TL didn't misstate anything. And, he unfortunately had a post deleted somehow.

Since the LON came along, and on into the UN, there is no right of conquest. It is not a valid way to expand borders or add colonies any longer. It is illegal. The three buffer areas are illegal, and Israel has been reprimanded. The only real problem is no one will enforce the Rule of Law here.

Call them buffers, call them occupied territories, call them what you will -- but they are NOT Israel. Besides, buffer... pffft, really? Yeah, the buffer is the tail wagging the dog, in case we hadn't noticed. Israel would do much better with a tightly-controlled border, keeping Jews and Palestinians each to their land. But, they want the LAND -- it is a LAND GRAB. It is unseemly, deplorable, and if the Palestinians had lighter skin people just might care.

You are quite correct. But if Israel should commit a massive genocide, EVERY arab nation, and there are plenty of those, would react. Sure Israel could probably handle Syria, Jordania and possibly Egypt at the same time. But if this scenario should happen I bet that Turkey would react, and Turkey have a slightly more modern army than the ones previously mentioned. Not to mention that you have to count in several former Sovietunion countries as well as several nations in the pacific (it is the pacific right? Or is it the Indian?)... Israel might be able to handle 3 countries but what if 20-30 were to invade? Oh and don't forget Pakistan. They really have some nasty weapons they wouldn't hold back on. ;)

Why would the surrounding Arab countries send regular armies then? They could just let 'freedom fighters' pass the border to help the Palestinians, secretly backed up by their respective goverment. The current situation in Iraq shows how effective guerilla warfare can be. Experts believe that some of these terrorists are non-Iraqis who entered the country after the fall of Saddam's regime.

<FONT COLOR=ORANGE>Pakistan may have nukes, but I bet Israel has more! I dare say that if Israel saw a massive build up on their border; a build-up that they didn't think they could stop. Then they would use nukes to stop that build up.

As far as Freedom Fighters go, most of the damage to our forces in Iraq, have been pin pricks at best. If they really want to do some damage they need to escalate the American casuality rate to something like 20 a day to start equaling our causalities we took in Vietnam. We didn't average that kind of casualty rate during the ground war.

I think Israel could handle anything that a "Freedom Fighter" army could throw at it. After all they've been handling this kinds of attacks for quite sometime. I also don't think that a "Freedom Fighter" Army would have the necessary discipline needed to take on a decent military force. Think of the language barrier such an army would have. Plus just go back and ask all those Freedom Fighters that died in Hebron at the beginning of the latest occupation by the Israelis. They are a "dead" example of what I am talking about.

[ 08-21-2003, 04:35 PM: Message edited by: Sir Taliesin ]

Isreal has not done anything that has actually stopped the resistance. The smartest move either side can make is to remain committed to a peace process and continue to discredit attacks on civilians that don't qualify as "collateral dammage"..ie. terrorist attacks.

The possibility of a conventional military victory against determined guerilla and/or terrorist resistance is slim. We supposedly did this in Afganistan...well news from over there the last few weeks and over the last 1+ years suggest the restistance is no where near defeat and maybe even more dangerous a a snake in the grass.

I am of the opinion it is a pipe dream to believe that military actions will ever end the violence that has been going on going on in Isreal and now in Iraq, but I do beleive that violence begets violence so I may be a bit biased.

The problem with using nuclear weapons close to home is that the fallout drifts where the wind takes it - so using nukes on its neighbours would be like peeing into the wind...

So Israel wins the right to radioactive land - that would be a hollow victory, wouldn't it?

And Israel is all but bankrupt as a result. Had it not been for the enormous funding provided by the US, Israel would be in economic ruins. Israeli GDP has dropped by more than 7% for two years in a row, shares listed on the Telaviv stock exchange have dropped in value by an average of 15%, the tourist industry has dramatically shrunk, the shekel has seen a huge devaluation against the dollar, unemployement rising from a decent 6% to 10% (and expected to reach 13% by the end of the year)...Then there is the damage caused by the bombs and the costs of keeping a huge standing army...need I go on?

You don't have to win a military battle to defeat a country - killing its economy amounts to the same thing...

[ 08-21-2003, 06:05 PM: Message edited by: Skunk ]

You are quite correct. But if Israel should commit a massive genocide, EVERY arab nation, and there are plenty of those, would react. Sure Israel could probably handle Syria, Jordania and possibly Egypt at the same time. But if this scenario should happen I bet that Turkey would react, and Turkey have a slightly more modern army than the ones previously mentioned. Not to mention that you have to count in several former Sovietunion countries as well as several nations in the pacific (it is the pacific right? Or is it the Indian?)... Israel might be able to handle 3 countries but what if 20-30 were to invade? Oh and don't forget Pakistan. They really have some nasty weapons they wouldn't hold back on. ;) </font>[/QUOTE]I wouldn't worry about that. Turkey and israel are good buddies. Turkey may be islamic, but they're not blind either. besides, Turkey wouldn't risk burning their hands on this, they're NATO members. Turkey thinks economic, not Jihad.

Israel plays by the international laws, they COULD have taken over their enemies lands and everything that comes with it. Then they wouldn't be bankrupt, as you claim they are. But they didn't, while they had every right to do so. Do you think it's odd that Israel is struggling financially ? They are completely surrounded by extremely hostile nations. Would you invest in tourism if you were in the Knesset ?

Why would the surrounding Arab countries send regular armies then? They could just let 'freedom fighters' pass the border to help the Palestinians, secretly backed up by their respective goverment. The current situation in Iraq shows how effective guerilla warfare can be. Experts believe that some of these terrorists are non-Iraqis who entered the country after the fall of Saddam's regime. </font>[/QUOTE]<font color='white'> Tanks and planes or Guerilla tactics. I think Israel could handle either. They have Speical Forces that rival or even surpass the SAS and Seals. Sayeret Duvdevan, for example. </font>

The problem with Nukes is without a delivery system they are just big paperweights ;) Israel has several delivery systems, the best Air Force on the planet, sorry USAF, and meduim range ballistic missles. IIRC they were working with the South Africaina in the early 80's and had test fired a missle that was capitable of hitting Moscow. Knowing the Israelis and their scienists, they can use a slide rule like most countries use super computers [img]smile.gif[/img] , their missles would be acurate enough to hit anything in range.