|
Post by Elledge on Jul 26, 2006 18:38:30 GMT -5
As both sides claim the site is holy based on pure blind faith in their religion, I don't really see how it matters which one has more "evidence" that it's a holy site. The concept of holiness in the first place is completely subjective to their specific faith.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Aug 2, 2006 6:42:12 GMT -5
As both sides claim the site is holy based on pure blind faith in their religion, I don't really see how it matters which one has more "evidence" that it's a holy site. The concept of holiness in the first place is completely subjective to their specific faith. Heh true story. It always make me laugh when different kinds of religious fanatics argue with each other about some of their faith-related nonsense and which one "is more right". All of that is a fiction anyway. It's like agruing about what is more real - Mickey Mouse or Tom&Jerry. I don't see that as "stupid"; I see it as "resolve". One must consider that these were formulated in 1948 when the Jews were starting off with virtually nothing. I see it as if it's written by someone who needs to go to a mental hospital IMMEDIATELY so not to infect people who still aren't insane. Anyway, i like p. 3. According to it, Muslims have an absolute right to conquer Israel land with a sword as well ;D There is solid proof, however, that this is the site of the original Temple of Solomon. So once again, the historical record and evidence support the position of the Jews; while the positions of the Muslims are often just "because the Mulah says so". Ok, some fanatics made some structure they call a "holy temple". That's still isn't any hard evidience. I guess in a pure virtual sence (if you believe in all that religion etc.) a word of a God has a bigger weight than a word of some mortals. So muslims are right
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Aug 2, 2006 6:50:09 GMT -5
How different is the crisis in the Middle East from the months leading up to WW2? Germany only wanted what they claimed to be their lands. The Europeans (England, France, Russia) placated the German overtures and we all know what it fostered. Denial of what is in front of you does not alter it's path. Israel also wants what they claimed to be their lands. And most of their neigbours don't agree with it. So, according to your own statements, Muslims must unite and pacify the agressor. The Islamist militants are the Nazis of the 30's and 40's and the Communists from the 50's to the 80's. Nah. USA participated in about 45 wars on foreign territory after WWII. So USA is already more agressive than Nazis, Islamists or Communists.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Aug 2, 2006 6:57:15 GMT -5
Israelies are killing like 10x more paleastiniens as they loose to terror attack - so they are 10x more devilish then terrorists war is hell, but a death count is not exactly the way to keep track of what is 'fair'. I don't see why not. If you don't believe that all human lives are equal (on a statistical level rather than personal one) then you're Nazi
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Aug 2, 2006 11:25:04 GMT -5
Every day more Arabs and Muslims kill other Arabs and Muslims in the Sudan, Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the world than the Israelis have killed in three weeks of combat. But the international community - and the Arab world - turns a blind eye. Many Arab governments actually support the genocidal Sudanese government. Even “peaceful” nations, such as Egypt and Jordan, have killed more Muslim and Arab dissidents, extremists and terrorists than Israel has - and without much protest.
