Fernando
Everything posted by Fernando
-
So this is the info I got per six day war: According to all the military analysts and pundits, it was to be a lopsided match. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) consisted of 275,000 troops, compared to the 456,000 soldiers of the combined Iraqi, Syrian, Jordanian and Egyptian armies. The united Arab forces also had a decided edge with regards to weaponry and military equipment: they boasted more than double the amount of tanks, and close to four times the amount of combat aircraft. The three-week period preceding the Six-Day War was one of dread, shock and fright for the residents of the Holy Land. http://m.chabad.org/multimedia/timeline_cdo/aid/525341/jewish/Introduction.htm What I heard in the past about this conflict it's the same that this site report. So then tell me if what I have said in the past is wrong?
-
What point? That Israel gone to war against terrorism?
-
Well when you hijacked a bus I'm supposed to let it slide? When the country is a heaven for terrorist organization is that supposed to be OK? I ask why does Israel do this? And all I keep seeing is that they get provoke into it by terrorist act. See it would be a genocide if Israel came and bomb my country. My country that has done nothing or its a heaven for terrorist organization. They are going to war like USA at Afghanistan, and in a war environment casualties happen.
-
Because you mix fact with things that are one sided. Like this: the hijacking of bus 300 in the seventies out of protest- where the palestinian hijackers were arrested and afterwards brutally killed in could blood) You want me to side with hijackers? No matter what the reason is, when you hijack a bus your a criminal. There's nothing peaceful about that.
-
Like I said Ecuador was bigger. Something a long these lines: I meant that because of this war in which different nations came against Israel, it actually expanded their borders. Is that not right?
-
If I'm not mistaken, the plan that Israel acquired further land after getting there was after a war that they had against other nations. The 6th day war or whatever it was. They came against Israel a couple of nations and they lost. In that process they lost lands. Again you keep bringing me such a one sided argument. I want to hear both sides as well.
-
Ecuador was more bigger. Brazil is one of the country in South America that has taken more land from many nations. Ecuador and Uruguay are the two countries that have been screwed the most over the years relative to land being taken away.
-
Yeah like that. But the recent conflict of modernity has been with Peru.
-
Yes you guys did in the past
-
It seems like you and everyone keeps coming back to one gigantic point that I really have not talked about. That's that Israel came and took possession of Palestinian land all from 1948. Now if I'm not mistaken wasn't the major powers after world War 2 took that land and gave it to Israel? Second taking land from another country has happened many times in my country of Ecuador. Peru has robbed land from us, Brazil as well. Yet we don't go to Peru and Brazil becoming a terrorist organization. So land itself just won't justify anything for me. It has to be how the people of Palestine has acted and Israel against each other. Here is when I need more information. But not just from Palestinian but from Israel. Because all I hear is that Israel did that and this. Well I need to know to hear the other side and see what's what. Like I believe Hamas is dirty and uses school, hospital and un building to fire rockets from. So Israel has no choice there. So in every argument and point you bring I want to hear the other side as well. In conclusion the land argument is not enough for me to say, hey I'm going to side with this terrorist organization....
- 16,138 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- governments
- laws of countries
- (and 1 more)
-
So because of that then Palestinian nation is allowed to create terrorist organization? I should be worried now that native Americans might do the same? Not making a distinction, I'm saying that Palestinian nation has no sovereign over itself when it let's a terrorist organization run free and wild. Is just a heaven for terrorist.
- 16,138 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- governments
- laws of countries
- (and 1 more)
-
So they are no country but a terrorist organization affiliate as I said. And because of that there will never be peace till the terrorists threat is eliminated.
- 16,138 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- governments
- laws of countries
- (and 1 more)
-
Yes but Palestinian nation have no control over them. Hamas attack Israel. See it would be different is Israel attack say Belgium. A country with no terrorist affiliation or that has harm them. Here Hamas attack but does Palestinian nation do anything about it? So logic course is to go to war against terrorism.
- 16,138 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- governments
- laws of countries
- (and 1 more)
-
So here's the thing, Israel gets hit with war crimes just like usa. It's find and dandy and some people will pay for that, like soldiers and what not. But a nation that has no control of themselves like Palestinian nation that is run by a terrorist organization they will never fall under that. Because a terrorist organization does not fall under any jurisdiction.
