Israel and U.S to take out Iran?

[tryreading]

If we want to invade Iran, that's one thing. But if we arm Israel with nukes, I don't see how that's going to help us. I don't think Iran really thinks we're going to allow Israel to launch them. It's just going to **** off the other middle eastern countries against us and Israel. They are already upset at us enough for giving Israel millions of dollars per year and yet we don't do that for other countries, which can look kind of hypocritical if you look at it from that point of view.

"It is Israeli policy to neither confirm nor deny that it possesses nuclear weapons, although it is generally accepted by friend and foe alike that Israel has been a nuclear state for several decades."

http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=so02norris

"The impressive numbers for U.S. aid to Israel become even more so when they, and the attached conditions, are compared with other Middle East countries. The roughly $3.3 billion in annual aid compares with some $2 billion for Egypt, $225 million for Jordan, and $35 million for Lebanon. Aid for the Palestinian Authority (PA) is not earmarked, but has been running at about $100 million."

http://www.wrmea.com/archives/Jan_Feb_2001/0101015.html

 

[tryreading]

We can support Israel, that's ok. But we can't favor them to the point where every other country in the middle east is subservient or severely underprivileged compared to them. Israel can keep the nukes they have but I don't see why we should arm them with more.

The thing is that Israel has to be militarily stronger than the surrounding Arabic countries to avoid being destroyed, its people exterminated.

 

[Mark O'Neill]

Why is it Iran wants 'nuclear power' when it is sitting on some of the largest oil and gas reserves in the world? Why do you think. Arab countries have been trying for years to oust Israel - sorry, destroy Israel - with convential means, everytime being defeated. But all the airpower and armoured mobility in the world ain't gonna help when someone drops a nuke on your head.
I support Israel all the way - any country that has taken on almost the whole Middle East at once - and won - has got my vote.
But I can't help thinking it is a role reversal of the Crusades - in the Crusades, was it not the 'infidel' Muslims who were defiling 'our' holy land?

 

[Connecticutter]

Why is it Iran wants 'nuclear power' when it is sitting on some of the largest oil and gas reserves in the world? Why do you think. Arab countries have been trying for years to oust Israel - sorry, destroy Israel - with convential means, everytime being defeated.

Yep. Is the world going to listen to the Iranian President's rhetoric, or are we just going to ignore it an assume that he can't possibly be as bad as he makes himself out to be.

Now I think we can avert war yet, and with our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan we should come up with a good diplomatic solution. However, the world need to realize that the Iranian state is not equal to the Israeli state in terms of modernity, democracy, and human rights - and their creation of nukes should not be brushed off.

 

[Touchmaster]

Both countries have appalling records on human rights, but at least Iran hasnt ever attacked any other countries or even threatened an attack - which you cant say of Israel... Also there is no way any country would attack Israel with nukes given that it is common knowledge that the country is in possession of a vast number of nuclear warheads and would respond with devastating and overwhelming thermonuclear force. If Iran is trying to build nukes (and it has broken none of its obligations with regards to sticking to peaceful nuclear power protocols thus far, despite the impression given by the white house and its UK lackeys), then they can only possibly be for defensive purposes, because it must know that the mere handful of warheads which would be possible for it to produce in the near future (and even a small number would still be many years off), while useless in terms of threatening any other nuclear power, would make it less likely to be the target of future oil wars. And it is oil that is the issue here, as the US is desparate to avoid a ternd towards oil trading in Euros, as the fading of the power of the petrodollar would be devastating for the house of cards that is the modern US economy. As Iran is due to open an oil bourse trading in Euros in March, it is no surprise that rhetoric towards that country, whose nuclear programme dates back to the (US-supported) Shah in the seventies, has become preparing the public for war - the US will attempt to prevent the success of the oil bourse at all costs. Previously, Saddam was preparing to trade his oil in euros - about the same time as talk about regime change there was being bandied about (under the pretext of illegal weapons...!) - coincidence? maybe.. Another country preparing for transfer to euro trading is Venezuela - another country regularly targeted by US destabilising operations, as the US government have no possible excuse for overt military intervention there.. if there was any way they could spin it then Im sure they would try, but unfortunately for the superchickenhawks there is no possible way that the Venezuelan administration can currently be smeared as an international threat. (I love it when the US attacks countries for being a threat to world peace when they have instigated more wars in the last century than any other country by far).

 

[Connecticutter]

Both countries have appalling records on human rights, but at least Iran hasnt ever attacked any other countries or even threatened an attack - which you cant say of Israel...

