OT--Israeli raid in Syria
 

War mongering? All sides are slinging the word "terrorism" around too
loosely ever since 9/11.

I consider it terrorism to *deliberatly* target civilians in order to scare
a population into doing or not doing something. Guerilla warfare isn't
terrorism. Blowing up civilian busses is. There's a difference between
tageting civilians and "collateral damage".

I don't even see the Sept 11 *Pentagon* attack as "pure terrorism".
The Pentagon *is* a legitimate military target and if you work there, you
are part of the militarty structure. However the innocent people in the
plane that hit the Pentagon are such high "collateral damage" as to be able
to call it terrorism in light of the rest of the 9/11 attacks. If that
plane was empty - I'd label the Pentagon strike as a "sucker punch".

-W

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news:Jcjgb.272

Really? It's not? What would Canada call it if NY State decided
Plattsburgh
needed to expand north into Quebec for maybe 8 or 30 or 100 miles?

OT--Israeli raid in Syria
 

I agree with all that below.

You seem to think Israel is right in it's actions - can
you tell me why? Don't the Palestinian's have a right
to fight to protect their land?



"Clams Canino" wrote in message
news:52mgb.511201$cF.181837@rwcrnsc53...
War mongering? All sides are slinging the word "terrorism" around too
loosely ever since 9/11.

I consider it terrorism to *deliberatly* target civilians in order to
scare
a population into doing or not doing something. Guerilla warfare isn't
terrorism. Blowing up civilian busses is. There's a difference between
tageting civilians and "collateral damage".

I don't even see the Sept 11 *Pentagon* attack as "pure terrorism".
The Pentagon *is* a legitimate military target and if you work there, you
are part of the militarty structure. However the innocent people in the
plane that hit the Pentagon are such high "collateral damage" as to be
able
to call it terrorism in light of the rest of the 9/11 attacks. If that
plane was empty - I'd label the Pentagon strike as a "sucker punch".

-W

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news:Jcjgb.272

Really? It's not? What would Canada call it if NY State decided
Plattsburgh
needed to expand north into Quebec for maybe 8 or 30 or 100 miles?

OT--Israeli raid in Syria
 

I agree with all that below.

You seem to think Israel is right in it's actions - can
you tell me why? Don't the Palestinian's have a right
to fight to protect their land?

Well let's see:

Political contributions to US politicians by
people sympathetic to Zionism: $gazillion

Political contributions to US politicians by
people opposed to Zionism: $3.16

Hmm. Looks like the Palestinians have a ways to go to earn our support. :-(

OT--Israeli raid in Syria
 

So let them wage a guerilla war against Israeli SOLDIERS. (as opposed to
school kids)
I have no problem with that.

-W

"Gary Warner" wrote in message
...

I agree with all that below.

You seem to think Israel is right in it's actions - can
you tell me why? Don't the Palestinian's have a right
to fight to protect their land?



"Clams Canino" wrote in message
news:52mgb.511201$cF.181837@rwcrnsc53...
War mongering? All sides are slinging the word "terrorism" around too
loosely ever since 9/11.

I consider it terrorism to *deliberatly* target civilians in order to
scare
a population into doing or not doing something. Guerilla warfare isn't
terrorism. Blowing up civilian busses is. There's a difference between
tageting civilians and "collateral damage".

I don't even see the Sept 11 *Pentagon* attack as "pure terrorism".
The Pentagon *is* a legitimate military target and if you work there,
you
are part of the militarty structure. However the innocent people in the
plane that hit the Pentagon are such high "collateral damage" as to be
able
to call it terrorism in light of the rest of the 9/11 attacks. If that
plane was empty - I'd label the Pentagon strike as a "sucker punch".

-W

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news:Jcjgb.272

Really? It's not? What would Canada call it if NY State decided
Plattsburgh
needed to expand north into Quebec for maybe 8 or 30 or 100 miles?

OT--Israeli raid in Syria
 

Gary Warner wrote:

I agree with all that below.

You seem to think Israel is right in it's actions - can
you tell me why? Don't the Palestinian's have a right
to fight to protect their land?



The land of the so-called Palestinians actually is in Jordan. The
ancestors of those who call themselves Palestinians left Israel in 1948
to help their Arab brothers slaughter the Jews.

OT--Israeli raid in Syria
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gary Warner wrote:

I agree with all that below.

You seem to think Israel is right in it's actions - can
you tell me why? Don't the Palestinian's have a right
to fight to protect their land?



The land of the so-called Palestinians actually is in Jordan. The
ancestors of those who call themselves Palestinians left Israel in 1948
to help their Arab brothers slaughter the Jews.


And what history book did you read that one in?

Most Palestinians fled after the mass executions of anyone not a Jew by the
fledging Israelis army and its irregulars - Stern Gang etc.. The number of
Jews in Palestine was minute pre 1939, only when the mass immigration after
WW2 did the numbers rise.

The big problem for the Israelis is that they carved out a country using
terrorism against the Brits and Palestinians - the freedom fighting
Palestinians are only trying to win back their country from a rogue state.

Or are they just a bunch of sub humans who dont deserve national self
determination like the Jews?

OT--Israeli raid in Syria
 

Roger Martin wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gary Warner wrote:

I agree with all that below.

You seem to think Israel is right in it's actions - can
you tell me why? Don't the Palestinian's have a right
to fight to protect their land?



