Terrorists - Drawing Parallels.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 12:56 PM
link   
What is undeniable is that there are parallels which is what the OP was getting at.

A terrorist army/militia operating across a border with some implicit support of a host nation/population and launching indiscriminate attacks against Israel/UK. I don't particularly mind if you call them tactical or strategic parallels, but at least we agree that they exist.

Why is a conflict of Muslims against Jews so much more significant than Catholics against Protestants, or any of the examples you gave- is it just because the Israelis are on the receiving end? I can't help thinking that this is a very narrow minded point of view if not entirely unsurprising. Had you lived in England or N. Ireland during the IRA campaigns (which I am assuming you didn't) you might have a different take on the situation.

Lybia may appear as a joke to you but not many were laughing over here when their weapons were used with the benefit of their training to help to murder thousands on the UK's streets.

To try and help me understand your position better please can you explain why you have such contempt and hatred for Hezbollah, (proabably understandably so), but seem very reluctant to extend that criticism to the IRA?




posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
I still stand by what I said.

IRA did not indiscriminantly rocket attack British residential areas. Their attacks concentrated on the Military. Hezbullah's primary attacks are against Israel's residential areas which provides no military benefit. Hezbullah's support of Palestinians in bombing Malls and Cafes may be a parallel as you talk about.


Ok.

I will try and be patient with you, as you clearly do not get what we are saying here, have no knowledge of the conflict and clearly can't be arsed to read up on it.

So, I'll take your indiscriminate rocket attacks and raise you with a 3,000lb bomb in Manchester City Centre on a Saturday morning, which incidentally I - and about 40,000 other casual shoppers had to run for my life from - the explosion of which was so powerful that it was heard 8 miles away, injured 206 people and destroyed 70,000 square meters of the city.

Or, if the level of terror there doesn't satisfy your weird fantasy that no one else has ever experienced anything like Israeli's do, how about the bombs in Warrington, the first of which was designed to rupture a high pressure gas main and the second of which was strategically placed at one end of a major shopping street, in a cast iron bin with the deliberate intent of turning the bin into a fragmentation "grenade" for maximum killing/injury power at the point where it was calculated that surviors of the first blast would run to, and timed to explode a few minutes later when they got there.

Or how about the mortar attack on Downing Street that was intended to assasinate the Prime Minister?

Or maybe the Brighton Hotel bombing which was undertaken during the height of a Conservative Party Conference, in which a normal, public hotel was blown to pieces in an attempt to wipe out the entire upper tier of the British Government.

Maybe the blast in Enniskillen which killed 11 people attending a WW2 rememberance day parade and injured 63 others.

Or how about lobbing mortar bombs into the worlds busiest airport (at time - Heathrow) and also into the other major London Airport Gatwick.

This is/was an organisation with the following record;

1100 members of the UK armed forces and Royal Ulster Constabulary killed
600-650 Cilivians killed
6000 members of the UK armed forces injured
14,000 Civilians injured.

Now, having read that, tell me how that level of terror was any different than what people in Israel are experiencing right now.

Then tell me why, if the UK didn't see fit bomb the crap out of the Civilian infrastructure in Ireland and managed to remain restrained, Israel feels it has to carry out genocide in Lebanon?

But don't EVER tell me its not a valid comparison, because it sure as hell is.



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 11:49 PM
link   
How many british citizens sat in bomb shelters for nearly a month (About 1 million Israeli citizens are sleeping and eating in bombshelters).
How many British citizens left Britain (not Ireland) for southern Britain (about 0.5 million Israeli citizens moved from northen Israel to cental Israel.
Residents of Northern Israel cannot continue in a normal routine since they are under daily 130-200 rocket attacks.

Do you see the difference ??????



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
How many british citizens sat in bomb shelters for nearly a month (About 1 million Israeli citizens are sleeping and eating in bombshelters).
How many British citizens left Britain (not Ireland) for southern Britain (about 0.5 million Israeli citizens moved from northen Israel to cental Israel.
Residents of Northern Israel cannot continue in a normal routine since they are under daily 130-200 rocket attacks.

Do you see the difference ??????


What I see a difference in the current scale of the attacks used by Hezbollah.

I am aware that a considerable number of people moved away from Northern Ireland during the troubles but I have no figures.

As for bomb shelters, no, people did not spend time in them during the main part of the troubles.

Normal routines were severly disrupted. People avoided major centres. the whole point of the attacks was to disrupt.

