27 Israeli pilots to refuse missions in West Bank, Gaza

Care to explain this? Your quoted piece seems to contradict this wild assertion.

 

I usually avoid many of the Israel/Palestine debates, in that I feel it is a situation where both sides are wrong/right from various perspectives, and moreover I can honestly say that were i born as an Israeli or a Palestinian I might be completely sympathetic to whatever each has done, even though both go against my actual moral compass, so I honestly haven't noticed Lil's tendancy to push one side of this debate...


...on that note, however, and ( I swear) without having read ahead, what recent participation I have made in these debates leads me to predict that, if he hasn't already, bama will certainly make an appearance in this thread, and I would find it hard to imagine that Lil's predictability factor or indeed the extremity of his slant will rival what bama will bring to the table.

And further, in Lil's defense, when discussing the Israeli/Palestinian situation with Canadians, Europeans, etc. I somethimes find myself taking the Israeli position as counterpoint, but almost invarialby when Isael/Palestine comes up in an American discussion, I find myself taking the Palestinian position for counterpoint. As a nation the USA is remarkably consistent in our general perspective of this issue, and perhaps Lil is simply trying to balance that tendancy to keep the discussion more in line with how the world views it; shared responsibility, and less how the US tends to see it; bad vs. good, or at least very bad vs. not nearly so bad.

 

MacBeth, why don't you just read the thread first before participating in the discussion.

 

In that my initial comment was based on the actual predictability of a certain poster on this issue, and that would have been negated had I read ahead, I wanted to respond at that time in the discussion; the very time you had responded. Is there a problem with this? I often see people responding as they read, but rarely have I seen you...well, at least you're consistent in another respect, although I still maintain that it wasn't me who p*ssed in your Corn Flakes way back when...

 

I don't know what the hell you are talking about, but to come into a thread, dump a long-ass post and say "I have no idea of the discussion at hand, but I am sure xxx will post in this thread and it will be an extreme position" when that person has already posted three times in this thread which could have easily been seen is pretty damn stupid, and I would have said the same thing no matter who would have done it (well, except if it had been one of the people with extra buttons).

 

Certainly

"Several years away"

amply supported, by this quote,


"But don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen any time soon. "

and this one:

"These problems will take time to solve: the Russian experience has shown that oil field development should not be
rushed, and Iraqis are proud of the degree to which they have developed their oil fields given the trying circumstances
surrounding their country. In other words, Iraq’s oil fields are not money lying on the ground for the first person to pick
up, but a long-term investment."

http://www.csis.org/europe/2003_Feb_03_Ebel.pdf


"Miniscule effect"

An educated guess based on Iraq's capacity as compared to Opec's and the worlds based on the Baker institue studies. (http://www.bakerinstitute.org/Pubs/workingpapers/pecupdate/PecupdateJaffe.pdf) Even in a best case scenario, Iraq will, within 10 years, match the yearly production capacity of Venezuela, about 6 million barrels a day by 2010. While that's certainly nothing to sneeze at, there's a projected worldwide production of 95 million a day at that point.

Will Iraq (making the GIGANTIC ENORMOUS assumption that it leaves OPEC) be a major player in Oil production with roughly 7% market share? Certainly. Will it be able to singlehandedly lower prices enough to "save lives" by producing a few hundred thousand more barrels a day Probably not in any but the most strained extrapolation.

In closing I would like to say:

ASSERTION SUPPORTED



EDIT: I'm sorry for continuing this discussion, it has nothing to do with 27 Israeli Pilots, I guess.

 

uh-huh.

 

Apology accepted .

 

Well at least you now know that Iraq is in OPEC, earlier you were wondering if they would join. Trying to back up your wild assertions with proof is educational, isn't it, Samuel?

Your logic is once again severely flawed. To further your education, I would like to inform you that Iraq has more oil than any country in the world, with the exception of Saudi Arabia. Finding and development costs in Iraq are tiny relative to other countries. To think that Iraq ramping up to full capacity won't put any pressure on OPEC or put any pressure on oil prices is ludicrous. With the doors open to foreign investment, their infrastructure will undoubtedly be improved dramatically. With a friendly regime in power, upgraded infrastructure, and over 100 billion barrels of proved reserves, a democratic Iraq has the potential to reshape the entire energy industry.

Samuel, you have been PANTSED

 

If you haven't spent the time in the ME threads were lil made totally inappropriate comments, how can you possibly express such an opinion here? He doesn't just 'have a tendency', he has expressed racist comments that resulted in some subsequent discussion, which apparently, you did not partake in.

I'm embarrassed for you on this one, MacBeth. You don't know what you are talking about. You were so willing to jump right in w/o any background, that for at least me, your future posts will have lost some of their credibility.

 

So you think it's worth the deaths of 305 Americans to occupy Iraq for the next 50 years. Interesting.

You do realize, of course, that our *children* will eventually have to defend Iraq.

I wonder if it will be worth it to them.

 

1. TJ, as you well know, Iraq being in OPEC aids my argument and hinders yours.

2. Yes, I'm aware that Iraq's proven Oil reserves are 11% of the world's known, I read it in the report that you got it out of after I linked it for you. However, this is sleight of hand; reserves and capacity are two different things. What matters is how much production Iraq can engage in at the optimal level; it would simply be uneconomical and wasteful for them to build up enough capacity to be able to produce 11% of the world's daily output.

3. Again, this narrow portion of the debate ignores the GIGANTIC ENORMOUS start up costs for rehabbing the Iraqi oil industry (which we were initially promised would finance the war-- yeah right)

Sigh... a typical example of your favorite debating style, which I wholeheartedly oppose:

 

Let me ask you, SamFisher, how can Iraq *join* OPEC when they are already in it? You clearly don't know what you are talking about. This much is obvious. Your opinion will be discounted appropriately.

 

Sam Fisher and Trader_Jorge, you guys crack me up. Please keep it up .

 

Duly noted that my initial phraseology, as opposed to the entirety of my substantive premise, was incorrect, however you, my myopic friend:



BTW, that "exposed" graphic you've used twice, as I'm sure you know, comes from "worldpeaceinternational.org" or some similarly sinster sounding crew of birkenstock wearers; beware the image search, it makes for strange bedfellows.

 

Sam, what do you know about my debating style? Very little. You are a rookie who has only been here since April. Most of my classic posts were delivered before you even got here. I am in semi-retirement mode at this point. Limited partner status if you will. I do not have the time to invest in developing additional classics for the archives. My legend and intellect have been proven time and time again. Yours are still in the process of evaluation -- and it's not looking good at this point. You can't google your way to CC.Net infamy as you repeatedly attempt to do. It takes wit, humor, intelligence, wide-ranging interests, and strong brand equity. Trader_Jorge is the embodiment of these traits.

 

That one in and of itself probably was a classic, brand equity indeed.

 

Those who boast of high intelligence and strong character rarely have either.

But I'm sure you're the exception.

 

keeping on topic...


From the Jerusalem Post:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1064373872834


All active pilots among dissenters grounded
By MATTHEW GUTMAN


Advertisement

The Israeli Air Force moved

swiftly Thursday to mete punishment on some of the 27 officers who signed a petition refusing to serve in the territories, grounding nine of the pilots, who drew harsh condemnation from Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on down to their fellow reservists.

Simultaneously the government and the IDF, fearing international fallout and the championing of the 27 reservists, prepared to launch a counter- propaganda campaign abroad.

The refusal movement, led by some of Israel's most legendary pilots, was met with unprecedented rancor, with Sharon saying that the "severe and difficult" issue must "be dealt with and quickly."

The Prime Minister said it was "unacceptable," that officers should "exploit their uniform and rank in the name of the IDF for political purposes."

