A conversation with an ex IDF commando

Lebanon belongs to Syria, in every right and manner. That's why there wasn't a Lebanon before the French colonialism...but there was a Syria long before that.

Evil Israelis? Their Government, but the people of Israel are as much my Brothers as the people of Iran. No, we should be defending from the "evil Americans".

And you still don't know what extremist means. Buffalo, not all Arabs/Muslims are extremists or terrorists, just like not all Israelis/Jews are.
 
Greater Syria doesn't exist.

Yet....

But Lebanon is a part of Syria. Simply look before the colonialism, there was no such thing as Lebanon, at least not as its own country.

That, and the fact that I'd say most Lebanese support annexation.
 
Yet....

But Lebanon is a part of Syria. Simply look before the colonialism, there was no such thing as Lebanon, at least not as its own country.

That, and the fact that I'd say most Lebanese support annexation.

Isn't that Hitler's excuse for the "Anschluss" that most Austrians were for it, and how about Czechoslovakia and autonomy for the Sudetens, and the annexation of the Sudetenland, do you have a Hakenkreuz, in you bedroom? Mien Kamph maybe?
 
What does Syria have to do with Germany? Perhaps that was Hitler's ideals, but Hitler was crazy. And besides, that was a mere belief, whereas it is fact that Lebanese land belongs to Syria.
 
What does Syria have to do with Germany? Perhaps that was Hitler's ideals, but Hitler was crazy. And besides, that was a mere belief, whereas it is fact that Lebanese land belongs to Syria.

re-read BR's post again. he is comparing Syrian claims and German claims. it's a very good analogy.

you know, most of the wars in Europe were caused by these disagreements about borders... about who owned which piece of land when, and who should really be the real owner of it given the minority populations that kept changing their citizenship after border lines were re-drawn.

in the interest of peace and stability there should be no wars to "reclaim" the land. almost every country that has a border has some historical claims over another country. those borders were drawn and re-drawn in blood.

it's irrelevant that there was no Lebanon 60 or more years ago. the fact is that it's there now, the country has a distinct culture, dialect, national identity, interests, etc. it is therefore not a part of Syria.

and it's nonsense that "most Lebanese want to be annexed". right... that's why Syrian intelligence services are assassinating anti Syrian politicians, right?
 
What does Syria have to do with Germany? Perhaps that was Hitler's ideals, but Hitler was crazy. And besides, that was a mere belief, whereas it is fact that Lebanese land belongs to Syria.

But you are espousing the exact same insanity that Hitler used for his excuse to start WWII.

It started with small claims of land to protect the Germany People, and to have lebensraum, isn't that exactly what you and your Hero Bashar al Assad are espousing.

Everything that you espouse about Israel come directly from Mien Kamph, Hitler's own soul, and mad dream.

alJazeera Magazine
The Nazi - Arab connection existed even when Hit liar first seized power in ... the founders of the ruling Syrian Bath Party, recalls \"We were ray cysts. ...
http://aljazeera.com/news/newsfull.php?newid=35569
 
re-read BR's post again. he is comparing Syrian claims and German claims. it's a very good analogy.

you know, most of the wars in Europe were caused by these disagreements about borders... about who owned which piece of land when, and who should really be the real owner of it given the minority populations that kept changing their citizenship after border lines were re-drawn.

in the interest of peace and stability there should be no wars to "reclaim" the land. almost every country that has a border has some historical claims over another country. those borders were drawn and re-drawn in blood.

it's irrelevant that there was no Lebanon 60 or more years ago. the fact is that it's there now, the country has a distinct culture, dialect, national identity, interests, etc. it is therefore not a part of Syria.

and it's nonsense that "most Lebanese want to be annexed". right... that's why Syrian intelligence services are assassinating anti Syrian politicians, right?


Of course this isn't for any reclamation. It's in the best interests of Syria and Lebanon to unite. Lebanon would enjoy all of the benefits of being part of Syria. Maybe that's not alot, but as a part of Syria, it would be richer and stronger (defintely so, at least a little).

Syrian and Lebanese culture and dialect are very, very close.


Nope. I'd safely say most Lebanese would not mind annexation. And there is no proof that Syria is behind the assasinations. It actually makes sense that Israel was behind the assasinations.


Buffalo, that little bit of fact is not something I support. I do know about the connection, but that was the past and had I been alive then, I would not have supported it.
 
Norsefire

Buffalo, that little bit of fact is not something I support. I do know about the connection, but that was the past and had I been alive then, I would not have supported it.

I doubt it, everything you post says that you would.
 
Support the eradication of an entire people? The subjugation of innocence? War and crime? Poverty and chaos?

Nope. I would not.

List of German films 1933-1945 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
While not as highly regarded as the Weimar films, the films of Nazi Germany ..... Propaganda film about how "well" the Jews were treated in Concentration ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Films_in_the_Third_Reich

The Germans were very proud to tell all how well they treated the Jews in their wonderful concentration camps,

Education - Book Review
It was in the interest of the Nazi-regime to prove that Auschwitz was a peaceful, safe camp, in which the Jews were well-treated, with no occurrences of ...
http://www1.yadvashem.org/education/book_reviews/english/book-auschwitz_album.htm

And you again are using the same techniques as the Nazi, You want to spread the Myth of how happy the Jew is in the Care of the Syrians, the same propaganda that the Nazi's spouted.
 
How many people you killed in your life Buffalo? Innocent people whose country you invaded?

Ever go back and see the results of your hubris?

You're a fine one to be teaching morals to a young boy.
 
How many people you killed in your life Buffalo? Innocent people whose country you invaded?

The South Vietnamese asked the USA for help against the invasion from the North Vietnamese forces. So it wasn't an invasion by the USA, Sam.

In fact, if you're so against invading countries, you should be highly pissed off at North Vietnam. But notice that you're turning it around ...because of your hatred of the USA.

Baron Max
 
The South Vietnamese asked the USA for help against the invasion from the North Vietnamese forces. So it wasn't an invasion by the USA, Sam.

In fact, if you're so against invading countries, you should be highly pissed off at North Vietnam. But notice that you're turning it around ...because of your hatred of the USA.

Baron Max

Uh thats the revised American history you're spouting.
As dictated by the Geneva Conference of 1954, the partition of Vietnam was meant to be only temporary, pending national elections on July 20, 1956. Much like Korea, the agreement stipulated that the two military zones were to be separated by a temporary demarcation line (known as the Demilitarized Zone or DMZ).

Although the United States attended the Geneva Conference (1954), it refused to sign the Geneva Accords (1954). The Accords mandated, among other measures, a ceasefire line, intended to separate Vietnamese independence and French forces, and elections to determine the rulership of Vietnam on both sides of the line, within 2 years. It also forbade the political interference of other countries in the area, the creation of new governments without the stipulated elections, and foreign military presence. The United States promptly subverted all of the measures of the Accords at once when it installed anti-communist Ngo Dinh Diem as President of South Vietnam, and gave him military backing. By 1961, poor decisions by Diem, almost all against the counsel of his American advisors, including refusals to hold elections, and attacks on Buddhism (the majority religion in southern Vietnam), and other ethnic groups, had made him unpopular. In that year, a popular uprising began, headed by the National Liberation Front. The U.S. also began providing direct support to the South Vietnamese in the form of military and financial aid and military advisors, the number of which grew from 600 in 1961 to 16,000 by the end of John F. Kennedy's presidency in 1963.

The Gulf of Tonkin Incident occurred during the first year of the Johnson administration. While Kennedy had originally supported the policy of sending military advisors to Vietnam, he had begun to alter his thinking due to the military ineptitude of the Saigon government and its inability and unwillingness to make needed reforms. Shortly before his assassination in November 1963, he had begun limited recall of American forces. Johnson's views were likewise complex, but he had supported military escalation in Vietnam as a means to challenge the expansionist policies of the Soviet Union. The Cold War policy of containment was to be applied to prevent the "fall" of Southeast Asia under the precepts of the domino theory. After Kennedy's assassination, Johnson ordered in more American forces to support the Saigon government, beginning a protracted United States presence in Southeast Asia.

According to the U.S. Naval Institute[2], a highly classified program of covert attacks against the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (North Vietnam) known as Operation 34A, had begun under the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in 1961. In 1964 the program was transferred to the Defense Department and conducted by the Military Assistance Command, Vietnam Studies and Observations Group (SOG). For the maritime portion of the covert operation, Tjeld-class fast patrol boats had been purchased quietly from Norway and sent to South Vietnam. Although the crews of the boats were South Vietnamese naval personnel, approval of the plan came directly from Admiral U.S. Grant Sharp, Jr., CINCPAC in Honolulu. After the coastal attacks began, Hanoi lodged a complaint with the International Control Commission (ICC), which had been established in 1954 to oversee the terms of the Geneva Accords, but the U.S. denied any involvement. Four years later, Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara admitted to Congress that the U.S. ships had in fact been cooperating in the South Vietnamese attacks against the DRV.

Typical ignorance and hubris.


