The_Gabe

You post things like this and then expect people to respect what you have to say? Boggle. Okay, please show me how it did not stop weapons from passing on ships? I NEVER said it was right to do it for an economic purpose, all I said was that it still served a function. Once again, you twist peoples' words.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/09/95621/israeli-document-gaza-blockade.html#ixzz0qSOTiCqD Does this mean we get to stop pretending this is about blocking weapons? Even if it was used an economic welfare, it still blocked weapons. I'm not saying what the government did was okay, but there will most likely be a change soon.

That's like calling someone Hiltar. How low do you think of us that you'd have to be surprised that noone called you that?

As you've said it before, give me some of the weed you're smoking because that sounds like you pulled that fact straight out of your ass.

Are you done yet? All you seem to be able to do is blame other people. Firstly, donating money means very little. You don't donate to be proud of it and use it in an argument, you do it because it's the right thing to do. Second, money is not relevent to this conversation. Third, Bush Is leading? Bush isn't president anymore Charles, Obama is. And the fact that Obama doesn't support us, and is already seen as an uneffective leader, both in national and foreign manners, means that Israel can stand on its own two feet. Of course the support of the U.S is important, but we won't be demolished easily without it either. What you've seen over the last two weeks embarrasses you? Dude, where have you been for the past.. Forever? You choose to blame who ever come to mind for you. Look, Israel has common sense, and you cannot seem to understand that. I've lived in the U.S for a while now, and very few people here have common sense. Why do you think I love Israel so much? People here are intellegent. People have different opinions, but if you ever try to take my opinion about how I feel about my country, then I truly lost all respect for you Charles. Unfortunatly, coming from a 14 year old, this whole post means nothing to you.

Atleast I have a feeling of pride for my home country. All I've seen you ever do is criticize others. In retrospect, it seems like you think of yourself as smarter than anyone else.

Full story here. Brilliant and comic. :thumbup: Reading this brought me great feelings and proudness of my country of ישראל

Glad that you're fnally leaving 1/10 your bank bad 1/10 your stats are pretty bad too Honest rates bruh O and I do believe you botted 99 mining so I didn't count that in rates.

O gabe: should I have a party for 99 pray? Codguy: no it's only 99 pray O gabe: o ok *goes to check picture thread* Hyprocrite Still 9/10 but u suck

Welcome to the club.

Do they not have white out in your country?

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/foreign_aid.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_%E2%80%93_United_States_relations http://www.ccmep.org/hotnews2/usforeignaid041402.html#A2 http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/publish/article_17.shtml And it was very little in the start. Also, it's a lot less then 100 trillion another poster mentioned, plus, in the war of 48 there was no or very little financial aid from the U.S, the wars were won because of strategy.

Well in case anyone is wondering, it amounts to over $100,000,000,000 in aid since Israel was formed. And no, it wasn't formal aid in the early days, but most of the hardware the fledgling IDF used came from Western sources, a lot of it from the US as far as I can tell. And of course, the US was the first nation to recognize Israel's independence, which is pretty important too. Yep, you're pretty much right on. It is extremists on both sides of the issue that are the problem. And this is why people like myself are becoming more vocal. As for your more recent post, I don't think anyone is disputing that the commandos were attacked when they landed on the ship. They just shouldn't have been there at all. And once again, note that those pictures prove conclusively that if the people on the ship wanted those Israelis dead, they would be. Resisting was wrong, but they very arguably showed more restraint than Israel did. In the early days of Israel and the wars, the U.S did not give Israel anything? Even if you don't believe Matok, who lived there. I asked my dad, a veteran of 3 or 4 Israeli wars to confirm that they did not indeed have the U.S aid support, atleast in the early wars. Not sure about later wars, my dad went to sleep.

Hey look there buddy, Israel has every right to exist. There's a country dedicated to every other major religion, no reason for this one not to be one. Also, go learn some history. Do you want the same thing that occured in Europe to happen again? This is why this country was created, so Jewish people could leave in safety and fairness. If Israel was a weak nation, it would have been destroyed by now. When it first declared independence, it was attacked by multiple countries on that day and won. Do not give me this bull [cabbage] about how it doesn't serve to exist. He's an analogy for you to understand... Black people and their independence. Ya the worlds not fair, why didn't we say that when the blacks wanted to gain equal rights and become free people. What has Israel done to the world? What has any country do to the world for that fact? Here's something it gave to the world; a place to unite a common culture where you're not afraid of persecution.

Yes, they were. They never should have tried to board that ship. Just as Rony said, there you are changing the statements around again. Why do you call the people on the ship idiots? There is a saying that is very relevant in Arabic, fear can make a donkey attack a lion. The people of the ship were in all right to be where they were as it was international water. Since Israel was conducting an illegal boarding, I don't care if it was Satan himself, they had all rights to be there and they had all right to defend themselves from breakers of the law, and worse, breakers of the word they agreed to [i.e. the UN laws governing the sea which they signed]. Israel, the lion, stuck themselves in a position to pounce and the IHH, the donkey, decided to respond to an unwanted threat. Israel signed an international agreement to adhere to the laws of the sea which they break and yet they validate the existence of their country by a UN resolution? It is convenient to pick and choose what agreements to follow. Israel has also had the "it is illegal to settle occupied territory" resolution passed on them and reiterated many times which they have ignored and such but I won't get into that. Simple, because they knew who was boarding, and they attacked first. There wouldn't have been any casualties if they didn't start attacking. As I said before, they were warned before, and did you even see the radio transmission video?

Yes, they were. They never should have tried to board that ship. Just as Rony said, there you are changing the statements around again.

It does match you if you have it. You don't get an option if you don't have it so it's a lot better in mw2.

I made 250 overloads in 1 stew. You're doing it wrong. Here is what you do. Make 5-10 overs, log out, make 5-10 more, logout, repeat.

What would Israeli ships be carrying there exactly? Doesn't matter what they would be carrying. Your reluctance to answer the question is answer in and of itself. I didn't see any compelling arguments in that article. It's the same "they were bad guys!" whining we've heard a million times. The people being bad guys didn't give the Israelis any more right to commandeer their ship in international waters and kill 9 of them, than it gives the cops the right to do shoot people because *they* are bad guys. (Psst: Terrorist groups use the *exact* same justifications. You're in poor company.) What would you like to hear from the article? How attacking the soldiers was justified? Or how discrediting Israel, plus making Egypt back down from the blockade and opening Cairo's borders (which would allow smuggling of weapons) was their main goal? I don't see what you're arguing about. For the international waters part, the legality of this is being investigated.

This isn't what you want to hear, but the situation would be completely different. No blockade, no weapons to supply anyone, not anything. The situation would be completely different. Sorry, but that's a copout. The situations under which the request to board is made do not have to be identical. Remember that just as paranoid as you are about ships carrying Palestinian activists, Arabs feel the same way about you. The pertinent issue is a ship in international waters being asked for permission to be boarded by a country it considers an enemy or opponent, denying such permission, and then being boarded against their will. So I ask again: if Israel had a ship in international waters near an Arab country, that country's navy demanded the right to board, was told no and tried to board anyway, would you expect the Israelis to not respond, and then claim they were at fault if they did? What would Israeli ships be carrying there exactly?

0/10 atm should go in blogscape.

This isn't what you want to hear, but the situation would be completely different. No blockade, no weapons to supply anyone, not anything. The situation would be completely different.

You tend not to have too many problems when you use tear gas, tasers and rubber bullets against humanitarian activists. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/01/gaza-flotilla-eyewitness-accounts-gunfire http://www.elpais.com/articulo/internacional/Israel/asalta/legalidad/internacional/elpepuopi/20100601elpepiint_1/Tes And unfortunately anti-semitism still doesn't justify breaking the law. By the sound of the radio transmission, do you have any idea how dangerous it could have been to let the ship go freely?

Thanks for that Rony. Now it justifies another part of the puzzle. Qeltar, answer this question for me. There were 6 ships coming, 5 of them were searched with no problems, why was the 6th so differently?

I really doubt it, the magnum is a lot easier to use and doesn't have dodgy sights. The only thing the Deagle has is 1 more bullet in the clip. I've always liked the USP anyway, I used it on all my classes on CoD4 and its great on MW2 as well. All the other prestiges I used the SPAS on my sniper classes, I have about 1600 kills with it I think. I like the handguns because you can pull them out quicker, a ton of times I've died because I've been switching to my shotty. Especially on Highrise because of all the M/L/C morons who run through the tunnels under the map and get behind you. I'd be one of those idiots. On that map I just use marathon pro lightweight pro and commando pro with magnum tac knife and I go back and forth between A and C killing people inside the place and capturing. I got the most of amount of kills + flag captured on ground wars domination that way :thumbsup: