Syria vs Israel

[Hye4Lebanon]

Originally Posted by tsedek

Oh wait............ if I drive you against the wall having my gun pointed at you and threaten to shoot you but you shoot me first - you started the fight?

haven't you heard from your master? Don't fire until fired upon?

I am sure down there somewhere by Dimona there are nukes pointed at us.

How should we feel about them heh? I personally feel threatened.

[proIsrael-nonIsraeli]

Originally Posted by Hye4Lebanon

haven't you heard from your master? Don't fire until fired upon?

I am sure down there somewhere by Dimona there are nukes pointed at us.

How should we feel about them heh? I personally feel threatened.

You are exaggerating. US has no reason to fear Israeli nukes. Quite the contrary. Israeli nukes supplement ours.

[Dalzi]

Originally Posted by proIsrael-nonIsraeli

You are exaggerating. US has no reason to fear Israeli nukes. Quite the contrary. Israeli nukes supplement ours.

Both of your nukes supplement each other :D.

[proIsrael-nonIsraeli]

Originally Posted by Dalzi

Both of your nukes supplement each other :D.

I am sure you are correct.

[tsedek]

Originally Posted by Hye4Lebanon

haven't you heard from your master? Don't fire until fired upon?

I am sure down there somewhere by Dimona there are nukes pointed at us.

How should we feel about them heh? I personally feel threatened.

You can hang on to your own version of the 6-day war but it is 'bull' and everybody knows it. Here are the facts - evidenced facts - with the whole world as its witness.

[chafic]

Originally Posted by alon

How many time the Syrians teased israel in the last years? with the Hamas, and with HA last summer...If one flight above their country is a reason to start a war, so israel had a lot of reasons to start war in the past and they chose to ignore...Flights above enemy countries is something very putative, the Egyptian did it a lot of time to israel, and the Syrian too...Nobody thought about starting a war back then because of flights...

But it's ok to start a war for the abduction of a soldier (Shalit) when you have thousands detained?
But it's ok to start a war for two abducted soldiers (by Hezbollah) when you have Lebanese detainees in your prisons and are violating Lebanese airspace everyday?

How do you define your OKs?

[alon]

Originally Posted by chafic

But it's ok to start a war for the abduction of a soldier (Shalit) when you have thousands detained?
But it's ok to start a war for two abducted soldiers (by Hezbollah) when you have Lebanese detainees in your prisons and are violating Lebanese airspace everyday?

How do you define your OKs?

There is a difference between starting a war because of agressive action of killing soldiers and kindapping them, and between starting a war because of one flight above enemy country, as I said, the Syrian tried in the past to enter israeli airspace many times and nobody thought about starting a war with them because of this...
If the airplane attacked them, so I can understand...But they said that the airplanes didn't attack nothing...
They have the right to start a war, they always have, but it isn't proportional...The "war" on Gaza wasn't only because of Gilad Shalit kidnaping but also because thousands of Kassams which the Palestinians shoot on israel every day since IDF left Gaza...
The war on Lebanon was launch not only because of the kidnaping but because of the ignoring from resolution 1501, the first kindapping in 2001 which israel warned Lebanon, the attacks of HA on IDF in the last 6 years, the second attempt to kidnap soldiers, and also because of the shooting on israelis civilians centers in the 12 of july; Shlomi, Kiryat Shmona and others Kibbutzim...this is a declaration of war from HA, say what you want...this is not like one flight above country, this isn't like a Katyushas, this isn't like killing soldiers on the border...
And the proof is that HA attack israel dozens if time since the withdrawal, and israel ignored...This time it was different.

[proIsrael-nonIsraeli]

Originally Posted by chafic

But it's ok to start a war for the abduction of a soldier (Shalit) when you have thousands detained?
But it's ok to start a war for two abducted soldiers (by Hezbollah) when you have Lebanese detainees in your prisons and are violating Lebanese airspace everyday?

How do you define your OKs?

I think I can answer that too.

I will ignore your last question because it appears to be rhetorical and I will concentrate on first two (I will assume those two questions are not rhetorical).

These two questions are practically identical so they both comply with following schema:

"Is it proper (for Israel) to respond with great force to "single, tiny, almost innocent" act of aggression (by Lebanon, by Palestinians, by ...)?"

Correct answer should not only be OK but it also should be an obligation and it must become unbreakable rule. Israel's response in similar situations must become fully predictable.

[Abou Sandal]

Originally Posted by alon

because of the shooting on israelis civilians centers in the 12 of july; Shlomi, Kiryat Shmona and others Kibbutzim...this is a declaration of war from HA, say what you want...this is not like one flight above country, this isn't like a Katyushas, this isn't like killing soldiers on the border...

What?....What?.....
Are you trying to re-write history?!!
Peuuuleaaase....can you enlighten us about those events?

Anyway,

So now,according to you,you finally recognize that the kidnapping of 2 soldiers is not a valid reason to wage a "full scale war".

BTW,i noticed that you always seem to change your standards.The only valid reason to start a war,according to what i noticed in your rethorics,is the reason that you find valid.

You have always a legitimate reason,and the other one is always wrong.
Wrong reason,...and if plausible reason,...wrong timing,....and if plausible timing,....wrong means,....and if plausible means,....wrong place,....and if plausible place,....wrong reason...And so on.

So you should be our Thermometer,our Barometer....

And we should not bother to think or act,because you would be here to think on our behalf and to act accordingly.

Well not anymore.

Things are not just mediatic or rethoric issues anymore.It's not about who is right and who is wrong anymore.

If it is true that Israel always managed to shift the blame mediatically,well...It is also true that the others don't care to be blamed anymore anyway.

So there is no use to try to find plausible excuses and scenarios to start aggressing the other.

The other is also ready and capable of biting although he makes sure that you don't see his teeth.

So now,it is time to act with high responsibility.

While Israel is being reckless,Syria is restraining itself.Till now.

But things could quickly take another turn.So maybe that if Israel continues on violating Syrian airspace,maybe it would be surprised very soon of an unexpected Syrian reaction....

What use would be the blame shifting then?.....

[Abou Sandal]

Originally Posted by proIsrael-nonIsraeli

Correct answer should not only be OK but it also should be an obligation and it must become unbreakable rule. Israel's response in similar situations must become fully predictable.

I understand what you mean from the Iraeli point of view.Yet there are 2 holes in this strategy:

1-Israel always find a way to aggress the other without even being touched.Which means that i get the stick wether i behave good or bad.

2-Israel failed to protect not only itself,but also its soldiers during the July war.If it wasn't from the cessation of hostilities and the goodwill of HA to honour its engagement,few thousands of Israeli soldiers were already trapped behind the ennemy lines and already starving and fading of thirst.They were dropped 48 hours before the ceasefire by helicopters , hoping that they could encircle HA lines.It turned out that HA lines are not fixed ones and that they can form and reform at will.So the commandos were trapped like rabbits.

Conclusion:When you always act mean anyway,and when you turn out to be weaker than you thought,you are not really credible enough to make your ennemy fear anything from you,should he act against your will.

BTW,this is why Israel always use the "terror strategy" in its wars:Spectacular civilian damages and casualties,in order to spread terror ,not only during the conflict itself,but in the hearts and minds of future generations.

This does not work anymore.On the countrary,it boosts our moral.(I don't know why btw.)