Re: Iran vs Israel
 

This thread is quite remarkable.

Question for you, zipo:

Could Iran, using "terrorism", "wipe Israel off the map"?

Re: Iran vs Israel
 

>>Question for you, zipo:

Could Iran, using "terrorism", "wipe Israel off the map"?<<

Well, you are confounding the issue here.

First, Cyrus categorically refutes the notion that asymmetrical warfare is warfare, and that it can be carried out by Iran's military. This is obviously absurd - it is clear that he persists in this line of 'reasoning' only because his factual arguments have been soundly refuted.

The issue of Iran's president proclaiming that Iran's goal is to (quote) "wipe Israel off the map" was only raised to clarify Iran's intent. Honestly - how can one seriously deny that this is Iran's intent? When a head of state makes such a declamation, is this not to be taken seriously?

As far as whether state sponsored terrorism can "wipe Israel off the map", this was not the issue raised in the thread. Cyrus clearly asserted that Iran was not a military threat to Israel - I merely pointed out that state sponsored terrorism is indeed a military threat.

If you wish to weigh in refuting this point, go right ahead.

Re: Iran vs Israel
 

[ QUOTE ]
A terrorist threat is a military threat if you consider the result of both is a big pile of dead Israelis

[/ QUOTE ]

So, a military threat is considered a terrorist thread when you consider the result of both is a big pile of dead palestinians --- ooops ragheads dont count!

Re: \"Wipe Israel Off the Map\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
It makes me wonder, sometimes, for whom these sorts of statements are really intended

[/ QUOTE ]

Quit wondering. You answered your own question.

Re: Zipo wet
 

[ QUOTE ]
Oh it's a veritable theatre of the absurd. QUICKLY! Hide in the basement! The Iranians are coming -- asymetrically! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

There are lots of New Yorkers who would have been glad of a warning of imminent assymetrical danger.

Re: Zipo wet
 

[ QUOTE ]
When O when is MMMMMM going to weigh in?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been reading this thread with interest, but have refrained from commenting, as the list of topics spelled out were not the issue I was arguing with Cyrus; also I have discussed many of these issues in previous threads, and have no wish to rehash old ground while I am busy trying to win a jackpot.

I will however note that Cyrus is all wet, because Iran and their minion army Hezbollah obviously pose a potentially serious threat to Israel, and are capable of inflicting severe damage if they so decide. Just because they could not (at present) defeat Israel, does not mean they could not harm Israel severely.

Hezbollah is an extremely well-trained, well-organized, and well-equipped terrorist army, and may in fact pose a potentially graver threat to even the United States, than al-Qaeda.

Re: Iran vs Israel
 

The very purpose of a State is that it's citizens' lives, Arab or Jewish, are more valuable than the lives of non-citizens.

Re: Iran vs Israel
 

[ QUOTE ]
>>Question for you, zipo:

Could Iran, using "terrorism", "wipe Israel off the map"?<<

Well, you are confounding the issue here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you refusing to answer the question?


[ QUOTE ]
First, Cyrus categorically refutes the notion that asymmetrical warfare is warfare, and that it can be carried out by Iran's military. This is obviously absurd - it is clear that he persists in this line of 'reasoning' only because his factual arguments have been soundly refuted.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not interested in your interpretation of what Cyrus has said. His statements are in this thread for all to see, as are yours. I'm quite certain that people can judge for themselves who has the better of the argument.


[ QUOTE ]
The issue of Iran's president proclaiming that Iran's goal is to (quote) "wipe Israel off the map" was only raised to clarify Iran's intent. Honestly - how can one seriously deny that this is Iran's intent? When a head of state makes such a declamation, is this not to be taken seriously?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is completely irrelevant to my question.

[ QUOTE ]
As far as whether state sponsored terrorism can "wipe Israel off the map", this was not the issue raised in the thread. Cyrus clearly asserted that Iran was not a military threat to Israel - I merely pointed out that state sponsored terrorism is indeed a military threat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you refusing to answer the question?

Re: Iran vs Israel
 

Why are you turning a complex issue that affects millions of lives into a simple question?

If Iran could kill one Israeli with terrorism, doesn't the Israeli government have a responsibility to do whatever it takes to prevent the death of that Israeli?

It must be fun to criticize everyone while living in a state that has no real military threats.

Re: Iran vs Israel
 

>>Why are you refusing to answer the question? <<

I gave a comprehensive, cogent reply to your question in context, giving you the benefit of the doubt that you were not trolling.

You are no longer entitled to the benefit of that doubt.

Gamblor weighs in (no, really)
 

[ QUOTE ]
If Iran could kill one Israeli with terrorism, doesn't the Israeli government have a responsibility to do whatever it takes to prevent the death of that Israeli?


[/ QUOTE ]

Therefore, and in full agreement with Zipo's position too, 1 Israeli equals 10,000 Israelis, i.e. the preventive measures and the response for the murder of one Israeli by a suicide bomber are the same measures and response for 10,000 Israelis killed in battle. OK, I begin to understand how the pair of you equate "military threat" with "terrorist threat"...

You two should be teaching at West Point. Confuse the hell outta the cadets!.. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

MMMMMM weighs in (he does, look!)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Iran and their minion army Hezbollah obviously pose a potentially serious threat to Israel, and are capable of inflicting severe damage if they so decide. Just because they could not (at present) defeat Israel, does not mean they could not harm Israel severely.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are more clever than Zipo. That, or you had the benefit of reading our li'l exchange before ..."weighin' in". [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

You were careful not to put the word "military" in there -- as in, "military threat". Good job.

Yes, Iran is a serious worry for Israel, on account of Tehran's inherently unstable, autocratic, fanatic, fundamentalist regime and the mullahs' assistance to various anti-Israeli groups, including terrorist groups. And if Iran acruired nukes, the whole region will be threatened - and not just Israel. (Note that, in this very thread, I have already said as much. But the fanatics' eyes tend to glaze over and ignore text when it doesn't agree with their pre-ordained world view.)

HOWEVER, a military threat is something else completely!

This whole sub-thread started when Zipo, moronically, started insisting that
-- a terrorist threat is the same as a military threat, and
-- Iran is a neighbor to Israel (it's in the same 'hood, y'all! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img])

Just to prick once more the grunting fanatics' skin, I will repeat it : Israel is under no military threat from its neighbors because israel is militarily stronger than all its neighbors combined!

...Now prepare yourselves for a serious, serious howler, and I mean serious :

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="brown">Hezbollah ... may in fact pose a potentially graver threat to the United States, than al-Qaeda.</font>

[/ QUOTE ]
OK, perhaps others know of 2+2 posts in 2005 with a higher calibre of outrageousness. I don't. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

For me, that is our MMMMM Post Of The Year, right there. It goes into the Archives, immediately.

Re: MMMMMM weighs in (he does, look!)
 

Cyrus, Hezbollah represents both a terrorist AND a military threat to Israel. Why are you defining "military threat" only as one which might completely defeat a nation? Methinks you are taking too narrow a view of the meaning of the word "military".

Hezbollah is both an army and a terrorist organization--and as such, they represent both threats to Israel.

[ QUOTE ]
.Now prepare yourselves for a serious, serious howler, and I mean serious :

[ QUOTE ]

Hezbollah ... may in fact pose a potentially graver threat to the United States, than al-Qaeda.

[/ QUOTE ]


OK, perhaps others know of 2+2 posts in 2005 with a higher calibre of outrageousness. I don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are completely ignorant of such things, obviously, good Cyrus. There have long been made intelligence assessments of the potential for Hezbollah to harm the USA. Suffice to say, that while Hezbollah is not now actively prosecuting such plans, their potential capability for terrorist attacks against the USA is actually greater than that of al-Qaeda.

Hezbollah is more organized, better trained, more disciplined, and better equipped. Their army is BETTER than those al-Qaeda terrorists who were training in Afghaninistan prior to the U.S. assault on their base there. Their army is fully schooled in terror tactics as well. Also, they are not actively being hunted down right now, so they aren't laboring under the same kind of pressures al-Qaeda must face.