I don't want to get sidelined into semantics here. We are talking about terrorism here, and terrorist actions, and proportionate repsonses, so given what I've set out in my earlier posts, I ask you again, would the UK have been justified in bombing Dublin and ruining the civilian infrastructure in Ireland in an attempt to destroy the IRA?

Its a simple question.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 02:37 PM
link   
It is a WRONG question and Again I refer you to the strategy of this conflict.

Hezbullah is Iran's proxy and Syria's proxy.
Iran and Syria sent a fortune into Lebanon to build a front-line against Israel in the form of bunkers, fortified ammunition dumps, weapons, ammunition, rockets, training consultation and logistical support. This was all performed as part of the plan Iran had to confront the west and Israel with its nuclear ambitions.

It is obvious that in the near future Iran will be attacked by either Israel or the US if diplomacy fails.
Hezbullah is Iran's front line against Israel and what we are seeing today is a scaled down version of what would have happened if the US or Israel would have struck Iran.

What Israel is doing now is dismantling that front line.

In my mind Israel is using the last Hezbullah aggression to defang Hezbullah.

With that in mind I am sure you can see that there is no parallel between the two situations.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
It is a WRONG question and Again I refer you to the strategy of this conflict.

Hezbullah is Iran's proxy and Syria's proxy.
Iran and Syria sent a fortune into Lebanon to build a front-line against Israel in the form of bunkers, fortified ammunition dumps, weapons, ammunition, rockets, training consultation and logistical support. This was all performed as part of the plan Iran had to confront the west and Israel with its nuclear ambitions.


Bold claim. Sources from non propagandist Israeli factual websites please, after you have responded to my folowing comments...




With that in mind I am sure you can see that there is no parallel between the two situations.


There are exact parallels between the situations. I will spell them out for you.

The IRA and Hezbollah are both illegal terrorist organisations.
The IRA and Hezbollah struck at both military AND civilian targets.
The IRA and Hezbollah both staged operations out of a country that was publicly unsypathetic to their actions, and yet did not seek to actively drive them out militarily.
The IRA and Hezbollah both operate within the confines of the civilian populace, using them as cover and a means of escape.
The IRA and Hezbollah both stored weapons in caches within civilian areas.
The IRA and Hezbollah both have pseudo-religious backgrounds to their campaigns

Heres where there are no parallels.

In dealing with the IRA, the UK employed intelligence assets and special forces to track the cells, and if need be eliminate them whilst at the same time, pursue an active political campaign to mitigate the differences between the people involved.

In dealing with Hezbollah, Israel has unleashed its army and airforce on a soveriegn nation, destroyed the infrastructure of the country and killed Lebanese civilians at a rate that is fast approaching 20 Lebanese for every Israeli killed.

However, I ask you again - given the continuing parallels I am drawing - would Britian have been justified in bombing Dublin and parts of Ireland, as per the current Israeli action in Lebanon, in order to deal with the IRA?

Its a simple yes/no answer. Come on, I know you can do it.



[edit on 4-8-2006 by neformore]



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Can you fresh squeeze carrot juice using an orange squeezer?

This is the same type of question. It is too bad you cannot see the differences with the two.
From my understanding is that you do not want to see this obvious difference.
The IRA never prepared itself in alignment with other nations for a day in which all those nations/organizations would attempt to erradicate the UK.

As soon as you inderstand that you will see the errors of your way.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
Can you fresh squeeze carrot juice using an orange squeezer?

This is the same type of question. It is too bad you cannot see the differences with the two.
From my understanding is that you do not want to see this obvious difference.
The IRA never prepared itself in alignment with other nations for a day in which all those nations/organizations would attempt to erradicate the UK.

As soon as you inderstand that you will see the errors of your way.


From everyone in this thread's understanding, it os obvious YOU refuse to see.

And you havent answered the question originally posed. Would the UK have been justified in bombing Ireland into the stone age?

Stop dodging the question and answer it, if you will. Playing the martyr is not going to win any arguements here.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 12:43 PM
link   
There is nothing to compare. The UK should have not bombed dublin to smithereens because the IRA was not part of a plan to destroy the UK and turn it into a different state. The fact that you can't see this is scary.

Hezbullah chief warthog 'Nasrallah' claims at every turn that Israel should become a muslim country and so does his maniac mentor Ahmedinajad.

I guess you will need more time to learn in what world you live in.

If you try to make parallels between two unrelated situations what you are actually doing is creating a vitrual reality to suite your cause and your arguement.

