Israel's Catch22

[Ariux]

Netanyahu yesterday told the press that "America has forfeited any moral right to tell Israel not to attack Iran".
'forfeited any moral right" you say? The beleaguered U.S. taxpayer essentially finances the Israeli lifestyle of punitive land-theft and collective punishment...

The God Damned Jews have no moral authority to start with. And, if not for the Zionist cult of "Evangelicals", Israel would be as popular among Christians as it is among Muslims.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I'm predicting no one will attack, mark my words. The world cannot keep invading the middle east because of nuclear programs....Iran will make their own nukes and it has to be accepted, many other countries have them now....blame it on the nuclear arms race.

And is it really just about the political price? What about the people that will be killed? It's sad that people see it just as a game....it's not okay to attack Iran it shouldn't be accepted in the society like that

Very few countries have nuclear weapons now. Israel acquired its nukes at about the same time China did nearly a half century ago. At that time only the US, USSR, UK, France, China and Israel had nukes. Only North Korea, India and Pakistan have acquired them since.

Those are a lot of countries still and Iran is surrounded by a few of them....

Apparently Iran is determined to push ahead with its nuclear weapons programs regardless of the consequences and if Obama is reelected the US will take no effective action to stop them so whether or not Iran acquires nukes will depend on Netanyahu's efforts to rally sufficient support for an Israeli strike.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Very few countries have nuclear weapons now. Israel acquired its nukes at about the same time China did nearly a half century ago. At that time only the US, USSR, UK, France, China and Israel had nukes. Only North Korea, India and Pakistan have acquired them since.

Those are a lot of countries still and Iran is surrounded by a few of them....

Apparently Iran is determined to push ahead with its nuclear weapons programs regardless of the consequences and if Obama is reelected the US will take no effective action to stop them so whether or not Iran acquires nukes will depend on Netanyahu's efforts to rally sufficient support for an Israeli strike.

SO WHAT!!! Why does America always have to be the one to start wars? Iran is free to do what they want Israel threatens them all the time, man you guys really want war?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Those are a lot of countries still and Iran is surrounded by a few of them....

Apparently Iran is determined to push ahead with its nuclear weapons programs regardless of the consequences and if Obama is reelected the US will take no effective action to stop them so whether or not Iran acquires nukes will depend on Netanyahu's efforts to rally sufficient support for an Israeli strike.

SO WHAT!!! Why does America always have to be the one to start wars? Iran is free to do what they want Israel threatens them all the time, man you guys really want war?

It would be a small war to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in a very volatile part of the world. Better a small war now than the threat of nuclear war later.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Apparently Iran is determined to push ahead with its nuclear weapons programs regardless of the consequences and if Obama is reelected the US will take no effective action to stop them so whether or not Iran acquires nukes will depend on Netanyahu's efforts to rally sufficient support for an Israeli strike.

SO WHAT!!! Why does America always have to be the one to start wars? Iran is free to do what they want Israel threatens them all the time, man you guys really want war?

It would be a small war to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in a very volatile part of the world. Better a small war now than the threat of nuclear war later.

No it won't be a small war, also there is always a nuclear threat from all nuclear armed countries.

How about stop invading middle east countries and make the world a better place? Im all for that

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Those are a lot of countries still and Iran is surrounded by a few of them....

Apparently Iran is determined to push ahead with its nuclear weapons programs regardless of the consequences and if Obama is reelected the US will take no effective action to stop them so whether or not Iran acquires nukes will depend on Netanyahu's efforts to rally sufficient support for an Israeli strike.

SO WHAT!!! Why does America always have to be the one to start wars? Iran is free to do what they want Israel threatens them all the time, man you guys really want war?

BecauseIKnow,

It was not always that way, I was just reading about World War I, how the Balfour Declaration was signed by the British, the purpose, to get the US to enter World War I. I wonder, how different the past 100 years would have been, but for that British act and the resulting action of the US in entering World War I. From the ashes of one war, the next war is born. And it just never ends, the wars. Now, in the US, going to war is like drinking water, so natural and normal and expected.

