Quietly, U.s. Prepares For Israel Strike On Iran

[abu afak]

QUIETLY, U.S. PREPARES FOR ISRAEL STRIKE ON IRAN


WASHINGTON [MENL] -- The United States has been examining the prospect that Israel will attack Iranian nuclear facilities in an attempt to prevent the Islamic republic from completing an atomic bomb as early as this year.

U.S. analysts and government sources said the Bush administration has discussed the prospect of an Israeli air strike at several levels of government. They said the issue has been examined in terms of the diplomatic, military and security implications for the United States, particularly its military presence in Iraq and the Persian Gulf region.

The issue of Iran's nuclear weapons program was discussed by President George Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon during the latter's visit to the White House on April 14. The sources said the two men were alone during the brief discussion in an effort by the president to gauge a likely Israeli response to the completion of an Iranian nuclear bomb.

"It would be intolerable for the Middle East if they [Iran] get a nuclear weapon," Bush said after meeting Sharon.

http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2004/may/05_07_2.html

[L@mplighterM]

Nuke Tehran and call it a day!

If that doesn’t stop construction on the reactor take it out as well.

[Oh Jerusalem]

Maybe we can dig a tunnel from here all the way underneath Iran's nuclear facilities, fill it up with dyanamite and boom. :rolleyes:

[Mil]

It will never happen.

[Mediocrates]

Israel would literally have to be insane to attack Iran at George Bush's request. If Bush thinks it's so 'intolerable' then he should do something since clearly Israel would suffer the consequences anyhow. At worst the US would get drawn into another regional conflict.

We tend to want to think that somehow Iran is different, that they're some massive magical force unlike Iraq and that they (Iran) have this incredible military force. That's simply not the case. But sadly it's simply not relevant either.

What is relevant is that Europe and Russia have already decided that Iran shall have nuclear weapons - they're merely pretending about how best to cover that effort with some kind of plausibe deniability. The IAEA is nothing more than window dressing so the EU can claim they had good intentions after the fact. But the fact is, Iran will have a fully functioning nuclear capability in no more than 3 years and possibly less. In fact if I had to gamble I'd say that the EU is already working with Iran on developing all of the other technologies such as electronics, targetting, manufacturing, telemetry. The Russian ploy to develop 5 or 6 'peaceful use' nuclear power plants is a red herring since Iran is already working with Pakistan to develop the nuclear technology. The Russian power plants and EU technology will serve to weaponize those Pakistani derived lab experiments.

One might ask why would Europe do this? I think the clearest answers are:

The EU views Iranian threats in terms of exporting the Islamic Revolution through terrorism and low level warfare. The EU position is that Iran is not likely to use nuclear weapons against the EU or major EU partners in order to further the Islamic Revolution.

Israel on the other hand is entirely expendable. In fact Israel's destruction fits in rather well with the EU's strategic doctrine of Arabo-Islamic appeasement at arms' length.

The EU figures that a weaponized nuclear capability is a 'safer' bet than a terrorist with a crude nuke in a box truck. EU technology will serve to weaponize nuclear tech which amounts to rendering devices smaller, more reliable, more predictable, requiring less fissile material. This means that Iran would be more likely to posit nuclear weapons as a 'standard' strategic deployable threat as opposed to rogue threats.

Cold War - 2, the new proxy. The EU will effectively set up the Iranian strategic nuclear threat as the new stratefic opponent to the US in order to bolster its (EU) own strategic opposition to the US. Moreover, as we already see the US has few effective intelligence assets in the Arab/Farsi world to carry on an effective covert network against it or its EU sponsors. This is the EU's most effective articulation of their opposition to a unipolar world lead by the US. The EU can't confront the US directly so it will use Iran as a foil for that. It will also attempt to pry Pakistan lose from the Us orbit by destabilizing the government there and leading to the eventual success of Islamic fundamentalists there. This will tend to place further stress on US involvement in west Asia, where it is hoped that the US will eventually withdraw. To the EU, a nuclear armed fundamentalist middle east/west Asia is preferable to US influence there, to say nothing of the presence of Jews in Israel which is anathema to the political goals of the EU in the region as well.

The Wahabi see-saw. Last but not least the EU will bolster the other theofcratic regime in the region, Iran in opposition to the Saudis. Neither state can affford either a strong secular Iraq nor a weak theocratic opponent in the region. The balance is terror(ism) must be maintained. In addition, the Iranians have zero compunctions to squashing their own internal problems absolutely so in a race to see which one, Saudi Arabia or Iran will survive their own internal problems, the Iranians will win. This will result in a progressive destruction of Saudi society and political strength until the ruling family is exterminated and the entire country is transferred to Wahabi- Osma aligned politcal control. Not only may could this seriously cripple world oil markets and probably result in a severe protracted decline of the US economy it would provide another front from which the US will retreat. Again, the EU and the region itself would rather see a severely repressive Taleban like Saudi Arabia than it accepts US relationships with the current Saudi regime.

[John]

In the past Iran has said that they would use nukes on Israel when acquired.

[Oh Jerusalem]

In the past Iran has said that they would use nukes on Israel when acquired.
Correct. They even had it painted on their long range missiles during a military parade in Teheran a few years ago. (Since the press then got hold of the pictures, they've kept their missiles clean as a whistle since then).

Medicrates, Israel would indeed be crazy if they did it at Bush's insistance. The question is whether we should be doing this irregardless of any other country's opinions or requests.

[Macc]

Iran with Nukes is like a baby with a Ketchup spray bottle; either way it's gona be a mess.

[tandem]

the big question is how to do it. iran learned from the osirak bombing. the iranian facilities are deep underground and surrounded by anti-aircraft missile salvos. the only plausible way is some kind of internal sabotage. israel did this with the osirak core when they bombed parts of the reactor in france. that didn't stop iraq and they decided to accept a damage core. or maybe israel fighters can somehow fly over iran, get through all the anti-aircraft missiles, and drop a couple of bunkerbusters on the suspected sites.

and suppose israel succeeds doing that, can you imagine the international condemnation? i would hope the US will side with israel this time, unlike when israel bombed osirak the americans were among the first countries to condemn israel. the iranian reaction also remains to be seen. as long as it's internal sabotage the iranians will really have to prove israel did it whereas with an air strike it's very obvious who has the capability to be behind it.

[takeo]

if Israel attacks Iran Iran would use it as an excuse to bomb Israel as well, it feels relatively secure since Israel can not reach Iran overland. It would also harm Israel's relations with the EU, its most important trade partner, even further.

Bush is not going to attack Iran either, noone, neither in the us nor his allies, would accept another even more difficult war in these circumstances (cfr. the war in Iraq)

the EU doesn't want Iranian nukes, not officially and not for real either. They know Iran still has relations with groups such as hesbollah and is situated in a difficult region. Besides all this we're aware the us could abuse this fact for legitimising an aggression against Iran. That's why the EU doesn't even help Iran to devellop nuclear technology for peacefull goals. besides this in Europe since Tchernobyl many people are questioning the use of nuclear technology for generating energy, it's also a very disturbing method for the environment. (nuclear waste).
Iran is not an ally of the European Union, there are too much disputes in many issues (for example human rights), it is however an important trade-partner and we do not want to see Iran destabilised, it may be a fundamentalist country but it is not supporting terror against the Western world. and of course we can use our relations with Iran to gain influence in the region at the expence of the us, which dominates most of the region. (more or less the same situation as existed with saddam Houssein and still exists with Syria)

Russia is another matter, it sees Iran as an ally in the region, against us-dominated azerbaidjan and against chechen terrorists(supported by Saoudi arabia), who do not get support from Iran. Iran is a Russian ally in the Muslim world and the caspian region, one they can trust, and besides this an important tradepartner. Russians don't care too much about human rights

[MichaelC]

.....it may be a fundamentalist country but it is not supporting terror against the Western world.
I am now utterly convinced that taco, if not all fronce, is from another planet.

[MGB8]

Didn't they say that Iraq would just use an Israeli attack as pretense to bomb Israel? Hmm...

Taco just wants Iran to have nukes in the hope that they would be used to kill Jews and Israelis.

Of course, what he should realize, but doesn't, is the more likely place for that bomb to end up, given relative access to entry into countries and security precautions - would be EUROPE - likely via train to France or Germany.

Oh well, let the Europeans appease away. It will be their nuclear barbacue.

[tandem]

it may be a fundamentalist country but it is not supporting terror against the Western world.
in your view israel isn't a part of the "western world", despite the fact that it's the only democratic nation in the middle east with western values.

[Semsem]

<<I am now utterly convinced that taco, if not all fronce, is from another planet.<<

Oh so I am not the only one who thinks that Taco is a meschuggene nut? He even lies and distorts Jewish and Israeli history. I find it disgusting.

[Semsem]

>>[QUOTE=takeo]if Israel attacks Iran Iran would use it as an excuse to bomb Israel as well, it feels relatively secure since Israel can not reach Iran overland. It would also harm Israel's relations with the EU, its most important trade partner, even further.<<

Takeo do me a favour. Take the EU and shove them up ......... you know where.

When Israel bombed the Iraqi reactor Europe also screamed and yelled. Europe will get theirs one day ......you watch.

[Semsem]

Iran has said they want to destroy Israel.

[Semsem]

Yes Taco thinks Iran is not supporting terror against Israel either!!! Nor the Jews in Argentina who were attacked twice by Iran. He lies out of his nose.

[Oh Jerusalem]

I am now utterly convinced that taco, if not all fronce, is from another planet.
He warped here.

[takeo]

I am now utterly convinced that taco, if not all fronce, is from another planet.

and yet it's true, Iran doesn'tc support terrorism directed against the us or Western Europe.

Taco just wants Iran to have nukes in the hope that they would be used to kill Jews and Israelis.

Of course, what he should realize, but doesn't, is the more likely place for that bomb to end up, given relative access to entry into countries and security precautions - would be EUROPE - likely via train to France or Germany.

Oh well, let the Europeans appease away. It will be their nuclear barbacue.

you didn't even read my posts that's obvious.


in your view israel isn't a part of the "western world", despite the fact that it's the only democratic nation in the middle east with western values.

many israeli's have sefardim origin which are not western by any standard, and most ashkenazi's originate in Eastern europe which isn't really western either, neither are the Russians and the palestinian minority.
ok, fine, Israel had a lot of western influences and adopted the European political system, but it still doesn't make Israel a western nation.



Oh so I am not the only one who thinks that Taco is a meschuggene nut? He even lies and distorts Jewish and Israeli history. I find it disgusting.

you're the most meschugge here around.


When Israel bombed the Iraqi reactor Europe also screamed and yelled. Europe will get theirs one day ......you watch.

you mean Israeli attack? don't be ridiculous man...

[Barak]

many israeli's have sefardim origin which are not western by any standard, and most ashkenazi's originate in Eastern europe which isn't really western either, neither are the Russians and the palestinian minority.
ok, fine, Israel had a lot of western influences and adopted the European political system, but it still doesn't make Israel a western nation.

So European countries also cease to be western in a couple of years with all the muslims being there, won't they?

[Mira~]

and of course we can use our relations with Iran to gain influence in the region at the expence of the us, which dominates most of the region. (more or less the same situation as existed with saddam Houssein and still exists with Syria)


Right or wrong, this is what it all comes down to, doesn't it? Takeo, I realize that I still haven't responded to you in the other thread. Your posts take a bit more time to respond to and it's not the kind of time I have now because I am leaving the country for two years in a week. :eek: But you should see a documentary that is out on DVD now about Robert McNamara, US Secretary of Defense under Kennedy. We now have letters from Kruschev to Castro where Castro tells Kruschev that he is willing to lauch nuclear missles already on the island at the United States. Kruschev reminds him that if they were to do that, the United States would respond by completely annihilating Cuba. Castro responded by saying that he undserstood and that he was willing to allow Cuba to be destroyed if it meant that he could destroy the US in the process. Talk about being a martyr for the cause!

Also, you have been to Iran and potentially elsewhere in the ME. You should go to Israel too, and you should take a tour of the seamline so that you can understand the terrain better and how the Israeli and Palestinian villages are situated. You are pretty good on Iraq and Chechnya, but please do not be insulted whe I say that you could be better informed on the Israeli-Arab conflict.

[Binyamin]

Europe needs to have a strong relationship and large investments in Iran, so that they can have popular support for blocking American action there. They are intersted in challenging America's might, and while they cannot do that militarily, this allows them to do it diplomatically. This is also why France is increaasing thier investments in Iran.

Israel or America can e-bomb Iran. Its the ultimate surgical device that the left has been dreaming of. There will not be any civilian (or military) casualties [unfortunately for them, that also means no heart-breaking pictures, but that's better for us]. There will not be any Iranian response, military or otherwise.

[Mediocrates]

So European countries also cease to be western in a couple of years with all the muslims being there, won't they?


Tak's critique is straight up ethno-racism. It's politics defined by racial boundaries. It's nonsense.

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by Oh Jerusalem
He warped here..

That certainly would explain the "warped" in his viewpoint.

[takeo]

So European countries also cease to be western in a couple of years with all the muslims being there, won't they?

perhaps some large cities such as Marseille or Brussels, but certainly not the entire country, where they're still a small minority.


Takeo, I realize that I still haven't responded to you in the other thread. Your posts take a bit more time to respond to and it's not the kind of time I have now because I am leaving the country for two years in a week.


I have unsufficient time as well.

But you should see a documentary that is out on DVD now about Robert McNamara, US Secretary of Defense under Kennedy. We now have letters from Kruschev to Castro where Castro tells Kruschev that he is willing to lauch nuclear missles already on the island at the United States. Kruschev reminds him that if they were to do that, the United States would respond by completely annihilating Cuba. Castro responded by saying that he undserstood and that he was willing to allow Cuba to be destroyed if it meant that he could destroy the US in the process. Talk about being a martyr for the cause!


Castro saw the missiles as the ultimate protection, he didn't believe Cuba would be safe once they were removed. For Krutshev it was all part of a strategical game, protect Castro while at the same time pressuring the us and forcing them to remove their missiles from the Russian-Turkish border.


Also, you have been to Iran and potentially elsewhere in the ME. You should go to Israel too, and you should take a tour of the seamline so that you can understand the terrain better and how the Israeli and Palestinian villages are situated. You are pretty good on Iraq and Chechnya, but please do not be insulted whe I say that you could be better informed on the Israeli-Arab conflict.

i've been to Israel a couple of years ago, I've even been for a short time to the occupied territories. of course I don't know Israel as well as you do by visiting it one time, what I had was an impression and lots of information, it was not as I imagined, before my visit i wasn't really interested in the israeli/palestinian conflict. it was of course impressive to seee an entirely Jewish country, but too much disturbing things, especially in the occupied territories and especially the very racist attitude of many Israeli citizens. (it was before the second intifadeh by the way)

Posts: 322 Europe needs to have a strong relationship and large investments in Iran, so that they can have popular support for blocking American action there. They are intersted in challenging America's might, and while they cannot do that militarily, this allows them to do it diplomatically. This is also why France is increaasing thier investments in Iran.

it's one of the rasons, but most importantly Europe is a neighbour of the middle East and this trade and exchange benefits us as well, what happens in Iran is an internal matter, but Iran wants friendly relations with Europe and doesn't harm us (on the contrary to the Taliban that harboured all kind of terrorist groups), so why should we harm them?

Israel or America can e-bomb Iran. Its the ultimate surgical device that the left has been dreaming of. There will not be any civilian (or military) casualties [unfortunately for them, that also means no heart-breaking pictures, but that's better for us]. There will not be any Iranian response, military or otherwise.

the informatisation process isn't very devellopped yet, so it'll be an easy target.

Tak's critique is straight up ethno-racism. It's politics defined by racial boundaries. It's nonsense.

it's just a fact that the western victims are ALWAYS more valuable than middle-eastern ones (which includes israel), while middle Eastern o eastern european victims are more valuable than African or Asian victims (who cares if yesterday a couple of thousands peasants drawned in Bangladesh, in Europe it would just get half a minut of attention, in the us probably nothing)
I didn't invent this and I don't think it's fair, but that's how the world looks today ;. (just compare all the attention 11th september got to the millions of congolese who were warvictims in the last year alone...)

[Mira~]

Castro saw the missiles as the ultimate protection, he didn't believe Cuba would be safe once they were removed. For Krutshev it was all part of a strategical game, protect Castro while at the same time pressuring the us and forcing them to remove their missiles from the Russian-Turkish border.

No, you didn't read what I wrote, did you? See the film. Again, because I know that we all skip over words when we are on our way to say something ourselves....

you should see a documentary that is out on DVD now about Robert McNamara, US Secretary of Defense under Kennedy. We now have letters from Kruschev to Castro where Castro tells Kruschev that he is willing to lauch nuclear missles already on the island at the United States. Kruschev reminds him that if they were to do that, the United States would respond by completely annihilating Cuba. Castro responded by saying that he undserstood and that he was willing to allow Cuba to be destroyed if it meant that he could destroy the US in the process.


i've been to Israel a couple of years ago, I've even been for a short time to the occupied territories. of course I don't know Israel as well as you do by visiting it one time, what I had was an impression and lots of information, it was not as I imagined, before my visit i wasn't really interested in the israeli/palestinian conflict. it was of course impressive to seee an entirely Jewish country, but too much disturbing things, especially in the occupied territories and especially the very racist attitude of many Israeli citizens. (it was before the second intifadeh by the way)

I don't care if the people there are cursing and craping in the streets. The point was that you need to have a strategic understanding of the actual terrain in order to understand what can and cannot be compromised from a security standpoint. It wasn't meant to illicit an emotional response.

As far as your comments on French relations with Iran, they came up in the other thread as well, and they have been echoed by Oliver. That France's interest in world affairs is competing for influence with the US via the EU and UN is not news to most of us in the United States. I've been saying it on this board for a long time. But the depths that France has been sinking to is what is surprising and dangerous at this point in time. I don't care that Chirac didn't support the war. That's history now. It's time to deal with the present and do what is in the best interests of the Iraqi people. You and Oliver want to gloat that things are rough going a year and half after the invasion? That's just stupid. You both should wait five years to gloat, but in the meantime, tell your stupid leader not to sabatoge the efforts of those countries who are trying to stabalize Iraq and make it a successful mission. France doesn't need to follow Jordan's lead, it just needs to shut the hell up!

[MGB8]

You've been to Israel and seen "racist attitudes" huh?

What exactly constitutes a racist attitude to you, Takeo?

Because its not the Jews who are saying that all Israel should be cleansed of the ethnic minority on the land. Its the Pal Arabs.

Its not the Jews who in their textbooks teach that the other side is not entitled to any land and are by nature coniving, immoral, and "dogs and pigs." That's the arabs, too.

Its not the Jews who deny the other side access to their holy places - the Muslims control Harm-al-shariff or however you put it. When Jordan ruled East Jerusalem, Jewish sites were desecrated, and the Pal Arabs have done the same, and some argue that they are doing this to the temple mount as we speak.

Most of the Israelis I know are the opposite of racist. In fact, I think that its the world that imposes a racist double standard by expecting, and thus forgiving, the Arabs to act like Barbarians with their suicide bombings and attempted genocide, while the Jews are expected to behave better than any European nation ever has.

I think what you consider racism is Israelis valuing their LIVES over Palestinian nationalism and ease of living. In which case, I hope the same situation occurs to you, and you volunteer to die to make another persons life a little easier.

In fact, I know that there are many people awaiting organ transplants, takeo. How dare you live when others could get out of bed with your organs! You should committ suicide and donate your liver and heart and kidneys, takeo - then you'd live up to the standards you impose on Israel and its citizens.

[SteveMetch]

President Bush is laying low on any new foreign policy thrusts until after the election.

If John Kerry is elected then it’s only a mater of time before an Iranian or North Korean nuke is placed in a Major US and/or Israeli city and detonated. They know that he will be spineless in the face of this threat and push forward to finishing their weapons.

If George Bush is elected then both the North Korean and Iran regimes will be destroyed. The big question is which one to do away with first and by what means. By making an example of one we may be able to turn the other. In this new era of global WMD terrorism there is unfortunately no other way to resolve this than through force.

To think that the future of many millions may hang of the votes of few thousand on Nov 2 is very unnerving. Its time to pray for yet another boost of divine providence like we had in the 2000 elections.

If Al Gore was president we would probable all be forced to attend Islamic peace studies in an attempt to get in tune with our inner Muslim.

[takeo]

No, you didn't read what I wrote, did you? See the film. Again, because I know that we all skip over words when we are on our way to say something ourselves....

I didn't see the movy yet


I don't care if the people there are cursing and craping in the streets. The point was that you need to have a strategic understanding of the actual terrain in order to understand what can and cannot be compromised from a security standpoint. It wasn't meant to illicit an emotional response.

it wasn't emotional, Israel is really a racist state. israeli palestinians only have rights in theory, while palestinians in the occupied territories have no rights at all. It's not palestinian nationalism that should be respected, but palestinians as a people. They deserve the same what the jewish people had: a state of their own and citizens right. If you can't understand it you're equally racist. besides many people in Israel DID want the extermination of the palestinians, extermination by exiling them. I was really surprised Israeli could have such an attitude. Those opinions are reflected in some parties which have taken part in the ruling government, another shocking fact. as if the germans would allow the nazi's to be a government coalition partner! I could see the intifadeh coming already, oslo was not respected by neither side, espacially not by israel which was building colonies as if their life depended on it. palestinians said to be at this pace these lands would be israeli in another 10 years and they would all live a giant refugee camps. remind you, this was BEFORE the second intifadeh!

As far as your comments on French relations with Iran, they came up in the other thread as well, and they have been echoed by Oliver. That France's interest in world affairs is competing for influence with the US via the EU and UN is not news to most of us in the United States. I've been saying it on this board for a long time. But the depths that France has been sinking to is what is surprising and dangerous at this point in time. I don't care that Chirac didn't support the war. That's history now. It's time to deal with the present and do what is in the best interests of the Iraqi people. You and Oliver want to gloat that things are rough going a year and half after the invasion? That's just stupid. You both should wait five years to gloat, but in the meantime, tell your stupid leader not to sabatoge the efforts of those countries who are trying to stabalize Iraq and make it a successful mission. France doesn't need to follow Jordan's lead, it just needs to shut the hell up!

our opposition to the war was justified, no WMD's, no less terrorism but more, another dictatorship replacing Saddam, etc. You just ignore the fact that all Bush did was deliver false promises and continue to insult us because we didn't support you, incredible hypocrisy and dishonnest attitude! So in fact Bush should shut up and recognise he made a mistake, as well as you should.

What should happen now in Iraq is a real democracy and the end of the foreign occupation, which just plunched Iraq into a war and chaos and didn't succeed in stabilising Iraq, on the contrary. US-troops are clearly hated in Iraq, and behaved extremely bad, and should be replaced by neutral un-troops. Immidiate elections should be hold to which anyone can participate and all political prisoners should be released. than this new elected government will be able to decide about the future of the Iraqi people.
What's happening now is just a continuation of the de facto occupation and will further lead Iraq on the way of war and destruction.


What exactly constitutes a racist attitude to you, Takeo?

Because its not the Jews who are saying that all Israel should be cleansed of the ethnic minority on the land. Its the Pal Arabs.

Its not the Jews who in their textbooks teach that the other side is not entitled to any land and are by nature coniving, immoral, and "dogs and pigs." That's the arabs, too.

see above, I just ad that it's not only the Arabs who think that the other side is not entitled to any land and that they're by nature immoral and "dogs and pigs", many Israeli think the same of the palestinians.

Most of the Israelis I know are the opposite of racist. In fact, I think that its the world that imposes a racist double standard by expecting, and thus forgiving, the Arabs to act like Barbarians with their suicide bombings and attempted genocide, while the Jews are expected to behave better than any European nation ever has.

israel is expected to behave according to the the geneva-conventions and in the interest of human rights. Israel is also expected to comply to the wishes of the international community to end the occupation. Whatever the Arabs do does not legitimise this occupation, not from a moral point of view neither from a security point of view. there are no evidences that the Westbank and Gaza-strip are protecting israel, on the contrary the only war israel nearly lost was in 1973...

I think what you consider racism is Israelis valuing their LIVES over Palestinian nationalism and ease of living. In which case, I hope the same situation occurs to you, and you volunteer to die to make another persons life a little easier.

no, israel should value palestinian life the same as israeli lives. Bt i see there is some change in attiture, many israeli protested against their government and high court just ruled that the fense was harming israeli rights, unseen in the past.



If John Kerry is elected then it’s only a mater of time before an Iranian or North Korean nuke is placed in a Major US and/or Israeli city and detonated. They know that he will be spineless in the face of this threat and push forward to finishing their weapons.

rarily I've heard such loads of



If George Bush is elected then both the North Korean and Iran regimes will be destroyed. The big question is which one to do away with first and by what means. By making an example of one we may be able to turn the other. In this new era of global WMD terrorism there is unfortunately no other way to resolve this than through force.

Your last sentence, I've heard it before, before the war in Iraq to be exact...
If you attack North Korea you'll provoke a nuclear war and war with the People's Republic of China, which has the nuclear capacity to destroy the us-territory several times...
if you attack Iran you'll just create a huge war-zone from iraq to Afghanistan, a war you can never win, and an excellent terrain for Al-Quaida to finally take power in the entire region. But just how you will sell this to the American public opinion who is already sick and tired of the war in Iraq is another matter. Actually can I quote your last sentences? It would be excellent publicity for the campaigners of Jhon Kerry.



To think that the future of many millions may hang of the votes of few thousand on Nov 2 is very unnerving. Its time to pray for yet another boost of divine providence like we had in the 2000 elections.

no problem, Bush can count on his brother and other friends to manipulate the vote a little, as he did last time... I'm not sure Americans would appreciate but you still have a huge pr-machine at your disposal to sell it to them, and who cares anyway about public opinion once elected?

If Al Gore was president we would probable all be forced to attend Islamic peace studies in an attempt to get in tune with our inner Muslim

you're too funny

when I read your extremist insane opinion I'll start to change my opinion that Kerry, Clinton and Gore are not much better than Bush or even worse, ANYONE is better than Bush, and Kerry should get the support of the leftwing. It's like during the last presidential elections between Chirac and Le Pen, you have to choose between evil and greater evil. some people even symbolically voted for chirac with gloves on.

[tandem]

many israeli's have sefardim origin which are not western by any standard, and most ashkenazi's originate in Eastern europe which isn't really western either, neither are the Russians and the palestinian minority.
ok, fine, Israel had a lot of western influences and adopted the European political system, but it still doesn't make Israel a western nation.
and yet the root of the ashkenazi jews was western germany and france, and eventually they spread to eastern europe as well. therefore, i really don't see how they are so different from your "western" ancestry. and sfaradim jews, their origin is mostly the iberian peninsula. the term in general refers to jews who were expelled during the spanish inquisition and fled to places such as turkey, the middle east, and north africa. the arab minority in israel is not jewish but nonetheless some of them adopt a "western" lifestyle. how is it any different from foreign muslems who come to live in france or any other european country and adopt a western lifestyle? same , yet france and most of western europe are still termed by you "western" countries.

it wasn't emotional, Israel is really a racist state. israeli palestinians only have rights in theory, while palestinians in the occupied territories have no rights at all.
once again you prove how truly ignorant you are. muslem arabs in israel have the same rights as jews and christians. unlike jews, arabs don't have to serve in the army yet they enjoy the same perks. arabs in israel elect their own MPs to the knesset. arabs are appointed to senior ranks with the IDF, the government, and police forces. arabs sit on the israeli supreme court. arabs in israel are afforded the same healthcare and welfare programs as jewish israelis. arabs in israel are free to worship their religion anywhere they want. it's a stark contrast to how jews can worship judaism in their own land. while an arab muslem can pray pretty much anywhere he wants, if an israeli jew walks into an arab village to pray there he'll be lynched. as for the palestinian arabs in the territories, they are not israelis so none of this applies to them. israel took control of the land from egypt and jordan, not palestine, not the "palestinian" people.

our opposition to the war was justified, no WMD's, no less terrorism but more, another dictatorship replacing Saddam, etc.
you're right, we should have just left saddam in power, allow him to continue to develop WMD, allow him to murder more innocent iraqis by the truck loads, just as long as france can continue to supply saddam with banned arms (which france, as a permanent security council member, agreed not to do), provide his regime protection on the security council, and have french corporations continue to receive lucrative contracts from saddam. you are so right, takeo. what were we thinking? :rolleyes: maybe some of us are not egoistic piece of garbage like most french

israel is expected to behave according to the the geneva-conventions and in the interest of human rights.
maybe france can set an example. as soon as france will adhere to the geneva convention and actually give a about other people in world instead of siding with villians and dictatorships all the time and turn a blind eye on their atrocities, or as soon as france will stop bullying smaller european countries just as chirac did before the war against saddam, threatening to derail their admission into the EU for not supporting france's position on iraq, or how about when france was busy bribing african countries to get them to refuse to cooperate with the coalition, and let's not forget paying compensation to millions of people who were tortured by french troops and displaced in the french colonies in north africa, maybe then israel can follow france's example of a country who cares about humanitarian rights. until then, france doesn't have any right whatsoever to criticize israel and it's anti-terrorist activities.

Israel is also expected to comply to the wishes of the international community to end the occupation.
why? do you actually think we're stupid like france and most of europe? one of the key "wishes" of the international community is for israel to return to 1967 borders, which is impossible, split jerusalem, which is not even a muslem city, and give control over the area to arabs, and allow refugees to return to a newly created palestine and israel.

oh gosh, given the rate these ing arabs breed (the palestinian arab population in the territories nearly tripled in one decade), jews in israel will undoubtedly become a minority. do you actually think we're gonna allow that to happen? we're not gonna follow europe in that direction. france, a "western" foreign country to arabs, has more muslems living in it than there are jews living in israel, the jewish state. that should tell you something about where your country is heading, takeo.

there are no evidences that the Westbank and Gaza-strip are protecting israel, on the contrary the only war israel nearly lost was in 1973...
imagine the outcome of the yom kippur war had there not been a buffer.

no, israel should value palestinian life the same as israeli lives.
why should we, when palestinian arabs themselves don't value their own lives, or israeli lives for that matter? only yesterday, arafat's thugs executed a so-called "collaborator" in the middle of the street. where is the condemnation from france, the UN, the EU, all the human rights groups that are so quick to label the israelis as nazis for killing arab terrorists and their leaders? the palestinian arab arafat's thugs executed yesterday was not the first "collaborator" to be killed in such manner. unfortunately most of them turn out to be innocent. a few weeks ago the al-aksa brigades forced a palestinian to shout on the mosque speakers that he was a collaborator and then they executed him. later it turned out the man was innocent. his family got a letter of apology from the al-aksa brigades. how nice of them! the perpetrators were never caught because, of course, they work in arafat's security service.

the way we see it, as long palestinian arabs continue to target israeli civilians, we have the right to fight the terrorists who perpetrate those attacks. and if it means ending up with collateral damage on the palestinian arab side, then so be it. just look at the way palestinian arabs treat each other. no respect, like animals. if they can't respect the human rights of their own people, what makes one think they'll ever respect the human rights of israelis. these are the kind of savages that we in israel have to deal with. not france, not england, not germany, not even the US have to deal with these psychos. we israelis do and we'll deal with them our way.

no, israel should value palestinian life the same as israeli lives. Bt i see there is some change in attiture, many israeli protested against their government
the only israelis protesting against the security fence are anarchists and leftist idiots. the rest of israel is sane enough to realize the importance of the fence and is fully supportive of the initiative. in fact, it was the israeli left who always advocated separation from the palestinian arabs.

