Israel will fail...

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 12:55 am

\"They're trying to hit civilians. Period. Now, to do that, they have to fire a LOT of rockets in the general direction of civilian areas. The fact that they don't have the technology to do the damage they'd like to the targets they'd like does NOT excuse the fact that they're trying.\"

Oh i'm not arguing against that. I just want to know how they're picking out purely civilian places. From what i've gathered.. they're lobbing a lot of rockets 'over there'. Saturation fire. If you fire a lot of rockets or drop a lot of bombs.. you're bound to hit something.

Flabby:

Actually.. I might just take you up on that offer.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:04 am

Ferno wrote:I just want to know how they're picking out purely civilian places. From what i've gathered.. they're lobbing a lot of rockets 'over there'.

They may be dumbfire, but that doesn't mean they're random. They still go in the general direction you aim them, and they're pretty clearly being aimed at civilian areas. In Israel, unlike Hezbollah controlled territory, the military has bases that aren't buried under civilian territory. The rockets aren't aimed at those bases, or at open fields -- they're aimed at cities.

It's like they're lobbing fusion in the general direction of the "civilian" base. It's not exactly sniping with MD, but they know what they're expecting to hit.

Flabby Chick wrote:If i pay for the ticket, you wanna come for a visit Fern.

Are you gonna offer me a ticket when the fighting dies down?

Flabby Chick · Post by **Flabby Chick** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:07 am

I don't know how they do it Fern, i'll ask someone in the know later. The rockets are not fired randomly over the 30 square area of n Israel thats been fired upon, they do concentrate upon the various towns. So when an attack happens like yesterday, it happened in Ma'alot, Tiberius, Kirat Shmona, Akko and Niahrea. They can't hit specific targets, laser guided and all that, but the general area of a town, yes. I suppose it's all to do with trajectories...physics n stuff, rather than computors. Also they're fired in salvos of 10 to 15 not just one rocket at a time.

As for the tickets guys, with the economic state of the kibbutz being like it is because of this bloody war, you'll have to wait a while.

Eight citizens were killed in yesterdays attack btw.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 am

Lothar wrote:They may be dumbfire, but that doesn't mean they're random. They still go in the general direction you aim them, and they're pretty clearly being aimed at civilian areas. In Israel, unlike Hezbollah controlled territory, the military has bases that aren't buried under civilian territory. The rockets aren't aimed at those bases, or at open fields -- they're aimed at cities.

It's like they're lobbing fusion in the general direction of the "civilian" base. It's not exactly sniping with MD, but they know what they're expecting to hit.

oh I totally agree. Hezbollah wants to hit hard so it will aim to where it guesses where a city might be. Maybe they're shooting to where they guess israeli troops might be also.

just like carpet bombing.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:12 am

I'm pretty sure they have access to maps. The cities aren't exactly top-secret.

They kind of have to guesstimate the right shooting angle, based on wind and other conditions, but they have some rules of thumb that give them a pretty good idea, and if they can get accurate enough feedback from spies or the media (\"3 rockets hit Haifa at 2:47 PM\" kind of thing) they can adjust their methods for later shots.

Flabby Chick · Post by **Flabby Chick** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:17 am

They're definatly not shooting at the army within Israel with the Katyushas, only towns. Also the Media is being slagged off here no end by the civilian population for being too bloody good at reporting. When a rocket hits, the media basically gives an on-line account of where it hit. Idiots.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:19 am

So I guess they're hitting as accurate as they can, huh.

the premise from what i've gathered; is hezbolla is targeting masses of civilians as if they have precision guided muntions or something.

amazing what you figure out once you cut out the spin.

why can't they just involve each other instead of going after the civ's?

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:41 am

Ferno wrote:why can't they just involve each other instead of going after the civ's?

Because "the civ's" are the target. Hezbollah doesn't want to stop the Israeli army; they want to destroy the nation and kill the Jews.

"the main cure (to the situation) is the elimination of the Zionist regime" - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, calling for a cease fire only because he believes it will help in accomplishing that goal. This may be the best argument I've ever heard for NOT having a cease fire.

The one thing I like about AhMADinejad is that he's nuts enough to actually say what he believes. Now we just need the rest of the Western world to listen up and realize -- this is not about Israel's army or the Gaza strip or prisoner exchanges or cease fires. It's about wiping out a nation and a whole people group on the way to establishing Islamic domination of the world (including places like Thailand.) It's all connected -- it all goes back to the same goals Al Qaeda and other terrorists have, and even some of the same goals Saddam had. Whether or not the different groups work with each other, they're all working toward those same goals, which is why it's important to fight them and win.

Kilarin · Post by **Kilarin** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 7:32 am

Ferno wrote:btw, two soldiers crossed over to lebanon and were arrested in a town. this is confirmed by no less than three sources.

Can you post links to those sources? Because, as I already posted here, my research turned up only one source with that story, and that source wasn't even pretending to be unbiased. If it was just two soldiers wandering over the border (a darn stupid thing to do), how do we explain the others that were killed? And if they were "arrested" instead of kidnapped, why didn't the government have them in jail? Why were terrorists making demands that a guy who had smashed in the skull of a 4 year old girl, just because she was Jewish, be released before they would release the soldiers?

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 8:26 am

Ferno, they sure as hell aren't trying to focus the bulk of their rocket attacks on the Israeli military because unlike the far away cities in Israel the Israeli military is on the border of Lebanon! Yet we see reports of hundreds of rockets spamming the cities.
You fire one salvo, wait on your spotters to cell phone the hit location and adjust accordingly just like a long range mortar. You have to really want to believe they aren't trying to hit civilians to come up with that perception because the evidence completely disproves it otherwise!

Another thing, Hezbollah did target the Israeli military when they fired a smart missile and hit an Israeli naval ship. that ship didn't even have it's missile defenses on at the time because the conventional thinking was that Hezbollah didn't have any kind of sophisticated missile capability.
Well it turns out that either Syria or Iran has provided them with at least one guided missile.
So now do the Israeli's wait until Syria or Iran provides Hezbollah with a nuclear or chemical or biological warhead to fit on top of their next guided missile and launch it into some place like downtown Tel Aviv?

We are on the verge of watching the nutbag in Iran successfully start WWIII because he thinks his god will reward him and his fellow islamofacsists for doing so!
Wake up man!

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 11:46 am

hey, anyone got reports of the katy's hitting towns anywhere?

a smart missile? where? when?

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 12:35 pm

Guided Missile:

By RAMIT PLUSHNICK-MASTI, Associated Press Writer Sat Jul 15, 4:27 PM ET

JERUSALEM - Elite Iranian troops helped Hezbollah fire a sophisticated radar-guided missile at an Israeli warship, Israeli officials said Saturday, describing an apparent surprise blow by militants who had been using only low-tech weapons.

Iran denied that it had any troops in Lebanon.

Israel initially believed that an aerial drone armed with explosives hit the warship, but it became clear that Hezbollah had used an Iranian-made C-802 missile to strike the vessel late Friday, an Israeli intelligence official said on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the information.

Iran's embassy in Beirut issued a statement late Saturday that called the Israeli allegations \"meaningless.\"

It is \"an attempt to escape reality with the aim of covering up (Israel's) inability to confront the Lebanese nation and resistance,\" the statement said.

One Israeli sailor was killed and three were missing after the attack. The ship was returning to its home port in Israel, the army said.

About 100 fighters from Iran's Revolutionary Guard helped import, equip and fire the missile at the Spear, a missile ship cruising off the coast of Lebanon, which is under an Israeli naval blockade, Israeli officials said.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad condemned Israel's military offensive in Lebanon, saying \"the Zionist regime behaves like Hitler,\" Iranian state television reported.

Hezbollah is widely believed to have been trained, funded and guided by the Revolutionary Guard since the militant group was founded during Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon. The Islamic republic's elite corps of more than 200,000 fighters is independent of the regular armed forces and directly controlled by Iran's supreme leader.

\"We can confirm that it (the ship) was hit by an Iranian-made missile launched by Hezbollah. We see this as a very profound fingerprint of Iranian involvement in Hezbollah,\" Brig. Gen. Ido Nehushtan told The Associated Press.

The Shiite militant group had been firing only highly inaccurate Katyusha rockets at Israeli targets. Israel appeared surprised that the guerrilla group had high-tech weapons.

Israeli officials speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information said that Hezbollah also has Iranian-made drones that are more accurate than missiles, as well as longer-range projectiles that could hit Tel Aviv, Israel's commercial hub.

An Israeli military official said the Spear's missile detection and deflection system was not on during the attack, apparently because the sailors did not anticipate such an attack.

The military official said the ship is one of the most technologically advanced in the Israeli fleet, boasting an array of high-tech missiles and a system for electronically jamming incoming missiles and other threats.

Nehushtan said another Hezbollah radar-guided anti-ship missile hit and sank a nearby Cambodian merchant ship around the time the Spear was struck. Twelve Egyptian sailors were pulled from the water by passing ships, Brig. Gen. Noam Fieg said.

Nehushtan said the body of one of the four Israeli soldiers missing in the attack was found on the damaged warship. Other Israeli military officials said two bodies had been found.

Israel launched an offensive after Hezbollah guerrillas crossed the Israel-Lebanon border on Wednesday and captured two Israeli soldiers. Israel has bombarded Lebanon's airport and main roads in the most intensive offensive against the country in 24 years, while Hezbollah has launched hundreds of rockets into Israel.

A few of many Hezbollah rocket attacks that hit Israeli cities. and towns.

Ferno, I have to wonder what news sources you've been watching to not know about these attacks! Granted the use of the guided missiles is not mentioned much in the mainstream media since it makes the Hezbollah / Iran connection so clear. Few in the media want you to think about that, but to not know that Hezbollah has also been hitting Israeli cities and towns successfully with rockets is bizzare!

Did you really think Hezbollah was just lobbing the rockets randomly up into the air and they were all falling harmlessly into the countryside?

Flabby Chick · Post by **Flabby Chick** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:49 pm

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/746581.html

Fern, it's a fukin war man....

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 2:41 pm

Jesus Christ, they still use Katyushas? Arent those damn things from WWII?

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 3:26 pm

did anyone see the satelite footage of the Hezbolla terrorist diving up in his truck? he hops out and fires a katyusha rocket then climbs back into his truck to drive off and about 15 seconds later he gets hit by a Isreali bomb or Artillery shell!!!

Isreal is in a lose lose situation, if they stop the attacks then Hezbolla become more emboldened and claims Victory, if they continue, since Hezbolla built thier bunkers underneath schools and hospitals then they get hammer for killing civi's. even if they do kill Hezbolla they dont wear uniforms and the Arab press propagandize it as Isreal killing more Civi's

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:07 pm

CUDA wrote:...Isreal is in a lose lose situation, if they stop the attacks then Hezbolla become more emboldened and claims Victory, if they continue, since Hezbolla built thier bunkers underneath schools and hospitals then they get hammer for killing civi's....

Unless the powers that be get off their collective ass for the first time since 1939/1941.....
I'm not holding my breath for that to happen so instead I say "Go Israel! Go far, go fast and go for the throat! Don't stop until you've pulled Iran and Syria into it so we'll all have to get in there in spite of our politicians!"

roid · Post by **roid** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:42 pm

Will Robinson wrote:
CUDA wrote:...Isreal is in a lose lose situation, if they stop the attacks then Hezbolla become more emboldened and claims Victory, if they continue, since Hezbolla built thier bunkers underneath schools and hospitals then they get hammer for killing civi's....
Unless the powers that be get off their collective ass for the first time since 1939/1941.....
I'm not holding my breath for that to happen so instead I say "Go Israel! Go far, go fast and go for the throat! Don't stop until you've pulled Iran and Syria into it so we'll all have to get in there in spite of our politicians!"

you know, there once was a time where people went out of the way to AVOID World War 3. Wouldn't a war with Iran be kinda...huge?

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:48 pm

roid wrote:you know, there once was a time where people went out of the way to AVOID World War 3. Wouldn't a war with Iran be kinda...huge?

Not as huge as you'd think.

And there's no such thing as "avoiding" at this point, only "putting off". We went to great lengths to avoid war with the Soviet Union because it would've meant the death of everyone on both sides... but war with Iran will be relatively quick. After all, most of their freedom fighters (TM) are tied up in Iraq at the moment ;)

roid · Post by **roid** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:55 pm

I guess i'm hoping Iran's growing generation gap is indicative of a seriously fast draining powerbase of the crazy Muslims. To be replaced with either SANE muslims or plain old secular Joe Smiths, who cares!

But yeah, i guess that'll take time. Trigger fingers on all sides are likely too itchy to let the situation solve itself with time.

strangely, this is similar to how i think of the USA religious right problem. It's dying out. byebye!

(edit: ★■◆●!... i didn't mean that personally man. you're NOT one of the crazys, you just vote for em

.)

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 7:56 am

The reason I'm convinced we should crack this egg open now instead of later is because no matter how many times we've had a cease fire, a new land for peace deal, a new anything peaceful...the end result is always the same. The islamo-facsists increase their strength and the subsequent attacks are more and more deadly.

It won't be long before Iran will be able to provide it's terrorist wing with some seriously nasty armament.
I think it's obvious they won't hesitate to do so once they have it.

Basically we are one shipment away from having Hezbollah, Hamas or al Queda equiped with a relabeled N.Korean or ex-Soviet or pilfered Pakistani warhead!

So although fighting now may be huge compared to something like the Iraqi invasion, it will be nothing compared to waiting to fight until after the new and improved 9/11 attack complete with mushroom cloud and then facing Iran armed with nuclear missiles to use on our troops!

Nothing the Iranians and islamo-facsists in general have done leads a smart person to believe that they won't continue to escalate and spread their violent operations.
Will they stop when the jews are all dead? Even if you believe they would, is letting that happen something we should stand by and watch?!?
If not, what will stop them?
It seems history has proven they never stop unless they are dead or have their necks under some tyrants boot.

Tricord · Post by **Tricord** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 9:05 am

Kilarin wrote:This ISN'T some kind of game. If you shoot at someone, you can only expect that they will shoot back with the biggest baddest guns they have. The GOAL is to be disproportionate. To hit so hard, that the enemy won't try to hurt YOU again.

