Galloway wipes the floor with Sky News anchor

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by White Doors

I don;t see Israel starting wars with their neighbours

Then you obviously haven't even bothered to look at an ounce of Israel's history since it's formation.

Go educate yourself on the topic.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Israel has never started a war in it's entire existence. You are the one who has to do some research my friend. Try taking a history course or two.

That is 100% false.

Not sure how you can suggest that I should take a history course when you're clearly spewing falsities yourself.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Jordan and Egypt have and I don't see Israel attacking them at all, do you?

Not lately. Obviously you would like to ignore the rest of the history of that region because Israel has clearly attacked Egypt in the past.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

That is 100% false.

Not sure how you can suggest that I should take a history course when you're clearly spewing falsities yourself.

With the exception of the Suez Crisis, what war has Israeli been involved in which it was not provoked?

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Then you obviously haven't even bothered to look at an ounce of Israel's history since it's formation.

Go educate yourself on the topic.

No it is you that needs to study their history. They have been invaded many times. The only time it was even 'close' that Israel started a conflict was when they did a pre-emptive strike as it was plain to see that the Arab countries were about to attack them.

[drp_69]

Hmmm! Isn't it strange that ones perception of media bias depends on which side you support in this struggle!
I believe that most media outlets are heavily biased against Israel and anything that they do for self preservation.
Dont let anyone here tell me that media outlets like the CBC and BBC are biased in Israels favour. (there are others too)
Recently on the BBC's Hard Talk I saw an interview with Israel's UN ambassador, the host (a female whose name I cant recall) was so obviously anti-Israel it was shocking. She was rude objectionable and obstreperous. To the ambassadors credit, he kept his calm and clearly won the debate (as it turned into one) hands down.
I am with White Doors on this one. Can anyone explain why civilians in Israel hide or huddle in bunkers whilst civilians in Lebanon have missiles hidden (by Hezballah) in their houses or under their beds? Spot the difference?
Hezzbollah has clearly stated their primary aim is to destroy the state of Israel, they are supported by Iran whose lunatic leader has publicly stated the same.

[Bleeding Red]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

The difference in that parallel being that the timeframes are large. Israel was only established in 1948.

So it is all in the timing?

And by 1940 only 30% of the people in that region were Jewish.

Yes, because thet were displaced (forcably in some cases) by Assyrians, Babylonians and Romans.
Weren't Natives a majority in the 1800's?
Ottoman Empire docs show that a good percentage for the "Native" Arab population emigrated to what is now Israel in the '40's also.

They've displaced (forcibly in some cases) many Arabs (711,000 palestinians according the UN's numbers) since then and that is a major cause for any of these conflicts.

The question here would be are hezbollah Palestinians? I guess the argument could be made that hezbollah count their solidarity with the Palestinians as a reason for the initial incursion (notwithsatnding any so called covert, wet, black-ops incursions by any other party)

And once again - Many Arabs left Israel through their own accord or per instructions form Egyptian generals who though they would win a war, or by force. Numbers vary on your point of view.

Israel attacked Egypt in the 50's.

in conjunction with the UK and France in response to Egypt's blockade of the Suez Canal in 1956.

In the 60's Israel fought with several of it's Arab neighbors and conquered the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula, and Golan Heights.

Israel fired the first shot in that one - in response to Syria, Jordan and Egypt's military buildup along Israels boarders.

More skirmishes occured between Israel and Syria and Egypt over the next few years. In the 70's Egypt and Syria attacked Israel trying to regain some of the conquered territories.

On the Holiest of Jewing Holy Days - Yom Kippur.

WHITE DOORS: In 1982 Isreal attacked Lebanan and eventually captured Beirut. One might see this as the original cause of their particular conflict despite the fact that Israel did withdraw for a time.

In response to gurilla gunfire coming from across the Lebanon boarder aimed at farmers along that boarder.

