IRAQ THREAD originaly "Seems at least one Brit agrees with me....er us."

[Jack_Dubious]

Re: Re: Re: Cute

Originally posted by shartley
You work for me, and I give you money. You spend that money on strippers and buying food and drink for your pals. Am I to blame because your children go hungry?

That is all wrong...

I am *not* gonna buy food and drink for my pals, when I can spend it on more strippers!!!


JDub

[shartley]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Cute

Originally posted by Jack_Dubious
That is all wrong...

I am *not* gonna buy food and drink for my pals, when I can spend it on more strippers!!!


JDub

[Collegeboy]

Every time I post a post I ask myself is this what I believe in and what is this coming from. When ever someone post a post I read it and see what it is saying then ask myself does that hold water to anything that I know, does it dispute what I say, if not I dispel it, it it disputes what I say I look at it and see what is wrong with my ideas and try and find the right or the more correct belief. So far I have changed my opinion once on here and it was a number mistaken on my part. No other time has anyone been able to put together a well thought out opinion that counters my opinion.

ShooterJM

I am arguing that if you use the logic that many hear have used to say that Israel doesn't target civilians, then it only holds up to reason that you use that same logic against Palestine to conclude that they don't target civilians. Both sides use unnecessary measures and force to kill one or two people. Force they know that will kill both terrorist/soldier and civilian. But they still do it. I say both sides target civilians.

Here is the outline of the UN approved partition plan of Israel. Look at it anything outside the blue is illegally controlled land.

http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/part.html

[Lone Brain Cell]

Originally posted by Collegeboy



I am arguing that if you use the logic that many hear have used to say that Israel doesn't target civilians, then it only holds up to reason that you use that same logic against Palestine to conclude that they don't target civilians. Both sides use unnecessary measures and force to kill one or two people. Force they know that will kill both terrorist/soldier and civilian. But they still do it. I say both sides target civilians.

civilians will die no matter what in this conflict, it happens. the point is who is the one purposely targeting them. Do you see the Israel planting bombs in busses?, do you see them blowing up a night club? Ppl will die if they are in the wrong place @ the wrong time.

Yes the palestinians have lost part of their homeland. sorry thats just the way it is. The aussie aborignals lost their homeland 200 years ago too, they just wernt able to stop the white agressor, Same with the nativ americans. Australia would be speaking Japaneese right now if the allied forces couldnt drive them back 50 years ago.

Think of this. If Sadam was as powerfull as the states, do you think that he would be sitting back in Bagdad with his feet up at the moment??? or do you think that he would have his aircraft carriers sitting off the coast of the u.s waiting for you guys to surrender? he is the agressor here he is the one that if he could would blow up every western nation given 1/2 a chance. do you want to give him that chance??? I dont!

[ShooterJM]

Three times you've said that Palestinians can't get and don't have access to high tech weapons and that suicide bombs are their only weapon. Just wanted to make sure you read it and actually answered the question. By continually bringin up the defunct UN 181 sometimes I get the impression you don't read my posts.


Ok so no weapons. That's really weird. Wonder why President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt informed Isreal's defense minister this past july that they would start trying to halt weapons smuggling in the Palestinian authority territories in Rafah. Must be just smuggeling rocks and stuff huh? Check the Arabic News. It's in there.

Maybe all those tunnels that Egypt thinks are being used to smuggle weapons are really used for those giant worms like in Treamors. Who can say right? Or maybe they weren't actually used yet, just built in preperation.

You know. Another just crazy thing that popped into my head? Wasn't there a palestinian ship that was caught about a year ago....what was it...the Karine A? Yeah. The Karine A. 50 TONS of weapons. Rocks I'm sure. MAybe some nails and stuff to put in rudimentry sucide bombs. I betcha some articles when that happend have a list of the type of rudimentry sucide bomb stuff that was seized. January of 2002 or thereabouts if you care to look it up. Hmmm lets look over the manifest shall we? Hmmmm morters, rockets, oh SWEET look at this a 122mm mobile rocket launcher! Those things are pretty sweet! 20km effective range! Hmmm RPG 7's, RPG 18's, man there's over 400 anti tank rockets on this one boat....oooooh there's more antitank mines, anti personel mines.. Hey look my favorite! Machine guns complete with almost 700,000 rounds of ammo! Crazy stuff I tell ya! And check this out....sniper rifles. Man. Those crazy palestinans must have had the wrong order shipped. I'm sure all they wanted was low tech slingshots and bottles.



I'll try this ONE MORE TIME. IF I say I'm gonna kill JOHN DOE. And I kill JOHN DOE and kill one or two other people in the process. That's different then if I say I'm going to kill these little kids and their mother. And I kill the little kids and their mother and JOHN DOE's bodyguard who was walking by.

