quote:

---

Originally written by 7Synergy7:

d r o n e

-s-

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Kelandon:

quote:

---

Originally written by Lenar Labs:

Nightwish

---

I know four of their songs: Wish I Had An Angel, Nemo, Wishmaster, and Moondance. What are some others that I should know?

---

quote:

---

Originally written by jamesmcm:

Well, i never stop listening to Iron Maiden so...

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Ephesos:

Infernal, thanks for not responding to any of my posts.

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

and the third was on one of the Jewish holy days, during which, nearly all of the military was off duty.

---

And Israel would've been hard-pressed to win had it not been for... Portugal. Well, or Operation Nickel Grass.

Another reason Wikipedia is everyone's friend... who would've guessed that Portugal saved Israel? :D

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Ephesos:

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

Do you really think that if the press knows something, the government won't after a day?

---

Okay, but the government can't trust everything the press says. Otherwise, the U.S. gov't would constantly be consulting the Enquirer over possible retaliation for abductions.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

Whether or not Israel bullys it's neighbors, is irrelevant.

---

Maybe if you're looking at the case in a political vacuum, then it could be irrelevant. But if Israel does tend to bully its neighbors (an idea which I agree with, though I acknowledge that it's mutual bullying), then the U.S. would have a reason to withold said information. Maybe, just maybe, the U.S. doesn't want anything to happen that will de-stabilize the Middle East any more than it already has been.

And just in general, I believe that it's totally relevant what Israel does to its neighbors, just as much as it is relevant what Israel's neighbors do to Israel.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

There is only one reason that Israel doesn't make "misconceived 'first strikes'" to wipe enemies who have repeatedly stated that they would wipe Israel off the map off the map. Unlike what you seem to beleive, Israel waits for actual violence before taking part in military actions.

---

Yes, and we all know that incidences of violence around Israel are few and far between, don't we? :P

I mean seriously, the country just has to wait about 24 hours before another reason for military action pops up.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

As for destroying America's rapport with the Middle East, well, if preventing the all out slaughter of extremist Palestinians destroys one's rapport amongst the Palestineans, then there is no comment I can possibly make on the matter.

---

Could you clarify what the heck that means?

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

What you don't have the resources for is taking on the entire extremist Muslim world.

---

...which would likely declare jihad on us after an act like invading Iran. And anyway, I don't think it's an argument about whether or not we could do it. I think we could do it. I just don't think we could "finish the job" in less than half a century, unless you use W's definition of "finish the job".

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

As for the right recognizing that Israel is a liability, most Palestinean groups beleive that anything concerning Israel's right to exist is a direct threat to them.

---

Is this part of your argument, or just part of a tangential rant?

---

quote:

---

And can we leave out the cheap shots about whose country is more "civilized"? That goes for everyone here.

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Nioca:

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

Israel waits for actual violence before taking part in military actions.

---

The thing is, 'actual violence' can be initiated by either side.

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Tyranicus:

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

quote:

---

Originally written by Tyranicus:

I disagree. You might be able to take on Syria, but Iran would eat you for breakfast.

---

Israel has the second best army in the world. Second best only because it is lacking the numbers of the best, namely, the American. America consistently buys Israeli made and/or improved weapons.

---

It has to do with numbers. In case you hadn't noticed, Iran is significantly bigger, and not just in area.

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Tyranicus:

I disagree. You might be able to take on Syria, but Iran would eat you for breakfast.

---

quote:

---

What in the world could you possibly use to back that statement up?

---

quote:

---

Originally written by The Worst Man Ever:

That you find Pollard's punishment unacceptable and Vanunu's acceptable tells an impartial observer all they need to know about you: you are a chauvinist crank and expecting to receive any useful information from you is unreasonable.

---

quote:

---

My understanding, by the way, is that Pollard offered information to the Israeli government and Vanunu information to the British press. Similar behavior, different gravity.

---

quote:

---

One reason we're withholding information from Israel, by the way, is that you have a nasty habit of bullying your neighbors and forcing us to bail you out diplomatically. It's destroyed our rapport with the middle east. Further, if the IDF decides to make some kind of misconcieved 'first strike' against Iran - the sort of thing it does ALL THE DAMN TIME - then we face having to bail you out militarily.

