Europe more dangerouse than USA? (gunshots vs terror threat)

Its neither, its a survival issue ....

 

in a sense survival is about politics

 

Excuse me? since when is the result of a war decided by international law, instead of by bullets and treaties?

And it's absurd for you to demand the Israelis abide by your interpretation of international law, while their neighbors -- who have launched multiple wars of aggression against Israel -- get a free pass. Wars of aggression are supposedly illegal too, you know. Why aren't you lecturing us about them?

Come to think of it, when's the last time you protested the annexation of Tibet by China? Or Kashmir by India....

Hell, we can hit closer to home than that: The West Bank of the river Jordan was occupied by Jordan in 1948, then annexed by Jordan in 1950. It remained under Jordanian rule until 1967 when it was occupied, though not annexed, by Israel. Jordan did not officially relinquish its claim to the West Bank until 1988.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation

So where are you on the subject of Jordan illegally occupying, then annexing the West Bank? You have no problem with that, but you object to the Israelis running the Jordanians' butts back home in 1967?

All this indignation about Israel illegally annexing territory is a one-sided smoke screen -- just like all the self-righteous indignation when the Israelis blow up some bomb-making SOB, and a few of his family and neighbors die with him.

For some strange reason, the people who scream about Israelis targeting such scum -- and unfortunately also taking out a few of the civilian accomplices they hide amongst -- have no problem with Palestinian suicide bombers deliberately choosing 'soft' civilian targets in Israel: packed family restaurants; students on public buses; bedridden patients in hospitals; or other random non-military targets.

If you push those folks hard enough, they'll give a nod to political correctness by reciting some rote answer about deploring violence from either side -- then go right back to slamming the Israelis and making excuses for the Palestinians.

 

I concur exactly with Troy. (And I don't have exactly a sterling history with the Jews so I know it is not a biased opinion) I cannot believe that rockets can be fired near constantly, sometimes at Israeli girl's schools, deliberately targeting civilians, then the Jews bulldoze Arafat's house in retaliation, for example, and everybody screams at how they over-react! I am sorry if a child gets hurt in he process, but the reason we have these deadly, unwinnable, protracted wars is that the West is so good at targeting that few civilians suffer pain. If more civilians suffer the consequenses for the rocket attacks, perhaps they wud think twice. Their wud be very little successful terrorism if the people they are mixing with and hiding behind wud simply not allow it. What did it take to make Germany and especially Japan stop their aggression? Pain on an unimaginable level. Nothing less worked. It is different here because entire countries (arguably) are not attacking. So, a rocket comes from that neighborhood, remove that neighborhood from the map. It will become apparent to the nearby neighborhoods that they ought not allow that **** in their neighborhood. End of war. I listened to Netanyahu in an interview one time and he said that the more you try to reconcile, the more they will feel emboldened and attack. Strength is the only thing that will stop wars. Once they are stopped, talks can resume.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oN3K1Wsd-I0&feature=related Watch the whole thing but 11:00 on applies to this discussion. Pay attention to the comments below - in particular the one by Nassprivatestyler. The world needs more men like Netanyahu, the Israeli version of Dick Cheney, a man that "get's it". Funny thing, many of the leftists probably understood Netanyahu, sympathized with him and, even if they are too dim to really get it, saw Bill Mayer agree and thus go along with whatever he said...until I said he was like Dick Cheney.

 

Well, I happen to think the comparison to Dick Cheney is extremely unfair to Netanyahu....

I'm no expert on Middle Eastern culture and languages, so take what I'm saying here with a grain of salt. Real scholars (or real Arabs) are invited to straighten me out, if I'm wrong. But what I've been led to believe from my reading is that there's no across-the-board, direct equivalent to our notion of a truce or ceasefire in the Arab culture.

To us (Americans), those words generally imply that we're agreeing to stop the fighting as a preliminary step towards negotiating a more comprehensive peace agreement. The closest Arab words, in contrast, supposedly indicate just a temporary halt to the fighting, with no lasting peace implied -- a chance for opponents to catch their breath, bind up their wounds, rearm, and then get down to business again.

So when Americans negotiate a truce, ceasefire or armistice and it doesn't hold up, we feel that we've been had -- snookered, lied to and backstabbed, even. Meanwhile the Arabs are wondering what all the angst and anger are about, because they never promised anything but a temporary stop to the fighting -- for tactical or strategic purposes -- to begin with....

 

Problem is ... when push comes to shove the real ugly face of war pops up ...

Im an Arab and an Egyptian, a lot of my relatives fought in 1973 and i lost a few family and family friends in the process, why ? Simple they took our land by force and we fought back for it.

Now we can start an endless debate how this land is theirs or ours or my great great grand papy laid a brick there, it has Egypt written on it etc... but in reality its plain and simple, they came in with force, which gave us every right to fight back their ARMY (not civilians) to take what we think is ours.

