You are right. But why not put Israel back in the land from where it came (the original piece of land) and explain that if a Jew looks to "expand" the land they will be bombed. And if an Arab looks to blast a Jew they will be bombed back.

Stop giving Israel an upper hand in the form of US dollars and weapons... take both their bombs and and guns away (or give them equal power and let them kill each other). Simple as that. If a Jew dresses up like an Arab and blows up a bus all the Israel land goes to the Arabs by default (Extreme Jews are known to do this, sadly). If an Arab dresses up like Jew to sneak onto a Jewish bus and goes boom -- the same deal.

Done Deal.

(P.S. NO I'm not serious)

US Marines are back in Beirut today, evacuating American residents.

First thing I heard when I turned on the TV this morning was that US Marines had landed in Lebanon. I thought, "Oh, crap! That can't be good." Once they explained that it was an evacuation mission, I felt better about it.

The remarkable thing about it is how unremarkable it seems to have our Marines just showing up in a foreign country. Imagine any other country trying to land their soldiers in the US.

We wouldn't have precipitated the need, as have Lebanon and the Palestinians.

Lebabnon and the US are literally worlds apart.

Thickheaded but surprising Pat Buchanan was lamenting on the Scarborough show t'other night the Israeli bombing of a Lebanese army barracks holding troops who were kicking back and being held out of the conflict so as not to stir things up.

Funny, didn't this start cause Israeli soldiers who were minding their own business were needlessy attacked and killed?

Like Pat said, we've been pretty much giving Israel the green light on everything it's done for the last 50-60 years and that might not have been too smart.

Peragro, I wouldn't expect the self-loathing Americans to understand difference between the two situations.

Lets see, you harbor an enemy who uses your house for a base and what does that make you? An innocent bystander?

You mean like they were bombed in 91 and held back? It does work both ways. They want something back for their restraint then.

It is a violation of the Geneva Conventions to place soldiers or military supplies and equipment in civilian populated areas.

Since we all know that the brave patriots of Hizbollah (like the 'freedom fighters' in Iraq and Afghanistan) follow the conventions, then we know there that there is no way they would do something so despicable as to endanger innocent civilians to hide weapons.

B

Odd bit of bloody trivia whilst browsing the web,aren't we humans wonderful?

http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/rnr/184098587.html

Assuming everything you say is true, we know Isreal would be at fault when civillian casualties mount up. After all, if they hide weapons in civillian areas, those are no longer civillians but also in the cause and therefore fair game. So, if weapons are found in most of the spots Isreal hits, life is good. Carry on. If not, there is a problem. You aid a terrorist, you are also a terrorist. Simple as that. No "Ands, Buts or Ifs".

It's cool. We used to write messages to others when we bombed the enemy in WWII. If the kids are important to the parents, maybe they should try staying out of the business of harboring those people. Lets see, I don't want to be dragged to jail so maybe I won't agree to harbor my cousin who is a known escaped felon.

!!

Well now,that all depends upon "mitigating circumstances"did he rape,murder or steal?and if so,there must be a reason which will absolve him from personal responsibility,so the lawyers say.............:silly:

No doubt.

Well, that is something the mindfux will have to get involved with then. They will probably trace it down to a traumatic event in childhood where Daddy didn't give Sonny a new bicycle. Or maybe Mommy didn't show Sonny enough TLC.