It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Israel vows "disproportionate" response to rockets

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Animal

Originally posted by centurion1211


It's also why Israel will use a 'disproportionate response' - they can't afford to lose..


Loose what?





Their entire country and quite possibly their lives along with it.

Tell me you don't honestly believe that after winning a war against Israel the arabs would just say, "Let's go back to the 1947 borders, it all we really want".




posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


the arabs?

israel is only fighting palestine at the moment.

if israel was to establish peace with palestine, the rest of the arab world would have a harder time justifying their crusade against israel.

at the moment all israel stands to loose is taking more land from the palestinians. they already have taken more than any treaty has entitled them to.

the idea they would loose everything is an absurdity at the moment. however continue down the path they are on and they will have to worry about loosing everything.



posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
All the history is great but Hamas is still firing rockets. Look at how many countries around the world (including the US) were habited by someone else first before another power came in.


Yes you're correct there princeofpeace but it can also be said that the American Indians were in their every right to be firing their arrows at the white 'settlers'...Yes?

Further more, just because we can find 100's of instances throughout history does not make it right. We all know it's wrong to take what is not ours and given we do know know better in todays day and age (though we choose to forget it when it's convenient) it makes it even more of a crime!

It's called willingfully doing wrong by others when you know better. Try doing that in your own community and see where you end up... like ummm... prison! However if we place the actions under a military durestriction, suddenly everything's moral and just... and that my friend is called denial!

IRM


[edit on 1/2/09 by InfaRedMan]



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:10 AM
link   
The entire Middle East situation is a no-win for either side, IMO. I've never been to Israel, but I have been to Egypt and Arab states. One thing that struck me was how different the news reports were, compared to what we see in the US reported as news. What people need to understand is that citizens of nations respond to situations based upon the knowledge that they have.
In the US, the truth is that almost all MSM news sources report the ME situation from the Israeli point of view. In the ME, outside of Israel, the opposite is true. Recently, some MSM, such as CNN, have begun to report some things as they are reported in Arab countries, and you can see the difference in many peoples' views towards to current Israeli-Gaza situation. Many Arabs I met and lived with truly were mystified as to how the US could unilaterally support Israel, when in their opinion, Israel was the real aggressor(of course, based upon what they knew as "facts".)
I wonder how many people here would have a different view if the only news they had access to reported things only from the Arab side. Please remember, that most ME citizens do not have the access to the Internet that many enjoy in Western-style nations.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:21 AM
link   
Israel has to play this one carefully.
With clear support for Gaza coming from neighboring countries, it would seem Israel is beating a dog, while surrounded by that dog's pack.

We've already seen what Israels "defensive" actions are. More civilians die than actual Hamas militants.

You may say "well boo hoo for them, war is war", but nations who hold the ability to crush a neighboring country are held to higher standards, as is the entire purpose to civilization.

If you can't show restraint against the civilians who are unfortunately mixed up in the conflict, you simply aren't civilized. You might as well be part of Al-Qaeda yourself.


Hamas clearly wants conflict. Perhaps they see this as a last stand for Gaza, or perhaps they are just as mad as the Israelis. Not much information comes out of Gaza, so it's nearly impossible to decide what they stand for exactly.


The issue here isn't whether you support the terrorists in Israel, or the terrorists in Gaza, the issue is what WE the civilized world can do to protect or evacuate as many civilians as we can.

They don't have the option of leaving by themselves and claiming refugee status, they'll be shot at the border by either Israel or Egypt. Their sea access is locked down by Israels navy, and their airspace is locked down by the Israeli air force (not that it would matter, their only air port has been occupied, bombed, and completely non-operational for quite some time, the tarmac looks like a rock bed now at best.)

The civilians in southern Israel have the ability to flee the area, so they've got what they need to survive.
The civilians in Gaza simply have no-where to run to, and no-where to hide. They are quite literally cannon fodder.


If you support either Israel or Hamas, I personally think you have the mentality of a 12 year old watching hollywood movies.

I know where I stand, with the civilians being shelled, bombed, and shot at.

Now where are your loyalties?
With the innocent, or the blood thirsty?



