Netanyahu: World has no "moral right" to stop Israel from attacking Iran
- Thread starter shinobi602
- Start date
- Status
Dude Abides
Banned
Same idea of deference/ mutually assured destruction as with the USSR and USA.
Neko Mimi Mode
Member
You have no evidence for this and it certainly doesn't relate to facts on the ground.
You probably already know this, but the mandate included Jordan etc, so yes, that's not actually very surprising.
My point was that there was already a rather large community and increasing growth of Jews moving to Israel long before there was a state. Jews want to live in the land of Israel, that's all there is to it.
Dude Abides
Banned
Jewish people certainly do. Unfortunately a bunch of non-Jews were already living there, making up the vast majority of the population for decades, and had little interest in suddenly living in a state that was explicitly and proudly not for them. For some reason Israeli partisans are puzzled by this, or pretend to be.
NullPointer
Member
Agreed. But we're only directly enabling and supporting one of those countries.
So yes, I hold Israel to a higher standard than its neighbors, seeing as it drags us down with it.
RustyNails
Member
Neko Mimi Mode
Member
Not puzzled at all, you seem to be the one digging up this historical footnote which is tenuously related to the topic at hand.
By the way, a majority of Israeli arabs, particularly in East Jerusalem, are against losing Israeli citizenship should there ever be a "palestine". Also a majority of them vote for Zionist parties like Kadima.
Tell that to Americans, or basically any other nation/people on Earth.
Though I should point out that Tel Aviv was sand dunes 100 years ago.
RustyNails
Member
It's truly remarkable. Jewish people getting a collective conscious in early 1900s coinciding with balfour declaration, is much more than "Jews just want to live in Israel".
Neko Mimi Mode
Member
Jewish migration to Israel was going on a LONG time before that, smartass. Did you even check the article I linked?
No man, don't you get it. If somebody wants to live somewhere, its "that's all there is to it".
All you need is a propaganda campaign and systematic genocide.
Dude Abides
Banned
I was responding to a poster who was confused about why some people have a problem with Israel. You decided to inject yourself into the conversation, without, apparently, understanding what it was about.
That's nice about Israeli Arabs and citizenship. Since Israel likes to ban political parties that get too far out of line, it's not surprising most end up voting for Kadima.
It seems like you've devolved into "A land with no people for a people without a land" talking point nonsense so I'll let you go ahead with that.
And the Arabs took it from people who live there before. There are the Europeans in the Americas, the British and Australia, the white population in South Africa, the Romans developing colonies throughout the empire, and many more. History is full of examples of inhabited places being nested by foreign communities. Not saying it's right, but it happens often.
One of their proxies? Uh, yeah...
I agree that Israel needs to adopt a policy of basically nuking the Iranian government into oblivion in the event of an attack, though. No hesitation or international investigation. Making that crystal clear would reduce the chances of it happening.
RustyNails
Member
0 BC to 1900 AD: Jews make up minority around present day Israel
1900 to 2000, Jews begin to outnumber the natives 3:1.
What accounts for the sudden emigration of Jews to the land of Palestine, other than Balfour declaration and the mandate?
Besides, you are not allowed to set up shop in a land just because your book says it's a nice place.
I'm not sure what world you live in in which this is not already the policy everybody assumes Israel has.
Devolution
Member
Americans made sure to establish their moral authority with MD, heavy violence against those who dared to not acquiesce lands to us and forcing assimilation of those who were to weak to do otherwise. There was literally no one to speak up for the NA other than themselves. Try that in this day and age against a foreign established group of people (the Palestinians) or another nation (Iran) and see how fast the international community (those who will inevitably get caught in the crossfire due to allegiances, religion and regional overlapping of people) will not simply turn a blind eye.
You're not just talking about a country/nation treating a small minority within their own country like shit at this point, you're talking about Israel (an ally) bullying Iran (a place the U.S. has been fucking with for decades on behalf of Petroleum reserves). Many Arab nations despise the U.S. for their meddling after WWII on top of creating the nation of Israel right on top of them. If we want to get into "moral rights" the entire nation of Israel has been wrong since its inception. If we want to get into "moral rights" the US had no authority to impose the Shah in Iran and depose their democracy. Now what ithe US does is support Israel because it's the only one that will have us. We stole from Iran, we took their democracy, wealth and their oil (for a while) and then we wonder why they don't want to sit at the table with us while we basically let Israel talk shit and stand tall. Huh.
I'm not talking about a nuclear missile.
I mean that if a nuclear device is smuggled in and detonated, period, Iran goes up in smoke. No evidence as to the source before they respond.
Neko Mimi Mode
Member
The formation of a Jewish state in the mandate was proposed by the British (the ruling power at the time) and ratified by the UN. Your anti-US rant is misplaced.
Phantast2k
Member
Can't keep up with the thread atm.
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausla...-fuer-militaerschlag-gegen-iran-a-634415.html
Their older articles are sub-only, so no link. However here's a secondary source on KSA (obviously) denying that Sunday Times report:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-...f-airspace-clearance-for-iran-strike-1.267118
So it wasn't a leak after all. I was mistaken about that.
/edit
lol, what? By that proxy, Turks should gtfo out of Anatolia and Arabs should gtfo out of Maghreb and´contain themselves to the Arabian peninsula.
Thanks a lot for the insight.
My source is German, which cites the Sunday Times:
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausla...-fuer-militaerschlag-gegen-iran-a-634415.html
Their older articles are sub-only, so no link. However here's a secondary source on KSA (obviously) denying that Sunday Times report:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-...f-airspace-clearance-for-iran-strike-1.267118
So it wasn't a leak after all. I was mistaken about that.
/edit
lol, what? By that proxy, Turks should gtfo out of Anatolia and Arabs should gtfo out of Maghreb and´contain themselves to the Arabian peninsula.
Yeah, again, that is exactly the kind of thing everybody expects Israel to do already.
At least you admit there's a double standard going on. I can't really remember the last time a double standard was ever really a fair position to maintain in international politics.
And if Obama gets re-elected, that "us" may not refer to America and Israel anymore
Devolution
Member
The United States was the first to extend recognition through aid and it's pretty obvious its interests in the region were the reason. The US stayed neutral for a while only because the it didn't want to instigate a war with the Soviets but has become more Pro-Israel since the 60s. The U.S. has constantly been paranoid about pre-emptive Israel strikes since giving weaponry in the 60s but felt/feels the state had/has a right to defend its borders. Right now though people can see the tensions mounting again especially after Israel and Lebanon went at it.
Is this a joke? Double standards are basically the entire basis of international politics. This isn't kindergarten, this is realpolitik. There is no fair, there's only safe.
NullPointer
Member
Well, you expect assholes to act like assholes, and aren't surprised when they do. You don't expect friends to act like assholes, and when they do, they should expect to get an earful.
/simplification
This is also true.
RustyNails
Member
I don't see what I said has got to do with Arabs in Maghreb?
I agree totally, it was a sarcastic jab at the poster I quoted. But you bring up the aspect of "safety", which is most likely why Israel is even considering pre-emptive strikes against Iran in the first place.
It probably also explains why organizations like the UN are ultimately ineffective in their efforts to establish "fair" international relations. And also why Israel might not wait for further diplomatic efforts before going after Iran themselves.
Uhh... yea, I'd probably stick to letting pigeon defend your statement.
The irony of all this posturing is that it justifies Iran pursuing a nuclear deterrent. If their safety is really in jeopardy, shouldn't they seek a legitimate deterrent? It seems like the countries that do have nuclear weapons have been the biggest aggressors in modern history. PEACE.
Agent Unknown
Member
First of all, I'm anti war and hate politics, so no dog in that side of the fight. Otherwise, my take:
A country which understandably doesn't want to experience another Holocaust yet at the same time now thinks it's perfectly fine to allow its own soldiers to indiscriminately murder unarmed men, women and children, picking them off like dogs and sometimes even using them as human shields in house searches wants to preach to the world about "drawing moral lines and preventing atrocities." Now there's a paradox of hypocrisy for ya.
Hey, since you're taking the opportunity to be cute with the Yiddish, could you tell me if there's a phrase for "good boy" in a suit who thinks it's OK to blow the head off an innocent, elderly Lebanese woman or a child walking across a road? And maybe you could also enlighten folks as how to say "murderous blabbering gasbag" in Hebrew?
A country which understandably doesn't want to experience another Holocaust yet at the same time now thinks it's perfectly fine to allow its own soldiers to indiscriminately murder unarmed men, women and children, picking them off like dogs and sometimes even using them as human shields in house searches wants to preach to the world about "drawing moral lines and preventing atrocities." Now there's a paradox of hypocrisy for ya.
Hey, since you're taking the opportunity to be cute with the Yiddish, could you tell me if there's a phrase for "good boy" in a suit who thinks it's OK to blow the head off an innocent, elderly Lebanese woman or a child walking across a road? And maybe you could also enlighten folks as how to say "murderous blabbering gasbag" in Hebrew?
If the Jews were smart they should have wiped out 99.99% of the Arabs back before nuclear weapons were invented.
[I do not actually support views such as these. I have dear and close Arab friends. I am making a reference to the genocide of the Native Americans. I am not Anti-American. I live in America and appreciate our freedoms and love this land and its vision, despite its sometimes overbearing religious population. I am not anti-religious. My best friend is a Christian, and I was raised going to Sunday School. I support all views and beliefs, except Scientology, which should be wiped from the Earth completely, all its members put into mental institutions or executed.]
NullPointer
Member
Uhh... yeah. Whatever you say.
I wonder how many people bitching about Israel's treatment of Palestinians live in America. Certainly a shining example of how to treat the indigenous people of a foreign land.
Uhh... you kind of just proved my point...
Anticitizen One
Banned
Iran and Isreal are engaged in a trolling contest and everybody is falling for it
It doesn't, really, because very little could make Israel's position more tenuous than more unilateral attacks on Arab nations. Which probably explains why America's interest lies in preventing such an attack. Israel's path to safety is the same as America's path to safety -- avoiding a disastrous military engagement, spending more time at the peace table, moderating the hawk leaders on both sides, and building a detente and a functional diplomatic relationship, so that by the time Iran develops its nuclear weapons, as it eventually will regardless of any action short of conquest, both sides can trust each other not to use them. In the long term, global community is the only practical solution. Conquering everybody and killing all the dissidents might seem like a good idea, but in practice it just hasn't worked out.
I have no problem with Iran getting nuclear power or nuclear weapons. Any argument I've seen against this occurring has been an absolute joke designed to scare ignorant people. Iran isn't just going to nuke the shit out of Israel for no reason. They gain nothing from that. Furthermore, the idea that Iran getting nukes means that terrorists get nukes is a dumb argument. Terrorists already have access to nukes. They just don't use them because there's better ways to spread terrorism than utilizing a highly volatile substance that is difficult to transport and is expensive to store and weaponize.
Also let's be honest here; Iran is going this route because they saw what happened to Iraq. There's a reaosn the U.S. will never invade N. Korea or Pakistan, two countries FAR more dangerous than Iran.
If Obama wins a second term, I want him to pimp slap Bibi in the Oval Office and tell him to go fuck himself. I know that will never happen, but I can dream.
Also let's be honest here; Iran is going this route because they saw what happened to Iraq. There's a reaosn the U.S. will never invade N. Korea or Pakistan, two countries FAR more dangerous than Iran.
If Obama wins a second term, I want him to pimp slap Bibi in the Oval Office and tell him to go fuck himself. I know that will never happen, but I can dream.
"I'm not saying it's right, I'm just normalizing it."
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
We obviously hold modern people to a higher moral standard than 17th century people, who we hold in turn to a higher standard than 2nd Century BCE people.
Osiris
I permanently banned my 6 year old daughter from using the PS4 for mistakenly sending grief reports as it's too hard to watch or talk to her
Dude's going to give the US elections their "October Surprise" and leave Obama in the shit to assist Romney into power, attack Iran and force the US to either assist or watch them fail.
If they assist, Obama is hosed with the left-wing.
If they watch them fail Obama is hosed with everyone else.
Just conjecture of course, but such politically charged actions (with equally grave consequences) have happened before, and will likely happen again.
Civilized world my ass.
Wouldn't be surprised if this was calculated on Netanyahu's part. He obviously doesn't like Obama, and he knows Israel is a sensitive issue in US politics.
He wants Romney in office, and making this public gives Republicans ammo on the BS "Obama is anti-Israel narrative".
60 days.
He wants Romney in office, and making this public gives Republicans ammo on the BS "Obama is anti-Israel narrative".
60 days.
This is all fine and good but you're kind of dealing with one side who has an official foreign policy of exterminating the Zionist regime. That sort of attitude doesn't really leave much room for negotiations. You're personifying Western logic onto a decidedly non-Western country and hoping for the best possible outcome.
Look, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying Israel is a golden child being tormented by its rotten Arab neighbours. Everyone on both sides has done some really sketchy shit. I'm not saying Israel NEEDS to go bomb the shit out of Iran so they don't get nukes. All I'm saying is, for someone living in a Western country, Iran having nukes really doesn't provide any beneficial changes to MY status quo whatsoever. Israeli conflicts aside, having a hostile foreign nation becoming significantly stronger militarily isn't in my best interests at all. If it comes down to Iran getting nukes or Israel attacking Iran (and it certainly doesn't seem like we're at this breaking point just yet), my position should be pretty clear by now.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
I thought British forces were fighting the Arabs (or was it the Israelis?) and the British left the country pre-mandate.
flippymittens
Banned
The United States was founded on the near genocide of a native population. Israel is not perfect but pretty much no country is.
They have rockets fired into their country's borders and receive death threats and any action that Israel takes seems criticized and they are held up to a huge double standard in my view. I never said Israel was the victim, not country is perfect but Israel is secular and gives equal rights to women.
Except Israel does not believe in an only Jewish state to my knowledge and is one of the most tolerant countries to minorities in the region from what I read.
Another example of double standards
I can tell you now that President Obama will invade Iran if Israel does. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/12/israel-iran-call-idUSL1E8KC05X20120912 (atleast from what I have read).
Not to mention most of the left will elect him regardless of him continuing many of the policies they oppose and because his changed position on same sex marriage I imagine would get some of the "liberal" vote. I mean it is pretty much done that Romney will not win, given the current electoral math at-least.
I would not vote for President Obama if he did not assist Israel and I imagine people from both sides would not vote for him if he did not. I am against war but when and Iranian President makes remarks previously listed in the thread I do not feel a nuclear Iran would be good for the world. Not to mention the Iranian government's abuse of its citizens.
So you are saying Prime Minister Netanyahu is the architect of some conspiracy to oust President Obama from office? Really?
Oh and if anything President Obama is the one who does not like the Prime Minister with the remarks he made about him. (not saying he does but you are stating Prime Minister Netanyahu dislikes our President with no evidence of your claim.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/08/us-mideast-netanyahu-sarkozy-idUSTRE7A720120111108
That's what they said about the Soviet Union. No offense, but I feel like this is a little othering -- realpolitik was the order of the day in dar al-Islam four hundred years ago. In the final analysis, leaders are people, and do what they have to do to survive, or they get replaced by people who will.
It's also important to remember that Israel has an official DOMESTIC policy of exterminating the Palestinians, which they've been a lot better at so far than the Iranians. It's not as simple as saying "well, they hate Israel, that's all there is to it." They hate Israel because of actual things that have happened and that have continued to happen -- and those are the things that both sides must address. This is a little like saying that the Irish Republican Army's official policy is dethroning the Queen of England.
Dude Abides
Banned
Yes, and it's generally recognized as a shameful tragedy for which our government has apologized. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
You asked why people may have an issue with Zionism, and I explained why. Pointing out that other countries have also behaved poorly isn't very relevant.
- Status