Is Israel Getting Ready To Invade Iran?
London’s Times is reporting that the Israeli military is at the ready, waiting for orders to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities (like the one pictured, the Bushehr nuclear power plant).
They are making preparations on every level for this eventuality. The message to Iran is that the threat is not just words,” one senior defence official told The Times.
[...]
Officials believe that Israel could be required to hit more than a dozen targets, including moving convoys. The sites include Natanz, where thousands of centrifuges produce enriched uranium; Esfahan, where 250 tonnes of gas is stored in tunnels; and Arak, where a heavy water reactor produces plutonium.
Is this what we get with Netanyahu? And would this be done even without approval of the United States? Any attack would require flying over Jordanian and Iraqi air space.
ALAN,
What do you mean by Is this what we get with Netanyahu?
Like all of a sudden it’s a markedly alternative foreign policy approach than the last 3 PMs?
yawn…another stimulating post…
Um Cara Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 10:23 am
What do you mean by Is this what we get with Netanyahu?
And while I am sure Alan did not mean to imply that the US is somehow a part of Israel’s decision making process on who they democratically elect, these types of statements contribute to the idea that Israel is a US puppet, rather than a sovereign nation.
And would this be done even without approval of the United States?
I hope that cooler heads will prevail, but I don’t understand the implication that somehow the one of the worse thing about this would be that Israel did something w/o asking ‘Daddy’.
Plus, if they did ‘ask daddy for permission’ and Daddy said ‘OK’, it probably wouldn’t be something openly discussed anyway. I.e. even if this goes down, we likely won’t know the answer to Alan’s question.
ecsredeye Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 3:00 am
Let Israel be truly independent. Let’s stop paying them three billion a year and let’s stop giving the billions to Egypt and Jordan that we do as pay off for their making peace with Israel. Let’s not ship them any more weapons and let’s not veto UN resolutions that call upon Israel to follow international law.
willy Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Israel has the right to defend itself.
April 17th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
Alan
Would that be consider an act of terrorism?
If not,would it be oke for any other country
to do the same to Israel in the name of pre-
emptive self-defense?
Drk H Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 12:19 am
Pierre – Why would an act of pre-emptive self-defense be deemed terroristic. How many times should Iran be allowed to say Isreal should be wiped off the map of the earth, before Isreal should act. Or maybe you think the U.N. will help. Like they did in Rwanda or right now in Darfur.
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 12:39 am
Jared,
As the bible says ” don’t do unto others
what you don’t want to be done to you”.
If human stop behaving only like amphibian,
the world would be a better place.!
Remember! the cortex evolved for a reason–use it.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 12:45 am
HUH?
Care to rephrase into a coherent and relevant comment?
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 1:06 am
We don’t need another war, idiot!!
Drk H Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 1:10 am
Pierre -Then maybe Iran should quit saying Isreal should be wiped off the face of the earth. Where is the requirement for Iran to take responsibility for keeping the region unstable. Ya big dope.
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 1:16 am
How many times did USSR say they will wipe off
USA from the face of the earth?
trees are people too Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 1:38 am
I don’t think they ever publicly proclaimed this as an objective that they desired to fulfill………………
It was implied through the buildup of nukes, but they never expressed a strong desire to annihilate us, it was more of a defensive buildup that was somewhat mutual, in fact it was referred to as MAD, mutual assured destruction……………..
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 2:07 am
So a MAD strategy will definetly bring peace ln
the middle east.
Let both boxers wear gloves for a good fight.! You see, rarely 2 big dogs ever fight one another.Only then can you declare yourself as the world champ.
Or you can take off both gloves and shake hands.Bravo! peace has finally come.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 2:43 am
PIERRE,
You said:
As the bible says ” don’t do unto others what you don’t want to be done to you”.
If human stop behaving only like amphibian, the world would be a better place.! Remember! the cortex evolved for a reason–use it.
I asked you to clarify with a relevant statement and then you say:
We don’t need another war, idiot!!
??????
Somehow, calling me the idiot just doesn’t seem to fit. Take a look inward, and I’m sure you’ll find the source of the idiocy in this discussion.
Lee Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 4:37 am
Drk,
“How many times should Iran be allowed to say Isreal should be wiped off the map of the earth, before Isreal should act.”
Are you serious? Have you learned nothing from the failure of the Bush doctrine? Rhetoric is just rhetoric and that statement has a lot of different connotations, notably that Palestinians should be governing rather than Israeli’s versus ‘We are going to strike against them’. It doesn’t automatically mean ‘Israel should be attacked and everyone wiped out’.
It’s absolutely absurd that Iran will attack Israel. Israel has nukes (although they are very coy about it), not to mention the US propping it up. An attack from Iran just isn’t going to happen.
But anyway, this notion thats it ok to preemptively attack another nation if it publically makes verbal threats is just utter foolishness.
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
1. JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 17th, 2009 at 11:24 pm
PIERRE,
Firstly, Chavez does hate America…any proclaimed socialist hates capitalist countries.
Secondly, I’d like you…for a change…to stop regurgitating left-wing talking points and think for yourself…do you homework before you post your drivel…that way you don’t look like an idiot for posting things like: “Bush attempted to overthrow him.”
Hey Jared,
If you are so sensitive about being an idiot,
don’t start calling others as such.Anyway it’s only a feeling, it will go away.Or maybe that sensitivety is justified as being part of your genes.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
PIERRE,
I’m not sensitive to the fact someone called me an idiot…what I’m sensitive about is an idiot calling me an idiot.
How’s that research on the VE 2002 coup coming along or have you just decided to let it go?
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
It’s only a feeling; it will go away.
As for the research, I gave you the answer since
last night. I guess you are sensitive about facts
as well.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
PIERRE,
You gave me the answer???? All you said was “the US supported the coup.”
If you actually had provided facts…then I would’ve conceded…however, all you did was lump the VE coup in with a handful of other coups.
What? I’m just supposed to believe you? LMAO!
average james Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Pre-emptive self defense Drk ? Pretty dicey. We could sure stir alot of sh%t up and create lots of new enemies behaving like that. Hmmmmmmm….Hey that’s what WE’VE been doing.
average james Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Pierre,
In my opinion this would not fall under the term terrorism.
Pre-emptive strikes from any nation toward another are nothing short of an act of war, in my opinion. I believe in defense, never offense, it is one of the delineating factors between “good guys” and “bad guys”.
Kregg Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
James said; Pre-emptive strikes from any nation toward another are nothing short of an act of war, in my opinion. I believe in defense, never offense, it is one of the delineating factors between “good guys” and “bad guys”.
K: CA state law allows ‘preemptive self-defense” if the ‘defender’ is in fear for his/life or great bodily injury. Why would that same principle not apply on the international front? Must Israel allow the killing of it’s citizens by Iran before moving to defend itself?
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
The reverse is true as well!
If Iran is feared for her existence, then she
should acquired Nukes for protection.
Stop the madness!!
Kregg Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Pierre said: If Iran is feared for her existence, then she should acquired Nukes for protection. Stop the madness!!
K: Iran is not ‘feared for her existence’, Iran is feared for the very explicit statements it has made about wiping Israel off the face of the earth. Israel seems willing to ’stop the madness’ by reducing Iran’s capacity to fulfill it’s promise. Boom…
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Funny…I don’t remember anyone saying Iran should be “wiped off the face of the earth.”
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
USSR used to say the same thing, Yet you never
had the gut to advocate for the pre-emptive action.
A paper tiger doesn’t scare you!!
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
No, the USSR never said the “US should be wiped from the face of the earth.”
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
Does Nikita Khruschev rung a bell?—-
The shoe banging at UN in 1962–
Remember going under your school desk!!
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
PIERRE,
No, Nikita Khruschev doesn’t “rung” a bell…
I do remember that it was JFK and Khruschev’s person-to-person phone calls that effectively ended the cold war.
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
Yes, you did negotiate with the evil empire.
Now you can’t talk with a paper tiger.
Please don’t tell me that we don’t talk with states-sponsering terrorism.
Remember Iran-contra, Irak- Iran war,Afgan-soviet war : which country were we sponsering?
Nikita S. Khruschev was the full name of URSS PM.
