Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Because when you are the Bible-proclaimed "God's chosen people," you have moral authority over the whole planet. And of course this grants you rights to an unaccountable, secret nuclear weapons stockpile, too.

If you take what you put in quotes and use it as a search term in a Bible data-base, you will see it come up four times, all in the New Testament, describing those who follow Jesus.
"God's chosen people" is something the Jews created as a description of themselves, and does not come from the Bible.
The Bible does point out three individuals called God's chosen, who are Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, of whom Paul says, it was for their sake that Jesus was revealed to the Jewish people first, but we all know how that turned out.

edit on 31-8-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Haha yeah Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - ALL JEWISH

As for knowing how Jesus thing turned out the ROMANS CRUCIFIED HIM and a ROMAN SOLDIER stuck a spear in him to finish him off! Jesus's followers were mainly other Jews, Jesus was Jewish and Christianity was not born for another three hundred years, by the same people that killed him - THE ROMANS!

reply to post by TrueAmerican



As Gods chosen people, as you put it, doesn't that include an obligation to the Palestinian people?

Just sayin'

Originally posted by RicochetPR
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

As Gods chosen people, as you put it, doesn't that include an obligation to the Palestinian people?

Just sayin'

Every religion think they are Gods Chosen people, Muslims, Christians and Jews!

When you give the Palestinians the land back in exchange for peace what obligation do you expect israel to have? At some stage the Palestinians have to be responsible for themselves, especially with all the Arab funds sent to develop, the West Bank is thriving.Israel's responsibility is for its own people!

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by old_god

 

If Israel acted mature and found a middle ground on this treaty, it would be a first step in putting right the wrongs in other nations (lesser developed and more volatile) - as long as you come out the aggressor you will have an equally aggressive reaction.

Would you mind expanding on this idea of a middle ground, please?

My understanding is that Iran can live up to the treaty or hand in their three months' notice and get out of the treaty. Isn't some of the problem that Iran is living up to parts of the treaty but not all of them?

What would a middle ground look like? Iran can have some nuclear weapons, but has to let the world count them? Perhaps force Israel to disclose its nuclear program in full (even though they haven't signed the treaty)? Not trying to be a wise guy, I just can't see what this would look like.

It's hard to say my friend but I know something, if Israel went and made a positive move, one that no one expected they would not lose their sovereignty (or ground) but would earn the respect of other people (eventually).

A middle ground is not all rosy as people think, it will be made up of some very small promises but promises that can be kept and then goals that can be achieved.

It would certainly leave no leg for the likes of Iran to stand on and make comments. My point is that as long as nations act as aggressors (or perceive to be that way) other nations will use the opportunities to attack those nations (on a political level) which doesn't do anyone favours.

Its like this:

You got 3 kids in a playground, all holding water pistols at each other, about to fire. A mediator (the teacher) steps in and tells them to put their pistol down, but they all say the same thing, "him first".

Because no one backs down, no resolution is ever reached and the same stalemate situation exists.

Keep this situation up for long enough and eventually you have a generation of people who have forgotten what it was they were so worked up about in the first place but they carry on playing out the same ill fated motions as their predecessors.

Originally posted by Hongkongphooey
reply to post by MrInquisitive

 

First of all, I am not 'pro-zionist' otherwise I would live in Israel and not Asia! Secondly, i have lived among the Palestinian's and know what is happening in the West Bank. Palestinians are getting screwed over, but not so much Israel these days, its more their own greedy government...

... you obviously have a lot of hatred for Israel stating that they are rogue and we should all be grateful that they haven't used nukes! Lets get something straight shall we, Israel has done nothing other intelligence agencies or countries haven't done, whether it is MI5, MI6,SAS, CIA, NSA, KGB, GRU, DGSE, BND, MAD, MSS etc., the only difference is that Israel got caught in using foreign passports and it is often assumed Israel is behind the assination of Iran's scientists, of which there is NO actual proof!

When Israel is wrong, I agree thay deserve to be critised, but every day here on ATS their are people like 'Corruption Exposed' whose only goal in life is to watch and critisise Israel for so much breathing air!

You don't have to live in Israel to be a pro-Zionist, all you need to do is support the notion that it is/was right to take land from other people and make the country of Israel with it, and to support the continued existence of this contrived country. This you seem to do; at least you defend its actions.

I don't doubt that the Palestinian Authority is corrupt and does its people wrong. So does just about every other government do so to its own people. The point is, the Palestinians have to deal with all kinds of hassles from Israel as well. This is even worse in Gaza.

Glad we at least agree on the water/natural resources issue facing the region.

I was being sarcastic about being thankful Israel hasn't used it's nukes yet. It has had no reason to use them and would deserved to obliterated if it were to use them on non-nuclear-armed states.

As for the term "rogue state", it certainly fits the definition: A state that conducts its policy in a dangerously unpredictable way, disregarding international law or diplomacy.

The very fact that it is talking up attacking Iran makes it a rogue nation. That it continues illegally hold control over the occupied territories and its peoples makes it a rogue state. Then there was my litany of other crimes by Israel, so it is a rogue state. The definition of a rogue is one who is dishonest. Israel won't admit that it has nuclear weapons, even though it is well known that it does have them. Don't know what is more dishonest than that.

Your excuse for Israel is that other countries do the same thing, so why criticize Israel for its actions. What other countries conduct assassinations using faked passports of their allies? What other countries conduct piracy in international waters? But most importantly, it is established that Israel does these things, HAS A ROGUE NUCLEAR ARSENAL (by definition) and is doing everything in It power to have military and espionage strikes against another country that has signed the NPT, which Israel hasn't.

And Israel now is indignant now that the IAEC may be forced to demand inspections of Israel's nuclear program. This is the point of this thread. Israel lies to the international community, breaks international laws, but then wants the international community to come down hard on Its rivals that MAY want to have their own deterrent against the aggressive, militarily powerful and nuclear-armed powers, the US and Israel. Iran sees what happened to Iraq because Iraq didn't have nuclear weapons and sees what has not happened to N. Korea because it does. I don't blame Iran one bit for wanting a deterrent against the US and/or Israel. That said, there is no proof that Iran is set on building a nuclear arsenal, but that doesn't stop Israel from continuing to call for attacks against Iran, as well as conducting a very destructive cyber campaign against Iran (I am assuming the Stuxnet virus is a collaborative effort between the US and Israel).

As for there being no proof that Israel is behind the assassinations of Iranian scientists, Israel has a history of such operations, including the engineer behind the super cannon Iraq had been working on some time back. It is also documented (read Seymour Hirsch articles on the matter) that Israel is supporting the MLK, a terrorist organization fighting the Iranian government. It's not a stretch to assume the assassinations are by this group, but targeted by Israel.

Claiming people on ATS are criticizing Israel for breathing error is pure hyperbole. People are criticizing it for Its crimes and hypocrisy. I'm sure there is some pure anti-semitic Jewish banker, etc. stuff here and there, but that is not what Corruption Exposed, myself and others on this thread are talking about

reply to post by MrInquisitive

Do you have time for a question or two from someone who isn't very knowledgable about the issues, and hasn't even read the thread?

I was struck by this comment:

And Israel now is indignant now that the IAEC may be forced to demand inspections of Israel's nuclear program. This is the point of this thread. Israel lies to the international community, breaks international laws, but then wants the international community to come down hard on Its rivals that MAY want to have their own deterrent against the aggressive, militarily powerful and nuclear-armed powers, the US and Israel.

I thought, AHA! I've found the point of the thread, but it confuses me.

I know Israel doesn't talk about it's weapons program, and conducts clandestine operations, but are there other lies Israel tells to the world? And what laws has it broken? I've heard about the blockade, but that was declared legal by the UN.

