IAEA, Hypocrisy and Israeli Nukes.

[T-Rex]

In the 1973 War it was feared that the Israeli Army was on the verge of collapse and then nothing will stop Egypt to invade into the heart of Israel. If the government did delivered a massage to the Americans (and there controversies about it), it was in order to prevent the destruction of the country.

In any case, what blackmailing got to do with it? Even if accepting your argument, Egypt and Syria launched unprovoked attack on Israel after three years of a ceasefire, and Israel prevented them from defeating its forces, what exactly Israel blackmailed from them? Its total military defeat?

BTW, eventually, Israel win the 1973 War only by conventional capabilities and the war ended when the Israelis Army was only 100km from Cairo and 35km from Damascus.

This is the only case of "nuclear blackmail" you have got against Israel? for more than 40 years Israel is believed to have nukes and that is it? A threat to use WMD if it be defeated in a war more than 30 years ago? This is the main reason why Iran should develop nukes?

No, in 1973 the israeli army was not about to collapse, it faced defeat in Sinai. The message is clear, if its adversaries ever put israel in a position of where defeat is imminent israel will use its nukes, but if its neigbours are faced with defeats they have no such option to prevent the defeat. This nuclear blackmail of israel must end.

 

[nirreich]

No, in 1973 the israeli army was not about to collapse, it faced defeat in Sinai. The message is clear, if its adversaries ever put israel in a position of where defeat is imminent israel will use its nukes, but if its neigbours are faced with defeats they have no such option to prevent the defeat. This nuclear blackmail of israel must end.

Again, according to the reports the use with a threat of nuclear weapons (which is still far from using nukes) was allegedly delivered to the Americans when the Israeli leadership thought that the military is going to be defeated and nothing will stop the Arab armies to eliminate Israel. Of course today we know better but what we know now wan not known the Israel in 1973.

As I said, even if I agree with you presentation of the situation, this is hardly a nuclear blackmail. Israel prevented its military defeat, but never used the perception of it being a nuclear country to force the Arabs to jeopardise their own interests. Moreover, if Israel wanted to use nuclear blackmail then the logic thing to do is to declare that it is a nuclear weapons country, and as you well aware Israel behaved exactly to the contrary.

Furthermore the 1973 incident is an isolated one which present extreme circumstances, and you cannot use just one example to say that Israel use nuclear blackmail. If this is the excuse of Iran's nuclear ambitions then it is very feeble.

 

[T-Rex]

Again, according to the reports the use with a threat of nuclear weapons (which is still far from using nukes) was allegedly delivered to the Americans when the Israeli leadership thought that the military is going to be defeated and nothing will stop the Arab armies to eliminate Israel. Of course today we know better but what we know now wan not known the Israel in 1973.

As I said, even if I agree with you presentation of the situation, this is hardly a nuclear blackmail. Israel prevented its military defeat, but never used the perception of it being a nuclear country to force the Arabs to jeopardise their own interests. Moreover, if Israel wanted to use nuclear blackmail then the logic thing to do is to declare that it is a nuclear weapons country, and as you well aware Israel behaved exactly to the contrary.

Furthermore the 1973 incident is an isolated one which present extreme circumstances, and you cannot use just one example to say that Israel use nuclear blackmail. If this is the excuse of Iran's nuclear ambitions then it is very feeble.

There's no such thing as 'isolated' incident as far as threat from the israeli nukes is concerned. To a zionist the israeli nuclear blackmail will certainly look like a fair game, after all, a zionist qualifies as a champion in hypocrisy, but to the rest of the world, it is viewed as nuclear blackmail.

 

[nirreich]

There's no such thing as 'isolated' incident as far as threat from the israeli nukes is concerned. To a zionist the israeli nuclear blackmail will certainly look like a fair game, after all, a zionist qualifies as a champion in hypocrisy, but to the rest of the world, it is viewed as nuclear blackmail.

Of course it is isolated because this is the only example you have and it happened during a severe military conflict in extreme situation and almost 40 years ago. If this is not an isolated incident, that please define what an isolated incident is.

Israel cannot nuclear blackmail when it even does not declare it has nuclear weapons. How can it blackmail anyone with something it is not ready to admit it even has?

