truth on hold Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 HEY NETANYAHU WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO DEMOLISH THE HOMES OF THE 3 JEWISH TERRORISTS WHO BURNED THIS POOR WOMAN'S SON TO DEATH? http://youtu.be/pGE1qgSC_2M
Justice Posted July 13, 2014 Author Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) Let's not get into '67 but let me tell you my version. Good one. Who was amassed on the Sinai Peninsula? Oh spare me with that BS. You attack someone because you "believe" they're going to attack you? Yeah...right... And I'm supposed to just take them at their word, huh? Attack them. Fine. Go right ahead. But take their land? See, that's the believable part. Motive. Edited July 13, 2014 by NoJustice
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 No Justice: You believe that the Israelis had no reason to believe that new attacks would be forthcoming in the ongoing war in 1967?
3rdnlng Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) Here you go. A quick copy and paste. In early October 2002, President Bush was trying to convince Congress to pass a resolution to give him unilateral authority to go to war with Iraq. In a major address to the nation on October 7, he said "We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. . . . We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gasses." He also said that a "very senior al Qaeda leader" received medical treatment in Baghdad. In the same speech, the president closely connected the need to attack Iraq with the 9/11 attacks: "Some citizens wonder, 'after 11 years of living with this [saddam Hussein] problem, why do we need to confront it now?' And there's a reason. We have experienced the horror of September the 11th." Thus, the terrorist attacks of 9/11 were a major reason for attacking Iraq. Vice President Cheney said on "Meet the Press" in late 2001 that a meeting between Mohamed Atta and an Iraqi official in Prague in 2001 was "pretty well con- firmed."3 On September 27, 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld argued that the link between Saddam and al Qaeda was "bulletproof." Link? Also you stated that he insinuated this several times. Provide those different links too. The main problem with Iraq is that they failed to live up to UN requirements. Everyone thought they had WMD's, especially after Saddam claimed it. Do you think that he didn't after gassing his own people? Do you rationally think that he didn't have connections with Al Qaeda when he had the same common enemy? You need to just stop your horseshit. You are sounding like "Baghdad Bob" Oh spare me with that BS. You attack someone because you "believe" they're going to attack you? Yeah...right... And I'm supposed to just take them at their word, huh? Attack them. Fine. Go right ahead. But take their land? See, that's the believable part. Motive. I see you conveniently omitted my question re who was amassed in the Sinai. You're losing me and I have been one of your more reasonable opponents. Edited July 13, 2014 by 3rdnlng
4merper4mer Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) HEY NETANYAHU WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO DEMOLISH THE HOMES OF THE 3 JEWISH TERRORISTS WHO BURNED THIS POOR WOMAN'S SON TO DEATH? Why do you call them "Jewish" terrorists instead of Israeli terrorists? P.S. I don't think Netanyahu reads this board. Edited July 13, 2014 by 4merper4mer
truth on hold Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) Why do you call them "Jewish" terrorists instead of Israeli terrorists? Ummm because that's what the israeli media and politiciamns have been calling them. But if you want to refer to them as just Israelies, fine by me. That means when Israeli Arabs commit acts of terror they should simply be referred to as Israelis as well. And not that its needed, but removing the distinction just all the more reason to demolish their homes. Edited July 13, 2014 by Joe_the_6_pack
Justice Posted July 13, 2014 Author Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) Link? Also you stated that he insinuated this several times. Provide those different links too. The main problem with Iraq is that they failed to live up to UN requirements. Everyone thought they had WMD's, especially after Saddam claimed it. Do you think that he didn't after gassing his own people? Do you rationally think that he didn't have connections with Al Qaeda when he had the same common enemy? You need to just stop your horseshit. You are sounding like "Baghdad Bob" I see you conveniently omitted my question re who was amassed in the Sinai. You're losing me and I have been one of your more reasonable opponents. Lol. Believe me if you want but even back then I knew Iraq didn't have any WMDs, but how can I prove that? Bush had the MOTIVE to attack Iraq. That was enough for me. The Egyptians amassed in the Sinai. Why do you need me to answer that? Listen, any logical person should know that Israel must have planned the 6 day war well in advance. They were obviously well prepared. They vanquished three countries in less than a week. Maybe, just maybe, the Egyptians caught wind of their preparations and assembled to defend themselves. https://dk-media.s3.amazonaws.com/AA/AT/gambillingonjustice-com/downloads/275071/Did_President_Bush_Mislead_the_Country_in_His_Arguments_for_War_with_Iraq.pdf http://anthonysummersandrobbynswan.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/iraq-al-qaeda-911-the-connection-that-wasnt/ Edited July 13, 2014 by NoJustice
3rdnlng Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 Lol. Believe me if you want but even back then I knew Iraq didn't have any WMDs, but how can I prove that? Bush had the MOTIVE to attack Iraq. That was enough for me. The Egyptians amassed in the Sinai. Why do you need me to answer that? Listen, any logical person should know that Israel must have planned the 6 day war well in advance. They were obviously well prepared. They vanquished three countries in less than a week. Maybe, just maybe, the Egyptians caught wind of their preparations and assembled to defend themselves. https://dk-media.s3....r_with_Iraq.pdf http://anthonysummer...ion-that-wasnt/ I would expect them to have contingency plans when they are surrounded by people that want them exterminated. You are spouting crap and I am about done with you.
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 Lol. Believe me if you want but even back then I knew Iraq didn't have any WMDs, but how can I prove that? Bush had the MOTIVE to attack Iraq. That was enough for me. The Egyptians amassed in the Sinai. Why do you need me to answer that? Listen, any logical person should know that Israel must have planned the 6 day war well in advance. They were obviously well prepared. They vanquished three countries in less than a week. Maybe, just maybe, the Egyptians caught wind of their preparations and assembled to defend themselves. https://dk-media.s3....r_with_Iraq.pdf http://anthonysummer...ion-that-wasnt/ Israel must always be prepared to be immediately at war. They are surrounded by hostile enemies, bent on their extinction, who do not even acknowledge their right to exist. Their very existence hinges on their level of preparedness. As such, they cannot afford to take threats, like the ones levied against them in 1967, lightly. They must react to them swiftly and severely. They must teach you not to be aggressors. As long as you refuse to learn, they will continue to punch you in the mouth. And you deserve it.
Justice Posted July 13, 2014 Author Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) Does this sound like a man who wants peace? http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/07/12/israeli-pm-admits-military-occupation-over-palestinians-to-last-forever/ I would expect them to have contingency plans when they are surrounded by people that want them exterminated. You are spouting crap and I am about done with you. Contingency plans? Those are some great "contingency plans". I'm pretty sure those plans were very specific. I'm sure they knew all along they were going to attack these nations to take their land in six !@#$ing days. You're just too damn ignorant to see that. Be done with me. Edited July 13, 2014 by NoJustice
B-Man Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended his country’s retaliation against rocket attacks launched at Israel from Gaza, saying that Israel would do “whatever is necessary” to defend itself, and that Hamas is responsible for any civilian casualties that occur. “This is an unconscionable attack on civilian populations, and of course we have to act to defend ourselves,” he told Bob Schieffer on CBS’s Face the Nation Sunday. “We are doing exactly what any country would do, you would do, if you were attacked from across the border.” Netanyahu said that Hamas rocketeers were embedding themselves in “homes, hospitals, next to kindergartens, mosques,” and that as a result, Israel’s attempts at surgical strikes in response had caused unintentional civilian casualties. “The difference between us is we’re using missile defense to protect our civilians, and they’re using civilians to protect they’re missiles,” he said. Asked by Schieffer about whether he agreed that the conflict ultimately had to have a political rather than a military solution, Netanyahu responded that Hamas was not interested in a political settlement. “They’re talking about destroying the State of Israel,” he said. “Sometimes you just have to fight against people who want to murder you.” http://www.nationalr...r-you-katherine
Justice Posted July 13, 2014 Author Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) http://www.nationalr...r-you-katherine I don't think anyone on this planet believes Hamas has the capabilities to destroy anyone, much less Israel. Over exaggerate much? Edited July 13, 2014 by NoJustice
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 Does this sound like a man who wants peace? http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/07/12/israeli-pm-admits-military-occupation-over-palestinians-to-last-forever/ Contingency plans? Those are some great "contingency plans". I'm pretty sure those plans were very specific. I'm sure they knew all along they were going to attack these nations to take their land. You're just too damn ignorant to see that. Be done with me. They absolutely did have those plans in place. That's what military strategists do. They build massive contingencies for every senario. For instance, the United States has multiple plans in place for the invasion of Canada; and there is a set of circumstances, were they to be met, in which those plans would be carried out. War planning doesn't happen after the fact. War planning happens long before the fact. That way, when the circumstances in which you would go to war are met, you're ready, and hopefully more so than your enemy. In 1967 the conditions for Israel's war plan were met. They had heard enough very loud saber rattling, were weary of your guerrilla attacks, And were witnessing military mobilization on hostile borders. They enacted their plans for their own defense and safety. Your takeaway should have been: perhaps we should have acknowledged Israel's right to exist. Instead you cry that they should have waited for your inevitable attack against them. This is why they should drive you into the sea.
B-Man Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 I don't think anyone on this planet that believes Hamas has the cspabilities to destroy anyone, much less Israel. Over exaggerate much? What a shallow statement. It's not a false "all or nothing" strawman. They are attacking civilians and need to be stopped. The fact that is their own stated goal is the destruction of Israel , and whether you do not believe they can do it is not really the point. .
Justice Posted July 13, 2014 Author Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) What a shallow statement. It's not a false "all or nothing" strawman. They are attacking civilians and need to be stopped. The fact that is their own stated goal is the destruction of Israel , and whether you do not believe they can do it is not really the point. . The only people succeeding in wiping out someone else is the Israelis to the Palestinians and that's a fact. One of my goals is to nail Eva Mendes. That isn't gonna happen. Go back to the '67 borders, dismantle all the ILLEGAL settlements and as part of the deal make sure Palestine will never have a military. That's the only way. Edited July 13, 2014 by NoJustice
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) The only people succeeding in wiping out someone else is the Israelis to the Palestinians and that's a fact. One of my goals is to nail Eva Mendes. That isn't gonna happen. Go back to the '67 borders, dismantle all the ILLEGAL settlements and as part of the deal make sure Palestine will never have a military. That's the only way. Hey bud, evil bastard here. It doesn't matter that the Palestinians and Hamas are incompetent. It's reasonable and moral to focus on their goals, not their success rate, since they are launching rockets at civilians. And that's not the only way. The moral way is to give you nothing, demand your complete surrender, and walk back your apartheid as you can show that you deserve it. A good start would be not acting like third world animals, and not only acknowledging, but fully embracing Israel's right to exist. Oh, and I'm pretty sure Eva Mendez would find you're thoughts on a woman's role, and thereby you, repulsive. Cheers! Edited July 13, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker
DC Tom Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 Oh spare me with that BS. You attack someone because you "believe" they're going to attack you? Yeah...right... And I'm supposed to just take them at their word, huh? Attack them. Fine. Go right ahead. But take their land? See, that's the believable part. Motive. Egypt did kick UNEF out of the Sinai and blockade the Straits of Tiran. That wasn't a "belief."
Justice Posted July 13, 2014 Author Posted July 13, 2014 Egypt did kick UNEF out of the Sinai and blockade the Straits of Tiran. That wasn't a "belief." Damn! That's some deadly, evil **** right there!
DC Tom Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 Damn! That's some deadly, evil **** right there! It is an act of war. And the same sort of action (blockade of Gaza) that Hamas uses to justify attacking Israel.
Nanker Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 Oh, sweet Jeepers. Maybe this will settle him down. No Peace? No piece!
Recommended Posts