Something kicking off in Israel

IMG_6420.jpeg
 
Huthis still winning the Gulf of Aden games


Traffic through the Red Sea remains low, reflecting ongoing tensions in the region. The departure of the USS Eisenhower signals strategic shifts. Reports indicate that the Houthis are gaining significant ground, influencing the current situation.

GPK55E3X0AA9j7O
 
  • Sad
Reactions: wildcats and theLBC
Just one of the ports on Normandy beaches , if Brandon ordered this to be replicated US defense budget would probably not suffice , given Gaza pier for 320+mio lasted 2 weeks before it fell apart,

imagine this was 'assembled' in combat conditions on every one of the landing beaches in matter of days , not 3 months like Gaza Pier , note Atlantic at Normandy is some of the roughest sea and has a considerable tidal motion ,
main-qimg-e4b7863e1c4c37ae0e3ed51ed830cbcc

0*HEPoKwWrBjDmHONt


0*JwhJg4wjvlQas7qn




AND it was in service for quite some time, EVERYTHING came in through those temp ports. It was not till they got to Antwerp that they got a good, but destroyed port. One of the reasons of the battle of the bulge was to take this port away, it was a big deal. The supply line was running thin.
 
AND it was in service for quite some time, EVERYTHING came in through those temp ports. It was not till they got to Antwerp that they got a good, but destroyed port. One of the reasons of the battle of the bulge was to take this port away, it was a big deal. The supply line was running thin.
Port on Omaha beach did not last long as a massive storm wrecked it , but some on the other beaches survived.
But like said Atlantic in the channel is no Mediterranean Gaza beach

Maximum wave heights are around twice the significant wave height. They reached as high as 5 m at the eastern end of the Normandy beaches at 18 UTC on 20 June, and 4 m close to Omaha beach.
This matches contemporary reports of waves between about 2.5 and 4.5 metres high.

Fig_18%20copy.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: babyguppy
Port on Omaha beach did not last long as a massive storm wrecked it , but some on the other beaches survived.
But like said Atlantic in the channel is no Mediterranean Gaza beach

Maximum wave heights are around twice the significant wave height. They reached as high as 5 m at the eastern end of the Normandy beaches at 18 UTC on 20 June, and 4 m close to Omaha beach.
This matches contemporary reports of waves between about 2.5 and 4.5 metres high.

Fig_18%20copy.jpg

The invasion had been postponed several time, and when they went the weather was not ideal, but if they did not go then it would be months before they could try again.

Few things worse then having an army sitting there doing nothing.
 
The invasion had been postponed several time, and when they went the weather was not ideal, but if they did not go then it would be months before they could try again.

Few things worse then having an army sitting there doing nothing.

The most feared words from the 1SG are, "If you can't find something to do, then I will find something for you."
 
Huthis still winning the Gulf of Aden games


Traffic through the Red Sea remains low, reflecting ongoing tensions in the region. The departure of the USS Eisenhower signals strategic shifts. Reports indicate that the Houthis are gaining significant ground, influencing the current situation.

GPK55E3X0AA9j7O
This is a straightforward decision by NATO/US forces. They support this, shown by letting it happen. A few days of direct action from the air, or even a MEU, and it’s over. Just like Vietnam, a decade of “war” put to bed in 10 days when the decision was made to do so.
 
Been awhile since I've been in the PJ. This topic is fun. In short, my hot take no one asked for

1.) Fuck hamas.
2.) Fuck israel's government and their leadership.
3.) American people first, i.e., stay the fuck out of this issue and stop the god damn war mongering and proxy fuckery with our tax money.

/rant over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doubloon and Mr.BR
And they still have not surrendered. Gotta drop a few more apparently. I am of the philosophy that you don’t quit until your enemy waves the white flag. Palestine started it and Israel needs to finish it.

They for sure started this chapter of the conflict.

But they obviously didn't start this on the aggregate.

I'll never understand why the sins of Europeans (German society) had to be paid by the land and houses of Arabian Palestinians who had nothing to do with the Third Reich's actions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr.BR
They for sure started this chapter of the conflict.

But they obviously didn't start this on the aggregate.

I'll never understand why the sins of Europeans (German society) had to be paid by the land and houses of Arabian Palestinians who had nothing to do with the Third Reich's actions.
Doesn’t really matter they were on the losing end of the war. At that time they were the Ottoman Empire not Palestine. The powers that be at that moment in time gave Jews Israel as part of their reparations for WW2. When you lose, you also lose your ability to dictate what happens. The Ottoman Empire was no more and it was broken up. I have zero sympathy for them and they lost their claim a long time ago. It’s important to win when you are at war. Otherwise, you have to deal with the consequences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Emerson0311
Doesn’t really matter they were on the losing end of the war. At that time they were the Ottoman Empire not Palestine. The powers that be at that moment in time gave Jews Israel as part of their reparations for WW2. When you lose, you also lose your ability to dictate what happens. The Ottoman Empire was no more and it was broken up. I have zero sympathy for them and they lost their claim a long time ago. It’s important to win when you are at war. Otherwise, you have to deal with the consequences.

"..The powers that be.."

Britain, via the U.N.? An organization that was all of a few years old, gets to tell a people who did nothing to German Jews that they have to leave their land and thier houses because some ancient book says a certain people have rights to this land? By what power did the U.N. have to say who has what land?

Ottomans, palinstians, whatever, drop the labels and recognize there are still people alive who "have the keys" to houses and lands that they were kick off of because "mUh RePaRaTiOnZ", translation, paying for the crimes they did not commit.

Doesn't the very body that granted Israel's existence state that land can't be taken via conflict/war?

(stares at gaza and westbank).
 
"..The powers that be.."

Britain, via the U.N.? An organization that was all of a few years old, gets to tell a people who did nothing to German Jews that they have to leave their land and thier houses because some ancient book says a certain people have rights to this land? By what power did the U.N. have to say who has what land?

Ottomans, palinstians, whatever, drop the labels and recognize there are still people alive who "have the keys" to houses and lands that they were kick off of because "mUh RePaRaTiOnZ", translation, paying for the crimes they did not commit.

Doesn't the very body that granted Israel's existence state that land can't be taken via conflict/war?

(stares at gaza and westbank).
It’s not the first time people have been displaced in human history. And yes Britain 🇬🇧 and the UN had the power to do as they wish. It’s the consequence of being on the right side of things. Unless something or someone else comes along and changes the rules that’s the way it is. The rules change all the time and probably will continue to change. Israel was created on the basis of those rules at that time. They have been attacked repeatedly and have won even when attacked by multiple foreign powers at once. Nations have come and gone, borders and populations have changed. Just about every nation on Earth has had its borders changed over time. It happens and no one complains about it like the Palestinians do. They aren’t and shouldn’t have the right to return. Israel shouldn’t have to give up anything unless they lose. And do you think Russia isn’t going to take away territory from Ukraine? I bet they do and will.
 
Last edited:
"..The powers that be.."

Britain, via the U.N.? An organization that was all of a few years old, gets to tell a people who did nothing to German Jews that they have to leave their land and thier houses because some ancient book says a certain people have rights to this land? By what power did the U.N. have to say who has what land?

Ottomans, palinstians, whatever, drop the labels and recognize there are still people alive who "have the keys" to houses and lands that they were kick off of because "mUh RePaRaTiOnZ", translation, paying for the crimes they did not commit.

Doesn't the very body that granted Israel's existence state that land can't be taken via conflict/war?

(stares at gaza and westbank).
Does the right of return apply to American Indians too, or is that too close to home? Russians in the PNW? Mayans in the southern US?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doctorwho1138
It’s not the first time people have been displaced in human history. And yes Britain 🇬🇧 and the UN had the power to do as they wish. It’s the consequence of being on the right side of things. Unless something or someone else comes along and changes the rules that’s the way it is. The rules change all the time and probably will continue to change. Israel was created on the basis of those rules at that time. They have been attacked repeatedly and have won even when attacked by multiple foreign powers at once. Nations have come and gone, borders and populations have changed. Just about every nation on Earth has had its borders changed over time. It happens and no one complains about it like the Palestinians do. They aren’t and shouldn’t have the right to return. Israel shouldn’t have to give up anything unless they lose. And do you think Russia isn’t going to take away territory from Ukraine? I bet they do and will.
So playing this out, if Israel loses they should give everything to the Palestinians and Hezbollah?

Playing it further:
is China in Afghanistan because we lost?
Did the communists get Vietnam because we lost?
Did China get Hong Kong because the Brits were too big of a coward to hold them to their word on when they would get it back?

If Ukraine loses (seems pretty probable at this point), what does NATO lose other than a lot of money and face?

If BRICS+ becomes the economic superpower, do we serve them then?

If might makes right, does losing make wrong?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ken226
They for sure started this chapter of the conflict.

But they obviously didn't start this on the aggregate.

I'll never understand why the sins of Europeans (German society) had to be paid by the land and houses of Arabian Palestinians who had nothing to do with the Third Reich's actions.
a fair point but off a bit. the big influx post ww2 was of european decent. the "jews" were there 2K or so years before islam was invented. in fact they are the same people the sabras and the "arabs",both semitic. in fact the grand mufti of jerusalem was a big time supporter of hitler and there were some muslims in the waffen ss. they were from the balkans not arabia. muslims encouraged by the mufti. they were useless and spent their time killing serbs just like always. they mutinied and were disbanded. i think some might have been sent to france where they were also useless.
 
So playing this out, if Israel loses they should give everything to the Palestinians and Hezbollah?

Playing it further:
is China in Afghanistan because we lost?
Did the communists get Vietnam because we lost?
Did China get Hong Kong because the Brits were too big of a coward to hold them to their word on when they would get it back?

