Israel has never lost a conventional war, or won a guerilla war

[Saint Marcus]

And Israel is a democracy, the Palestinian Authority is an autocratic regime.

You support Franco, who also was a dictator. So don't start this democracy hypocracy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Just for speculations sake, what do you think the US response would be if Mexico had purposefully killed or injured that many of its civilians in that same period of time and showed absolutely no signs of slowing down?

Like I said in the other thread... Vietnam... example of public opinion turning when a guerrila war took full hold. And a guerilla war this will be, and it'll be worse than Lebanon ever was, and Israelis couldn't deal with that.

[Sirotnikov]

Like I said in the other thread... Vietnam... example of public opinion turning when a guerrila war took full hold. And a guerilla war this will be, and it'll be worse than Lebanon ever was, and Israelis couldn't deal with that.

I think Israel will do everything possible to avoid it from becoming a "Lebanon".

Infact, that is what many security advisors suggest - that our hastened unilateral withdrawal (read: escape) from Lebanon, has give Arafat the idea that he could make Intifada 2.

Well, this time, it has to be different.

Defensive = bad.

We should constalty be on the move, attacking terrorist hideouts, making weekly incursions - and then withdrawing.

Staying there, would be a bad choise, since then we're sitting tanks

[Imran Siddiqui]

But, Siro, obviously Sharon WANTS to stay there... seeing as he's been annexing West Bank land like crazy since 2000.

[Eli]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
But, Siro, obviously Sharon WANTS to stay there... seeing as he's been annexing West Bank land like crazy since 2000.

an·nex Pronunciation Key (-nks, nks)
tr.v. an·nexed, an·nex·ing, an·nex·es
1. To append or attach, especially to a larger or more significant thing.
2. To incorporate (territory) into an existing political unit such as a country, state, county, or city.
3. To add or attach, as an attribute, condition, or consequence.

[Imran Siddiqui]

What is your point Eli? According to defintion 1 & 3, Sharon HAS been annexing land like crazy... even if it isn't fully incorporated into Israel, you know it will be.

[Eli]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
What is your point Eli? According to defintion 1 & 3, Sharon HAS been annexing land like crazy... even if it isn't fully incorporated into Israel, you know it will be.

Nothing was "added" to Israel. Sharon, and every other representative of the Israeli goverment said clearly that Israel is not interested in staying in those places.

As for the future, I can only hope you're right.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Um... hello... since 2000 about 25% of the West Bank has been formally annexed by Israel!!

[Eli]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Um... hello... since 2000 about 25% of the West Bank has been formally annexed by Israel!!

Umm... Source?

[Imran Siddiqui]

http://mondediplo.com/maps/mappingtheconflict200109

As you can see since what was Proposed in 2000 at Camp David, significant areas have been annexed.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Like I said in the other thread... Vietnam... example of public opinion turning when a guerrila war took full hold.

Typical Palestinian propaganda. Always dodging questions with pointed ends.

1) They weren't in a guerrila war during the time of those stats.
2) Arafat has continually broken any and all negotiated ceasefires and makes no attempts to reign in the activities of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc. despite having the force needed to do so.

[Imran Siddiqui]

1) They weren't in a guerrila war during the time of those stats.

There will be... and it basically is.

2) Arafat has continually broken any and all negotiated ceasefires and makes no attempts to reign in the activities of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc. despite having the force needed to do so.

This is an incredibly laughable statement. Ok, so since Dino says Arafat has the force, he must

Typical Israeli propaganda .

[DinoDoc]

You are still ignoring the question I asked, Imran. What would be the American reaction if Mexico killed or injured 56584 civilians in an attempt to regain the territory they lost to us in the Mexican-American War?

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
There will be... and it basically is.

Guerrilas are the exact opposite of terrorists, Imran. Guerrilas choose to put themselves against combatants, terrorists on the other hand choose to target weak and defenseless civilians: old men, women, children--anyone in fact except soldiers--if they can avoid it.

This is an incredibly laughable statement. Ok, so since Dino says Arafat has the force, he must

You have too choices, Imran. You can either admitt that an army consisting of around 30,000 men, far in excess of the forces commanded of any other militant faction, can at least make a concerted effort to stop the attacks upon civilians or you can just say that it would be impossible for it to do just that and that Arafat is impotent to deliver on any peace deal.

[Imran Siddiqui]

What would be the American reaction if Mexico killed or injured 56584 civilians in an attempt to regain the territory they lost to us in the Mexican-American War?

We'd try to fight back and annilate them... and if it got really bad withdraw... there was a reason we didn't listen to the people who said 'All Mexico' because of the guerrila and terrorist attacks that would come from it... so we took mostly uninhabited areas (by Mexicans)

Guerrilas are the exact opposite of terrorists, Imran. Guerrilas choose to put themselves against combatants, terrorists on the other hand choose to target weak and defenseless civilians: old men, women, children--anyone in fact except soldiers--if they can avoid it.

I don't understand how you can make such a blanket statement. Guerrilas and terrorists are cut from the same cloth, and terrorists don't mind killing soldiers, in fact, many Israeli soldiers have been knocked off at checkpoints.

You have too choices, Imran. You can either admitt that an army consisting of around 30,000 men, far in excess of the forces commanded of any other militant faction, can at least make a concerted effort to stop the attacks upon civilians or you can just say that it would be impossible for it to do just that and that Arafat is impotent to deliver on any peace deal.

It is impossible to stop militant factions.... but you have to crawl before you walk and you have to have a fair peace, in order to take some of the thunder away from the militants and then deal with them.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
We'd try to fight back and annilate them...

Now, we are starting to get somewhere. Now, let's look at the reactions of some of the states currently dealing with seperatists violence. How does the Isreali reaction to it compare to that of Russia, a State critical of Isreal's recent actions, reaction to its problems in Chechnya? We could even see how it compares against the actions of another critic, China, in dealing with thier own problems with Islamists.

I don't understand how you can make such a blanket statement.

Because it is true.

Guerrilas and terrorists are cut from the same cloth, and terrorists don't mind killing soldiers, in fact, many Israeli soldiers have been knocked off at checkpoints.

Guerrilas are not terrorists. They are irregular soldiers who wage war on regular military forces, secret police agencies, and governmental counter-insurgency police units. Guerrilas do not prefer civilian targets. They do not conciously select civilian victims.

I'll give a cookie to the first person who can tell me where that comes from.

but you have to crawl before you walk

I agree wholeheartedly. He could start by reigning in those that report directly to him: Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, etc.

BTW, no one is asking for him to completely stop the terrorists. Only that he make a genuine effort to try. Something which he has never done at any step of the peace process.

[Imran Siddiqui]

How does the Isreali reaction to it compare to that of Russia, a State critical of Isreal's recent actions, reaction to its problems in Chechnya? We could even see how it compares against the actions of another critic, China, in dealing with thier own problems with Islamists.

And we've condemned both for it... harshly. But not Israel.

Because it is true.

No it isn't. In Nicaragua, our guerrilas was to the Communists, terrorists. They are very similar.

Only that he make a genuine effort to try. Something which he has never done at any step of the peace process.

Nothing will ever be good enough. Israel will never be happy with any attempts.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
http://mondediplo.com/maps/mappingtheconflict200109

As you can see since what was Proposed in 2000 at Camp David, significant areas have been annexed.

Err... I don't know who drew your map bud, but this is quite different from all the maps I've seen...

You should visit a more reliable source.

www.mideastweb.org or something

(let's hope I gave him the correct link. i have dozens of those. I wouldn't want him to discover my secret palestinian porn stash. )

Nothing will ever be good enough. Israel will never be happy with any attempts.

Not true.

Israel will be happy by some serious attempts.

But when he arrests people that are small fish, and on the TV his spokesmen say that it's a sherade for the world, what should i think?

[Imran Siddiqui]

You should visit a more reliable source.

Than Le Monde?

[Sirotnikov]

Yes!

Never trust a frenchman!

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus


You support Franco, who also was a dictator. So don't start this democracy hypocracy.

And this comes from a guy who support Stalin.

[Sirotnikov]

****.

That site hasn't the updated map.

anyway, it's more than this.

If you go to look at the map @ mideastweb.org, you'll see that it's the same map, but it is noted "this is not the updated map, israel added 10% more to that".

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
And we've condemned both for it... harshly. But not Israel.

No, we haven't. The issue doesn't even rate as having any import.

No it isn't. In Nicaragua, our guerrilas was to the Communists, terrorists. They are very similar.

I'm refering to what people are, not what you choose to call them. Would you try giving me an objective reason why terrorists can reasonablly called guerrilas?

Nothing will ever be good enough. Israel will never be happy with any attempts.

Well, he might actually try shutting down his revolving door of a correctional system and see what happens.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, we haven't. The issue doesn't even rate as having any import.

Ask Russia what they thought about the rebukes we've given them... same with China.

I'm refering to what people are, not what you choose to call them. Would you try giving me an objective reason why terrorists can reasonablly called guerrilas?

Because they engage in similar activities. Guerrilas easily become terrorists, and have in the past. It is only a hop, skip, and a jump from attacking soldiers using guerilla tactics to attacking the civilians that back the enemy soliders.

Well, he might actually try shutting down his revolving door of a correctional system and see what happens.

Does anyone know how much jail space there is in Palestine? That, and politics makes him have to release a few after a short while.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Ask Russia what they thought about the rebukes we've given them... same with China.

Ask them when was the last time we gave them a "stern" rebuke.

Because they engage in similar activities.

Civilians are not part and parcel of a guerilla's strategy. They do not actively seek to kill civilians. More often than not, they do not hide behind citizens hoping that the prospect of more innocent deaths will help them escape retribution.

Guerrilas easily become terrorists, and have in the past. It is only a hop, skip, and a jump from attacking soldiers using guerilla tactics to attacking the civilians that back the enemy soliders.

So your objection to saying that guerillas are different from terrorists is that they (guerillas) can become terrorists? Aren't you basically conceeding that there is a difference between the too forms of warfare?

Does anyone know how much jail space there is in Palestine?

If you don't have the space to hold them, execute them. It isn't like he hasn't been shy about that for lesser offenses.

That, and politics makes him have to release a few after a short while.

Which goes to the heart of why he is apparently impotent to offer Isreal any security guarantees in exchange from withdrawing from the Occupied Territories.

[Saint Marcus]

And this comes from a guy who support Stalin.

At least I don't change my opinions every single week.

First you're all pro-Franco, in such an extend that everyone here on the forum flamed you for it. Then you changed and now your sig says that democracy is great. New week, new flavor.

Giancarlo: "Franco is my hero, I love Franco!"
Rest of OT: "shut up fascist"
Giancarlo: "Oh, ok. Democracy is great, down with dictatorships!"

And me supporting Stalin? Only when having to chose between him and Hitler. Though I do believe the best governement would be a benevolent dictator. Sadly, there aren't many of those around.

[Giancarlo]

Listen up: I don't change my opinions every week. But have to moderate my views a bit... Franco did save Spain from socialist tyranny and economic meltdown, but I support the Partido Popular more (pp.es) which is democratically elected and is the current ruling party in Spain.

Now back to Israel...

[Saint Marcus]

But have to moderate my views a bit

again?

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by paiktis22


Paiktis:

Please either keep to the topic of the thread, or start your own.

LOTM

[Bereta_Eder]

Hey I was here yesterday. Since then nothing!

But respecting your wish.

Conventional wars are easier to win assuming you have superiority in weapons and a bunch of good generals.

Gorilla wars are harder to win.
There, on topic

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
http://mondediplo.com/maps/mappingtheconflict200109

As you can see since what was Proposed in 2000 at Camp David, significant areas have been annexed.

Thank you for your map, imram. It confirms that the PA was offered 95% of the territories at Camp David, including land where many settlements exist. Most of the annexations are in areas immediately adjacent to (a rifle shot from?) heavily populated areas in metro Jerusalem and metro Tel Aviv, in pre-67 Israel. In addition, as your map does not make clear, there was discussion of compensating the Palestinians with land from pre-67 Israel. It is clear why President Clinton was so angered at the PA reaction to Camp David.

So, Imram, now that Dubya has found Arafat just as excriatingly frustrating to work with as Clinton did, at least we have bi-partisan consensus

LOTM