Kipp.
I woudnt make too much fun of it all.
Most of you younger guys are going to live long enough to do national service on Australian soil against an asian intruder.

Did you have a good read of my site?

http://whatwillbecomeofaustraliajackburrell.blogspot.com/

*Theres a high probability, with so many revelations from The Lord (visions, words of knowledge and prophecies), that there is much truth in what has been sent to the christians, as warnings about the sins of the Australian people, of it all coming to pass.

Look at China!
She smiles at everyone and pretends to be a good friend...yet she builds her armies for the outward march. She appears to be the invader of christian prophecies.

God has little love for the abortions, sexual perversion, the porn, the idolatry, our their easy going ways.

Allowing an invader is a 'known way' God has of punishing nations for their sinful ways.

I can't believe you are even allowed to write columns given your complete ignorance about the situation.

Lowenstein likely doesn't read these comments, and thus can't learn from his mistakes, but this is the guy that tried to say Israel was an apartheid state!

Unless the definition has changed to include allowing ethnic groups to live in peace - even when they openly call for your destruction as many Arab-Israeli's do - or

He tried to say they close off roads for Jews, but that was nonsense and I remember his face looking all embarressed when he was on TV, although the stubborn ignoramus wouldn't retract his bizarre statement. The IDF closed off roads for Israeli's, which includes Arabs, when near Palestinian areas.

He is trying to do the same here, grasping for a straw! But Lowenstein, Israel bombing a tunnel smuggling weapons is not the first act of aggression. The terms of the ceasefire are no smuggling of weapons from Egypt!

They broke it, they should be punished, collectively, because just like we hear Muslims say when they bomb our trains (you voted for Blair or Bush) they voted for the genocidal lunatics Hamas.

Shame. What utter bigots. And the fact that Hamas in-bred hick leaders know Israel won't bomb while their 4 wives and litters are around (glad Israel changed that dumb policy, and good on them for bombing mosques storing weapons - all the IDF need to realise now is that mosques themselves are weapons and bomb them too) shows they know IDF values are civilised compared to their own!

Polycarp, if I had known you were placarding melbourne yesterday, I would have been happy to walk with you. Pro-Commie and Pro-Palestinians share my contempt, as well as them sharing a lack of reasoning skills, morals and the qualities which will avoid their early extinction.

As Daggett points out “a tiny fraction are Hamas members, and far fewer fire Qassams - Israel's
justification for their current attacks.”

Two points

1 since the death of Arafat and the decline of his political faction, Fateh, Hamas has become the dominant political force and administers what is loosely recognized as the “government” of Gaza.

The proportion who are actually card-carrying Hamas members is, therefore, mere academic observation.

If so few people are actually firing Qassam rockets

Why cannot the acknowledge government of Gaza, Hamas police their territory and arrest those who fire these rockets?

This is a replay of the apologists for anarchy, very few Irishmen were members of the IRA but it did not stop the UK government sending troops into Northern Ireland to defend UK territorial integrity and curb the excesses of self appointed murderers.

Israel, in bringing down the military on Hamas and anyone who supports it either materially, emotionally or simply by silence against their butcherous attacks on Israel, is acting to defend itself against a lawless and murderous enemy which the world has suffered for far too long.

My observation of history, fighting a war absolutely kills more people immediately but fewer over time, when compared to a half hearted “conditional war”.

I trust Israel will fight this war will all the effort needed to eliminate, once and for all, their enemy and the enemy of all nations who respect the rule of law.

The Palestinians are just another example of a failed state and their failure has not been for the lack of external aid which the west has provided nor the willingness of Israel to negotiate (which has, at times, wavered but has, nonetheless, been sincere) it has been on the historic unreasonable expectations, deceit and intransigence of Palestinians

Taking sides in this conflict is really
not going to help anyone. It's only going to add
fuel to the fire with dire results.

From watching the media, and reading the posts
on this thread - it's obvious that it is time
for a radical rethinking of the conflict.

Both sides are convinced that the other side
doesn't care about its stories or suffering.
As Loewenstein points out, this makes
reconciliation next to impossible.

There's no point in blaming one or the other for this
conflict.

There must be a way for Israel to exist
securely while allowing justice for the Palestinian
people. A sustainable future should involve both
of them. Pointing fingers, inciting further
hatred, achieves nothing constructive.

Israel deserves our support, but not at the expense
of the Palestinians. Palestinians should not be
regarded as 'unpeople,' seemingly unworthy of our
sympathy or understanding. Why should Israeli people
be important, but Palestinian people not? This
attitude results in a skewed perspective on the
conflict.

It is time that Israel and the Palestinians met
face to face, listened to each other's grievances,
kept politics out of the discussion, and negotiated
with honesty. As Loewenstein emphasizes, only then,
and on the condition that both Israel and the
Palestinian state achieve safety and security will
this conflict be resolved.

I can hope and pray, but I won't hold my breath.

Foxy “Taking sides in this conflict is really
not going to help anyone. It's only going to add
fuel to the fire with dire results.”

‘dire results’ must be a rhetorical comment, I can think of little which is more dire than tanks rumbling through your living room, especially when you invited them in by firing rockets at them.

Margaret Thatcher had a couple of things to say about taking sides too

Lightly “Standing in the middle of the road is very dangerous; you get knocked down by the traffic from both sides.”

With more gravitas

“ To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects.”

“Taking sides” is in the nature of people.

If we left everything to those who cannot take sides or come to a decision or resolution, we would still be hunter gatherers, living in caves and the Palestinians would have been extinct years ago, because of inter-clan warfare and the Palestinian strategy, where they consistently switch between firing rockets and adopting the fetal position, thereby securing their position at the bottom of the pecking order,

"It is time that Israel and the Palestinians met
face to face, listened to each other's grievances,
kept politics out of the discussion, and negotiated
with honesty. "

Check your history, you will find the last few decades are littered with the agreements Israel has agreed to and the Palkestinians have rejected. That is why Israel & Jordan, Israel and Egypt have instituted successful peace accords, Jordan kicked Arafat & his rabble out and Egypt maintains a border with Gaza.

Dear Col,

Thank You for responding to my post and for
the quotes from Margaret Thatcher.

I respect the right for you to have your opinion,
however I also believe that there must be as
I stated in my post, a radical re-think on this
issue. No one has a monopoly on suffering.
But only one side is in the position to end
the occupation and to finally recognise that
they both are historically destined to share the
same homeland. A democratic state can not continue
to maintain a brutal occupation over another
people for over 40 years and continue to claim
that they are doing it in the name of 'security.'

Peace should not only be acceptable on Israel's
terms.