Iran is only a few months away from creating an atomic bomb

[Glock Glockler]

Manedwolf,

I do not excuse everything Israel does, in fact I would like to the US massively reduce our involvement in the ME, but the I would be making the same arguements regardless of the country in Israel's situation. A nation has a right to defend itself and Israel has been attacked many times by its neighbors, of your neighbor has constantly thretened you should I not defend your right to protect yourself?

If you think that, you have got the mentality completely wrong. Knocking down the world trade center didn't convince America to leave the middle east; nuking a few million people in Iran won't convince middle eastern states that Israel is going to stay. Indeed, it'll likely turn even the Turks against Israel

Bad comparison; we didnt erect the WTC as a response to ME actions but if you destroy Iran's nuclear facilities you have destroyed their nuclear facilities. For that reason alone it is worth it. Also, the Turks hate the Iranians and they are buddies with Israel, I think the Turks would be just fine with it.

Misses the point. The technology is out there, and it's only a matter of time before someone who hates Israel gets one. You can dream about nuking the whole problem away all you want, but it won't happen. What if, after Nukes hit Iran, the Pakistanis decide to send a clandestine package into some middle eastern state's hands???

Then you bomb whatever country wants to go that route. This is a very simple concept: you don't let the guy who wants to hurt you get strong, I don't know why you can't get it.

Regarding Israel, none. Virtually zero. The only response has been warfare so far to most of these problems, and it doesn't seem to have worked too well the past 50 years

Hmmm, Israel has done pretty well keeping the invading countries out every time they attacked Israel, I think war has worked fine just far. And Israel has offered HUGE concessions to the "Palestinians" who are actually one of their biggest security threats.

The "let's try to deal with this problem like we dealt with religious violence in Northern Ireland" approach at least gives you a chance

First off, the violence in NI has nothing to do with religion but just for giggles what do you think Israel should do? Should they give territory to other countries? Should they get rid of their nukes? Seeing how they have been attacked by it's neighbors so often I see their concern for their security as competely reasonable.

 

[Cousin Mike]

Anybody who believes anything that Israel says publicly or has said about them publicly or describes their capability to defend their interests needs to contact me for a bridge sale I have going this week.

+1 again

Israel is pretty helpless without the United States, except when they're fighting civilian militant populations. The only reason the U.S. is despised in the arab world is because of our continuing, unwavering support for Israel, no matter how illegal and immoral their military actions are.

Also, Iran has a huge army, and an even bigger volunteer army. We're talking almost 18 million people. Tehran, if I am not mistaken, is extremely well protected by AA weapons, etc. Anyone going into Iran will not have an easy fight on their hands.

I also find it kind of funny that people who have no knowledge of the things the Israeli govt. does, blindly support Israel in any and every matter without question. Anyone who says they don't like things that the Israeli government does is automatically and unjustly branded anti-semitic, because IMHO that's the best way to keep people from talking about Israel and their policies towards their neighbors. What I also find funny is the only person I know (other than myself) who is against Israeli policy is a good friend of mine who happens to be Jewish. A majority of Israel's own citizens are against the occupation, and are against Israel's violent 'strike first' policies. The Israeli army has killed over 10 times more Palestinian civilians than terrorist attacks have killed Israeli civilians... It's called overkill.

The U.S. is the only country in the UN that supports Israel's activites: military raids on it's neighbors without provocation, illegal settlements, the targeting of civilians and ambulances in military operations. Israel constantly breaks the laws and rules of the Geneva convention, the Hague, etc. - and we consistantly use our veto power on the security council to stop the world community from doing anything about it. Why should Israel be the only country in the region with nuclear weapons? Why should only people we approve of get to have nuclear weapons? Why do Israel's neighbors not have the right to defend themselves from an incredibly hostile country if they choose?

If George Bush allowed our Army to do things in Iraq that Israel's defense forces do everyday in the occupied territories, we would be in serious trouble with the world community. Then again, if George Bush was as crazy as Ariel Sharon, we would have already invaded Venezuela for Hugo Chavez' comments. Lots here @ THR don't trust their government. You see it in posts, you see it in profile comments. Yet, when it comes to Israel, almost no one even attempts to question anything they do, or why we automatically support them in any and every matter concerning that part of the world. It's unfair, and I wonder why so many of us are "pro-Israel" when so many of their own citizens despise their governments actions.

 

[ArmedBear]

If the Iranians think like this too, then that pretty much explains why they want nuclear weapons of their own.

For some reason it seems that Iran shooting first at Israel = bad, while Israel shooting first at Iran = the Lord's work.

Not to mention that there are plenty of people in Israel who elect their own government, and they might want to have a say in the matter. I'd bet that they'd be HAPPIER with a MAD stalemate, than an israeli-initiated nuclear exchange.

Cmon, think about it, stalemate, or mutual annihilation. Stalemate, or annihilation. Stalemate, or annihilation.

And here's the bonus - if you decide to have the stalemate (don't shoot), then you can still have the option to choose annihilation LATER. If you choose annihilation first, you don't get to choose stalemate later on.

You're reading a lot into my post. I'm not talking about the "Lord's Work." The Devil's work, maybe. But I'm not much of a Believer.

While Israel may be a republic, Iran is not. Israel may not trust Iran's leadership not to nuke Israel, and I wouldn't blame Israel. If they strike, it will be to pre-empt a nuclear attack, not precipitate mutual annihilation. That's why time is of the essence.

The best outcome would be enough Iranians feeling like they had a choice between getting rid of their government by any means necessary, or being nuked by Israel. That could spark a much-needed revolution.

I'm not sure why you're trying to sell me on the advantages of not being nuked.

 

[longeyes]

"O death, where is thy sting?"
~Shakespeare


"O Sting, where is thy sting?"
~Longeyes

People have allegedly loved their children from day one. And people have made war since day one. Someone send this guy a telegram.

 

[Ironballs]

every suicide bomber wants MAD in essence

An islamic nation wants MAD with Israel, and is willing to sacrifice itself to destroy the Jews. They think it martyr them. It is not a deterrent, but and act of Allah to them... when one mad man has his finger on the button in Iran,... lookout.

 

[longeyes]

Every suicide bomber wants MAD.

In theory.

There's been no wholesale slaughter of Muslim nations. That's a fantasy. The reality would be far different from anything they imagine. Israel is capable of annihilating every Muslim capitol if they choose. I doubt that's an acceptable trade-off even to zealots.

 

[shootinstudent]

Also, the Turks hate the Iranians and they are buddies with Israel, I think the Turks would be just fine with it.

You are dreaming if you think a Nuke wouldn't erode Turkey's (which has to answer to an electorate) support for Israel. Turkey and the US are the only two real allies Israel has...you can read on this board for yourself what some Americans are already thinking about the alliance. What do you think is going to happen when Israel has no allies? The mediterreanean coast isn't fertile enough to keep the current war machine going.

Then you bomb whatever country wants to go that route. This is a very simple concept: you don't let the guy who wants to hurt you get strong, I don't know why you can't get it.

Sure, it's simple, but it's also wrong. What do you do when someone gets a bomb without you knowing? Hint: They aren't going to sit on that bomb for very long if you've already nuked another country for having one.

Hmmm, Israel has done pretty well keeping the invading countries out every time they attacked Israel, I think war has worked fine just far. And Israel has offered HUGE concessions to the "Palestinians" who are actually one of their biggest security threats.

This is blatantly false. Israel has been the victim of terrorist attacks continuously for the past 50 years, people have died in all of its wars, and now it's in such a bind that if there were a change in American and Turkish policy towards Israel, they could find themselves facing a long term disaster...with millions of neighbors who hate them.

As for the concessions, try this: Name one substantial concession that's been offered to the Palestinians since 1948. I'd sure like to see it. The Palestinians themselves see Israel as their biggest security threat...and indeed, there are Israeli armies in Palestinian land and have been ever since 1967. What concession was that, again?

First off, the violence in NI has nothing to do with religion but just for giggles what do you think Israel should do? Should they give territory to other countries? Should they get rid of their nukes? Seeing how they have been attacked by it's neighbors so often I see their concern for their security as competely reasonable.

The violence in Northern Ireland that's divided between Catholics and protestants has nothing to do with Religion? Are you joking?

Israel should withdraw from the land it illegaly (by every measure) seized in 1967, should move towards a government that is not religious and does more to include Palestinians (including Catholics in government was key to the Good Friday accords), and stop trying to settle the part of the Jerusalem that has always been considered outside the legal scope of Israeli territory and that is a linchpin in the entire peace process. IMO, those moves would give it enough legitimacy to weather an impending US disinterest in its cause and could actually help to develop democracy throughout the middle east...normalized relations with the Arab states would mean more trade and development, and likely more calls for Israeli style democracy in its neighbors. Just look at Jordan for an example of that.

Just a note...if you look at who struck first, after the 40's Israel launched a "pre-emptive strike" in virtually every single major war it's fought. Sometimes it was to ward off impending attack, others it was to grab land deemed essential for whatever political reasons were at play.

 

[longeyes]

Israel should withdraw from the land it illegaly (by every measure) seized in 1967, should move towards a government that is not religious and does more to include Palestinians (including Catholics in government was key to the Good Friday accords), and stop trying to settle the part of the Jerusalem that has always been considered outside the legal scope of Israeli territory and that is a linchpin in the entire peace process.

And what will the Muslim world concede in return?

Israel's right to exist in perpetuity?

How generous.

Do you also encourage religious pluralism in Muslim-controlled states?

Land won in war is not land illegally seized, but that's ancient stuff now.

 

[shootinstudent]

And what will the Muslim world concede in return?

Israel's right to exist in perpetuity?

How generous.

Do you also encourage religious pluralism in Muslim-controlled states?

Land won in war is not land illegally seized, but that's ancient stuff now.

1. Yes, the Muslim world would likely recognize Israel. They've already indicated a willingness to do so, and it would be to their financial benefit.

2. Yes, religious pluralism in Muslim states could be encouraged by this means. Trade with a non-muslim state and de-militarization would foster the change.

3. Land won in war is illegaly seized. That's been the case for most of the 20th century, and the US is included in the list of countries that recognize the legal principle of self-determination...that's why the Israelis and the US have invented "occupied territories" to describe the West Bank and Gaza. They'd have absolutely no face-saving argument whatsoever if those territories were annexed.

 

[AZ Jeff]

Just a note...if you look at who struck first, after the 40's Israel launched a "pre-emptive strike" in virtually every single major war it's fought. Sometimes it was to ward off impending attack, others it was to grab land deemed essential for whatever political reasons were at play.

Your statement above shows you are obviously not old enough to remember any of the earlier military engagements between Israel and it's neighbors. Do some reading on the wars of 1967 and 1972, and then tell me that those wars were "pre-emptively" launched by Israel.

 

[longeyes]

Land won in war is illegaly seized. That's been the case for most of the 20th century, and the US is included in the list of countries that recognize the legal principle of self-determination

Self-determination--under strict guidelines imposed by those who have conquered the territory, you mean.

If Muslims want to acknowledge Israel's right to exist they can do that NOW.

 

[shootinstudent]

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign R...dress by Prime Minister Begin at the National

Az Jeff, here're some quotes from PM Begin's speech:

Our other wars were not without an alternative. In November 1956 we had a choice. The reason for going to war then was the need to destroy the fedayeen, who did not represent a danger to the existence of the state.

and

In June 1967 we again had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.

Longeyes,

Uh, and just why would the Arab states do that? When has anything been offered in return for their acceptance of Israel?

 

[Master Blaster]

Israel should withdraw from the land it illegaly (by every measure) seized in 1967, should move towards a government that is not religious and does more to include Palestinians (including Catholics in government was key to the Good Friday accords), and stop trying to settle the part of the Jerusalem that has always been considered outside the legal scope of Israeli territory and that is a linchpin in the entire peace process. IMO, those moves would give it enough legitimacy to weather an impending US disinterest in its cause and could actually help to develop democracy throughout the middle east...normalized relations with the Arab states would mean more trade and development, and likely more calls for Israeli style democracy in its neighbors. Just look at Jordan for an example of that.

Just a note...if you look at who struck first, after the 40's Israel launched a "pre-emptive strike" in virtually every single major war it's fought. Sometimes it was to ward off impending attack, others it was to grab land deemed essential for whatever political reasons were at play.


shootinstudent
View Public Profile
Send a private message to shootinstudent
Find More Posts by shootinstudent
Add shootinstudent to Your Buddy List

Today, 05:54 PM

You are full of CRAP and You know nothing about Israel.

 

[AZ Jeff]

Az Jeff, here're some quotes from PM Begin's speech........

Have you ever READ A HISTORY of those wars? My recollection of the 1967 war was that Egyptian tanks were rolling towards Israel and Syrian shells were falling IN Israel before Israel took overt action.

 

[longeyes]

To Shootinstudent:

Wasn't it you who acknowledged our primary rights come from a Higher Power?

We should not ask ANYONE for a right to exist. Ever.

If there is a way of honest compromise that respects both sides, I'm for it, not for an exchange of nukes. But there's a dreadful impasse over there and it's hard to be too optimistic.

 

[R.H. Lee]

At one time or another, Israel has offered the 'Palestinians' everything they ever requested. Israel's concessions were anwered with 'Palestinian' homicide bombers who killed Israeli women and children. 'Palestinians' interpret concessions from Israel as weakness, and will not allow peace to interfere with their vow to push Israel into the sea.

 

[shootinstudent]

At one time or another, Israel has offered the 'Palestinians' everything they ever requested.

Want to take a stab at documenting that claim?

Edit:

Master and AZ Jeff,

I think I'm going to rely on Menachem Begin over you two on this question.

Longeyes,

If there is a way of honest compromise that respects both sides, I'm for it, not for an exchange of nukes. But there's a dreadful impasse over there and it's hard to be too optimistic.

Agreed. I'm all for trying to settle it too. And it's not because I really care about which side is more "fair" than the other...I'd like to see both sides of the conflict find a way to go on living in peace.

 

[Cousin Mike]

Before 1948, there was no state of Israel.. The country was called Palestine. Christians, Muslims and Jews lived there, together, in peace ever since the end of the Crusades. Palestine did not fight any wars I am aware of as a nation, and it's populace did not fight amongst themselves. It was also a place where people of all 3 religions made pilgrimages to worship on ancient holy ground. (Try to do that now...)

In 1948, the U.S., UK, and other world powers set up the state of Israel in response to the holocaust, and the call for a Jewish state and homeland. In effect, we forced millions of Palestinians out of their ancestral homeland, effectively making them refugees in countries like Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, etc - we simply took the existing country of Palestine, and changed it's name to what it was called in our Bibles.

So, lets draw a parallel.

What if some world comittee decided that because of the genocide in Africa, all Africans needed a new homeland? What if millions of Africans from every country on the continent were given a permanent home inside the U.S., and all they left for us were Connecticut and Idaho? What if the aforementioned Africans took complete control of the government, and continually used that political power to attack those of us who remained in Connecticut and Idaho, even re-taking and re-drawing those borders? What if they changed the name of our country?

What would you do if the only way you could live a peaceful life and put food on the table was to move to Mexico or Canada? What if those of us who stayed had no Army, no military, no real government, and no way to fight back? I have the feeling you'd be a little pissed off.. I have the feeling we would ALL want to fight back. And what if a country like Russia supported the New African government in everything they do? What if they sent weapons and tax money at every request, and never said or did anything on behalf of the real American people?

How do you think our neighbors and allies would feel about that?
You wouldn't fight back any way you knew how? I would.
But by fighting back the only way you knew how, you would be called a terrorist.

That simply is the Palestinian reality. And it's wrong and unfair that we buy it hook line and sinker everytime someone calls these people names on TV. My final $0.02 - As someone posted earlier in this thread... Nothing good has come from our unconditional support of Israel.. and IMHO, nothing will.

 

[ArmedBear]

Nothing good has come from our unconditional support of Israel.. and IMHO, nothing will.

Not even this?

 

[Cousin Mike]

LOL!!!

Well, maybe that beautiful piece of machinery

In response to ArmedBear's thoughtful comments, I have abandoned my position and decided that we SHOULD support Israel unconditionally... If they supply all American citizens with free Desert Eagles.

 

[Master Blaster]

Before 1948, there was no state of Israel.. The country was called Palestine. Christians, Muslims and Jews lived there, together, in peace ever since the end of the Crusades. Palestine did not fight any wars I am aware of as a nation, and it's populace did not fight amongst themselves. It was also a place where people of all 3 religions made pilgrimages to worship on ancient holy ground. (Try to do that now...)

There was no country called palestine not before 1948 or after 1948, this just shows your ignorance of history.

 

[Cousin Mike]

There was no country called palestine not before 1948 or after 1948, this just shows your ignorance of history.

That IS a joke, isn't it?

I really hope so...

 

[NineseveN]

Shootingstudent, I'm not necessarily pro-Israel, but you obviously have no clue about this topic. You're a smart guy, that's obvious, but you're completey wrong.

Did Israel itself steal this so-called 'illegally seized' land?

Did Israel truly launch premeptive strikes in the previous "wars"?

Did Israel fail to offer any sort of consessions to those they were at war with?

The answer to all three is, "no".

In fact, some would argue that part of Israel's current problem is their lack of pre-emptive strikes in old days and giving all that land they controlled in war back instead of keeping it all as a cushion border against further attacks.

 

[seansean]

+1 again

Israel is pretty helpless without the United States, except when they're fighting civilian militant populations. The only reason the U.S. is despised in the arab world is because of our continuing, unwavering support for Israel, no matter how illegal and immoral their military actions are.

Also, Iran has a huge army, and an even bigger volunteer army. We're talking almost 18 million people. Tehran, if I am not mistaken, is extremely well protected by AA weapons, etc. Anyone going into Iran will not have an easy fight on their hands.

I also find it kind of funny that people who have no knowledge of the things the Israeli govt. does, blindly support Israel in any and every matter without question. Anyone who says they don't like things that the Israeli government does is automatically and unjustly branded anti-semitic, because IMHO that's the best way to keep people from talking about Israel and their policies towards their neighbors. What I also find funny is the only person I know (other than myself) who is against Israeli policy is a good friend of mine who happens to be Jewish. A majority of Israel's own citizens are against the occupation, and are against Israel's violent 'strike first' policies. The Israeli army has killed over 10 times more Palestinian civilians than terrorist attacks have killed Israeli civilians... It's called overkill.

The U.S. is the only country in the UN that supports Israel's activites: military raids on it's neighbors without provocation, illegal settlements, the targeting of civilians and ambulances in military operations. Israel constantly breaks the laws and rules of the Geneva convention, the Hague, etc. - and we consistantly use our veto power on the security council to stop the world community from doing anything about it. Why should Israel be the only country in the region with nuclear weapons? Why should only people we approve of get to have nuclear weapons? Why do Israel's neighbors not have the right to defend themselves from an incredibly hostile country if they choose?

If George Bush allowed our Army to do things in Iraq that Israel's defense forces do everyday in the occupied territories, we would be in serious trouble with the world community. Then again, if George Bush was as crazy as Ariel Sharon, we would have already invaded Venezuela for Hugo Chavez' comments. Lots here @ THR don't trust their government. You see it in posts, you see it in profile comments. Yet, when it comes to Israel, almost no one even attempts to question anything they do, or why we automatically support them in any and every matter concerning that part of the world. It's unfair, and I wonder why so many of us are "pro-Israel" when so many of their own citizens despise their governments actions.

That's one of the truest posts I've seen here. Criticizing israel(rather, the israeli government) is verboten in polite conversation, and as to why that's so...look at our media. We're all programmed to give israel special consideration, 3+ billion a year in aid(taxpayer money) to the detriment of our own people. Imagine if, instead of sending that money to israel, we used it right here? I can think of lots of ways we can use that cash.

 

[NineseveN]

That's one of the truest posts I've seen here. Criticizing israel(rather, the israeli government) is verboten in polite conversation, and as to why that's so...look at our media. We're all programmed to give israel special consideration, 3+ billion a year in aid(taxpayer money) to the detriment of our own people. Imagine if, instead of sending that money to israel, we used it right here? I can think of lots of ways we can use that cash.

I don't see anyone trying to stop you all from discussing or criticizing Israel. Just because we don't agree with you does not mean we're trying to censor you. But your side of the fence has a lot of innaccuracies in this thread, we're trying to point them out.

In the end, who you side with is the product of opinion, and it's hard to argue that. But we can argue facts pretty readily, and state what are opinions are on the matter based on those facts. There is a difference. Feel however you like, but don't use ideas like "water is not wet" as the basis for your thoughts and call it fact.


Who here is "blindly following Israel"?

Who here is saying you cannot discuss Israel?

Who here has been "automatically and unjustly branded anti-semitic" for discussing Israel?

I see the smoke, but I can't seem to find the fire, which is the case when you guys just want to say "we hate Israel, you're all stupid" and have nothing but your opinions and inaccurate pseudo-facts to back up your claims.


I haven't called any anti-Israel people in this thread, "Nazi", but yet, somehow, I and everyone that thinks along the same lines is "blindly supporting Israel in any and every matter without question"? Or did I read you guys wrong?


That's funny, really.


Save the dramaitcs please, by all means discuss, just because we think you're wrong does not mean we're forbidding you to discuss the issue.