Iran seeks to become major Mideast player

[KidRocks]

You would rather see it go to your buddies in the ME so they could build more IED and make more plans to attack innocent civilians.

................... NAaaaaaaa I'll stick with Israel

I've got a brilliant idea, what's say we get the U.N. to put out a resoulution for voting stating that Iran/Syria will no longer back Hezbollah, Hamas and the PLO in accordance with the United States no longer backing Israel.

Gee, who'd of thought of telling the U.S. to get the hell out of the Middle East?

 

[Kandahar]

I've got a brilliant idea, what's say we get the U.N. to put out a resoulution for voting stating that Iran/Syria will no longer back Hezbollah, Hamas and the PLO in accordance with the United States no longer backing Israel.

Because the two are not comparable. Israel is a liberal democracy; Hamas and Hezbollah are illiberal, apocalyptic terrorist organizations.

Why should we make such a tradeoff when Israel is in a position to wipe them out anyway?

Gee, who'd of thought of telling the U.S. to get the hell out of the Middle East?

It is not that simple as you certainly must realize. As long as we use oil we have no choice but to be involved in the Middle East. We couldn't "get the hell out" (i.e. adopt an isolationist xenophobic foreign policy) even if we wanted to.

 

[KidRocks]

Because the two are not comparable. Israel is a liberal democracy; Hamas and Hezbollah are illiberal, apocalyptic terrorist organizations.

Why should we make such a tradeoff when Israel is in a position to wipe them out anyway?



It is not that simple as you certainly must realize. As long as we use oil we have no choice but to be involved in the Middle East. We couldn't "get the hell out" (i.e. adopt an isolationist xenophobic foreign policy) even if we wanted to.

Israel will never, ever wipe out Hezbollah, Hamas nor the Palestians, never!

So, forget that notion and get realistic, America is stuck proping up Israel to the tune of billions and billions and billions of American dollars not to mention providing Israel with hi-tech fighters/weapons and technology.

As time goes by Israels enemies will only get stronger and hi-tech savey themselves unless maybe they... nah, nevermind.

 

[Kandahar]

Israel will never, ever wipe out Hezbollah, Hamas nor the Palestians, never!

What the hell? Are you their paid spokesperson or something?

So, forget that notion and get realistic, America is stuck proping up Israel to the tune of billions and billions and billions of American dollars not to mention providing Israel with hi-tech fighters/weapons and technology.

Good.

As time goes by Israels enemies will only get stronger and hi-tech savey themselves unless maybe they... nah, nevermind.

It certainly doesn't seem that way. With the exception of Iran (which has only been able to do so because of its large number of people), Israel's enemies are no more tech-savvy than they were 20 years ago...In fact, most of them are WORSE off.

As for Iran, yes, we need to overthrow the theocracy now, while they can only cause a lot of damage, before they can cause catastrophic damage.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

I've got a brilliant idea, what's say we get the U.N. to put out a resoulution for voting stating that Iran/Syria will no longer back Hezbollah, Hamas and the PLO in accordance with the United States no longer backing Israel.

Gee, who'd of thought of telling the U.S. to get the hell out of the Middle East?

Thats a brilliant idea, you keep backing the terrorists kid. You seem to have a real desire to look after them.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Israel will never, ever wipe out Hezbollah, Hamas nor the Palestians, never!

So, forget that notion and get realistic, America is stuck proping up Israel to the tune of billions and billions and billions of American dollars not to mention providing Israel with hi-tech fighters/weapons and technology.

As time goes by Israels enemies will only get stronger and hi-tech savey themselves unless maybe they... nah, nevermind.

As opposed to propping up the kid killers and throat cutters like you? Your more interested in seeing these animals win there causes then see those that are fighting them win. Says a whole lot about you....:doh

 

[KidRocks]

As opposed to propping up the kid killers and throat cutters like you? Your more interested in seeing these animals win there causes then see those that are fighting them win. Says a whole lot about you....:doh

Kid killers?

You want to talk about "kid killers? I heard a report on CNN that of the 300 citizens killed by Israel in Lebonon so far, 1/3 of those were children...CHILDREN!

Did you hear me?

But of course, you don't give a damn about that statistic do you? It's all about Israel and their precious few who have died so far.

Says a lot about your shallowness, doesn't it? Not to mention your hypocrisy!

 

[Goobieman]

Kid killers?
You want to talk about "kid killers? I heard a report on CNN that of the 300 citizens killed by Israel in Lebonon so far, 1/3 of those were children...CHILDREN!

Collateral damage.
Compared to the Israeli civilians, that were killed on purpose.

Did you hear me?

I did. Your obtuseness is deafening.

But of course, you don't give a damn about that statistic do you? It's all about Israel and their precious few who have died so far.

Its all about the fact that Israel hits miltary targets and occasionally kills civilians while doing so, whereas Hezboulah (et al) hits civilian targets and delibertly kills innocents.

But of course, you dont give a damn about that.

Did you hear me?

 

[KidRocks]

Collateral damage.
Compared to the Israeli civilians, that were killed on purpose.


I did. Your obtuseness is deafening.

But of course, you don't give a damn about that statistic do you? It's all about Israel and their precious few who have died so far.
Its all about the fact that Israel hits miltary targets and occasionally kills civilians while doing so, whereas Hezboulah (et al) hits civilian targets and delibertly kills innocents.

Did you hear me?

It's a fool who believes that Israel doesn't kill women and children on purpose!

The Israeli machine fires smart bombs and missles knowing full well that they are going to blow up many civilians along with a few Hezbollahs, do you think they give a damn... hell no they don't, they know that the Americans and the media are on their side.

 

[Goobieman]

It's a fool who believes that Israel doesn't kill women and children on purpose!

What part of "collateral damage" dont you get?

 

[KidRocks]

What part of "collateral damage" dont you get?

"Collateral damage" my @ss, Israel knows full well many innocent women and children are going to die in their effort to kill a few Hezbollahs with a single launch of their missle.

Only they call it ""collateral damage" and you and their willingly "media" goes along with it.

 

[Goobieman]

"Collateral damage" my @ss, Israel knows full well many innocent women and children are going to die in their effort to kill a few Hezbollahs with a single launch of their missle.

Congrats -- you DO know what collateral damage is.

Its no different than a B-17 overruning its target and dropping its bombs on a German school.

You know what a B-17 is, right?

 

[KidRocks]

Congrats -- you DO know what collateral damage is.

Its no different than a B-17 overruning its target and dropping its bombs on a German school.

You know what a B-17 is, right?

No comparison, overrunning a target is very different, what the Israeli's do cannot be classified as collateral damage, actually it is knowingly pre-meditated murder, just out and out terrorism. That's my point.

 

[Goobieman]

No comparison, overrunning a target is very different,

No. Its not.
In both cases you dropped the bomb to destory a leitimate target and the bomb killed someone unintentionally.

what the Israeli's do cannot be classified as collateral damage, actually it is knowingly pre-meditated murder, just out and out terrorism. That's my point.

Yes. Thats your point.
And it only proves you arent capabe of reason.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Kid killers?

You want to talk about "kid killers? I heard a report on CNN that of the 300 citizens killed by Israel in Lebonon so far, 1/3 of those were children...CHILDREN!

Did you hear me?

But of course, you don't give a damn about that statistic do you? It's all about Israel and their precious few who have died so far.

Says a lot about your shallowness, doesn't it? Not to mention your hypocrisy!

Then the kids should be pissed at there moms and dads for harboring terrorists... NO hipocrisy here. KIds are going to die when you use them as human shields.. Thats what they want to happen., I'm shallow ... you root for terorrists and defend them at every turn. Yet your not willing to go stand with them... And you have the nuts to call me shallow....:rofl

 

[KidRocks]

No. Its not.
In both cases you dropped the bomb to destory a leitimate target and the bomb killed someone unintentionally.


Yes. Thats your point.
And it only proves you arent capabe of reason.

If I launch a missle directed at your neighbors and I miss and hit your home a few doors down, that's collateral damage.

If I launch a missle directed at your neighbors house knowing full well you are inside with a house full of your neighbors family, that's pre-mediated murder, of your neighbors family, just pure "I didn't care", just classic terrorism.

See the difference?

 

[Calm2Chaos]

If I launch a missle directed at your neighbors and I miss and hit your home a few doors down, that's collateral damage.

If I launch a missle directed at your neighbors house knowing full well you are inside with a house full of your neighbors family, that's pre-mediated murder, of your neighbors family, just pure "I didn't care", just classic terrorism.

See the difference?

Nope I don't,
considering also in that house is a three members of hezbolla or three family memebers that have or have had information concerning terrorists or terrorist activity.

By the way exactly what proof do you have the Israel is targeting civilians. Because thats what you just said essentially. Do you have ANY real proof the they are targeting civilians?

 

[Goobieman]

If I launch a missle directed at your neighbors and I miss and hit your home a few doors down, that's collateral damage.

If I launch a missle directed at your neighbors house knowing full well you are inside with a house full of your neighbors family, that's pre-mediated murder, of your neighbors family, just pure "I didn't care", just classic terrorism.

See the difference?

Nope. Both are collateral damge.

 

[Hobbes]

No. Its not.
In both cases you dropped the bomb to destory a leitimate target and the bomb killed someone unintentionally.

Israel can't be criticized for causing too much "collateral damage" ? There has to be a limit and who gets to decide? There was even an alternative; Israel could have used more ground attacks from the beginning but they chose to airstrikes which does make since to minimize their own causalties, however, this choice also caused more civilain deaths. The Israeli's made their choice and it has given them bad PR; they couldn't have expected anything less. But back to my question, when is the collateral damage too much? A large portion of the world seems to think it is too much already, are they all wrong?

 

[Goobieman]

Israel can't be criticized for causing too much "collateral damage" ? There has to be a limit and who gets to decide?

