SHOCKING NEWS!!!

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Actually there are reports that Israel turned down such a deal with Syria.
No clue really on such deals with Palestine as I dont care.
Just read about the Syrian thing on some site today.

Even if such an offer was made, how do you reconcile it with support for Hezbollah?

Reminds me of Araft: talk of peace for the dummies in the West, and then call for Jihad back at home. Heck, we don't even need to go so far back -- we can find the same double-speak made by Hamas.

 

[Aimster]

The deal was that they end their support with Hezbollah/Iran along with other things.

Syria pressed for the matter to go to the higher ups and Israel said no so the discussions were ended.

go on google/news and type syria israel. youll get the articles

 

[Aisengard]

If the Syria thing involves giving up the Golan Heights, then Israel was completely correct in rejecting that deal.

The heights are a perfect staging ground for more rockets. The likes of Hezbollah and Hamas have proven that the Arab world is not ready for the responsibility of owning militarily strategic locations without blowing their wad as soon as they get them. See: Gaza Strip.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Actually there are reports that Israel turned down such a deal with Syria.
No clue really on such deals with Palestine as I dont care.
Just read about the Syrian thing on some site today.

Now would you trust Syria to uphold any bargain?

They have not shown the willingness to live in peace with Israel.
Israel's other neighbors have, Syria has not.

 

[Jadow]

I think Israel should start shooting missiles at Palestinian HQ and after each one say "Recogize us yet?" After enough missiles, they'll get recognized.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Aimster
Actually there are reports that Israel turned down such a deal with Syria.
No clue really on such deals with Palestine as I dont care.
Just read about the Syrian thing on some site today.

Now would you trust Syria to uphold any bargain?

They have not shown the willingness to live in peace with Israel.
Israel's other neighbors have, Syria has not.

Because Israel occupies territory they claim is theirs.

Israel has no claim to that territory either way.

Everyone else made peace because Israel gave back land. Time to do the same with Syria.

So long as Israel controlss occupied territory, it can be said that Israel is the one who doesnt want to give peace to Syria. Just give that land back already, it serves no damn purpose at all other than to annoy Syria's military.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Aimster
So long as Israel controls occupied territory, it can be said that Israel is the one who doesnt want to give peace to Syria. Just give that land back already, it serves no damn purpose at all other than to annoy Syria's military.

It's a valuable source of water for Israel. It's also extremely strategically valuable. Until it was seized in '63, it was used a a missile launching site that because of it's elevation allowed the Syrians to launch missiles deep into Israel. Given that Syria has a similar structure and attitude about promises that NK has I really don't blame Israel for refusing. After all, Syria not only harbors the leaders of, but actively supports (via cash and weapons), Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah. The three largest terrorist groups Israel faces in the Palestinian territories.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Because Israel occupies territory they claim is theirs.

Israel has no claim to that territory either way.

Everyone else made peace because Israel gave back land. Time to do the same with Syria.

You haven't answered the question of why would you trust Syria.

An who is everybody else that made peace for land? The only country is Egypt, and even they are doing a half assed job controlling tiny bit of border, being unable to stop all the tunneling into Gaza.

So long as Israel controlss occupied territory, it can be said that Israel is the one who doesnt want to give peace to Syria. Just give that land back already, it serves no damn purpose at all other than to annoy Syria's military.

Besides what palehorse74 mention, I suggest you read some history before making clueless remarks.

You can twist it any way you want, but after three wars Israel is very well within its right to keep the territory. Someone has made a comment in the forums that nailed it, stating that if the agressor doesn't risk losing any land, then why would they stop with their agression?

What can be said more accurately is that while Syria support the terrorists organizations Hezbollah and Hamas (their almighty leader is in Syria), then Syria is the one who doesn't want peace.

 

[Aimster]

sorry but there is no justification for israel occupying territory that isnt theirs.
especially when Syria wants peace with Israel.

With that kind of thinking Egypt and Israel would be enemies now.

Syria wanted peace and promised to disarm support to hezbollah and distance itself from Iran (the deal had a buffer zone in which Israel would be allowed to have military zones as assurance). Israel rejected this plan. Meaning Israel cannot blame Syria for squat in the future since they wanted peace. This was the perfect plan for everyone, but the higher ups didn't want to go ahead with it.

Israel has the military capabilities to take back the land and Syria cannot do squat. Dont make excuses for Israel. That's like the U.S occupying Iraq forever because Al Qaeda lives inside Iraq. We wwill be protecting our isecurity at the same time benefiting from their oil.

Israel's fanboys never admit Israel does anything wrong. Israel is the perfect country.!!

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Aimster
sorry but there is no justification for israel occupying territory that isnt theirs.
especially when Syria wants peace with Israel.
...
Israel's fanboys never admit Israel does anything wrong. Israel is the perfect country.!!

I'm sorry -- Mr. Omniscient -- but why don't you tell us what should be the repercussions for hostilities and eventually war?
While you're at it, why don't you tell us what Israel did wrong by taking over the Golan Heights in order to stop the Syrians from firing at random.

I await your response, and I hope you won't do your vanishing act again, like you did with the whole bit about the airstrikes on Beirut.

EDIT: Here you go, this should shut you up like last time:

From 1948-67, when Syria controlled the Golan Heights, it used the area as a military stronghold from which its troops randomly sniped at Israeli civilians in the Huleh Valley below, forcing children living on kibbutzim to sleep in bomb shelters. In addition, many roads in northern Israel could be crossed only after probing by mine-detection vehicles. In late 1966, a youth was blown to pieces by a mine while playing football near the Lebanon border. In some cases, attacks were carried out by Yasir Arafat's Fatah, which Syria allowed to operate from its territory.

 

[Aimster]

I dont care what the reason was in 1967. I never said it was wrong to take the area. I said it was wrong not to accept peace if it benefits everyone.

What year is it currently?
Syria wants peace. Give them back the land and you got peace. .. or continue to not trust Syria and be at war with them.
Next time Syria does something to piss of Israel dont cry terrorist or some other BS.

Someone posted that Israel was never given the opportunity to give back any land and I posted how that was not the case. You jump in and start defending Israel like you are a paid PR person for the state of Israel.

Read the agreement between Israel-Syria. It benefited everyone. Israel's leaders F'd up.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Aimster
sorry but there is no justification for israel occupying territory that isnt theirs.
especially when Syria wants peace with Israel.

With that kind of thinking Egypt and Israel would be enemies now.

Syria wanted peace and promised to disarm support to hezbollah and distance itself from Iran (the deal had a buffer zone in which Israel would be allowed to have military zones as assurance). Israel rejected this plan. Meaning Israel cannot blame Syria for squat in the future since they wanted peace. This was the perfect plan for everyone, but the higher ups didn't want to go ahead with it.

Israel has the military capabilities to take back the land and Syria cannot do squat. Dont make excuses for Israel. That's like the U.S occupying Iraq forever because Al Qaeda lives inside Iraq. We wwill be protecting our isecurity at the same time benefiting from their oil.

Israel's fanboys never admit Israel does anything wrong. Israel is the perfect country.!!

Aimster
For 20 years Syria controlled Golan and harrassed Israel. Even though they lost 2 wars and sued for peace. This was demonstrating that they wanted to be good neighbors?

They lost the Golan in the '67 war. You do not see Israel launching weapons into Syria from it. Even in the '73 war, Israel did not use the Golan as an attack point against Syria.

Now Syria wants that peice of land back for "peace". They harbor the Hezbollah and Hamas leadership, feed weapons from Iran into Lebanon.

When Jordan wanted peace, they kicked out the Palestinians that were causing trouble. And Israel provided Jordan with a peace treaty and trade.

Let Syria show that they want peace by removing the support of Israel's enemies.
Otherwise they are not interested in peace, but status within the Arab world. At present, they are the only Arab/Muslim country that is "standing up" to Israel from the original gang.

Egypt is only half heartedly trying to help maintain the peace. There is much smuggling that is going on via their territory in Gaza. They could crack down hard if they chose to.

 

[Aimster]

Key points of the secret pact

* An agreement of principles will be signed by the two countries, and following the fulfilment of all commitments, a peace agreement will be signed.

* Israel will withdraw from the Golan Heights to the lines of 4 June 1967. The timetable for the withdrawal remains open: Syria demanded the pullout be carried out over a five-year period, while Israel asked for the withdrawal to be spread out over 15 years. At the buffer zone, along Lake Kinneret, a park will be set up for joint use by Israelis and Syrians. The park will cover a significant portion of the Golan Heights.

* Israel will retain control over the use of the waters of the Jordan river and Lake Kinneret.

* The border area will be demilitarised along a 1:4 ratio (in terms of territory) in Israel's favour.

