Israel's Raid on Syria: Prelude to a Nuke Crisis?

Post Reply New Topic

Did you just attribute a quote to ascan that was not something he said?

Attribute quotes to members that are not what they said and I will ban you and there will be no appeal.

Every member here is entitled to express his opinion about the issues. You are entitled to express a different opinion about the issues.

he basically expressed almost verbatem what kind of rhetoric bill o'reilly expresses daily (though i think the tough talk part actually more reflects in the style of rush limbaugh but if i posted him, i'd be accused of calling ascan fat or something so why bother) and i felt i needed to point it out in a parody manner because there was no point in trying to refute someone who is just talking rhetoric and ad hominem attacks.

i didn't realize that such a post could be put me in line for an e-spanking.


though i hardly think that my post amounts to nearly the response you're threatening.

Ascan's pretty much right on the money. When the state of Israel was formed, the Arab peoples who lived in the region at the time were given a very good deal in regards to land retained by them. However, they chose to go to war instead, thinking they could defeat the young nation. Failed utterly, needless to say.

And since then, every action Israel has taken towards peace has been repaid by the Muslim Terrorists with more terror and more missile attacks. I urge everyone to check out a timeline starting with the early 90s of Israel making peace overtures, and the Muslim Terrorists responding with more terror attacks.

I don't see how people can continue to defend the Muslim Terrorists inhabiting the Gaza Strip. It was only a couple years ago that Israel removed their own settlers from that land to give it back to the Muslim Terrorists in exchange for peace. But the Muslim Terrorists now do nothing but bombard areas within range with rockets.

Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel in its charter, not the other way around.

All these and more are the reasons why I believe that far from giving Israel a "free pass" on its actions, the Liberal Media comes down way, way too hard on it. Israel would frankly be justified in rounding up and deporting all the Muslim Terrorists living in Gaza, and as we all know they have the military capability to level Gaza. For the record I don't support that, but even if they were to do it, they'd still be miles better than the Muslim Terrorists.

Sure, if you consider being driven off your lands and pushed into temporary refugee camps "a very good deal." These camps still exist a half-century later - it really should be no surprise that they have festered and become a source of violence. Instead of trying to solve this problem, Israel has illegally expanded her borders and pumped most of the water out from under of the West Bank. Israel wants terrorism against her - it is a great excuse to build a 'protective' wall that runs outside of the internationally recognized borders, to bomb the suburbs of Beruit.

You could've just said so. It would've made your opinion on the issue more clear. There is no need to mock or humiliate another member. Misuse of the quote feature is abuse of your privileges. Abuse of your privileges can result in loss of your privileges.

I'm British; the leftist-controlled television news, here, isn't exactly replete with the rhetoric of the American right, you know. What I said is just common sense, to most.

Wow, then I should have come to you when a now-banned member was doing that to me. (That's not what he was banned for -- he eventually discovered other ways to get banned.) Instead, I went to another mod, who said he couldn't do anything about it, even though this member was making up 10 quotes per day "by" me.

An informed article on the subject can be found at http://www.counterpunch.org/cook09272007.html

Counterpunch does, on occasion, go off the deep end on some subjects but also frequently publishes factually based articles by people on the scene. This seems to be one of the latter.

I'm sorry for your unpleasant experience. Moderation of this site experiences fluxation from time to time which has the potential to be challenging for all of us. If you're dissatisfied with the response you get from any mod, you can always appeal to me. I will not reverse another mod's decision, but I will discuss your issue with them. If you're dissatisfied with my response, you can always appeal to Alex.

You started by distorting what I said, and finished it up by being completely misinformed.

The arab nations were OFFERED a good deal. They chose to go to war instead because they thought they could get an even better one. They got their asses kicked. And then the nations like Jordan and Lebanon wouldn't allow the Palestinians - all of whom were enemy combattants and lawfully could be kicked out of the nation of Israel - entry into their lands. That's where those refugee camps came from. The actions of Arab nations.

Saying that Israel has illegally expanded her borders is what they call "patent nonsense". Might I add that the Sinai Penninsula was given back to Egypt when they sued for peace, and the Golan Heights have never been given back to Syria because Syria doesn't want peace, they want to, and I quote, "Pave the road from Damascus to Tel Aviv with the skulls of Jewish children". And thus, all that other nonsense about building a wall so they can bomb Beirut is nonsense. The wall isn't even anywhere NEAR Beirut. If you're going to make an argument like that, at least have the sense to say they won't give back the Golan Heights because it's too militarily useful (which is true, but they're mainly just keeping Syria from having it and installing missile launchers on it like they did during the 6 Day War).

So is that thing about Israel "wanting terrorism"... the Wall across West Bank has cut terrorism by 90%. If they didn't want terrorism, they wouldn't have built the thing.

You see, this is why I'm so openly hostile to anyone who doesn't completley support Israel over the Muslim Terrorists - because it's stupid on every level of the word not to.

I have to believe that the reason supporting Muslim Terrorists over Israel has become so en vogue on the left is because the left is so completely deranged with Bush hatred, that they hate everything Bush likes, and since Bush likes Israel and hates Muslim Terrorists, they must hate Israel and like Muslim Terrorists.

or how about that 80+% middle east terrorism springs back to the creation of israel?

it isn't bush that likes israel, it's american politicians in general. if you want to stay in office, you support israel. there's no two ways about it.

there's no "en vogue" movement against israel...it's people coming to their senses that there's a way to fix this without the murder of millions of muslims in the process.

i know you're brittish, you support the NDP...you're essentially a xenophobe far right supporter.....or....expressing the same views and opinions of bill o'reilly (his fox news persona) and rush limbaugh.


your "common sense" also consists of being biggoted against gays and near-racist statements against immigrants into your country.

Here's an interesting article that my brother just emailed me:

SILENCE IN SYRIA, PANIC IN IRAN

Dr. Jack Wheeler

One of India's top ranking generals assigned to liaise with the Iranian military recently returned to New Delhi from several days in Tehran - in a state of complete amazement.

"Everyone in the government and military can only talk of one thing," he reports. "No matter who I talked to, all they could do was ask me, over and over again, 'Do you think the Americans will attack us?' 'When will the Americans attack us?' 'Will the Americans attack us in a joint operation with the Israeli s?' How massive will the attack be?' on and on, endlessly. The Iranians are in a state of total panic."

And that was before September 6. Since then, it's panic-squared in Tehran. The mullahs are freaking out in fear. Why? Because of the silence in Syria.

On September 6, Israeli Air Force F-1 5 and F-16s conducted a devastating attack on targets deep inside Syria near the city of Dayr AZ-Zawr. Israel's military censors have muzzled the Israeli media, enforcing an extraordinary silence about the identity of the targets. Massive speculation in the world press has followed, such as Brett Stephens' Osirak II? in yesterday's (9/18) Wall St. Journal.

Stephens and most everyone else have missed the real story. It is not Israel's silence that "speaks volumes" as he claims, but Syria's. Why would the Syrian government be so tight-lipped about an act of war perpetrated on their soil?

The first half of the answer lies in this story that appeared in the Israeli media last month (8/13): Syria's Antiaircraft System Most Advanced In World. Syria has gone on a profligate buying spree, spending vast sums on Russian systems, "considered the cutting edge in aircraft interception technology."

Syria now "possesses the most crowded antiaircraft system in the world," with "more than 200 antiaircraft batteries of different types," some of which are so new that they have been installed in Syria "before being introduced into Russian operation service."

While you're digesting that, take a look at the map of Syria: Notice how far away Dayr AZ-Zawr is from Israel. An F15/16 attack there is not a tiptoe across the border, but a deep, deep penetration of Syrian airspace. And guess what happened with the Russian super-hyper-sophisticated cutting edge antiaircraft missile batteries when that penetration took place on September 6th.

Nothing.

El blanko. Silence. The systems didn't even light up, gave no indication whatever of any detection of enemy aircraft invading Syrian airspace, zip, zero, nada. The Israelis (with a little techie assistance from us) blinded the Russkie antiaircraft systems so completely the Syrians didn't even know they were blinded.

Now you see why the Syrians have been scared speechless. They thought they were protected - at enormous expense - only to discover they are defenseless. As in naked.

Thus the Great Iranian Freak-Out - for this means Iran is just as nakedly defenseless as Syria. I can tell you that there are a lot of folks in the Kirya (IDF headquarters in Tel Aviv) and the Pentagon right now who are really enjoying the mullahs' predicament. Let's face it: scaring the terror masters in Tehran out of their wits is fun.

It's so much fun, in fact, that an attack destroying Iran's nuclear facilities and the Revolutionary Guard command/control centers has been delayed, so that France (under new management) can get in on the fun too.

On Sunday (9/16), Sarkozy's foreign minister Bernard Kouchner announced that "France should prepare for the possibility of war over Iran's nuclear program."

