Iran Red Lines
Mother Jones has learned that a parade of high-level Israeli officials are on their way to the White House over the next two weeks to discuss Iran policy. Here's where the two countries differ on what to do next.
Adding to Israeli concern, Clawson and Wurmser said, is uncertainty over whether the next US administration will be willing and able to get organized on Iran policy quickly enough to meet Israeli concerns about Iran's nuclear progress as the calendar advances.
"Even beyond the question of whether McCain or Obama wins, the Israelis are afraid that no new administration is really going to be able to get its act together quickly to be able to mobilize a plan and do something," Wurmser said.
Wurmser put the odds of Israel striking Iran before Bush leaves office at "slightly, slightly above 50-50."
Wurmser said that different pressures weigh for and against Israeli military action either before or after the US election in November, but before Bush leaves office. "Israelis may think politically they don't want to get in a situation to do something that causes a reaction against US forces in Iraq, which causes the Republicans to lose the election." But acting after the elections would deeply complicate Israeli relations with the incoming administration.
Wurmser posits a third possibility. "The Israelis may have new information," and that may explain the up-tempo in the high-level US Israeli discussions on Iran. "But a second thing that might explain it is, this is not real. This is pressure to get Bush to act before he leaves."
"A lot turns on details about the assessment not just of Iran's nuclear progress, but also on parts of the Iran program that may not be publicly disclosed and on the projected status of Iran's air defenses or other countermeasures," says one former Bush administration official who asked to speak on background. "I think this also may be a more demanding option operationally than may be apparent from the public debate.
"I've been skeptical of the war talk until recently because I was informed enough to know better," the former official added. "Now I'm not gloomier, just less informed."
Robert Gallucci, a former longtime State Department nonproliferation expert who now serves as dean of Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, said a recent consultation with US government scientists persuaded him that Iran is not likely to have significant nuclear breakout capability for about five years.
"The test is when Iran could plausibly accumulate significant quantities of highly enriched uranium or plutonium so you have to worry about not only nuclear weapons development, but also the possible threat of transfer to a terrorist organization," Gallucci said Friday.
"I came away [from recent consultations with government scientists] believing that is actually some distance away in time—beyond five years," Gallucci said.
Gallucci said he was talking about when Iran could conceivably produce five or ten or more nuclear weapons. (Iran denies it is seeking a nuclear weapons capability at all, and the 2007 US NIE concluded that Iran had halted its weaponization program in 2003.) Are Israel's threat assessments based on the projection of when Iran could produce one nuclear weapon? "I tend to want to answer that and say there are two ways to come up with a difference [between US and Israeli assessments]. Technically, Israel and the US could have a different assessment of the obstacles that the Iranians might run into and how quickly they could overcome them."
"There could also be a tolerance [difference]," Gallucci said. "We're prepared to say, 'It's unlikely they could do this in this amount of time.' The Israelis could be saying, 'Thank you very much, we're a little closer to the problem than you are.' American national security types are not certain of how quickly Iran could do it, but are just as uncertain about whether Iran would do it or not."
Photo of a B-2 Spirit bomber by flickr user James Gordon used under a Creative Commons license.
ISRAEL’S SUSTAINABLE PARASITISM ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
Israel and the American Neo-Con/Neo-Lib Diaspora notoriously donate thousands of dollars to elect corruptible American presidential and congressional officials, who then repay Israel a thousand fold from precious tax revenues; with millions of dollars worth of technologically advanced military equipment and services, and with the priceless lives of thousands of young patriots. In the case of the un-Constitutional Iraq War, Podhoretz Neo-Con Bush sacrificed over a trillion dollars and the lives of 4,000 young patriots, to sole benefit of Israel.
Jeugenen,,
I agree with you the question is why ordinary the Americans can not see this simple truth.
Not just the most unjust effects of their support for the state of Israel but in so many other ways too.
And the answer is unfortunately this that they have lost their ability to think critically. Evaluate things independently with a sense integrity and sincerity not just propaganda BS.
Every aspects of American system have become secret ever department every state and federal agencies have secret programs to the point that no one in this country has any idea what the true state of affairs In this country really is.
Americans are mentally going backwards even though they live in conspicuous glory at this moment their system of government is becoming more and more corrupt it is so bad and so out of whack that I sincerely feel that very soon this country will collapse .
bahman"
"Guilty ppl always want to get-of the hook through technicality"
Technically, that's true.
But "technicalities" are the specificities of reality.
When you need to buy tires for your car, and the service attendant asks you what side tires do you have, what do you say?:
"Guilty ppl always want to get-of the hook through technicality"?
You would need the detail information to get the rubber.
I did not make up this aspect of God and nature. I merely count on it to keep me sane and self respecting.
As far as people not liking me, I chose this venue because I knew it was LOADED with Anti-Jews. So I am in no way surprized or ashamed. This is what I do for sport. Other people play poker, I deny the Jew-haters (and certain others) the luxury of believing their own bullsh*t.
Jeugenen:
How has the Iraq military action benefited Israel? I am sure you have an answer but two things are likely:
a) Its probably a nonsensical answer
b) You likly won't share it with us.
JZaid:
Why does everyone have to be "something" which is defined in your limited vocabulary?
A- Because in your attempt to control the 'frame of reference' you need to know what you are disparaging.
It hard to disparage someone you can't bumper-sticker.
I think you are desperate, I think of you as no way a defender of the Jews, first and foremost the Jews I know and love more than you could ever image you miserable little **** would never ever want to be defended by someone as insignificant as you.
Also, since when defending Jews is the same as defending the criminal Duo of American military industrial complex and Israel the original terrorists remember how your not so Jewish friends use to rune round the then Palestinian territory killing and ethnically cleansing the “HOLY LAND” you mean technicality like that.
I know some Jews they would not want to have anything to do with homicidal, psychologically damaged, insignificant din dongs like you.
Also I thought you are so prolific and so incisive that you can cut through anybody where is your Zionist MOJO your terrorist supporter.
And sometimes Palestinian sympathizer, LOL hahahah
You make me dream of the New Persopolice
bahman:
Translation>
You love Jews so long as:
> They are Iranian (not Israeli)
> They agree with you about the evil of Israeli Jews and "Zionist" and American Jews.
Does that about sum it up?
Here is my conclusion:
There is no cure for Crazy.
"Democratic Reps. Robert Wexler of Florida and Barney Frank of Massachusetts pulled their support — Wexler on July 9, and Frank a week earlier — from a congressional resolution that called for increasing inspections on all sea and air traffic in and out of Iran, among other measures. The bill has been targeted by a coalition of progressive groups that give an argument that the measure is pushing for a de facto blockade on Iran that may lead to war...arguing that the bill would send an unnecessarily bellicose message to Tehran."
Some people are finally showing some "vision" in Washington after all.
JZaid, we need more Jews like you, and I also think that, at the end of the day, people like you would be the lasting and the winners.
bahman:
PS> I did not defend you.
Please try not to flater yourself.
Trollstein wrote to JZaid: "Why does everyone have to be "something" which is defined in your limited vocabulary?
A- Because in your attempt to control the 'frame of reference' you need to know what you are disparaging.
It hard to disparage someone you can't bumper-sticker.
Posted by: Trolstein July 15, 2008 2:32:42 PM Respond ^"
Interesting from someone who forget the 2nd "l" in his own name's signature. Was that a "vocabulary" mistake or just a "misspell”? LOL
Tro”ll”stein or should I call you Tro”l”stein: A “simple“ advise for a “complicated“ kid such as you Steiny; don’t point your finger at others before you look at yourself first into the mirror. Maybe NewPolonia’s idea was on the money… I add myself to the ever growing “Stein Ignore” list from this moment on. Bye bye Steiny. Please don’t cry. Oh, I know you're a big man LMAO.
Allen McGoo
Ignore to your heart's content.
I wasn't talking to you anyway.
Your post BTW lacked wit.
It also lacked substance.
"don’t point your finger at others before you look at yourself first into the mirror. "
Blah, Blah, wonk, wonk . . just like popeye's frekin motha.
It also lacked originality. But you already knew that.
"Crime rises in military with lower standards --
LEXINGTON HERALD LEADER 13-JULY-2008
Before Army Sgt. 1st Class Randal Ruby was accused in Iraq of beating prisoners and of conspiring to plant rifles on dead civilians, he amassed a 10-year criminal record documenting assaults on his wife in Colorado and Washington state and a drunken high-speed police chase in Maine for which he remains wanted. Before Lance Cpl. Delano Holmes stabbed an Iraqi private to death with a bayonet, he was hospitalized after threatening suicide in high school, was accused of assault, disorderly conduct and trespassing, and, in the months leading up to deployment, was twice linked to drug use. Before Army Spec. Shane Carl Gonyon was convicted of stealing a pistol at Abu Ghraib prison, he was convicted twice on felony charges and arrested four times, once for allegedly giving a 13-year-old girl marijuana in exchange for oral sex. He enlisted weeks after his release from a federal prison in Oregon."
http://www.kentucky.com/216/story/459852.html
Trollstein,
I think you are done.
You have nothing to say just a few last insults and derogatory personal comments.
Also remember no one needs to use facts to dispute the stories of Harry potter however one can humorously take the pies (as the English would say)
I personally would not waist my FACTS on you.
One other personal observation before I kick you to the curb, is it not ironic that you are now collaborating with your abusers the genocidal westerners (germens English polish Americans) against the noble ppl of Iran.
I too as your modern day protector am giving you your freedom, freedom to get an identity that does not involve killing innocent ppl and become a toy in the hands of American military junta.
Be gone now.
Trollstein
Ok, that was a little funny so I through you a little boon.
Tell me what is Israel going to do when Iran has the bomb.
Or even more importantly what is the USA going to do?
How are they going to convince the Saudis of their relevance?
I wander what happens to the value of dollar once the Iranians have the bomb? Lol
See we don’t need facts just some strait talk.
Once the Iranians have the bomb America has absolutely no roll to play in that region well I exaggerate it has a roll but it would be an extremely diminished roll.
And of course with that Israel becomes the little insignificant patch of land that it is.
And just between the two of us considering the kind of inaptitude they have displayed over the years, don’t you think an enhanced Iranian roll in that part of the world is better for all.
Including the Jews I mean seriously if ultimately Israel is destined to be no more than a tourist destination who would you like to be in charge?
The Arabs countries or the Iranians? Interesting question don’t you think.
bahman:
The Iranian people are very smart. However, not smart enough to prevent themselves from being subjugated by their own leadership. Honestly, I have always been very impressed with the Iranian intellect. Their best judgment however is entirely another subject. The smartest Iranian I ever met was a commercial realtor who amassed himself a vast fortune off of levering other people’s capitol. But he would also repeatedly outsmart himself. For example, there were two lots of property located next to each other. Separately, the lots were too small to build on but combined, they became one of the best undeveloped commercial plots in the area. But the two land owners hated each other and refused to cooperate. So my friend the realtor set up a shell company and purchased one plot from one guy and used his existing corporation to purchase the other plot from the other owner—thereby masking his motive of outsmarting them both. Except what he failed to consider is that one of the landowners was connected in the local politics and did not like to be outsmarted. So the town legally forced him to sell the combined plot to them, under a controversial provision in the U.S. Constitution.
Does this true story have any correlation to the Iranian situation in the Middle East?
Iran has no personal stake in the Israeli / Palestinian conflict. They are trying to exploit the regional people’s hot tempers to improve their own leverage and strengthen their position. But also to distract their own people from their own backwards misery.
Remove the influence of radical religion and--would the Iranian people get over their tendency to outsmart themselves, and Iran SHOULD today be a world leader in technology and have a super powerful (and productive) global economy—just like Israel--only much larger.
You asked:
“I wander what happens to the value of dollar once the Iranians have the bomb?”
This event has yet to come to fruition. The US Dollar is being artificially supported by the fact that petroleum is traded in dollars. Which to my understanding is why the US invaded Iraq, because Saddam had recently switched his sale of oil off the Dollar. If the USA strikes Iran, it WONT be to protect Israel but to avert a similar situation in Iran re: currency.
If Israel strikes the Iranian development project it would be for an entirely different reason. It would be exclusively to scuttle the development of Iranian nuclear weapons. No one on this topic has yet answered my earlier question so here is your chance to be a hero.
Why would Israel risk the type of retaliation being threatened by Tehran for any other reason?
“ . . . . Israel becomes the little insignificant patch of land that it is”
Israel will never be insignificant:
“Israel, the 100th smallest country, with less than 1/1000th of the world's population, can lay claim to the following:
Israel has the highest ratio of university degrees to the population in the world.
Israel produces more scientific papers per capita than any other nation by a large margin - 109 per 10,000 people - as well as one of the highest per capita rates of patents filed.
In proportion to its population, Israel has the largest number of startup companies in the world. In absolute terms, Israel has the largest number of startup companies than any other country in the world, except the US (3,500 companies mostly in hi-tech).
Israel is ranked #2 in the world for venture capital funds right behind the US.
Outside the United States and Canada, Israel has the largest number of NASDAQ listed companies.
Israel has the highest average living standards in the Middle East. The per capita income in 2000 was over $17,500, exceeding that of the UK.
With an aerial arsenal of over 250 F-16s, Israel has the largest fleet of the aircraft outside of the US.
Israel's $100 billion economy is larger than all of its immediate neighbors combined.
On a per capita basis, Israel has the largest number of biotech start-ups.
Twenty-four percent of Israel's workforce holds university degrees - ranking third in the industrialized world, after the United States and Holland - and 12 percent hold advanced degrees.
Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East.
In 1984 and 1991, Israel airlifted a total of 22,000 Ethiopian Jews at risk in Ethiopia to safety in Israel.
When Golda Meir was elected Prime Minister of Israel in 1969, she became the world's second elected female leader in modern times.
When the U. S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya was bombed in 1998, Israeli rescue teams were on the scene within a day - and saved three victims from the rubble.
Israel has the third highest rate of entrepreneurship - and the highest rate among women and among people over 55 - in the world.
Relative to its population, Israel is the largest immigrant-absorbing nation on earth. Immigrants come in search of democracy, religious freedom, and economic opportunity.
Israel was the first nation in the world to adopt the Kimberly process, an international standard that certifies diamonds as "conflict free."
