What's new

Israel: Grateful for India's shift of position at UN

Simple.
It's always fun to see a guerrilla force defeat a well armed and funded convention I Arny with air supremacy.
As for Hamas, they simply do not have the firepower to engage Israel and their tactics cause large number if Palestinian civilian casualties.
"defeat"? how did Hizbullah defeat IDF with all south lebanon destroyed and hundreds of it's soldiers dead while hiding in civilian inferstructure
 
"defeat"? how did Hizbullah defeat IDF with all south lebanon destroyed and hundreds of it's soldiers dead while hiding in civilian inferstructure

when you are a guerilla force you cant expect to take on a conventional military and expect to win and march into your enemies country with your non existent tanks and airforce

but they bought northern israel to a standstill

used innovative and daring techniques to repeatedly hit your troops and cause chaos in your ranks

pop up behind your front lines to create confusion and fear

End result being you left Lebanon with a bruised ego and egg on your face your murder and targeting of population centers creating more animosity and bad press across the world
 
when you are a guerilla force you cant expect to take on a conventional military and expect to win and march into your enemies country with your non existent tanks and airforce

but they bought northern israel to a standstill

used innovative and daring techniques to repeatedly hit your troops and cause chaos in your ranks

pop up behind your front lines to create confusion and fear

End result being you left Lebanon with a bruised ego and egg on your face your murder and targeting of population centers creating more animosity and bad press across the world
We left lebanon as victors , while lebanon begged for truce. U can check it out
It's like saying U.S lost to taliban.
If we'd not care about civilian casualtie on the other side, all of lebanon would be destroyed, while hizbullah shooted toward civilian populated areas
 
How about you? You sell weaponry to Myanmar while very well knowing, it will eventually hurt Rohingya muslims.. Are they not muslim enough?

They're too black.

No just kidding, in all seriousness it hasn't been confirmed. Even if it is, they don't use planes to bomb them. And we haven't issued statements supporting them nor do Pakistanis blindly praise them.
 
One of the People on another forum replied to my question with the following answer :

"They should have Created Israel somewhere in India instead of Middle East , That way Most of the Current issues would have never existed ."

What do you think ?
 
We left lebanon as victors , while lebanon begged for truce. U can check it out
It's like saying U.S lost to taliban.
If we'd not care about civilian casualtie on the other side, all of lebanon would be destroyed, while hizbullah shooted toward civilian populated areas

Hezbollah and the Lebanese government are different entities. Hezbollah could have kept fighting longer, but Lebanon wouldn't have been able to take it.

The US did lose to the Taliban, last time I checked the Taliban are still there and still control a sizeable amount of Afghanistan. It's not like the country has become stable either, it's even more violent than it was before NATO invaded. So America along with the rest of it's pals accomplished next to nothing.

No, you didn't destroy Lebanon because that would be bad for PR. Nothing more, nothing less. You make up the most sappy of excuses and expect us to roll with them like we're brain dead. Luckily for you most of us are.
 
One of the People on another forum replied to my question with the following answer :

"They should have Created Israel somewhere in India instead of Middle East , That way Most of the Current issues would have never existed ."

What do you think ?

In India does not sound friendly. :tsk:
 
One of the People on another forum replied to my question with the following answer :

"They should have Created Israel somewhere in India instead of Middle East , That way Most of the Current issues would have never existed ."

What do you think ?

I'd love to see just what the pro Israel Indian lap dogs on this site have to say. Even if they say they would be okay with it, they would be lying.

Anyway, Israel should have been setup in Germany.

"defeat"? how did Hizbullah defeat IDF with all south lebanon destroyed and hundreds of it's soldiers dead while hiding in civilian inferstructure

http://www.counterpunch.org/2006/10/13/how-hezbollah-defeated-israel-2/
 
Hezbollah and the Lebanese government are different entities. Hezbollah could have kept fighting longer, but Lebanon wouldn't have been able to take it.

The US did lose to the Taliban, last time I checked the Taliban are still there and still control a sizeable amount of Afghanistan. It's not like the country has become stable either, it's even more violent than it was before NATO invaded. So America along with the rest of it's pals accomplished next to nothing.

No, you didn't destroy Lebanon because that would be bad for PR. Nothing more, nothing less. You make up the most sappy of excuses and expect us to roll with them like we're brain dead. Luckily for you most of us are.
We didn't destroy lebanon, doesn't mean we couldn't.
Killing/injuring none combatants and damaging civilian infer structure is indeed a bad PR for Israel, but seems that goes the other way for the terror organizations it faces, which target civilians.

I'd love to see just what the pro Israel Indian lap dogs on this site have to say. Even if they say they would be okay with it, they would be lying.

Anyway, Israel should have been setup in Germany.



http://www.counterpunch.org/2006/10/13/how-hezbollah-defeated-israel-2/
Yeah, let's post random links.
I can say that the germans won in ww2 and it will still mean shit, just like ur links
Also, thanks for noting that Hizbullah and Lebanon ain't same entities, only admiting that they're terror organization
 
We didn't destroy lebanon, doesn't mean we couldn't.
Killing/injuring none combatants and damaging civilian infer structure is indeed a bad PR for Israel, but seems that goes the other way for the terror organizations it faces, which target civilians.

Depends on your definition of couldn't. Military wise, yeah you could, but when you add real life politics into the mix you can't. For example, Pakistan can flatten India's major cities. But the repercussions are too great, so we effectively can't. Catch my drift?

Hezbollah and Hamas and other groups are justified in why they attack Israeli civilians. If you kill their civilians, you can't expect them not to do the same. Also, everyone in Israel is a trained soldier too which doesn't further your case. If you really want us to empathise, stop killing their civilians and remove the mandatory conscription.
 
Is that a joke?

No. It's a fair question. They are fighting both.

As for the creation of the state of Israel, its exactly where it should have been.

It's their Holy Land first. If the Christians are ok with the Jews holding it, the Muslims would just need to get in line.

It's a simple hierarchical pecking order.
 
Why does a nation of 1.2 billion plus (India), need the approval,support and encouragement of a flimsy State of less than ten million(Israel) in the Middle East, I wonder? Are Indians that insecure about who or what they are? I see this a lot from Indians, they almost salivate over Israel. Guys, Israel is minute compared to India, yet you are desperate to find some overlap with them. Why? It's actually pathetic don't you think? (rhetorical question, no need to give stupid answers).

Israel is key supplier of military technologies for India
Being neutral in issues of importance to them is the least India can do
 
Back
Top Bottom