Comments on: Hasbara: Why does the world fail to understand us?

By: Benoit Pavinosi

Benoit Pavinosi — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:27:25 +0000

I visite Israel for The first time in my life, this people are just crazy,
Now I am crazy to, I can tell you why.but I think you can understand here why http://www.Hasbara.us or juste Hasbara.us. I am not Jewish, but no body is perfect. . 17ans 1/2. French.

By: Bosko

Bosko — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 20:13:02 +0000

Directorb
“@Bosko,
Let me put it this way, maybe the next Israeli government is prepared to pay you money for not writing on this blog”
.
“Your Eisenhower comment is completely over the top and does Israel and your position more harm than good”
.
Really? By that definition, people like you should be very happy that I am writing on this blog. Hey, do me a favour … Go talk to Ayla and convince her that she should be happy too for me to stay.
.
By the way, what do you think is my position, directorb?

By: Bosko

Bosko — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:49:19 +0000

Directorb
Which bit of my Eisenhower comment was wrong? I don’t believe that talking about REAL history turns REAL people against Israel. Only people who already are against Israel would be offended by me saying that Eisenhower was playing cold war politics and tried to woo Egypt away from the Russians unsuccessfully. I guess the only thing that I might have added was that it emanated more from his secretary of state Foster Dulles than him personally.
And I’ll say it again, even at the risk of offending. It was a grave mistake of the Eisenhower administration.

By: directrob

directrob — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 14:34:35 +0000

@Bosko,
Let me put it this way, maybe the next Israeli government is prepared to pay you money for not writing on this blog. Your Eisenhower comment is completely over the top and does Israel and your position more harm than good.

By: Bosko

Bosko — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 05:28:04 +0000

In 1973, Israel paid a very heavy price for it’s complacency when it did not mobilize it’s army in reaction to observing Egyptian preparations of war. It did not do so because it allowed itself to be deceived by several false alarms. In which Israel did mobilize but nothing happened which incurred heavy economic costs. But finally after it failed to react in order not to incur those costs, that’s when Egypt DID attack and the result was a was a hair breath between Israel and total defeat. Had such a thing been allowed in 1967, the outcome would have been much worse because Israel did not have a geographic buffer zone to absorb the initial shock of a surprise attack by the combined Arab forces.
.
Now, does anyone else want to try to tell me that I am telling lies?

By: Bosko

Bosko — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 05:17:11 +0000

Just in case another ‘bright spark’ is contemplating the thought to tell me that even Israeli leaders admitted that the Egyptian army was not poised to attack in June 5 1967. You are all missing the point. Read what I said above again. I said that once Egypt mobilised it’s forces, together with Syria and Jordan and they jointly threatened Israel (whatever the timing), Israel had to, I’ll say it again, HAD TO mobilize too. If it would not have done so, the same thing would have happened as in 1973, only with much worse consequences at least in terms of Israeli civilian casualties. Or worse: A total defeat. This is what the Egyptians did in 1973 …
.
” Israel could not afford the massive costs of maintaining a suitable regular standing military which could defeat the Arab coalition which surrounded it.29 Thus, it relied on the capabilities of its reserve forces. Nowhere in the world exists a reserve force which possesses the ability to mobilize and conduct war with the speed and effectiveness of the Israeli Defense Forces’ reserves. However, the cost for such an effective system is the severe economic strain which the nation must bear every time the reserve forces are mobilized. Israel had conducted a large-scale mobilization in the spring of 1973 in reaction to Egyptian movements on the East Bank of the Suez and the cost was enormous”
.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1997/Moulton.htm
.
So, Israel had no choice but to launch it’s premptive strike even though Nasser had no immediate plans to attack. He was willing to bide his time till Israel would collapse economically. Then he would have started hostilities. That was nasser’s plan. Do you guys understand now? Or do you want to post more stupid out of context and irrelevant quotes by whoever, stating that Egypt wasn’t quite ready to attack Israel on June the 5th 1967. Of course he was not. But Israel was not obliged to wait till he WOULD be ready. That would have been stupid of Israel to wait that long!!!

By: Bosko

Bosko — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 22:17:21 +0000

Mikesailor
Pity people like you only concentrate on Israel’s reactions to what it’s Arab neighbours dished out to it prior to 1956. Go read up on the Fedayeen.
.
And about Eisenhower whom a leftie like you (you are a leftie aren’t you?) probably despises in every other way: His reaction to what his allies France, Britain did in conjunction with Israel, was a foolish political stunt which did not work out for him or America. He was willing to betray his allies in order to woo Nasser away from the Soviets. It did not work. What a surprise.

By: Bosko

Bosko — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 22:04:52 +0000

“Syrian land”
.
Live and learn. No man’s land is now Syrian land. Go read up on what Dayan really said.
.
And as far as what Begin supposedly admitted, I guess you wouldn’t care to post a reference source to verify it?
.
Nah, I didn’t think so.
.
You also wouldn’t care to tell us on what basis do you disagree with what I presented above? Nah, I didn’t think so either. It’s just easier to label things you don’t like to hear as lies, eh Mikesailor?

By: Mikesailor

Mikesailor — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:00:57 +0000

@Bosko and Nitchell: It is truly pathetic when your ‘hasbara’ has become synonymous with outright lying and propaganda. Even Begin admitted that the ’67 war was a “war of choice”. As to Syrian ‘provocations’, I suggest your read Dayan’s memoirs. Therein he states the Israeli provocation of using bulldozers to uproot more and more Syrian land until the Syrians would respond, thereby giving the Israelis an ‘excuse’ to us violence. Pity you don’t read read your own history. The ’56 was a ‘crisis’ in name only, the Israelis, along with the French and British, cooked up the scheme to attack Egypt and take the Canal. Eisenhower, to his credit, kiboshed that fiasco to the everlasting condemnation of Israelis. The inability of mast Israelis to see themselves as anything other than the world’s perennial victims has run its course.

By: Mitchell Cohen

Mitchell Cohen — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:37:16 +0000

“Mitchell, where I live, if my son punches out another kid in school, he’ll be expelled as a bully. The principal won’t listen to his excuse that the other kid drew a line in the dirt and dared him.” [End of Aristeides]

I don’t know where you live, but if my son got expelled for punching out some punk who was pushing him around and threatening him, I would ask him two questions:

1) how did the other bloak look?

2) did you get all your homework assignments….?-)

The rest of your post is not even worth responding to as your are doing a good job posting links that contradict what you are claiming.