We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Mundane & Pointless Stuff I Must Share: The Off Topic Forum

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Crissa
King
Posts: 6720
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Santa Cruz

We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Crissa »

So, here.

Israel is blockading Lebanon because Hamas attacked Israeli security forces because...

I don't know. But we're supposed to talk about 'the war'.

Being as 'Liberals' don't control the government right now, and therefore have no say in international affairs, we're supposed to beg conservatives (who don't usually listen to us in the first place) to be enraged that their President won't stand up and stop the senless slaughter of civillians.

-Crissa
User avatar
Zherog
Knight-Baron
Posts: 907
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Zherog »

Crissa at [unixtime wrote:1153165265[/unixtime]]Israel is blockading Lebanon because Hamas attacked Israeli security forces because...


You're mixing up the groups Israel is pissed off at.

Hamas is a terrorist group in Gaza that has control of at least part of the Palastinian government. Israel is pissed at them - and pounding the shit out of Gaza - because they kidnapped an Israeli soldier and killed two others.

Hezbollah is a terrorist group in Lebanon that has control of part of the Lebanese government. Israel is pissed at them, too. This is the group that kidnapped two Israeli soldiers.

we're supposed to beg conservatives (who don't usually listen to us in the first place) to be enraged that their President won't stand up and stop the senless slaughter of civillians.


:wtf: Right - because by golly, if George says stop it, everybody in the Middle East will go back to their own sandbox and play nice again.
You can't fix stupid.

"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives." ~ Jackie Robinson
power_word_wedgie
Master
Posts: 287
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by power_word_wedgie »

I pretty much agree with Zherog here. The G8 pretty much has asked for the whole thing to end.

>G8 summit calls on Israel to halt Mideast offensive<

>G8 calls on Hizbollah to end attacks on Israel<

That better than the President to ask by himself: all of these countries are standing behind the same position.

Actually, the more I see it, the more I agree with Israel's current position which is:

1) Release of their soldiers.
2) Hizballah to back away from the Israeli border and allow the Lebanese army to patrol it.
3) Stop the rocket attacks of Israel.

To equate it back to home, let's say that some Mexicans (some descendants of those that lived in California before US rule) felt that California was seized in an unjust manner during the Mexican-American War. (Actually, they probably have a case, but that not the main jist of my point) After politely asking the US to give California back to Mexico, for some strange reason their request goes on deaf ears. Thus, to impress their point, they begin to shell Southern and Central California with rocket-fire. I'm thinking that the residents of California wouldn't appreciate it if I sat back here in Indiana saying, "You know, they got a point, give it back or live with the rocket fire and kidnapping of the police officer or two." I'm thinking that they would want the US to make every effort possible to stop the rocket-fire, even if it meant world ridicule.
PhoneLobster
King
Posts: 6403
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by PhoneLobster »

I'm with Putin on this one.

Isreal as usual is over reacting, and in a criminal manner.

Lets make this clear people.

Niether Hamas nor Hezbollah are what you can exactly call responsible structured institutions. Different cells are independent and act independently without input or knowledge from other groups that happen to call themselves the same thing.

Thats what terrorist organizations ARE, thats how they work. One cell (MAYBE) kidnaps ONE man so Isreal destroys the vital power plants and infrastructure supplying thousands upon thousands of people and kills dozens of innocent people for NO REASON.

The victims are not even connected with the original criminals, because its the collective punishment of everyone. The stupid california mexico analogy above would be "A mexican civilian kidnaps a californian, so you bomb all mexico cities power plants, roads, police stations, military out posts etc... cutting off millions from vital services, then you start randomly blowing up more civilians till someone surrenders or you feel better about it". I mean after all one mexican commits a crime, ALL mexicans must pay, maybe with their lives hey? THATS the standard Isreal sets.

Another cell kidnaps TWO men so Isreal destroys even more vital infrastructure required by even more thousands of people and kills even more dozens upon dozens of innocent civilians.

And its worse when isreal does it because the government elements of Hamas and Hezbollah have a genuine degree of deniability, they genuinely cannot be held 100% responsible for actions by any and every mad fringe group under their very broad banners. (and the citizens in general DEFINITELY shouldn't be held remotely responsible and arbitrarily blown to smithereens)

But Isreal does this stuff directly by government order and using the full force of an organized obedient military. And as a result we have terrorists commiting random chaotic murder, and an army commiting organized war crimes and a government commiting crimes against humanity.

