Invading Israel

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
When the UN comes in to take back what is theirs who will they blame?


Quite frankly, hell, if there is one, would freeze over first before the UN grew enough balls to go in and take back what is theirs.

For crying out loud, the UN cannot even stop what is happening in Sudan, but for some unknown far-reaching reason, you seem to speculatively think the UN will "come to take back what is theirs"?! Let me know when hell freezes over, ArchAngel, cause your wishful thinking does not apply here.






seekerof




posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Quite frankly, hell, if there is one, would freeze over first before the UN grew enough balls to go in and take back what is theirs.


Were the US behind it the rest would go along.

The entire world, other than America, is ready for a solution.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimmefootball400
This would be your battle of Armageddon.


Please get your facts straight. Armageddon is at the end of the 7yr tribulation period after the rapture. This battle wouldn't be Armageddon. This battle between israel and iran is foretold in Ezekiel chapters 38 and 39, where Russia gets involved to. the result? God defends Israel, Iran and Russia/allies are destroyed.





posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 09:53 PM
link   
I love it how the media projects this thing about israel, like israel is surrounded by these wild arab people awaiting at their gates to ravage israel and all its ideology....
I think people should read up about the start of the state of israel, and through its starting years what it did to get where it was.
Israel has been a terroist state since it came into existence, incading the gaza strip and south lebanon. Why? To spread the zionist state.
If anyone remembers laurence of arabia, end of ww1 when the british were going to give the arab state its own land, for helping the british rebel agaisnt the ottomans. Did the arabs ever see the land? NO Yet who did the british give land to after ww2?
Let me tell you something else, israel hates arabs as much as arabs hate israel. You cant make out that israel is this holier than though good guy, as alot of israels are racist zionists.
I just dont think it was a good idea giving the jews their own land in the midde of the arab world.
Im sure if you grabbed a a large amount of african people and then give them their own land in the middle of china. Then the african people start growing, physicaly and economicly that one day the decide to call their land "New Africa" you dont think that the chinese people will not like this?
I am 100 percent sure they would. Now is it the chinese people fault for getting aggrevated at the pacify take over of thier land? No its the africans people fault for setting up their community with out the respect of its neigbours cultures.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
Were the US behind it the rest would go along.

The entire world, other than America, is ready for a solution.


The US is meaningless to the equation of Sudan.
Your just another looking to place blame.
Well, you are incorrectly placing blame on the US.
The UN has over 190 member nations, 191 counting the US, that can act in a meaningful way, and to simply point out that the world is waiting on the US is ludicrous, if not down right humorous.
The UN needs to grow some, while others need to do likewise.
Don't wait for the US.
How about the world doing something without the US for once, k?


I mean geez, ArchAngel, lets apply what you just replied to me and compare that to the ill-fated mention you made to Riwka:

as posted by ArchAngel
When the UN comes in to take back what is theirs who will they blame?

I suppose in the applied above quote, made by you, that you forgot to mention or included that the UN comes to take back what is theirs only when the US comes along?

Perhaps you wish to clarify your position?







seekerof

[edit on 7-12-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 10:55 PM
link   

The UN has over 190 member nations, 191 counting the US, that can act in a meaningful way, and to simply point out that the world is waiting on the US is ludicrous, if not down right humorous.


Let me then explain greater things.

UN Veto Power.

With that, and American military might we enforces the current situation.

Look at the resolutions concerning Israel and how America votes.

In the SC the veto has been employed the most times in the defense of another nation.

In the GA it is America, Australia, and a few Pacific Island nations that we control against the entire world with UK abstaining.

Were it not fro the US veto the SC would long ago have imposed a solution.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 12:02 AM
link   


I just dont think it was a good idea giving the jews their own land in the midde of the arab world.


Not only that, but the land they claim to be theirs because it says so in their holy book. well the muslim holy book disagrees and by handing the land to the jewish people, the british basically slapped the muslims in the face. Implying their beliefs are just plain wrong.

How does one justify believing one holy book over another.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 12:13 AM
link   
to all those quoting scripture and other religious nonsense, please try sticking to facts. please dont include your personal beliefs and try to pass the trouble in the middle east off as some mystic war between the 'Chosen Few' and those hateful arabs who want to erase the peace loving israeli state off the map



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
Look at the resolutions concerning Israel and how America votes.

Immaterial, again.
How about instead of looking at how many times the US has vetoe'd resolutions against Israel, do two things:
First, realize and recognize that the resolution(s) passed, regardless of the US veto.
Second, look into the reasoning behind why the US veto'd.




Were it not fro the US veto the SC would long ago have imposed a solution.

Excuse me, again, the US is but one vote.
As such, there are five permanent members.
As mentioned above, despite US veto's, the majority of resolutions pass.
For you to sit here and insinuate that the US, making one vote, is holding up the UN on acting or from a solution, is again, ludicrous and humorous.





seekerof



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by wang
I love it how the media projects this thing about israel, like israel is surrounded by these wild arab people awaiting at their gates to ravage israel and all its ideology....
I think people should read up about the start of the state of israel, and through its starting years what it did to get where it was.
Israel has been a terroist state since it came into existence, incading the gaza strip and south lebanon. Why? To spread the zionist state.
If anyone remembers laurence of arabia, end of ww1 when the british were going to give the arab state its own land, for helping the british rebel agaisnt the ottomans. Did the arabs ever see the land? NO Yet who did the british give land to after ww2?
Let me tell you something else, israel hates arabs as much as arabs hate israel. You cant make out that israel is this holier than though good guy, as alot of israels are racist zionists.
I just dont think it was a good idea giving the jews their own land in the midde of the arab world.
Im sure if you grabbed a a large amount of african people and then give them their own land in the middle of china. Then the african people start growing, physicaly and economicly that one day the decide to call their land "New Africa" you dont think that the chinese people will not like this?
I am 100 percent sure they would. Now is it the chinese people fault for getting aggrevated at the pacify take over of thier land? No its the africans people fault for setting up their community with out the respect of its neigbours cultures.



Aint that the truth.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 04:37 AM
link   
I have a suspicion that Pentagon already has a plan to invade Israel.

it can't risk Israeli nukes falling into dumb Arab hands. fanatic miight try to buy or steal them. CIA does not think that nukes are safe enough. security may be not good enough. there is also the danger of someone selling them to millionaire Arab oil baron.

every country in the middle east should give up its nukes.

so many things could go wrong.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 04:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by mr conspiracy
I have a suspicion that Pentagon already has a plan to invade Israel.

it can't risk Israeli nukes falling into dumb Arab hands. fanatic miight try to buy or steal them. CIA does not think that nukes are safe enough. security may be not good enough. there is also the danger of someone selling them to millionaire Arab oil baron.

every country in the middle east should give up its nukes.

so many things could go wrong.



The US has a plan to invade just about every country on the planet.


`dumb arab hands` thats racist on so many levels its a joke.

how about `dumb jewish hands` - they built there bombs with stolen nuke tech and help from france.

They are also ready to use them - they loaded at least 1 bomb on an aircraft in the 3 day war.

everu country should give up its nukes - that means the `big` 5 with them.

but thats not going to happen until lots have been used.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
All the UN resolutions "against" Israel that have been passed are under Chapter VI:



Under Chapter Six of the Charter, "Pacific Settlement of Disputes", the Security Council "may investigate any dispute, or any situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute". The Council may "recommend appropriate procedures or methods of adjustment" if it determines that the situation might endanger international peace and security. These recommendations are not binding on UN members.



To bad Israel isnt in the "Pacific"


[edit on 8-12-2005 by crisko]



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by crisko
To bad Israel isnt in the "Pacific"


It has nothing to do with geographical location.


Source
pa·cif·ic ( P ) Pronunciation Key (p-sfk) also pa·cif·i·cal (--kl)
adj.
Tending to diminish or put an end to conflict; appeasing.
Of a peaceful nature; tranquil.
pacific

adj 1: promoting peace; "the result of this pacific policy was that no troops were called up" 2: relating to or bordering the Pacific Ocean; "Pacific islands" [syn: Pacific] 3: disposed to peace or of a peaceful nature; "the pacific temper seeks to settle disputes on grounds of justice rather than by force"; "a quiet and peaceable person"; "in a peaceable and orderly manner" [syn: peaceable] n : the largest ocean in the world [syn: Pacific, Pacific Ocean]



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiracy Theorist



I just dont think it was a good idea giving the jews their own land in the midde of the arab world.


Not only that, but the land they claim to be theirs because it says so in their holy book. well the muslim holy book disagrees and by handing the land to the jewish people, the british basically slapped the muslims in the face. Implying their beliefs are just plain wrong.

How does one justify believing one holy book over another.


Well, let's see ....

Isn't the Hebrew Bible older than the koran - by a couple thousand years?

And, isn't the Koran based on parts of the Hebrew Bible, at least the cast of characters is the same?

Yes, those are a couple of good places to start in answering your last question.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 03:59 PM
link   
TC:

Seeing how Israel has never been a threat to her neighbors, and since she has those weapons so that she may survive while being surrounded by people who want nothing but her demise, and since she can expect no help from a "world council" (U.N.) that despises her, nit-picking everything about her and ignoring all violations of human decency by her neighbors, I'd have to say, no. We should not try and take her nukes away.


Haha, that is the singlemost hilarious thing I have ever read. Not a threat to her neighbours? No help from the UN? Ignoring all violations of human decency by her neighbours?

Haha, that's rich.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Isn't the Hebrew Bible older than the koran - by a couple thousand years?


The Christian Bible is older than the Jewish holy book.

The Babylonian Talmud was not finished until around 400AD.

The Karaites holy book is the Biblical old testament.

Karaites do not run Israel, Talmudists do.

The two religions are as different as Christianity and Islam are.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Conspiracy Theorist



I just dont think it was a good idea giving the jews their own land in the midde of the arab world.


Not only that, but the land they claim to be theirs because it says so in their holy book. well the muslim holy book disagrees and by handing the land to the jewish people, the british basically slapped the muslims in the face. Implying their beliefs are just plain wrong.

How does one justify believing one holy book over another.


Well, let's see ....

Isn't the Hebrew Bible older than the koran - by a couple thousand years?

And, isn't the Koran based on parts of the Hebrew Bible, at least the cast of characters is the same?

Yes, those are a couple of good places to start in answering your last question.


Well, let's see ....

Aren't Judaism and Islam effectively the same religeons? After all, Muslims follow the teachngs of all (i think) the Jewish prophets. Moses (pbuh) recued the Jews from Egypt, Jesus (pbuh) came to the jews and converted them to christianity, then mohammed (pbuh) came and converted christians to muslims, while in both cases some of the people refuted the prophets teaches and didnt convert.

you must therefore remember that muslims are effectively 2nd generation jews, and by saying israel is jewish land, means it also belongs to the muslims.

why then were the muslims literally kicked out of the area to make space for jewish settlers?

you must also remember that many jews do not support israels action in the middle eastand admit what is happening is wrong. it's just the few corrupt zionists who are aiding america with its goals of eventually taking over the middle east. israel from the west, russia from north in bosnia and chechnya, and america and europe at the heart through iraq and next up iran.

there also india and pakistan at war, they shouldnt be as they have always been peaceful nations, but like like with israel, its a mess cause by the retreat of the british empire, and now theres fighting over land, so effectively we also have india coming in from the south due to the wests actions, and who knows, maybe china, another tiger nation from the west...



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiracy Theorist

mystic war between the 'Chosen Few' and those hateful arabs who want to erase the peace loving israeli state off the map



Is this a joke ? peace loving israeli state



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr conspiracy
it can't risk Israeli nukes falling into dumb Arab hands.



Please also can you not use hatefull language ! atfer you being jewish should know better then everyone the effects of hate.

PS: are they any better in dumb jew hands ?





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join