A nuclear blackmail is what Iran plans to do once it will successfully develop nuclear weapons: it will use it as a nuclear umbrella and deterrence for terror organisations operating against Israel, like Hamas and Hisbuallha, and for its terror group which aspire to overthrow Arab regimes in the ME. But of course judging from your anti-Semitism and double standards so far you do not have a problem with nuclear blackmail as long as Israel is not behind it.

 

[T-Rex]

Of course it is isolated because this is the only example you have and it happened during a severe military conflict in extreme situation and almost 40 years ago. If this is not an isolated incident, that please define what an isolated incident is.

Israel cannot nuclear blackmail when it even does not declare it has nuclear weapons. How can it blackmail anyone with something it is not ready to admit it even has?

A nuclear blackmail is what Iran plans to do once it will successfully develop nuclear weapons: it will use it as a nuclear umbrella and deterrence for terror organisations operating against Israel, like Hamas and Hisbuallha, and for its terror group which aspire to overthrow Arab regimes in the ME. But of course judging from your anti-Semitism and double standards so far you do not have a problem with nuclear blackmail as long as Israel is not behind it.

No it is not, what was true for Egypt, is true for Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and even Iran. So, the threat from these israeli nukes is unacceptable.

 

[nirreich]

No it is not, what was true for Egypt, is true for Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and even Iran. So, the threat from these israeli nukes is unacceptable.

What threat? That if Egypt, Iran, KSA, Jordan and Syria launch a surprise military attack to defeat Israel, Israel might threat to use nukes because it might think (with good reasons) that they want to destroy it?

I have an idea: the Arabs and Iran avoid trying to defeat Israel and threat its existence and they can relax and not fear any Israeli nuclear threat. Can they hold their ambitions to attack and defeat Israel and destroy it? If not, do you suggest that Israel should commit suicide a let the Arabs defeat it?

 

[Zabaniyah]

Well, it's understandable why Israel would want to go for nukes. They had it for a long time. Maintained 'opacity'. Then, the USA would have no problem.

They have neither officially declared nukes nor denied them. Only they have hinted them.

Although, there's bias on the US side. Why all the fuss over Iran's nuclear program? Iran has its own reasons to go for nuclear (both civilian and military) development. It has a long and powerful history where USA was not even alive back then.

The key question is: Why should Israel be the only Middle Eastern nation with nuclear weapons?

It becomes unfair for the other 'wannabe' regional powers.

Nuclear weapons are not for conventional purposes, it's a deterrent for which it is used as the last resort.

Should IAEA deal with Israel's nukes? Frankly, it's an irrelevant question since it's more or less an irrelevant organization.

 

[nirreich]

Well, it's understandable why Israel would want to go for nukes. They had it for a long time. Maintained 'opacity'. Then, the USA would have no problem.

They have neither officially declared nukes nor denied them. Only they have hinted them.

Although, there's bias on the US side. Why all the fuss over Iran's nuclear program? Iran has its own reasons to go for nuclear (both civilian and military) development. It has a long and powerful history where USA was not even alive back then.

The key question is: Why should Israel be the only Middle Eastern nation with nuclear weapons?

It becomes unfair for the other 'wannabe' regional powers.

Nuclear weapons are not for conventional purposes, it's a deterrent for which it is used as the last resort.

Should IAEA deal with Israel's nukes? Frankly, it's an irrelevant question since it's more or less an irrelevant organization.

In a perfect world of liberty and democracy maybe the considerations you presented were relevant. The world is not based on justice and what a country has the right to have. It is based on balance of powers and the main objective should be the preserve its stability even in the price that rogue regimes like Iran are be blocked from developing nuclear weapons. This is a price we definitely can live with, while nuclear war seems a bit bigger cost to humanity than that.

 

[Zabaniyah]

In a perfect world of liberty and democracy maybe the considerations you presented were relevant. The world is not based on justice and what a country has the right to have. It is based on balance of powers and the main objective should be the preserve its stability even in the price that rogue regimes like Iran are be blocked from developing nuclear weapons. This is a price we definitely can live with, while nuclear war seems a bit bigger cost to humanity than that.

Iran is a rogue regime in what sense?

There's no such thing as a 'perfect world'.

From the American point of view or from the practical Israeli point of view? You know, it was said that Israel did help Iran during the Iran-Iraq war

Might as well you two find something in common rather than always licking Uncle Sam's boot

It was the US that had a huge grudge against the Iranian regime for over 30 years, not exactly the other way around. Iran may not actually have or be willing to go for active nukes, but they have the finger prints for the technology.

