What do they (Islamic terrorists) want?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cestusdei
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rodrigo_Bivar said:
What? You forgot the Israelis already assasinated the past leader of Hezbollah? How does that compare to any small military action you did? The casualty ratio between the IDF and Hezbollah is about 2.5 to 3.5 even according to the UN and Lebanese sources.
Click to expand...
No, that’s not true. The casualty ratio in Hizbullah’s latest war was about 1.5 to 1…they fought the entire war with only 3,000 soldiers.

And the past leader died years ago in a terrorist attack. Hassan Nasrallah did so well in this war that, after capturing two Israeli soldiers, killing almost a hundred (including the commander of a SF unit), and raining rockets on Israel…he gave a speech in public in beirut. Yet the Israelis did not touch him.
The problem with you Muslims is that you think a single IDF soldier killed is a glorious victory for you, regardless of the cost to your own side.
Click to expand...
No, the problem for you is that you can’t rationally evaluate this war because of your hatred from Muslims. I understand that you don’t want them to win, but the facts don’t do what you want.
I should think that Hezbollah are busy licking its wounds right now. Meanwhile in downtown Haifa, it’s business as usual.
Click to expand...
Hizbullah is taking over Lebanon, not licking its wounds. Israel, on the other hand, is having scandal after scandal, and it’s currently trying to open new training centers to deal with different kinds of warfare…do you think they are doing that because of their stellar performance in this war?

And then there’s Iran building nukes (Israel is powerless to stop it) and Syria (with more powerful forces than the recently victorious Hizbullah) right next door…oh yeah, “business as usual” alright
 
What do they want?
  1. All of us dead.
  2. Them in charge. Of the entire world, & all who dwell therein…
They are willing to settle, however, for:
  1. Many of us dead.
  2. The rest of us enslaved.
  3. Them in charge. Of the entire world, & all who dwell therein.
I am beginning to think that Pershing may have been smarter (& less inhumane) than I thought when I first read that story.
This:nope: does not make me happy. But it is the truth.
 
Where do you get your statistics, pro?

Secondly, I’m sure you’re happy Iran is getting nukes. Then when they use those nukes - we shall see amageddon. Is that what you want?

As for Hezbollah busy taking over Lebanon - it just goes to show the Muslim mentality. We shall see the next Hezbollah action and then more retaliation from the Israelis. And Lebanon will become more rubble. Is that what you want? You can’t win militarily against the Israelis. The Egyptians, Syrians and Jordanians have realize that - which is why they only ‘fight’ by proxy. And more fool the people of Lebanon who support Hezbollah. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

Like I said: rational people would prefer to be on the side of the Israelis than on the Hezbollah/Lebanese side after the last war. It’s back to normal in Israel and the skies are clear of Hezbollah rockets. Ask the average person in Haifa whether they feel Israel has won or not. I’m sure they will realize that they did.

Then ask the poor Lebanese still left homeless and destitute after the Israeli bombings - I’m sure in their heart of hearts they know they are on the losing side.
 
Rodrigo_Bivar said:
Where do you get your statistics, pro?

Secondly, I’m sure you’re happy Iran is getting nukes. Then when they use those nukes - we shall see amageddon. Is that what you want?
Click to expand...
Nice try changing the subject. The question was: did Israel teach those Iranians a lesson? The answer is: of course not. The Iranians are now ignoring threats of an attack and making threats of their own with impunity.
As for Hezbollah busy taking over Lebanon - it just goes to show the Muslim mentality. We shall see the next Hezbollah action and then more retaliation from the Israelis. And Lebanon will become more rubble.
Click to expand...
Is that what you want? You can’t win militarily against the Israelis. The Egyptians, Syrians and Jordanians have realize that - which is why they only ‘fight’ by proxy. And more fool the people of Lebanon who support Hezbollah. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
Click to expand...
Besides the point. You claimed that Israel “taught Hizbullah a lesson.” The fact of the matter is, Hizbullah is now stronger than it ever was before after the war. What kind of Israeli “victory” leaves its enemy in a better position than it was before the war!?

The fact of the matter is, Hizbullah took on the IDF militarily, and defeated it. That was not a “proxy” war…Hizbullah used its weapons to destroy Israeli tanks and force IDF ground units to retreat. That was a military victory, plain and simple.
Like I said: rational people would prefer to be on the side of the Israelis than on the Hezbollah/Lebanese side after the last war. It’s back to normal in Israel and the skies are clear of Hezbollah rockets. Ask the average person in Haifa whether they feel Israel has won or not. I’m sure they will realize that they did.
Click to expand...
Uh, the average Israeli thinks the war was lost. They want to sack Olmert over it. You need to spend some time reading Israeli papers.
Then ask the poor Lebanese still left homeless and destitute after the Israeli bombings - I’m sure in their heart of hearts they know they are on the losing side.
Click to expand...
Read the article from the Jerusalem post I cited above. It quotes people who had their homes and businesses destroyed-they’ve been paid by Hizbullah (not the Lebanese government) for the property, and are generally proud that Hizbullah defeated the IDF.
 
pro, while you rejoice that Hezbullah survived they didn’t really win. They are no longer shooting into Israel are they? Also Israel does have the power to stop Iran and destroy it. Iran certainly plans to destroy Israel. I remind you of Golda Meir’s words, “Israel will not die that men may speak well of her.” I find it hard to believe that you or anyone in the West can actually support and root for the terrorists to win.
 
Pro is going on about how the Lebanese support for Hezbollah has increased. He doesn’t understand that it is irrelevant. Even if the entire Muslim world becomes Hezbollah, Israel is still winning.

Every day Israel survives, it wins. Every day the Muslims fail to destroy Israel, they lose.

Oh… I suppose the Muslims don’t mind living in rubble so long as they got to fire a few rockets at Haifa.
 
Something is wrong with it tonight. Try to google it and then click on it. It is eye openning.
 
cestusdei said:
www.foxnews.com

The lead article is on the goals of the Islamic terrorists. They are very simple:
  1. Seizing Jerusalem and subjugation of Christendom.
  2. Destruction of the White House and by extension the USA.
They are delighted at the election results and consider it a sign of American cowardice. They are heartened by the democrats win. they know that the liberals and democrats will essentially surrender. Given how they treat Christians over there we can have a general idea of what is in store for us. There is now no excuse to claim we don’t know what they want or that we can “negotiate” with them.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry if I sound a bit racist here. I promise I am not. I’m just very angry. I read this in a primary resource. This comes straight from th Quran, Koran, Q’ran, however the heck you want to spell it… even the Muslims can’t seem to decide… Muhammad wrote that the Muslims are God’s chosen people and that they should try to convert the whole world. They shouldn’t do it by force, but if the unbeleivers were even the slightest bit aggressive, kill them! Now, I don’t know about everyone else, but being in an AP World History class, you learn what the Muslims did back then. They were among the most annoying groups to study! (These groups include wandering/invading nomads, Muslims, and those darn Huns…) Neither of these groups could keep their hands off other peoples’ land! They just waltz right in and start conquering! Now here is the contradiction. Even when Muhammad was the leader, he lead a giant attack on Mecca because they kicked him out and forced Islam upon it. If he said God said not to force Islam on “unbelievers”, then what was he doing sending thousands of people from Medina on an attack?! These terrorists are doing the same thing!!! It’s driving me insane!!!
And another thing, what is up with them naming their kids “Muhammad” all the time?! You know how many Muhammads there were in Islam history? I failed a test because I couldn’t remember which Muhammad was which! Do Christians go around naming their kids Jesus all the time? NO! They always say “who is great and may Allah bless him” or something along the lines of that when they talk about the prophet Muhammad, but isn’t it kind of contradictory when they overuse that name and make it seem less “Holy” by naming every other boy that’s born Muhammad??? That’s kind of like how in the US the name John or Ashely is so common, it’s not special anymore. They degrade their own “Last Prophet’s” name…
 
inJESUS said:
sorry for your test 😦 but :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: about the way you put it!

it was Muhammad who told them that the house that has the name Muhammad will be blessed 😃

well i find it boring as well… if someone is writing about Muhammad and if you delete the “peace be upon him” stuff, you’d delete half of the article!😛 and when am listening on tv about a sheikh talking about Muhammad, i get annoyed by his repetitive blessings each and every time the word muhammad is mentioned… i mean why say it each and every time the name is used?! one woman was once blamed on tv for ommiting “once” the blessing! is it an intercession? because it sure sounds more than “respect” !
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
inJESUS said:
sorry for your test 😦 but :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: about the way you put it!
Click to expand...
I know… it’s so sad it’s funny:)
if someone is writing about Muhammad and if you delete the “peace be upon him” stuff, you’d delete half of the article!😛 and when am listening on tv about a sheikh talking about Muhammad, i get annoyed by his repetitive blessings each and every time the word muhammad is mentioned… i mean why say it each and every time the name is used?!
Click to expand...
no joke… do we say “Blessed be the Lamb of God” or something EVERYTIME we talk about Jesus…? Heck no!
one woman was once blamed on tv for ommiting “once” the blessing! is it an intercession? because it sure sounds more than “respect” !
Click to expand...
Are you serious??? And the whole “lets-degrade-women” thing is stupid does anyone want to know how it started? I promise this is true. True and ridiculous. Thank you Mr. Harmon…(History teacher) If you don’t want to read this, then just stop reading. I’m going on another rant…:

A short time after Muhhamad (do I have to “bless” his name…?) the men of the whole Islam tribes started getting abnormally large egos. The kind that girls today would quickly get rid of by delivering a nice burn. But, since this is approximately 650 AD (not sure about date. More of an educated guess than actual answer) women were concidered inferior, even though they still had similar rights. No Islam guy would listen to a woman… Anyway, the guys start thinking in strange ways. Let me simulate it in the same way we did in class. (Plus some of my own sarcasm…😛 )

Muslim dude #1(lets call him Mohammad…): Oh my Allah, these women just have the hots for us!