Sherri

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Apparently Iran is determined to push ahead with its nuclear weapons programs regardless of the consequences and if Obama is reelected the US will take no effective action to stop them so whether or not Iran acquires nukes will depend on Netanyahu's efforts to rally sufficient support for an Israeli strike.

SO WHAT!!! Why does America always have to be the one to start wars? Iran is free to do what they want Israel threatens them all the time, man you guys really want war?

BecauseIKnow,

It was not always that way, I was just reading about World War I, how the Balfour Declaration was signed by the British, the purpose, to get the US to enter World War I. I wonder, how different the past 100 years would have been, but for that British act and the resulting action of the US in entering World War I. From the ashes of one war, the next war is born. And it just never ends, the wars. Now, in the US, going to war is like drinking water, so natural and normal and expected.

Sherri

Unfortunately it seems like that, I have experienced war personally and it's not a good thing and should never be accepted as a normal thing...it is sickening

 

[MHunterB]

OK, so four months AFTER the USA entered WW1 - the British issued the Balfour Declaration.

And that's 'evidence' that the US was *bribed* to enter WW1??? On behalf of Jews, against Germany????

Gee, in which kind of propaganda-raddled brain would the above make sense? (hint: 'Heil.....')

 

[pbel]

Then why does she need them, except to threaten her enemies...you get what you sow!

 

[MHunterB]

How and who did zimmerman telegram have bad consquenses? - Yahoo! Answers

It certainly appears as though the Zimmerman telegram was much more influential re: the US entry into WW1 than the Balfour Declaration four months later.

 

[DreyfussRan]

ss dreyfuss is nothing new-----he is paraphrasing goebbels

he may be an idiot and a bigot, but mixed into the garble of race baiting venom he spews is one element of truth: Obama does not intend to take any political risks to prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and he is depending on israel, just as drefyfeesran and others who see themselves as enemies of israel are, to solve the problem of iran's nuclear weapons programs for him, just as during the cold war israel relieved the us of the responsibility of having to defend that gulf oil field from soviet control by defeating soviet client states, egypt and syria.

....it is a tad sobering that the studied imbecile who asserts that there "was never a zionist plan to expell the native populationof palestine" presumes an authority to call anyone "a bigot and idiot"




despite the fact that "no red lines" and "no deadlines" got all the headlines, in the same interview,

clinton acknowledged that israel felt an iran with nuclear weapons posed an existential thereat, and said "no nation can abdicate their self-defense if they feel that they’re facing such a threat.”

...but of course iran should not make any similar claim about a nuclear israel...

us: Setting red lines for iran i... Jpost - iranian threat - news

that is at least a flashing green light. Dreyfussran is correct that the ball is now in netanyahu's court and it is his responsibility to rally enough domestic political support for a strike against iran's nuclear weapons programs in order to protect israel and the rest of the world from iran's nukes and from the further proliferation of nuclear weapons that are sure to follow an iranian nuke now that the obama administration has abdicated its leadership role on this issue.

....please note the implication that israel is "protecting the world from iran'...and that the issue is the world against iran....do some lite backtracking on the global status of israel

 

[toomuchtime_]

SO WHAT!!! Why does America always have to be the one to start wars? Iran is free to do what they want Israel threatens them all the time, man you guys really want war?

It would be a small war to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in a very volatile part of the world. Better a small war now than the threat of nuclear war later.

No it won't be a small war, also there is always a nuclear threat from all nuclear armed countries.

How about stop invading middle east countries and make the world a better place? Im all for that

Of course it will be a small war. No one wants to occupy Iran or take over their oil fields. The goal is simply to destroy certain military capabilities, and Iran has only a very limited ability to retaliate. Destroying Iran's nuclear weapons programs will make the world a better place and a safer place for everyone including the Iranian people.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

It would be a small war to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in a very volatile part of the world. Better a small war now than the threat of nuclear war later.

No it won't be a small war, also there is always a nuclear threat from all nuclear armed countries.

How about stop invading middle east countries and make the world a better place? Im all for that

Of course it will be a small war. No one wants to occupy Iran or take over their oil fields. The goal is simply to destroy certain military capabilities, and Iran has only a very limited ability to retaliate. Destroying Iran's nuclear weapons programs will make the world a better place and a safer place for everyone including the Iranian people.

Just like the Iraq war right? Nope it's not gonna happen the way you think, I guarantee Israel will attack Hezbollah right before Iran and maybe attack gaza(huge violation if they do attack, militants have right to respond any way).

So Of course it will result with more palestinais, lebenese and Iranians murdered hot acceptable to you it seems like an okay thing. Iran is so behind in everything they aren't a threat to nobody, there are warships there too and Iran won't do nothing

 

[DreyfussRan]

It would be a small war to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in a very volatile part of the world. Better a small war now than the threat of nuclear war later.

No it won't be a small war, also there is always a nuclear threat from all nuclear armed countries.

How about stop invading middle east countries and make the world a better place? Im all for that

Of course it will be a small war. No one wants to occupy Iran or take over their oil fields. The goal is simply to destroy certain military capabilities, and Iran has only a very limited ability to retaliate. Destroying Iran's nuclear weapons programs will make the world a better place and a safer place for everyone including the Iranian people.

I marvel at your swagger and routine set of false-authorities...how in heaven's name do you know what the basic motivations are for Iran? If Iran had "limited retaliatory capabilites" the Israelis would not be pressuring the U.S. for intercession you pompous idiot....and yes---I'm sure the entire planet would conflate the "world being a better place" with the criminal state of Israel...you cannot even grasp the pertinent details of the history you propose to interpret...try a basic mid-east edcuation template before echoing your fatuous ignorance across the boards

 

[toomuchtime_]

ss dreyfuss is nothing new-----he is paraphrasing goebbels

he may be an idiot and a bigot, but mixed into the garble of race baiting venom he spews is one element of truth: Obama does not intend to take any political risks to prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and he is depending on israel, just as drefyfeesran and others who see themselves as enemies of israel are, to solve the problem of iran's nuclear weapons programs for him, just as during the cold war israel relieved the us of the responsibility of having to defend that gulf oil field from soviet control by defeating soviet client states, egypt and syria.

....it is a tad sobering that the studied imbecile who asserts that there "was never a zionist plan to expell the native populationof palestine" presumes an authority to call anyone "a bigot and idiot"




despite the fact that "no red lines" and "no deadlines" got all the headlines, in the same interview,

clinton acknowledged that israel felt an iran with nuclear weapons posed an existential thereat, and said "no nation can abdicate their self-defense if they feel that they’re facing such a threat.”

...but of course iran should not make any similar claim about a nuclear israel...

us: Setting red lines for iran i... Jpost - iranian threat - news

that is at least a flashing green light. Dreyfussran is correct that the ball is now in netanyahu's court and it is his responsibility to rally enough domestic political support for a strike against iran's nuclear weapons programs in order to protect israel and the rest of the world from iran's nukes and from the further proliferation of nuclear weapons that are sure to follow an iranian nuke now that the obama administration has abdicated its leadership role on this issue.

....please note the implication that israel is "protecting the world from iran'...and that the issue is the world against iran....do some lite backtracking on the global status of israel

Indeed, Israel will be protecting the world by taking out Iran's nuclear weapons program. The US, Europe and nearly all the Arab states consider themselves at risk from Iranian nukes for good reason, and all would like to see Israel destroy Iran's nuclear program. Moreover, if Iran were to be allowed to acquire nukes despite all the efforts of the international community to stop it, more proliferation of nuclear weapons is sure to follow, especially from Iran's Arab neighbors, so by taking out Iran's nuclear weapons programs, Israel will be making the world a safer and better place for everyone including the Iranian people.

 

[DreyfussRan]

he may be an idiot and a bigot, but mixed into the garble of race baiting venom he spews is one element of truth: Obama does not intend to take any political risks to prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and he is depending on israel, just as drefyfeesran and others who see themselves as enemies of israel are, to solve the problem of iran's nuclear weapons programs for him, just as during the cold war israel relieved the us of the responsibility of having to defend that gulf oil field from soviet control by defeating soviet client states, egypt and syria.

....it is a tad sobering that the studied imbecile who asserts that there "was never a zionist plan to expell the native populationof palestine" presumes an authority to call anyone "a bigot and idiot"




despite the fact that "no red lines" and "no deadlines" got all the headlines, in the same interview,

...but of course iran should not make any similar claim about a nuclear israel...

us: Setting red lines for iran i... Jpost - iranian threat - news

that is at least a flashing green light. Dreyfussran is correct that the ball is now in netanyahu's court and it is his responsibility to rally enough domestic political support for a strike against iran's nuclear weapons programs in order to protect israel and the rest of the world from iran's nukes and from the further proliferation of nuclear weapons that are sure to follow an iranian nuke now that the obama administration has abdicated its leadership role on this issue.

....please note the implication that israel is "protecting the world from iran'...and that the issue is the world against iran....do some lite backtracking on the global status of israel

Indeed, Israel will be protecting the world by taking out Iran's nuclear weapons program. The US, Europe and nearly all the Arab states consider themselves at risk from Iranian nukes for good reason, and all would like to see Israel destroy Iran's nuclear program. Moreover, if Iran were to be allowed to acquire nukes despite all the efforts of the international community to stop it, more proliferation of nuclear weapons is sure to follow, especially from Iran's Arab neighbors, so by taking out Iran's nuclear weapons programs, Israel will be making the world a safer and better place for everyone including the Iranian people.

perhaps you might breifly review the positioning of the "world" on the subject of Israel?....the presumption that Israel is acting in some selfless capacity to ensure global security by eliminating Iran's nuclear capabilities is pure, undiluted propaganda...you cannot seem to tell the difference between propaganda, and fact...although this quality makes you an ideal Zionist, alas it also makes you an embarrassment in polemics. Iran's rush for nuclear capacities are clearly in the interest of possessing a deterrent to the U.S./Israel neo-colonial axis that implemented the basic designs for PNAC over a decade ago...most observers at the time predicted that Iran would seek a nuclear deterrent.
I advise you to breifly consider which side of the signature quote you post at the bottom of your comments might apply to you....

 

[toomuchtime_]

No it won't be a small war, also there is always a nuclear threat from all nuclear armed countries.

How about stop invading middle east countries and make the world a better place? Im all for that

Of course it will be a small war. No one wants to occupy Iran or take over their oil fields. The goal is simply to destroy certain military capabilities, and Iran has only a very limited ability to retaliate. Destroying Iran's nuclear weapons programs will make the world a better place and a safer place for everyone including the Iranian people.

Just like the Iraq war right? Nope it's not gonna happen the way you think, I guarantee Israel will attack Hezbollah right before Iran and maybe attack gaza(huge violation if they do attack, militants have right to respond any way).

So Of course it will result with more palestinais, lebenese and Iranians murdered hot acceptable to you it seems like an okay thing. Iran is so behind in everything they aren't a threat to nobody, there are warships there too and Iran won't do nothing

Wrong on all counts. The goal in Iraq was regime change. The goal in Iran is simply to destroy their nuclear weapons program. Israel will not attack Lebanon or Gaza before a strike on Iran for two reasons. First, such attacks would put Iran on alert and possibly cost additional Israeli losses during the strike, and second, it is far from clear that either Hezbollah or Hamas would risk an Israeli retaliation for the sake of an Iran that had just been weakened and humiliated by Israel and would be of questionable value to them after that.

 

[toomuchtime_]

....please note the implication that israel is "protecting the world from iran'...and that the issue is the world against iran....do some lite backtracking on the global status of israel

Indeed, Israel will be protecting the world by taking out Iran's nuclear weapons program. The US, Europe and nearly all the Arab states consider themselves at risk from Iranian nukes for good reason, and all would like to see Israel destroy Iran's nuclear program. Moreover, if Iran were to be allowed to acquire nukes despite all the efforts of the international community to stop it, more proliferation of nuclear weapons is sure to follow, especially from Iran's Arab neighbors, so by taking out Iran's nuclear weapons programs, Israel will be making the world a safer and better place for everyone including the Iranian people.

perhaps you might breifly review the positioning of the "world" on the subject of Israel?....the presumption that Israel is acting in some selfless capacity to ensure global security by eliminating Iran's nuclear capabilities is pure, undiluted propaganda...you cannot seem to tell the difference between propaganda, and fact...although this quality makes you an ideal Zionist, alas it also makes you an embarrassment in polemics. Iran's rush for nuclear capacities are clearly in the interest of possessing a deterrent to the U.S./Israel neo-colonial axis that implemented the basic designs for PNAC over a decade ago...most observers at the time predicted that Iran would seek a nuclear deterrent.
I advise you to breifly consider which side of the signature quote you post at the bottom of your comments might apply to you....

No matter how much it rankles your racist ass, Israel shares a common interest with most of the rest of the world in preventing Iran from acquiring nukes, so while Israel will be acting in its own self interest when it takes out Iran's program, this action will also serve the interests of the US, Europe and most of the Arab states, as well as the rest of the world that would be less safe if further nuclear weapons proliferation were permitted.

 

[DreyfussRan]

Of course it will be a small war. No one wants to occupy Iran or take over their oil fields. The goal is simply to destroy certain military capabilities, and Iran has only a very limited ability to retaliate. Destroying Iran's nuclear weapons programs will make the world a better place and a safer place for everyone including the Iranian people.

Just like the Iraq war right? Nope it's not gonna happen the way you think, I guarantee Israel will attack Hezbollah right before Iran and maybe attack gaza(huge violation if they do attack, militants have right to respond any way).

So Of course it will result with more palestinais, lebenese and Iranians murdered hot acceptable to you it seems like an okay thing. Iran is so behind in everything they aren't a threat to nobody, there are warships there too and Iran won't do nothing

Wrong on all counts. The goal in Iraq was regime change. The goal in Iran is simply to destroy their nuclear weapons program. Israel will not attack Lebanon or Gaza before a strike on Iran for two reasons. First, such attacks would put Iran on alert and possibly cost additional Israeli losses during the strike, and second, it is far from clear that either Hezbollah or Hamas would risk an Israeli retaliation for the sake of an Iran that had just been weakened and humiliated by Israel and would be of questionable value to them after that.

As a matter of protocol, when you propose to make statements like "wrong on all counts'---this necessarily entails a bit more teeth than personal speculation---which is all you offer...do you understand this? Are you familair with the content of scope of PNAC? The "goal" in Iraq was conquest and control---which is exaclty what took place...we now hold all the cards, having set up a reliable proxy-government, and replaced troops with military contractors. The same 'goal' applies to Iran...U.S./Israeli hegemony. Israel will not launch a strike on Iran without the assurred backing of the U.S. military...otherwise it would have already happened

 

[SAYIT]

Israel is a terrorist state that does nothing but continually attack it's peaceful neighbors.
While screaming "remember the holocaust"
And labeling anyone who objects an anti-semite.

Uh-huh.
What was it your comrades screamed as they slammed those passenger jets into America?
Something like: "Allahu Akbar!"