Israel attacks "terrorist training camp" in Syria

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3166154.stm

Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa is quoted by Reuters as saying the raid "threatens security and peace in the region and internationally, and could aggravate the deteriorating situation in the region".

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak condemned it as "aggression against a brother country".

A spokesman for the UK Government said that "while Israel is entitled to take steps to protect itself against terrorist attack, these steps should be within international law".

France and Germany both described the raid as unacceptable.

This is JUST what the region needs atm. Israel stirring up even more shít than normal while the USA faces growing resentment to it's occupation of Iraq...


edit: BTW it doesn't mention it in the article, but the USA came out with a vague statement basically saying that Syria was on the opposing side in the "war on terrorism" however they said they were still trying to find out the "specific details" of the attack.

main report : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3165394.stm

mr_angry

This is f*cking rediculous - the Israeli's have really overstepped the mark this time. Of course, they'll get away with it because her big buddy, the USA, will spew out all the usual bullsh*t, such as the UK government came out with in that article. If we were to take that to its fullest extent and implement this within International law, would Ireland be able to send in jets and blow up the Shankill Road because of a perceived terrorist threat? I think not.

I'm an advocate of peace, but I REALLY hope that someone kicks the Israelis ass sometime soon, and teaches them the lesson they're crying out for.

Victor

A spokesman for the UK Government said that "while Israel is entitled to take steps to protect itself against terrorist attack, these steps should be within international law".

And the invasion of Iraq was what?

magick

Lets just say Syria retaliates, what are numbers (armed forces/wepaons/air forces etc) that both Israel and Syria have?

Sparks

Originally posted by magick
Lets just say Syria retaliates, what are numbers (armed forces/wepaons/air forces etc) that both Israel and Syria have?

If I remember the unoffical estimates right, Israel has just over a hundred warheads and Syria has none.

Victor

Israel's armed forces are as good if not better than the American's (in all but strategic ability) and a nation that is capable of being on a war footing in hours and a vast civil defence system (right down to school kids filling sand bags). It is believed to have a substantial (100+ missiles / bombs) nuclear capability fitted to ballistic missiles able to hit anywhere in the Middle East. Realistically it has 200-300 modern combat aircraft. It has about 4,000 tanks of mixed vintage and 11,000 other armoured vehicles .

Syria is broke. It has a nominal nuclear and biological development plan, but about 200 ballistic missiles (mostly Scuds), some with chemical warheads. Realistically it has 200-300 middle aged combat aircraft. It has about 4,000 of mostly older tanks. It's air force and tanks are on average 10-20 years older than Israel’s. Syria is in the middle of a spat with Russia about $6bn in debt owed for weapons supplied in the 1970s and 1980s that proved ineffective against Israel in Lebanon (Soviet policy was to never give / sell the really good stuff). Syria isn't paying and Russia isn't supplying.

The only potential advantages Syria has are (a) appealing to the Arab League for assistance (going to the UN will only be vetoed by the USA) (b) it has brand new anti-tank missiles (Kornet AT-14) that out range all other tank weapons, it may be in possession of other modern weapons that were bound for Iraq (c) dissimilar combat, i.e. creating a war by proxy though Lebanon or Palestine.

The crux of the matter is if Israel acts too provocatively and forces either Egypt or Saudi Arabia, both with modern equipment to cooperate with Syria. This would result in another 1967 / 1973 style war. The border is short 76km and the Israeli's hold the high ground. With this height advantage, Damascus is precariously close to the border. Either side could bypass the Golan and go through Lebanon or Jordan.

In practice, Syria can bloody Israel's nose. Israel can annihilate Syria.

www.fas.org is a good site to look at for individual pieces of information.

Manach

The attack does seem to escalate the situation some what.
Whilst there is no love lost between the various Arab states in the region, would not a serious attack on Syria bring on board both Jordon & Egypt?

Theres very little chance of any large scale war happening at this time, especially between just syria and israel.

I remember reading statistics sumwhere about such a war which said 3.5 of the 5 million Israelis would be involved in any war (could be more i'm not sure). For every 1 israeli jet shot down they would shoot down 17 enemy fighters. However they can only maintain a full scale war for 2/3 weeks at the most due to the strain it puts on the country.

Ofc it made no mention of israel using nukes, which could halt a war in a matter of days (or else prolong it indefinitely)

LegacyUser

Originally posted by Sparks
If I remember the unoffical estimates right, Israel has just over a hundred warheads and Syria has none.

warheads will never come into the equation, suicide bombers will, i won't be eating any big macs in jerusalem for at least a few weeks

Biffa Bacon

I hope to God Syria retaliates. Israeli tanks will be in Damascus within a week and another scumbag Arab dictator will be overthrown.

Vader

Israel diddnt just say, well we know there is a base there lets attack it. They must have asked for and receives US approval for this little op.

