SYRIA VOWS TO ATTACK ISRAEL UNLESS IT WITHDRAWS FROM THE GOLAN HEIGHTS

No.

 

To say no, is to deny reality.

To say no is to say that the entirety of the Americas belongs to the native peoples.

What do you believe is the reality?

 

They did. Until we invaded and took them back.

This attempt by the UN to monopolise war is blatantly step 1 in world government.

 

Probably so the Palestinians could claim it. I mean really, they claim everything else, may as well throw in the entire Golan Heights.

 

Judging by how it went the last few times Syria attacked them and Israel responded, the Israeli's would just go ahead and take all of Syria in combat.

 

If Syria attacks Israel, this will be good,
Syria has a death wish.

 

Germany won WWII?

 

From https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/history-and-overview-of-the-golan-heights

From the western Golan, it is only about 60 miles -- without major terrain obstacles -- to Haifa and Acre, Israel's industrial heartland. The Golan -- rising from 400 to 1700 feet in the western section bordering on pre1967 Israel -- overlooks the Huleh Valley, Israel's richest agricultural area. In the hands of a friendly neighbor, the escarpment has little military importance. If controlled by a hostile country, however, the Golan has the potential to again become a strategic nightmare for Israel.

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.

...

There are approximately 17,000 Druze inhabitants on the Golan Heights today. In contrast to 1948-1967, when civilian infrastructure and services were almost completely neglected by successive Syrian governments, Israel has invested substantial sums in either installing or upgrading electric and water systems, in agricultural improvements and job training, and in building health clinics, where none had existed previously. The inhabitants also enjoy the benefits of Israel's welfare and social security programs. Israel has built or refurbished schools and classrooms, extended compulsory education from seven years to ten, and made secondary education available to girls for the first time. The Golan's Druze residents enjoy complete freedom of worship; the Israeli authorities have made financial contributions and tax and customs rebates to the local religious establishments.

...​

-----------------

I say let Israel have it. Syria didn't control it for all that long and did a poor job it while they had it. I'll bet a public referendum, like that held in Crimea, would favor Israel also.

Not that internet anti-Semites would be interested in such facts.

 

That’s not a very good comparison. Syria invaded Israel, and they lost. I hope the Syrians learned a valuable lesson. If you’re going to invade another country, you better win.

 

The link works for me in Firefox.

Let's try another site:

http://web.stanford.edu/group/tomzgroup/pmwiki/uploads/3380-1974-06-KS-a-IEM.pdf

Lines A and B are on the UNDOF map in my previous post.

Regarding the UN and international law:

http://unimelb.libguides.com/internationallaw/sources

According to its own judicial organ, UN is not a source of international law.

 

Putin isn’t going to risk war with the US over a strip of land that’s not even in his own country. Assad isn’t going to risk the gains he’s made in the civil war, by getting his ass kicked by Israel.

 

And Texas and california

 

Again .. It is funny how each thread that talks about Israel has 100 plus replies..
While other more serious matters are not even mentioned in this Forum.
Buy tickets my friends ... May 2019 - Eurovision Tel Aviv... Party

 

George H.W. Bush told Saddam Iraq didn't own Kuwait. Turns out he was right.

 

Bravo.

I suspect so. I know that I am jumping the gun but I am thinking about Japan's raid on Pearl Harbour. I realize that Adolf had a benevolent eye on Tokyo but he was not very pleased with that attack because it upset his own timetable. So I wonder what Vlado thinks about Syria's boast?

 

You've posted on the wrong thread. This is not about the Eurovision Melody Festival. This is the 100 plus replies thread about Israel and Syria.

 

Let Syria attack. Israel will wreck what remains of its military infrastructure plus any foreign forces who are foolish enough to assist.

Assad hasn't spent years murdering Syrians and flattening their cities and towns to launch a hopeless war against a superior power. Unlike Syrian children, Israelis fight back, and with superior firepower.

 

Iran is already operating in Syria.

 

Actually, Israel will do what it always does: Run and cry to the USA.

Israel is not a superior power. They're a paper tiger who depends entirely on the US for protection.

 

Legitimate ownership is not determined by recognition.

 

Even assuming everything you say is true (and it isn't), why would I care?

Syria can't wipe its nose without Russia or Iran supplying a tissue. Lebanon is a plaything for regional powers. Turkey & Egypt need US help to do any more than look menacing. Iraq is divided between Kurdistan and Iran. Iran can't do much without Russia & China. The Saudis are basically Iran with better (US) weapons and less civilisation, and the Gulf states are moderately less nasty versions of that. All of those nations have woeful records in virtually every category any civilised person cares about (Iran just imprisoned a woman for 38 years for campaigning against wearing headscarves). All oppress minorities, often to the point of mass murder. Many occupy land that should rightly belong to others.

Israel is the only nation in the entire region worth a pinch of *****. If you want to back the other failed states go ahead. I doubt you have ever found an anti-American dictatorship you didn't support one way or another.

 

Unlike you, I don't support any country except for the USA. And unlike you, I don't want to send US tax dollars to a foreign government in support of an agenda that has nothing to do with the concerns of the average American. So if you think Israel is so great, then feel free to move there or to send them your own money. That way you can more meaningfully demonstrate your personal loyalty to Israel.

 

Honestly ... that's just media propaganda BS shouting ... just the usual kindergarten!
Syria does not even have the military power to take on Israel ... and any shelling or the like from Syria will, as we all know, be answered hard by Israel.

The status of the Golan Heights can be debated without end ... and even me, who is everything but not a friend of Israel, must admit that Israel has legitimate security reasons to keep this region occupied.

So just go back to sleep, the thing just noted and filed under unimportant!

 

Gee, if I was 12 years old that post would SO put me in my place. Right up there with 'go back to Russia' and 'you smell'. PF: come for the sub standard arguments, stay for the childish name calling.

If the US government wants to spend a few billion dollars a year to support the only decent nation in the region then yay USA! Why on earth should I be upset about that? If they want to stop then yay USA! again. I don't care either way. Israel will survive and thrive, much to your disappointment.

I think we can safely assume you plan to maintain your support for anti-US dictatorships from the comfort of a democratic first world society, so you can save your suggestions about where the rest of us should live. When you shift to Damascus or Caracas & give up your nice first world passport in favour of something that strips you of a safe 'plan B' you can start handing out advice to the rest of us on where we should live. Until then it is just proof that you don't have an argument worthy of the name.

 

Well, if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black...

Because that money should stay in the USA, where it belongs, instead of being wasted on a foreign agenda that has nothing to do with the interests and concerns of ordinary Americans.

And because neutrality is the wisest policy to pursue in foreign affairs, just as America's founders believed.

You and other progressives want to destroy the legacy of the founders by turning the federal government into a global police force.

So if anyone is anti-American, it's you.

Unlike you, I don't support any country except for the USA.