Go Back  

Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria 

Current Rating:

Join NowJoin Now
 
  #1  
Old 01-31-2013, 03:20 AM
johnleeknoefler's Avatar
johnleeknoefler
Offline:
So Fucking Banned
Poster Rank:229
Male
Join Date: May 2010
Contributions: 26
 
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss3866
Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria

Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria
Quote:
By FARNAZ FASSIHI, JULIAN E. BARNES and SAM DAGHER
Israel bombed a suspected shipment of antiaircraft missiles in Syria on Wednesday, according to regional and U.S. officials, in its most ambitious strike inside its neighbor's territory in nearly two chaotic years of civil war there.

The early-morning strike in a border area west of Damascus targeted a convoy of trucks carrying Russian-made SA-17 missiles to Hezbollah, the anti-Israel Shiite militant and political group in Lebanon, according to a Western official briefed on the raid.

Israel launched an airstrike against a convoy of trucks moving near the Lebanon-Syria border Tuesday, a senior U.S. official and a Lebanese security official said.

Israeli officials declined to comment on the report, and to a Syrian allegation that Israel had bombed a Syrian military facility.

A strike draws Israel further into Syria's conflict—a civil war that has already deepened the region's divides as its powers have taken sides with arms and funding. It also marked a challenge to Iran, which has backed and financed Hezbollah.
[IMG]Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria[/IMG]
"An attack of any kind is a major escalation," said Timor Goksel, an expert on Hezbollah and a professor at American University in Beirut. "Why would Israel do this out of the blue?"

The answer, according to several Western officials and security analysts, is that Israel took a calculated risk that Syria's government, strained by its own internal war, would choose not to retaliate. Meanwhile, Hezbollah and Iran—both facing coming elections and financial challenges—would also be unlikely to strike back at Israel now.

In addition to taking out weapons that could be used by Hezbollah against Israeli warplanes in a future conflict, Israel sent what amounted to a message of warning to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Iran against attempting to transfer any chemical or biological weapons to Hezbollah, U.S. and Western officials said. The use of such weapons has been singled out by President Barack Obama as a "red line" that could trigger a U.S. intervention.

Syria maintained that the accounts of a strike on an arms convoy near the country's border with Lebanon were wrong. Instead, Syria's military said, Israeli jets had attacked a military facility near Damascus.


"Israeli warplanes violated our airspace at dawn today and directly struck one of the scientific research centers responsible for elevating resistance and self-defense capabilities in the area of Jamraya in the Damascus countryside," Syria's military said in a statement carried by the official Sana news agency. The attack killed two workers and injured five others, it said, and "caused significant material damage and the destruction of the complex" and an adjacent parking lot.

Syrian activists say the Jamraya site is in a mountainous area of military facilities and training camps located on a heavily guarded road just off the main Damascus-Beirut highway.

Later Wednesday, a U.S. official said the accounts of two targets—a convoy of weapons, and a military site—weren't mutually exclusive.

The U.S. believes Israeli warplanes bombed a Hezbollah-bound convoy of antiaircraft missiles, U.S. officials said. The vehicles may have been close to a military facility, they said, cautioning their information remained incomplete.

Tensions in the broader region have been building for days. On Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel is vigilantly watching the disintegration of Syria and the fate of its "deadly weapons.'' Israel's army deployed an Iron Dome missile-defense system in northern Israel that same day.

Two days later, four Israeli jets flew low over villages in southern Lebanon, a violation of the country's airspace, according to the Lebanese military. A spokesman for the United Nations' peacekeeping forces in Lebanon said the group had recorded a higher-than-usual number of Israeli jets entering Lebanon's airspace in the past few days.

Hezbollah keeps a stockpile of weapons in military bases in Syria located near the Lebanese border, according to security officials in Iran and Lebanon.

As Syria's security has deteriorated, Hezbollah has grown increasingly concerned that its weapons cache could fall into the hands of rebels, said Gen. Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese security official.

"Hezbollah has decided that it's no longer safe to keep the weapons sheltered inside Syria," Gen. Hanna said, adding they want to "bring them back before it's too late."

For months, Israeli officials have also spoken of the risk that Syria's weapons caches might fall into the hands of Hezbollah amid the civil war, and vowed to act if necessary. Israel has worried about specific types of weapons that would mark a "game changing" shift on the battlefield in a future conflict with the Shiite militia. Though most attention has been focused on Syria's chemical weapon stockpile, if Hezbollah were to obtain the SA-17 missiles, it would limit Israel's air superiority in Lebanon, said analysts.

Hezbollah denied that Israel had attacked a convoy of its weapons in Syria. "We have no information about this issue. We are not concerned at all," said Hezbollah spokesman Ibrahim Mousawi.

An attack on Syria would be a relative rarity for Israeli forces. In November, Israel said its forces had targeted and hit a Syrian military vehicle after a Syrian mortar shell landed in the Golan Heights. The retaliatory attack was the only previously reported Israeli attack inside Syria in its nearly two years of internal conflict.

For much longer, though, Israel has been tied to attacks aimed at blocking weapons from reaching the country's regional foes. Israel is widely believed to have attacked a site in Syria in 2007 that was suspected of being a nuclear facility under construction. The Israeli government has declined to confirm or deny that strike.

In late October, Sudanese officials accused Israel of using fighter jets to attack a weapons factory inside Sudan. Israel has viewed Sudan as a conduit for arms to the Palestinian militant group Hamas, according to regional intelligence analysts. Israel didn't comment publicly on the strike, which came about two weeks before Israel and Hamas fought an eight-day battle in the West Bank.

"Israel has a long history of intercepting and preventing weapons that are on their way to terror groups, whether it is Hamas or Hezbollah,'' said Gerald Steinberg, a professor of political science at Bar Ilan University.

Israel has typically maintained silence amid allegations of pre-emptive attacks, a stance Israeli analysts and Western officials alike view as an effort to avoid escalating hostilities.

"The usual way this plays out is the Israelis won't take credit, whoever suffered the effects will divert attention or try to down play it," said Aram Nerguizian, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a nonpartisan think tank. "The Israelis got their point across. If anyone had any questions that Israel would act on what it perceives to be its red lines…now they have an answer."

Quote:
—Adam Entous, Joshua Mitnick and Nada Raad contributed to this article.
Quote:
Write to Farnaz Fassihi at farnaz.fassihi@wsj.com, Julian E. Barnes at julian.barnes@wsj.com and Sam Dagher at sam.dagher@wsj.com
Quote:
A version of this article appeared January 31, 2013, on page A1 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria.

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-31-2013, 07:42 AM
mengala's Avatar
mengala
Online
My Rank: MASTER SERGEANT
Poster Rank:382
Join Date: Apr 2010
 
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
2/20 13/20
Today Posts
2/11 sssss1894
Re: Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria

Syria did not attack Israel, Israel attacked Syria. This is against the United Nations Charter.

Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mengala For This Useful Post:
fenek, Rackas321
  #3  
Old 01-31-2013, 07:44 AM
mengala's Avatar
mengala
Online
My Rank: MASTER SERGEANT
Poster Rank:382
Join Date: Apr 2010
 
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
2/20 13/20
Today Posts
2/11 sssss1894
Re: Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria

The only reason israel had the guts to attack syria is because the syrian governments hands were tied fighting the fsa terrorists. israel and the rebel terrorists are ally's.

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-31-2013, 08:35 AM
fenek's Avatar
fenek
Offline:
My Rank: CORPORAL
Poster Rank:1231
Male
Join Date: May 2011
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 11/20
Today Posts
0/11 ssssss308
Re: Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria

It sucks that I believe Syria's side of the story over Israel's. By the way, the article says that Israel has increased the number of planes flying in Lebanon's airspace. Can you imagine a country that neighbors you constantly using your airspace without permission?

Israels overall strategic objectives in the Middle East are constantly being undermined by its own paranoia. Even if the country whose sovereignty you're constantly violating is a shit, bad country (like Sudan...), it does nothing but perpetuate anger and ultimately inflames the conflict. And for what?

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-31-2013, 08:39 AM
mengala's Avatar
mengala
Online
My Rank: MASTER SERGEANT
Poster Rank:382
Join Date: Apr 2010
 
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
2/20 13/20
Today Posts
2/11 sssss1894
Re: Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria

Quote:
Originally Posted by fenek View Post
It sucks that I believe Syria's side of the story over Israel's. By the way, the article says that Israel has increased the number of planes flying in Lebanon's airspace. Can you imagine a country that neighbors you constantly using your airspace without permission?

Israels overall strategic objectives in the Middle East are constantly being undermined by its own paranoia. Even if the country whose sovereignty you're constantly violating is a shit, bad country (like Sudan...), it does nothing but perpetuate anger and ultimately inflames the conflict. And for what?
The truth is that israel is a warmongering racist apartheid state.

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-31-2013, 10:10 AM
johnleeknoefler's Avatar
johnleeknoefler
Offline:
So Fucking Banned
Poster Rank:229
Male
Join Date: May 2010
Contributions: 26
 
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss3866
Re: Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria

Quote:
Originally Posted by mengala View Post
Leading fundamentalist rabbis gather in Israel to defend the publication of a book, Torat Ha'Melech, that attempted to provide halakhic justification for the killing of non-Jews, including innocent children and families. The gathering exposed not only the ferocious racism of a swath of Israel's pro-settlement rabbinate, but the powerlessness of the government to stop them.
Unfortunately you are in the Current Events section and way off topic. Your other posts are at least on topic even if in error and bias toward the Islamic slant.
In addition you lie about the source of the book and fail to mention that it was widely rejected by not only the entire Rabbinate but the Nation of Israel in majority and the government of Israel in whole.

Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-31-2013, 10:21 AM
mengala's Avatar
mengala
Online
My Rank: MASTER SERGEANT
Poster Rank:382
Join Date: Apr 2010
 
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
2/20 13/20
Today Posts
2/11 sssss1894
Re: Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria

[quote=johnleeknoefler;3435068]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mengala View Post
Leading fundamentalist rabbis gather in Israel to defend the publication of a book, Torat Ha'Melech, that attempted to provide halakhic justification for the killing of non-Jews, including innocent children and families. The gathering exposed not only the ferocious racism of a swath of Israel's pro-settlement rabbinate, but the powerlessness of the government to stop them. QUOTE]

Unfortunately you are in the Current Events section and way off topic. Your other posts are at least on topic even if in error and bias toward the Islamic slant.
That video was in jerusalem and was taped by a jew, so there is no bias slant. Just the truth.

Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-31-2013, 10:29 AM
mengala's Avatar
mengala
Online
My Rank: MASTER SERGEANT
Poster Rank:382
Join Date: Apr 2010
 
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
2/20 13/20
Today Posts
2/11 sssss1894
Re: Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria

Russia condemns Israeli air strike on Syria

Quote:
Russia says it is very concerned about reports of an Israeli air attack inside Syria near Damascus and any such action would amount to unacceptable military interference.

"If this information is confirmed, then we are dealing with unprovoked attacks on targets on the territory of a sovereign country, which blatantly violates the UN charter and is unacceptable, no matter the motives to justify it," the Russian foreign ministry said in a statement on Thursday.

Syrian state television said that military command had confirmed a "scientific research centre" north-west of Damascus was struck at dawn on Wednesday, causing damage. Two people were killed and five wounded in the attack on the site, it said, which was engaged in "raising the level of resistance and self-defence".

US officials quoted in the New York Times said they believed the target was a convoy carrying sophisticated anti-aircraft weaponry and Israel had notified
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...i-strike-syria

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-31-2013, 10:31 AM
MCBR's Avatar
MCBR
Offline:
So Fucking Banned
Poster Rank:76
Join Date: Sep 2009
 
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Quoted: 2350 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 15/20
Today Posts
0/11 ssss12857
Re: Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria

Nothing will happen. At most bigmouthed Iran comes in and gets buttraped by UN.

Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-31-2013, 10:37 AM
johnleeknoefler's Avatar
johnleeknoefler
Offline:
So Fucking Banned
Poster Rank:229
Male
Join Date: May 2010
Contributions: 26
 
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss3866
Re: Israeli Jets Blast Arms Shipment Inside Syria

A summery and frank appraisal of Toras Ha-Melech

Quote:
Torah and Military Inethics


July 14, 2011


I. Military Ethics

Torat HaMelech, a book published last year by two rabbis in Israel, has been lambasted by Israeli media and government as racist and an incitement to violence. Confident that most if not all commentators on the book failed to understand, and probably even to read, the book, I set out to discover for myself the truth about its contents. While the media got a lot wrong about the book and failed entirely to explain its creative thesis, they were right about the book being racist. But before we get to that, I’d like to discuss the book’s goals and methods.

Contrary to media reports, Torat HaMelech is not about when or how Jews may kill gentiles. The book is about military ethics — when and how a soldier may kill. The underlying question of military ethics has long attracted the attention of thinkers because of its perplexing nature: What could possibly justify the killing of another person? If war is ever ethically allowed — admittedly a big “if” but one that the majority of humanity has historically accepted — there must be some coherent distinction between the circumstances in which killing is and is not allowed.

Jewish thinkers have struggled to build military ethics based on Jewish sources. Some, such as R. Shaul Yisraeli (Amud Ha-Yemini, no. 16, ch. 5), contend that international convention — not what largely ignored laws say but what standing armies do — obtains halakhic sanction. Others, such as R. Menachem Shach (cited by R. Broyde, below n. 1), attempt to construct an ethic based on Torah laws. (R. Michael Broyde’s wonderfully concise survey of Jewish military ethics can be found here: link, p. 19 in the PDF.) Torat HaMelech follows R. Shach’s path of considering war to be a generalized scenario of the Talmudic scenario of an encounter with a dangerous foe but with a twist, one that will be a lasting contribution to the literature if the book can survive its other significant flaws.

II. Universal Military Ethics

In their search for a Jewish military ethic, the authors of Torat HaMelech first set out to build a universal military ethic based on the seven Noahide commandments. Analyzing at length the Noahide prohibition of murder, the authors unveil a comprehensive delineation of when a gentile may kill in a time of war and other duress. They write dispassionately, which can be understood as callousness but could equally be interpreted as a thoughtful commitment to textual argumentation rather than emotion. I would have compromised somewhat and allowed my emotions to poke through on occasion. I cannot, however, fault the authors for deciding differently.

After building a universal ethic, the authors argue that when Jews battle gentiles, Jews are subject to the Noahide, rather than the later Torah, prohibition of murder. This bold move, based on a debatable but defensible Talmudic interpretation, allows them to level the playing field so that the Torah permits Jews and gentiles to fight on equal terms. This is all clever and worthy of discussion. However, the universal military ethic the authors construct is horrifically liberal when it comes to killing civilians — both Jews and gentiles.

III. Targeting Civilians

A Jews is obligated to sanctify God’s name and suffer martyrdom rather than violate certain prohibitions including murder. This obligation does not apply to gentiles but, despite that, authorities debate whether a gentile may kill an innocent bystander in order to save his own life. The authors discuss this debate but conclude that all agree that if the bystander is not entirely innocent, if he even offers some kind of moral support to the enemy, then all authorities allow a gentile to kill such a person in order to save his own life. Translating this into the terms of modern warfare, the authors allow soldiers or anyone in danger to kill any enemy civilian who supports the enemy war effort. This is not an issue of Jew or gentile but a universal military ethic that permits killing civilians. The authors offer a list of target priorities (p. 216), with enemy soldiers at the top, but they justify targeting innocent civilians if it will tangibly help the war effort. This is not just a matter of collateral damage, a topic of much debate in contemporary military ethics, but specifically targeting civilians.

I saw one defender of the book state that it is a compilation of different views. This is only partially correct. The authors suggest multiple paths to reach their destination allowing the targeting of enemy civilians. In addition to the above approach, they “kitchen sink” the issue. They do not, however, quote mainstream views that are more restrictive regarding civilians. While they quote R. Shaul Yisraeli’s essay on this subject multiple times, they only utilize him regarding specific points and not his advocacy of international military conventions. This is quite suprising because, as R. Michael Broyde states, “I can find no other serious halakhic authority who assumes that the halakhot of war are identical to the rules of personal self-defense.”

The authors’ “kitchen sink” views range from the extremely permissive to the horrifically bloodthirsty. I found only one parenthetical mention (p. 182) in the entire book of the concept that you may only kill a rodef, a pursuer, if you cannot stop him with lesser means. Surely that concept is relevant in discussing civilian supporters of a war. Aside from non-military means of stopping the efforts, what about capture?

One of the most bizarre “kitchen sink” arguments goes as follows (p. 115): A government — Jewish or gentile — can kill its citizens because otherwise how can it force them to serve as soldiers. Therefore, an army can kill enemy civilians because if those civilians support the enemy, they are dangerous. And if they support us, then they count as our civilians whom we are allowed to kill. Understandably, the authors bring no Torah source for such a disturbing argument.

Another difficult argument is based on the idea that anyone may serve as witness, judge and executioner to a gentile who violates severe prohibitions. This flies in the face of Tosafos (Avodah Zarah 26b), according to whom the Chazon Ish (Bava Kamma 10:15) rules, that a gentile must be judged in court. If a soldier witnesses a gentile committing a religious crime, the authors argue, he may shoot to kill regardless of the circumstances. The practical implications of such a liberal policy are troublingly broad.

IV. Evaluation

The book is an uneven mix of textual and logical argumentation. In some sections, the authors quote a plethora of post-Talmudic commentaries and codes who continue the Talmudic discussion. However, in many other sections — perhaps the majority of the book — the authors quote few if any authorities and rely entirely on Talmudic sources when available and otherwise logical arguments. I noticed that they do this even when post-Talmudic sources on the subject abound. And sometimes the authors fail to cite crucial authorities who disagree with their basic point.

The authors’ primary military ethic is interesting and deserving of consideration. However, not only is their adoption of a minority view while omitting mention of more mainstream views clumsy, their extreme application and additional arguments are simply shocking.

V. Racism

The media and courts have accused the authors of writing a racist book. As I began to read the book, I was hoping to find that they are wrong. However, despite my attempt at a generous reading, I am forced to conclude that they are correct, even if some of their examples miss the mark. It is important to note that the authors emphasize and reiterate that a Jew is absolutely forbidden to kill a gentile. The first chapter is devoted to explaining why, but is preceded with a chapter summary (as are all chapters) unequivocally stating that a Jew may not kill a gentile. In general, it need not even be said but the authors’ construction of a universal military ethic requires them to first place Jews and gentiles within the same Noahide prohibition.

As an addendum to this chapter, the authors offer a kabbalistic interpretation of the Talmudic concept that anything prohibited to a gentile must also be prohibited to a Jew. While the authors use kabbalistic distinctions between Jewish and gentile souls, they do much to bridge that gap in a spirit that is surprisingly lacking in racism (e.g. pp. 42-44).

However, chapter four provides incontrovertible evidence of racism. In this chapter, the authors argue that Jewish lives are more important than gentile. Not more important to us because we take care of our own before we take care of others, but simply objectively more important. They prove this in section three by ignoring the Ramban’s view that we violate Shabbos to save the life of a resident gentile (ger toshav — see his commentary to Lev. 25:45 and the back of Sefer Ha-Mitzvos, omitted aseih 16), according to whom R. Nachum Rabinowitz holds is the halakhah (Melumedei Milchamah no. 43). Omitting this important datum, they reason that since a Jew’s life overrides Shabbos and a gentile’s does not, therefore a Jew’s life is always more important than a gentile’s. Aside from the fact that not all Jewish lives override Shabbos and some gentile lives do, the rationale underlying all of this has nothing to do with the importance of lives (see here: link). This is simply poor logic based on partial information.

Some have interpreted this chapter to mean that the authors advocate killing gentiles in order to harvest their organs to save Jewish lives. This is an understandable misreading but incorrect; the last footnote in the chapter (p. 169 n. 16) makes it clear that they do not advocate such an approach (see also p. 199 n. 31). Nevertheless, they use this disturbing principle to justify killing gentile civilians during war, even targeting innocent children to affect their parents, in order to save the lives of Jewish soldiers or civilians.

Torah HaMelech proposes an indecent military ethic that permits the strategic killing of anyone in an enemy nation. No measure of compassion exists, not for infants or even sympathetic civilians, in pursuing military victory. The racist undertones within the book compound its unworthiness, making it a painful and unrewarding read. While the authors offer some worthwhile halakhic interpretations, I question whether any but the boldest scholars will quote the book due to its many flaws.

[Note: I am using the transliteration of the book's Hebrew title that the media has adopted. I would normally write the title as Toras Ha-Melekh.]
So we have absolute proof that Mengala is lying. Or simply parroting the medias blatant lies and anti-Israel bias. Condemning and ascribing blame on an entire nation and it's people because of the words written by two of it's members is certainly racist and in Mengala's case made more so disgusting after it is well known that the mainstream media, the government, the Rabbinate and the people of that nation have completely rejected those views. And here I thought racism was not allowed on DR.

Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to johnleeknoefler For This Useful Post:
icheerthebull

Powered by vBulletin Copyright 2000-2010 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO