Several dead, many wounded in bus attack in Israel

[CDNBear]

The US and Western 1941 embargo of Japan provoked the 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

Thank you for clearing the question of whether or not you blame the US.

You blame the US, like we said.

The Arab 1967 blockade of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping provoked the 1967 Israeli attack against its Arab neighbors.

No, the amassed armies on Israel's borders and of course the public statements of an eminent attack.

But thanx for playing along.

And I really do appreciate you admitting that you blame the US.

Thanx again.

 

[DaSleeper]

The US and Western 1941 embargo of Japan provoked the 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
The Arab 1967 blockade of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping provoked the 1967 Israeli attack against its Arab neighbors.

And hamas constantly provokes Israel with their terrorist attacks and Israel should not be blamed for retaliating.....Got it...

Then what the Hell are we arguing about????

 

[Goober]

The Israelis can leave but the Jews can stay.

Petros I am aware of your opinion on this I was asking EAO -

The US and Western 1941 embargo of Japan provoked the 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
The Arab 1967 blockade of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping provoked the 1967 Israeli attack against its Arab neighbors.

And why did the US place an embargo on Japan

Of the two situations, Israel had a lot more wiggle room.

Are the questions on a long list to be answered

 

[earth_as_one]

The Zionist State of Israel was created during the 1947-48 Zionist ethnic cleansing war. The Zionist State of Israel continues to practice ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem and the West Bank. Israel's religious minorities have fewer rights than the Jewish majority. Currently the Zionist State of Israel is responsible for the welfare of 3.1 million Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. These people have no nationality, no rights and many suffer cruel oppression and injustice. Currently Zionist State of Israel is trying to pacify an insurgent revolt by its minorities. During this conflict both sides have committed war crimes. Israel's restriction on humanitarian aid entering Gaza and exports leaving has caused extreme poverty and is a crime against humanity.

And hamas constantly provokes Israel with their terrorist attacks and Israel should not be blamed for retaliating.....Got it...

Then what the Hell are we arguing about????

Israel has every right to defend itself. They have no special right to commit war crimes or crimes against humanity. Canada and Canadians should not unshakably support war criminals or people who commit crimes against humanity.

 

[Goober]

The Zionist State of Israel was created during the 1947-48 Zionist ethnic cleansing war. The Zionist State of Israel continues to practice ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem and the West Bank. Israel's religious minorities have fewer rights than the Jewish majority. Currently the Zionist State of Israel is responsible for the welfare of 3.1 million Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. These people have no nationality, no rights and many suffer cruel oppression and injustice. Currently Zionist State of Israel is trying to pacify an insurgent revolt by its minorities. During this conflict both sides have committed war crimes. Israel's restriction on humanitarian aid entering Gaza and exports leaving has caused extreme poverty and is a crime against humanity.



Israel has every right to defend itself. They have no special right to commit war crimes or crimes against humanity. Canada and Canadians should not unshakably support war criminals or people who commit crimes against humanity.

When Israel attacks it is a War Crime - When Hamas attacks - It is OK.

 

[Colpy]

All Egypt did was deny Israel access to the Suez Canal. The economic impact on Israel which has navigable ports on both sides of the canal would be minimal, far less then restricting Japan's access to oil, steel and rubber.

.

Well yeah.....if you ignore the radio broadcasts calling for the destruction of the Jewish state:

May 16, 1967: "The existence of Israel has continued too long. We welcome the Israeli aggression. We welcome the battle we have long awaited. The peak hour has come. The battle has come in which we shall destroy Israel."

May 29, 1967, from Nassar himself: "God will surely help and urge us to restore the situation to what it was in 1948."

May 30, from Jordan's King Hussein, on signing a mutual defense pact with Egypt: "The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel...to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations."

Oh, then of course you have to ignore the fact that Nassar booted out the UNEF.......threw out the only buffer Israel had.....

And lastly, you have to ignore the fact that Nassar alone moved 100,000 troops into the Sinai, while Jordan, and Syria mobilized.


Israel, in 1967, was a nation of 2,745,000.................that's right, less than 3 million people,.......... arrayed against 33 million Egyptians, 5.7 million Syrians, and 1.2 million Jordanians

Population statistics - countries compared - Nationmaster

That is 3 million up against 40 million on her borders, and them backed by several other Arab states.......

