 |
| |
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
 |
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:20
|
|
The last terract in Israel happenned shortly after the event in Iran, commemorating Humaini's death. On that event, the IJ director met Ali Hamnai of Iran.
The Islamic Jihad director was promised by Iran to have their own budget, and an increase in funds of 70%.
To prove his effectiveness, the terract in northern Israel was ordered and executed over night.
It killed 17 people on a bus. The bus was completely charred, and flew several meters in the air. Most of the bodies are still unrecognizable.
Arafat knows that he is loosing control to Iran and Syria, but he's ignoring that, hoping that eventually it will work in his favour, when he eventually goes into peace talks, as the Palestinian leader.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
panag
|
 |
MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Oct 2000
time: 07:20
|
|
|
|
 08-06-2002 22:16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3
|  |
|
Re: Iran increases Islamic Jihad budget by 70% - more terracts ahead
|
Support Apolyton
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sirotnikov
The last terract in Israel happenned shortly after the event in Iran, commemorating Humaini's death. On that event, the IJ director met Ali Hamnai of Iran.
The Islamic Jihad director was promised by Iran to have their own budget, and an increase in funds of 70%.
To prove his effectiveness, the terract in northern Israel was ordered and executed over night.
It killed 17 people on a bus. The bus was completely charred, and flew several meters in the air. Most of the bodies are still unrecognizable.
Arafat knows that he is loosing control to Iran and Syria, but he's ignoring that, hoping that eventually it will work in his favour, when he eventually goes into peace talks, as the Palestinian leader. |
hi ,
not to mention all the heroin and opium they got growing in the bekaa , ........ 
more money for more attacks , ....
have a nice day
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
|
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:20
|
|
KH, you are mistaken.
Our military solution managed to reduce the terror infrastructure greatly.
You simply don't know what we managed to prevent.
We managed to prevent several attempts at mega-terracts, including blowing up Israeli sky scrapers.
One super-terract with 10 bombs going off in one day, 3 in jerusalem, and 7 around Israel.
No one claimed that Defensive Shield was a complete solution. It was a measured step to reduce the terror network.
And we managed quite well. From 2 successfull terracts per day in March, we moved to one successfull terract per week, now.
Plus, we managed to capture or kill more than 80% of Hamas members in the west bank, and destroy most of the Tanzim infrastructure on the west bank.
We also hurt Islamic Jihad and Fatah, but much much less.
We hardly touched the Palestinian policemen, those who weren't involved in fighting against us, that is.
It is a success because I know what it managed to prevent, and you don't. In May, this was escalting very very fast.
Plus, we managed to get the world to understand that reforms are needed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
panag
|
|
MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Oct 2000
time: 07:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sirotnikov
erm... could you explain?
at least in hebrew?? |
hi ,
lets see if you can get this one ; "vet , tet , het" and "sin , feh , heh" , ......
as for the tech , secure server , and a small thing that is above , ........and there it is 24 / 24 , 7 / 7 , ..... no big deal , ...
and a comp with a dual chip from AMD , ....
have a nice day
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
|
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:20
|
|
The passover bombing was an opportunity.
What actually triggered Defensive Shield were the intelligence evidence, and two failed attempts to blow up Tel Aviv's highest Sky Scrapers, which failed.
One involved over a ton of explosives.
The terrorist groups are not actually supported by most. They are maybe supported in spirit by many, but little actually participate.
And still, little from 3 M people, is quite enough to make a bad day for Israel.
You say "undercut their support by making deals". Well we tried that didn't we? Camp David.
And that whole **** about not being able to create a viable state, is bulllshit which was invented post-factum, a year later, by the PA information ministry.
I can point you to www.memri.org, where in one of the articles they compare speeches made exactly after camp david, with the recent claims.
Apparently in 2000, the Palestinians never called this "not viable".
The truth is, that they didn't come there to talk.
I read diaries by people who were there. They say, that while the Israeli side constantly tried to give actual and factual suggestions, the Palestinian neogociators simply restated theoretical demands, like a moto.
Israel : Let's make so and so and so
Palestine: We need a solution based on 242 141 etc.
Israel: Ok, let's make so and so
Palestine: We need a solution based on 242 141 etc.
At one point, Clinton lost his cool and yelled at the Palestinians that they didn't come to make peace.
This is from the Diary of Ben-Ami, probably of the most leftist negociators in the Barak government.
Look at any interview with Dennis Ross after Camp David 2000. He says clearly, that the Palestinians were not ready to make peace.
Tell me, whatfor should we agree to more concessions? What did the Palestinians do for us, that we should concede to more? They destroyed both their own and our economy and state and killed hundreds.
In any case, if we make a huge concession now, it kills any chance to win against terror.
Don't you get that terror only feeds by concessions?