[Justcurious]

QUIETLY, U.S. PREPARES FOR ISRAEL STRIKE ON IRAN


WASHINGTON [MENL] -- The United States has been examining the prospect that Israel will attack Iranian nuclear facilities in an attempt to prevent the Islamic republic from completing an atomic bomb as early as this year.http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2004/may/05_07_2.html

Why would Israel attack any other country? Israel is peaceful, isnt't it?

[takeo]

and yet the root of the ashkenazi jews was western germany and france, and eventually they spread to eastern europe as well.

yes, but their many years in eastern Europe made them less western, besides their original roots lie in the Middle East of course. I notice it every day how much the culture, lifestyle and values of my parents differs from the mainstream western values, and they're quite integrated compared to others.
Of course American Jews who lived for many generations in the US have westernised, which is normal, but the recent Jewish immigrants from the soviet-Union or the middle-east will agree with me I think. (as mil said the Soviet Jews in the us are still a very tight community, watch Russian movies, have their own organisations, etc. )

therefore, i really don't see how they are so different from your "western" ancestry.

it's quite a difference, have you ever been to eastern Europe, it's another world, especially the balkans and the former Soviet Union, poland, hungary and czech republic are more western.

and sfaradim jews, their origin is mostly the iberian peninsula. the term in general refers to jews who were expelled during the spanish inquisition and fled to places such as turkey, the middle east, and north africa.

only some sefardim originate in the Iberian peninsula, and during the times they were there it was Arab-dominated.

the arab minority in israel is not jewish but nonetheless some of them adopt a "western" lifestyle.

An Israeli lifestyle, that's right, they're very different from the palestinians in the occupied territories, because they have been treated better as well by Israel.

how is it any different from foreign muslems who come to live in france or any other european country and adopt a western lifestyle? same , yet france and most of western europe are still termed by you "western" countries.

you're right of course, but in Israel even the majority of the population is not western, to the contrary of france.


once again you prove how truly ignorant you are. muslem arabs in israel have the same rights as jews and christians. unlike jews, arabs don't have to serve in the army yet they enjoy the same perks. arabs in israel elect their own MPs to the knesset. arabs are appointed to senior ranks with the IDF, the government, and police forces. arabs sit on the israeli supreme court. arabs in israel are afforded the same healthcare and welfare programs as jewish israelis. arabs in israel are free to worship their religion anywhere they want.

this is all in theory, in reality israeli Arabs suffer from day-to-day discrimination,, wether it's in the police, in their work (they always get the worst jobs even if they have the same qualifications), in courts, everywhere they're underrepresented compared to their demographical weight. Arab villages always get less money from the state than jewish ones, this is reality unfortunately.



it's a stark contrast to how jews can worship judaism in their own land. while an arab muslem can pray pretty much anywhere he wants, if an israeli jew walks into an arab village to pray there he'll be lynched.

why would they pray in an arab village? In Arab villages in Israel I often saw slogans on the wall "arabs go home" and other threatening messages, Israeli arabs don't feel like they're equal citizens.

as for the palestinian arabs in the territories, they are not israelis so none of this applies to them. israel took control of the land from egypt and jordan, not palestine, not the "palestinian" people.

so if those territories belong to israel the people who live there are israeli's, you can't just take the land without its citizens, that's hypocritic BS.

you're right, we should have just left saddam in power, allow him to continue to develop WMD

don't you know yet? He DIDN'T DEVELLOP WMD..................

allow him to murder more innocent iraqis by the truck loads

much less Iraqi's were murdered by Saddam than by the occupying forces during the last years...


, just as long as france can continue to supply saddam with banned arms (which france, as a permanent security council member, agreed not to do),

France didn't, but I agree we should have done, to give Iraq a chance to defend itself properly.

provide his regime protection on the security council, and have french corporations continue to receive lucrative contracts from saddam.


better trading with Saddam than with al-quaida-supporting Saoudi companies as you are doing

you are so right, takeo. what were we thinking? maybe some of us are not egoistic piece of garbage like most french

you are much more egoistic than we are, you don't mind some 1000's of death people to reach your goal of controlling Iraq

maybe france can set an example. as soon as france will adhere to the geneva convention and actually give a about other people in world instead of siding with villians and dictatorships all the time and turn a blind eye on their atrocities, or as soon as france will stop bullying smaller european countries just as chirac did before the war against saddam,

we never bullyed small countries as you bullied small latin-American nations who didn't agree with your Iraq-policy, as usual you promised economic assistance in exchange of a favorable position in the iraq-issue, as usual you didn't hold to your promises. We never directly supported so many villains and dictators as you did during many decades (pinochet, guatemala, honduras, Indonesia, egypt, Saoudi Arabia, etc.)
you're such a hypocrite, it's pathetic, accusing us of things you're doing since decades.

[takeo]

threatening to derail their admission into the EU for not supporting france's position on iraq, or how about when france was busy bribing african countries to get them to refuse to cooperate with the coalition

the us directly offered money to countries such as Angola if they would vote favorable in the security council, this is bribing, we never did anything similar.
most governments simply refused to cooperate, and the ones who did got punished hardly by their populationsduring the next elections for doing so. (at least the democratic ones, many members of the "freedom coalition" were dictatorships themselves).

and let's not forget paying compensation to millions of people who were tortured by french troops and displaced in the french colonies in north africa

this was in the 50's, 10 years after you killed millions of vietnamese and Laotians, on the contrary to france you never offered yourapologies.



, maybe then israel can follow france's example of a country who cares about humanitarian rights. until then, france doesn't have any right whatsoever to criticize israel and it's anti-terrorist activities.


israel doesn't care at all about humanitarian rights, even the israeli high court convicted the israeli government for not respecting human rights.

why? do you actually think we're stupid like france and most of europe? one of the key "wishes" of the international community is for israel to return to 1967 borders, which is impossible, split jerusalem, which is not even a muslem city, and give control over the area to arabs, and allow refugees to return to a newly created palestine and israel.

yes indeed this should happen and only if this happens Israel will be a peacefull country.


oh gosh, given the rate these ing arabs breed (the palestinian arab population in the territories nearly tripled in one decade), jews in israel will undoubtedly become a minority.

that's a lie, palestinians would still be a minority and as you said once they live in israel they adopt israeli way of life and stop "breeding"...

do you actually think we're gonna allow that to happen? we're not gonna follow europe in that direction. france, a "western" foreign country to arabs, has more muslems living in it than there are jews living in israel, the jewish state. that should tell you something about where your country is heading, takeo.

there are more muslims in the us as well than Jews in Israel I think
I understand you, a racist, wants palestinians to continue living under occupation and in camps, but the younger generation in Israel wants to change that policy, they wat israel to become a normal peacefull country.

imagine the outcome of the yom kippur war had there not been a buffer.

it wouldn't have happened iwthout the occupied territories.

Israel could have defended its borders instead


why should we, when palestinian arabs themselves don't value their own lives, or israeli lives for that matter? only yesterday, arafat's thugs executed a so-called "collaborator" in the middle of the street. where is the condemnation from france, the UN, the EU, all the human rights groups that are so quick to label the israelis as nazis for killing arab terrorists and their leaders? the palestinian arab arafat's thugs executed yesterday was not the first "collaborator" to be killed in such manner. unfortunately most of them turn out to be innocent.

a lot of innocents suffer in any war, most people in Guantanamo and many in israeli prisons are innocent as well.

the way we see it, as long palestinian arabs continue to target israeli civilians, we have the right to fight the terrorists who perpetrate those attacks.

fine, but remember that as long as you occupy the occupied territories palestinians have the right to attack Israel.

and if it means ending up with collateral damage on the palestinian arab side, then so be it.


but if you target civilians on purpose you're as bad as hamas, and that's what you're doing.

just look at the way palestinian arabs treat each other. no respect, like animals.

it is none of your business, you still should threat them as human beings if not you're guilty yourself.

if they can't respect the human rights of their own people, what makes one think they'll ever respect the human rights of israelis. these are the kind of savages that we in israel have to deal with. not france, not england, not germany, not even the US have to deal with these psychos. we israelis do and we'll deal with them our way.

but you're making them psycho's, this policy creates extremism, as American policy turned Iraqi's into suicide fighters as well, a phenomenon which didn't exist in Iraq before the occupation.

the only israelis protesting against the security fence are anarchists and leftist idiots.

bs, as perez said more people demonstrated than extremists living in the occupied territories, according to polls a majority of Israeli's want to get rid of the occupied territories.


the rest of israel is sane enough to realize the importance of the fence and is fully supportive of the initiative. in fact, it was the israeli left who always advocated separation from the palestinian arabs.

of course, the problem is that the fence goes trough palestinian territory, it should be build along the israeli-palestinian border, which would be natural and much more effective.

[Ahava]

So European countries also cease to be western in a couple of years with all the muslims being there, won't they?

If it does, it's because Muslims are gonna institute sharia law, not because there are a lot of foreigners. That is, as Mediocrates said, ethno-racism.

[SteveMetch]

rarily I've heard such loads of


When is the last time you read one of your posts?

John Kerry has already said he wants to “Internationalize” the war on terror. Translation: We will not do anything that will upset the French or the UN. We will effectively put our national security in their capable hands.

Based on the extensive French and UN track record of doing nothing in the face of incredible evil and threats this would ultimately lead to the course of history I outlined. Iran and North Korea will develop crude nuclear weapons which will then be transported to US and Israeli cities via truck or cargo container and detonated by a third party of Islamic Terrorists.

By the way Takeo yet another genocide is happening in Sudan and surprise surprise surprise the French and UN are doing nothing. Apparently putting underwear on the heads of Iraq prisoners is much more of an “atrocity”.


Your last sentence, I've heard it before, before the war in Iraq to be exact...
If you attack North Korea you'll provoke a nuclear war and war with the People's Republic of China, which has the nuclear capacity to destroy the us-territory several times...

