The Cellar - View Single Post

Undertoad · 07-23-2006, 07:29 PM

That assumes that the best way to end the current violence is through enforced cease-fire. I don't think you've been listening to what Iran/Hisballah has been saying. They have no reason to cease fire. They believe they will win. They also believe that negotiation is weakness.

Israel pulled back to the '67 borders in two places: Gaza and Lebanon. They have now been attacked on specifically those two borders. Why?

You claim to like peace but you want the terrorists to maintain control of the country they have hijacked, with the 10,000 missiles they have built up and the money of oil-rich Islamist fundamentalist dictators with nukes. I don't think this "peace" you have in mind is going to work out. Sure engagement hasn't solved many problems, but disengagement has to be on both sides bucky, especially in this nukular age where the worst case is unthinkable.

07-23-2006, 07:29 PM	#66
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	That assumes that the best way to end the current violence is through enforced cease-fire. I don't think you've been listening to what Iran/Hisballah has been saying. They have no reason to cease fire. They believe they will win. They also believe that negotiation is weakness. Israel pulled back to the '67 borders in two places: Gaza and Lebanon. They have now been attacked on specifically those two borders. Why? You claim to like peace but you want the terrorists to maintain control of the country they have hijacked, with the 10,000 missiles they have built up and the money of oil-rich Islamist fundamentalist dictators with nukes. I don't think this "peace" you have in mind is going to work out. Sure engagement hasn't solved many problems, but disengagement has to be on both sides bucky, especially in this nukular age where the worst case is unthinkable.