According to industry officials, Israel designed the airline industry's most impenetrable flight security. U. S. officials now look to Israel for advice on how to handle airborne security threats.
In 1991, during the Gulf War, the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra played a concert wearing gas masks as scud missiles fired by Saddam Hussein fell on Tel Aviv.
Israel has the world's second highest per capita of new books.
Israel is the only country in the world that entered the 21st century with a net gain in its number of trees, made more remarkable because this was achieved in an area considered mainly desert.
Israel has more museums per capita than any other country.
Medicine... Israeli scientists developed the first fully computerized, no-radiation, diagnostic instrumentation for breast cancer.
An Israeli company developed a computerized system for ensuring proper
administration of medications, thus removing human error from medical treatment. Every year in U. S. hospitals 7,000 patients die from treatment mistakes.
Israel's Givun imaging developed the first ingestible video camera, so small it fits inside a pill. Used to view the small intestine from the inside, the camera helps doctors diagnose cancer and digestive disorders.
Researchers in Israel developed a new device that directly helps the heart pump blood, an innovation with the potential to save lives among those with heart failure. The new device is synchronized with the heart's mechanical operations through a sophisticated system of sensors.
Technology... With more than 3,000 high-tech companies and start-ups, Israel has the highest concentration of hi-tech companies in the world (apart from the Silicon Valley).
In response to serious water shortages, Israeli engineers and agriculturalists developed a revolutionary drip irrigation system to minimize the amount of water used to grow crops.
Israel has the highest percentage in the world of home computers per capita.
Israel leads the world in the number of scientists and technicians in the workforce, with 145 per 10,000, as opposed to 85 in the U. S., over 70 in Japan, and less than 60 in Germany. With over 25% of its work force employed in technical professions. Israel places first in this category as well.
The cell phone was developed in Israel by Motorola, which has its largest development center in Israel.
Most of the Windows NT operating system was developed by Microsoft-Israel.
The Pentium MMX Chip technology was designed in Israel at Intel.
Voice mail technology was developed in Israel.
Both Microsoft and Cisco built their only R&D facilities outside the US in Israel.
The AOL Instant Messenger was developed in 1996 by four young Israelis.
A new acne treatment developed in Israel, the ClearLight device,produces a high-intensity, ultraviolet-light-free, narrow-band blue light that causes acne bacteria to self-destruct - all without damaging surroundings skin or tissue.
An Israeli company was the first to develop and install a large-scale solar-powered and fully functional electricity generating plant, in southern California's Mojave desert."
All the above while engaged in regular wars with an implacable enemy that seeks its destruction, and an economy continuously under strain by having to spend more per capita on its own protection than any other country on earth. This from a country just 55 years young having started off life on a very frontiers-like basis, whose population had mostly just emerged from the devastating World War II years.”
Also: Perhaps most importantly, Israel is likely going to be the place where the world’s dependence on Arab religious theocracies is finally broken:
“Israeli invention could pave way for hydrogen cars” (April 24, 2008).
http://www.jewishjournal.com/science_and_technology/article/israeli_inve...
#######
#######
===
Oil is payoff for the
West's efforts at providing
PROXY COMBATANTS for Israel
--for protecting Israel
from expanding, encircling
Islamic Arabism; a Jewish
nation-state having sup-
porters throughout the West
willing to destroy the
entirety of Western civili-
zation for Israel's sake.
That's the gut-wrenching
truth of why Western demo-
cracies are sacrificing
blood and treasure in the
Middle East; especially the
U.S., which has enough
off-shore and on-land oil
reserves to last 300 years
at her present rate of
consumption, and which
reserves were PURPOSELY
capped and/or not drilled
because Israel's supporters
have poured millions of
dollars into ENVIRONMENTAL
MOVEMENT groups' coffers,
to work at keeping America
from oil/energy indepen-
dence and tied to Israel's
interests in the Middle
East.
That's the truth you'll
NEVER see nor hear reported
in Western mainstream news
media, because Israel's
supporters control what's
fit to be said or printed
about why the West wars
with Islamic Arabism.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147&hl=en
#######
#######
Interesting. I was reading everyone's post. I couldn't help however to laugh at someone's unpopular comments. I guess the whole world was created, discovered and built in Israel. I am surprised that the Model T wasn’t included.
To Deacon (and others):
"Although completely unreported by the U.S. media and government, the answer to the Iraq enigma is simple yet shocking -- it is in large part an oil currency war. One of the core reasons for this upcoming war is this administration's goal of preventing further Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard. However, in order to pre-empt OPEC, they need to gain geo-strategic control of Iraq along with its 2nd largest proven oil reserves. The second coalescing factor that is driving the Iraq war is the quiet acknowledgement by respected oil geologists and possibly this administration is the impending phenomenon known as Global "Peak Oil." This is projected to occur around 2010, with Iraq and Saudi Arabia being the final two nations to reach peak oil production. The issue of Peak Oil has been added to the scope of this essay, along with the macroeconomics of `petrodollar recycling' and the unpublicized but genuine challenge to U.S. dollar hegemony from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency. The author advocates graduated reform of the global monetary system including a dollar/euro currency `trading band' with reserve status parity, a dual OPEC oil transaction standard, and multilateral treaties via the UN regarding energy reform. Such reforms could potentially reduce future oil currency and oil warfare. The essay ends with a reflection and critique of current US economic and foreign policies. What happens in the 2004 US elections will have a large impact on the 21st century."
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.html
Since you fellows get so much internal satisfaction from blaming Jews, I don't suppose this would disuaid you in that goal, just the same as chain-smokers refused to accept that cancer would be the result, until 1990's.
Americo:
You wrote:
" . . I guess the whole world was created, discovered and built in Israel. I am surprised that the Model T wasn’t included."
Is that a fancy way of saying you disbelieve the specific list earlier presented? That's how I read your statement. If so, you're wrong and have made no effort to clarify the point. If not, what is your point?
Trollstein
I think you suffer from verbal diarrhea,
You provid answers to the questions you know and avoid questions you don’t know.
Ok, first you may want to look to see how the Iranians are doing here in US,
I believe you will find we are if not the top ethnic group in terms of education and wealth ect we are very much at the top.
Also what is missing in your assessment is consideration of geo-political environment once Iran acquires the Bomb. And can not be subject to various intimidation tactics of the west in general.
You only answered (correctly) the relationship between the bomb and US dollar and avoided the bomb and Israel question .
It is the consideration of that question that would give you the understanding of my “insignificant patch of land” comment.
Also as you may know, smart ppl have a habit of noticing other smart ppl.
There is no doubt in my mind that you could have continued another 20 page listing the truly astounding achievements of the Jewish ppl.
That, with all due respect was not my question although I believe since I through the boon you had the right to take it. Never the less my question was about the geo political consequences for Israel the significance of the country (not the Jewish ppl and yes I believe there is a deference in this case) even, as it continues being rather creative and educated which as I mentioned I accept that question is related to the roll Israel has been playing in support of the American military industrial complex, and the intimidation of its so called allies (lol) like the Saudis through the various aggressive moves by the Israelis to make them nervous so to create the rational for the need for American support not for the country but for the slogs and the pigs that are in power today.