Now imagine the example i made earlier regarding some one entering your house by force and taking residence there, imagine how you would feel when you are unable to protect yourself, the emotional and physical damage that occurs when you cant even protect your family.
Now imagine on the other side, you fought for this land, you spilled blood and guts to take it, you finally have a place to call home after years of wondering, its your dream and your life and some one is threatening your family and your loved ones .....

In that situation very few humans turn to civilized resolution but would want to tear the other person with their own teeth, when survival of your loved ones is in stack trust me, a human turns into a wounded animal. Yet restraint and compassion is what makes us different and should be the ruling factor in our behavior but behavior is so much more difficult than talking.
Reminds me of a friend back in school, who seemed to be the kindest person i know, never fought never used violence but at one time he did fight and only then i knew he was Egyptian champion in Judo. Lets just say he fubared the other guy who had hit him first. My point is Strength should give compassion and peace not violence. At the end of the day isnt this what we all want? peace? yet it needs to be enforced its not some thing u can get with out fighting for it ..


get my drift?

 

"Simple they took our land and we fought back for it" -
Wik -
During May and June the Israeli government had worked hard to keep Jordan out of any war; it was concerned about being attacked on multiple fronts, and did not want to have to deal with the Jordanian West Bank. However, Jordan's King Hussein got caught up in the wave of pan-Arab nationalism preceding the war;[g] and so, on May 30, Jordan signed a mutual defense treaty with Egypt, thereby joining the military alliance already in place between Egypt and Syria. The move surprised both Egyptians and foreign observers, because President Nasser had generally been at odds with Hussein, calling him an "imperialist lackey" just days earlier.[94] Nasser said that any differences between him and Hussein were erased "in one moment" and declared: "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight."[94]

At the end of May 1967, Jordanian forces were given to the command of an Egyptian general, Abdul Munim Riad.[95] On the same day, Nasser proclaimed: "The armies of Egypt, Jordan and Syria are poised on the borders of Israel ... to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not of more declarations."[96] Israel called upon Jordan numerous times to refrain from hostilities. According to Mutawi, Hussein was caught on the horns of a galling dilemma: allow Jordan to be dragged into war and face the brunt of the Israeli response, or remain neutral and risk full-scale insurrection among his own people. Army Commander-in-Chief General Sharif Zaid Ben Shaker warned in a press conference that "If Jordan does not join the war a civil war will erupt in Jordan".[97] However, according to Avi Shlaim, Hussein's actions were prompted by his feelings of Arab nationalism.[g]

On June 3, days before the war, Egypt flew to Amman two battalions of commandos tasked with infiltrating Israel's borders and engaging in attacks and bombings so as to draw IDF into a Jordanian front and ease the pressure on the Egyptians. Soviet-made artillery and Egyptian military supplies and crews were also flown to Jordan.[98]
This put Arab forces just 17 kilometers from Israel's coast, a jump-off point from which a well-coordinated tank assault would likely cut Israel in two within half an hour.[98] Hussein had doubled the size of Jordan's army in the last decade and had US training and arms delivered as recently as early 1967, and it was feared that it could be used by other Arab states as staging grounds for operations against Israel; thus, attack from the West Bank was always viewed by the Israeli leadership as a threat to Israel's existence.[98] At the same time several other Arab states not bordering Israel, including Iraq, Sudan, Kuwait and Algeria, began mobilizing their armed forces.

The Egyptian attack plan was code-named Operation Dawn, and was planned by General Abdel Hakim Amer. It called for the strategic bombing of Israeli airfields, ports, cities, and the Negev Nuclear Research Center. Arab armies would then invade Israel, and cut it in half with an armored thrust through the Negev.
In his speech to Arab trade unionists on May 26, Nasser announced: "If Israel embarks on an aggression against Syria or Egypt, the battle against Israel will be a general one and not confined to one spot on the Syrian or Egyptian borders. The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel."[99][100]
Speaking to the UN General Assembly in September 1960, Nasser had stated that "The only solution to Palestine is that matters should return to the condition prevailing before the error was committed - i.e., the annulment of Israel's existence." In 1964 he said, "We swear to God that we shall not rest until we restore the Arab nation to Palestine and Palestine to the Arab nation. There is no room for imperialism and there is no room for Britain in our country, just as there is no room for Israel within the Arab nation." In 1965 he asserted, "We shall not enter Palestine with its soil covered in sand, we shall enter it with its soil saturated in blood."