The land of the so-called Palestinians actually is in Jordan. The
ancestors of those who call themselves Palestinians left Israel in 1948
to help their Arab brothers slaughter the Jews.


And what history book did you read that one in?


About 20 of them.


Most Palestinians fled after the mass executions of anyone not a Jew by the
fledging Israelis army and its irregulars - Stern Gang etc.. The number of
Jews in Palestine was minute pre 1939, only when the mass immigration after
WW2 did the numbers rise.

It was substantial in 1939 and it was more substantial as many of the
survivors of the Aryans arrived after WW II.




The big problem for the Israelis is that they carved out a country using
terrorism against the Brits and Palestinians - the freedom fighting
Palestinians are only trying to win back their country from a rogue state.

Uh-huh.





Or are they just a bunch of sub humans who dont deserve national self
determination like the Jews?


The Jews, eh? Why not just come out and say it, fella. Don't use the
so-called Palestinians as your surrogates.

OT--Israeli raid in Syria
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Roger Martin wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gary Warner wrote:

I agree with all that below.

You seem to think Israel is right in it's actions - can
you tell me why? Don't the Palestinian's have a right
to fight to protect their land?



The land of the so-called Palestinians actually is in Jordan. The
ancestors of those who call themselves Palestinians left Israel in 1948
to help their Arab brothers slaughter the Jews.


And what history book did you read that one in?


About 20 of them.


Most Palestinians fled after the mass executions of anyone not a Jew by
the
fledging Israelis army and its irregulars - Stern Gang etc.. The number
of
Jews in Palestine was minute pre 1939, only when the mass immigration
after
WW2 did the numbers rise.

http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhisto...tish%20Mandate

Written by an Israelis.


It was substantial in 1939 and it was more substantial as many of the
survivors of the Aryans arrived after WW II.



http://www.mideastweb.org/palpop.htm

Notice that the population figures from the various census have very large
numbers of Arabs/Palestinians and rapidly increasing numbers of Jews.

An analogy of that period would be allowing mass migration from Mexico
into California and then only allowing Roman Catholics to vote in elections
after they've chased off all of the non Roman Catholics.



The big problem for the Israelis is that they carved out a country using
terrorism against the Brits and Palestinians - the freedom fighting
Palestinians are only trying to win back their country from a rogue
state.

Uh-huh.


http://www.ariga.com/peacewatch/dy/

Has a Zionist's history of Deir Yassin - 100 non combatants killed.





Or are they just a bunch of sub humans who dont deserve national self
determination like the Jews?


The Jews, eh? Why not just come out and say it, fella. Don't use the
so-called Palestinians as your surrogates.


Why does a pro Palestinian viewpoint make me an anti Semite?
I was anti apartheid as well, and any thinking person would have
to agree that Israel practices a form of religious apartheid on non
Jews. I'm not sure that I can think of any other so called democratic
state which practices such blatant discrimination based solely on
religious belief (plenty of African states though).

OT--Israeli raid in Syria
 

"Gary Warner" wrote:

You mean that their continually grabbing land that isn't theirs - even
while supposedly "negotiating" in good faith isn't showing teeth?

Israel has lots more money, militarty, and resources. They negotiate
but all the while continue to make land grabs. Then they wonder why
terrorists attack them. Hmmmm....isn't building walls annexing people
a kind of terrorism??



"NOYB" wrote:
No.

NOYB, I disagree with your curt and unsophisticated answer.

TERRORISM (From the American Heritage Dictionary):
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an
organized group against people or property with the intention of
intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or
political reasons.


Israel building settlements and fencing in land that is not theirs qualifies
as follows:

Unlawful?
Yes, by international standards (law) much of the land annexed by Israel is
not
theirs. Israel is in violation of UN resolutions on this subject. (I
believe - could be wrong)

Force?
Yep, they are taking land by force.

Intention of Intimidating or Coercing?
While it's hard to proove what someone's intent is, I believe the Israeli
leadership wants
to intimidate the Palestinians into just "accepting" that Israel WILL have
this land.

TERRORISM does not have to be killing of people or killing of civilians,
though Israel does that too.

OT--Israeli raid in Syria
 

"Gary Warner" wrote in message
...
"Gary Warner" wrote:

You mean that their continually grabbing land that isn't theirs - even
while supposedly "negotiating" in good faith isn't showing teeth?

Israel has lots more money, militarty, and resources. They negotiate
but all the while continue to make land grabs. Then they wonder why
terrorists attack them. Hmmmm....isn't building walls annexing people
a kind of terrorism??



"NOYB" wrote:
No.

NOYB, I disagree with your curt and unsophisticated answer.

TERRORISM (From the American Heritage Dictionary):
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an
organized group against people or property with the intention of
intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological
or
political reasons.


Israel building settlements and fencing in land that is not theirs
qualifies
as follows:

Unlawful?
Yes, by international standards (law) much of the land annexed by Israel
is
not
theirs. Israel is in violation of UN resolutions on this subject. (I
believe - could be wrong)

Force?
Yep, they are taking land by force.

Intention of Intimidating or Coercing?
While it's hard to proove what someone's intent is, I believe the Israeli
leadership wants
to intimidate the Palestinians into just "accepting" that Israel WILL have
this land.

TERRORISM does not have to be killing of people or killing of civilians,
though Israel does that too.

It's not terrorism. Imperialism...maybe. But, not terrorism.

Check the definition of Imperialism:

"The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or
by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations.
"

Now isn't that a better definition? And it doesn't need any spin to make it
"fit"...