fanger
Gold Member
Ergo israels blockade of Gaza is an act of warRead post 1 dufus. Egypt initiated an act of war.israel fired the first shot
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ergo israels blockade of Gaza is an act of warRead post 1 dufus. Egypt initiated an act of war.israel fired the first shot
Ergo israels blockade of Gaza is an act of warRead post 1 dufus. Egypt initiated an act of war.israel fired the first shot
Ergo, you have issues with making valid, comparative analyses.Ergo israels blockade of Gaza is an act of warRead post 1 dufus. Egypt initiated an act of war.israel fired the first shot
On the morning of June 5, 1967, Israel launched a preemptive strike against Egyptian forces in response to Egypt's closing of the Straits of Tiran you could argue that was an act of defenseErgo israels blockade of Gaza is an act of warRead post 1 dufus. Egypt initiated an act of war.israel fired the first shot
Oh please. A blockade, of itself, is not necessarily a belligerent act of aggression. It is also a defensive strategy.
The blockade of Gaza is a RESPONSE to Hamas aggression, and thus an act of defense and not one of belligerency.
"Since 1945, the UN Security Councildetermines the legal status of blockades and by article 42 of the UN Charter, the Council can also apply blockades.[10] The UN Charter allows for the right of self-defense but requires that this must be immediately reported to the Security Council to ensure the maintenance of international peace."Ergo israels blockade of Gaza is an act of warRead post 1 dufus. Egypt initiated an act of war.israel fired the first shot
On the morning of June 5, 1967, Israel launched a preemptive strike against Egyptian forces in response to Egypt's closing of the Straits of Tiran you could argue that was an act of defenseErgo israels blockade of Gaza is an act of warRead post 1 dufus. Egypt initiated an act of war.israel fired the first shot
Oh please. A blockade, of itself, is not necessarily a belligerent act of aggression. It is also a defensive strategy.
The blockade of Gaza is a RESPONSE to Hamas aggression, and thus an act of defense and not one of belligerency.
On the morning of June 5, 1967, Israel launched a preemptive strike against Egyptian forces in response to Egypt's closing of the Straits of Tiran you could argue that was an act of defenseErgo israels blockade of Gaza is an act of warRead post 1 dufus. Egypt initiated an act of war.israel fired the first shot
Oh please. A blockade, of itself, is not necessarily a belligerent act of aggression. It is also a defensive strategy.
The blockade of Gaza is a RESPONSE to Hamas aggression, and thus an act of defense and not one of belligerency.
Sigh. As usual the frigging Zionist revisionist history. Is there any fact that the Zionists won't deny?
Direct from the CIA:
"Helms was awakened at 3:00 in the morning on 5 June by a call from the CIA Operations Center. The Foreign Broadcast Information Service had picked up reports that Israel had launched its attack.
June 5, 1967. Israel decides they must conduct a surprise military attack in order to eliminate as many enemy aircraft as they can. The control of the air was the decisive factor in the decimation of the armies of five arab armies.
ROTFLMFAO!You are just a bunch of fantasists. The fact is, Israel started the war. Every frigging objective historian, the CIA, British Intelligence and the Intelligence services of the western world know that Israel started the war. Only you Zionist morons keep up this ridiculous charade, convincing yourselves that starting the war is not starting a war. You people just can't accept the facts, it's hilarious. It's like the Japanese claiming the U.S. started the war because the U.S. embargoed Japan and Pearl Harbor was a pre-emptive strike. Grow up punk.
Again, flip flopping like a fish. Make up your mind.There was no belligerent aggression on the part of the Arab states. Unless you believe a blockade is belligerent aggression.
SHHH! The 'electronic intifada' brigade doesn't like hearing truth. It fucks up their narrative. And BTW it was 1948 that Jordan allowed the destruction of ALL previous Jewish presence in the West Bank. Hebron, Silwan, the Jewish Quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem; just to name a few.Adding that Jews were removed from Jerusalem by force in 1957 by Jordan.
I present facts, you make things up.<snip>
Don't hold your breath . . . . . . but you've been here long enough to know that.Still waiting for evidence that Israel was threatening the sovereignty or integrity of Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, and thus each of those nation's actions were defensive.
Yes, they did as the OP declared in the last sentence. Do you know how to read? Read the whole thing and then you'll know why. After all, it was because four Arab armies were amassed on their borders.israel fired the first shot
So you too flip flop like a fish. From your posts, it is clear that you, like the rest of the 'electronic intifada' brigade, have a very twisted grip on facts. It is OK for Hamas to fire first shots, but not OK for Israel to have fired first in 1967 all for the same supposed reasons.Ergo israels blockade of Gaza is an act of warRead post 1 dufus. Egypt initiated an act of war.israel fired the first shot
"the CIA assessed that Nasser’s military presence in the Sinai was defensive, stating that “Armored striking forces could breach the UAR’s double defense line in the Sinai in three to four days and drive the Egyptians west of the Suez Canal in seven to nine days. Israel could contain any attacks by Syria or Jordan during this period”
Neither U.S. nor Israeli intelligence assessed that there was any kind of serious threat of an Egyptian attack. On the contrary, both considered the possibility that Nasser might strike first as being extremely slim.
The current Israeli Ambassador to the U.S., Michael B. Oren, acknowledged in his book “Six Days of War“, widely regarded as the definitive account of the war, that “By all reports Israel received from the Americans, and according to its own intelligence, Nasser had no interest in bloodshed”.
Four days before Israel’s attack on Egypt, Helms met with a senior Israeli official who expressed Israel’s intent to go to war, and that the only reason it hadn’t already struck was because of efforts by the Johnson administration to restrain both sides to prevent a violent conflict.
“Helms interpreted the remarks as suggesting that Israel would attack very soon”, writes Robarge. He reported to Johnson “that Israel probably would start a war within a few days.”
Israel's attack on Egypt in June '67 was not 'preemptive' | Foreign Policy Journal
So no answer why Egypt removed the UN Peacekeepers, initiated war by violating international waters, and why Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria all had their armies massed on the border of Israel while publicly calling for the extermination of the Jewish people.The only fact is, Israel started the war. Can't you bozos ever resign yourselves to the facts. You are always pulling out some sort of rationalization. It's like the who cold cocks a passerby on the street and tells the police, well, "he reached in his pocket". It's still f_cking assault you clowns.
"At precisely 8 a.m. on June 5, 1967, virtually the entire Israeli air force streaked into Egyptian airspace simultaneously. Some aircraft entered from Israel's Negev desert to the east, some directly from major Israeli bases to the northeast, and hundreds from the Mediterranean to the north and northwest.......Today what is clear is that the Israelis wanted war, Egypt did not, the Soviets could have prevented it, and the Americans should have."
Twenty-Five Years Ago This Month
By Richard H. Curtiss
Thought so.