July War with up to FIVE enemies!

[buffycat]

Israel braces for July war with up to five enemies

On Sunday, Israeli military intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin told the Cabinet that the Jewish state faces five adversaries in what could result in an imminent confrontation. Yadlin cited Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, Hamas and Al Qaida.

snip

Already, military intelligence has assessed that Hamas acquired more than 50 missiles with a range of 22 kilometers. Officials said this would allow Palestinian missile strikes on any part of Ashkelon, the largest city in southeastern Israel and which contains strategic sites.

***

OMG they have 50 -- 50!!!! missles!! Nuke em now!!

[ScottSA]

Israel braces for July war with up to five enemies

On Sunday, Israeli military intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin told the Cabinet that the Jewish state faces five adversaries in what could result in an imminent confrontation. Yadlin cited Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, Hamas and Al Qaida.

snip

Already, military intelligence has assessed that Hamas acquired more than 50 missiles with a range of 22 kilometers. Officials said this would allow Palestinian missile strikes on any part of Ashkelon, the largest city in southeastern Israel and which contains strategic sites.

***

OMG they have 50 -- 50!!!! missles!! Nuke em now!!

Right. Should we wait till they have 100 missiles? 200? How many missiles should we let them get before we attack a terrorist organization? Do you ever think before you type?

[buffycat]

Israel braces for July war with up to five enemies

On Sunday, Israeli military intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin told the Cabinet that the Jewish state faces five adversaries in what could result in an imminent confrontation. Yadlin cited Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, Hamas and Al Qaida.

snip

Already, military intelligence has assessed that Hamas acquired more than 50 missiles with a range of 22 kilometers. Officials said this would allow Palestinian missile strikes on any part of Ashkelon, the largest city in southeastern Israel and which contains strategic sites.

***

OMG they have 50 -- 50!!!! missles!! Nuke em now!!

Right. Should we wait till they have 100 missiles? 200? How many missiles should we let them get before we attack a terrorist organization? Do you ever think before you type?

Scott - Palestine is an occupied territory as such the people there have a right to defend themselves and attempt to regain their lands.

All would be so easily solved if Israel would dismantle the settlements and get the heck out. Period.

50 missles is nothing - what about Israels hundreds of nukes? And here bloated defense forces? All propped up by the US military industrial complex and the US GOP.

Oh, and of course I think before I type, why with the insults all the time?

Hamas was democratically elected. Hamas held to a ceasefire for over 18 months, while Israel did not. In fact Israel is currently violating another ceasefire term by flying over Lebanese airspace (something she has Never stopped doing).

Besides that - the one screaming for war seems to be the right wing extremists leading the land of Israel. They called for war with Iraq, they are calling now for war with Iran. Fine if they are the ones who will fight it - but they won't be - they are proxy warriors and need only call on their puppy the US.

So, who REALLY wants this?

The average person in Israel (probably not) the average Palestinian - probably NOT either. Those who beleive in Greater Israel (ie LAND and RESOURCES now belonging to others) YES. That has been the political aim of the Zionist ideology since its inception.

(I'll wait for your next insult with anticipation!!)

[Bonam]

Hamas held to a ceasefire for over 18 months

I didn't know allowing rockets to be constantly launched at Israel from the territory you control counts as "holding to a ceasefire" now.

All would be so easily solved if Israel would dismantle the settlements and get the heck out. Period.

Israel dismantled the settlements and got the heck out of Gaza. Was all solved? Nope. Was anything even slightly improved in any way? Nope. Violence (both against Israel and against Palestinians) increased, and the quality of life of Palestinians decreased. More Palestinians are living in poverty and dying now in Gaza then did while Israel was occupying the place.

Besides that - the one screaming for war seems to be the right wing extremists leading the land of Israel.

Yes, because having a charter that says that Israel must be whiped out doesn't constitute calling for war. The president of Iran saying Israel should be whiped off the map isn't screaming for war. Kidnapping soldiers at guardposts isn't provoking war. Nope, of course not. These are all peaceful actions of our friendly Arab/Muslim neighbours.

50 missles is nothing

Tell that to the person whose kids get killed by one of those missiles.

the average Palestinian - probably NOT either

The average Palestinian voted for Hamas, and thus knowingly voted for war, death, and suffering.

[M.Dancer]

Scott - Palestine is an occupied territory as such the people there have a right to defend themselves and attempt to regain their lands.

Bookmark this post for the next time someone claims that no one here justifies terrorism.

"Palestine" = Israel...

[Rue]

Israel braces for July war with up to five enemies

On Sunday, Israeli military intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin told the Cabinet that the Jewish state faces five adversaries in what could result in an imminent confrontation. Yadlin cited Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, Hamas and Al Qaida.

snip

Already, military intelligence has assessed that Hamas acquired more than 50 missiles with a range of 22 kilometers. Officials said this would allow Palestinian missile strikes on any part of Ashkelon, the largest city in southeastern Israel and which contains strategic sites.

***

OMG they have 50 -- 50!!!! missles!! Nuke em now!!

And you Buffy where do you live? Are the missiles pointed at you? Do you live with missiles pointed at you from a group that states they need to wipe you out? Do you?

Easy to make such childish remarks when you live far removed from the hostility and have no clue what it is like to have your life threatened.

[Rue]

"OMG they have 50 -- 50!!!! missles!! Nuke em now!! Scott - Palestine is an occupied territory as such the people there have a right to defend themselves and attempt to regain their lands. All would be so easily solved if Israel would dismantle the settlements and get the heck out. Period. 50 missles is nothing - what about Israels hundreds of nukes?""

Its interesting Buffy chooses to write in sounding like an onvoxious Vallery Girl and then claims she is insulted?

Let us look at the above comment. This typifies your intellectual dishonesty. Hamas's charter is not to defend anything and you know it. Its charter which is there for anyone read, talks about killing all the Jews of Israel, and then taking Israel and creating a Muslim theocracy in Israel, The West Bank, Gaza and then Jordan and probably Lebanon. It has nothing to do with defending Gaza or Hamas. Nothing and for you to suggest that shows you have zero credibility. Hamas has never been a defence organization. It in fact kills Muslim civilians who do not collaborate with it. It was responsible just two days ago for attacks on 3,000 Christians in the Gaza.

You further show your intellectual dishonesty by suggesting if Israel dismantled its settlements and "get the heck out" there would be no problem. Yes Buffy you are quite transparent. First of all trying to suggest the only reason Hamas exists is to protest the settlements is as bug a crock of sheeyit as it gets.

The creation of Hamas and its charter have nothing to do with protesting settlements and everything to do with the Muslim Brotherhood's desire for a theocracy in Jordan-Israel-Palestine and its desire to also place a theocracy in Egypt, and eventually absord Lebanon. You Buiffy of course make no effort to read about Hamas and its agenda and instead make these shallow inferences that it simply is defending Palestinians or protesting settlements. Oh its so easy in the world of Buffy to select only those notions which suit her agenda.

As for your comment "just get the heck out"-gee Buffy aren't we smarmy and cute. Of course do you mean get the heck out of Israel or do you simply mean get the heck out of the West Bank? Well Buffy? Is your ambiguity sweet and innocent or are you once again too gutless to come out and say you want Israel erased so you make such veiled references? Well?

As for your Vally Girl routine over missiles, you live in a world without conflict so your comments about missiles are simply you reflecting the ignorance that comes from a sheltered person spoiled and fat on the luxury of the peace in her country and so writes in and sounds precisely like what she is, a spoiled brat making valley girl comments.

Grow up Buffy. Living with a missile pointed at your face is not a joke. Your Oh My God sarcasm belittles not just Israeli Jews, but the very Palestinians who will also die or did it not dawn on you and your Valley Girl Oh My God comments, that with a country so small one missile will kill not just those get the heck out Jews but Muslims as well.

As for your comments on nuclear bombs. Use your brain Buffy. Do you think Israel would nuke Gaza or the West Bank? Are you that clueless or is that Valley Girl act genuine.

Here Buffy lets talk in small words...if Israel nuked the West Bank and Gaza it would kill everyone in Israel, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan from fall-out.

Yes in Buffy's world Israel will wipe itself out to defend itself. I guess we call that Buffy Logic.

Buffy once again you try turn this into a simplistic Hamas good guy v.s. Israel bad guy issue. Egypt, Jordan, Mr. Abbas, and Lebanon are equally as threatened by Hamas's missiles and ties with Hezbollah as is Israel but of course in Buffy's world we block that part out.

