Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 51
Thanks Tree41Thanks

Thread: More Israeli aggression

  1. #11
    The Un-Holy One The Man's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    38,627
    Thanks
    23645

    From
    Toronto
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    Read the article carefully... There's no mention of exactly what the Israeli missiles hit. Why would Syria withhold such a salient piece of information, unless it was incriminating?
    There is no justification for an unprovoked attack by one country on another. Period.
    Thanks from Friday13

  2. #12
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    May 2007
    Posts
    16,819
    Thanks
    13348

    From
    Houston, Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Um ... this has nothing to do with the Palestinians. Hezbollah is a Lebanese proxy for Iran, and Syria is a conduit to get weapons from the latter to the former.
    So you think Israel is totally innocent? If you do, then we just disagree. I'm not claiming Israel is the prime aggressor, just that this conflict is not one-sided. What do you think?
    Thanks from The Man

  3. #13
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    64,867
    Thanks
    32894

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by The Man View Post
    I can come up with examples of Israel actually attacking Iran:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assass...ear_scientists

    Not vise versa though.
    Iran uses Hezbollah as its proxy. Hezbollah attacks Israel.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah

    Even the Arab League holds Hezbollah to be a terrorist organization.

    Israel was not attacking Syria, but Hezbollah, which operates through Syrians space.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Man View Post
    You are a lawyer in America....
    True, but not relevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Man View Post
    [Y]ou believe that Israel has a right to unilaterally attack other countries, in violation of international laws, to kill people in other countries too. You would likely not extend this privilege to any other country.
    If another country, or someone in it, poses a national security threat, and the country's government is either responsible or does nothing to stop it, then such an attack is absolutely justified. Hezbollah poses a national security threat to Israel wherever it happens to be. Just like al-Qaeda posed a national security threat to the United States, justifying an invasion of Afghanistan, where al-Qaeda was given refuge by the Taliban government. Under what circumstances do you presume a country must allow itself to be attacked?

  4. #14
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    64,867
    Thanks
    32894

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly5 View Post
    So you think Israel is totally innocent?
    I stated the facts. Your question does not tend to edification. Or do you seek to justify attacks on Israel, and assert that it must allow itself to be attacked?

  5. #15
    ~Standing My Ground~ Sassy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    45,622
    Thanks
    18173

    From
    God Bless Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Iran uses Hezbollah as its proxy. Hezbollah attacks Israel.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah

    Even the Arab League holds Hezbollah to be a terrorist organization.

    Israel was not attacking Syria, but Hezbollah, which operates through Syrians space.


    True, but not relevant.


    If another country, or someone in it, poses a national security threat, and the country's government is either responsible or does nothing to stop it, then such an attack is absolutely justified. Hezbollah poses a national security threat to Israel wherever it happens to be. Just like al-Qaeda posed a national security threat to the United States, justifying an invasion of Afghanistan, where al-Qaeda was given refuge by the Taliban government. Under what circumstances do you presume a country must allow itself to be attacked?
    I do not agree at all that was justified, nor has that gone well for us or them.
    Thanks from The Man and Leo2

  6. #16
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    64,867
    Thanks
    32894

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Sassy View Post
    I do not agree at all that was justified.
    When someone attacks you, a return attack is justified. While the Taliban (the then-government of Afghanistan) was not the attacking entity, it gave refuge to the attackers, and we had the right to pursue the attackers wherever they went; and since the government of Afghanistan was harboring the attackers, we had a right to take it down in order to prevent harboring of additional fugitives and interference with our operations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sassy View Post
    ... nor has that gone well for us or them.
    That is because of how the situation was handled, not because of the mere fact that we went there.
    Thanks from Djinn

  7. #17
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    May 2007
    Posts
    16,819
    Thanks
    13348

    From
    Houston, Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    I stated the facts. Your question does not tend to edification. Or do you seek to justify attacks on Israel, and assert that it must allow itself to be attacked?
    You are so sensitive about this it is impossible to discuss it with you. I already stated that Israel isn't the primary aggressor. Just because I don't believe that Israel is never at fault doesn't mean I am anti-Israel. I certainly don't expect Israel to allow itself to be attacked without a military response. No country should allow this to happen.
    Thanks from The Man

  8. #18
    ~Standing My Ground~ Sassy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    45,622
    Thanks
    18173

    From
    God Bless Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    When someone attacks you, a return attack is justified. While the Taliban (the then-government of Afghanistan) was not the attacking entity, it gave refuge to the attackers, and we had the right to pursue the attackers wherever they went; and since the government of Afghanistan was harboring the attackers, we had a right to take it down in order to prevent harboring of additional fugitives and interference with our operations.

    We will have to agree to disagree on that. And it did not accomplish what we wanted to.
    Thanks from The Man

  9. #19
    ~Standing My Ground~ Sassy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    45,622
    Thanks
    18173

    From
    God Bless Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post


    That is because of how the situation was handled, not because of the mere fact that we went there.
    Disagree with this too. And we were really there to defend a pipeline that never came to anything, and likely never will.
    Thanks from The Man

  10. #20
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    64,867
    Thanks
    32894

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly5 View Post
    You are so sensitive about this it is impossible to discuss it with you.
    Hardly. But you did not bring up a point to discuss.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Russian aggression
    By The Man in forum Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11th November 2014, 12:08 PM
  2. Aggression sped our Evolution
    By Loki in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 2nd July 2014, 05:41 PM
  3. An Israeli Woman protects a Palestinian Boy from an Israeli Soldier.
    By Ronin Tetsuro in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 6th July 2012, 07:29 PM
  4. Aggression in children, causes, solutions
    By The Man in forum Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 27th June 2012, 07:03 PM

Search tags for this page

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed