|
| 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 |
|
#51
July 10th 03, 06:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
(phil hunt) wrote in message ...
On 10 Jul 2003 04:19:47 -0700, Quant wrote: I don't have the information to calculate how profitable this project was but its a fact that the dependence of Israel on the US is also because of the American planes Israel has. On the 80's as you know, US preasured Israel by stopping shipments of F-16 parts. This dependence, as you know and wrote, has also its heavy price. Does Israel manufacture jet engines? If it doesn't (and IIRC that is the case), then it won't be independent in aircraft manufacture anyway. I imagine there are many other itesm used in advanced fighter aircraft, such as composite materials, which are simply uneconomic for small production runs. Engines were indeed large part of the problem. Israel wanted to produce American engines in Israel. Then, first, there were technical problems to do it, and then the American approach has been changed and they retreated from their initial consent to enable to Israelis to produce the engines by their own. I searched the web and found the following quotes from: "Dov S. Zakheim, Flight of the Lavi: Inside a U.S. Israeli Crisis" http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/lavi.html The quotes: 1. "The Israelis recognized that they would have to look overseas for the plane's engines, as well as for other key components. Indeed, the more sophisticated the plane they wished to build, the more dependent they would be on foreign support. To minimize their degree of dependence on foreign suppliers, the Israelis conceived of a relatively simple plane, termed the Aryeh, that would capitalize upon the technical advances that IAI was expected to have achieved in the 1980s but would nevertheless remain on the low end of the spectrum of sophistication associated with ground attack aircraft. It was in that spirit that Minister of Defense Ezer Weitzmann approached his American counterpart, Harold Brown, in April 1980, to obtain American support for the coproduction of General Electric F-404 engines in Israel." 2. The situation was actually worse than even the Courant had reported, and it offered some real insights into the management problems that were bedeviling the aircraft. The Israelis had planned initially to coproduce the engine with Pratt & Whitney, and then to produce the follow-on engines entirely on their own. In the event, the Bet Shemesh engine plant was incapable of carrying out even the initial, more limited, task. Pratt & Whitney had reapportioned the coproduction work several times, giving the Israelis increasingly less complex tasks. Finally, frequent changes of managcmcnt, labor problems, and other management deficiencies forced the cancellation of the coproduction effort only a few weeks after our visit to Israel in April, although the decision to cancel coproduction remained a closely held secret. .... Again, I don't sure if the comparison is good, but look at the Merkava. This project is one of the most profitable projects ever was in Israel. The cost of manufactring the Merkava to the IDF is much smaller than the cost of buying the M1A2 tanks Do you have costs for this? Not an accurate cost, but yes. The cost of one Merkava Mk3 including all the systems in it to the Israeli Ministry of Defence is around $3 million. Merkava Mk4 could cost up to $4 million. To the US army it costs around $4.3 mn per M1A2 tank. General Dynamics tried to sell 1000 M1A2 tanks to Turkey in a price of $5 million per tank. and there's sde effect such as industry of upgraing M60 tanks and selling tank systems to India or upgraded tanks to Turkey. How much commonality of parts do these have with Merkava? All the upgraded parts I know of the M60's are based on the Merkava project. The armour is based on the same technology, we just fit it to the M60's shape. The fire control systems are the same. The communication systems are the same. The Israeli M60's tracks are Merkava tracks. etc. 
|
|
#52
July 10th 03, 08:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#53
July 10th 03, 09:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#55
July 11th 03, 06:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(JGB) wrote in message . com...
(Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (phil hunt) wrote in message ... Couldn't Israel have funded construction itself? Another small country, Sweden, manages to. No. Israel has grown rather dependent upon the billions annually provided in US aid (depending upon whose numbers you use, US aid would be equal to somewhere around between 3 and 6% of their GDP). According to year 2000 numbers, Israel had a GDP that was just over half that of Sweden, and a lower per-capita GDP to boot. Go-it-alone is not a likely avenue for israel; they even required South African capital to develop their BVRAAM, the Derby. YEs, but isn't it interesting, Kevin, that in 1970 Israel's GNP was $3,050 per capita versus Japan's $3,000 at the time (look it up). Yet today, after perhaps $80 billion in US aid since, Israel's per capita GNP, is now, as you state, half of Japan's or Sweden's. Mind you, in 1970 Israel had already taken the "territories" before the major stream of US aid and arms had really begun. Besides the never ending wars the Arabs have forced on Israel, Please. 56 was not forced upon them, and if you are honest about it, neither was 67: "As Mordecai Bentov, at the time a member of the Israeli government, said, "The entire story of the danger of extermination was invented in every detail, and exaggerated a posteriori to justify the annexation of new Arab territory." " Source: http://www.wrmea.com/Washington-Repo...91/9107040.htm (And no, that is not an "Arab" source) Add in Begin's later similar comments, and your case that the 67 War was somehow forced on the Israelis starts getting weaker by the minute.... not to mention the boycotts and the like, the new arms race, where nearly $6 billion in US arms sold to EGypt, Not a threat to Israel; if you think it is, then please provide actual evidence. Saudi Arabia, Couldn't even handle Iraq; not a real threat to Israel in the conventional war sense, and apparently has more than its own share of internal problems with which to keep it busy anyway. the UAE and Jordan, LOL! Have you examined exactly what the strength of the Jordanian Air Force is recently? And you think it poses a threat to Israel?! A handful of ex-USAF F-16A's?! And since when has the UAE been on the Israelis threat scope? Get real. forces Israel not only to require the $3 billion in aid annually to keep up, but also requires a massive internal effort to keep a military reserve and a military-industrial complex so heavy and so distortive of Israel's economy, and diversive in forcing so much of its talent into arms production, which overall is sterile in terms of fostering economic growth, that I honestly wish the US, and the rest of the world, would simply impose a GLOBAL embargo on ALL AID AND ARMS SALES into the region completely! Israel could solve a lot of its own problems by faithfully negotiating the establishment of a palestinian state in the West Bank and a return of the Golan to Syria in return for Syrian recognition of Israel's right to exist and the creation of a security zone under MNF/UN auspices as has existed in the Sinai since around 78. If the Egyptians, Saudis and other Arab and Muslim states had NO access to advanced arms from the West or East, and had to develop and produce all their own internally, Israel would be better off even without the aid or arms sales to it!!! I am totally convinced of it. The Israeli arms industry is way too big, and way too controlled by the US thanks to the aid, that overall is a drag on the economy, but nonetheless necessary as long as the enemy and hostile Muslim states have access to US and other international sources of modern arms. This is why Israel's growth has lagged. If the world stops selling the Muslims states $10 billion in arms annually, Israel would be able to stop taking $3 billion in US aid AND STILL BE ECONOMICALLY BETTER OFF in the long run. Face reality--the Israelis don't *want* to see US aid end, it has become their teat which provides neverending succor. Heck, they even tried to hold us up over this last conflict: www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/ 2003-02-24-unwilling-cover_x.htm "Israel is seeking $12 billion on top of the $3 billion it receives annually." That is TWELVE freakin' billion dollars...and you think they want to give up that kind of loot? Again, get real. Brooks
|
|
#56
July 12th 03, 03:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 10 Jul 2003 12:47:22 -0700, JGB wrote:
(phil hunt) wrote in message ... Couldn't Israel have funded construction itself? Another small country, Sweden, manages to. Yes, you're basically right that Sweden is an anomaly. A relatively small country of about 8 or 9 million that manages to develop and produce some of the finest military equipment in the world, as well as automobiles and other high priced consumer goods. Still, Sweden's population is nevertheless over 50% larger than Israel's, and it has not been involved in a single war in well over a century, and sits on mountains of iron Not really relevant, since (1) raw materials amount to an insignificant fraction of the cost of a fighter aircraft, and (2) national wealth isn't really determined by mineral deposits -- ask any Japanese. with a highly educated population. So has Israel. Althogh Sweden's GDP is higher than Israel's, Israel spends a higher fraction on defense, so the amount each country spends on its air force (including procurement) is probably roughly comparable. Israel, by contrast, is a mere 54 years in the making, with smaller population, that was only recently industrialized, and has been expending vast treasures and large amounts of blood over that period of time with little letup. Israel bit off more than it could chew with the Lavi in the early '80s. But at this time it would not be sensible to produce a first rate platform on its own. Even France, Germany, England and Russia will have a tough time keeping up with latest generation US platforms, such as the F-22. Firstly, England doesn't have a government, so its isn't having a tough time, or any other kind of time, doing anything. The UK and Germany (together with Italy and Spain) together produce an aircraft which is roughly comparable with the F-22: the F-22 is more highly specified (F-22 has stealth and a higher power to weight ratio, but a higher wing loading), but costs rather more than the Typhoon, so on perfermance/price they are probably about the same. Frankly, the best thing that could happen to ISrael is if the entire world would be a global arms and aid embargo on the ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST, including Israel and the Arab and Muslim countries altogether. This isn't going to happen, and if it did, I doubt if it would help Israel. Sure, Israel has got more technology than the other countries in the region, but without aid they can't afford to make many high-tech weapons, and without imports it's going to have difficulty making military jet engines. The Muslim countries in the middle east have a much larger aggregate GDP, and proably more of the highly skilled and educated people needed to make morern weapons in the aggregate, so in the long term they would be able to make more weapons, of all types than Israel. -- Phil "If only sarcasm could overturn bureaucracies" -- NTK, commenting on www.cabalamat.org/weblog/art_29.html
|
|
#57
July 12th 03, 07:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(JGB) wrote in message . com...
(Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (JGB) wrote in message . com... (Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (phil hunt) wrote in message ... Couldn't Israel have funded construction itself? Another small country, Sweden, manages to. No. Israel has grown rather dependent upon the billions annually provided in US aid (depending upon whose numbers you use, US aid would be equal to somewhere around between 3 and 6% of their GDP). According to year 2000 numbers, Israel had a GDP that was just over half that of Sweden, and a lower per-capita GDP to boot. Go-it-alone is not a likely avenue for israel; they even required South African capital to develop their BVRAAM, the Derby. YEs, but isn't it interesting, Kevin, that in 1970 Israel's GNP was $3,050 per capita versus Japan's $3,000 at the time (look it up). Yet today, after perhaps $80 billion in US aid since, Israel's per capita GNP, is now, as you state, half of Japan's or Sweden's. Mind you, in 1970 Israel had already taken the "territories" before the major stream of US aid and arms had really begun. Besides the never ending wars the Arabs have forced on Israel, Please. 56 was not forced upon them, and if you are honest about it, neither was 67: So you say. Sure, if the US had the West Coast blockaded by the Chinese or Japanese navy, that would constitute no threat. I agree that blockading ISrael's only port facing Asia, Eilat, was no threat to America, but it sure was to Israel. As was the encroachment of the Egyptian army deep into the Sinai. No threat to America, but a very great threat to Israel. Kevin knows which are real threats to Israel because Kevin doesn't live in Israel and hasn't a clue. "As Mordecai Bentov, at the time a member of the Israeli government, said, "The entire story of the danger of extermination was invented in every detail, and exaggerated a posteriori to justify the annexation of new Arab territory." " Source: http://www.wrmea.com/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/0791/9107040.htm A lot of Jewish leftists say a lot of things that bear little resemblance to reality. Ahem. Read a bit more before you stick your other foot in your mouth in this regard. FYI, at the time of the war, both Begin and Bentov were sort of Hawkish. It was later that they admitted that Israel was no so much forced into war, as it was taking advantage of rather clumsy policy decisions on the part of Nasser, who IIRC claimed he was acting in support of Syria against claimed Israeli provocations. Like most things in this world, not so much a case of black/white as it is varying shades of gray. Hindsight seems to have afforded both of those former Israeli leaders a bit more balanced view of the situation (not to mention a more complete one, as they were sitting on the Israeli Cabinet at the time--and you were...?) than what you seem to maintain. I'll wager Begin and Bentov are a bit more accurate than the anonymous "JGB"... Add in Begin's later similar comments, and your case that the 67 War was somehow forced on the Israelis starts getting weaker by the minute.... What, no claim that Begin was a closet weakling/leftist? not to mention the boycotts and the like, the new arms race, where nearly $6 billion in US arms sold to EGypt, Not a threat to Israel; if you think it is, then please provide actual evidence. The only evidence you would accept, and indeed enjoy with great edification, is if Dimona or an Israeli city were blown up. INdeed, just before the outbreak of war, Egyptian jets did indeed successfully invade Israeli airspace, got quite close to Dimona, and were NOT succressfully intercepted! If you were indeed serious about the subject, I'd suggest you do some serious research. The above translates to, "I have no evidence whatsoever that Egypt remains a major threat to Israel, so i'll harken back to '73 and try to obfuscate a bit." Sorry, but that doesn't fly very far. Try again? Saudi Arabia couldn't even handle Iraq; not a real threat to Israel in the conventional war sense, and apparently has more than its own share of internal problems with which to keep it busy anyway. What it can do is transfer arms and supplies to other ARab states. And those states will just *immediately* pick up those weapons and storm Israel, right? Uhmmm...you do know that all of those nifty advanced US arms that SA has aquired come complete with a requirement for US approval for transfer to a third party? If you don't believe that, ask IAI--they lost out on selling the Kfir to a nation or two back in the late 70's/early 80's because of US refusal to authorize the transfer of the US engine they were using. the UAE and Jordan, LOL! Have you examined exactly what the strength of the Jordanian Air Force is recently? And you think it poses a threat to Israel?! A handful of ex-USAF F-16A's?! And since when has the UAE been on the Israelis threat scope? Get real. If you really knew anything at all, you'd know that the Jordanian army was probably the BEST that Israel every faced in the ME. Not big, but quite good. And the Israelis defeated it quite handily each time they faced it. Now, in today's environment, in the topographical setting that exists between Jordan and Israel, tell me how *any* army is going to succesfully conduct an offensive while the other side controls the air? Did you miss out on that whole Desert Storm event a few years back? It takes more than equipment. It takes good people and training. Yep, it does. And Jordan, compared to its neighbors, is apparently pretty good--but still no match for Israel, and nobody but you is disputing that tidy little fact. BTW, did you know that Pakistani pilots downed a number of Israeli planes in '67? I don't dismiss either the Jordanians or the Pakistanis if Israel had to face them. Odd, but Michael Oren's recent book, "Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of a Modern Middle East" (Presidio, 2002), seems to have missed that little factoid (and Oren, being a former Israeli governmental official, would have presumably picked up on that, as he was rather careful to address how all of the regional nations reacted--yet he never *once* mentions Pakistan...). I hate to be repetitive, but any real evidence of this? Given your distinct aversion to providing *any* evidence, that is... YOu, on the other hand are ready to dismiss EVERY threat to Israel, You just have not presented a realistic one yet. Syria would *like* to be a threat to Israel, but it just can't pull it off (look at the performance of their troops during ODS, not to mention Lebanon). Egypt has more to lose from another war with Israel than it could possibly gain (and the performance of their ground units in ODS was not exactly top-of-the-line, either). Jordan, while professional in military matters, is just too shallow in the depth department, and they know it (maybe that is one reason why they have a peace treaty with Israel). The UAE?! Gimme a break... but build up every inconsequential possible threat to the US. We do face a potential threat, on a regional basis, from the PRC in the not-too-distant future; denying the obvious in that regard will not do you any good. We are following a policy of cautious constructive engagement at present, but that is only going to be successful for as long as we are prepared to be more forceful (and having the PRC realize that) when/if required. Israel's continued provision of late-generation military products and technology to the PRC can hardly be considered a *good* thing by USians, now can it? The reality is, that Israel is a tiny state comprised of mostly 5 million Jews, most of the male population of whom serves for weeks annually in the reserves for most of their adult lives, and which faces not only 4 million Arab enemies internally, Ah, so all of the Palestinians are enemies of Israel, even those that are Israeli citizens? literally next door, but also 250 million Arabs and countless hundreds of millions of more Muslim supporters whose main dream is to eliminate the JEwish state. No state, no Sparta, has ever had to face anything even remotely lopsided in all of recorded history. And its main large benefactor, the US, also arms the other side quite well. THAT is the REALITY that Israelis face EVERY day regardless of what you or any outsider not living there may think or imagine. If you would climb down off that soapbox long enough to actually engage your brain and *think* a bit, you would realize that the US providing military support to neighboring (and not so neighboring) Arab nations is a *good* thing. Ever stopped to realize the degree of US control that accompanies those weapons packages? Check out the story of the Egyptian plan to conduct a retaliatory strike against the Sudanese after that failed assasination attempt on Mubarak a few years back. Reports indicate what prevented the Egyptians from acting was US refusal to support the operation; all of thast high-tech US weaponry requires a pretty good logistical tail to make it effective, and when the US says, "no" (which in this case was wrong, IMO; we should have let Egypt hammer them), it carries great weight. forces Israel not only to require the $3 billion in aid annually to keep up, but also requires a massive internal effort to keep a military reserve and a military-industrial complex so heavy and so distortive of Israel's economy, and diversive in forcing so much of its talent into arms production, which overall is sterile in terms of fostering economic growth, that I honestly wish the US, and the rest of the world, would simply impose a GLOBAL embargo on ALL AID AND ARMS SALES into the region completely! Israel could solve a lot of its own problems by faithfully negotiating the establishment of a palestinian state in the West Bank and a return of the Golan to Syria in return for Syrian recognition of Israel's right to exist and the creation of a security zone under MNF/UN auspices as has existed in the Sinai since around 78. The US could have negotiated an end to the Cold War by returning ALaska. No, it couldn't. You are getting desperate now...hardly surprising given that your entire argument seems to be bouyed solely upon the force of your own hot air... Listen, what you spout is similar nonsense. Islam itself was built on the death of Judaism which it replaces. Islam cannot tolerate a Jewish state by its very nature as it is still interpreted. THAT is the true essence of the conflict, and it has nothing to do with any meager postage-sized parcels of land. I don't think so, and as we have seen with the treaties between Israel and Egypt/Jordan, it does not have to be the case. You seem to be hell-bent on taking a ":this is the way it was a thousand years ago, so this is the way it has to be now and forevermore." Not very logical, IMO. Until the Mullahs and Qadis and Imams of Islam recognize the RIGHT of the JEWISH NATION to exist in her homeland, no "returning" of anything is going to lead to any true peace. The return of the Sinai helped lead to true peace between Egypt and Israel, so your argument does not seem to meet the test of actual events very well. The issues of land and "settlements" and all of that are negotiable ONLY as details once the FACT of Jewish nationhood in the Land of Israel is truly accepted by the Muslim peoples. All the rest is blarney. UN Res 242. If the Egyptians, Saudis and other Arab and Muslim states had NO access to advanced arms from the West or East, and had to develop and produce all their own internally, Israel would be better off even without the aid or arms sales to it!!! I am totally convinced of it. The Israeli arms industry is way too big, and way too controlled by the US thanks to the aid, that overall is a drag on the economy, but nonetheless necessary as long as the enemy and hostile Muslim states have access to US and other international sources of modern arms. This is why Israel's growth has lagged. If the world stops selling the Muslims states $10 billion in arms annually, Israel would be able to stop taking $3 billion in US aid AND STILL BE ECONOMICALLY BETTER OFF in the long run. Face reality--the Israelis don't *want* to see US aid end, it has become their teat which provides neverending succor. Heck, they even tried to hold us up over this last conflict: Face reality, no congressman challenges the end of aid, not because of AIPAC or huge mythical power in Dakota or Kansas, but because $7 billion in annual arms sales, and all the jobs and votes they represent, would go down with a unilateral end to aid. Sorry, but if that were the case, what of those congressmen who have no military industry in their districts (and there are quite a few--look at Iowa, Montana, Wyoming, and various districts across the rest of the nation. Your argument that this is somehow all tied to US defense industry viability just does not hold up. www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/ 2003-02-24-unwilling-cover_x.htm "Israel is seeking $12 billion on top of the $3 billion it receives annually." That is TWELVE freakin' billion dollars...and you think they want to give up that kind of loot? Again, get real. LOAN GUARANTEES, not money. Or in plain language, a consignor so that it can get loans on world capital markets at reasonable interest rates. LOL! When was the last time Israel had to pick up the tab for one of these major "loans"? Hmmm? That is not talking about the US forking over $12 billion US dollars from the treasury to Israel and you know it. That is typical BS. No, it is indeed what was requested, and NO, it was not all for "loan guarantees"; they were also requesting *grants*. Do your homework and come up with something besides "JGB says so" and then get back to me, 'cause from where I stand JGB's record is hurtin' because he can't seem to come up with *any* supporting evidence. Brooks
|
|
#58
July 12th 03, 03:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com...
(JGB) wrote in message . com... (Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (JGB) wrote in message . com... (Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (phil hunt) wrote in message ... Please. 56 was not forced upon them, and if you are honest about it, neither was 67: So you say. Sure, if the US had the West Coast blockaded by the Chinese or Japanese navy, that would constitute no threat. I agree that blockading ISrael's only port facing Asia, Eilat, was no threat to America, but it sure was to Israel. As was the encroachment of the Egyptian army deep into the Sinai. No threat to America, but a very great threat to Israel. Kevin knows which are real threats to Israel because Kevin doesn't live in Israel and hasn't a clue. "As Mordecai Bentov, at the time a member of the Israeli government, said, "The entire story of the danger of extermination was invented in every detail, and exaggerated a posteriori to justify the annexation of new Arab territory." " Source: http://www.wrmea.com/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/0791/9107040.htm Which Came First - Terrorism or "Occupation"? There were 3000 terrorist attempts before the '67 war. The following is a partial list of documented acts of Arab errorism, all occurring prior to the beginning of the Israeli administration of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967: Jan 1, 1952 - Seven armed terrorists attacked and killed a nineteen year-old girl in her home, in the neighborhood of Beit Yisrael, in Jerusalem. Apr 14, 1953 - Terrorists tried for the first time to infiltrate Israel by sea, but were unsuccessful. One of the boats was intercepted and the other boat escaped. June 7, 1953 - A youngster was killed and three others were wounded, in shooting attacks on residential areas in southern Jerusalem. June 9, 1953 - Terrorists attacked a farming community near Lod, and killed one of the residents. The terrorists threw hand grenades and sprayed gunfire in all directions. On the same night, another group of terrorists attacked a house in the town of Hadera. This occurred a day after Israel and Jordan signed an agreement, with UN mediation, in which Jordan undertook to prevent terrorists from crossing into Israel from Jordanian territory. June 10, 1953 - Terrorists infiltrating from Jordan destroyed a house in the farming village of Mishmar Ayalon. June 11, 1953 - Terrorists attacked a young couple in their home in Kfar Hess, and shot them to death. Sept 2, 1953 - Terrorists infiltrated from Jordan, and reached the neighborhood of Katamon, in the heart of Jerusalem. They threw hand grenades in all directions. Miraculously, no one was hurt. Mar 17, 1954- Terrorists ambushed a bus traveling from Eilat to Tel Aviv, and opened fire at short range when the bus reached the area of Maale Akrabim in the northern Negev. In the initial ambush, the terrorists killed the driver and wounded most of the passengers. The terrorists then boarded the bus, and shot each passenger, one by one. Eleven passengers were murdered. Survivors recounted how the murderers spat on the bodies and abused them. The terrorists could clearly be traced back to the Jordanian border, some 20 km from the site of the terrorist attack. Jan 2, 1955 - Terrorists killed two hikers in the Judean Desert. Mar 24, 1955 - Terrorists threw hand grenades and opened fire on a crowd at a wedding in the farming community of Patish, in the Negev. A young woman was killed, and eighteen people were wounded in the attack. Apr 7, 1956 - A resident of Ashkelon was killed in her home, when terrorists threw three hand grenades into her house. Two members of Kibbutz Givat Chaim were killed, when terrorists opened fire on their car, on the road from Plugot Junction to Mishmar Hanegev. There were further hand grenade and shooting attacks on homes and cars, in areas such as Nitzanim and Ketziot. One person was killed and three others wounded. Apr 11, 1956 - Terrorists opened fire on a synagogue full of children and teenagers, in the farming community of Shafrir. Three children and a youth worker were killed on the spot, and five were wounded, including three seriously. Apr 29, 1956 - Egyptians killed Roi Rotenberg, 21 years of age, from Nahal Oz. Sept 12, 1956 - Terrorists killed three Druze guards at Ein Ofarim, in the Arava region. Sept 23, 1956 - Terrorists opened fire from a Jordanian position, and killed four archaeologists, and wounded sixteen others, near Kibbutz Ramat Rachel. Sept 24, 1956 - Terrorists killed a girl in the fields of the farming community of Aminadav, near Jerusalem. Oct 4, 1956 - Five Israeli workers were killed in Sdom. Oct 9, 1956 - Two workers were killed in an orchard of the youth village, Neve Hadassah, in the Sharon region. Nov 8, 1956 - Terrorists opened fire on a train, attacked cars and blew up wells, in the North and Center of Israel. Six Israelis were wounded. Feb 18, 1957 - Two civilians were killed by terrorist landmines, next to Nir Yitzhak, on the southern border of the Gaza Strip. Mar 8, 1957 - A shepherd from Kibbutz Beit Govrin was killed by terrorists in a field near the Kibbutz. Apr 16, 1957 - Terrorists infiltrated from Jordan, and killed two guards at Kibbutz Mesilot. May 20, 1957 - A terrorist opened fire on a truck in the Arava region, killing a worker. May 29, 1957 - A tractor driver was killed and two others wounded, when the vehicle struck a landmine, next to Kibbutz Kisufim. June 23, 1957 - Israelis were wounded by landmines, close to the Gaza Strip. Aug 23, 1957 - Two guards of the Israeli Mekorot water company were killed near Kibbutz Beit Govrin. Dec 21, 1957 - A member of Kibbutz Gadot was killed in the Kibbutz fields. Feb 11, 1958 - Terrorists killed a resident of Moshav Yanov who was on his way to Kfar Yona, in the Sharon area. Apr 5, 1958 - Terrorists lying in ambush shot and killed two people near Tel Lachish. Apr 22, 1958 - Jordanian soldiers shot and killed two fishermen near Aqaba. May 26, 1958 - Four Israeli police officers were killed in a Jordanian attack on Mt. Scopus, in Jerusalem. Nov 17, 1958 - Syrian terrorists killed the wife of the British air attache in Israel, who was staying at the guesthouse of the Italian Convent on the Mt. of the Beatitudes. Dec 3, 1958- A shepherd was killed at Kibbutz Gonen. In the artillery attack that followed, 31 civilians were wounded. Jan 23, 1959 - A shepherd from Kibbutz Lehavot Habashan was killed. Feb 1, 1959 - Three civilians were killed by a terrorist landmine near Moshav Zavdiel. Apr 15, 1959 - A guard was killed at Kibbutz Ramat Rahel. Apr 27, 1959 - Two hikers were shot at close range and killed near Massada. Sept 6, 1959 - Bedouin terrorists killed a paratroop reconnaissance officer near Nitzana. Sept 8, 1959 - Bedouins opened fire on an army bivouac in the Negev, killing an IDF officer, Captain Yair Peled. Oct 3, 1959 - A shepherd from Kibbutz Heftziba was killed near Kibbutz Yad Hana. Apr 26, 1960 - Terrorists killed a resident of Ashkelon south of the city. Apr 12, 1962 - Terrorists fired on an Egged bus on the way to Eilat; one passenger was wounded. Sept 30, 1962 - Two terrorists attacked an Egged bus on the way to Eilat. No one was wounded. Jan 1, 1965 - Palestinian terrorists attempted to bomb the National Water Carrier. This was the first attack carried out by the PLO's Fatah faction. May 31, 1965 - Jordanian Legionnaires fired on the neighborhood of Musrara in Jerusalem, killing two civilians and wounding four. June 1, 1965 - Terrorists attack a house in Kibbutz Yiftach. July 5, 1965 - A Fatah cell planted explosives at Mitzpe Massua, near Beit Guvrin; and on the railroad tracks to Jerusalem near Kafr Battir. Aug 26, 1965 - A waterline was sabotaged at Kibbutz Manara, in the Upper Galilee. Sept 29, 1965 - A terrorist was killed as he attempted to attack Moshav Amatzia. Nov 7, 1965 - A Fatah cell that infiltrated from Jordan blew up a house in Moshav Givat Yeshayahu, south of Beit Shemesh. The house was destroyed, but the inhabitants were miraculously unhurt. April ? '66 - Explosions placed by terrorists wounded two civilians and damaged three houses in Moshav Beit Yosef, in the Beit Shean Valley. May 16, 1966 - Two Israelis were killed when their jeep hit a terrorist landmine, north of the Sea of Galilee and south of Almagor. Tracks led into Syria. July 13, 1966 - Two soldiers and a civilian were killed near Almagor, when their truck struck a terrorist landmine. July 14, 1966 - Terrorists attacked a house in Kfar Yuval, in the North. July 19, 1966 - Terrorists infiltrated into Moshav Margaliot on the northern border and planted nine explosive charges. Oct 27, 1966 - A civilian was wounded by an explosive charge on the railroad tracks to Jerusalem. Copyright (c)1999 The State of Israel. All rights reserved. BTW, did you know that Pakistani pilots downed a number of Israeli planes in '67? I don't dismiss either the Jordanians or the Pakistanis if Israel had to face them. Odd, but Michael Oren's recent book, "Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of a Modern Middle East" (Presidio, 2002), seems to have missed that little factoid (and Oren, being a former Israeli governmental official, would have presumably picked up on that, as he was rather careful to address how all of the regional nations reacted--yet he never *once* mentions Pakistan...). I hate to be repetitive, but any real evidence of this? Given your distinct aversion to providing *any* evidence, that is... http://www.scramble.nl/pk.htm "The Six-Day War between Israel and a number of Arab countries in 1967. During this conflict the PAF sent personnel to Egypt, Jordan and Syria to support the Arabs in their battle against the Israelis. PAF pilots managed to shoot down ten Israeli aircraft, including Mirages, Mystères and Vautours, without losses on their own side. The PAF pilots operated with Egyptian, Jordanese and Iraqi combat aircraft. " We do face a potential threat, on a regional basis, from the PRC in the not-too-distant future; denying the obvious in that regard will not do you any good. We are following a policy of cautious constructive engagement at present, but that is only going to be successful for as long as we are prepared to be more forceful (and having the PRC realize that) when/if required. Israel's continued provision of late-generation military products and technology to the PRC can hardly be considered a *good* thing by USians, now can it? In fact, the presumed challenge of the PRC to the US is as nothing compared to the challenge of the Muslims to ISrael. Pakistan is a nuclear state with at least 150 nukes, and Iran soon will be. When you add in Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia and all the vast numbers enemies of ISrael's very existence, the PRC threat to the US is less than a gnat to a whale compared to the Muslim threat to Israel. The reality is, that Israel is a tiny state comprised of mostly 5 million Jews, most of the male population of whom serves for weeks annually in the reserves for most of their adult lives, and which faces not only 4 million Arab enemies internally, Ah, so all of the Palestinians are enemies of Israel, even those that are Israeli citizens? Every Muslim is ipso facto an enemy of ISrael, unless he is of that very small minority that accepts that the Israelites mentioned in the Koran and today's Jews have some historic connection. Look, is every Chinese an enemy of America? ANd yet you hold up the sale of a few antiquated weapons by ISrael to the PRC as some big deal while you arm the Arabs and other Muslims to the teeth. literally next door, but also 250 million Arabs and countless hundreds of millions of more Muslim supporters whose main dream is to eliminate the JEwish state. No state, no Sparta, has ever had to face anything even remotely lopsided in all of recorded history. And its main large benefactor, the US, also arms the other side quite well. THAT is the REALITY that Israelis face EVERY day regardless of what you or any outsider not living there may think or imagine. If you would climb down off that soapbox long enough to actually engage your brain and *think* a bit, you would realize that the US providing military support to neighboring (and not so neighboring) Arab nations is a *good* thing. Ever stopped to realize the degree of US control that accompanies those weapons packages? Check out the story of the Egyptian plan to conduct a retaliatory strike against the Sudanese after that failed assasination attempt on Mubarak a few years back. Reports indicate what prevented the Egyptians from acting was US refusal to support the operation; all of thast high-tech US weaponry requires a pretty good logistical tail to make it effective, and when the US says, "no" (which in this case was wrong, IMO; we should have let Egypt hammer them), it carries great weight. Israel was better off with inferior Soviet equipment in ARab hands. While the argument that the US has better control over its more sophisticated equipment in Arab hands has some merit, I wouldn't be totally dismissive of Arab capabilities to eventually master this technology. I'm not that racist. The US can always leave the area; Israel has to live there. forces Israel not only to require the $3 billion in aid annually to keep up, but also requires a massive internal effort to keep a military reserve and a military-industrial complex so heavy and so distortive of Israel's economy, and diversive in forcing so much of its talent into arms production, which overall is sterile in terms of fostering economic growth, that I honestly wish the US, and the rest of the world, would simply impose a GLOBAL embargo on ALL AID AND ARMS SALES into the region completely! Israel could solve a lot of its own problems by faithfully negotiating the establishment of a palestinian state in the West Bank and a return of the Golan to Syria in return for Syrian recognition of Israel's right to exist and the creation of a security zone under MNF/UN auspices as has existed in the Sinai since around 78. The US could have negotiated an end to the Cold War by returning ALaska. No, it couldn't. You are getting desperate now...hardly surprising given that your entire argument seems to be bouyed solely upon the force of your own hot air... Listen, what you spout is similar nonsense. Islam itself was built on the death of Judaism which it replaces. Islam cannot tolerate a Jewish state by its very nature as it is still interpreted. THAT is the true essence of the conflict, and it has nothing to do with any meager postage-sized parcels of land. I don't think so, and as we have seen with the treaties between Israel and Egypt/Jordan, it does not have to be the case. You seem to be hell-bent on taking a ":this is the way it was a thousand years ago, so this is the way it has to be now and forevermore." Not very logical, IMO. Not I; the Muslims. It is they who have to leap ahead by 1400 years. Right now too many of them prefer the 7th century. Until the Mullahs and Qadis and Imams of Islam recognize the RIGHT of the JEWISH NATION to exist in her homeland, no "returning" of anything is going to lead to any true peace. The return of the Sinai helped lead to true peace between Egypt and Israel, so your argument does not seem to meet the test of actual events very well. It's not true peace. THe peace between Russia and the US was often warmer at some times. THeir press publishes the vilest antisemitic stuff that would make Julius Rosenberg blanch. Until the ideology or theology of Islam changes radically regarding the JEwish state and other "infidels" in their midst, every "peace" is merely "hudna" or a temporary ceasefire. It wasn't until Russia rejected the ideology of communism that true peace between the US and Russia became possible. There will be only a possibility of "sulha" or true reconciliation and peace between the Jewish state and the Islamic nation when the latter recognizes Jewish rights and rejects the more radical elements of Islamic thought. If the fundamental ideology or theology is not modified, the people cannot reconcile their deepest beliefs with coexisting alongside a group that is unacceptable according to those beliefs. Might as well try to get Nazi Germany to live peacefully alongside Israel. Little bits of territory, whether they be Alsace-LOrraine, the Sudetenland, or the West Bank and Golan are the distractions and not the core of