Iran Nuclear.

....which brings us back to "Truth or Rhetoric".

Presumably, therefore, you are expecting Iran to launch a nuke into Israel almost as soon as they are ready? Which would appear to be right around now.

An Iranian nuclear attack on Israel would bring about the total destruction of the State of Iran, in a massive retaliatory attack by the West - led by the US. The country would be razed to the ground.

For all that ruling elite in Iran rattle on about martyrdom, I'd say it's long-odds on that whoever has their finger on the button (Ahmedinejad?...Khameini?) would prefer not to die in a thermonuclear fire-storm, along with 20+ million of his countrymen.

Isn't it? :(
 
They would get more nuclear weapons than they could have dreamt of. Thats for sure. Would they do it? Probably not but I simply wouldnt trust any extreme islamists on any matter of life or death, but as i said before, the main risk would be proxy local nuclear weapons (Dirty bombs maybe) through Hamas or Hezbollah. That is a genuine threat

The other danger is that surrounding states will feel obliged to go down the same route with the further risk that they coiuld fall into quasi AQ hands (saudi?) at some time in the future. They are as uncomfortable about Iran as Israel
 
Last edited:
their treatment of Arabs/Palestine i'd suggest, which is the biggest human rights disgrace of our time

Oh really? Perhaps some people in Darfur may have something to say about that? or maybe the Kurds ? Or maybe the Tamils? Shall we go on? Congo? Zimbabwe?

The declaration of war on Iraq contained within it the fact that many many Iraqis would die - this didn't need to be explicitly stated.

It was written down where exactly?

And Gaza was a "war crime" even though it was a clear response to being attacked?

I find this stuff unbelievable. What other country would be expected to simply stand there and do nothing about a constant barrage of rockets onto its land for two solid years (which was how long israel put up with it). What were they supposed to do FFS?
 
Hamm

You can understand surely why many people think there is a whiff (and i am not saying this is the case with you...cos i fcking drink with you sometimes) about anti israeli sentiments, when their actions are adjudged to be "the worst" in the world in the face of the slaughters in Sudan, Sri lanka and elsewhere?

Oh and the one country that has always given the vote to the arabs is... Israel.

Ok we expect that from commited jew haters such as Jenny Tonge and Ken livingstone, but what is disturbing is when this becomes accepted fact across the board.
 
I understand what you are saying but I think the key here is that I don't judge Israel in the context of the countries you have mentioned, all of which I'm not too well read up on but broadly all sound atrocious to the uninformed.

I also wouldn't align myself with Livingstone! :D

But, i do think that some of the actions Israel has engaged in are dispicable and what's worse is the arrogant attitude that goes along with it. This does not mean I don't equally see the wrongs of the surrounding arab nations, nor do these wrongs, for me, lessen the severity of my opinion on Israel - I still don't understand how it gets away with certain things - the 2 officers responsible for bombing the UN got the mildest slap on the wrists! They are too well protected by America.

I can assure you (don't think i need to) that I do not have any anti-semitic feelings whatsoever, and the religion of the state of Israel is irrelevant for me when studying the state's actions.
 
Last edited:
For an overview of countries with historical, current, and developing nuclear weapons status, check out http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons . Israel is not a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty, and refuses to disclose its arsenal, which is nonetheless estimated to be around 60-80 nuclear bombs. Most of which were built before it felt even slightly threatened by Iran, with the full technical and moral support of the USA, whose own space exploration and missile system was enormously assisted by that good ole Nazi, Dr. Wehrner von Braun, who established the development, via Jewish and other slave labour (oh, the irony) of the V-2 rocket, which killed hundreds of British civilians in World War II. Funny old world, ain't it?
 
Clive, thought you might be interested in a different viewpoint:

Sources:
WhoProfits.org
Title: “Who Profits? Exposing the Israeli Occupation Industry”
Authors: The Coalition of Women for Peace

Palestine News Network, August 26, 2008
Title: “US Tax Breaks Support Israeli Settlers”

Workers World Newspaper, February 9, 2009, and Global Research, February 11, 2009
Title: “The Tunnels of Gaza, An underground economy and resistance symbol”
Author: Sara Flounders

CommonDreams.org, February 24, 2009
“Can Gaza Be Rebuilt Through Tunnels? The Blockade Continues-No Supplies, No Rebuilding”
Author: Ann Wright

Student Researchers: April Rudolph, Natalie Dale, and Kerry Headley
Faculty Evaluator: Jeff Baldwin, PhD
Sonoma State University

Israeli and international corporations are directly involved in the occupation of Palestine. Along with various political, religious and national interests, the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights is fueled by corporate interests. These occupying companies and corporations lead real estate deals, develop the Israeli colonies and infrastructure, and contribute to the construction and operation of an ethnic separation system, including checkpoints, walls and roads. They also design and supply equipment and tools used in the control and repression of the civilian population under occupation.

An extensive, on-going grassroots investigation, which exposes hundreds of international companies and corporations involved in the occupation, is being conducted and posted online at http://www.whoprofits.org by the Israeli group Coalition of Women for Peace. The project currently focuses on three main areas of corporate involvement in the occupation: the settlement industry, economic exploitation, and control of the population. At this stage they are not investigating the vast industry of military production and arms trade (see story # 9).

The ongoing business of construction in the occupied territories of the West Bank and Golan Heights includes housing developments as well as extensive infrastructure projects such as roads and water systems for the exclusive use of Israeli settlers, on lands confiscated from Palestinians. The construction industry includes real estate dealers, contractors, planners, suppliers of materials, as well as security, surveillance, and maintenance services.

While the US government has on numerous occasions affirmed the illegality of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land, it encourages American support by providing tax deductions for donations to these settlements, which have nearly doubled within a year and are rapidly accelerating. An audit conducted by Reuters of American tax records found that thirteen tax exempt groups linked explicitly to settlements managed to collect more than $35 million in the past five years alone. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice defended the tax incentives as “humanitarian,” and rejected any comparison to Palestinian charities facing US sanctions for suspected links with Islamic parties, such as Hamas.

Israeli industrial zones within the occupied territories hold hundreds of companies, ranging from small businesses serving the local Israeli settlers to large factories that export their products worldwide. Settlement production benefits from low rents, special tax incentives, lax enforcement of environmental and labor protection laws, and other governmental supports. Palestinians employed in these industrial zones work under severe restrictions on movement, on organization, and with almost no government protections. These “advantages” often result in the exploitation of Palestinian labor, Palestinian natural resources, and the Palestinian consumer market.

All Palestinian imports and exports are controlled, restricting competition with Israeli producers, and making Palestinian consumers a captive market for Israeli goods. Restrictions are imposed on the development of Palestinian businesses, and all utilities and basic services are routed through Israeli firms.



 Severe restrictions on movement of Palestinian labor and products inside the occupied territories and to neighboring areas have further increased the dependency of the Palestinian economy on Israeli companies as employers and retailers. The growing network of checkpoints and walls has all but destroyed Palestinian local production and the Palestinian labor bargaining power.

Eighteen months ago, outraged when the Palestinians of Gaza voted for the leadership of Hamas in democratic elections, Israel imposed a total lockdown on the entire population of Gaza. The Palestinians, determined to continue to resist occupation, found a way to circumvent total starvation. Author Sara Flounders notes, “The Israeli blockade led to a new economic structure, an underground economy. The besieged Palestinians have dug more than 1,000 tunnels under the totally sealed border. Many thousands of Palestinians are now employed in digging, smuggling or transporting, and reselling essential goods.” Smuggling constitutes approximately 90 percent of economic activity in Gaza, according to Gazan economist Omar Shaban.

The tunnels connect the Egyptian town of Rafah with the Palestinian refugee camp of the same name inside Gaza. They have become a fantastic, life-sustaining network of corridors dug through sandy soil. Tunnels are typically three-tenths of a mile long, approximately forty-five to fifty feet deep. They cost from $50,000 to $90,000 and require several months of intense labor to dig.

Food is towed through on plastic sleighs. Livestock are herded through larger tunnels. Flour, milk, cheese, cigarettes, cooking oil, toothpaste, small generators, computers, and kerosene heaters come through the tunnels. Every day 300 to 400 gas canisters for cooking come through the lines. On the Egyptian side, the trade sustains the ruptured economy, while corrupt or sympathetic guards and officers look the other way.

The Israeli siege of Gaza, followed by twenty-three days of systematic bombing and invasion, has created massive destruction and scarcity. Food processing plants, chicken farms, grain warehouses, UN food stocks, almost all of the remaining infrastructure, and 230 small factories were destroyed. At the time of this printing, hundreds of trucks packed with essential supplies from international and humanitarian agencies sit outside the strip, refused entry to Gaza by Israeli guards.

As soon as the Israeli bombing ended, work on the tunnels resumed.