Only in your dreams, half of China’s assets are held in US banks or US bonds and over half their trade is with the US. Nuking the US is about as likely as the Chinese Nuking Shanghai. The global economy and interdependence championed by the US is making war more and more difficult between most nations, a very positive historic development in the course of human events. The thought that China would risk this relationship over North Korea is beyond rational thought.


if you attack Iran you'll just create a huge war-zone from iraq to Afghanistan, a war you can never win, and an excellent terrain for Al-Quaida to finally take power in the entire region.

A dream come true I am sure. The last time a country was complete taken over with loss of less than 1,000 soldiers was France in WW2 by Nazi Germany. Iran would be no different than Iraq. These low losses are unheard of in world history considering that we have liberated almost 50 Million people. About the population of France liberated in WW2 at a cost of about 100,000. This is almost a 100 fold improvement, not bad. Who knows maybe 50 years from now we could accomplish a 50 Million liberation losing only 100 soldiers. Not much of a sacrifice considering we are helping to prevent a nuclear weapon from being detonated at a loss of million people and $5 trillion dollars. No, the mathematics alone in addition to the human suffering make the doctrine of preemption the way they next American Century will play out.


But just how you will sell this to the American public opinion who is already sick and tired of the war in Iraq is another matter. Actually can I quote your last sentences? It would be excellent publicity for the campaigners of Jhon Kerry.

The only ones sick of this war is the foreigners living in America with American citizenship. These “Americans” should not be confused with the ones who bled and died making the world safe for freedom. They understand that freedom isn't free. The main question in this next election is there still enough real Americans left to continue the American Revolution or will we begin the slow spiral into nominalism and self-hatred that characterizes the French.

Takeo my message to you is simple if George Bush is re-elected just,

Sit Down, Shut up, and Hang on
Welcome to the next American Century

[MGB8]

takeo,

Your post is the same BS propaganda based in propaganda that you have been spouting from Day one.

Seroiusly, its garbage, and you have proven this without a doubt in your recent posts.

The idea that Israeli ARABS (not Israeli "Palestinians" - as Palestine is at best a nation, which has never existed ever on the face of this earth, but its a nationality, not an ethnicity...) are "2nd class citizens" is very much exagerated. This is not Black people in the 1940's in the US. They vote, they have Members of Parliament, they eat in the same restaurants in the same sections, some non Jewish ethinic arabs serve in the military...etc. etc. etc. They can wear the Hijab to school! Unlike in France! Your attempt to analogize between the two is at best disengenous, and in all likelyhood shows the corruption of your heart.

The Arabs in the territories have MORE rights than Arabs in most of the Arab states, Takeo. They have local representation, BEFORE Oslo - including, I believe, elected mayors, although much may have been done tribally. After Oslo they had more, and 98% of the Arab population was under PA control. But they had a Jewish dictator, instead of an Arab one - that is the ONLY distinction...oh, except that Israel won't go in and kill 20,000 in one week like Syria did, Jordan similar, and the Saudis, Iraqis and Kuwaitis just expelled them all - with not 1/100 of the provocation that the Pal Sunni Arabs have given Israel.

As for the "racism" of Israelis - frankly, I think you are making this up as you have proven yourself prone to do over and over again. Not that there aren't some Israelis who don't want to expell the Arabs - but when 80+% of Israeli's support the creation of a Palestine with the full knowledge that attacks will almost certainly come from that Palestine - the idea that Israeli's are racist is shown to be as hollow as it is.

You've been on this board for a long time, Takeo, and yet not once have you even tried to consider the Israeli concerns - to put yourself in the Israeli shoes, constantly under attack, surrounded by hostile neighbors, even those you have peace treaties with, most pledged to your destruction - sooner or later.

I hope you feel the pain of suicide bombers striking your family, Takeo - not a Jewish thing to say, but I really do - under the excuse of some nationalistic reason - say the Basque wanting part of France. Then lets here you make excses for them.

I have made several posts saying that Europe is going to moral hell. When I say Europe - I especially mean people like you.

[takeo]

When is the last time you read one of your posts?

John Kerry has already said he wants to “Internationalize” the war on terror. Translation: We will not do anything that will upset the French or the UN. We will effectively put our national security in their capable hands.

What he wants to say is tha the us alone can not solve international problems, when the us does it alone, the result is disastrous as in Iraq currently.


Based on the extensive French and UN track record of doing nothing in the face of incredible evil and threats this would ultimately lead to the course of history I outlined. Iran and North Korea will develop crude nuclear weapons which will then be transported to US and Israeli cities via truck or cargo container and detonated by a third party of Islamic Terrorists.

BS, Iran and North-Korea will give up their nukes in return for lucrative business contracts and recognition of the regimes, exactly as happened in the case of Lybia.

By the way Takeo yet another genocide is happening in Sudan and surprise surprise surprise the French and UN are doing nothing. Apparently putting underwear on the heads of Iraq prisoners is much more of an “atrocity”.

but the us isn't doing anything either is it? The US is much better in creating humanitarian problems (Iraq, Vietnam) than solving them...

Only in your dreams, half of China’s assets are held in US banks or US bonds and over half their trade is with the US. Nuking the US is about as likely as the Chinese Nuking Shanghai. The global economy and interdependence championed by the US is making war more and more difficult between most nations, a very positive historic development in the course of human events. The thought that China would risk this relationship over North Korea is beyond rational thought.

you are wrong, china's current position is entirely based on its strong regional position, which creates a kind of geo-political equilibrance in the region with the us, why do you think China is so sensitive about Taiwan? China's entire ideology is based on their independance and victory over imperialistic powers, the korean war is remembered every year in China and leader Hu already declared they wouldn't let down the Koreans.
besides the us has as much to loose as China, China is the most important new market in the world and if this gets lost for us-companies it'll be a disaster.
what'll probably happen is the Chinese assisting the koreans in korea without directly targetting the us, I wouldn't be surprised that Korea got its nukes from China, which considers them to be an excellent self-defense for North-Korea.


A dream come true I am sure. The last time a country was complete taken over with loss of less than 1,000 soldiers was France in WW2 by Nazi Germany. Iran would be no different than Iraq. These low losses are unheard of in world history considering that we have liberated almost 50 Million people. About the population of France liberated in WW2 at a cost of about 100,000. This is almost a 100 fold improvement, not bad. Who knows maybe 50 years from now we could accomplish a 50 Million liberation losing only 100 soldiers. Not much of a sacrifice considering we are helping to prevent a nuclear weapon from being detonated at a loss of million people and $5 trillion dollars. No, the mathematics alone in addition to the human suffering make the doctrine of preemption the way they next American Century will play out.

but what will you achieve, another longlasting war as in Iraq against an entire population, a war you can't win. besides Iran is stronger and larger than Iraq, you will turn Iran from a relatively modern nation into another Afghanistan, and turn it from a relatively harmless country into an extremely dangerous one, as you did in the case of Iraq. If so many Americans would be dying for freedom it would be worth it, but everyone knows they are not bringing freedom but repression and occupation, as in Iraq.
no offense, but if you really believe what you're writing above, even after what happened in Iraq, you're a brainless moron...


The only ones sick of this war is the foreigners living in America with American citizenship. These “Americans” should not be confused with the ones who bled and died making the world safe for freedom. They understand that freedom isn't free. The main question in this next election is there still enough real Americans left to continue the American Revolution or will we begin the slow spiral into nominalism and self-hatred that characterizes the French.

typical extreme-right BS to think that only foreigners are
the ones responsible for the opposition against the criminal policy of your government. But the fact is that more than half of the Americans is against the war in Iraq, according to polls (i published them on this forum). I doubt all of them are "fake " Americans. (besides this distinction you make between "real" and "fake" Americans make me doubt if you belong to the KKK...you certainly have the same style and fanatism, and if you would live in france you would be member of FN without any doubt)

Takeo my message to you is simple if George Bush is re-elected just,

Sit Down, Shut up, and Hang on
Welcome to the next American Century

wait and see, if he's reelected I'm sure NATO and the transatlantic alliance will be ended, Europe will search new alliances with the rest of the world, the us will be isolated involved in all kinds of endless extremely inpopular wars and stop being a worldpower.

[Mediocrates]

Sour grapes - you hope to lead this new imaginary alliance of terrorists and broken genocidal third world states. Frankly, I hope you do.

[SteveMetch]

What he wants to say.... blah blah blah

Takeo, what are the positive things, if any, that the United States has done?

Just a check to see if our minds are operating on the same plain reality.

[takeo]

Sour grapes - you hope to lead this new imaginary alliance of terrorists and broken genocidal third world states. Frankly, I hope you do.

I was talking of an economic, military and political alliance with Russia and China, I hope one day it'll become reality. if Bush gets reelected we are one step closer to such an alliance, I don't think Blair or any of your allies in Europe will survive the elections.



Takeo, what are the positive things, if any, that the United States has done?

Just a check to see if our minds are operating on the same plain reality.

WWII, without any doubt the us were on the right side, WWI as well, at the end of the 40's early 50's when the us actively undermined European colonialism, I find the war against the taliban justified as well, the abolishment of slavery, scientific inventions, etc. there are many examples.
(however fastfood is nOt among them, but this is a matter of taste...)

[Mediocrates]

There's no 'IF' in that statement - it's a foregone conclusion in your mind whatever happens over here because that's simply where you want to lead your country. Which is really I suppose why you should really be supporting the Bush White House - it's all the more fodder for what you hope will be a rationale for France to lead its dingy coalition.

[Binyamin]

israel doesn't care at all about humanitarian rights, even the israeli high court convicted the israeli government for not respecting human rights. The supreme court apparently not being Israeli.

yes indeed this should happen and only if this happens Israel will be a peacefull country.
that's a lie, palestinians would still be a minority and as you said once they live in israel they adopt israeli way of life and stop "breeding"...You're an idiot.
it wouldn't have happened iwthout the occupied territories.Becuase if Israel would have lost the six-day war, there would have been no need for the Egyptians to attack after that.
Israel could have defended its borders instead What's this supposed to mean?
a lot of innocents suffer in any war, most people in Guantanamo and many in israeli prisons are innocent as well.Takeo should work for the Mossad.
fine, but remember that as long as you occupy the occupied territories palestinians have the right to attack Israel.Now we got it loud and clear.
but if you target civilians on purpose you're as bad as hamas, and that's what you're doing.
it is none of your business, you still should threat them as human beings if not you're guilty yourself. So now were guilty(of some undefined crime that applies only to Israel)- we should have committed suicide instead of letting this happen.
but you're making them psycho's, this policy creates extremism, as American policy turned Iraqi's into suicide fighters as well, a phenomenon which didn't exist in Iraq before the occupation.



