Israel attacks Syrian port

[Higgly]

Isn't a port receiving nukes a bit more of a military target than a bus, or Sbarro's Pizza?

And Israrel should surrender its existence to someone who believes in 72 virgins and rides a mad camel?

Do you have any pictures of those nukes? Here's another theory for you. There were no nukes at all, but North Korea was engaging in trade with Syria. The US is trying to put pressure on North Korea by blockading trade, so it gets its client state, Israel, to bomb the shipment and the port just to send a message that anybody who trades with North Korea will suffer. The nukes stuff is just a convenient cover story.

Your last sentence is the usual drivel we too often see from your crowd.

[Higgly]

Any action by Syria that may have security comsequence for Israel may provoke a response by Israel. It is not as you incorrectly assume, out of the blue, but a fact of their position as belligerants.

More nonsense. This is why we have the Geneva Conventions. You cannot attack unless you are attacked. Those are the rules. Read 'em and weep. Pre-emptive strikes amount to little more than making somebody else pay for your paranoia. Look at Iraq. Weapons of Mass Destruction, my ass.

Edited September 21, 2007 by Higgly

[Higgly]

And Israel's done what, managed to survive without Arab (and your) permission?

Your ignorance of historical fact is limitless.

[Higgly]

You can freely read Al Jazeera news online. Don't pretend like it's been savagely sensored out by the "certain part of society". Anyway, it wasn't on Al-Jazeera either.

Why? Do you see Israel using these bombs? Do you see Israel threatening to exterminate the Palestinians, drive the Lebanese into the Sea, or whipe Syria off the map? I don't. Israel having the bomb is an insurance policy. Places like Syria having the bomb, even if the government was sane enough not to use it themselves, would be too easy for terrorist groups to get their hands on.

You are trivializing the censorship of Al-Jazeera. No surprise there.

Do you see Syria using these bombs? Here you go again again. Special rules for Israel. Hard talk for everyone else.

[bush_cheney2004]

More nonsense. This is why we have the Geneva Conventions. You cannot attack unless you are attacked. Those are the rules. Read 'em and weep. Pre-emptive strikes amount to little more than making somebody else pay for your paranoia. Look at Iraq. Weapons of Mass Destruction, my ass.

This is false...the four "Geneva Conventions", later adopted as the GC's of 1949 have nothing to do with the legality of war or pre-emptive measures, just the methods and means to affect such ends, as well as the impact on combatants and non-combatants.

Those are most certainly not the rules....attack at will.

Edited September 21, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[ScottSA]

More nonsense. This is why we have the Geneva Conventions. You cannot attack unless you are attacked. Those are the rules. Read 'em and weep. Pre-emptive strikes amount to little more than making somebody else pay for your paranoia. Look at Iraq. Weapons of Mass Destruction, my ass.

This is not a playground upon which one runs to the teacher crying when someone breaks "the rules." And just so you know, the "rules of war" covered by the GC are not the rules of war you think they are. They have nothing to say about the initiation of hostilities, they are simply conventions governing, to the extent that anyone agrees to be governed, the methods of fighting the war once it gets rolling.

[jbg]

So if Syria were to sponsor some sort of covert military action against Israel, then that would be OK?

If they attack a bus or a pizza parlor, no.

[jbg]

Your ignorance of historical fact is limitless.

The Arab unhappiness with the Jews started when we threw off the yoke of dhimmitude and insisted on "self-determination". Oh, that's a phrase only haters can use, I guess. Quite rich of you.

[WestViking]

Do you have any pictures of those nukes? Here's another theory for you. There were no nukes at all, but North Korea was engaging in trade with Syria. The US is trying to put pressure on North Korea by blockading trade, so it gets its client state, Israel, to bomb the shipment and the port just to send a message that anybody who trades with North Korea will suffer. The nukes stuff is just a convenient cover story.

Your last sentence is the usual drivel we too often see from your crowd.

Uh-huh - and the sovereign nation of Syria is just sitting on her hands allowing a huge opportunity to condemn Israel to the world for its aggressive action float by. Considering that Syria is already awash with the Iranian National Guard your theory is more than just difficult to accept. Do you lay awake nights dreaming up this nonsense?

[M.Dancer]

So if Syria were to sponsor some sort of covert military action against Israel, then that would be OK?

"So if Syria were to sponsor some sort of covert military action...."?

That would be a welcome change. Certainly better than the covert terrorist support they currently give. It would also mean that Israel would have a open reason to destory Syria (again).

...So yes, that would be ok.

[M.Dancer]

Nonsense. Israel is tied with Syria in terms of its kill total. The difference of course is that Israel kills the citizens of other countries while Syria kills its own. Of course, since they're not Jews, they don't count, eh Dancer?

Does that non sequitor have any particular relevance to normal space time reality?

Reminds me of the "This is your brain on drugs....." commecials.

[M.Dancer]

More nonsense. This is why we have the Geneva Conventions. You cannot attack unless you are attacked. Those are the rules. Read 'em and weep. Pre-emptive strikes amount to little more than making somebody else pay for your paranoia. Look at Iraq. Weapons of Mass Destruction, my ass.