I thought that part of the problem with Iran was that it was violating its treaty obligations for inspections. That, coupled with its rhetoric, has many nervous.

Any help would be appreciated.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by Corruption Exposed


You are a full blown propagandist. I wouldn't be surprised if you're getting paid to do this.

Why does Israel have nukes? To threaten? Or to dissuade others from threatening them?

The former! That's a fact.

Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, and so on, has threatened or is currently threatening Israel with existential destruction. And you seek to enable them by criticizing Israel for it's much needed nuclear arsenal!

And to boot - you support Iran - a maniacal Islamist Shi'ite Regime, in their desire for nuclear energy: ignoring calls, made almost weekly now, for Israels destruction; ignoring the Shi'ite doctrine of the Imam Mahdi and the portents which precede his coming. Some of which have already been met (internecine fighting between Muslims, sufferring in Iraq, war in Syria)

You are nothing but a propagandist bent on bending information.

reply to post by MrInquisitive

You don't have to live in Israel to be a pro-Zionist, all you need to do is support the notion that it is/was right to take land from other people and make the country of Israel with it, and to support the continued existence of this contrived country. This you seem to do; at least you defend its actions.

How can you claim this is a contrived country??

There is a difference between a nation and a country.

The Jewish people are a nation FAR FAR MORE than the palestinians are - and in fact, they are the contrivance of Arabists, not the Jews; But the Jews are a nation without a land - or rather, a nation that has been severed from it's land by the political powers for 2000 years. But did they forget? Or was their daily prayers a reminder of Jerusalem - of never forgetting, or believing in their redemption from exile. This is a people that WAITED and ANTICIPATED its return to no place else but Israel, aka Palestine, earlier known before Hadrian renamed it (to spite the Jews) as Judea.

Originally posted by MrInquisitive
Please tell me of one specific case of China exporting nuclear weapons technology.

Ok, here you go....

In 1986, China concluded a comprehensive nuclear cooperation agreement with Pakistan. That same year, Chinese scientists had begun assisting Pakistan with the enrichment of weapons-grade uranium, and China also reportedly transferred enough tritium gas to Pakistan for 10 nuclear weapons. Since then, China has supplied Pakistan with a variety of nuclear products and services, ranging from uranium enrichment technology to research and power reactors. China allegedly involved Pakistani scientists in a nuclear test at its Lop Nur test site in 1989.

cns.miis.edu...

In a 1997 report by the Director of Central Intelligence, it stated that China "was the primary source of nuclear-related equipment and technology to Pakistan" during the second half of 1996.



The whole wide world knows it! But you don't? Jeeez! If you have the time and inclination, you need to give this a read: Chinese-Pakistani Nuclear/Missile Ties And The Balance Of Power

It pays to keep abreast of what's happening across the world!

Cheers!

Originally posted by Cassius666
Pretty much, yes. Imagine if Bush would have talked of wiping Iraq off the map. If you dont have the muscle stfu. If you do have it, use force in a controlled manner, not to wipe something off the map.

But that isn't what he said and it does not seem to be what he meant...it was a statement originally made by the Ayatollah and somewhat either paraphrased or misquoted by the Iranian President. It has then become a pseudo-fact used to argue against Iran's nuclear program. It is a declaration expressing a viewpoint not at all exclusive to Iran but shared by more than a few middle eastern countries regarding the spurious way in which the nation of Israel was established. And we all know the history of that. When Israel was suddenly given the ruling right over the city of Jerusalem, it caused the unrest that the ME and other countries now grapple with. The Ayatollah called it an 'unnatural' creature because of the unconventional way in which it happened. Countries are not formed like that except in this one case. Even the dissolution of the USSR, which resulted in many new countries being formed, is not viewed as unnatural nor is it causing the degree of conflict that the formation of Israel has caused, for everyone involved, including and perhaps especially, the people who are now citizens of Israel.

The people who are now Israeli in the sense of nationality existed (or at least their family lines/ancestors) before 1948 and if there were some sudden change in which Israel was no longer recognized as a sovereign nation ruling over Jerusalem, the people who are citizens of Israel would still exist even if that country no longer existed.

THAT is the premise behind the gone-viral statement made and mistranslated back in 2005.

If you are unclear, you can read this article.

Something crucial to consider is mentioned in that article, emphasis mine:

(...) one problem was translating a metaphorical turn of phrase in Persian that has no exact English equivalent — there was, for instance, no mention of a map — and there was a heated debate about whether the original statement was a threat or a prediction.

And a quote from a similar article:

Ahmadinejad's alleged condemnation of Israel came at a "World Without Zionism" conference in Tehran in Oct. 2005, in which he was quoted by an English-language Iranian news site as saying "Israel must be wiped off the map." But as several analyses of the original Farsi statement show, this appears to be a mistranslation.

Arash Norouzi of the Mossadegh Project noted in 2007 that Ahmadinejad "never... uttered the words 'map,' 'wipe out,' or even 'Israel'" in his statement. Rather, he argued, the translation should have been that "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time." (Both The Washington Post and The Atlantic came up with similarly variant translations.)

This is a key difference, Mr. Norouzi argued, because Ahmadinejad used the "vanish from the page of time" idiom elsewhere in his speech: when describing the governments of the Shah of Iran, the Soviet Union, and Saddam Hussein.

While war and revolution were involved in the three regimes' collapse, none of them, Norouzi argued, were "wiped off the map." Rather, they underwent regime change.

This suggests in turn, he said, that Ahmadinejad was calling for regime change in Israel, not nuclear genocide.

Juan Cole, another critic of the speech's translation, compared Ahmadinejad's statement to Reagan-era calls for the end of the Soviet Union.

The USSR, or Soviet Union is no longer on any map...it has essentially been 'wiped off the map' technically speaking...but are the people that lived there all dead? Has there been a massive genocide committed against the former Soviet people?

No. Not at all.

However I am fairly certain Iran does not want to have to deal with whatever is going on in Israel either.

Probably not. The main reason might very well be that whatever is going on IN Israel invariably spills across the borders...and in the ME, neighbors are much closer in many ways than what we know here in the US....even living 3 hours from the Mexican border, as I do, cannot be comparable to living in a middle eastern country, I am sure. Cause and effect does not regard national borders...many of Mexico's issues are caused by American problems and in some degree vice versa.

The idea of force, however, is part of the problem, not the solution....imho, that is.

Israel will never loose its weapons!!!!!

Really!!

Ofcourse Israel must be inspected.

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Originally posted by libertytoall

It's quite simple actually.. Anyone with half a brain would realize the difference. The muslim world has been trying to exterminate Jews for thousands of years. Leaders in Muslim countries openly call for the extermination of Israel followed by exterminating Jews. The Koran teaches this and their blessed Mohammed prophet made it his final order. Israel uses it's nuclear arsenal as a deterrent from being exterminated. Never has Israel or it's leaders called for the extermination of Muslims or any of it's neighbors.

Please cite sources in these unfounded claims. Please tell us precisely which Muslim countries' leaders are calling for this extermination of Jews.

Is Mohammed a good enough Muslim leader?

"The eleventh century saw Muslim pogroms against Jews in Spain; those occurred in Córdoba in 1011 and in Granada in 1066.[60] In the 1066 Granada massacre, a Muslim mob crucified the Jewish vizier Joseph ibn Naghrela and massacred about 4,000 Jews."

Please provide something besides the mis-translated quote from Iran's prime minister. And where exactly in the Koran does it call for this extermination? Could you please provide the passage # and even the quote if you have it?

The Hadith says "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews , when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews."

