One of my best friend's uncles is a marine, and he's fought in the Gulf War as well as Iraq. From what he's seen, this is how he thinks it'll go down
And that makes him the authority on middle eastern affairs? I served in affers, 2 tours.
It seems you are either misunderstanding me, not reading well, or both.
Likewise.
but simply saying Israel could easily take the rest of the land if need be. Do you disagree with that?
No, and i dont see how that affects the validity of my argument. Youre saying a palestinian/israeli crisis will plunge the world into war. Im merely showing that israel already has taken most of the land at terrible humanitarian cost, and no one has done any more than wag a finger. 'A UN lockdown of the Middle East'. You must be joking. The un has about as much real power as the palestinian authority. That was demonstrated in the gaza crisis and their pathetic reaction to it.
And that makes him the authority on middle eastern affairs? I served in affers, 2 tours
Well I think being in a WAR in the Middle East gives him some credibility on WAR in the Middle East. [/quote]Youre saying a palestinian/israeli crisis will plunge the world into war.
Actually my FRIEND'S UNCLE is saying it MIGHT plunge the world into war.
Im merely showing that israel already has taken most of the land at terrible humanitarian cost, and no one has done any more than wag a finger.[quote]
Yes. So? I'm saying, then why wouldn't they think they could take the rest of Palestine? That mentality would lead to do said taking over, resulting in 0% Palestine. If you think NO ONE would do anything about that, you're mistaken.
Well I think being in a WAR in the Middle East gives him some credibility on WAR in the Middle East.
Fighting as a boot in iraq doesnt suddenly give you expertise on the palestinian israeli conflict. Thats like saying living in britain makes me an expert on german affairs because britain is in europe.
Actually my FRIEND'S UNCLE is saying it MIGHT plunge the world into war.
So you lack conviction in that view. Good for you. Its nonsense.
I'm saying, then why wouldn't they think they could take the rest of Palestine?
Because they dont want it. They have all the nice bits. In case you hadnt noticed from all the tv reports, gaza and the west bank have become impoverished shanty towns.
If you think NO ONE would do anything about that, you're mistaken.
Israeli settlements get bigger by the day. Israel wouldnt go in and take over a massive area of land, but by allowing radical zionists to settle wherever they want, they are slowly but surely taking over whilst the world just watches and wags its finger.
Israeli settlements get bigger by the day. Israel wouldnt go in and take over a massive area of land, but by allowing radical zionists to settle wherever they want, they are slowly but surely taking over whilst the world just watches and wags its finger.
And what happened the last time that we watched a slow occupation while wagging our finger?
And what happened the last time that we watched a slow occupation while wagging our finger?
The difference is, the world was actually concerned with the spread of nazism and german influence. No one really cares much for the palestinians. Seriously, who do you think will stand up to them? So long as the Israelis have the us on side, none of the arab nations will try anything, nor will any western nations who want to keep cosy with the us.
Im not hating on the israelis, im saying it like it is.
What about the radicals?
What about them? Its all posturing. The real radicals who would want to wipe out the israelis have neither the support of their own people, nor the means to do any real damage to the israeli cause.
have neither the support of their own people, nor the means to do any real damage to the israeli cause.
Do the radicals need the support of their own people? They can go places to acquire the means to "do real damage" to Israel. This is getting off topic anyway.
No one wins in war. Everyone suffers no matter what. If nuclear war occurs then most likely one side will launch. The other side will detect it and launch back causing everyone to die. No winners.
Do the radicals need the support of their own people?
If yore talking about starting ww3, then yes. Theres a big difference between terrorist groups using dirty bombs and a state military with avanced weaponry on another country. If it were that simple, ww3 would have started long ago.
If it were that simple, ww3 would have started long ago.
The radicals with the potential to start something as monumental as World War III aren't stupid. If a random devastating terrorist attack happened right now, then it would just be a "terrorist attack" and there would be the usual month-long clamor. If that same terrorist attack were to happen in response to something along the likes of an Israeli invasion taking the rest of Palestine, then the world would panic, there would be MAJOR clamor (lul i like clamor, it's a funny word), and everyone would go overboard. Eventually there would be major conflict before the initial attack is sorted out.
Who would win World War 3? Either the US or Russia. No other country in the world has a significant military force to compare to these two factions. Sure China has a large military, but it cannot properly provide for it. Russia and the US also have two leading advantages over everyone else, their navys, and technological abilities. Both these sides also lead with the top intelligence organizations in the world, in addition to dominance in space communitcation abilities. No longer is it a matter of size, but ability. The nuclear abilities of both sides can destroy the world 100 times over, if nuclear warfare was decided upon. So, if these two sides faced each other, no one would triumph, because there would be nothing substantially left of the earth to conquer and feel triumph over. If these sides, Russia and the US joined forces...the world would be _______<(negative verb)
The radicals with the potential to start something as monumental as World War III aren't stupid.
Well, if starting ww3 is their aim, then yes they are, as they have evidently failed.
If that same terrorist attack were to happen in response to something along the likes of an Israeli invasion taking the rest of Palestine, then the world would panic, there would be MAJOR clamor (lul i like clamor, it's a funny word), and everyone would go overboard. Eventually there would be major conflict before the initial attack is sorted out.
One question, why would the world suddenly panic? 911 will probably be the biggest terrorist attack, and it didnt get anywhere close to starting ww3. I really dont see how ww3 could even be started by a terrorist group. Weve already declared war on 'terror'. Who else are we going to declare war on. Radicals dont affiliate with states, since all states are far too moderate for their liking, so how do you propose that a terrorist attack perpetrated by a small group could ever turn into a full blown world war?