Iraq
Saudi Arabia

Morocco

Algeria
Libya

Kuwait

Tunisia

Sudan
PLO​

A nation of 26,000 square kilometers, one third the size of New Brunswick, with no buffer zone.

Oh, here is a comparison of their strength in military terms:

Israel:

50,000 troops
214,000 reserves
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks[2]
Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed

The Arab States

Egypt: 240,000
Syria, Jordan, and Iraq: 307,000
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks[2]
Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

OF COURSE they struck first.

As you will remember, I pointed out that they could not mobilize and stay that way.......you will notice the IDF is mostly reserves.....the Arabs all regular troops.

 

[earth_as_one]

Thank you for clearing the question of whether or not you blame the US.

You blame the US, like we said.

No, the amassed armies on Israel's borders and of course the public statements of an eminent attack.

But thanx for playing along.

And I really do appreciate you admitting that you blame the US.

Thanx again.

South and North Korea have both massed huge numbers of soldiers along their border. The North constantly makes belligerent statements regarding imminent attacks and what they intend to do. Both sides are guilty of brinkmanship. Its been that way since the 1950's and except for the occasional minor border skirmish, the situation is more or less stable.

The US and USSR used to constantly play war games along the Iron Curtain in Europe. They also made belligerent statements, taunts and insults, yet they never entered into conflict directly and instead fought a long cold war and a series of proxy wars.

I can give many other examples of where two sides appeared ready to start a war and then the situation was defused through diplomacy. If war resulted every time one country massed it troops on its border or a leader made a threatening statement, we would have had many more wars.

 

[Colpy]

South and North Korea have both massed huge numbers of soldiers along their border. The North constantly makes belligerent statements regarding imminent attacks and what they intend to do and both sides are guilty of brinkmanship. Its been that way since the 1950's and except for the occasional minor border skirmish, the situation is more or less stable.

The US and USSR used to constantly play war games along the Iron Curtain in Europe. They also made belligerent statements, taunts and insults, yet they never entered into conflict directly and instead fought a long cold war and a series of proxy wars.

Neither the Koreas, nor the East-West line during the Cold War ever mobilized and massed troops on the border for an invasion.

Both situations are evenly matched, in neither case is one side so small, and so outgunned that letting the other have initiative means disaster (see post below)

........and a loss in the war would not mean complete and total genocide in either of your examples.

They are NOT the same, not even remotely.

 

[AbtFet]

How Israel takes its revenge on boys who throw stones - Middle East, World - The Independent

In most cases, children as young as 12 are hauled from their beds at night, handcuffed and blindfolded, deprived of sleep and food, subjected to lengthy interrogations, then forced to sign a confession in Hebrew, a language few of them read

 

[Goober]

How Israel takes its revenge on boys who throw stones - Middle East, World - The Independent

In most cases, children as young as 12 are hauled from their beds at night, handcuffed and blindfolded, deprived of sleep and food, subjected to lengthy interrogations, then forced to sign a confession in Hebrew, a language few of them read

That is plain wrong - Children being abused is abhorrent - I would also ask you to view Hamas TV, school books etc and how they depict Jews - Abuse is abuse is it not.

 

[EagleSmack]

In July 1941, the IJN headquarters informed Hirohito that its reserve bunker oil would be exhausted within two years if a new source was not found.
Events leading to the attack on Pearl Harbor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Japan is an island nation completely dependent on oil imports. Without bunker oil, every Japanese warship and cargo ship would become useless. Their entire economy and military would grind to a halt within two years. Exactly how does cutting off Japan's access to oil not constitute a provocation?

The Japanese were spreading their empire by force and had no intentions of stopping. So the US decided to stop selling them oil. If they were not invading all over the place there would never have been a reason to stop selling them oil and raw materials.

Japan may have contemplated attacking the US or Western nations before July 1941, but the decision to attack came shortly after the US and western nations cut off their access to oil, rubber and steel and seized their bank accounts. Japan was content to buy these things. Money was not an issue for the Japanese as a result of looting and pillaging China. Seizing control of strategic oil and rubber assets became priority when their money couldn't buy them.

The US would have been content to sell them except for their war of aggression in the Far East. The bombing of Pearl Harbor was to prevent the US from stopping them from stealing more raw materials.