Anyways, the roots of this conflict are clearly more recent than your Native example. As such I think the Arabs who have had territory taken away or have suffered an invasion at some point (1982 for Lebanon) have a greater "right" to defend themselves and retaliate than the Indians whose land was stolen from there over a century ago.

So then, if Israel is succesful in implimenting the unilateral withdrawl and basically drawing their own boarders and can hold on to them for over 100 years, then the Palestinians, Arabs and hezbollah at that time will have less of or no right to "defend' themselves?

If hezbollah has the right to redraw the boarders at their whim, whether by peaceful of violent means, then so do the Natives. I don't see how time diminishes a "right"?

[Hakan]

With the exception of the Suez Crisis, what war has Israeli been involved in which it was not provoked?

Right off the top of my head the 6 day war of 1967 where Israel bombed all of eastern Egypt's water pumping stations in the matter of hours.

Was Israel provoked? Maybe, but the first hostilities where undeniably of Israeli origin. Not to mention the overwhelming spoils they received after the war.

[Bingo]

Good lord another string that has me just scratching my head ... I'm with many that wonder what the heck is going on here these days.

Did Israel go too far in this one? I think probably ... but then I wonder how many Calgary based hockey fans supporting a terrorist organization in this would feel the same way if they had loved ones blown up in pizza joints or public buses ignite killing innocent citizens every other day?

No one side is ever right in a war, but this is a faction within a country against a democracy, with said faction clearly being supported by a regime in Iran that has done nothing but incite hatred for the past x number of years.

I think Israel is fed up. Fed up with this crap going on next to them from year to year to year with no end in sight. I can't blame them though they need to get a hold of things before they take it too far and lose world opinion (may have already done this).

There's not a racist or religiously slanted opinion in my body and I really wish this region could find a way out of this mess, but supporting Hezbollah in this really makes me shake my head. Imagine if the US housed a Montana militia group that consistently snuck across the border to kill Canadian citizens?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

If hezbollah has the right to redraw the boarders at their whim, whether by peaceful of violent means, then so do the Natives. I don't see how time diminishes a "right"?

Hard to punish a people for something that their great-great-grandparents did don't you think? In the Israel case we're dealing with things that have happened in one lifetime.

I've actually been thinking of a parallel with Natives in North America. To do so we'd have to invent a fictional scenario. Imagine that for various reasons the world declared a Native state in the middle of Canada. Trying to parallel the situation there is hard because of the religious implications of Jerusalem to both sides but let's try and replace religious and cultural significance with monetary significance. So let's say the world declares Alberta to be the new Native state. Let's say that China helps fund and militarily arm this new state. Then let's say that the Canadians flee this state in massive numbers and natives across NA and the world move there. Let's say the Natives attack BC and Saskatchewan a few times and conquer some territory there. Let's say that they start "settling" these areas by displacing the Canadians that had been living there. Let's say China invades BC under the pretext of having Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Do you think Canadians would have something against both this Native state and China? Do you think we'd have the right to defend our territory? What if this new state attacked Saskatchewan, would we want to retaliate at all?

To me that much more closely parallels the Israel situation then talking about what happened in the 1800's with the Natives.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Hakan

Right off the top of my head the 6 day war of 1967 where Israel bombed all of eastern Egypt's water pumping stations in the matter of hours.

Was Israel provoked? Maybe, but the first hostilities where undeniably of Israeli origin. Not to mention the overwhelming spoils they received after the war.

The massive military buildup of Soviet arms in Syria, Egypt and Iraq is a good enough excuse alone for a pre-emptive strike.

Overwhelming Spoils? Is nation security a spoil of war or simply a necessity? The main territorial acquisitions, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan, were simply seen as strategic buffers. Syrian artillery could have fired deep into Israel from the Golan Heights and the Sinai Peninsula has the perfect geography for blitzkrieg style armour assaults. The Israelis were justifiably protecting themselves.

