Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
and then

Israel Agrees to Wait 'til after Election

32 posts in this topic

I just saw a news flash on Fox (5:30 am) that Israel has promised to wait 'til after the US elections to decide on an Iran attack. No link yet. I haven't been able to get confirmation yet. If it's true...it's a very big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's very kind of them. What a mad world we live in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fox News.....not the best source..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they don't scupper the Election chances of their ally, eh.

And it's not at all Israel that pulls the strings, is it. No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard twice more (same source) that it is true. If it turns to be accurate and not intentional misinformation, I wonder if this was the result of arm twisting on Obama's part or if Netanyahu has reassessed the situation and decided there is yet time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how Iran can be expected to give up their nuclear program out of fear of a military strike when Israel and America keep assuring everyone they won't attack Iran and that the consequences of a military strike are unacceptable.

"All options are on the table." What a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how Iran can be expected to give up their nuclear program out of fear of a military strike when Israel and America keep assuring everyone they won't attack Iran and that the consequences of a military strike are unacceptable.

"All options are on the table." What a joke.

Obama will support Israel if they decide to preempt but he would only do it out of self interest. He knows he cannot win without American Jewish support. I'm not sure what to think any longer. If Israel is bluffing and Obama calls them on it then Iran (as you say) has no incentive to stop their program. If it's just a ruse on their part it will make them seem all the more duplicitous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw a news flash on Fox (5:30 am) that Israel has promised to wait 'til after the US elections to decide on an Iran attack. No link yet. I haven't been able to get confirmation yet. If it's true...it's a very big deal.

Proving once again that it's Israel that wants to attack Iran. Noticing the consummate lack of criticism, apparently that's okay with the media too, simply because our government is on the attackers' side.

He knows he cannot win without American Jewish support.

That's an interesting quote. Please define "American Jewish support".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because an American citizen happens to be a liberal democrat and Jewish doesn't mean they're going to support Israel's war mongering.

Joe Biden isn't Jewish, and he's the problem, because he's a Zionist. Jews are the greatest allies alive in the fight against Israel's tyranny. Despite what the media has distorted peoples' thinking into believing, hardcore Zionists aren't the leaders of all Jews the same way Jesse Jackson isn't the emperor of all black people.

It's hard to believe that Barack Obama isn't Israel-friendly enough for Zionists. They apparently won't be happy until they have a US President green lighting Israel into a war of extermination of their Palestinian problem:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pretty certain that most of the Arab rulers favor attacking Iran. And most Americans would support attacking Iran, according to opinion surveys. Even Obama has said that "all options on the table." This is hardly the view of an Israeli imperialist. And let's not pretend Iran is an innocent victim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proving once again that it's Israel that wants to attack Iran. Noticing the consummate lack of criticism, apparently that's okay with the media too, simply because our government is on the attackers' side.

That's an interesting quote. Please define "American Jewish support".

Yam, that would be those Jews in America who support the State of Israel. Since many do not, I try to differentiate. Some are like you and absolutely dream of the demise of the State as it exists today seeking instead a State devoid of Jewish identity that will be Arab in a couple of generations. You know, the kind where Jews are relegated to second class citizenship while living (if they are allowed to survive) on their own land.

I actually think Netanyahu is being strong armed by Barry. If so, it's a shame. But saying you're not going to attack and then attacking anyway is no worse than breaking a few campaign promises eh? :innocent:

Israel is and will remain a State for the Jewish people. With Jerusalem as their eternal and undivided capitol. I saw where some twit in the British Parliament got sacked for saying otherwise...poor nibs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also stop saying Zionist, sounds like a mad dictator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yam, that would be those Jews in America who support the State of Israel. Since many do not, I try to differentiate. Some are like you and absolutely dream of the demise of the State as it exists today seeking instead a State devoid of Jewish identity that will be Arab in a couple of generations.

I think you should differentiate even more. Jews who do not support many of Israel's policies can still support the nation of Israel. Just like those who disagree with US policy can do so hoping to make the US more prosperous and secure. The knee-jerk assumption that anyone who disagrees with what Israel's leaders do are either antisemites or self hating Jews is just a way to avoid discussing the policies in question.

You know, the kind where Jews are relegated to second class citizenship while living (if they are allowed to survive) on their own land.

That would truly suck. Ask the Palestinians...

