J
JCM
Ditto.
#Israel #War #Gaza
- Thread starter Necronic
- Start date
- Status
Officially, they refuse to state whether they do or don't. Unofficially, yes. They have something called the Sampson Option, which basically means they have enough nukes to make all their neighbors suffer if it ever looks like they'd be in a fight they'd lose. The Israelis remember the Holocaust and aren't willing to let it happen again.
It's one of the reasons why their neighbors haven't tried a massive offensive since the 60's: Israel would kick their ass, but even if they COULD win, Israel would nuke them before it got that far. It's sort of why everyone in the Middle East wants a nuke.
So. Iran gets a nuke. They threaten to nuke Israel. Israel threatens to nuke them first, and everyone else around them, just in case. Neither side wants to be the one who fires nukes second.
Nukes fall, everyone dies.
That about right?
Basically, except that Israel will never let it get that far. They'd rather risk a ground war than let Iran get a nuke, which is why they've been using missiles to blow the fuck out of Iran's development facilities, kidnapping/murdering it's scientists, and all kinds of other nasty shit. Their proactive approach is probably the best solution to the problem, currently. Iran's still going to going for a nuke but each setback buys Israel more time for a more realistic government to come into power.
This all goes out of the window once the US gets reliable missile defense technology. Japan, Israel and South Korea will get it the second we have it up and running because our entire international strategy depends on keeping those countries safe.
It's amusing when people forget that I'm Canadian. You have any idea how anti-american most of the media in Canada is? Trust me, I get a lot more than "rah rah USA" stories up here.
There's also a lot bigger chance of dying on the road on the way to the airport than when you're in the plane, but how many people are afraid of flying? This statement of yours means nothing.
Basically my points above still stand. If Israel disarmed, there'd be a massacre. If the Palestinians did, there would be peace. Egypt has the ability to remedy every single humanitarian thing wrong in Gaza but do not, and get near-zero blame anywhere it. And my comment about "killing jews" was more accurate and timely than I thought it would be, as this is from the Globe and Mail in an article today quoting a police chief in Gaza: “We’ve got 10,000 men willing to sacrifice themselves to kill as many of the Jews as possible.”
And Ariel Sharon's son thinks Israel should carpet-bomb Gaza.
There's not exactly a shortage of crazy on either side, here.
There's not exactly a shortage of crazy on either side, here.
J
JCM
Amen.
Which makes it even sadder that some people help justify it, after all a few dead thousand Palestinian kids dead because of broken-down hospitals? No problem, fine with that. Now a homemade bomb wounds one Isreali? KILL ALL THE ARABS!!!
And then the West wonders how impressionable kids are brainwashed into flying planes into buildings and killing thousands? To them, thousands are killed monthly because of the US vetoing ANY UN decision on Isreal, and people like you saying "making people live in misery and terror while stealing land"? I'm okay with that!
Its a bullshit imaginary point, because its about as real and proven as a unicorn. We saw Palestine put down its weapons in the past, and still get attacked. Your scenario? Still never happened, nor ever will, because the Palestinian would move back to occupied land, and Isreal would never allow that.... and with the US army around, we'd just see another South Korea.
If Palestinians put down their weapons? Isreal would just wait for some other Arab country to make an attack, and them strike Palestine saying they were looking for "agents of that country", like they did many times in the past.
Again, reality, not wishful opinion supporting killers. Both sides are arseholes, the only difference is that Isreal's media support brainwashes you on the West to support human right abuses, like Chinese and Arab media tells them that the US is pretty much an Isreali puppet or the Anti-Christ or something.
Which makes it even sadder that some people help justify it, after all a few dead thousand Palestinian kids dead because of broken-down hospitals? No problem, fine with that. Now a homemade bomb wounds one Isreali? KILL ALL THE ARABS!!!
And then the West wonders how impressionable kids are brainwashed into flying planes into buildings and killing thousands? To them, thousands are killed monthly because of the US vetoing ANY UN decision on Isreal, and people like you saying "making people live in misery and terror while stealing land"? I'm okay with that!
My point still stands, if unicorns flew, they'd be killed by Pegasi (is that the plural of Pegasus?).
Its a bullshit imaginary point, because its about as real and proven as a unicorn. We saw Palestine put down its weapons in the past, and still get attacked. Your scenario? Still never happened, nor ever will, because the Palestinian would move back to occupied land, and Isreal would never allow that.... and with the US army around, we'd just see another South Korea.
If Palestinians put down their weapons? Isreal would just wait for some other Arab country to make an attack, and them strike Palestine saying they were looking for "agents of that country", like they did many times in the past.
Again, reality, not wishful opinion supporting killers. Both sides are arseholes, the only difference is that Isreal's media support brainwashes you on the West to support human right abuses, like Chinese and Arab media tells them that the US is pretty much an Isreali puppet or the Anti-Christ or something.
