It's not a good sign when Israel

[WriterDom]

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/20/america/20iran.php

Sends over 100 warplanes along with rescue helicopters 900 miles or roughly the same distance as Iran's uranium enrichment plant. Yeah, they could be sending a message, but the world has been for years and Iran hasn't listened.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/20/america/20iran.php

Sends over 100 warplanes along with rescue helicopters 900 miles or roughly the same distance as Iran's uranium enrichment plant. Yeah, they could be sending a message, but the world has been for years and Iran hasn't listened.

When the IDF were prepping for the mission into Iraq the didn't advertise and they did a similar train up and that time they only used 6 (I believe). I think it is just saber rattling.

What's that saying? "A saber makes no noise when you unsheath it?" Or something similar.

This time you have to consider that Hamas gets alot of their funding from Tehran. As a client state, Palestine would be obligated to get frisky and with the recent peace treaty, I don't think Israel is ready for that again.

 

[WriterDom]

I hope you are right. I can see why they would want to strike while W is still in office though. Israel will not allow Iran to have the bomb. Period. End of story.

 

[Kennundrum]

I was asked to participate in the following thread on behalf of someone who is currently unable to respond personally due to illness.

It's a commonly held belief that religion and politics shouldn't be mixed. I'm one of the people who likes to see the two seperated. Iran & Israel, amongst others, are two countries who don't currently subscribe to this philosophy.

Most people reading this thread will understand that Israel's problems with it's neighbours cannot be narrowed down to a single reason (unless you wish to count the (re)establishment of Israel's independence as a reason). It can, however, be agreed that many of Israel's conflicts are due to friction resulting from religious differences: Israel is the the world's only Jewish state, and it was founded in the middle of what Islamic law considers some of it's most holy lands. The Jewish religion lays claim to this land due to their heritage, as does Islam. Both sides are unrelenting in their claims to legitimate ownership of the area.

Israel considers itself(rightly or wrongly) surrounded by enemies. It is massively outnumbered. If it wasn't due to international military aid, it would have long ago fallen to it's enemies, simply due to insufficient resources. Israel has survived the last 60 years since declaring independence with the aid of the west, mostly the USA. Without it, Israel wouldn't exist.

The USA cannot continue to indefinately support Israel as it has over the last 6 decades. Currently Israel recieves $3Billion each year in military aid from America. From a simple economic perspective, if Israel is unable to provide a service to balance out this massive financial drain, eventually the USA will cease providing this military aid. Once this happens, Israel will be forced to fend for itself, and it's only way to do this over any sustained period is through nuclear weapons.

It is very likely that Israel already has nuclear weapons. If it percieves that it's existance is threatened, it will use these weapons to eliminate the percieved threat, if it feels it has no other choice.

To address the title of the thread, it's not a good sign when Israel feels it is threatened. While it exists in it's current location and situation, I don't see this changing until the entire area has been transformed, by one party or another, into a radioactive wasteland uninhabitable by anyone.

 

[kinkyknickers]

God's chosen people........... shame I don't believe in either.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

I hope you are right. I can see why they would want to strike while W is still in office though. Israel will not allow Iran to have the bomb. Period. End of story.

McCain would green light Israel. Obama.. another reason why I'm queasy about him in office.

 

[Kennundrum]

McCain would green light Israel. Obama.. another reason why I'm queasy about him in office.

Do you think Obama would or would not "green light" Israel?

 

[kinkyknickers]

I like it how you're still clinging to the hope that America is the worlds great super power. It's cute.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

Do you think Obama would or would not "green light" Israel?

No, I don't. I can't think if a Democratic president who has unquestionably supported Israel.

 

[WriterDom]

They have about 150 nukes according to Jimmy Blabbermouth Carter.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

I like it how you're still clinging to the hope that America is the worlds great super power. It's cute.

We are - we just don't have the political will to use the big stick like it should be used. We should be building casinos in Iraq by now - the new pre-Castro Cuba.

 

[kinkyknickers]

Casinos, that'll show 'em who's boss. Ah cha ching cha ching. The almighty green back is nothing in comparison to a lone, suicide bomber.

Remeber 9/11? Or was that your own government that did that? Either way, the bigger they are the harder they... fall.....try....aint.

 

[Kennundrum]

We are - we just don't have the political will to use the big stick like it should be used. We should be building casinos in Iraq by now - the new pre-Castro Cuba.

The use of the word "should" is interesting. Why "should" these things happen/have happened?

 

[Homburg]

No, I don't. I can't think if a Democratic president who has unquestionably supported Israel.

I don't think that a president should unquestionably support anything. The office of the president of the United States of America should rigourously question support for any foreign power.

This has nothing to do with my feelings on Israel, by the way. I'm fine with Israel. I just dislike the idea that unquestioning support of a foreign power is somehow good.

Question everything.

 

[WriterDom]

I like it how you're still clinging to the hope that America is the worlds great super power. It's cute.

We are. There is no cling or hope to it.

 

[Noor]

I hope you are right. I can see why they would want to strike while W is still in office though. Israel will not allow Iran to have the bomb. Period. End of story.

Especially since W is the first US president to clearly state that Israel has the right to defend itself in the manner it sees fit. With the next president it will probably go back to the previous status quo of Israel has the right to defend itself as long as the US agrees. Like in Gulf War 1, do you really think Israel would have just allowed Iraq to fire scuds at them without doing anything?

Watching Israel when the Iraq war started this time was interesting. W was all about WMD but after a very short time, when Israel was not on high alert, it was pretty obvious that there were unlikely to be any.

 

[Kennundrum]

We are. There is no cling or hope to it.

The Oxford Dictionary defines "superpower" as "any of the few most powerful and influential nations of the world".

Having established that by the definition of the word, there are multiple superpowers, what leads you to believe that the USA is "the world's great superpower"?

To be the most influential nation in the world, the USA would need to be loved, respected, or feared by more people/countries than any other nation. To compare the USA's influence to China, in these terms, isn't favourable to your claim of the USA being the world's great superpower.

It's possible that you have a different understanding of what "superpower" means in this context. If so, explain what you mean, but come up with your own word to act as a lable for your sentiments for the future; the word superpower already has a definiton. The time for Newspeak passed 24 years ago.

 

[00Syd]

I don't think that a president should unquestionably support anything. The office of the president of the United States of America should rigourously question support for any foreign power.

This has nothing to do with my feelings on Israel, by the way. I'm fine with Israel. I just dislike the idea that unquestioning support of a foreign power is somehow good.

Question everything.

I support this.

 

[BiBunny]

The Oxford Dictionary defines "superpower" as "any of the few most powerful and influential nations of the world".

Having established that by the definition of the word, there are multiple superpowers, what leads you to believe that the USA is "the world's great superpower"?

To be the most influential nation in the world, the USA would need to be loved, respected, or feared by more people/countries than any other nation. To compare the USA's influence to China, in these terms, isn't favourable to your claim of the USA being the world's great superpower.

It's possible that you have a different understanding of what "superpower" means in this context. If so, explain what you mean, but come up with your own word to act as a lable for your sentiments for the future; the word superpower already has a definiton. The time for Newspeak passed 24 years ago.

What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? Seriously?

 

[WriterDom]

The Oxford Dictionary defines "superpower" as "any of the few most powerful and influential nations of the world".

Having established that by the definition of the word, there are multiple superpowers, what leads you to believe that the USA is "the world's great superpower"?

To be the most influential nation in the world, the USA would need to be loved, respected, or feared by more people/countries than any other nation. To compare the USA's influence to China, in these terms, isn't favourable to your claim of the USA being the world's great superpower.

.

Economically we are a Super power. $13.84 trillion GDP which pretty much ties the entire EU GDP of $14.38 trillion even though they have 60% more people.

Militarily we are a super power. We have 11 carriers and two under construction. The entire rest of the world has 11. In fact, you'd have to combine the next 17 countries to equal our tonnage as far as ships go.

China is loved? For what? Killing our pets and polluting the planet? Killing monks? Forced labor camps? Human rights of any kind?

 

[Breaker_Morant]

Casinos, that'll show 'em who's boss. Ah cha ching cha ching. The almighty green back is nothing in comparison to a lone, suicide bomber.

Remeber 9/11? Or was that your own government that did that? Either way, the bigger they are the harder they... fall.....try....aint.

Okay, I was using a metaphore. What should be happening is that US companies should be investing in the infra-structure, employing Iraqis, and in general helping the people of Iraq get away of XX number of years of Ba'athist rule.

Clear enough?

 

[Breaker_Morant]

The use of the word "should" is interesting. Why "should" these things happen/have happened?

Lack of political will induced by a democratically controlled Congress, imnsho.

 

[WriterDom]

Remeber 9/11? Or was that your own government that did that? .

Yeah, like our government could conceive, plan, and carry out 9/11 without one person selling the story to the press. Unplug your computer now. You are too stupid to be online.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

I don't think that a president should unquestionably support anything. The office of the president of the United States of America should rigourously question support for any foreign power.

This has nothing to do with my feelings on Israel, by the way. I'm fine with Israel. I just dislike the idea that unquestioning support of a foreign power is somehow good.

Fine with Israel in what way? The fact that it exists or ?? Explain please.

Personally, I believe that Zionism - and if I understand the definition correctly ~ the right of the state of Israel to exist - should be defended by this country and the rest of the free world. Just as we would defend the UK. Call me a lemming if you want, but I have made the choice based upon both history and my personal affinity for the Jewish people/culture.

Question everything.

That's the difference between you and me, H. I have been in the position where I had no choice in the matter - granted, I put myself there - but that experience turned me into a do-er. Monday morning quarterbacking doesn't change the fact that the game was lost to the other team. The time to influence the outcome is before the final buzzer.

Having said that - I can agree with you that in that we as a country shouldn't allow ourselves to be spoon fed. Just as we need do-ers, we need thinkers as well.

Besides, what fun would it be if we all had the same opinion?

 

[Breaker_Morant]

Watching Israel when the Iraq war started this time was interesting. W was all about WMD but after a very short time, when Israel was not on high alert, it was pretty obvious that there were unlikely to be any.

Iraq did fire long range tactical missiles, albiet conventional into Kuwait after Iraqi Freedom kicked off. Took out a shopping mall in Kuwait City. Saddam had already demonstrated his willingness to gas his own people (well the Kurds - guess he didn't consider them "his" people) - the fact that the IDF stood down a bit just meant that they felt that Coalition forces had established air supperiority and could detect an incoming launch. Also don't forget, we had established Patriot batteries all around Israel - just in case.

And while this may seem as a non-reply - we don't know everything that went on either.