Assad given weapons ultimatum

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Sultan PM'ed me about my quote to him a bit above on this page.

wow. i mean wow. not only do you make a private conversation public, but rather than putting my exact words up, you paraphrase and change the meaning to further your own arguments.

even when "apologising" for possible misrepresentations, you take the opportunity to reiterate those misrepresentations and rebut them with your position. please, next time you want to apologise just put a knife in my back. that would be more honourable.

disappointing. and clearly not worth the time it would take to respond.

memnoch, i appreciate that you raised some concerns, but it's a bit late to put the cat back in the bag. please leave timber's response up as a lasting, shameful reminder of what is acceptable at IW Forums.

[Timber Loftis]

Sultan, first, I have deleted my post out of respect for your obvious wishes. You could have posted or PM'd me regarding any objection, as I graciously offered, but you did not.

Second, I tried to quote you as best I could, and I even cut/pasted your PM/email to me to demonstrate such. I did not take any opportunity to reiterate misrepresentations and/or reubut them.

In fact, I tried to quote you fairly and answer you EXTREMELY fairly all around. I tried to bridge differences where they existed and admit your points where they stood. In short, I tried to "make friends" with you, as I feel you are a vehemently biased poster, but knowledgable and thoughtful.

I have, however, saved your PM to me and my posted response so I may adequately respond should you toss accusations around again that I misquoted you. I did not misquote or misrepresent you, and to assert such is dirty pool, old man.

I note that I am exceedingly disappointed. I tried to represent you fairly and post responses to you fairly and amicably. I tried to be non-partisan and recognize valid points while still asserting my beliefs. You turned it on its head, claiming falsities against me. I tried to reconcile differences, and you jumped on it to misrepresent things.

In short, do not PM me again, keep any discussion between us in the open, and KISS MY ASS.

I have yet to make any real enemies on IWF. You have the honor of being the first. I sincerely oppose your broad-brushed post claiming I misrepresented you (as I said, I've saved your comments for rebuttal if you like), and I will gladly put my reputation up against yours any day of the week, month, or year.

Please be clear. If you want to speak to me, do it in front of everyone. Do not PM me again, and you are on my "ignore" list. I am through with trying to bridge gaps with you. You do not garner the respect I give every other IWF member, because you twist things. Be clear: everyone else here gets my respect for their view: you, after this, do not.

Rather than taking the oppurtinity to engage in dialogue, you made this partisan. Only you will lose in this, trust my words.

[ 01-10-2004, 03:35 AM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Memnoch]

OK...well that's sorted that out, anyway. At least you've managed to clarify your relationship, if nothing else. I don't have a problem with what your relationship is, just as long as it doesn't negatively impact the rest of the forum. If we see a feud blossoming we'll be clamping down on that very strongly as we don't have time for any of that. But I'm sure that won't happen - I trust you're both mature enough to move on beyond that.

Anyway. I'll keep this thread open but would appreciate no further comments from either of you on each other. Let's all get back on topic, please. Cheers. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Timber Loftis]

Areed Memsie. I will try to keep my trap shut re Sultan on this thread. I tried. I swear, I tried.

[Skippy1]

Originally posted by Black Baron: The problem with asad that he is a dictator. In Israel, we have opposition, and a change could be made. In syria the only change will come when asad will die. The question of disarmament is a rather problematic. iran is not knowed for peacefull realtionships. While we have good army, if we will be attacked by syria and iran we can suistain too heavy damage for us to exist. Our area is small. you do not need a nuke to wip it off. merely a few hundreds of good rockets. Gee, what iran has? Out nukes are the only option of keeping the mad ayatollah at bay forever. He can shout what he wishes but he knows that we have the big club. We can get rid of our nuclear weapons, provided that the un wil oblidge to obliterate the country that will attack us. plus we must sign these peace treaties. that will never happen.

Hi Black Baron,

Nice to have an opinion from someone on the frontline, so to speak. I hear what your saying about the different forms of govt. and agree that it is a difficult situation. On the other hand, I've often thought that it must be difficult for countries that do have the same leaders for a long period to understand our own form of govt. where we change our leaders so often. This must cause problems getting used to different personalities and viewpoints not to mention different policies.

I also agree that for the time being, it is prudent to retain your nuclear arsenal. Iran is coming under increasing pressure to come clean about exactly what they have and to destroy it. I think they have come to the realisation that they are in serious danger of becoming the next Iraq. To my mind as well, Iran has modified their radical ways slightly over the last few years. The realisation that the west will not just sabre rattle anymore and that the UN has been shown up for the dithering, almost useless institution it has become, will not be allowed to stand in the way when action is required. Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea of sending young men to war. But there comes a time when that is the only option left to reasonable people. The trick is to recognise that point, and act immediately. The UN doesn't recognise the point in time when it is nessecary, if indeed it ever did, so has become a toothless waste of time and space. Idiots like Hussein noticed this and played them perfectly for almost two decades!

Your last paragraph is the crux of the matter, and this is why I have said in previous posts that the Israeli govt. needs to exercise some tolerance and bend a little. Syria, through Assad has at least taken a step in the right direction. If Syria continues to talk of peace and makes moves towards securing this end, the Palestinians will have no option but to scale down their overt actions against Israel. Yasser Arafat also needs to be dealt with! This man has caused so much trouble over the years that I find it hard to believe he has not been caught in someones gunsights yet.

[Skippy1]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Skippy1, I wanted to mention I reread your post and appreciate it. You make some good points to counter my Syrian "trustworthiness" argument. I still feel there are extremist groups which could come to power -- and Syria's history of "reasonableness" could suddenly change. But, thanks for the input. Oh, and I thought the "smart" comment might be a bait, but hey I'm easily baited.

Join the club, TL. Swallowed my fair share of hooks!

I like a good debate, and try to see it from all sides. I also tend to support the underdogs. It's an Australian thing!

[Timber Loftis]

Black Baron, I know it's a bit Offtopic, but we have discussed the occupied territories and the walls. As you know, I and some others feel this is land Israel unfairly annexed and should leave.

However, I was wondering what your view on this was and what the view generally in Israel is. If you don't mind, please share your thoughts.

[Alson]

Well, I can't speak in Black Baron's name... but I'm a "frontliner", too. [img]smile.gif[/img] It seems that (most) of the people here are rational people that try to look at the big picture before taking any decision--which is something I truly appreciate and try to do the same myself. I'd be more than willing to share my thoughts with you on this matter.

I'd start with a disclaimer, though: I'm a secular individual, so the so-called "promised land" issue isn't close to my heart as it is to others, and my opinions accordingly. Secondly... you'll have to excuse me if I do many grammatical/spelling mistakes--as my spell-checker isn't working lately, and English obviously isn't my mother tongue.
I'd like to point out one important issue that is oft twisted by the media (as hard as it is to admit it, every station has its interests, purity of journalism or not). Israelis--well, most of them--are not interested in holding on to the annexed territories forever. We've seen too much bloodshed, felt too much pain, lost *too* much lives of innocents because of them. Most Israeli soldiers are actually willing to use controlled force against their own people in order to evacuate the settlements if ordered to. However, the evacuation must be a part of an agreement that deals, *in depth*, with the number one issue for Israel--security. Imagine this: Israel returns the annexed territories to the Palestinians, against the will of hundreds of thousands of its citizens--and a week after that, a suicide bomber kills 20 people in the very heart of Tel Aviv. Is that such a fictional scenario? You'll be the judge. While you're at it, think of Israel's response.

The crux of the problem, as it is reflected from the scenario above, is *trust*. They don't trust us to ever give them their lands back. We don't trust them to have the ability to restrain their radical groups (if you can call them radical at all--as they form more than half of their population). However... hope's far from being lost. Seeing the constant failures of our leaders in achieving anything, new initiatives crop up in both sides. After all--trust between leaders is nothing, trust between people (and on the larger scale, societies) is everything. The most impressive project is that of Amd.(ret) Ami Ayalon (the former head of the GSS, so no one suspects he'll agree to something that risks Israel's safety, let alone suggest and promote it) and Dr. Sari Nusseibeh (the head of the Palestinian university, if memory serves), called "The Peoples' Voice". I honestly suggest you take a look if the matter is close to your heart. It's a promising project.

Projects such as this one are, in my opinion, the way to go. I don't know if The Peoples' Voice will end the feud--au contraire, I believe it won't. But it plants the seeds of compromise in both sides--even on the subconscious level--seeds that'll hopefully grow to fruitful trees in the near future. Isn't that poetic? :-\

Well, I can go on and on, but I feel I've rambled enough for now, let alone striding off-topic. Anyway, thank you for reading. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 01-11-2004, 09:22 AM: Message edited by: Alson ]

[Memnoch]

Just wanted to say thanks for providing us with your perspective, Alson. Seeing as the majority of us can safely debate this issue from behind the safety of our PCs, it's always interesting to hear from someone on the "frontline" where words/policies have an all-too-real effect. Thanks for being here and hope you stick around. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Timber Loftis]

Alson, I note you're a very helpful contributor on BG issues, and I thank you for the perspective. It is funny that for all the bad press Israelis get, a large contingency of the population protests a lot of the Palestinian treatment. Especially amidst the security threats, I find this attitude to be a hallmark of the fairness of the society.

As for the Tel Aviv bombing scenario you hypothesize, would it not be a workable solution to simply get Palestinians out of Israel and into Palestinian land and to keep the people segregated with borders? Perhaps not -- I'm sure Israel relies on cheaper imported labor like European states and America does, which complicates the security issue.

Anyway, it's nice to know Israelis may not see Palestinian occupation, and the settlements therein, as a sort of "manifest destiny."

Oh, and as far as I can tell, your English is flawless. You should not be concerned that it is sub-standard at all. Had I not known otherwise, I would have considered you a "first language" speaker.