J
JCM
Funnily, bitch all we want about USA's political blunders around the world (Kissinger's Isreal support leading to the billions spent in the Palestine clusterfuck, like training the same guys who would later cause Sept 11, supporting dictators like the Arab Royal family, installing a puppet in Iran that led to the rise of the Ayatollah), world peace still rests on the shoulders of the USA, and is better off because of it.
I shudder to think what will happen when China overtakes the US in GNP and military might.
Anonymous sides with Palestine in this case:
http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/...tabases-leaks-emails-addresses-and-passwords/
http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/...tabases-leaks-emails-addresses-and-passwords/
It's possible to get all of the Israeli based attacks to stop by convincing their leadership to stop attacks.
It's impossible to get all the Palestine based attacks to stop without convincing all of Palestine to stop attacks. Palestine is still fractured, and those that control the weapons are unbridled. There is no unity, and that's why so few nations accept them as a state.
J
JCM
This is actually wrong.
Its as possible to get all the Isreali based attacks to stop as it is to get all US army bases away from other countries. The ultra-orthodox Jews and the Hawks in the government are about as powerful as the Republicans in the US. It will never stop.[DOUBLEPOST=1353428561][/DOUBLEPOST]
True, taht could be a best case scenario.
One of the main difficulties is that there is no central leadership amongst the palestinians with whom to negotiate, and who are in a position to deliver. The 2008 ceasefire you are referring to did not succeed in completely stopping the rocket attacks. Hamas did arrest a handful of people, but they were all let go without charges being pressed. And I was under the impression that 19 was the total amount of palestinian dead (3 civilians, 16 militants) during the ceasefire.
To me, that is simply more evidence indicating that you can make whatever deals with the palestinians, but they are unlikely to work. Israel has experienced this several times.
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/11/20/letter-hamas-stop-rocket-attacksHuman Rights Watch said:
And the Palestinians fight back by firing deliberately at civilian population centers, and position their rockets next to schools, hospitals, and residential complexes so that, should the other guy respond, they carry a large risk of causing collateral damage. Which gives you opportunities of taking some nice pictures and spreading them around the world, to show everyone how the other guy is mean and evil.
To me, there are few if any acceptable reasons for such actions, which is why I have a hard time sympathising with Hamas, al-Aqsa, Islamic Jihad, or any others who partake in such. It's almost as if they don't really care about the fate of their own civilians.
That was more true during the Mubarak era, who continued the pro-Israeli foreign policy of Sadat (who, btw, was assassinated by muslim extremists). It is somewhat less true after Mubarak's overthrow, and the street in Egypt is very anti-Israel, though most of them admit that Egypt is currently not able to fight a conflict against anyone. In the Sinai peninsula the local bedouins are a force to be reckoned with, and are smuggling weapons, narcotics, jihadists, as well as some more benign stuff into Gaza and Israel. Egypt hasn't been extremely successful in re-establishing central control of the Sinai, and several border incidents have left strains on Egyptian-Israeli relations.
Things may have changed a bit since the Kissinger years.
Well, at least it gets Clinton's mind off the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_the_U.S._diplomatic_mission_in_Benghazi issue. She'd rather walk into the middle of the firefight than deal with the nosy american public.
J
JCM
Good catch there... I'd love to see what the new Egyptian government would do in the middle of the clusterfuck if war starts.[DOUBLEPOST=1353438208][/DOUBLEPOST]And yeah, things are more organized on the Isreali side. Kinda their fault, when you do not permit people to form their own country, you end up with the horror of fanaticism and manipulation that is Palestinian politics.
Heres a question, why do the Palestinians need their own country? If they were to just be part of Israel they would have full and equal rights as any Jewish citizen. They could vote and run in elections (there is an Arab party that has seats in the Israeli Parliament). I get that Hamas wants to maintain power but for the average Palestinian citizen, having Israel control the entire land would be a good thing.
I understand that Israel is not 100% blameless for this situation and has handled some things very poorly, but I just think living in a democracy with rights would be a lot better than trying to be independent with a brutal dictatorship.
I understand that Israel is not 100% blameless for this situation and has handled some things very poorly, but I just think living in a democracy with rights would be a lot better than trying to be independent with a brutal dictatorship.
Most Jewish Israeli voters are against the one-state solution because were all the Palestinian refugees to return and Palestinian birthrates continue, Israel would be Palestinian-majority fairly quickly, and Jewish Israelis would be forced into second-class citizenship. That, plus the fact that for many Israelis (and Jews in general) Israel is intended to be the official Jewish theocratic homeland.
Most Palestinian Arabs are allegedly supportive of a one-state solution, particular those living in Israeli who want to maintain their Israeli citizenship. That's not to say that they're not also supportive of two-state, but two-state is losing a lot of ground, and quite a few folks think one-state is inevitable and already where the whole situation is sliding into. The reason why a lot of people want to sit down and make it official is because the kind of one-state solution Israel is sliding into now is South Africa.
