Cease Fire! Israeli PM Has Accepted Cease-Fire Deal

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

ABC News: Israeli PM Has Accepted Cease-Fire Deal (http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2303062)

By KARIN LAUB


JERUSALEM Aug 11, 2006 (AP)— Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has accepted an emerging Mideast cease-fire deal and informed the United States of his decision, Israeli officials said Friday.

FOXNews.com - U.N. Security Council Approves Cease-Fire Resolution - The Mideast (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207902,00.html)

UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. Security Council adopted a resolution Friday that calls for an end to the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah (javascript:siteSearch('Hezbollah');), and authorizes the deployment of 15,000 U.N. peacekeepers to help Lebanese troops take control of south Lebanon as Israel withdraws.

The draft, adopted unanimously, is the first significant council response to the crisis and offers the best chance yet for peace after more than four weeks of war in the Middle East.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (javascript:siteSearch('Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert');) had earlier accepted the cease-fire deal and informed the United States of his decision on Friday, officials said.

[Wyatt_Junker]

Cease Fire! Israeli PM Has Accepted Cease-Fire Deal

What is this? Let's Make A Deal? I don't see Monty Hall?

I have one little question; Who's On First?

http://www.videos4training.com/images/who's%20on%20first.jpg

Wadda bunch of silly ass slapstick.

[Lubbock]

Well, if what's going on right now is Israel's idea of "cease fire", then I say, let's have more cease fire.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

It's a friggin' disaster. The Israelis simply did not want to get bogged down in another protracted occupation with no real commitment from the international community to end Hezbollah. None of this surprises me.

BUSH, PUT BOOTS ON THE GROUND IN LEBANON, HELP ISRAEL FINISH HEZBOLLAH AND STRIKE SYRIA FROM THE AIR!

Jesus wept.

[Patriot Heart]

Sad news indeed.

[MSGT]

Olmert is finished. His poll numbers at the start of fighting was 75%. Right before the cease fire agreement they were 48%. He said that hezbollah was better prepared than they thought and better armed. He needed an out because either way he is through. Either JP or Haaretz said that the big push was only to get more favorable results in the negotiations.

[MSGT]

Kaw....kaww

[DoctorDoom]

A muzzie cease fire? Surely they jest. The ONLY thing that provides is a breathing spell while the terrorists rearm for the next attack. God save Israel. The compromisers and surrenderists won't.

[MSGT]

It disgusts me that we abandoned and then betrayed our only ME ally. Thanks Bush.... you sure are tough on terror.



The Jewish papers I read lead me to believe that they don't want us there. If they are not feared in the region they are in trouble. Get this, some even think they need to do well in this war to stay a viable partner with us.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/749293.html
Of course, being the champion for Israel you've already seen all this and still want to blame GWB. Or maybe, just maybe, you just want to blame GWB for every thing you can think of, regardless of the situation.


Besides we are not the savior of Israel. If the world starts to think so, we will be taken out of the way. Glory where it is due and all that.

[Lubbock]

I just don't understand why Bush hasn't called AmeriConArtist up to Washington and put him in charge. I mean in charge of every aspect of government and foreign policy and the War on Terror and the Katrina clean up and the price of gas and cancer research and why it don't rain in the Texas Panhandle.

Just put the ConArtist in charge of the whole shooting match and he'll have it all cleared up in a week.

Bush is responsible for every ill that has befallen the world since Eve at the apple, and ConArtist has the answer to everything.

A Bush Hating ConArtist in Charge --that'll work!!!

[Maggie_T]

A muzzie cease fire? Surely they jest. The ONLY thing that provides is a breathing spell while the terrorists rearm for the next attack. God save Israel. The compromisers and surrenderists won't.


Amen.

[Beowulf]

15,000 UN Peacekeepers? We're screwed, especially when there is no peace to keep.

Just wait, this will happen:
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b204/Beowulf58/boyvstank.jpg
and they'll be at it again!

[dPrasse]

Well, if what's going on right now is Israel's idea of "cease fire", then I say, let's have more cease fire.

Agreed ! More Airstrikes and tripling of the Israeli troop numbers in Lebanon and troops on the Litani River ... all great ingredients for a good cease-fire ... kill the terrorists and then we'll cease firing ... Go Israel !

