Amos Yadlin + why bombing Damascus is important to Israel.

Who is 'glorifying' him?

 

More than likely it is not precision however, the intent is to minimize casualties rather than maximize them unlike the weapons and methods we discuss that were used in Syria by both the Assad Regime and the rebels. There the intent was to murder whomever they could that was not them and, to state that the intent to destroy infrastructure that aids and possibly stops this or similar operations or capabilities is murder is ludicrous .

 

Does the end justify the means, a very good question, I can say that before Israel attacked Gaza in 2006 I was in favour of the attack because the reality of thousands of rockets on Israeli towns was unbearable, to that end I supported military means, until the news showed what happened when a Tank shell hit a civilian building killing 4-5 familiy members of a Gazan Doctoter that worked in Israel, killing his daughters, that was the second I realized nothing can justify those kind of tragedies.

In Syria 120,000 died, some by Chem weapons in their sleep, that's the reality, the war is on for the past 3 years with the involvment of other countries from both sides so its not not really IF to get the West involved but to what level, I suppurt getting Chem out of Syria every day over an attack that's only objective to begin with is to hit and harm as less as possible, the rebels are right however that this solution works only for Syria neighbors and not to assist the suffering Syrian ppl and that was supposed to be the issue all along.

So emotionaly speaking, I rather Assad be defeated then let this situation go on, rationaly he poses no real threat on my country so its not an Israeli interst he will be deposed. but I cant be indiffrent to those macabre images.

 

Like I say, I was referring in general to what I regard as the disingenuous position of those who claim objectively that a distinction can be made between the intentional and deliberate targeting of civilians on the one hand and the the targeting of military infrastructure on the other, in the scenario whereby both are located within highly populated areas. I draw here the analogy of the drunk driver who, having killed children as a result of driving recklessly and at speed through a built up urban area close to a school, attempts to minimize the consequences of his actions by claiming that what resulted from the said actions, whilst tragic, were nevertheless unintentional and therefore excusable. Although the driver might argue that he didn't deliberately set out to kill the children in question, the fact that he got behind the wheel of a car intoxicated before driving recklessly at speed close to a school INEVITABLY resulted in the said tragedy. So at the end of the day, the question regarding intentionality in a scenario where so-called targeted bombing occurs within densely populated areas is one of semantics.

 

when gays are putin in the ritz, to some that may be small pox

 

So now we are talking about the target being in a "highly populated" area. This is why I was asking for the location of the targets which have yet to be supplied.

Yes, this is known as vehicular homicide." It is against the law by the way.

Not really. If the attack is legal and follows the Geneva Contention where reasonable care has been taken to protect civilians then it is allowable whereas driving drunk is always against the law, no matter how much carre one takes not to kill others.

Perhaps another example would make your point a bit better.

 

Good point.

 

If I were Assad, I would be right onto Military Hardware + Weapons E Bay, and spend money bolstering my air force, rockets, right across the board. I'd be adding to cart like no one's business.

 

That's the thing, I think he will use this charade of international monitoring of his chemical weapons as the ideal opportunity to build up his conventional weapons. I think Putin and Assad are clever cookies and are outmaneuvering their opponents to the point of check-mate.

 

That's what I would do.

I'd just upgrade everything else.

Planes, tanks, rockets, whatever.

I would crush what is left of those ghouls(aka rebels). Now that the strike against Assad is not on, or doesn't look on, I would go hard on those bastards, and get them the hell out of Syria by all and any means. Anything to stop Russia lending some troops for the process, under the circs.

Can't see how that would violate any international laws, do you?

 

I disagree. I believe they mugged Obama while he waffled on whether he really had a red line or didn't have a red line and then at every turn didn't know what he was doing or what was going on. And right now, he's owned by Assad and Putin and soon to be Iran.

I'd say that this is a win for everybody but the US however, as Obama doesn't seem to have a clue as to what he is doing it is quite possible he make make up for his shortcomings by over reacting and creating something we really don't want to see so it has a slim possibility to be a loss for everybody..

 

I concur. He will probably make a show of destroying a couple of brrels of whatever and Putin will say they shipped an undisclosed amount of whatever to Russia for rendering on a ship that just never takes the stuff off but returns to sender and then, kniwng Assad will be around for a loooooooong time, will provide the goods you speak of above until the cows come home in return for unending support in whatever he needs in that area.

 

Well it's logical however, I suggested another example from you and seriously, tried to think of another today myself to support your contention but .... no cigar.

On the other hand, I wondered why so often those responsible for deliberately positioning things such as we speak of so they use the population as human shields are let off the hook and, what proposals are made to bring them to heal for the war crime of doing so?

 

i would rather see that than to believe israel owns Obama.

I am actually proud that obama stopped the military pursuit and enabling syria to pursue options.

I know AIPAC aint seeking diplomacy on syria or iran.

But i will be laughing when an attack on either syria or iran results in israel being wiped off the map. I have no doubt that israel will be a target from every country on every side.

The US did win. We aint at war as of today!

Obama is a man, and like all of us, is still learning.
The problem with Obama is he has morons surrounding him and they are not conveying quality intel. I think he has the same problem i do and trust that people can be honest and do the right thing, naturally.

Obama aint the reason that all the problems are occurring. Syria is not HIS fault and if a moron thinks that Obama should have just fired on syria to save face, then i consider that kind of person a weak minded sob.

If compassion for human life was the proper reason of military intervention, then i would ask the congress to invade israel, to stop the bigotry and oppression. That would be a win win for the middle east, american budgetting and the reduction of global security.

ie... the world wouldnt hate americans any longer

 

Brilliant.

 

Why is there no attack on Syria? because Assad is correct, the West should 'expect everything' and Saudi too. it would not be Israel but our 'interests' that would be hit in retaliation .......don't ya think? I do .................We would go into economic melt down and fast!

 

No they didnt use them against a civilian population. that is, unless you believe that all Palestinian resistence groups are civilians.

Even the evidence on the ground does not support your misrepresentation. If used as an incindiary, where were the massive fires that would have been generated by its indisciminant use?

Wait... I know...... just like the jews developing a genetic bomb to only kill palestinians, they also developed a WP bomb that only burned little children and women and left the building intact so settlers could move into them. The best of both worlds, the weapon kills all the civilians and provides free housing for cheap jews illegally re-settling gaza.

You are hilarious.

We already know you don't argue with fact, but with biased misinterpretation, exaggerations and unsubstantiated accusations that are characteristic of your typical jew hypocritical jew hater.

 

i dont think fear is/was a reason. I dont like the idea or to ever believe that fear is a good reason to do what is right.

what interest do you have in israel? But i see your point; you perhaps think that all over the globe the fractions would attack western interests. I thought that that is what they are doing now.

The only interest i have is that equality exists and oppression stops.

by what?

Reaganomics is what would begin, again. Most of it the debt recasting and ceiling increases would happen without american even realizing it's happening.

The melt down will occur, without any doubt, if Iran or syria is already nuke armed. If Russia was smart, they would already be publishing that both are equiped with nukes and watch how the rhetoric subsides.

I would love to see Iran with nukes and then ask an AIPAC'er, 'what the hell are you going to do now', except shut up and go play bingo with the kids.

 

Except I have seen the pictures, read the testimonies, and know what...I believe them and that over you and Habara merchants.

- - - Updated - - -

Call me that one more time and you are reported, buddy.

 

Two fat ladies....

 

If you remember Obama threatened Iran not to hit US interests if Israel attacked them?

Oil installations and pipe lines are just sitting there ya know ............. If Syria is hit by any US bombs all hell will break loose out there ............. I think if Syria was attacked by the US she would know she was to become another Iraq and so would have nothing to loose ............ I wish I could believe this was a game of bluff but it isn't, it is simply idiot lunatics running the asylum. all fine on paper but ..................they forgot the human factor.

 

Funny how on the one hand you've waved the Goldstone report about and then on the other hand you ignore its findings.



- - - Updated - - -

I didn't call you a hypocritical jew hater.
I said that your response was typical of a hypocritical jew hater. Surely you can appreciate the difference.

I could supply a list of responses from known jew haters that would prove without a shadow of a doubt that my characterization of your post is both accurate and precise. I won't, but I could.

Perhaps you should pause and consider what you posted in this context since in the past you demonstrated that you occasionally use hypocritical jew hating sites and authors as sources, and those sites feature an abundance of statements of similar type.

Of course everyone here, including myself, knows that you personally are not a hypocritical jew hater......don't they?

 

Obama stopped the assault on Syria because he was humiliated by Putin into retreat mode. How ironic it is, that it's Putin, rather than Obama, who speaks on behalf of the vast majority of American's. So why you are 'proud' of somebody who would otherwise have almost certainly attacked, is odd to say the least.

Wanting Israel to be wiped off the map is just plain dumb and short sighted and merely plays into the hands of those who falsely claim that Ahmadinejad desired the same. I don't think it's a laughing matter to desire the killing of any civilians wherever they happen to live on this earth.

 

At no time in this thread have I made direct mention of it, let alone "waved the Goldstone report about ".

See, when you begin with an untruth, there is just no incentive to read more untruths.

- - - Updated - - -

Irrelevant to topic what you or 'everyone else' thinks of any member.

Please refer to rules and return to topic.

 

About as ironic as the US State speaking on behalf of IPAC, an arm of Israel, than to the vast majority of Americans.