Obama throws Israel under the Bus

[BT]

STILL WAITING......Debate forurm.......questions posed.......still waiting for responses to those specific questions       

Does that apply just to everyone else but you?

[sirs]

Is that a deflection?  Sure didn't seem like any answers to the questions posed.  Shall I repost them for clarity?

[BT]

Is that a deflection?  Sure didn't seem like any answers to the questions posed.  Shall I repost them for clarity?

Actually it is establishing my acceptance of the glass parking lot option going years back.

in response to this:

ok, one little reference, that could easily have been taken as tongue and cheek, does not a position make.

First things first.

[sirs]

...on to the 2nd

[Christians4LessGvt]

SIRS.....I would let it lie.
If you haven't noticed all three of them settled (threw in the towel)
with basically nonsensical answers to the problem yesterday.
No need to rub it in

[BT]

CU

Why is the glass parking lot solution nonsensical?

[BT]

ok, one little reference, that could easily have been taken as tongue and cheek, does not a position make.

So, let's get back the the direct questions posed, if you don't mind:

You seriously advocating nuclear Armageddon? 

Please, what are these conditions of violation that  would warrant this response?? 

So, if Hezbollah, backed by Syria & Iran equipment, launch hundreds of rockets into the New Israel, from their new positions in the Golan Heights, we........take out Lebanon with some nukes??

So you concede that i have been supporting the glass parking lot solution for years.

So on to the rest of your queries though a careful reading of what i posted in this thread seems clear enough.

Let's review what i posted.


I have addressed that point for years. I am on record saying that if a two state peace is achieved any violation of said peace will result in a full nuclear attack by both the US and the Russians on all parties involved.

And then your queries:

You seriously advocating nuclear Armageddon?

Yes

Please, what are these conditions of violation that  would warrant this response?? 

any violation of said peace

So, if Hezbollah, backed by Syria & Iran equipment, launch hundreds of rockets into the New Israel, from their new positions in the Golan Heights, we........take out Lebanon with some nukes?? [/b]

we take out all parties involved.

Yeah i think all that was covered in the original statement

[sirs]

Please, what are these conditions of violation that  would warrant this response?? 

any violation of said peace

So, if Hezbollah, backed by Syria & Iran equipment, launch hundreds of rockets into the New Israel, from their new positions in the Golan Heights, we........take out Lebanon with some nukes??

we take out all parties involved.

Yeah i think all that was covered in the original statement

"All parties", meaning those who initiated the attacks?.......and what of those that backed them?  Nukes, even tactical ones, have a pretty wide latitude of destruction & death.  So, Lebanon becomes a glass parking lot under your peace plan, in the event of the 1st attack upon the New Israel, from some point within the Golan or West Bank?

SIRS.....I would let it lie.
If you haven't noticed all three of them settled (threw in the towel)
with basically nonsensical answers to the problem yesterday.
No need to rub it in

You make a compelling arguement, C

[BT]

"All parties", meaning those who initiated the attacks?.......and what of those that backed them?  Nukes, even tactical ones, have a pretty wide latitude of destruction & death.  So, Lebanon becomes a glass parking lot under your peace plan, in the event of the 1st attack upon the New Israel, from some point within the Golan or West Bank?

All means all.

The attacked as well as the attackers and the backers of both sides.

[BSB]

Just what was your question sirs? Some "if"? What if?

Look, we all live with "what ifs?". What if I get cancer tommorow? What if a bunch of nuts fly planes into the WTC? What's your point, sirs?

BSB 

[Christians4LessGvt]

CU ....Why is the glass parking lot solution nonsensical?

#1. Last week you equated Israel with the Nazis. So why are you at all interested in any kind of deals?
      If you believe what you claim you do, why not call for just outright nuking Israel now?
      Would you have made deals with Hitler over Auschwitz?

#2. You are advocating killing millions of women and children by nuking entire areas because
        someone from Al-Qaeda, Hamas, or Hezbollah shoots an RPG across the border?
        I'm not quite sure if you really believe what you type or it's more a case of saying
        the outrageous out of frustration.

[Plane]

Well if we are seriously considering a 100% kill of both sides as a final solution, perhaps I can submit for considerations idea only half so drastic.

Lets kidnap every child in the land .

We would not need to keep them , we would only transport them across the fences and plonk them down on the other side of every wall.

It might be hard to prevent rescues , but that would be a critical part of the plan, the children of one side are the hostages of the safety of the kids of the other side.

Both sides would have an intrest in maintaining good water and food supplies to the opposite side of the fence, both sides would loose motive to toss bombs and rockets randomly or specifically.

Every child would be returned after his 12th birthday, with one would hope , no harm done more than development of a strong Stockholm syndrome.

I know this is very drastic and ugly , but the situation as it is includes raising up children to treasure hatred above love and land above blood.  What plan is more drastic and ugly than this?



http://children.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/05/06/palestinian-children-reared-to-fight-and-die-for-a-free-palestine/

[sirs]

Just what was your question sirs? Some "if"? What if?

This IF

"All parties", meaning those who initiated the attacks?.......and what of those that backed them?  Nukes, even tactical ones, have a pretty wide latitude of destruction & death.  So, Lebanon becomes a glass parking lot under your peace plan, in the event of the 1st attack upon the New Israel, from some point within the Golan or West Bank?

All means all.

The attacked as well as the attackers and the backers of both sides.

Well, that's pretty much a non-starter now, isn't it.  Israel can't defend, and some idiots with a martyrdom complex, have the perfect plan then to rid the region of Israel, by merely attacking them.  Bravo. 

Seriously, with as much as you, BsB, and Xo extoll the mandate that Israel go back to being far less defensive, none of you have any desire to address the 300lb gorilla in the room. 
Israel, you go back to pre-67 borders, with your country split in half. 
Palestinians, you get the lands Israel needed to defend itself,
and.....peace at last

Brilliant           One can see why Bibi wasn't so keen on the idea, since no one wants to address the IF-factor seriously

[BT]

Well if we are seriously considering a 100% kill of both sides as a final solution, perhaps I can submit for considerations idea only half so drastic.

Lets kidnap every child in the land .

We would not need to keep them , we would only transport them across the fences and plonk them down on the other side of every wall.

It might be hard to prevent rescues , but that would be a critical part of the plan, the children of one side are the hostages of the safety of the kids of the other side.

Both sides would have an intrest in maintaining good water and food supplies to the opposite side of the fence, both sides would loose motive to toss bombs and rockets randomly or specifically.

Every child would be returned after his 12th birthday, with one would hope , no harm done more than development of a strong Stockholm syndrome.

I know this is very drastic and ugly , but the situation as it is includes raising up children to treasure hatred above love and land above blood.  What plan is more drastic and ugly than this?



http://children.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/05/06/palestinian-children-reared-to-fight-and-die-for-a-free-palestine/

Looks like plane gets it.

The idea is to change the mindset of the belligerents.

And the way you do that is make sure they have much more to lose by continuing the war than they do in making sure everyone keeps the peace.

[BT]

Just what was your question sirs? Some "if"? What if?

This IF

"All parties", meaning those who initiated the attacks?.......and what of those that backed them?  Nukes, even tactical ones, have a pretty wide latitude of destruction & death.  So, Lebanon becomes a glass parking lot under your peace plan, in the event of the 1st attack upon the New Israel, from some point within the Golan or West Bank?

All means all.

The attacked as well as the attackers and the backers of both sides.

Well, that's pretty much a non-starter now, isn't it.  Israel can't defend, and some idiots with a martyrdom complex, have the perfect plan then to rid the region of Israel, by merely attacking them.  Bravo. 

Why is it a non starter? All you are doing is predetermining what the consequences of breaking the peace are. Seems to me with that kind of motivation Hamas and Hezbollah would not be very welcome in Lebanon and Gaza.

How is this any different than Debka calling for nuke strikes against the Iranian Reactors?