[luke warm]

israel just blew up the palestinian foreign ministry (albeit at 1:30 am - i think doing so at 4:00 pm might have carried a slightly sterner message)... they also have blown up bridges, etc, in lebanon reported here

if their most recent captured soldiers aren't returned, do you think they will attack syria? iran to follow? fwiw, and i'm far from sure about this, i believe egypt will come in on the side of israel, but only at the very last possible moment

[hrothgar]

luke warm, on Jul 13 2006, 02:21 AM, said:

i believe egypt will come in on the side of israel, but only at the very last possible moment

sniffing a lot of glue these days?

[luke warm]

hrothgar, on Jul 12 2006, 06:26 PM, said:

luke warm, on Jul 13 2006, 02:21 AM, said:

i believe egypt will come in on the side of israel, but only at the very last possible moment

sniffing a lot of glue these days?

strangely enough, i never got into that... guess there were so many more options back in the day... in any event, egypt has given signs of being the sanest of those who seem hell bent on being destroyed, to the point where they may actually choose self preservation... we'll see, i guess

[hrothgar]

luke warm, on Jul 13 2006, 02:31 AM, said:

in any event, egypt has given signs of being the sanest of those who seem hell bent on being destroyed, to the point where they may actually choose self preservation... we'll see, i guess

Egypt is tettering on the brink of a revolution. Any kind of military action in support of Israel would lead to massive expressions of popular unrest. i wouldn't be surpised to see regime fall.

I don't think that Egypt would attack Israel.
I'd be SHOCKED to see any overt support...

[helene_t]

hrothgar, on Jul 13 2006, 01:26 AM, said:

sniffing a lot of glue these days?

Interesting. I forgot to include that option in the "why are the media obsessed" poll.

[Winstonm]

helene_t, on Jul 13 2006, 03:06 AM, said:

hrothgar, on Jul 13 2006, 01:26 AM, said:

sniffing a lot of glue these days?

Interesting. I forgot to include that option in the "why are the media obsessed" poll.

BTW, the street slang term is called "huffing."

[luke warm]

a quote from a syrian citizen: "The Israelis wouldn't be stupid enough, would they? If they hit Syria, that's World War III," he added.

do you think that's true? why or why not? from the BBC

[Winstonm]

luke warm, on Jul 17 2006, 04:44 PM, said:

a quote from a syrian citizen: "The Israelis wouldn't be stupid enough, would they? If they hit Syria, that's World War III," he added.

do you think that's true? why or why not? from the BBC

I think the threat for WWIII is based on oil - I can't say how much oil production Syria provides, but if somehow Iran were pulled into this conflict all hell could break lose.

If there is a WWIII, it may not be so "organized" as WWII but may be a war of opportunity. If somehow the U.S. and its allies were pulled into a second front war with Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, the North Koreans might view that as an opportune time to attack South Korean. Any retaliation there from the U.S. could draw China into the war. With an economy in desparate need of oil and the U.S. trying to fight a 3-pronged war, China could then move to disrupt the Russian oil supply to Israel for their own use, bringing Russia into the fray.

This is all somewhat odd in that to a degree it follows the course of Armegeddon described in ancient literature. Who knows, maybe those old dead guys were right.

[luke warm]

nice analysis... if n.k. did attack s.k., the u.s. will almost be forced to respond... if not us, japan will... i doubt that's what the syrian quoted in that article had in mind, but it sounds feasible to me

and yeah, it all does sound sorta biblical, eh? gog and magog, the eagle from the west (us?)... the return of Jesus... sheesh

[Winstonm]

luke warm, on Jul 17 2006, 07:11 PM, said:

nice analysis... if n.k. did attack s.k., the u.s. will almost be forced to respond... if not us, japan will... i doubt that's what the syrian quoted in that article had in mind, but it sounds feasible to me

and yeah, it all does sound sorta biblical, eh? gog and magog, the eagle from the west (us?)... the return of Jesus... sheesh

Hi Jimmy.

Thanks for the nice words in the other post. I, too, have no problem debating with reasonable people and listening to opposing views - as long as they are like you and realize that they are only views and could be wrong.

I could be totally wrong as well.

However, my brother is a U.S. Army Colonel, and he told me that the condition of our armed services are such that we would be hard pressed to go to war in two theatres - three would be impossible.

Middle East, North Korea, and China/Russia. Adds up to 3. Yikes.

[luke warm]

right, even with the mightiest military force in history it's possible to be stretched too thin... that explains my statement in another thread about nuclear war... it also explains why i believe there will never be peace, not only in that region but on earth

[Al_U_Card]

Winstonm, on Jul 17 2006, 05:04 PM, said:

This is all somewhat odd in that to a degree it follows the course of Armegeddon described in ancient literature. Who knows, maybe those old dead guys were right.

Well, Megedoh being an ancient trail stop on a caravan route through palestine that saw a lot of waring factions over the centuries, conflict there is just a "reference point" like hauling coals to Newcastle etc.

The world has been at war for a very long time.....peace will only break out when all of the violent people have been killed.....

Besides the hamitic and semitic people kill each other out of habit more than necessity.

[luke warm]

Al_U_Card, on Jul 18 2006, 03:23 PM, said:

peace will only break out when all of the violent people have been killed.....

well that's certainly one view of when peace will break out...