@sh76 saidSinai is part of what country again?
Diplomacy? 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?
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, ir ...[text shortened]... ts army into the Sinai. And all you can say is "they should have tried diplomacy"? Get real, please.
Oh right.... 😆
BTW, what happened when the Ever Given blocked the Suez? Ships went around. It's feasible. 😆
Look - I'm not trying to convince you. I know that's not possible given your inherent bias on this topic.
It is OTHER people listening that are my audience, and I want to say one thing: Israel propaganda has been relentless and FALSE. When you take the red pill, you wake up to what has been happening and, when that happens, you support Palestinians. Not because you like Arabs, and not because you particularly like Islam - like me you may know very little about it.
But because when you look at the facts, you realize you were lied to. The Israeli conspiracy has Washington DC wrapped around its little finger and YOU are the pawns the need to be "controlled." Israel spends MASSIVE amounts of money making sure the US public stays ignorantly and "knee-jerkily" on their side.
I don't like being "managed," and when I find out they lied, I'm against them. Forever. I'm stubborn that way. 😆
1 edit
@sh76 saidCorrect. Let me give him a bit of a timeline:
Diplomacy? 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?
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, ir ...[text shortened]... ts army into the Sinai. And all you can say is "they should have tried diplomacy"? Get real, please.
- Nasser closed the Strait on 22 May 1967, threatening Israel to destroy any shipping that passes through
- From 22 May to 5th June, international bodies, the US, UK and others, including Israel tried to talk to Nasser to open back the Strait of Tiran ie diplomatic soluton was attempted
- On 5th June after Nasser's refusal, the IAF, destroyed several strategic military locations across Egypt, crippling much of the army and airforce killing thousands.
- On 10th June the war ended
- One 11th June Israel took the Sinai Peninsula, took control of the Strait of Tiran and opened shipping lines.
Nasser had to STFU an get his bony butt back in hiding.
Serves them right.
The damage :
- 18,000 men lost from Egypt, Jordan and Syria and hundreds of millions in destroyed millitary equipment
- 760 men lost from Israel.
@spruce112358 saidIt does not work like that. Its not .. I own this land is near this piece of water therefore I can close it... The UN made a statement of how these waterways should be used, and you are totally off.
Sinai is part of what country again?
Oh right.... 😆
BTW, what happened when the Ever Given blocked the Suez? Ships went around. It's feasible. 😆
Look - I'm not trying to convince you. I know that's not possible given your inherent bias on this topic.
It is OTHER people listening that are my audience, and I want to say one thing: Israel propaganda has been r ...[text shortened]... being "managed," and when I find out they lied, I'm against them. Forever. I'm stubborn that way. 😆
The United Nations has addressed the closure of the Straits of Tiran on multiple occasions, particularly in the context of the Suez Crisis and subsequent tensions in the region. The UN has emphasized the principle of free and open transit through the straits, while also acknowledging Egypt's sovereignty and the need to insulate the operation of the Suez Canal from political disputes.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
Free and Open Transit:
The UN has consistently supported the principle of free and open transit through the Straits of Tiran, particularly for Israeli shipping.
Sovereignty:
The UN has also recognized Egypt's sovereignty over the Straits and the need to respect its territorial integrity.
Insulation from Politics:
The UN has stressed that the operation of the Suez Canal and the Straits of Tiran should be kept separate from political disputes and conflicts.
1957 Declaration:
In 1957, Israel's Foreign Minister, Golda Meir, declared at the UN General Assembly that any closure of the Straits of Tiran would be considered by Israel as an act of war.
1967 Crisis:
In May 1967, Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping, which was a major factor leading to the Six-Day War. The UN Secretary-General at the time, U Thant, initially requested the relocation of the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) but ultimately agreed to a full withdrawal at Egypt's request.
@sh76 saidIt's amazing that Zionists are still insisting on this fairy tale.
Diplomacy? 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?
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, ir ...[text shortened]... ts army into the Sinai. And all you can say is "they should have tried diplomacy"? Get real, please.
"Neither U.S. nor Israeli intelligence assessed that there was any kind of serious threat of an Egyptian attack. On the contrary, both considered the possibility that Nasser might strike first as being extremely slim."
"Yitzhak Rabin, who would later become Prime Minister, told Le Monde the year following the ’67 war, “I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions which he sent to the Sinai, on May 14, would not have been sufficient to start an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it.”
Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin acknowledged in a speech in 1982 that its war on Egypt in 1956 was a war of “choice” and that, “In June 1967 we again had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.”
Despite its total lack of sustainability from the documentary record, and despite such admissions from top Israeli officials, it is virtually obligatory for commentators in contemporary mainstream accounts of the ’67 war to describe Israel’s attack on Egypt as “preemptive”."
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/07/04/israels-attack-on-egypt-in-june-67-was-not-preemptive/
Nasser's saber rattling was bluster and if Israel was sooooooooooooooooo worried about some Egyptian attack, it could have accepted offered UN peacekeepers on its side of the border.
Please stop with this nonsense.
@spruce112358 saidSh's version of events omits that Israel had attacked across the borders of both Jordan and Syria in the months before the war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_Six-Day_War
Sinai is part of what country again?
Oh right.... 😆
BTW, what happened when the Ever Given blocked the Suez? Ships went around. It's feasible. 😆
Look - I'm not trying to convince you. I know that's not possible given your inherent bias on this topic.
It is OTHER people listening that are my audience, and I want to say one thing: Israel propaganda has been r ...[text shortened]... being "managed," and when I find out they lied, I'm against them. Forever. I'm stubborn that way. 😆
@sh76 saidThe Polish government requested the help of Britain and France to defend the rights of their citizens. That’s legit - up to B&F if they want to help. 😆
By comparison, the British and French declaration of war on Germany on Sep 3, 1939, was far less justified.
After all, neither country was under direct threat of being attacked by Germany.
@no1marauder saidYeah right...
It's amazing that Zionists are still insisting on this fairy tale.
"Neither U.S. nor Israeli intelligence assessed that there was any kind of serious threat of an Egyptian attack. On the contrary, both considered the possibility that Nasser might strike first as being extremely slim."
"Yitzhak Rabin, who would later become Prime Minister, told Le Monde the year foll ...[text shortened]... have accepted offered UN peacekeepers on its side of the border.
Please stop with this nonsense.
Expelling UN peace-keeping forces, and closing off shipping lanes with threats that Israeli vessels will be sunk, is an act of war. Further Egypt was amassing troops near the border. Israel had a right to respond.
The element of surprise and pre-emptively striking while the enemy sleeps is the most formidable advantage.
Go Israel !! 😆
@no1marauder saidDid you conveniently leave out the fact that the PLO attacked Israel first ? From your own Wiki article :
Sh's version of events omits that Israel had attacked across the borders of both Jordan and Syria in the months before the war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_Six-Day_War
On November 13, 1966, in response to PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) guerrilla activity,[14][15] including a mine attack that left three dead,[16] the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) attacked the village of as-Samu in the Jordanian-occupied West Bank.[17] Jordanian units that engaged the Israelis were quickly beaten back.
@Rajk999 saidI won't bother arguing with someone as profoundly ignorant of international law as you consistently show yourself to be.
Yeah right...
Expelling UN peace-keeping forces, and closing off shipping lanes with threats that Israeli vessels will be sunk, is an act of war. Further Egypt was amassing troops near the border. Israel had a right to respond.
The element of surprise and pre-emptively striking while the enemy sleeps is the most formidable advantage.
Go Israel !! 😆
Israel refused to host the UN forces, which were placed to prevent another Israeli sneak attack like the one in 1956 (also unmentioned by both SH and yourself):
"Egypt volunteered that if Israel were concerned about an Egyptian invasion, it could accept UNEF on its own side of the armistice line. "If Israel wants them to stay," Field Marshal Amer told Soviet Ambassador Pozhidaev, "it can make its own territory available." U Thant was thinking along the same lines. On May 18, he posed that option to Israel's UN ambassador, Gideon Rafael, as a protection against a possible invasion. Rafael replied that this option was "entirely unacceptable to his Government."[135]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_Six-Day_War
Whether Egypt had a legal power to block passage in the Straits of Tiran is unclear, but negotiations were ongoing to solve that issue and, anyway, an Israeli response under pre-emptive war doctrine would have had to be limited to only that which would open the Strait - not a massive, all-out attack on Egypt and Syria:
"In a 30 March 1968 Ma'ariv interview Defense Minister Moshe Dayan explained: "What do you mean, [the war was] unavoidable? It was, of course, possible to avoid the war if the Straits [of Tiran] had stayed closed to Israeli shipping."[199]"
"That the announcement of the blockade of the Straits of Tiran paved the way for war is disputed by Major General Indar Jit Rikhye, military adviser to the United Nations Secretary General, who called the accusation of a blockade "questionable," pointing out that an Israeli-flagged ship had not passed through the straits in two years, and that "The U.A.R. [Egyptian] navy had searched a couple of ships after the establishment of the blockade and thereafter relaxed its implementation."[202]"
(Same article)
1 edit
@Rajk999 saidIsrael's attack on Samu was condemned by the UN Security Council as a violation of the UN Charter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_228
Did you conveniently leave out the fact that the PLO attacked Israel first ? From your own Wiki article :
On November 13, 1966, in response to PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) guerrilla activity,[14][15] including a mine attack that left three dead,[16] the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) attacked the village of as-Samu in the Jordanian-occupied West Bank.[17] Jordanian units that engaged the Israelis were quickly beaten back.
@no1marauder saidYou full of $$hiTT. In 1956, that fool Nasser, nationalised the Suez Canal to hinder shipping lanes used by Israel. The Suez Canal prior to that was owned by the British and the French. This caused the tension with Israel who attacked in 1956. Again, a justifiable attack.
I won't bother arguing with someone as profoundly ignorant of international law as you consistently show yourself to be.
Israel refused to host the UN forces, which were placed to prevent another Israeli sneak attack like the one in 1956 (also unmentioned by both SH and yourself):
Nobody should care about internatonal law neither Geneva Convention guidelines when dealing with terrorists. Terrorists follow no law, and no law should be adhered to when dealing with them.
@sh76 saidSays the nut with a conspiracy theory. LOL! Your psychological projection is obvious. You must be really desperate to avoid a debate. Does it make you that angry that you are badly wrong?
At least I'm a real person.
You're probably some sort of botched early model AI bot built to badly simulate a conspiracy nut.
I think you set the record for the most ad hominem attacks within in 2 days.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
It was about regime change all along.
https://www.axios.com/2025/06/22/[WORD TOO LONG]
Trump admitted it on truth social the very same day he said it was not about regime change. But Israel got pounded by a lot of hyper sonic missiles Israel had no defense for and was losing the war badly. So Trump had to falsely claim he "obliterated" Iran's nuclear enrichment sites as an excuse to end the conflict.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us-strikes-may-have-set-back-iran-nuclear-program-only-months-sources-say-2025-06-24/[WORD TOO LONG]
And don't forget Israel funded Hamas to avoid a two state solution.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
You can stop pretending Israel is the victim now. Especially since they knew Hamas was going to attack and let it happen as an excuse to ethnically cleanse Gaza before they build the Ben Gurion Canal through Gaza.
https://www.newarab.com/news/what-israels-ben-gurion-canal-plan-and-why-gaza-matters
I ran across a website claiming building the canal through Gaza was a crazy conspiracy theory. LOL! Egypt gets the second most aid from the US government just for emergency access through the Suez canal. Not as much as Israel gets, but still a lot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis
Not bad for a non person, huh? LOL!
@Metal-Brain said===Not bad for a non person, huh? LOL!===
Says the nut with a conspiracy theory. LOL! Your psychological projection is obvious. You must be really desperate to avoid a debate. Does it make you that angry that you are badly wrong?
I think you set the record for the most ad hominem attacks within in 2 days.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
It was about regime change all along.
https://www.ax ...[text shortened]... ut still a lot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis
Not bad for a non person, huh? LOL!
Actually, that post is quite bot-like.
At least with ChatGPT, they programmed it to be nice.
@no1marauder saidThe tit-for-tat violence between Israel and its neighbors started before 1947 and has never stopped to this day.
Sh's version of events omits that Israel had attacked across the borders of both Jordan and Syria in the months before the war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_Six-Day_War
Any one arbitrary event you cherry pick wasn't the "start" of the violence, just one more chain in the never ending cycle.
Here's a radical suggestion: If Egypt and Jordan weren't interested in war with Israel, possibly they could have considered not engaging in acts of war and military threats, whether they intended to invade or not.
@sh76 saidI have no idea what you are talking about. How would you know what is "bot like"? Do bots identify themselves? How do you know?
===Not bad for a non person, huh? LOL!===
Actually, that post is quite bot-like.
At least with ChatGPT, they programmed it to be nice.
Do bots remember you are a lawyer who told me you preferred Trump out of the 3 hardcore Zionist POTUS candidates at that time? How much does AI remember and how do they form a reply using that memory? Do you even know or are you making this up as you go along?