Foxnews has the agreement on the website ....
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207995,00.html

[DeclinetoState]

I'm not impressed.

At least in the Middle East, a cease-fire usually only lasts as long as it takes for one or both of the combatants to reload.

[Lubbock]

Maybe this will impress you, Decline:

Tripling Forces, Israel Expands Push in Lebanon </NYT_HEADLINE><NYT_BYLINE version="1.0" type=" ">
By JOHN KIFNER (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/john_kifner/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and GREG MYRE (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/greg_myre/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
</NYT_BYLINE><NYT_TEXT>
BEIRUT, Lebanon (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/lebanon/index.html?inline=nyt-geo), Aug. 12 — Israel (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/israel/index.html?inline=nyt-geo) poured troops, tanks and commandos into southern Lebanon on Saturday, tripling its forces, pushing deep toward the Litani River and carrying out 80 airstrikes against Hezbollah (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/h/hezbollah/index.html?inline=nyt-org) fighters, one day after a United Nations Security Council (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/s/security_council/index.html?inline=nyt-org) resolution calling for a cease-fire.

The Israeli cabinet is to consider the Security Council resolution at its regular meeting on Sunday, but it was far from clear when the major military thrust ordered by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/ehud_olmert/index.html?inline=nyt-per), apparently with American approval only hours after the United Nations (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/u/united_nations/index.html?inline=nyt-org) vote on Friday, would end.

“This operation is aimed at preventing Hezbollah from firing rockets into northern Israel and is not limited in time,” said a government spokesman, Avi Pazner.

The Hezbollah leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/n/hassan_nasrallah/index.html?inline=nyt-per), went on TV on Saturday night to charge that “nothing had changed” since the United Nations resolution, but pledged to abide by a cease-fire once it came into effect.
“The war did not end, because the aggression is still going on,” he said, but added that his forces would stand down “when the Israeli aggression stops.” The Lebanese government, which has proposed sending 15,000 Lebanese Army troops south in conjunction with an international peacekeeping force of 15,000 to form a kind of buffer zone, was to meet for a vote on the Security Council resolution late on Saturday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/13/world/middleeast/13mideast.html?ei=5094&en=6ee985b8fa5f388e&hp=&ex=1155441600&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print

[ConspiracyBuff]

Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said Saturday that the Islamic militant group will abide by a U.N. cease-fire resolution but will continue fighting as long as Israeli troops remained in south Lebanon.

A senior Israeli government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Israel will halt its war in Lebanon at 7 a.m. (midnight ET) on Monday. Israel’s Cabinet was to endorse the U.N. cease-fire resolution on Sunday.
Nasrallah grudgingly accepted the cease-fire plan in a televised address as the Lebanese Cabinet was in session to vote on whether to agree to the U.N. resolution. Hezbollah has two ministers in the government.

“We will not be an obstacle to any (government) decision ... but our ministers will express reservations about articles that we consider unjust and unfair,” he said.
Hours later, Israel Radio reported Israeli army units reached the Litani River, less than 24 hours after the government ordered an operation to march toward the river in a final push against entrenched Hezbollah guerrillas.
The units were part of a massive force that flooded into Lebanon, trying to seize as much territory as possible before a U.N. cease-fire comes into effect. The objective was to control southern Lebanon up to the Litani River, about 18 miles from the Israeli border, before handing over the area to the Lebanese army and U.N. troops.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14315126/

[Lubbock]

This is pretty impressive, too, Decline:

IDF troops advancing to Litani River
By YAAKOV KATZ, JPOST.COM STAFF AND AP (editors@jpost.com)

IDF operations in Lebanon continued to expand on Saturday, with armored, infantry and engineering forces extending deep into Lebanon, with the goal of covering the entire region between the Israeli border and the Litani River.

Israel had reportedly landed the most number of troops in enemy territory in the largest aerial mission since the Yom Kippur War in 1973.

According to the IDF, troops were advancing north and west toward the Litani River, some 30 kilometers from Israel. Taking the territory would take several days, the army said, following which the IDF would operate in the area to remove the terror infrastructure and to destroy rocket launchers.

