|
reply posted on 8-10-2009 @ 02:21 AM by Echelon117
|
 
Well yeah, it would be a given that he address ALL nations with nuclear stockpiles, which is what I thought he plans on doing?
If I am not mistaken isn't the OP and his source suggesting Obama is going to completely ignore Israel and their nuclear stockpile?
Im just saying that it doesn't make any sense to want to disarm a world of nukes, but ignore one country... So either the source is bogus or if it
isn't then Obama must be naive to leave one country out.
Forgive me if I'm wrong or I have mistaken something
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 8-10-2009 @ 02:30 AM by wazthewazzock
|

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Originally posted by stevegmu
How is it a double standard? Israel is an ally.
Israel is the ally of the far religious right in the country. To the rest of us its just another country draining of us our resources and our
relations with other nations.
Our allies should have nuclear weapons
Since when? When did the United states have the authority as to what nations can and cant have nuclear weapons? Did God give us that authority? What
BS, seriously.
SG
Thank you seperating from the thread which is already full of horseradish.
"They're not going to nuke anybody on our side so its ok"
So what makes someone "our" side?
Because they listen and follow every word thrown out?
And as you pointed out,
Why is it if America say its ok it is ok?
Why cant someone from Iran, Russia or China go to inspect it.
We have been led our entire generation to think America is the leader of the world which is complete poppycock.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 8-10-2009 @ 02:31 AM by jd140
|
  
reply to post by Echelon117
He is just complaining that Obama took a stance on Iran and hasn't said anything about Israel.
Obama isn't in any posistion to disarm any country other then his own. The UN as a whole agreed to the terms against Iran. If the UN decides as a
whole to disarm the world of Nukes then everyone with a Nuke will be addressed.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 8-10-2009 @ 02:34 AM by Echelon117
|
Ah yeah, I see! Cheers
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 8-10-2009 @ 04:08 AM by Dark Ghost
|
  
Originally posted by oozyism
Double standards any one, or do we still have our heads under the sand. WAKE UP!
I personally believe the US should stop this none-sense not because they have to, but because they should care. They should care that certain policies
of theirs causes more harm than good.
Barack Obama, the US president, has agreed to abide by a 40-year policy of allowing Israel to keep nuclear weapons without opening them to
international inspection, according to a US newspaper.
In a report on Saturday, The Washington Times quoted three unnamed sources as saying Obama had confirmed to Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel's prime
minister, that he would maintain the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
english.aljazeera.net...
[edit on 7-10-2009 by oozyism]
I really have to wonder what your agenda is oozyism. What do we need to wake up from? That Israel is an enemy? That the West should not try prevent an
Islamic Theocracy from having access to nuclear weapons because a rogue ally of ours (Israel) has nukes? Two wrongs don't make a right now do
they?
We all know that the USA is being hypocritical on the Iran nuclear technology issue. I think you are trying emphasise this one point over and over in
your threads so that it appears more valid to you.
Funny you should mention those "unnamed sources" because they appear to be prerequisites for most negative stories about Israel. At the root of
almost every single piece of "breaking news" there are always unnamed sources. It's funny because any other country would dismiss most of the
stories as fiction fabricated out of thin air or quarter-truth air.
It's understandable to keep the identity of your sources hidden on certain issues. The problem is that the more anonymous sources that you have, the
less credible the story actually is. No matter how many times you repeat it.
Then building upon this idea by using stories that are based on anonymous sources to prove an argument is troublesome.
[edit on 8/10/2009 by Dark Ghost]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-10-2009 @ 09:47 PM by oozyism
|
Originally posted by Echelon117
If Obama wants to be serious about disarming the world of nukes, and wants Iran to stop all enrichment activity's, then I think he should address
Israel's nuclear stockpile...
Wouldn't that make sense?
It is unfortunate that for some it has no sense at all  I don't know how they receive this mentality, but all in all it is a problem.
[edit on 11-10-2009 by oozyism]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-10-2009 @ 09:53 PM by oozyism
|
reply to post by jd140
Obama isn't in any posistion to disarm any country other then his own. The UN as a whole agreed to the terms against Iran. If the UN decides as a
whole to disarm the world of Nukes then everyone with a Nuke will be addressed.
Yeah exactly, Obama is in no position to disarm any country other then his own, and the same went with bush who disarmed Iraq
It is also true that Iran is merely following the international law which permits them to pursue peaceful nuclear energy. The UN brought sanctions
against Iran because of the US and its allies who are pushing against the right Iran has. Plus the US has too much power when it comes to the UN.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-10-2009 @ 09:53 PM by stevegmu
|
reply to post by InfaRedMan
We used Iraq as a hedge against Iran. Neither were never our ally. We used the Taliban to fight the Soviets. We were never allied with nor associated
with UBL, nor any Arab mujahadeen.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-10-2009 @ 09:58 PM by stevegmu
|

reply to post by GhostR1der
That facility is destroyed?
We are fighting Iran via proxy in Iraq and Afghanistan, as they are training and equipping our enemy. They are also a state sponsor of terrorists and
terrorism. Of course they have no right to nuclear weapons. They will use them. If Israel has them, they would only use them as a weapon of last
resort. We used them to save lives in WWII, because those who attacked us were unwilling to surrender, unless a massive show of force was used. We
also warned the populations of Nagasaki and Hiroshima before we dropped the bombs.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 28-10-2009 @ 06:55 PM by 2Resistance
|
reply to post by oozyism
we dont care about pakistani nukes either I wonder what they both have in common with us the U.S. oh yeah there are allies! Down with radical Islam
and lets the Jews have peace PLEASE!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 28-10-2009 @ 07:57 PM by vor78
|
reply to post by oozyism
There is no double standard because the situations are vastly different. As others have already stated, the US and Israel are allies. By contrast,
Iran and the US have hostile diplomatic relations and as a result, the US should be expected to take whatever political course of action is
available to them in order to reduce or eliminate any potential threat they might pose. The burden doesn't all fall on the US, anyway. The
Iranians aren't exactly an honest broker themselves.
I'd also point out that the balance of power in the region is precarious at best. The Israelis are surrounded and badly outnumbered, but their
nuclear forces level the playing field. If the Iranians develop a nuclear weapon, that balance of power goes right out the window, and if that
happens, the Israelis might very well feel compelled to launch a first strike and that's something no one wants because it probably wouldn't end
there.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |