Support NeoGAF

[Propagandhim]

I'm not denying them a homeland at all. Read what I was responding to, sheesh. Your first point is easily countered by the history of the region from the Israeli POV too. Don't attack me for no reason, even if I'm making a tongue-in-cheek comment (well attack me, fine, but at least respect what I'm responding to).

You made an extremely simplified and sarcastic comment and he responded respectfully. Where did he attack you?

 

[psycho_snake]

'Israel also bombed a textile factory in the border town of al-Manara, killing one person and wounding two, Mayor Ali Rahal told The Associated Press.'


Are textile factories considered military targets now?


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060723/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_israel

It seems that any place where innocent people are is a military target.

 

[APF]

You made an extremely simplified and sarcastic comment and he responded respectfully. Where did he attack you?

Uh, I was also replying to an extremely simplified comment, and responded in kind, to show exactly how simplistic that calculation is.*

But nice try, Propagandhim! :lol



*Instigator's response basically was, "sure that's true, but there are extenuating circumstances, and certainly you can't deny them a homeland because etc etc..." Well duh; that's the point...

 

[Propagandhim]

Uh, I was also replying to an extremely simplified comment, and responded in kind, to show exactly how simplistic that calculation is.*

But nice try, Propagandhim! :lol



*Instigator's response basically was, "sure that's true, but there are extenuating circumstances, and certainly you can't deny them a homeland because etc etc..." Well duh; that's the point...

Oh okay. Where did he attack you though? Quote it or something.

 

[APF]

Oh okay. Where did he attack you though? Quote it or something.

If I've learned one thing from the ME conflict, it's that anyone who responds to my provocations is engaging in a morally-outrageous, unprovoked, and illegal attack that should be condemned by sternly-worded UN General Assembly Resolutions.

 

[Propagandhim]

If I've learned one thing from the ME conflict, it's that anyone who responds to my provocations is engaging in a morally-outrageous, unprovoked, and illegal attack that should be condemned by sternly-worded UN General Assembly Resolutions.

:lol

 

[iapetus]

If I've learned one thing from the ME conflict, it's that anyone who responds to my provocations is engaging in a morally-outrageous, unprovoked, and illegal attack that should be condemned by sternly-worded UN General Assembly Resolutions.

I think you mean anyone who responds to the provocations of other GAF Conservatives by banning you. Other than that, your analogy is good.

 

[Instigator]

I'm not denying them a homeland at all. Read what I was responding to, sheesh. Your first point is easily countered by the history of the region from the Israeli POV too. Don't attack me for no reason, even if I'm making a tongue-in-cheek comment.

Since when asking you to back your claims an attack?

But please, use this historical context from the Israeli POV. Should be easy after all. Oh wait, that's was another attack. Sorry.

 

[Enron]

Way to completely miss the point, which is your 2-faced ineptitude and explicit racism. I never stated what I expect and don't expect. Your mentality of 'meh, its war, people will die', as long as its people on the non-Israeli side, tells me all I need to know about you. You're a morally depraved individual, who is getting annoyed that some people are outraged at the carnage. Its obvious you would staunchly defend Israel no matter the situation, so there is no point even aknowledging your presence.

And this is not a war. Its is nothing like a war, no matter how much you'd like it to be one.

is it just me or does slurpy seem found of the phrase "tells me all i need to know" :lol :lol

and I see he has played the race card. Brilliant!

 

[APF]

Since when asking you to back your claims an attack?

Huh? Back my claims what? What was I claiming again?

But please, use this historical context from the Israeli POV. Should be easy after all. Oh wait, that's was another attack. Sorry.

Wait, what? You're sarcastically suggesting it's impossible to explain the "extenuating circumstances" from the Israeli POV for operations such as this one, or for their holding land, excursions into the Palestinian/"disputed" territories, etc? What are you really arguing against here--that's what I'm getting at by saying you're "attacking" me for no reason...

 

[Instigator]

Wait, what? You're sarcastically suggesting it's impossible to explain the "extenuating circumstances" from the Israeli POV for operations such as this one, or for their holding land, excursions into the Palestinian/"disputed" territories, etc? What are you really arguing against here--that's what I'm getting at by saying you're "attacking" me for no reason...

I'm suggesting you're either unwilling or unable to explain it.

Israel doesn't act in a vacuum or without any motives so the Israeli POV can easily be explained, but it would take a skilled debater to make that POV morally acceptable to most people here at GA.

 

[APF]

I'm suggesting you're either unwilling or unable to explain it.

Probably; I'm definitely unwilling, since that's not the discussion I wanted to get into in the first place. The idea you put forth, that it's easier to explain on GAF the moral reasoning behind supporting terrorist attacks vs defending against them isn't lost on me...

 

[oldboy1]

Israel celebrates anniversary of terrorist attack:

We were not terrorists, we were 'resistance fighters'

The controversy over the plaque and the two-day celebration of the bombing, sponsored by Irgun veterans and the right-wing Menachem Begin Heritage Centre, goes to the heart of the debate over the use of political violence in the Middle East. Yesterday Mr Netanyahu argued in a speech celebrating the attack that the Irgun were governed by morals, unlike fighters from groups such as Hamas.

 

[Instigator]

Probably; I'm definitely unwilling, since that's not the discussion I wanted to get into in the first place. The idea you put forth, that it's easier to explain on GAF the moral reasoning behind supporting terrorist attacks vs defending against them isn't lost on me...

But that's the thing. Israel is not just defending against them. It is causing them (let's stick to Palestinians and not mention Hezbollah, it's a different issue altogether).

If you are unwilling to recognize this fundamental point then this conversation will go nowhere.

 

[APF]

But that's the thing. Israel is not just defending against them. It is causing them (let's stick to Palestinians and not mention Hezbollah, it's a different issue altogether).

If you are unwilling to recognize this fundamental point then this conversation will go nowhere.

It will go nowhere*, especially if you are unwilling to recognize the fundamental point that Palestinian support for terrorist attacks against Israel *causes* Israeli reponses.




*[You know, just like every other Isr v Pls conversation, since these are the points of disconnect]

 

[Propagandhim]

It will go nowhere*, especially if you are unwilling to recognize the fundamental point that Palestinian support for terrorist attacks against Israel *causes* Israeli reponses.




*[You know, just like every other Isr v Pls conversation, since these are the points of disconnect]

terrorism

n : the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimindation or coercion or instilling fear [syn: act of terrorism, terrorist act]

(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism)

350+.

 

[APF]

Hey look, it's a red herring

 

[Ripclawe]

But that's the thing. Israel is not just defending against them. It is causing them (let's stick to Palestinians and not mention Hezbollah, it's a different issue altogether).

If you are unwilling to recognize this fundamental point then this conversation will go nowhere.

Palestinians terror groups, the support of them and Hezbollah are the same. They have caused a lot of their own suffering by being stupid and being led by people who used their own desires for personal gains(arafat and his billions)

Black September is a perfect example of this plus a number of intifada since then which have served no purpose other than prolong the mess they are in for decades.


I have yet to see Israel given even a 6 month window of a true ceasefire from all sides so the pressure to work together is on them. That proves to me that its all about destruction of Israel and Jews for the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah.

 

[Propagandhim]

Hey look, it's a red herring

Well, wait, no. You're discrediting Palestinian action as an invariable wrong labeled as terrorism. I forgot what terrorism was, so I had to look it up. That's what the internets is for.

 

[APF]

Well, wait, no. You're discrediting Palestinian action as an invariable wrong labeled as terrorism.

When did I do that? Who the **** are you guys arguing against??

 

[Propagandhim]

When did I do that? Who the **** are you guys arguing against??

It will go nowhere*, especially if you are unwilling to recognize the fundamental point that Palestinian support for terrorist attacks against Israel *causes* Israeli reponses.

Support for terrorism. Right?

 

[Ripclawe]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/741409.html

According to reports Sunday, the Hamas leadership in Gaza is ready to halt Qassam fire as part of a cease-fire deal that would involve an end to IDF action in the Gaza Strip. Senior members of Fatah made similar claims Saturday.

The initiative, discussed by representatives of Palestinian organizations in Gaza over the past several days, also includes an agreement to set up a unity government.

The Egyptian-initiated plan consists of freeing abducted IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, a joint cease-fire and the cessation of IDF assassinations in the Gaza Strip. The release of Palestinian prisoners would be part of the deal, but come at a later stage.