Japan was the ones that brought the oil and raw material shortages on themselves with their wars.

Compare that to the impact blocking Israel's access to the Suez canal and the Straits of Tiran. Israel has many ports on the Mediterranean. Most of their trade was on the Mediterranean side. Israel still had access to all its trading partners. Shutting down Aqaba just made trade more expensive and inconvenient.

Sure, all Israel needed to do is have their ship bound from the Pacific to travel around Africa, up to the Straights of Gibralta, across the Mediterranean and then they could unload. That would be that big of a deal right?

Certainly they weren't facing the same situation as the Japanese in 1941. But again, I'm not judging Japan or Israel's decision to go to war. All I'm saying is that in 1967, Israel attacked first and that Japan in 1941 had at least as much provocation for war as Israel did in 1967.

You're way off. The US was no threat militarily to Japan in December 1941. They were unreachable. They could hurt us far more than we could hurt them and they did so. Not with just Pearl Harbor, the took over Guam, the Phillipines, and a whole host of other places. They were on their way to Australia when they were finally halted at the Battle of the Coral Sea. We had no ability to succesfully defend what we already had never mind bring war to their doorstep...

...unlike the Arabs on the eve of the Six Day War. They were on the doorstep of Israel... not 4060 miles away. They had every means to defeat Israel if Israel allowed the first strike. The morning airstrikes destroyed all Arab air cover setting them up for one of the biggest routs in history.

Regarding what the Arab leaders were really thinking when they made their belligerent statements against Israel.... I'm sure they wanted to defeat Israel through war, but I'd rate their chances in 1967 about as low then as it is now.

That is the new revisionist way of looking at it.

I'm going to have to go with the Arabs were planning to wear down and weaken Israel through sanctions and blockades and the point of their deployments and belligerent talk was to intimidate Israel and domestic political reasons. That's just my opinion. But if the Arabs really were planning to secretly attack Israel, then why were they blabbing about it on the front pages. That's not being very secretive.

Not just your opinion. As I said, that is the new revisionist history of the Six Day War. After the big butt kicking the Arabs got they had to make Israel look like the bad guy and the Arabs the victim.

The Arab "blabbing" was simply their arrogance. They were ready for war and wanted war. They brushed the UN Forces aside and with their newly built and Soviet trained armies and airforces they believed nothing could stop them. After all that boistering and the following azz kicking they smartened up.

In the Yom Kippur War in 1973, Anwar Sadat didn't tell the Israelis they were coming did they? At that time Israel was much better prepared than they were in 1967 and it is a good thing as they were caught completely off guard.

Are you saying that other countries like Japan can afford to loose wars? The people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki might disagree with you.

Japan is still there isn't it.

If Israel loses to the Arabs I doubt the Arabs will pump millions of dollars into their economy and help them rebuild.

If Israel capitulates... they are finished and the nation of Israel is gone.

The Zionist State of Israel seems bent on fighting a total war to the bitter end. That path leads to total ruin and destruction, but not the extermination of Jews. No doubt the end will involve gross atrocities and attempts at genocide. But many Jews live outside Israel and many Jewish Israelis will flee before the end.

I support Canada accepting every Israeli refugee who has clean hands. War criminals should be sent to the Hague to face justice.

"The Zionist State of Israel"... how colorful.

So you are OK with the destruction of Israel? Just asking.

The Jews will find other places to live? No big deal eh?

 

[Colpy]

How Israel takes its revenge on boys who throw stones - Middle East, World - The Independent

In most cases, children as young as 12 are hauled from their beds at night, handcuffed and blindfolded, deprived of sleep and food, subjected to lengthy interrogations, then forced to sign a confession in Hebrew, a language few of them read

Yeah, I don't doubt it, and I don't know what to say about it.

The alternative is to shoot at them..........sooooo........

Are the Israelis an occupying force??? If so, how do you expect thenm to handle crowds of stone-throwing kids?????

Oh, here is a TIME article on the same subject.....very sympathetic to the Palestinian kids, as they should be....

But it includes this:

I

n the case of the Palestinians, history and society have made hatred for Israel almost an instinct. Still, there was shock in June among Palestinians when members of a West Bank family were accused of hanging a boy for suspected collaboration with Israeli forces.

​

Read more: Israeli Prisons: Are Palestinian Children Abused? - TIME

Things are relative sometimes.
​

 

[EagleSmack]

Besides... there are plenty of Jews outside of Israel... just have them move and live with other Jews. No big deal. They can just move.

Hey wait... why don't the Palestinians move to where all the other Arabs are?! There are plenty of Arabs that live outside of Israel! They can just move in with them!

How absurd.

South and North Korea have both massed huge numbers of soldiers along their border. The North constantly makes belligerent statements regarding imminent attacks and what they intend to do. Both sides are guilty of brinkmanship. Its been that way since the 1950's and except for the occasional minor border skirmish, the situation is more or less stable.

The US and USSR used to constantly play war games along the Iron Curtain in Europe. They also made belligerent statements, taunts and insults, yet they never entered into conflict directly and instead fought a long cold war and a series of proxy wars.

I can give many other examples of where two sides appeared ready to start a war and then the situation was defused through diplomacy. If war resulted every time one country massed it troops on its border or a leader made a threatening statement, we would have had many more wars.

If the US and NATO geared up for war along the Iron Curtain... you bet the Soviets would do something about it. And did you ever hear of the Cuban Missle Crisis?

There is a HUGE difference to having troops on the border to moving massed Armored and Infantry Divisions into assembly areas.

Good grief. You REALLY need to read a book and stay off the internet.

 

[earth_as_one]

Neither the Koreas, nor the East-West line during the Cold War ever mobilized and massed troops on the border for an invasion.

Both situations are evenly matched, in neither case is one side so small, and so outgunned that letting the other have initiative means disaster (see post below)

........and a loss in the war would not mean complete and total genocide in either of your examples.

They are NOT the same, not even remotely.

DMZ Korea is the Demilitarized Zone lying in the middle of the two parts of Korea which houses nearly 2 million soldiers of both sides.
DMZ Korea

Starting on November 15, 1974, the South discovered four tunnels leading under the DMZ, by use of water-filled pipes dug vertically into the ground near areas of suspected tunneling activity. The first of the tunnels runs forty-five meters below surface for about 3.5 kilometers, penetrating over 1,000 meters into the DMZ. The first tunnel discovered featured electric lines and lamps, as well as railways and paths for vehicles. The second, discovered on March 19, 1975, runs the same length, laying between 50 and 160 meters below ground. The discovery of the third tunnel occurred on October 17, 1978, as the result of, kike the previous two, a tip off from a North Korean defector. That tunnel runs about 1,600 meters, laying about 150 meters below ground. The fourth tunnel, discovered on March 3, 1990, has an almost identical structure as the second and the third tunnel.

Both Koreas deploy the majority of their military personnel and technology within 160 kilometers of the Military Demarcation Line that runs through the middle of the DMZ. In practical terms that represents over one million troops on either side, plus large numbers of tanks, long-range artillery, and armored personnel carriers. Arguably, the DMZ is the last front of the Cold War.
Korean Demilitarized Zone - New World Encyclopedia

 

[Goober]

DMZ Korea is the Demilitarized Zone lying in the middle of the two parts of Korea which houses nearly 2 million soldiers of both sides.
DMZ Korea

Starting on November 15, 1974, the South discovered four tunnels leading under the DMZ, by use of water-filled pipes dug vertically into the ground near areas of suspected tunneling activity. The first of the tunnels runs forty-five meters below surface for about 3.5 kilometers, penetrating over 1,000 meters into the DMZ. The first tunnel discovered featured electric lines and lamps, as well as railways and paths for vehicles. The second, discovered on March 19, 1975, runs the same length, laying between 50 and 160 meters below ground. The discovery of the third tunnel occurred on October 17, 1978, as the result of, kike the previous two, a tip off from a North Korean defector. That tunnel runs about 1,600 meters, laying about 150 meters below ground. The fourth tunnel, discovered on March 3, 1990, has an almost identical structure as the second and the third tunnel.

Both Koreas deploy the majority of their military personnel and technology within 160 kilometers of the Military Demarcation Line that runs through the middle of the DMZ. In practical terms that represents over one million troops on either side, plus large numbers of tanks, long-range artillery, and armored personnel carriers. Arguably, the DMZ is the last front of the Cold War.
Korean Demilitarized Zone - New World Encyclopedia

Answers to my questions - waiting.

 

[Colpy]

DMZ Korea is the Demilitarized Zone lying in the middle of the two parts of Korea which houses nearly 2 million soldiers of both sides.
DMZ Korea

Starting on November 15, 1974, the South discovered four tunnels leading under the DMZ, by use of water-filled pipes dug vertically into the ground near areas of suspected tunneling activity. The first of the tunnels runs forty-five meters below surface for about 3.5 kilometers, penetrating over 1,000 meters into the DMZ. The first tunnel discovered featured electric lines and lamps, as well as railways and paths for vehicles. The second, discovered on March 19, 1975, runs the same length, laying between 50 and 160 meters below ground. The discovery of the third tunnel occurred on October 17, 1978, as the result of, kike the previous two, a tip off from a North Korean defector. That tunnel runs about 1,600 meters, laying about 150 meters below ground. The fourth tunnel, discovered on March 3, 1990, has an almost identical structure as the second and the third tunnel.

Both Koreas deploy the majority of their military personnel and technology within 160 kilometers of the Military Demarcation Line that runs through the middle of the DMZ. In practical terms that represents over one million troops on either side, plus large numbers of tanks, long-range artillery, and armored personnel carriers. Arguably, the DMZ is the last front of the Cold War.
Korean Demilitarized Zone - New World Encyclopedia

Exactly.....evenly matched, both with large professional armies they can keep in the field, with a large buffer (demilitarized zone) in between them..........

Not at all the same.

 

[earth_as_one]

I am aware of the difference in numbers.

Israel
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks[2]
Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed


Combined Arab Forces
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks[2]
Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed

Israel was much stronger relative to their adversaries than numbers alone would suggest. Israel had qualitative advantages in air, land and sea forces. Israel also had nukes, effectively bringing a gun to what their adversaries thought was a knife fight.

Israel developed its first nuclear weapon in 1966.
Israel's Qualitative Military Edge :: Asaf Romirowsky

 

[Colpy]

I am aware of the difference in numbers.

Israel
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks[2]
Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed


Combined Arab Forces
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks[2]
Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed

Israel was much stronger relative to their adversaries than numbers alone would suggest. Israel had qualitative advantages in air, land and sea forces. Israel also had nukes, effectively bringing a gun to what their adversaries thought was a knife fight.

Israel developed its first nuclear weapon in 1966.
Israel's Qualitative Military Edge :: Asaf Romirowsky

Perhaps....I know they had them by the late sixties.....

Now, are you suggesting they should have waited for the Arabs to attack.....then nuked them???

It would have been their only option.

 

[ironsides]

Are you saying that other countries like Japan can afford to loose wars? The people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki might disagree with you.

Every time people suffered oppression and injustice, the people responsible pay a terrible price if they don't voluntarily change their ways. I'm not aware of any exceptions. Nazi Germany is an example of what happens when the oppressors fight a total war to the bitter end. South Africa is an example of the oppressors having the good sense to abandon state based oppression and injustice.

The Zionist State of Israel seems bent on fighting a total war to the bitter end. That path leads to total ruin and destruction, but not the extermination of Jews. No doubt the end will involve gross atrocities and attempts at genocide. But many Jews live outside Israel and many Jewish Israelis will flee before the end.

I support Canada accepting every Israeli refugee who has clean hands. War criminals should be sent to the Hague to face justice.

Wonder just how many Israeli refugee's are pounding on the doors to enter Canada for that matter any country. If that scenario you mentioned you would see an event you and others like you have never seen before. Most of those Jews living outside Israel would flock to Israel to defend her, those who don't physically don't go to Israel would defend her interests abroad. You to this day do not understand, when confronted Israel does not run.

 

[EagleSmack]

I am aware of the difference in numbers.

Israel
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks[2]
Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed


Combined Arab Forces
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks[2]
Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed

Israel was much stronger relative to their adversaries than numbers alone would suggest. Israel had qualitative advantages in air, land and sea forces. Israel also had nukes, effectively bringing a gun to what their adversaries thought was a knife fight.

Israel developed its first nuclear weapon in 1966.
Israel's Qualitative Military Edge :: Asaf Romirowsky

More revisionism. Bottom line... the Arabs came to fight, bragged about it, boasted, the time for declarations is over it was said... then got their azzes handed to them.

The haters NEEDED to revise history.