Will an Iranian Nuke Create More Stability?

[+and-then]

http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/06/22/column-debusmann-idINDEE85L0FT20120622

Can the doctrine of mutually assured destruction work in the volatile M.E.? Or will Iran's known use of terrorist entities in pushing their "foreign policy" be an inherently destabilizing factor in the world?

[libstaK]

Eveytime another nation gets a nucleur bomb it's a step in the wrong direction - simple as that. The cold war was filled with fear and propaganda for many years, this would be even worse I believe.

[docyabut2]

Nothing like a sucide bomber behind a atomic bomb:( even the scienitists are saying even a small nuclear war could pludge the world to go in a nuclear winter.

Edited June 23, 2012 by docyabut2

[MichaelW]

No because it will just create an arms race.

[Yamato]

http://in.reuters.co...E85L0FT20120622

Can the doctrine of mutually assured destruction work in the volatile M.E.? Or will Iran's known use of terrorist entities in pushing their "foreign policy" be an inherently destabilizing factor in the world?

It depends on the definition of "work". If working means to prevent a nuclear attack by another nuclear power, in that, it's never failed, and then.

Iran will get respected like Israel, the US, the UK, France, China, Russia, India, and Pakistan. every other nuclear power in the world when it has semi-modern ballistic missiles armed with atomic warheads.

Let's not get crazy like the gobmint and build 32,000 nukes or something. Good Lord. Iran had some blueprints and is enriching fissile material and modernizing its nuclear program and everyone's hair is on fire. I've got a wet towel for ya.

I also kinda remember a place called Korea. So important, thousands of Americans gave their lives to it thanks to the gobmint. So vital, we're still technically at war. The wrong half of that place detonated a nuclear weapon years ago and they're firing rockets way out over the Sea of Japan like it's nothing. How many standards can we possibly have on this issue and expect anyone else in the world to take us seriously? If non-proliferation is the goal then single standards must be adhered to for everybody.

If other nations are not going to be allowed the "right" to nuclear energy, then I suggest the juggleheads get their pens out and scribble something to that effect.

[+and-then]

It depends on the definition of "work". If working means to prevent a nuclear attack by another nuclear power, in that, it's never failed, and then.

Iran will get respected like Israel, the US, the UK, France, China, Russia, India, and Pakistan. every other nuclear power in the world when it has semi-modern ballistic missiles armed with atomic warheads.

Let's not get crazy like the gobmint and build 32,000 nukes or something. Good Lord. Iran had some blueprints and is enriching fissile material and modernizing its nuclear program and everyone's hair is on fire. I've got a wet towel for ya.

I also kinda remember a place called Korea. So important, thousands of Americans gave their lives to it thanks to the gobmint. So vital, we're still technically at war. The wrong half of that place detonated a nuclear weapon years ago and they're firing rockets way out over the Sea of Japan like it's nothing. How many standards can we possibly have on this issue and expect anyone else in the world to take us seriously? If non-proliferation is the goal then single standards must be adhered to for everybody.

If other nations are not going to be allowed the "right" to nuclear energy, then I suggest the juggleheads get their pens out and scribble something to that effect.

In this we agree. The NPT should probably be revisited and the nuclear powers at least attempt to create a system where countries can enjoy the benefits of nuclear energy without the temptation of building bombs. It would be worth providing them free power plants not to have the worry of bomb proliferation. Ultimately it will be the Israelis that will decide whether the Iranians must be trusted on this as they have most to lose in the short term. But once Iran has a bomb they will have the power to coerce their neighbors in MANY ways. Yes they will be safe from a nuclear strike from Israel but I don't recall Israel threatening such anyway, ever. Think of Assad in Syria. He is literally butchering children of those opposed to him and the world wrings their hands instead of acting. Gaddaffi threatened to slaughter and look what happened. Yes the oil was the difference but it was more than that. He also has some very nasty wmd's and a means to gift them pretty accurately to most of his immediate neighbors. Sarin and VX are MASS casualty weapons. Thousands dead from a single warhead possibly. So the world watches instead of acting. Now imagine the reaction if an Ayatollah did this in Iran - post nuke? Or if they told Israel AFTER Hezbollah had just seized a school or village in the Golan, that they would nuke Israel if they responded? You say they would never behave so recklessly but you have no proof of such a statement - only a supposition that world leaders have to be somewhat rational.....have you really paid attention to how the world IS today?

