US Might free Jonathan Pollard

[pbel]

But it is Israel that has made all those offers for peace: Offering back the Sinai, Golan for peace and making multiple offers to the Palestinians for peace.
Whoops! Forgot that , eh Peebel??

You mean after you steal someone's land, we'll let you have some of it back if you give us Peace.

The Arabs aren't going for that and you know it.

When someone attacks you first, it's not called stealing.
But ya, that the only way the Golan will ever be returned.
Show me on example in history where a country who gained territory through conquest from their enemy , gave back the territory without a peace treaty of some sort?
I don't understand why you make it sound unbelievable.

Nazi Germany, Nazi-like Japan, Nazi-like Serbia...besides conquest by force like Israel's 67 pre-emptive strike to steal land is illegal today in International Law.

 

[toastman]

You mean after you steal someone's land, we'll let you have some of it back if you give us Peace.

The Arabs aren't going for that and you know it.

When someone attacks you first, it's not called stealing.
But ya, that the only way the Golan will ever be returned.
Show me on example in history where a country who gained territory through conquest from their enemy , gave back the territory without a peace treaty of some sort?
I don't understand why you make it sound unbelievable.

Nazi Germany, Nazi-like Japan, Nazi-like Serbia...besides conquest by force like Israel's 67 pre-emptive strike to steal land is illegal today in International Law.

They didn't give back the land because they were defeated. What a terrible example Pbel.

And the pre emptive strike was not to steal land . But i'm used to anti Zionists making up shit.

 

[pbel]

When someone attacks you first, it's not called stealing.
But ya, that the only way the Golan will ever be returned.
Show me on example in history where a country who gained territory through conquest from their enemy , gave back the territory without a peace treaty of some sort?
I don't understand why you make it sound unbelievable.

Nazi Germany, Nazi-like Japan, Nazi-like Serbia...besides conquest by force like Israel's 67 pre-emptive strike to steal land is illegal today in International Law.

They didn't give back the land because they were defeated. What a terrible example Pbel.

And the pre emptive strike was not to steal land . But i'm used to anti Zionists making up shit.

Oh you mean America and Russia's conquests of Germany and Japan were a peace deal?...Dumb da da dumb.

 

[aris2chat]

Apparently, most of the Middle East. No statues of Sadat today.

Egypt and Syria are very poor countries. They are by category considered "Third WOrld".

Israel wasn't exactly a rich country then. Regardless, nothing you have said backs up your comment that it was not much of a victory. Because it was. A miraculous one actually.
And no, I'm not just saying that because it's Israel, I'm saying it because it's the truth.

beating up on poorly trained third world conscripts using second hand Soviet weapons...

After they got the drop on you with a surprise attack.

Meh, not that impressive. Of course, the US has had to bail the Zionist Entity out of that fight and every fight since.

Russia gave Egypt top of the line brand new weapons, not second hand. If Egypt went to war with soldiers less than ready, that in nothing to do with Israel. Jordan and Syria I know had the best of training.
If they were not ready, they should not have begun a war with Israel. Arabs thought they could trample Israel in the dust, oops, they were wrong.

 

[pbel]

JoeB131, et al,

I'm a bit confused.

beating up on poorly trained third world conscripts using second hand Soviet weapons...

After they got the drop on you with a surprise attack.

(COMMENT)

There was no surprise attack (on the part of the Israelis).

Meh, not that impressive. Of course, the US has had to bail the Zionist Entity out of that fight and every fight since.

(COMMENT)

What do you mean here?

The US wasn't involved in any air, ground or sea action in support of the Israelis. Where did you get this?

Most Respectfully,
R

Et Tu, Rocco? Tell us what a Pre-Emptive strike is in that History Book?

 

[pbel]

Israel wasn't exactly a rich country then. Regardless, nothing you have said backs up your comment that it was not much of a victory. Because it was. A miraculous one actually.
And no, I'm not just saying that because it's Israel, I'm saying it because it's the truth.

beating up on poorly trained third world conscripts using second hand Soviet weapons...

After they got the drop on you with a surprise attack.

Meh, not that impressive. Of course, the US has had to bail the Zionist Entity out of that fight and every fight since.

Russia gave Egypt top of the line brand new weapons, not second hand. If Egypt went to war with soldiers less than ready, that in nothing to do with Israel. Jordan and Syria I know had the best of training.
If they were not ready, they should not have begun a war with Israel. Arabs thought they could trample Israel in the dust, oops, they were wrong.

A steady mouthpiece of Israeli propaganda, Israel bombs the Egyptian Air force before declaring a war, had less troops than Israel on the border which any General will tell you its suicide without a great numerical advantage...

Fascism will never work because Karma is stronger...

 

[JoeB131]

[

I find it hard to believe that one person can be full of so much shit.

BTW, are you saying Israels weapons were much better??
You truly have no idea what you're talking about....

Um, guy, I was in the military for 11 years. Yes, i'm really saying that.

for instance, just taking tanks. The IDF had M60 Pattons, the same tank used by the US Army at that time. Meanwhile, the Egyptians were using T-55's, which the USSR had already classified as obsolete. The M60 had a more powerful gun, with a longer range and more reliable performance.

Of course, what gave the Egyptians a big advnatage was that they had the latest Soviet Sager missiles, which the Israelis hadn't planned for, allowing them to pick off tanks before they could get their main gun into range.

Of course, we still had to bail them out at the last minute with new tanks. THey just changed the marking from tanks from Germany.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Russia gave Egypt top of the line brand new weapons, not second hand. If Egypt went to war with soldiers less than ready, that in nothing to do with Israel. Jordan and Syria I know had the best of training.
If they were not ready, they should not have begun a war with Israel. Arabs thought they could trample Israel in the dust, oops, they were wrong.

Actually, russia gave Egypt T-55 tanks that were designed during WWII, and were vastly inferior to the Patton tanks the Zionists were using.

Not to worry, the Zionists will be driven into the sea someday, and the world will rejoice.

 

[Hossfly]

JoeB131, et al,

I'm a bit confused.

beating up on poorly trained third world conscripts using second hand Soviet weapons...

After they got the drop on you with a surprise attack.

(COMMENT)

There was no surprise attack (on the part of the Israelis).

Meh, not that impressive. Of course, the US has had to bail the Zionist Entity out of that fight and every fight since.

(COMMENT)

What do you mean here?

The US wasn't involved in any air, ground or sea action in support of the Israelis. Where did you get this?

Most Respectfully,
R

Joe probably ingests Psilocybin mushrooms. They're hallucinogenic.

 

[JoeB131]

What do you mean here?

The US wasn't involved in any air, ground or sea action in support of the Israelis. Where did you get this?

Most Respectfully,
R

Joe probably ingests Psilocybin mushrooms. They're hallucinogenic.

Everyone knew at the time that in the middle of the Yom Kippur War, Nixon transferred a bunch of US Army M60 tanks from germany to the IDF.

And the Arabs promptly thanked him by cutting off the Oil Supply, which probably contributed to his need to resign.

 

[Hossfly]

Apparently, most of the Middle East. No statues of Sadat today.

Egypt and Syria are very poor countries. They are by category considered "Third WOrld".

Israel wasn't exactly a rich country then. Regardless, nothing you have said backs up your comment that it was not much of a victory. Because it was. A miraculous one actually.
And no, I'm not just saying that because it's Israel, I'm saying it because it's the truth.

beating up on poorly trained third world conscripts using second hand Soviet weapons...

After they got the drop on you with a surprise attack.

Meh, not that impressive. Of course, the US has had to bail the Zionist Entity out of that fight and every fight since.

Weapons used by both sides during '73 war.


Yom Kippur War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JoeB131]

Israel wasn't exactly a rich country then. Regardless, nothing you have said backs up your comment that it was not much of a victory. Because it was. A miraculous one actually.
And no, I'm not just saying that because it's Israel, I'm saying it because it's the truth.

beating up on poorly trained third world conscripts using second hand Soviet weapons...

After they got the drop on you with a surprise attack.

Meh, not that impressive. Of course, the US has had to bail the Zionist Entity out of that fight and every fight since.

Weapons used by both sides during '73 war.


Yom Kippur War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Exactly my point.

The Zionists had first rate US Weapons. The same ones the US Army was using at the time.

Compared to the Arabs, who had weapons that were both Soviet and obsolete.

Come on, T-34 tanks? Seriously?

 

[RoccoR]

pbel, et al,

Two points I would like to make.

Et Tu, Rocco? Tell us what a Pre-Emptive strike is in that History Book?

(COMMENT)

In connection with the outbreak between Israel and Jordan, it commenced with Jordanian artillery fire; not Israeli offensive action.

2. The Chief of Staff of UNTSO reported on the evening of 5 June as follows:

3. The situation in Tiberias and Damascus was reported quiet. The situation in Beirut was reported as quiet. The Chairman of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan-Israel Mixed Armistice Commission had been informed by the Israel delegate that Jordan was shelling Tel Aviv and Lydda and by the Jordanian delegate that Israel was shelling Jenin. He was further informed by the Israel delegate that Israel would bomb Ramallah and Amman if Jordan did not stop shelling Tel Aviv and Lydda. The Chairman of the Mixed Armistice Commission approached both sides in an effort to stop Jordanian shelling and the threatened retaliation by Israel. In Jerusalem heavy machine-gun and mortar fire was continuing in the general area of Mount Scopus.

SOURCE: S/7930/Add.1 6 June 1967

At the time of the opening of hostilities, Egyptian Sinai Front Command had prepositioned over 100,000 troops in the Sinai Peninsula, over 900 tanks, a like number of artillery guns. and an additional couple hundred howitzer (mixed towed and mounted motor vehicle) or armored chassis.

Secondly, the initiation of a preemptive strike is defensive if it is obvious war is eminent.

Outside of the Arab world, claims of American and British military intervention were not taken seriously. Britain, the U.S. and Israel denied these allegations. On June 8, Egyptian credibility was further damaged when Israel released an audio recording to the press, which they said was a radio-telephone conversation intercepted two days earlier between Nasser and King Hussein of Jordan.

Nasser: ...Shall we include also the United States? Do you know of this, shall we announce that the U.S. is cooperating with Israel?
Hussein: Hello. I do not hear, the connection is the worst - the line between you and the palace of the King from which the King is speaking is bad.
Nasser: Hello, will we say the U.S. and England or just the U.S.?
Hussein: The U.S. and England.
Nasser: Does Britain have aircraft carriers?
Hussein: (Answer unintelligible).
Nasser: Good. King Hussein will make an announcement and I will make an announcement. Thank you... Will his Majesty make an announcement on the participation of Americans and the British?
Hussein: (Answer unintelligible).
Nasser: By God, I say that I will make an announcement and you will make an announcement and we will see to it that the Syrians will make an announcement that American and British airplanes are taking part against us from aircraft carriers. We will issue an announcement, we will stress the matter and we will drive the point home.​

SOURCE: Six-Day War Wiktionnaire

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

JoeB131, et al,

I'm a bit confused.

beating up on poorly trained third world conscripts using second hand Soviet weapons...

After they got the drop on you with a surprise attack.

(COMMENT)

There was no surprise attack (on the part of the Israelis).

Meh, not that impressive. Of course, the US has had to bail the Zionist Entity out of that fight and every fight since.

(COMMENT)

What do you mean here?

The US wasn't involved in any air, ground or sea action in support of the Israelis. Where did you get this?

Most Respectfully,
R

Et Tu, Rocco? Tell us what a Pre-Emptive strike is in that History Book?

We were obviously discussing the Yom Kippur war, stupid.

Dumb da dumb da !

 

[toastman]

[

Russia gave Egypt top of the line brand new weapons, not second hand. If Egypt went to war with soldiers less than ready, that in nothing to do with Israel. Jordan and Syria I know had the best of training.
If they were not ready, they should not have begun a war with Israel. Arabs thought they could trample Israel in the dust, oops, they were wrong.

Actually, russia gave Egypt T-55 tanks that were designed during WWII, and were vastly inferior to the Patton tanks the Zionists were using.

Not to worry, the Zionists will be driven into the sea someday, and the world will rejoice.

When you and your ilk are driven to the sea, that's when the world will be a better place.

BTW, we've been hearing that threat for over 66 hears, Nazi Shill. Kinda gets old after a while, ya know, guy??

 

[toastman]

pbel, et al,

Two points I would like to make.

Et Tu, Rocco? Tell us what a Pre-Emptive strike is in that History Book?

(COMMENT)

In connection with the outbreak between Israel and Jordan, it commenced with Jordanian artillery fire; not Israeli offensive action.

2. The Chief of Staff of UNTSO reported on the evening of 5 June as follows:

3. The situation in Tiberias and Damascus was reported quiet. The situation in Beirut was reported as quiet. The Chairman of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan-Israel Mixed Armistice Commission had been informed by the Israel delegate that Jordan was shelling Tel Aviv and Lydda and by the Jordanian delegate that Israel was shelling Jenin. He was further informed by the Israel delegate that Israel would bomb Ramallah and Amman if Jordan did not stop shelling Tel Aviv and Lydda. The Chairman of the Mixed Armistice Commission approached both sides in an effort to stop Jordanian shelling and the threatened retaliation by Israel. In Jerusalem heavy machine-gun and mortar fire was continuing in the general area of Mount Scopus.

SOURCE: S/7930/Add.1 6 June 1967

At the time of the opening of hostilities, Egyptian Sinai Front Command had prepositioned over 100,000 troops in the Sinai Peninsula, over 900 tanks, a like number of artillery guns. and an additional couple hundred howitzer (mixed towed and mounted motor vehicle) or armored chassis.

Secondly, the initiation of a preemptive strike is defensive if it is obvious war is eminent.

Outside of the Arab world, claims of American and British military intervention were not taken seriously. Britain, the U.S. and Israel denied these allegations. On June 8, Egyptian credibility was further damaged when Israel released an audio recording to the press, which they said was a radio-telephone conversation intercepted two days earlier between Nasser and King Hussein of Jordan.

Nasser: ...Shall we include also the United States? Do you know of this, shall we announce that the U.S. is cooperating with Israel?
Hussein: Hello. I do not hear, the connection is the worst - the line between you and the palace of the King from which the King is speaking is bad.
Nasser: Hello, will we say the U.S. and England or just the U.S.?
Hussein: The U.S. and England.
Nasser: Does Britain have aircraft carriers?
Hussein: (Answer unintelligible).
Nasser: Good. King Hussein will make an announcement and I will make an announcement. Thank you... Will his Majesty make an announcement on the participation of Americans and the British?
Hussein: (Answer unintelligible).
Nasser: By God, I say that I will make an announcement and you will make an announcement and we will see to it that the Syrians will make an announcement that American and British airplanes are taking part against us from aircraft carriers. We will issue an announcement, we will stress the matter and we will drive the point home.​

SOURCE: Six-Day War Wiktionnaire

Most Respectfully,
R

Nazis like Pbel and Joe know this already, Rocco.
But their extreme hate for Israel obscures facts like these that counter their agenda.
Of course Israel only attacked because war was imminent. Of course Israel attacked first because Egypt was planning to attack them.

Am I surprised by people like Joe and Pbel ignoring these facts? No, distorting history is part of the anti Zionist , pro Palestinian agenda..

 

[pbel]

JoeB131, et al,

I'm a bit confused.


(COMMENT)

There was no surprise attack (on the part of the Israelis).


(COMMENT)

What do you mean here?

The US wasn't involved in any air, ground or sea action in support of the Israelis. Where did you get this?

Most Respectfully,
R

Et Tu, Rocco? Tell us what a Pre-Emptive strike is in that History Book?

We were obviously discussing the Yom Kippur war, stupid.

Dumb da dumb da !

Rocco was talking about June 67, so was my answer...His answer of a Defensive pre-emptive strike is bullshit...

 

[toastman]

Et Tu, Rocco? Tell us what a Pre-Emptive strike is in that History Book?

We were obviously discussing the Yom Kippur war, stupid.

Dumb da dumb da !

Rocco was talking about June 67, so was my answer...His answer of a Defensive pre-emptive strike is bullshit...

Actually, if you take the time to read his post above, you will understand that it WAS a pre emptive strike. It wasn't about stealing land.
If it were, why did Israel make repeated offers to return it???

 

[pbel]

We were obviously discussing the Yom Kippur war, stupid.

Dumb da dumb da !

Rocco was talking about June 67, so was my answer...His answer of a Defensive pre-emptive strike is bullshit...

Actually, if you take the time to read his post above, you will understand that it WAS a pre emptive strike. It wasn't about stealing land.
If it were, why did Israel make repeated offers to return it???

The only time Israel was sincere about peace was Rabin's offer, and your right wing ZioNuts shot him in the back!

 

[pbel]

pbel, et al,

Two points I would like to make.

Et Tu, Rocco? Tell us what a Pre-Emptive strike is in that History Book?

(COMMENT)

In connection with the outbreak between Israel and Jordan, it commenced with Jordanian artillery fire; not Israeli offensive action.

2. The Chief of Staff of UNTSO reported on the evening of 5 June as follows:

3. The situation in Tiberias and Damascus was reported quiet. The situation in Beirut was reported as quiet. The Chairman of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan-Israel Mixed Armistice Commission had been informed by the Israel delegate that Jordan was shelling Tel Aviv and Lydda and by the Jordanian delegate that Israel was shelling Jenin. He was further informed by the Israel delegate that Israel would bomb Ramallah and Amman if Jordan did not stop shelling Tel Aviv and Lydda. The Chairman of the Mixed Armistice Commission approached both sides in an effort to stop Jordanian shelling and the threatened retaliation by Israel. In Jerusalem heavy machine-gun and mortar fire was continuing in the general area of Mount Scopus.

SOURCE: S/7930/Add.1 6 June 1967

At the time of the opening of hostilities, Egyptian Sinai Front Command had prepositioned over 100,000 troops in the Sinai Peninsula, over 900 tanks, a like number of artillery guns. and an additional couple hundred howitzer (mixed towed and mounted motor vehicle) or armored chassis.

Secondly, the initiation of a preemptive strike is defensive if it is obvious war is eminent.

Outside of the Arab world, claims of American and British military intervention were not taken seriously. Britain, the U.S. and Israel denied these allegations. On June 8, Egyptian credibility was further damaged when Israel released an audio recording to the press, which they said was a radio-telephone conversation intercepted two days earlier between Nasser and King Hussein of Jordan.

Nasser: ...Shall we include also the United States? Do you know of this, shall we announce that the U.S. is cooperating with Israel?
Hussein: Hello. I do not hear, the connection is the worst - the line between you and the palace of the King from which the King is speaking is bad.
Nasser: Hello, will we say the U.S. and England or just the U.S.?
Hussein: The U.S. and England.
Nasser: Does Britain have aircraft carriers?
Hussein: (Answer unintelligible).
Nasser: Good. King Hussein will make an announcement and I will make an announcement. Thank you... Will his Majesty make an announcement on the participation of Americans and the British?
Hussein: (Answer unintelligible).
Nasser: By God, I say that I will make an announcement and you will make an announcement and we will see to it that the Syrians will make an announcement that American and British airplanes are taking part against us from aircraft carriers. We will issue an announcement, we will stress the matter and we will drive the point home.​

SOURCE: Six-Day War Wiktionnaire

Most Respectfully,
R

According to your Logic, Japan was right to sneak attack Pearl Harbor without a declaration of war...Defensive pre-emptive war Rocco, you just created a new oxymoron.