It is not clear, however, whether the Hamas political leader in Damascus, Khaled Meshal, would agree to such a deal.

Representatives of several military factions in Gaza denied Saturday reports of a unilateral cease-fire. Palestinian sources stated that they are only willing to accept a joint truce that would include an end to Qassam fire in return for a halt in IDF actions in Gaza.

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas met Hamas parliament members and leaders in Gaza, urging them to accept the deal before American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's arrival on Monday.

Most Palestinian factions, including the Hamas leadership, have agreed to the Egyptian deal in principle, but argue that Israel will not be ready for a cease-fire as long as Shalit is held captive. Fatah's leadership also rejects a unilateral cease-fire at this stage.

Egypt, meanwhile, is continuing its efforts to persuade Hamas leaders overseas and in Gaza to free Shalit in exchange for Egyptian guarantees to release Palestinian prisoners later on, as part of a comprehensive cease-fire deal.

Dr. Salah al-Bardawil, head of the Hamas parliamentary faction, told Haaretz that if Israel stops its actions in Gaza, most Palestinian groups would accept a cease-fire.

He added, however, that Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh already proposed a unilateral cease-fire and Israel rejected it.

Hamas leaders in Gaza are interested in separating the negotiations over the Palestinian prisoners in exchange for Gilad Shalit from Hezbollah's negotiations over Lebanese prisoners. Bardawil stressed that there is no cooperation between Hamas and Hezbollah about the prisoner exchange negotiations.

"We don't intend to reach a joint deal. Hezbollah entered the picture after Hamas was already in it, they want their prisoners and we have ours," he said.

It is not clear whether Meshal is also in favor of a separate Hamas deal with Israel.

Fatah sources said that Hamas' Gaza leadership does not want its name mixed up with the fighting in Lebanon, especially in view of the sharp international criticism of Hezbollah.

Hamas leaders believe Hezbollah has harmed the Palestinian cause by its actions and are striving to reach a separate deal with Israel.

However, Fatah officials are doubtful about the chances of reaching an agreement, due to the unclarity of the position of Hamas' overseas leadership, headed by Meshal.

 

[Propagandhim]

http://www.haaretz.com

:lol :lol :lol :lol

 

[APF]

Support for terrorism. Right?

Uh, yeah, that's what I said... WTF?

 

[Ripclawe]

:lol :lol :lol :lol

Are you suggesting that they have faked whole quotes from Salah al-Bardawil to write this story?

 

[Instigator]

It will go nowhere*, especially if you are unwilling to recognize the fundamental point that Palestinian support for terrorist attacks against Israel *causes* Israeli reponses.




*[You know, just like every other Isr v Pls conversation, since these are the points of disconnect]

It's a vicious circle, you're right. I'm not disputing that.

But the crux of the problem is not terrorist attacks. It's the Israeli occupation and annexation of the Palestinian territories which would happen with or without terrorist reprisals.

The destruction of Israel is a silly goal as the country is not going anywhere. You've had generations of Israelis living in the pre-1967 borders, I don't see how you can move all those people.

But I don't think Israel can negotiate in any good faith when it continues to set up the ground work for more land grabs when a lasting peace treaty, if ever, is signed. Israel is a position of great strenght and can just wait it out until it has all the territories it wants and cleansed of Palestinian presence. It wins either ways, but the latter option is preferable for the Israelis.

 

[kojacker]

Latest stuff
from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5207478.stm

The UN's Jan Egeland has condemned the devastation caused by Israeli air strikes in Beirut, saying it is a violation of humanitarian law.

Mr Egeland, the UN's emergency relief chief, described the destruction as "horrific" as he toured the city.

He arrived hours after another Israeli strike on Beirut. Israel also hit Sidon, a port city in the south crammed with refugees, for the first time.

Trying to look after those caught in the shlt storm:

He appealed for both sides to halt attacks and said UN supplies of humanitarian aid would begin to arrive in the next few days.

"But we need safe access," he said. "So far Israel is not giving us access."

# Israeli Defence Minister Amir Peretz said Israel supports the idea of an international peacekeeping force in south Lebanon, and suggested it should be led by Nato.

# Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Israel had "pushed the button for its own destruction".

# Syria's information minister said his country would enter the conflict if a major Israeli ground invasion of Lebanon threatened the security of Damascus.

# An unarmed UN observer was seriously wounded by small arms fire - thought to be from Hezbollah - at a UN position in the village of Maroun al-Ras, which Israeli said it had taken control of on Saturday.

The BBC's Jim Muir in the southern city of Tyre says there has also been intense bombardment there, striking at least nine civilian vehicles. Some were hit within sight of hospitals where they were trying to take injured people, he says.

Further east, engineers trying to mend impassable roads to allow a UN-escorted aid convoy also came under fire, our correspondent reports.

He says that bombing has intensified in the region since Israel dropped warning leaflets on Friday, and the Israelis are now shooting at almost anything on moving on the roads.

And the scores on the board:

More than 350 Lebanese have been killed in the 11 days of violence, many of them civilians, and angry protests condemning Israeli attacks have been held in cities around the world.

At least 36 Israelis have been killed, including 17 civilians killed by rockets fired by Hezbollah into Israel.

First responses I've noticed from Iran and Syria
Israel is still targeting anything on the roads
Well... things can only get better.

 

[MetalAlien]

See why they have the luxury of pointing fingers? Israel acts as a nation. All the surrounding countries mearly fund the attacks and then remain quiet or smug.

The best thing American has done is support Israel (in general of course).

 

[APF]

It's a vicious circle, you're right. I'm not disputing that.

But the crux of the problem is not terrorist attacks. It's the Israeli occupation and annexation of the Palestinian territories which would happen with or without terrorist reprisals.

As I suggested before, the problem (esp. from the Israeli POV) is the terrorism first-and-foremost, along with a Palestinian government unable to reign-in those terrorist and militant groups--to the extent the government itself isn't actually one of those groups (sound familiar?). Further, and FWIW, Israel at least has shown a willingness and the ability to withdraw from occupied territory, even when it's extremely painful for them to do so...

 

[kojacker]

See why they have the luxury of pointing fingers? Israel acts as a nation. All the surrounding countries mearly fund the attacks and then remain quiet or smug.

The best thing American has done is support Israel (in general of course).

Just a little hell of a lot unbalanced

 

[Slurpy]

All the posts of 'What the problem, civilians always die in a war. Why arent you outraged and posting about at all the other conflicts throught history?' are absolutely class. Just brilliant.

I can't even begin to wrap my mind around any point you may be trying to get across. Its reassuring to know that injustice will always have its supporters. These are the types of people who are an obstacle and an impediment to progression of society and humankind as a whole.

Congratulations.

Mr Egeland, the UN's emergency relief chief, described the destruction as "horrific" as he toured the city.

"It is horrific. I did not know it was block after block of houses … It makes it a violation of humanitarian law"

A visibly moved Mr Egeland expressed shock that "block after block" of buildings had been levelled.

Surgical strikes indeed.

Poor Beirut. The 'Paris of the Middle-East', as it is known, is being torn to shreds with the rest of the world watching utterly impotently.

 

[Instigator]

As I suggested before, the problem (esp. from the Israeli POV) is the terrorism first-and-foremost, along with a Palestinian government unable to reign-in those terrorist and militant groups--to the extent the government itself isn't actually one of those groups (sound familiar?).

From the Israeli POV, this is merely an annoyance and quite an exceptable annoyance at that considering they control key aspects of the Palestinian life and access points and reap the political rewards of continued colonization. Not a bad deal.

Further, and FWIW, Israel at least has shown a willingness and the ability to withdraw from occupied territory, even when it's extremely painful for them to do so...

True, but the move was largely seen as symbolic at best as there were few settlements to begin with and thus a drain on military ressources to maintain security over there. The US also had to foot the bill of relocation of the settlers that weren't supposed to be there in the first place. The real prize is the West Bank, it's where most of the settlements are.

And looking at maps of the West Bank, you can already spot the parts Israel won't give up. It's also likely any peace agreement will also come a demand to give up more territory around key settlements and infrastructures for security and territorial integrity reasons.

A real show of goodwill would be to stop the settlement efforts altogether instead making future peace treaty negotiations harder.

 

[APF]

From the Israeli POV, this is merely an annoyance and quite an exceptable annoyance at that considering they control key aspects of the Palestinian life and access points and reap the political rewards of continued colonization. Not a bad deal.

What "political rewards" are you talking about?


[edit: have you ever heard an Israeli talk about terrorism as an "annoyance," outside the context of resignation that they're going to happen, but life goes on? It's like saying Palestinians consider checkpoints and collateral damage "annoyances" they're willing to live with, so long as they can bomb cafes and extract guilt money in aid packages]

 

[Instigator]

What "political rewards" are you talking about?


[edit: have you ever heard an Israeli talk about terrorism as an "annoyance," outside the context of resignation that they're going to happen, but life goes on? It's like saying Palestinians consider checkpoints and collateral damage "annoyances" they're willing to live with, so long as they can bomb cafes and extract guilt money in aid packages]

Annoyance is just me using frank talk, there are some things politicians will never say. That should be ovbvious.

Basically, with the level of control Israel over the occupied territories and the few suicide bombers who get through, it is a quite manageable threat when all is said and done. The cost politically pales in comparison to politics concerning settlements.

 

[LuCkymoON]

It will go nowhere*, especially if you are unwilling to recognize the fundamental point that Palestinian support for terrorist attacks against Israel *causes* Israeli reponses.




*[You know, just like every other Isr v Pls conversation, since these are the points of disconnect]

Israel occupied Palestine sanctioned land before Palestinians resorted to terrorism. Israel causes the terrorism by occuping the land. Have you not seen the Israeli only settlements and Israeli only roads that cut up the West Bank and Gaza Strip?

 

[Ripclawe]

All the posts of 'What the problem, civilians always die in a war. Why arent you outraged and posting about at all the other conflicts throught history?' are absolutely class. Just brilliant.

HEzbollah hides/carries out attacks from its infrastructure and personnel within the civilian population of southern Lebanon.

Originally Posted by Instigator:
From the Israeli POV, this is merely an annoyance and quite an exceptable annoyance at that considering they control key aspects of the Palestinian life and access points and reap the political rewards of continued colonization. Not a bad deal.

Terrorist acts are not an annoyance. Israel has better things to do with its resources than having to look at where the next attack is coming from the Palesitinians.

 

[Instigator]

Terrorist acts are not an annoyance. Israel has better things to do with its resources than having to look at where the next attack is coming from the Palesitinians.

Yes, it has Palestinian homes to bulldoze, settlements to build, lands to annex, the next military outposts to set up.

In the grand scheme of annexation, terrorist acts by Palestinians are merely an annoyance.

 

[Illuminati]

But I don't think Israel can negotiate in any good faith when it continues to set up the ground work for more land grabs when a lasting peace treaty, if ever, is signed. Israel is a position of great strenght and can just wait it out until it has all the territories it wants and cleansed of Palestinian presence. It wins either ways, but the latter option is preferable for the Israelis.

In the grand scheme of annexation, terrorist acts by Palestinians are merely an annoyance.

I don't see how giving back the Gaza Strip back to the Palestinians was a form of annexation.

 

[APF]

The cost politically pales in comparison to politics concerning settlements.

These comments are moonbat-worthy, which from you comes as a shock. Nontheless, as I've already shown--and you've acknowledged,--Israel has shown it is both willing and capable of movement in this area, despite how painful it is, despite assassinations, despite everything you're saying here. I seriously don't think you're providing reasonable commentary, sorry.

 

[Ripclawe]

Yes, it has Palestinian homes to bulldoze, settlements to build, lands to annex, the next military outposts to set up.

In the grand scheme of annexation, terrorist acts by Palestinians are merely an annoyance.

Which is why they pulled out of Gaza and the Palestinians promptly did nothing about that development other than elect a terrorist group and allow more rockets to be fired out of there. land for peace is not the objective of Hamas and Hezzbollah, its about the destruction of Israel. Palestinians have been given too many chances and wasted all of them

 

[Ripclawe]

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,19889664-23109,00.html

Syria 'to come clean' on al-Qaeda cells

From: Agence France-Presse From correspondents in London
July 24, 2006

SYRIA is prepared to tell the US the whereabouts of al-Qaeda cells in Lebanon, Britain's Sky News television reported today.

Sky News said they had spoken to Syrian cabinet minister Amr Salem.
"Syria has real hard knowledge," the channel quoted him as saying.

A Sky News correspondent said the Syrians were offering to tell the US where many fundamentalists were.

He said the channel was told specifically there were cells of Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist network in Lebanon, and Syria knew of their whereabouts.

Since Syrian troops pulled out of Lebanon last year, the cells have grown, he said.

"We know where they are and we can tell you," the correspondent said Sky News was told Syria was prepared to say.

The channel also quoted Mr Salem as saying "Syria offers to be an intermediary between Iran and the United States" and "Syria can play an important role in Iraq".

Syrian deputy foreign minister Faisal Mukdad told Sky News yesterday Syria was ready to open a dialogue with the US to resolve the crisis in Lebanon.

"It has been Syria's ongoing position that we are ready to have a dialogue with the United States," he said.

 

[APF]

Palestinians have been given too many chances and wasted all of them

As someone once said, they never lost an opportunity to lose an opportunity...

 

[Instigator]

I don't see how giving back the Gaza Strip back to the Palestinians was a form of annexation.

Pull out of Gaza is merely a stalling tactic to increase land grabs in West Bank. Keep your eye on the big picture.

These comments are moonbat-worthy, which from you comes as a shock.

Am I supposed to view this as tongue-and-cheek?

Which is why they pulled out of Gaza and the Palestinians promptly did nothing about that development other than elect a terrorist group and allow more rockets to be fired out of there. land for peace is not the objective of Hamas and Hezzbollah, its about the destruction of Israel. Palestinians have been given too many chances and wasted all of them

Leaving your backporch while invading your living room is not an improvement. I'm refering to the Palestinians here.

To me, the issue of Hezbollah is different despite your claim they're exactly the same.

 

[Link1110]

Sky News said they had spoken to Syrian cabinet minister Amr Salem.
"Syria has real hard knowledge," the channel quoted him as saying.

"We know where they are and we can tell you," the correspondent said Sky News was told Syria was prepared to say.

More like "We knew where they WERE," since they probably moved already.

 

[Illuminati]

Pull out of Gaza is merely a stalling tactic to increase land grabs in West Bank. Keep your eye on the big picture.

Forcfully removing their settlers from the West Bank and Gaza is somehow a tactic to grab even more land?

 

[MetalAlien]

There are only like 4 or 5 of us posting to this thread anymore...

Cage match?

 

[Willco]

Forcfully removing their settlers from the West Bank and Gaza is somehow a tactic to grab even more land?

You don't understand. They're Jews. That's how they think -- all tricky and Jew like.

 

[Instigator]

Forcfully removing their settlers from the West Bank and Gaza is somehow a tactic to grab even more land?

*sighs*

Gaza was a drain on security ressources. Israel pulled out of Gaza (and a few isolated settlements in the West Bank) to consolidate on the main settlements in the West Bank. Settlement efforts still continue over there.

This Gaza pull-out was already in the cards when Rabin was around because even then, it made no sense in terms of security.

 

[Phoenix]

Foreign Office minister Kim Howells has criticised Israel's bombardment of Lebanon, while on a visit to Beirut.

He said Israel had not carried out "surgical strikes" and attacking the Lebanese nation was not the answer.

Downing Street said the prime minister would stand by Mr Howell's comments, adding the British government had "always urged restraint on Israel".

Meanwhile thousands of people across the UK have joined demonstrations against Israeli attacks on Lebanon.

Speaking in Beirut, Mr Howells said: "I very much hope that the Americans understand what's happening to Lebanon.

"The destruction of the infrastructure, the death of so many children and so many people. These have not been surgical strikes.

"And it's very difficult, I think, to understand the kind of military tactics that have been used.

"You know, if they're chasing Hezbollah, then go for Hezbollah. You don't go for the entire Lebanese nation."

Its like he read all my posts and said them out loud for the public

 

[Phoenix]

'Israel also bombed a textile factory in the border town of al-Manara, killing one person and wounding two, Mayor Ali Rahal told The Associated Press.'


Are textile factories considered military targets now?

At some point in history, terrorists went into or otherwise used that textile factory (perhaps to take a shit) and as such it should now be considered a military target. Right enron?