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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (191382)	7/10/2006 11:49:17 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Prescient, but not completely prescient. 1923 was before missiles were invented. I think Jabotinsky's reasoning applies even if the Palestinians are armed only with slingshots. it is only a matter of time before the Palestinians get weapons capable of causing large numbers of casualties in Israeli cities. True. But will the response be worth it? Will they continue to be supported from the outside if they cause large numbers of civilian casualties in this way?

To: Bilow who wrote (191382)	7/10/2006 11:55:17 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The more the Palestinians militarize the conflict, the more they free up the Israelis to make a military response. This is not to their advantage, since they are the weaker party. Arafat made his gains by getting the diplomatic world to embrace the ruse of secular & limited Palestinian nationalism. The terror war and the election of the honest fanatics of Hamas have torn off the curtain off that stage set. That fact, plus the general nature of the post 9/11 world, are causing reality to seep even into European diplomatic niceties.

To: Bilow who wrote (191382)	7/11/2006 7:25:08 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The problem for Israel is that as time goes on, the trend in weapons is for weapons to become more and more effective at longer and longer ranges A relatively cheap video chip, DSP with some software, model rocket engine, and a couple of oz of plastic explosive, would make an anti-personnel device which would be difficult to protect against. They could be fired from the opposite side of a building, a block away from the soldier target. If we were trying to occupy China, that's the sort of insurgent device we would be up against. It is only a matter of time before we see them in the ME, at which point, our soldiers will no longer go on dismounted patrols. Israel will face the same thing.