[Charlie Prime]

.....have you really paid attention to how the world IS today?

I'm curious why you are such a strong supporter of Israel.

Are you Jewish?

Edited June 23, 2012 by Charlie Prime

[Drayno]

If Iran has nuclear weapons, the U.S. will have a hissy fit.

I really wouldn't like to see the U.S. invade Iran. Because then Russia would get angry.

Then before you know it, Israel will act like the tough kid on the block and be wiped out.

Etc, etc.

[+and-then]

I'm curious why you are such a strong supporter of Israel.

Are you Jewish?

Nope. I was raised a Christian and believe that the Jews (and by extension their State) are indeed set apart by God. Not because they are superior in any way to others but simply because my Creator chose them for His own purposes. He promised that all who blessed them would be blessed and all who cursed them would receive a curse. So it's an act of faith on my part. Sometimes it's difficult because their Secular State is as corrupt and messed up as all the others but He didn't say bless them when they are acting correctly. For the most part I grew up learning of the Holocaust in Europe and then in the 60's saw them time and again survive aggressions that they logically shouldn't have - which strengthened my faith in God. The final disposition of the Jews of today is a terrible testing by God. If you believe scripture then you know that only 2/3 of those living at the time of the end will survive as a remnant. If that's now, then we're talking about of loss of another 6-10 million Jews worldwide. So much for the arrogance of being "chosen", huh?

I do it because of my faith. I can't see believing any other way. And my seeming animosity toward anything Palestinian is really an expression of exasperation over the continual hatred that the Arabs show by not allowing a peace to be made available for everyone. But that is also part of scripture. It won't end until and in the way, it is supposed to end.

[Charlie Prime]

I do it because of my faith. I can't see believing any other way.

Ah. I totally see where you are coming from. I live in the Bible Belt of Texas. My mother is a Premillennial Dispensationalist. My daughter is a type of Baptist.

I'm not for a couple of reasons.

One, I believe the English bible you follow is a hacked-up, pasted together political document designed by Constantine to empower the Roman Empire to enslave people, and later used by the British Empire, and today Fabian socialism for the same purpose.

Two, I believe evil does not emanate from a good tree. In other words, when we see people doing evil things, we know their actions spring from an evil place. When I run the accounts, I see the evil side of the ledger being filled up by evangelical Christians, conservative Muslims, and zionist Jews. Thus, they are evil.

Please don't support evil.

Edited June 24, 2012 by Charlie Prime

[+and-then]

Ah. I totally see where you are coming from. I live in the Bible Belt of Texas. My mother is a Premillennial Dispensationalist. My daughter is a type of Baptist.

I'm not for a couple of reasons.

One, I believe the English bible you follow is a hacked-up, pasted together political document designed by Constantine to empower the Roman Empire to enslave people, and later used by the British Empire, and today Fabian socialism for the same purpose.

Two, I believe evil does not emanate from a good tree. In other words, when we see people doing evil things, we know their actions spring from an evil place. When I run the accounts, I see the evil side of the ledger being filled up by evangelical Christians, conservative Muslims, and zionist Jews. Thus, they are evil.

Please don't support evil.

I respect your opinion and your sense of tact. We disagree on the infallibility of scripture however. So we'll just have to agree to disagree. Israel's government is no doubt evil but no more so than any other human government. And I believe the preponderance of the evidence supports that the Jewish State has tried mightily to share the land numerous times over the years. It has always been their Arab brethren who have screamed NO...... The Arabs want all or nothing. They can never have it all.

[buckskin scout]

I respect your opinion and your sense of tact. We disagree on the infallibility of scripture however. So we'll just have to agree to disagree. Israel's government is no doubt evil but no more so than any other human government. And I believe the preponderance of the evidence supports that the Jewish State has tried mightily to share the land numerous times over the years. It has always been their Arab brethren who have screamed NO...... The Arabs want all or nothing. They can never have it all.

Incorrect, western media cant be relied upon for desemination of truth and it extremely censored, in that it solely focuses the demographic threat - the Palestinians and not on Israel with its own brand of terrorism, ethnic cleansing, and human rights violations. It is far too pro-zionist.

[+and-then]

The Arabs have never agreed to even the concept of a truly Jewish State in their midst. This is undeniable. The Arabs continue to lose land in every war they wage and yet the world screams against Israel for defending themselves and demands that Israel give up the land. It's silly. I believe Israel is in the land for good and all. The "Palestinians" could have a State and have peace if they wanted it. They do not, it's as simple as that.

[Yamato]

The map is the problem, now isn't it, gentlemen?

What kind of "State" can anyone imagine, even on their best day, that the Palestinians are going to get, looking at the map?

I pay a lot of attention to 'Shalom TV' made available for free on my Networks list of my On Demand programming. The entirety of its programming is thick gummy Zionist slop; 100% corn-fed Zionist propaganda. I listen to a lot of big wigs both from within the Israeli government and without, and based on their slobbering teary-eyed love for what they've taken, there is no way they're going to give it up. It's beyond obvious that the torque must be placed on Israel if we're going to get Palestine on the map.

Iran getting a nuke or not - will NOT affect the intractable nature of the collective Zionist mindset about Palestine's land (forgive my use of the word Palestine btw, some people can't even use the word Palestinian without putting it in quotes).

No, the Zionists must be met with cold, hard diplomacy of the kind they cannot ignore. When they're feeling the sting of our new policy they will come on bended knee, and they'll even be allowed to come back a 2nd time with a Palestinian envoy. Imagine that!? This is the gentlest effective treatment that I can think of and I'm always up for suggestions and improvements.

The importance of the Israel-Palestine issue is to put an end to it, not continue to enable it forever. It's time for the US to stop being the infidel because we're better than that. I think the ramifications this would have for the relationship between the US and the region going all the way to Iran and beyond are potentially huge.

Edited June 26, 2012 by Yamato

[buckskin scout]

The Arabs have never agreed to even the concept of a truly Jewish State in their midst. This is undeniable. The Arabs continue to lose land in every war they wage and yet the world screams against Israel for defending themselves and demands that Israel give up the land. It's silly. I believe Israel is in the land for good and all. The "Palestinians" could have a State and have peace if they wanted it. They do not, it's as simple as that.

No, the Jews were completely culpable! They aggressively committed land grabs BEFORE the British withdraw on May 15, 1948. April through May proceeding the British withdrawal seen various Jewish terrorist groups and militias commit widespread massacres, rapes, and atrocities against the Palestinians.

The UN Partition of Palestine

Why did the UN recommend the plan partitioning Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state?

"By this time [November 1947] the United States had emerged as the most aggressive proponent of partition...The United States got the General Assembly to delay a vote 'to gain time to bring certain Latin American republics into line with its own views.'...Some delegates charged U.S. officials with 'diplomatic intimidation.' Without 'terrific pressure' from the United States on 'governments which cannot afford to risk American reprisals,' said an anonymous editorial writer, the resolution 'would never have passed.'" John Quigley, "Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice."

Why was this Truman's position?

"I am sorry gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents." President Harry Truman, quoted in "Anti Zionism", ed. by Teikener, Abed-Rabbo & Mezvinsky.

Was the partition plan fair to both Arabs and Jews?

"Arab rejection was...based on the fact that, while the population of the Jewish state was to be [only half] Jewish with the Jews owning less than 10% of the Jewish state land area, the Jews were to be established as the ruling body—a settlement which no self-respecting people would accept without protest, to say the least...The action of the United Nations conflicted with the basic principles for which the world organization was established, namely, to uphold the right of all peoples to self-determination. By denying the Palestine Arabs, who formed the two-thirds majority of the country, the right to decide for themselves, the United Nations had violated its own charter." Sami Hadawi, "Bitter Harvest."

Were the Zionists prepared to settle for the territory granted in the 1947 partition?

"While the Yishuv's leadership formally accepted the 1947 Partition Resolution, large sections of Israel's society—including...Ben-Gurion—were opposed to or extremely unhappy with partition and from early on viewed the war as an ideal opportunity to expand the new state's borders beyond the UN earmarked partition boundaries and at the expense of the Palestinians." Israeli historian, Benny Morris, in "Tikkun", March/April 1998.

Public vs private pronouncements on this question.

"In internal discussion in 1938 [David Ben-Gurion] stated that 'after we become a strong force, as a result of the creation of a state, we shall abolish partition and expand into the whole of Palestine'...In 1948, Menachem Begin declared that: 'The partition of the Homeland is illegal. It will never be recognized. The signature of institutions and individuals of the partition agreement is invalid. It will not bind the Jewish people. Jerusalem was and will forever be our capital. Eretz Israel (the land of Israel) will be restored to the people of Israel, All of it. And forever." Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."

The war begins

"In December 1947, the British announced that they would withdraw from Palestine by May 15, 1948. Palestinians in Jerusalem and Jaffa called a general strike against the partition. Fighting broke out in Jerusalem's streets almost immediately...Violent incidents mushroomed into all-out war...During that fateful April of 1948, eight out of thirteen major Zionist military attacks on Palestinians occurred in the territory granted to the Arab state." "Our Roots Are Still Alive" by the People Press Palestine Book Project.

Zionists' disrespect of partition boundaries

"Before the end of the mandate and, therefore before any possible intervention by Arab states, the Jews, taking advantage of their superior military preparation and organization, had occupied...most of the Arab cities in Palestine before May 15, 1948. Tiberias was occupied on April 19, 1948, Haifa on April 22, Jaffa on April 28, the Arab quarters in the New City of Jerusalem on April 30, Beisan on May 8, Safad on May 10 and Acre on May 14, 1948...In contrast, the Palestine Arabs did not seize any of the territories reserved for the Jewish state under the partition resolution." British author, Henry Cattan, "Palestine, The Arabs and Israel."

Culpability for escalation of the fighting

"Menahem Begin, the Leader of the Irgun, tells how 'in Jerusalem, as elsewhere, we were the first to pass from the defensive to the offensive...Arabs began to flee in terror...Hagana was carrying out successful attacks on other fronts, while all the Jewish forces proceeded to advance through Haifa like a knife through butter'...The Israelis now allege that the Palestine war began with the entry of the Arab armies into Palestine after 15 May 1948. But that was the second phase of the war; they overlook the massacres, expulsions and dispossessions which took place prior to that date and which necessitated Arab states' intervention." Sami Hadawi, "Bitter Harvest."

The Deir Yassin Massacre of Palestinians by Jewish soldiers

"For the entire day of April 9, 1948, Irgun and LEHI soldiers carried out the slaughter in a cold and premeditated fashion...The attackers 'lined men, women and children up against the walls and shot them,'...The ruthlessness of the attack on Deir Yassin shocked Jewish and world opinion alike, drove fear and panic into the Arab population, and led to the flight of unarmed civilians from their homes all over the country." Israeli author, Simha Flapan, "The Birth of Israel."

Was Deir Yassin the only act of its kind?