Most Palestinian Arabs are allegedly supportive of a one-state solution, particular those living in Israeli who want to maintain their Israeli citizenship. That's not to say that they're not also supportive of two-state, but two-state is losing a lot of ground, and quite a few folks think one-state is inevitable and already where the whole situation is sliding into. The reason why a lot of people want to sit down and make it official is because the kind of one-state solution Israel is sliding into now is South Africa.
J
JCM
Because
a) about 200 thousand of them were already there in Palestine, a British territory, were kicked out to make space for Israel. They have as much right to exist as Isreal does, but then the Arabs flooded the area with refugees and that makes it hard.
b) Israel will not give them Isreali citizenship nor equal rights. Imagine the native Americans a hundred or two years back, in concentration camps, being treated with contempt and being collectively punished.
c) today's Palestinian majority was raised in terrible conditions, being taught since young that Isreal and its backer, the US, was responsible for their condition, and live in fear and humiliation. Doubt they'd volunteer to be Isreali instead of being Palestinian.
Add the following line to the last caption "and arab propaganda", and you've got the majority of Palestinians and their mindset.
Like most sane people here have been saying, it's a double-sided fuck up.
-Israel wanted to steal more land and fucked itself up,
-Palestine wanted its right and got fucked up,
-US spent trillions on this fuck up,
-Israeli sympathizers who couldn't give a shit about thing like how Palestine's high infant mortality rate due to its lack of infrastructure and medicine, helped this fuck up
-and the only ones gaining from this are the Arab terrorist organizations that get fresh teenagers willing to blow themselves up.
For generations diplomats can use the creation of Isreal, the Egypt-Isreal War and the post-war Isreali rights abuses as the worst handling of foreign policy by the West (we are looking at you Britain, too).[DOUBLEPOST=1353470347][/DOUBLEPOST]
The current conflict is actually better for Israel than to start some Arab version of apartheid. They can still get away with land grabs and depriving Palestinians of basic rights with the "terrorist" excuse, even when there isn't any attack, and US will veto anything anyone tries to do to stop it, with some loss in reputation and respect and some terrorist attacks on the side.
But if they start segregating its own citizens, I doubt that the American public would continue supporting the US veto, it would be a total PR disaster for both Isreal and the US.
J
JCM
Go home Palestine and Isreal, you are drunk.
GasBandit
Staff member
I said it a'fore, and I'll say it a'gin.
This is so very, very far past the point of possible compromise that it's almost irrelevant how it got there. It only matters which side winning would be in our best interest.
Is it wrong that I just wish both states would annihilate each other so this could end?
Somewhat depending on which school of thought you subscribe to... yeah, something to that effect is pretty much the basis of any nation's foreign policy. What are the advantages and drawbacks of various outcomes, and what does it take to reach them.
It's also the main reason why I personally tend to be highly sceptical when I hear the leaders of Great Powers framing their foreign policy initiatives in moral rhetoric. They do what is in their own interests, with the rest being perception management. Which is all fine and good if your own interests lie along similar lines, but I tend to kind of snort derisively when any single nation is trumpeted as a 'force for good in the world'.
Not necessarily, in my opinion. It's good to keep an open mind when examining scenarios, even if doing so occasionally leads one down morally ambiguous paths. But it seems to me that you are wishing for the highly unlikely. Purposeful action requires both intent and capability, and the Palestinians are short on the capabilities required for such an undertaking. Israel wiping out the palestinians is militarily possible, though.
From the viewpoint of a theoretical thought exercise, I suppose the benefit of what you wish for is directly related to how much the situation afterwards is in your favor. Mutual destruction would stop the fighting between the Pals and the Israelis, but what would happen then? The removal of Israel from the picture would cause a significant change in the balance of power in the region, which usually tends to result in instability until a new equilibrium (of whatever form) comes about. How likely is it that what follows is preferable to the current situation?
Because this thread has already been Godwin'd, I don't feel bad about posting what thought this stimulated: Israel is to the Middle east what Nazi Germany was to WWII in that it makes allies of people who utterly hate each other (Soviets & the West compare to the other Middle eastern nations).
Israel and Gaza agree to ceasefire.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/world/article/Israel-and-Hamas-agree-to-Gaza-cease-fire-4055588.php
Hopefully both sides are actually committed to keeping it.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/world/article/Israel-and-Hamas-agree-to-Gaza-cease-fire-4055588.php
Hopefully both sides are actually committed to keeping it.
GasBandit
Staff member
J
JCM
Exactly. Just like Nazi Germany kept the Americans and Russians from going at each other, Israel is the only reason we aren't seeing a Shiite and Sunni grudge match (which is technically the ancient Persian vs Arab war, under a new name).
What the fuck? How is civilian mapping a national security threat?
- Status