 

Thx for the link mark, you missed a few points:
wiki-
Nasser publicly denied that Egypt would strike first and spoke of a negotiated peace if the Palestinians were allowed to return to their homeland and of a possible compromise over the Strait of Tiran.[74]

Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban wrote in his autobiography that he found "Nasser's assurance that he did not plan an armed attack" convincing, adding that "Nasser did not want war; he wanted victory without war".[102][103] Writing from Egypt on June 4, 1967, New York Times journalist James Reston observed: "Cairo does not want war and it is certainly not ready for war. But it has already accepted the possibility, even the likelihood, of war, as if it had lost control of the situation."[104]
----------------

Honestly i gave my view from what i have seen and brought up with, stories from relatives in the war their beliefs and their pains. I am sure wiki has accuracy but i am part of it living in the dispute and hate. I just truly like to see the good in people and i like to allow for something that for some reason its always forgotten, human beings make mistakes, miss interpret information and may let their emotions guide their words and actions rather than their brains.

I had a very interesting debate once with a very nice American fellow who was visiting Egypt, it was amazing how different we both viewed events. Culture, propaganda, media, ideas etc. shape us so differently.
How are we to truly measure what is right or wrong? Many law suits are won because of well structured presentation even if the case is false and some others fail even when the case is true.

I dunno if im setting my view clearly but there is no such thing as absolute truth, there is always the different justifications, understanding and interpretations of it.

I hope some day some honest to god leaders have the wisdom, strength, compassion and will power to think about what should be done and work bloody hard to get this over with.

I will not post any more as i only wanted to share my view as some one living in the region, i do not wish to debate nor i am saying Egyptians, Palestinians, or Israeli are saints. Each country has its share of mistakes the sooner we realize there is no "good" and "bad" just wrong decisions and ongoing ones the sooner we solve this ....

 

You seem like a good guy and I just posted what I saw in Wiki because what I thought I knew from school was totally one-sided. I twice watched an History Channel show that recreated the '73 war and it was pretty one-sided. I do not buy that it is propaganda because it was one-sided but our life-experiences do color the way we see things. I have learned more about the wars (plural) because of this discussion than all I had learned previous in my life. At least the discussion forces one to Google some differing viewpoints and thereby learn. (I saw everything from "poor us" to "poor them" on both sides painted from many vantage points.)
By the way, did you attend an American University? Your English is impressive and replete with US slang! ("FUBARed", "dunno", "get my drift?")

 

( i know i said i wouldn't post but meh )
Nah never been to the US, had many American teachers and friends though

I use to hang around my teachers at school and i spent most of my time in school with teachers. Different cultures, religions, faiths and believes always fascinated me, i dont like the idea of people or culture dictating my beliefs or ideas. i would rather find out myself so to speak
I did not choose my religion because my parents told me to do so, i chose what i thought suits me after reading and learning and reaching my own view.

I must have picked up the slang along the way

Thx mark i understand your point of view just wanted to clarify mine. I never bought the US is bad propaganda because my experience has tough me regardless of where you are from we are all humans and we all share the basic necessities in life and having different points of views is what makes life worth exploring
I even ran into an Israeli dude once, was a nice chap had some very interesting talks with him ...
its like we are both the same coin, each on his side but can not see the other ...

 

Excellent posts Vulkyn!

 

Ditto to the above. Education opens all of us to the power of understanding. It is sad that the radicals in the world seem to be so uneducated. That is the fault of nations who do not care to educate their population.

 

Seriously... Vulkyn is a very intelligent guy. Excellent posts!!

To those who vilify Arabs: Vulkyn represents the majority of Arabs and of all people in all lands.

It is the minority (like our far right or left wingers in the States) that you hear all the crazy quotes from. The average person is usually open minded and interested in peace, so they can live their lives and raise their families.

I've been to Arab countries and Israel. Their populations are, indeed two sides of the same coin.

Same was true in Nazi Germany. My wife's father was stationed at the Berlin wall as an American. The German guards and the American guards would get together and drink beer. They were friendly and were the same - just two sides of the same coin.

 

i just mentioned the law and the un mandate, i didn't make it personal

and it's not my interpretation of the law but the facts of the law

as for the suicide bombers, it's called asymmetrical warfare, isreal has jets the palistinians have people

you seem to be against one means of delivery and not the other, dead is dead no matter how the bomb got there, war is hell

just think if another country was after a fugitive in the us and we didn't want to surrender them, what would your reaction be if they bombed us to get him?

isreal may have the right to bomb but in the long time is it the right thing to do?

are more suicide bombers created that way?

what's being done has been done for 50 years. what is your definition of crazy?

unfortunately peace between them may be beyond them and may have to be imposed

sometimes there is no good answer just the least bad one

chemotherapy isn't isn't the ideal but it's better than the alternative

 

So when the Israelis blow up a home because the guy there is storing rockets, or building bombs for suicide bombers, and a suicide bomber blows up a restaurant full of families happily celebrating a holiday, you think the only difference is the 'means of delivery'?!? You honestly equate a military strike against a specific threat with setting off a bomb full of rusty nails in the middle of a crowd?

I don't think we're going to find enough common ground to have an intelligent conversation; your ideas of right and wrong are completely outside my value system. I personally distinguish between military action and random terrorism -- just like I distinguish between self defense and random murder, or between hunting and random cruelty to pets.