Cease-fire analysis: Not so bad in theory (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525858200&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)
IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz said that Israel had nearly tripled the number of forces in Lebanon as part of its expanded ground war in Lebanon, and expects to fight for another week.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525855062&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Article complete with map.

[MSGT]

No one ordered Israel anything. The Un came up with a peace plan and Israel accepted it.

[Maggie_T]

Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said Saturday that the Islamic militant group will abide by a U.N. cease-fire resolution but will continue fighting as long as Israeli troops remained in south Lebanon.

Ok, which? :rolleyes:

Bah. Why am I not surprised. This is what "cease-fire" amounts to. They stop shooting at each other for potty breaks and then resume hostilities. Am I wrong?

[Lubbock]

Let me spell it out for you: Hezbollah is a part of the ELECTED government of Lebanon.

Let me spell it out a little further for you: NO ONE --not the US or the UN is going to tell Israel to stop kicking Hezbollah's butt!

Or haven't you noticed?

Please refer to posts #17 and 19.

Do you ever stop to think that just maybe you ought to get beyond what the Leftstream Media puts out? Do you ever stop to think that there are things that go behind the scenes that are 1.) beyond your knowledge; and 2.) beyond your understanding if you did have knowledge of them?

You are nothing more than a Liberal trying hard to pass yourself off as a Conservative. You are a liar and a fraud! You hate Bush and it wouldn't matter waht he did, it would be wrong.

End of story!

[Maggie_T]

Who? Me? :confused:

[dPrasse]

Who? Me? :confused:

No , he's smacking Americon ... you got those 2 cornfused ... :lol:

[Riverboat]

She's still looking for her bifocals. ;)

[DeclinetoState]

Ok, which? :rolleyes:

Bah. Why am I not surprised. This is what "cease-fire" amounts to. They stop shooting at each other for potty breaks and then resume hostilities. Am I wrong?Well, they reload, too.

Let's see where we are in six months, a year, two years, before we get start rejoicing over all of this. This cease-fire doesn't mean much if you consider in in the context of 4,000 years of history of turmoil and conflict in the region.

[Maggie_T]

Maybe I should start looking for my brain. :sad: Man, I'm really screwing it up, today.

[dPrasse]

Too many years in the Gulag , Maggie ... time for some freedom ... :D

[Lubbock]

No, Maggie. It's not you. It's the IslamoNazi Ass-kissing Liberals. They've pushed you over the edge.

[UnkHiram]

The only cease fire they should be accepting, is one that allows them to reload and bury the dead. That way they know how many are left and how much ammunition they still need.

[Maggie_T]

:D Love ya, guys.

[ConspiracyBuff]

Bush just DID.

He did? Bush told Israel to stop kicking hezbollah butt? Am I on the same planet as you? Bush and the UN are two completely seperate entities, and as MSGT pointed out, Israel accepted the cease-fire, apparantly to begin Monday. Bush didn't tell Israel anything, I don't know why you keep bringing it back to Bush it's annoying.

[dPrasse]

Back in Miami, Bush said that observers must remember that "this crisis began with Hezbollah's unprovoked terrorist attacks against Israel. Israel is exercising its right to defend itself. And we mourn the loss of innocent life, both in Lebanon and in Israel."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,206365,00.html
This , from the same article really sheds light on just how good of allies we have in france and russia in the WoT ..

As Bush spoke Monday, Russian and French officials criticized the U.S. refusal to accept an immediate cease-fire and promoted Iran as a force for stability in the region.

[DoctorDoom]

The ceasefire will end when the Hezbos decide to use the lull to launch another salvo of Katyushin rockets into a northern-Israel town. I'll give those savages a week, maximum.

[DoctorDoom]

As Bush spoke Monday, Russian and French officials criticized the U.S. refusal to accept an immediate cease-fire and promoted Iran as a force for stability in the region.The Frogs and the Russkies must be dizzy from the circle-jerking. Iran as a "force for stability"???? :rolleyes: I hereby appoint them as two charter members of the Axis of Asswarts.

[dPrasse]

Axis of Asswarts ?????


:lol: too funny !

[Maggie_T]

The Frogs and the Russkies must be dizzy from the circle-jerking. Iran as a "force for stability"???? :rolleyes: I hereby appoint them as two charter members of the Axis of Asswarts.


