|
|
Post by Benjamin on Feb 26, 2014 12:02:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Feb 26, 2014 17:57:01 GMT
The article said that " Local reports had said four members of its military wing, the Islamic Resistance, were killed." When there are fatalities, don't they usually respond with violence?
|
|
|
|
Post by Benjamin on Feb 26, 2014 20:24:11 GMT
They do -
but the last time Israel struck a Syrian convoy on its way to Hezbollah, they threatened violence... but unless I've missed something, I don't recall anything actually happening.
Don't get me wrong, they WILL strike, eventually - but they seem so busy with Syria right now that they lack the motivation to strike out on another front.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2014 21:12:16 GMT
They have also said that their response will be in the form of taking out Israelis in high office. The good guys are going to take proper precautions in case there are attempts to carry this plan out.
|
|
|
|
Post by shiloh on Feb 27, 2014 5:55:28 GMT
I don't know, you guys. This looks as though it's just going to get worse. Hezbollah, Fatah, Al Queda (sp?) and Hamas are all making nice, nice with eachother now. These terrorist organizations are all supposed to go against Israel. Psalm 83 battle in the works, anyone? I could be dead wrong but I can easily see Isaiah 17:1 and the Psalm 83 battle happening simultaneously.
|
|
|
|
Post by Benjamin on Feb 27, 2014 7:41:49 GMT
Al Qaeda  In Arabic, it means, "The Base", because the origin of the term is a literal list (database) of terrorists and their agencies. I agree wholeheartedly that Isaiah 17 and Psalm 83 could be simultaneous. I've long felt that Isaiah 17 might be the opening foray of the Psalm 83 war; that Syria's attack on Israel (Isaiah 17:4-6) could be the first of many dominoes that fall in a broader conflict. Psalm 83 lists the nations according to their ancient names. I used to feel that this was simply because the Psalm was written more than 2500 years ago, but lately I've wondered if it might also be indicative of a fragmentation of the nations listed in that psalm. Food for thought. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2014 12:28:07 GMT
I am with you guys on this one. I believe these wars will be a one two punch one after the other. Interesting concept Benjamin on the list of ancient names. I will have to think on that one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Benjamin on Feb 27, 2014 12:56:29 GMT
no, no... not ancient names.
"Al Qaeda" was the name given to a literal list of terrorists that the US had their eye on. When the term was first used, it wasn't to describe a cohesive terror group, but a list of individuals that all had links to terrorist action.
The story goes that the original list was referred to simply as "the database", and contained the names of thousands of mujahideen that had served to further US interests in insurgency against Russia. The US funded these terrorists (channeling funds through Pakistan's "ISI" spy agency) because they aided in fighting against the tide of communism throughout central Asia and the Middle East.
The name became so synonymous with the group that it was eventually assumed by the group itself - Bin Laden claimed that "Al Qaeda" was a literal training ground for mujahideen in the war against Russia, while agents in the West claim the name had its origins in their databases.
If you dig a little further into the history here, an alarming trend emerges.
It was the US that funded Bin Laden, as the warlord over numerous terrorist networks fighting against Russia.
It was the US that funded and provided weapons for Saddam Hussein, as "the enemy of our enemy" fighting against Iran in the 1980's.
This pattern of funding terrorism goes back a long, long way... and what you reap, you sow. Numerous wars have been fought because "the enemy of my enemy" came back to bite the United States. Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan are all excellent examples of this very thing. The chickens always come home to roost.
|
|