Why would Israel risk the type of retaliation being threatened by Tehran for any other reason
And I guess to complete the thought you are suggesting >>>> Other reason>>than believing that the threat to its national security the so called “existential threat” is absolutely real
Well first in order to drive this question to its crises point I have to accept that Israel is in fact going to take action and since I have repeatedly argued that I do not believe Israel or the US would under any circumstance attack Iran then I guess I do not accept the premise of you question and therefore need not to answer.
Also this that the question of Jewish ppl aside the so called state of Israel is a conduit for American intimidation in the region and should the US determine that the economical threat to its financial system is deep enough to warrant the extremely heavy cost of that war (a truly BIG assumption that even this ***kn stupid administration would be hard press to miscalculate) then at that point I see Israel as the one most to lose. And of course I see no way for Israel to attack Iran by itself it just does not have that kind of capabilities may be to scratch the surface of some facilities in Iran but nothing that would be very costly for the Iranians to replace. Another word whilst Israel does have the capability to attack it can not sustain that attack long enough to mean anything.
Now please answer the question regarding the Iranians having the bomb what do you think will happen next? Both to Israel and the region.
Trollstein you wrote,
The Iranian people are very smart. However, not smart enough to prevent themselves from being subjugated by their own leadership. Honestly, I have always been very impressed with the Iranian intellect. Their best judgment however is entirely another subject.
do you really think you are qualified to make that assessment?
And just one other thing the Iranian you mentioned does not seem as intelligent and smart as you suggested. Did you choose him to be the top dog so you can easily nock him down?
You wrote,
“not smart enough to prevent themselves from being subjugated by their own leadership”
Every nation mast-be responsible to make the necessary changes to its leadership and governmental systems if those changes are to be sustainable.
Democracy is not margarine to spread around, nations that have had no experience of it require a multi layer of development if they are to be successful at it and even then with carelessness you can see what can happen to the system just look at US.
What the Iranians are doing and this is not just the government most Iranians support the government on this point even decedent like I. (we too believe that this is in fact an existential issue for our nation) it to challenge the general notion that US has legitimate interest in that part of the world that includes access to our resources and and and.
And as you can see they are winning hands down.
Bahman:
You asked several questions but only answered one and did so rethorically.
I asked one question and answered one question, which I think is a fair trade-off, since many bloggers outright refuse to answer questions at all. So please get used to the fact that I will not be answering all your questions and not because I want to avoid doing so but for 'point-of-order' reasons stated and besides, some of your questions are patently rethorical.
But I will have a run at the one you repeated, even though it is still quite hypothetical.
If Iran aquires Nuclear weapons, it will not only be a threat to Israel and the USA but to the Middle East and therefore the world. Which is why the entire world, through the rarely uninamous Security Counsel has already begun the process of preventing same. The Saudi's and Kuait and other oil producers are mainly Sunni and would see a nuclear (Shiite) Iran as a threat rather then an ally. It is plausible that Israel might be seen (by then) as more benevolant--after they conclude that Israel is at least sane, while Iran is not.
Does that answer your question? Because I have one more for you.
What will Iran and the oil producers do when oil is ultimately rendered obsolite and due to worldwide carbon-emmission regulations, the producers may have to pay to dispose of it?
Whay will the Jew-haters do for fun?
East and West, nukes, war on terror, etc are only a smoke screen. Several countries have Tesla technology that makes nukes obsolete. The US, IsisRaEl, Arabs, Russia, China, Europe, England, Spain, Mexico, Japan, Korea, etc are controlled by the same elites. There are only the elites and the masses. As long as the masses fight each other, the elite will continue to win. It is time to wake up.
Trollstein, T you wrote,
T-But I will have a run at the one you repeated, even though it is still quite hypothetical.
I am kind of amused at your mediate response here because in my rather “smart” Iranian mind. Lol, the answer to this rather hypothetical quastion is no less than the rational for all that the west is trying to do to provent the said. So yeh it is important is it not?
T-If Iran acquires Nuclear weapons, it will not only be a threat to Israel and the USA but to the Middle East and therefore the world.
B-You obviously asserting this assumption but lets look at it, little bet more carefully than simply taking it for granted.
If Iran has the bomb there are to choices available to it
First, to use it against Israel.
Now to every observer in the international arena it is or rather should be absolutely clear that this choice would render the Iranian nation with absolutely 0 gain for without a doubt Iran will be attacked and will be absolutely destroyed “Annihilated” for 100’s of years to come.
Now I have heard from some Israeli distortions artist that Iranian leadership is Crazy enough to do it.
I believe that assessment is rather paranoid and there is no evidence to show that Iranian leadership as socially and economically challenged as they are never the less are so stupid to completely go in to self distrust mode.
So I do not accept that assumption as reasonable.
The second choice Iranians have is to use the Bomb as a deterrent force against the aggressive western power that have for the last god knows how long 200 years and more been taking advantage of our nations.
As evidenced by the recent dispute. Remember the operative word here is deterrent (the threat of use under certain defined set of circumstances which of course will be worked out later.
As was the case with US and USSR,
To understand that this strategy has tremendous advantages for Iranian ppl as well as for the government I personally do not support is to understand that this then must be the real motivator rather than to send a single bomb to Israel and get every one killed.
Comprehendo,
It is called reasonable deduction not crazy causations.
T-Which is why the entire world, through the rarely unanimous Security Counsel has already begun the process of preventing same.
B-Now as for the UN resolution which US almost always acquires by undue pressure and influence against those that are simply unconvinced of their assumptions lets look at an example like India which Americans have been trying to coheres in to compliance by first offering unprecedented technology transfer and then suggesting that if they don’t support US position they will not receive the goods.
Holly cow what kind of unanimous decision is that?
To look at this and other “facts” (the fact that India did vote to sanction Iran) takes us back to some of your early comments that you speak with “facts” but you see US and Israel are very good at producing/manufacturing the facts so one has to be a little wiser than “facts” in order to disaffirm the truth here.
No one out side western power has anything to lose in fact some including the Arab states that are made so nervous by the Americans have a lot to gain if they ware in fact smart enough to understand that at the very least they don’t have to pay the cost of what is called the imperial tax by using American dollar and switch to who ever they want to.
T-The Saudi's and Kuait and other oil producers are mainly Sunni and would see a nuclear (Shiite) Iran as a threat rather then an ally.
B-Of course they see us as threat after all there foul and parasitic existence is dependent upon American support this of course to the determent of their ppl. Please let me know you have enough intelligence to understand this point it is very important specially for Americans to understand this point that how American military industrial complex together with oil and other global financial interest groups have completely deceived the essence of the American constitution and to the determent of the ppl of Saudi Arabia and other Persian golf states have guaranteed the survival of anti human governments of these states.
Do you understand????
So what the heck of course they would see us as threat and why shouldn’t we be.
T-It is plausible that Israel might be seen (by then) as more benevolant--after they conclude that Israel is at least sane, while Iran is not.
OK, I don’t think so you see the Arab governments are not the Arab ppl.
But would they collaborate with US and Israel to fend of the possible repercussion of ever expanding Iranian influence? Of course they would they would also ***k their mother to stay in power
What does that tell you?
T-Does that answer your question?
B-Well it was your answer and I am grateful for the attempt
T-Because I have one more for you.
T-What will Iran and the oil producers do when oil is ultimately rendered obsolite and due to worldwide carbon-emmission regulations, the producers may have to pay to dispose of it?
