feelings on what is happening in the Middle East

[zody]

<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

[Stu M]

I suspect Zody, you'll get two points of view:

 

1) Israel are well within their rights to defend themselves against terrorist aggression and are perfectly entitled to react the way they are against Lebanon.

 

2) Israel is an aggressor and the bombing of a defenceless country is an overreaction and a typical act by a state who makes a habit of this sort of behaviour.

 

There was a debate on BBC Online. Almost without fail, every post was firmly within one of these two camps. My own belief, it's a mixture of both. Israel is aggressive, sometimes out of necessity because of the position it finds itself in, sometimes it goes too far and isn't interested in mediation.

 

The Lebanon situation needs UN intervention and should not be left to either Israeli military policy or Hezbollah terrorism/military action, call it what you will, to dictate.

[zody]

thanks for your input Stu

[Big J R]

Thanks Stu.

 

I couldn't have put it better myself. They are both as bad as each other.

 

Interesting that Lebanon now seem to have some very effective weapons and the finger is being pointed at Iran, which is rather worrying.

 

Newsflash on BBC News at One is that it seems possible that the Lebanon have shot down an Israeli F.16 fighter jet !

[BladeRunner]

My sympathies are for Israel. They have always been persecuted from when time began, Arabs,Turks ,Romans,Nazi's , Arab terrorists .There just never seems to be a break from trouble. They have a right to be paranoid about their own safety .At least they're not afraid to kick arss when threatened. Good luck to them for making a stand , sooner or later they'll get around to Iran And syria known terrorist sympathisers .

[Stu M]

Told you, there's Position No. 1. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

 

Now who's adopting Position No. 2...?

[pabird]

Quote:

Enfield Blade said:
My sympathies are for Israel. They have always been persecuted from when time began, Arabs,Turks ,Romans,Nazi's , Arab terrorists .There just never seems to be a break from trouble. They have a right to be paranoid about their own safety .At least they're not afraid to kick arss when threatened. Good luck to them for making a stand , sooner or later they'll get around to Iran And syria known terrorist sympathisers .

Think you will find Syrian footprints on most of the funding and equiping stuff.

[TopGun]

Quote:

Enfield Blade said:
My sympathies are for Israel. They have always been persecuted from when time began, Arabs,Turks ,Romans,Nazi's , Arab terrorists .There just never seems to be a break from trouble. They have a right to be paranoid about their own safety .At least they're not afraid to kick arss when threatened. Good luck to them for making a stand , sooner or later they'll get around to Iran And syria known terrorist sympathisers .

you'll have you know who after you Mr B...........Clue <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/ufo.gif" alt="" />

[Stu M]

Quote:

Enfield Blade said:
Good luck to them for making a stand

Does that include shelling UN observers 14 times when asked to stop on four occasions?

[American FLEET FAN No1]

Fighting has been going on there for thousands of years.Why should anyone think it will be different in the future?

[zody]

is there ever a winner

[Barry Scott]

There's only one man big enough for the job...

 

[zody]

BUT

 

 

is there ever a winner

[Barry Scott]

nope, isn't it obvious?

[American FLEET FAN No1]

Quote:

zody said:
BUT


is there ever a winner

No! All the time there is religious intolerance towards others beliefs. As i said, this has been going on for thousands of years!

[zody]

but there again why do we and the amercians intervere, are they the winners or want to be the winners <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

[The Invisible Man]

No single incident or flare-up can be viewed in isolation but must be seen in its historical context. Maybe it what a daft idea for the "west" to invent a country in 1948 (or was it 47?) which was bound to upset the previous incumbents who understandably want it back. Of course the Israelis who fought for it following WW2 (using "terrorist" tactics) will claim that it was Israel long before it was Palestine. And how the hell do they get into Eurovision anyway?

 

All nonsense of course, but leading to the tragedy that is the Middle East today.

 

It would probably help if the USA butted out.

[Stu M]

Quote:

zody said:
but there again why do we and the amercians intervere, are they the winners or want to be the winners <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

It suits us to get the Israelis do some of the dirty work, and if we're really fortunate, we get to have a pop at Syria and Iran as well.

[American FLEET FAN No1]

Quote:

The Invisible Man said:
No single incident or flare-up can be viewed in isolation but must be seen in its historical context. Maybe it what a daft idea for the "west" to invent a country in 1948 (or was it 47?) which was bound to upset the previous incumbents who understandably want it back. Of course the Israelis who fought for it following WW2 (using "terrorist" tactics) will claim that it was Israel long before it was Palestine. And how the hell do they get into Eurovision anyway?

All nonsense of course, but leading to the tragedy that is the Middle East today.

It would probably help if the USA butted out.

Maybe Britain shouldn't have sided with Poland, then we wouldn't have been involved in the second world war. Before the cries of: "That was different, Poland was invaded". The only differences are, this is not expansionism, this is Genocide, and now you don't have to invade, you just sit hundreds of miles away and launch rockets at the country.
Should America side with the Arabs then? You seem to have a short memory, it wasn't the Israelies that flew planes into American buildings, nor set off bombs on London buses or trains.

[The Invisible Man]

As far as I am aware it wasn't Lebanon either.

 

In 1939 Britain has a treaty in place with Poland. USA did not, and did not enter the war until two years later. I'm not sure what that's got to do with it though.