I actually think Netanyahu is being strong armed by Barry. If so, it's a shame. But saying you're not going to attack and then attacking anyway is no worse than breaking a few campaign promises eh? :innocent:

Israel is and will remain a State for the Jewish people. With Jerusalem as their eternal and undivided capitol. I saw where some twit in the British Parliament got sacked for saying otherwise...poor nibs.

I'd say it's more a situation where starting another senseless and illegal war of aggression might cause the US voting public to throw in with someone who does not want the US engaging in such activities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[/b]

Yam, that would be those Jews in America who support the State of Israel. Since many do not, I try to differentiate. Some are like you and absolutely dream of the demise of the State as it exists today seeking instead a State devoid of Jewish identity that will be Arab in a couple of generations. You know, the kind where Jews are relegated to second class citizenship while living (if they are allowed to survive) on their own land.

I actually think Netanyahu is being strong armed by Barry. If so, it's a shame. But saying you're not going to attack and then attacking anyway is no worse than breaking a few campaign promises eh? :innocent:

Israel is and will remain a State for the Jewish people. With Jerusalem as their eternal and undivided capitol. I saw where some twit in the British Parliament got sacked for saying otherwise...poor nibs.

I dream of the demise of its policies towards other people in other lands that have nothing to do with what kind of state it is. I'm afraid I don't see where I ever advocated 2nd-class citizenship for anybody. How faithful Israel is to the Jewish identity is a different subject.

The world is not going to remain divided along race, religion or ethnicity and I'm not interested in supporting governments who prioritize doing so because when we're all the same shade of caramel, that'll be another way to squeeze the racism out of us, if we can't learn how to respect individual rights before then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dream of the demise of its policies towards other people in other lands that have nothing to do with what kind of state it is. I'm afraid I don't see where I ever advocated 2nd-class citizenship for anybody. How faithful Israel is to the Jewish identity is a different subject.

The world is not going to remain divided along race, religion or ethnicity and I'm not interested in supporting governments who prioritize doing so because when we're all the same shade of caramel, that'll be another way to squeeze the racism out of us, if we can't learn how to respect individual rights before then.

Admirable ideology but hardly a picture of the world that IS. The Jews want a distinct homeland where their religion and culture can be secure for the future. They take a tiny space in a very large world and all they ask is to be able to maintain themselves as a distinct culture. I think you are well aware that if the State of Israel is not protected (by themselves) from a growing Arab demographic, the State would lose it's Jewish essence in a couple of generations. It would become just another sad, ruined place where the Arabs fight each other and force Jews and Christians into dhimmitude. And that's why the Jews will never allow it...not ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm the Fox story seems to be false, because Israel may attack next month or sooner. :alien:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Admirable ideology but hardly a picture of the world that IS. The Jews want a distinct homeland where their religion and culture can be secure for the future. They take a tiny space in a very large world and all they ask is to be able to maintain themselves as a distinct culture. I think you are well aware that if the State of Israel is not protected (by themselves) from a growing Arab demographic, the State would lose it's Jewish essence in a couple of generations. It would become just another sad, ruined place where the Arabs fight each other and force Jews and Christians into dhimmitude. And that's why the Jews will never allow it...not ever.

Everybody wants something. The Lakota declared independence a few years ago. They want a distinct homeland and their culture secure for the future too and that's at least relevant to me. "The Jews" maintaining themselves isn't holding their hands out begging for money. Was Palestine a sad ruined place before the UN authorized a plan the region didn't want any part of? Nope. My very first post on this website reflected as such. You must ask yourself what's changed between then and now. Governments playing terroristic games with people over demographics doesn't interest me. Jim Crow is dead, and rightly so. If the Lakota start building walls and evicting people from their own property I will defend civil liberties as always and oppose that crap, not defend it hypocritically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has said time is running out to put a stop to Iran's nuclear programme.

Speaking to a pro-Israel conference in the US, Mr Netanyahu said he could not allow his people to "live in the shadow of annihilation".

source

Israel's nuclear capability.

But you are quite happy for your recalcitrant neighbours to "live in the shadow of annihilation" are you, Mr Netanyahu?

He stressed that all options were on the table, but that containment - leaving Iran to develop its programme under monitoring - was "not an option".

Are "all options on the table" or not, Mr Netanyahu?

Edited by Leonardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he was talking about options to end their program. Letting them continue it doesn't end it, and is therefore not an option.