Whay will the Jew-haters do for fun?
B-Well this is question so much more important for the slogs of Saudi’s than for the Iranian I am sure Iran will be expanding in all other areas as evidence by its ever growing relationship with South America its indigence nuclear program and if you look closer you find that they are in fact making grate strides in other fields also.
By Elaine Sciolino Published: July 16, 2008
"We are very pleased by the administration's decision," said Cristina Gallach, Solana's spokesman, in an interview by telephone. "It is a clear signal to the Iranians of the engagement of the United States and its commitment to a negotiated solution. At the same time, it is a clear message to the Iranians of the seriousness of this exercise."
Cyrus you state that "If the U.N. Security Council looses its authority to legislate and enforce international law, the entire United Nations should be disbanded as it would be far safer to have NO police then have police that DO NOT police." Yet you fail to mention that Israel continues to be in bold defiance of at least 35 of U.N. Security Counsel resolutions, including 242,252, 262, 267, 271, 298, 446, 452, etc etc....
Realist:
Please read carefully. It is a LONG post in two parts but the underlying conflict is 90 years old. Superficial comments and questions will not be answered by me.
Thanks.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
U.N.S.C.Res. 242 long ago been complied with (see bottom section).
252 references General Assembly resolutions 2253 and 2254 (ES-V) of 14 July 1967
And then it says: “ . . . Deplores the failure of Israel to comply with the General Assembly resolutions mentioned above”
But it does NOT say that it directs Israel to do A, B and/ or C. The resolutions simply voices its unhappiness with Israel’s actions WITHOUT directing them.
This may sound like splitting hairs. It is splitting hairs. But hairs are the standard language of international diplomacy. Peoples minds are wrongly attuned to interpreting such because they (we) are used to pragmatic laws. For example, we would never have such as law as:
“Parking after 8-pm is DEPLORED”.
But that’s because local tribunals function to take decisive action. By contrast, International tribunals often exist to create ambiguous policy, so that numerous opposing nations can all claim they equally achieved a victory, when such is patently impossible because that would add up to like 600% success--when the functional limit is never above 100%.
262 deals with an event which took place in 1968 and was a PAST and IRREVERSIBLE event when the Security Counsel first resolved it. It is a condemnation, NOT a directive. So your statement on 262 is false because you are accusing Israel of violating U.N.S.C. 262 BEFORE IT WAS FIRST DRAFTED OR PASSED.
267 starts out with:
“Reaffirms its resolution 252 (1968);” (and we already know what 252 does and does not say.
Then Res. 267 “Deplores” and even “Censures” but once again does NOT DIRECT.
Res. 271 more or less reaffirms 267 in slightly stronger language and speaks about the then PAST event of an arson, alleged to have taken place at the Al Aqsa Mosque, without stating who supposedly committed such alleged arson. But here is the most interesting part:
It summarizes: “in the event of a negative response or no response, the Security Council shall convene without delay to consider what further action should be taken in this matter;”
What this says is that if Israel fails to comply or, refuses to comply, the entire resolution subordinates to the next Security Counsel Resolution. So we must assume one of two (and only two) conclusions. Either a) Israel complied. Or, b) the matter is automatically to be discussed and disposed of in a future resolution. Either way, this resolution is self expirational.
But what is even more interesting is that the only thing which prompted this meeting of the Security Counsel in the first place, was the fire at the Mosque. It was solely in response to that fire which gave rise to this resolution. Since the resolution does not identify who set the fire, it is possible that the fire was set by Muslims, to spawn outrage and hence, to prompt a negative reaction from the Security Counsel. Are they alleging that the government of Israel set this fire? Not from the language. Who does that leave? Either a Jewish civilian acting unofficially or, a Muslim either acting officially or unofficially. Either way, such would NOT be a legitimate reason for the convening of the U.N. Security Counsel.
Resolution 298 says absolutely NOTHING of moment to the controversy and merely restates certain previous language already discussed herein.
Res. 446 deals with “settlements”; “deplores” Israel without directing it.
Finally (after 11 years) directs Israel to “desist” from transfer[ing] parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories; (Ill get to this at the end).
Finally, says: it will “reconvene in July 1979 to review the situation”. So once more we need to fast-forward to a future Security Counsel meeting to ascertain the status of this resolution.
That future resolution is:
452 which is primarily occupied with “settlements”. OK. So I admit that Israel has failed to comply with various U.N.S.C. resolutions dealing with “settlements” and has even breached its promise to stop building in those zones--as part of the “Roadmap”.
As I said previously, I do not agree with every decision made by the government of Israel. Here is one example.
But Israel has numerous times already made difficult concessions in return for permanent peace. They dismantled ‘settlements’ in Egypt and even returned some fairly healthy Egyptian oil wells, in return for the peace treaty. But what the Israelis have always avoided doing is giving concessions in return for war. So that’s where we are at with that. The Arabs know what they need to do to reclaim these “settlements” as their own and people ignore the fact that Israel offered to vacate these in yr. 2,000 and such was rejected over the status of (then) 5.5-million Arabs of which 5.25-million were born outside Israel.
Peace is offered and war is offered. The Arabs prefer war.
Now I save the best for last:
242, which says (in pertinent part):
(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;
The two conditions are both called for simultaneously.
It specifically calls for: “Withdrawal of Israel armed forces . . “
It specifically DOES NOT say: ‘Withdrawal of the nation of Israel to the borders it maintained prior to the onset of the 1967 conflict’ Why not?
Why the ambiguity? And so what if Israel were to withdraw its “armed forces” while retaining its unarmed forces? Would that not comply?
-continued-
Lastly, there is a longstanding debate over the wording “territories” which was serious enough to have been a heated debate before the Resolution 242 was even finalized. The Soviets threw a fit because in their own words, wording the resolution that way would permit Israel to define exactly what areas are included. Now, after the resolution 242 passed, the same Russians change their position and insist that there is no ambiguity and no room for such definition.
“ . . .it [242] does not specify how much territory Israel is required to give up. The Security Council did not say Israel must withdraw from "all the" territories occupied after the Six-Day war. This was quite deliberate. The Soviet delegate wanted the inclusion of those words and said that their exclusion meant "that part of these territories can remain in Israeli hands." The Arab states pushed for the word "all" to be included, but this was rejected. They nevertheless asserted that they would read the resolution as if it included the word "all." The British Ambassador who drafted the approved resolution, Lord Caradon, declared after the vote: "It is only the resolution that will bind us, and we regard its wording as clear."”
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/meaning_of_242.html
It is a grave danger and a profound folly to compare these (essentially two) fairly ancient resolutions dealing with “Settlements” that Israel has offered to give up, with the forbidden construction of a Nuclear weapon--by a religiously deranged regime in Tehran. As if the two deserve to be coupled. Tehran has no direct business or stake in the Israel/Palestine conflict, other then its perception that the Jews are Nazis and the Muslims are the proverbial ‘Jews’, who it wishes to be on a mission to defend.
Finally, we are back to Article 22 of the League of Nations, which superseded the United Nations Res. 181 by some 25+ years and called for ‘Palestine’ to be divided into two zones, one being reserved exclusively for the “Jewish National Homeland”. There are already two such zones (including Jordan) and NOT including “Palestine”. Whilst article 22 does not specifically say “two countries”, the absence of such language much easier lends itself to the alternate conclusion that only ONE such country was ever mandated, namely Israel. It is the third nation in the place of (legally) no more then two, where the core of the problem has always resided. Once Jordan was officially established, its remnants became legally and irrevocably the “Jewish National Homeland”. Since the West Bank and Gaza were never part of the nation of Jordan, they MUST therefore be deemed part of legally mandated Israel. National borders are quite unlike most other subjects which are the legitimate concern of the United Nations. The United Nations is NOT permitted to redraw such national borders without consent from the nation it is modifying. Imagine if the United Nations were chartered with permission to (for example) make New Mexico part of Mexico? Is there much if any doubt that they would have not already done so?
Israel has always nonetheless, been willing to live in a three state solution and Shimon Perez personally offered the Grand Mufti this solution in 1947, which he rejected. Israel does NOT intend to promote the creation a third (Arab) nation--who’s official goal is to attack and destroy it. This may not make sense to you but it makes quite good sense to me.
Security Counsel Resolutions are passed sans vetoes and NOT by simple majority vote, which means that the exact language, (not the ‘tone’ or ‘tenor’) must be scrupulously adhered to. If the resolution was ambiguously written, then one side must not be forced to take the brunt of the discrepancy.
And, in closing, the United Nations does far more damage then it resolves. It is an undemocratic executive committee for third-world dictators and tyrants-- more easily fleece the USA and others. It probably should be disbanded or at least, a second group of countries who offer:
Free speech; Free Press and Free religion should form a new treaty organization to ultimately replace it. Those votes should be allocated by population and any financial contributions made to needy countries should be made DIRECTLY from the benefactor to the recipient(s). We are getting hoses, as the ultimate aim of the existing United Nations is to cultivate a “one world government” which will in practice be anarchy and no government at all, with no democracy or basic human rights either.
Part 2:
We would trade our old, somewhat antiquated machine for a new (international) one without benefit to ourselves and by abrogating the few civil rights we have left.
bahman:
It is late already and I will address your post tomorrow
We all know that the Zionists/Jews/Israelis don't need the U.S. to wage war, but they have always used others to do their dirty jobs. It's in the Talmud. Zaid is right and he speaks for me and I am sure, for many others. As far as what you define as "hate" is concerned, I can tell you have been brainwashed by your own group. If the Jews would get to know others better and not be in a constant state of apartheid from Americans and the rest of humanity, they would not feel so paranoid or believe everybody "hates" you.
bahman:
"Now I have heard from some Israeli distortions artist that Iranian leadership is Crazy enough to do it.
I believe that assessment is rather paranoid and there is no evidence to show that Iranian leadership as socially and economically challenged as they are never the less are so stupid to completely go in to self distrust mode.
So I do not accept that assumption as reasonable."
So you say Iran would not send a nuclear attack to Israel. Suppose I agree with that per-se statement. We have not ended the debate. Suppose Iran uses their nuclear arsenal to back up more conventional attacks, such as terror ops, or even ops against Israeli military? Perhaps sinking some Israeli military ships (perhaps by guided missile attack) or by engaging Israeli armed forces in the air? How about sending troops to one or mode Israeli frontiers to assist with a full-out invasion?
This, there can be no doubt, Iran would gladly do in a Hollywood heartbeat.
But the larger problem is this:
Those who study the Quran are aware that the subject of "Judgment day" is quite prolific. Whereas the Christian Scriptures deal with this subject in a few places and more completely so in one book (of "Revelations"), in the Muslim Scriptures, this subject is addressed hundreds of times and all over the place. It is a prime central component of the Islamic tradition.
Main Stream Islam has always held that a few sub-sections of Quran clearly define two important points: 1- That no one knows when "Judgment Day" will arrive and more importantly, 2- it shall arrive on its own time and NOT be rushed or induced.
But a relatively small splinter group of Islamic zealots has disregarded 1 and 2 and their doctrine specifically calls for all good Muslims to take whatever steps are needed to insure the swift and certain arrival of "Judgment Day". Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad belongs to this sub-category. Now, to give you an idea how dangerous this relatively minor change in liturgy is, consider that under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the exiled spiritual leader of the Muslim Iranians, OUTLAWED this specific teaching as apostate and dangerous (for obvious reasons). However, there are few if any other practical differences between Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamic teachings and Mahmud Ahmadinejad's.
I am now out of time and must defer further comments for later.
Trollstein,
you wrote,
"U.N.S.C.Res. 242 long ago been complied with (see bottom section).
252 references General Assembly resolutions 2253 and 2254 (ES-V) of 14 July 1967
And then it says: “ . . . Deplores the failure of Israel to comply with the General Assembly resolutions mentioned above”
But it does NOT say that it directs Israel to do A, B and/ or C. The resolutions simply voices its unhappiness with Israel’s actions WITHOUT directing them.
This may sound like splitting hairs. It is splitting hairs. But hairs are the standard language of international diplomacy. Peoples minds are wrongly attuned to interpreting such because they (we) are used to pragmatic laws. For example, we would never have such as law as:
“Parking after 8-pm is DEPLORED”.
But that’s because local tribunals function to take decisive action. By contrast, International tribunals often exist to create ambiguous policy, so that numerous opposing nations can all claim they equally achieved a victory, when such is patently impossible because that would add up to like 600% success--when the functional limit is never above 100%."
There you go again with your manufactured lies and distortions
A typical Jewish attitude, is like a guilty M***F**er trying to get of through technicality.
If I had the time to go and dissect every one of those resolutions you have quoted most likely I would find that every one of them ware watered down under enormous pressure from US or other equally immoral western nations that would and have prostituted their principals in favor of GOLD, you know them we all know them.
I know because every single time the Arabs put forward a resolution to condemn Israel in a meaningful way US threatens to veto the resolution and after much pushing and shoving and the world wide outrage and so on and so forth various nations are Coerced, either black-mailed or their vote paid for with promises of aids and so on
By the Americans they all get together and vote for a “none binding resolution” F***kn shame.
That literally works-out to mean nothing for the aggrieved.
YES, Trollstein, I know all about your resolutions and yes you are absolutely right they don’t mount to anything but you know the reality on the ground is changing and it is changing very fast.
Iranians as you may have noticed don’t give rats A***** for those UN resolutions that are coerced and manufactured.
Every one of those resolutions you have mentioned here are pile of garbage they are designed to be ineffective.
So yes you are completely right. Israel is not in any way required or directed to mend its murderess ways thanks to America. (What a shame for this nation to have to carry)
To say nothing about the moral burden that Israelis should feel but they don’t well some do and some don’t.
I say it agin,
The typical Jewish attitude is like a guilty M***F**er trying to get of through technicality.
But the world is changing and is changing fast.
bahman:
"I know because every single time the Arabs put forward a resolution to condemn Israel in a meaningful way US threatens to veto the resolution and after much pushing and shoving and the world wide outrage and so on and so forth various nations are Coerced, either black-mailed or their vote paid for with promises of aids and so on
By the Americans they all get together and vote for a “none binding resolution” F***kn shame."
But those are the RULES which govern the U.N. world treaty organisation.
They may NOT be fair but it is neither fair that 88 African nations (most un-democratic) control nearly 50% of the U.N. Gen. Assembly votes. Is it fair that the USA pays 25% of the U.N. budget while giant oil producers--such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and others pay NOTHING?
Is that what you mean by "controlled by gold"?
Bahman:
You wrote:
“Now as for the UN resolution which US almost always acquires by undue pressure and influence against those that are simply unconvinced of their assumptions lets look at an example like India which Americans have been trying to coheres in to compliance by first offering unprecedented technology transfer and then suggesting that if they don’t support US position they will not receive the goods.”
I think you are off the track here B.
The security Council operates by majority and veto of that majority. That’s the game everyone signed onto, including India. (I happen to like East Indians BTW. Why? Because they generally can be reasoned with).
China and Russia have no such relationship to the USA and they could have easily vetoed the resolutions against Iran. Why did they not only fail to veto but actually vote “yes” (two increments)? Hard to be certain but I think that in addition to the previously stated, Iran probably lied directly to them—their friends.
BTW, on a side note, when Pakistan succeeded from India in 1947 (without any permission from the U.N.), the USA supported them. This was sold as an ‘anti-communist’ move but in reality, we were backing our buddies the Brits, after their recent humiliation in India. This pissed off the Indians and made adversaries of them--for not very good of a reason.
Did the Hindus have their land stolen?
Had they been “ethnically cleansed”?
Just curious.
“ . . . constitution and to the determent of the ppl of Saudi Arabia and other Persian golf states have guaranteed the survival of anti human governments of these states.”
The USA had its part in the founding and engineering of many of these Gulf states. But so did England and France have their own share of the pie. That did NOT stop all but one of these Arab nations from siding with Hitler in WW2. (The lone holdout was Jordan, who owed its very existence to the British, had no oil and had their limitary trained in close cooperation with her Majesty).
Oh . . . look at the time.
Trollstein, you wrote,
The USA had its part in the founding and engineering of many of these Gulf states. But so did England and France have their own share of the pie. That did NOT stop all but one of these Arab nations from siding with Hitler in WW2. (The lone holdout was Jordan, who owed its very existence to the British, had no oil and had their limitary trained in close cooperation with her Majesty).
Oh . . . look at the time.
I guess you have not finished with this but just to let you know, not to deceive yourself the answer you are providing is not relevant I am looking at the behavior of US and the western powers I agree they all have a sheer in this, (not to forget the Russians and the Dutch). after all my, not so clever friend, it is a forgone conclusion that they (the golf states) are regardless of the spin you may manage to put on the behavior of the US and the western powers we both agree that those states are absolutely without moral legitimacy do we not?
So why would you be surprised that they are willing to deceive their protectors why not? it would have saved them from all their obligation. What do you expect from a prostitutes loyalty? LOL
You are beginning to show signs of desperation in your thought processes (it remains relatively impressive but its beginning to falter) I worn you I despise dishonest thinkers.
I think you are off the track here B.
The security Council operates by majority and veto of that majority. That’s the game everyone signed onto, including India. (I happen to like East Indians BTW. Why? Because they generally can be reasoned with).
Based on the principal of “some pigs are more equal” of course.
Again you are trying the technicality rout.
Have you ever studied ethics?
The point I am making and the point you do not want to address is this, that the “facts” you speak of are BS they are manufactured what I am saying is that even though Russia sings the resolution it also maintains that it does not see the Iranian nuclear activity as having ever diverted or that there has ever been any evidence that it intends to divert and even so she sings.
Again, either you are ignorant or you think I am, or you are trying to spin like most of you compatriots always do. I am surprised you have not laced all you argument with the word “terrorism” just to antagonize and influence opinions.
China and Russia have no such relationship to the USA and they could have easily vetoed the resolutions against Iran.
B-No China does not have “favorite nation” status with US?
And Russia even to this day is not a recipient of various grants and aids and so on.
B-Also when you consider that these nations are part of the current security arrangement in the world it does not surprise me that they could have singed in to a certain security status that the emergence of a country like Iran would most definitely disturb. This after all this is Persia we are talking about and if you are any kind of a student of history you would know the significance of the emergence of the iran.
Why did they not only fail to veto but actually vote “yes” (two increments)? Hard to be certain but I think that in addition to the previously stated, Iran probably lied directly to them—their friends.
B-No one in its right mind should ever trust the Russians Come on my fiend tell me you are knowledgeable enough to know that.
B-And as for the Chinese OMG are you serious, when it comes to self interest even the Israelis should watch out for them. LOL
B-You see your facts my friend is more like a pretend-game, a make believe without any substance
BTW, on a side note, when Pakistan succeeded from India in 1947 (without any permission from the U.N.), the USA supported them. This was sold as an ‘anti-communist’ move but in reality, we were backing our buddies the Brits, after their recent humiliation in India. This pissed off the Indians and made adversaries of them--for not very good of a reason.
Did the Hindus have their land stolen?
Had they been “ethnically cleansed”?
Just curious.
I know, you seem to think that this two episode in history have some historic, political or even moral similarities I do and I don’t, I think to dissect that issue adequately would requires a lot of historic digging and wisdom so, with all due respect I will defer, I will say this though.
Any time any society splits based on ethnicity they are asking for a bigger problem later it may be 100 years it may be 200 years sooner or later the problem is coming.
In a sense what they are doing is they are deploying their “identity” as a way of creating a comfort zone but our paths always and always lays a cross each others ( I like what I just said) hehe
And human identity is based on our deference’s rather than our commonality.
So it is fundamentally a bad, divisive, maybe racist move.
I personally am disgusted by such thinking. I am a Persian I advocate for the unity of man kind not its separation.
I think it is clear that the Bush administration has finally seen the economic light. Laura on her other blog signaled the fact that the U.S. is finally agreeing to direct talks with Iran partly (speculation is) because the world financial system can't stand the oil price runup.
It would be a good idea for liberals to start envisioning a foreign policy that leads to detente with Iran - which I think is going to be part of Obama's foreign policy. Although rightwing Israeli politicos are going to do their best to create the bomb Iran scenario, I can't imagine the U.S. - even with crazy Bush - going along with it. So what is a better scenario?
Recent statements by Ahmenadijad make it obvious that, in his view, the solution is a one state solution. Israel will "disappear" like the Soviet Union, not because Iran is going to attack it - there's zero evidence that that is being considered on any level - but because the more numerous Palestinian population, over the whole of Israel, including the occupied territories, will gain political power.
That's a good starting point. If Iranians believe that, a firmer statement of non-aggression towards Israel should be one of the U.S.'s demands on Iran. Incidentally, the same demand should be made on Israel. The condition that we have established at the moment - which keeps shifting around, but is basically meant to cripple Iran's ability to generate nuclear power - is a dealbreaker. We should certainly be content with non-aggression, which is enough - more than enough, really. North Korea threatens Japan much much more than Iran threatens Israel, yet there is no crazy talk of bombing North Korea.
If Iran meets those more realistic standards, there's no reason that the U.S. couldn't work on two fronts - recognizing Iran and pulling down the sanctions, and encouraging the two state solution in Israel and Palestine. The latter will probably take money - certainly, the U.S. should consider providing money for Palestinian families that have claims on land inside Israel. Israel doesn't recognize those claims. That's fine. The U.S., by providing money, can float the Palestinian state for a while, making it economically more secure.
This is going to be an interesting time. The likely next government of Israel will be even further to the right, while the U.S. is going to shift left. This will create some opportunities that weren't present when both Israel and the U.S. were ruled by the far right.
roger:
You wrote:
"North Korea threatens Japan much much more than Iran threatens Israel, yet there is no crazy talk of bombing North Korea. "
Whether that premise is true of not is mooted by the fact that Israel may strike the Iranian Nuclear facility, just the same as they did in Iraq in 1981 and more recently in Syria. They did not talk, crazy or otherwise. They sortied.
"The latter will probably take money - certainly, the U.S. should consider providing money for Palestinian families that have claims on land inside Israel."
Rewind to yr 2,000. Pres Clinton had assembled international pledges equalling $30-billion to cement a deal with the Palestinian-Arabs. (In today's depressed dollars, that would be equivilant to at least $50-billion.)
The Palestinian-Arab deligation walked out (in a fit) and started the "second intafata".
The conflict is MUCH more complicated. The ISraelis became abundantly convinced that peace would have been a profound disapppointment to Mr. Arafat & co.
Once and a while, when I am trying to sell something and the prospective client is being very negative, I will go out on a limb and offer a rediculous low price, (like color TVs for $25.00 each.) In my decades-long carear, I have never once been called on one of these gambits. In the case of the Israelis in 2,000, Clinton called the shots, which specified that Israel would abandon 95% of the total land it had aquired in 1967. Clinton ponied up the cash and when the smoke cleared, Clinton was convinced that no amount of money would have effected a settlement. My tendancy is to agree.
Many of the power brokers in the Arab Mid East are zealot extremist Muslims who can not live with the idea of a world in peace, because that would short-circut their perception that the worldwide Islamic revolution--called for in the Quran was only a fable.
Trollstain you're still hung up on this aren't you?! Yes arafat was a terrorist, but not the modern invention of one. An idiot like him could never invent anything. The Irgun were the modern terrorists. After that it moved to Algeria. When it became successful there in migrated right back where it started. Just poetic isn't it.
If this little country (Israel) decides to attack Iran because Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons and the Israelis do, then I think that Irans friend Russia should immediately destroy Israel. I think roughly four atomic bombs would do the job.The Israel of this world was destroyed by God forever in the year seventy through the use of the Roman military. Apparently there I some people living today who don't know what the word "forever" means. There will be a new Israel but this thing in existance today ain't it. I only hope that the Russians and anyone else involved will (somehow) manage to let innocent people of Jewish decent leave this pissassed country before it's too late.
Fool Christian open your eyes, the jews got u where they want as they want and when they want, sound like porn isn't it. Christians will fight along muslims when the time comes. We muslim are not your enemies you they the closest in faith to us. But unfortunately the jews know how to make a fool of you. We muslims belive in mighty jesus we belive he will come back. Now think who is the outsider and according to your books who kill jesus and who live like jesus today its us muslims who live like him. Jesus prostrate when he pray. who pray like this jesus fast for months who fast like that. Please my christian friends among you there are some who are just don't let the jews fool you like this.
Shak:
Surah 4:157 of the Qur~an clearly states that Jesus was NOT killed.
Yet, zealot Muslims often have no inhibition to assert (as you have) that (nonetheless) the Jews were responcible for his murder.
The truth shall set you free. Equally, lies will imprison thee. Sadly, whilst you peer out from the prison of your own lies, you see only the Hebes--who you accuse of being your incarcerator.
It is certainly true that Jews have never every done anything wrong.
Or at least nothing that can be proven
Let me put it this way nothing that any self respecting Jew would admit to.
The ppl that killed Jesses ware Iranians. They ware over there trying to spy on the Romans.
For any one interested in knowing the Jewish ppl I ask them NO, beg them to read TALMOD.
I wander also why the truth never set the Jews free.
Also why did God curse them?
Why did Jehovah thought it was in fact acceptable to kill so many innocent Egyptians as revenge for the enslavement of the Jews Collective punishment is ethically rejected by man but practiced by both the Jews and their God.
Makes me sick.
As for the Moslem guy let me put it this way Mohammad was a pedophile. Every thing he said was garbage.
If you knew what the “TRUTH” is it may indeed set you free but, if that truth comes from a Moslem or a Jew run a way fast it is a BIG LIE.
The people that killed Jesus were his cousins, the children of Esau. Jn 8:33, etc. states that they were descendants of Abraham and they were trying to kill him. Since they had never been in bondage they had to be from Esau or Ishmael(or both). Esau made up the money changers and Pharisee leadership 2000 years ago. He married into the Canaanites, Hittites, Hivites, Ishmael's daughter, Khazars, etc. Was forced by the Maccabees(John Hyrcanus) to become a Jew. He also teamed up with the tribe of Dan(serpent/missing from the 144,000 in the book of Rev.). Esau is leadership of both the Muslim and the Jew. He controls the "east" and "west".
"Also why did God curse them?"
God has NOT cursed the Jews.
The Jews have traditionally been cursed by competing tribes of HUMANS, aided by false Gods of their own.
Resolution 580 in the Senate demands a blockade, too.
if iran doesn't give in to stping enrichment activities or the full inspection of alleged weapons,then it should be bombed at all cost - if not,these enriched weapons will transfered to hamas & hizbullah who will not hesitate to use against isreali targets.
In the past 72 (or so) hours, the world public media has reported the following news-events (in no special order).
a. About 20 separate terror explosions have been detonated in mainly Hindu neighborhoods in India. The same radical Islamic group who took responsibility for the India train bombing (a few years ago) has claimed these new attacks as theirs.
b) A slew of terror attacks have occurred INSIDE Gaza City, mainly targeted at the Hamas officials who had unlawfully seized control after they split with the Fatah. Several innocents--including young children have been killed and injured.
c) The Government of China has received an official warning (terror threat) from an Islamic Radical group threatening the upcoming Olympic games in Beijing.
These are only the events which made international news. Surely left out were:
1. The ongoing (nearly continuous) squad and terror deaths of Hindu civilians in the Cashmere region of India;
2. The Islamic 'gorilla' wars in the Philippines.
3. The rather frequent apprehension by the FBI of terror cells inside the USA, thwarting their actions before they successfully occur.
4. Several other such daily events which do not make news.
Truth being consistently stranger then fiction, there are still educated people in the USA and elsewhere who blame all of this on the Jews, the USA, or both, one being the puppet of the other.
kaylord wrote,
if iran doesn't give in to stping enrichment activities or the full inspection of alleged weapons,then it should be bombed at all cost - if not,these enriched weapons will transfered to hamas & hizbullah who will not hesitate to use against isreali targets.
Yes, you are right, that is why I have argued that Iranians need to immediately announce that they do have the bomb or are developing one to prevent the parasitic forces (American military industrial complex) that mean harm to the Iranian ppl think twice.
Also Hamas and Hezbollah, are made of refugees that racist Jews created to establish Jewish only state.
If hamas or Hezbollah attack Israel its because they have problems with Israel if you know what I mean.
If you don’t want to be attacked why don’t you stop building houses on occupied territory?
