[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
Israel was created by the UN as the British’s exit strategy. [/quote]
True, although Britain abstained on the resolution in question (181).
That sounds like something that JusttheFacts would write. Any sources for that?
[quote] The United States of America has been a much better place to live for my family (which is Jewish) then Israel.
The oppertunities are endless here. [/quote]
I’m glad you think that.
Again, sources?
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
Get used to that sound. You’ll hear it a lot more 
bang bang bang bang. Or this one. POW. I thought this was a thread for people to make actual statements about things, rather than that batman tv series. Seriously zap, read that passage again. [/quote]
Getting mad that no one will bang you? I’m sure there’s someone with really bad teeth just waiting for you.
Really? Well, little guy, you seem to have skipped several millenia of ensuing history since the fall of Babylon. Have you just not gotten to that class yet? I’ll point you in the right direction.
You could start with the Bible. It’s a book written about all kinds of Jewish goings on, BEYOND THE TIME OF BABYLON!
Then, try reading Tacitus and Dio Cassius. Or try reading Josephus who was there when the JEWS of JUDAEA were crushed by the Romans. Was Josephus a Zionist shill two thousand years before Zionism became a movement? Had the Romans really surrounded the Arabs of Palestine in Massada? Strangely enough, I’m going to go with Roman historians who were there over “Danny”, the C student from Third Tier College, UK.
Now when you are done with that, read about what happened in the 7th century in the region. Ever wonder how The Dome of the Rock was built right on top of the Temple Mount? Why there are so few Christians and up until recently, Jews left in the Levant? Where did all the Greeks and Byzantines and Roman go? Read about Muhammad living with the Jews in the region and instructing him to pray towards Jerusalem as he tried to curry favor with the tribes. In fact, shit, you might as well just start somewhere like ancient Persia and work your way up to 1870 (when what happened Danny?)
Again, you’re missing several eons of history in the region. Weren’t you just accusing people of not knowing history? Hmmmmm…
Where is this country “Palestine” in the history texts? I’m just curious… I mean you know so much history, who was the last King in Palestine? When did this term in referring to a separate state come into usage?
Is that what you guys tell yourself to feel better about losing to a bunch of farmers at the height of your power? That “the greatest army in the world” got beat head-to-head repeatedly by militia? That guys like George III, Germaine, Gage were the best you could come up with, while a distant isolated farming colony produced men like Washington, Adams, and Jefferson? Does it ease the sting from the fact that you were the only country to have ever been conquered and kept by the French?
Let’s do a little comparison between Israel and an Arab nation. How about Egypt, its neighbor? Egypt’s population is 80 million, Israel’s is 6 million. Egypt is five times the size of Israel, which is smaller than new Jersey. Egypt has the amazingly fertile Nile basin, and huge mineral and oil deposits, an enormous tourism interest, as well as sitting astride the vastly lucrative Suez Canal.
AND YET, ISRAEL HAS A GDP OF $150 BILLION and Egypt is at $88 billion. How could that be? What great natural resource are the Jews sitting on to make them so successful? Rocks? Cedar trees? Sand? Are you going to tell me that they are this productive because of some vast Jewish conspiracy, Herr Hitler?
What’s the matter, can’t counter with real facts? Not to worry, not you or any of your puny little unwashed friends could force me to do anything that I didn’t want to.
That’s funny. The Arabs are renowned in the agricultural world for their lack of farming knowledge. For instance, they managed to turn the green fields of Mesopotamia into a desert through centuries of poor farming technique. So some of our troops read about, say, Alexander marching through a ripe and fertile area, and now when the Americans roll through it is an arid wasteland. Would the same happen if they compared, say the writings of the Bible to the writings of Ehud Barak?
Jewish immigration didn’t begin in the 1900s, by the way Danny. When did the movement back to Judaea start? Hint: You’re decades off.
[quote] But things change, and far too many Jews came, without regard for the current inhabitants. Moshe Dayan suggested the arabs would “live like dogs, or leave”. How nice. He was in charge of Israeli military activity all throughout it’s formative period
[/quote]
And it turns out he was right. The Israelis made the desert bloom, while the Arabs continue to live like dogs, DESPITE VAST VAST OIL WEALTH.
[quote]ChuckyT wrote:
The Israelis founded their own country by defeating all comers. This is the same way that the UK, the USA, the Arabs who stole Judea, and everyone else have countries.
