Meanwhile, In Syria

[Carl_Manchester]

Globs said:

Then Hamas - a creation of Israel to upset the PLO. Try reading about the 1948 Nakba and the invasion of Palestine before you start denigrating people than in any other place in the world would be described as 'rebels' or 'freedom fighters'.

Sorry Globs, I agree with some of the stuff you are posting about regime change but lets not air-brush out large parts of Israeli-Arab history here and let us not also forget that Iran is still a basket case of an Islamic state so whilst many 'Iranians' we see in London are pretty cool and cosmopolitan, their country is still stuck in the 1800's. I am happy that Iran has signalled that they want to join the 21st century, to do so they must overthrow their own Islamic dictatorship. Good luck to them, they will need it.

The bottom line is that the Arab nations were determined in 1947 to exterminate every Jew out of Israel and have been working out ways of re-taking the land back ever since the UN vote went against them.

The Palestinian leader is *still* saying he wants the 1947 UN council vote repealed as it was wrong.

People say that the Arab's beef was with the land partition and it was not about the Jewish people per se, you need to ask, why then was it that Jews were expelled from the Arab states from the 1940's right through the 1970's and still today, many Arab states taint them as if the Nazi's were still roaming the earth ?

The behaviour of Israel today is a direct result of decades of abuse and provocation from the Arab world. If you raise a child in this manner and then give it a state of the art weapons cache once it has grown up then there should be no surprises at the resulting chaos in the present day.

If the Palestinians wanted peace they would not be firing (or allowing to be fired) rockets at the Israelis. It is obvious that any retaliation from the Israelis will result in large civilian casualties due to their weapons and tactics. It just does not make any sense.

Re: The U.S - Most of the historical hatred of the U.S in the Arab world can be traced back to not only the vote in 1947 but also the giving of $3-4billion USD per year to Israel in military aid thus, the parking of cutting edge U.S military (and Israeli) hardware in Israel stops (or at least significantly deters) the Arab states from Invading - again. This is why some Arab states (including Pakistan) have burnt the U.S flag in the streets. They always will hate the U.S because it backs the 1947 accord and prevents any Arab state from changing it through military assistance.

[Countdown]

Transmitter Man said:

Hi Countdown,

Is this alleged or fact - I don't know.

I 'personally' think that if Israel has indeed given weapons to Syrian opposition fighters then it would be to one or more of the groups in the Golan and only light weapons at that. This to extend Israels arm to keep both IS and Hezbelloah at bay and at least allowing them not to have to put their own boots on Syrian territory - yes I know the history of the Golan.

I do remember reading a good while back that some opposition (FSA) fighters were attacked by Al Nusra and of course it goes without saying that their weapons would have been taken however I'm adding 2 + 2 here and making 5.

With weapons entering the Syrian conflict from many countries, some legit but probably as many illegitimately then I really don't know what to make of this and I'm sure half of the latter were probably stolen.

Just my 2p.

What are your thoughts on this issue?

Phil

I think it's in Israel's interests to have Hezbollah/Assad/FSA kicking 7 bells out of each other for as long as possible. As such I'd be reasonbly confident that they were doing everything in their power to keep that conflict going on. They do not want a Shia coalition on their northern border, stretching from Lebanon to Iran. I don't think they'd be stupid enough to give weapons which were obviously israeli in origin to the FSA for political reasons, which is why I think that's possibly a false flag exercise.

[Countdown]

Carl_Manchester said:

If the Palestinians wanted peace they would not be firing (or allowing to be fired) rockets at the Israelis. It is obvious that any retaliation from the Israelis will result in large civilian casualties due to their weapons and tactics. It just does not make any sense.

And if the Israelis wanted peace they would have stopped evicting Palestinians from East Jerusalem and building settlements.

[Carl_Manchester]

Countdown said:

Carl_Manchester said:

If the Palestinians wanted peace they would not be firing (or allowing to be fired) rockets at the Israelis. It is obvious that any retaliation from the Israelis will result in large civilian casualties due to their weapons and tactics. It just does not make any sense.