I have to pick on this. Haven't the past five years showed us that you can stop a government with a war, but you will never stop rogue suicide bombers or small terrorist factions from doing their thing. Israel is only infuriating it's enemy, convincing more and more individuals to act on their own. Furthermore, an act against Hezbollah is pretty much taken personal by any islamic faction in the neighborhood, not only Hezbollah themselves. Imagine your neighborhood school has just been bombed by the enemy. What will your reaction be?

- Back off, cease fire, they're bombing our schools, we shouldn't mess with this enemy!
- Shoot and kill the ★■◆● for bombing our schools!

No matter how scandalous the Hezbollah or any other islamic faction is, they're there. You can't wipe them from the face of the earth, you need other solutions. In time Israel will realise that. They can't keep up their macho attitude without taking more and more punishment themselves.

I am not saying they are not in their right, I am just saying that it is clear Israel doesn't want to minimize casualties on both sides, it wants to maximize retaliation regardless of collateral damage.

Diplomacy seems a lost virtue. Yes, it requires patience and skill. Even if you have neither, you should still seek diplomatic solutions.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 12:24 pm

Diplomacy only works on nations and other humans; it is useless on terrorists and their organizations because they are neither humans nor nations. Diplomacy will always fail in the Middle East; just as halfassed military intervention will always fail in the Middle East.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:14 pm

Tricord wrote:Haven't the past five years showed us that you can stop a government with a war, but you will never stop rogue suicide bombers or small terrorist factions from doing their thing.

No, they haven't.

All the past five years have shown is that we haven't finished the job. Do you really think the jihad that's been going on since 1948 (and, really, since long before that) will be solved by invading a grand total of 3 countries (Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon)? Do you really think our military leadership expects that?

Furthermore, do you think the "rogue suicide bombers" and "small terrorist factions" are really doing it on their own? Were you asleep during the part of the thread where we were talking about Iranian-built weapons being supplied to Hezbollah? Have you been asleep during the previous discussions about the Iranian-trained jihadis in Iraq?

Taking down the state sponsors of terrorism is the first and most important step toward ending the war the jihadis started with civilization a long time ago. Replacing terrorist breeding grounds with legitimate, functional countries is the #1 long-term priority in the War on Terror ("preventing attacks" is the #1 short-term priority.)

Israel is only infuriating it's enemy, convincing more and more individuals to act on their own.

Perhaps Israel is convincing a few more individuals to act on their own... but they're killing the individuals who have heavy weaponry, and probably much faster than new jihadis are being recruited.

an act against Hezbollah is pretty much taken personal by any islamic faction in the neighborhood

Aren't you always complaining that our views are too simplistic? Yet here you are, not even understanding that there are a lot of Islamic factions that hate Hezbollah and would love to see them taken down.

You can't wipe them from the face of the earth, you need other solutions.

Right. But "diplomacy" is a pretty much worthless solution in this case -- you can't negotiate with people whose end goal is taking over the whole world. You can't compromise with them; they'll take whatever you give them and then work toward getting you to give them more.

The only thing that works is sufficiently marginalizing the ideology -- getting people in that part of the world to view jihadis the same way as we view the KKK. That will take at least a generation, and probably more.

Here's the process:

1) continue to focus on stopping attacks on civilization, whether it's American or European or Australian or Israeli or Thai civilization. (Yes, there is an active jihad being waged in Thailand.) This requires greater intel -- like the wiretapping so many people whined about. You don't necessarily need to wipe out the organizations, just neuter them.

2) damage, destroy, or severely cripple the main sponsors of terrorism: states like Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and (to a lesser extent) Saudi Arabia, as well as "charities" and individuals who fund terrorism. On the sub-national scale this requires greater intel -- like the covert bank record thing the NYT exposed. On the national scale it can sometimes be accomplished through diplomacy -- the Saudis, for example, have somewhat toned down their support for terrorism under US pressure (but we need to up the pressure and they need to tone down their support even more.) With other nations it requires outright invasion.

3) Transform the culture such that people won't grow up thinking it's every Muslim's duty to wage war against the infidel. This will take at least a generation, and will probably require significant military action against the Iranian regime.

(You'll notice I said nothing about North Korea here, for good reason -- KJI2 is nuts, but he's not a jihadi. Very, very different methods should be used to counter him.)

TIGERassault · Post by **TIGERassault** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 3:45 pm

Krom wrote:it is useless on terrorists because they are neither humans nor nations.

...

If I ever need to see proof that the leaders of the Western world are brainwashing the public, I'll just look at that post!

Krom wrote:the War on Terror

Yup; definetley brainwashing!

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 3:59 pm

Pretty much Tiger...how many Muslims in this world? One billion or so? How many want to fight? Even a small percentage of a billion is too many...it's a fight that is not going to be won. It's not just a physical fight...you people thinking killing a few here or there is going to change the way they think? No...they are not going to wake up one day and say \"you know what, I love America\". Find the root of the overall problem and see what could be done.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:49 pm

Zuruck wrote:Pretty much Tiger...how many Muslims in this world? One billion or so? How many want to fight? Even a small percentage of a billion is too many...it's a fight that is not going to be won. It's not just a physical fight...you people thinking killing a few here or there is going to change the way they think? No...they are not going to wake up one day and say "you know what, I love America". Find the root of the overall problem and see what could be done.