-
So no evidence against it or for it. Then that doesn't solve our issues. Now here see this, the problem I have here is that you think Israel is enjoying this. Israel for a long time tried to negotiate with a state that is being backed by a terrorist organization. That was and always will be a lost cause. I don't think nobody wants to deal with Palestinian nation either. I mean if the world cared they would have sent the military to get rid of Hamas. Instead they let it continue there and keep attacking Israel. So if the Palestinian nation does not take action against Hamas then who will?
- 16,138 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- governments
- laws of countries
- (and 1 more)
-
No not really, because it still left me with the biggest question I had from the beginning. Is Hamas using hospital, un refuge and school to fire rockets from? Tell me, have in the past terrorist organization used any means necessary to get what they wanted? The biggest mistake I think is the world thinks that any peace can come when dealing with Palestinian nation. Because Hamas is a terrorist organization and one thing we know is that we don't negotiate with terrorist. Per usa yes we all know that Iraq was all a hoax and fabricated. But was using it as an example being the last big war from an advanced country in which casualties happen. That being said I still find it hard that Israel would target such building if it wasn't for this thing I asked.
-
Yes people dying is a byproduct of any war. Study past war men. It has happened in many wars that usa has been, in major conflicts of European nations and what not. Israel is at war with Hamas. Palestinian is lost its past when they sided with a terrorist organization. Israel would never have enter Gaza if it wasn't for this terrorist organization constantly firing rockets their way. Israel protects itself and has gone to war with Hamas. Which should have happened a long time ago. The problem will be if they don't completely get rid of Hamas because all these casualties would have been for nothing.
-
The rocket by the beach is just a byproduct of the conflict. If you knew about the deaths that happened in the Iraq conflict when usa was there you wouldn't bring such things. Is not like the country meant it. When you go to war you will get these types of casualties. Moreover the Palestinian state doesn't exist. It doesn't exist because when you side yourself with a terrorist organization your no longer in control of your sovereign.
-
@Mohammed Seif, I have a question since you always give me good feedback when ever it comes to middle east stuff. Giving the protest and such against Israel attacking Gaza and hitting places like school and such, I have to ask one thing. Is there a reason they actually hit those targets on purpose? Cause Israel is a country, a sovereign nation, and as such in this common era it's rare to commit such atrocities without any cause. So it leads me to ask, does this happen because Hamas a terrorist organization uses schools, hospital and such considered safe heaven to launch rockets and defend themselves? If this is the case, then what course it leaves a nation to defend itself? I'm sure if USA was on the receiving end being hit frequently by rockets from a terrorist organization that uses kids and defenseless people as shield then it leaves no option.
-
Kalou was really good for us. Compare to what Torres offer us, Kalou was a good poacher. The Kalou, and Chicharito are not world class player but we can't have world class player sitting in the bench. Poachers are just that, like Dzeko able to come into the game and get a goal here and there. Dzeko is actually above these two lots, but that's the idea a poacher. A player in that mold is what we need if Lukaku leaves.
-
If we sell him then the replacement has to be someone that is not in the mold of Costa/Drogba. We don't need another target man. Here is when Torres would have been awesome if he was half the player he was at Liverpool! So I think it has to be someone in the type of Chicharito/Kalou player. A pure poacher. It would have been Mandžukić, but he's of. So I don't know who will that be unless Mourinho sees as Schurle the option with maybe adding a youth....but the youth is pushing it. We all would love Bamford to come into the set up and leave us dazzling. But I have no faith in our youth policy. I will believe when I see it, like doubting Thomas.
-
Arsenal getting the Colombian keeper David Ospina. He is very good. Arsenal are starting to buy quality players now. It changed since Ozil of last season.
-
Everton line up £20m Romelu Lukaku bid to secure Christian Atsu loan http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/492225/Everton-line-up-20m-Romelu-Lukaku-bid-to-secure-Christian-Atsu-loan
-
Did anyone catch this from Mourinho: The Blues boss added: "We clearly needed a player for the midfield with a different profile and we had two or three options, but, my club were fantastic with the way they killed the situation with Fabregas. I wonder who those other options was. Paulinho?
-
Terry, Cahill and Ivan for CB. That's decent but might want another one unless we use Zouma as that 4th spot. Then Azpi for RB and Felipe for LB. No real cover for either one side, but it's good if we use Ake as well. So depending if we use youth then we will have enough cover. If not we might need one more defender.