And if the Israelis wanted peace they would have stopped evicting Palestinians from East Jerusalem and building settlements.

I don't agree with the settlement building but again, this a result of Israel being poked with sticks for decades. The land the settlements are on would not be in dispute at all (its Palestinian) if the Israelis were left in peace during the 50s, 60s and so on, this is especially true of the Egyptians.

As it stands now and after more than one war, with Israel the sole target, some Israelis now think the land is theirs.

Like I say, if Israel would have been left alone once the 1947 UN resolution was passed then we would not be in this mess with Israel, as it stands this bloc below are still refuting the results of the 1947 UN accord:

Algeria
Bangladesh
Brunei
Iran
Iraq
Kuwait
Lebanon
Libya
Malaysia
Oman
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Sudan
Syria
United Arab Emirates
Yemen.

As states (not the people), those countries should hang their heads in shame and so on it goes - for all the bluster coming out of the UAE and the like about being progressive yet, the 21st century still awaits their arrival. As it stands Israel goes from strength to strength (3.8% GDP growth in 2016) much to angst of the states who want to destroy it and good luck to them for they have, in a short space of time, made a successful state which contributes to civilisations technological progress out of a desperate situation.

Oh and they do not hang gay people in Israel, sorry had to get a low-blow in at the end (if you will excuse the pun).

[grumbledoak]

Carl_Manchester said:

Like I say, if Israel would have been left alone once the 1947 UN resolution was passed then we would not be in this mess with Israel

That's not really true, is it. The creation of the state of Israel was a very cynical act.

It was stolen land in antiquity, it is stolen land now. It isn't going to stop being stolen land any time soon.

[anonymous-user]

Carl_Manchester said:

Algeria
Bangladesh
Brunei
Iran
Iraq
Kuwait
Lebanon
Libya
Malaysia
Oman
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Sudan
Syria
United Arab Emirates
Yemen.

You wouldn't trust any of that lot no further than you can gob.

[anonymous-user]

scherzkeks said:

Let the great neocon triggering commence.

You bored us stless with how good Trump was last year.

[Carl_Manchester]

grumbledoak said:

Carl_Manchester said:

Like I say, if Israel would have been left alone once the 1947 UN resolution was passed then we would not be in this mess with Israel

That's not really true, is it. The creation of the state of Israel was a very cynical act.

It was stolen land in antiquity, it is stolen land now. It isn't going to stop being stolen land any time soon.

the UN resolution called for the creation of a home for the Jews as well as a home for the Palestinians.

The context of this is Jerusalem which has been invaded what, 50 times over 3000 years+? I think 'stolen' is not a binary word when we are talking about middle east border lines and ownership of land.

The Arab nations have had plenty of opportunities to create a palestinian state when the British pulled out but failed and really, with all the wealth in the Arab world, you would think they would all be living in gold plated houses if, the Arab world wanted it that way. They have had 60+ years to sort it. I

You can call it 'stolen' land, or you could also argue that something had to give, someone had to give up something in that region and that is why the UN resolution was drafted in the first place, they (the Arab world) could not and still cannot agree on giving up land for the Jews and the Palestinians, even the smallest piece.

Was it too much to ask, after the events of WW2, facing near extermination, to give them somewhere to call home? It is as clear now as it was then, the Arab world was not willing to give them an inch of land and so the UN decided to do something about it.

[grumbledoak]

Carl_Manchester said:

Was it too much to ask, after the events of WW2, facing near extermination, to give them somewhere to call home? It is as clear now as it was then, the Arab world was not willing to give them an inch of land and so the UN decided to do something about it.

We didn't do it out of kindness. We intentionally created a thorn in the side of the Arab world. And gave a bunch of people we didn't much want somewhere else to go. And Israel, surrounded by enemies, is basically psychotic. It must be the regional superpower. All the others must be destroyed. It is life or death, genocide or annihilation.

There isn't going to be any peace.