Yes both the IRA and Hezbulah resorted to terrorism both have state support that is the ONLY similarity. If fact all terrorist organizations have some kind of state support - Hamas, Jihad, Al-qaida - All Iran.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
There is nothing to compare. The UK should have not bombed dublin to smithereens because the IRA was not part of a plan to destroy the UK and turn it into a different state. The fact that you can't see this is scary.


Thank you for finally answering the question. But the fact that you do not see the paralells is scary itself.

The IRA DID want to turn the UK into a different state. Nothern Ireland was part of the UK. The UK would be different without Northern Ireland. Add to the fact that the majority of Northern Irish did not want to join the rest of Ireland, and you have a similarity here.


Hezbullah chief warthog 'Nasrallah' claims at every turn that Israel should become a muslim country and so does his maniac mentor Ahmedinajad.


The fact that Hezbollah is a group of Nutjobs has been established, and genereally, is not in question. However, Lebanon is not Hezbollah, and more lebanese civilians and infrastructure is getting destroyed by indiscriminate Israeli attacks. So israel is not going after hezbollah directly. They are basically attacking everything in Lebanon.


I guess you will need more time to learn in what world you live in.


No, Ive had plenty of time to see and know the world I live in. And Ive had enough time to learn that israel's tactics are not only questionable morally, but are self defeating and will worsen your situation in the long run. You are making the same mistakes you have been making for the past 50 years, and the same mistakes the U.S. is making in Afghanistan and Iraq. You are hitting the fly with a sledgehammer and destroying your walls in the process.


If you try to make parallels between two unrelated situations what you are actually doing is creating a vitrual reality to suite your cause and your arguement.


I would say you live in a one sided virtual reality. The paralells are there, and they are both real. You either cant or choose not to see it.


Yes both the IRA and Hezbulah resorted to terrorism both have state support that is the ONLY similarity. If fact all terrorist organizations have some kind of state support - Hamas, Jihad, Al-qaida - All Iran.


They also target innocent civilians. Both organizations were funded by foreign entites. Both organizations hid amongst civilians who really didn't do much to stop them. Both existed in countries whose leaders were questly sympathetic to their causes.

And thats just the beginning.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 02:44 PM
link   
And you are doging that fact that the the IRA did not have several countries behind them who actively supported them in their master plan to destroy the UK. NOT to change the UK.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 02:52 PM
link   
No you're right they only had Libya supplying them weapons, training arrangements with Shining Path etc, and overt fund-raising in the US!!

(Strangely enough fund-raising for anti-Israel terror groups is an offence but anti-Brit terror was supported at quite high levels)



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
And you are doging that fact that the the IRA did not have several countries behind them who actively supported them in their master plan to destroy the UK. NOT to change the UK.



Northern Ireland is soverign British territory. The IRA wanted Britain out of Northen Ireland completely to "unite" the two nations, and started the armed campaign to drive out British forces. They attacked a soverign nation of the Union and also attacked the mainland and UK resources abroad,

As for "not being backed by other countries"

From Wikipedia



In the mid 1980s, the Provisional IRA received large quantities of modern weaponry, including heavy weaponry such as Heavy machine guns, over 1000 rifles, several hundred handguns, rocket propelled grenades, flamethrowers, surface to air missiles and the plastic explosive semtex from the Libyan regime of Muammar al-Qaddafi. reportedly, Qadaffi donated enough weapons to arm the equivalent of three infantry battallions. (See Provisional IRA arms importation).


Funding came from Libya and from the NORAID group in the US. The IRA also had links with your own hated PLO, and with the ANC in South Africa.

Judah - let me put this to you - Libya - a state sponsor of terrorism - like Syria and Iran as far as you are concerned. The same country responsible for the Lockerbie bombing, the same Country the US itself bombed in an attempt to assasinate Ghadaffi because of his links to terrorism. Libya tried to fund the invasion of Northern Ireland by the IRA.

See the parallel?

Its there.

Both our countries (you are from Israel aren't you?) fought terror groups sponsored by other countries.

So tell me, please - given ALL the parallels I've provided (and theres LOTS of them) would the UK have been right to bomb Dublin and sections of Ireland?

Whats so hard about the question? Its how terrorists are dealt with isn't it?

[edit on 6-8-2006 by neformore]



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 01:33 PM
link   
neformore,



Judah - let me put this to you - Libya - a state sponsor of terrorism - like Syria and Iran as far as you are concerned. The same country responsible for the Lockerbie bombing, the same Country the US itself bombed in an attempt to assasinate Ghadaffi because of his links to terrorism. Libya tried to fund the invasion of Northern Ireland by the IRA.

See the parallel?


I'll keep it simple.
Libya tried to fund the invasion of Northern Ireland by the IRA NOT THE whole UK
Iran funds the Hezbullah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad in order to destroy all of Israel.
The IRA did not refuse of recognize the UK on UK territory only in Ireland (Northern Ireland).
Hezbullah Hamas, Islamic Jihad refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist.

On a tactical level there is a parallel between the two conflicts. On a strategic level it is different and therefore the means to deal with the situation must be different. You cannot negotiate an arrangement with someone who does not regcgnize your right to exist.
NOW DO YOU UNDERSTAND? Capish? Comprende?



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
On a tactical level there is a parallel between the two conflicts. On a strategic level it is different and therefore the means to deal with the situation must be different. You cannot negotiate an arrangement with someone who does not regcgnize your right to exist.
NOW DO YOU UNDERSTAND? Capish? Comprende?


The IRA did not recognise the right of the British Government to retain control of Northern Ireland Judah. They tried to assasinate the British Prime Minister over it, on more than one occasion. Its not me who isn't understanding here. During the conflict with the IRA they would not negotiate.

sigh

OK. Let me get this straight. If the terrorists threaten Jews because they live in Israel, then its ok for Israelis to go and bomb them.

If terrorists threaten another country, the situation is different and that country should be much more even handed and nice about it, because its different, and it doesn't threaten Israel.

It doesn't matter if that organisation blows up city centres, civilians, kids, members of the armed forces etc because thats nothing to do with Israel.

Basically, what you are saying is that its ok for the IRA to have commited all those atrocities in England, Northern Ireland and across Europe at British army bases because they didn't target Israel.

And you are also saying that no other nation has a right to defend itself against terrorists in the same manner as Israel does?

What the hell is the US doing in Afghanistan and Iraq then Judah?

I'm talking about dealing with TERRORISTS here. We go out and bomb the crap out of them don't we Judah? Thats the way to deal with them surely?

So, should the UK have gone and bombed Dublin and sections of Ireland in order to flush out the IRA? Simple question. Answer it.


[edit on 7-8-2006 by neformore]



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 02:19 PM
link   
Again I will repeat myself.

Any country who is in an existential threat has the right to defend itself in a mighty military manner.

Where the British in danger of having their country wiped off the face of the earth?

The US suffered a massive attack on US soil and it was larger than the US wishes to admit (in my view). The Islamic world speaks time and time again and spend plenty of resources in trying to destroy the US and Israel (and now the UK too).

The IRA never threatened the British country as a whole as to wipe it off the face of the earth and therefore their is no parallel. With the IRA there were issues to negotiate on. With Hezbullah and the Islamic world there is nothing to negotiate about. They have repeatedly said that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.

This war is not restricted only to the two kidnapped soldiers. It is about dismantling Irans front line against Israel on the day the international community, the US and / or Israel decides to dismantle the Iranian nuclear threat.
Israel sees that Iran will use the Palestinians from the Israel's central and Southern regions to attack Israel and Hezbullah from the north with weapons no other terror group has access to on the day Iran is dealt with.

That is what this war is about. That is why I am again saying that the IRA/Hezbullah comparison is wrong.

The UK like any other country has a right to defend itself from terrorism. No other country aside from Israel lives under a constant threat that their country will be wiped off the face of the earth.



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Answer the question Judah.

Or are you pro-IRA?



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Answer the question Judah.

Or are you pro-IRA?


Reading comprehesion problems?

I answered that already in post 2395555 above - to that evil elf dude.



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi

Originally posted by neformore
Answer the question Judah.

Or are you pro-IRA?


Reading comprehesion problems?

I answered that already in post 2395555 above - to that evil elf dude.



No comprehensions problems here. I would just like you to state it clearly that there is a difference in what you deem to be "terrorism"



[edit on 7-8-2006 by neformore]



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
The UK like any other country has a right to defend itself from terrorism. No other country aside from Israel lives under a constant threat that their country will be wiped off the face of the earth.


Actually, thinking about this and applying your arguments, you obviously think the US invasion in Afghanistan, and subsequent actions in Iraq following 9/11 were not justified?

Am I right?






top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join