Interesting take on Israel's tantrum.

[Ogami]

The Question wrote:

Yeah, here's one -- Israel makes the prisoner exchange Hamas wanted for that one soldier, just as they've made prisoner exchanges so often in the past.

LOL And thereby reward Hezbollah/Hamas to drastically increase said tactic? I can just picture you and Donovan at Poker, Question: "Here look at my cards, and tell me what you think I should do!"

Then they learn from their mistake and stop sending tanks into Gaza when there's no reason for there to be Israeli tanks in Gaza in the first place.

Whose mistake was this again??? Ha ha ha. Someone made a big mistake fucking with Israel on this one, and they're getting their asses chewed up so badly that they want a ceasefire. I guess the Hezbollah ceasefire means they want the Israelis to stop sending them to hell so they can go find some bigger weapons to use. Thanks but no thanks.

Nothing is proving Israel's correctness in strategy more than all the howling by those who want to see Israel beaten. The critics don't want peace, they want to see the hated Israelis driven into the sea as General Nasser promised the Palestinian refugees 60 years ago. Once again, the world is outraged that Israel refuses to die!

-Ogami

 

[The Question]

The Question wrote:

Yeah, here's one -- Israel makes the prisoner exchange Hamas wanted for that one soldier, just as they've made prisoner exchanges so often in the past.

LOL And thereby reward Hezbollah/Hamas to drastically increase said tactic?

Or maybe... I dunno... act like human beings, instead of blood-ravening animals? Have you ever stopped to wonder why there's so much anti-Semitism in the world today? You seem to understand how the Pallies and other assorted ragheads earn the enmity cast their way, are you blind to how Israel earns its share of scorn and disgust?

I can just picture you and Donovan at Poker, Question: "Here look at my cards, and tell me what you think I should do!"

And I can picture you shooting the other players and claiming you won the game.

Whose mistake was this again???

Israel's, jackass. They had no justification for having a tank in Gaza when it was captured. You send your military forces into "enemy territory" unprovoked, you'd damn well better expect people to freak out. You're the one who's big on the self-defense angle -- well, the Palestinians had every right to defend themselves against hostile Israeli incursion into Gaza.

Nothing is proving Israel's correctness.

Edited for accuracy.

 

[Ogami]

The Question wrote:

And I can picture you shooting the other players and claiming you won the game.

The Bush Doctrine identified at last!

Israel's, jackass. They had no justification for having a tank in Gaza when it was captured. You send your military forces into "enemy territory" unprovoked, you'd damn well better expect people to freak out. You're the one who's big on the self-defense angle -- well, the Palestinians had every right to defend themselves against hostile Israeli incursion into Gaza.

Hey, I agree completely. Let them fight until there is a clear winner.

America's Civil War lasted four years, but when it was over, it was over. Can you imagine if there was a United Nations around then? We'd have UN peacekeepers to this day patrolling the Mason-Dixon line, North and South would never have settled anything. That is the horror that is the "peace" of the UN.

-Ogami

 

[The Question]

I say we simply impose the peace of the graveyard on both sides. They obviously can't accept each others' presence there, they won't live and let live.

The thing that pisses me off about Israel in particular is simply that we've been funding their side of it, and where's that investment when we need it? I say let them fight it out themselves, sure, fine, but make them give our military hardware back and repay the 1.6 trillion dollars we've given them all this time, with interest.

After all, I would imagine the rationale behind giving them all that ordnance and all that dough was to protect them from terrorism... well, here they are no better than the terrorists themselves. We weren't protecting them from anything, we were just making them the bigger bullies. Time for them to cough up what they owe us and then get down to business with rocks and molotovs, same as the other savages.

 

[Ogami]

Donovan thinks the Civil War was fought with antiquated arms. Okay, I guess several hundred historians were wrong about the American Civil War being the first modern war, it was modern in every way it was fought.

But what would they know. Heh.

 

[Donovan]

Donovan thinks the Civil War was fought with antiquated arms. Okay, I guess several hundred historians were wrong about the American Civil War being the first modern war, it was modern in every way it was fought.

But what would they know. Heh.

First "modern war" is a relative term detailing the use of such innovations as ironclad ships, aerial observation, telegraph, photography, rail travel, torpedos and land mines. Also the first wide use of such modern conveniences as rifles. Not because of the development of WMD, missiles. Modern, yes. For 1861. Not for 2006, when the stakes are infinitely higher and more global.

Hundreds of historians are not wrong. WE know plenty.

You, however, are wrong. And willfully ignorant, which is unfortunate for you and those around you.