Israel bombed a site in Syria recently and no one complained, this sends out a message from Israel and America that they can do anything they like in the Middle East, this is designed to pave the way for an attack on Iran, we have been here before haven't we.
Israel will act to prevent any other nation from getting a nuclear weapon which begs the rather obvious question, should other states have the right to do the same to Israel ? or indeed America ? Does the right to break the UN charter over nuclear weapons only apply to Israel and America ? if this is the case then why ? is it any wonder that the Middle East is the favourite spot for nuclear war to happen.
Israel has a massive nuclear arsenal and they will not negotiate with anyone and they get away with it because of the USA, they even kidnapped and jailed an Israeli citizen who told the world about their WMD's meanwhile they keep expanding.
We still have no proof of Iran having WMD's while America and Israel has them by the thousands, how can this be justified ? who are the real aggressors here, could it be America led by a cretin who thinks god is looking after him, or Israel perhaps who continue to steal land from the Palestinians and persecute them, now cutting off water and electricity to Gazza, they will be to blame when the balloon goes up.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
69 comments:
Yup, I would rather proper functioning democracies have nuclear weapons rather than theocracies like Iran and terror enablers like Syria.
The reason no-one said anything is because they are all ashamed that they did not do it themselves.
And remember Terry that Iran has threatened Israel with complete destruction. Would you rather we sat back and waited to see what happened? I mean, once they have the bomb it will be harder to face them down.
But you will do well to consider that Syria and Iran are bullies. You appease the bully and they are emboldened by your timidity and lack of consequences for their actions. History has taught us that failing to reign in and put down a bully nation before they become a credible threat will cost millions of lives. And I for one think that is too high a stake.
Oh what a plant you are TK, Syria if it had a nuclear facility was building it to use on Israel and in violation of all arms treaties.
Yes we know that you are a mindless socialist jew hater, a bit like Stalin in that respect but do really have to show your anti semitic bile so openly?
'now cutting off water and electricity to Gazza, they will be to blame when the balloon goes up.'
'Gazza' is he still on the go?
That about sums up your interest in the issue as anything other than wishing to appear on the radical left. In truth Tezza your happy sitting in your armchair taking four choccy bics with each cup of tea, expelling muffled farts and smelling vaguely of sweat. You're about as radical as the late Queen Mum.
I suggest that the good Councillor reads "Saddam's Secrets" by former Iraqi Air Vice Marshall Georges Sada.
In his book, Sada confirms that Saddam Hussein shipped out his WMDs to Syria over a period over several months during 2002-3 before the Anglo-American liberation of Iraq.
The site bombed in question was a storage facility for these WMDs and thus Israel had every moral right to destroy it. If Israel hadn't of bomb two French-designed nuclear facility in 1981, Saddam Hussein would have had the bomb by 1990.
God bless Israel
I see the SNP are backing you over Trident!
http://www.podpolitix.com/2007/11/01/salmond-puts-his-snp-tanks-on-labour%E2%80%99s-natural-left-wing-turf/
"Israel will act to prevent any other nation from getting a nuclear weapon which begs the rather obvious question, should other states have the right to do the same to Israel ? or indeed America ? Does the right to break the UN charter over nuclear weapons only apply to Israel and America ? if this is the case then why ?"
Because Israel, although undoubtedly unpleasant in some ways, is a relatively secular nation and a fully funcitoning democracy. Syria's Ba'athist government is one of the most oppressive, cruel and unfair regimes on earth. There is also always the danger that fanatical Arab Muslims will take over the government of Syria at some point in the future. Even your blinkered ideology can't make you think that it would be preferable for Islamofascists to have the H-bomb than the Israelis.
Israel perhaps who continue to steal land from the Palestinians
Apart from the Sinai, the prize of a war they didn't start, which they handed back to the Egyptians as soon as they promised not to go invading again...
And Gaza, which they unilaterally handed over to the Arab Palistinians...
And the Golan Heights, which they would happily hand over to the Syrians if they would promise to stay ten metres away from the shores of Lake Galilee...
And I could go on...
Patrick
Yeah. Syria didn't complain either, wheich leads me to believe that they had something to hide...
Goodness me, you're blinkered and Naive.
Are you aware that the Iranian leader insists that he never made that infamous quote about wiping Israel off the map ? Rather difficult to correct it now though.
"Syria and Iran are bullies" and I suppose that America and Israel are not ?
The actions of America and the continuing illegal brutality of Israel is what brings us closer to disaster each day.
Anon - Of course anyone who speaks out against Israel is an anti Semitic Jew hater right ? Even the thousands of Jews all over the world including Israel who agree with me right ?
People like you are the type who will bear the responsibility for the carnage which is coming.
Justine - You must be a real nice person - that's the kind of response which I think people should read.
