1 edit
@sh76 said"Knee-jerk" I would object to since that implies judging without considering, and I would find that offensive.
Well, I was close anyway.
I still think you're more knee-jerk anti-neocon than you care to admit.
If I am 95% against neocons, well, that could be. I have to first look up what a 'neocon' is. Is that like Dick Cheney?
EDIT: A quick read suggests that I agree with neocons on removing foreign dictators on principle and disagree with them about almost everything else, including opposing socialism. I think socialism is the foundation of civilization upon which capitalism and free markets flourish.
No party fully represents my views. 😆
I remember vividly when my views on Israel started to change from support to opposition. Someone - it might even have been in these forums - said something like 'Israel has always been responding to attacks, never attacking first ..." and idly (as I do) I went to check that statement.
Wikipedia was quite new at that point, and I suddenly came upon the 1967 Israeli sneak attack on Egypt that destroyed their Air Force on the ground.
And I was like, "What. WHAT?!?!? ISRAEL ATTACKED FIRST?!?"
That was the switch. I started pulling on that thread, and it lead me to realize that, over many years of not really paying attention, I had become the victim of relentless propagandizing - right down to how Hollywood treated Jews vs Muslims. But the deeper you get into the actual facts, who came from where, who moved where, what happened next, you realize that the Palestinians have gotten a very raw deal.
Then in 2006, I watched the propaganda machine spinning in front of my eyes. Hamas won the election in BOTH the WB AND Gaza. But they were blocked from taking control in both enclaves. Fatah remained in control in the WB, but that became "Hamas has seized control in Gaza."
Then Hamas offered a 10-year truce to which Israel responded with a 16 year military blockade. That became "Hamas terrorists vow to destroy, blah blah blah."
So I am implacably against Israel's behavior as a scientist who works from facts and principles. There isn't any other possible route for me. 😆
@spruce112358 saidYou liberals are truly unhappy about everything.
I remember vividly when my views on Israel started to change from support to opposition. Someone - it might even have been in these forums - said something like 'Israel has always been responding to attacks, never attacking first ..." and idly (as I do) I went to check that statement.
Wikipedia was quite new at that point, and I suddenly came upon the 1967 Israeli sne ...[text shortened]... r as a scientist who works from facts and principles. There isn't any other possible route for me. 😆
Your loss. Me, I aint losin nuthin
@spruce112358 said===Wikipedia was quite new at that point, and I suddenly came upon the 1967 Israeli sneak attack on Egypt that destroyed their Air Force on the ground.
I remember vividly when my views on Israel started to change from support to opposition. Someone - it might even have been in these forums - said something like 'Israel has always been responding to attacks, never attacking first ..." and idly (as I do) I went to check that statement.
Wikipedia was quite new at that point, and I suddenly came upon the 1967 Israeli sne ...[text shortened]... r as a scientist who works from facts and principles. There isn't any other possible route for me. 😆
And I was like, "What. WHAT?!?!? ISRAEL ATTACKED FIRST?!?"===
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing...
While of course it's true that Israel attacked first in 1967, it was after months of threats and acts of war against it.
Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran, effectively blockading Israel. It ordered the UN peacekeepers out and it marched its army into the Sinai. If you know anything about the May and June weather in the Sinai, you'll know that they weren't there on vacation.
“Our aim is the full restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people. In other words, we aim at the destruction of the State of Israel. The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel.” – President Nasser of Egypt, November 18, 1965
“Brothers, it is our duty to prepare for the final battle in Palestine.” – Nasser, Palestine Day, 1967
“Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight . . . The mining of Sharm el Sheikh is a confrontation with Israel. Adopting this measure obligates us to be ready to embark on a general war with Israel.” – Nasser, May 27, 1967
“We will not accept any … coexistence with Israel. … Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel …. The war with Israel is in effect since 1948.” – Nasser, May 28, 1967
“The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel . . . . to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations.” – Nasser, May, 30, 1967 after signing a defense pact with Jordan’s King Hussein
“We are now ready to confront Israel …. The issue now at hand is not the Gulf of Aqaba, the Straits of Tiran, or the withdrawal of UNEF, but the … aggression which took place in Palestine … with the collaboration of Britain and the United States.” – Nasser, June 2, 1967
“Under terms of the military agreement signed with Jordan, Jordanian artillery co-ordinated with the forces of Egypt and Syria is in a position to cut Israel in two at Kalkilya, where Israeli territory between the Jordan armistice line and the Mediterranean Sea is only twelve kilometers wide … .” – El Akhbar newspaper, Cairo, May 31, 1967
Cairo Radio Statements:
May 19, 1967: “This is our chance Arabs, to deal Israel a mortal blow of annihilation, to blot out its entire presence in our holy land”
May 22, 1967: “The Arab people is firmly resolved to wipe Israel off the map”
May 25, 1967: “The Gulf of Aqaba, by the dictum of history and the protection of our soldiers, is Arab, Arab, Arab.”
May 25, 1967: “Millions of Arabs are … preparing to blow up all of America’s interests, all of America’s installations, and your entire existence, America.”
May 27, 1967: “We challenge you, Eshkol, to try all your weapons. Put them to the test; they will spell Israel’s death and annihilation.”
May 30, 1967: “With the closing of the Gulf of Akaba, Israel is faced with two alternatives either of which will destroy it; it will either be strangled to death by the Arab military and economic boycott, or it will perish by the fire of the Arab forces encompassing it from the South from the North and from the East.”
May 30, 1967: “The world will know that the Arabs are girded for battle as the fateful hour approaches.”
Jordan
“All of the Arab armies now surround Israel. The UAR, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Yemen, Lebanon, Algeria, Sudan, and Kuwait. … There is no difference between one Arab people and another, no difference between one Arab army and another.” – King Hussein of Jordan, after signing the pact with Egypt May 30, 1967
Iraq
“The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear – to wipe Israel off the map. We shall, God willing, meet in Tel Aviv and Haifa.” – President Abdel Rahman Aref of Iraq, May 31, 1967
Palestinians
“D-Day is approaching. The Arabs have waited 19 years for this and will not flinch from the war of liberation.” – Ahmed Shukairy, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, May 27, 1967
“This is a fight for the homeland – it is either us or the Israelis. There is no middle road. The Jews of Palestine will have to leave. We will facilitate their departure to their former homes. Any of the old Palestine Jewish population who survive may stay, but it is my impression that none of them will survive.” – Shukairy, June 1, 1967
“We shall destroy Israel and its inhabitants and as for the survivors – if there are any – the boats are ready to deport them.” – Shukairy, June 1, 1967, speaking at a Friday sermon in Jerusalem
Syria
Syria’s forces are “ready not only to repulse the aggression, but to initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland. The Syrian army, with its finger on the trigger, is united…. I as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation.” – Syrian Defense Minister Hafez Assad, May 20, 1967
“Our two brotherly countries have turned into one mobilized force. The withdrawal of the UN forces … means ‘make way, our forces are on their way to battle.'” – Foreign Minister Makhous on his return from Cairo
Others
“The freedom of the homeland will be completed by the destruction of the Zionist entity and the expulsion of the Americans and the British from the region.” – Algerian Prime Minister Houari Boumedienne
“We want war. War is the only way to settle the problem of Israel. The Arabs are ready.” – Yemeni Foreign Minister Salam
https://www.sixdaywar.org/precursors-to-war/arab-threats-against-israel/
If in your mind the world came into existence on June 5, 1967, then sure, Israel struck first.
But if you look at the context, Israel's war was defensive.
I know. I know. The historical record is mixed as to whether Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq really intended to invade Israel or whether it was all bluster. And historians can debate it in hindsight until the cows come home.
Israel didn't have the luxury of hindsight in 1967. It had to take the threats and actions of the UAR seriously. To brush them off as bluster would have been sheer insanity.
@spruce112358 saidIn the 1967 war Israel did attack first. Its called a pre-emptive attack and gives the first attacker a distinct advantage. This is not a game of chess and there are no rules except what is in the Geneva Convention. This is a war, a matter of life and death, and of Israels very existence, and Israel is outnumbered. In 1967, Egypt, Syria and Jordan and other surrounding Arab nations were preparing for war and amassing troops and military hardware along the borders. It was a well known fact that war was on the horizon. If you think Israel should wait to be attacked first then you are pretty dumb. Read the history instead of fabricating lies.
I remember vividly when my views on Israel started to change from support to opposition. Someone - it might even have been in these forums - said something like 'Israel has always been responding to attacks, never attacking first ..." and idly (as I do) I went to check that statement.
Wikipedia was quite new at that point, and I suddenly came upon the 1967 Israeli sne ...[text shortened]... r as a scientist who works from facts and principles. There isn't any other possible route for me. 😆
The rest of your post is also rubbish but I dont have the time to correct all your foolishness.
@spruce112358 saidYou are a liar. You have stated the following very clearly:
"Knee-jerk" I would object to since that implies judging without considering, and I would find that offensive.
If I am 95% against neocons, well, that could be. I have to first look up what a 'neocon' is. Is that like Dick Cheney?
EDIT: A quick read suggests that I agree with neocons on removing foreign dictators on principle and disagree with them about almost eve ...[text shortened]... ilization upon which capitalism and free markets flourish.
No party fully represents my views. 😆
- Israel should be nuked.
- Jews should be killed
- Israel should not exist
- Arabs own Palestine
This is the ranting of Islamic extremist. Ordinary level-headed people who dislike Israel do not say theese things. These statements put you into the category of a delusional nutcase, which can only come from being indoctrinated yourself as a child as in the case of Gazan children being taught in schools to kill Jews. Chances are good you are from that stock.
@spruce112358 saidThere was no raw deal.
But the deeper you get into the actual facts, who came from where, who moved where, what happened next, you realize that the Palestinians have gotten a very raw deal.
There was a viable deal by the UN on the table in 1948.
They refused and said there is going to be no Jewish state in Palestine.
They started the war with about 6 surrounding Arab states.
These 6 countries entered the newly formed state to kill Jews and remove Israel
They failed and were chased out.
So stop with the lies.
@sh76 saidPre-emptive strikes are always 100% wrong because "I know what you are about to do!" is always false. 😆
===Wikipedia was quite new at that point, and I suddenly came upon the 1967 Israeli sneak attack on Egypt that destroyed their Air Force on the ground.
And I was like, "What. WHAT?!?!? ISRAEL ATTACKED FIRST?!?"===
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing...
While of course it's true that Israel attacked first in 1967, it was after months of threats and acts of w ...[text shortened]... reats and actions of the UAR seriously. To brush them off as bluster would have been sheer insanity.
No, you don't know. Ever. You may guess, and you may have been right or wrong. But you never, ever KNOW.
No government has the right to violate the rights of their own citizens, let along the rights of citizens of another nation. So clearly the whole concept of a "preemptive" strike based on "rhetoric" belongs on the dustbin of history. 😆
NB. Israel was not 'blockaded' since the Mediterranean ports were open. Again - propaganda!
@Rajk999 saidFixed. 😆
You are a liar. You have stated the following very clearly:
- Israel should be nuked.
- Jews should be killed
- Israel should not exist
- Arabs own Palestine
This is the ranting of Islamic extremist. Ordinary level-headed people who dislike Israel do not say theese things. These statements put you into the category of a delusional nutcase, which can only come fr ...[text shortened]... e of Gazan children being taught in schools to kill Jews. Chances are good you are from that stock.
- Israel might be nuked if they don't stop.
- No one should be killed.
- Israel should not exist in its current form.
- Palestinians own Palestine and their rights are being violated NOW.
😆
1 edit
@spruce112358 saidThats "Fixed by a Islamic fanatic"
Fixed. 😆
- Israel might be nuked if they don't stop.
- No one should be killed.
- Israel should not exist in its current form.
- Palestinians own Palestine and their rights are being violated NOW.
😆
More realistically:
- No Islamic state has the ability [incl Pakistan] to nuke Israel.
- Im good with that one except if you want war, expect death.
- Nobody is changing Israel except that they will expand their ownership of Palestine.. [sorry for people like you]
- Ownership of a some parcels of land does not give you rights to a whole nation. This is why the UN shared and partitioned it.
- Palestinians have a right to die and be killed, if they start wars and if their sole aim in life, according to them, is to kill Jews.
@spruce112358 saidSo your position is that you always have to wait until you're invaded before you strike?
Pre-emptive strikes are always 100% wrong because "I know what you are about to do!" is always false. 😆
No, you don't know. Ever. You may guess, and you may have been right or wrong. But you never, ever KNOW.
No government has the right to violate the rights of their own citizens, let along the rights of citizens of another nation. So clearly the whole concept of a ...[text shortened]... y. 😆
NB. Israel was not 'blockaded' since the Mediterranean ports were open. Again - propaganda!
@sh76 saidMy position is that governments must protect the rights of their own citizens, and not violate the rights of citizens of other nations. 😆
So your position is that you always have to wait until you're invaded before you strike?
As for the Strait in 1967, Egypt owned the land to both sides at the time (Sinai and Tiran Island) and the channel was < 3 miles distant so within Egypt's territorial waters. Egypt's right to control traffic through the strait is similar to Turkey controlling the Bosphorous, so quite normal.
Diplomacy was the correct approach to securing the right to travel through the Strait of Tiran. 😆
@spruce112358 saidDiplomacy? Egypt was threatening Israel with destruction practically every day and moved its army into the desert towards Israel on a broad front? What did you want Israel to do? Ask pretty please?
My position is that governments must protect the rights of their own citizens, and not violate the rights of citizens of other nations. 😆
As for the Strait in 1967, Egypt owned the land to both sides at the time (Sinai and Tiran Island) and the channel was < 3 miles distant so within Egypt's territorial waters. Egypt's right to control traffic through the strait is si ...[text shortened]...
Diplomacy was the correct approach to securing the right to travel through the Strait of Tiran. 😆
And the Mediterranean was open? That's your answer? You really don't know much about this topic, do you?
Israel needed oil shipments through the straits of Tiran (from Iran, ironically) to survive. After the 1956 war, Egypt agreed to allow free passage through the straits, and the UN peacekeeping force to be stationed in the Sinai.
In May, Egypt expelled the peacekeepers, closed the straits (cutting off oil supplied to Israel) and marched its army into the Sinai. And all you can say is "they should have tried diplomacy"? Get real, please.