View Single Post
  #6  
Old October 14th 03, 09:42 PM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 14 Oct 2003 08:52:39 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:


How do you figure that since Israel treats its Arabs/Palestinians
better than any of the oil-rich regimes in the region, which
ironically promote a Palestinian state but refuse to take any
Palestinians into their own rich kingdoms. BTW, the "innnocent
civilians" you mention are 9 chances out of 10 shooting at Israelis
from their homes, hosting Hamas or other terrorists, or chanting
"death to Israel".


So expressing a hatred for Israel warrants a death sentence? Does not
sound very democratic to me.

Israel is a pretty small island of freedom in a vast region of brutal
regimes with oppressive Islamic laws.


Islamic law is no more repressive than Jewish law.

Only to confirmed jews and assumed sympathisers. Not much freedom
there if you belong to the wrong ethnic group.
Not that I'm not even implying the neighbouring nations are nice guys.


Again, how can you reach that conclusion when Israel has bent over
backwards trying to make the distinction between peaceful Palestinians
and those that support terror? Everytime Israel relaxes restrictions
and makes an effort to move forward in negotiations... BAM!!!...
another suicide bombing (which is of course orchestrated from Yasser
Arafat himself and his terror connections). And how can Israel
negotiate when nations like Syria, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia are
pouring in funds to the terrorists or tunneling in weapons to them?
The Israelis have a genuine right to self-preservation and if that
means an Apaches fires into a crowd to take out a Hamas leader- too
bad.

No, Israel is bent on the destruction of the Palestinians, just as the
Palestinians are bent of the destruction of Israel. Two wrongs do not
make right.


Israel would only use nuclear weapons to protect itself in the event
that the nation was about to fall- as a last resort. But Israel's
neighbors only want to build a bomb to be used against Israel.


And you know this how??

The US only wanted the bomb to kick the **** out of the Japanese, and
to intimidate the Russians. In the eyes of many in the region, Israel
has been a constant and violently active military threat since it was
created. I don't approve of the use of nuclear weapons, but it does
seem like the only way to be rid of Israel, and thus to the Arabs, a
last resort. The alternative is to live under the threat of Israeli
agression for all eternity.

Now you've really gone overboard. It was Japan that attacked Pearl Harbor, raped China and used bio-weapons on them, killed Allied soldiers on death marches, and did human medical experiments on helpless civilians with Unit 731.

Their determined kamikaze attacks and fanatical devotion to the
Emperor made it imperative that we use the atomic bombs to end the war
with the least casualties for both the US and Japanese. A homeland
invasion would have taken years and the casualties on both sides
probably in the millions. As far as Israel goes that nation has
between 200-400 nuclear weapons estimated (low-to-high) and has never
used them despite Saddams 1991 provocation with the Scuds and the all
too real threat that one of those warheads might have been chemical.
If you remember 1990 then you will recall Saddam threatening to burn
Israel utterly, so when the Scuds went flying Israel had to use
restraint not knowing what was in the warheads. Israel could have
destroyed Baghdad or for that matter Damascus, Tehran, or Riyadh.
Israel has no such intention, just a safeguard in the event of a war
that enters Israeli territory with no hope of winning. An Arab bomb on
the other hand has only one target and purpose- Israel, to kill the
Jews.

I can't believe you would not be against this. You seem to side with
the enemies of peace.


Peace has many enemies in the middle east, and Israel is formost among
them. It is you who sides with the enemies of peace.


Syria, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yasser
Arafat have funded and carried out terrorist attacks against Israel
and the West for decades. Israel has stood strong and retaliated. In
extreme cases Israel has carried out pre-emptive attacks that only did
good (like the Osirak reactor and killing Gerald Bull). Had they not
then Iraq would have had a bomb by 1991 and a Supergun to fire it
against Israel or coalition troops. Israel is not the aggressor here
but they refuse to be helpless victims of terror. That's why the US
supports Israel.


Thank God President Bush is for Israel.


If said entity exists I have more relevant bones to pick with it. Bush
is pretty far down the list.


Your atheistic anti-semitism is showing.


I think you should take a trip to Israel yourself Mr. Minyard and see
what life is like. Talk to an average Israeli family or person in the
street. They don't want war, they want peace. But not at any cost.


They (at least those represented by the actions of the current
government) want peace through the annihilation of the Palestinian
people, and any other group that stands against them, in a country
twice the size originally allocated to them. Sounds like a repeat
performance of Hitler and his cronies.
I can only hope that Israel, like Germany, will eventually come to its
senses.

Hey, the Palestinians had their chance for a state in 1948 and they

rejected the proposal, choosing instead to try to push the Jews into
the sea in war. They failed. And then they tried 4 more times to do it
militarily and failed 4 more times. Now, its the "plight of the poor
Palestinians" nonsense. And let me tell you that Yasser Arafat won't
be content with the '67 borders- he wants Israel ultimately destroyed
and all the land. Same old goal, different strategy.

Israel isn't a theocracy but they are justified morally in having the
bomb.


Nobody is justified in using such a doomsday weapon, whether that use
is military or political. If Israel isn't a theocracy, than why do
jews (not Israelis) have such priviliges in Israel?


The US was justified when we had the bomb. Had Germany or Japan built
one they would have used it against us and we were at war. Germany
failed to build one due to impure graphite that led the German
scientists down the wrong road. However, Germany had two radiological
weapons under construction in 1945 that would have been equally
disturbing if used. Fortunately they were discovered by the Allies and
dismantled. Japan, OTOH, was recieving Uranium from Germany and did
have a program to build a bomb at a location in occupied Korea. It is
still not clear how far they progressed but had they made a bomb they
would have used it against any US invasion force. Israel has been at
war 6 times since 1948 and has never used its bombs. The Israeli
nuclear deterrent keeps Syria, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia in line.
As an Israeli saying goes "The Arabs have the oil, but we have the
matches". As long as the Arabs leave Israel alone, then they have
nothing to fear.
As far as an Israeli theocracy go, that is nonsense. It is true that
Israel allows aliya from any nation where Jews want to leave (Russia,
Argentina, Ethiopia, etc...) but that does not in any way interfere
with the priviliges that Arab Israelis get, which is greater than in
any Arab nation. The second Intifada, however, has had grave
consequences for the Palestinian people whose leader Yasser Arafat has
put in peril by his unwillingness to truly seek peace and negotiate
for an end to the conflict. It is Yasser himself that condemns the
Palestinians to be unemployed, impoverished, and in harms way... yet
he has no remorse in using his own people for his own selfish
purposes. Any leader that commands his people to sacrifice their
children in order to kill a Jew is a murderer at heart and doesnt
deserve a Nobel Peace Prize.

Rob


Rob A


Germany never came close to a bomb, they never even sustained a
reaction. Mr. Arafat is in collusion with terrorists, just as the
Israeli Premier is, they are both evil.

Al Minyard