(According to Schweitzer and Perry, the hadith are "even more scathing (than the Quran) in attacking the Jews")

"The Quran associates Jews above all with rejection of God's prophets including Jesus and Muhammad, thus explaining their resistance to him personally. (Cf. Surah 2:87–91; 5:59, 61, 70, and 82.) It states that they are, together with outright idolators, the worst and most inveterate enemies of Islam, and thus will not only suffer eternally in Hell but in this world will be the most degraded of the Peoples of the Book, below even Christians, everywhere."

"During his wanderings, Maimonides also wrote The Yemen Epistle, a famous letter to the Jews of Yemen, who were then experiencing severe persecution at the hands of their Muslim rulers. In it, Maimonides describes his assessment of the treatment of the Jews at the hands of Muslims:

... on account of our sins God has cast us into the midst of this people, the nation of Ishmael [that is, Muslims], who persecute us severely, and who devise ways to harm us and to debase us.... No nation has ever done more harm to Israel. None has matched it in debasing and humiliating us. None has been able to reduce us as they have.... We have borne their imposed degradation, their lies, their absurdities, which are beyond human power to bear.... We have done as our sages of blessed memory have instructed us, bearing the lies and absurdities of Ishmael.... In spite of all this, we are not spared from the ferocity of their wickedness and their outbursts at any time. On the contrary, the more we suffer and choose to conciliate them, the more they choose to act belligerently toward us"

Furthermore, if the Muslim world has been trying to exterminate Jews for thousands of years, they've done a horrible job of it. Not to mention that Islam is only about 1500 years old, so it is an impossibility for Muslims to have been trying to exterminate Jews for thousands of years; this just shows your ignorance of history.

I'm not going to respond to that tone but you're wrong.

And if you actually knew any history, you'd know that Jews lived amongst the Muslims in the Middle East quite peacefully for most of the time

Actually less than half of that time was peaceful. Pipe down your tone of voice "If you actually knew any history.." How about a tall glass of ______ for you.

en.wikipedia.org...

double post sorry

reply to post by dontreally

You are a full blown propagandist. I wouldn't be surprised if you're getting paid to do this.

Right back at you, I hope they aren't paying you too much because you're not convincing anyone.

I get paid in chocolate covered peanuts

Why does Israel have nukes? To threaten? Or to dissuade others from threatening them?

The former! That's a fact.

Stating your opinion as fact does not actually make it a fact, it still remains your opinion.

Israle has nukes for various reasons, even though I have several issues with the terrorist state of Israel, I believe any nation has the right to DEFEND itself. But I do not support war mongering nations who constantly lie and demonize countries with propaganda and mistranslated statements.

Israel are the biggest hypocritse on the global scene with the United States, Russia, and China.

Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, and so on, has threatened or is currently threatening Israel with existential destruction. And you seek to enable them by criticizing Israel for it's much needed nuclear arsenal!

Why is this nuclear arsenal much needed? No one else in the region has a nuclear arsenal and only one nation on earth has ever used nuclear weapons, and it's not an Arab country. Get your head out of the sand and take a look around, got get some fresh air. The hate in your posts is very evident.

And to boot - you support Iran - a maniacal Islamist Shi'ite Regime, in their desire for nuclear energy: ignoring calls, made almost weekly now, for Israels destruction; ignoring the Shi'ite doctrine of the Imam Mahdi and the portents which precede his coming. Some of which have already been met (internecine fighting between Muslims, sufferring in Iraq, war in Syria)

I have made it quite clear that I am not an "Iran supporter" in this thread and many other threads. What I don't support is another war based on lies which will end up with more dead innocent people. You and your blind hatred for the Islamic faith and it's followers really shows your true colors.

I always chuckle when your hardline war mongers spew your hatred and call anyone who is against senseless wars an "Iran supporter" or "anti-semite" or "propagandist".

You are nothing but a propagandist bent on bending information.

You need to take a good, long look in to the mirror.

reply to post by Corruption Exposed

Right back at you, I hope they aren't paying you too much because you're not convincing anyone.

Little needs to be said to convince people of whats popularly believed. All you need do is keep up the tempo.

Stating your opinion as fact does not actually make it a fact, it still remains your opinion.

How can you say that is an opinion. That is a fact supported by geo-political reality. Why would Jews move themselves to Israel for any other reason but to live in a nation state of their own - in their ancient homeland. Why would they risk their lives knowing they're moving into the heart of Dar Al Islam - the Islamic world, knowing that all these nations, every member of the Arab league, aside from a few countries, has no diplomatic relations with them.

What you're accusing Israel of - of having malicious intent - is akin to accusing a white guy moving into a black ghetto with intentions of flaring up a race war - when hes the only white guy!

Why is this nuclear arsenal much needed? No one else in the region has a nuclear arsenal and only one nation on earth has ever used nuclear weapons, and it's not an Arab country. Get your head out of the sand and take a look around, got get some fresh air

I'm noticing some lethargy in this latest post of yours. Your arguing is usually better.

No. Israel needs a weapon as deadly as a nuke to keep off it's many enemies from preemptively attacking it, as they've done many times before.

The nuke option, or Samson Option, is to bring down the temple, so to speak, on everyone. If a Muslim country decides on attacking Israel with the intention of eliminating it - which would be an act of genocide, Israel would have the right to strike back with the most deadly means at their disposal. To date, no Muslim nation has been crazy enough to take such a risk.

But Iran, having a nuke themselves, could finish Israel off with just one. Instead of fighting a protracted war, one simple nuke could finish it. Yes, they would be courting a possible Israeli counter attack, but that would be worth it. One nuke of their would finish them off, where a protracted war takes quite a bit of time, and against an enemy that poses a nuclear option, that simply isn't fair.

And BTW - only decent and just people are allowed to have 'unfair' means at their disposals. In such a world as the one we live in, it is imperative - apparently lost on you - that Islamists not have nuclear weapons. Especially when Shi'ite Islam, the state religion of Iran, believes inducing a state of chaos will precipitate the coming of their messiah - the 12th Imam.

reply to post by Corruption Exposed

Dear Corruption Exposed,

Hello again, another thought provoking post, I see. But my thoughts on your post aren't clear and I hope you'll expound on them and set straight any errors in understanding I might make.

I get paid in chocolate covered peanuts

Yum, my prefence is for things with coconut, or maybe peanut butter cups. Maybe I can get in on your deal.

Israle has nukes for various reasons, even though I have several issues with the terrorist state of Israel, I believe any nation has the right to DEFEND itself. But I do not support war mongering nations who constantly lie and demonize countries with propaganda and mistranslated statements.

I take this to mean that you're Ok with Israel having nukes for defensive purposes, subject to your complaints about them.

Why is this nuclear arsenal much needed? No one else in the region has a nuclear arsenal. . .

That's an interesting question, which I'd like you to explore. (Oh, setting aside Iran because nobody knows what they've got, there is still Pakistan.) Why the need for nuclear weapons? I don't know, but a few possibilities come to mind. If several countries decided to attack simultaneously, I can see where they would want to close off some fronts of the battle so they can concentrate their troops in other areas. Or perhaps, they don't believe that the US will back them in any war. It's no good to say to Israel, "if someone drops a nuke on you first, you can be sure the US will help you." After a nuke or two, I would think Israel would be more or less finished. Or, maybe they are the small kid on the block and see nuclear weapons as an equalizer.

There are more possibilities, but I'm curious to know why you think they have them.

Israel are the biggest hypocritse on the global scene with the United States, Russia, and China.

Let's grant for this discussion that that is true. I'm not sure how that fits into weapons policy. You'll have to help me with that one.

What I don't support is another war based on lies which will end up with more dead innocent people.

I'm not sure I want to go into the question of whether WMDs were a lie, honestly believed faulty intelligence, or hiden or moved weapons before we got there. What I don't understand is the "dead innocent people" idea. Certainly, nobody likes that. But, how can a war be conducted without any civilian casualties? Of course, if you're against any war, that's fine, war is a terrible thing. But I'm curious, how is it to be prevented in this case?

Anyway, thanks for reading all this. I'm glad you're posting.

With respect,
Charles1952

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Corruption Exposed

 

Dear Corruption Exposed,

Hello again, another thought provoking post, I see.

But my thoughts on your post aren't clear and I hope you'll expound on them and set straight any errors in understanding I might make.

I get paid in chocolate covered peanuts

Yum, my prefence is for things with coconut, or maybe peanut butter cups. Maybe I can get in on your deal.

Israle has nukes for various reasons, even though I have several issues with the terrorist state of Israel, I believe any nation has the right to DEFEND itself. But I do not support war mongering nations who constantly lie and demonize countries with propaganda and mistranslated statements.

I take this to mean that you're Ok with Israel having nukes for defensive purposes, subject to your complaints about them.

Why is this nuclear arsenal much needed? No one else in the region has a nuclear arsenal. . .

That's an interesting question, which I'd like you to explore. (Oh, setting aside Iran because nobody knows what they've got, there is still Pakistan.) Why the need for nuclear weapons? I don't know, but a few possibilities come to mind. If several countries decided to attack simultaneously, I can see where they would want to close off some fronts of the battle so they can concentrate their troops in other areas. Or perhaps, they don't believe that the US will back them in any war. It's no good to say to Israel, "if someone drops a nuke on you first, you can be sure the US will help you." After a nuke or two, I would think Israel would be more or less finished. Or, maybe they are the small kid on the block and see nuclear weapons as an equalizer.

There are more possibilities, but I'm curious to know why you think they have them.

Israel are the biggest hypocritse on the global scene with the United States, Russia, and China.

Let's grant for this discussion that that is true. I'm not sure how that fits into weapons policy. You'll have to help me with that one.

What I don't support is another war based on lies which will end up with more dead innocent people.

I'm not sure I want to go into the question of whether WMDs were a lie, honestly believed faulty intelligence, or hiden or moved weapons before we got there. What I don't understand is the "dead innocent people" idea. Certainly, nobody likes that. But, how can a war be conducted without any civilian casualties? Of course, if you're against any war, that's fine, war is a terrible thing. But I'm curious, how is it to be prevented in this case?

Anyway, thanks for reading all this. I'm glad you're posting.

With respect,
Charles1952

My concern with Israel's possession of nuclear weapons is that they have used veiled threats of an offensive nature various times so I do not see their arsenal as a completely "defensive" nature. As I previously mentioned in the thread that there is the Samson option. Israel has not proven itself to be a very trustworthy nation so my opinion is that the hardline extremists who are running Israel cannot be trusted with their arsenal, regardless if they have ever used them in the past.

I am not a big fan of Pakistan having nukes either,but I also previously mentioned that they were forced to get nukes as a deterrent due to their neighbor India who had gone nuclear. I believe this topic would deserve a thread of it's own. Here is my post earlier on in this thread where I addressed the Pakistan/India situation with another member.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

My comment on Israel being among the world's hypocrites with their weapons policy is due to the fact that they will not allow inspections, yet they are threatening another nation for the same reason. In my opinion this is the action of a hypocrite.

I believe we will never agree on the WMD's fiasco, they kept on changing their reasons for going into Iraq, and from my research I have done over the years, it wasn't faulty intelligence. They new darn well that the information Colin Powell presented at the UN was fabricated. That presentation he gave was the performance of a lifetime and he deserves an Oscar for it. I honestly believe that Colin Powell feels some guilt for his participation in the Iraq fiasco.

Sorry if I did not answer all your questions and please feel free to ask me to further elaborate on any of the points we have mentioned.

Peace.