From: "Robert Comer" 

> Where? At themselves? Are they planning to nuke jerusalem? I'm not sure
> their rockets could go straight up & back down, so possibly they'd just
> deliver the bombs by truck so that they could all sing & hold hands
> round the bombs as the timer ticks down.

I doubt they would nuke Jerusalem or anywhere near that, but if the battle
escalates to where neighboring countries join in with the Palestinians,
they would nuke them.

But anyway, if it's just the Palestinians, Israel wouldn't need nukes,
their conventional military is more than up to the task.

And you're forgetting their Air Force, who needs trucks when you have air
superiority...

> So everyone but the Israelis are in favour. It hasn't happened however
> coz you're the Israeli's bitch.

Look, I agree, that Israel isn't helping anything here, if they would ask
for a peacekeeping force it might possibly come about - but how can they
trust the Palestinians to do their part...

--
Bob Comer


"Adam" <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the
field.near the bridge"> wrote in message
news:44697174{at}w3.nls.net...
> Robert Comer wrote:
>>> For how long? The Palestinians have already been under occupation for
>>> nearly 40 years. The Crusader state lasted quite a while too.
>>
>> For as long as it takes to kill millions. (or more if they start lobbing
>> nukes)
>>
>
> Where? At themselves? Are they planning to nuke jerusalem? I'm not sure
> their rockets could go straight up & back down, so possibly they'd just
> deliver the bombs by truck so that they could all sing & hold hands
> round the bombs as the timer ticks down.
>
> Hey let's hit Ramallah....do you know how far Ramallah is from
> Jerusalem? How about Jenin or Nablus? Hey maybe they could wipe out the
> tomb of the patriachs in Hebron. That would be a big win.
>
>>> ROFLMAO. Do you really believe that???? It has been a sine qua non of
>>> Israeli policy along with non right of return.
>>
>> Yep, I really believe that and haven't seen any proof otherwise. (and
>> quite
>> a lot of proof that supports it)
>>
>
> Oh come on. Do a tiny bit of research.
>
> Even your troops are not acceptable. Back in 2001 or so the Israeli
> MinDef said US troops & only US troops might be OK & Sharon
hit the roof.
>
> Here's one example:
>
> http://english.people.com.cn/english/200107/23/eng20010723_75648.html
>
> "
> Israel Will not Oppose Expansion of CIA Monitoring Mechanism: Sharon
> Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Monday that his country would
> not object to reinforcement of U.S. Central Intelligence Agency monitors
> in the region to oversee the ceasefire between Israel and the
> Palestinians.
>
> Addressing the Knesset (parliament) Foreign Affairs and Defense
> Committee, Sharon said that this issue should be discussed and
> coordinated with the U.S. administration, according to Israel Radio
> reports.
>
> Sharon obviously thought that increasing the size of the CIA contingent
> here could be a compromise plan that would ease the pressure from the
> international community that has urged Israel and the Palestinians to
> accept third-party observers to help stop the violence.
>
> The clashes between the two sides have lasted for about 10 months and
> left over 600, most of them Palestinians, dead.
>
> Israel has repeatedly rejected the idea of an international observing
> force in the area, while the Palestinians urge the international
> community to send such a force to help both sides to hold the ceasefire
> that was reached under the auspices of U.S. CIA Director George Tenet on
> June 13.
>
> Leaders from seven industrialized countries and Russia, or G8, issued a
> statement in Genoa, Italy last Saturday, saying "Third- party
> monitoring, accepted by both parties, would serve their interests in
> implementing the Mitchell report."
> "
>
> So everyone but the Israelis are in favour. It hasn't happened however
> coz you're the Israeli's bitch.
>
> Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5