They are already in a state of legal war. So your prevaricating nonsense about waiting to be attacked before you can defend yourself is just that, nonsense. Read that in the rules of war and weep.

oh...and the rest of that post too.....vacuous nonsense.

[Bonam]

Jews lived in peace in Palestine under the Turks. In fact they lived in peace all over the Arab world until Israel came into existence.

I guess if a massacre every few weeks or months is your definition of peace... try learning some actual history rather than Arab propaganda.

[ScottSA]

BS. Jews lived in peace in Palestine under the Turks. In fact they lived in peace all over the Arab world until Israel came into existence. And by the way, they were very laregly outnumbered. Where did you get this crap?

Blacks lived in peace under the southern plantation system too. In fact, quite a bit more peace than that enjoyed by Jews under the Ottomans...especially when Ramadan fasting got Musselmen all riled up and ornery.

Whatever caused this ridiculous deification of "peace" on the left, as if peace is an end in and of itself? It's not, you know. If it were, the Palestinians would have learned long ago that the best way to attain it is by not lobbing rockets at Jews.

[ScottSA]

Would have been faster if we had access to Al Jazeera, I'll bet. But then, that's why certain parts of society lobbied so hard to have it kept off the airways, isn't it?

Al Jazeera just wants to broadcast a new and as yet un-noticed form of terrorism. It must be stopped.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q03QSzbptRU...ted&search=

[M.Dancer]

Al Jazeera just wants to broadcast a new and as yet un-noticed form of terrorism. It must be stopped.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q03QSzbptRU...ted&search=

You have a common form of gaelic self hate. I recommend you watch train spotting 10 times.

[ScottSA]

You have a common form of gaelic self hate. I recommend you watch train spotting 10 times.

My cultural heritage is being stolen. Have I nae right to be miffed?

[M.Dancer]

My cultural heritage is being stolen. Have I nae right to be miffed?

Oh oh......you know the bagpipes aren't native to scotland right? They came to the north after the 10 century.

That one of the first recorded mentions of the pipes appaers in ancient greece? Another in the Bible is thought to be a bagpipe. Bagpipes can be found almost everywhere sheep, and sheeps stomaches are used as bladders.

On another note, a friend of mine is coming back from scotlansd with a few tins of Grants Haggis (for the high Holidays). I always serve it with Auld Alliance and toast as an appetizer......

[Higgly]

Blacks lived in peace under the southern plantation system too. In fact, quite a bit more peace than that enjoyed by Jews under the Ottomans...especially when Ramadan fasting got Musselmen all riled up and ornery.

Whatever caused this ridiculous deification of "peace" on the left, as if peace is an end in and of itself? It's not, you know. If it were, the Palestinians would have learned long ago that the best way to attain it is by not lobbing rockets at Jews.

Your comparison of black slaves in the Dixie plantation system to Jews live under the Turks shows how little you know about the history of the Middle East.

I would like to see a credible source for your statements here. One only has to look back in history to find mistreatment of all kinds of religious groups - say the Catholics in Elizabethan England, the Protestants and Moslems in Spain, the Protestants in France and Italy, etc., etc... All of these were treated much more badly - burning at the stake, tortue, etc. than were the Jews by the Moslems. In fact, Jews were treated much more badly in Europe than they ever were under the Turks. Surely you will at least acknowledge that.

As for the deification of Peace by the left, isn't that what Israel keeps saying ti wants? You don't mean to tell me that you are for a constant state of war do you? If so, then pick up your gun and head for the front. Nobody is stopping you and there are lots of bloody battlegrounds to chose from.

Edited September 22, 2007 by Higgly

[ScottSA]

In fact, Jews were treated much more badly in Europe than they ever were under the Turks. Surely you will at least acknowledge that.

Absolutely not. Christ, the Islamic barbarians have been slaughtering the Jews since Mohammed rose from hell and wrote a book about how wonderful it is to kill them. The only reason they didn't beat Europe in pure numbers of dead Jews is because the Jews in the middle east were already dead or fled. Why do you think the Jewish population in the Middle East and Turkey is about 10 these days, and so dhimmified that they are hardly even Jews?

As for "peace," I brought up the plantations to show you that "peace" is not an ideal in and of itself...something the left forgot about the time they forgot "give me liberty or give me death" and thunk up "better red than dead." Israel wants peace, but not at the price of having to swim offshore for it, which is what the lovely peace loving Arabs demand in return for it.

[buffycat]

Absolutely not. Christ, the Islamic barbarians have been slaughtering the Jews since Mohammed rose from hell and wrote a book about how wonderful it is to kill them. The only reason they didn't beat Europe in pure numbers of dead Jews is because the Jews in the middle east were already dead or fled. Why do you think the Jewish population in the Middle East and Turkey is about 10 these days, and so dhimmified that they are hardly even Jews?

What unmitigated nonsense and hateful musings.

Why is this allowed here? What if someone were to write: When Jesus rose from Hell - or Yaweh rose from hell? Hmmm? Or how about Krishna? Or Buddha? Hmmmm??

Not only is this sort of tripe bigotted and offensive - but it is also factually incorrect.

You are one hateful person Scott.