I vote that you get to decide!! :roll:

Fact of the matter is that Hezboulah - deliberately - places their military assets in and among civilians, knowing that the Israelis will kill innocents, and that people like you will forget the former, focus on the latter, and whine about the Israelis 'going too far'.

You've fallen for Hezboulah propaganda efforts. Good work.

There was even an alternative; Israel could have used more ground attacks from the beginning but they chose to airstrikes which does make since to minimize their own causalties, however, this choice also caused more civilain deaths.

There is only one military on the face of the planet that has put cilian casualties ahead of their own military losses -- the US in Iraq.

That said, when you have to choose between your people and their people, you always choose your people.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Israel can't be criticized for causing too much "collateral damage" ? There has to be a limit and who gets to decide? There was even an alternative; Israel could have used more ground attacks from the beginning but they chose to airstrikes which does make since to minimize their own causalties, however, this choice also caused more civilain deaths. The Israeli's made their choice and it has given them bad PR; they couldn't have expected anything less. But back to my question, when is the collateral damage too much? A large portion of the world seems to think it is too much already, are they all wrong?

Why the hell should they put more of there people at risk to kill these terrorist and there supporters that they use as shields. These civilians you keep talking about seem to have no problem aiding or assisting these guys. They damm sure don't d anything to discourage them. So airstirkes limit the amount of total caualities for the time being..

 

[Hobbes]

Why the hell should they put more of there people at risk to kill these terrorist and there supporters that they use as shields. These civilians you keep talking about seem to have no problem aiding or assisting these guys. They damm sure don't d anything to discourage them. So airstirkes limit the amount of total caualities for the time being..

Show me this "assisting" your talking about. We're talking about collateral damage, like the Red Cross ambulances hit by one missle , then another. Or the missiles that miss targets or bombs that kill civilains next door to a house being targeted. Airstikes limit total causalties?? They cause more civilain causalties undoubtedly. And moving in ground forces, which they are doing now, is what is creating the buffer zone to limit rockets from reaching Israeli cities. So yes, they're are going in, and they could have earlier. It had to be done eventually. But you missed my question somehow. Whats the limit for collateral damage? Are people wrong for thinking it's already too much? Who decides whats too much?

 

[Kandahar]

Show me this "assisting" your talking about. We're talking about collateral damage, like the Red Cross ambulances hit by one missle , then another. Or the missiles that miss targets or bombs that kill civilains next door to a house being targeted. Airstikes limit total causalties?? They cause more civilain causalties undoubtedly. And moving in ground forces, which they are doing now, is what is creating the buffer zone to limit rockets from reaching Israeli cities. So yes, they're are going in, and they could have earlier. It had to be done eventually. But you missed my question somehow. Whats the limit for collateral damage? Are people wrong for thinking it's already too much? Who decides whats too much?

What makes you think that a ground invasion from the beginning would result in fewer civilian casualties than air strikes followed by a ground invasion? And even if that were true, why should Israel be expected to trade its soldiers lives for the lives of Lebanese civilians?

Why don't you blame the people who are firing rockets from apartment complexes - thus making the building a target - rather than the people who are destroying them?

 

[Goobieman]

Show me this "assisting" your talking about. We're talking about collateral damage, like the Red Cross ambulances hit by one missle , then another. Or the missiles that miss targets or bombs that kill civilains next door to a house being targeted.

Yep. Thats all collateral damge.
Note that when Hezboulah lobs a rocket into Israel -- that's NOT collateral damage.

Airstikes limit total causalties??
They cause more civilain causalties undoubtedly

.
Your primary goal as a military commander is to worry about the lives of your guys first, civilains second, and the enemy third.
So yes - you paste the targets from the air.

Anyone wonder why the Israelis drop flyers telling Lebanese civilians to run away? Clearly, its because the Israelis have no regard for innocent lives.

So yes, they're are going in, and they could have earlier. It had to be done eventually.

And they will take fewer casualties because of their air campaign.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Show me this "assisting" your talking about.
We're talking about collateral damage, like the Red Cross ambulances hit by one missle , then another. Or the missiles that miss targets or bombs that kill civilains next door to a house being targeted. Airstikes limit total causalties?? They cause more civilain causalties undoubtedly. And moving in ground forces, which they are doing now, is what is creating the buffer zone to limit rockets from reaching Israeli cities. So yes, they're are going in, and they could have earlier. It had to be done eventually. But you missed my question somehow. Whats the limit for collateral damage? Are people wrong for thinking it's already too much? Who decides whats too much?

Clothing, housing aid, training, money, assitance, taking no action at all. These are all ways of assiting. Do not complain about being killed when you allow these people to fire there rockets feet from your house. They didn't just pop up. They live and walk amomgst the civilian population. A population that does little if anything to purge these animals from there midst.


The limit is when you have softened your target or targets enough so that you limit as much as possible the danger your soldiers going in country.

The ones that are crying for civilians in this case seem to be the same ones defending Hammas and Hezbollah in some form or fashion. The civilians seem to be allowing the use of themselves as shields. I have a hard time mustering feelings for a group of people that do little if anything to help themselves out of the position they are in, of there own accord