Israel is a big problem.
1)The have a wide range of WMD
2)They have diobeyed more UN resolutions than Iraq, they are the 2nd most frequent country to vote against UN resolutions(if you take everytime the US uses its veto as one vote).
3)They treat a significant proportion of their pop. as animals
4)They piss off al their neighbours
5)They piss me off!:mad:

LegacyUser

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
I hope to God Syria retaliates. Israeli tanks will be in Damascus within a week and another scumbag Arab dictator will be overthrown.

uh i don't think so, if push really comes to shove, regardless of their military prowess 5 mill israelis would lose to 300 mill arabs even if they were just swinging frying pans

Victor

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
I hope to God Syria retaliates. Israeli tanks will be in Damascus within a week and another scumbag Arab dictator will be overthrown.

And Israeli military government is better how?

Don't bother asking this "biffa bacon" guy anything tbh...He seems to base his arguements on the theory that "he's right-wing and thats what he believes in" rather than on fact

MagicBusDriver

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. You cannot serious think Syria a known supporter of terrorism is better than Israel.

Also while Israel may overreact, the last two serious opportunities to peace where destroyed by Arafat. If Israel cannot create peace with diplomacy, it has no option but to use force.

Sparks

I must admit it was somewhat odd that the weapons in the video from the "training camp" were all Israeli...

Victor

Originally posted by MagicBusDriver
Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East.

Not quite. Lebanon, Iran, Egypt, Turkey, Kuwait (not sure if women can vote quite yet, but it's on the way) and Cyprus are all democratic, some having problems around the edges. Israel also doesn't behave like a democratic nation in many ways.

mr_angry

And Israeli military government is better how?

I agree.

You cannot serious think Syria a known supporter of terrorism is better than Israel.

The only reason that Israel is not described as a supporter of terrorism is that they are bigger than Palestine. They killed just as many, if not more, innocent civilians as the terrorists they are fighting against. Personally, I don't think they're any better than Syria. Hope that clears the matter up for ya.

Biffa Bacon

Originally posted by mr_angry4
s is f*cking rediculous - the Israeli's have really overstepped the mark this time.

Yes, why won’t they just march obediently to their deaths like they did last time?

I'm an advocate of peace, but I REALLY hope that someone kicks the Israelis ass sometime soon, and teaches them the lesson they're crying out for.

You mean like this, Mr Peace Advocate?

Originally posted by bananayoghurt
uh i don't think so, if push really comes to shove, regardless of their military prowess 5 mill israelis would lose to 300 mill arabs even if they were just swinging frying pans

Try reading up on some history. Israel has repeatedly defeated attacks by Arab nations – in ’48, ’67 and ’73. If you want to find out why, read Why the West has Won by Victor Davis Hanson.

Originally posted by Victor
And Israeli military government is better how?

Well for starters they wouldn’t be supporting terrorism.

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
Yes, why won’t they just march obediently to their deaths like they did last time?

This excuse for all their actions is starting to wear extremely thin at this stage.

Well for starters they wouldn’t be supporting terrorism.

No, they'll just keep killing civilians in 'retaliation'.

LegacyUser

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon

Try reading up on some history. Israel has repeatedly defeated attacks by Arab nations – in ’48, ’67 and ’73. If you want to find out why, read Why the West has Won by Victor Davis Hanson.

50 years isn't pissing time as far as nationhood goes, there won't be an israel in 200 years, definately not if they think all their problems can be solved by killing people.

Fionnan

Those TV pictures shown by the Israelis were broadcast first by IRanian television, basically boasting about the organisations they have attacking Israel. I believe every nation has the right to hunt down terrorists who attack them where-ever the scum hide.

bonkey

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
Well for starters they wouldn’t be supporting terrorism.

Guess that depends on your definition of terrorism.

Apparently, if you strap a bomb to yoruself and kill a load of civilians, you're a terrorist. If, on the other hand, you're firing rockets from a helicopter with any shade of an excuse of being after a suspect, then its not terrorism - its "collateral damage".

jc

Moriarty

Originally posted by Sparks
I must admit it was somewhat odd that the weapons in the video from the "training camp" were all Israeli...

Soviet era automatic weapons are now produced in Israel? Since when? I saw an awful lot of PKs, AKs and soviet blok grenades. I didnt see a single m16, m249 or any other western weapon.

Biffa Bacon

Originally posted by Frank_Grimes
This excuse for all their actions is starting to wear extremely thin at this stage.

No it’s not an excuse for their actions. The justification for their actions is that they are being attacked by genocidal fanatics whose openly-declared goal is the destruction of the state of Israel, and they must therefore either defend themselves or die.

Of course, given all the “never again” talk after WW2, you might be forgiven if you expected Europeans to recognise and support the Jewish people’s right to self-defence. Apparently not though.

Originally posted by bananayoghurt
50 years isn't pissing time as far as nationhood goes, there won't be an israel in 200 years, definately not if they think all their problems can be solved by killing people.

More bigoted anti-Israeli hate speech. Israel has on multiple occasions offered peace to the Arabs and had it thrown back in their faces. Any time they offer concessions or relax security arrangements, they are rewarded with an increase in terrorism. It is the criminal Arafat and his terrorists friends who are the aggressors, it is they who refuse to compromise – not the Israelis.

Originally posted by bonkey
Apparently, if you strap a bomb to yoruself and kill a load of civilians, you're a terrorist.

Correct.

If, on the other hand, you're firing rockets from a helicopter with any shade of an excuse of being after a suspect, then its not terrorism - its "collateral damage".

If you’re suggesting that that’s what the Israelis are doing I reject that utterly. You think they just fire rockets into a crowd of civilians at random? This is what makes me want to puke in all these discussions about the Middle East – the vile moral equivalence. There is no moral equivalence between injury caused by the aggressor to the victim and injury caused by the victim to the aggressor. There is no moral equivalence between those who deliberately target civilians and those who seek to minimise civilian casualties in as far as is humanly possible. Why is it so hard for people to see that?

Welcome to boards.ie Fionnan by the way!

Hobbes

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
You think they just fire rockets into a crowd of civilians at random?

No not random. I am sure they look for someone to shoot at first.

But they are no better then the terrorists they claim to be fighting. Putting a suicide bomber onto a bus is no different then firing a missile into a refugee camp. Syria makes the news but the two places in Palistine that were bombed by the Israelis as retaliation hardly got a mention.

Take a look at the suicide bombers history up to the point where the Israelis bombed her family for no reason (well for a reason, but none of them were terrorists). If anything made her into a terrorist, it was the actions of Israel.

mr_angry

they must therefore either defend themselves or die.

How exactly has "defending themselves" stopped them from dying? As far as I can see, the Israeli people are still dying, and it is as much caused by the fact that the Israelis retaliate so vehemently when attacked themselves. Its a vicious circle, and the Israelis have to accept some responsibility for it. If you don't accept that, then I'm sorry, but I can no longer respect your opinion.

By the way, I apologise for my earlier comment about someone kicking the Israeli's asses. It was out of order. I just find the Israeli's aggressive stance rather frustrating.

sovtek

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
No it’s not an excuse for their actions. The justification for their actions is that they are being attacked by genocidal fanatics whose openly-declared goal is the destruction of the state of Israel, and they must therefore either defend themselves or die.

When the state of Israel's creation involved killing innocent people and genocide (look up the legal term), then not one Israeli can call anyone a terrorist and not be a complete hypocrite.

Of course, given all the “never again” talk after WW2, you might be forgiven if you expected Europeans to recognise and support the Jewish people’s right to self-defence. Apparently not though.

Evidentally that "never again" statement seems to pertain only to the Jewish people if the actions of the powers that be are considered.
An American that gets Israeli citizenship based upon his/her religion and then moves into a settlement that was built upon land taken from a Palestinian and has UN Resolutions stating that it must give it back, has about as much right to self defense as a burglar breaking into your house.

More bigoted anti-Israeli hate speech. Israel has on multiple occasions offered peace to the Arabs and had it thrown back in their faces. Any time they offer concessions or relax security arrangements, they are rewarded with an increase in terrorism.

When they "offer" peace at the same time continually building new settlements, one can't honestly say that the Israeli government isn't "throwing it" in the Palestinian people's face.

It is the criminal Arafat and his terrorists friends

As opposed to the criminal Sharon. Meanwhile Arafat is expected to "reign in on terrorist" while he's confined by Israel's to his headquarters while they plot to kill him.

If you’re suggesting that that’s what the Israelis are doing I reject that utterly. You think they just fire rockets into a crowd of civilians at random?

No they try and blame the victim for living around dozens of children, otherwise an F-16 is a perfectly reasonable weapon to bring criminals to justice. Nevermind that assassinating criminals without trail isn't usually the act of a "democracy". Then consider all the teenage "militants" that the IDF kill for throwing rocks at them.

This is what makes me want to puke in all these discussions about the Middle East – the vile moral equivalence.

My thoughts exactly when Israel and American condemn the actions of "terrorists" while conducting themselves in the same manner.

There is no moral equivalence between injury caused by the aggressor to the victim and injury caused by the victim to the aggressor.

Hence Israel's lack of moral standing in condemning "terrorists".

There is no moral equivalence between those who deliberately target civilians and those who seek to minimise civilian casualties in as far as is humanly possible.

No you are correct, which is why the IDF don't have the moral high ground here.

Typedef

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon

Well for starters they wouldn’t be supporting terrorism.

Ah yes, Jewish-supremecist pseudo-religous neo-apartheid "democracy", enforced on Palestinians under the heel of an Israeli army boot.

Highly democratic and most certainly not 'terrorist'... we're talking about a 'Western democracy' after all... in fact, the Palestinians must have voted to be disenfranchised by military occupation, and the leftist media is polluting the airwaves with lies.

doh.... how did I miss that all these years?

mr_angry

There is no moral equivalence between injury caused by the aggressor to the victim and injury caused by the victim to the aggressor.

By the way, I disagree entirely.

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

There's no "But not if it was already done unto you, it's alright" in that statement. I freely admit that innocent Israeli civilians have suffered at the hands of terrorists, but that is not a justification for going out and slaughtering Palastinian civilians in response.