BS, Iran and North-Korea will give up their nukes in return for lucrative business contracts and recognition of the regimes, exactly as happened in the case of Lybia.
Quote:
A dream come true I am sure. The last time a country was complete taken over with loss of less than 1,000 soldiers was France in WW2 by Nazi Germany. Iran would be no different than Iraq. Not much of a sacrifice considering we are helping to prevent a nuclear weapon from being detonated at a loss of million people and $5 trillion dollars.


but what will you achieve, another longlasting war as in Iraq against an entire population, a war you can't win. besides Iran is stronger and larger than Iraq, you will turn Iran from a relatively modern nation into another Afghanistan, and turn it from a relatively harmless country into an extremely dangerous one, as you did in the case of Iraq. If so many Americans would be dying for freedom it would be worth it, but everyone knows they are not bringing freedom but repression and occupation, as in Iraq.
"no offense, but if you really believe what you're writing above, even after what happened in Iraq, you're a brainless moron... "


Can we all ignore this idiot?

[MGB8]

Takeo,

I'm going to give you a chance here to build some credibility, which you know you have very very little of on this board.

You recently stated that you had been to Israel a few years back, visited the territories, too, and were displeased with the racist attitudes of Israelis.

Now, I find it odd that, after being on this bulletin board all this time, only now do you bring up your trip to Israel as a point of discussion.

So odd, in fact, that I think that you are simply making it up, as you have made up other things only to be caught on it later.

However, Takeo, you have a golden opportunity here to prove otherwise. You can start be detailing this trip. When did you go? What airport did you fly into and what did it look like? Who did you talk to? What hotels did you stay in? What cities did you visit? Did you have a tourguide, or was this unguided, and did you travel with anyone.

Here is your chance, Takeo. I believe that most people on this board think like I do on this - that you are simply lying, casting even more doubt on some of the, in my opinion, ridiculous and morally blind things you write. But you can prove me wrong, at least on this point.

You went to Israel, Takeo? Prove it. I dare you.

[MGB8]

Justcurious,

Of course Israel wants peace, but its prepared to defend itself, pre-emptively if necessary.

Just like Israel did in striking Iraq's Nuclear reactor (thank g-d), Israel, this time with the blessing of the US (if it didn't have it last time, and we may never know), may be preparing a strike not to kill Persians, but to knock out their nuclear facilites so that the number 1 terrorist supporting state in the world requires another decade or so before joining the Nuclear club.

Any sane person, especially one living in Europe, easilly accesible by rail, road, or boat...easy to hide a bomb in....would be hoping that Israel does the world's dirty work for it - since, the rest of the world lacks the backbone to protect the lives of their families, and would rather simply hope for the best instead of taking action to prevent the worst.

Neville Chamberlein is alive and well.

[rhodescholar]

For all those who continue to take the bait from the resident , i dont know whether to laugh or not.

You can post facts here all day, and this type of human garbage will never accept them, or reason with you. It is a propaganda machine, possibly placed here, to simply spout nonsense over and over, always changing the subject when challenged.

Stop trying to debate it, its useless. It has never been interested in an honest debate, and all of your links, history and facts wont change it. Like i said long ago, it should have been banned, and now the board is suffering more for it as the same tired repetitious arguments are made over and over.

Notice how no matter what the thread title, the still reverts to teh same propaganda lines?

This is a BIG reason the board has gotten so stale, which is EXACTLY what the turd wants. STOP feeding the troll.

[takeo]

There's no 'IF' in that statement - it's a foregone conclusion in your mind whatever happens over here because that's simply where you want to lead your country. Which is really I suppose why you should really be supporting the Bush White House - it's all the more fodder for what you hope will be a rationale for France to lead its dingy coalition.

It could happen, it couldn't, depending indeed, among other circumstances, on the us-policy in the near future.
If that's what I want? Frankly, yes, we should end us-supremacy at least on the military field, and the only way to do so is to forge new coalitions. we should have a relation with the us as for example sino-American relations, completely independant but extensive trade-partners.



The supreme court apparently not being Israeli.

what do you mean, that they're self-denying anti-semitic nazi's?


What's this supposed to mean?

just defend and fortify your own borders, instead of using all your force and resources to oppress millions of defenseless palestinians and protect a few 1000 extremist colonisers.

Takeo should work for the Mossad.

that's according to Amnesty international, usually well informed.

Now we got it loud and clear.

exactly, but not innocents as the palestinians are doing, but collaborators and occupiers as the iraqi's are doing, that's why in the end iraqi resistance will be more succesfull. if palestinians will start to attack only military and political targets the israeli people will finally understand that the occupation is the problem, not the Palestinians living there. (they got the same message in libanon and understood it, since the israeli-palestinian border has seen much less bloodshet)


So now were guilty(of some undefined crime that applies only to Israel)- we should have committed suicide instead of letting this happen.

you wouldn't have committed suicide by playing according to the rules, on the contrary you would have gained much more understanding than currently.


Can we all ignore this idiot?

sure, you can use the ignore function if you wish so... I wouldn't mind I prefere debating with intelligent respectfull people who are capable debating.

I'm going to give you a chance here to build some credibility, which you know you have very very little of on this board.

I couldn't care less

You recently stated that you had been to Israel a few years back, visited the territories, too, and were displeased with the racist attitudes of Israelis.

Now, I find it odd that, after being on this bulletin board all this time, only now do you bring up your trip to Israel as a point of discussion.

i did bring it up before, more than once, you can ask the more senior members of this forum.

So odd, in fact, that I think that you are simply making it up, as you have made up other things only to be caught on it later.

sure, if you think so

[takeo]

However, Takeo, you have a golden opportunity here to prove otherwise. You can start be detailing this trip. When did you go? What airport did you fly into and what did it look like? Who did you talk to? What hotels did you stay in? What cities did you visit? Did you have a tourguide, or was this unguided, and did you travel with anyone.

I've already told about it on this forum. i've been to tel aviv, tiberiah, jerusalem, haifa and nearby ruins of akko, diving in the red sea, among others and to the occupied territories. It was in may or june 1999, I landed in ben gurion in the night and what i remember were the metallic pilars in the shopping corridor and the big carpet in the departure hall depicting some kind of city on a hill.
I stayed with friends most of the time, in tel aviv we stayed in hotel melody paid for by the organisation which invited us, and in tiberiah in a small hostel california. near eliat it was a big touristic complex but i forgot the name.
i travelled with an youth organisation associated with gush shalom, our sister youth organisation in Israel. I travelled with a couple of friends, 5 in total.

Here is your chance, Takeo. I believe that most people on this board think like I do on this - that you are simply lying, casting even more doubt on some of the, in my opinion, ridiculous and morally blind things you write. But you can prove me wrong, at least on this point.

I told you before, whatever you or others think on this board does't bother me. Your ideology bothers me, but only because those are the viewpoints wich determine israeli and us policy and cause so much harm. (my viewpoints aren't ridiculous for most intelligent and moderate posters on this board, I don't care what a few hottempered extremists as yourself think about me)


You went to Israel, Takeo? Prove it. I dare you.

do you want to see my holiday pictures? you can, if you show me yours... (actually I would really be interested to see the pictures of members of this forum, I would like to imagine who I'm talking to, and this applies especially for the ladies....)


Of course Israel wants peace, but its prepared to defend itself, pre-emptively if necessary.

israel doesn't need to defend preemptively, it has enough capacity to react to any aggression.

Just like Israel did in striking Iraq's Nuclear reactor (thank g-d), Israel, this time with the blessing of the US (if it didn't have it last time, and we may never know), may be preparing a strike not to kill Persians, but to knock out their nuclear facilites so that the number 1 terrorist supporting state in the world requires another decade or so before joining the Nuclear club.

Iran won't nuke israel, anyone kows nuking israel means the destruction of their country and regime as well.

Any sane person, especially one living in Europe, easilly accesible by rail, road, or boat...easy to hide a bomb in....would be hoping that Israel does the world's dirty work for it - since, the rest of the world lacks the backbone to protect the lives of their families, and would rather simply hope for the best instead of taking action to prevent the worst.

you can only prevent this by fighting the only people who might use them, al-quaida and other extremists, what you did was making more ennemies and attacking the wrong people.


You can post facts here all day, and this type of human garbage will never accept them, or reason with you. It is a propaganda machine, possibly placed here, to simply spout nonsense over and over, always changing the subject when challenged.

have you ever contributed anything to this forum, except criticising and insulting people? I don't think so, you're worthless.

Stop trying to debate it, its useless. It has never been interested in an honest debate, and all of your links, history and facts wont change it. Like i said long ago, it should have been banned, and now the board is suffering more for it as the same tired repetitious arguments are made over and over.

so if I can't be convinced by your deficient arguments I'm garbage? Tell that to the billions of people who didn't believe George Bush about WMD...
and I think this board needs some opposition voices, what you want is a forum with only brainless extremists as yourself. Bt don't worry there're enough forums like those(on either side of the political spectrum), you sure will find your way there and won't be disturbed by people who think different.

[MGB8]

Good, Takeo... you are gaining some credibility. Of course, it would really help you if you started trying to place yourself in the position of the people you criticize, and actually listening to the points made on this forum.

The points like:

(1) Arab terrorism against Israel began well before "the occupation", & before Oslo Pal Arabs had one of the highest per capita wealths of any Arabs, local autonomy (since Israel really didn't want to be involved in governing them), universities etc...but had a Jewish dictator instead of an Arab one. Post 1993/Oslo, when 98% of Arabs were under PA control, suicide bombings became the weapoin of choice, although during times of calm there were few checkpoints, no curfews, many worked in Israel, etc.... and the PA, despite "renouncing violence" planned this intifadah, armed and funded the terror groups, incited hatered of Jews and denied the right of Israel to exist through their schoolbooks, media, and mosques...even though they were clearly on a path to get the great majority of what they said (in English) they wanted! This doesn't make sense if the Pals wanted a 2 state solution. It only makes sense if they want the destruction of Israel - which, of course, Arafat is on record as saying he wants, as late as 98, not to mention Hamas and Jihad and even Al-Aqsa (fatah/PLO).