So grave is the matter considered that even the Knesset Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee decided to discuss the pilots's refusal when it recovenes next Tuesday following the Rosh Hashan holiday.

IAF commander Maj. Gen. Dan Halutz gave the order Thursday morning to ground the nine the only active pilots of the refusal movement, and ordered the immediate grounding of the handful of flight instructors in the Hazterim base in the south. They will meet with their commanders in the coming days and will be asked to retract the statement publicly. Those who refuse will be dismissed from active duty.

IDF sources indicated that the reservists would likely not be tried, largely because their reserve duty is semi-voluntary, and because a majority of the signatories are beyond the age of reserve duty.

The signatories of the letter, circulated first in the press, and then handed over to Halutz, said that they refused to "continue to harm innocent civilians," and other "immoral and illegal," operations that are part and parcel of the occupation.

In a meticulously planned media campaign, the pilots had cut a deal of exclusivity with Channel Two and Yediot Aharonot prior to the release of their letter. They were to the other media Thursday and remain virtually underground until the Friday morning publication of Yediot.

Apparently their letter had been circulating among IAF officers for about two months, unbeknownst to the IAF's central command.

But the harshest words came from the pilots' own commander in chief, Halutz. In an effort at damage control, Halutz wrote a letter to all IAF officers slicing into the pilots by saying their refusal is virtually as immoral as "sticking a knife in the backs of the fighters fulfilling their operational duty and into democracy." He also condemned the action of the 27 pilots at a time when "hundreds of civilians and soldiers are killed in terrorist attacks."

As he has reiterated several times on national television for the past two days, Halutz added that there is no more moral an army than Israel's and that never was an order given to target innocent civilians. In his letter to his subordinates, Halutz also wondered how the refuseniks could be shot in the media wearing their flight suits without the knowledge of base commanders.

Standing steadfastly behind the IAF and Halutz, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, slammed the refuseniks, saying their "refusal has no connection to morality they are simply using [their] rank and their uniform to sound political statements."

The pilots have not negated that statement.

Much of the condemnation, including that of Chief of Staff Moshe Yaalon focused the refusniks' exploitation of their status as pilots, and their ranks to promote a marginal political viewpoint.

Hundreds of reserve pilots, those who conduct targeted killings among them, flooded the media Thursday, slamming the letter of refusal, as immoral, traitorous and even dangerous. Some feared that the publication of details of their activities could leave pilots exposed to the International War Crimes Tribunal.

Yet to the chagrin of the IAF the hemorrhaging continued. Sources close to the refusing pilots reported that since the Wednesday announcement as many as seven additional pilots signed the letter, one of them a colonel.

The IDF is especially piqued due to the high rank of the refusniks. There are two Lt. Colonels, nine colonels, and a Brigadier General involved, and the IAF is anxious that the as of yet tiny movement could have a larger overall impact. Brig Gen (res) Yiftah Spector, a legendary ace in the IAF served as a base commander and was at one time Halutz's flight instructor.

Sources in the IAF are also beginning to fret over of what is called "gray refusal," whereby a small number of pilots express their discomfort with targeted assassinations and are removed from the assignment by their superiors. The deal is conducted quietly often without the knowledge of senior IAF commanders.

Maj (res) Chen Alon, one of the leaders of the infantry refusal movement the Courage to Refuse, which aided the pilots in their decision and public relations, said that the pilots are aiming for 50 signatories by Friday morning.

The leaders of the airforce refusal movement approached over 100 of their active reserve duty colleagues, among them helicopter gunship pilots who are called on for a support role in assassinations.

Most rejected the call to refuse. One, a Blackhawk pilot, told The Jerusalem Post that while "I don't really condone the assassinations But I thought signing the petition a dangerous line to cross. Orders are orders; they are part of serving in the Air Force."

 

Yeah, sorry, T_J. Totally uncalled for. My apologies.