Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PartyTime who wrote (9481)	2/17/2003 8:52:20 PM
From: Machaon	Respond to of 25898

<< As I understand it, Syria uses Lebanon as a buffer against Israel who, with its US-supplied superior weaponry, has defeated the Syrian nation. >> Are you saying that you believe Israel would have attacked and invaded Syria, if it weren't for Syria, and the PLO, invading and conquering Lebanon? In that case, why do you think that Syria's use of Lebanon, as a buffer, has stopped Israel from conquering Syria? Also, since you say that Israel has already defeated the Syrian nation, why didn't Israel take over Syria, if you believe that this is Israel's intention? Do you really feel that Israel would conquer Syria the first chance it gets, and that Syria's fears of Israel are justified? << Lebanon got squeezed in between. >> I can see that you really weep for the Lebanese people. Please dry those tears and get back into the "peace" rally. <g> << It comes back to not condemning Syria for this, but more to solving the Israel-Palestinian issue. >> Don't condemn Syria, and the PLO, for invading and destroying Lebanon? You feel that a country can invade and destroy one of it's neighbors, if there is a problem with one of it's other neighbors? Right now, India and Pakistan are involved in a dispute about Kasmir. By your logic, China should not be criticized if it invades and destroys India, in order to provide a buffer between it and Pakistan.

To: PartyTime who wrote (9481)	2/17/2003 10:00:54 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25898

As I understand it, Syria uses Lebanon as a buffer against Israel who, with its US-supplied superior weaponry, hasd defeated the Syrian nation. So the invasion of Lebanon by Syria was justified? Don't give me any "No" crap, you are clearly acting as Syria's apologist. In what way was Syria threatened by Israel? I do remember Israel invading Syrian territory- -after Syria attacked Israel. In one instance, they kept part of it- -the Golan Heights. That was because Syria for years had been using that area to rain shells on Israel. In no instance did Israel attempt to conquer Syria. Do you they would have failed had they tried? And if you can justify Syria's invasion of Lebanon, you should find justifying a US invasion of Iraq simplicity itself. US-supplied superior weaponry Is it your contention that we should simply have let them be run over by nations that greatly outnumbered them? You're the one who says nations must have the approval of a motley collection of 10th-rate tinhorn dictators before invading another country (although the invaders here would be members of that motley collection). Are you going now to condemn the Arabs for their repeated invasions of Israel? Did you do so at the time? It comes back to not condemning Syria for this Why not? YOu certainly don't hesitate to condemn the US. You do it repeatedly every day on this very thread. solving the Israel-Palestinian issue. And you propose this be done how? You think there have been no efforts? It has been "solved" repeatedly and come unsolved because the Arabs simply WILL NOT allow Israel to exist at all. Until that changes, nothing else will.