If the Arabs HAVE to have it back they could try, but they know they would lose. So instead of dealing with that they encourage murder of civilian Jews, which doesn’t get them anything but an external bogeyman. This helps keep the peoples’ minds off the facts that their countries are shitholes run by strongmen. Their countries aren’t in ruins because of the Jews, they aren’t poor because of the Jews, they have no exports besides oil and bodies not because of the Jews, the little strip of land that they’re missing is not the root cause of all evil. They have enormous problems to deal with that do not stem from the Jews, and until they admit this they are destined for more shit.
[/quote]
Agree with Zap. Chucky owns this thread. Well done.
[quote]ChuckyT wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
Israel was created by the UN as the British’s exit strategy.
True, although Britain abstained on the resolution in question (181).
Israel was created by the west in the hopes of having a place for Jesus to return and demand that, 144K jews representing the 12 tribes of Israel, they convert to Christianity or die.
That sounds like something that JusttheFacts would write. Any sources for that?
The United States of America has been a much better place to live for my family (which is Jewish) then Israel.
The oppertunities are endless here.
I’m glad you think that.
The evangelicals created Israel so that they could have their rapture.
Again, sources? [/quote]
If you are not an evangelical then you are clueless because you have not been exposed to this.
If you are an evangelical then you are being intellectually dishonest at the very least.
Evangelicals and Jews Together
http://www.nationalreview.com/dreher/dreher040502.asp
Most of my family is Jewish but the rest are evangelicals (the story is too long to get into it). I have heard the evangelicals reasons for keeping Israel safe and they constantly refer to Revelations. You should read the part about how Jesus Christ is suppose to return to the Temple in Israel.
The Rapture is ambiguously refered to in the Bible three times if I remember correctly which is the basis of the Christain Zionist movement.
John Nelson Darby is the considered the modern found of Christain Zionism and that is where the majority of the support for founding Israel came from.
I would prefer that this stuff did not exist because I find it more than twisted that Christians would support Israel and they want as many jews there as they can get there. Churchs in the USA sponser Jewish immigrants passage to Israel from Europe and Eurasia for this reason.
I am sure you can not be convinced but this stuff is more real then most people know.
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
ChuckyT wrote:
The Israelis founded their own country by defeating all comers. This is the same way that the UK, the USA, the Arabs who stole Judea, and everyone else have countries.
If the Arabs HAVE to have it back they could try, but they know they would lose. So instead of dealing with that they encourage murder of civilian Jews, which doesn’t get them anything but an external bogeyman. This helps keep the peoples’ minds off the facts that their countries are shitholes run by strongmen. Their countries aren’t in ruins because of the Jews, they aren’t poor because of the Jews, they have no exports besides oil and bodies not because of the Jews, the little strip of land that they’re missing is not the root cause of all evil. They have enormous problems to deal with that do not stem from the Jews, and until they admit this they are destined for more shit.
Agree with Zap. Chucky owns this thread. Well done.
[/quote]
Israel defeated ‘all comers’ because the US and western Europe made sure they did not lose.
The vested interest runs much deeper than most people can understand.
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
Evangelicals and Jews Together
http://www.nationalreview.com/dreher/dreher040502.asp
Most of my family is Jewish but the rest are evangelicals (the story is too long to get into it). I heard the evangelicals reasons for keeping Israel safe and they constantly refer to Revalations. You should read the part about how Jesus Christ is suppose to return to the Temple in Israel.
The Rapture is ambiguously refered to in the Bible three time if I remember correctly which is the basis of the evangelical movement.
John Nelson Darby is the considered the modern found of Christain Zionism and that is where the majority of the support for founding Israel came from.
I would prefer that this stuff did not exist because I find it more than twisted that Christians would support Israel even and they want as many jews there as they can get there. Church’s in the USA sponser Jewish immigrants passage to Israel from Europe and Eurasia for this reason.
I am sure you can not be convinced but this stuff is more real then most people know.[/quote]
Unfortunately this crap is accurate. many people believe in this shit.
Islam also has it’s own end of the world fantasy.
Iran’s president is allegedly a big believer in it.
ChuckyT and danny,
I wanted to personally thank Chucky for expanding and adding to the conversation to the point that I don’t have much to add.
danny, you would do well to give his points some serious thoughts.