Is there such a thing called collateral damage? Yes. Will it have a higher chance to occur if you build you military headquarters in residential areas to try to use human sheilds? Yes. Is that the same as blowing up a school on purpose. No.


So lets review. Palestinians have access to weapons, yet choose to use sucide bombing. There's a reason for this. I suggest you read up on WHY. I'll give you a hint..... it has something to do with morale warfare.......

And you still haven't refuted or ever tried to refute any validity of UN 181 anything.

[LoveMyMag]

Re: Re: Re: Cute

Originally posted by shartley

Just a few more facts to add to shartley's reply...

In the years following the Gulf War, Saddam built himself upwards of 50 "victory" monuments and palaces costing as much as $2.5 billion a year. Many of which have gold plated faucets and artificial rivers, waterfalls and lakes.

Saddam's son Uday was in charge of importing rotting food and repackaging them as fresh.

In 1999 Forbes magazine estimated Saddam's personal wealth at $6 billion.

I could go on.

[Collegeboy]

.I never said the Palestinians didn't have weapons. I said they didn't have high tech weapons. RPGs, Machine guns, ak 47s, sniper rifles are not what I consider high tech weapons. I understand the morale impact of a suicide bombing campaign.

See in your idea of the difference between suicide bombing and what Israel are doing you are purposely one siding it.

If the Israelis can say we are targeting that one terrorist with this huge bomb, forget about the 15 to 30 other people there they shouldn't be there. The Palestinians can say I am targeting that one soldier over there, forget the 15 to 30 civilians in the area, they shouldn't be on that bus with this soldier. They are purposely hiding soldiers with the civilians.

Again I am not advocating any sides attacks, just showing you how logic works both ways.

I will look one more time into your post on 181, there was some reason why it didn't hold up IMO, I just can't remember

[1stdeadeye]

Wake up

Originally posted by Collegeboy
.I never said the Palestinians didn't have weapons. I said they didn't have high tech weapons. RPGs, Machine guns, ak 47s, sniper rifles are not what I consider high tech weapons. I understand the morale impact of a suicide bombing campaign.

The Palestinians are attacking the Israeli's will to fight. It is so much easier then to blow up a cafe or a nightclub line full of kids (20+ dead in that attack) then to hit a legitimate target, eh?

See in your idea of the difference between suicide bombing and what Israel are doing you are purposely one siding it.

If the Israelis can say we are targeting that one terrorist with this huge bomb, forget about the 15 to 30 other people there they shouldn't be there. The Palestinians can say I am targeting that one soldier over there, forget the 15 to 30 civilians in the area, they shouldn't be on that bus with this soldier. They are purposely hiding soldiers with the civilians.

One sided, LOL! Bo knows football and CollegeBoy knows 1 sided! :P

You keep referring to a bomb of an apartment building and a missle attack on an office building. Yes, there were legitimate targets there. Yes both targets were killed. In the apartment bombing there was collateral damage. In the office attack though, THERE WAS NO COLLATERAL DAMAGE! The Israeli's targeted a Fatah Military Leader, one of Yassers buddies. They then used a missles to blow up his office. He was the only person killed. That is the difference between the Israeli's and the Palestinians! The Israeli's exert SOME effort to avoid civilians while the Palestinians deliberatly target them. Come on CollegeBoy give me any kind of justification for machine gunning a school bus? The 70 year old driver was a target?
If the Israeli's really wanted to go mideval on the Palestinians, the body count would be much higher. All Palestinian attacks are calculated to maximize the body count! Nuff said!

Again I am not advocating any sides attacks, just showing you how logic works both ways.

I will look one more time into your post on 181, there was some reason why it didn't hold up IMO, I just can't remember

So since you keep citing 181 and that never passed, I guess that makes 2 things you were wrong about, eh tovarisch?

[ShooterJM]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
just showing you how logic works both ways.

Ok that's just funny.

[shartley]

Originally posted by ShooterJM



Ok that's just funny.

[Collegeboy]

Re: Wake up

First of all 181 was passed by a 2/3 vote (read the site I showed it said so)



http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00p40

I will respond to the rest when I have a chance

[cphilip]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-615748,00.html

[cphilip]

Here is the correct link directly to UN resolution 181 and it was 33 for and 13 against. It passed by almost 3/4 majority... November 29, 1947

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00ps0

[1stdeadeye]

And

Originally posted by cphilip
Here is the correct link directly to UN resolution 181 and it was 33 for and 13 against. It passed by almost 3/4 majority... November 29, 1947

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00ps0

And if you read it, It was accepted by the Jewish state and rejected by the Arab state!

[aaron_mag]

Uhhhh Cphillip....time to rename this thread to Israel/Palestine Thread Originally "IRAQ THREAD" originally "Seems at least one Brit agrees with me....er us."