And why does all this make it important that the US specifically damn well disown this murderous rogue state? Because of the way the US has crippled the security council and thus the UN from making even a mild rebuke let alone DOING something about Isreal with countless mean and petty vetos. And because of the vast degree to which your country subsidizes and supports the bloodthirsty government there.

Seriously the thing Isreal most fears is for America to walk away, cut off the funds, cut off the vetoes, cut off the only real internationally sympathetic rehtoric and leave it to face the full local and international repercussions of its criminal murderous lunatic actions alone.

Its time America just stopped giving crack to that crack whore.
Phonelobster's Self Proclaimed Greatest Hits Collection : (no really, they are awesome)
User3
Prince
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by User3 »

PhoneLobster at [unixtime wrote:1153184520[/unixtime]]
Isreal


Israel.

But I've got to agree with you on this. Of course, at this point it's just escalated into crazy town. Israel didn't have to retaliate the way they did, but that's how they've been rolling for the last 50 years (coincidentally, how long they've been around).
And once the rockets are flying in both directions the bridges are bombed (metaphorically and actually).

The Lebanese government should have reigned in Hezbollah, but as far as I've heard they were too buisy trying not to devolve into another civil war to worry about little things like terrorist ersatz governments. Now they're basically fucked because they have no way to re-gain control (no bridges or airports), and dealing with the damage the Israelis have done will be so much trouble that they'll have to turn to the nations which funded Hezbollah for help. Actually gaining control where they never had it just isn't in the cards.

So, funded by the US, Israel will devastate them until the 'threat is fully neutralized,' and Iran will try even harder to become a nuclear power. And then maybe we'll (they'll, that is) finaly get that nuclear war we've been hearing about for the past...50 years.

It's just too bad we didn't give california to the Zionists instead.
User avatar
Josh_Kablack
King
Posts: 5318
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Online. duh

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Josh_Kablack »

CellularCrustacean wrote:The victims are not even connected with the original criminals, because its the collective punishment of everyone. The stupid california mexico analogy above would be "A mexican civilian kidnaps a californian, so you bomb all mexico cities power plants, roads, police stations, military out posts etc... cutting off millions from vital services, then you start randomly blowing up more civilians till someone surrenders or you feel better about it". I mean after all one mexican commits a crime, ALL mexicans must pay, maybe with their lives hey? THATS the standard Isreal sets."


Well, a better analogy would be if the Mexican government had taken the official position that kidnapping isn't a crime, so we're not going to make any effort to arrest kidnappers, or to allow your police to pursue them into our territory. This would leave the US with the options of :

A. Letting the kidnappers do whatever they wanted with impunity, so long as they can cross the border.

B. Comitting an act of war by sending in police force to recover the victims and arrest the kidnappers anyways

C. Commiting an act of war by actually starting a war, with the vague hope of eventually overthrowing the government which openly tolerates (and possibly encourages or subsidizes attacks) upon your nation.

Now, you might notice that there are in fact no good options there, so I really can't place blame for making a poor choice among them. I'm not naiive enough to beleive that Israel is in any way the good guys, but I'm not gullible enough to fall for the Palestinian "We're all just victims of US imperial Zionism" propaganda either.

And Crissa, Dubya is on record cursing about this state of affairs, (really, he said "shit" on a live mic today) he's dispatching Condi to the area and he has worked out a joint strategy with Tony Blair and the G8 to use international pressure to de-escalte things. You crying that he's not doing anything to stop this is just denying reality. You should instead be crying that he's not doing the right things, or is making the situation worse, either of which would be entirely plausible
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
power_word_wedgie
Master
Posts: 287
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by power_word_wedgie »

Josh, the thing is that if it was just the kidnapping of soldiers, that would be one thing. However, I'm thinking that people in Israel were getting sick and tired of being shelled by rockets, and the kidnapping of the soldiers was the straw that broke the camel's back. That's why the Israeli demands don't only stop at the release of the soldiers - they also include the cessation of being rocketed by Hizbollah and Hamas.

Let's put it this way: if San Diego, Los Angeles, Tucson, and El Paso were being rocketed on a nightly basis by covert rocket-making factories in Mexico, the citizens of the US would want every measure taken to have it stop, even if it included knocking out power grids in Mexico. Also, the Lebanese government isn't condoning the situation via law, but they can't control Hizbollah either and hence the attacks - they don't even control South Lebanon. Actually, we do have some historical reference: the US Army did chase Pancho Villa back through Mexican territory in attempts to capture him.