Publically, I fully expect you to try to “piss further than him.” However, in private, I hope you give his points the attention they deserve.
The logic is undeniable.
JeffR
Ok jeff, i’ll consider what chucky wrote. Yeh i considered it and he presumed i didn’t know about the romans etc. Ok ok, i don’t just read what’s prescribed, and no, i’ve never read josephus, and no, i wasn’t there. I just though psalm 167 was quite profound about the way the jews of the old testament reacted to being taken away from eretz-Israel. That’s why i mentioned it. “How we wept, when we remembered Zion”… Ok?
Don’t try to put down my studies. Just don’t. I’m not saying i’m anything incredible, but the point is, my reading is wider than most, who seem to accept 1 WASP journos account of mideast history, and come to that familiar conclusion ‘well, they’ve been fighting for centuries’.
I’m not sure excatly what occurence in 1870 you’re referring to (there were lots lol) but the Zionist started their program around then. I get points? Good maybe you’ll all stop trying to discredit me like it’s a competition. Don’t treat me like a petulant youth, knwo i have the right intention (probably the same as you) which is just to end the suffering in the most final way. Sorry if my conclusion isn’t ‘NUKE IRAN, THEM BASTARDS BIN ASKIN $ IT FO A LOONG TIME! YEEHA’ I think that more war is not the way.
If you know, there’s a consequence to that. Look at iraq today, the statue came down, and what did some yank do immediately after? PUT UP A US FLAG. Not wise, it causes pain
Seriously, what link do Jews have to Gaza? If there is one, please tell me. I honestly thought there was none.
If i remember correctly, The Ottoman empire was falling apart, and the land called palestine (for a bit) was claimed by Britain as a Mandate, after the English and French engineered an arab coup to overthrow the (non-arab) rulers. Correct?
I have no shame in admitting the french conquered the land i lived in 940 years ago. That’s the truth. But, This ‘farming colony’ you spoke of received such massive aid from France (a bitter enemy and rival at the time) that France was fucked, and the the FR happened, forever changing history etc etc. So, that’s why America is the birthplace of Capitalism, because you accidentally killed feudalism in your getting support from the French. (No negatives, i don’t hate American’s etc, just sometimes you get too caught up in your own isolated self-importance maybe). If we really want to talk about pure, honest defeat by an impoverished nation, i can think of one such war… In the last 35 years…
Mate i apologise for my one lapse from talking sense, that comment about a brick. It seems you know a lot, enough to spar with, so it didn’t refer to you. It was to anyone who mindlessly quotes cnn etc. Let’s not get fruity though.
True true about some arabs ruining land etc. But not Plaestine in the 1940s. It was the reverse, as i said. this ‘desert bloom’ etc. What? In my opinion that’s like the ‘fighting for centuries’ I saw footage of an Israeli in Jaffa, literally scratching his head, as a friendly ara farmer’s field right next door was sucking a huge fat orange.
marmadogg i didn’t knwo that. That’s very deep. Everything else you said i agree with. Definitely it wasn’t a natural victory of Israel over Arabs, they were heavily supported, trained, sponsored, in my previous understanding as they were a group of white (though not gentile) people who could handle money reputedly well, and watch over as USA ‘internationalised’ the arab oil (as i’ve heard one US senator describe it as lol
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
marmadogg i didn’t knwo that. That’s very deep. Everything else you said i agree with. Definitely it wasn’t a natural victory of Israel over Arabs, they were heavily supported, trained, sponsored, …[/quote]
The Arabs were supported and armed by the Soviets. They did not make their tanks themselves.
True, but several times the soviets turned down arab/ egyptian requests for more armaments
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
True, but several times the soviets turned down arab/ egyptian requests for more armaments[/quote]
Maybe then they should be blaming the former Soviet Union for all that ails them?
Ummm… Yeah. Listen I feel that It’s all fucked up, but i have more respect for the greedy superpower who don’t escalate the grade of weapons every few weeks than the one that does. In my albeit limited understanding, The Soviet’s stopped Nasser-era Egypt and Syria seriously turning it on Israel. Honestly if at their peak they’d fully armed Lebanon, Jordan and Palestine so they could compete with Israel’s firepoqer, maybe noe the refugees i complained recently on behalf of would have access to fresh drinking water, and would be growing oranges with the whole gentile-jew in arab country experiment a distant memory
But that would have entailed lots and lots of israelis dying, which i don’t think is cool.
tell me if you agree even slightly with this. As illusory as the whole ‘They look just like each other’ thing about Islamic terrorists and their non-terrorist, passive countrymen is, I don’t believe Lebanese/palestinians who don’t act aggressively should die, just because someone says ‘they should stand up’ etc. That is a job for the police, not the civilians, or even army. Similarly I’d hate to see israeli citizens die on such a massive scale as to end the war, on behalf of their eminently more aggressive military leaders. None of that is cool with me. That’s like me hating Waterbury for letting some people on this board insinuate that i’m a terrorist-acolyte.
Nah
How about this to consider- I’d like to see a whole Israeli cabinet that were never involved in the war except for their mandatory militaray service of course (not primary to the second clause, just first in the order i’m writing- shit i hate having to write disclaimers) and an elected Palestinian government of the future that plays no part in revolutionary struggle. Just governemnts who live next door to each other, and are respectful of each other.
I’d like to add that to my list of ideals to stop the war
Oh, and no superpower intervention if all they do is veto UN proposals and supply weapons
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
That is a job for the police, not the civilians, or even army. Similarly I’d hate to see israeli citizens die on such a massive scale as to end the war, on behalf of their eminently more aggressive military leaders. None of that is cool with me. That’s like me hating Waterbury for letting some people on this board insinuate that i’m a terrorist-acolyte. [/quote]
Let’s get real clear here. Who’s job is it to reign in terrorists? Whoever it is, has not been doing their job. No, your fantasies aside, the government of the nation harboring the terrorists, through police or through military means, is the one responsible for GOVERNING over their own land.
The populace in the region, who is not simply innocent, who live side by side and help build fortifications, are not as innocent as you would like everyone to believe.
The innocent ones and the smart ones are not in the vicinity of the Hezbollah terrorists. Their homes and other material issues can be rebuilt.
Whine, whine, whine. Life is so unfair. Somebody make it right, stop everyone suffering, boohoo. This is what I am hearing. This is the real world, the only thing that will fix it is strength. Preferably strength from the people and government of Lebanon in the most current instance, but barring that, strength from somebody willing to quash terrorism.
The lebanese need to decide whether they will pay the price to fight terrorism in their community or if they will pay the price for not fighting terrorism over and over again.
Not a nice choice to have to make.
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
How about this to consider- I’d like to see a whole Israeli cabinet that were never involved in the war except for their mandatory militaray service of course (not primary to the second clause, just first in the order i’m writing- shit i hate having to write disclaimers) and an elected Palestinian government of the future that plays no part in revolutionary struggle. Just governemnts who live next door to each other, and are respectful of each other.[/quote]
History shows that chickenhawks make worse mistakes when running a country than ex-military.
I know you don’t need any examples.
Israel’s current PM has no military experience and we have seen how that has turned out.
Your ideas are interesting but history has show that chickenhawks really F things up.
Look what happened in Vietnam with chickenhawk Dems running the show.
The chickenhawk Republicans have committed the same idiotic mistakes.
OK that;s about right "
“Let’s get real clear here. Who’s job is it to reign in terrorists? Whoever it is, has not been doing their job.” agreed
No, your fantasies aside, the government of the nation harboring the terrorists, through police or through military means, is the one responsible for GOVERNING over their own land."
I’m glad you aclled them fantasies, compared to ‘reality’ that’s a compliment, and our only hope for a constructive future. It won’t be me (i’m about to be an english teacher in asia, Spain, somewhere nice and hot and playing with the local girls and their native tongues, you get me?) but one day someone with the same ideas of ethical equivalence, and beginning at the root of the problems, will solve this whole puzzle.
“Whine, whine, whine. Life is so unfair. Somebody make it right, stop everyone suffering, boohoo. This is what I am hearing. This is the real world, the only thing that will fix it is strength.” So what did you come to these threads for? To reiterate just how terrible terrorists are? (Been done in many ways already). To Pick holes in hopeful solutions with semantics and whatnot?
Strength leads to conflict. I like a weightlifting analogy as much as any other. You’re strong, right? What happens to your muscles everytime you have a good workout? That’s right, your muscles die and come back stronger? Israel’s methods of ‘solving’ the terrorism by default bombings (have you seen Beirut recently?) is the workout (death), mine are the PWO shake Micronised. Superfly.
