home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.conspiracy.america-at-war      Debating how war is good for business      4,706 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 3,082 of 4,706   
   hummingbird to All   
   Re: 'Middle East' Crisis: Who backs an i   
   26 Jul 06 10:31:54   
   
   XPost: uk.politics.misc, alt.politics.british, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.conspiracy.new-world-order, alt.america, us.politics   
   From: RHBIYDTNPPAX@spammotel.com   
      
   On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 22:27:13 -0400  'Mrs Ken Ehrett'   
   posted this onto uk.politics.misc:   
      
   >On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 00:27:48 +0100, hummingbird   
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >>On 25 Jul 2006 22:12:34 GMT  'Bert Hyman'   
   >>posted this onto uk.politics.misc:   
   >>   
   >>>In news:l9lbc2t03pg6p5ppavp6t71acjtselggbg@4ax.com hummingbird   
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> In reality what you are seeing is Israel seeking vengeance, nothing   
   >>>> more.   
   >>>   
   >>>Against Hizballah,   
   >>   
   >>Not so. The Israelis fired the first shot in this war and are now   
   >>imposing collective punishment onto civilians incl women and children.   
   >   
   >Clearly you think Hezbollah has the right to grab Israeli soldiers and   
   >Israel is just supposed to accept it.   Tough cookies and all that.   
      
   No, I do not think that. Pity you can only see two extreme options.   
      
   The issue is what sort of response from Israel would have been most   
   effective, not only in securing release of their two soldiers but also   
   with an eye on the longer term. Bear in mind that what Hezbolloh   
   wanted is to use the captives as negotiating chips to secure release   
   of their own people held by Israel - many more in number.   
      
   I bet that by launching a massive bombing campaign to kill hundreds   
   of innocent women/kids and causing huge destruction, Israel has not   
   only lessened the chances of soldier release but also created a lot   
   more hatred - and therefore future terrorism - against itself. Is   
   that a good policy?   
      
   Fact is that bombing will not solve the current problem.   
      
   >>That is immoral and clearly against international law.   
   >   
   >What does International Law say about kidnapping people from their own   
   >country?   Tough cookies there too?   
      
   Israel is equally guilty of such actions as its adversaries. Let's not   
   forget that Israel has been conducting a political assassination   
   policy for several years - quaintly described as *targeted killings*.   
      
   --   
   "Blair's inner circle and its ferocious grab for power":   
   http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1747772,00.html   
      
   "In the guise of fighting terrorism and maintaining public order,   
   Tony Blair's Government has quietly and systematically taken power   
   from Parliament and the British people. The author [Henry Porter]   
   charts a nine-year assault on civil liberties that reveals the   
   danger of trading freedom for security":   
   http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article1129827.ece   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca