I
:roll: sure. Iran (backer of Hezbollah and Hamaz, ally of Al-Qaeda) having nukes is fine. Israel having nukes threatens the region. well done, boys, really well done.
Surely, you,re missing the point here. The idea behind a nuclear free middle east, is infact, that the middle east will be nuclear free. This includes Iran as much as it does Israel.
No one of any consequence is saying that a nuclear armed Iran is acceptable
the idea is simply that if Iran is not allowed to go nuclear then Israel should follow the same rules.
This could be mutually beneficial for both Israel and Iran as Israel would be spared the trouble of stiking Iran (and the horrendous backlash it would provoke) and Iran would be spared the trouble of being hit. If both sides managed to convice their respective populations that this was a diplomatic victory then i think they could pull it off.
I find it intresting that those who are screaming from the rooftops about the need to prevent Iran from sparking off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East (with some legitimacy) are the same ones criticising this resolution.
This resolution provides the means to prevent a nuclear arms race without military strikes
And let's be under no illusion of what the consequences of military strikes on Iran would be
we would see a huge increase in oil prices
Iran would cause as much trouble as possible in Afganistan, Iraq and through Hamas and Hezbollah, and Islamists would be given a boost in popularity across the world
Hope and change, I suppose.
Here's your change, have hope that Iran doesn't nuke you.
Iran won't nuke you.
They've got more to gain by keeping the world alive, than by destroying it.
You forget that Iranian oil makes our world work.
Usama bin Laden, on the other hand... that's a different story.
No they wouldn't. They would immediately have the hell of the world unleashed upon their door stop.are you kidding? by nuking Israel they usher in Paradise on Earth where they will be immortal heroes attended by those 72 nubile virgins.
we're talking about Iranian Shia fundamentalists; these are the people who brought us the Suicide Bomber - Al Quada learned it from these guys. we are truly talking about people who don't mind destroying themselves and a good hunk of the world because they think they will come out ahead from that bargain.
Don't kid yourself.no, it doesn't. the world is not dependent upon Iranian oil.
Iranian ally.
No they wouldn't. They would immediately have the hell of the world unleashed upon their door stop.
The suicide bomber became famous by either anarchists in the pre-WWII US, or by the Japanese in WWII. Depends on who you ask. Japs won't live up to it.
Don't kid yourself.
No. Usama hates Shia almost as much as he hates the West. Iran sending arms to the Taliban/FATA recently is less of an alliance in the sense you're talking about and more in the US-Soviet Union in WWII.... just a common enemy.
I recently got into a tiff with USA-1 where he argued that President Obama's foreign policy has been comparably error-free; that the problems with today's world stem from the Bush administration. Ladies and gentlemen, here we are, stabbing one of our closest allies in the face. well done, Obama, well done. Israel's one guarantee of survival you want to threaten. gee wiz, that won't make them more likely to use it :roll:
guess this is what you get when you elect a man who spent 20 years in Reverend Wright's Church
Washington's unprecedented backing for a UN resolution for a nuclear-free Middle East that singles out Israel has both angered and deeply worried the Jewish state although officials are cagey about openly criticising their biggest ally.
The resolution adopted by the United Nations on Friday calls on Israel to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and urges it to open its facilities to inspection.
It also calls for a regional conference in 2012 to advance the goal of a nuclear-free Middle East.
Israel is widely believed to be the only nuclear power in the Middle East, with around 200 warheads, but has maintained a policy of deliberate ambiguity about its capabilities since the mid-1960s.
The document, which singles out Israel but makes no mention of Iran's controversial nuclear programme, drew a furious reaction from the Jewish state who decried it as "deeply flawed and hypocritical." ...
:roll: sure. Iran (backer of Hezbollah and Hamaz, ally of Al-Qaeda) having nukes is fine. Israel having nukes threatens the region. well done, boys, really well done.
Oh good god!
That tears it ... it's time for Obama's ass to be impeached.... and he can take Ramblin' Joe Biden with him.
I recently got into a tiff with USA-1 where he argued that President Obama's foreign policy has been comparably error-free; that the problems with today's world stem from the Bush administration. Ladies and gentlemen, here we are, stabbing one of our closest allies in the face. well done, Obama, well done. Israel's one guarantee of survival you want to threaten. gee wiz, that won't make them more likely to use it :roll:
guess this is what you get when you elect a man who spent 20 years in Reverend Wright's Church
Washington's unprecedented backing for a UN resolution for a nuclear-free Middle East that singles out Israel has both angered and deeply worried the Jewish state although officials are cagey about openly criticising their biggest ally.
The resolution adopted by the United Nations on Friday calls on Israel to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and urges it to open its facilities to inspection.
It also calls for a regional conference in 2012 to advance the goal of a nuclear-free Middle East.
Israel is widely believed to be the only nuclear power in the Middle East, with around 200 warheads, but has maintained a policy of deliberate ambiguity about its capabilities since the mid-1960s.
The document, which singles out Israel but makes no mention of Iran's controversial nuclear programme, drew a furious reaction from the Jewish state who decried it as "deeply flawed and hypocritical." ...
:roll: sure. Iran (backer of Hezbollah and Hamaz, ally of Al-Qaeda) having nukes is fine. Israel having nukes threatens the region. well done, boys, really well done.
It also calls for India and Pakistan to join the NPT. The big difference between Israel and Iran is that the former already has nuclear weapons, the latter does not.
are you kidding? by nuking Israel they usher in Paradise on Earth where they will be immortal heroes attended by those 72 nubile virgins.
we're talking about Iranian Shia fundamentalists; these are the people who brought us the Suicide Bomber - Al Quada learned it from these guys. we are truly talking about people who don't mind destroying themselves and a good hunk of the world because they think they will come out ahead from that bargain.
no, it doesn't. the world is not dependent upon Iranian oil.
Iranian ally.
No they wouldn't. They would immediately have the hell of the world unleashed upon their door stop.
The suicide bomber became famous by either anarchists in the pre-WWII US, or by the Japanese in WWII. Depends on who you ask. Japs won't live up to it.
Don't kid yourself.
No. Usama hates Shia almost as much as he hates the West. Iran sending arms to the Taliban/FATA recently is less of an alliance in the sense you're talking about and more in the US-Soviet Union in WWII.... just a common enemy.
Suicide bombing is just a tool that is used in warfare, typically when better methods are not avaliable.
THose who do not distinguish between warfare and terrorism might say so, especially if they support the terrorism.
In truth, however, anybody who seeks to engage in mass murder of innocent civilians is a terrorist. In order to qualify as geurilla war, the targets need to be miltary and strategic, not civilians killed for being civilians.
Kills me to say so, but Gardener is right on this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?