the problem that has to be solved. The issues of land and "settlements" and all of that are negotiable ONLY as details once the FACT of Jewish nationhood in the Land of Israel is truly accepted by the Muslim peoples. All the rest is blarney. UN Res 242. What about it? If the Egyptians, Saudis and other Arab and Muslim states had NO access to advanced arms from the West or East, and had to develop and produce all their own internally, Israel would be better off even without the aid or arms sales to it!!! I am totally convinced of it. The Israeli arms industry is way too big, and way too controlled by the US thanks to the aid, that overall is a drag on the economy, but nonetheless necessary as long as the enemy and hostile Muslim states have access to US and other international sources of modern arms. This is why Israel's growth has lagged. If the world stops selling the Muslims states $10 billion in arms annually, Israel would be able to stop taking $3 billion in US aid AND STILL BE ECONOMICALLY BETTER OFF in the long run. Face reality--the Israelis don't *want* to see US aid end, it has become their teat which provides neverending succor. Heck, they even tried to hold us up over this last conflict: Face reality, no congressman challenges the end of aid, not because of AIPAC or huge mythical power in Dakota or Kansas, but because $7 billion in annual arms sales, and all the jobs and votes they represent, would go down with a unilateral end to aid. Sorry, but if that were the case, what of those congressmen who have no military industry in their districts (and there are quite a few--look at Iowa, Montana, Wyoming, and various districts across the rest of the nation. Your argument that this is somehow all tied to US defense industry viability just does not hold up. www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/ 2003-02-24-unwilling-cover_x.htm "Israel is seeking $12 billion on top of the $3 billion it receives annually." That is TWELVE freakin' billion dollars...and you think they want to give up that kind of loot? Again, get real. LOAN GUARANTEES, not money. Or in plain language, a consignor so that it can get loans on world capital markets at reasonable interest rates. LOL! When was the last time Israel had to pick up the tab for one of these major "loans"? Hmmm? Those are loans that Israel will be making from banks in the international capital markets. They are not US gov't loans. Israel lost $12 billion in the intifada (which is the equivalent of the US losing $1.2 TRILLION after 9/11) and simply wants to borrow on the int'l market, but needs a good cosignor to get the loans at a lower rate. Israel has never defaulted on a loan. That is not talking about the US forking over $12 billion US dollars from the treasury to Israel and you know it. That is typical BS. No, it is indeed what was requested, and NO, it was not all for "loan guarantees"; they were also requesting *grants*. Do your homework and come up with something besides "JGB says so" and then get back to me, 'cause from where I stand JGB's record is hurtin' because he can't seem to come up with *any* supporting evidence. Supporting evidence of WHAT???
|
|
#59
July 13th 03, 02:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(JGB) wrote in message . com...
(Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (JGB) wrote in message . com... (Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (JGB) wrote in message . com... (Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (phil hunt) wrote in message ... Please. 56 was not forced upon them, and if you are honest about it, neither was 67: So you say. Sure, if the US had the West Coast blockaded by the Chinese or Japanese navy, that would constitute no threat. I agree that blockading ISrael's only port facing Asia, Eilat, was no threat to America, but it sure was to Israel. As was the encroachment of the Egyptian army deep into the Sinai. No threat to America, but a very great threat to Israel. Kevin knows which are real threats to Israel because Kevin doesn't live in Israel and hasn't a clue. "As Mordecai Bentov, at the time a member of the Israeli government, said, "The entire story of the danger of extermination was invented in every detail, and exaggerated a posteriori to justify the annexation of new Arab territory." " Source: http://www.wrmea.com/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/0791/9107040.htm Which Came First - Terrorism or "Occupation"? There were 3000 terrorist attempts before the '67 war. The following is a partial list of documented acts of Arab errorism, all occurring prior to the beginning of the Israeli administration of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967: snip for brevity Uhmmm...you seem to have left out: "The Massacre of Baldat al-Shaikh (Dec. 31, 1947) in which over 600 unarmed Palestinian men, women and children were slaughtered; the Massacre of Dair Yasin (Apr. 10, 1948) in which a whole village of 500 unarmed Palestinian civilians were slaughtered by Israelis; the Massacre of Lid (July 11, 1948) in which about 426 unarmed Palestinians were slaughtered; the Massacre of Kufr Qasim (Oct. 29, 1956) in which 50 Palestinian men, women and children were killed; the Massacre of Khan Younis refugee camp (Nov. 3, 1956) in which 250 Palestinians were killed and nine days later, another 275 Palestinians were killed..." (Source: www.bsudailynews.com/vnews/display.v/ ART/2002/12/03/3dec367c1b9df ) That too is only a partial list. Rememeber that bit about shades of gray? BTW, did you know that Pakistani pilots downed a number of Israeli planes in '67? I don't dismiss either the Jordanians or the Pakistanis if Israel had to face them. Odd, but Michael Oren's recent book, "Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of a Modern Middle East" (Presidio, 2002), seems to have missed that little factoid (and Oren, being a former Israeli governmental official, would have presumably picked up on that, as he was rather careful to address how all of the regional nations reacted--yet he never *once* mentions Pakistan...). I hate to be repetitive, but any real evidence of this? Given your distinct aversion to providing *any* evidence, that is... http://www.scramble.nl/pk.htm "The Six-Day War between Israel and a number of Arab countries in 1967. During this conflict the PAF sent personnel to Egypt, Jordan and Syria to support the Arabs in their battle against the Israelis. PAF pilots managed to shoot down ten Israeli aircraft, including Mirages, Mystères and Vautours, without losses on their own side. The PAF pilots operated with Egyptian, Jordanese and Iraqi combat aircraft. " Uhmmm...do you have anything a bit more concrete? And just how did these Pakistanis manage to go 10-0 during a war where most Arab airpower was destroyed on the ground or never got into the fight? Lastly, why bother? Your point regarding alleged Pakistani pilots involved in the 67 War would be germane to the present issues exactly *how*? We do face a potential threat, on a regional basis, from the PRC in the not-too-distant future; denying the obvious in that regard will not do you any good. We are following a policy of cautious constructive engagement at present, but that is only going to be successful for as long as we are prepared to be more forceful (and having the PRC realize that) when/if required. Israel's continued provision of late-generation military products and technology to the PRC can hardly be considered a *good* thing by USians, now can it? In fact, the presumed challenge of the PRC to the US is as nothing compared to the challenge of the Muslims to ISrael. So now it is all Muslims who are the enemy of Israel? Are you racist much? Uhmmm...what about those *Turkish* Muslims that Israel is selling so much combat power to these days? Pakistan is a nuclear state with at least 150 nukes, and Iran soon will be. When you add in Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia and all the vast numbers enemies of ISrael's very existence, the PRC threat to the US is less than a gnat to a whale compared to the Muslim threat to Israel. Oh, nooo, Mr. Bill! Nations in the outlying region may become nuclear powers, or already are?! How dare they! That is obviously the sole purview of Israel (which is a nuclear power as well, predating those you mention by a period of decades)... Come on, get real--you are condemning other nations for the very same course of action that Israel has taken? The reality is, that Israel is a tiny state comprised of mostly 5 million Jews, most of the male population of whom serves for weeks annually in the reserves for most of their adult lives, and which faces not only 4 million Arab enemies internally, Ah, so all of the Palestinians are enemies of Israel, even those that are Israeli citizens? Every Muslim is ipso facto an enemy of ISrael, Yup, racist. And not a very original one at that. unless he is of that very small minority that accepts that the Israelites mentioned in the Koran and today's Jews have some historic connection. Look, is every Chinese an enemy of America? Nope. I like the Taiwanese. ANd yet you hold up the sale of a few antiquated weapons by ISrael to the PRC as some big deal while you arm the Arabs and other Muslims to the teeth. Antiquated weapons? I guess I should expect that kind of laughable description from a guy who couldn't tell the difference beween AMRAAM and Python, and who was quite convinced that not only the US but also the RAAF had deployed the latter. Phalcon sure as heck is/was not "antiquated", nor is the radar that the Israelis are marketing to the PRC for the J-10, nor is the HMSS that they are also trying (if they have not already done so--sort of murky) to sell to the PLAAF. You have been singing the praises of Python, which the PRC produces under license (-3 variant), and we have numerous reports that later models have been, or are being, marketed to the PLAAF as well, but now all of a sudden in order to suit your argument you want to call them "antiquated" as well? Flip-flop much? literally next door, but also 250 million Arabs and countless hundreds of millions of more Muslim supporters whose main dream is to eliminate the JEwish state. No state, no Sparta, has ever had to face anything even remotely lopsided in all of recorded history. And its main large benefactor, the US, also arms the other side quite well. THAT is the REALITY that Israelis face EVERY day regardless of what you or any outsider not living there may think or imagine. If you would climb down off that soapbox long enough to actually engage your brain and *think* a bit, you would realize that the US providing military support to neighboring (and not so neighboring) Arab nations is a *good* thing. Ever stopped to realize the degree of US control that accompanies those weapons packages? Check out the story of the Egyptian plan to conduct a retaliatory strike against the Sudanese after that failed assasination attempt on Mubarak a few years back. Reports indicate what prevented the Egyptians from acting was US refusal to support the operation; all of thast high-tech US weaponry requires a pretty good logistical tail to make it effective, and when the US says, "no" (which in this case was wrong, IMO; we should have let Egypt hammer them), it carries great weight. Israel was better off with inferior Soviet equipment in ARab hands. The evidence does not support that theory. While Egypt was being armed by the Soviets they fought two major wars (67 and 73) with israel, while since the US has taken over as a major security partner with Egypt they have fought...nada, zip, none. While the argument that the US has better control over its more sophisticated equipment in Arab hands has some merit, I wouldn't be totally dismissive of Arab capabilities to eventually master this technology. I'm not that racist. Yep, you are if you like to use that "all Muslims" brushstroke that you are so quick with. The US can always leave the area; Israel has to live there. Which is why they should learn to be a decent neighbor. forces Israel not only to require the $3 billion in aid annually to keep up, but also requires a massive internal effort to keep a military reserve and a military-industrial complex so heavy and so distortive of Israel's economy, and diversive in forcing so much of its talent into arms production, which overall is sterile in terms of fostering economic growth, that I honestly wish the US, and the rest of the world, would simply impose a GLOBAL embargo on ALL AID AND ARMS SALES into the region completely! Israel could solve a lot of its own problems by faithfully negotiating the establishment of a palestinian state in the West Bank and a return of the Golan to Syria in return for Syrian recognition of Israel's right to exist and the creation of a security zone under MNF/UN auspices as has existed in the Sinai since around 78. The US could have negotiated an end to the Cold War by returning ALaska. No, it couldn't. You are getting desperate now...hardly surprising given that your entire argument seems to be bouyed solely upon the force of your own hot air... Listen, what you spout is similar nonsense. Islam itself was built on the death of Judaism which it replaces. Islam cannot tolerate a Jewish state by its very nature as it is still interpreted. THAT is the true essence of the conflict, and it has nothing to do with any meager postage-sized parcels of land. I don't think so, and as we have seen with the treaties between Israel and Egypt/Jordan, it does not have to be the case. You seem to be hell-bent on taking a ":this is the way it was a thousand years ago, so this is the way it has to be now and forevermore." Not very logical, IMO. Not I; the Muslims. It is they who have to leap ahead by 1400 years. Right now too many of them prefer the 7th century. There you go again, with that tarbrush of your's.... Until the Mullahs and Qadis and Imams of Islam recognize the RIGHT of the JEWISH NATION to exist in her homeland, no "returning" of anything is going to lead to any true peace. The return of the Sinai helped lead to true peace between Egypt and Israel, so your argument does not seem to meet the test of actual events very well. It's not true peace. When was the last time they were shooting at each other? Over twenty years without any significant conflict between the two nations, given the nature of the region overall, is truly amazing. If that is not "peace" then what the hell do you define "peace" as? Hint--"peace" does not require that everyone hold hands and sing "Kumbayah"; it can exist in an environment where significant distrust, or even animosity, remains, but as long as the system in place keeps the two parties from resorting to aggression and bloodshed, then it is indeed "peace". THe peace between Russia and the US was often warmer at some times. THeir press publishes the vilest antisemitic stuff that would make Julius Rosenberg blanch. Ever heard of Meyer Kahane? Or his followers? Until the ideology or theology of Islam changes radically regarding the JEwish state and other "infidels" in their midst, every "peace" is merely "hudna" or a temporary ceasefire. It wasn't until Russia rejected the ideology of communism that true peace between the US and Russia became possible. There will be only a possibility of "sulha" or true reconciliation and peace between the Jewish state and the Islamic nation when the latter recognizes Jewish rights and rejects the more radical elements of Islamic thought. If the fundamental ideology or theology is not modified, the people cannot reconcile their deepest beliefs with coexisting alongside a group that is unacceptable according to those beliefs. Might as well try to get Nazi Germany to live peacefully alongside Israel. Little bits of territory, whether they be Alsace-LOrraine, the Sudetenland, or the West Bank and Golan are the distractions and not the core of the problem that has to be solved. Those "distractions" are major thorns in the side of every attempt to find a peaceful solution. They don't *have* to be, but Israel seems to like it that way. The issues of land and "settlements" and all of that are negotiable ONLY as details once the FACT of Jewish nationhood in the Land of Israel is truly accepted by the Muslim peoples. All the rest is blarney. UN Res 242. What about it? It clearly stated that that Israel was to give up those settlements and that land. If the Egyptians, Saudis and other Arab and Muslim states had NO access to advanced arms from the West or East, and had to develop and produce all their own internally, Israel would be better off even without the aid or arms sales to it!!! I am totally convinced of it. The Israeli arms industry is way too big, and way too controlled by the US thanks to the aid, that overall is a drag on the economy, but nonetheless necessary as long as the enemy and hostile Muslim states have access to US and other international sources of modern arms. This is why Israel's growth has lagged. If the world stops selling the Muslims states $10 billion in arms annually, Israel would be able to stop taking $3 billion in US aid AND STILL BE ECONOMICALLY BETTER OFF in the long run. Face reality--the Israelis don't *want* to see US aid end, it has become their teat which provides neverending succor. Heck, they even tried to hold us up over this last conflict: Face reality, no congressman challenges the end of aid, not because of AIPAC or huge mythical power in Dakota or Kansas, but because $7 billion in annual arms sales, and all the jobs and votes they represent, would go down with a unilateral end to aid. Sorry, but if that were the case, what of those congressmen who have no military industry in their districts (and there are quite a few--look at Iowa, Montana, Wyoming, and various districts across the rest of the nation. Your argument that this is somehow all tied to US defense industry viability just does not hold up. Yep, and it still ain't holding water... www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/ 2003-02-24-unwilling-cover_x.htm "Israel is seeking $12 billion on top of the $3 billion it receives annually." That is TWELVE freakin' billion dollars...and you think they want to give up that kind of loot? Again, get real. LOAN GUARANTEES, not money. Or in plain language, a consignor so that it can get loans on world capital markets at reasonable interest rates. LOL! When was the last time Israel had to pick up the tab for one of these major "loans"? Hmmm? Those are loans that Israel will be making from banks in the international capital markets. They are not US gov't loans. Israel lost $12 billion in the intifada (which is the equivalent of the US losing $1.2 TRILLION after 9/11) and simply wants to borrow on the int'l market, but needs a good cosignor to get the loans at a lower rate. Israel has never defaulted on a loan. What the hell are you talking about? The article in question dealt not with the intifada, or loans. It dealt with the fact that Israel was joining the que to ask for more US money, some $12 billion in this case, as part of the US's attempt to build a coalition to conduct what became known as OIF. They wanted 12 billion ON TOP of their "normal" $3 billion plus in US aid. Period. That is not talking about the US forking over $12 billion US dollars from the treasury to Israel and you know it. That is typical BS. No, it is indeed what was requested, and NO, it was not all for "loan guarantees"; they were also requesting *grants*. Do your homework and come up with something besides "JGB says so" and then get back to me, 'cause from where I stand JGB's record is hurtin' because he can't seem to come up with *any* supporting evidence. Supporting evidence of WHAT??? All of your assertions, i.e., "Egypt remains a grave threat to Israel", "Israel only sells antiquated military goods to the PRC", "Begin and Bentov were left-wing radicals whose statements regarding the 67 War are inconsequential", and maybe "All Muslims are rabid Israel-haters (except for Turkey, which is OK because they pay for things from Israel, right?)". Brooks
|
|
#60
July 14th 03, 05:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(JGB) wrote in message . com...