Fortunately, Hezbollah has not taken it upon themselves to send suicide bombers to the USA...or to do far worse. If they did so decide, they would potentially pose a greater danger than al-Qaeda, because they are simply more capable, as organizations go. By the way, Hezbollah has long had clandestine operatives in the USA. Hezbollah's slogan is "Death To America!" For whatever reasons, though, they have not begun a serious terror onslaught against the USA. That DOESN'T mean that they aren't capable of it.

Re: MMMMMM weighs in (he does, look!)
 

Cyrus, I just want to commend you on your rhetorical techniques. Defining the terms as you see fit to justify your predetermined conclusions. It is you who should be a teacher. In fact your greatest opportunity for success is probably in the ad industry, since marketing is all about deceptively framing the pitch so that a substandard product is made to seem superior to one that is actually better. Bravo.

Re: Iran vs Israel
 

[ QUOTE ]
&gt;&gt;Why are you refusing to answer the question? &lt;&lt;

I gave a comprehensive, cogent reply to your question in context, giving you the benefit of the doubt that you were not trolling.

You are no longer entitled to the benefit of that doubt.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must be joking. You most decidely did not answer the question. Instead, you gave your spin of this thread. Now, rather than answer, you are attacking me.

The fact is that rather than take on Cyrus's overall point about the type of nation-state Israel is, you chose to engage in semantic nitpicking about the definition of "neighbor" and "military threat". And that's fine. If you want to debate those points, knock yourself out.

But don't think for a second that readers can't see what you're doing.

Re: MMMMMM weighs in (he does, look!)
 

in regards to hizbollah constituting a militry threat to israel, i disagree. a couple days ago, hizbollah launched a suprise attack on the sheeba farms with the intent of distracting the bulk of israeli soldiers in the region so they could snag some israeli hostages in the golan. final score, 0 hostages, to the best of my knowledge 0 israelis dead, 5 hizbollah dead. keep in mind, this was a suprise attack, and the largest effort by hizbollah in years. military threat? me thinks not. the next day, israeli planes demolished some hizbollah outposts in southern lebanon with zero resistance. hizbollah absolutely retains the ability to inflict terroristic damgage on israel, but to label them a military threat is a stretch, no matter how loosley you define the term.
as for being a threat to the usa, it is ridiculous to compare hizbollahs capabilities to al qaeda, and them label them a serious threat. hizbollah was created after the israeli invasion of lebanon with the aim of resisting the israeli forces. due to the funding they have recieved from iran, there has been some of the usuall iran flavored rhetoric, but hizbollah aim after the withdrawl of israel is to regain what they believe is their land/provide representation for poor shia (and syria and iran) in lebanese government. Hizbollah has concrete goals, and acts within these goals. there actions are generally prudent to their aims. al qaeda on the other hand is operated by maniacss, albeit capable ones. their goals are much broader, and less defined. Al qaeda operates without the constraints of borders, everyone knows where to find hizbollah. to put them in the same league as the qaeda's in regards to their threat levle to the usa is ridiculous. Hizbollah is moving (very slowly) into the political proscess in lebanon. i believe they have a minister in the cabinet. it is the aim of the lebanese govt to incorporate them into the political process. it's hard to imagine qaeda doing the same thing. to gauge their threat level to the usa based on military capabilities is ignorant. as for operatives in the usa, the ira had/has operatives in the usa. their purpose to raise money. same with hizbollah. there are alot of rich lebanese in the us, and the "operatives" are there to get money.

Re: MMMMMM weighs in (he does, look!)
 

Hi in40892,

The fact that Hezbollah has chosen merely to harry Israel with minor attacks over the years is not indicative of its full potential for serious combat, nor its potential for serious terrorist operations.

I'm not talking about their current threat level to the USA, but rather their *potential* for serious threat to the USA. They are a not only a better army, but also a better-organized and more competent terrorist organization, than al-Qaeda.

On September 5, 2002, Richard Armitage, US Deputy Secretary of State, declared that "Hezbollah may be the A-Team of terrorists, while al-Qaeda may actually be the B-Team."

Prior to 9/11, Hezbollah had killed more Americans than had any other terrorist organization.

Following is an excerpt from a different source (USA Today):

(excerpt) "The A-Team' of terrorists

Terrorism investigators and analysts say Hezbollah could attack U.S. interests at home and abroad if the Bush administration were to take on Iran, the group's chief benefactor, or Syria, its supply pipeline between Lebanon and Tehran.

U.S.-Syrian relations have been strained by accusations that Syria helped top Iraqi officials flee coalition forces. Secretary of State Colin Powell recently warned Syrian President Bashar Assad against aiding Palestinian terrorist groups.

But when it comes to Hezbollah's potential threat on U.S. soil, the bigger worry is Iran and its reaction to U.S. efforts to rebuild Iraq, says Magnus Ranstorp, director of the Center for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at St. Andrew's University in Scotland.

"If Iran's agenda isn't satisfied," he says, "the threat from Hezbollah to the U.S. rises exponentially."

U.S. officials have called Hezbollah (which means "party of God" in Arabic) "the A-Team" of terrorist organizations. A radical Shiite group, its leaders are known for carrying out synchronized attacks — a technique al-Qaeda has copied.

Within a year of its creation in 1982, Hezbollah carried out a suicide bombing that killed 241 people at the U.S. Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut. In 1985, Hezbollah members killed a U.S. Navy diver during the hijacking of TWA Flight 847 in Lebanon. And in the 1990s, the group kidnapped several Americans and Westerners.

Terrorism analysts say Hezbollah attacks on Americans declined as its leaders focused on making the transition from terrorists to political players in Lebanon. Equally significant, analysts say, Hezbollah and other radical Muslim groups realized that they could raise millions of dollars in the USA — legally and illegally — as long as they didn't draw attention by killing Americans.

So far, Hezbollah has no reason to jeopardize its money train, Ranstorp says. But if Hezbollah decides to target Americans, he says, "the cost-benefit calculation will be very rational."...

..." More capable than al-Qaeda

U.S. officials say Hezbollah has more operatives in the USA than al-Qaeda, access to chemical and biological agents through Iran and active training camps in Lebanon.

"Hezbollah has a significant presence in the United States waiting for a call to action," says Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. He says he is worried about law enforcement's ability to confront the threat.

The task is daunting, Ranstorp says. "Hezbollah is not an organization you just tackle. They are not some small hornets' nest you stick your hand in and get moderately stung. These are super bees who can, because of the Iranian connection, wreak serious havoc to the United States."(end excerpt)

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...lah-usat_x.htm

The leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, has made the following statement: "Death to America was, is, and will always be our slogan."

You can find much more on the web about Hezbollah's capabilities if you care to do so.

No, I actually get an opinion
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If Iran could kill one Israeli with terrorism, doesn't the Israeli government have a responsibility to do whatever it takes to prevent the death of that Israeli?


[/ QUOTE ]

Therefore, and in full agreement with Zipo's position too, 1 Israeli equals 10,000 Israelis, i.e. the preventive measures and the response for the murder of one Israeli by a suicide bomber are the same measures and response for 10,000 Israelis killed in battle. OK, I begin to understand how the pair of you equate "military threat" with "terrorist threat"...

[/ QUOTE ]

"A man who saves one life saves the whole world"
- The Talmud

Re: MMMMMM weighs in (he does, look!)
 

&gt;&gt;Cyrus, Hezbollah represents both a terrorist AND a military threat to Israel. Why are you defining "military threat" only as one which might completely defeat a nation? Methinks you are taking too narrow a view of the meaning of the word "military".&lt;&lt;

Well, when I forced Cyrus to confront the errors in his analysis, instead of graciously acknowledging the flaws in his reasoning he began spinning furiously and attempted to obfuscate the core issue under discussion.

Cyrus forgot the important rule - "when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging".

Sadly, he just keeps digging himself deeper.

Re: Official Cyrus vs. MMMMMM Israel/Arabs Thread
 

i don't get it. the title of the thread and the OP led me to believe that there will be genuine discussion. i feel very strongly on the issue. nothing said here has made any sense yet.

Re: Official Cyrus vs. MMMMMM Israel/Arabs Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
i don't get it. the title of the thread and the OP led me to believe that there will be genuine discussion. i feel very strongly on the issue. nothing said here has made any sense yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Threads have a way of meandering off topic. Address the OP questions yourself and steer it back.

Re: Official Cyrus vs. MMMMMM Israel/Arabs Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]

Threads have a way of meandering off topic. Address the OP questions yourself and steer it back.

[/ QUOTE ]

wish i could

[ QUOTE ]

I would like to propose the following questions to be debated by the 2 parties:

[/ QUOTE ]

The merciless early morning light
 

[ QUOTE ]
When I forced Cyrus to confront the errors in his analysis, instead of graciously acknowledging the flaws in his reasoning he began spinning furiously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here are the positions which you supported in this thread. Let the light shine on 'em :

- Iran is neighbor to Israel.

- A military threat is the same as a terrorist threat.

- State sponsored terrorism is a military threat. (A variant of the main theme...)

- Iran poses a significant military threat to Israel.

And one lovely Yogi-Bearism from Zipo, truly original:

- Asymmetrical warfare is warfare!

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

...Tell me, which is your personal favorite? Mine is the neighbor thingy, where Iran is neighbor to Israel. Gives me acid flashback where Tajikistan is neighbor to Paraguay and everybody is neighbor to everybody else! Oh man.

Re: MMMMMM weighs in (he does, look!)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Cyrus, I just want to commend you on your rhetorical techniques. Defining the terms as you see fit to justify your predetermined conclusions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wanted to commend you again. Plus add that stating something is not something it is known to be is the greatest technique of all.

Re: MMMMMM weighs in (he does, look!)
 

bonjour MMMMMM


Your comment regarding Hezbullah
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not talking about their current threat level to the USA, but rather their *potential* for serious threat to the USA.

[/ QUOTE ]

The first paragraph of the article you linked:
[ QUOTE ]
Terrorism investigators and analysts say Hezbollah could attack U.S. interests at home and abroad if the Bush administration were to take on Iran, the group's chief benefactor, or Syria, its supply pipeline between Lebanon and Tehran.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you see what the Bush administration should not do?

If attacked, the *potential* for serious threat will come from the group being attacked (what ever that group). For some reason people dont like to be taken on, attacked, occupied, ruled by foreign entities. Go figure.

Talk lauder
 

Are you seriously accusing me of the following ?[ QUOTE ]
Defining the terms as you see fit to justify your predetermined conclusions.
Stating something is not something it is known to be is the greatest technique of all.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was a thread started by YOU about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. To your original post's questions, I responded item by item!

Zipo hijacked the thread by posting a few standard (and irrelevant to your query) inanities of the fanatical pro-Zionist lobby. I tried to address 'em as best as I could.

Unfortunately, onto the irrelevancy was added absurdity. To wit : "Iran is neighbor to Israel"; "Iran threatens Israel militarily"; etc. I cannot help it if Zipo sees the world this way.

Still, it's nice to be appreciated, even if for all the wrong reasons! [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Re: MMMMMM weighs in (he does, look!)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Prior to 9/11, Hezbollah had killed more Americans than had any other terrorist organization.


[/ QUOTE ] all but a couple in the marine barrack bombing. it is a bit of a stretch to attribute this to hizbollah, or atleast hizbollah as it exists today. in 1983 hizbollah was a loose orginaization of various shi'ite groups, some of whom pooled rescources to pull off that attack. hizbollah objective then was to not only fight israel, but to turn lebanon into an iran like religious state. an objective they have long since dropped. sure they are better organized then al qaeda, but the point is their objectives don't resemble those of al qaeda. at this point in addition to being a militia, they are the lone political party of the shia in lebanon. [ QUOTE ]
[Terrorism analysts say Hezbollah attacks on Americans declined as its leaders focused on making the transition from terrorists to political players in Lebanon./quote]


i don't see this tren reversing even if the us dramatically increases pressure on iran. as they have entered the political arena in lebanon, they are not merely lackeys of iran and syria. hizbollah recieves alot of money from syria, and as the us has increased pressure on syria, hizbollah's rhetoric towards the us has not changed dramaticallly.