Here we are folks come and get a look at the type of person who supports Israel and America in the middle East - This is an example of their attitude, do you feel safe with people like this supporting Israeli's having WMD's ?
"We have no proof...Iran has nuclear weapons" says the Pillock of Paisley.
Has it not crossed what passes for your brain, that the first proof will be a dinky little mushroom shaped cloud over Tel Aviv?
Rumpole - The CIA medicine that you constantly take must taste good.
Anon - Israel does not have the right to carry out strikes against anyone.
"Even your blinkered ideology can't make you think that it would be preferable for Islamofascists to have the H-bomb than the Israelis."
I consider Israel to be the last place on earth where WMD's should be allowed, they do not have the right to ride roughshod over the UN or anyone else, they, not the Arabs are the biggest threat to world peace.
"Are you aware that the Iranian leader insists that he never made that infamous quote"
Yes
Patrick - "Icould go on" that's one thing right.
"they, not the Arabs are the biggest threat to world peace"
In what way?
"they, not the Arabs are the biggest threat to world peace."
So, are you proposing the west take action to remove this capability from Israel?
If so, what would be your stance, were Israel to give up their nuclear arsenal, if the Islamic and Ba'athist nations were to openly develop similar programmes?
Jackart - you missed a couple of points there.
Rabbie - We know that Israel has them don't we ? What could be worse than that ?
Patrick - "Icould go on" that's one thing right.
I believe the rest of my statement is right too. Care to counter by naming an area 'stolen' by the Israelis? Unless you can't, that is...
Patrick
RFS - And ?
RFS - We have certainly done this
PA - My stance is the banning of all WMD's everywhere. And a ban on ever building any again, by anyone.
And I also note that he claims there are no gays in Iran.
Patrick - I think you know well enough that I can counter your arguments on Israel, you may not like what I say and vice versa but we have done this ad nauseam.
" We have certainly done this"
No, what we did before was I asked you to justify that statement and you squirmed for ages and then called me names. So in a way I am still waiting for an answer.
RFS _ So he has a 50% success rate then.
RFS - That's a bit petulant even for you.
What you're really saying is that we have argued about these issues many times and you won and I lost and I called you names right ? Is that it ?
The term WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) covers many evils from Nuclear to Chemical and Bilogical. For the sake of consistency I am assuming everyone in this discussion is using the acronym in relation to nuclear weapons.
First of all, I think that when Oppenheimer tested his first bomb, Alfred Nobel must have felt a shudder wherever he is beyond the grave.
I believe nuclear weapons to be the single largest continuing evil legacy of the Second World War.
"PA - My stance is the banning of all WMD's everywhere. And a ban on ever building any again, by anyone."
A world wide ban on possession of WMD's is all very well and laudable. But how do we dispose of them? We have enough trouble arguing about what happens to Dounray waste let alone active warheads. Who would decide who the "inspectors" are? What sactions would be imposed by non-compliance? Who would have the responsibility/authority to impose those sanctions?
As for "a ban on ever building any again, by anyone."
Hate to point this out but, as the saying goes "The djinni is out of the bottle"
The technology and know how to create these weapons is out there. If you have access to the material, all you need is an internet connection and a physics phd.
How are you going to police such a ban?
Who is going to police such a ban?
And again what sanctions could/would be imposed for non-compliance?
With "rogue" nations currently ignoring International opinion and the will of the UN, what chance of a "disarmed" world imposing rules on them?
Add to that, the fact that radical terrorist/freedom fighting organisations will still exist and in a disarmed world will see WMD's as an even more attractive option than flying into office blocks.
It's not as simple as saying "they're bad - make them go away"
"So he has a 50% success rate then.
"
This is a joke right?
I think you know well enough that I can counter your arguments on Israel,
I havn't seen you do that, I'm afraid. In fact, all I've seen are evasions of historic fact and mathematical impossibilities. Tell us again, Terry, how the Arab Palistinians have been reduced to 12% of their previous extent by a nation still no more extensive than their own territories!
We still have no proof of Iran having WMD's
I take it you believe that that reactor at Bushehr really is for power generation then, despite the fact that (a) Iran is awash with oil; (b) they havn't even pretended to hook it up to the distribution grid; and (c) they are enriching fuel far beyond the purity levels required for power production? For crying out loud, what more proof do you need?
Patrick
"My stance is the banning of all WMD's everywhere. And a ban on ever building any again, by anyone."
Kumbaya...
YOU - "The actions of America and the continuing illegal brutality of Israel is what brings us closer to disaster each day."
ME - "What about the actions of your hero Tony Blair then Terry boy? Barbaric, illegal brutality. No? Oh yeah he was New Labour leader at the time."
Tsk, Tsk, Tsk. Terry, Terry, Terry!
New Labour bombed Iraq along with their Conservative friends across the pond.
Where were you when this happened?
Where were the resounding blogs from you on here castigating Blair for his part in bombing that country?
As the song goes "Silence is golden!"
(Political Athesist aka Mutt aka ?) 05/11/07
My understanding is that nuclear warheads can be dismantled safely.
The inspectors - the sanctions - the authority would come under the auspices of the UN.
Nuclear weapons inspectors can detect WMD's and they would have access under a world wide agreement guarded by the UN.
Policing the ban - who would do this - and the sanctions would be the responsibility of the UN.
Rogue nations would be expected to toe the line, if we start with America and Israel the rest will follow.
Radical terrorist organisations can be controlled by the UN if everyone agrees on the way forward.
I have never said it was simple but I believe it can be done if you read the UN charter you will see how if everyone complies.
RFS - No joke, poorly chosen words perhaps - He is right about Israel and wrong about homosexuals in Iran.
"Radical terrorist organisations can be controlled by the UN if everyone agrees on the way forward.
I have never said it was simple but I believe it can be done if you read the UN charter you will see how if everyone complies."
The naivety of this statement alone is breathtaking. You are going to appeal to Kim Jong Il's better nature? Good luck with that one.
How do you compel those who don't play nice to do so? Did you see the Simpsons Treehouse of Horrors episode where they ban and get rid of all weapons of any kind then Kang comes along with a slighshot and enslaves all of mankind?
(Anonymous) 05/11/07
Patrick - I've dealt with your first para. And I'm not going back to it.
There is no proof that Iran has WMD's we do read / hear a lot of rumours about it but no proof so, it depends on who you believe doesn't it. Now we have been here before Patrick right ?
***Rogue nations would be expected to toe the line***
Uh huh, as they are at present?
The likes of Kim Jong Il (sp?) et al, are ignoring UN Mandates at present and the UN does not have the political will to enforce these mandates.
*** if we start with America and Israel the rest will follow.***
Huh? If the UN cannot get a grip on tinpot dictators and theocratic hegemonies what chance do they have convincing two of the most militaristically advanced right wing republics in the world to bend to it's collective will.
***Radical terrorist organisations can be controlled by the UN if everyone agrees on the way forward.
***
Okay, show of hands. Hands up every country who is a member of the UN. Okay, hands down every member country of the UN who DOES NOT sponsor International Terrorism.
Look at that still quite a few hands up in the air - Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, etc, etc!
How can the UN "agree on the way forward" when it's members are responsible for some of the very terrorist attrocities we want to stamp out?
Born out of the League of Nations which was created primarily to allow nation states to talk to each other and avoid another global conflict, the UN as is grew out of this as a method of getting Nato and Warsaw Pact countries around tables together so they could agree the rules of the Cold War.
The Cold War is long gone and the modern geopolitical landscape is much different to the 60's. 70's and even the 80's.
The United Nations is outdated, outmoded and toothless.
And I'm not going back to it.
In your shoes, I wouldn't either!
Now we have been here before Patrick right ?
I take it you mean that you wouldn't believe an intelligence assessment about Iran, based upon the fact that the one about Iraq was utterly falsified by the (Labour) government? If so, I agree with you - I wouldn't believe it either.
The government cried wolf over Iraq - they made out there was a threat when there wasn't. Now we have to avoid making the mistake the villagers in the story did - where there is credible evidence of a threat we must act instead of just assuming it's all made up by dark forces in Number Ten, for reasons which I personally cannot begin to comprehend.
Patrick
"He is right about Israel and wrong about homosexuals in Iran."
No, what that shows is that he is a practiced liar and you are buying into his filth and hatred.
mark shanks - my hero Blair ? you haven't been paying attention have you - you are more kean to harm labour than to save lives in the middle East or indeed anywhere.
Colin McIntyre Paisley - This is a cheap shot I have spoken out and written about my opposition to the Iraq war from the start and |I still do.
I don't understand how you could come away with this.
RFS - I believe in the UN but, it needs the support of all.
Your argument is familiar it's the same argument we hear from those who want to control oil and sell weaponry.
(Political Athesist aka Mutt aka ?) 16:05
A very very lengthy way to say nothing new, the UN is the only way forward the alternative is barbarism.
Patrick - What I mean is, you believe sources that I don't trust and vice versa and I'm sorry but we have done this already.
RFS - He's not & I don't.
***A very very lengthy way to say nothing new, the UN is the only way forward the alternative is barbarism.***
Okay the short and sweet version:
The UN is outdated, outmoded, toothless and powerless.
How are we going to change that, to bring about the changes you are advocating?
Terry you've lost me. What did I say that was supportive of Israel or America? I was merely noting that your interest is so shallow you couldn't even be bothered to spell Gaza correctly. In fact I'm very supportive of Palestine, it the faux lefty poseurs you pretending to support the cause to annoy the right, that get my goat. Out of interest how many Palestinians have you actually met and discussed the matter with? Still I'm happy you want everyone to read my comment. I love attention.