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Transmitter Man said:

Quantum said:

"You were the one telling us how moderate and wonderful the FSA is, killing children, cooperating and supplying and fighting with Al Nusra and ISIS "

You'll become a politician yet.

Taking comments, twisting them and using the remainder out of context will get you nowhere, at least on this PH thread.

You have never debated the fact that there are more than a single group opposing the Syrian regime. You simply go the troll route in bunching them all together by call anyone and everyone that opposes Assad, regardless of whether they're Syrian or not as 'moderate Islamist rebels.

The day you stop that you'll earn respect.

Phil

I am not interested in creating a "% of Islamic fundamentalist craziness" index. These "Armed opposition groups" would be the groups which are changing their name so often, so they cannot be tied to atrocities, or their working links to ISIS etc. Al Nusra becomes the totally moderate and not Islamic Fundamentalist at all, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham. Amazing the affect a simple name change can have ! InShaAllah.

Support the legitimate government of Syria to end the blood shed in Syria. Easy isn't it. When Russia did exactly that, they brought peace to large parts of the country, unless you are happy for people to continue dying in the country, which it seems you are.

Phil, you have been talking up these "moderate groups" for ages, and each time, they turned out to much less moderate than you profess.

Let us know which of these groups you consider to be moderate, and we can discuss their relative merits.

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Monday 10th July 14:03

[Globs]

As someone expressed an interest in the relationship between Israel and Syria I thought I'd post this article up which gives some details about it:
https://rehmat1.com/2017/06/20/wsj-israel-funds-is...

Particularly of note is the deal offered Syria about Golan:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4291337,...

I think also someone referred to Iran as a 'basket case', not sure where that came from but certainly Iran itself is a friendly, stable country because I often chat to an Iranian friend who visits Iran on a regular basis. They have some wonderful ballistic missiles they used to take out ISIS the other day, and have now been fighting ISIS solidly for over 5 years, for which we should all be very grateful.
http://www.iransview.com/iran-missiles-strike-kill...

Here's also a good summary of the Syrian advance against our terrorists:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-06/syrian-ar...

Interesting to see how chopped up Syria has become, the neocons must be furious how they failed to take the prize: the murder of Assad, before Russia moved in they were within a month or two of Syria being another Iraq/Libya/Yemen/Somali/Afghanistan thanks to the the Hegemon.

[anonymous-user]

Globs said:

I think also someone referred to Iran as a 'basket case', not sure where that came from but certainly Iran itself is a friendly, stable country because I often chat to an Iranian friend who visits Iran on a regular basis.

You've swung me over, think I'll book a full board fortnight in Tehran. Just reassure me the cranes are 100% used for the construction industry not for dangling people who call the Ayatollah a w*nker?

[Transmitter Man]

Countdown said:

And if the Israelis wanted peace they would have stopped evicting Palestinians from East Jerusalem and building settlements.

As has been stated by myself and others the Israeli's + ooo's of settlers pulled out of Gaza.

It's not stopped the rockets.

Phil

[Transmitter Man]

grumbledoak said:

We didn't do it out of kindness. We intentionally created a thorn in the side of the Arab world. And gave a bunch of people we didn't much want somewhere else to go. And Israel, surrounded by enemies, is basically psychotic. It must be the regional superpower. All the others must be destroyed. It is life or death, genocide or annihilation.

There isn't going to be any peace.

Another word for 'nuts' Grumble.

Go read history and how the British government of the time done all they could to stop the Jews from sailing to the newly created state of Israel from the UK ports.

i'll save you the time;

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Exodus

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliyah_Bet

3. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jun/30/isra...

4. http://www.thedailybeast.com/mi6-attacked-jewish-r...

Would you like me to go on?

Phil

[Countdown]

Transmitter Man said:

s has been stated by myself and others the Israeli's + ooo's of settlers pulled out of Gaza.

It's not stopped the rockets.

Phil

They pulled out of Gaza for the same reason they withdrew from South Lebanon. NOT as a part of any negotiated peace but purely for strategic military reasons. because of it's size and population density the could (and do) control Gaza much more effectively and cheaply from the "outside" rather than have their soldiers and settlers in the middle acting as sitting ducks.