Muslim dude #2 (let’s call him Ibn because that was also an overused name): I know man! They just can’t get over us!

Mohammad: We’re just so hot. We’re too hot for them!

Ibn: Like, dude! Honestly… Hey, why don’t we make them wear stupid veils so they can be protected from our hotness!

Yea… that’s more or less how it went down… How is putting a veil on women supposed to make them “protected from the men’s hotness”? If you ask me, I don’t see what “hotness” they were talking about!😛
 
jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1157913624183

Muna Fayyad, a Shi’ite professor at the University of Lebanon, and the Mufti of Tyre, Sayyid Ali al-Amin, for example, both questioned the right of Hizbullah to bring disaster on the Shi’ites of Lebanon, by dragging them into an ill considered adventure they never wanted, in the interests of a foreign power like Iran, about whom they were never consulted.

A poll conducted in Lebanon in late August revealed that two thirds of the non-Shi’ite public believed that Hizbullah had actually been defeated in the war.

Hazim Saghiya, writing in Al-Hayat, questioned whether victory could be celebrated on the ruins of Lebanon by a leader who had to remain in hiding. Another commentator in Al-Hayat, Hasan Haydar, compared Nasrallah’s interview of apology to Egyptian president Gamal Nasser’s admission of defeat in 1967. The Arabs, he noted, were still paying for the defeat in 1967, and he wondered for how long the Lebanese and the Arabs would be paying for Nasrallah’s “ill-considered ‘victory.’”

IN DIRECT military terms Hizbullah’s losses were heavy and will not be easily replenished either. Key installations and command and control centers were totally destroyed in the Dahiya area of Southern Beirut and in the South of the country. Fortified positions, bunkers and stores in close proximity to the border with Israel have been demolished, and it is highly unlikely that Israel will allow their reconstruction under any circumstances.

The organization lost between a quarter to a third of its fighting men. Bravado aside, in numerous encounters Hizbullah fighters fled the field of battle, leaving their equipment behind, to avoid direct confrontation with Israeli ground forces.
 
well regarding the women veil, it was Umar who asked Muhammad for it and…yes you guessed it…Umar’s request inspired Allah so he sent a “revelation” obliging Muhammad’s women to cover themselves…Muhammad even made sure they couldn’t get married after he dies 😉
 
Rodrigo_Bivar said:
jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1157913624183

Muna Fayyad, a Shi’ite professor at the University of Lebanon, and the Mufti of Tyre, Sayyid Ali al-Amin, for example, both questioned the right of Hizbullah to bring disaster on the Shi’ites of Lebanon, by dragging them into an ill considered adventure they never wanted, in the interests of a foreign power like Iran, about whom they were never consulted.

A poll conducted in Lebanon in late August revealed that two thirds of the non-Shi’ite public believed that Hizbullah had actually been defeated in the war.

Hazim Saghiya, writing in Al-Hayat, questioned whether victory could be celebrated on the ruins of Lebanon by a leader who had to remain in hiding. Another commentator in Al-Hayat, Hasan Haydar, compared Nasrallah’s interview of apology to Egyptian president Gamal Nasser’s admission of defeat in 1967. The Arabs, he noted, were still paying for the defeat in 1967, and he wondered for how long the Lebanese and the Arabs would be paying for Nasrallah’s “ill-considered ‘victory.’”

IN DIRECT military terms Hizbullah’s losses were heavy and will not be easily replenished either. Key installations and command and control centers were totally destroyed in the Dahiya area of Southern Beirut and in the South of the country. Fortified positions, bunkers and stores in close proximity to the border with Israel have been demolished, and it is highly unlikely that Israel will allow their reconstruction under any circumstances.

The organization lost between a quarter to a third of its fighting men. Bravado aside, in numerous encounters Hizbullah fighters fled the field of battle, leaving their equipment behind, to avoid direct confrontation with Israeli ground forces.
Click to expand...
true.
 
Rodrigo_Bivar said:
Claims of increased strength of Hezbollah are irrelevant. The objective of the war was not to destroy Hezbollah but to stop the rocket attacks on Israel.
Click to expand...
I thought the objective was to secure the release of the soliders taken hostage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top