"The lebanese need to decide whether they will pay the price to fight terrorism in their community or if they will pay the price for not fighting terrorism over and over again.
Not a nice choice to have to make."
Good point. It’s a very complex decision- confront the counter-productive who claim to have your best interests at heart (claim) or the ones who overtly bomb your locale to destroy said counterproductive force. I’d like to remind you of the academically recognised 3 motivations of terrorism
Act like this doesn’t matter, but if i know this, you can bet that Israel does. I suggest that not bombing so much, and rather working at point 2 by less destructive, morale destroying methods, would be most productive. Like secular, democratic, proactive meetings, to gather the community to be unified, without guns of course
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
I read quite a bit of the rabbi’s opinion, but fuck! it’s long, so i stopped. BUT i am a history student and i got a 1st for the Israel/ arab world (not just palestine) conflict. That is the most corrupt shit, ever. U Americans, did u know, as of 2002, 1/2 of ALL US humanitarian aid was sent to Israel, they aren’t a very poor nation, so it goes to buy tanks/helicopters/new guns. Did u also knwo that Israel has stolen the land which Gaza draws it’s water from, and now sells it to them?
I could go on with facts. It makes me so bitter to think of the injustices. And if anyone doubts the arab’s willingness to negotiate, check out UN security council resolution 336 (i think, but i know it was made on nov 22nd, my birthday) which instructed the Israelis decades ago to return ‘expropriated land’ to the Palestinians.
Israelis use Jewish persecution as a massive excuse, they are evil. I am 1/8th jewish. I am not racist. I am informed. This shit needs to stop. Bob Geldof and Bono will not suffice. Americans need to pressurise their government.
Everytime a rehash of res.336 is made by the UN again, USA uses it’s power to completely veto the whole shit. There wasa quote i used for my paper i can’t forget “The Western World is trying to salve its conscience with Arab land (and blood)”
What do u think of this?[/quote]
dannyrat, I’ve read quite a bit of what you’ve written. You say “i am a history student and i got a 1st for the Israel/ arab world (not just palestine) conflict.” Congratulations. A big question thiough? At what level are you studying history (for what degree are you reading) and at which university?
There’s a huge difference between a Harvard PHD and an undergraduate degree from a mediocre 4 year college. I wager the latter.
Nuke Iran, Blame the Jews
Who Benefits from the Israel-Lebanon Flare-Up?
by Jorge Hirsch
Members of the Jewish faith and others correctly point out that Jews are often blamed for the sins of others. They may be about to be proven right again, in a big way. The current conflict may escalate to the point where the US will use nuclear weapons against Iran, in what will be the first use of nuclear weapons in war since Nagasaki. And the world will blame it on the Jews.
Israel’s hugely disproportionate response to Hezbollah’s actions is causing immense suffering, is in blatant violation of the Geneva conventions, and deserves the strongest of condemnations. It is especially important for Jews today to distance themselves from Israel’s immoral government policies and US’s support for them. Fortunately some are doing this [1], [2], [3], unfortunately, many are not. “Thousands of American Jews clogged the streets” in New York and elsewhere in the US [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] in support of Israel’s actions, reports the Jerusalem Post. Both Houses of the US Congress have just passed solidly backed bipartisan resolutions supporting Israel’s actions in Lebanon [1], [2], to “solidify long-term backing of Jewish voters” according to the Washington Post.
The irony is, Israel’s war crimes are going to be dwarfed in comparison to the crime against humanity that will take place if the US uses nuclear weapons against Iran. Israel, by its disproportionate reaction and by accusing Iran (without proof) of being behind Hezbollah’s actions [1], [2], [3] , [4], will be seen as having played a key role if the conflict escalates to engulf Iran and the United States. Yet the motivation for those that want this to happen [1], [2] is not to ensure Israel’s hegemony in the Middle East, rather it is to ensure US hegemony in the world.
Israel’s Interests
It goes without saying that Israel would benefit from the destruction of Hezbollah. Yet it is hard to see how the indiscriminate attack against Lebanon that is taking place will achieve anything other than strengthening the already strong support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and elsewhere in the Arab world. Shmuel Rosner argues in a Haaretz OpEd that Israel is “America’s deadly messenger”, being used to promote Bush’s “democracy agenda”. It certainly appears that Israel’s current actions are irrational and self-destructive. Unless their real aim is to draw Syria and Iran into the conflict, following directions from Washington. At the very least it is clear that Israel would not be doing this in the absence of a guarantee from the US that it will intervene if the conflict widens, which in any event Bush has already publicly announced.
If Iran enters the conflict and shoots a single missile against Israel, the US will step in and destroy the military infrastructure of Iran by aerial bombardment. As suggested by Seymour Hersh and others [1], [2], [3], [4], this is likely to involve the US use of nuclear “bunker busters”.
It has been predicted that if the US or Israel attack Iran, Iran will unleash Hezbollah who will carry out devastating attacks against Israel. “Hizbollah was also seen as a means of tying our hands on the Iranian nuclear threat,” says an Israeli official. Well, we are in the dress rehersal, and we are seeing that despite all the hype, Hezbollah is a paper tiger. Green light for the Iran attack.
Iran’s Interests
What is really unusual about the current flare-up in the Middle East is the barrage of strident denunciations against Iran, from the Bush administration, politicians from across the political spectrum [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], and the mainstream media [1], [2], [3], [4], that uniformly accuse Iran (without presenting evidence) of being behind the Hezbollah actions. This has never happened before when there was conflict in Lebanon where Hezbollah was involved, why now?
One argument is Ahmadinejad’s stated animosity against Israel. However, that has been Iran’s stated position since 1979.
The other argument is that Iran is trying to “divert attention” from the nuclear issue. That defies the most elementary logic. If Iran was really intent in getting nuclear weapons and destroying Israel, it would try to keep things as quiet as possible until it gets those nuclear weapons, several years into the future.
The reality is that, whether one ascribes to Iran evil or benign intentions, Iran draws no benefit whatsoever from the current turmoil in Lebanon. Neither does Syria. Consequently the rhetoric from the US and Israel suggests a deliberate attempt to draw Syria and Iran into the conflict.
The US’s Interests
A US attack on Iran has been predicted by analysts for several years. The US policy vis-a-vis Iran is clearly directed towards confrontation rather than accommodation. There are many reasons for the US to attack Iran, including the control of energy resources, suppression of a regional power opposite to US and Israeli interests, etc. However I have argued for many months that the key reason for the US to seek a military confrontation with Iran is that it will “force” the US to cross the nuclear threshold and use low yield nuclear weapons against Iranian installations. And this is seen as essential to further US geopolitical goals.
The United States used nuclear weapons against Japan not because it had to. It did so to demonstrate to the world that it was in possession of a new weapon that packed the destructive power of thousands of bombing missions into a single one. To tell the rest of the world, beware.
Since then, it has spent over 5 trillion dollars in building up its nuclear arsenal, but nuclear weapons have become “unusable” after 60 years of non-use. America has achieved nuclear primacy but it is useless, until it shows that nuclear weapons are usable again.
Everything has been put in place. The US is likely to have obtained classified “intelligence” concerning hidden Iranian chemical and biological underground facilities. Low yield B61-11 nuclear bunker busters must have been deployed, just in case “surprising military developments” give rise to “military necessity”. Once Iran is drawn into a conflict and shoots a single missile against Israel or US forces in the region, the US administration will argue that the next Iranian missile could carry chemical or biological warheads and cause untold casualties among Americans, Iraqis or Israelis. A low yield nuclear bunker buster will be touted as the most “humane” way to prevent further loss of life.
Why it may happen
In 1941, a vast military effort was started by the United States to create nuclear weapons, culminating in the Trinity test and subsequent bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The effort was shrouded in secrecy and any moral qualms were set aside. When it succeeded, it was argued that many American and Japanese lives had been saved by nuking Japan into surrender.
Any speculation during the period 1941-1945 that the United States had 100,000 people devoted to create a secret weapon million-fold more powerful than any known weapon would have been dismissed as the ultimate “conspiracy theory”.
Similarly, much evidence indicates that a deliberate project, shrouded in secrecy, exists today that will culminate in the nuking of Iran, to “save lives”. Many are privy to parts of the plan, as Seymour Hersh revealed, only a few know the plan in its entirety. Low-yield nuclear bunker busters will be used, untested but as reliable as the untested “Little Boy” that leveled Hiroshima. Americans will buy the “military necessity” argument because it will be true: American troops in Iraq will be sitting ducks facing Iranian missiles, with or without WMD warheads.