"The Gulf of Tonkin incident," writes Louise Gerdes, "is an oft-cited example of the way in which Johnson misled the American people to gain support for his foreign policy in Vietnam."[62] George C. Herring argues, however, that McNamara and the Pentagon "did not knowingly lie about the alleged attacks, but they were obviously in a mood to retaliate and they seem to have selected from the evidence available to them those parts that confirmed what they wanted to believe."[63] The National Security Council recommended a three-stage escalation of the bombing of North Vietnam. On March 2, 1965, following an attack on a U.S. Marine barracks at Pleiku, Operation Flaming Dart and Operation Rolling Thunder commenced. The bombing campaign, which ultimately lasted three years, was intended to force North Vietnam to cease its support for the NLF by threatening to destroy North Vietnam's air defenses and industrial infrastructure. As well, it was aimed at bolstering the morale of the South Vietnamese.[64] Between March 1965 and November 1968, "Rolling Thunder" deluged the north with a million tons of missiles, rockets and bombs.[65] Bombing was not restricted to North Vietnam. Other aerial campaigns, such as Operation Commando Hunt, targeted different parts of the NLF and PAVN infrastructure. These included the Ho Chi Minh Trail, which ran through Laos and Cambodia. The objective of forcing North Vietnam to stop its support for the NLF, however, was never reached. As one officer noted "this is a political war and it calls for discriminate killing. The best weapon … would be a knife … The worst is an airplane."[66] The Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force Curtis LeMay, however, had long advocated saturation bombing in Vietnam and wrote of the Communists that "we're going to bomb them back into the Stone Age".[67]
 
List of German films 1933-1945 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
While not as highly regarded as the Weimar films, the films of Nazi Germany ..... Propaganda film about how "well" the Jews were treated in Concentration ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Films_in_the_Third_Reich

The Germans were very proud to tell all how well they treated the Jews in their wonderful concentration camps,

Education - Book Review
It was in the interest of the Nazi-regime to prove that Auschwitz was a peaceful, safe camp, in which the Jews were well-treated, with no occurrences of ...
http://www1.yadvashem.org/education/book_reviews/english/book-auschwitz_album.htm

And you again are using the same techniques as the Nazi, You want to spread the Myth of how happy the Jew is in the Care of the Syrians, the same propaganda that the Nazi's spouted.


Two things:

The Nazis did not want the outside world to know of such atrocities.


And news flash: Syrian Jews are treated very well, but of course that is not the case with Israeli Muslims, it's Israel you should be talking about.
 
Two things:

The Nazis did not want the outside world to know of such atrocities.


And news flash: Syrian Jews are treated very well, but of course that is not the case with Israeli Muslims, it's Israel you should be talking about.

Norsefire, you still haven't explained how you could have been a neighbor to Jew's in Syria, there are only about 50 left in Syria,


SYRIA GIVING JEWS FREEDOM TO LEAVE - New York Times
Previously, Syrian Jews wishing to travel abroad had to leave at least one family member behind and had to post bonds in the range of $1000 per person, ...
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...es Topics/Subjects/I/Immigration and Refugees

SYRIA GIVING JEWS FREEDOM TO LEAVE
Print Single-Page Save Share
Del.icio.usDiggFacebookNewsvinePermalinkBy THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN,
Published: April 28, 1992
Syria informed the United States over the weekend that it was lifting a travel ban on its 4,500 Jewish citizens, the State Department announced today.

Most of them are expected to leave. If they do, there will be no more significant Jewish populations left in the Arab world, outside of Morocco. The once flourishing Jewish populations of Baghdad, Cairo, Alexandria, Tunis and Algiers have either been evicted or fled since 1948, as a spillover from the Arab-Israeli conflict.

In 1992 there were only 4,500 left, and they were treated so well, that in 1995 only 50 chose to remain when Syria lifted the travel and immigration restrictions.

On the eve of the talks, the Syrian Foreign Ministry informed the United States Embassy in Damascus that it was lifting most of the restrictions on travel and sale of property by its Jewish citizens, the State Department said. Previously, Syrian Jews wishing to travel abroad had to leave at least one family member behind and had to post bonds in the range of $1,000 per person, to insure their return.

Yes, how well the Jews were treated by the Syrians, family members held hostage to keep traveling family members in line, pay a $1,000 dollars Bail Bond, per-person to travel out side the country.

So again how old are you? To have lived with Jewish neighbors in Syria?
 
Obvious BS. But of course, you never adress how Muslims are treated within Israel.


Now, yes, my neighborhood in Latakia was primarily Christian with some Jews, and I never noticed Jews upset.

Remember, there is a difference between Proud Syrian Jews and Syrian Jews that want to betray their country.

Most Syrian Jews are proud of being Syrian though.

Just like Iran has the most (after Israel) Jews in the ME.
 
Lebanon belongs to Syria, in every right and manner. That's why there wasn't a Lebanon before the French colonialism...but there was a Syria long before that.

you see, syrians actually think lebanon is theirs, and they use it for their ops mission on israel as a third party so it wont look like as if they are responsible, but when israel invades lebanon for defensive measures after being attacked, all of the demons are out of the bottles.

why ho why, if hezbullah are such great heroes and defenders of lebanon, they dont "resist" the syrian invasion?

syria isnt israel(jews).
 
Back
Top