Speaking of which, I found this pic


http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/J/U/french_knife2.jpg


Ain't it the truth. :D

[dajoga]

Hey, knock it off--I'm moving to S. Lebonan to start a new business--selling wine and cheese to the Frenchy soldiers. 15,000 of them are coming, I hear!
Le'see, 15K bottles of vino/day at a profit of $.50/bottle--not too bad!
:roar:

[MSGT]

Are we like now going to pretend that the US not only brokered this deal but they we don't have a seat on the security council?I was going to give a long reply and trash any hope of argument you may have but I'll just post something you can understand.

http://starsandgarters.blogs.com/photos/doodles/shitbird.JPG

[MSGT]

For those of you with intelligence that would like to see the resolution. This is what is posted at Haaretz.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/749631.html

[Bluemoon_Rising]

The bottom line is that we're going to have to fight this war sooner or later. Iran, Syria and Hezbollah handed Israel and the West a perfect opportunity to smash them. Instead, it appears to be pretty clear that we are moving toward another stale-mated situation wherein Hezbollah survives to fight another day.

I'm sorry, Lubbock, but that is the real danger here. We should be going after Hezbollah along with Israel and we should be hitting Syria. Indeed, we should have hit Syria hard shortly after we toppled Saddam's regime when it became clear that it was bent on feeding the insurgency in Iraq.

Further, in spite of Israel’s stated intensions, it is not yet at all clear that it will in fact take its offensive all the way to the Litani River. That is what Israel needs to do, and I hope it does. In any event, this resolution smells like another stale mate to me.

I am deeply concerned about what is happening in Iraq. We could very well lose this thing if we don't start directly bringing it to these punks -- Syria and Iran -- soon.

We shall see.

[Beowulf]

I almost totally agree with you, Bluemoon. The best thing the US can do is stay out and let Israel go after these animals. THAT in and of itself is the best way we could help them. We could learn from them as they do it once and do it right by keeping politics OUT of war. We haven't learned to do that yet in America.

[Lubbock]

And I agree with Bluemoon, also, in this respect: sooner or later, it's going to come down to an all out WWII-style campaign. There is no getting around it. Anybody with one eye and half sense knows that eventually huge parts of the ME will have to be subjected to Bunker Busters and Cluster Bombs, collateral damage and civilian casualties be damned.

As far as I'm concerned, the sooner the better. If it had been left up to me, I would have turned Mecca into a radio active hole on September 12, 2001.

But . . . I'm not running it, and neither is anyone here, so I have to trust that there are people who know what they're doing and know when the time is right.

I don't see what good it does to storm around, breathing fire and blaming Bush for the fact that Hezbollah attacked Israel.

For whatever reason, Israel signed on to the cease fire, so I have to believe the folks in charge over there had their reasons and know what they're doing, as well. Israel could just as well told the US to go doodle in our collective hat, there would be no cease fire. But Israel didn't. She signed in to the deal.

We all know that Hezbollah isn't going to quit. It doesn't matter how many UN "Peacekeepers" are moved into the region, Hezbollah isn't going to quit.

Israel's powers-that-be didn't listen to the IDF when this thing started, and huge mistakes were made on day one. It hurt Israel militariarilly. That's out there. Everybody knows it.

Maybe Israel signed on to it, hoping for a respite in order to get a change in power, and time to rearm. Everyone is saying the ceasefire will only give Hezbollah a chance to rearm. Well, maybe Israel is planning to use the cease fire for the same reason.

[DoctorDoom]

IMO, Israel is biding its time in the "ceasefire". The Hezbos will violate it. That's what they do. And then no one will have an argument against finishing them off.

[Lubbock]

Bingo!!!

And something is going to touch off the threat in Iran, as well. Israel can take Iran out. The US can take Iran out. It's just a matter of time and a question of who gets the shot. But it's coming.

Syria will get her share of Bunker Busters before it's over, as well.

Girlfriend troubles aside, I think we're going to see Netanyahu make a comeback.

[dPrasse]

I wonder if the new missile attacks into Haifa will affect the cease fire agreement ?

[Lubbock]

No doubt it will, dP. I think a cease fire is dead before it gets off the ground. All of the gyrations we've gone through with the UN is nothing more than window dressing for the world.

If you sat Condi Rice down and made her tell the truth, she would tell you that a cease fire won't hold for fifteen minutes.

And here's a question: Supposing the UN can even find 15K "peacekeepers" willing to go into the region, how in the heck are they going to get them in. The way things are going now, half of them will get their butts shot off before they can take up a duty station. You don't think it matters to Hezbollah who they lob bombs at, do you?

I keep picturing fifteen thousand peacekeepers bivouacked forty miles from the border while the rockets keep flying.

Hezbollah is proclaiming today --loud and long, they will not disarm.

There goes your cease fire.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

I don't see what good it does to storm around, breathing fire and blaming Bush for the fact that Hezbollah attacked Israel.

I'm certainly not blaming Bush for the Hezbollah attack.

Israel's powers-that-be didn't listen to the IDF when this thing started, and huge mistakes were made on day one. It hurt Israel militariarilly. That's out there. Everybody knows it.

The cabinet failed to listen to its army generals, relying too heavily on air power when it became clear after about two weeks into this thing that an aggressive, fast-moving ground offensive would be required to neutralize Hezbollah.

Maybe Israel signed on to it, hoping for a respite in order to get a change in power, and time to rearm. Everyone is saying the ceasefire will only give Hezbollah a chance to rearm. Well, maybe Israel is planning to use the cease fire for the same reason.

The reason is clear to me. Israel is understandably hesitant to get bogged down in another prolonged occupation without any real commitment from the international community to neutralize Hezbollah's military arm in Lebanon once and for all. So it has waffled back and forth between an on-going air campaign and a half-hearted ground campaign . . . waiting on the U.N. council to make up its mind.

Others have argued that Israel can handle Hezbollah on its own, and yes of course it can -- technically. But as I have said from the beginning, the problem is political and strategic At the end of day, Israel does not want to be standing around with its dick in its hand deep in Lebanon, caught up in a conflict against an insurgency that eventually ends in a stale mate and their withdrawal . . . only to start the whole cycle over again in another few years or so.

Ultimately, for insurmountable strategic and political reasons, the remainder of the balance of this offensive, beyond Hezbollah, is our fight, if this thing is to ever be resolved in a manner that breaks this cycle -- a self-imposed cycle of violence, an illusion of sorts, tragically unnecessary. Further, Hezbollah owes us a blood debt. Damn it! Reagan ordered a massive air strike against Hezbollah in the Bekaa Valley in response to its 1983 Beirut barracks bombing that killed over 200 marines. Weinberger nixed that order. Had I been Reagan at the time, instead of merely being hurt and astonished by Weinberger's insubordination, I would have fired his ass and executed the mission. Weinberger initially argued that we didn't know for sure that Hezbollah was responsible when in fact we had sufficient intelligence to warrant a strike against it, and certainly it was indisputable that Hezbollah guerillas had been repeatedly firing on marine positions for weeks before the bombing.

You don't allow such a thing to be carried out against our troops and walk away. I loved Reagan; he was one of this nation's greatest presidents. But Reagan failed miserably in that instance. Make no mistake about it.

We have got to understand Israel's strategic and political limitations. We have got to understand that victory means finishing off Hezbollah once and for all. Israel needs our help, if not on the ground than from the air against the immediate source of this cancer -- namely, Syria.

We should have done this already some three to four years ago. We were given another opportunity to do so with Iran's recent gambit in Lebanon.

I am not confident that we are not about to squander another opportunity.

You want to shut the Islamofacists' propaganda machine down? You want to effectively silence the leftist pukes at home? Attack!

[Maggie_T]

Blue, very well said. Every time.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

Are we like now going to pretend that the US not only brokered this deal but they we don't have a seat on the security council?

For crying out loud, Americon, what is your point? The U.S. is trying to work out a permanent resolution in support of Israel's attempt to neutralize Hezbollah. I'm not encouraged by this move; I think it's going to end badly and may only serve to shield Syria from our wrath, but you talk as if this is some kind of calculated betrayal. It's either an out-and-out blunder or the prologue to a larger war -- in my opinion, an unnecessary waste of time and political capitol as the clock continues to tick away the time in Iraq.