(Kevin Brooks) wrote in message om... (JGB) wrote in message . com... (Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (JGB) wrote in message . com... (Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (JGB) wrote in message . com... (Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (phil hunt) wrote in message ... Which Came First - Terrorism or "Occupation"? There were 3000 terrorist attempts before the '67 war. The following is a partial list of documented acts of Arab errorism, all occurring prior to the beginning of the Israeli administration of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967: snip for brevity Uhmmm...you seem to have left out: "The Massacre of Baldat al-Shaikh (Dec. 31, 1947) in which over 600 unarmed Palestinian men, women and children were slaughtered; Never heard of it; never happened. When, where, proof. evidence of any kind??? Never happened? Do a Google on it and you will come up with an amazing number of hits for this "never happened" event. One sample: "The massacres started early: Major General R. Dare Wilson, who served with the British troops trying to keep peace in Palestine before the end of the British Mandate, reported that on Dec. 18, 1947, the Haganah murdered 10, mostly women and children, in the Arab village of al-Khisas with grenades and machine gun fire. Wilson also described how on Dec. 31 the Haganah slaughtered another 14, again mostly women and children, again using machine guns and throwing grenades into occupied homes, this time in Balad Esh-Sheikh. [12] Throughout 1948, the massacres continued: 60 at Sa'sa' on Feb. 15; 100 murdered in Acre after its May 18 seizure by the Haganah; several hundred at Lydda on July 12, including 80 machine-gunned inside the Dahmash Mosque; 100 at Dawayma on Oct. 29, with an Israeli eye-witness reporting that "the children were killed by smashing their skulls with clubs"; 13 young men mowed down by machine guns in open fields outside Eilabun on Oct. 30; another 70 young men blindfolded and shot to death, one after another, at Safsaf the same day; 12 killed at Majd al-Kurum, also on Oct. 30, with a Belgian U.N. observer writing that "there is no doubt about these murders"; an unknown number killed the next day at al-Bi'na and Deir al-Assad, described by a U.N. official as "wanton slaying without provocation"; 14 "liquidated," according to the Israeli military's report, at Khirbet al-Wa'ra as-Sauda on Nov. 2. [13] A particularly repugnant method of killing employed by the Jewish militias was the blowing up of houses with their occupants still inside, often at night. The militia would place explosive charges around the stone houses, drench the wooden window and door frames with gasoline, and then open fire, simultaneously dynamiting and burning the sleeping inhabitants to death. [14]" Source: http://www.mediamonitors.net/robinmiller3.html His number at Baldat al-Shaikh (which he refers to by the alternative Balad Esh-Sheikh) is quite different from that "five hundred" used in the other report, but then that is just haggling over the *degree* of guilt, not that it exists. You might also do a Google on "Stern Gang" and "Irgun" if you are interested in reading *the other side* of the story... the Israelis (collective) are hardly innocent lambs when it comes to terrorism and murder. the Massacre of Dair Yasin (Apr. 10, 1948) in which a whole village of 500 unarmed Palestinian civilians were slaughtered by Israelis; EVen the Palestinians themselves don't use this lie anymore. I have a BBC tape where the villagers were interviewed, and altogether, perhaps 114 died, including possibly 25 which indeed were executed ("massacred'). The original figure of 254 was made up by Jewish leftist in order to discredit Begin and the Irgun which was a rival of the Ben Gurion and the mainstreat leftists who controlled the zionist movement. And even the old villagers affirm there were no rapes or mutilations as was originally alleged and circulated for decade. Gee, only 114? I guess that makes it OK then (sarcasm switch to "on" position). By the way, at what point does an atrocity become an atrocity, in your opinion? If 114 is good-to-go, then all of those recent Palestinian suicide bombings don't count either? BTW, I did not mention the massacres by Arabs of hundreds of Jews that occured in the 1920s and '30s, not to mention during the '48 war. Check out the founding date for the Irgun, if you want to be completely fair about this issue. How about the killing of Bernadotte? Was that OK as well? the Massacre of Lid (July 11, 1948) in which about 426 unarmed Palestinians were slaughtered; More fabricated myths of events that never occurred. You'd call it Lod, and the number of dead, and their status as combatants/non-combatants, receives different treatment in various sources. There was reference to the forced eviction of the Arab civilians by Rabin, who was present when it happened and commented about the need to use "warning shots" as they herded them down the road. the Massacre of Kufr Qasim (Oct. 29, 1956) in which 50 Palestinian men, women and children were killed; the Massacre of Khan Younis refugee camp (Nov. 3, 1956) in which 250 Palestinians were killed and nine days later, another 275 Palestinians were killed..." (Source: www.bsudailynews.com/vnews/display.v/ ART/2002/12/03/3dec367c1b9df That too is only a partial list. Rememeber that bit about shades of gray? Listen Kevin, most of the stuff you listed either never happened or were WILDLY exaggerated, Given that you think 114 is an OK amount of dead, or for that matter the 25 that you acknowledge were executed, I am not surprised that you find this all rather inconsequential. Now, even though you acknowledge at least one incident of cold-blooded executions, can you tell me how many Israelis, in the entire history of the nation, have been arrested, tried, and/or convicted of terrorist-type attacks on Palestinians? Given that the Stern Gang and Irgun did really exist, and did really do some rather nasty things, one would think that some number of Israelis have been held accountable for acts which occured over the last 50-plus years...but to my knowledge, the answer would be along the lines of the Bernadotte murder, where the case remains "unsolved"...but hey, that's OK, right? Israelis are to be applauded for committing murders and executions, but by-golly-those-Palestinians-better-cough-up-every-terrorist-RIGHT NOW...? just like "Comical ALi's" assertions of no US marines in Baghdad. Massive lying is an old ARab tradition. And apparently a new Israeli one. At any rate, if we want to go back to determine who spilled blood first, Arabs or Jews, I can confidently assert that Muhammad the Prophet committed a massacre of 600 Jews near Medina (Yathrib originally founded by Jews in Arabia), enslaving their women and children, robbing them of their wealth, and ethnically cleansing the remainder out of the Hijaz (northern Arabia and what is now Jordan), an edict which stands to this day. ARabs drew FIRST blood, both in the seventh century and in the 20th century. They put their mosques on Jewish soil, not the other way round. THere are no synagogues on ARabian soil. Arabs are the aggressors; Jews are the defenders. No, it is not about who was first--it is about realizing that the violence has gone *both* ways, instead of trying to portray all Muslims as evil murderers and all Israelis as White Knights. But you can't admit to that, because it would tarnish your "Israel is good/Arabs are evil" foundation for this entire discussion. BTW, did you know that Pakistani pilots downed a number of Israeli planes in '67? I don't dismiss either the Jordanians or the Pakistanis if Israel had to face them. Odd, but Michael Oren's recent book, "Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of a Modern Middle East" (Presidio, 2002), seems to have missed that little factoid (and Oren, being a former Israeli governmental official, would have presumably picked up on that, as he was rather careful to address how all of the regional nations reacted--yet he never *once* mentions Pakistan...). I hate to be repetitive, but any real evidence of this? Given your distinct aversion to providing *any* evidence, that is... http://www.scramble.nl/pk.htm "The Six-Day War between Israel and a number of Arab countries in 1967. During this conflict the PAF sent personnel to Egypt, Jordan and Syria to support the Arabs in their battle against the Israelis. PAF pilots managed to shoot down ten Israeli aircraft, including Mirages, Mystères and Vautours, without losses on their own side. The PAF pilots operated with Egyptian, Jordanese and Iraqi combat aircraft. " Uhmmm...do you have anything a bit more concrete? And just how did these Pakistanis manage to go 10-0 during a war where most Arab airpower was destroyed on the ground or never got into the fight? Lastly, why bother? Your point regarding alleged Pakistani pilots involved in the 67 War would be germane to the present issues exactly *how*? I don't know how true it is, but the Israeiis did lose 50 planes in that war, and Pakis have long proudly claimed that their pilots were among the few Muslim pilots that downed ISraeli jets. They make the claim, and I have no verification of it, one way or the other. Is it germane? Well, it might have something to do with why the US is hesitating to supply Pakistan with the F-16s it paid for long ago. That, and the fact that I suppose they can carry nuclear weapons. The first is a non-issue as regards the F-16's; they were embargoed because of the nuclear program. The US frowns on proliferation...but Israel? Different view, apparently, as backed up by their cooperation with the former South African nuclear weapons program... We do face a potential threat, on a regional basis, from the PRC in the not-too-distant future; denying the obvious in that regard will not do you any good. We are following a policy of cautious constructive engagement at present, but that is only going to be successful for as long as we are prepared to be more forceful (and having the PRC realize that) when/if required. Israel's continued provision of late-generation military products and technology to the PRC can hardly be considered a *good* thing by USians, now can it? In fact, the presumed challenge of the PRC to the US is as nothing compared to the challenge of the Muslims to ISrael. So now it is all Muslims who are the enemy of Israel? Are you racist much? Uhmmm...what about those *Turkish* Muslims that Israel is selling so much combat power to these days? Pakistan is a nuclear state with at least 150 nukes, and Iran soon will be. When you add in Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia and all the vast numbers enemies of ISrael's very existence, the PRC threat to the US is less than a gnat to a whale compared to the Muslim threat to Israel. Oh, nooo, Mr. Bill! Nations in the outlying region may become nuclear powers, or already are?! How dare they! That is obviously the sole purview of Israel (which is a nuclear power as well, predating those you mention by a period of decades)... Come on, get real--you are condemning other nations for the very same course of action that Israel has taken? First of all, as I have often stated before, nukes are a Jewish invention and that fact alone gives ISrael the right to have them. Now that is perverted logic if I have ever heard it. Nerve gas was a German invention--does that give Germany the right to posses it? And all of the other states in the region are recognized and no one is threatening to wipe them off the map. Except Israel, with its nukes, right? I don't think there is a nation on earth, including the US, that has a greater right to nukes than does Israel. And Israel has the right to preemptively strike at any state in the region that is hostile to ISrael and seeking WMD to destroy Israel. More perverted logic. The way you portray it, Israel is a purely Machiavellian Institution, and whatever it chooses to do defines "right", instead of having policies that follow "right". In fact, i believe the main reason the US went to war in Iraq was to avoid a possible nuclear strike by Israel on Iraq. You are joking, right? At any rate, no Arab or Muslim had anything to do with inventing nukes as did Jewish scientists. More warped reasoning. Israel had nothing to do with the invention of either the motorcar or the airplane--so they have no right to them? If Iran or any state in the region threatens Israel with WMD it can expect a nuclear attack by Israel at any time. Israel is too small to wait to absorb a first strike. Puhlease...get real. The reality is, that Israel is a tiny state comprised of mostly 5 million Jews, most of the male population of whom serves for weeks annually in the reserves for most of their adult lives, and which faces not only 4 million Arab enemies internally, Ah, so all of the Palestinians are enemies of Israel, even those that are Israeli citizens? Every Muslim is ipso facto an enemy of ISrael, Yup, racist. And not a very original one at that. unless he is of that very small minority that accepts that the Israelites mentioned in the Koran and today's Jews have some historic connection. Look, is every Chinese an enemy of America? Nope. I like the Taiwanese. WE defend the Taiwanese more than we defend Israel. LOL! Harken back to 73 and the DEFCON status that Nixon placed us at in response to Soviet rumblings vis-a-vis the Yom Kippur War. Recall that US Patriots and crews went to Israel during ODS. And remember that we are not giving Taiwan billions of bucks each and every year. Consider those FACTS, and then you might begin to get a clue... WE sell Israel's enemies military equipment but the US does not sell the PRC military equipment to use against Taiwan. You keep saying that, and then you never can come up with any real evidence that Egypt or Jordan are really still "enemies" of Israel... ANd yet you hold up the sale of a few antiquated weapons by ISrael to the PRC as some big deal while you arm the Arabs and other Muslims to the teeth. Antiquated weapons? I guess I should expect that kind of laughable description from a guy who couldn't tell the difference beween AMRAAM and Python, and who was quite convinced that not only the US but also the RAAF had deployed the latter. Phalcon sure as heck is/was not "antiquated", nor is the radar that the Israelis are marketing to the PRC for the J-10, nor is the HMSS that they are also trying (if they have not already done so--sort of murky) to sell to the PLAAF. You have been singing the praises of Python, which the PRC produces under license (-3 variant), and we have numerous reports that later models have been, or are being, marketed to the PLAAF as well, but now all of a sudden in order to suit your argument you want to call them "antiquated" as well? Flip-flop much? IN terms of OFFENSIVE weaponry, the equipment sold to China was no match for US equipment. But you said we were foolish for not buying Python ourselves, and now you claim it is an inferior product. Want it both ways, don't you? And how are Python, Phalcon, that Elbit/Elta radar for the J-10, and that HMSS all lumped together as purely "defensive" weapons? You are as far off the mark here as you were when you classified Python (now apparently a piece of worthless junk, in your opinion) as "AMRAAM"... At any rate, I reiterate, if the US sells Egypt and Saudi Arabia modern equipment, why shouldn't Israel sell to China, Cuba or anyone who can pay for it? Israel also sells to the US. So ISrael ought to do the same as the US, and arms BOTH sides. Why is this wrong? Because we are footing the bill. Can the aid to Israel, and they can sell to whomever they darned well choose--but they should not be allowed to have it both ways. Kind of like what my father used to tell me--"As long as I pay the bills, you live by *my* rules." We are paying the bills. Israel was better off with inferior Soviet equipment in ARab hands. The evidence does not support that theory. While Egypt was being armed by the Soviets they fought two major wars (67 and 73) with israel, while since the US has taken over as a major security partner with Egypt they have fought...nada, zip, none. The US already forced Israel to give them back every inch of the Sinai already. AND gives Egypt $2.8 billion in annual aid. SO what could they gain from attacking ISrael NOW? Unless they felt they could destroy it and get away with it. Exactly. Which proves they are no longer a serious threat to Israel. Now that was not that hard to admit, was it? While the argument that the US has better control over its more sophisticated equipment in Arab hands has some merit, I wouldn't be totally dismissive of Arab capabilities to eventually master this technology. I'm not that racist. Yep, you are if you like to use that "all Muslims" brushstroke that you are so quick with. All Muslims who say that the Temple MOunt does not belong to the Jews at all, and that they have the right to Jerusalem, and that ISrael is sitting on Arab/Muslim land is anti-Jewish and hence a mortal enemy, just like the Nazis. They deny the right of Jewish existence. BZZZ! Sorry, you automatically lose this debate by virtue of trying to use a backhanded delivery of the Nazi Card. Can't win without it, huh? The US can always leave the area; Israel has to live there. Which is why they should learn to be a decent neighbor. Israel is living amidst criminals and looters just the same as were seen n Iraq, whose only desire is to destroy and LOOT what the Jews built there over the last century. Not unlike the looting of former Arab villages by...Israelis. It's why the Palestinians left,figuring that the Jews would be crushed in a matter of weeks and that they would then be able to loot everything the Jews had built over 30 or more years prior to 1948. They gambled wrong, and lost, but refused to give up their quest. I don't think they ever will. Time will tell. read a bit and you will find that a lot of them left under duress, with folks like the Stern Gang and Irgun pushing from behind while the Palmach did its own share of forced evictions (like Lod). UN Res 242. What about it? It clearly stated that that Israel was to give up those settlements and that land. Does not. It says Israel must return occupied territories. It returned 90% of them already, but will not "return" disputed lands without peace treaties. There is a peace treaty with Jordan. There is no country called Palestine to make a treaty with. Syria refuses to negotiate unless it is promised everything back in advance. Utter insanity. Why should aggressors be allowed to get ALL of the land back, especally when it is disputed land? Golan is first mentioned in the bible. Israel does not have to return Jewish land, only occupied Arab land. Yeah, sure. First the nazi Card, now the Bible defense... Supporting evidence of WHAT??? All of your assertions, i.e., "Egypt remains a grave threat to Israel", "Israel only sells antiquated military goods to the PRC", "Begin and Bentov were left-wing radicals whose statements regarding the 67 War are inconsequential", and maybe "All Muslims are rabid Israel-haters (except for Turkey, which is OK because they pay for things from Israel, right?)". Some Egyptian parliamentarians have called for Egypt to build nuclear weapons. Sorry, you already agreed that you were wrong about Egypt being a serious threat. I go along with the Bush-Sharon policy that any state now seeking to acquire nukes has to be attacked before it gets them. That is NOT the Bush policy. Turkey is not an Arab state, though it is Muslim. The ARab muslims are the craziest of the lot. They started the whole mess in the first place. Sorry, you quite clearly said all Muslims. Now you want to say that Muslims who happen to live in a nation providing payments to Israel for weapons are OK folks... double standard much? Brooks
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| how to force jeppview charts with flitestar? | rexwind | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | January 19th 05 11:13 AM |
| USA - Air Force one | franck jeamourra | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | June 11th 04 11:40 AM |
| 100 Air Force Overviews online !! | Frank Noort | Aerobatics | 0 | May 17th 04 06:47 PM |
| Who's At Fault in UAV/Part91 MAC? | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | April 29th 04 03:08 PM |
| RV-7a baggage area | David Smith | Home Built | 32 | December 15th 03 04:08 AM |
Linear Mode
