Israel on a bombing spree?

www.usatoday.com...

Bombing Gaza

www.nydailynews.com...

Bombing Syria


Who's next?

Seems like a trend.

X

Who is next? =
www.theatlantic.com...

X

I'd think of Gaza as just another day in the Middle East and ..well? It's Israel. What would we expect?

Syria on the other hand ... Hey... One of these days, Assad might just take them up on this and call it what it clearly is. It's not a "surgical strike" or a "preemptive measure". It's an open act of war. Syria's been mighty tolerant so far, but as they are ditching their WMD, they might get real offended that Israel isn't showing appreciation for such an effort and start returning some favors.

What is Netanyahu doing? TRYING to start a war?? What if he succeeds and we just stay home?

There seems to be a lot of hotheads in charge of Israel these days. Can't they get some less aggressive people in charge over there. I wonder what their own citizens think of their leaders obsession with war.

rickymouse
There seems to be a lot of hotheads in charge of Israel these days. Can't they get some less aggressive people in charge over there. I wonder what their own citizens think of their leaders obsession with war.

For a nano second I believed you were talking about America...

reply to post by rickymouse


Yes I would also like to hear what an Israeli thinks on the matter...and then I wonder if its even news over there?
I would imagine from their perspective all they are aware of is the aggression of Hamas.

I know its not a simple situation, but I would like the world to be aware of the destruction being done to all sides.

And then I wonder who is next

X

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I know just the place were Syria can Drop there WMD.

Do us all a favor.

When haven't they been?

Reference: WTC7, among others

Xcouncil=wisdom
www.usatoday.com...

Bombing Gaza

www.nydailynews.com...

Bombing Syria


Who's next?

Seems like a trend.

X

The Gaza bombing was in reply to a rocket attack on southern Israel.
The Syria bombing was to destroy Russian made, Iranian-supplied weapons en route to Hezbollah.
That taken into account... can't say I blame them.

redoubt

The Gaza bombing was in reply to a rocket attack on southern Israel.
The Syria bombing was to destroy Russian made, Iranian-supplied weapons en route to Hezbollah.
That taken into account... can't say I blame them.

That certainly is the story.

We aren't allowed to really question the events that precipitated these responses, though.

reply to post by Xcouncil=wisdom

I think destruction of the Zionist regime (along with some other unexpected governments around the world) has been long planned by the new world order people...They seem to be assisting that act just by allowing the governments simply do what they are really good at,and by doing so most governments will automatically discredit and eventually discharge themselves without "any out side intervention" from TPTB...This seems like a new trend,,let the nature take it's course,then everybody is happy and no one can complain.

reply to post by Ranong


I would never go that far... There are almost 8 million people in Israel, after all. A high enough % to call important are Arab Israelis. I am coming to have a very hard view toward those Israelis that actually DO set their nation's policy...but then, I have no kinder view toward those in our Government in a similar position.

I'd feel it a little unfair if someone dropped a bomb right on my city because of Washington's policies and actions. Heck...They didn't ask me or care what I thought, eh? I don't believe Israel is all that different in that way.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


For some strange reason when there is a war, they never seem to target the capital building right away. It is almost like the ones in power want to destroy most of the people's property and kill as many regular citizens as possible. I suppose no country wants the other country attacking it's leaders, they get to go in exile if they lose. Maybe I am reading more into this than is really there.

But why do governments get so pissed at terrorists, is it because they tend to go after the leaders of the country? 911 did not target a residential neighborhood. They targeted our economic hierarchy and DC. I think there may be some sort of master rule against targeting the rulers of countries myself.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

We know how the USA reacts to a powerful country placing missiles/rockets within striking distance of its borders. (Cuban missile crisis) Do you feel that Israel should react differently?

We also know how the USA reacts when it receives murderous attacks on its citizens within its borders. (9/11) Should Israel react differently?

Wrabbit2000
I'd think of Gaza as just another day in the Middle East and ..well? It's Israel. What would we expect?

Syria on the other hand ... Hey... One of these days, Assad might just take them up on this and call it what it clearly is. It's not a "surgical strike" or a "preemptive measure". It's an open act of war. Syria's been mighty tolerant so far, but as they are ditching their WMD, they might get real offended that Israel isn't showing appreciation for such an effort and start returning some favors.

What is Netanyahu doing? TRYING to start a war?? What if he succeeds and we just stay home?

edit on 1-11-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

The problem with this is, one is Assad would have explain what exactly the Israelis were bombing and that would bring to much attention their arming Hamas and others. Second Syria was no match for Israel before the civil war now its a shadow of what it once was just trying to deal with the rebels. The last thing they would want is to start something with Israel and suddenly find itself under a bombing campaign. That and Russia has military tech deals with Israel it desperately needs to play catch up with the West and Assad only exist so long as Russia sees the relashionship as profitable.

reply to post by whywhynot


You'd be assuming I consider the Cuban Missile Crisis to have been worth the risk of global thermonuclear war.

In my modern eyes and modern thinking, it wasn't worth it at all. At it turns out, what no one then could possibly have known? We apparently came within a hairs breath of it. Kennedy had NO idea battlefield nukes were already deployed with the Russians ..not just intermediate missiles. He couldn't have guessed the battlefield commanders had weapons free status on them, if they came under direct assault.

How many unknowns exist here that Israeli leaders think they know everything about, but may find out later? They had no clue about. (If there is a 'later' after such a mistake is made) World Wars (#1) have started over such fatal miscalculations. I'd love it if we didn't see Part #3 by accident of literal ignorance while throwing bombs and missiles around.

reply to post by MrSpad


Actually, No. Assad has no obligation to explain anything. An act of war is an act of war.

If, somewhere deeeeep down in intelligence files, it shows Bin Laden and his bunch of merry murderers were after something very specific that September day ...did or would the US have felt obligated to explain all that in detail before going to war in Afghanistan?

We shouldn't, wouldn't, and didn't ...if there was anything remotely like that involved to explain. Hard to say...since the act itself was all the cause the world figured we needed for the first active response to war. (not counting the second half which came later in Iraq).

My understanding of general international law and practice is that bombing targets within a sovereign nation is plenty to justify the start of open hostilities by both parties to the conflict ....the one bombing things started.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Never-the-less this is not idealized but real time reactions of countries. They don't have all the facts beforehand and if they hold action until they do it may be too late.

The Middle East remains a conventional war because no one with nuclear weapons needs those weapons to protect themselves or to further their national goals. The surest path to a nuclear war is for Israel to feel so threatened by an enemy that conventional weapons will not protect their people. So far Israel has been able to manage their threats thru surgical strikes. No strikes and the threats build to an overwhelming threat and that is when they would go nuclear.

Remember what a small country this is, a jet can across the width of the country, in some areas, in about 1 minute. I bring this up because they could be quickly overwhelmed conventionally if they don't take actions to keep the serious threats at bay.

reply to post by whywhynot

Never-the-less this is not idealized but real time reactions of countries. They don't have all the facts beforehand and if they hold action until they do it may be too late.

What you're arguing there sounds a lot like the doctrine of preemptive war. That, in my view, could better be termed as a War Crime. Outright. 1 count for every man, woman and child that die as a result of the first strike without direct and unmistakable aggressive provocation.

Israel could simply declare it's nukes, declare just how big they really are and make MAD or the Samson Option public, well known and standard policy. That puts the ball 100% in the Arab's court. If they THEN would like to commit suicide by Israeli Nuclear Warhead? Hey...attack! It'll take 30-45 minutes for their greatest aspiration to come true. In reality, it would take an absolute madman to attack Israel and I think even Israel knows it.

It's why, I believe, they feel so comfortable bombing other nations. They know full well, no one is stupid enough to risk a Jericho Missile coming back at 'em for responding to the attacks.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I would normally agree with you, except when speaking about the Middle East. I doubt that the MAD approach would be effective against a culture that has suicide bombers whose mother praise their son's death. The suicide bomber attacks tell me that they are not only unafraid of death but actually welcome it and therefore MAD has no effect.