You must be so chuffed the SNP are supporting you against Wendy over Trident though.
So the President of Iran is not a liar?
(Justine) 06/11/07 - A misspelled word reveals all this to you and leads you to these conclusions and you call me shallow !
(RfS) 13:58 -
I'm not aware of him being a liar but, I tend to think that there are very few people on the planet who are not liars.
Iran is a far off place about which we know very little, perhaps they look at us with our many theatrical religions our Royal fools etc. And conclude that we are very weird indeed.
Unlike you they are probably to polite to say so.
"I tend to think there are very few people....who are not liars."
You never spoke a truer word Councillor and if you're including a sensitive Labour politician in Renfrew, who bans those who catch him out, I'm with you all the way.
"Iran is a far off place, of which we know little."
Oh yes we do - during WW11 Russia invaded it.
Why would Uncle Joe do that councillor? Could it have been for oil do you think?
Janet, hen, did you just call me sensitive ?
"Iran is a far off place about which we know very little"
By the same token Israel is a far off place about which we know very little. In which case this whole "the Jews are going to kill us all" angle you are working seems a little unsupported.
(Rabbie) 07/11/07 - "a far off place" I was paraphrasing Chamberlain on Czechoslovakia you dummy.
You and me would be speaking German if it wasn't for our ally Uncle Joe, that's why his portrait adorned the firesides of millions of British homes during WW2
***You and me would be speaking German if it wasn't for our ally Uncle Joe***
So, genocidal maniac Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili is a good guy because he stopped another genocidal maniac in his quest for world dominance?
Incidentally, had one vote in history gone differently, the whole world would be speaking German.
At one of the first meetings of the newly independent American Congress they held a vote to determine what the offical language of the newly constituted nation should be. English narrowly beat German by a handful of votes.
Had that handful of votes swung the other way, German would now be the international language of business, aviation, science, etc.
(RfS) 13:37 -
"Iran is a far off place about which we know very little"
I was paraphrasing Chamberlain on Czechoslovakia. He said this in approx. 1939 we don't have that excuse now.
Cllr, I was around during the war -you weren't and Stalins photograph wasn't displayed in our Labour voting, working class house, nor in any of the other two-up, two down, outside toilet, bathroom-less houses on our street, either before or after they were bombed.
Had it been, it would sure as hell have come down when he put British servicemens lives at risk trying to starve out Berlin.
"You and me would be speaking German if it wasn't for our ally Uncle Joe, that's why his portrait adorned the firesides of millions of British homes during WW2" (Sic)
Correct...but that was before it became more widely known that he maintained a concentration camp network that was almost as brutal as Hitler's...
Do you admire Stalin, councillor?
(Rabbie) 08/11/07 - Stalin's portrait was very popular so was knitting woolies for our brave Soviet comrades who saved us at great loss to themselves.
Whatever you might think of Stalin or the Soviet Union we would not be here if it wasn't for their sacrifice.
It must be annoying to you to live with the truth, that those nasty commies saved our lives and our freedom.
(Anonymous) 08/11/07 - I admire some of his achievements not least in war time where he was the main man - I don't admire how he dealt with those he considered to be his enemies and I also think that his demonisation by the West became an industry controlled by the CIA and the American and British right wing.
"Whatever you might think of Stalin or the Soviet Union we would not be here if it wasn't for their sacrifice."
As you would say "we have been here before".
The Soviets only got into the war after the Germans attacked them. Stalin had not interest in defeating Hitler until he was attacked and then when he countered he realised he could subjugate vast areas of Eastern Europe.
And you call the rest of us apologists for evil.
(RfS) 15:07 - It just rips your knitting to know that people like you owe your very existence to Stalin and our Soviet comrades doesn't it.
***It just rips your knitting to know that people like you owe your very existence to Stalin and our Soviet comrades doesn't it.***
You could be onto something here.
Hitler turned on Stalin, which effectively led to the formation of the "Soviet Bloc" and the Warsaw Pact which in turn led to the formation of NATO, polarising "communism" and "democracy".
Had this not happened, Stalinism would have crept in quietly and we would all be living variations of Article 58 in our "legal system" and what a happy world that would be.
Amongst other perfectly acceptable uses, Article 58 was used to imprison returned Soviet prisoners of war on the grounds that their capture by the Axis Powers during the war was proof that they did not fight to the death and were therefore anti-Soviet.
So yes, Uncle Joe turning into a megalomaniacal, despotic demagogue did directly lead to us living in the world we live in today and I suppose we should be thankful for that.
PA - You need to learn how to take the occasional 'sore yin' you're a terrible loser.
(Rabbie) 14:36 -
My take on this is that you should spend some time trying to learn about politics, you haven't a clue
Post a Comment