Now I guess when we get into the issue of Jerusalem, the whole thing takes on a tinge of ideological messiness. In my own opinion, the city should be a city-state along the lines of the Vatican, but no one would ever agree on that.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

The question here would be are hezbollah Palestinians? I guess the argument could be made that hezbollah count their solidarity with the Palestinians as a reason for the initial incursion (notwithsatnding any so called covert, wet, black-ops incursions by any other party)

Well the lines are blurred aren't they? But these displaced people (the Palestinians) certainly settled into many of the surrounding Arab states including Lebanon. Nor should we underestimate the sympathy that must be natural when you see a people uprooted and forced into your land.

But Palestinians are not the only people group that can claim being wronged by Israel since it's inception this century.

Nor we should ignore what feelings must arise in nearby Arab countries when they see how clearly the US has subsidized and militarized Israel. It must create a us against them mentality. The US has been a bully in this region through Israel. They've given an unfair advantage to one state out of many for various reasons.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by peter12

The massive military buildup of Soviet arms in Syria, Egypt and Iraq is a good enough excuse alone for a pre-emptive strike.

Overwhelming Spoils? Is nation security a spoil of war or simply a necessity? The main territorial acquisitions, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan, were simply seen as strategic buffers. Syrian artillery could have fired deep into Israel from the Golan Heights and the Sinai Peninsula has the perfect geography for blitzkrieg style armour assaults. The Israelis were justifiably protecting themselves.

Now I guess when we get into the issue of Jerusalem, the whole thing takes on a tinge of ideological messiness. In my own opinion, the city should be a city-state along the lines of the Vatican, but no one would ever agree on that.

not to mention that golan also has a third of the state of israel's fresh water supply beneath it.

But ya, it's probably because they fear syria's armoured divisions.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Middle..._%28Chomsky%29

Here's a good lecture on the US's middle east policy and their relationship with Israel and the Arab countries.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

not to mention that golan also has a third of the state of israel's fresh water supply beneath it.

But ya, it's probably because they fear syria's armoured divisions.

One week of war would pay for 3 desalination plants. So yeah, it's probably the armoured divisions.

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Well the lines are blurred aren't they? But these displaced people (the Palestinians) certainly settled into many of the surrounding Arab states including Lebanon. Nor should we underestimate the sympathy that must be natural when you see a people uprooted and forced into your land.

But Palestinians are not the only people group that can claim being wronged by Israel since it's inception this century.

Nor we should ignore what feelings must arise in nearby Arab countries when they see how clearly the US has subsidized and militarized Israel. It must create a us against them mentality. The US has been a bully in this region through Israel. They've given an unfair advantage to one state out of many for various reasons.

The USA subsidizes Egypt more than Israel...
Israel has an unfair advantage? Alot of the miltary equipment that Israel has is made there. They don't have Abrahms tanks for example.
How is having a population of @ 6 million and being surrounded by 10's of millions of people that think you are lower than Monkey's an unfair advantage. I mean, I know the 'left' loves to 'cheer' for the underdog and everything (despite the clear delineation of right and wrong here) but you have to really question who has an 'unfair advantage' here. And besides, what a stupid thing to quantify.

And I'll point out that Palestinians already have their own country, it's called Jordan.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by White Doors

The USA subsidizes Egypt more than Israel...

Source?

That sounds blatantly false to me based on the information I've read.

[Hakan]

One week of war would pay for 3 desalination plants. So yeah, it's probably the armoured divisions.

It sure would. Too bad Israel wasn't paying the bill for fuel or weaponry.

[Hakan]

but then I wonder how many Calgary based hockey fans supporting a terrorist organization in this would feel the same way if they had loved ones blown up in pizza joints or public buses ignite killing innocent citizens every other day?

If they were blowing up our pizza joints because my country had invaded Montana and not given back all of the territory then I would probably want my government to give that territory back and begin the process of establishing diplomatic relations.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Source?

That sounds blatantly false to me based on the information I've read.

Don't worry, it is.