Will this increase or decrease the likelihood of terrorist actions in America, Europe and the rest of the world?

If you were a member of a family murdered in this conflict, would you be seeking revenge?

Should Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert, be tried for war crimes if or when this conflict comes to an end?

What will the price of oil be in 4 weeks time?

As I understand it, Gausie, the UK has border guards stationed in France to check passports. UK police would have no jurisdiction to detain or arrest on French soil as a matter of law. Nor are the UK responsible for the security of the French end of the tunnel, or the land around it. Hence my suggestion that the UK should invade. The UK could call it Pas de Dover, or perhaps the Day Trip Strip?

If you are happy with the compromise that Israel should be allowed to station border guards in the Lebanon to check passports, then I think that that is fair enough.

Oh for goodness' sake ! This just shows the level of thinking here !
DOES FRANCE ALLOW ITS TERRITORY TO BE USED TO LAUNCH ROCKET ATTACKS, SHELLING OR SEND SUICIDE BOMBERS TO THE UK ?
Know the difference between that and strikes and illegal immigrants just wanting a better life?

Kayak

It's a little bigger that you realise. There's over 100 (rising to between 200 and 300 for operations) members of the Kent police force who spend their on-duty time in France. Travel time to and from Kent are counted as part of their hours - I know a few of them.

You are partly right Gausie, but it is a very small area. More in the nature of buildings and an apron straddling a border. What is needed is a whole province.

Of course I am being facetious, ITLB, and I do know the difference between rocket attacks and someone walking down a tunnel. The point I am really making is that what in normal circumstances would be an act of war and of disdain for the local people is described by many using words such as "you can't blame them". Well, you can, actually. It is by no means obvious that Israel should be entitled to act extraterritorially. Maybe it is the only answer, but it isn't beyond questioning on moral and legal grounds and it certainly isn't a situation in which anyone querying it should be accused of anti-Semitism.

It's interesting to continue a comparison with the Franco/UK co-operation.

Kent police are present in France to help manage the problem of difficult Brits abroad rather than French nationals wishing to do Britain harm. They are there because both the French and British governments recognise there is a problem, want to solve it, and are happy to cooperate in finding a solution.

The joint political will to solve the problem is what leads to the spirit of cooperation that may make this work. As long as there is no joint political will to stop rocket attacks and suicide bombers there is no hope of any similar arrangement falling into place in the middle east.

Posters who sympathise with rocket attacks and suicide bombers with platitudes such as 'what else can they do?' reflect the issues that really need to be solved. They are reinforcing political support of these attacks.

Yes, Israelis continue to build in 'settlements' that are outside Israel, but Israel has also demonstrated its willingness to stop doing so, to evict and to bulldoze settlements in return for the promise of peace. And demonstrated this willingness with actions as well as with words. What a shame it is that every time Israel has evicted settlements and withdrawn they are rewarded with more rockets and bombs.

I can't offer a solution - but I sympathise with the Israeli dilemma, and see continued development of settlements as the Israelis building a bargaining position for eventual lasting peace similar to the peace with Egypt after surrendering that huge portion of desert south of Eilat that was seized from the retreating Egyptians during the 6 day war.

Are you suggesting you would like Israel to simply have their towns and villages rocketed constantly and not take action to try and end that?
If so, what other sovereign state would accept that do you think?

I would, however agree totally with:
"Maybe it is the only answer, but it isn't beyond questioning on moral and legal grounds and it certainly isn't a situation in which anyone querying it should be accused of anti-Semitism. "

In any dispute, too much one-sidedness or arrogance with the correctness of one's position is guaranteed to lose the goodwill of anyone judging the dispute. That perhaps is just public relations. Much of Israel's problem is not what they do, but that they seem to have no interest in coming out on top morally. Perhaps it is the American influence. Apart from the cultural influence of the strong guy wins, shoot first, work out why later, etc., it is difficult to see that Israel would have been able to behave like they have without American support.

The land-grab and the jets may well be required, but if I were running Israel I would spend much more time and money on looking super-clean than occupying land and in sending the jets. Every child killed, or Palestinian who thinks rightly or wrongly that he's not allowed to change a lightbulb, reflects badly, again purely in terms of public relations. To casual observers it looks as though Israel don't care about the suffering of other peoples, because 'they' did it.

I should say that a parallel is how much more one is able to engage with you, ITLB, now that you appear to have paused the anti-Semitic bigot line of argument. Arrogant one-sidedness does not win arguments.

I'm happy to engage with you and most people.
However, the likes of fred are different. I have no polite words for him and his mentality.
Haystacker, frankly, I'm not sure about, but am suspicious as he spouts some of the things anti-semites do under the cloak of "reason".
fahel might be the sort of person who if he was the leader of a state like Syria, the Israelis could engage with. After all, peace is only achieved between enemies, not friends.
Neither, as I've said repeatedly, do I think everyone who is against the policies of the Israeli government is anti-semitic. Personally I do not like some of their policies either.

It is very obvious why Israel should be "entitled to act extraterritorially"

and Israeli restraint is very commendable

"restraint"

LOL

I agree with Camelot.

ITLB

Haystack is not anti-semitic. Just a wee bit misguided.

G
How do you know I am not anti-semitic? I was enjoying all this name calling!

In the land of the B?

I would suggest you start at the beginning of this thread and read my postings.

If then you could consider my remarks anti-Semitic, anti-Jewish or racist, point to them and I will reconsider them.

I am critical of some of the recent Israeli administrations, and I am certainly critical of their recent policies and inhumane actions and regarded as criminal.


I consider such actions as barbaric.

I must admit from reading your postings, I am glad that it is the contact we have had.

Oh dear God, Fred, start at the beginning of this thread and read your postings? Poor old ITLB will have lost the will to live before he's a tenth of the way through.

Fred - if you also choose to reread this thread, perhaps you'll watch those videos you claimed strenuously to have avoided too?

:)

fahel and Fred-please let me have your comments on the news article of today. Barbaric in the extreme if true.

Hamas Accuses Egypt of Killing 4 Tunnel Smugglers

by Hana Levi Julian



The Hamas terrorist organization that rules Gaza has accused Egypt of killing four smugglers Wednesday by pumping gas into a tunnel under the border. Six other smugglers were injured.

A Hamas security official told the Associated Press on condition of anonymity that Egyptians filled the tunnel with some type of crowd dispersal gas. The smugglers suffocated to death, according to Dr. Hamdan Abu Latifa, who was interviewed in the border town of Rafiah.

If true, then the incident is barbaric and against international law.