Israel Threatens to Hit Damascus-Next step of A Clean Break?:

Matt Giwer wrote in
:

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.
Capturing a prisoner of war from the occupying power is lawful in
international law. Their only obligation is to allow Red Cross visits
along with proper treatment in accordance with his rank.

And when has that ever happened?
The ICRC won't get to see the latest abductee and you know it.
He will be murdered in contravention of the laws of war.
And-uh sneaking into Israel proper isn't allowed.
Were it an attack by regular forces of the Palestinian authority
that would be one thing but then it would be open war and that
is something the Paleosimians cannot afford.

In any case the Paleosimians have made their bed and will have to
lie in it. Well they lie anyway its just now they have to do it
from a horizontal position.

IBM

"Big Red" wrote in
oups.com:

1. Trim your responses.

Israel. It would ammount to sucide.

2. When has this ever stopped them?

IBM

Matt Giwer wrote in
:

[snip]

Israelis are so professionally (but not really) paranoid that it
proclaims a

Well given their hostile neighbourhood its small wonder they
are....

child throwing a stone at a tank a threat to its existence and then
murders the child for it with a sniper a few days later. Not because he
did it but because the picture of throwing the stone was caught on
camera. Palestinians are not permitted to have role models.

Child with a stone?
Ever seen some of these "children with stones"?
A teenager with a a four foot sling launching heavy
projectiles can do serious damage. By me, taking such an
individual out with a rifle bullet is A-OK.

IBM

Jordan wrote:
Matt Giwer wrote:
Jordan wrote:
wrote:
Change the date and ethnic group for a fun experience. Pre-World War 2
Germany did try to expel Jews.
Were the Jews, as a group, in pre-World War 2 Germany carrying out a
murderous terrorist campaign aganst the non-Jewish Germans?

Their property had not been stolen at that time so they did not have the lawful
right to use deadly force to regain it.

The originally Arab land that the Zionists originally built their
settlements on was stolen by the _Turks_,

The OTTOMANs did not steal the land. They only ruled it. That is the answer the
Sultan gave the Zionist appeal lead by Herzl to GIVE them Palestine, "I only
rule the land. I do not own it." It is the obvious answer. It was not his to give.

It shows just how far back the Zionists held the communist confabulation of
sovereignty with ownership. First they came for the communists and we never
thanked them.

BTW: Have you ever come across the reason why Israel's original efforts to get
Stalin as its international pretector fell through?

not the Jews (and certainly
not the "Israelis," as Israel did not exist at the time). The Zionists
purchased the land from the _Turks_.

Something between two and three percent was actually purchased. Some put it as
low as 1%.

All the rest was stolen from its rightful owners who have every moral and human
right to reclaim it by any means available including deadly force.

If the Palestinians really cared about equity, they would be trying to
get compensation from _Turkey_ for the lands,

As you are ignorant of history, even Zionist history, law and sovereignty you
have no informed opinion on the subject.

instead of trying to murder Jewish civilians.

As to civilians, as I have noted, any member of the IDF on or off duty, active
or reserve is a lawful target. It would be improbably bad luck not to injure one
of them in a crowd. That is why the conventions of war say in effect, if the
military is among civilians they put the civilians at risk and the attackers are
not liable for civilian casualties. Israel says EXACTLY the same thing when
dozens of civilians are murdered in the process of murdering an alledged
"terrorist."

As to Jewish civilians 20% of Israel is non-Jewish and as Israel is not a
segregated country one in five of those killed is on average not jewish. So
either stop whining about Jews or be prepared to defend segregation in Israel.

--
If the a href="http://www.ussliberty.org"attack on the Liberty/a was a
mistake, it is possible to mistake OJ Simpson for Britney Spears in broad
daylight.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3649
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Zionism http://www.giwersworld.org/disinfo/disinfo.phtml a4

wrote in
ups.com:

Jordan wrote:
wrote:
"Jordan" wrote in message
ups.com...


No. I think it would help its international position for Israel to
_annex_ the Golan Heights and then reply to all questions about their
future disposition with "They're Israeli national territory. What are
you offering us to purchase them?"

This is also how Israel should have dealt with the issues of the West
Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.

What would your do with the four million
people living there?
Mass expulsion? To where?

Shove them over the borders to the Arab states who so love them that
they are willing to use them as a permanent causis belli against
Israel. I'm sure that they would be well-treated by their Arab
brethren.

And if not, at least they wouldn't be Israel's concern any more. There
would be an international outcry, sanctions would be demanded, nothing
would happen, and in a few years they'd be as forgotten as the few
million Germans pushed out of the territories Poland annexed in 1945 --
in the middle of war and a terrible winter.

Change the date and ethnic group for a fun experience. Pre-World War 2
Germany did try to expel Jews.

Oh really?
They tried to isolate the Jews but leaving Germany was not an
option after what 1936 or so. Get caught trying that and it was
off to Dachau.

IBM

Robert Kolker wrote in
:

Jordan wrote:

If the Israelis had done this after 1967-72, there would have been _no_
"Palestinian issue," and by now there would be very little
international concern about the descendants of said "Palestinians," who
would have long since integrated into whatever countries they wound up
living in.

In whatever country Palestineans dwell they are a pox and a nuisance.
Recall what happened in Lebanon. They were also a pain in the arse in
Kuwait where some of them worked. They were not particularly loved by
their Muslim "brothers".

Particularly in Iraq these days...

IBM

Matt Giwer wrote:
I have never been off-topic in s.h.w-i. We have been over that many times and
no one has produced a single example of it. I did not post one word in this
thread until you posted.

That I deal with real history regarding WWII and you deal accept Allied
proganda as what happened regarding WWII is a long-standing disagreement and
will likely never be resolved.

Matt, I actually wasn't talking about you. I disagree with you
regarding the Holocaust and the role of Jews in European and Mideastern
history, but you've never attempted to do real harm to those you debate
with. That puts your moral standing at least one order of magnitude
above scumbags like Carlos Yu, who tried to get people he didn't like
fired from their jobs, and hacked into accounts; or Douglas Muir, who
made fraudulent bids on my items on eBay in order to damage my account
there. You grasp the basic concept that speech is not harm; they
don't.

If I met you IRL I'd treat you politely; I can't say the same thing for
them.

Sincerely Yours,
Jordan

Robert Kolker wrote:
Matt Giwer wrote:
As I said, the boy in the picture was murdered by an Israeli
sniper. That is what is called cold-blooded murder. So are the single
shots that enter classrooms to murder students.

It happens all the time, especially in Unganda.

A new low even for you. The IDF is no better than Ugandan militias.

I notice you have not one word to say about Hutus and Tutsis who are
several orders of magnitude more brutal than the Zionists you love to
hate.

And the Israeles are no better than Hutus.

I do not recall that subject ever coming up in this newsgroup.

But if you would like, the Hutus do not claim to have the most moral army in
the world. They do not even claim to have a moral army.

If the Israelis were as bad as you say, there would not be a
single Palestinean left alive in Gaza City tonite.

The night isn't over. But everyone that dies from lack of electricity, water,
food, medicine or any other cause related to this siege or the occupation in
general has been murdered by Israel. As such deaths are mostly among children
and the elderly it is going to be a very unpleasant accounting to Israel's
already blood-drenched scorecard.

That is why group punishment is a war crime punishable by hanging.

--
No democracy has the right to keep secret facts which could materially
affect any election.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3646
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
http://www.giwersworld.org

Jarg wrote:



Good point. Pretty much every country that exists today was created at
someone elses expense, often displacing groups that had previously displaced
other groups, and on and on...

The human race is a nasty species. We are the baddest smartest apes in
The Monkey House.

Bob Kolker

Jarg wrote:


Then we can allow the tribes the opportunity to sort out which one was where
first, although that would seem problematic given their lack of written
history.

I want the coffin and burial shroud concession when that happens. By the
way, if we did give it back to the Indians, within thirty years it would
all be back in the same hands.

Bob Kolker