The potential to use these missiles to create a huge war and have Iran use a nuclear bomb is real. It is not a joke subject to Oh My Gaws guffaws. It is precisely why Abbas and Jordan and Egypt and Israel are meeting. It is precisely why Saudi Arabia and Lebanon are informally involved. It is precisely whyt Israel is now on crisis alert as is the US,and Russia and Turkey. You think this is a joke? China and Russia have already given Israel the green light. So has the Arab League. You think this is a joke? We could very well see commando strikes in Gaza or aerial bombings where innocent civilians get caught in the cross fire. This is not a joke.

As much as you think this is a joke Buffy, Israel can not sit with missiles pointed at its civilians that would wipe them out in literally less then 3 minutes.

For those of us who care to discuss the conflict without making Oh my God guffaws..many of us worry an invasion of Gaza is immindent and the Arab League is openly discussing it with Israel and China and Russia are goingf to sit this out and it will come down to whether the US feels this will destablize Iraq or not.

An attack on Gaza may also include a strike on Iran. This is very serious.

What we see is a very real war front emerging between the Sunni Muslim nations versus Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and Sudan on the otherwise.

No this is not a joke and innocent people could die.

Like Oh my Gawd Buffy some of us are not chewing gum and talking about it like silly school girls.

Hamas was democratically elected. Hamas held to a ceasefire for over 18 months, while Israel did not. In fact Israel is currently violating another ceasefire term by flying over Lebanese airspace (something she has Never stopped doing).

Besides that - the one screaming for war seems to be the right wing extremists leading the land of Israel. They called for war with Iraq, they are calling now for war with Iran. Fine if they are the ones who will fight it - but they won't be - they are proxy warriors and need only call on their puppy the US.

So, who REALLY wants this?

The average person in Israel (probably not) the average Palestinian - probably NOT either. Those who beleive in Greater Israel (ie LAND and RESOURCES now belonging to others) YES. That has been the political aim of the Zionist ideology since its inception.

(I'll wait for your next insult with anticipation!!)

You leave yourself open to insults when you make such deliberately insulting comments such as "50 missiles is nothing".

Your reference to

[Rue]

Hamas held to a ceasefire for over 18 months

Bonam I think anyone who in fact bothers to read what happened will kno Hamas in fact violated the ceasefire numerous times and did not hold to it for 18 months but Buffy doesn't let facts get in her way.

In fact when Israel pulled out of Gaza, the first thing Hamas did was launch missile attacks and it does today as it has done every day continuously, Of course Buffy lives far from the missiles and hasn't a clue that they are being shot off daily.

Israel went in to Gaza to prevent missile attacks from Hamas. Hamas then did what Hezbollah did, state it was only defending itself. So when Israel left, what does Hamas do, immediately shoot missiles into Israel stating-oh did we state we only shoot at Israel because they are in Gaza? Did we say that. Oh hee hee. We also want to wipe out Israel. Come on you knew that.

Hezbollah used the exact same p.r. stunt. It told the world it only existed because Israel was on Lebanese soil. Israel went into Lebanon to prevent missile attacks and terrorist attacks being launched against its civilians. It said to Hezbollah, you only fight is because we are on Lebanese soil, fine we leave.

What happens? The day they left Hezbollah begins missile attacks into Israel proper. did we say we were simply fighting to liberate Lebanon says Hezbollah? Oh tee hee hee, you also know our charter says we want to wipe out Israel.

This is precisely the bull Israel puts up with. Terror groups whose agendas are clear and unambiguous and call for its eradication and yet we have the Buffy Arm Chair Experts writing in with OH MY GOD expressions pretending Israel is not in danger and are making it all up and then fabricating misrepresentations that Hamas stuck to an 18 month ceasefire.

Now in regards to the following comment;

"The average Palestinian voted for Hamas, and thus knowingly voted for war, death, and suffering."

I am not so sure about the comment. Look I do not doubt there are Palestinians who when they voted for Hamas voted for terrorism and support its terror.

But I also think there may be many Palestinians who voted for Hamas not for terror but because it was the only alternative to the corupt and violent PLO.

I believe people voted for it precisely because at the time they were desperate for a non corupt regime.

Hamas holds the hearts and minds of its people hostage to its desire to eradicate Israel because of their desperate need for a non corupt government.

So no I am not ready to demonize and write off all Palestinians. Even if is true which I do not believe it is because its a generalization that suggests all Palestinians are deliberately evil and deserve to die, that is wrong. Its wrong to condemn any people to suffer for any reason.

You know I am as strong a supporter of Israel's right to exist as they come, but you should also know everytime I see seomeone demonizing Palestinians and saying they deserve their fate I say don't do that because that is no different then how people demonize Jews and Israelis. Its wrong to take an entire people and hold them morally responsible for the actions of terrorists who claim to represent them.

Palestinians are humans suffering and caught up in the same historic curse as the Israelis. They are as much victims as Israeli civilians.

Most Israelis polled as much as they hate Palestinian terrorists want peace with them. Yes Israelis because they have suffered terrorist attacks do not trust Palestinians and think they hate them but this is the result of trauma.

Yes when Palestinians are polled the majority indicate they want all of Israel and engage in anti-semitic stereotypes they have been taught, but that is exactly what trapped, desperate people come to believe when its forced on them and they believe they have no other choices. Like the Israelis I do not excuse it. I explain it though as a psychological result of trauma.

For me e need to help people who are traumatized heal and to do that we need to challenge any stereotype or generalization that makes either appear evil or the enemy. To find peace these people need time to seperate and heal then slowly interact in projects where they share their pain and see they bled and suffered the same way. This takes time and careful planning and will need the help of peacemakers from other countries. It will require leaving politics behind and embracing basic precepts of trauma and survival counseling which transcend politics and religion and are best illustrated by the healing circles used by aboriginal peoples in Canada with criminals. The healing circles of the aboriginal peoples are very similiar to approaches in Islam and Judaism for healing community conflicts and it of course is also something one day who knows peacemakers like the Mennonites may be able to help with as they understand it too.

Until then we should demonize Palestinians.

I can understand why Israelis fear Palestinians and vice versa. I blame it on the terrorists first and foremost who deliberately use terrror to get them to hate each other. But I also see there being failures of the leaders of the Islamic faith to denounce terror, and a failure of the Arab League to come clean and denounce terror but instead secretly let Israel do all its fighting for it against terrorists. I slo see failure with the religious leaders in both Palestine and Israel for failing to form a peace committee and walking out together hand in hand in peace marches but instead staying silent leaving any peace work to grass roots organizations who are dismissed for not being religiously appropriate.

I do not blame the average Israeli or Palestinian for the same reasons. They both are faced with terror. I see failure with the religious leaders, maybe the UN, politicians, bust mostly the terrorists who are scum of the earth and make peace impossible.

I will not hate or demonize Palestinians. They suffer and bleed as do Israelis. They are both victims.

[Bonam]

I'm not trying to demonize the Palestinians, was just replying to buffycat's post. In my opinion, many Palestinians would indeed support terrorism against Israel. Of course, there are many reasons for why they hold that belief, including the propaganda and coercion by some of their leaders. But the fact remains that they did elect Hamas, and they did know that Hamas would mean more violence between Palestine and Israel.

I'm not saying that they are evil for doing so, or that they are thereby all terrorists, or anything like that, but to a certain extent, a people are very much responsible for the actions of their government, especially if it's a democratically elected government, as Hamas was. When terrorists are just a minor faction stirring up trouble, yeah, you can say that the rest of people there aren't responsible. But when it's the elected government, then those that elected it have some share of the responsibility. That's the burden of democracy. If the American people elected a president whose platform was "let's nuke every other country", and then the US went ahead and did that, would the average American voter be blameless?

As for the ceasefire not being held by Hamas, yeah, I pointed that out and agree with you.

[fellowtraveller]

Israel braces for July war with up to five enemies

On Sunday, Israeli military intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin told the Cabinet that the Jewish state faces five adversaries in what could result in an imminent confrontation. Yadlin cited Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, Hamas and Al Qaida.

snip

Already, military intelligence has assessed that Hamas acquired more than 50 missiles with a range of 22 kilometers. Officials said this would allow Palestinian missile strikes on any part of Ashkelon, the largest city in southeastern Israel and which contains strategic sites.

***

OMG they have 50 -- 50!!!! missles!! Nuke em now!!

Right. Should we wait till they have 100 missiles? 200? How many missiles should we let them get before we attack a terrorist organization? Do you ever think before you type?

Scott - Palestine is an occupied territory as such the people there have a right to defend themselves and attempt to regain their lands.

All would be so easily solved if Israel would dismantle the settlements and get the heck out. Period.

50 missles is nothing - what about Israels hundreds of nukes? And here bloated defense forces? All propped up by the US military industrial complex and the US GOP.

Oh, and of course I think before I type, why with the insults all the time?

Hamas was democratically elected. Hamas held to a ceasefire for over 18 months, while Israel did not. In fact Israel is currently violating another ceasefire term by flying over Lebanese airspace (something she has Never stopped doing).

Besides that - the one screaming for war seems to be the right wing extremists leading the land of Israel. They called for war with Iraq, they are calling now for war with Iran. Fine if they are the ones who will fight it - but they won't be - they are proxy warriors and need only call on their puppy the US.

So, who REALLY wants this?

The average person in Israel (probably not) the average Palestinian - probably NOT either. Those who beleive in Greater Israel (ie LAND and RESOURCES now belonging to others) YES. That has been the political aim of the Zionist ideology since its inception.

(I'll wait for your next insult with anticipation!!)

Other than Hamas being elected, my search for any facts in this post has been completely in vain.

Imagine being surrounded by people who want to turn your home and your family into a puddle of melted glass, and repeatedly tell you that. And they mean it. For sixty years.

Israel has decided not to be obliterated.

Shame on them.

[M.Dancer]

I think a July war with up to 5 enemies is crazy.

Wait till September when the weather is better....

[JerrySeinfeld]

I think a July war with up to 5 enemies is crazy.

Wait till September when the weather is better....

Indeed.

We can dicker about ideas all day long. Let's talk about FACTS.

FACT: Hezbollah & Hamas have consistently shown their willingness and desire to use every military technology available to them to harm innocent Israelis.

FACT: Hezbollah and Hamas are largely armed by IRAN and SYRIA.

QUESTION: If Iran and Syria ship arms to Hezbollah and Hamas - which both have proven to use at every opportunity - what will happen if Iran gets the nuke?

Connect the dots. There are only 3 or 4 of them and they're all lined in in a pretty straight line.

[scribblet]

Connect the dots. There are only 3 or 4 of them and they're all lined in in a pretty straight line.

Yabbut - it's ALL Israel's fault doncha know

[Argus]

I think a July war with up to 5 enemies is crazy.

Wait till September when the weather is better....

Indeed.

We can dicker about ideas all day long. Let's talk about FACTS.

FACT: Hezbollah & Hamas have consistently shown their willingness and desire to use every military technology available to them to harm innocent Israelis.

FACT: Hezbollah and Hamas are largely armed by IRAN and SYRIA.

QUESTION: If Iran and Syria ship arms to Hezbollah and Hamas - which both have proven to use at every opportunity - what will happen if Iran gets the nuke?

Connect the dots. There are only 3 or 4 of them and they're all lined in in a pretty straight line.

If it weren't for the West holding Israel back I think they would have already blown the hell out of Iran and Syria's infrastructure and left them all shaking their fists in the dark.

[ScottSA]

We can dicker about ideas all day long. Let's talk about FACTS.

FACT: Hezbollah & Hamas have consistently shown their willingness and desire to use every military technology available to them to harm innocent Israelis.

FACT: Hezbollah and Hamas are largely armed by IRAN and SYRIA.

QUESTION: If Iran and Syria ship arms to Hezbollah and Hamas - which both have proven to use at every opportunity - what will happen if Iran gets the nuke?

Connect the dots. There are only 3 or 4 of them and they're all lined in in a pretty straight line.

I don't think it's a reasonable expectation that Iran will give a nuke to Hezbollah or Hamas. As much as some of those folks might like to blow the evil Jew and themselves to kingdom come, the strategic use of nukes from the perspective of Iran is better served by using them for deterence. Once they pop off, the chickens will come home to roost in the form of a big fireball over Tehran, and that won't serve anyone, including the 12th Imam, any good. I don't think that's the concern. I think a much more immediate concern is the potential for Iran to get the bomb, establish deterence (which doesn't depend on parity), and then beef up both Hezbollah and Hamas with virtual impugnity and in perpetuity, keeping Israel reeling on its feet at no real cost to Iran. A further reaching danger is that once under a nuclear umbrella, Iran can throw its weight around regionally, including Iraq, and no one can do much about it.

What most folks don't get is that having nukes is far more politically powerful than using nukes. Nukes of the type that Iran can aspire to, at least in the short term, are no more than big bombs with a high pollution factor. They are not the city busters that the western nations and russia have. But the contest in the nuclear club is not about who has the bigger stick, it's about who is going to pull the trigger in a Mexican standoff, and the answer so far is: nobody.

The purpose of deterence is to preserve the political status quo from the machinations of an enemy...not to nuke the opposing side into radioactive dust. In a highly developed and well choreographed nuclear standoff like that between the US and the USSR, various layers of nuclear capability came into play, like first, second, and third strike capability, but again, it wasn't about one side being able to irradiate a bit more of the remaining dust particles on the other side, it was about the demonstrated capability of doing so. In a basic deterence umbrella, all one side needs is a bullet in the chamber...it doesn't matter whether it's a 22 cal or a 50 cal. With even a couple of bombs, Iran will have achieved a nuclear umbrella under which it can, to its mind at least, undertake all sorts of conventional adventures.

[fellowtraveller]

QUESTION: If Iran and Syria ship arms to Hezbollah and Hamas - which both have proven to use at every opportunity - what will happen if Iran gets the nuke?

We can be certain that Iran does not yet have nukes, because Israel has not yet attacked Iran.

But Israel would be brain dead if they did allow Iran to get the capability.

And brain dead is something Israel has never been.

There is a bad moon rising.......

[ScottSA]

QUESTION: If Iran and Syria ship arms to Hezbollah and Hamas - which both have proven to use at every opportunity - what will happen if Iran gets the nuke?

We can be certain that Iran does not yet have nukes, because Israel has not yet attacked Iran.

But Israel would be brain dead if they did allow Iran to get the capability.

And brain dead is something Israel has never been.

There is a bad moon rising.......

Very bad. I believe we've been in the winter war of WW III for several years. It's almost a given that a major war involving Israel in the absence of cold war stasis would suck in the global powers. With the exception of France, of course, which would pre-emptively surrender to Denmark.

[Sulaco]

Israel braces for July war with up to five enemies

On Sunday, Israeli military intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin told the Cabinet that the Jewish state faces five adversaries in what could result in an imminent confrontation. Yadlin cited Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, Hamas and Al Qaida.

snip

Already, military intelligence has assessed that Hamas acquired more than 50 missiles with a range of 22 kilometers. Officials said this would allow Palestinian missile strikes on any part of Ashkelon, the largest city in southeastern Israel and which contains strategic sites.

***

OMG they have 50 -- 50!!!! missles!! Nuke em now!!

Right. Should we wait till they have 100 missiles? 200? How many missiles should we let them get before we attack a terrorist organization? Do you ever think before you type?

Scott - Palestine is an occupied territory as such the people there have a right to defend themselves and attempt to regain their lands.

All would be so easily solved if Israel would dismantle the settlements and get the heck out. Period.

50 missles is nothing - what about Israels hundreds of nukes? And here bloated defense forces? All propped up by the US military industrial complex and the US GOP.

Oh, and of course I think before I type, why with the insults all the time?

Hamas was democratically elected. Hamas held to a ceasefire for over 18 months, while Israel did not. In fact Israel is currently violating another ceasefire term by flying over Lebanese airspace (something she has Never stopped doing).

Besides that - the one screaming for war seems to be the right wing extremists leading the land of Israel. They called for war with Iraq, they are calling now for war with Iran. Fine if they are the ones who will fight it - but they won't be - they are proxy warriors and need only call on their puppy the US.

So, who REALLY wants this?

The average person in Israel (probably not) the average Palestinian - probably NOT either. Those who beleive in Greater Israel (ie LAND and RESOURCES now belonging to others) YES. That has been the political aim of the Zionist ideology since its inception.

(I'll wait for your next insult with anticipation!!)

What a strange proposition. it seems to me that you argue, in response to swcott, that Israel should not defend itself because others have a right to wipe it out. Wow... if only the germans understood that. Put another way - I would never expect anyone not to defend himself - whether in the right or in the wrong.

[buffycat]

What a strange proposition. it seems to me that you argue, in response to swcott, that Israel should not defend itself because others have a right to wipe it out. Wow... if only the germans understood that. Put another way - I would never expect anyone not to defend himself - whether in the right or in the wrong.

Hmmm..

This thread was the last post I made before being bannished from the Land of MLW Forums.

I will finally answer your post Sulaco.

I do not deny that Israel - or anyone else has the right to defend themselves. What I have problems with is the Israeli Admin's penchant for expansion of undeclared borders and the outright theft of Other's lands in the Occupied Territories - which is btw illegal according to international law. (I'll leave out the collective punishment since I believe it's already been mentioned).

Israel is not the vunerable little land that she makes herself out to be. She is the worlds - yes the WORLD'S - fourth largest military power. She is armed to the teeth, and also has nuclear weapons capacity (ie both the nukes themselves and the delivery systems). IOW for anyone to come and attack Israel right now would be outright suicide for them. Give your head a shake.

I have NO idea what the Germans have to do with this so you will have to clarify that. Unless if I can make a guess - that since so many Jews were sadly killed by the Nazis (mostly on Polish soil) that this for some kind of reason makes it OK to go and do what they are doing now?

I dunno about you but in my books - two wrongs don't make a right.

[M.Dancer]

Israel is not the vunerable little land that she makes herself out to be. She is the worlds - yes the WORLD'S - fourth largest military power.

I dunno ..................

Well I can think of a dozen nations that have stronger armed forces than Israel.

Lets start off the top of my head.

USA

Russia

Britain

Red China

France....

(shall i continue?)

India

Pakistan

North Korea

Iran

Ukraine

(still not near israel yet....)

Republic of China

Germany (Gut Gott!)

South Korea

Vietnam

Egypt

Syria

And somewhere down below, you find Israel......

The point is, Israel isn't near the largest military power in the region, but the most capable.

....I'll let Rue deal with the remainder of your 1/2 truths......

[Bonam]

July's over, and there wasn't any war, not even with one enemy, let alone 5 ;p

[Rue]

Scott I just read back your comment. It is classic Henry Kissinger approach to international relations. I do think though, the intangible or sheer irational nature of terrorism has put a monkey wrench in this theory. It would make sense to me in a sane world where governments are rational.

The problem with this classic Kissinger theory is that it does not account for these autonomous terror units who can often trigger off diasterous results with minor and obscure actions no one has predicted.

Kissinger's world of checks and balances never predicted an Osama Ben Laden, simply super-powers involved in proxy wars.

Today trying to predict the next move and suggest terrorists can be deterred with checks and balances just does not work anymore.

It just takes one wing nut with one terrorist cell of 20 to trigger off a massive retaliation these days. That is what worries me so much.

So while I agree with you on one classic level of political analysis, on another I just don't know anymore since I believe all it takes is one nut to throw off the equation and I genuinely believe terrorists are not deterred by the threat of force for the precise reason they are not rational - I believe emotion blinds them.

Of course I am generalizing. Some are clever like foxes but I believe most are angry nut jobs who let blind rage and fanaticism blind them to rational response to superior power.

They also have learned to adapt as good as any cock-roach or rat.

[marcinmoka]

What most folks don't get is that having nukes is far more politically powerful than using nukes.

Well put.

Some are clever like foxes but I believe most are angry nut jobs who let blind rage and fanaticism blind them to rational response to superior power.

Rue, to a certain extent, you do suggest this division (i.e rational vs. fanatical) which exists in terrorist ranks. While you point out their capacity, we should focus in their respective roles as well. While I wholeheartedly agree that you cannot deal with the large irrational, fanatical elements using the traditional "Kissinger" approach, you could potentially make inroads in combating the "clever foxes" you refer to, i.e the existent power base which is pulling the strings of the fanatical foot soldiers, namely Iran, Syria and the Saudi elite. While they are but a minority, they should clearly understand what is at stake and should thus be more willing to succumb to sticks (and the occasional carrot).

Despite the individual cell structure so pervasive in terrorism which permits these miniture groups to dictate the tactical portions of attacks, the overlaying strategies, motifs, and *money* come from the top, just as in a conventional army.

Edited August 2, 2007 by marcinmoka

[Bonam]

I think it's reasonable to assume that even governments like those of present day Iran would not directly use nuclear weapons against Israel, for reasons of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD). However, despite the fact that these top level players may not directly want to use nuclear weapons themselves, but instead use their possession of nuclear weapons as a political bargaining chip, that doesn't mean that various terrorist organisations won't be able to use them.

For example, governments that financially support some terrorist groups (i.e. Hezbollah, Hamas), often disavow any knowledge of or involvement with specific acts of those groups. By disavowing and even condemning actions of the terrorist groups that they fund, these states escape retaliation against themselves.

Take for example this scenario: Iran covertly provides a nuclear weapon to a terrorist group. This group smuggles it into Israel and detonates it. All middle-eastern governments immediately condemn the attack and the terrorist group responsible. An investigation finds links indicating that the bomb originated in Iran. Iran reacts swiftly to the findings, arrests a few nuclear officials that it claims are members of the terrorist group and acted without the support or knowledge of the government, and executes them.

At that point, if Israel proceeded to nuke Iran to oblivion in the classic response that the MAD doctrine calls for, they would not enjoy much international support. Furthermore, a nuclear strike whiping out Iran would destroy any possibility to find evidence that the Iranian government was indeed involved in the provision of those nuclear materials to the terrorist group. That means that Israel would be forever branded a nuclear aggressor by the international community, and would undergo isolation and possible retaliation itself. This isn't a guarantee that Israel wouldn't implement full nuclear retaliation anyway, but it does make it unlikely, and so it's a risk and gamble that a government like that of Ahmadinejad just might consider.

Of course that's just a random plot off the top of my head. But something along those lines, where a terrorist group gets its hands on nuclear materials and uses them without the possibility to directly link it to a state government, definitely becomes a much more probable possibility once middle-eastern nations start acquiring nuclear weapons.

[ScottSA]

Scott I just read back your comment. It is classic Henry Kissinger approach to international relations. I do think though, the intangible or sheer irational nature of terrorism has put a monkey wrench in this theory. It would make sense to me in a sane world where governments are rational.

The problem with this classic Kissinger theory is that it does not account for these autonomous terror units who can often trigger off diasterous results with minor and obscure actions no one has predicted.

Kissinger's world of checks and balances never predicted an Osama Ben Laden, simply super-powers involved in proxy wars.

Today trying to predict the next move and suggest terrorists can be deterred with checks and balances just does not work anymore.

It just takes one wing nut with one terrorist cell of 20 to trigger off a massive retaliation these days. That is what worries me so much.

So while I agree with you on one classic level of political analysis, on another I just don't know anymore since I believe all it takes is one nut to throw off the equation and I genuinely believe terrorists are not deterred by the threat of force for the precise reason they are not rational - I believe emotion blinds them.

Of course I am generalizing. Some are clever like foxes but I believe most are angry nut jobs who let blind rage and fanaticism blind them to rational response to superior power.

They also have learned to adapt as good as any cock-roach or rat.

As always, an intelligent post.

A couple of clarifications first. What I was touching on is classic deterence theory. It originated in the same realist paradigm Henry Kissinger is so fond of, to be sure...specifically the USSBS...but beyond that they have no real connection.

You're right, deterence theory evolved out of the armed stasis of the cold war and between rational state actors, and when I'm talking about it, I'm talking about Iran...a state actor. I believe that Iran, in spite of it's f**ked up leadership, still knows the game and how deterence theory works. I have my doubts that they understand its limits because of the soft underbelly the west has shown it, and that's cause enough for concern, but I have no doubt Iran knows the benefits of having a nuclear umbrella.

You are quite right...terrorists - and I distinguish here between Iran and terrorists - are a wild card, and we know they can trigger massive backlash...Afghanistan is proof enough of that. Triggering nuclear backlash from Israel or the west is quite another thing, however, several boundings up the escalation ladder even from full scale invasion. No one in the west wants to open the nuclear Pandora's box, and that in and of itself is the power of possessing a nuke.

And I'm not simply making the claim that all is well and good because Iran is not likely to use the bomb pre-emptively. In fact, my real concern is that Iran will overestimate the deterrent value of the bomb and embark on adventurism in a way the Soviets never would have. Israel will only be pushed so far, and unlike a significant segment of the population in the US and Canada, it has the national backbone to fight back hard.