BREAKING: Israel fires 'warning shots' at Syria over Golan Heights mortar strike

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


I don't want Israel gone personally, but I believe most people blame her for everything,

Just wanted to clarify that.




posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


Would your justification apply to Mexico shelling Texas as well?


Yes it would be similar, but please note that i did not offer this as a means for justifying the actions of either side, but merely to illustrate the history of the area.

The US example would be a similar and valid one. The only thing i can comment is different time and different circumstances. Though similarities are present, I would classify Israels involvement a bit different the US in North America, wouldn't you agree?


Only there is no moral justification for initiating an aggressive posture.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



Only there is no moral justification for initiating an aggressive posture.


Morality, specifically cultural morality, is not international and does not transcend borders I am sad to say.

Our morals are not their morals.

Tricky situation when you are trying to "morally" justify potentially harmful action.

Again, I just comment based on my outside observations. I lack the more in depth knowledge and experience to comment further.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Apparently Israel should not retaliate to any kind of attack on it's territory, according to this thread.
It was a warning shot. Deal with it.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Shenon
 


So Israel gets hit in their military base and they fire a warning shot, and they're the bad guys.

Okay.

I suppose if a nuke ever hit Israel, people would want Israel to pay for the radiation cleanup downwind.



That wasn´t my Intention nor did i say such.´I merely stated that Syria (just to be clear,i don´t think the Goverment is so stupid as to piss of Israel,Turkey and the West,so it has to be from the Rebels or other Elements in Syria) is trying to start a War to get rid of the Goverment and/or force a Response from Iran when/if Syria is beeing attacked. Either by Turkey(NATO) or Israel...or both.

I´m just trying to see the bigger Picture,which in this case should be very obvious by now.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Hey Slayer,

Sorry missed seeing your post.

I am not defending Syrian aggression during the period prior to the Six day war as I have not done neough reading to comment, but I do recall an issue revolving around the strategic importance of the heights.


n addition to its strategic importance militarily, the Golan Heights contributes significantly to the water resources of the region. This is true particularly at the higher elevations, which are snow-covered much of the year in the cold months and help to sustain baseflow for rivers and springs during the dry season. The heights receive significantly more precipitation than the surrounding, lower-elevation areas. The occupied sector of the Golan Heights provides or controls a substantial portion of the water in the Jordan River watershed, which in turn provides a portion of Israel's water supply. The Golan Heights are the source of about 15% of Israel's water supply.[37]


I believe Israel received international criticism from this move. Its an important region to all it would appear.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Shenon
 


I can accept that since I can't even find who is a "good guy" in Syria.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs
reply to post by beezzer
 



Only there is no moral justification for initiating an aggressive posture.


Morality, specifically cultural morality, is not international and does not transcend borders I am sad to say.

Our morals are not their morals.

Tricky situation when you are trying to "morally" justify potentially harmful action.

Again, I just comment based on my outside observations. I lack the more in depth knowledge and experience to comment further.


It's a knee-jerk reaction when I see Israel attacked, both on the field and on the pages of ATS.

I can't sayI fully understand either.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



I can't sayI fully understand either


Nor I Friend, Nor I.

Everything we discuss and debate is conjecture and inference. We lack the experience necessary to truly see the perspective of all parities in the middle east without being there.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Coming up next..buffer zone,occupation



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by all2human
Coming up next..buffer zone,occupation

Yeah, occupying a literal war zone torn apart by it's own citizens. Sounds plausible.

Do you people even think about what you're typing in your posts?



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by IsraeliGuy
 


Torn apart from a foreign funded war,with there own desperate Rebels firing on them..
iv'e done my research,have you?
edit on 11-11-2012 by all2human because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Shenon
 


I can accept that since I can't even find who is a "good guy" in Syria.


They good guys are the poor terrified Syrians who are running for the borders for safety from trigger happy lunatics.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   
And here is another clue:

Aren´t UN-Forces currently responsible for the "Protection" of the Golan Heights? Why did they allow "Syrian Tanks" to enter the Area? Aren´t they there to prevent such things?

edit on 11-11-2012 by Shenon because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs
I am not defending Syrian aggression during the period prior to the Six day war as I have not done neough reading to comment, but I do recall an issue revolving around the strategic importance of the heights.


Yet.

You keep posting only one sides faults of the equation.



I believe Israel received international criticism from this move. Its an important region to all it would appear.


What's important is telling both sides of the story not just one.
IMHO of course.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by all2human
Torn apart from a foreign funded war,with there own Rebels firing on them..
iv'e done my research,have you?
edit on 11-11-2012 by all2human because: (no reason given)

You're quick to shift the issue aren't you.
How in the world does that matter at all? For all I care it could be torn apart from an alien invasion, it still doesn't matter that it's absolutely absurd to even suggests anyone is going to occupy that area.

The situation can barely keep from exploding as it is with the civil war and the borders as they are, and you imply that someone is going enter itself into this wild conflict between some dubious rebels and the Syrian government and occupy a territory that is clearly out of anyone's control?
As if Israel doesn't have issues with it's neighbors already.

The fact you've "done your research" (that probably revolves around snooping in RT.com and some nonsense blogs) does not change the fact that you're talking out of your ass. Nobody, especially not Israel, is going to occupy Syria as it is right now. Suggesting so only proves you're nothing more than an internet armchair general that knows nothing of what he's talking about.


Originally posted by Shenon
And here is another clue:

Aren´t UN-Forces currently responsible for the "Protection" of the Golan Heights? Why did they allow "Syrian Tanks" to enter the Area? Aren´t they there to prevent such things?

A clue for what?
UN forces have never been able to keep the peace on any border in the region. They don't even have the mandate to open fire in order to protect themselves. You think they'll do it to protect someone else?
I don't think it's a clue to some conspiracy more than it's a clue to the UN's impotence regarding peace keeping.

The same BS happened in Lebanon with the peace-keeping "force" that basically did nothing but present a nuisance to both sides.
edit on 11-11-2012 by IsraeliGuy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 



What's important is telling both sides of the story not just one.
IMHO of course.


I could not agree with your more.

However, as i have started to allude to in some other Israel focused threads, it is become difficult to remain unbiased. When a Israeli bulldozer runs over a Palestinians home, while hummers swerve to hit children throwing rocks, I find not real ability to defend these actions.

No one is guiltless. My only issue that has grown since my time began on ATS but a short year ago, is that Israel seems reluctant to admit any guilt.

In a very guilty world, Israels claims to innocence concerns me.

edit on 11-11-2012 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shenon
And here is another clue:

Aren´t UN-Forces currently responsible for the "Protection" of the Golan Heights? Why did they allow "Syrian Tanks" to enter the Area? Aren´t they there to prevent such things?

edit on 11-11-2012 by Shenon because: (no reason given)


Israel is actually responsible for protection of the Golan. This is part of Israel, annexed during the Six Day War. UN observes, that's all



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs

What's important is telling both sides of the story not just one.
IMHO of course.


I could not agree with your more.

However, as i have started to allude to in some other Israel focused threads, it is become difficult to remain unbiased. When a Israeli bulldozer runs over a Palestinians home, while hummers swerve to hit children throwing rocks, I find not real ability to defend these actions.

No one is guiltless. My only issue that has grown since my time began on ATS but a short year ago, is that Israel seems reluctant to admit any guilt.


In contrast to the Arab population that simply rushes to admit their guilt? Puh-lease.

If you're trying to hint it's important to look at both sides before reaching a conclusion, perhaps you could start by not being biased against Israel.

Also, would you really set your opinion on these matters according to ATS threads that focus on Israel?
It's just like watching propaganda in order to stay unbiased. Absurd.

If anything, the Israeli argument is mostly based on facts and the reasoning for things to happen, while the Arab argument shoots straight for the emotional part. Most fall for the emotional stuff.
A very fine example would be your post that speaks of demolishing houses without even trying to realize why does that happen.
Does it serve any goal? Is it only to be seen as evil? Is it really necessary?
If you truly believed it's important to look at both sides of the story you wouldn't be so quick to judge that as Israel's fault so quickly.
edit on 11-11-2012 by IsraeliGuy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs
No one is guiltless. My only issue that has grown since my time began on ATS but a short year ago, is that Israel seems reluctant to admit any guilt.


This seems to be a universal problem in the ME. Not Just Israel but Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia,Yemen, Libya and Egypt etc etc etc

All of which have played the denial game and many have also as you laughed at earlier and found amusing ignore the UN like Iran has over it's Nuclear program.....





top topics
 
8
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join