Further, Israel is signaling that it will continue to advance against Hezbollah in spite of the so-called cease fire.

At this point, I don’t think anyone can really know what’s going to happen here. Israel’s signals are mixed, and it is not at all clear that an international force will achieve its stated goals. I would that we just cut to the chase and join Israel against Hezbollah and Syria, but we shall see.

[Wyatt_Junker]

Does anyone know the actual hezbollah census in S. Lebanon? And even if we did know an exact population count of hezbos, the real question then becomes how many Shia are similarly intertwined with them? The kind of people that toggle back-n-forth between one camp and another, seeking their advantage either way. A number you will never know because the moment before you enter their house they remove the Nasrallah picture hanging over their dinette set.

I keep hearing that Olmert's problem was that he didn't commit to ground troops after air power, but really if the Shia are the real problem, why not do 'real' air and kneecap them as well? Fer shit's sake, I just finished watching Future Weapons and believe me, there are so many powerful powerful intermediary weapons like the centrifuge or steel rain that can gut this thing like a trout. Why are punches being pulled? It seems that Hezbollah maxes out or redlines with about 150 or so Kayusha rockets(which suck) as a lame show of force. Apparently, this is all they have in the tank. Whereas Israel hasn't even hit one tenth of its potential stride.

[MSGT]

The Moonman is right about stopping the cycle of violence. The question is how do we do this without turning the entire ME into a world wide free for all?

It appears that nuclear war is coming if we like it or not. If Iran gets nukes they will use it. At this point we will have no other choice. Armageddon sure looks close.

[Bluemoon_Rising]

I see it as what it is, weakness.

I have been a die-hard supporter of Bush's war on terror from the beginning. I openly ridiculed those who claimed that he was screwing around. I told people to wait and see what he did after the election, and that then we would see the real hardcore Bush come forth to stomp the crap out of Iran and Syria.

We correctly rejected Kerry for his terroist pandering pro-UN garbage, and reelected Bush, who then proceeded to do exactly the same thing he ridiculed Kerry for. Run to the UN, offer deals to the terrorists in Iran... and now he doesn't even want our allies fighting terror. It is freaking ridiculous.

What really annoys me though are the people (here) who SEE the danger, DISCUSS the danger, then claim that it is someone elses job to fight that danger. Apparently it is too much for the US to handle a minor insurgency in Iraq, but the little nation of Israel should be able to take on the entire Islamic world, all alone, while we stand on the sidelines wringing our hands and shaking our heads at their excesses.

As the events of this week proved, this is OUR war too, and it is about time we quit talking and get the hell in it.

Frankly, I'm moving toward this view. It is not at all clear what the Bush Administration is up to. It sure as hell does appear to me that Bush's offensive has gone adrift. I've said it before; I'll say it again: it never made any sense whatsoever to take down Saddam's regime unless we were prepared to strike Syria -- neutralizing the threat on our flank.

The first Bush Administration understood this, and that is primarily why it didn’t want to take things quite that far in the first Persian Gulf War. Nevertheless, Bush Sr. should have decimated the fleeing Republican Guard and then supported the subsequent Shia insurrection from the air, leaving it to the Iraqis to work out their own destiny, which is what I had expected Bush Sr. to do. Another missed opportunity.

One thing is for certain, in the face of the current war between Israel and Hezbollah, most Americans are still thinking in terms of the old Israeli-Arab dynamic.

We are knee deep in this thing. What we do in response to Syria's and Iran's incessant meddling directly impacts our ability to succeed in Iraq.

[MSGT]

What really annoys me though are the people (here) who SEE the danger, DISCUSS the danger, then claim that it is someone elses job to fight that danger. Apparently it is too much for the US to handle a minor insurgency in Iraq, but the little nation of Israel should be able to take on the entire Islamic world, all alone, while we stand on the sidelines wringing our hands and shaking our heads at their excesses.

As the events of this week proved, this is OUR war too, and it is about time we quit talking and get the hell in it.{I was trying to ignore you, but since this is at me..}Have you heard ONE TIME Israel ask for any help. EVERYTHING in print from Israel says they don't want us there. They want to fight their own battle. If they are seen as week or as NEEDING our help, they will be invaded from every angle and there won't be a damn thing we can do. The jews are pissed at Olmert for trying to have an air war, then commiting the ground troops to late. The whole time his poll numbers were going down and he needed out. TRY,TRY,TRY to get 1 fact through your head and leave the spin.

You don't. So, you want an all out world war with nukes flying in all directions. To hell with everything?

[MSGT]

I have been a die-hard supporter of Bush's war on terror from the beginning. I openly ridiculed those who claimed that he was screwing around.

The minute our troops leave Iraq and enter Iran is the minute the Iraqi insurgency ends. Or 99% of it anyway. They are attacking us in Iraq, not to "halt democracy" (democracy, despite what Limbaugh says, has never concerned Islam or any other modern despotic regime), but because that is what Muslems do. They seek out unbelievers and kill them. Killing American soldiers is even better, as it weakens the resolve of the American people.

Iraq, despite the spin, was never any more "terrorist" than any of their neighbors, but they did provide the other Iranian flank and a launching point into Syria. Sadly, I suspected the war was a sham when Bush immediately began chastising Israel for their War on Terror, making alliances with Pakestan, and inviting the Saudi Princes to a BBQ at his ranch (and all this within months of 9-11). Those concerns are now turning out to be correct.
Call me a skeptic.

[Lubbock]

" . . . Perhaps his popularity crashed because he launched Israel into a war anticipating help that never came. . . . "

You're are the one who is way off base in your assesment, but I understand why.

You never look at any situation through any lense other than finding a way to make Bush responsible for what you perceive as a disaster.

1.) The United States has been shipping arms to Israel from day one, and Lord only knows what kind of intelligence we provided; and

2.) You didn't really expect the United States to put troops on the ground in this war, did you?

Please don't tell me that you have let your hate for Bush cloud your thinking to that extent.

[MSGT]

Wow! Now this is a freaking weird assessment. Where in the hell did you get such a ridiculous notion? They opened with an air and artillery war for the same reason that every nation with such an advantage does, to soften the enemy position, damage morale, and stir things up. This isn't new of course. We have done the same in every war since the invention of indirect fire.

Perhaps his popularity crashed because he launched Israel into a war anticipating help that never came. The only forces we sent were journalists who promptly began spreading lies.Do you just make shit up as you go. Either you are the dumbest or the most committed Bush hater since Bagdad Bob.





Your question was how to stop the "circle of violence." I will give you a complete answer. There are only two ways:

1. We Surrender. We stick burka's on our wives, mutilate our daughters, and convert to Islam. We murder all who refuse. We murder all who violate Islamic law.

2. We fight. We crush every Muslim nation beneath the grinding wheels of industry -- carpet bombing their cities and killing all we can find until they completely renounce their faith in evil. We ban the practice of Islam everywhere, including here, and imprison all who spread the poison.Alright there, Bob. Neither one of these are gonna happen no matter who is in office. Try and give a reasonable answer. This one sounds like it came from a 12 yr old.

[Lubbock]

Okay. I don't wave the white flag often, but now it's time.

I hreby surrender to Baghdad Bob [I like that MSGT. May I use it?]

When you're up against some who posts -- Bush has surrendered to Islam, it's time to quit.

There was little hope for a reasonable debate from the jump, but like a fool, I held out hope.

All hope is gone.

[Peachdiane]

When you're up against some who posts -- Bush has surrendered to Islam, it's time to quit.

I have to admit I was disappointed in Sept. 2001 when he said, "That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace."

I was hoping he'd see Islam for what it really is.

[Lubbock]

One point:

I suspect in September, 2001, the President's only option was to declare Islam a Religion of Peace. Had he stood up and said Islam is a Death Cult, we would have had anarchy here in America. As angry as this nation was, we might have seen Muslims being hung in public and Mosques burned to the ground. Wholesale anarchy.

[MSGT]

Not only that but we would have 1.5 billion people to kill that Russia, China and France are all trying to buddy up to. {I know....France? Hey they got nukes}

[MSGT]

I hreby surrender to Baghdad Bob [I like that MSGT. May I use it?]


:thumb:http://www.feelmypain.net/baghdad_bob.jpg:thumb: