Israeli troops 'move into Gaza'

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, would it matter? Bush has blamed it all on Hamas in the news so far. It wouldnt acheive much for Obama to say much in contradiction when he has an election promise to keep.

I would think there will be more said from Europe, from what I have been reading on the BBC news about this, Hamas are using new rockets with a much greater range now. So this could have a strategic impact on Europe...

I think this may be the idea behind it all. Its already been rumoured that the Iranians are providing Hamas with more advanced weapons and this would be the smoking gun.
The US has been itching to go after Iran and if they could prove a link then, in their eyes, it would provide justification.
 
a aid worker diary

BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Aid worker diary: Part seven

To be honest it to late for a ceasefire, all people there in gaza who have lost family and friends and probably seen there houses and area destroyed wont be prepared to sit back.

Now the ground invasion has started there is going to be more blood shed.

The worst thing about this is it was all unnecessary and will do more damage than good to both sides israel and palestine!
 
Just to chuck a spanner in the works, the Gaza area was first colonised by the Greeks.

Discuss.

:)

Messa

PS on the Obama discussion, as someone said 'you can only have one President at once'.
 
I think this may be the idea behind it all. Its already been rumoured that the Iranians are providing Hamas with more advanced weapons and this would be the smoking gun.
The US has been itching to go after Iran and if they could prove a link then, in their eyes, it would provide justification.
I dont honestly think it is a scheme to involve the west in Iran. Why would the west use the excuse of people in a terrorist country being attacked to invade a seperate country? Just because they are supplying weapons and training? Doesnt seem enough to me.

But if the new rockets that Hamas are using were pointed at Greece for instance, then it would be bad news...
 
I dont honestly think it is a scheme to involve the west in Iran. Why would the west use the excuse of people in a terrorist country being attacked to invade a seperate country? Just because they are supplying weapons and training? Doesnt seem enough to me.

But if the new rockets that Hamas are using were pointed at Greece for instance, then it would be bad news...

You've got my point a bit wrong there mate. The US has refused to condemn Israel and its actions and they class Hamas as a terrorist organisation. If they could prove a link between Iran categorically supplying a terrorist organisation and deliberately de-stabilizing the area then that would involve Iran in the 'war on terror'. They went to Iraq for less...
 
Well, would it matter? Bush has blamed it all on Hamas in the news so far. It wouldnt acheive much for Obama to say much in contradiction when he has an election promise to keep.

If it matters or not is another story which only time will tell.
But i'm not getting your point about Bush.
Where in BO's manifesto did it say he would continue with the policies of the previous administration?
 
The USA has already used the line 'self defence against future attacks' when bombing Libya, so to think that the (Bush) regime do not intend to go after Iran is blinkered.

Messa
 
You've got my point a bit wrong there mate. The US has refused to condemn Israel and its actions and they class Hamas as a terrorist organisation. If they could prove a link between Iran categorically supplying a terrorist organisation and deliberately de-stabilizing the area then that would involve Iran in the 'war on terror'. They went to Iraq for less...

WMD's that could reach targets in Europe - not rockets that cannot. Why should the US think its ok to invade another country? I am not sure that it being de-stabilised is a strong enough argument. The area was destabilised when Israel invaded Lebanon, and has certainly been destabilised with its own invasion of Iraq.

The US simply cant afford another war right now, surely? They have been in Afghanistan since 2002 (I think) and Iraq since 2003, why invade a much stronger and better equipped target?

If it matters or not is another story which only time will tell.
But i'm not getting your point about Bush.
Where in BO's manifesto did it say he would continue with the policies of the previous administration?

I am not sayin he will follow the previous governments lead. The point I am failing to make is that the US considers Hamas a terrorist organisation. Now, I dont know if Obama has the power to veto that or not, but vetoeing it would be the only way the US could provide any aide greater that words of support and food/medicine. And even if he could veto it, wouldnt that be political suicide for him?

Plus, what do people want the US to do, send troops in?
 
The USA has already used the line 'self defence against future attacks' when bombing Libya, so to think that the (Bush) regime do not intend to go after Iran is blinkered.

Messa

Off topic, but...

Well then, he has got 16 days to do it, doesnt he? Anyway, didnt the US attack Libya after Libya deliberately attacked US naval forces? Slightly different to attacking to prevent future attacks imo.
 
WMD's that could reach targets in Europe - not rockets that cannot. Why should the US think its ok to invade another country? I am not sure that it being de-stabilised is a strong enough argument. The area was destabilised when Israel invaded Lebanon, and has certainly been destabilised with its own invasion of Iraq.