I don't think Israel has nuclear weapons, but if they've had them for decades, then it's quite telling that their Arab neighbors were apparently okay with it, since reports of Arab leaders planning on buying or building nuclear weapons didn't start popping up until Iran decided to have a nuclear program. It's almost as if the Arabs aren't threatened by Israel and all that talk about Israeli aggression and imperialism was simply propaganda for their ignorant populations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he was talking about options to end their program. Letting them continue it doesn't end it, and is therefore not an option.

I don't think Israel has nuclear weapons, but if they've had them for decades, then it's quite telling that their Arab neighbors were apparently okay with it, since reports of Arab leaders planning on buying or building nuclear weapons didn't start popping up until Iran decided to have a nuclear program. It's almost as if the Arabs aren't threatened by Israel and all that talk about Israeli aggression and imperialism was simply propaganda for their ignorant populations.

The option for Iran to continue it's nuclear program under monitoring implies that program will not be militarised. There seems to be an assumption that Iran's nuclear program has a definite military goal, and I'm not suggesting I know it does not, but that assumption is not borne out by any facts yet.

Israel destroyed an under-construction nuclear facility in Syria whithout any indication this facility was to be used for military purposes. It does not follow that all nuclear facilities have a military purpose and it might be that Iran are actually telling the truth. While I do not suggest allowing Iran to continue their program without international monitoring of it, there is no valid reason at present to stop it via military action. Even if Iran do end up developing nuclear weapons, then I do not see a particular problem with that. There are other nations more volatile than Iran who are nuclear powers, and we haven't seen any nuclear war yet.

Of course, the balance of power in the Middle East will change if Iran do get "the bomb". Israel will find it more difficult to make any hidden nuclear threat when addressing it's neighbours. It is even possible that Iran developing nuclear weapons will cause the situation in the Middle East to cool down.

As for "Israeli aggression and imperialism", I have not seen anyone talk of Israel as having imperialist designs but their aggression is unarguable. This is not to say their neighbours are victims, they are as aggressive as Israel is, but as the cliche states "two wrongs do not make a right".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The option for Iran to continue it's nuclear program under monitoring implies that program will not be militarised. There seems to be an assumption that Iran's nuclear program has a definite military goal, and I'm not suggesting I know it does not, but that assumption is not borne out by any facts yet.

Israel destroyed an under-construction nuclear facility in Syria whithout any indication this facility was to be used for military purposes. It does not follow that all nuclear facilities have a military purpose and it might be that Iran are actually telling the truth. While I do not suggest allowing Iran to continue their program without international monitoring of it, there is no valid reason at present to stop it via military action. Even if Iran do end up developing nuclear weapons, then I do not see a particular problem with that. There are other nations more volatile than Iran who are nuclear powers, and we haven't seen any nuclear war yet.

Of course, the balance of power in the Middle East will change if Iran do get "the bomb". Israel will find it more difficult to make any hidden nuclear threat when addressing it's neighbours. It is even possible that Iran developing nuclear weapons will cause the situation in the Middle East to cool down.

As for "Israeli aggression and imperialism", I have not seen anyone talk of Israel as having imperialist designs but their aggression is unarguable. This is not to say their neighbours are victims, they are as aggressive as Israel is, but as the cliche states "two wrongs do not make a right".

Iran does not need a bomb, Israel provided that for them. It is called Dimona.

All they need is a few rockets with a 25% chance of hitting the target. This whole matter is getting ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The option for Iran to continue it's nuclear program under monitoring implies that program will not be militarised. There seems to be an assumption that Iran's nuclear program has a definite military goal, and I'm not suggesting I know it does not, but that assumption is not borne out by any facts yet.

Israel destroyed an under-construction nuclear facility in Syria whithout any indication this facility was to be used for military purposes. It does not follow that all nuclear facilities have a military purpose and it might be that Iran are actually telling the truth. While I do not suggest allowing Iran to continue their program without international monitoring of it, there is no valid reason at present to stop it via military action. Even if Iran do end up developing nuclear weapons, then I do not see a particular problem with that. There are other nations more volatile than Iran who are nuclear powers, and we haven't seen any nuclear war yet.

Of course, the balance of power in the Middle East will change if Iran do get "the bomb". Israel will find it more difficult to make any hidden nuclear threat when addressing it's neighbours. It is even possible that Iran developing nuclear weapons will cause the situation in the Middle East to cool down.

As for "Israeli aggression and imperialism", I have not seen anyone talk of Israel as having imperialist designs but their aggression is unarguable. This is not to say their neighbours are victims, they are as aggressive as Israel is, but as the cliche states "two wrongs do not make a right".

