Israel raids ships carrying aid to Gaza, killings civilians

[Burgold]

This is untrue. Not the 1000 tanks or the kicking out the UN forces. Those are true. But Nasser never wanted war, he just played poker badly.

Eisenhower knew Nasser did not want war, and that he was just posturing.

Let's say you are right... which I don't think you are... but let's say you are right.

If you bluff and threaten me and shove me by closing canals and my lifeline to food and trade... and I decide to take your bluff seriously and hit back and instead of being cowed your bluff makes me fight back and you lose, well isn't it your fault for bluffing and threatening? Do you expect your words and actions to have no cost? It's a dangerous game when you threaten war and you mass troops and you close off trade routes.

Don't you bare a responsibility for your actions making the other nation believe it had to act?

Edit: It's sort of like bragging you are going to break a blockade, getting on a ship, charting a course to go through the blockade, and then attacking the people trying to maintain their blockade. Do you think that your words, plans, and actions have no consequences? Do you think you can say and do anything without repercussions?

[Thiebear]

There was plenty of back and forth brinksmanship by both sides and most historians now agree that Nasser was never willing to go all the war and invade Israel but of course instead of providing any evidence you just claim he is a conspiracy theorist. The reason Israel attacked the other countries is because they were all part of a defense pact. When you have a defense pact you don't just attack one part of it you have to attack the whole thing because the other members will be coming after you. So if you want to have a respectful honest discussion on the 1967 War I am willing to have that but if you just want to call names and dismiss people out of hand let me know now so I don't put any more effort into responding to your posts.

Actually i posted a timeline with pertinent dates..

You should brush up on it also.

[Redskins Diehard]

Let's say you are right... which I don't think you are... but let's say you are right.

If you bluff and threaten me and shove me by closing canals and my lifeline to food and trade... and I decide to take your bluff seriously and hit back and instead of being cowed your bluff makes me fight back and you lose, well isn't it your fault for bluffing and threatening? Do you expect your words and actions to have no cost? It's a dangerous game when you threaten war and you mass troops and you close off trade routes.

Don't you bare a responsibility for your actions making the other nation believe it had to act?

Edit: It's sort of like bragging you are going to break a blockade, getting on a ship, charting a course to go through the blockade, and then attacking the people trying to maintain their blockade. Do you think that your words, plans, and actions have no consequences? Do you think you can say and do anything without repercussions?

That second paragraph is priceless in this thread....priceless. Nice attempt at a save with the edit.

[JMS]

There was plenty of back and forth brinksmanship by both sides and most historians now agree that Nasser was never willing to go all the war and invade Israel but of course instead of providing any evidence you just claim he is a conspiracy theorist. The reason Israel attacked the other countries is because they were all part of a defense pact. When you have a defense pact you don't just attack one part of it you have to attack the whole thing because the other members will be coming after you. So if you want to have a respectful honest discussion on the 1967 War I am willing to have that but if you just want to call names and dismiss people out of hand let me know now so I don't put any more effort into responding to your posts.

I don't think the israilis cared. The causes belli for israel in 1967 was Egypt cutting Israel off from her only red sea port. That was how Israel got her Iranian oil. It was a done deal after Nasser did that.

Oh by the way. Johnsonwas in office in. 67. Eisenhower was long gone.

[Burgold]

That second paragraph is priceless in this thread....priceless. Nice attempt at a save with the edit.

It's actually what I intended the whole time, but I was fearful most wouldn't get it.

but yeah, I see whatcha mean.

[Jrew1223]

Alright class,

Get out your pencils and paper and get ready to take notes... Today's topic will be "What led up to the 1967 War."

In the months that proceeded the conflict, the Israeli army was taking part in a land grab along the Golan Heights by basically taking a tractor and plowing a field and if there was no response they would plow closer to Syria and this went on up until the Syrians said enough and started to fire artillery toward the Israelis. You don't have to take my word for it at all! Luckily we have Moshe Dayan to thank for setting that record straight in an interview he did in the 1970's to where he claimed that at least 80% of the violence was initiated by his forces.

During this time period, Syria and Egypt were battling over who was the true symbol of Pan-Arabism and when Israel "retaliated in self defense" (I say with sarcasm) against the Syrian shelling, the Syrians taunted Nasser by say what are you going to do about it oh mister so called leader of the Pan Arab movement? The first time the Syrians taunted him Nasser didn't even bother to reply because he was more concerned with modernizing Egypt.

The Israelis then announced loudly that they were going to launch a major offensive against Syria and again the Syrians asked Nasser as to what he was going to do about it and that is why he told the UN to remove the peacekeeping forces along the Egyptian Israeli border. You guys need to understand that the reason Nasser did this was because is was the bare minimum he could do politically in order to ease the taunting of Syria and make it look like he was on their side. (He didn't care)

Israel wanted the 1967 War and they did everything possible to make sure that it would happen... Why? Because they wanted to knock out Nasser out of the Israeli governments fears of a modernized Arab state. Their mind set was such that if any Arab state was allowed to modernize then eventually they would attack Israel. If Israel didn't want war, all they had to do was restation those peace keeping troops on its side of the border since they were working fine.

In the straits of Tiran, the so called blockade didn't really exist as we think it did. When the conflict began, the UN decided to have a moratorium as to where Egypt would agree not to fire upon foreign flagged vessels if Israel would agree to not sail Israeli flagged vessels. Nasser said yes, Israel said no. When Israel said it had the rights to the straits of Tiran, Nasser said they didn't and offered to send the matter to the world court for it to be decided. Israel again refused.

A few days before the 6 Day War broke out, a member of Israeli Intelligence arrived in Washington to feel out the Americans because in reality, they weren't afraid of the Arabs they were afraid of Washington repeating what happened in 1956 when we told Israel to get out. According to American intelligence, they concluded that there was no way that Nasser was going to attack and if by some irrational chance he does, Israel would kick their !@#. The Israeli intelligence officer said they do no disagree with any of the American intelligence. The American intelligence actually stated that if there was a war that it would only last between 7 to 10 days at the most.

I don't think that there was a formulated plan to take over specific territory by the Israelis... I think however that in this plan to knock out Nasser, the lands were taken in the moment of opportunity (West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights).

Under International Law, you are required to seek all diplomatic solutions before engaging in war and in every step, Israel sought none of them. They feared a modern Egypt and the rise of Pan-Arabism and they had to knock out Nasser to stop it. The events that led up to the war were egged on by the Israelis to give them the excuse the needed to act.

All of this information is found in the scholarly records...

Class dismissed...

[dockeryfan]

A missile hit the Pentagon i guess also? To say Israel attack Egypt to get the land ignores the other countries? Let me go look again, you aluminum foil hat people get me sometimes.

Grabbed this one from the UK, they've never liked Isreal:

http://www.sixdaywar.co.uk/timeline-concise_v2.pdf

May 27th 1967

Nasser cancels a planned Egyptian attack on Israel (Operation Fajr - Dawn), planned for following day, after it

became obvious that the Israelis knew about the plan.

The NY Times reported that Jordan would admit Saudi and Iraqi forces into its country to do battle with Israel

Look, I'm not making this up. Here is the CIA analysis. They knew that if an altercation happened, it would take approximately 7 - 9 days. Read the assessment.

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol49no1/html_files/arab_israeli_war_1.html

Nasser was losing ground in terms of his place in the eyes of the Arab world. He needed to show some level of support, even if he had no intention of invading Israel. If he closed the straits, and had to keep Israel on high alert, that would take it's toll eventually on Israel.

Now in retrospect, it was bad poker. But the CIA knew he would lose quickly, and so did he. By all accounts, most historians think he was never going to do anything other than flex his muscles at the door.

[JMS]

A missile hit the Pentagon i guess also? To say Israel attack Egypt to get the land ignores the other countries? Let me go look again, you aluminum foil hat people get me sometimes.

It's really not that big a stretch.not like Israel hadn't been caught read handed conspirering to steal egypyion land (with uk and france) in 1957.

In 67 Eisenhower was gone, Nasser had no more credit with the US. And Egypt was dumb enough to give Israel an excuse. Egypt was israels largest existential threat, and Israel coveted a security buffer.

Along with the Jordanian and Syrian lands which were important historically and for natural resources.

[JMS]

Now in retrospect, it was bad poker. But the CIA knew he would lose quickly, and so did he. By all accounts, most historians think he was never going to do anything other than flex his muscles at the door.

You might be right on all that. But from a general perspective not many folks gave Israel much of a chance in 1967. As I recall, it was pretty much regarded as a miracle.

A very ballsy move by little Israel. Remember 1967 was before she received massive aid from the united states. She was fighting with french and British equipment. Largely

[Larry]

actually Kilmer is dead on, go google camp david accords and what happened, it was a pretty brutal indictment of the PLO and how they "negotiated" they were given every single demand and arafat walked away.

Really?

The only thing I find under "Camp David Accords" was a treaty between Israel and Egypt. They were signed. Jimmy Carter got the Nobel Peace Prize. Egypt got the Sinai and the Suez canal back. Sadat got killed. Egypt became the #2 recipient of US aid.

[Ryman of the North]

I could be wrong but I do not believe that Israel gained any of the territories outlined by starting a war. I believe they gained all of those lands by defeating there enemies in battle.

you are not wrong, JPYAK likes his revisionist history

[Ryman of the North]

These claims. Since you got these claims from the news, mind showing me and other other fellow ESers? We'd love to see these sources.

the UN is an anti Israel body only a retard would try to claim otherwise, I posted links in another anti israel thread, do a little research, there is even a watchdog organisation formed by countries like canada because of it.

are you arguing that Great Britain wasnt the dominant power in the area at the time they gave the palestinian mandate? because if you are arguing that you are an idiot and will now be ignored.

[Ryman of the North]

No he doesn't. He just makes up things as he goes along with nothing to back up his claims. In other words, your standard MO in a internet argument/debate.

what exactly have I made up? you are just pissy because you have no facts to back up your hypocritical argument.

[jpyaks3]

the UN is an anti Israel body only a retard would try to claim otherwise, I posted links in another anti israel thread, do a little research, there is even a watchdog organisation formed by countries like canada because of it.

are you arguing that Great Britain wasnt the dominant power in the area at the time they gave the palestinian mandate? because if you are arguing that you are an idiot and will now be ignored.

So you are too lazy to back up your assertions? How about if you actually formulate an argument and back it up with credible links instead of calling everyone retards. But then again you wouldn't be able to just make **** up that way so I guess that wouldn't work for you.

[Ryman of the North]

Let's say you are right... which I don't think you are... but let's say you are right.

If you bluff and threaten me and shove me by closing canals and my lifeline to food and trade... and I decide to take your bluff seriously and hit back and instead of being cowed your bluff makes me fight back and you lose, well isn't it your fault for bluffing and threatening? Do you expect your words and actions to have no cost? It's a dangerous game when you threaten war and you mass troops and you close off trade routes.

Don't you bare a responsibility for your actions making the other nation believe it had to act?

Edit: It's sort of like bragging you are going to break a blockade, getting on a ship, charting a course to go through the blockade, and then attacking the people trying to maintain their blockade. Do you think that your words, plans, and actions have no consequences? Do you think you can say and do anything without repercussions?

best post of the thread.

and by the way, the reason Egypt backed down was they got busted planning the invasion and then found out that israel knew TO THE HOUR when the attack was to commence. I find guys like dockeryfan quite amusing, his twisted idea of middle eastern history and politics is a joke.

JMS at least has a clue and JPyak has an inkling of one but tends to overlook anything that doesnt agree with his opinions.

[jpyaks3]

you are not wrong, JPYAK likes his revisionist history

Nice rebuttal. Most scholars and experts in the region agree that Nasser was not going to invade Israel there have been numerous links posted in this thread along with several long explanations. How about you actually try and contribute to the discussion with some actual information backed by credible sources not something you read somewhere but can't find or something you saw somewhere but can't be bothered to produce.

[Ryman of the North]

Alright class,

Get out your pencils and paper and get ready to take notes... Today's topic will be "What led up to the 1967 War."

****edited because not only was it opinion mixed with some fact but most of the opinion was wrong and ill informed, stick to posting on muslim blogs, those guys will believe you.*****

All of this information is found in the scholarly records...

*****not very reputable scholars apparently*****

Class dismissed...

[Larry]

the West Bank? again yes its called war and the jews were willing to give it all back

You keep making that claim. From what I've read, it's not true.

What Israel has offered is a lot of the west bank, except:

Israel keeps all Israeli settlements.

And all of the roads connecting all of the settlements.

And all of the utilities connecting the settlements.

And all of the Palestinians borders with all other countries.

And a "security zone" around all of these things.

In short, Israel has "offered" about half of Palestine, divided into, I think, 47 areas, which do not touch each other, likewise not touching any other country. All all travel or commerce between these 47 areas, or from any area and the outside world, will be under permanent Israeli control.

Gee, I can't understand why those ungrateful people don't consider that a great offer. It's everything they want.

They must just be anti-semetic.

[jpyaks3]

Let's say you are right... which I don't think you are... but let's say you are right.

If you bluff and threaten me and shove me by closing canals and my lifeline to food and trade... and I decide to take your bluff seriously and hit back and instead of being cowed your bluff makes me fight back and you lose, well isn't it your fault for bluffing and threatening? Do you expect your words and actions to have no cost? It's a dangerous game when you threaten war and you mass troops and you close off trade routes.

Don't you bare a responsibility for your actions making the other nation believe it had to act?

Edit: It's sort of like bragging you are going to break a blockade, getting on a ship, charting a course to go through the blockade, and then attacking the people trying to maintain their blockade. Do you think that your words, plans, and actions have no consequences? Do you think you can say and do anything without repercussions?

Yes, Nasser miscalculated the Israeli response but that doesn't change the fact that an Israeli offensive action resulted in the acquisition of territory which is what my argument was in the first place. It has also been shown that Israel had knowledge that Nasser wasn't planning to attack and there were also diplomatic proceedings for dealing with the canal situation. Israel saw an opportunity and attacked you can't really fault them for that but its important to recognize the action for what it was it was an attack by Israel.

[Ryman of the North]

Nice rebuttal. Most scholars and experts in the region agree that Nasser was not going to invade Israel there have been numerous links posted in this thread along with several long explanations. How about you actually try and contribute to the discussion with some actual information backed by credible sources not something you read somewhere but can't find or something you saw somewhere but can't be bothered to produce.

google Israeli spy and Israeli intelligence circa 1948- present.

The israelis knew all about the plans, you arent even trying. seriously jpyak, you "israel was always attacking" people are FUNNY. but some of us can read.

[jpyaks3]

You keep making that claim. From what I've read, it's not true.

What Israel has offered is a lot of the west bank, except:

Israel keeps all Israeli settlements.

And all of the roads connecting all of the settlements.

And all of the utilities connecting the settlements.

And all of the Palestinians borders with all other countries.

And a "security zone" around all of these things.

In short, Israel has "offered" about half of Palestine, divided into, I think, 47 areas, which do not touch each other, likewise not touching any other country. All all travel or commerce between these 47 areas, or from any area and the outside world, will be under permanent Israeli control.

Gee, I can't understand why those ungrateful people don't consider that a great offer. It's everything they want.

They must just be anti-semetic.

Don't ask him to back up his facts because he probably lost the link or something. But you are absolutely correct the offer was a joke Israel knew that it was absolutely unacceptable and that the Palestinians would never take it and thats precisely why the offer was extended to win a PR battle and make it look like all Israel wanted was peace but the Palestinians were being unreasonable.

[dockeryfan]

Alright class,

Get out your pencils and paper and get ready to take notes... Today's topic will be "What led up to the 1967 War."

In the months that proceeded the conflict, the Israeli army was taking part in a land grab along the Golan Heights by basically taking a tractor and plowing a field and if there was no response they would plow closer to Syria and this went on up until the Syrians said enough and started to fire artillery toward the Israelis. You don't have to take my word for it at all! Luckily we have Moshe Dayan to thank for setting that record straight in an interview he did in the 1970's to where he claimed that at least 80% of the violence was initiated by his forces.

During this time period, Syria and Egypt were battling over who was the true symbol of Pan-Arabism and when Israel "retaliated in self defense" (I say with sarcasm) against the Syrian shelling, the Syrians taunted Nasser by say what are you going to do about it oh mister so called leader of the Pan Arab movement? The first time the Syrians taunted him Nasser didn't even bother to reply because he was more concerned with modernizing Egypt.

The Israelis then announced loudly that they were going to launch a major offensive against Syria and again the Syrians asked Nasser as to what he was going to do about it and that is why he told the UN to remove the peacekeeping forces along the Egyptian Israeli border. You guys need to understand that the reason Nasser did this was because is was the bare minimum he could do politically in order to ease the taunting of Syria and make it look like he was on their side. (He didn't care)

Israel wanted the 1967 War and they did everything possible to make sure that it would happen... Why? Because they wanted to knock out Nasser out of the Israeli governments fears of a modernized Arab state. Their mind set was such that if any Arab state was allowed to modernize then eventually they would attack Israel. If Israel didn't want war, all they had to do was restation those peace keeping troops on its side of the border since they were working fine.

In the straits of Tiran, the so called blockade didn't really exist as we think it did. When the conflict began, the UN decided to have a moratorium as to where Egypt would agree not to fire upon foreign flagged vessels if Israel would agree to not sail Israeli flagged vessels. Nasser said yes, Israel said no. When Israel said it had the rights to the straits of Tiran, Nasser said they didn't and offered to send the matter to the world court for it to be decided. Israel again refused.

A few days before the 6 Day War broke out, a member of Israeli Intelligence arrived in Washington to feel out the Americans because in reality, they weren't afraid of the Arabs they were afraid of Washington repeating what happened in 1956 when we told Israel to get out. According to American intelligence, they concluded that there was no way that Nasser was going to attack and if by some irrational chance he does, Israel would kick their !@#. The Israeli intelligence officer said they do no disagree with any of the American intelligence. The American intelligence actually stated that if there was a war that it would only last between 7 to 10 days at the most.

I don't think that there was a formulated plan to take over specific territory by the Israelis... I think however that in this plan to knock out Nasser, the lands were taken in the moment of opportunity (West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights).

Under International Law, you are required to seek all diplomatic solutions before engaging in war and in every step, Israel sought none of them. They feared a modern Egypt and the rise of Pan-Arabism and they had to knock out Nasser to stop it. The events that led up to the war were egged on by the Israelis to give them the excuse the needed to act.

All of this information is found in the scholarly records...

Class dismissed...

Quoted because it is the most accurate of the posts so far.

[Ryman of the North]

Really?

The only thing I find under "Camp David Accords" was a treaty between Israel and Egypt. They were signed. Jimmy Carter got the Nobel Peace Prize. Egypt got the Sinai and the Suez canal back. Sadat got killed. Egypt became the #2 recipient of US aid.

My apologies, It was a negotiation held at Camp david, and arafat walked out after being given everything he wanted, I believe it was one of clintons aides who leaked the negotiations afterwards, its been a while.

[jpyaks3]

google Israeli spy and Israeli intelligence circa 1948- present.

The israelis knew all about the plans, you arent even trying. seriously jpyak, you "israel was always attacking" people are FUNNY. but some of us can read.

I don't want to google anything how about you actually make an argument and back it up with facts from credible sources. Your shtick is getting old.

[Ryman of the North]

You keep making that claim. From what I've read, it's not true.

What Israel has offered is a lot of the west bank, except:

Israel keeps all Israeli settlements.

And all of the roads connecting all of the settlements.

And all of the utilities connecting the settlements.

And all of the Palestinians borders with all other countries.

And a "security zone" around all of these things.

In short, Israel has "offered" about half of Palestine, divided into, I think, 47 areas, which do not touch each other, likewise not touching any other country. All all travel or commerce between these 47 areas, or from any area and the outside world, will be under permanent Israeli control.

Gee, I can't understand why those ungrateful people don't consider that a great offer. It's everything they want.

They must just be anti-semetic.

ok try to stay with me Larry WERE DOES NOT MEAN ARE Israel had a very different apporach in the 60's and 70s and even until the 80s not until the nineties did they begin to get hardline and tell the arabs to go eff themselves, they did try several times to iron something out but lets be honest, when you are negotiating from strength you are less likely to give up anything you dont absolutely have to.