At the end of the day, it all has to do with politics. If Olmert would have done nothing with respect to soldier abductions and the rocket attacks by Hizbollah and Hamas, he would have been kicked out of power. Heck, even many of the Israeli liberals are supportive of the counterattacks. And though I agree with US tightening purse strings usually having an effect, I'm thinking that the Israelis would have conducted the same actions.

I do agree with you that they really didn't have any wonderful choices, however. Actually, the only one that comes out ahead is Hamas. First, they get to ditch an Israeli referendum. Second, the focus isn't on the government's inability to pay civil servants.
User avatar
Josh_Kablack
King
Posts: 5318
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Online. duh

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Josh_Kablack »

PWW, either I'm trying too hard to make the point that

Image

involved in this situation and being overly ambigious, or you didn't notice that I opened that last post with a quote.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
power_word_wedgie
Master
Posts: 287
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by power_word_wedgie »

Sorry, I guess my reply was more to the Cellular Crustracean. :blush: (I didn't notice that the opening quote was by him)

But I do agree with you, the whole situation stinks with very few obvious solutions to fix it. I guess that I'm picking the one side that doesn't stink as much, but it isn't by much. If I was Israel, I don't know if I would shell things that makes it hard for an anti-Syrian government currently in Lebanon, but that's me.
User3
Prince
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by User3 »

power_word_wedgie at [unixtime wrote:1153191578[/unixtime]]Cellular Crustracean


I'm pretty sure phone lobsters aren't cellular:
Image
User avatar
Josh_Kablack
King
Posts: 5318
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Online. duh

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Josh_Kablack »

My fault, I intially just used " " marks instead of QUOTE tags, and edited in the tags after I noticed the ambiguity.

And while I agree with Catharz in general, his particulars are way off. While granting titles to lands inside the US would have made for a much more peaceful "Jewish Homeland" than the lands in Israel. If we had put the "Zionists" in California, then they'd be at war with the Scientologists right now :P

"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
Draco_Argentum
Duke
Posts: 2434
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Draco_Argentum »

The Israelis are conducting WW2 era attacks. The first world has moved on.

Rockets leaving your nation and hitting another is an act of war. The Lebanese government either can't or won't stop it. Israel really is justified in declaring war. Its just that we don't like they type of war they picked.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Username17 »

Hold on a minute, I think it's time that we take this back a bit. OK, maybe about 65 years. To when the Stern Gang (the progenitor of the modern-day Kadima party) was a terrorist network in Palestine that shot people in an effort to remove the British from Palestine and help with the final solution of transplanting all Jews from Europe to Palestine and murder anyone who happened to be there.

You know, the Axis. The bad guys. The guys who bombed the King David Hotel. The guys who became the Likud and eventually Kadima. The guys who invaded Lebanon twice in the last century and murdered literally countless civilians doing it each time.

The ones who've been laying seige to Gaza for two generations. The guys who just this year kicked things off by shelling a Palestinian beach, killing some children and then refusing to apologize afterwards.

And now, some fvcking soldiers got captured while on patrol, and they cut loose with shelling civilian airports and powerstations? So they send armed men into disputed regions with orders to use live fire and some of them don't don't come back and use that as a justification for a full-scale assault on multiple sovereign nations.

What the hell? Their "justification" for invading Gaza and Lebanon is that private citizens fought back when they invaded them! The only reason that the UN hasn't issued a condemnation of Israel is that the United States vetoed it!

Don't fool yourself, Israel is a pariah state. They're as evil as South Africa was and as dangerous as North Korea is now. The only reason that the world doesn't unite to destroy them is that the United States threatens nuclear reprisals on anyone who tries.

Anything that Palestinians, Lebanese, Persians, or any other predominantly Muslim ethnicities want to do to Israelis, and I do mean anything is justified. Israel operates Gaza as a death camp, and the nation was started by actual Nazis and radicalized madmen with Stockholm syndrome, and it's never gotten nicer. Future generations will look on those who resisted Israeli attrocities the same way they look upon those who resisted the Nazi murder machine - crimes great and small will be trivialized in light of the pressing need of the greater conflict.

This isn't a situation where maybe everyone should just settle down. No. Israel is a pariah state that needs to be driven into the sea. Like the government in Khartum or Pyongyang, the world will be a better, safer place if it and everyone who supports it are dead. Future generations will see our complicity and judge us with contempt. And I don't blame them.

And because I obviously haven't offended people enough, because nothing can offend people enough when speaking of the myriad and despicable crimes that have characterized the Israeli state since before its inception, I'll leave you with a fun fact: The population of Israel is 6 million today. Hitler killed the wrong Jews.

-Username17
Draco_Argentum
Duke
Posts: 2434
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Draco_Argentum »

Russia and the US both have veto power. The UN is really quite worthless.

The problem is that Israel exists. Creating it was a dumbass move but thats not the fault of the people born there since. So you can't claim they have to right to self defense. What they don't have the right to do is conduct a WW2 style campaign of bombing the civilian populace's morale.

Of course the Israelis do vote these people in, at least a Palestinian civilian dosen't have to say that.
PhoneLobster
King
Posts: 6403
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by PhoneLobster »

wrote:Russia and the US both have veto power. The UN is really quite worthless.


Whoaaaa stop right there.

The US is the vandal on the security council.

Yeah you heard me.

Try looking at this.

wrote:Since the Security Council's inception, China (ROC/PRC) has used 5 vetoes; France, 18; Russia/USSR, 122; the United Kingdom, 32; and the United States, 80.


Looks like a lot of vetoes, especially for Russia, but wait thats the entire history including some pretty rocky early years...

wrote:
The majority of the USSR vetoes were in the first ten years of the Council's existence, and the numbers since 1984 have been: China, 2; France, 3; Russia/USSR, 4; the United Kingdom, 10; and the United States, 42.


Yes thats fvcking right the grand old United States of Dr No have since 1984 produced more one nation vetoes than all the other members combined TWICE OVER.

Guess which country most of the US vetoes have been about...

I'll give you a hint its the most prominent aparthied state left on the planet and its military routinely kills innocent civilian members of the downtrodden ethnic majority of its citizens.

It starts with 'I'.

Edit: Heck, heres some even better material,
Rather detailed veto stuff

Notice this bit... wrote:Between the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the end of 2004, vetoes were exercised on 19 occasions. For that period, usage breaks down as follows:

- the United States used the veto on 13 occasions (11 regarding Israel, 1 Bosnia, 1 Panama)


It is widely known that the current US administration is actively hostile to the UN in general, and most nations regard US veto power on the UN as the biggest hurdle to its actual function in recent times.
Phonelobster's Self Proclaimed Greatest Hits Collection : (no really, they are awesome)
User avatar
Absentminded_Wizard
Duke
Posts: 1122
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Absentminded_Wizard »

DA wrote:Of course the Israelis do vote these people in, at least a Palestinian civilian dosen't have to say that.


Sort of. The way the Israeli electoral system is set up, it's hard to tell who's going to be in positions of power from election results. There are tons of political parties, and you only need an infinitessimal percentage of the popular vote to get seats in the Knesset. As a result, no party ever wins a majority and it's always a question of who the winning party can negotiate a coalition with. A victory by Likud could mean either a hard right government (with help from even more orthodox/conservative parties) or a "national unity" coalition with Labor.
Doom314's satirical 4e power wrote:Complete AnnihilationWar-metawarrior 1

An awesome bolt of multicolored light fires from your eyes and strikes your foe, disintegrating him into a fine dust in a nonmagical way.

At-will: Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee Weapon ("sword", range 10/20)
Target: One Creature
Attack: Con vs AC
Hit: [W] + Con, and the target is slowed.
power_word_wedgie
Master
Posts: 287
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by power_word_wedgie »

The thing is that the US really isn't the vandals, per se, because they're exercising an option that was given by the UN via the set-up of the Security Council as a veto member. Thus, you're saying the same thing that DA is saying: the UN is really quite worthless - he's just noting that it is within the rules of the UN to why it is worthless.
Draco_Argentum
Duke
Posts: 2434
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Draco_Argentum »

Well theres actually two trains of thought there.

First the UN is worthless because the veto system means a few countries who happened to be powerful when it was set up get to make everyone else their bitches.

Second the US uses it to prop up Israel. Russia has Chechnya. Notice that both countries are playing the international bully. I'd be annoyed at letting them vote. Giving them veto is terrible.
PhoneLobster
King
Posts: 6403
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by PhoneLobster »

The Veto sucks.

BUT.

No, the UN is not worthless.

ALL the other nations manage to play ball pretty friendly like.

It is the US contribution that is worthless.

Indeed worse than that.

PS. Chechnya comments don't justify the vast crimes of YOUR pet country in the middle east.
Chechnya is bad but its hardly comparable in scale, duration, nature or in the degree to which Russia is prepared to spit in the face of the international community. (Veto anyone?)
Phonelobster's Self Proclaimed Greatest Hits Collection : (no really, they are awesome)
User avatar
Josh_Kablack
King
Posts: 5318
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Online. duh

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Josh_Kablack »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1153200799[/unixtime]]Hold on a minute, I think it's time that we take this back a bit. OK, maybe about 65 years. To when the Stern Gang (the progenitor of the modern-day Kadima party) was a terrorist network in Palestine that shot people in an effort to remove the British from Palestine


So, you're saying that a nation founded by a bunch of terrorists opposed to British occupation is bound to be illegitimate ?

"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Username17 »

power_word_wedgie at [unixtime wrote:1153222737[/unixtime]]The thing is that the US really isn't the vandals, per se, because they're exercising an option that was given by the UN via the set-up of the Security Council as a veto member. Thus, you're saying the same thing that DA is saying: the UN is really quite worthless - he's just noting that it is within the rules of the UN to why it is worthless.


No. The UN is based on the idea of consensus among the winning powers of World War II (plus France). It's like ordering a pizza for five people - even if four of you like olives you can't have olives if the fifth guy is allrgic to them. Thus, noone gets exactly what they want but everyone gets something they can live with. As a way of adjudicating anything that you only get one of (like a large pizza, or a planet) it's not unreasonable.

And indeed, every country on Earth has agreed that nations get to fight wars to stop sessesionist movements. The United States is allowed to have fought the Civil War, and they can periodically kill Phillipinos to maintain the protectorate and so on. Noone likes civil conflicts, but nations are allowed to engage in them to maintain their own borders and priviledges.

What countries, except Israel, are not allowed to do is invade other countries. Your right to slaughter innocent civillians ends at your internationally recognized border. And Israel hasn't lived up to that promise, and the United States repeatedly and willfully refuses to follow its own pledge to hold consensus on that point when Israel breaks that promise - which it does every fvcking year.

Yes, the UN is a fine way to handle things. It's the only way to handle things. The problem is that the United States is evil and willfully undermining the concept.

-Username17
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Username17 »

Josh wrote:So, you're saying that a nation founded by a bunch of terrorists opposed to British occupation is bound to be illegitimate ?


Sure seems that way!

But no, I'm saying that if you were fighting against the British during World War II, the chances of you being a good guy are very slim.

Remember, Jews were allowed to live, work, and even run for office in Palestine. There was literally no impediment at all to Jews going to live there and many Jews actually did live there and did fine. The platform of the Zionists was not that Jews should be allowed to live in peace in Jerusalem, but that Jews should make war on anyone else trying to live in peace in Jerusalem.

-Username17
User avatar
Zherog
Knight-Baron
Posts: 907
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Zherog »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1153239095[/unixtime]] What countries, except Israel, are not allowed to do is invade other countries.


Even when those other countries are firing rockets - that go boom really loud and kill people - from their country into your country?
You can't fix stupid.

"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives." ~ Jackie Robinson
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by Username17 »

Zherog at [unixtime wrote:1153242644[/unixtime]]
FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1153239095[/unixtime]] What countries, except Israel, are not allowed to do is invade other countries.


Even when those other countries are firing rockets - that go boom really loud and kill people - from their country into your country?


If they are doing so on the grounds that you have their people under blockade and are starving and killing their children with rockets and bulldozers, probably not.

Israel's only claim to the legitimacy of their actions is that those whacky muslims keep fighting back when they attempt to massacre them. And sorry, that just doesn't fly as an excuse for genocide. People are allowed to fight back against genocide.

-Username17
User3
Prince
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re: We're not talking about 'the war' enough

Post by User3 »

Hey, Frank, can you go into a little more detail about the founding of Israel? I know a reasonable amount about the political/Western aspect of things (rubber making, etc), but I know nothing of what was going on in Palestine. You seemed to imply that there was a group of Jewish freedom fighters working with The Axis?
Post Reply