All of this has caused Tehran to respond with maniacal threats. On Monday (9/17), a government website proclaimed that "600 Shihab-3 missiles" will be fired at targets in Israel in response to an attack upon Iran by the US/Israel. This was followed by Iranian deputy air force chief Gen. Mohammad Alavi announcing today (9/19) that "we will attack their (Israeli) territory with our fighter bombers as a response to any attack."

A sure sign of panic is to make a threat that everyone knows is a bluff. So our and Tel Aviv's response to Iranian bluster is a thank-you-for-sharing yawn and a laugh. Few things rattle the mullahs' cages more than a yawn and a laugh.

Yet no matter how much fun this sport with the mullahs is, it is also deadly serious. The pressure build-up on Iran is getting enormous. Something is going to blow and soon. The hope is that the blow-up will be internal, that the regime will implode from within.

But make no mistake: an all-out full regime take-out air assault upon Iran is coming if that hope doesn't materialize within the next 60 to 90 days. The Sept. 6 attack on Syria was the shot across Iran's bow.

So - what was attacked near Dayr az-Zawr? It's possible it was North Korean "nuclear material" recently shipped to Syria, i.e., stuff to make radioactively "dirty " warheads, but nothing to make a real nuke with as the Norks don't have real nukes (see Why North Korea's Nuke Test Is Such Good News, October 2006).

Another possibility is it was to take out a stockpile of long-range Zilzal surface-to-surface missiles recently shipped from Iran for an attack on Israel.

A third is it was a hit on the stockpile of Saddam's chemical/bio weapons snuck out of Iraq and into Syria for safekeeping before the US invasion of April 2003.

But the identity of the target is not the story - for the primary point of the attack was not to destroy that target. It was to shut down Syria's Russian air defense system during the attack. Doing so made the attack an incredible success.

I disagree that it must be stupid to completely support Israel in their every move. In fact, you display an obvious partisanship. Any neutral observer would see that there is a cycle of violence in the Middle East, and that all parties can get fugly from time to time. History has shown that peace requires compromise and recognition that the governments and political movements there are not saintly. But the last time there was real movement towards peace, the Ultra-orthodox assassinated Rabin, and Israel rewarded this act of terrorism by turning to a Likud government with no interest in compromise or peace.

Israel's recent war against Lebanon can only be described as terrorism. While the Hezbollah presence along the southern border of Lebanon were legitimate military targets, they weren't the primary target. Bridges and dairies and apartment buildings were hit far from the border zone; areas that were not militarily connected to any real threat were devastated. The objectives were not merely to neutralize Hezbollah, it was to punish Lebanon. And Israel was unwilling to invest the lives needed to neutralize the military threat, but they did a good job of punishing people not connected with the fighting. And when Israel finally pulled out, it dropped millions of anti-personnel mines. This is really no better than blowing up cafes or supermarkets with suicide belts - the fact that a child will get her leg or face blown off a year or ten down the road instead of immediately makes no difference, nor does the fact that these weapons were dropped by plane instead of delivered in person.

If they had built the fence on their own border, I would say good for them, good fences make for good neighbors. This wall was not built along Israel's recognized borders, it extends into occupied territory where its being used to consolidate Israeli military, economic and political control. Settlements continue to be built on land taken in a war that Israel started, and this is in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions drafted by the UK. The US has abandoned its traditional role as an 'honest broker' for peace ... US presidents from Truman through Clinton all failed your test of not completely supporting Israel. Only the genius Bush the son has the intelligence to see things your way. And look what he's done everywhere else.

Well stated - however, you did not bother to acknowledge that Hezbollah made using civilian infrastructure their main tactic in battling Israel. Everyone knows that on the ground, Hezbollah isn't even the slightest match for Israel. Really, their only hope of victory was a propaganda victory with the Liberal Media. Which they got - it's been demonstrated time after time how biased for the Hezbos and against Israel the media was. Research Zombietime's claims about the Red Cross Ambulance Bombing, or look up Adnan Hajj on Wikipedia.

I don't know the real truth of what happened in the Israel/Hezbollah war. I personally think your claim of dumping cluster bombs on residential neighborhoods is a bit absurd, in that it would be a colossal waste of money for Israel in addition to handing the enemy all the propaganda they could use.

As for other presidents not agreeing with my way of seeing it - well, we weren't at war with Muslim Terrorists under the Truman through Clinton administrations. The Muslim Terrorist infestation that Clinton ignored blew up in Bush's face. Not that I make any claims that Bush has been anything remotely resembling competent since his reelection in 2004.

Which is what? The Jews leaving the country that is theirs, or laying down their arms so the Muslims can kill them?

See this on Israeli cluster bombs. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/761781.html