Are you trying to place an equalency between human rights in Israel and Iran? Try being a woman in Israel, then try being a woman in Iran. Try being a homosexual in Israel, and then Iran. Try preaching unorthodox religious views in both countries. Compare what happens when you are accused of a crime in both countries. Try running for office as a reformer in Israel, then try it in Iran. Then you'll learn the difference between a democracy and a theocracy.

There is no equivalency.

From the US point of view, Israel is an ally, and Iran can't be trusted with nuke by their own admission of their agenda.

 

[Mickyjaystoned]

Isn't this all just religious biggotry, on one hand you have ahmedinejad saying his cause is supported by god, he is preparing the world for what he believes will be the coming of the perfect human, Allah's second incarnation, he believes this 2nd coming will make the world an infinitely better place but it must come after great upheavel and bloodshed replacing war with peace, bloodshed and great upheavel that Ahmedinejad obviously feels it's his destiny to provoke.

On the other hand we have George W Bush who is the wests most hated world leader saying he has been chosen by god to rid the world of the tyranny of evil, the war on terror is his version of the eternal good Vs evil struggle, he is hoping that taking out all diversity from the planet and replacing it with American consumerism and christian conservatism, yes George also thinks his actions will make the future a much better and more peaceful place, but how does the american president go about this transformation?

Simple, by invading Afghanistan and Iraq, by carpet bombing civilians in both countries by declaring a "War on Terror" that has no percievable end, and infact is doing more to recruit terrorists than to stem the flow of recruiting, they also feel by flaunting nuclear weapons, allying themselves with Israel and selling Bunker Busters to the "Jewish" State, they are making our world a better place.

And obviously there we have God's chosen people, yes when Tony Blair came to power in england he saw it as vital to pledge his allegiance to Zionism by making Holocaust Day, a day where the whole country is supposed to respect Jews for their misfortune in the 20th century while ignoring the holocaust of many other races, yes Britain and America may make strange bedfellows but why do both align themselves so closely with Israel, well the answer is quite simply zionism and the belief that all these countries are rightly inheritants of god's promised land.

So now we have a world wide divide, Europe and america's Zionists (leaders) are opposite China Iran, while russia is sitting on a diplomatic fence to avoid winding anyone up, the only thing that unites all these would be Messiah's is just that, the fact they all think by taking their country to war in the hope that they will banish evil from the world and assume their rightful place as Messianic saviour, creating a future of unprecedented good out of the apparent evil of today.

I just have never understood how people can say with such conviction "We are fighting for a better world" surely a better world would be one without fighting?

 

[Touchmaster]

Are you trying to place an equalency between human rights in Israel and Iran? Try being a woman in Israel, then try being a woman in Iran. Try being a homosexual in Israel, and then Iran. Try preaching unorthodox religious views in both countries. Compare what happens when you are accused of a crime in both countries. Try running for office as a reformer in Israel, then try it in Iran. Then you'll learn the difference between a democracy and a theocracy.

There is no equivalency.

From the US point of view, Israel is an ally, and Iran can't be trusted with nuke by their own admission of their agenda.

Its not their record on human rights towards Israelis thats the issue - it is their crimes against those that can't vote for the government that is the problem (i.e. many thousands of dead palestinian civilians and many hundreds of thousands who have had their homes and livelihoods destroyed).

 

[Mickyjaystoned]

Above post is spot on.

How can Righteous Americans say that they condemn Iran for the Human rights record when Israel as stated above is not exactley without sin.

Thousands upon Thousands have died because of Israel and the refusal to accept peace talks in the 90's.

As for Americans passing judgements on anyone for human rights violations, c'mon get real America has probably exerted more influence over ******** on Human rights than any other country, Slavery, Holocaust of native americans, and various military excursions and sanctions imposed on south america.

Please who are you to say anything about Irans "Terrible" HUman Rights situation.

Talking about the "Disrespect" of Women et al, what the **** do you know about how women are treated in Iran other than what the Biased Mainstream media tells you.

God damn biggots.

 

[Connecticutter]

Above post is spot on.

How can Righteous Americans say that they condemn Iran for the Human rights record when Israel as stated above is not exactley without sin.

Thousands upon Thousands have died because of Israel and the refusal to accept peace talks in the 90's.

You are rewriting history here. There were the Oslo accords in 1993, and then Arafat refused to make compromises and accept a Palestinian state in 2000, instead resorting to terrorism and violence.

Now after more than 5 years of Ariel Sharon, Israel is much more secure from terrorists because of anti-terrorism operations and the separation barrier. If it was you and your friends being blown up, I don't think that you would just sit down and take it.

