Political Crossfire Forums

[SpartanPhalanx]

thatisnotme wrote: mendosan wrote: thatisnotme wrote: SpartanPhalanx wrote: thatisnotme wrote: ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Secondary Oak wrote: Skywalker wrote: plz can anyone explain me her point of view...
Because a cease-fire will gain nothing. It will simply return things back to how they were - and that means Hezbollah sitting on the border and occasionally shooting at Israelis and kidnapping them, which is an unacceptable status for Israel and apparently also for the US.

That's paradoxical indeed: cease-fire will gain nothing and fighting will gain nothing either. So it's a pointless cause to begin with.

There is no proof that the fighting will gain nothing. Wait-and-see is a prudent stand at this moment.

Nothing except the radicalisation of Public Opinion against Israel and the United States, and possibly the start of WWIII. Is THAT the 'something' you want? because it sure isn't what I want pal.....

Pure speculation on your part... one can easily speculate also that the Israeli actions against Lebanon could avert WWIII.

Who would fight WWIII some shi**y Arab states and Iran, I don't think so, just the usual rhetoric, people need to accept that a cease fire just means Hez get to rearm and the war starts again in six year.


Agree on that, Hezbollah has to be reduced to a non-entity.

In that case, so does Zionism, you know, the notion that Israel HAS to be a state for the Jews, the in-gathering of world Jewry and other such non-sense which contributes to the problems in the region has to be reduced to the same non-entity.

If Israel can ditch Zionism and become a genuine state where the individual rights of ALL its citizens are respected, where Arab Israelis have EXACTLY the same rights as Jews, where there is a JUST solution to the Palestinian question, then they might be on the right track.

Until then, Israel will continue to dictate and pummel its neighbours if they don't bend over when told to.

[thatisnotme]

SpartanPhalanx wrote: thatisnotme wrote: mendosan wrote: thatisnotme wrote: SpartanPhalanx wrote: thatisnotme wrote: ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Secondary Oak wrote: Skywalker wrote: plz can anyone explain me her point of view...
Because a cease-fire will gain nothing. It will simply return things back to how they were - and that means Hezbollah sitting on the border and occasionally shooting at Israelis and kidnapping them, which is an unacceptable status for Israel and apparently also for the US.

That's paradoxical indeed: cease-fire will gain nothing and fighting will gain nothing either. So it's a pointless cause to begin with.

There is no proof that the fighting will gain nothing. Wait-and-see is a prudent stand at this moment.

Nothing except the radicalisation of Public Opinion against Israel and the United States, and possibly the start of WWIII. Is THAT the 'something' you want? because it sure isn't what I want pal.....

Pure speculation on your part... one can easily speculate also that the Israeli actions against Lebanon could avert WWIII.

Who would fight WWIII some shi**y Arab states and Iran, I don't think so, just the usual rhetoric, people need to accept that a cease fire just means Hez get to rearm and the war starts again in six year.


Agree on that, Hezbollah has to be reduced to a non-entity.

... become a genuine state where the individual rights of ALL its citizens are respected...


You should bring that manifesto to every Muslim country, starting with Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, UEA, and so on.

[mr_happy]

If you want a rationale argument read the following, if not ignore my post.

Reason 1:
Israel, Syria, Iran, and Hezbollah are not involved in these talks. Sure, Italy can agree to a cease-fire, but against who? All Cease-fire means in these talks is Israel ceasing fire, they bear no mention of Hezbollah ceasing fire. Now, if Israel and hezbollah are not part of these talks, how can there be a ceasefire? Sinoira claims that he has no control over Hezbollah so how can he call for a cease fire? What abotu Syria and Iran? If they aren't part of the talks how can they be told to stop sending weapons to hezbollah?

Reason 2:

ISrael went to war for two things
1. The return of the two abducted soldiers
2. A cessation of rocket fire against Israeli civillians.

Hezbollah has promised to do neither so why would they stop fighting? Hezbollah could end the war right now by returning the Israeli troops. Sinoira could end the war right now by forcing Nasrallah to return the troops. Hell, Sinoira could end the war by enforcing Security Council Resolution 1559, but he hasn't. Until at least #1 of the demands is met, there is no reason for ISrael to accept a cease-fire.


Reason 3:
The ceasefire agreement does not call for Hezbollah to disarm, pullback, or cease hostilities. It does not call for Iran or Syria to stop supplying wepons. It does not call for Lebanon to implement 1559. All it does is tell ISrael to stop its current war. This cease-fire will last six years and in 2012 there will be fighting again. Any ceasefire needs to be permanent. The loss of life thus far has been bad enough. There's no need for it to happen again and again. Lebanon will never recover if it faces a war every decade.

[mr_happy]

SpartanPhalanx wrote: thatisnotme wrote: mendosan wrote: thatisnotme wrote: SpartanPhalanx wrote: thatisnotme wrote: ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Secondary Oak wrote: Skywalker wrote: plz can anyone explain me her point of view...
Because a cease-fire will gain nothing. It will simply return things back to how they were - and that means Hezbollah sitting on the border and occasionally shooting at Israelis and kidnapping them, which is an unacceptable status for Israel and apparently also for the US.

That's paradoxical indeed: cease-fire will gain nothing and fighting will gain nothing either. So it's a pointless cause to begin with.

There is no proof that the fighting will gain nothing. Wait-and-see is a prudent stand at this moment.

Nothing except the radicalisation of Public Opinion against Israel and the United States, and possibly the start of WWIII. Is THAT the 'something' you want? because it sure isn't what I want pal.....

Pure speculation on your part... one can easily speculate also that the Israeli actions against Lebanon could avert WWIII.

Who would fight WWIII some shi**y Arab states and Iran, I don't think so, just the usual rhetoric, people need to accept that a cease fire just means Hez get to rearm and the war starts again in six year.


Agree on that, Hezbollah has to be reduced to a non-entity.

In that case, so does Zionism, you know, the notion that Israel HAS to be a state for the Jews, the in-gathering of world Jewry and other such non-sense which contributes to the problems in the region has to be reduced to the same non-entity.

If Israel can ditch Zionism and become a genuine state where the individual rights of ALL its citizens are respected, where Arab Israelis have EXACTLY the same rights as Jews, where there is a JUST solution to the Palestinian question, then they might be on the right track.

Until then, Israel will continue to dictate and pummel its neighbours if they don't bend over when told to.


Is that why the Israeli laws give palestinian Israelis more rights than any other arab country? Check out Syria or Kuwait. i'm sure they treat their Palestinians well. What about Jordan? They killed more palestinians in one month than ISraeli killed in both intifadas. Israel treats the palestinians better than any other middle eastern nation. If I were Palestinian i'd be in line for ISraeli citizenship right now. What the PA extremeists dont get is that Israel is their ultiamte asset. Israel is a very welathy country, and when they form their own, they could easily piggyback off its economy to get a nice vibrant one of their own. If the PA had realized that 60 years ago there would be no refugee camps but resorts and flats.