Less Than $2.8k To Go!!
Just A Reminder
Please Don't Forget
To Donate To FR
This Quarter
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Posted on 05/30/2013 1:50:00 PM PDT by ConservativeMan55
Assad probably made that statement from deep
in the furor bunker.
Agreed. Assad won't do squat against Israel, but will say a plenty. He knows Israel is relatively on his side, so this message is 100% towards arabs, as he simultaneously winks at Israel.
ping!
Wars and rumors of wars.
What is Arabic for you are dumb*** LOL!
That what Assad is
Assad is Arabic for Asshat lol
In my opinion it is an empty threat. He needs to win back the Sunnis that are against him. Showing strength against Israel and implying that Israel is on the rebels side may cause some rebels to think about their position.
Of course he is not stupid enough to attack Israel, but talking a big game can be just as potent to win over the extremist Sunnis and make them stop fighting.
Anyone can see that he would be accelerating his demise if he were to do a move this stupid.
In addition to this, he is threatening to strike them if they decide to hit Syria again. Which backs up my opinion that its simply posturing on his side.
Also the part in brackets in the title is misleading. He is threatening to retaliate against any Israeli strike. The title makes it seem as if he is threatening to strike at any time for no reason.
Context is important.
ROFL that good one ROFL
so.... dictator Daddy Assad learned the lesson in 73 about what happens when they attack Israel... and they’ve (Daddy and Sonny Assad dictators) very wisely NOT attacked since....
so why now all these threats against Israel again?
the kid is worried Obama will replace him with Islamicists to help build the next world-wide Islamicist Caliphate
the so-called rebels we read about in all the articles about how Obama is arming them...
so...the last refuge for a dictator to retain power is to threatened to take his country into war against a neighboring people
but he won’t dare do it.
right now, he can still either hang on to power, or escape to a safe refuge somewhere
if he attacks Isr, he can kiss his ass goodbye.
I doubt he will attack (but obviously Isr has to be on guard just in case, and has to eliminate any particularly dangerous weapons from that theatre)
Uh no.. the words in parenthesis are not misleading.
He is threatening to strike Israel.
Uh no.. He is threatening to retaliate against any future Israeli strike.
Let us not be dishonest here, there is no reason to be.
Before you jump on me I am not accusing you of being purposefully dishonest but I am just correcting the title.
You are basically saying that:
“I will punch you in the face”
is the same as:
“If you hit me again, I will punch you in the face”
There isn’t a good way out of this for Israel, other than to let them all keep fighting forever.
Like my mom used to tell me when I was about to misbehave:”If you feel froggish, you go right ahead and hop.”
And pay the consequences, baby.
Retaliate! I thought we had enough on our plates without misleading headlines like that.
I’m not going to keep arguing with you.
He threatened to strike Israel.
He threatened to RETALIATE!
Retaliate = You hit me, I’ll hit you back.
Check out the background of the author. You’re being hoodwinked. That’s not what he said.
I would have taken that as a concession but it is not as you restated the comment afterwards.
Do you agree that we would retaliate against any attack by any nation against us?
If you do agree then you would also agree with the statement from a random US president saying “If Israel attacks us we will retaliate in kind.”
That statement would not be seen as a threat to strike Israel.
It is the same case here. I’m just going on about it because it’s something you added to the title which is not particularly accurate as to the content of the article.
I’m just arguing for the principle. It diminishes the integrity of the site when a seemingly innocent dishonesty is added to the title of an article.
I know rational posters would agree with me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.