However, Ann Wright, retired US Army colonel, former State Department official, and current peace activists, asks, “How do you rebuild 5,000 homes, businesses and government buildings when the only way supplies come into the prison called Gaza is through tunnels? Will the steel I-beams for roofs bend 90 degrees to go through the tunnels from Egypt? Will the tons of cement, lumber, roofing materials, nails, drywall, and paint be hauled by hand, load after load, seventy feet underground, through a tunnel 500 to 900 feet long, and then pulled up a seventy-foot hole and put into waiting truck in Gaza?”
For the people of Gaza, rebuilding their homes, businesses, and factories is on hold. Over 5,000 homes and apartment buildings were destroyed and hundreds of government buildings, including the Parliament building, were smashed. Two cement factories in northern Gaza were completely destroyed by Israeli bombs.

Building supplies, cement, wood, nails, glass will have to be brought in from outside Gaza. Israel controls 90 percent of the land borders to Gaza, including the northern and eastern borders and 100 percent of the ocean on the west side of Gaza. Egypt controls the southern border with Gaza.

Wright concludes, “The Israelis who bombed Gaza will be the primary financial beneficiaries of the rebuilding of Gaza. They bombed it and now will sell construction materials to rebuild what they have bombed, exactly like the United States has done in Iraq.”

Update by Sara Flounders
Much has been written about the suffering of the Palestinians, and most of it is true. What gives the history of Palestine its special potency is not the suffering, however, but the indomitable will of the people to continue fighting, even when it seems impossible. This part of the story—suffering and determination—has continued in the six months since the massive Israeli bombing of Gaza ended last January.
The Israeli invasion laid waste to much of the Gaza’s fragile infrastructure. The siege of Gaza continues, reducing the entire strip to a prison economy with all the desperation that implies. Every effort is being made to increase the isolation. The Israelis have forbidden the entry of even the most basic building materials that are essential to reconstruct the thousands of homes that Israeli bombs destroyed during the December/January assault on Gaza’s population.

Tens of millions of dollars of medical, food, clothing and other everyday aid has been collected from people from all around the world to send to the 1.5 million Palestinians living in Gaza, the largest open-air prison of the world. The great bulk of this aid is stalled at the border crossing points, prevented by the Israeli occupation authorities from entering.

My article, “The Tunnels of Gaza,” written last February, was about the 1,000 tunnels that the Palestinians courageously dug and maintained to bring material in from Egypt. These tunnels built during the months of siege and reopened after the invasion continue to be an important lifeline for Gaza’s population and a symbol of continued resistance. Now, they have even become a source of desperately needed building materials.

Some Gazans have turned to making dried mud bricks, a homebuilding material from an ancient age, to rebuild their bombed homes. And the best mud comes from the tunnels themselves, as an article in Bloomberg on June 3 pointed out. Again, a source of possible despair has become a story to inspire confidence in ultimate victory.

But it is important that the rest of the world refuse to allow the systematic isolation and total destruction of Gaza. One way to do this is to join in the work of Viva Palestina, one of several Gaza Solidarity Campaigns determined to bring in a small portion of supplies needed by the Gazans, and what is perhaps even more important, to keep world attention upon the continuing Israeli siege.

An MP in Britain, George Galloway, organized the first Viva Palestina caravan that took off from London and in twenty-three days crossed North Africa to deliver to Gaza 107 vehicles—including ambulances and a fire engine—255 people, and $2 million of aid last March. Now Galloway and Vietnam anti-war veteran Ron Kovic are organizing a similar caravan starting from the United States that aims to bring 500 vehicles and $10 million in aid—and to impact US political policy toward Palestine and Gaza (see vivapalestina-us.org).

The International Action Center is helping the Viva Palestina effort, and hopes that more and more people and organizations from all over the world will join to help lift the siege of Gaza and show solidarity with the Palestinian people, who once again are showing that they won’t give up.
 
What gives the history of Palestine its special potency is not the suffering, however, but the indomitable will of the people to continue fighting, even when it seems impossible

Colin. There is a whole lot of paranoid socialist twaddle within that . I dont think for a moment the issues are driven by capitalism or big business

Two points

1. Oslo

2. If Israel wants to screw down a movement whos demands are that Israel should cease to exist and jews worldwide should be exterminated (I can easily provide the links), then good luck to them. I see no reason at all why they should negotiate with scum. If Fatah had got its act togther and was a decent rather than corrupt organisation, then progress could be made

Although give them what they want, and they would no doubt reject again

which brings us back to point one
 
Last edited:
For the purposes of continuing a generally useless argument (because the situation will never be resolved until any number of requirements are met by both sides), clivex, how would you support your statement that the issues are not driven by capitalism? Capitalism drives the entire Middle East, as it does everywhere other than North Korea. Why would this be such a curious exception?
 
Because it is presented as the prime motivation and frankly, i simply do not believe that to be true. The Iraq war is given as an example which on any cost benfit analysis would not stand up for a second
 
Yes. And no doubt the second world war was engineered to boost Hawker Siddleys shares..and so on

Old conspiarcy theory best left with the few nutters that believe in far left rubbish, islamists and underdeveloped third formers
 
If you're going to be flippant, clivex, you could at least have used a valid comparison.

Last time I checked my Commando magazine collection, it was the frightful Bosch who started WW2, and not Britain - thereby somewhat invalidating your opening gambit.

A war is started for no good reason. The person who initiates the war, just happens to be the son of one of Carlyle Groups execuitves. Carlyle Group, and their proxies, benefit to the tune of billions of dollars through said war.

These are facts, not conspiracies. The only thing that is up for debate, is whether or not someone would actually be crazy enough to start a war for no other reason than to fill his family's boots. Given we are now almost seven years down the line, and it has long been established that every reason offered-up for going to war has long since been torpedoed, it does beg the question as to the true motive.

I don't confess to know what that is, but it does make the thinking among us ponder. ;)
 
G-G - I reckon he'd have swamped Government House first with Pussycat Ranch girls armed with crates of Jim Beam, taking the mind of the Iraqi elite off all rational thought for several weeks, as they bonked themselves into a glazed stupor. Then he'd quietly insinuate the SEALS, who'd make the lot disappear (bar the girls, who'd all get Congressional Medals of Honour), and that would be that.
 
i think GG is possibly right. Was as simple as that and it was idealogy and the mistaken belief that it would be an easy win that started the ball rolling. And if the US had gone in and it was a peaceful response by the iraqis (like say the regime changes in eastern europe ...mostly) then would it have been a bad thing? The US would have got out asap and the iraqi Havel would have set the country on the right track

but it wasnt Czechoslovakia. That was the mistake
 
Oh, I've no doubt that Bush Baby thought he could follow in his Pappy's footsteps. Too bad his Pappy didn't pursue the napalmed Iraqi army right down the 'Highway of Death' and into Baghdad in the Gulf War, though, and put a stop to Saddam then and there. With the weaponry that the USA and its allies had in Saudi at the time, it would've been a pushover, with no further expenditure on logistics required. They could've peacefully repatriated the some 35,000 Iraqi deserters who camped out on Saudi's borders for years, rather than be sent back to sure execution, too, and have initiated something resembling a democratic process much earlier.

As things went, the US and its European soldiers-in-arms pulled back, claiming their remit was only the liberation of Kuwait. Really, this was a huge blunder, costly at all levels. Little George figured he'd finish off what Daddy started, which would've been the honest and probably truthful approach, except that Congress was highly unlikely to fund a mere wish. Thus we all had to endure the lies and the shell game of 'which one is the real aim under?' for years, and thousands more Iraqis had to be killed, and American boys maimed or sent home in body bags.

I don't know when the penny will drop with politicians, but their public would far rather they just speak straight and then act on what they say, rather than - as in the invasion of Iraq on the pretext of WMD/nuclear bunkers/dodgy baby milk factories, etc. - go, in what looks like a blindly headstrong manner, into some quagmire, ignoring history (Afghanistan, Vietnam, u-name-it) and then trying to convince their people through a blustering rearguard defence of their actions.
 
I think that was the problem Krizon. Although reading what some idiots on the left especially have been spouting recently you would have thought that Saddam was a genial benign, cuddly, slightly authoritarian leader. Its conveniently forgotten what a threat he was to both the region and his own people. Our leaders should have been honest and said, "sick of imposing no fly zones and all that, were getting rid of the XXXX")

Shouldnt be too sure that GW was out to please father though. Their relationship isnt supposed to be quite as warm as many would assume and idealogically they were poles apart

I have no problem with the toppling of saddam. Just on security and humanitarian grounds it was justified. Couldnt give a fck what the UN think. They voted consistently against intervention in Darfur for christs sake. Bankrupt organisation. What I still cant beleiev is the complete lack of groundwork and intelligence beforehand (covered well in a great bio on rumsfeld (who actually had strong doubts) and elsewhere)
 
I'm disturbingly in agreement with you - again! - clivex. The UN has been a total waste of space, as was its predecessor, the League of Nations. Did you ever see a wonderful Ronald Searle cartoon back in the 1950s, where a party of schoolchildren is being shown around the building? The astounded children are watching as fully-grown people of all nationalities brawl and savage each other, manifestoes flying everywhere, total chaos. The teacher's sublimely informing the little ones: "And here is the League of Nations, where they fight for peace... "

The UN has proved to be anything but humanitarian, viz Tutsis vs Hutus, Congo (assorted tribes), Serbs v Croats, Zimbabwe (Mugabe vs all others), Darfur (anarchy), you name it. It costs wealth beyond the combined dreams of Mammon and Croesus to run, and timidly stands back watching the bastid of the day knock hell out of the victim of the day, wittering about being only there to do... what, exactly? Hand out bandages and offer victim support counselling later to any survivors? Sickening. No brains, no balls, no use.
 
