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

[ArmedBear]

ArmedBear, now that's good.

No matter what the history is, and everyone has their legitimate beef over there, that map puts a few things in perspective. Many Palestinians live in Jordan. See Jordan, far bigger than Israel and a LOT bigger than the occupied territories.

That said, I can think of something to do with $3 Billion. Refund it to taxpayers, along with every penny we spend on foreign aid, the UN, or anything else that isn't in the direct support of operating the United States. In no way should we as taxpayers be forced to send our money out of the country, to causes and countries we may personally oppose. That's what charities are for.

 

[jsalcedo]

Didn't Israel bomb an Iranian nuclear facility in 1982 to prevent the creation of weapons grade nuclear material?

 

[shaldag]

In 1981, Israel bombed the Osirak reactor in Bagdhad, Iraq.

The timing of the decision was critical, sincew it happened days before the reactor came online. The only fatality was a technician working in the facility at the time.

 

[Cousin Mike]

In no way should we as taxpayers be forced to send our money out of the country, to causes and countries we may personally oppose. That's what charities are for.

+1

Btw, seeing that poster almost cost me my screen and keyboard
Does kinda put things in perspective though, when ya think about it.

 

[jcoiii]

And there you have the reason no one is using them against enemies right now.

There's also the fact, besides fallout, that any nuke in a city will kill millions of noncombatants...there's a moral consideration some people might take into account.

An attack on Iran to solve this nuke problem is silly, IMO. The technology is out there, and if Iran isn't the first, then some other state that hates Israel in the region will build one after Iran is attacked...and it will have that much more incentive to strike first, claiming the right of preemptive attack to foreclose Israeli preemptive strikes.

The only answer that makes any sense at all is to find a way to improve relations between Israel and all of its neighbors. That will take concessions, negotiating with terrorists, and lots of other things that no one wants to do, but seriously...look at the numbers. In the long run, trying to bomb every problem out of the way is going to fail.

Concessions and negotiations only embolden the agressor to take more action and demand more concessions and negotiations. That is never the way to solve a problem becuase in this scenario, Iran says something like "If you will stop fighting the Islamic terrorists attacking you, we will not use our nuclear weapon on you." That's called extortion in most circles, but "negotiation in others." We've seen how well the negotiations and concessions with the Palestinian Authority have worked. Every time a cease fire is called and concessions made, the terrorists strike again. Gee, what an incentive to keep trying.

 

[scout26]

Ahmadinejad is a loudmouth IMO, nothing more. I think he is more interested in the survival of a theocratic government in Iran than he is in committing suicide and taking millions of Iranians with him.

Ahhh, the "Rational Man" Fallacy. Think about this; would he rather be remembered as Ahmadinejad "The Maintainer of the Status Quo", or Ahmadinejad, "The Destroyer of Isreal" ????

Do you really think he/they care if a few hundred thousand to a several million of his/their co-religionists get waxed in the process ??? Remember this is the same regime that sent in unarmed human wave attacks, killing ten of thousands, against the Iraqis in the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war. They don't have the same outlook on life that we do. (e.g. the suicide bombers)
If Isreal had not bombed the Osirak facility, (I recommend "Raid on the Sun", tells the story of the Osirak attack) and Saddam had managed to build a bomb, do you not think that he would have used it against Isreal ?????

The destruction of Isreal is their focus, if you don't think they will as soon as they can, you haven't learned anything from history.

 

[shootinstudent]

We've seen how well the negotiations and concessions with the Palestinian Authority have worked. Every time a cease fire is called and concessions made, the terrorists strike again. Gee, what an incentive to keep trying.

I see this claim all the time, but it's false. The only "concession" that's been made is to stop bombing Palestinian locations that harbor militants. There is no time before just recently where the building of Settlements has been curtailed or slowed down...now tell me: If a negotiator who has invaded your ladn comes to you and says "If you stop attacking me, I'll leave, I promise"...but he's building thousands of houses and permanent structures by the day, would you believe him?

Can someone explain to me why, if the Israeli government genuinely planned on negotiating with the Palestinians, there were settlements built immediately after the conquests in every single place that was supposed to be Palestinian controlled?

If these wars were only about stopping terrorism, what's the purpose of permanent settlements?

 

[shaldag]

I see this claim all the time, but it's false. The only "concession" that's been made is to stop bombing Palestinian locations that harbor militants. There is no time before just recently where the building of Settlements has been curtailed or slowed down...now tell me: If a negotiator who has invaded your ladn comes to you and says "If you stop attacking me, I'll leave, I promise"...but he's building thousands of houses and permanent structures by the day, would you believe him?

Can someone explain to me why, if the Israeli government genuinely planned on negotiating with the Palestinians, there were settlements built immediately after the conquests in every single place that was supposed to be Palestinian controlled?

If these wars were only about stopping terrorism, what's the purpose of permanent settlements?

Immediately? You mean after the Khartoum statement of "no land for peace"?

In any event, that was 1967. Let's talk about now. You don't think that the withdrawl of Israeli troops and cessation of control of West Bank towns was not a concession? And what exactly did Israel get for that?

And the ownership of that land is in dispute. It is not simply Arab land "occupied by Israelis. Again, do you want to talk about Hebron? Sure, it was a wholly Palestinian city prior to 1967. That is, since 1929, when the Jewish occupants of the city were either massacred or fled. Just because the Israelis are the most recent victors in this battle does not make us the evil occupiers.
Or do you simply buy the Palestinian claim that there was never a Jewish presence or commonwealth between the Jordan and Mediterranean prior to the 1800s?


Let me tell you, when the Israeli arrmy took Hebron in 1967, the Mayor of the city fully expected a massacre of the city's inhabitants in revenge for that massacre 40 years ago. A number of those soldiers had grandparents and other immediate relatives killed. I wonder, if the results of that war had been reversed, would the Arabs have treated the Jews in the same way? Not if you take their own words at face value.



By the way, shootinstudent, I thank you for the kind wishes that you posted the other day. Unfortunately, everyone in the area has been scarred by the current conflict. Let's hope that the next calendar year brings about some real improvement for everyone.


One other thing, concerning the main topic of this thread. The current govenment in Iran is doing its best to torpedo any hope of any talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Any time that talks are initiated, whether diplomatically or through the intelligence/security forces of the two. Iranian-sponsored Hizbollah steps up attacks from Lebanon into Israel. Iran has no interest in ANY peace settlement that allows for the existence of a Jewish state.

Although some here may view the Iranian/Palestinian difficulties with Israel as one problem, this is not the case in Israel. Israel can and will address those problems separately.

 

[shootinstudent]

Or do you simply buy the Palestinian claim that there was never a Jewish presence or commonwealth between the Jordan and Mediterranean prior to the 1800s?

No, what I claim is that they were a small minority, and only grew strong enough to declare independence after a wave of massive (and unwanted by the majority of the people living in that land at the time) immigration.

I was talking about the 67 land grab when I spoke of the settlements. I'd still be interested in a direct answer to the question: What was the purpose of settlement building? And, given the image settlement building projects, why would you expect the palestinians to believe the Israelis are genuine in any conciliatory offers?

I for one believe the UN partition, in its original form, could've worked. I think it still can.

The relevance to Iran is this: If Israel can prove its willingness to give the Palestinians what they were owed from the beginning, and that it isn't intent on capturing all of Israel and Jerusalem for religious or political reasons, then the radicals like those in Iran will lose credibility. They will have no argument to justify their corrupt regimes and wasteful militarization, and that can help to secure peace in the future.

Unlike the situation in Europe, there is no 1500 year history of constant calls to exterminate all Jews in the Middle East. Discrimination, bad things, yes...but the idea that all Jews should be killed is a distinctively Western product, and I see no reason why the spread of that diseased worldview can't be stopped in the Arab and Iranian states before it gets any worse.

 

[Cousin Mike]

Ahhh, the "Rational Man" Fallacy. Think about this; would he rather be remembered as Ahmadinejad "The Maintainer of the Status Quo", or Ahmadinejad, "The Destroyer of Isreal" ????

Do you really think he/they care if a few hundred thousand to a several million of his/their co-religionists get waxed in the process ??? Remember this is the same regime that sent in unarmed human wave attacks, killing ten of thousands, against the Iraqis in the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war. They don't have the same outlook on life that we do. (e.g. the suicide bombers)
If Isreal had not bombed the Osirak facility, (I recommend "Raid on the Sun", tells the story of the Osirak attack) and Saddam had managed to build a bomb, do you not think that he would have used it against Isreal ?????

The destruction of Isreal is their focus, if you don't think they will as soon as they can, you haven't learned anything from history.

Ahh, once again, the "He's Arab! He's a nutbag! He's incapable of being reasonable!" argument. Yes, I do think that Ahmadinejad is a rational man. He's a lot more moderate than the Ayatollahs who ran the country before him. I also think he is very disagreeable, but that has nothing to do with his mental health. Saddam Hussein was an insane tyrant. He's suspected of mudering over a million of his own countrymen. Saddam used gas on his own people, I'm sure you knew that. Rape and torture were not things that happened in Iraq, they were institutionalized into the fabric of everyday life there. Saddam Husseing, in short, was quite a few cents short of a dollar.

Ahmadinejad, on the other hand, made a comment. One comment.

A comment that other leaders of state have been making in that part of the world for almost 60 years, I might add. And people will still be saying it in another 60 years. Where's your evidence of his insanity? When has Ahmadinejad tried to 'ethnically cleanse' a part of his own population? Who has he had exterminated? What mass murders and institutionalized torture/rape is he responsible for? If you have hard evidence that Ahmadinejad is doing more than just talking out of the side of his mouth, please present it.

As for the value of human life, I have to say I agree with you. What I will say is that suicide is different. Nobody wants to commit suicide. Especially rich, powerful leaders of state. I dunno about "Maintainer of the status quo" or "Destroyer of Israel,"

However...

I know for sure he doesn't want to be remembered as "Ahmadinejad, the dumba$$ who signed his own death warrant and took the great ancient Persian civilization along with him," or "Ahmadinejad, the idiot traitor of Islam who sacrificed his entire nation"

 

[CAnnoneer]

Why the hell do we care what happens to some far off country that's a pimple on the butt of geography?

All we need to do is:
1) watch out for nukes and prevent anybody from getting them
2) buying oil cheap
3) selling them conventional weapons to kill each other, because obviously that is all they care about

No foreign aid, no interference beyond our immediate interests, no trying to fix the world.

They fight each other because it keeps their regimes in place, mmmkaaay?

That's why Saudi sheikhs and imams give 25k to the families of suicide bombers etc. It is fascism pure and simple. Divert the attention from domestic pressures, redirect energies to perceived threats.

Same goes for Israel. They are as close to a military dictatorship as any country can get while still keeping a modicum of democracy. Constant external threat makes certain your average Abraam and Isaac do not ask inappropriate questions of their social and political betters.

It's all "for the cause", mmmkaaay?

The dumbest shmuck is the one that sticks his wiener between a hammer and an anvil. Ouch time.

 

[Mad Chemist]

We have an army on their front porch.
Iran wants nuclear weapons as a hedge against US invasion.
It's fairly obvious.

We have grievances with Iran because they finance terror operations, most of which are directed at Israel. I also think it is safe to assume that their intelligence has penetrated various Iraqi factions as well.

Arafat screwed the Palestinians for decades, his Fatah party is still srewing them. Yitzak Rabin had the best chance to successfully broker a peace aggreement, but he was murdered by one of his own people. It's no longer possible to say--Israelis good, Palestinians Bad--or vice versa. Both sides have blood on their hands and both remain obstinant while their people suffer.

Aside from encouraging a settlement, I don't think involvement is good for the US. I also believe that our continued military aid to Israel has enabled this situation to continue. Without our involvement, economic pressures would have forced the withdrawal of troops a long time ago.

Arafat is gone and Sharon is shifting positions, there is still hope.

 

[Dannyboy]

He's a lot more moderate than the Ayatollahs who ran the country before him.

You don't actually believe that he's running the country, do you?

 

[Cousin Mike]

As much as any President runs a country

Guess that's kind of a "no." Khomeini was as much of a nutbag as Saddam. I don't think Ahmadinejad falls into the same category. Also, to add, if we hadn't gotten involved in Iranian politics in the first place (installing the Shah as head of their government, who was deposed in 1979 and sentenced to death in absentia), we wouldn't have problems with the Iranians either.

See where I'm going with this whole thing?

We put our money, weapons, tax dollars and ideals somewhere they don't belong, and in 20 years or so they all turn around and wanna kill us. Hmmm.

 

[AZ Jeff]

As much as any President runs a country

Guess that's kind of a "no." Khomeini was as much of a nutbag as Saddam. I don't think Ahmadinejad falls into the same category. Also, to add, if we hadn't gotten involved in Iranian politics in the first place (installing the Shah as head of their government, who was deposed in 1979 and sentenced to death in absentia), we wouldn't have problems with the Iranians either.

See where I'm going with this whole thing?

We put our money, weapons, tax dollars and ideals somewhere they don't belong, and in 20 years or so they all turn around and wanna kill us. Hmmm.

Mike, that philosophy is what's driving a lot of Americans to say "let's get out of the Middle East". It's an alluring proposition, but it's probably not practical for two reasons:

1. global economy and global influence of the US economy on the rest of the world economy
2. energy demands of the US (OIL) place the M.E. as a strategic geographical region

Now if someone could figure out how to stop needing imported oil for the US economic engine, then at least some of the motiviation for involving ourselves in the M.E. would go away. Of course we would still export our consumerist culture and our Hollywood garbage to the rest of the world, and that would give plenty of reason for Islamic fundamentalists to hate us anyhow.

There's no easy way out here................

 

[R.H. Lee]

Arabs and particularly the 'Palestinians' should be grateful the U.S. provides support to Israel, because it gives us the ability to restrain them. Who knows what might befall the Arab world as the result of an autonomous Israel?

I personally have no use for a culture that beats, mutilates and murders its women, and sends its children out with explosives strapped to their bodies. Since inventing the number "0" 2500 years ago, the Arabs have done nothing except war with their neighbors and commit piracy on the high seas. Now, they've decided to make war on the western world, and Iran's nuclear aspirations are a component of that goal. Enough's enough. It's time to adopt 'zero' tolerance for their aggression and let them stew in their own poverty and insanity.

 

[.45Guy]

Unlike the situation in Europe, there is no 1500 year history of constant calls to exterminate all Jews in the Middle East. Discrimination, bad things, yes...but the idea that all Jews should be killed is a distinctively Western product, and I see no reason why the spread of that diseased worldview can't be stopped in the Arab and Iranian states before it gets any worse.

You know I can sit here and cite examples all day to no avail, but I will point out this one as it turned my stomach when Klintoon shook hands with the man of peace Arafat. Shall we look at the uncle who raised the lad? Grand Mufti Hajj Amin al-Husseini. I seem to recall his invovement in the planned ME concentration camps. Here's a snapshot, and a link: http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_mandate_grand_mufti.php

The Mufti reviewing the SS Hanjar division in 1943.

To say that there is no antipathy, or genocidal tendencies is a bit off mark.

 

[scout26]

Cousin Mike,

I did not say, that "He's a Nutjob or He's Insane." To explain, the "Rational Man" fallacy means "He thinks like me." His beliefs/motivations are decidely different then ours, and trying to apply y/our thought process and beliefs to someone else to predict their behavior is the fallacy. (e.g. "He wouldn't do it, because I wouldn't do it.)

Ahmadinejad, on the other hand, made a comment. One comment.

I have a hard time believeing that he just now came to that opinion and it was the first and only time he has made that comment. But for almost 60 years I've been hearing "Destroy Isreal" from that part of the world. Given what they've attempted and done to accomplish that goal, I tend to take that at face value.

Shootinstudent:

I for one believe the UN partition, in its original form, could've worked. I think it still can.

I think it could work also, there are also some/many Isrealis that think it could also (and Sharon is basically implementing it). The problem is that the some/many/most Palestinians don't want it to work. We'll see.

 

[scout26]

double tap

 

[Cousin Mike]

Mike, that philosophy is what's driving a lot of Americans to say "let's get out of the Middle East". It's an alluring proposition, but it's probably not practical for two reasons:

1. global economy and global influence of the US economy on the rest of the world economy
2. energy demands of the US (OIL) place the M.E. as a strategic geographical region

Now if someone could figure out how to stop needing imported oil for the US economic engine, then at least some of the motiviation for involving ourselves in the M.E. would go away. Of course we would still export our consumerist culture and our Hollywood garbage to the rest of the world, and that would give plenty of reason for Islamic fundamentalists to hate us anyhow.

There's no easy way out here................

+1 I guess that's the real issue. And people of either opinion have made good points here. I also agree that getting out of the region right now is not the answer, but who knows what the answer is anymore? I don't think we should abandon everyone and everything over there, but who knows what to do if they hate us so much? I'm starting to think this isn't going away in our lifetime. Sad, considering I'm saying that at 25. Just my opinion.

scout26, I didn't mean to generalize. That just seems to be the common opinion of Ahmadinejad, and I see no evidence of that. I misunderstood the "Rational Man" fallacy. However, I really don't buy the fact that they're so different from us. None of us have grown up under the circumstances that they have, except for maybe the Israeli gentleman who posted a while back. It's hard to judge how any of us would behave if we had spent years upon years on either side of an ugly conflict. Especially if we were on the losing side. As for the Palestinians not wanting the conflict to stop, I disagree. I think we hear from the (extremely) vocal minority of terrorists, rather than the general population. When news agencies send their people to the region, what are they doing? Showing you their funerals (which look wild and scary, because they're shooting rilfes in the air and screaming), talking to suicide bombers, masked gunmen, and other militants. We never see the invterview with the Palestinian parents whose child became a suicide bomber. We never see the 17 year old schoolgirl from Gaza just trying to go to school everyday. Those people feel the same way we do. They just want all this over with.

I will not say the Arabs are innocent victims of aggression, in general. I also won't say that they are irrational human beings in general. I think Arab governments manipulate the whole situation for whatever reasons, and use the Palestinians to push their own agenda.

My only real complaint about Israel is that they are over-aggressive. IMO, they are way too trigger happy on the ground in the territories. Nobody opposes killing armed threats. But school children, infants, old men and women, unarmed civilians, people worshipping? I've seen too many pictures of it to deny it ever happens, and we should not turn a blind eye to it. That's my only beef with Israel.

They need to hold themselves to the same standards that we do if they want to recieve support from our taxpayers, military, government, etc. Our soldiers dont pump bullets into dead bodies to "verify the kill." The most recent case on Yahoo! news a few weeks ago, the victim was a 14 year old unarmed girl. Our soldiers aren't over there bulldozing the olive orchards and ruining the landscape and the economy. Our soldiers don't bulldoze occupied homes. We're not redrawing Iraqs borders, and building settlements. Our soldiers aren't gassing people while they worship. Theirs shouldn't either. Armed conflict against a threat I would never argue with. And groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc. etc. etc. are a threat. The Palestinian infrastructure is not... Unless the motive is other than self defense.

 

[bjbarron]

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

Great! We needed an exit strategy from Iraq and Afghanistan anyway....

 

[shootinstudent]

The Mufti reviewing the SS Hanjar division in 1943.

To say that there is no antipathy, or genocidal tendencies is a bit off mark.

I believe I clearly expressed that there is such sentiment, especially now. My point was that it's got no long history in the culture, and that it can be stopped...genocidal hatred for Jews is something that is new in the middle east, and it generally came from Western influence...like those men pictured above.

The Mufti you're talking about was no popular figure...he was appointed by the British, who themselves have no ancient tradition of being friends to the Jewish people.

 

[ArmedBear]

My point was that it's got no long history in the culture, and that it can be stopped...genocidal hatred for Jews is something that is new in the middle east, and it generally came from Western influence...like those men pictured above.

That's a load of crap.

Genocidal hatred has not been universal, either in terms of time and place, but it's not new, and it predates what you refer to as "Western influence" by more than a millenium.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf15.html#c

Whether it can be stopped is another question. And my posting of this link does not mean that I think there's never been genocide that went the other way. The Bible documents it, though at the time it was written, there was no difference between historical texts and religious texts as there is today.

It's important not to give the "West" too much credit or blame, and it's foolish to think we can fix everything, or sometimes anything.

 

[R.H. Lee]

genocidal hatred for Jews is something that is new in the middle east, and it generally came from Western influence...like those men pictured above.

Where do you come up with this stuff????? You consistently make some of the most outrageous assertions that have absolutely no basis in historic fact.

 

[shootinstudent]

ArmedBear,

You need to reread my post. Violence and discrimination is in the article...where's the broad based call for exterminating all Jews, accompanied by something like the blood libel?

It's important not to give the "West" too much credit or blame, and it's foolish to think we can fix everything, or sometimes anything.

That's fine...that's not my point here. My point is that the theory that the Jewish people as a whole need to be exterminated is decidedly western in origin, and it runs back to the original days of the blood libel...a European invention.

In contrast, Jews were a minority in Muslim lands, and while sometimes the victims of harsh rule (as were other religious minorities), there was until recently no general theory floating around that it would be better if all Jews were slaughtered. Indeed, even the Hamas charter claims that Jews must be allowed to live in peace (as long as the ruling party is Islamic, of course). I believe that group gets more Nazi like every day, and I think they are a bunch of thugs who lie...but it should be interesting to you at least that even Hamas's charter doesn't call for exterminating Jews.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/hamas.htm

See article 31:

Under the wing of Islam, it is possible for the followers of the three religions - Islam, Christianity and Judaism - to coexist in peace and quiet with each other. Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam. Past and present history are the best witness to that.

The point of this regarding Israel, Iran, and other extremists is that there's hope for reversal. Genocidal feelings for all Jews aren't a traditional part of the culture, and there's no reason why we need to feel like there's absolutely nothing we can do to secure peace between Israelis and Arabs. Indeed, I think we ought to do everything we can to make sure that people realize how untraditional and contrary to even their own people's interests these terrorists are...the more the world is aware of that, the more alienated terrorists will be from any popular support.