Lee Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 5:36 am
Kregg/Drk and all the other right-wingers who like to get rabid over the ‘wiped off the map’ quote,
This is how Ahmadinejad explained its meaning in his own words:
“.. Press TV: So you did not threaten to wipe Israel off the map as an Iranian leader? That we will wipe Israel off the map?
Ahmadinejad: No. We say that the people of Palestine should have rights and when the people of Palestine exercise this right, this will happen. Where is the Soviet Union ..”
Iran did not say it would attack Israel. Iran cannot afford to attack Israel, even if it had nukes.
Unfortunately, the only reason for Iran to get nukes is to defend against _us_ as its our government that has been saber-rattling and threatening their regime as well as publically declaring them part of an ‘axis of evil’. It’s a shame you guys either choose to ignore this or simply cannot see it.
April 18th, 2009 at 12:14 am
PIERRE,
It’s not “acts of terrorism” any more, remember? It’s “man-made disasters”.
What a joke…
April 18th, 2009 at 12:20 am
You forgot to add your famous, “and why does it matter” to the text.
Do you really think that anyone is going to try and shoot down Israeli jet fighters?
The only airspace where there will be an attempt to engage them will be distinctly Iranian.
April 18th, 2009 at 1:32 am
” According to the report, Obama is willing to put pressure on Israeli leaders behind the scenes to achieve unity as long as his actions do not become known to the public.”
Sneaky b@stard!!
Go for it Israel! Obama has thrown you under the bus anyway & how you fit under there with all the others is amazing.
average james Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 11:51 am
I believe this is called “diplomacy”. Perhaps you should look into it Infidel.
“Thrown under the bus” is a bit tiresome and overused as well as not very original. I think you can do better than that Infidel.
infidel Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
Diplomacy = Chicanery now ?
April 18th, 2009 at 2:29 am
Somebody should take those toys away from Isreal before they hurt someone. They are starting to act more like little kids rather than a nation. I hope they realize the Bush doctrine is no longer valid.
infidel Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 3:09 am
Oh yeah that makes alot of sense. Take away the nukes of the only stable country in the ME & give it to one that has already said over & over & over it wants to destroy Israel. Israel should nuke them off the planet.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 3:12 am
Since when did the Bush doctrine apply to how Israel conducts their foreign policy?
Robert Blair Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 3:20 am
Bush used to believe that they loved him and his “cowboy” ways. Isreal is notorious for pre emptive actions, and amping up minor things (like the rocket attacks that injured three people in six months) into an “imminent” danger and threat.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 3:25 am
So, since Israel is notorious for their preemptive actions…it would be safe to say the Bush administration had no impact on their foreign policy.
I wouldn’t say that an attack on sovereign territory, regardless of how “minor” YOU would classify it should go unpunished. But, since we’re on the subject…how many rockets would YOU say would qualify as an “imminent danger and threat”?
Me? One.
Lee Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 4:44 am
“how many rockets would YOU say would qualify as an “imminent danger and threat”?”
Jared,
What makes folks like me lose sympathy for Israel is that unfortunately the response is rarely proportionate or discriminating.
On top of that, there are two sides to the story.. e.g how would you like it if your land was stolen on a regular basis.. how would you like it if large sections of your population lived in an open prison.
In fact there are many aspects of the way Israeli government’s treat Palestinians which are reminiscent of Apartheid and the way Black American’s were discriminated against before the civil rights movement.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
What would be an appropriate response in your opinion, LEE? rocket for rocket?
Lee Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 5:23 am
Jared,
Well thats an interesting question. If it were just a case that poor, innocent, Israel had done nothing to the Palestinians then a proportionate response would probably be to use intelligence (best in the world) to identify the rough area where the rocket attackers came from (e.g an apartment block(s) ) and then send in special forces to do a raid of those homes, looking for weapons or evidence of involvement in the attack.
It’s important to remember that the main effect of the rockets is to make residents scared, there have been a minute amount of injuries of deaths caused by the Qassam rockets.
Anyway, that would be the case if Israel were innocent here.. But frankly the’re not. What Israel should really do after these attacks is consider stopping stealing their land, stopping brutal oppression and treating Palestinians generally as second-class citizen’s.
Imagine it this way.. If African-American’s had chosen a violent path of protest in the 50’s and 60’s, would it have been ok for the government to bomb black neighborhoods, or prevent people from entering/leaving black neighborhoods etc..
If it isn’t clear. I certainly totally condemn the violence from the Palestinian radicals, but I equally condemn the succession of Israeli governments for their downright ‘evil’ responses and brutal oppression which has led to this armed resistance.
April 18th, 2009 at 2:59 am
Israel should realize the days of US support are over. There’s a new pansy in town & he is showing every sign of non-support for Israel. So either way, Israel should do what it has to do to survive.
Robert Blair Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 3:15 am
Pansy with thorns…Infidel…lots of thorns. LOL
infidel Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 3:17 am
Pansies have thorns? I though they were kinda delicate & wilted pretty fast.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 3:18 am
Thorns? How so, ROBERT?
Robert Blair Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 3:21 am
I was implying that the “pansy” has teeth…in other words, you may consider our president soft, but in reality he has a sturdy backbone.
Kregg Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
His backbone was so strong he used it to lower his whole body in a bow to the King – now THATS some backbone!
Um Cara Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Come on Kregg, that’s pretty weak.
I would have gone with teasing Robert about mixing his metaphors, pansies with backbones? Even kooky theories like evolution don’t have flowers with vertebrae.
You could have tweaked Robert in a light, friendly way – and at the same time gotten a dig in on evolutionary theory.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 3:26 am
As evidenced by….?
average james Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Could it be that Biden was correct in his assertion that the president would be significantly challenged internationally in the first six months ?
“As evidenced by…..?”-Jared
Shall we see what happens and then pass judgement ? Are you guilty of pre-emptive ridicule ?
Do you recall “Talk soflty and carry a big stick” ?
So far, this president does just that.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
AVERAGE JAMES.
uh-uh…my liberal friend.
I’ve always said I would take a wait-and-see approach to Obama’s administration. I merely asked ROBERT to identify situations whereby Obama has shown a “sturdy backbone”.
“Talk soflty and carry a big stick” ?
as evidenced by…?
average james Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Jared,
Ok, I stand corrected.
“Talk softly and carry a big stick”
The evidence is clear to me. Obama has been “talking” to the international community, friend and foe. He has not been threatening or demanding. He has been reaching out, tying to establish relationship where there has been no relationship, diplomacy from an entirely different angle. That being said, Obama is the commander in chief of the most powerful military on earth(big stick). No need to crow. I believe it will prove successful, that we will lead and others follow, not from bullying but leading.
Kregg Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Um said: Come on Kregg, that’s pretty weak.
K: Whats worse is that a couple of posts down someone had already used that gag!
Um Cara Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Well, it’s the weekend, we should all be allowed to be a little off our game, I should think.
Kregg Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Going flyfishing tomorrow. Should be a glorious day in the central valley. Bass, perch, bluegills. Catch-and-release pond not far from here… Wish you could come.
Kregg Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
It seems the nesting system only reports certain levels of response out to the list?
April 18th, 2009 at 3:13 am
Really Robert? Yeah, it was pretty sturdy in that big bow he gave to the Saudi.
average james Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Humility is a desirable character trait, as is open-mindedness.
Do you not like flowers infidel ?
April 18th, 2009 at 3:23 am
Is Israel About to Bomb Iran’s Nuclear Sites?…
by Damozel | The Times Online seems to think that Israel is, and indeed we’ve been hearing threats of impending action since last summer. I find this all too easy to believe, but after what I’ve heard about its attacks on the Palestinians, I am prepa…
April 18th, 2009 at 11:02 am
War war war.
Nuke nuke nuke.
Kill kill kill.
Well at least the Christians, Jews & Muslims agree about something.
average james Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Hey Rocky,
Perhaps it would be more accurate as;
Extremist Christians, extremist Jews & extremist Muslims agree about something.
April 18th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
“How many times should Iran be allowed to say Isreal should be wiped off the map of the earth, before Isreal should act.”
This statement is taken out of context and purposely misquoted to make it sound like a threat for propaganda purposes. A context was provided at the time: “the statement was THE ISRAELI REGIME will vanish just as the Soviet Union disappeared”. Another place they compare it to how the Shah’s regime toppled. Both of the regimes they mentioned collapsed from the inside, neither involved an external threat, just as no threat was made in this case..
infidel Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
“Whether you like it or not, the Zionist regime is on the road to being eliminated.”