The rockets haven't stopped but neither has the assassination by hellfire missile or 500lb bomb. Of course, one is portrayed as a terrorist attack on innocent families and the other is "israel's inalienable right to defend itself".

[anonymous-user]

Countdown said:

The rockets haven't stopped but neither has the assassination by hellfire missile or 500lb bomb. Of course, one is portrayed as a terrorist attack on innocent families and the other is "israel's inalienable right to defend itself".

Don't send rockets then is the answer to that. ffs

[Countdown]

Raygun said:

Countdown said:

The rockets haven't stopped but neither has the assassination by hellfire missile or 500lb bomb. Of course, one is portrayed as a terrorist attack on innocent families and the other is "israel's inalienable right to defend itself".

Don't send rockets then is the answer to that. ffs

Their view is "we're going to get bombed anyway, we might as well fire back" even knowing full well that there will be minimal impact on the Israelis.

[Transmitter Man]

Globs said:

As someone expressed an interest in the relationship between Israel and Syria I thought I'd post this article up which gives some details about it:
https://rehmat1.com/2017/06/20/wsj-israel-funds-is...

Particularly of note is the deal offered Syria about Golan:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4291337,...

I think also someone referred to Iran as a 'basket case', not sure where that came from but certainly Iran itself is a friendly, stable country because I often chat to an Iranian friend who visits Iran on a regular basis. They have some wonderful ballistic missiles they used to take out ISIS the other day, and have now been fighting ISIS solidly for over 5 years, for which we should all be very grateful.
http://www.iransview.com/iran-missiles-strike-kill...

Here's also a good summary of the Syrian advance against our terrorists:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-06/syrian-ar...


Interesting to see how chopped up Syria has become, the neocons must be furious how they failed to take the prize: the murder of Assad, before Russia moved in they were within a month or two of Syria being another Iraq/Libya/Yemen/Somali/Afghanistan thanks to the the Hegemon.

Globs,

Your first articles author: http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/joy-karega/

Re your second article. In wars land is often lost. The Arabs started the war but lost. They also lost the Golan.

Re your third statement. So Iran is stable and friendly because your mate told you so, doh. It may come as a surprise to you that they take diplomatic hostages, of all persuasions in Iran. They also enjoy giving parties in Kensington: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Embassy_sieg...

Re your fourth article. If you had unlimited air power you'd advance against ISIS in Palmyra. Didn't Russia hold a concert the last time they advanced into Palmyra: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/05/palm... - When was that, oh yes, a year ago. Then lost it again to ISIS.

Re your fifth article (statement). Other than light weapons up to and including ATGM's the Americans if that is who you are referring to were hardly there at the time Russian moved in (don't you know Obama talked the talk but did not walk the walk (red lines). Hardly pro-active.

Image link does not work!

Phil

[Transmitter Man]

Quantum said;

Phil, you have been talking up these "moderate groups" for ages, and each time, they turned out to much less moderate than you profess.

Let us know which of these groups you consider to be moderate, and we can discuss their relative merits.

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Monday 10th July 14:03

[/quote]

Come on Quantum, you're slacking.

Have another vodka on me, Na Zdorovia

Syriac Military Council: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syriac_Military_Coun...

Could you please give me a level 2 question.

Phil

Edited by Transmitter Man on Monday 10th July 16:25

[Bibbs]

Transmitter Man said:

They also enjoy giving parties in Kensington: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Embassy_sieg...

So a few Iranian Arabs wanted their own country and did some nasty things AGAINST Iran (with funding from Iraq), and then a few months later the west supported Saddam in gassing the Iranians and going to war?

So for that reason we shouldn't like them?

Would rather be in Tehran than Riyadh, Baghdad, Damascus, Dubai or Jerusalem (in fact, I'm trying to organise a few weeks there within the next year).

Edited by Bibbs on Tuesday 11th July 01:45