|
|
|
Post by ajerzguy on Aug 2, 2006 14:22:33 GMT -5
How different is the crisis in the Middle East from the months leading up to WW2? Germany only wanted what they claimed to be their lands. The Europeans (England, France, Russia) placated the German overtures and we all know what it fostered. Denial of what is in front of you does not alter it's path. Israel also wants what they claimed to be their lands. And most of their neigbours don't agree with it. So, according to your own statements, Muslims must unite and pacify the agressor. The Islamist militants are the Nazis of the 30's and 40's and the Communists from the 50's to the 80's. Nah. USA participated in about 45 wars on foreign territory after WWII. So USA is already more agressive than Nazis, Islamists or Communists. What a crock of hyperbolism. 1st off both the Israelites and Muslims have claimed these lands for thousands of years. 2 The nation of Israel was granted it's sovereignty by vote in the United Nations. 3 The Palestinians have been offered Statehood on numerous occasions, which they've rejected. 4 I'm not familiar with the topography of Israel but most of what I see is dessert. It doesn't have any natural resources that can be seen as vital to anyone. 6 It is surrounded by a creed of people that is sworn to eliminate both the country and the people. 7 You can't produce one instance, where Israel has been the initial aggressor in a major war in that region. 8 They truly are a peaceful society that is continually forced to defend itself. You can't say the same for the Muslims. More hyperbole. You can't name 10 wars that the US has participated in since WWII. I'll give you 3; Korean War 1950-1953, Viet Nam War 1959-1973, Gulf War 1990-1991 (5 day war), Afghanistan war (2001-Present), and the Iraqi War (2003-Present). Now all you have to do is give me 5 more. Hitler had the same mantra as the Muslims, "rid the world of the Jews". It so happens Israel didn't exist when he was alive. Had there been a State of Israel at the time you can be rest assured he would have tried to eliminated it. It's amazing how a Russian can accuse the US of being more aggressive than any of the aforementioned trio. Since we are living in the the Muslim era we can quickly identify how threatening they can be. Here's a little fact: countries which have a majority of Muslim people (using data from the CIA World Factbook) total 11,883,889 square miles (20.6% of the world's land area), 1.4 billion people (22% of the world's population), and US$ 4.3 trillion of GDP on a purchasing power parity basis (8.7% of the world's GDP). Total world trade with these nations adds to over US$ 800 billion. Military spending totals over US$ 60 billion. Once the militant Muslims eliminate the Jews they will consume the entire Middle East and then start on the rest of the world. There are 8.77 million Muslims in France, Germany and England. It is estimated that between 1.1 and 7 million Muslims live in the United States today with the large majority from South Asian, African-American and Arab backgrounds. There are an estimated 14 to 20 million Muslims in Russia, constituting approximately 14 percent of the population. Take oil away from the world and place 1,000 terrorist with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons in each of these countries with a mission and they couldn't be stopped. It is the belief of the extremists to spread Islam world wide. The Russians imposed their will on the majority of Europe after WWII. They went so far as to put up a wall separating Berlin. They also supported and aided the Vietnamese during that war. Attempted to place nuclear weapons 90 miles from the US in Cuba. Can't say the same for the US. Now they have their own in country Radical Muslim problem. We all know the history behind Hitler.
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Aug 2, 2006 19:58:49 GMT -5
4 I'm not familiar with the topography of Israel but most of what I see is dessert. It doesn't have any natural resources that can be seen as vital to anyone. There is quite a fair bit of agricuture but the area is indeed resource poor. The wars fought in that area are pretty much based on religion. All 3 of the major monotheistic religions have important sites throughout the area they would love to control and all 3 religions have been guilty of crimes in the area (in fact the biggest single massacre in the area in modern times wasn't by muslims or jews but by christians - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_Massacre ) As for trying to make out the Israelis are merely trying to defend themselves that really isn't true. Israels governement officially doesn't allow new settlements in Palestine but in reality it actively defends those settlements. Many of these new settlements have been placed on already claimed land. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Aug 2, 2006 20:43:05 GMT -5
More hyperbole. You can't name 10 wars that the US has participated in since WWII. I'll give you 3; Korean War 1950-1953, Viet Nam War 1959-1973, Gulf War 1990-1991 (5 day war), Afghanistan war (2001-Present), and the Iraqi War (2003-Present). Now all you have to do is give me 5 more. Well here's a link to US military operations en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_history_eventsOff the top of my head you guys; invaded the Commonwealth territory of Grenada (despite protest from commonwealth nations such as my own) fought nicuargua on several fronts, both directly and indirectly had a hand in the failed bay of pigs attack on Cuba (US Navy gave transport and bombarbment support to the CIA trained army) Operation El Dorado Canyon where the US bombed Libya and the small naval battles that ensued. That failed military operation in Iran during the hostage crisis.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Aug 3, 2006 1:29:59 GMT -5
