If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:
Matt Giwer wrote: Jordan wrote: Matt Giwer wrote: Dean A. Markley wrote: Israel need not hit Damascus. All they need do is hit Assad's house near Latakia with a 2000 lb bomb. How does that act of war improve matters? By demonstrating to the Syrians that when they commit acts of war against Israel through third party clients, Syria will suffer _direct_ retaliation. Resistance to occupation is lawful and not an act of war EVEN IF there were evidence of the implicit assertion that Syria were sponsoring it. Actually, whether or not it is "lawful" (the deliberate murder of civilians is generally NOT "lawful" under any version of the Laws of War), it is most definitely an "act of war." By attempting armed "resistance" in a lost territory, a national government backing this resistance is committing an act of war against the occupier. The war may then resume, and let the dice fall where they may. Given the relative strength of Israel and Syria, I suspect that rather soon Syria will have some _more_ lost territory to complain about. Capturing a prisoner of war from the occupying power is lawful in international law. Yes, _under conditions of WAR_. Of course, if Syria is actively at war with Israel, Syria is violating the truce that ended Peace For Galilee, and Israel would now be within her rights to also carry out warlike operations against Syria. Their only obligation is to allow Red Cross visits along with proper treatment in accordance with his rank. Have such Red Cross visits been allowed? Even if Syria or Iran were sponsoring it it would be no different from French support of American colonies Um, Matt, that support _was_ an act of war, and it led to the escalation of the American Revolutionary War into a world war involving America, England, France, Holland and Spain. I direct you to Tuchman, Barbara, _The First Salute_ for some of the details; there are many other diplomatic and military histories of the 1770's-1780's. or Czech support of Zionists by sending arms to let Stalin pretend innocense. Yes, that too was an act of war (against Britain as the occupying Power). What you're not getting about an "act of war" is that the victim doesn't have to choose to treat the situation as a war. And often doesn't. Israel seems to be finally losing all patience with the Palestinians and with Syria, which if true I am very heartily glad to see. The radical Arabs need another good bitch-slapping to remind them of their place in the balance-of-power food chain, IMHO. Resistance to occupation is always lawful by any means available. And that is specifically because it was approved against the Nazis in WWII. Yes, in time of WAR. What are you not getting about the fact that, when Britain and Russia supported armed resistance against the Nazis, it was in the context of a WAR? Let the *******s _bleed_ like they made Lebanon bleed. The Druze SLA army that Israel financed to start the civil war in Lebanon (with the hope of establishing a friendly Christian government) was the one which asked Syria to intervene to save their butts. As the SLA was an Israeli puppet we rationally assume that request was made with the approval of Israel. Israel tried to abandon their puppets but public opinion forced the government not only to give them residence but citizenship if they requested it. I think you're forgetting a _lot_ of history here, specifically involving the PLO and the later Syrian occupation of Lebanon. Sincerely Yours, Jordan |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:
Matt Giwer wrote in
: Dean A. Markley wrote: Israel need not hit Damascus. All they need do is hit Assad's house near Latakia with a 2000 lb bomb. How does that act of war improve matters? Attitude adjustment. Makes it clear to them they are responsible for their surrogates. And-uh it makes the Syrians look powerless. Plus its fun seein' Asshat palaces goes kerblooie... IBM |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:
[snip] Israel need not hit Damascus. All they need do is hit Assad's house near Latakia with a 2000 lb bomb. Or that palace the Assads have east (IIRC) of Damascus. They could probably do that with ground launched rockets. IBM |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:
Well I hope they don't start before my popcorn is ready. It is however about freakin' time. The Ass-Syrians have needed an attitude adjustment for a long time. IBM |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:
Report: Israel Threatens To Assassinate Palestinian PM If Militants
Don't Release Captured Soldier... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/0...-_n_24178.html |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:
dontcowerfromthetruth wrote: Keep in mind (when reading the following) that Syria has supposedly made some sort of defense pact with Iran. Syria and Iran have made an explicit, open defense pact. So is attacking Damascus the way the Zionists will expand the war for Israel to Syria and Iran next (in accordance with the 'A Clean Break' agenda that esteemed intelligence writer/author James Bamford discusses on pages 261-269/321 of his 'A Pretext for War' book - see the URL about such included after the following) as Bush and Cheney have already said that the US would come to Israel's aid if Israel is attacked which will most likely happen if Israel gets into it with Syria and Iran: Well damn, it would be _nice_ if this happened -- it would get the war with Syria and Iran out into the open and put a powerful ally on our side. Plus, Israel could smack around Syria, maybe bite off another chunk of their territory, keeping the Syrians occupied while we took out the Iranian regime. If, that is, we're ready for it. I don't know though that the timing of this is entirely or at all under Israeli control. Remember that this all started because Hamas, feeling its oats as the new government of "Palestine," has decided to continue to step up terrorist operations against Israel, apparently not fully grasping that _as the government_ these are much more clearly Palestinian acts of war against Israel. I also don't see why all this would be to the Israeli advantage, unless this is combined with a long-term plan to drive the Palestinians out of Gaza and the West Bank. I _hope_ that it is, but I greatly fear that the Israelis still imagine peaceful coexistence with the Palestinians possible -- they've been pursuing that mirage for a very long time now. Though I do think that it's likely that Israel will emerge from this First Terrorist War that began in 2001 with a stronger position vis-a-vis the Islamic world Sincerely Yours, Jordan PS - I know full well that you meant this to be alarming and ominous. However, I'm rather pro-Israeli, and see it as a good development for the world if Israeli power grows. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:
Jordan wrote:
dontcowerfromthetruth wrote: Keep in mind (when reading the following) that Syria has supposedly made some sort of defense pact with Iran. Syria and Iran have made an explicit, open defense pact. As they have both been threatened by both Israel and the US as was Iraq and they have seen the US slaughter in Iraq that is the least they should do. So is attacking Damascus the way the Zionists will expand the war for Israel to Syria and Iran next (in accordance with the 'A Clean Break' agenda that esteemed intelligence writer/author James Bamford discusses on pages 261-269/321 of his 'A Pretext for War' book - see the URL about such included after the following) as Bush and Cheney have already said that the US would come to Israel's aid if Israel is attacked which will most likely happen if Israel gets into it with Syria and Iran: Well damn, it would be _nice_ if this happened -- it would get the war with Syria and Iran out into the open and put a powerful ally on our side. Plus, Israel could smack around Syria, maybe bite off another chunk of their territory, keeping the Syrians occupied while we took out the Iranian regime. If, that is, we're ready for it. http://www.giwersworld.org/opinion/running.phtml 2006 June 26 Palestinians guilty again In the two weeks before Palestinians from Gaza destroyed an Israeli tank, killing two, injuring one, kidnapping a fourth, had murdered 18 civilians in Gaza including women, children and paramedics. But it is Palestinians who are guilty for fighting back. It is always the same. Zionists can do no wrong. But they kidnapped a member of the Israeli army!!! The day before Israeli troops entered Gaza and kidnapped two Palestinians who have since disappeared. The government press release said they were terrorists but they have not been charged. They have not been heard of since. Ever wonder who sold Bush on the idea of a prison in Guantanamo? The real screw up in this was the failure of IDF policy to kill their own rather than let them be taken prisoner. If Palestinians kill him it will be murder. Looks to me like they will be doing the IDF's job for them. Shocked? Yes the IDF does have this policy and it is well known in Israel. The reason is the voters get hysterical when it happens and demand the government make all the concessions demanded. When it happens near elections the government has been forced to do just that. The policy to kill their own is to avoid having to make concessions to the occupied people. And the world goes along with it The IDF is enforcing a criminal occupation of Gaza. Why is the death of the criminals more important than the deaths of the victims of occupation? Does Israel control the news in the West? I have no answer to that question. I do know the press behaves as though it is controlled by Israel. Why does not the government of Palestine stop it? The government does not have the arms needed because Israel does not want them to have weapons. The government does not have money to pay men to make peace because Israel does not want them to have money to pay salaries. The government in the West Bank does not have access to Gaza because Israel does not want them to have access to Gaza. So first making it impossible for the Palestinian government to do anything about it Israel then holds the government responsible for not stopping it. Where is even a casual mention of the in the news? If Israel controlled the news it is not clear how the coverage could better promote Israeli propaganda. I don't know though that the timing of this is entirely or at all under Israeli control. Remember that this all started because Hamas, feeling its oats as the new government of "Palestine," has decided to continue to step up terrorist operations against Israel, apparently not fully grasping that _as the government_ these are much more clearly Palestinian acts of war against Israel. It all started because a bunch of murderous, thieving Europeans went to Palestine with the explicite intention to expel the native population and steal their property. I also don't see why all this would be to the Israeli advantage, unless this is combined with a long-term plan to drive the Palestinians out of Gaza and the West Bank. I _hope_ that it is, but I greatly fear that the Israelis still imagine peaceful coexistence with the Palestinians possible -- they've been pursuing that mirage for a very long time now. Why are you hoping for an additional war crime such as was found a hanging offense at Nuremberg? Why do you support such a crime against humanity? Are you a Nazi? Though I do think that it's likely that Israel will emerge from this First Terrorist War that began in 2001 with a stronger position vis-a-vis the Islamic world Resistance to occupation is the lawful right of every occupied people. PS - I know full well that you meant this to be alarming and ominous. However, I'm rather pro-Israeli, and see it as a good development for the world if Israeli power grows. Every attack on Israel is completely lawful. http://www.giwersworld.org/israel/bombings.phtml Killing Israelis accords with international law by Matt Giwer, © 2004 [March] Israel and its supporters, affectionately known as Izziehuggers , bemoan the loss of lives proclaimed innocent when Israelis die. That is the usual "poor us" self-pity. Like it or not, international law is on the side of the Palestinians. International law specifically approves attacking members of a foreign military and the destruction of military assets. Attacking members of the foreign military with deadly force is approved by the Geneva and Hague treaties. These agreements do not distinguish between on and off duty. They do not distinguish between active duty and reserve. Israel has universal military service. After all the loopholes and caveats are considered 25-30% of Israelis are either active duty or reserve military. All of them are legitimate targets. It would be improbably bad luck to bomb any gathering of Israelis and not injure or kill at least one member of the Israeli military. The simple presence of one member of the military, active or reserve, justifies any and all attacks. Israel uses this principle when it kills a dozen to get just one so there can be no objection to it. In Israel the public transportation system is a military asset. It is used every day to move troops around the country and back and forth from the occupied territories. In time of war the entire system is commandeered to move troops to the front. They are as much a military asset as a Humvee or a tank or a train in Nazi Germany. Destroying them is not only legitimate but specifically approved. In both cases those who might actually qualify as innocent such as children are considered collateral damage. That makes them unfortunate and unintended casualties in an otherwise lawful attack. The parents know the danger to which they expose their children. The ratio of collateral damage to the intended action is not a consideration in that deaths and injuries are accepted when destroying military assets such as buses. As there is no ratio between a bus and a life it is not a consideration. Israel recognizes the acceptability of collateral loss of life and limb. It dropped a one ton bomb into an apartment building at 2am to kill one man. In the process seventeen others were killed and over a hundred injured. The Prime Minister personally declared this to be a successful operation. Israeli crocodile tears over their own dead while they do the same and worse is simply a propaganda ploy -- one last cynical use for the dead. Israel does have a way out of this. It can simply stop hiding its military among civilians. It can prohibit its civilian population from using military assets such as the bus system. If it were to take those steps it would have justification to object when civilians are harmed. Not only is this impractical it is in fact impossible. Ability to comply with the rules does not change or even mitigate the rules. As long as Israel hides its military among the civilian population all attacks are lawful. Not only are they lawful but Israel excuses its killing of civilians with exactly this argument. It states Palestinian freedom fighters aka terrorists are hiding among the civilian population. Therefore civilians casualties do not mitigate its attacks on its enemies. Reference Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Articles 48-78 Paradise Now doesn't go this far and is still condemned. No question why Zionists have worked so hard to shut down this website. Page reads: 19038 -- If the war on terror stops the price of oil goes back to $30 per barrel and all the investments in ethanol plants go into bankruptcy. -- The Iron Webmaster, 3667 nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml environmentalism http://www.giwersworld.org/environment/aehb.phtml a9 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:
On 1 Jul 2006 11:40:09 -0700
"Jordan" wrote: snip wank and flame fest material This is off topic for soc.history.what-if as this is present/future not past related. -- Lyn David Thomas |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:
Lyn David Thomas wrote:
On 1 Jul 2006 11:40:09 -0700 "Jordan" wrote: snip wank and flame fest material This is off topic for soc.history.what-if as this is present/future not past related. Jordan is s.h.w-i. If the regulars do not ignore why should anyone else? -- Extrajudicial killing is another term for cold blooded murder. -- The Iron Webmaster, 3666 nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml environmentalism http://www.giwersworld.org/environment/aehb.phtml a9 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
No US soldier should have 2 die for Israel 4 oil | Ewe n0 who | Military Aviation | 1 | April 9th 04 11:25 PM |
No US soldier should have 2 die for Israel 4 oil | Ewe n0 who | Naval Aviation | 0 | April 7th 04 07:31 PM |
NO MORE WAR FOR ISRAEL | MORRIS434 | Naval Aviation | 0 | April 4th 04 03:10 PM |
NO MORE WAR FOR ISRAEL | MORRIS434 | Military Aviation | 0 | April 4th 04 03:09 PM |
Israel pays the price for buying only Boeing (and not Airbus) | Tarver Engineering | Military Aviation | 57 | July 8th 03 12:23 AM |