The UN has proved to be anything but humanitarian, viz Tutsis vs Hutus, Congo (assorted tribes), Serbs v Croats, Zimbabwe (Mugabe vs all others), Darfur (anarchy), you name it. It costs wealth beyond the combined dreams of Mammon and Croesus to run, and timidly stands back watching the bastid of the day knock hell out of the victim of the day, wittering about being only there to do... what, exactly? Hand out bandages and offer victim support counselling later to any survivors? Sickening. No brains, no balls, no use

Lets just be clear that they are the bureaucrats and politicians you are refering to.
 
I would hope that anyone taking part in this discussion would be aware of that, Sheikh. They're not the Global Association of Greengrocers, are they? But we shouldn't feel as cynical and disheartened by everything connected to politics, should we? It shows how low the once quite high-minded have come over the years. Much as it seemed all wrong, perhaps having 'toffs' with vast estates and manor houses, dukes and lords by the dozen, was better for being less corrupt. Now that everyone sees politics as a way to line the pockets of their Savile Row suits, it's become a rather less savoury vocation than secondhand car dealer. Every African leader from the moment their country became independent, with the possible exception of the very moderate and modest Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia, has ripped the guts out of their own country and stuffed Swiss banks full to bursting. Even now, the ghastly 'Papa' Doc Duvalier of the wretchedly-ruined Haiti, who'd squirrelled away millions of Western 'aid', is allowed on a technicality to have millions returned to his son (as Papa is dead, God rot him). But don't get me started on the wilful mismanagement of overseas aid to the foul despots!
 
Harry, see the start of the topic. It's hardly the 'next' - it's been around for while, during which time Israel has murdered some Iranian nuclear scientists on their home turf. Iran is joining a fairly good-sized club of countries with outright or developing nuclear arsenals, the USA and Israel very much among them. Look through the discussion points made earlier on in the topic and you'll see that there is no reason why Iran shouldn't develop a full nuclear facility, other than it has threatened to blow Israel off the map of the world, etc.

But if we really think about that threat, it would include killing millions of Arabs, too, both directly in any blasts (since they do live in Israel as well as in other Arab states), and then by radioactive drift across neighbouring Arab states, giving rise to a Chernobyl-like follow-on of birth defects and slow deaths for decades to come.

I've no doubt that if Iran seriously postured, as in showed it might walk the walk instead of just talking the talk, the Arabs would be taking Ahmedinajad a bit more seriously than the clown they see him for at present. I would see a proactive strike, disabling all facilities, coming from the USA's military, but financially backed by Arab states.
 
Amazing that there is no reason why iran should not have weapons other than its explicit threat to wipe another country off the map. Like giving a flame thrower to a pyromaniac?

The threat is obvious and clearly pointed out in this thread Harry

They would be one step away from suppying terrorist organisations with low level "dirty bombs " which if used could make areas uninhabitable for centuries. We are not just talking the lefts favourite racist bigots Hezbollah and hamas here either. A strike or threat against the west by proxy is certainly a possibility

The second reason is that other arab states would feel that they would have to get into an arms race, most significantly Saudi arabia who despise Iran. This they want to avoid

the third reason is that although the present administration is extreme enough, it is possible that an even more vile party could be in charge of these weapons at some stage. A party that would see it as "allahs wilL" to eradicate jews and christians regardless of who gos up in flames with them

This is familiar rhetoric in that part of the world. It is a unique aspect of the (fairly large) fringes of islamism that genocide is very much on the agenda. Even before this moves on, basic sharia law enshrines that for certain segments of society

Given that AQ was sunni and definately not Shia and that this part of the world is seemingly drifting away from extremism, its odds on this wont happen, but do we know for sure?

The best way to deal with this would be for Russia and China to properly back tighter sanctions again and bring the iranian economy further to its knees but i do not believe Israel will wait for the effects of that and why should they? Would we hage sat around if libya was one step away from supplying the IRA with nuclear devices? No fucking chance and the electorate wouldnt have stood for it for a minute

Israel will go in hard and good luck to them
 
Last edited:
Back
Top