It's amazing how a Russian can accuse the US of being more aggressive than any of the aforementioned trio. Well, you can read further about wars so i don't need to answer that question again. USA has a biggest military spending and a strongest army that is obviously focused on fighting on a foreign territory. And USA actually uses it all the time. Besides, USA is the only country that purposefully used a nuclear weapons specifically against a civilians. Since we are living in the the Muslim era we can quickly identify how threatening they can be. Here's a little fact: countries which have a majority of Muslim people (using data from the CIA World Factbook) total 11,883,889 square miles (20.6% of the world's land area), 1.4 billion people (22% of the world's population), and US$ 4.3 trillion of GDP on a purchasing power parity basis (8.7% of the world's GDP). Total world trade with these nations adds to over US$ 800 billion. Military spending totals over US$ 60 billion. Once the militant Muslims eliminate the Jews they will consume the entire Middle East and then start on the rest of the world. There are 8.77 million Muslims in France, Germany and England. It is estimated that between 1.1 and 7 million Muslims live in the United States today with the large majority from South Asian, African-American and Arab backgrounds. There are an estimated 14 to 20 million Muslims in Russia, constituting approximately 14 percent of the population. Take oil away from the world and place 1,000 terrorist with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons in each of these countries with a mission and they couldn't be stopped. It is the belief of the extremists to spread Islam world wide. Well, the problem is that Christians has a significantly bigger military spending, GDP etc. And Christians do actually invade Muslim countries, kill their citizens, wage wars against Muslims etc. So it's obvious that Christians are even more threatening. www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1586978,00.html (stupid forum engine doesn't work with this link so just copy-paste it instead of just clicking on it) George Bush has claimed he was on a mission from God when he launched the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, according to a senior Palestinian politician in an interview to be broadcast by the BBC later this month.^^ Talking about a religious fanatics. The Russians imposed their will on the majority of Europe after WWII. They went so far as to put up a wall separating Berlin. You know, you post so much bullsh it that it makes me cry. Are all citizens of your country as stupid and ignorant as you? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_Control_CouncilHowever, relations between the Western Allies (especially the United States and the United Kingdom) and the Soviet Union quickly deteriorated, and so did their cooperation in the administration of occupied Germany. Against Soviet protests, the two Anglo-Saxon powers pushed for a heightened economic collaboration between the different zones, and on 1 January 1947 the British and American zones merged to form the Bizone. Over the course of 1947 and early 1948, they began to prepare the currency reform that would introduce the Deutsche Mark, and ultimately the creation of an independent West German state. When the Soviets learnt about this, they claimed that such plans were in violation of the Potsdam Agreement, that obviously the Western powers were not interested in further regular four-power control of Germany, and that under such circumstances the Control Council had no purpose anymore. On 20 March 1948, Marshal Sokolovsky, the Soviet representative, walked out of the meeting of the Council, never to attend one again.Now, who broken treaties and who was the cause of a separation of Germany? They also supported and aided the Vietnamese during that war. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam#The_Vietnam_War_and_ReunificationI don't know what do you want to say by that idiotic statement, but last time i checked it was USA who invaded an independent country so to kill their people who had other political regime (Communism). So, obviously it's USA who was an agressor there. USSR only helped one of the sides in a civil war in an independent country, but USSR never invaded it. Attempted to place nuclear weapons 90 miles from the US in Cuba. Another bullsh it. USSR placed nuclear weapons there. USA blocked only a last transport that transported a winter cloths for USSR soldiers. Anyway, it's USA who started all that sh it with a nuclear weapons so they should be last who can accuse others in doing the same. Can't say the same for the US. And i can because i know facts much better.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Aug 4, 2006 7:08:21 GMT -5
so how was the party in Afghanistan?
I heard it bombed.
|
|
|
Post by tamijo on Aug 7, 2006 8:59:39 GMT -5
Im with you all the way Ellestar, but with the **** people get out off their TV-set every day (one sided for sure) i'am afraid most prople wont be able to grab the facts.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Aug 7, 2006 9:38:06 GMT -5
the thing is that the fact and knowledge dont matter in this fact, Isreal + USA > rest of world - they ll keep on doing what they want and no1 ll stop em
and i dont really understand the logic behind whips statement, arabs kill each other so it s ok that Israel and USA slaugther Arabs aswell?
Isreal want be civiliased but act like a nationalistic terorist country that want take over neighbour staates, kill or deporte people there and settle themself, they might have a look into history book maybe.
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Aug 7, 2006 10:19:41 GMT -5
and i dont really understand the logic behind whips statement, arabs kill each other so it s ok that Israel and USA slaugther Arabs aswell? I'm refering to what gets reported in the media and "world opinion". Muslim vs Muslim persecution seems to be tolerated; but Israel is condemned for what you call "slaugther Arabs".
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Aug 8, 2006 6:56:47 GMT -5
and i dont really understand the logic behind whips statement, arabs kill each other so it s ok that Israel and USA slaugther Arabs aswell? I'm refering to what gets reported in the media and "world opinion". Muslim vs Muslim persecution seems to be tolerated; but Israel is condemned for what you call "slaugther Arabs". Well, if others are bad because they do something you can't claim that you're good AND do the same... So, if you want to say that Israel isn't any better than Fundamentalist Muslim fanatics, then yes, i agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by ajerzguy on Aug 10, 2006 9:14:27 GMT -5
It's amazing how a Russian can accuse the US of being more aggressive than any of the aforementioned trio. Well, you can read further about wars so i don't need to answer that question again. USA has a biggest military spending and a strongest army that is obviously focused on fighting on a foreign territory. And USA actually uses it all the time. Besides, USA is the only country that purposefully used a nuclear weapons specifically against a civilians. Well, the problem is that Christians has a significantly bigger military spending, GDP etc. And Christians do actually invade Muslim countries, kill their citizens, wage wars against Muslims etc. So it's obvious that Christians are even more threatening. www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1586978,00.html (stupid forum engine doesn't work with this link so just copy-paste it instead of just clicking on it) George Bush has claimed he was on a mission from God when he launched the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, according to a senior Palestinian politician in an interview to be broadcast by the BBC later this month.^^ Talking about a religious fanatics. You know, you post so much bullsh it that it makes me cry. Are all citizens of your country as stupid and ignorant as you? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_Control_CouncilHowever, relations between the Western Allies (especially the United States and the United Kingdom) and the Soviet Union quickly deteriorated, and so did their cooperation in the administration of occupied Germany. Against Soviet protests, the two Anglo-Saxon powers pushed for a heightened economic collaboration between the different zones, and on 1 January 1947 the British and American zones merged to form the Bizone. Over the course of 1947 and early 1948, they began to prepare the currency reform that would introduce the Deutsche Mark, and ultimately the creation of an independent West German state. When the Soviets learnt about this, they claimed that such plans were in violation of the Potsdam Agreement, that obviously the Western powers were not interested in further regular four-power control of Germany, and that under such circumstances the Control Council had no purpose anymore. On 20 March 1948, Marshal Sokolovsky, the Soviet representative, walked out of the meeting of the Council, never to attend one again.Now, who broken treaties and who was the cause of a separation of Germany? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam#The_Vietnam_War_and_ReunificationI don't know what do you want to say by that idiotic statement, but last time i checked it was USA who invaded an independent country so to kill their people who had other political regime (Communism). So, obviously it's USA who was an agressor there. USSR only helped one of the sides in a civil war in an independent country, but USSR never invaded it. Another bullsh it. USSR placed nuclear weapons there. USA blocked only a last transport that transported a winter cloths for USSR soldiers. Anyway, it's USA who started all that sh it with a nuclear weapons so they should be last who can accuse others in doing the same. Can't say the same for the US. And i can because i know facts much better. Yes the US used nuclear weapons on 2 Japanese cities to end the war in the Pacific. Stalin refused to declare war on Japan and only did so after the the bombs were dropped. Besides the casualties of the bombs even though horrific pale in comparison to what Stalin is attributed with. Since you like to use wikipedia I will counter with the same regarding Stalin: "Regardless, it appears that a minimum of around 10 million surplus deaths (4 million by repression and 6 million from famine) are attributable to the regime, with a number of recent books suggesting a probable figure of somewhere between 15 to 20 million. Can you provide any particular information substanstiating this claim since the 1900? I'm sure there were more Christians killed in Soviet Russia than CHristians killing others worldwide. I think the opperative words here are "according to a senior Palestinian politician. That holds alot of water! Actually the Russians walked out because the west would not pay reparations to rebuild East Germany for the Russians; The Soviets pushed the Allies for reparations from West Germany's industrial plants, though this had not been agreed to. Predictably, Harry S. Truman refused to give the Soviet Union reparations; Joseph Stalin responded by splitting off the Soviet sector of Germany as a Communist state. This had nothing to do with the currency and was used as a smoke screen by the Russians. For your information, North Vietnam was a province of France and with both Russian and Chinese involvement supported Ho Chi Minh with arms and training to start the revolution. After years of war the French bailed out and the US sent advisors to South Vietnam. This was legal due to the following; In 1954 it was determined by the Geneva Conference that the State of Vietnam would rule the territory of Vietnam south of the 17th parallel, of which the former colony of Cochin-China formed the heartland, pending unification on the basis of supervised elections (see Geneva Conference (1954)) in 1956. The elections and unification did not take place as planned (see below). When the territory was divided in this way, approximately 800,000 to 1 million North Vietnamese, mainly Vietnamese Roman Catholics, fled south due to what they perceived as "communist persecution" in the North. The Republic of Vietnam was proclaimed in Sàigòn by Ngô Ðình Diệm on October 22, 1955, after the Emperor Bảo Ðại was deposed. Are you the second coming of Yakov Smirnov? Winter Clothing?? What, Russia was sending wool shorts to this tropical island? That may be the most absurd statement I have ever read. Hopefully all Russians aren't as smart as you are. I'll let those that read this thread come to their own conclusion as to the intelligence of both of us. Your assessment is irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Aug 10, 2006 23:37:21 GMT -5
oh yeah SURE - use factsNstuff!
(but he still hasn't acknowledged the soviet invasion of afghanistan, which actually may not be surprising as the soviet governement refused to let the soviet press report anything about it)
|
|
|
Post by WarningU2 on Aug 13, 2006 22:48:02 GMT -5
If it ever was ... Israel and or the USA would counter strike. It would be WWIII. As for how this all started ... the following link is likely the best summary of the whole mess. I suggest everyone who is spouting off in this thread should read it to appreciate both sides of the issues at hand. It's been going on for a long time ... much longer then you might think. www.answers.com/topic/british-mandate-of-palestineAnyway the website is a fascinating read if you hadn't realized how long this has been an issue. Of course the joke is on the European powers now ... those Arab countries they regulated to the desert ... well them's oil in those hills. Al Habib Jedds a millionaire.
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Aug 14, 2006 8:21:17 GMT -5
Just think how much worse things would be if the Jews had gotten a piece of the Middle East that had oil.
|
|
|
Post by WarningU2 on Aug 14, 2006 21:35:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Aug 22, 2006 0:51:17 GMT -5
Yes the US used nuclear weapons on 2 Japanese cities to end the war in the Pacific. There was a discussion about that on that forum. Find it and read the links that are there before saying another bulls hit. Stalin is georgian, he isn't russian. Blame georgia ok? Thanks. Can you provide any particular information substanstiating this claim since the 1900? I'm sure there were more Christians killed in Soviet Russia than CHristians killing others worldwide. Soviet Russia was mostly atheist. Besides, this is not the point. It's mostly non-russian leaders who did it so there is no point to blame russia. Also, it's our internal business while here we're talking about killing of a foreign citizens and about holy wars. I think the opperative words here are "according to a senior Palestinian politician. That holds alot of water! www.bushwatch.com/evangelist.htm"The Washington Post subsequently reported that a call to the White House for clarification went unanswered. A number of reports* cautioned that Bush's exact words may have been lost in translation, but no alternate translation or attendee has contradicted the meaning expressed in the Ha'aretz translation. Bush's belief that he is acting as the hand of God has been well documented this past year, and his comments to Abbas wouldn't be the first time Bush has used his religious beliefs to score political points. Anyone who is capable of calling an empty trailer found in Iraq a Weapon of Mass Destruction is perfectly capable of telling a religious Arab that God told him to invade Iraq. --Politex, 07.01.03" "Earlier, Jackson Lears in the New York Times reported Bush as saying, " ''Events aren't moved by blind change and chance''..., but by ''the hand of a just and faithful God.'' From the outset he has been convinced that his presidency is part of a divine plan, even telling a friend while he was governor of Texas, ''I believe