[Topaz]

So NOW we know why Bush didn't want to answer David Gregory's question about this. Bush had talked to Israel just before the attack and probably gave his blessing to them! Bush certainly likes the game of war doesn't he? He just doesn't want to be IN IT fighting!!

[jbg]

Absolutely not. Christ, the Islamic barbarians have been slaughtering the Jews since Mohammed rose from hell and wrote a book about how wonderful it is to kill them. The only reason they didn't beat Europe in pure numbers of dead Jews is because the Jews in the middle east were already dead or fled. Why do you think the Jewish population in the Middle East and Turkey is about 10 these days, and so dhimmified that they are hardly even Jews?

Scott, normally I post with you but this varies between wrong and out of bounds.

The fact is that, despite occasional Muslim pogroms, the Jews were relatively unmolested in the Muslim world. In act, one of our (pro-Israelis') leading contnetions is that huge Jewish communities were uprooted from Arab lands in the wake of 1948, and that made the "return" of fleeing "Palestinians" impossible. The Arabs, having ousted the Jews, owed it to their Arab brethren to repatriate the "Palestinians", a duty they fell woefully short of carrying out. They are using the "Palestinians" as weapons of hate, rather than treating them humanely. But up until the beginning of the 20th Century, Jewish life flourished in much of the Arab world. Let's not take our hatred of Arabs that far. Indeed, one can argue that one of the reasons that Arab civil life stalled out (along with European life) was the expulsion and slaughter of Jews.

Also, Turkey continues to have a Jewish community. Indeed, Al Quaeda bombed a Bar Mitzvah in Istanbul not too long ago.

I think Mohamed was a pedophile and his existance was counterproductive. But let's not let our zeal on this verge into historical inaccuracy.

[ScottSA]

Scott, normally I post with you but this varies between wrong and out of bounds.

The fact is that, despite occasional Muslim pogroms, the Jews were relatively unmolested in the Muslim world. In act, one of our (pro-Israelis') leading contnetions is that huge Jewish communities were uprooted from Arab lands in the wake of 1948, and that made the "return" of fleeing "Palestinians" impossible. The Arabs, having ousted the Jews, owed it to their Arab brethren to repatriate the "Palestinians", a duty they fell woefully short of carrying out. They are using the "Palestinians" as weapons of hate, rather than treating them humanely. But up until the beginning of the 20th Century, Jewish life flourished in much of the Arab world. Let's not take our hatred of Arabs that far. Indeed, one can argue that one of the reasons that Arab civil life stalled out (along with European life) was the expulsion and slaughter of Jews.

Also, Turkey continues to have a Jewish community. Indeed, Al Quaeda bombed a Bar Mitzvah in Istanbul not too long ago.

I think Mohamed was a pedophile and his existance was counterproductive. But let's not let our zeal on this verge into historical inaccuracy.

Oh it's hardly an inaccuracy, nor is it out of bounds. Islam slaughtered Jews wherever they were across the middle east, Persia and Anatolia. Just because the west wasn't there to write about most of it doesn't mean it didn't exist. Where are the Jews if they were treated so well? Why did they flee to the west? Why are the remaining Jewish communities so small?

And then lets talk about the conditions non-Muslims live under...scorned, disprportionately taxed, with no political power...lets not let a zeal for smoothing over the wrinkles of history get in the way of reality.

And Buffy, according to the kindergarten sweetness and light your mindset would have society live in, we are supposed to "use our words" instead of our hands...a prescription that seems to hold with the S&L crowd only so long as the "words" are along nicey nice lines.

Islam is a death cult. More than that, it's a worldly ideology that happens to celebrate the next life more than this one. And that would be fine...a lot of Christians celebrate the life to come too...but the difference is that Christians aren't told that living in the afterlife requires that they kill the infidel. The only law abiding Muslim is a bad Muslim who chooses to obey civil law over religious law. If you had read the Koran...any one of 4 or 5 widely accepted translations...you'd know that. It is not like other religions. Its like the old testament on steroids. If Christianity had posited a Christ on horseback beheading his enemies, sacking caravans, raping widows and little girls, pogroming and enslaving 2 entire tribes of Jews and generally carrying on like a 7th century Vinnie and the boys, THEN you could claim similarities. But it doesn't...the Christian message and the message of Islam are radically different. Any nicey nice passages in the Koran are abrogated by the death cult passages that follow them ("abrogation" being the the psychopath's explanation for why God changed his mind from nicey nice when Modog had no power to vile and murderous when he got power). Whereas the Jews have modified their beliefs to accomodate the time period in which they live, Islam is still living in the 7th century, taking the word of a psychotic butcher literally.

[Higgly]

So NOW we know why Bush didn't want to answer David Gregory's question about this. Bush had talked to Israel just before the attack and probably gave his blessing to them! Bush certainly likes the game of war doesn't he? He just doesn't want to be IN IT fighting!!

If you are talking about the attack on Iraq, the whole idea came first from the Israeli Likud Party . It first saw the light of day in a paper written by Wolfowitz when he and Richard Perle were working for Benjamin Netenyahu's election campaign following the assassiantion of Itzhak Rabin. You can be damned sure the Israelis approved.