If Ukraine loses (seems pretty probable at this point), what does NATO lose other than a lot of money and face?

If BRICS+ becomes the economic superpower, do we serve them then?
Yes, If Israel loses and they have to make concessions as to part of its agreement as a result of losing the war.

We withdrew from Afghanistan and Vietnam. Did we fight China in Afghanistan? I must have missed that. I thought Afghanistan was in control of the Taliban. But yeah we don’t have any say as to what goes on there because we left and gave up. They are on their own. Not sure how that’s equivalent to what happened to the Ottoman Empire or any of your other examples for that matter.
 
Yes, If Israel loses and they have to make concessions as to part of its agreement as a result of losing the way.

We withdrew from Afghanistan and Vietnam. Did we fight China in Afghanistan? I must have missed that. I thought Afghanistan was in control of the Taliban. But yeah we don’t have any say as to what goes on there because we left and gave up. They are on their own. Not sure how that’s equivalent to what happened to the Ottoman Empire or any of your other examples for that matter.
Isn’t quitting or giving up losing? Isn’t the point of conflict to get the other person to to quit- to lose?

My point isn’t to be stupidly contrarian like some on here revel in. My point is that losing a war doesn’t mean that right is always the winner. It has its perks for sure, but right does lose and evil prevails. And sometimes neither side is morally right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chrome
It’s not the first time people have been displaced in human history. And yes Britain 🇬🇧 and the UN had the power to do as they wish. It’s the consequence of being on the right side of things. Unless something or someone else comes along and changes the rules that’s the way it is. The rules change all the time and probably will continue to change. Israel was created on the basis of those rules at that time. They have been attacked repeatedly and have won even when attacked by multiple foreign powers at once. Nations have come and gone, borders and populations have changed. Just about every nation on Earth has had its borders changed over time. It happens and no one complains about it like the Palestinians do. They aren’t and shouldn’t have the right to return. Israel shouldn’t have to give up anything unless they lose. And do you think Russia isn’t going to take away territory from Ukraine? I bet they do and will.

The consequences of being on the right side of things? I.e., fucking with an ethnic group thats not going to be able to push back as hard as you can.

Got it. Trax.

Agreed israel has been fucked with, some of it was deserved, some of it wasn't, but to believe they are 100% innocent country since 1949 is simply ignoring history.

How do you think we got Texas and the southwest?

And it ain't too late to expand into British Columbia all the way up to Alaska. Watch your back, Canadians!

Not ignoring that, but that was also almost a century before "the world" decided to stand up the U.N. and agree to no more land grabs via war.

Goes without saying IDGAF about the UN and its existence, but if we (the US) are going to beat our chests around the globe about the "rules based order" and "international law" but subsequently fund war crimes in israel, kind of degrades our standing. whatever is left anyways.

a fair point but off a bit. the big influx post ww2 was of european decent. the "jews" were there 2K or so years before islam was invented. in fact they are the same people the sabras and the "arabs",both semitic. in fact the grand mufti of jerusalem was a big time supporter of hitler and there were some muslims in the waffen ss. they were from the balkans not arabia. muslims encouraged by the mufti. they were useless and spent their time killing serbs just like always. they mutinied and were disbanded. i think some might have been sent to france where they were also useless.

Agreed about the post influx of jews coming into the Sinai area were of euro descent, but outside of religion, they were dramatically different ethnic groups compared to the arabian jews in the area, largely just united by their religion.

And agreed, there were obviously Jews in the area for millenia, along with christians, muslims, and so on.
Does the right of return apply to American Indians too, or is that too close to home? Russians in the PNW? Mayans in the southern US?

Like we did to the indians, they have self determination and equal rights under the US constitution, lets get there.
 
Isn’t quitting or giving up losing? Isn’t the point of conflict to get the other person to to quit- to lose?

My point isn’t to be stupidly contrarian like some on here revel in. My point is that losing a war doesn’t mean that right is always the winner. It has its perks for sure, but right does lose and evil prevails. And sometimes neither side is morally right.
Yes quitting is losing in my book. Israel has every right to exist as it has in my book because of how history unfolded. They are in the right and have fought tooth and nail to maintain its place in the Middle East. Zero sympathy for Palestine.
 
Yes quitting is losing in my book. Israel has every right to exist as it has in my book because of how history unfolded. They are in the right and have fought tooth and nail to maintain its place in the Middle East. Zero sympathy for Palestine.

They no more or no less right to exist than any other country, what makes them 'special' is the body of power and the land utilized to snap them into existence. Given the year they were founded and by the body of authority that "granted" them their country, they have a right to exist under that structure, but not at the expense of the civil liberties and rights of the original people who occupied the land.

And I'll take the argument one more step further. Israel is exponentially less safe today than they were OCT 6. The have burning through their equity and good will at a cosmic level, and have officially entered pariah state.

And they are taking the US with them. For whatever fucking reason we continue to back them...