* Syria will also agree to end its support for Hizbollah and Hamas and will distance itself from Iran.

Who would monitor the agreement?
U.S. Bush administration said they are not going to have any kind of talks with Syria.
Bush failed at foreign policy yet again.

There was to be a post controlled by U.S/UN to make sure that the agreement was met.
Hezbollah was to turn into a political party and not a military party.

Sounds like a perfect deal to me.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Key points of the secret pact

* An agreement of principles will be signed by the two countries, and following the fulfilment of all commitments, a peace agreement will be signed.

* Israel will withdraw from the Golan Heights to the lines of 4 June 1967. The timetable for the withdrawal remains open: Syria demanded the pullout be carried out over a five-year period, while Israel asked for the withdrawal to be spread out over 15 years. At the buffer zone, along Lake Kinneret, a park will be set up for joint use by Israelis and Syrians. The park will cover a significant portion of the Golan Heights.

* Israel will retain control over the use of the waters of the Jordan river and Lake Kinneret.

* The border area will be demilitarised along a 1:4 ratio (in terms of territory) in Israel's favour.

* Syria will also agree to end its support for Hizbollah and Hamas and will distance itself from Iran.

Who would monitor the agreement?
U.S. Bush administration said they are not going to have any kind of talks with Syria.
Bush failed at foreign policy yet again.

There was to be a post controlled by U.S/UN to make sure that the agreement was met.
Hezbollah was to turn into a political party and not a military party.

Sounds like a perfect deal to me.

You would wonder that if Syria would choose to address that last point, then they couild move forward fairly easily. Given that Syria was a participant in the '73 conflict; you would wonder what their word means.

How difficult would it be for Syria to address the last issue. They at that point are giving up nothing strategic to Israel and might be showing that they are sincere, vs their actions for the previous 60 years which have been anything but openly hostile.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Aimster
I dont care what the reason was in 1967. I never said it was wrong to take the area. I said it was wrong not to accept peace if it benefits everyone.

Not everybody are as credulous as your are.

Ever heard of the phrase "don't negotiate with terrorists"? Why should Israel negotiate with them while they are providing material support and a safe haven for the likes of Hezbollah & Hamas?

You jump in and start defending Israel like you are a paid PR person for the state of Israel.

Easy there, you're starting to sound like Jhhnn; soon you'll be talking about zionist conspiracies. If you can't handle my criticism of your comments, then don't post; attempting to dismiss my remarks as "paid defense" doesn't really detract from their validity -- it only shows that you have nothing to say.

And by the way, it would be nice to get paid for posting on the forum.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
To slackware---who sez---You are not going to win this debate, if you noticed, nown of your previous compadres are willing to go this far with you, nor will any of them, it's a disease, the disease is yours, i have the cure.

What cure do you have?---right now its an Israeli 30 to 1 kill ratio---what happens when it becomes 25 to 1---or 20 to 1---Israel has now pissed off the Arabs and they can still sustain a 30 to 1 kill ratio and win. When will jerks like you learn that co-operation and negotiation---rather than piggish politics is the best way?

Tell that to Chamberlain in at his grave and see if he agrees with you now.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: dna
During the last decade, the PA had a several years of being left in charge, while showered with billions of dollars in financial aid.

All the good will and money was squandered.

Do you think they'll do better this time around? Do you think that they have worthy leaders now?

How much money was in Arafats coffers when he kicked the bucket? I heard over 1 billion. Guess we know where the money went(big surprise).

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Lemon law
To slackware---who sez---You are not going to win this debate, if you noticed, nown of your previous compadres are willing to go this far with you, nor will any of them, it's a disease, the disease is yours, i have the cure.

What cure do you have?---right now its an Israeli 30 to 1 kill ratio---what happens when it becomes 25 to 1---or 20 to 1---Israel has now pissed off the Arabs and they can still sustain a 30 to 1 kill ratio and win. When will jerks like you learn that co-operation and negotiation---rather than piggish politics is the best way?

Tell that to Chamberlain in at his grave and see if he agrees with you now.

You can tell it to Stalin and the 20 million dead Russians after Hitler invaded despite their 'agreement'

Middle East Cease Fire:
When Israel agrees to stop blowing the hell out of terrorist groups, but the terrorists can launch all the rockets they want at Israel.

 

[ProfJohn]

What purpose of Syria does allowing Hezbollah, Hamas etc to have their leaders in Syria? What is Syria gaining from this relationship?
What does Syria gain from allowing Iran to channel arms through Syria to Hezbollah?