As for Americans passing judgements on anyone for human rights violations, c'mon get real America has probably exerted more influence over ******** on Human rights than any other country, Slavery, Holocaust of native americans, and various military excursions and sanctions imposed on south america.

Please who are you to say anything about Irans "Terrible" HUman Rights situation.

I don't know if you are aware, but slavery was ended in the 1860s. Killings of the Native Americans is also well in the past. Did you forget?

And don't even get me started on South America. You can't blame America on their problems, as their corrupt leaders like to do.

Talking about the "Disrespect" of Women et al, what the **** do you know about how women are treated in Iran other than what the Biased Mainstream media tells you.

God damn biggots.

Well, I'm sorry if I look like a bigot to you. After all, you are the one who criticises Jews for being so sensitive about the Holocaust. I mean, how dare they? The nerve!

If you want to show me that women's rights are respected in Iran, then post some evidence. Don't insult me, and don't assume that I am ignorant. That just makes it look like you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[oldreliable67]

Talking about the "Disrespect" of Women et al, what the **** do you know about how women are treated in Iran other than what the Biased Mainstream media tells you.

How about Amnesty International? Does that do it for you? Its not restricted to just women, but you'll get the picture:

Scores of political prisoners, including prisoners of conscience, continued to serve sentences imposed in previous years following unfair trials. Scores more were arrested in 2003, often arbitrarily and many following student demonstrations. At least a dozen political prisoners arrested during the year were detained without charge, trial or regular access to their families and lawyers. Judicial authorities curtailed freedoms of expression, opinion and association, including of ethnic minorities; scores of publications were closed, Internet sites were filtered and journalists were imprisoned. At least one detainee died in custody, reportedly after being beaten. During the year the pattern of harassment of political prisoners’ family members re-emerged. At least 108 executions were carried out, including of long-term political prisoners and frequently in public. At least four prisoners were sentenced to death by stoning while at least 197 people were sentenced to be flogged and 11 were sentenced to amputation of fingers and limbs. The true numbers may have been considerably higher.

Its hardly MSM, so you might find some credible reports specifically about women's rights abuses here, this one among them:

Tehran, Iran, Jan. 07 – An Iranian court has sentenced a teenage rape victim to death by hanging after she weepingly confessed that she had unintentionally killed a man who had tried to rape both her and her niece.

There is no mystery surrounding fundamental Muslim attitudes towards women. Just do a little research - doesn't take much.

 

[Tashah]

Talking about the "Disrespect" of Women et al, what the **** do you know about how women are treated in Iran other than what the Biased Mainstream media tells you. God damn biggots.

I am an Israeli woman, and I have visited Iran Micky. What would you like to explore? Perhaps we can begin with gender and Iranian politics.

Of the 89 Iranian women who petitioned for elective office in 2005, all 89 were rejected by the neoconservative 'Council of the Guardians' which is appointed by Ayatollah Ali Khameneh’i... the 'Supreme Leader' of Iran.

Human Rights Watch - Iran: Clerical Leaders Foreclose Free Elections

Do you consider these Iranian female disqualifications as part and parcel of a viable democratic process? Or is this instead a wanton exemplar of political gender discrimination by the ruling clerics?

 

[Connecticutter]

Of the 89 Iranian women who petitioned for elective office in 2005, all 89 were rejected by the neoconservative 'Council of the Guardians' which is appointed by Ayatollah Ali Khameneh’i... the 'Supreme Leader' of Iran.

Great post - definately shows how some were too quick to jump on my for decrying the state of women's rights in Iran.

I just wonder about you're use of the word neo-conservative. Don't you mean ultra-conservative?

 

[Tashah]

Great post - definately shows how some were too quick to jump on my for decrying the state of women's rights in Iran.

I just wonder about you're use of the word neo-conservative. Don't you mean ultra-conservative?

Good point. The 'Council of the Guardians' is appointed by the 'Supreme Leader' and consists of six Shi'a clerics and six laypersons steeped in Shi'a jurisprudence. They are indeed all ultra-conservative Islamists.

Israel can keep the nukes they have but I don't see why we should arm them with more.

The United States has never transferred either nuclear technology or nuclear weapons to Israel. Israel independently and internally developed its nuclear capability... and has had a nuclear profile for approximately four decades.

 

[Touchmaster]

noone has refuted my points - and if we are bringing Amnesty international into this, then we may do well to note its many condemnations of Israel, going back to the massacre in lebanon and beyond, and coming up to the present day house demolitions and of course the horrendous Jenin disaster.
for example 'The human rights situation in Israel and the Occupied Territories continues to deteriorate. Some 3,700 Palestinians – most of them unarmed and including over 600 children – have been killed by the Israeli army and settlers, and almost 1,000 Israelis – most of them civilians and including more than 100 children – have been killed by Palestinians since the start of the current uprising (Intifada) in September 2000. In addition, Palestinians living under Israeli military occupation in The West Bank and Gaza Strip are subject to a wide range of human rights violations.'

Also, the US has been accused by Amnesty (and many other independent bodies) of a wide range of human rights violations. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone etc...

And to say that the US wasnt to blame for South American problems is insane, it has been well estalished as historical fact that the CIA supported the majority of the areas's military coups in the sixties and seventies, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths and millions of shattered dreams but, on the plus side, free run for US corporations to plunder the areas natural resources.

 

[BillyBadAss]

Iran has every right to nuclear weapons. The US, Israel and these major powers are trying to bully people around. If the US, Israel, Russia and China have nukes, then any nation has the right to have nukes. When the US, Israel, Russia, China and France give up their nukes, then and only then, do other nations have any business telling Iran they can't have nukes. If I was Iran, I would tell the other countries to mind their own business and if attacked, Iran has the right to retailiate. Who could rationally argue, that Iran doesn't have the right to nukes? The only way to stop nuclear proliferation is for the major powers to agree to give their own nuclear weapons.

 

[UtahBill]

Iran has every right to nuclear weapons. The US, Israel and these major powers are trying to bully people around. If the US, Israel, Russia and China have nukes, then any nation has the right to have nukes. When the US, Israel, Russia, China and France give up their nukes, then and only then, do other nations have any business telling Iran they can't have nukes. If I was Iran, I would tell the other countries to mind their own business and if attacked, Iran has the right to retailiate. Who could rationally argue, that Iran doesn't have the right to nukes? The only way to stop nuclear proliferation is for the major powers to agree to give their own nuclear weapons.

Your next door neighbor, a fundamentalist evangelist who hates you because you don't attend his church, and has threatened to kill you, has every right to be as well armed as you are, at the least. You have done nothing to him, and everyone agrees that he is irrational and probably crazy.
But until he actually DOES something to you, the police will do nothing.
Do you feel safe?
It is always good to have a few big dogs around, and the USA is one. We have the power to keep the little dogs in check, and should. We are not always right in how or why we do it, but someone has to do it.
As Tashah has said, Israel is a one-nuke country. It is so small that a country like Iran only needs to use one. Retaliation would be out of the question without supporters like the USA. I am not willing to risk the destruction of an entire country for some misguided concept of "fairness".
Consider this, if one of the stupid Muslims leaders decides to launch, and the Israelis have time to retaliate, it is likely that they will launch everything, and destroy the Arab world. And it would be justified. Or not, as it wouldn't matter anymore. If Israel is to be no more, then why should they care if Muslim countries survive?
The clerics who are drunk with power should be taken out, preferably by their own people, but if not, by us. They are the misbehaving puppies, and the big dogs should be correcting them.

 

[BillyBadAss]

Your next door neighbor, a fundamentalist evangelist who hates you because you don't attend his church, and has threatened to kill you, has every right to be as well armed as you are, at the least. You have done nothing to him, and everyone agrees that he is irrational and probably crazy.
But until he actually DOES something to you, the police will do nothing.
Do you feel safe?
It is always good to have a few big dogs around, and the USA is one. We have the power to keep the little dogs in check, and should. We are not always right in how or why we do it, but someone has to do it.
As Tashah has said, Israel is a one-nuke country. It is so small that a country like Iran only needs to use one. Retaliation would be out of the question without supporters like the USA. I am not willing to risk the destruction of an entire country for some misguided concept of "fairness".
Consider this, if one of the stupid Muslims leaders decides to launch, and the Israelis have time to retaliate, it is likely that they will launch everything, and destroy the Arab world. And it would be justified. Or not, as it wouldn't matter anymore. If Israel is to be no more, then why should they care if Muslim countries survive?
The clerics who are drunk with power should be taken out, preferably by their own people, but if not, by us. They are the misbehaving puppies, and the big dogs should be correcting them.

Utah, dude, you are a trip man. The "big dogs" should be "correcting" them. The "big dogs" might take an ass kickin' for trying to "correct" others. I don't believe that Iran is as irrational and crazy as you make them out to be. It is the West which has committed crimes in the Middle East first. Therefore, the Middle East has a right to self defense and to acquire nuclear weapons.

 

[Touchmaster]

while a nuclear attack on Israel would indeed kill most of the population, I very much doubt it would reduce Israel's ability to retaliate - as most of its arenable is deployable from submarines. No country would be stupid enough to attack with nuclear weapons, and as I have already stated, if - and its a big if - Iran develops a nuclear capability, it will strictly be for defensive purposes - after all, it knows that as the world's fourth largest oil producer, and the largest that is not in US good books, it is ripe for military conquest...

 

[UtahBill]

Utah, dude, you are a trip man. The "big dogs" should be "correcting" them. The "big dogs" might take an ass kickin' for trying to "correct" others. I don't believe that Iran is as irrational and crazy as you make them out to be. It is the West which has committed crimes in the Middle East first. Therefore, the Middle East has a right to self defense and to acquire nuclear weapons.

My dentist is of Iranian extraction. Ask him where he wants to live. A prominent journalist who is Iranian showed before and after pics of several areas of Iran. Before and after what? The clerics! BAD PUPPIES!
I think you are being very selective in your reading of history. Both sides have hated each other clear back to the Old Testament times, long before there was a "west". The reason they hate the western countries is because we refuse to share and support their hatred for Israel. Because of influence from the early Catholic church, western countries have not always been so nice to Jews, but we are getting better.
Beats me how anyone can support Iranians in their effort to have power that they cannot handle wisely. BTW, guess who are the aggressors in most middle-eastern conflicts? Other middle eastern countries! When they are not fighting outsiders, they fight amongst themselves. We should encourgae that, at least until the average person on the street gets angry enough to depose their leaders.

 

[ptsdkid]

Utah, dude, you are a trip man. The "big dogs" should be "correcting" them. The "big dogs" might take an ass kickin' for trying to "correct" others. I don't believe that Iran is as irrational and crazy as you make them out to be. It is the West which has committed crimes in the Middle East first. Therefore, the Middle East has a right to self defense and to acquire nuclear weapons.

****billy badass sounds more like billy chickenass to me. The countries possessing nukes like USA and China are not threatening to use them. The modern day Hitler in Iran is and has been threatening to use nukes against Israel. Take your head out of the sand you weak-kneed liberal *****.

Doctor of liberal bashing...KidTim

 

[Touchmaster]

when has Iran threatened to use nukes against Israel (nukes which it could not possibly have for years anyway)? If you are referring to his call for Israel to be wiped off the map, this rhetoric has been going on for years in many Islamic countries, and is figuratively alluding to the fact that they dont recognise its right to exist being as it was founded on land stolen from arab families, rather than literally threatening it with attack (which due to US military aid over the years would be suicidal for any country in the region). Israel has invaded a number of other countries in the region, Iran has never invaded another country. Who is the true aggressor?

 

[cnredd]

****billy badass sounds more like billy chickenass to me. The countries possessing nukes like USA and China are not threatening to use them. The modern day Hitler in Iran is and has been threatening to use nukes against Israel. Take your head out of the sand you weak-kneed liberal *****.

Doctor of liberal bashing...KidTim

[Moderator Mode]

We knew it was just a matter of time...

ptsdkid,

Personally attacking the members of this forum with no regard for rules or civility has brought this upon you...

You have been suspended one week due to your unwillingness to debate in a constructive manner...

If/When you decide to return, this manner of debate WILL cease & desist or the next action will be permanent...

[Moderator Mode]

 

[Touchmaster]

noone has commented on the strange coincidence between increasingly aggressive US rhetoric against Iran and the March 2006 opening of the Euro oil bourse in that country...(with it's threatening of the Dollar's hegemony in oil trading)?

 

[Touchmaster]

It is interesting to note that as soon as Saddam noted he would change oil trading from Dollars to Euros, he became the target of regime change... and when Iran announced plans for such a change, more and more aggressive rhetoric about that country has been forthcoming... the other member of OPEC to suggest that it may follow suit, Venezuela, has also been the target of US destabilising operations and aggressive rhetoric. Coincidence?
the US has been lucky in the cases of Iran and Iraq, which are/were already international pariah states, and therefore action against them was fairly easy to get away with.. Venezuela has been more of a problem case, because it has been difficult to misrepresent the country as a threat to the international community, and indeed the country has good relations with not only its neighbours in Latin America, but practically all of the world, with the exception of the US and a couple of close allies such as Mexico (this hasnt stopped it trying, for instance in making a big deal of it upgrading its army's rifles from ancient '50s vintage models, and buying unarmed transport planes and patrol boats, saying that such minor purchases destabilise the region - despite the administration's friendly relationship with all of its neighbours). the government is also very popular at home. That is not to say that although overt action is currently out of the question, that the US's constant covert operations there won't continue and may one day succeed in compromising the MVR government. It is all about international currency reserves, which are what keeps the US economy afloat despite a massive debt crisis.