A question about rocket fire~and a paradox

[teddyearp]

I hope this stays in the I/P section.

For many days I have thought about asking the posters in this section who live in the United States this theoretical question.

Background.

For many years the southwest U.S. had endured mass illegal immigration; no let me cut to the chase. "La reconquista". Which means that the Mexicans want to take over 'land' that they lost during a war that they lost.

What has the U.S. done? Started to build a wall. Sound familiar? The other side has built tunnels. Sound familiar? The U.S. have attempted to destroy the tunnels. Sound familiar?

Now let me cut to the point. Say the Mexicans/Tijuana cartel grows tired of the 'occupation' or refusal of "La Reconquista" or the destruction of their tunnels and decides to build and fire rockets towards . . . say Long Beach, California, indiscriminately.

Even thought the U.S. can probably knock down these primitive rockets with their superior technology, how long; or better, how many of these rockets would you like to fall before the U.S. goes in and kicks their collective ASS?

 

[dilloduck]

I hope this stays in the I/P section.

For many days I have thought about asking the posters in this section who live in the United States this theoretical question.

Background.

For many years the southwest U.S. had endured mass illegal immigration; no let me cut to the chase. "La reconquista". Which means that the Mexicans want to take over 'land' that they lost during a war that they lost.

What has the U.S. done? Started to build a wall. Sound familiar? The other side has built tunnels. Sound familiar? The U.S. have attempted to destroy the tunnels. Sound familiar?

Now let me cut to the point. Say the Mexicans/Tijuana cartel grows tired of the 'occupation' or refusal of "La Reconquista" or the destruction of their tunnels and decides to build and fire rockets towards . . . say Long Beach, California, indiscriminately.

Even thought the U.S. can probably knock down these primitive rockets with their superior technology, how long; or better, how many of these rockets would you like to fall before the U.S. goes in and kicks their collective ASS?

If Obama is still the President ? We would never retaliate.

 

[eagle1462010]

We would go down to Mexico and stomp their butts. It is as simple as that.

 

[dilloduck]

We would go down to Mexico and stomp their butts. It is as simple as that.

Ya right-----as we sit and watch Mexico assist the invasion of our southern border.

 

[eagle1462010]

We would go down to Mexico and stomp their butts. It is as simple as that.

Ya right-----as we sit and watch Mexico assist the invasion of our southern border.

He asked if they were firing rockets. Different.

 

[Daniyel]

True, I don't remember the US asking for permission to go in Iraq chasing el-Qaeda..and that threat is far more distant.

 

[Moonglow]

we all know what would happen, the US would put an end to it with negotiations and then military intervention...not to mention the redneck militia would be infiltrating to kill...those over the southern border..

 

[Lipush]

We would go down to Mexico and stomp their butts. It is as simple as that.

Ya right-----as we sit and watch Mexico assist the invasion of our southern border.

It seems to me like you missed the point.

 

[teddyearp]

we all know what would happen, the US would put an end to it with negotiations and then military intervention...not to mention the redneck militia would be infiltrating to kill...those over the southern border..

We already even have some of that patrolling for now at least. Who knows what else?

 

[P F Tinmore]

I hope this stays in the I/P section.

For many days I have thought about asking the posters in this section who live in the United States this theoretical question.

Background.

For many years the southwest U.S. had endured mass illegal immigration; no let me cut to the chase. "La reconquista". Which means that the Mexicans want to take over 'land' that they lost during a war that they lost.

What has the U.S. done? Started to build a wall. Sound familiar? The other side has built tunnels. Sound familiar? The U.S. have attempted to destroy the tunnels. Sound familiar?

Now let me cut to the point. Say the Mexicans/Tijuana cartel grows tired of the 'occupation' or refusal of "La Reconquista" or the destruction of their tunnels and decides to build and fire rockets towards . . . say Long Beach, California, indiscriminately.

Even thought the U.S. can probably knock down these primitive rockets with their superior technology, how long; or better, how many of these rockets would you like to fall before the U.S. goes in and kicks their collective ASS?

The scenarios are not comparable. Mexico ceded land to the US in a post war treaty. Some was purchased by the US.

There has been no treaty ceding land to Israel.

 

[dilloduck]

I hope this stays in the I/P section.

For many days I have thought about asking the posters in this section who live in the United States this theoretical question.

Background.

For many years the southwest U.S. had endured mass illegal immigration; no let me cut to the chase. "La reconquista". Which means that the Mexicans want to take over 'land' that they lost during a war that they lost.

What has the U.S. done? Started to build a wall. Sound familiar? The other side has built tunnels. Sound familiar? The U.S. have attempted to destroy the tunnels. Sound familiar?

Now let me cut to the point. Say the Mexicans/Tijuana cartel grows tired of the 'occupation' or refusal of "La Reconquista" or the destruction of their tunnels and decides to build and fire rockets towards . . . say Long Beach, California, indiscriminately.

Even thought the U.S. can probably knock down these primitive rockets with their superior technology, how long; or better, how many of these rockets would you like to fall before the U.S. goes in and kicks their collective ASS?

The scenarios are not comparable. Mexico ceded land to the US in a post war treaty. Some was purchased by the US.

There has been no treaty ceding land to Israel.

God doesn't deal in treaties.

 

[teddyearp]

The scenarios are not comparable. Mexico ceded land to the US in a post war treaty. Some was purchased by the US.

There has been no treaty ceding land to Israel.

So there were no land purchases by the Jews in the late 1800's? Early 1900's? And though not a 'treaty' by the same standards, what was the UN partition plan then?

 

[P F Tinmore]

The scenarios are not comparable. Mexico ceded land to the US in a post war treaty. Some was purchased by the US.

There has been no treaty ceding land to Israel.

So there were no land purchases by the Jews in the late 1800's? Early 1900's? And though not a 'treaty' by the same standards, what was the US partition plan then?

I didn't say that. By 1948 the Jews owned about 7% of the land. But it was still Palestinian land.

The Jews own land in the US too and it is still US land.

The UN (not US) partition plan, resolution 181, was passed in the General Assembly in 1947. It recommended that the Security Council divide the land. The Security Council failed to act on it and it was never implemented.

Resolution 181 didn't happen.

 

[TooTall]

we all know what would happen, the US would put an end to it with negotiations and then military intervention...not to mention the redneck militia would be infiltrating to kill...those over the southern border..

Obama would draw a red line and then go to a fund raiser. When they crossed the red line he would draw another one, then he would play a a round of golf. And so it goes...............

 

[teddyearp]

The scenarios are not comparable. Mexico ceded land to the US in a post war treaty. Some was purchased by the US.

There has been no treaty ceding land to Israel.

So there were no land purchases by the Jews in the late 1800's? Early 1900's? And though not a 'treaty' by the same standards, what was the UN partition plan then?

I didn't say that. By 1948 the Jews owned about 7% of the land. But it was still Palestinian land.

The Jews own land in the US too and it is still US land.

The UN (not US) partition plan, resolution 181, was passed in the General Assembly in 1947. It recommended that the Security Council divide the land. The Security Council failed to act on it and it was never implemented.

Resolution 181 didn't happen.

Source? I see no evidence to support your claim that it A> didn't happen, or B> had to be acted upon by the Security Council.

United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[teddyearp]

we all know what would happen, the US would put an end to it with negotiations and then military intervention...not to mention the redneck militia would be infiltrating to kill...those over the southern border..

Obama would draw a red line and then go to a fund raiser. When they crossed the red line he would draw another one, then he would play a a round of golf. And so it goes...............

OK, OK folks. I guess I meant U.S. under some normal president . . . . . .

 

[P F Tinmore]

So there were no land purchases by the Jews in the late 1800's? Early 1900's? And though not a 'treaty' by the same standards, what was the UN partition plan then?

I didn't say that. By 1948 the Jews owned about 7% of the land. But it was still Palestinian land.

The Jews own land in the US too and it is still US land.

The UN (not US) partition plan, resolution 181, was passed in the General Assembly in 1947. It recommended that the Security Council divide the land. The Security Council failed to act on it and it was never implemented.

Resolution 181 didn't happen.

Source? I see no evidence to support your claim that it A> didn't happen, or B> had to be acted upon by the Security Council.

United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From your link:

Immediately after adoption of the Resolution by the General Assembly, the civil war broke out.[10] The partition plan was not implemented.[11]

Also.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D66JSmgiUI]Who Said Israel Has a Right to Exist? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Daniyel]

I didn't say that. By 1948 the Jews owned about 7% of the land. But it was still Palestinian land.

The Jews own land in the US too and it is still US land.

The UN (not US) partition plan, resolution 181, was passed in the General Assembly in 1947. It recommended that the Security Council divide the land. The Security Council failed to act on it and it was never implemented.

Resolution 181 didn't happen.

Source? I see no evidence to support your claim that it A> didn't happen, or B> had to be acted upon by the Security Council.

United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From your link:

Immediately after adoption of the Resolution by the General Assembly, the civil war broke out.[10] The partition plan was not implemented.[11]

Also.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D66JSmgiUI]Who Said Israel Has a Right to Exist? - YouTube[/ame]

People have rights, but the pretty words about Israel existing in the middle east is harsh and primitive.
So with this being said, the Palestinians never accepted the partition plan so their part expelled, Israel accepted.

 

[irosie91]

A point for discussion-----the term "Palestinian land" appears often on this board and in the world
and in my experience-----the term "Muslim Land" came up many times -----I have actually
only very very rarely come across the term "jewish land" ..
"Christian land or CHRISTENDOM" ----seems to have become superannuated....
Hindu land does not seem to exist anywhere-----
I need definitions ----it boils down ----in current times to only two Issues "muslim land"
and 'Palestinian land" now that the term UKRAINIAN land-----is so messed up that it
cannot stand up to debate

 

[P F Tinmore]

Source? I see no evidence to support your claim that it A> didn't happen, or B> had to be acted upon by the Security Council.

United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From your link:

Immediately after adoption of the Resolution by the General Assembly, the civil war broke out.[10] The partition plan was not implemented.[11]

Also.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D66JSmgiUI]Who Said Israel Has a Right to Exist? - YouTube[/ame]

People have rights, but the pretty words about Israel existing in the middle east is harsh and primitive.
So with this being said, the Palestinians never accepted the partition plan so their part expelled, Israel accepted.

Where is the part about the Security Council and the implementation? The General Assembly resolution was just a non binding recommendation. It means nothing without actions by the Security Council.