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Well I hope the PALIS do not have a BURITO eating contest near any open flames.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by johnsky
 





If you support either Israel or Hamas, I personally think you have the mentality of a 12 year old watching hollywood movies. I know where I stand, with the civilians being shelled, bombed, and shot at.

Well put!
Well out! (second line)



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by spliff4020


Ok, 50 years. First of all please tell what a "palestinian" is. Its nothing more than egyptians put there to stop the jews from reclaiming the land.



why dont they force egypt to take them back?

im confused wouldnt it solve the current problem?

if what u say is true (not saying it is or isnt)

israel should be attacking egypt because if they are egyptian than that means egypt is shooting missles into israel

just askin



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by inked up

Originally posted by Dermo
reply to post by inked up
 


Those firework rockets are being fired in retaliation of a fifty year, forceful Israeli settlement invasion into Palestinian territory.

So what, the Palestinians are to bend over and take it all the time?

Fair enough, you support the Israeli cause but I hope you can see that there are two sides to the story and Israel is the destabilizing influence.




Do you realize that the rockets (which can kill) are hitting innocent civilian areas? They are not hitting military targets. They are not hitting Israeli leaders. THEY ARE HITTING INNOCENT CIVILIAN AREAS.

And you defend this?



yeah, apparently katusha rpclets are "fireworks". I think I might buy some this fourth......



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
Gee, I wonder why the Palestinians fire rockets at Israel. It's makes no sense at all. I mean... what has poor Israel done to deserve it? It's just not fair! Not fair I tell you!





Would you mind updating your maps to show the activity since 2000?? Israel has handed over a lot of land in the interest of peace.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Without wasting my breath on the obviously clueless posters who have NO knowledge of history and shamelessly support Israel's endless campaign of genocide, I say this...

I am not the least bit suprised that Israel promises a disproportionate response - that is their modus operendai. A Palestinian sneezes, Israel calls it a biological attack and then kills 733 women and children!


I think it's about time that Israel goes Bye-bye!



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueTriangle
Would you mind updating your maps to show the activity since 2000?? Israel has handed over a lot of land in the interest of peace.


Another Zionist apologist. How about Israel hands back ALL of the land. It is NOT theirs. Shouldn't be a problem... In the interest of peace and all.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by kozmo
 


How about you give back all the land to however owned your country before your people came? Every place on Earth changed population gozillion times. So this does not make Israel right, true. And a lot of Palestinians lost their land and property without any compensation. How then it justifies taking land from generations of Israelis who were born here? There is Israel and there will be Israel. You do not like? Well - it is your problem,deal with it.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 


What ignorance
Who are "[My] people"? Who owned "my" land before "my people" came? That is quite a bit of obfuscation coupled with a little red herring and straw man, dontcha think?

Let's follow your logic for a moment... shall we? Hmmmm, sounds like you think that what "my people" did to the Indians was a terrible thing. Sounds like you think that in order for me to have any moral justification in condemning "your people", I should give my land back to said Indians, no? This simple assertion acknowledges several things; first, that you recognize that much of America was conceived by illegal land-grabbing methods and ethnic cleansing, both of which are wrong. And secondly, that since I do not return my land to it's rightful owner, "your people" are justified in doing the same thing to get "their land." Somehow you don't see the error of that???

Let's break this down further. "My people" didn't set out to illegally settle this land and commit genocide. "My people" don't have the arrogance to walk around claiming to be "God's chosen poeple". "My people" don't use such arrogant claims as justification to commit genocide and settle land that is not rightfully ours. "My people" haven't created an open air prison for the Indians, deprived them of food, water, medicine, education, jobs, travel etc., built a wall around their reservations nor launch military incursions against them. In fact, if you knew much about history you would recognize that much of the US was settled by buying and bartering for land with the Indians and the other "Rightful owners". You really need to understand what you are talking about before making any comparisons. This article describing the "Indian Wars" might be a good start.

Now, the Zionists sought to settle the land of Jerusalem and build Eratz Ysrael for more than half a century prior to the formation of the state of Israel. Understanding the World Zionist Congress, the Irgun, the Stern Gang, the Mossad and countless other Zionist controlling entities (ADL, AIPAC etc...) you begin to see a common thread of deception, control and conquest. They willfully waged a war of terror against the indigenous arabs in order to clear them of the land that their "religion" stated that they were entitled to. That terrorism willfully continues today. There is absolutely no comparison between the US and Israel.

Now, if you would like to debate me, one on one, on the matter then let's have at it. It is apparent to me that I know far more about the history of this conflict than you will read about in the next 50 years! Oh, and for the record... "My people" arrived in the United States in the 1930's.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by kozmo
 


What a lack or paying attention to a post? I did not know where you are from. US or rest of third rock from the sun. The point is that this land was somebodie's else. And if in your case your parents came in US in 1930s and you think that it is your land, then Jew that came to Israel in , say 2009 , can state the same with the same amount of justification.
As for your implications that i think that it justifies what happened in 1948 to Palestinian Arabs - it does not. I said that it does not make Israel right at what it did - all you nedd is read the whole post.

But there are millions of people who are born here, in Israel, as Israelis (Jews and Arabs by the way)! And you try to imply that you can through them out because their parents where wrong and threw out somebody else.....

Both your points are hypocritical. And double hypocracty does not make truth. You have no more right to decide who will be thrown out from Israel then Israelis in 1948. So if you aknowledge that they were wrong - then how it makes your suggestion right??? Kind of catch 22, isn't it?



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
reply to post by kozmo
 


How about you give back all the land to however owned your country before your people came? Every place on Earth changed population gozillion times. So this does not make Israel right, true. And a lot of Palestinians lost their land and property without any compensation. How then it justifies taking land from generations of Israelis who were born here? There is Israel and there will be Israel. You do not like? Well - it is your problem,deal with it.


Agreed! Lets not forget about the Arabs who conquered most of the Eastern world circa 700AD. Should people be demanding a return to these borders too? Israel has conceded a hell of a lot in recent times as a gesture of good will and got bugger all back but a barrage of rockets and suicide attacks on targetted civilian areas. You can't negotiate with these people, these people will respond to nothing but force.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by kozmo
 

Well check this out.....
Lehi
Avraham Stern sounds like a jolly chap
"In 1980 Israel instituted the Lehi ribbon, red, black, grey, pale blue and white which is awarded to former members of the Lehi underground who wished to carry it"
Well what goes around comes around.......



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 





israel should be attacking egypt because if they are egyptian than that means egypt is shooting missles into israel


And lose the billions of dollars a year that both Israel and Egypt receive every year, as a result of the "Camp David Peace accords" signed by them?
I think NOT.


The agreement also resulted in the United States committing to several billion dollars worth of annual subsidies to the governments of both Israel and Egypt, subsidies which continue to this day, and are given as a mixture of grants and aid packages committed to purchasing U.S. materiel. From 1979 (the year of the peace agreement) to 1997, Egypt received military aid of US$1.3 billion annually, which also helped modernize the Egyptian military.[4] (This is beyond economic, humanitarian, and other aid, which has totaled more than US$25 billion.) Eastern-supplied until 1979, Egypt now received American weaponry such as the M1A1 Abrams Tank, AH-64 Apache gunship and the F-16 fighter jet. In comparison, Israel has received $3 billion annually since 1985 in grants and military aid packages.[5]

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   
I'm looking around here, and still all I see are people bickering over where to stick an imaginary line while innocent people are dying.

"Wah, Israel is right, that's why innocent civilians have to die..."
"Wah, Hamas is right, that's why innocent civilians have to die..."
"I support these terrorists..."
"Yeah, well I support these other terrorists..."
"My terrorists can beat up your terrorists..."
"Nu-uh! I was here first..."


You really are juveniles who've watched too many action movies.
And so are the groups you support.


Let's work on getting refugees out of the region and away from these schoolyard morons with guns.

You know, what civilized nations are SUPPOSED to do.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Dermo
In fairness, It would be a bit of a one sided fight.

Yep. But so what? That would teach the smaller guy not to pick fights with someone who is bigger and stronger. Darwinism at it's best.


Don't you mean that it would teach the smaller guy not to fight back against the bigger guy after the bigger guy attacking him?

Thats bullying not Darwinism.




top topics



 
4
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join