We start by stopping the states that sponsor it and fund it. The "root of it", as you put it, can not be stopped just as Lothar alluded to with his KKK comparison, but to pressure states to knock it down instead of sponsoring it would reduce the threat greatly!

That is a practical response to the problem, not a cure but a positive change.
All you offered was basically surrender! You claim 'there are too many of them' and we 'won't win'...based on what? On a lack of resolve?
I think there are not too many of "them" when you focus on the sponsors. Iran and Syria are only two yet they are the source for a lot of the problems in the region.
Knock them down for sponsoring terrorism and everytime they get back up knock them down again until they show a new attitude. And do it now for crying out loud before they get to play the nuke card to protect themselves!! Mutually assured destruction does nothing when one of the parties has martyrdom as a goal!!!

We have hate groups here but we don't let them have power. If we did you would see the Clan lynching black people and Nazi's shooting down minorities of all colors.... They would also grow stronger as time marched on, recruiting more idiots as they were allowed to work their hatred freely.

Iran and Syria have been allowed to do just that unchecked by the world community.
They, islamo-facsists, need to be marginalized like the Clan and the Nazi's are in western countries. No, this won't stop every single instance of terrorism, but it will reduce the number of occurances a great deal.

If you have a better plan, minus the usual generic platitudes, one that has something a little more specific than calls for diplomacy like Tricords, as if "diplomacy" was some costumed superhero just hanging out in the Bat Cave waiting on the call for help.....
Well, I'm listening.

roid · Post by **roid** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 11:01 pm

Krom wrote:Diplomacy only works on nations and other humans; it is useless on terrorists and their organizations because they are neither humans nor nations. Diplomacy will always fail in the Middle East; just as halfassed military intervention will always fail in the Middle East.

urgh, don't you know anything about propeganda? what you said is TEXTBOOK propeganda psychology - used all throughout history and finally codified into a named science by the nazis - then those nazi propeganda masterminds were hired by USA to work for them (this is history!).

"The enemy is not human, so don't hesitate to kill them."

Will Robinson wrote:Iran and Syria have been allowed to do just that unchecked by the world community. They, islamo-facsists, need to be marginalized like the Clan and the Nazi's are in western countries

nono, don't marginalise the nations - that's dangerous. Just marginalise the crazies in their own local cultures. Get them busy, tied up intelectually fighting for their ideologys LOCALLY.

does anyone here understand the "terrorists are actually highly educated" issue? i've fergotten. But i'd like to think a lack of cultural education & lack of social stigma (prolly caused by local socioeconomic issues making the culture "sick" and prone to letting these kinda loons run free) is at fault - somehow.
Every culture has it's own odd problems when the ★■◆● hits the fan. America burnt witches and lynched minoritys. Islam bombs other countrys.
Target the socioecconomic base of the problem. America was scared of... well everything. Islam is... well i dunno what islams' problam is yet i guess that's what professional sociologists are for. Unfortuantely they arn't allowed much airtime, they gotta compete with all the mouth foaming war-addicts on air.

"grargahrarahgarh *foam foam* they arn't humaaaaaan, kill them allll!!!! *foam foam*"

i'm sick of hearing this unintelectual crotch grabbing. How about something new

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:16 am

roid wrote:don't marginalise the nations - that's dangerous.

I didn't say to marginalize the nations... but marginalizing their governments might be important. Make the Iranian Mullahs seem like outcasts in their own nation, and they lose their power base.

i'd like to think a lack of cultural education & lack of social stigma (prolly caused by local socioeconomic issues making the culture "sick" and prone to letting these kinda loons run free) is at fault - somehow....
Target the socioecconomic base of the problem.

Which is pretty much what I said, as PART of the solution. Don't forget "prevent attacks" and "cut off funding" (short-term) to go along with "target the root of the problem" (long-term culture transformation).

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:26 am

yeah i was quoting and replying to Will. (it was Tricord who was talking to you)

Lothar <-- now you :) wrote:I didn't say to marginalize the nations... but marginalizing their governments might be important. Make the Iranian Mullahs seem like outcasts in their own nation, and they lose their power base.

Marginalising governments could still be risky business though. An oppressive powerful government that is faced with sudden dissent may panic over the sudden proposition of loosing power and start shooting dissidents.

Attacking Bush directly is not as useful as attacking his ideological base - religion. Chipping away at the ideology of his religious power base, introduce doubt, get them questioning their faith, their resolve. Get them empathising with the enemy.

Bush standing up there on the podium without the bible-blindfold 'never say die' religious right solidly backing him up? Why would he even bother.

So, same with Iran... Attack the ideological base of militant 'anger is fun!' Islam - chip away at it's membership's resolve, introduce doubt.
Obviously none of us know wtf we're talking about when it comes to Islamic scripture, so we'd sponsor and encourage debate from those who DO know. Seed their culture with these debating disidents, Islamic apologists. Fund them up the wazoo, they need to get REALLY visible REALLY fast.

You know what? i just realised something. Jewish clerics (rabbis?) are culturally known for being fervent lovers of debate. I don't know how many movies i've seen portraying them as playing chess and openly discussing the kaballah/meaning of life.
Do you think it could be possible that Militant Islam sees this, and trys to be the opposite of it's enemy? Anti-Intelectualism and Conservativism go together like peas in a pod, we know this from Conservatives in western countrys. So maybe, Militant (conservative) Islam is the same... they associate open religious debate and intelectualism with the Jews! and they HATE the jews!

what'dya think?

Tricord · Post by **Tricord** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:49 am

Lothar wrote:Perhaps Israel is convincing a few more individuals to act on their own... but they're killing the individuals who have heavy weaponry, and probably much faster than new jihadis are being recruited.

Israel is indeed doing a good job if your belief is to kill anyone who takes up a gun and points it in the wrong direction (whether the guy shoots it or not is no longer an issue with all that pre-emptive stuff and over-reacting going on). However, why the hell do these people carry so much hate, so much violence and morbid envy to destroy their enemy? As has been said, being a muslim doesn't make one a terrorist, so what does make a terrorist then? The war against terror is not about killing anyone who raises against you, it's about trying to prevent anyone to raise against you by taking away their reasons to do so. Only that way you can have long-lasting peace and take away the fear among your citizens. Oppression just gives these people more reasons to do bad things. If your belief lies along these lines (and mine does), there is a lot more to do than just shooting at whoever threatens you (meaning the USA, Israel and every other nation carried away in the WOT). Go to the roots of the problem. Diplomacy, self-assesment and humility are key elements in light of this. Anger, violence and arrogance are not.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 9:09 am

Roid, I said we should marginalize the islamofacsists not the whole country. Unfortunately Irans government is run by a couple of islamofacsists, the nutbag Ahmadinejad and the equally delusional religious leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

So to marginalize the leadership in Iran you have to knock the government down, if not completely, which would be very costly, at least knock them down enough to set back their plans to arm with nuclear weapons and create much suffering among the people who support them. Make them suffer for their role in sponsoring terrorism and advocating by deed the elimination of a whole race of people!

Sieze their funds wherever possible, bomb their military assets, sink their ships if they leave the protected waters of their coastal areas, expell their diplomats, and launch a major propaganda campaign against their leaders within their own borders, airwaves etc. etc.
You would need to cut them off from the rest of the world and it would take the help of all the major countries in the world to make it impossible for them to resist the pressure. If you have some people *cough*France *cough*Russia*cough* *cough*Germany*cough* etc. that don't join the effort then they could resist indefinitely while the media tortured the naive with pictures of Iranian children suffering from what would be seen as \"the american embargo\". So gathering the support from all the major players is a tall order but if you did it they would be reduced to a localized trouble spot that would implode rather quickly.

I wonder if you will consider why those other countries would prefer we back off and allow the present conditions to continue while the islamofacsists build their strength ultimately to include nuclear weapons!! Because that is the goal of the nutbag and his spiritual tyrant friend. If they succeed were all in a world of hurt measured by the kilotons of warheads!

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:45 am

expell their diplomats... You would need to cut them off from the rest of the world and it would take the help of all the major countries in the world to make it impossible for them to resist the pressure.

and launch a major propaganda campaign against their leaders within their own borders, airwaves etc.

heh. ok, so the getting them to hate us and think we are unreasonable thugs - is that before or after the \"we are your friends\" propeganda starts playing?

a surreal mutualy exclusive conflicting combination of messages you're sending there

. Like firebombing a city at the same time as flooding it with a dam burst. We could all learn a thing or 2 from Pokemon.

TIGERassault · Post by **TIGERassault** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:59 am

Will Robinson wrote:Roid, I said we should marginalize the islamofacsists not the whole country. Unfortunately Irans government is run by a couple of islamofacsists, the nutbag Ahmadinejad and the equally delusional religious leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

So to marginalize the leadership in Iran you have to knock the government down, if not completely, which would be very costly, at least knock them down enough to set back their plans to arm with nuclear weapons and create much suffering among the people who support them. Make them suffer for their role in sponsoring terrorism and advocating by deed the elimination of a whole race of people!

Sieze their funds wherever possible, bomb their military assets, sink their ships if they leave the protected waters of their coastal areas, expell their diplomats, and launch a major propaganda campaign against their leaders within their own borders, airwaves etc. etc.
You would need to cut them off from the rest of the world and it would take the help of all the major countries in the world to make it impossible for them to resist the pressure. If you have some people *cough*France *cough*Russia*cough* *cough*Germany*cough* etc. that don't join the effort then they could resist indefinitely while the media tortured the naive with pictures of Iranian children suffering from what would be seen as "the american embargo". So gathering the support from all the major players is a tall order but if you did it they would be reduced to a localized trouble spot that would implode rather quickly.

I wonder if you will consider why those other countries would prefer we back off and allow the present conditions to continue while the islamofacsists build their strength ultimately to include nuclear weapons!! Because that is the goal of the nutbag and his spiritual tyrant friend. If they succeed were all in a world of hurt measured by the kilotons of warheads!

So you're saying that America should have a deliberate commission of an act of violence to create an emotional response from the victim in the furtherance of a political or social agenda.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Terrorism

See? Everything you described Iran will do if they get power, America is already doing. America has used nuclear weapons; America is using terrorism; America is building up a larger army at the expense of it's people.

Will Robinson wrote:I wonder if you will consider why those other countries would prefer we back off and allow the present conditions to continue while the islamofacsists build their strength ultimately to include nuclear weapons!!

Now do you understand? Or will you require more stuff like this to restore your brainwashed mind to be able to see what is really happening?

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 11:43 am

Tricord wrote:why the hell do these people carry so much hate, so much violence and morbid envy to destroy their enemy? As has been said, being a muslim doesn't make one a terrorist, so what does make a terrorist then?

I know this is a difficult concept

and we've never discussed it here before

so try to keep up:

Their religion doesn't necessarily make them terrorists, but one form of their religion makes them terrorists.

There are a number of Islamic beliefs -- jihad as war against the infidel, land being permanently Islamic if it's ever Islamic, lying in the name of Islam, non-Muslim life being virtually worthless -- that, when combined with something like the prescence of a successful Jewish nation in the middle of formerly Muslim lands, lead some people to believe the only solution is violence against civilians. Over the course of decades, certain religious/political leaders in various ME nations have "refined" their theories to call for more direct violence against infidels. In large part, it's because they've been successful in the past.

The war against terror is not about killing anyone who raises against you, it's about trying to prevent anyone to raise against you by taking away their reasons to do so.... there is a lot more to do than just shooting at whoever threatens you

Did you bother to read the rest of my post? That's exactly what I said with point 3.

The problem is, you can't "take away their reason for hating us" when their reason is the existance of Israel, or the fact that we won't convert to Islam. There are some people for whom the reasons are so strongly ingrained that we can't possibly take away their reasons. We can't diplomatically reason with those who believe America is the "great Satan" and the Caliphate should be reestablished, and that Allah himself commands them to destroy Israel (like, Iran's loony president -- for all the whining some of you do about Bush and "theocracy", why don't you whine about Iran?) When those people take up arms and start shooting, or even PREPARE to start shooting, the only sane response is to take out their ability to strike -- whether it means killing them, destroying their weapons, putting them in jail, or cutting off their financing. All of these are useful in the War on Terror.

You need a three-tiered approach:
- preventing immediate attacks (via military, law enforcement, etc.)
- disrupting funding and training (via greater intel, etc.)
- changing the culture in the Middle East so that nut-jobbery is marginalized rather than mainstream (this is a long-term process.)

You can try to take away short-term reasons for terrorism, but that only makes terrorists more bold -- because they feel like they're winning. Witness what's happened in both Gaza and southern Lebanon after Israeli pullouts.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 11:55 am

So you're saying that America should have a deliberate commission of an act of violence to create an emotional response from the victim in the furtherance of a political or social agenda.

I don't believe Will said to strike at civilians, so equating Iranian (or other) civilians with \"the victim\" is clever but ultimately misleading.

If I read it right, Will is advocating taking out the military infrastructure -- the support system that keeps the Iranian government in power -- in order to weaken that government and prevent them from developing more dangerous strike capabilities. He hasn't said anything about violence against civilians. The violence being advocated is specifically in order to reduce strike capabilities and weaken the government, not to create an emotional response -- a traditional military strike, not a terrorist attack.

Civilians are brought in only during the \"culture change\" phase of the activity -- broadcasting messages that make the Iranian Mullahs look like lamers, trying to convince the people to look down upon theocrats. The Iranian people already think their government is loony, and it would encourage them to fight against their loony government if they knew the rest of the world stood behind them. Isn't this the \"subtle\", \"working with allies\" approach people keep advocating?

TIGERassault · Post by **TIGERassault** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:47 pm

Lothar wrote:I don't believe Will said to strike at civilians, so equating Iranian (or other) civilians with "the victim" is clever but ultimately misleading.

If I read it right, Will is advocating taking out the military infrastructure -- the support system that keeps the Iranian government in power -- in order to weaken that government and prevent them from developing more dangerous strike capabilities. He hasn't said anything about violence against civilians. The violence being advocated is specifically in order to reduce strike capabilities and weaken the government, not to create an emotional response -- a traditional military strike, not a terrorist attack.

Civilians are brought in only during the "culture change" phase of the activity -- broadcasting messages that make the Iranian Mullahs look like lamers, trying to convince the people to look down upon theocrats. The Iranian people already think their government is loony, and it would encourage them to fight against their loony government if they knew the rest of the world stood behind them. Isn't this the "subtle", "working with allies" approach people keep advocating?

Well then, I'm confused. Why would preventing Iran from being able to attack supposed to weaken their government?

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:10 pm

roid wrote:heh. ok, so the getting them to hate us and think we are unreasonable thugs - is that before or after the "we are your friends" propeganda starts playing?

a surreal mutualy exclusive conflicting combination of messages you're sending there ....

The only reason you see a conflicting message is because you fabricated one completely out of whole cloth!
The message I would be sending wouldn't be designed to fool them into thinking were friends!
I'd be sending them messages that say "As soon as you dump the religious zealots who believe they can bring about the coming of the 12th Imam and ultimately the end of the world....
Well then we'll talk! Until then we're going to keep you down and cut off."

I'd be offering to help anyone who could stand up and overthrow the religious slapnuts in charge, the complete whacko's who caused the whole world to kick their asses down into the dirt!

Now, tell me, if my idea of having the world finally step up and force them into change, if that is the wrong move, what is the magical diplomatic message that would cause them to stop trying to kill all the jews and infidels?!?!

Is there some secret handshake we've been forgetting to use? Some password that would bring them out of their 12th century mindset? Perhaps we just need to shout "Parlay" like in Pirates of the Carribean and they will all just drop in their tracks toss their weapons down and begrudgingly come in good faith to the bargaining table!
I'd love to hear it if you know it.

You see it's real easy to sit back and criticize any effort someone makes and declare that all we need is diplomacy....

But just what the heck would that diplomacy look like? What's it going to sound like? Go on, give us an example of what gesture, word or deed you think would stop the islamofacsists from wanting to kill the jews and infidels! What diplomatic endeavor do you think would entice them to lay down their suicide bombs and misc. weapons and start looking for a peaceful existance shoulder to shoulder with their Israeli nieghbors?
You guys never quite seem to answer that challenge do you?!?
Diplomacy, Heh! When dealing with a true enemy diplomacy is merely a dog and pony show your politicians put on while your army builds it's strength! The Iranians and Hezbollah know that and have been practicing that from the beginning you however just don't get it at all!

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:29 pm

TIGERassault wrote:Well then, I'm confused.

Yes, you are. Primarily because you assume I must be wrong and then try to read what I wrote through that artificial and quite flawed filter. Please allow this "brainwashed mind" to educate you.

TIGERassault wrote:Why would preventing Iran from being able to attack supposed to weaken their government?

Preventing Iran from being able to send weapons anywhere. Prevent Iran from being able to ship oil or any other product anywhere. Prevent them from sending more soldiers and terrorists to places like Lebanon and Iraq to fight. Prevent them from doing anything at all outside of their borders. I don't even want them to be able to get a damn email out of there!
That would marginalize their whackjob government.
If the citizens overthrow them and elect a more moderate form of representative we'll know about it and we'll then open the gates to the rest of the world.
Ditto for Syria....

TIGERassault · Post by **TIGERassault** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 5:25 pm

Will Robinson wrote:
TIGERassault wrote:Why would preventing Iran from being able to attack supposed to weaken their government?
Preventing Iran from being able to send weapons anywhere. Prevent Iran from being able to ship oil or any other product anywhere. Prevent them from sending more soldiers and terrorists to places like Lebanon and Iraq to fight. Prevent them from doing anything at all outside of their borders. I don't even want them to be able to get a damn email out of there!
That would marginalize their whackjob government.
If the citizens overthrow them and elect a more moderate form of representative we'll know about it and we'll then open the gates to the rest of the world.
Ditto for Syria....

Firstly, you really think that the citizens are going to blame their own government for the American's blockade?
Secondly, it would very likely start a war against America by:
1: Any country that feels threatened that America will do the same to their country.
2: Iran's trading countrys.
3: Any country that thinks a country blockade like that would be too evil, regardless of what that country may do in the future.
4: Any country that thinks America are becoming too powerful and rebellious, and want to prevent them from starting WW3 (the UN is there for a reason, it's a bad idea to ignore it).
Thirdly, it's just downright evil to prevent every citizen of a country the rights and privelleges they deserve, simply because you feel threatened by it's government.

Shadowfury333 · Post by **Shadowfury333** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:24 pm

TIGERassault wrote:it's just downright evil to prevent every citizen of a country the rights and privelleges they deserve, simply because you feel threatened by it's government.

Agreed, I'd say that the military powerbase is what should be targeted. Embargoes and sanctions should be limited to that, unless someone can point out any examples where a full-scale trade embargo achieved positive change, instead of merely increasing the amount of poverty, which in turn fuels the terrorist war machine.