October 7th: The Crumbling Facade of a Western Security Asset

edited

These threads are great, I agree with people I normally don't.

a reply to: network dude

why does it take a history lesson to justify the attack of October 7th? Almost every anti-Israel post must first lay out a historical crime list before getting into whatever justification there is for blaming Israel for the events that took place.

Because it all falls apart if go back too far and you really look at those first few decades. So it's like beating rationality to a historical retcon, like if they say it first it is more true.

The further back history is more illuminating.

www.britannica.com...

Prior to the start of the war, attacks conducted against Israel by fledgling Palestinian guerrilla groups based in Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan had increased, leading to costly Israeli reprisals. In November 1966 an Israeli strike on the village of Al-Samūʿ in the Jordanian West Bank left 18 dead and 54 wounded, and, during an air battle with Syria in April 1967, the Israeli Air Force shot down six Syrian MiG fighter jets. In addition, Soviet intelligence reports in May indicated that Israel was planning a campaign against Syria, and, although inaccurate, the information further heightened tensions between Israel and its Arab neighbours.

Egyptian Pres. Gamal Abdel Nasser had previously come under sharp criticism for his failure to aid Syria and Jordan against Israel; he had also been accused of hiding behind the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) stationed at Egypt’s border with Israel in the Sinai. Now, however, he moved to unambiguously demonstrate support for Syria: on May 14, 1967, Nasser mobilized Egyptian forces in the Sinai; on May 18 he formally requested the removal of the UNEF stationed there; and on May 22 he closed the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli shipping, thus instituting an effective blockade of the port city of Elat in southern Israel. On May 30, King Hussein of Jordan arrived in Cairo to sign a mutual defense pact with Egypt, placing Jordanian forces under Egyptian command; shortly thereafter, Iraq too joined the alliance.

The hard part is turning all that into an Evil Israel card. Seems like they were mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.

And if you want to go all conspiratorial the Arab-Israeli conflict was historically a proxy battle for the Cold War.

The USSR historically backed the UN Arab Majority. Like their intelligence role in the Six Day War lead-up. One might say their intelligence escalated it.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: HopeForTheFuture
Totally agree with the OP.

You don't even know what he said.
It just sounded anti-Israel so you agree with it.
You get that he's a fake AI bot .. right?? No??
Pffft. Comical.

If you tell me Israel can't be criticized or implicated in conspiratorial activities purely by virtue of its ethnic background, that feels racist and raises more red flags for me.

I'm not going off topic.
Edited.

You are spot on. The Palestinian issue has been going on since 1948. You'd think, for a people w/their history, they'd be a little more gracious to their hosts. Imagine a group of people so treacherous and vile that there has to be laws to keep people from hating them. That's what's going on now.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
I'm not going off topic.
Edited.

Aw shucks. Just when it was getting interesting.

ATTENTION...please read before posting further....

**ALL MEMBERS** The recent surge in Hatred, Racism, and Sheer Stupidity STOPS NOW
The END of Hate Speech, subtle or otherwise, on ATS




BE AWARE THAT IF YOUR POST IS NOT ON TOPIC AND/OR IS ABOUT OTHER MEMBERS YOU MAY BE ABOUT TO HAVE POSTS REMOVED. OR YOU MAY BE TEMPORARILY POST BANNED!
AND, PLEASE REMEMBER THERE IS NO MORE MUD PIT....MUD NOT ALLOWED. Just because the MUD PIT is gone, doesn't mean ATS allows muddy politics.

Everyone and I mean everyone is allowed to post here on topic and to do so without being called names or becoming the target of others' posts. Debate the topic and leave each other out of it. OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS are encouraged.
Those who refuse to get that concept may be POST BANNED!!!

These rules apply to all threads and if you want to engage in personal attacks there are other sites on the Internet where you can do that. Our goal is for ATS to be above that. For members here to post like mature adults.
YOU are responsible for your own posts




And, as always...
Do not reply to this post.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: FlyersFan

If Hamas isn't eradicated, those noncombatants died for nothing. So really there's no choice except to finish the war. BAMN

With that said... Israel should do the finishing. They absolutely can. They have more than enough resources to do their own laundry without the nanny state stepping in to supervise or micromanage or any such malarkey. Let the UN play that game while US focuses on internal affairs which is what our leadership was appointed to do. We are NOT world police.

Israel won the war the 1st time. They have the right to expel every person there for war crimes against Israeli citizens. The repeated attempt to destroy their nation is duly noted by those that are impartial. How many nations have sent explosive missiles to Tel Aviv alone? The genocide discussion should be of Israel not by them.

a reply to: BigRedChew

IRAN is offering U.S. Protestors of Israel, COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS.

Source: www.thegatewaypundit.com...

Let's send them to IRAN, for good.