Even during the Clinton administration, they used a Russian scientist to give Iran fake nuclear technology information, and the Iranians figured it out from there.
Bill Clinton and CIA Gave Iranians Blueprint for Nuclear Bomb - National Ledger

There are plenty of examples of sheer stupidity, fanboyism and over confidence of the American axis of leadership.

If Uncle Sam does keep threatening Iran, then they might as well go for them. The only thing the Americans are doing now is arming neighboring Gulf States and antagonize them against Iran.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...saudi-arabia/2011/12/28/gIQAN55CNP_story.html

The Middle East is a big source of revenue for the US-based arms manufacturers, one of the few viable export oriented industries in the US. And considering the bleak economic outlook of the US, this trend will continue for a long time. The US cannot afford to open a new war front in the Middle East.

My recommendation to Israel is to find common ground with Iran, rather than always licking America's boot 24/7. They have their own issues against that may not exactly be relevant to Israel.

 

[nirreich]

Iran is a rogue regime in what sense?

There's no such thing as a 'perfect world'.

From the American point of view or from the practical Israeli point of view? You know, it was said that Israel did help Iran during the Iran-Iraq war

Might as well you two find something in common rather than always licking Uncle Sam's boot

It was the US that had a huge grudge against the Iranian regime for over 30 years, not exactly the other way around. Iran may not actually have or be willing to go for active nukes, but they have the finger prints for the technology.

Even during the Clinton administration, they used a Russian scientist to give Iran fake nuclear technology information, and the Iranians figured it out from there.
Bill Clinton and CIA Gave Iranians Blueprint for Nuclear Bomb - National Ledger

There are plenty of examples of sheer stupidity, fanboyism and over confidence of the American axis of leadership.

If Uncle Sam does keep threatening Iran, then they might as well go for them. The only thing the Americans are doing now is arming neighboring Gulf States and antagonize them against Iran.
AP sources: US to sell $30 billion worth of F-15 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia - The Washington Post

The Middle East is a big source of revenue for the US-based arms manufacturers, one of the few viable export oriented industries in the US. And considering the bleak economic outlook of the US, this trend will continue for a long time. The US cannot afford to open a new war front in the Middle East.

My recommendation to Israel is to find common ground with Iran, rather than always licking America's boot 24/7. They have their own issues against that may not exactly be relevant to Israel.

Most of what you wrote is irrelevant to the subject, so I will just follow your last point: What common ground Israel should find with a regime which threatens to destroy it and refuse to accept the legitimacy of its existence?

 

[Zabaniyah]

Most of what you wrote is irrelevant to the subject, so I will just follow your last point: What common ground Israel should find with a regime which threatens to destroy it and refuse to accept the legitimacy of its existence?

What just what is 'irrelevant' according to you? Bill Clinton did give nuclear technology to Iran just to display he's smart.

Does the 'wipe Israel off the map' motto have to strictly apply realistically?

Even if Iran nukes Israel, it'd be the end of Iran as well.

I suppose the next thing you'd say is something like: "But Iran follows a suicide bomber mentality!"

Ah...predictable

And as I said before, nukes are the last resort and a deterrent. Not a first hand weapon to apply.


By your logic, given that Pakistan has nuclear weapons, it'll also intend to annihilate India at first hand. It's been over a decade since they had nukes, and yet not a single nuke has been used in South Asia and beyond.

North Korea is a 'rogue nation' according to the fanboys in Washington. But did they wipe out South Korea?

Given that Iran sees future threats to its sovereignty (they'll never intend to be a blind puppet of the US), and that it will actively develop nuclear weapons, there's nothing you can do about it accept whine.

My point is that the US's strategy in the Middle East is thoroughly screwed. That is the result of not tightening the resulting loose ends of the Cold War.

The resultant Iraq war was a genocide.

Israel may exercise alternative options other than only through the US. I know it may sound unconventional and difficult, but it doesn't hurt to be flexible.

 

[nirreich]

What just what is 'irrelevant' according to you? Bill Clinton did give nuclear technology to Iran just to display he's smart.

Does the 'wipe Israel off the map' motto have to strictly apply realistically?

Even if Iran nukes Israel, it'd be the end of Iran as well.

I suppose the next thing you'd say is something like: "But Iran follows a suicide bomber mentality!"

Ah...predictable

And as I said before, nukes are the last resort and a deterrent. Not a first hand weapon to apply.


By your logic, given that Pakistan has nuclear weapons, it'll also intend to annihilate India at first hand. It's been over a decade since they had nukes, and yet not a single nuke has been used in South Asia and beyond.

North Korea is a 'rogue nation' according to the fanboys in Washington. But did they wipe out South Korea?

Given that Iran sees future threats to its sovereignty (they'll never intend to be a blind puppet of the US), and that it will actively develop nuclear weapons, there's nothing you can do about it accept whine.

My point is that the US's strategy in the Middle East is thoroughly screwed. That is the result of not tightening the resulting loose ends of the Cold War.

The resultant Iraq war was a genocide.

Israel may exercise alternative options other than only through the US. I know it may sound unconventional and difficult, but it doesn't hurt to be flexible.

First, you did not answer my question.

Second, I am happy to see that I am completely dispensable in this discussion - you ask the questions and answer instead of me. It is almost rude of me to interrupt in your discussion between yourself and the imaginable myself. Will it not be better let me to ask my questions and give my answers? It will save you the effort.

I never said that Iran will launch a nuclear attack against Israel the minute it has nukes. This option will be more realistic once the Iranian be able to develop a nuclear warhead, but Israel has a good deterrence against this kind of scenario. This is another reason why Israel should wait for a normalisation process in the ME before accepting NWFZ in the region. Even the Iranian regime is not that stupid to launch a nuclear attack against Israel.

However, Israel still should whatever in its power to prevent a nuclear Iran. Iran will use its nuclear capabilities as a deterrence not just against attempts for a regime change in Tehran but also for Israeli counter attacks against its terror organisations such as Hizbuallha in Lebanon. This situation will enable Iran with the help of all the radical factions and regimes in the ME to terrorise Israel and maintain Israel in a constant emergency situation.

Furthermore, the nuclear umbrella will also give stronger motivations for Iran's current attempts to undermine moderate Arab regimes: from Yemen to Lebanon and Bahrain. With it nuclear status, Iran will move with stronger motivation to place radical regimes also in KSA and Egypt.

Moreover, Iran with nuclear weapons will immediately cause a chain reaction and Arab countries like KSA and Egypt which fear Iran's influence will also develop nuclear weapons. This will create a nuclear ME that in the light of its instability could easily deteriorate into a nuclear war. As was shown in the past some of the leaders in the ME, such as Qaddafi and Saddam Hussain and the current leader of Sudan, did not see any problem using extreme measures. In addition nuclear ME will be the end of the current nuclear non-proliferation efforts and every rogue country will try to develop nuclear weapons: from Venezuela to Myanmar and Zimbabwe.

The US with the help of Israel is trying to prevent exactly this devastating consequences and stopping Iran. There cannot be any settlement with the Islamic Revolutionary regime in Iran which aspire to establish as many as radical Islamic regimes, mainly in the ME and take control over the ME oil reserves. The US is doing the right thing by blocking the aspirations of this terror regime and considering the option of a military strike against its nuclear programme.

For the sake of human kind, freedom and democracy, we should all hope the the leader of free nations, the US, will win in this conflict against the rogue regime of Iran which oppress all free spirits and basic human rights, and which responsible for the murder of innocent lives around the world and of thousands of Iranian people.

 

[T-Rex]

First, you did not answer my question.

Yeah, it's your old trick, nobody answers your crap only you answer with your load of crap!

Second, I am happy to see that I am completely dispensable in this discussion - you ask the questions and answer instead of me. It is almost rude of me to interrupt in your discussion between yourself and the imaginable myself. Will it not be better let me to ask my questions and give my answers? It will save you the effort.

When the liar is struck by truth, the truth appears to him as an imagination, it's nothing new.

I never said that Iran will launch a nuclear attack against Israel the minute it has nukes. This option will be more realistic once the Iranian be able to develop a nuclear warhead,

Do you want to say that israel does not have the 'Samson Option'?

However, Israel still should whatever in its power to prevent a nuclear Iran. Iran will use its nuclear capabilities as a deterrence not just against attempts for a regime change in Tehran but also for Israeli counter attacks against its terror organisations such as Hizbuallha in Lebanon. This situation will enable Iran with the help of all the radical factions and regimes in the ME to terrorise Israel and maintain Israel in a constant emergency situation.

There's nothing wrong in trying to stop the illegal attempts by rogue nations to topple foreign governments. As for Hezbollah, it is the perfect antidote to the israeli terrorism.

Furthermore, the nuclear umbrella will also give stronger motivations for Iran's current attempts to undermine moderate Arab regimes: from Yemen to Lebanon and Bahrain. With it nuclear status, Iran will move with stronger motivation to place radical regimes also in KSA and Egypt.

Arab people view rulers like Mubarak and Saleh as tyrannical despots whose mission is to plunder the wealth of the states, but of course, to the zionists they are 'moderate regimes' and that tells what the zionists are made of.

Moreover, Iran with nuclear weapons will immediately cause a chain reaction

How do you say that Iran's drive to acquire the nukes is not part of the chain reaction started by israel?

The US with the help of Israel is trying to prevent exactly this devastating consequences and stopping Iran. There cannot be any settlement with the Islamic Revolutionary regime in Iran which aspire to establish as many as radical Islamic regimes, mainly in the ME and take control over the ME oil reserves. The US is doing the right thing by blocking the aspirations of this terror regime and considering the option of a military strike against its nuclear programme.

If israel and the US can establish and nurture despots and thieves as rulers why can't Iran even wish to establish Islamic governments?

For the sake of human kind, freedom and democracy,.

Just how many despots and criminals have you propped up with the help of the US so far, for the sake of democracy, freedom and human rights?

 

[nirreich]

Yeah, it's your old trick, nobody answers your crap only you answer with your load of crap!



When the liar is struck by truth, the truth appears to him as an imagination, it's nothing new.



Do you want to say that israel does not have the 'Samson Option'?



There's nothing wrong in trying to stop the illegal attempts by rogue nations to topple foreign governments. As for Hezbollah, it is the perfect antidote to the israeli terrorism.



Arab people view rulers like Mubarak and Saleh as tyrannical despots whose mission is to plunder the wealth of the states, but of course, to the zionists they are 'moderate regimes' and that tells what the zionists are made of.




How do you say that Iran's drive to acquire the nukes is not part of the chain reaction started by israel?



If israel and the US can establish and nurture despots and thieves as rulers why can't Iran even wish to establish Islamic governments?




Just how many despots and criminals have you propped up with the help of the US so far, for the sake of democracy, freedom and human rights?

If you so smart and know it all, then why every time you are asked to explain your pompous statements all you can do is repeat the same old crap you posted before, but you never deal with the questions surrounding your arguments.

Just go back in this thread and see that I refuted all your Anti-Semite nonsense: that Iran wants nukes because of Israel, about Israel's allegedly WMD, and about the dire situation of the ME and the responsibility for this state of affair of the countries in this region.

In this post, I clearly pointed to the devastating scenario if Iran develops nuclear weapons, and you do not deny it, so I do not know why you make all this fas. You clearly made your point that you want Iran with nukes in the name of "justice" even if it means a nuclear war and a catastrophe. In you eyes this is a price worth paying. So at least stop pretend to speak for the oppressed people in the ME because if we follow you plan most of them will stop to exist.

 

[T-Rex]

If you so smart and know it all, then why every time you are asked to explain your pompous statements all you can do is repeat the same old crap you posted before, but you never deal with the questions surrounding your arguments.

Just go back in this thread and see that I refuted all your Anti-Semite nonsense: that Iran wants nukes because of Israel, about Israel's allegedly WMD, and about the dire situation of the ME and the responsibility for this state of affair of the countries in this region.

In this post, I clearly pointed to the devastating scenario if Iran develops nuclear weapons, and you do not deny it, so I do not know why you make all this fas. You clearly made your point that you want Iran with nukes in the name of "justice" even if it means a nuclear war and a catastrophe. In you eyes this is a price worth paying. So at least stop pretend to speak for the oppressed people in the ME because if we follow you plan most of them will stop to exist.

Why is it that every time you're asked questions you evade those questions and repeat your lies? I ask you again, do you want to say that israel does not have the 'Samson option'? What exactly do you find irrelevant in what zabanya has said and why is it irrelevant? What gives israel the right to prevent others from developing a deterrent to israel's nuclear threat?