Okay, never mind, I'm reminded of why I need to stay out of this. Sorry guys.![]()
Why sorry? You came with your views, based on your understanding and previous knowledge. You were convinced by another argument, and hopefully learned a bit of history. I see a healthy discussion here.![]()
why? really all you guys keep saying is "The Dome is a big deal" there for Arab/Muslim states will drop all past thinking and logic and do... what you guys haven't clearly said, so give me something more logical than "Iran-Iraq peace based on Muslim unity!"
so what do you guys believe the nations around Israel will do? and why will they do these things?
I don't think Islam and Muslims think with one mind, my stand is that the attack would wipe clean the whole context of the middle east and change the whole views of those governments around Israel, I think that such an attack could change the history of Islamic Terrorism, maybe we see Arab Mujahideen not going to Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden and others not fighting in Afghanistan, but in the West Bank and Lebanon, but maybe not, ObL hated than and latter secular socialist arabs like the PLO who in the 1980s were still out in front of the Palestinian issue.
it is the single most important site in all of Judaism, in the 19 years Jordan held it didn't let any Israelis go to it (though they agreed to) they also desecrated the Mount of Olives (the oldest Jewish grave yard on Earth over 3,000 years old) using its tombstones to pave roads and public bathrooms, also Jordan had agreed to let Israelis go there, Jordan blew up the synagogues of the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem and planed before 1967 to knock down the Quarter and make it a park, none of this lead to a war or attacks from Israel on Jordan or the wider Muslim world
it was during the first 19 years of Israel, part of the 1949 "peace" Jordan agreed to let Israelis go to the Wall and the Mount, Israelis were never able to go
yes they did, but not over issues of faith and holy sites, its not something most people go to war over
A decleration of war by a group of half a dozen guys, who would either die during the attack or captured right after? The OP did not say the state of Israel destroyed the Dome, rather a fringe group of religious nut-jobs.
First of all, drop the tone. Second, we were talking about Arab states. Not Terror organizations. The reasoning that Israel couldn't stop the attack on the Dome is enough to never negotiate again, is flawed. That's like saying that Israel should resume hosilities with Egypt after the cross-border incidents.
sadly I have to take my ball and go home, as I think every one else should Snake isn't willing to be even basically polite to people who disagree, to the point in his last post to say the number of people who don't agree with him are some how part of a pro-Israeli cabal or something, any more posting it this thread will clearly only draw out more rudeness from him which is a shame.
For God's sake, we're talking a war fought by armies intent on spreading radical Islamism, when they're actually kicking the ass of a secular dictatorship, intent on spreading regional terrorism. THE THIRD HOLIEST SITE IN ISLAM IS BLOWN UP. DURING THIS WAR. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan's already creating a hardened cadre of irregulars. And you really fail to see how blowing up the third holiest site in Islam might possibly relevant to the kind of people who sent teenagers through minefields over much less from an ISLAMIC POV?
Again,![]()
Black Angel: What are you talking about? He countered your points with evidence about early Israel not being affected by the Wall, he's not simply countering with, "more rudeness." Answer his critiques, don't just dance around the question.
Technically Hamas and Islamic Jihad are fringe nut jobs, too, but it never stops people treating them as all of the Palestinians. The reaction here is from the kind of people who went to Afghanistan to wage Jihad on the USSR. They're not going to be thinking in terms of rational differentiation here, especially with this happening just as Israel's trying to actually get a peace. These people will rationalize it as a conspiracy and no amount of evidence otherwise would ever be relevant to them. You're talking something equivalent to Al-Hakim's destroying the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, here. What the Arab dictators owned by the Soviets and the USA around Israel do doesn't matter to these people.
Um, I'm going to ask the same thing of you. Are you serious in not seeing the reality that Arab states in the 1980s are not the end-all be-all of the global ramifications here? And that the MUSLIM WORLD IS NOT JUST ARAB? Evidently not, as when Israel detonates sensitive sites which have GLOBAL, not merely MIDDLE EASTERN ramifications, with the kind of behavior that GAVE THE PLO A DESERVEDLY BAD NAME Israel can get away with this consequences-free because people are this incapable of viewing the gap between the dawn of Islamism and this act and analogies reliant on the secular monarchies of the Hashemites in the far more mutually secular 1940s.
But I forget, Israel can do anything it wants whenever it wants because Israel is just that awesome.![]()
Well, in that case I concede the point about the third holiest site in Islam and withdraw that point.However most of the argument still stands, in that in this case it's more likely to see the likes of Hamas show up much earlier and much more violently than IOTL.
Technically Hamas IS the elected government in Gaza. So your point is kinda moot. Also, again you are talking about a massive wave of terrorists from around the Muslim world. I did not disagree on that. But how does it have anything to do with Arab armies?
Unless you mean to say that there is a Muslim country with enough power projection to reach Israel without sharing a border with it, or that every Muslim nation on earth will declare war on Israel, I fail to see your point.
But I forget, you have already told me that you have an anti-Israel bias, and so any discussion with you about this matter has no real chance of changing your mind.
No one said otherwise. I just don't agree with your statement that this will lead to wars agains Arab armies, state-vs-state. You keep mentioning Iran as if it has some capacity to teleport it's army to the Israeli border.
*sigh* the wall thing is grade A BS, the Israelis weren't atheists, some were sure, but it wasn't a national thing, secular sure, though The National Religious Party was a key member of government for all 19 years, and they were doves on the war issue, and even Socialist members of government were over joyed in 1967 when the wall was taken, many rushed to see it and pray there, so the idea that Israel from 1948-1967 were a bunch of atheists who didn't care at all is silly
For reasons that have nothing to do with Israel and everything to do with Fatah's government by theft. It doesn't have anything to do with them, but you're under the impression that the will of Arab dictators in trying to stop them would be relevant.
I said I have a bias in favor of the Palestinians. How does this, strictly speaking, translate into being anti-Israeli? Does being for something mean that I must be against something else? As defenders of reprehensible concepts in AH love to say, it's just ALTERNATE HISTORY. IOTL, of course, the Palestinians have been screwed by their leaders as bad as they have by everyone else.
Iran does have Hezbollah and its component militias, as well as other weapons it can use here. Israel will also be facing a much smaller resource base than IOTL and the start of a prolonged oil embargo by Arab states who will be glad to trade with other states, and in a way to protect them against Islamist fanatics may decide as the USA's obviously incapable of stopping its allies from throwing firebombs in rooms full of fine dust that the Soviets at least will give them weapons which would enable them to put a lid on the rise of local Islamism that won't like their new approaches to the USSR.
The founders of the Israeli state who agreed to hand over the "Palestinian state" to Jordan with full respect for the terms of the British partitionrolleyes
certainly were atheists and socialists. Most of the actual religious Jews looked on the state of Israel as a blasphemous abomination. This only changed after Israel carved huge chunks off its neighbors by starting a war that they won in six days, purely for defensive purposes.
As though gaining huge territories guaranteed to be permanently hostile money traps is going to *help* security by some strange logic.
Are you saying that the armies will march off on thier own?
No, you said you have a bias against Israel, Palestinians were not mentioned in that conversation. But never mind that, I'll go with this.
Hezbullah does not exist yet ITTL. And what "other weapons"?
From a quick glance at the list of parties in the first Israeli government I see at least 25% of the parties were religious or "light" religious. So history fail there.