"By 1948, the Jew was not only able to 'defend himself' but to commit massive atrocities as well. Indeed, according to the former director of the Israeli army archives, 'in almost every village occupied by us during the War of Independence, acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murders, massacres, and rapes'...Uri Milstein, the authoritative Israeli military historian of the 1948 war, goes one step further, maintaining that 'every skirmish ended in a massacre of Arabs.'" Norman Finkelstein, "Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict."

http://www.wrmea.com/component/content/article/366/10409-the-un-partition-of-palestine.html

April Timeline 1948

April 1: Ship Nora delivers first consignment of Czech arms in Haifa. UN Security Council call for a special session of General Assembly to get a truce between Jewish Agency and Arab Higher Committee.

April 2: Haganah captures Palestinian village of Castel, west of Jerusalem, expelling its inhabitants.

April 3:

April 4:

April 5: Palestinian and Zionist leaders object to US proposals of trusteeship agreement.

April 6:Haganah launches Operation Nachshon (first phase of Plan Dalet); Haganah Giv'ati Brigade and other units capture villages along Tel-Aviv - Jerusalem road from local Palestinian militia.

April 7:

April 8: Haganah starts offensive against Palestinian town of Tiberias.

April 9: 'Abd al-Qadir al-Husseini is killed leading counterattack to recover Castel village. Irgun and Stern Gang massacre some 120 inhabitants in village of Deir Yassin

April 10:

April 11:

April 12: General Zionist Council decides to establish independent Jewish state in Palestine on May 16th.

April 13: Operation Har'el under Plan Dalet launched and carried out from now on starting at Nachshon. Villages along Jerusalem road attacked and demolished.

April 14:

April 15:

April 16: British evacuate town of Safed.

April 17: Security Council resolution calls for military and political truce. Haganah starts offensive against town of Safed.

April 18:

April 19:

April 20: US submits Palestine trusteeship plan to UN.

April 21: British suddenly evacuate residential quarters of Haifa.

April 22: Haganah launches Operation Misparayim to attack and occupy Haifa. Resistance of local Palestinian militia in Haifa collapses and then flee under combined shelling adn ground offensives.

April 23:

April 24:

April 25: Launching of Operation Chametz to conquer Jaffa, Haganah attacks suburban villages of Tell Rish, Yazur and Salameh.

April 26: Launching of Operation Yevussi for conquest of whole of Jerusalem; Haganah attacks Palestinian residential quarter of Sheikh Jarrah in East Jerusalem.

April 27: Haganah announces coordination of plans with Irgun.

April 28: Palestinian ALA unit under Michel Issa succeeds in fighting its way into Jaffa in order to break Haganah siege.

April 29:

April 30: All Palestinian quarters in West Jerusalem occupied by Haganah and residents driven out.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~thabetas/april1948.html

[ExpandMyMind]

No, the Jews were completely culpable! They aggressively committed land grabs BEFORE the British withdraw on May 15, 1948. April through May proceeding the British withdrawal seen various Jewish terrorist groups and militias commit widespread massacres, rapes, and atrocities against the Palestinians.

http://www.wrmea.com...-palestine.html

http://www-personal..../april1948.html

Superb post.

[Socio]

No because it will just create an arms race.

Exactly:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/22/opinion/the-bomb-and-the-bomber.html?_r=1

An Iranian bomb will bring about universal nuclear proliferation. Humanity’s greatest achievement since 1945 was controlling nuclear armament by limiting the number of members in the exclusive nuclear club. This unfair arrangement created a world order that guaranteed relative world peace.

But if Iran goes nuclear and the Middle East goes nuclear so will the Third World. If the ayatollahs are allowed to have Robert Oppenheimer’s deadly toy, every emerging power in Asia and Africa will be entitled to have it. The 60-year-old world order that guaranteed world peace will collapse.

An Iranian atom bomb will give radical Islam overwhelming influence. Once nuclear, the rising Shiite power will dominate Iraq, the Gulf and international oil prices. It will spread terror, provoke conventional wars and destabilize moderate Arab nations.