And Syria, which is quite capable of a counter attack chose to do nothing. They didn't even talk about the attack. Don't you find that to be curious? If an Iranian bomb might cool the area then the Saudi or Egyptian bombs should make things absolutely chilly. Preposterous.

No, the reality is that the world will continue the pressure on Israel until a day comes when Israel lashes out in frustration. Being a bible prophecy believer, I see a war just ahead that is going to leave Israel's enemies sitting in fear on less land than they currently possess wondering what in the hell just happened. And the world will be apoplectic and incapable of doing squat about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Syria, which is quite capable of a counter attack chose to do nothing. They didn't even talk about the attack. Don't you find that to be curious? If an Iranian bomb might cool the area then the Saudi or Egyptian bombs should make things absolutely chilly. Preposterous.

No, the reality is that the world will continue the pressure on Israel until a day comes when Israel lashes out in frustration. Being a bible prophecy believer, I see a war just ahead that is going to leave Israel's enemies sitting in fear on less land than they currently possess wondering what in the hell just happened. And the world will be apoplectic and incapable of doing squat about it.

and then, as a fellow believer in bible prophecy, who do you see as being the 'glorious/beautiful land' as mentioned in Dan 11: 42? Most translations TRANSLATIONS do not mention it as being Israel but one does, the New Living Translation, and I've considered it as being Israel for many years through my own study. So a read of Dan 11: 36- 45 indecates quite clearly that the 'glorious land' is overtaken by the King of the North and all the countries around it except Ammon, Moab and Edom who are spared. Remembering that bible prophecies usually have double application, we can see todays comparisons.

Let's say Iran, Syria and Iraq are a composit King of the North, things would make sense, IMO. Geographically fits nicely. Ammon, Moab and Edom were situated where Jordan is today. Jordan is spared from the King of the North. Egypt is not spared, nor is Saudi arabia. Though Egypt has its own form of false democracy now who's side is the Brotherhood on? Who is Jordan with or would be with? And I gather Saudi Arabia is not liked much by Iran and Syria?

Also surrounding Iran are up to 50 American military bases or countries with bases that the USA are allowed to use (South pushing the North, perhaps, IMO). Iran, Syria and Iraq could fan out and target these bases no trouble or just Iran and Syria. No nukes needed either. As I've mentioned before, Lybia's chemical weapons have not been found (?) so where did they end up?

IMO, going by bible prophecy and the prophecy of the Hopi American Indian, USA is going to be flattened in the ME along with those not in allience with Iran, Syria and Iraq (If these turn up to be the King of the North). I have thought China to be the King of the North, but perhaps not. China is interested in WWIII NOT happening, but it is going to feel abundantly threatened when WWIII does break out it may very well be the 'disturbance out of the north and east': Dan 11: 44-45 that will put an end to the King of the North in order to protect itself and launch an attempt to calm the situation down. The King of the North, if Iran, Iraq and Syria, is Muslim. China wishes politics and religion remain separate. So it will not like any threat of the King of the North trying to impose religion, no matter what the religion, onto China or the entire world. Religion just means trouble. China wants to see a world where religion and politics remain clearly separate and defined.

Note also that there's no mention of 'the glorious land' going forth to conquer or subdue any country, only that it itself with be overtaken. USA will be flattened, IMO. Without USA as Israels 'puppet', they will be totally alone and defenseless no matter what weapons they may or may not have. Nations, not matter who they are, have always been prepared to sacrifice countless of their own if they believe they will win as countries can generally rebuild. But nowhere is there mention of Israel rebuilding and having subdued any of her so called enemies in Dan 11: 36-45. And any mention of Israel in Revelation is symbolic not literal, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Israel is going to wait much longer. I think what HAS come out of Iran does definately point at their making weapons grade material. Russia volinteered to help them out and just trade them their Ore for the Commercial grade uranium they were saying they were trying to make, but they refused.

I don't know why the US or the EU would want to stop Israel. Israel would be doing what the West wants to do, but can't without appearing overly aggressive. It is no ones long term interest for ANYONE to have more nuclear weapons, much less a nation run by a Supreme Leader who takes his directions directly from God (Allah). It is not like if we elected Santorum, because the US would still have a freely elected Congress and a impartial Judiciary and millions of involved citizens. In Iran all the branches of government are directly controlled by the Supreme Leader, or his selected representatives.

We don't need any more nuclear nations on this planet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading Netanyahu's speech to AIPAC I think this story was misinformation. They could attack at any time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.