God wants me to run for president.'' This conviction that he is doing God's will has surfaced more openly since 9/11. In his State of the Union addresses and other public forums, he has presented himself as the leader of a global war against evil. As for a war in Iraq, ''we do not claim to know all the ways of Providence, yet we can trust in them.'' God is at work in world affairs, he says, calling for the United States to lead a liberating crusade in the Middle East, and ''this call of history has come to the right country.''"""BUSH, LIKE FUNDAMENTALISTS IN GENERAL, IS LEADING THE COUNTRY ASTRAY WITH HIS MISPLACED BELIEF IN HIS OWN ABSOLUTE CERTAINITY" "God speaks through me," he said. (We're not making this up. This story was first reported in the local papers, including the Intelligencer Journal and the Lancaster New Era, on July 16, 2004.) www.irregulartimes.com/godspeaksthroughme.htmlWe all know that Bush is the most fanatical Christian USA president of all time. So, i guess that first statement is true as well. Actually the Russians walked out because the west would not pay reparations to rebuild East Germany for the Russians; The Soviets pushed the Allies for reparations from West Germany's industrial plants, though this had not been agreed to. Predictably, Harry S. Truman refused to give the Soviet Union reparations; Joseph Stalin responded by splitting off the Soviet sector of Germany as a Communist state. This had nothing to do with the currency and was used as a smoke screen by the Russians. Any links? So far i'll believe wikipedia more than you. For your information, North Vietnam was a province of France and with both Russian and Chinese involvement supported Ho Chi Minh with arms and training to start the revolution. After years of war the French bailed out and the US sent advisors to South Vietnam. This was legal due to the following; In 1954 it was determined by the Geneva Conference that the State of Vietnam would rule the territory of Vietnam south of the 17th parallel, of which the former colony of Cochin-China formed the heartland, pending unification on the basis of supervised elections (see Geneva Conference (1954)) in 1956. The elections and unification did not take place as planned (see below). When the territory was divided in this way, approximately 800,000 to 1 million North Vietnamese, mainly Vietnamese Roman Catholics, fled south due to what they perceived as "communist persecution" in the North. The Republic of Vietnam was proclaimed in Sàigòn by Ngô Ðình Diệm on October 22, 1955, after the Emperor Bảo Ðại was deposed. Somehow, wikipedia doesn't agree to you once again. There was a civil war and USA invaded independent country. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea#Division_and_WarAre you the second coming of Yakov Smirnov? Winter Clothing?? What, Russia was sending wool shorts to this tropical island? That may be the most absurd statement I have ever read. Who said it should be a wool shorts? Only USA citizens are stupid enough to imagine something like that (i saw a winter clothing on russian soldiers while they were on a tropical islands in USA films). I have no idea about a tropical outfit of a USSR soldiers but i guess you need a different clothing if there is a rain season, for example. I'm just saying what i heard in an iterview with one of the commanding officers who was on a submarine that had orders to defend that transport (interview was on one of the national channels). Besides, they had the permission to attack USA ships (Aircraft carrier and destroyer) if USA ships will attack USSR transport so to not let it pass the blockade. Anyway, nuclear missiles were already deployed for sure because all of that started when USA recon plane saw them in Cuba. So you're wrong in any case. Wikipedia once again en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_missile_crisis"The missiles were placed to protect Cuba from further planned attacks by the United States and were rationalized by the Soviets as retaliation for the United States placing deployable nuclear warheads in the United Kingdom, Italy and most significantly, Turkey." "The photographs were shown to Kennedy on October 16 [2]. By October 19 the U-2 flights (then almost continuous) showed four sites were operational." "Kennedy reasoned that a blockade would be an act of war (which was correct) and war had not been declared between the U.S. and Cuba." "There were a number of issues with the naval blockade. There was legality - as Fidel Castro noted, there was nothing illegal about the missile installations; they were certainly a threat to the U.S., but similar missiles aimed at the U.S.S.R. were in place in Europe (sixty Thor IRBMs in four squadrons near Nottingham, in the United Kingdom; thirty Jupiter IRBMs in two squadrons near Gioia del Colle, Italy; and fifteen Jupiter IRBMs in one squadron near İzmir, Turkey)." "At the same time, Soviet merchant ships were nearing the quarantine zone."
|
|