---

quote:

---

We don't have the resources to take on Iran, and given how thirsty you people are for Muslim blood, we really don't want to give you any more slack than you absolutely need to function. Even the right wing, which is all in favor of you slaughtering brown people under normal circumstances, recognizes how much of a liability you've become to our foreign and military policy.

---

quote:

---

Maybe if you behaved like civilized human beings we wouldn't be forced to hide our intelligence data from you. And part of that involves not bombing first and asking questions later.

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Charged Slartile:

Actually, that brings up something I've always wondered. Infernal, you have very strong convictions. Most people here seem to disagree with them (with greater and lesser degrees of politeness, unfortunately).

Why do you bring up this stuff HERE? I mean I understand that you like to debate it, but do you really enjoy arguing about it with people who aren't receptive to your opinions?

---

quote:

---

Originally written by *i:

quote:

---

Except that the documents that he took legally belonged to Israel. Whether or not there was anything really, really bad in there, it was not America's to withhold. Stealing something you own from a thief is hardly a life sentance crime. In fact, I'd be extremely surprised if someone that did that got any more than a few months.

---

You really do have an oversimplified view of the matter. Pollard was likely doing a lot more than you claim. As to exactly what, it's unlikely we will ever know.

If you read the open literature on the matter, you can see that he likely gave other things to Israel (despite his claims to the contrary) that they did not need to have. This information was likely sold by Israel to other nations causing serious harm to the United States defense and intelligence capabilities.

Point is, he was a spy. Even if he felt that Israel should have these documents, that is not his decision alone to make. As for questions of legality, I think this is a lot more complicated than that. The US is required to share information regarding Israel's defense so long as it is not contrary to US security interests. A sovereign country always has the right to protect its own security regardless of other agreements.

Also: please do not double post.

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Arancan'tremembertherest:

The agents who abducted him in Italy committed a crime. Pollard committed a crime.

---

quote:

---

Frankly, you should keep well away from arguing the legality of any of this.

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Charged Slartile:

It's not quite as one-sided as that. Wikipedia has an even-handed presentation of what may or may not have happened, and discusses the sentencing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Pollard

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Arancan'tremembertherest:

http://www.vanunu.org/

---

quote:

---

Originally written by *i:

Passing on classified information to any other country is an extremely serious offense, the statement makes it sound like stealing bubble gum. It does not matter what he "felt" was right, that is not his decision to make. Neither one of us knows what was actually in the documents passed, for all we know there could have been a lot of things that were really, really bad included in there.

As a part of inaccuracy, many (if not all) of the people mentioned that were convicted were not tried nor convicted of treason, but with espionage.

---

quote:

---

On November 21, 2006 Jonathan Pollard entered his 22nd year of a life sentence for providing classified information to Israel.

Ever since Pollard was able to obtain the unclassified titles of the documents that were used as evidence against him, and these titles were published in a petition to Israel's High Court of Justice, there can be no doubt that the information Pollard passed to Israel concerned Syrian, Iraqi, Libyan and Iranian nuclear, chemical and biological warfare capabilities - all being developed for use against Israel.

It also included information on ballistic missile development by these countries and information on planned terrorist attacks against Israeli civilian targets. The US was deliberately withholding this vital information, despite a legal commitment to share this data with its ally, Israel.

Even a glimpse at the record shows that Pollard, who spied for an ally of the US, was sentenced far more severely than the most notorious spies for enemy states - all of whom are free today. A few examples:

* Michael Walker, part of the infamous Walker spy ring, was arrested in 1985, the same year as Pollard. The ring operated for 17 years, selling sensitive US military secrets to the Soviet Union, causing what authorities described as extensive damage to national security. He was sentenced to 25 years. Walker is a free man today.

* Clayton Lonetree, a marine sergeant guarding the US Embassy in Moscow, spied for the KGB and was sentenced in 1987 to 30 years. He gave the Russians the floor plans of the US embassies in Moscow and Vienna. His sentence was reduced three times. Lonetree is a free man today.

* Richard Miller is the first FBI agent ever tried for espionage. He turned over secrets, including a counterintelligence manual, to the Soviets. He was sentenced to 20 years. Miller is a free man today.

* Abdelkader Helmy, a missile researcher, was sentenced in 1989 for selling technology related to the Condor Missile project to Egypt which found its way to Iraq. He got 48 months and served considerably less. Helmy is a free man today.

* Samuel Morison, a US Navy analyst, removed scores of confidential material, including photos he sold that were printed in Jane's Defense Weekly. The photos were classified SCI; exposing such sensitive material carries a mandatory life sentence.

The grandson of an illustrious naval historian, his family ties are the only way to explain why in 1985 he was sentenced to only two years, and served only three months. What is more, in spite of extreme opposition by the CIA to clemency, Morison received a full pardon from former president Bill Clinton in January 2001. Morison is a free man today.

* Ronald Montaperto, a former pentagon analyst, gave highly classified information to the Chinese for more than a decade. This seriously damaged US national security by hampering efforts to track China's covert arms sales to nations sponsoring terrorism. Montaperto was recently sentenced to three months in prison.

Unlike the above-mentioned, Pollard was never convicted of treason. Nor was he ever accused of damage to the United States in a formal indictment - only in the media, where he could not respond to his accusers. The only offense Pollard was ever indicted for was one count of passing classified information to an ally.

IN 1998, ending years of denial, the Israeli government admitted that Pollard was its agent and granted him formal recognition. By definition, an agent works out of commitment to a country, not for profit. Once he was recognized as a bona fide Israeli agent, any speculation about Pollard's motive was put to the lie.

Pollard never had a trial. He was coerced into a plea-bargain agreement, which he honored and the US abrogated. In spite of the fact that he pled guilty and cooperated fully with the prosecution, at the last minute the sentencing judge ignored the plea deal and sentenced Pollard to life.
...

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Spookee Salmon:

English speakers have a long and rich history of borrowing words from other languages, mangling them, and using them until they no longer have any semblence of their original meaning. It no long matters what something used to mean, only what it means now. You dig?

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Black-Hatted Red Shirt:

I'm sure it got misfiled with all the appropriated Yiddish and nobody noticed that some Hebrew slipped in until it was too late.

—Alorael, who agrees that grab-and-mutilate linguistics are perfectly kosher.

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Thahd Lemonade:

What Salmon said. Really, "kosher" as commonly used in English has a very similar meaning to the original; it's just been generalized and is no longer specific to Jewish law. As religious-to-secular word-borrowings go, this one is pretty inocuous.

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Emperor Tullegolar:

So if I call someone a complete moron it's kosher as long as I give references? Can I also say "I'm right and your wrong" as long as I give references?

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Tyranicus.:

Mat Cauthon rocks, but he's not the best character.
Perrin Aybara for the win!

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon:

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

quote:

---

Originally written by Robert Daniel Oliver:

quote:

---

Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon:

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

quote:

---

Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon:

Using the CIA Factbook is garbage reasoning. Use something that is real. :)

---

The fact that you poited out how crappy the CIA's reasoning is and not Amnesty's just proves how crappy your reasoning is.

---

Who the heck are you??

---

Nobody you would want to argue politics, accuracy in journalism, human rights or international law with. Take my word for it.

:rolleyes:

---

Awww, come on Aran, stop being such a spoilsport.

---

So, you are opinionated. Big hairy deal. The fact that you ignore what I say, in favor of what you think I should have said, exposes your "reason" as the malfunction that it truly has become. But, what else should I have expected from someone with your backround?
:eek:

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Robert Daniel Oliver:

quote:

---

Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon:

quote:

---

Originally written by radix malorum est cupiditas:

quote:

---

Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon:

Using the CIA Factbook is garbage reasoning. Use something that is real. :)

---

The fact that you poited out how crappy the CIA's reasoning is and not Amnesty's just proves how crappy your reasoning is.

---

Who the heck are you??

---

Nobody you would want to argue politics, accuracy in journalism, human rights or international law with. Take my word for it.

:rolleyes:

---