Why Nato doesn't send troops to the West Bank

Any ideas why nobody physically intervenes in violent affairs there?

 

NATO is a defensive organization and nobody in Israel or Palestine has attacked them therefore they have no business there..

Next.

 

And how do you typify NATO's war in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere in the world if it is purely defensive? Or is the projection of military force half way around the world to fight a backward nation defensive?

 

US was attacked by terrorists from Afghanistan so it was viewed as an attack on all of NATO, the mission in Iraq was to train Iraqis as per UNSCR 1546 and was non combat.

 

How naive you are.

 

Beside the concise explanation by DrewBedson, there is the fact the such a NATO presence in the West Bank would be seen as a Christian invasion of Islam by the Arab League and some billion or so Muslims around the world. Nobody in NATO is that dumb.

What might make more aceptable sense would be a UN force composed of Muslim troops from non-Arab countries to seal the borders of a new, demilitarized Palestine, with a small US contingent separating Paletine from Israel and the IDF on the other side of the new Palestinian nation.

There is no doubt that the nation of Palestine is going to come into existence on the west side of the Jordan in the next ten years. The shape will be that laid out in the Taba Accords. The only dispute is how much (if any) of the illegally occupied territory will Israel be allowed to retain.

For years the US played "honest broker" in "peace talks" to settle the question. We failed because first the Palestinians and now the Israelis refused to budge, holding out for a better deal in one shape or another. The US is signaling LIkud that we are at the end of the rope. The real problem isn't selling a deal to the Palestinians, it is cutting a deal which the rest of the Arab world will accept peacefully. That's where sealing the Palestinian border comes in. It may take a century of favorable conditions for the wounds to heal.

In the end, Israel has no choice but to follow the mandate of the UN if the US supports it. The Arab world is in the middle of a cataclysmic revolution which could lead to a United States of Arabia. At the moment nobody is in charge and the whole casino is up for grabs. Isolating both Palestinians and Israelis from that violent conflict will be tough but necessary.

There is irony in the real possibility that had we pulled off the Oslo accords at the time, Palestine and Israel would now be firm allies in keeping the bloodshed on the borders from entering their lands.

 

Israel seems to do what it feels compelled to. There is violence over there all the time but no one physically intervenes despite the violence and death. Why?
What is really going on with Russia and Syria? Only those living and fighting there have a clue. What has the US been doing in the ME for 15 years since 9/11? Who knows?
When you read about a Palestinian suicide bomber blowing up a night club in Israel, what are your thoughts/feelings? When you read about Palestinian homes scorched and air strikes from Israel, what are your thoughts/feelings?

 

How irrelevant your argument is.

 

What could be done and by whom? Palestinians have vowed to destroy Israel so are you going to place western troops in Palestine to protect hamas while they fire rockets into Israel? Put western troops in the streets of Gaza so youths can throw Molotov cocktails from behind them at the approaching Israeli troops? Or would they be used to augment Israeli troops to conduct house to house searches for Hamas terrorists?

I think your idea and, that of many others would be something akin to what is occurring in Cyprus with the UN acting as a buffer between the two parties. Wondering how long, how many lives would be wasted while Gazans are subjected to the same treatment they are now. It's not like Israel still wouldn't hold considerable control over imports, water and power but it would slow Palestinian attacks on Israel while they instead attack our troops.

Palestinians would like the extra cash they would get from the troops though as the UN would be parked on the Palestinian side for the duration.

 

I tend to side with the Palestinians, because they are the innocent victims without an army or modern weapons to defend themselves. They were robbed of their homes and farms, gardens... their livelihood. They have no future, often not even a tomorrow. It is damn hard to love the Jews/Zionists/Israelis.. the whole loot down there... for their greed and cruelty. I can only leave it to God to take charge. May he forgive me my bias.

 

...but I gave him a "like"!!!

 

I never suggested intervention. Just asked for thoughts on get there never is any.
I also asked what your thoughts/feelings would be about an Israeli attack on civilian Palestinians and vice versa. Would you answer please?

 

Mind if I ask your nationality?
Americans overwhelmingly support Israel and don't bat an eye when they bomb Palestine.

 

If Hamas didn't keep launching HE rockets into civilian areas of Israel, they would need an army. I suggest that when the IDF go into Gaza every time those flying bombs start incoming, they're not going in for the fun of it.

 

Sadness.

Frustration.

 

I love Israel. I think their indifference regarding admonishing and international opinion is admirable. Their commitment to their sovereignty and security is impressive. The power and military capability of that tiny pretty new country is profound.
Americans will always side with Israel. #1-they are a much more powerful ally and #2-we hate Muslims.

 

Did you watch the towers fall on 9/11?

 

Israel hates you too. Have you ever looked at Israeli propaganda? It's all based on an endless contempt toward the world. That is propaganda, of course, it's difficult to say just what the people in Israel think. Though last I checked, about third thought they should give back area for Palestinians, third thought not, and less than third didn't give a damn. But the propaganda and belittling of other nations gets to the best of newspapers. In order to defend their ways the Israelis have partly turned against the rest of the world.

 

`
`
NATO or no NATO; not one drop of American blood for Israel.

 

Ever heard the saying the enemy of my enemy is my friend?
I have no idea what Israelis think of Americans. I have reiterated over and over again American's complete indifference and disinterest in international opinion of our country, citizenry, politics, lifestyle, etc. We just don't care. At all.
That people in other countries talk about our unemployment rates, race relations, economy, industry, etc...it is completely perplexing to us.
Israel has plenty of reasons to dislike a lot of peeps. I hope they eventually subdue and dominate the Middle East.

 

Israel doesn't need our troops and I'm sure we'll be happy to provide them with whatever resources and weapons they might ever request.

 

That dog don't hunt.

There were no terrorists from Afghanistan. Ostensibly, 15 of the 19 terrorists were from Saudi, two were from the UAE, one was from Egypt and the other from Lebanon (HERE).

So how come the US didn't invade Saudi, the UAE, Lebanon or Egypt? But instead sent tens of thousands of troops to the other side of the world to invade a backward tribal nation in order to kill one man 10 years later who had been living in Pakistan since at least 2006, and was kept safe under the protection of the Pakistani intelligence (HERE and HERE).

As for your UNSCR 1546 argument, how sly of you to present this canard.

The US invasion of Iraq took place on 20th March 2003, whereas UNSCR 1546 was dated 15 months later on 8th June 2004.

 

I wasn't talking about America but the world, Israel is supposedly on the "west's" side but I don't know how much. You don't care what they think, as long as they take over the Middle East, alright. It's not going to happen though.

 

What Israeli propaganda do you read?

 

Didn't go there to kill one man. Went there to stop the Taliban from aiding and abetting terrorists, close terrorist training camps, capture or kill terrorists and their leaders and to conduct regime change on an enemy who aided and abetted those who attacked the US.

Hardly a canard. NATO was not there to wage war but rather to train Iraqi police and security forces. If you wish to counter my facts than please do so with something other than calling it a canard as that simply flies in the face of good debate.

That is correct. NATO took no part in the invasion. At least you have proved you can use a calendar.