The US simply cant afford another war right now, surely? They have been in Afghanistan since 2002 (I think) and Iraq since 2003, why invade a much stronger and better equipped target?



I am not sayin he will follow the previous governments lead. The point I am failing to make is that the US considers Hamas a terrorist organisation. Now, I dont know if Obama has the power to veto that or not, but vetoeing it would be the only way the US could provide any aide greater that words of support and food/medicine. And even if he could veto it, wouldnt that be political suicide for him?

Plus, what do people want the US to do, send troops in?

My thinking would be that BO as new President has more urgent internal issues and will probably want to deal with those first.
His first step to dealing with the current financial disaster would be getting the f*ck out of Iraq and Afghanistan thereby eliminating the biggest financial burden the USA has ever had i.e Haliburton.

After that I don't think he's going to be too keen on embarking on another crusade for the Holy Grail , well not for a few months anyway
 
Off topic, but...

Well then, he has got 16 days to do it, doesnt he? Anyway, didnt the US attack Libya after Libya deliberately attacked US naval forces? Slightly different to attacking to prevent future attacks imo.

No, Reagans attack was in response to the Belin bombing, which was has never been linked to Iran.

Messa
 
My thinking would be that BO as new President has more urgent internal issues and will probably want to deal with those first.

Agreed. He has far more pressing issues to deal with at home before exercises his new found right to wield the mind control ray.
 
Unfortunately Jews, Muslims and Christians have not lived in peace before, during or after the creation of Israel. Israel is not the problem, religious differences are.
I think this says it all. I've read all the posts on this and its quite clear who are the Christians and who are the Muslims . Regardless of who is to blame ,Hamas for continuing to launch the rockets or Israel for its over the top reaction the sad fact is that when anything like this comes up its always the same . The Christian members on one side and the Muslim members on the other and you can prove in black and white that one side is telling the truth but the other isn't going to listen. This is the problem with the world at the moment . There is a very deep mistrust of the muslims by the vast majority of christians mainly due to the fact that they won't criticise " rightly or wrongly " anything done by a muslim country or individual as being wrong .There is probably the same feeling by the muslims against the christians . I myself being a christian think that if Hamas had not being firing rockets into Israel then this wouldn't have happened ,Palestine was provided with a lot of aid which the Hamas government decided to spend on weapons etc and as Jaffa said in an earlier post you would expect your government to do something about it . But if thats what the majority of the palestinians want then they have to live with it the same as the Christians live with the fact that extremists are going to try to commit some atrocity sooner or later against us . The way i see it is as long as there is this amount of distrust by both sides then we haven't got a hope of a peacefull coexistence worldwide never mind on this forum . I'm not going to be able to change your mind and your not going to change mine and thats the facts. It's a sad old world
 
I think this says it all. I've read all the posts on this and its quite clear who are the Christians and who are the Muslims . Regardless of who is to blame ,Hamas for continuing to launch the rockets or Israel for its over the top reaction the sad fact is that when anything like this comes up its always the same . The Christian members on one side and the Muslim members on the other and you can prove in black and white that one side is telling the truth but the other isn't going to listen. This is the problem with the world at the moment . There is a very deep mistrust of the muslims by the vast majority of christians mainly due to the fact that they won't criticise " rightly or wrongly " anything done by a muslim country or individual as being wrong .There is probably the same feeling by the muslims against the christians . I myself being a christian think that if Hamas had not being firing rockets into Israel then this wouldn't have happened ,Palestine was provided with a lot of aid which the Hamas government decided to spend on weapons etc and as Jaffa said in an earlier post you would expect your government to do something about it . But if thats what the majority of the palestinians want then they have to live with it the same as the Christians live with the fact that extremists are going to try to commit some atrocity sooner or later against us . The way i see it is as long as there is this amount of distrust by both sides then we haven't got a hope of a peacefull coexistence worldwide never mind on this forum . I'm not going to be able to change your mind and your not going to change mine and thats the facts. It's a sad old world


Very well articulated, and I agree.

:)
 
I think this says it all. I've read all the posts on this and its quite clear who are the Christians and who are the Muslims .

we have Sikhs and Hindus on here as well you know..

and at least 2 Buddhists :)
 
Last edited:
I know that mate but if you read the posts and then look at the user names you can usually figure out who's who lol
 
I'm a christian myself mate...did you kill Jesus?
 
I would guess at white christian although i should really read back through your posts on this thread
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top