Re: MMMMMM weighs in (he does, look!)
 

hi again, in48902,

I'm not trying to argue that Hezbollah is motivated currently to attack the USA, or that it represents a greater present threat than al-Qaeda. I'm merely saying that it has the potential to be a bigger threat, as it is more capable than al-Qaeda.

\"Hezbollah A Bigger Threat Than al Qaeda\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not trying to argue that Hezbollah is motivated currently to attack the USA, or that it represents a greater present threat than al-Qaeda. I'm merely saying that it has the potential to be a bigger threat, as it is more capable than al-Qaeda.

[/ QUOTE ]
Trust me on this, kid. Never mess with a good joke trying to make it better.

And yours was already already world class! [ QUOTE ]
Hezbollah may pose a potentially graver threat to the United States than al-Qaeda.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img][img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: \"Hezbollah A Bigger Threat Than al Qaeda\"
 

And why would you find MMMMMM's view on the threat Hezbollah poses to the US so ridiculous? Are you suggesting that they could not attract the same sources of funding/support as Al-Quaeda when they have many similar goals and a similar world view?

Your statements like this and those ridiculing zippo's mostly correct statements on warfare lead me to believe you are merely trolling or are incredibly dense. All your views basically amount to is saying that a wolf is not a threat until he is at your door and preventive defense policy and threat analysis serves no purpose.

Crying \"wolf\" again
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why would you find MMMMMM's view on the threat Hezbollah poses to the US so ridiculous?

[/ QUOTE ] Because Hezbollah and al Qaeda are vastly different!

We have to go on the basis of what we know :

- Hezbollah enjoys the open support of hundreds of thousands of people. Al Qaeda is a clandestine organisation.

- Hezbollah is a strictly local, Lebanese organisation that is for all practical purposes operating above ground. Al Qaeda is an international network, operating clandestinely.

- Hezbollah has never attacked Americans outside of Lebanon. Its targets have been almost exclusively Israeli. Al Qaeda's priorities are American. They have hit the U.S. directly to the heart and are threatening to do it again.

[ QUOTE ]
... zippo's mostly correct statements on warfare ...

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, then you saw some of the howlers too? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Tell me which ones, so's I can fill you in on the rest. (Hint : Zipo's got practically everything wrong| Quite an achievement.)

[ QUOTE ]
All your views basically amount to is saying that a wolf is not a threat until he is at your door
and preventive defense policy and threat analysis serves no purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

A wolf that is now atacking is posing a different kind of threat than a wolf that could decide in the future to attack. Threat analysis (or the whole SWOT rigmarole) is not this administration's forte -- and that goes for its supporters from the looks of it!

Re: Crying \"wolf\" again
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would you find MMMMMM's view on the threat Hezbollah poses to the US so ridiculous?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because Hezbollah and al Qaeda are vastly different!

We have to go on the basis of what we know :

- Hezbollah enjoys the open support of hundreds of thousands of people. Al Qaeda is a clandestine organisation.

- Hezbollah is a strictly local, Lebanese organisation that is for all practical purposes operating above ground. Al Qaeda is an international network, operating clandestinely.

- Hezbollah has never attacked Americans outside of Lebanon. Its targets have been almost exclusively Israeli. Al Qaeda's priorities are American. They have hit the U.S. directly to the heart and are threatening to do it again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly, my view is that Hezbollah has the *potential* to pose a greater threat than al-Qaeda; not that they currently do.

Secondly, all of the above stated reasons by Cyrus are irrelevant, because Hezbollah has in recent years openly contemplated declaring full terroristic war against the USA--but decided not to at the current juncture.

Hezbollah's motto is "Death to America!" (and "Death To Israel!"), but that motto does not imply that they are willing to undertake full hostilities at present. That, however, could be subject to change in the future.