Look at Hitler. He got more and more concessions in the 30s, and this only increased his belief in the use of force.
Arafat is not to be dealt with. You are right. And you are right about us having a problem.
But we can't negociate at any cost. This is just wrong. If we can't negociate, we must protect ourselves and wait for better times.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
panag
|
|
MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Oct 2000
time: 07:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by KrazyHorse
At least it's a negotiation, panananananananag.
The brits occupied Ireland for 700 years, controlling what the population read, said and saw. Guess what? There were still constant bloody rebellions. The only way for them to stop the shooting was to pull out/get kicked out in 1921(?) and then ensure equality of citizens as parts of a civil society in the demographically divided 6 Counties. The longer Israel stays, the worse it'll be when they pull out once and for all. The only other option is to literally push the Palestinians out, which would make Sharon et al exactly one step removed from the more bloodthirsty ethnic cleansers of the past century. |
hi ,
go to the nearest Israeli consulate or embassy , or write and ask for the deal on paper , .....then you can say its a deal , it happend on Malta , and it was one sided , ....pro pal , .........
have a nice day
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
|
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:20
|
|
quote:
"Maybe if we occupy their land a bit longer they'll learn to love us. 30 years wasn't quite long enough"
Re-educate. 
That's a piss-poor strategy, since it's just entrenching the situation up till Oslo. |
You're wrong.
Actually there was a much better chance for peace in 1993, than now, or even in 2000.
Why?
Because for 7 years, the Palestinian people were subjected to propoganda, unmatched since the Nazis, which calls for martyrdom, and terror, and promotes lack-of-compromise.
quote:
It's also indicative of the fact that you just don't feel that the Palestinians (and now it's not just Arafat you're claiming this of) are a negotiating partner; they're asking for too much so they need reeducation. I thought the Pals were supposed to be the ones negotiating in bad faith. |
They are not a negociating partner because they were taught against negociations for 7 years.
They are as a negociation partner, as 1944 Germany.
In 1993, they were ready for compromise.
Every school book and TV show and religious cermon, lead by the Palestinian Authority, was against compromise.
If in 1993, most of the People wanted a state over the west bank, today, many of them want a state instead of Israel.
You call it "those crazy jews are paranoid again".
But please, just learn what the PLO is teaching in it's schools and in it's TV shows.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
KrazyHorse
|
 |
Macedonia
May 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sirotnikov
The passover bombing was an opportunity.
What actually triggered Defensive Shield were the intelligence evidence, and two failed attempts to blow up Tel Aviv's highest Sky Scrapers, which failed.
One involved over a ton of explosives.
The terrorist groups are not actually supported by most. They are maybe supported in spirit by many, but little actually participate.
And still, little from 3 M people, is quite enough to make a bad day for Israel.
You say "undercut their support by making deals". Well we tried that didn't we? Camp David.
And that whole **** about not being able to create a viable state, is bulllshit which was invented post-factum, a year later, by the PA information ministry.
I can point you to www.memri.org, where in one of the articles they compare speeches made exactly after camp david, with the recent claims.
Apparently in 2000, the Palestinians never called this "not viable".
The truth is, that they didn't come there to talk.
I read diaries by people who were there. They say, that while the Israeli side constantly tried to give actual and factual suggestions, the Palestinian neogociators simply restated theoretical demands, like a moto.
Israel : Let's make so and so and so
Palestine: We need a solution based on 242 141 etc.
Israel: Ok, let's make so and so
Palestine: We need a solution based on 242 141 etc.
At one point, Clinton lost his cool and yelled at the Palestinians that they didn't come to make peace.
This is from the Diary of Ben-Ami, probably of the most leftist negociators in the Barak government.
Look at any interview with Dennis Ross after Camp David 2000. He says clearly, that the Palestinians were not ready to make peace.
Tell me, whatfor should we agree to more concessions? What did the Palestinians do for us, that we should concede to more? They destroyed both their own and our economy and state and killed hundreds.
In any case, if we make a huge concession now, it kills any chance to win against terror.
Don't you get that terror only feeds by concessions?
Look at Hitler. He got more and more concessions in the 30s, and this only increased his belief in the use of force.
Arafat is not to be dealt with. You are right. And you are right about us having a problem.
But we can't negociate at any cost. This is just wrong. If we can't negociate, we must protect ourselves and wait for better times. |
Phew. Do you actually believe this drivel? Wait for better times? In case you hadn't noticed, when you mix forcible seizure of land with a religious clash, the ones who got the short end of the stick don't tend to give up. With this attitude your grandchildren will still be able to experience Battleground: Israel. Have fun...
I love it. The Palestinians compare Israel to Hitler. The Israelis compare the PA to Hitler. What a dialogue.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attachment: 
|
