Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
4 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

Aw. Another one hurting from being shown up by me so many times. There there. You'll be ok. 

To borrow your phrase, "Please show me where". 

You have been asked before, and by other posters in relation to their own posts, to present the evidence of where your so superior intellect has "shown" me "up".  I understand that as this air of superiority only exists in the Walter Mitty mythical world, detatched from much of reality, that you inhabit, it might prove problematic to provide actual links, so why not not take the easier path and admit you can't.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Same in Israel. Hamas could have released all the hostages on Oct 8th 2023 and saved everyone a load of trouble 

You reckon Israel would have said, "cheers lads, let's say no more"?

Posted
4 minutes ago, benjii said:

You reckon Israel would have said, "cheers lads, let's say no more"?

Had they released the prisoners and Hamas agreed to disarm there would have been overwhelming pressure on Israel to end it.

Posted
23 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Had they released the prisoners and Hamas agreed to disarm there would have been overwhelming pressure on Israel to end it.

Pressure which means fuck all unless the US decide to stop it.

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Pressure which means fuck all unless the US decide to stop it.

It's all speculation of course but had Hamas given up their weapons and released the hostages I don't believe the war would have continued. At the very least it would have been over a long time ago. We were likely having this conversation on about page 20

 

Edited by hypochondriac
Posted (edited)

From the BBC, the White House Communications Director proving he is a complete plum, and has no idea how the Nobel Peace Prze is awarded;

"The Nobel Committee proved they place politics over peace," White House communications director Steven Cheung said after the announcement on Friday morning.

 

There is some irony in Marco Rubio having been one of several members of Congress who nominated the eventual winner.

Then there is this genius suggestion ;

"A GOP lawmaker told Fox Business on Friday that he’s working on a resolution to award Donald Trump a Nobel Peace Prize, since the Nobel committee failed to do so Friday morning.

,...............

Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA) told Fox Business Host Ashley Webster, in for Stuart Varney, that Trump is the “president of peace, and no one could have gotten us to this point that he’s gotten us to.”

Carter continued:

Joe Biden and his administration didn’t even try to achieve peace in the Middle East. Donald Trump has done that and I applaud him for that. That’s why he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize and that’s why I’m introducing a resolution for Congress today that will honor him with the Nobel Peace Prize, and if need be, we’ll call for a discharge petition on that. I hope we can work with the speaker though and get it on the floor for a vote.

"

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/huh-gop-congressman-tells-fox-152323768.html

 

Talk about massaging someone's fragile ego.

 

 

 

 

Edited by badgerx16
  • Haha 4
Posted
4 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

From the BBC, the White House Communications Director proving he is a complete plum, and has no idea how the Nobel Peace Prze is awarded;

"The Nobel Committee proved they place politics over peace," White House communications director Steven Cheung said after the announcement on Friday morning.

 

There is some irony in Marco Rubio having been one of several members of Congress who nominated the eventual winner.

Then there is this genius suggestin ;

"A GOP lawmaker told Fox Business on Friday that he’s working on a resolution to award Donald Trump a Nobel Peace Prize, since the Nobel committee failed to do so Friday morning.

,...............

Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA) told Fox Business Host Ashley Webster, in for Stuart Varney, that Trump is the “president of peace, and no one could have gotten us to this point that he’s gotten us to.”

Carter continued:

Joe Biden and his administration didn’t even try to achieve peace in the Middle East. Donald Trump has done that and I applaud him for that. That’s why he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize and that’s why I’m introducing a resolution for Congress today that will honor him with the Nobel Peace Prize, and if need be, we’ll call for a discharge petition on that. I hope we can work with the speaker though and get it on the floor for a vote.

"

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/huh-gop-congressman-tells-fox-152323768.html

 

Talk about massaging someone's fragile ego.

 

 

 

 

Yeah that's quite sad and pathetic.

Posted
17 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

To borrow your phrase, "Please show me where". 

You have been asked before, and by other posters in relation to their own posts, to present the evidence of where your so superior intellect has "shown" me "up".  I understand that as this air of superiority only exists in the Walter Mitty mythical world, detatched from much of reality, that you inhabit, it might prove problematic to provide actual links, so why not not take the easier path and admit you can't.

Nic`s "intellect" make plankton look like Einstein 

  • Like 1
Posted

This sounds like a good idea. Bloody Israel preventing peace:


Hamas has reportedly recalled around 7,000 members of its security forces from southern and central Gaza back into areas recently vacated by Israeli troops in Gaza City and the north.

The order, sent via phone and text, called for a “general mobilisation” to “cleanse Gaza of outlaws and collaborators with Israel.” 

Armed units, some in uniform, others disguised as civilians, have redeployed across northern districts, setting up checkpoints and patrols.

Hamas has also appointed 5 new governors, all former brigade commanders, to oversee the transition.

This raises fears of renewed internal violence just as Trump’s ceasefire plan enters its next phase, which calls for Hamas to disarm

Posted
23 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

I absolutely think that seriously degrading Hamas and then creating a wider buffer zone around Israel will make Israel safer. It won't prevent all attacks or make them completely safe but that was never possible. Soggy used that same argument when the US were destroying IS. He might have had a point if they hadn't been decimated and destroyed.

Degrading Hamas makes Israel in the immediate future, but breeding another generation of Palestinians (and piers in the Arab world) wanting to resist does not make them safer long term.

Additionally, Bin Laden's explanation for 9/11 tells us that organised Jihadi/islamic terrorist groups will seek vengeance at some point. They waited 19 years to do that. 

Posted
50 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

This sounds like a good idea. Bloody Israel preventing peace:


Hamas has reportedly recalled around 7,000 members of its security forces from southern and central Gaza back into areas recently vacated by Israeli troops in Gaza City and the north.

The order, sent via phone and text, called for a “general mobilisation” to “cleanse Gaza of outlaws and collaborators with Israel.” 

Armed units, some in uniform, others disguised as civilians, have redeployed across northern districts, setting up checkpoints and patrols.

Hamas has also appointed 5 new governors, all former brigade commanders, to oversee the transition.

This raises fears of renewed internal violence just as Trump’s ceasefire plan enters its next phase, which calls for Hamas to disarm

Or it addresses fears. 

Posted
53 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

This sounds like a good idea. Bloody Israel preventing peace:


Hamas has reportedly recalled around 7,000 members of its security forces from southern and central Gaza back into areas recently vacated by Israeli troops in Gaza City and the north.

The order, sent via phone and text, called for a “general mobilisation” to “cleanse Gaza of outlaws and collaborators with Israel.” 

Armed units, some in uniform, others disguised as civilians, have redeployed across northern districts, setting up checkpoints and patrols.

Hamas has also appointed 5 new governors, all former brigade commanders, to oversee the transition.

This raises fears of renewed internal violence just as Trump’s ceasefire plan enters its next phase, which calls for Hamas to disarm

It's why I fear what we're currently witnessing is more of a ceasefire than anything else. Pretty standard practice if the Israeli military are withdrawing but the bit in this agreement about Hamas disarming is the bit that remains to be seen. Sadly they'll morph into something else regardless.

 

Meanwhile Witkoff is making a speech in Tel-Aviv.

Chants of "thank you Trump" from the Israelis started ringing out, they instantly became deafening boos as soon as Witkoff mentioned Netanyahu. They know the score.

Posted
34 minutes ago, egg said:

Degrading Hamas makes Israel in the immediate future, but breeding another generation of Palestinians (and piers in the Arab world) wanting to resist does not make them safer long term.

Additionally, Bin Laden's explanation for 9/11 tells us that organised Jihadi/islamic terrorist groups will seek vengeance at some point. They waited 19 years to do that. 

They weren't safer prior to October 7th. The war has weakened their enemies considerably and will mean they should be a lot safer in the short to medium term. Arguably the capability of future generations of mad Hamas terrorists will be degraded as well without rogue nations funding them to the same extent although it's difficult to predict things so far away.

Posted
8 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Yeah no chance of violence from Hamas. None whatsoever.

The alternative to a "police force" or similar is nothing. That gives a real risk of civil unrest or anarchy. 

Someone has to police the people. Hamas still rule Gaza, so Hamas operatives will do the policing - that should be obvious.

Doubtless you'll explain the alternative...and I don't me in due course when (hopefully) new governance and a civil structure is in place. I mean today and the immediate future. 

Posted
14 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

They weren't safer prior to October 7th. The war has weakened their enemies considerably and will mean they should be a lot safer in the short to medium term. Arguably the capability of future generations of mad Hamas terrorists will be degraded as well without rogue nations funding them to the same extent although it's difficult to predict things so far away.

That misses the point. Al Qaeda weren't a thing during the siege of Beirut. 19 years later they were, and we got 9/11 as a consequence. 

Your focus is narrow. 20 hostages. 7/10. Hamas. Etc. There's a much wider picture.

It's obvious that revenge for this against Israel and it's supporters will be sought by Islamists. Israel's constant attempts to reduce that threat (e.g. today - Lebanon), and it's ongoing Zionism, only increases the appetite. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, egg said:

That misses the point. Al Qaeda weren't a thing during the siege of Beirut. 19 years later they were, and we got 9/11 as a consequence. 

Your focus is narrow. 20 hostages. 7/10. Hamas. Etc. There's a much wider picture.

It's obvious that revenge for this against Israel and it's supporters will be sought by Islamists. Israel's constant attempts to reduce that threat (e.g. today - Lebanon), and it's ongoing Zionism, only increases the appetite. 

🙃

Posted
8 minutes ago, egg said:

That misses the point. Al Qaeda weren't a thing during the siege of Beirut. 19 years later they were, and we got 9/11 as a consequence. 

Your focus is narrow. 20 hostages. 7/10. Hamas. Etc. There's a much wider picture.

It's obvious that revenge for this against Israel and it's supporters will be sought by Islamists. Israel's constant attempts to reduce that threat (e.g. today - Lebanon), and it's ongoing Zionism, only increases the appetite. 

Islamists want Israel removed from the face of the earth. They wanted that prior to October the 7th and they still want that. The only difference eis that now Qatar and Iran are thinking twice about what they can do and Hamas have been degraded significantly so they are less able to attack. Israel's action may result in an increased risk some time in the future-although the risk was already significant as proven by October 7th- but Hamas and its allies' capacity to do anything about it in the short to medium term is undeniably reduced. If Israel were smart they'd employ a buffer zone as I said to prevent any future attacks like October 7th.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Islamists want Israel removed from the face of the earth. They wanted that prior to October the 7th and they still want that. The only difference eis that now Qatar and Iran are thinking twice about what they can do and Hamas have been degraded significantly so they are less able to attack. Israel's action may result in an increased risk some time in the future-although the risk was already significant as proven by October 7th- but Hamas and its allies' capacity to do anything about it in the short to medium term is undeniably reduced. If Israel were smart they'd employ a buffer zone as I said to prevent any future attacks like October 7th.

Retribution for the siege of Beirut was not taken by an immediate Israeli neighbour, and not against them. Sure, Iran have shown themselves as weak, comparatively, but Israel cannot attack every nation and group who oppose their behaviour and objectives. 

2nd point. They've always had that ability - it's entirely their choice how close they permit Kibbutz near the border. A buffer zone does not need to be within Gaza. 

Posted
16 minutes ago, egg said:

That misses the point. Al Qaeda weren't a thing during the siege of Beirut. 19 years later they were, and we got 9/11 as a consequence. 

WTF are you on about? Al Q and 9/11 weren't revenge for anything specific, they were based on hardcore Islamist beliefs and a hatred of all things western/American. If anything was the catalyst it was the Saudi's choosing American help in defending themselves against the Saddam regime during the first Gulf War, which OBL took as something of a personal insult and betrayal.

More to the point, they haven't been capable of anything close to 9/11 since the US coalition went into Afghanistan and blew their arses into next Thursday. Much like the Israelis, they went in and made a hell of a mess but for the last quater of a century it's kept them relatively safe from large scale Islamist attacks. Kind of the opposite of what you're arguing.

  • Like 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

WTF are you on about? Al Q and 9/11 weren't revenge for anything specific, they were based on hardcore Islamist beliefs and a hatred of all things western/American. If anything was the catalyst it was the Saudi's choosing American help in defending themselves against the Saddam regime during the first Gulf War, which OBL took as something of a personal insult and betrayal.

More to the point, they haven't been capable of anything close to 9/11 since the US coalition went into Afghanistan and blew their arses into next Thursday. Much like the Israelis, they went in and made a hell of a mess but for the last quater of a century it's kept them relatively safe from large scale Islamist attacks. Kind of the opposite of what you're arguing.

Err. Perhaps establish facts mate before spouting. 

Osama bin Laden explicitly said that the September 11th attacks were linked to the 1982 Siege of Beirut. He made this statement in a video released in 2004, just before the U.S. presidential election, and offered it as a reason for the attacks. 

Islamists exist beyond Afghanistan. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, egg said:

Err. Perhaps establish facts mate before spouting. 

Osama bin Laden explicitly said that the September 11th attacks were linked to the 1982 Siege of Beirut. He made this statement in a video released in 2004, just before the U.S. presidential election, and offered it as a reason for the attacks. 

Islamists exist beyond Afghanistan. 

He invoked the 1982 Beirut siege as one grievance among many in a long list that included US troops in Saudi Arabia, sanctions on Iraq, and support for Israel. 

Al-Qaeda grew from the Afghan war and the 1990s US presence in the Gulf, not from a single Israeli siege.

Posted
4 minutes ago, egg said:

Err. Perhaps establish facts mate before spouting. 

Osama bin Laden explicitly said that the September 11th attacks were linked to the 1982 Siege of Beirut. He made this statement in a video released in 2004, just before the U.S. presidential election, and offered it as a reason for the attacks. 

Islamists exist beyond Afghanistan. 

There is a range of reasons why the US was seen as the great satan by him and his nutters. Being chosen to protect the islamic holy land in 1990 being a huge reason, and the notion that the USA funded opposing groups all around the world and stopped his warped version of Islam from uniting to take everyone on.

Posted
2 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

There is a range of reasons why the US was seen as the great satan by him and his nutters. Being chosen to protect the islamic holy land in 1990 being a huge reason, and the notion that the USA funded opposing groups all around the world and stopped his warped version of Islam from uniting to take everyone on.

Of course, but none of that alters the fact that Bin Laden said  “As I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and destroy towers in America so that they taste some of what we tasted". 

Odd that people argue so hard against fact. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, egg said:

Err. Perhaps establish facts mate before spouting. 

Osama bin Laden explicitly said that the September 11th attacks were linked to the 1982 Siege of Beirut. He made this statement in a video released in 2004, just before the U.S. presidential election, and offered it as a reason for the attacks. 

Islamists exist beyond Afghanistan. 

Those are the facts. The seige of Lebanon was A reason, not THE reason. Bin Laden despised anything involving western, particularly American, involvement in what he viewed as Middle Eastern, Muslim afairs. They're an ideology, one which has been expelled from half of the countries in the region, and they have committed atrocities against civilians from many countries which were nothing to do with the seige of Beirut.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, egg said:

Of course, but none of that alters the fact that Bin Laden said  “As I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and destroy towers in America so that they taste some of what we tasted". 

Odd that people argue so hard against fact. 

It is A Reason, not THE reason. 

And certainly not THE reason why Al queada existed 

Edited by AlexLaw76
Posted
5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

You mean the Jews aren't responsible for 9/11?

Now that's a crazy conspiracy theory that's got more support than it should have. Israel doing 9/11 - nuts. 

Posted
11 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

It is A Reason, not THE reason. 

And certainly not THE reason why Al queada existed 

Sure, there were a multitude of reasons, and the degree does not take away the fact that the siege of Beirut was avenged almost 20 years later by a people who were not directly impacted by it, and against a country who had no direct part in it.

Various points flow from that, including. 

Israel can neuter it's direct neighbours all it likes, but states and groups further afield will still be there.

Israel has developed more opposition, I think that's a given. 

The desire for revenge/punishment will be at least as strong as it was post Siege of Beirut. 

New terrorist or other rogue groups could crop up at any time. The siege of Beirut was stated as seeking to get rid of the PLO. It went. Up popped Hamas and Hezbollah, and vengeance was taken by Al Qaeda. 

Posted
1 minute ago, egg said:

Sure, there were a multitude of reasons, and the degree does not take away the fact that the siege of Beirut was avenged almost 20 years later by a people who were not directly impacted by it, and against a country who had no direct part in it.

Various points flow from that, including. 

Israel can neuter it's direct neighbours all it likes, but states and groups further afield will still be there.

Israel has developed more opposition, I think that's a given. 

The desire for revenge/punishment will be at least as strong as it was post Siege of Beirut. 

New terrorist or other rogue groups could crop up at any time. The siege of Beirut was stated as seeking to get rid of the PLO. It went. Up popped Hamas and Hezbollah, and vengeance was taken by Al Qaeda. 

I take it that you think we should shower all these Islamic extremists with love? Erode any sympathy for their causes and watch them all welcome and embrace their new allies, Israel and the West.

  • Like 1
Posted
14 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

This sounds like a good idea. Bloody Israel preventing peace:


Hamas has reportedly recalled around 7,000 members of its security forces from southern and central Gaza back into areas recently vacated by Israeli troops in Gaza City and the north.

The order, sent via phone and text, called for a “general mobilisation” to “cleanse Gaza of outlaws and collaborators with Israel.” 

Armed units, some in uniform, others disguised as civilians, have redeployed across northern districts, setting up checkpoints and patrols.

Hamas has also appointed 5 new governors, all former brigade commanders, to oversee the transition.

This raises fears of renewed internal violence just as Trump’s ceasefire plan enters its next phase, which calls for Hamas to disarm

My take on that...

In the last two years, Israel has been bombing the fuck out of Gaza amidst claims it was 'targetting Hamas'.  There's still 7,000 of them left!  Israel aren't very good at 'targetting'.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, whelk said:

I take it that you think we should shower all these Islamic extremists with love? Erode any sympathy for their causes and watch them all welcome and embrace their new allies, Israel and the West.

Nope. I've never hinted at that. I've just focused on reality. 

The point that started the exchange was that Israel are now safer. They're not.

Short term they're safer from their immediate neighbours, but history tells us that treating it's neighbours as they do, whether that be Lebanon or Palestine or Yemen or Syria or Iraq etc, only invites trouble from further afield. 

Modern Islamic extremism is a post Israel phenomenon. Israel is here to stay, thus Islamic extremism is here to stay. Israel trying to bomb it away only increases it's risk. The West's ongoing support of Israel's puts the West increasingly in the firing line.

If the Islamic extremists are financially and logistically choked, the extremism will be crude, as per Manchester recently. 

Israel and it's supporters are not safer. 

Edited by egg
Posted
23 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

My take on that...

In the last two years, Israel has been bombing the fuck out of Gaza amidst claims it was 'targetting Hamas'.  There's still 7,000 of them left!  Israel aren't very good at 'targetting'.

Probably quite difficult to target them all when they're happy to effectively use Gazans as human shields. Also asking 7,000 to return isn't the same as all 7000 being alive and getting the message.

Posted
25 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

My take on that...

In the last two years, Israel has been bombing the fuck out of Gaza amidst claims it was 'targetting Hamas'.  There's still 7,000 of them left!  Israel aren't very good at 'targetting'.

They got all their targets mate. Hospitals, schools, infrastructure, homes, etc, and anyone in and around them. 

They were never getting rid of Hamas. 

  • Haha 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, egg said:

Nope. I've never hinted at that. I've just focused on reality. 

The point that started the exchange was that Israel are now safer. They're not.

Short term they're safer from their immediate neighbours, but history tells us that treating it's neighbours as they do, whether that be Lebanon or Palestine or Yemen or Syria or Iraq etc, only invites trouble from further afield. 

Modern Islamic extremism is a post Israel phenomenon. Israel is here to stay, thus Islamic extremism is here to stay. Israel trying to bomb it away only increases it's risk. The West's ongoing support of Israel's puts the West increasingly in the firing line.

If the Islamic extremists are financially and logistically choked, the extremism will perpetuate in crude ways. 

Israel and it's supporters are not safer. 

Hold on so not only are Israel partially responsible for 9/11, they're also responsible for Islamist extremism! Who knew! If only those Jews weren't so awful eh? Islam is a religion of peace after all, it's just the evil Jews forcing them to get all murdery and rapey. October 7th is really their own fault when you think about it. They brought it on themselves.

Posted
11 minutes ago, egg said:

Nope. I've never hinted at that. I've just focused on reality. 

The point that started the exchange was that Israel are now safer. They're not.

Short term they're safer from their immediate neighbours, but history tells us that treating it's neighbours as they do, whether that be Lebanon or Palestine or Yemen or Syria or Iraq etc, only invites trouble from further afield. 

Modern Islamic extremism is a post Israel phenomenon. Israel is here to stay, thus Islamic extremism is here to stay. Israel trying to bomb it away only increases it's risk. The West's ongoing support of Israel's puts the West increasingly in the firing line.

If the Islamic extremists are financially and logistically choked, the extremism will perpetuate in crude ways. 

Israel and it's supporters are not safer. 

What action should they have taken to make them safer than they are now?

Posted
1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Hold on so not only are Israel partially responsible for 9/11, they're also responsible for Islamist extremism! Who knew! If only those Jews weren't so awful eh? Islam is a religion of peace after all, it's just the evil Jews forcing them to get all murdery and rapey. October 7th is really their own fault when you think about it. They brought it on themselves.

I haven't said Israeli behaviour was a reason for 9/11. Bin Laden did. That's a fact, not my opinion. 

Was that not Islamist extremism?

Do you not think there's a prospect of history repeating itself?

If it does, is it likely to come in the form of Islamist extremism?

Do you think that the chances of Israel, it's people, and it's supporters, being the victims of Islamist extremism has increased or reduced as a consequence of the past 2 years? 

And I've said nothing about Jews, don't play that card. 

 

Posted
41 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

My take on that...

In the last two years, Israel has been bombing the fuck out of Gaza amidst claims it was 'targetting Hamas'.  There's still 7,000 of them left!  Israel aren't very good at 'targetting'.

Unless HAMAS is Hospitals and Medical Aid Sites.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, egg said:

I haven't said Israeli behaviour was a reason for 9/11. Bin Laden did. That's a fact, not my opinion. 

Was that not Islamist extremism?

Do you not think there's a prospect of history repeating itself?

If it does, is it likely to come in the form of Islamist extremism?

Do you think that the chances of Israel, it's people, and it's supporters, being the victims of Islamist extremism has increased or reduced as a consequence of the past 2 years? 

And I've said nothing about Jews, don't play that card. 

 

Do you think that 9/11 would have happened and that Islamist extremism would exist without the actions of Israel?

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Do you think that 9/11 would have happened and that Islamist extremism would exist without the actions of Israel?

Islamic extremism has existed as long as there has been Islam, and most of it's victims have been Muslim. The manner of the creation of the state of Israel merely gives it a convenient focus and excuse.

Edited by badgerx16
Posted
1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Do you think that 9/11 would have happened and that Islamist extremism would exist without the actions of Israel?

I'm intrigued to know what you know to make you doubt what Bin Laden said in 2004.

Do you think that Islamists were grateful for the siege of Beirut, or perhaps a tad unhappy about the treatment of their brethren? 

Posted
1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

Islamic extremism has existed as long as there has been Islam, and most of it's victims have been Muslim. The manner of the creation of the state of Israel merely gives it a convenient focus and excuse.

Indeed and thanks for the reply but I was asking egg.

Posted
1 minute ago, egg said:

I'm intrigued to know what you know to make you doubt what Bin Laden said in 2004.

Do you think that Islamists were grateful for the siege of Beirut, or perhaps a tad unhappy about the treatment of their brethren? 

Hold on you just answered my question with a question. I'd appreciate an answer first.

Posted
1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

Islamic extremism has existed as long as there has been Islam, and most of it's victims have been Muslim.

Islam/Islam extremism is well established. That's not disputed. 

This is a thread about Israel. In that context, discussion of modern Islamist extremism (against non Muslims) must surely be in the context of Israel and it's supporters...

Posted
1 minute ago, egg said:

Islam/Islam extremism is well established. That's not disputed. 

This is a thread about Israel. In that context, discussion of modern Islamist extremism (against non Muslims) must surely be in the context of Israel and it's supporters...

Is not the United States the "Great Satan" ?

Posted
2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Hold on you just answered my question with a question. I'd appreciate an answer first.

I think the answer was obvious. Bin Laden said that the siege of Beirut was a reason. I don't dispute that, so I have no idea whether it would have happened if it were not for that. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...