GOOD BYE and GOOD RIDDENS! 🥳

originally posted by: 19Bones79
The conservatives have adopted BAMN and cancel culture purely because of Israel. It was their emotional trigger.

It stands to reason that they start acting in an irrational way similar to those they ridicule for doing exactly the same thing.

I don't know, I wonder if it is some kind of cognitive self-defence mechanism, like an attempt to maintain belief in a reality that never really was.

It seems to be affecting both extremes and as a consequence, eroding the sustainability of any middle ground. It's not like we don't know how that usually turns out.



C'est la vie.

You think both sides are for a Tranny teaching 4 th graders how to give a BJ is what is happening?

Do you also think that defending the innocent from evil we can all agree is bad, such as rape and murder?

What about men in womens bath rooms and shower areas that claim they are not what their DNA says they are? Even this liberal disagrees with those things.

Do you also think having safe borders for ANY nation, especially my nation America, is wrong?

Is it ok to deport people who have not been vetted who could be murderers and rapists or not, we can't tell while they are raping and murdering if this is a new thing for them without vetting them?


I am a Moderate/Liberal who is fiscally conservative. Those items above are extremists running amok if allowed to just be. Are they not? The right extremism is me if that above calls me right but I simple am not. I am just one man as my avatar. Balanced is the way to be. The evil is the only extreme we have here, period.





reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

originally posted by: network dude
well if that's a "win" then I suppose the rules have changed. I did ask a question that follows right along with this discussion. But it's not an easy one to answer, and usually results in folks scmpering away like little bitches.

Care to take a shot at it?

Why should I answer a question at your bequest? If you want to put forth your answer to that question, do so, but no one, certainly not me, is here to answer your questions for you.

No one is "scampering away like little bitches" because you asked that particular question. They're more likely just turning their backs and walking away from a futile interaction.

So by all means, show us what you've got. You take a shot at it first. Lead by example. I presume you wouldn't ask the question if you hadn't at least given it some thought. I mean hind sight is 20/20, you must have some idea by now.

a reply to: Justoneman

Sorry, you've lost me. I have no idea what you're talking about.

a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

To prove you have a real point would be nice. Just prove some of it or learn from Dude what you should've already without him.

originally posted by: BrucellaOrchitis
a reply to: Justoneman

Sorry, you've lost me. I have no idea what you're talking about.

Ha, I agreed it would be already in another post. That appears way over some peoples head here from your world. Can't handle the truth I see is a real thing for those people. If you want to just trash the truth you came to the wrong place to succeed.

a reply to: Justoneman

Prove what? What should I learn from Dude? He doesn't appear to have imparted any information.

Did I claim to have a point? I wasn't aware that I had.

a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

Admitting you have none is a start. I asked you about the extremists and gave examples if you agreed or not. Where was the confusion here?

originally posted by: BrucellaOrchitis

originally posted by: network dude
well if that's a "win" then I suppose the rules have changed. I did ask a question that follows right along with this discussion. But it's not an easy one to answer, and usually results in folks scmpering away like little bitches.

Care to take a shot at it?

Why should I answer a question at your bequest? If you want to put forth your answer to that question, do so, but no one, certainly not me, is here to answer your questions for you.

No one is "scampering away like little bitches" because you asked that particular question. They're more likely just turning their backs and walking away from a futile interaction.

So by all means, show us what you've got. You take a shot at it first. Lead by example. I presume you wouldn't ask the question if you hadn't at least given it some thought. I mean hind sight is 20/20, you must have some idea by now.

no guts. noted.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: BrucellaOrchitis

originally posted by: network dude
well if that's a "win" then I suppose the rules have changed. I did ask a question that follows right along with this discussion. But it's not an easy one to answer, and usually results in folks scmpering away like little bitches.

Care to take a shot at it?

Why should I answer a question at your bequest? If you want to put forth your answer to that question, do so, but no one, certainly not me, is here to answer your questions for you.

No one is "scampering away like little bitches" because you asked that particular question. They're more likely just turning their backs and walking away from a futile interaction.

So by all means, show us what you've got. You take a shot at it first. Lead by example. I presume you wouldn't ask the question if you hadn't at least given it some thought. I mean hind sight is 20/20, you must have some idea by now.

no guts. noted.

Is it me or do we have a pattern where the brain dead come on here and act like they know something is wrong with the facts we found as if they will go away? It is rinse and repeat from that playbook "Rules for Radicals" every single day on ATS. We clearly see thru it and it still happens every day like a drum beat. Well it wont work here at least. They do one thing for me. Helps me focus on what I am dealing with in the real world. Good to know they are real but so few it requires AI to pitch in to make it appear stronger than it ever could be.

I am not tired of trying to do the right thing.

a reply to: BigRedChew

This conversation could have been an opportunity for a genuine exchange of ideas, but you’ve chosen to reduce it to accusations and mockery.

Exactly what ideas do you bring to the table?

I'm listening.