If Syria truly wanted peace they would stop supporting and harboring terrorist groups.
Once they stop helping terrorist groups then they can move forward with peace talks.

 

[Lemon law]

The specter of Hitler is always dredged up to justify why one should have a no appeasement policy---and also require the other side to make the concession.
But how many cases that have led to peace did not start that way---quite a few by the way---look at S. Africa for example---or even Vietnam.---at some point
in time some bold plan that by-passed this normal cycle of tit-for tat violence has been proposed and accepted by both sides---or imposed from without.

But somehow this thread has spasmodically lurched onto the subject of the Golan Heights. In any conventional war--the motto is always seize the high ground. Because that unmutable force of gravity gives the occupying side's weapons that extra range---and reduces the range of the guns of the opposing side who are on the low ground and looking up.

BUT IN CASE NO ONE NOTICED----2006 ADDED A NEW JOKER IN THE DECK---that throws that CONVENTIONAL WISDOM into a cocked hat. And that was various groups like Hezbollah obtaining and deploying in large numbers---ROCKETS OF MUCH LONGER RANGE. So Israel's occupation of the Golan Heights is suddenly less relevant.---because high ground lowground---it does not matter and can come from anywhere.

Because now ANY group opposed to Israel can stand far away and peg rockets into Israel from mobile launch sites.---right now---far away is not all that far---pretty soon the range will increase---the guidance systems will get better----and for not all that much money----can be made readily available from very angry Arab neighbors flush with oil money---that new joker in the deck now punches a giant hole in the myth of Israeli invulnerability.

So Israel now faces two stark choices for the coming years.

1. Grab a bigger and bigger buffer zone.---and we all saw how well that went in Lebanon late last summer. And even if they have the military might--there is a limit to how much so few can occupy---and hold.---and a limit to how much indiscriminate civilian retaliation they can engage in without becoming totally reviled in the world community.

2. Get Israel to the peace table---and find common cause with their Arab neighbors.---rachet the tensions down---Israel's negotiating position will get worse over time.

Please understand I don't really have a dog in the fight---other than world peace--its just a comment about current trend lines---and not an I am rooting for one side or the other.

But if your passion and favoritism over rules your brain----you still better pick choice one or choice two. Because there are no other choices available.

Israel used to have the option of hiding behind a superior military and doing nothing to settle things--------------BUT THAT OPTION NO LONGER EXISTS UNLESS ISRAEL IS WILLING TO
ENDURE MORE MISSILE ATTACKS.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The specter of Hitler is always dredged up to justify why one should have a no appeasement policy---and also require the other side to make the concession.
But how many cases that have led to peace did not start that way---quite a few by the way---look at S. Africa for example---or even Vietnam.---at some point
in time some bold plan that by-passed this normal cycle of tit-for tat violence has been proposed and accepted by both sides---or imposed from without.

But somehow this thread has spasmodically lurched onto the subject of the Golan Heights. In any conventional war--the motto is always seize the high ground. Because that unmutable force of gravity gives the occupying side's weapons that extra range---and reduces the range of the guns of the opposing side who are on the low ground and looking up.

BUT IN CASE NO ONE NOTICED----2006 ADDED A NEW JOKER IN THE DECK---that throws that CONVENTIONAL WISDOM into a cocked hat. And that was various groups like Hezbollah obtaining and deploying in large numbers---ROCKETS OF MUCH LONGER RANGE. So Israel's occupation of the Golan Heights is suddenly less relevant.---because high ground lowground---it does not matter and can come from anywhere.

Because now ANY group opposed to Israel can stand far away and peg rockets into Israel from mobile launch sites.---right now---far away is not all that far---pretty soon the range will increase---the guidance systems will get better----and for not all that much money----can be made readily available from very angry Arab neighbors flush with oil money---that new joker in the deck now punches a giant hole in the myth of Israeli invulnerability.

So Israel now faces two stark choices for the coming years.

1. Grab a bigger and bigger buffer zone.---and we all saw how well that went in Lebanon late last summer. And even if they have the military might--there is a limit to how much so few can occupy---and hold.---and a limit to how much indiscriminate civilian retaliation they can engage in without becoming totally reviled in the world community.

2. Get Israel to the peace table---and find common cause with their Arab neighbors.---rachet the tensions down---Israel's negotiating position will get worse over time.

Please understand I don't really have a dog in the fight---other than world peace--its just a comment about current trend lines---and not an I am rooting for one side or the other.

But if your passion and favoritism over rules your brain----you still better pick choice one or choice two. Because there are no other choices available.

Israel used to have the option of hiding behind a superior military and doing nothing to settle things--------------BUT THAT OPTION NO LONGER EXISTS UNLESS ISRAEL IS WILLING TO
ENDURE MORE MISSILE ATTACKS.

As usual you are delussional.......
You really have no clue what Israel could have donew had they not been fighting a limited military engagement......

You say get both parties or all parties to the negoiating table!!?!!

One question.....What about those who will never ever never ever recognize Israel??
What do you negfotiate with them??? The demise of Isarael?? In exchange for what "PEACE"???

It`s been proven time and again Israel is willing to negotiate. But with whom? Nobody on the otherside is at all serious about negotiating with Israel....

ProfJohn had it right previously -- You do understand the whole ?right of return? is an attempt to flood Israel with Arabs in attempt to essentially take over the country from within? We are talking about people who left Israel in 1948 and 1967, 40 years ago.
BTW: There is much debate as to whether these people were forced to leave or left on their own. There is a lot of evidence that they left willingly before the war of 1948 essentially in order to get out of the way of the fighting. They believed that they could leave, the Arabs would start the war and take over all of Israel and then they would just return to their homes. Didn?t quite work out that way and now their kids and grandkids want to return?

BTW: No basis for negotiation exists as long as Hamas refuses to acknowledge the right of Israel to exist. What is Israel suppose to negotiate? The manner in which Hamas will 'push them into the sea'?

Then dna also had is correct -- During the last decade, the PA had a several years of being left in charge, while showered with billions of dollars in financial aid.

All the good will and money was squandered.

Do you think they'll do better this time around? Do you think that they have worthy leaders now?

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Slackware

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Slackware---you are still clueless---when you say--If he state next to you started to hip rockets onto your families state of residence you wouldn't have cared, oh no.

Believe it or not I care---I care deeply---but for every innocent civilian Hezbollah killed--Israel killed at least 30---such is the current state of tit for tat violence---the terrorists do not care
and neither does Israel----------I do not see this as a religious issue---I see it as mans infinite ability to act like pigs---and to engage in might makes right politics.---and man's infinite ability to have zero compassion to those they currently oppress.

*sigh* get this, you have not even been near the border or eiher country, i am a member of the IDF, i am right you are wrong.

Buy a ****** xbox instead of sitting here making a complete ass out of yourselft.

I find that seriously hard to believe......My son has been in the IDF for quite a while now....maybe you and him can get together and swap stories....lolol
Shalom aleichem - ??????? ????????

 

[Lemon law]

Thank you JEDIYoda for reciting all the lines for not getting Israel to the negotiating table.---saves me and everyone else the trouble of re-writing them.

Now in terms of the future---pick choice one or choice two.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Thank you JEDIYoda for reciting all the lines for not getting Israel to the negotiating table.---saves me and everyone else the trouble of re-writing them.

Now in terms of the future---pick choice one or choice two.

should Israel go to the table with the Palestinians, there has to be a responsible party of The other side that will honor/impliment such agreements (ie. having the authority and willpower to do so).

Who is in charge of the Palestinians at this point.
Hamas that does not want to come to the table
Fatah that may be willing but does not seem to have the ability/authority to honor/impliment.

With the Palestinians, you have a government that is split and unable to even determine what destiny is wants nor control its own borders from within.

With Arafat, at least there was a figurehead/puppet that could speak with two tongues.
Now the Palestinians have 2 puppets with 3-4 tongues.

When the Palestinians actually want to come to the table and talk peace, I am sure that Israel will be therre. Until then, the Palestinians need to grow up and have a government that they want to represent them and is willing to do so.

 

[Lemon law]

Wrong Eagle Keeper----lots of groups out there---with one thing in common---they want an end to Israeli domination. And I am just reading the tea leaves and showing you what will happen.----------you keep trying to convince yourself that Israel does not have to pick choice one or two---and its evidently working for you. But is it working on those people who will be obtaining and pegging those missiles at Israel?---and those people giving those missiles to the most competent groups---when you are relying on the incompetence of existing groups.

And when those missiles keep coming---and coming---and coming---are you going to say to yourself--its not really happening---I proved it by logic?---well---someone has to be the new Iraqi information minister.