(2) Rockets like the one that hit Sderot are likely to be fired from Arab controlled areas. And the rockets will get better. And if Israel relinquishes control of the borders, not only will the rockets get better - but there will be many more, with more powerful payloads and ranges - meaning not Sderot being in Danger, but Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. But, even with their current technology, if Israel withdrew to the "green line" Jeruslam would still be in danger from such rockets!

(3) Given that the Pal leadership encourages these attacks, certainly not doing anything to stop them, what would happen if these attacks contined post a "peace agreement, takeo?" Do you really want an all out war between Israel and a new Palestine? Do you want the other Arab countries to be dragged into this war? How many people will die because of this, takeo? Is this what you want? The possibility of Nuclear war? Or maybe you just want Israel to continue letting Arabs kill Jews with impunity? Until all the Jews are dead, just like the Nazi's tried to do?

You see, takeo, you are all theory, but you don't worry at all about the consequences of your proposed actions. If you did, you'ld realize that the actions that you suggest would almost certainly lead to hundreds of thousands of dead, and possibly the genocide of the Jews in Israel, or possibly a nuclear anhialation of the middle east?

Or maybe you do recognize this, and this is what you want?

[rhodescholar]

so if I can't be convinced by your deficient arguments I'm garbage? Tell that to the billions of people who didn't believe George Bush about WMD...SNIP

: Dont respond to my posts, they are not meant for you to either read or comment on.

To all others: He/She/It is a troll, one who should have been banned had the moderators been doing their job a long time ago. Early on i made note that this individual is not interested in intelligent debate, avoids responses, ignores facts, and provides nothing worthwhile. People who troll like this on boards GET BANNED. Why not here?

[MGB8]

Oh... a couple more things...

Iran has publically stated its willing to trade 100 million muslims for 5 million Jews? Why do you believe that they are lying? Why don't you believe that the leadership believes that it could escape Israeli retaliation, or that Israel might only react to the bomb sender, and not bomb, say, Mecca and Medina - so that "Islam would win"...and what about the terrorist bomb option, where Iran could plead "we had nothing to do with it"?

You try to apply European ideas of nationalism to a pan-muslim, pan-Arab movement, whose struggles are less about the battles between nations and more about the battle FOR the great Arab/Muslim nation.

Are you SO confident in your power to see the future that you are willing to risk these events, takeo? If so, could you tell me next weeks lottery numbers?

Oh, also, its very strange that you found so many of these "racist Israeli attitudes" in 99, BEFORE the 2nd intifadah. This was the era before the great disollusionment...or the great waking up to reality. It also runs counter to Israeli Polls, textbooks, parties like Meretz, Labor, Shinui,... and, in fact, Likud, which respects Arabs enough to believe them when they say they want to destroy Israel and then act on those desires.

I believe that its YOU who are the racist towards the Arabs, takeo. Because you don't take what they say in Arabic seriously. You cling to "its the occupation", and once its gone, the Arabs will realize they didn't mean all that stuff that they were saying - despite the fact that terror started before the occupation and the Arabs have very clearly stated that the goal is the replacement of Jewish Israel with Islamic Palestine, to return Dar Al-harb to Dar Al-Islam. Instead, you treat the Arabs as Children, while expecting Jews to live up to a higher standard. That, takeo, is the racism of lowered expecations - in essence YOU are saying that you believe that the Arabs are barbaric and lower the Jews (or Caucasians, since many Europeans view Israel as mostly white instead of the true ethnic mix it is).

[KettleWhistle]

I know I'm jumping in kind's of late into discussion, but it's such an obvious boloney. Just look at the quote below:

QUIETLY, U.S. PREPARES FOR ISRAEL STRIKE ON IRAN
The issue of Iran's nuclear weapons program was discussed by President George Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon during the latter's visit to the White House on April 14. The sources said the two men were alone during the brief discussion in an effort by the president to gauge a likely Israeli response to the completion of an Iranian nuclear bomb.


:D :D :D

[abu afak]

Israel targets Iran nuclear plant
The Sunday Times /timesonline.co.uk
| July 18, 2004
Uzi Mahnaimi and Peter Conradi


ISRAEL could launch a pre-emptive strike on Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power station if Russia goes ahead with plans to supply it with fuel, a senior American official warned last week.

Amid growing concern in the US government over Iran’s apparent determination to build a nuclear bomb, the official said he believed Israel would attack the plant, on the Gulf coast, if it appeared fuel rods were about to be shipped there.

Sources in Tel Aviv confirmed that the Israeli military had completed rehearsals for such a strike. “Israel will on no account permit Iranian reactors — especially the one being built in Bushehr with Russian help — to go critical,” an Israeli defence source said.

Ariel Sharon, the prime minister, recently called Iran the “biggest danger to the existence of Israel”. He said: “Israel will not allow Iran to be equipped with a nuclear weapon.”

Under the deal with Moscow, waste produced at Bushehr containing plutonium that could be used in bomb-making would be shipped back to Russia for storage. The procedure is to be supervised by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the nuclear watchdog.

The material must first cool, however, providing the Iranians with what Washington fears could be up to two years in which to extract the plutonium. Israeli sources believe that a quarter of a ton a year could be produced if Bushehr was functioning fully — enough for 20 bombs.

The fuel rods, stored at a Russian port, are expected to be delivered late next year but only after the resolution of a dispute with Moscow over financial terms.

According to Israeli sources, any strike on Bushehr would probably be carried out by long-haul F-15I jets, flying over Turkey, with simultaneous operations by commandos on the ground.

“If the worst comes to the worst and international efforts fail, we are very confident we’ll be able to demolish the ayatollahs’ nuclear aspirations in one go,” said a source familiar with the plans.

The source said the strike could be accompanied by an attack on other targets, including a facility at Natanz where the Iranians have attempted to enrich uranium — another route to making a bomb. A plant at Arak producing heavy water could also be hit.

A classified document delivered to Sharon earlier this year and seen by The Sunday Times highlighted the anxiety of the Israeli defence establishment over the seriousness of the perceived threat from Iran.

The document, entitled The Strategic Future of Israel and written by four of the country’s senior defence experts, said the military “should attack countries which develop nuclear weapons”. It also described Iran as a “suicide nation” and recommended “targeted killings” of members of the country’s elite, including its leading nuclear scientists.

Israel, whose own nuclear weapons programme is undeclared, showed its determination to prevent “rogue” Middle Eastern regimes acquiring the bomb when its planes destroyed a reactor built by Saddam Hussein, then the Iraqi leader, at Osirak in 1981.

Israeli sources believe that despite criticism at the time from both the US and Europe, Washington would not attempt to stop a similar attack on Bushehr.

However, they acknowledge that it could provoke a ferocious response from Iran — which could target northern Israel with rockets based in southern Lebanon or stage terrorist attacks against Jewish and Israeli targets abroad.

The emergence of the Israeli plans coincides with a growing rift between Europe and the US over how best to rein in Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

The efforts of Britain, France and Germany to find a diplomatic solution suffered a serious setback last month when Hasan Rowhani, a senior nuclear official, warned that Iran would reconsider an earlier decision to suspend enrichment of uranium.

Officials from the three countries will seek clarification from their Iranian counterparts later this month. Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, has accused Tehran of failing to provide convincing evidence to back its insistence it is not attempting to develop nuclear weapons.

Washington has become increasingly impatient, however, with what it sees as the failure of the softly-softly policy of Straw and the French and German foreign ministers — referred to disparagingly in private as “the Tehran three”. US officials have been pressing for the issue to be taken to the United Nations security council with the aim of subjecting Tehran to an escalating series of sanctions.

Although Iran claims that it is working on a civilian nuclear power programme, American officials argue that its huge oil and gas reserves obviate any need for one.

Further concern over Iran’s nuclear ambitions was raised by claims yesterday that Tehran had been shopping for high-speed switches and other equipment that could be used to make a bomb.

The American commission investigating the September 11 terrorist attacks is also expected to reveal new evidence of contacts between Al-Qaeda and Iran when it reports this week.

[abu afak]

Striking Iran will be Difficult.

Iran is expecting it and the anti-aircraft defenses will be incredibly Dense.

Perhaps .. from a post I made in June...
these have a further range than we know or can be Air-Launched from 100 miles or so away at less risk to Pilots.

Report: Israel Develops Its First Cruise Missile

By Laurie Copans Associated Press Writer
Published: Jun 9, 2004

JERUSALEM (AP) - Israel has developed its first surface-to-surface cruise missile with a range of at least 180 miles, according to a report to be published in Jane's Defence Weekly and obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press.
Jane's will publish the report June 16.

Called the Delilah-GL (ground launch), the missile could reach the territory of all of Israel's neighbors. Iran, however, would be out of range. The weapon fulfills Israel's 10-year quest for a such a missile, experts told the London-based publication.

The Delilah-GL (ground launch) is an adaptation of the Delilah, its air-launched predecessor, Jane's said, quoting officials at Israel Military Industries, where the missile is made.

The missile powered by a turbojet engine has a range of 155 miles, IMI said, but defense officials told Jane's that the missile could reach "well beyond 300 kilometers (180 miles)."

The advanced missile includes a high explosive 66-pound warhead and is guided by a global positioning system. The missile can also hover over an area before confirming its target through real-time visual intelligence transmitted back to the operator, Jane's reported.

The missile can be fitted with various payloads. One is an infrared device with electro-optical seekers for target acquisition and guidance. It can identify a target from a range of nine miles, Jane's said.

Israel developed the new technology after a decade of trying to obtain surface-to-surface cruise missiles. The United States has twice denied Israeli requests to purchase the Tomahawk land-attack cruise missile, Jane's reported.

In the 1980s, Israel deployed its own long-range surface-to-surface missile, called Jericho II. Foreign reports say it has a range of at least 900 miles, can carry a payload of 2,200 pounds and is suitable for nuclear weapons.

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBELBNM9VD.html

[Rita01]

QUIETLY, U.S. PREPARES FOR ISRAEL STRIKE ON IRAN

"It would be intolerable for the Middle East if they [Iran] get a nuclear weapon," Bush said after meeting Sharon.



What is intolerable is that the hapless, dim-witted George W. Bush has been ordained with nuclear power because of the US Supreme Court's betrayal of the American people. These old secret priests should be disbanded and sent packing for placing the whole world in mortal danger.

Junior Bush attacks only weakling states that cannot defend themselves, such as the broken, war-torn Iraq. If I were Iran or any other small nation with resources George intends to steal, as he did Iraqi assets, I would want a nuclear weapon, too.

[abu afak]

What is intolerable is that the hapless, dim-witted George W. Bush has been ordained with nuclear power because of the US Supreme Court's betrayal of the American people. These old secret priests should be disbanded and sent packing for placing the whole world in mortal danger.

Junior Bush attacks only weakling states that cannot defend themselves, such as the broken, war-torn Iraq. If I were Iran or any other small nation with resources George intends to steal, as he did Iraqi assets, I would want a nuclear weapon, too.
Would you prefer if he attacked China and North Korea?

What "assets" did "He Steal"?

Get some help Rita.

[Mediocrates]

I simply don't believe that the US or anyone else has any serious or credible plan to do anything about Iran. I expect tht Iran will have a functional intermediate range nuclear force, a regional force by 2006, including up to a dozen warheads on missiles. I expect they will have a semi-intercontinental ability with up to 50 missiles that can reach most of western europe and north africa, southern russia and india by 2008. They will probably develop a true ICBM capability that can strike the US by 2009. This will raise the stakes for Europe and India apprciably since Iran has for the most part said it's not bound by the NTBT and NNPT. Moreover they have openly declared that when they procure nuclear weapons they will have a first strike on no-threat doctrine. That is, Iran has already said it will have a nuclear doctrine of preemptive stikes on any perceived threat. The effect this will have is probably one or more or all of the following:

Accelerate nuclear development in India and therefore Pakistan.
India and Pakistan already have nuclear weapons though Pakistan is far behind India. Pakistan is already selling or bartering nuclear technology in violation of the NNPT so this can either make Pakistan richer or poorer, depending on the rate of acquisition. Pakistan is poised to become a fundamentalist mullocracy if Musharef falls.

Force Saudi Arabia to either embark on a massively expensive nuclear program or concede it cannot compete. A partially nuclear armed Saudi Arabia under increasing civil anarchy and possible disintegration of the ruling elite would be interesting. In either case it would either bankrupt the kingdom or drive the cost of oil sky high.

Blackmail the EU to pressure NATO to completely build down it's nuclear arsenal. The EU appears at this juncture to have little stomach for a fight. It is worried about it's own economies and increasingly 'diverse' citizenry. Therefore with France's prodding there will be pressure to remove all nukes from NATO countries.

Israel will be forced to openly declare their nuclear capabilities and when that happens the EU will declare them a pariah state and ennact severe political and economic sanctions.

By 2011 at least one major city in the middle east will be the target of a large nonconventional strike resulting in more than 1 million deaths.

[Barak]

No way we are going to use cruise-missiles as the main attack weapon. They have not the penetration needed to destroy the complexes. Remember, some of these are buried, and well buried, underground. So cruise-missiles are a no go. Only to soften up the target with an air strike immediately thereafter, or right after the airstrike, although I don't think that's highly likely.

[CanDo]

What is intolerable is that the hapless, dim-witted George W. Bush has been ordained with nuclear power because of the US Supreme Court's betrayal of the American people.

Hapless? Dim-witted? Under President Bush's great leadership capabilities America has been kept safe since the devastating attacks on Sept 11, 2001, and our economy is continuing to grow stronger.

I don't think that there were many leaders that could have done as good a job as Bush did, and I certainly feel that if you were the President of the U.S. instead of Bush, we would have already been taken over by Muslim extremists. That being the case, if President Bush is hapless and dim-witted, what would that make you? :D

These old secret priests should be disbanded and sent packing for placing the whole world in mortal danger.

Speaking of hapless and dim-witted, how do you feel that the US Supreme Court has placed the whole world in mortal danger? Al Qaeda, and other Moslem terrorist groups, have been attacking America for decades. Al Qaeda was allowed to grow and build it's dangerous and powerful forces under President Clinton.

But...... you say that the Supreme Court has placed the "whole world in danger". What would you do differently? Would you try to appease the terrorists? Give them New York in the hopes that they won't ask for more? Pay them off like Clinton and Carter did to North Korea, so that North Korea would not develop nuclear weapons? Well guess what happened to that Democrat approach to appeasing terrorism? North Korea developed a nuclear weapons program anyway!

Junior Bush attacks only weakling states that cannot defend themselves, such as the broken, war-torn Iraq.

Speaking of hapless and dim-witted ... Al Qaeda wasn't even a weak state. They still caused the worst attack ever on American soil! A nation that is allowed to develop weapons of mass destruction, like Iran, or Iraq, could do much more damage to America than Al Qaeda.

If I were Iran or any other small nation with resources George intends to steal, as he did Iraqi assets, I would want a nuclear weapon, too.

Speaking of hapless and dim-witted....... what has President Bush stolen from Iraq? On the contrary, Bush has put his political future on the line, and America has spent countless billions, and will spend additional countless billions to make this a safer and more democratic world.

Hiding under the bed, like you seem to want to do, and the EU wants to do, will not protect you or the EU from Moslem terrorism.

[takeo]

Would you prefer if he attacked China and North Korea?

he's not yet crasy enough to risk a nuclear war, but if he gets reelected we might expect the worst.

What "assets" did "He Steal"?

He stole the entire Iraqi economy and divided it among several us-companies. .


I simply don't believe that the US or anyone else has any serious or credible plan to do anything about Iran. I expect tht Iran will have a functional intermediate range nuclear force, a regional force by 2006, including up to a dozen warheads on missiles. I expect they will have a semi-intercontinental ability with up to 50 missiles that can reach most of western europe and north africa, southern russia and india by 2008. They will probably develop a true ICBM capability that can strike the US by 2009.

I don't think so, Iran doesn't have the means.

This will raise the stakes for Europe and India apprciably since Iran has for the most part said it's not bound by the NTBT and NNPT. Moreover they have openly declared that when they procure nuclear weapons they will have a first strike on no-threat doctrine. That is, Iran has already said it will have a nuclear doctrine of preemptive stikes on any perceived threat. The effect this will have is probably one or more or all of the following:

But they equally said not to attack unless attacked first, so not preemptive. (but they might use their nukes first when attacked)

Accelerate nuclear development in India and therefore Pakistan.
India and Pakistan already have nuclear weapons though Pakistan is far behind India. Pakistan is already selling or bartering nuclear technology in violation of the NNPT so this can either make Pakistan richer or poorer, depending on the rate of acquisition. Pakistan is poised to become a fundamentalist mullocracy if Musharef falls.

Pakistan is a real concern, despite the pro-western attitude of musharaf, he's not particularly strong and the military still has links with fundamentalist groups.

Force Saudi Arabia to either embark on a massively expensive nuclear program or concede it cannot compete. A partially nuclear armed Saudi Arabia under increasing civil anarchy and possible disintegration of the ruling elite would be interesting. In either case it would either bankrupt the kingdom or drive the cost of oil sky high.

it wouldn't make so much difference, saoudi Arabia already has an incredible strong military force. But those are useless in case of a civil war or revolution.

Blackmail the EU to pressure NATO to completely build down it's nuclear arsenal. The EU appears at this juncture to have little stomach for a fight. It is worried about it's own economies and increasingly 'diverse' citizenry. Therefore with France's prodding there will be pressure to remove all nukes from NATO countries.

on the contrary, France is not going to give up their nukes, on the contrary there is a tendency to increase military spending.

Israel will be forced to openly declare their nuclear capabilities and when that happens the EU will declare them a pariah state and ennact severe political and economic sanctions.

I don't think so, we didn't do it with pakistan and India either. the palestinian question will determine israeli-EU relations more than anything else.

By 2011 at least one major city in the middle east will be the target of a large nonconventional strike resulting in more than 1 million deaths.

I hope not, this can only happen if al-Quaida gets their hands on nukes (trough pakistan or corrupted Russian scientists) or if the us strikes North-Korea or another country with nuclear arms.



Hapless? Dim-witted? Under President Bush's great leadership capabilities America has been kept safe since the devastating attacks on Sept 11, 2001, and our economy is continuing to grow stronger.

haha, today there's much more poverty than 4 years ago and the economy was stagnating untill last year.
according to clarke and other major specialists Bush' anti-terrorist strategy was a disaster and made 11th september possible. Even today another attack is waiting to happen according to the FBI...

I don't think that there were many leaders that could have done as good a job as Bush did, and I certainly feel that if you were the President of the U.S. instead of Bush, we would have already been taken over by Muslim extremists.

another patient on this forum...
Bush caused an unnecessary war that costed untill now 900 american lifes and even the war in Afghanistan is still a disaster. Never before in American history since the civil war opinions in the us were so polarised.


Speaking of hapless and dim-witted, how do you feel that the US Supreme Court has placed the whole world in mortal danger? Al Qaeda, and other Moslem terrorist groups, have been attacking America for decades. Al Qaeda was allowed to grow and build it's dangerous and powerful forces under President Clinton.

Read the book published by Clarke, major security specialist under both the Bush and Clinton-administration. Al-Quaida has not been attacking the us for decades. One and a half decade ago most current al-Quaida members got financial support from the us payed by us-taxpayer-money;..

But...... you say that the Supreme Court has placed the "whole world in danger". What would you do differently? Would you try to appease the terrorists? Give them New York in the hopes that they won't ask for more?

come on, you have to fight terrorists, but Bush isn't fighting terrorism, he attacked Iraq which didn't have any relation with 11th september. You're the living example of typical american ignorance.

Pay them off like Clinton and Carter did to North Korea, so that North Korea would not develop nuclear weapons? Well guess what happened to that Democrat approach to appeasing terrorism? North Korea developed a nuclear weapons program anyway!

So what would Bush have done? Bomb North-Korea? it's not possible because China didn't allow it and war with china is impossible, even Bush understands that. Besides North-Korea only reactivated its nuclear programma after Bush included North-Korea on the axis of evil and didn't want to build a nuclear reactor for peacefull purposes as promised.


Speaking of hapless and dim-witted ... Al Qaeda wasn't even a weak state. They still caused the worst attack ever on American soil! A nation that is allowed to develop weapons of mass destruction, like Iran, or Iraq, could do much more damage to America than Al Qaeda.

didn't you know? THERE ARE NO WMD'S in Iraq...


Speaking of hapless and dim-witted....... what has President Bush stolen from Iraq? On the contrary, Bush has put his political future on the line, and America has spent countless billions, and will spend additional countless billions to make this a safer and more democratic world.

right, you made Iraq a safer country... :rolleyes:

Hiding under the bed, like you seem to want to do, and the EU wants to do, will not protect you or the EU from Moslem terrorism.

no our policy is first talk and than shoot only if necessary, your approach is "take a bazooka and shoot, doesn't really matter where you shoot as long as it stops moving" (this seems also to be your approach in Iraq, it was a great succes...)