“[It] is a decaying and crumbling tree that will fall with a storm.”
“If [The Zionists] Themselves Do Not Wrap Up Zionism… The Peoples Will Wipe These Germs of Corruption Off the Face of the Earth.”
“As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map.”
As quoted from Ahmadinejad
ff11 Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
As misquoted from Ahmadinejad, you mean.
pierre Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 12:07 am
Actually, this propaganda was spread by special lobbysts in DC–you know, the————.
ecsredeye Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 3:25 am
http://www.alan.com/2009/04/17/is-israel-getting-ready-to-invade-iran/comment-page-1/#comment-152872
‘Wiped off the Map’ – The Rumor of the Century
by Arash Norouzi
Across the world, a dangerous rumor has spread that could have catastrophic implications. According to legend, Iran’s president has threatened to destroy Israel, or, to quote the misquote, “Israel must be wiped off the map.” Contrary to popular belief, this statement was never made.
On Tuesday, October 25th, 2005 at the Ministry of Interior conference hall in Tehran, newly elected Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivered a speech at a program, reportedly attended by thousands, titled “The World Without Zionism.” Large posters surrounding him displayed this title prominently in English, obviously for the benefit of the international press. Below the poster’s title was a slick graphic depicting an hour glass containing planet Earth at its top. Two small round orbs representing the United States and Israel are shown falling through the hour glass’ narrow neck and crashing to the bottom.
Before we get to the infamous remark, it’s important to note that the “quote” in question was itself a quote – they are the words of the late Ayatollah Khomenei, the father of the Islamic Revolution. Although he quoted Khomeini to affirm his own position on Zionism, the actual words belong to Khomeini and not Ahmadinejad. Thus, Ahmadinejad has essentially been credited (or blamed) for a quote that is not only unoriginal, but represents a viewpoint already in place well before he ever took office.
The Actual Quote:
So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in Farsi:
“Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.”
That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word “regime.” pronounced just like the English word with an extra “eh” sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase “rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods” (regime occupying Jerusalem).
So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want “wiped from the map”? The answer is: nothing. That’s because the word “map” was never used. The Persian word for map, “nagsheh” is not contained anywhere in his original Farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase “wipe out” ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran’s president threatened to “wipe Israel off the map.” despite never having uttered the words “map.” “wipe out” or even “Israel.”
The Proof:
The full quote translated directly to English:
“The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.”
Word by word translation:
Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).
Here is the full transcript of the speech in Farsi, archived on Ahmadinejad’s web site
The Speech and Context:
While the false “wiped off the map” extract has been repeated infinitely without verification, Ahmadinejad’s actual speech itself has been almost entirely ignored. Given the importance placed on the “map” comment, it would be sensible to present his words in their full context to get a fuller understanding of his position. In fact, by looking at the entire speech, there is a clear, logical trajectory leading up to his call for a “world without Zionism.” One may disagree with his reasoning, but critical appraisals are infeasible without first knowing what that reasoning is.
In his speech, Ahmadinejad declares that Zionism is the West’s apparatus of political oppression against Muslims. He says the “Zionist regime” was imposed on the Islamic world as a strategic bridgehead to ensure domination of the region and its assets. Palestine, he insists, is the frontline of the Islamic world’s struggle with American hegemony, and its fate will have repercussions for the entire Middle East.
Ahmadinejad acknowledges that the removal of America’s powerful grip on the region via the Zionists may seem unimaginable to some, but reminds the audience that, as Khomeini predicted, other seemingly invincible empires have disappeared and now only exist in history books. He then proceeds to list three such regimes that have collapsed, crumbled or vanished, all within the last 30 years:
(1) The Shah of Iran – the U.S. installed monarch
(2) The Soviet Union
(3) Iran’s former arch-enemy, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein
In the first and third examples, Ahmadinejad prefaces their mention with Khomeini’s own words foretelling that individual regime’s demise. He concludes by referring to Khomeini’s unfulfilled wish: “The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time. This statement is very wise.” This is the passage that has been isolated, twisted and distorted so famously. By measure of comparison, Ahmadinejad would seem to be calling for regime change, not war.
The Origin:
One may wonder: where did this false interpretation originate? Who is responsible for the translation that has sparked such worldwide controversy? The answer is surprising.
The inflammatory “wiped off the map” quote was first disseminated not by Iran’s enemies, but by Iran itself. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran’s official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. International media including the BBC, Al-Jazeera, Time magazine and countless others picked up the IRNA quote and made headlines out of it without verifying its accuracy, and rarely referring to the source. Iran’s Foreign Minister soon attempted to clarify the statement, but the quote had a life of its own. Though the IRNA wording was inaccurate and misleading, the media assumed it was true, and besides, it made great copy…
April 18th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
How many challenges did Georgy Bush had during
his first 8 months? I guess 9-11 did not count!
You are all great americans, but a test/ challenge to harm Americans does not matter to you,
as long as it is seen as an Obama’s failure.
A well deserved certificate form EL Limbo Institute; Congradulations!!!!
April 18th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Well, it’s obvious the UN is too weak to deal with Iran’s nuclear aspirations. The EU has no answer. BO is even weaker than the other two. There’s no one else in the world that has the ability to stop Iran from first building nuclear arms, and then either selling them (as their economy is not doing well at all), or to lob a missile into Israel.
Should Israel just wait (like FDR) to be sneak-attacked first before doing anything? What would the UN/EU/BO do then? Call for peace talks while the radiation cloud spreads throughout the region?
pierre Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 11:46 pm
The last president and VP repeated the same lies(Mush.Clouds).
havok333 Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 12:13 am
Which lie do you refer to?
Even better, who do you think will keep Iran from nuking Israel if they get the technology?
craig7120 Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 12:00 am
yeah the same ppl that dont want Iran to have a gun are the same ppl promoting right to bear arms. funny stuff.
pierre Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 12:04 am
You are right my friend. Those people are talking with both sides of their mouth.
havok333 Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 12:15 am
They can have all the assault rifles in Iran they want, as far as I’m concerned. I was referring to nuclear armaments.
Drk H Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 12:20 am
Are you insane. The people who believe in the right to bear arms, also believe in common sense limitations on that right, such as no grenade launchers or machine guns. Why is that do you think? Because it is hard to make a case that a grenade launcher is appropriate for self-defense because it carries to much of a chance of harm to innocents. Also, we have laws that when you make threats aimed at somebody else you lose your gun rights, such as domestic violence. Same as I’m a in a Jihad the president of Iran. What is wrong with taking people at their words. He says he will wipe Isreal of the face of the map. Ok, then Isreal has every right to make sure he cannot do that.
ff11 Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Taking people at their words is one thing, lying about their word and then basing policy on it is quite another. He never said he would wipe Israel off the map. If Israel does attack Iran, then Iran has every right to respond in whatever way they see fit.
TDro319 Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
” Because it is hard to make a case that a grenade launcher is appropriate for self-defense because it carries to much of a chance of harm to innocents”
And a .38 or a .45 is LESS harmful to innocents? I guess it’s less harmful to get shot in the head with a handgun than a grenade launcher. I suppose you could make the case that there’s less dry cleaning involved with a handgun.
Maybe you should talk to the parents of sons and daughters who were “collateral damage” in gang shootings.
April 18th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
TDRO
Talk to the parents of sons and daughters who were collateral damage in DUI accidents, knife crimes, those who have been beaten to death in violent crimes.
Nah. then you couldn’t go into a tirade about how inanimate objects commit violent crimes all by themselves.
willy Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 8:05 am
TDro needs to really think long and hard on some of the things he says. I respect his pacifism but at some point one has to realize that one might just have to defend oneself with deadly force if need be.
flap Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
I think pacifism to an EXTENT is very noble…but at some point you gotta kick some ass or get your own ass kicked. Sorry, that’s reality.
April 19th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
I challenge anyone who thinks Israel shouldn’t be allowed to defend itself to move there for 7 years and see how many times you have to take cover in the midst of your daily activities.
THEN you have the right to an opinion on what they do to keep their citizens safe.
April 19th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
When are you people going to get it that ‘pre-emptive self-defense’ is an oxymoron????
It’s not self-defense unless you’re attacked!!!
April 19th, 2009 at 6:06 pm