A nuclear arms race in the most volatile region on earth, one that is undergoing massive political change, becoming more radical with the rise in power of entities like the Muslim brotherhood, it is a nightmare scenario for the rest of the world.

Might even come a point time where the rest of the world will only have a window of opportunity to choose to either destroy them or be destroyed by them, that is if the liberals have not had the rest of the world disarmed by then.

[buckskin scout]

Arab-Israeli War

By Benny Morris

On November 2, 1948, an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) patrol visited the campsite of a small Bedouin subtribe, Arab al Mawasa, just west of the Sea of Galilee in northern Israel. The area, along with the rest of upper central Galilee, had been conquered by the IDF three to four days before in an armored offensive code-named Operation Hiram.

The patrol, in search of arms, scoured the area. On nearby “Hill 213” the troops found the decapitated remains of two Israeli soldiers who had been missing since a skirmish one month before. According to the 103rd Battalion’s patrol report, “The men [then] torched the Arabs’ homes [tents?]. The men returned to base with 19 Arab males. At the base the males were sorted out and those who had taken part in enemy operations against our army were identified and then taken under Haim [Hayun]’s command to a designated place and there 14 of them were liquidated. The rest are being transferred to a prisoner of war camp.”1

Few such documents have surfaced in Israel’s archives during the past fifty years, partly because soldiers and officers who committed atrocities rarely left written descriptions behind, partly because those that do exist are mostly deposited in the IDF Archive, where internal censors make sure that documents explicitly pertaining to massacres or expulsions never see the light of day. But occasionally slips occur.

We now know, on the basis of United Nations, American, and British documents and a handful that surfaced in Israel’s civilian archives (the Israel State Archive, party political archives, private papers collections, etc.) during the 1980s and 1990s, of more than a dozen massacres of Arabs by Jewish troops in the course of the first Arab-Israeli war of 1948. These range in size from the shooting of a handful or several dozen civilians arbitrarily selected and lined up against a village wall after its conquest (as occurred, for example, in Majd al Kurum, Bi’na and Dir al Assad, Ilaboun, Jish, Saliha, Safsaf, and Sasa during Hiram) to the slaughter of some 250 civilians and detainees during a firefight in the town of Lydda, southeast of Tel Aviv, on the afternoon of July 12, 1948.

Over the years, the release of new documents and newspaper interviews with witnesses and participants has uncovered Israeli massacres of Arab civilians and prisoners of war in the subsequent wars of 1956, 1967, 1973, and 1982. The revelations came as a shock to much of the Israeli public, which was nurtured on a belief in its own moral superiority and on a doctrine of “purity of arms.” Jewish troops, it was believed, in the mainstream Jewish underground, the Haganah, before 1948, and in the IDF since then, had been trained not to sully their arms by committing atrocities. When an atrocity nonetheless came to light, it was always dismissed as a rare exception, a unique occurrence.

The truth is otherwise—and not surprisingly. Underlying the series of Arab-Israeli wars has been a deep hatred by each side of the other and deep existential fears, both among Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs. Moreover, the wars have been at least partly fought in areas crowded with civilians (the whole of Palestine in 1948, the Gaza Strip in 1956 and 1967, the West Bank and Golan Heights in 1967, and southern Lebanon and Beirut in 1982). Almost inevitably, civilians were hurt and killed, sometimes deliberately, more often unintentionally.

cont... see link http://www.crimesofw...ab-israeli-war/

Edited June 26, 2012 by dside

[buckskin scout]

Superb post.

Thank you!

[+and-then]

The map is the problem, now isn't it, gentlemen?

What kind of "State" can anyone imagine, even on their best day, that the Palestinians are going to get, looking at the map?

I pay a lot of attention to 'Shalom TV' made available for free on my Networks list of my On Demand programming. The entirety of its programming is thick gummy Zionist slop; 100% corn-fed Zionist propaganda. I listen to a lot of big wigs both from within the Israeli government and without, and based on their slobbering teary-eyed love for what they've taken, there is no way they're going to give it up. It's beyond obvious that the torque must be placed on Israel if we're going to get Palestine on the map.

Iran getting a nuke or not - will NOT affect the intractable nature of the collective Zionist mindset about Palestine's land (forgive my use of the word Palestine btw, some people can't even use the word Palestinian without putting it in quotes).

No, the Zionists must be met with cold, hard diplomacy of the kind they cannot ignore. When they're feeling the sting of our new policy they will come on bended knee, and they'll even be allowed to come back a 2nd time with a Palestinian envoy. Imagine that!? This is the gentlest effective treatment that I can think of and I'm always up for suggestions and improvements.

The importance of the Israel-Palestine issue is to put an end to it, not continue to enable it forever. It's time for the US to stop being the infidel because we're better than that. I think the ramifications this would have for the relationship between the US and the region going all the way to Iran and beyond are potentially huge.

This is the primary point of disagreement I have with you and all others of a similar mindset here at UM. I don't accuse anyone of anti semitism because for me that's a particularly nasty and offensive accusation and I do not believe it to be true of anyone I've chatted with here. I think what they believe is worse in some ways though. They are so offended by the history of Palestine, the Jews, Arabs and the perpetual struggle over the land that they fail to be able to see why it is an intractable problem today. YES, Israel will probably be pushed into a peace deal at some point that gives the "Palestinians" most of what they want. But it is at this point where I believe that all who detest Israel are going to be called on to face the truth of the facts on the ground there. After a brief interlude where the new State of Palestine is allowed to arm itself and train a fighting force the attack against an even smaller and more vulnerable (strategically) Israel will begin. The "Palestinians" may or may not even try to find a pretext for their assault. At this point it will become very clear who is fairminded about the process and who just wants Israel GONE. The net effect will be that Israel will rise up and destroy a large number of persons and property and reclaim the land they had recently given away for peace. And my guess is that the world will be screaming that they are the aggressors even while they are defending themselves.

[+and-then]

No, the Jews were completely culpable! They aggressively committed land grabs BEFORE the British withdraw on May 15, 1948. April through May proceeding the British withdrawal seen various Jewish terrorist groups and militias commit widespread massacres, rapes, and atrocities against the Palestinians.

http://www.wrmea.com...-palestine.html

http://www-personal..../april1948.html

I disagree with your take on the situation. BUT.... even if you are 100% accurate in your appraisal, where do they go to move forward? They are deadlocked over the issue. There is no love lost between them and both want the land. I believe that history as well as the STATEMENTS of the Arab stepchildren have made it quite clear that Israel can never be allowed to exist as a Jewish State in Palestine. But it sounds as though you either don't care if Israel were evicted en masse OR you actually believe that at some point enough land could be given to appease/satisfy the "Palestinians" so that a peace could exist between them. I don't know you so I'll not try to decide which but those seem to be the only options to be drawn from your stance.

I believe a third world war will erupt, emanating from this region, because the world simply cannot allow a Jewish State to exist, even on a tiny sliver of land. When it grinds to a halt, as all wars do, I wonder if the motivation will have been worth the devastation.

[Yamato]

This is the primary point of disagreement I have with you and all others of a similar mindset here at UM. I don't accuse anyone of anti semitism because for me that's a particularly nasty and offensive accusation and I do not believe it to be true of anyone I've chatted with here. I think what they believe is worse in some ways though. They are so offended by the history of Palestine, the Jews, Arabs and the perpetual struggle over the land that they fail to be able to see why it is an intractable problem today. YES, Israel will probably be pushed into a peace deal at some point that gives the "Palestinians" most of what they want. But it is at this point where I believe that all who detest Israel are going to be called on to face the truth of the facts on the ground there. After a brief interlude where the new State of Palestine is allowed to arm itself and train a fighting force the attack against an even smaller and more vulnerable (strategically) Israel will begin. The "Palestinians" may or may not even try to find a pretext for their assault. At this point it will become very clear who is fairminded about the process and who just wants Israel GONE. The net effect will be that Israel will rise up and destroy a large number of persons and property and reclaim the land they had recently given away for peace. And my guess is that the world will be screaming that they are the aggressors even while they are defending themselves.

It's an intractable problem starting with and caused by Zionist nationalism. Some people refuse to see the source of the problem and I won't call them anti-Semitic either even if over 90% of Semites are Arabs.

Is the UK alright after losing all that empire? (Am I anti-British because I'm not bitter that they had to see it go? Of course not!) Likewise, is Turkey okay these days? How about Russia?

International peacekeepers will prevent anyone from rising up and destroying anyone once Palestine is on the map. There again, Israel is the obstacle because they will refuse to accept foreign soldiers violating their sovereignty. They will refuse the end of their own propaganda mill because once the sunlight comes in, once the investigation is no longer in-house, their gig is up. Once again, Israel's arm is the one that must be twisted and the US has plenty of torque on tap for the twisting.

[d e v i c e]

I think it's right that nations keep an eye on Iran's nuclear development. They should be prevented from making the bomb, period. I don't care who else currently has the bomb, it's too late for that, those countries already have it. To put it simply, Iran hates Israel and it hates the U.S. If the current regime in Iran had it there way, both the U.S and Israel would be gone. For sure.They wish only harm on those countries. On those grounds alone both Israel and the U.S should prevent nuke development in Iran. And they are.

[Yamato]

I think it's right that nations keep an eye on Iran's nuclear development. They should be prevented from making the bomb, period. I don't care who else currently has the bomb, it's too late for that, those countries already have it. To put it simply, Iran hates Israel and it hates the U.S. If the current regime in Iran had it there way, both the U.S and Israel would be gone. For sure.They wish only harm on those countries. On those grounds alone both Israel and the U.S should prevent nuke development in Iran. And they are.

Why is it too late if countries already have the bomb? That's the attitude that drives the desire for more countries to get the bomb in the first place. I think countries that already have the bomb should be engaged aggressively by their own countrymen if nothing else.

Israel preventing nuke development in Iran is the height of hypocrisy when they can't sign the treaty the rest of us signed nor submit to the inspections the Iranians have been giving through the UN more than anyone else. The Keepers of the Double Standard who expect Iran to behave even better over this ought to cool it with the acts of economic war against Iran. They aren't preventing anything but the Iranian people are sure suffering and it's giving a lot of credence to the propaganda they receive daily from their government.

[d e v i c e]

Why is it too late if countries already have the bomb? That's the attitude that drives the desire for more countries to get the bomb in the first place. I think countries that already have the bomb should be engaged aggressively by their own countrymen if nothing else.

Israel preventing nuke development in Iran is the height of hypocrisy when they can't sign the treaty the rest of us signed nor submit to the inspections the Iranians have been giving through the UN more than anyone else. The Keepers of the Double Standard who expect Iran to behave even better over this ought to cool it with the acts of economic war against Iran. They aren't preventing anything but the Iranian people are sure suffering and it's giving a lot of credence to the propaganda they receive daily from their government.

Because preventing Irans nuke development isn't about whether or not Iran should/shouldn't have that technology - it's about not risking what the current Iranian regimes actions will be, if they do. Look at it simply; would you like it if your enemy was pointing a gun at your head? No you wouldn't. And you would prevent your enemy from getting his hands on that gun in the first place, if you could? That's what is happening.

Hypocricy or not, is for me, beside the point - Irans government have made some dire threats, and those threats are being taken seriously.

I'm not proud of everthing the west does, but in this case, I will stand up for it.