After the US uses nuclear weapons again, it will have established the usability of its nuclear arsenal against non-nuclear countries. It will be possible to wage war “on the cheap”, saving many American lives in future conflicts. “Support the troops” is the one thing all Americans, no matter how diverse their views are, agree on.
It should not be allowed to happen. The President has sole authority to order the use of nuclear weapons against Iran. We know from previous actions of this administration what Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are capable of. There have been radical changes in US nuclear weapons policies and in preemption “doctrine”, and the Bush announcement that the nuclear option is “on the table”. In response, there needs to be a strong groundswell call to restrict the absolute presidential authority of this President to order the use of nuclear weapons against Iran. By the general public, by “antinuclear” organizations, by scientific, political and professional organizations. To push Congress into action before it is too late. Without a “nuclear option”, the US will be more interested in negotiation than in confrontation with Iran.
Cui Bono?
In the short term, Israel certainly will benefit from the destruction of Iran’s military capabilities. But Israel will not enjoy peace as a result, because the nuking of Iran will create enormous animosity against Israel in the Muslim world and beyond. To the extent that the world buys the US fable that the nuking of Iran was required by “military necessity” and not premeditated, Israel (and Jews worldwide) will bear a heavier than deserved brunt for having contributed to “precipitate” these events.
The US will reap enormous benefits. Flexing its nuclear muscle, it will establish its absolute hegemony in the Middle East and Central Asia and beyond, and gradually squeeze China and Russia into nuclear disarmament and complete submission.
In the end of course we will all lose. Because the nuclear genie, unleashed from its bottle in the war against Iran, will never retreat. And just like the US could develop nuclear weapons in only 4 years with completely new technology 60 years ago, many more countries and groups will be highly motivated to do it in the coming years.
Think about the current disproportionate response of Israel, applied in a conflict where the contenders have nuclear weapons. 10 to 1 retaliation, starting with a mere 600 casualties, wipes out the entire Earth’s population in eight easy steps. Who will be willing to stop the escalation? The country that lost 60,000 citizens in the last hit? The one that lost 600,000? 6 million?
As the nuclear holocaust unfolds, some will remember the Lebanon conflict and subsequent Iran war and blame it all on the Jews. Others will properly blame Americans, for having allowed their Executive to erase the 60-year old taboo against the use of nuclear weapons, first in doctrine and then in practice, despite having the most powerful conventional military force in the world. Others of course will blame “Muslim extremism”.
And then the blaming will wither away as a three-billion-year old experiment, life on planet Earth, comes to an end.
Jorge Hirsch is a Professor of Physics at the University of California at San Diego, a fellow of the American Physical Society, and organizer of a recent petition, circulated among leading physicists, opposing the new nuclear weapons policies adopted by the US in the past 5 years. He is a frequent commentator on Iran and nuclear weapons. Email to: jorgehirsch@yahoo.com.
[quote]
dannyrat, I’ve read quite a bit of what you’ve written. You say “i am a history student and i got a 1st for the Israel/ arab world (not just palestine) conflict.” Congratulations.[/quote]
Hey, thanks very much. I really appreciate that. You know, I don’t want to be dannyrant at all, but my introduction is just to show where i’m coming from/ that i’m not just an idealist hippy, so maybe you’d all give a little credence to thoughts beyond ‘bad islamic terrorist. Naughty boy!’
Huh. Ouch you stabbed me in the back You lose. I’m clearly not a Harvard PhD, i’m in the UK. My cousin went to Oxford and got a first, i’m hella proud of him (he’s from the same background as me too, real poor). But, i misbehaved intensely at school, so despite AABB at a level, such big places (universities accept/reject you before you get your a level results) turned me down. I’m an undergraduate. Don’t get it twisted though. I study at the University of Glamorgan, near Cardiff. I do English and History. My history teacher is a published author many times over, and has worked with Noam Chomsky lots of times on projects, and I think he’s impressed with my knowledge. Basically, i’m confident in my understanding of this subject, despite it being 1/12 of my workload for one academic year. How about you? Do you study?
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
My history teacher is a published author many times over, and has worked with Noam Chomsky lots of times on projects, and I think he’s impressed with my knowledge. Basically, i’m confident in my understanding of this subject, despite it being 1/12 of my workload for one academic year. How about you? Do you study?
[/quote]
One class from a Chomsky follower. Anyone surprised?