Hippocracy and Propaganda - Iran and Israel

[sky's the limit]

So,

We all know the propaganda coming out of the Bush Administration and certain European nations when it comes to Iran's nuclear activities. Iran, a SIGNATORY to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act that allows them the right to develop civil nuclear capabilities - which the 'West' continues to thwart...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7420737.stm

Then there's Israel.

a NON signatory to that same Act, and in possession of somewhere between 100-200 nuclear weapons.... Nobody seems to care - Go figure.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7420573.stm


What a world.

stl

[niss]

Israel is non signatory so they are not in breach of any non proliferation treaty. They have also allegedly had said weapons for 40 some odd years with out using them.

Better the devil you know then the one you don't.

[sky's the limit]

Israel is a non-signatory so they don't have to abide by the treaty.... To say they are "not in breach" is slightly misleading.

Non-proliferation is not something they support. Fair enough, if I were them, I'd want nuclear weapons too... However, the treatment of Iran over this whole topic is insane, and transparently so.

stl

[Cat Driver]

I am far from a Liberal.....but when it comes to G.W. Bush I can't believe I was happy when he beat Gore....

.......Gore is a harmless wingnut compared to Bush.

[Dex]

..........................................

Non-proliferation is not something they support. Fair enough, if I were them, I'd want nuclear weapons too... However, the treatment of Iran over this whole topic is insane, and transparently so.stl

Especially when one considers that the Bush admin. lifted a nuclear materials embargo against Pakistan and India. And of course when you add the fact that the Pakistan government isn't really doing anything to prevent weapons and bombs from entering Afghanistan which kill/wound our soldiers.........

[sky's the limit]

..........................................

Non-proliferation is not something they support. Fair enough, if I were them, I'd want nuclear weapons too... However, the treatment of Iran over this whole topic is insane, and transparently so.stl

Especially when one considers that the Bush admin. lifted a nuclear materials embargo against Pakistan and India. And of course when you add the fact that the Pakistan government isn't really doing anything to prevent weapons and bombs from entering Afghanistan which kill/wound our soldiers.........

Bingo...


There's a wonderful book called "Ghost Wars" by Steve Coll, mainly about the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, but it deals heavily with the U.S./Pakistani alliance in fighting the Soviets through the Afghan resistance. The things the U.S. looked the other way on in regards to the Pakistanis are mind boggling... That trend absolutely has continued since 9/11.

Unfortunately the U.S. would like us all to believe the world is black and white, good and evil - it just simply isn't the case. The States, the Israelis, the Brits, and the French among others, have committed far wider atrocities on humanity than the Iranians or old Osama could ever imagine - but we're the "good guys," so it's OK.

I'd love to see what would happen if Iran occupied another nation and killed a couple thousand people in a few weeks like Israel did with Lebanon a couple summers back.

stl

[Cat Driver]

How come Bush does not invade Zimbawbe and take Mugabe out, Saddam was a pussy cat in comparison.

[niss]

I'd love to see what would happen if Iran occupied another nation and killed a couple thousand people in a few weeks like Israel did with Lebanon a couple summers back.

stl

I would love to see what would happen if Iran or any other country had militants cross the border kill and kidnap their soldiers and then intentionally fire rockets at their civilians like hezbollah did with Israel.

Cause and effect.

[sky's the limit]

Cause and effect.

Are you sure you want to go down that road???

What's been going on in the Occupied Territories for decades is State Sponsored terrorism. Now these are obviously very complex issues, but to start the "cause and effect" argument is to ignore the present issues entirely.

The whole point is, Israel and Iran are judged in two entirely separate ways, and it's got to be maddening if you're a Muslim.

stl

[niss]

I understand that there is a differance in standards for the two. But like I pointed out in my first post better the devil you know then the devil you down. Israel for forty years has had the capability to destroy a lot of countries yet hasnt. Iran has been quite verbally aggressive to the state of Israel. Israel has proven they can be trusted with the technology. A nuclear Iran is quite unsettling for many.

Lebanon is not the occupied territories. Israel is out of Lebanon and the only people in the world who think otherwise is Hezbollah. And none of that would have happened had Nasrallah not entered a dick measuring contest.

And as far as weather or not its maddening if your a Muslim is irrelevant to me. The Muslims we need to worry about cant be calmed anyway. The militant extremist Muslims dont care about the basic politics, Hamas refuses to change its stance on the destruction of Israel, Hizbollah will continue to come up with new reasons to attack.

[Blakey]

There are no good guys and no bad guys. It's all in your view point. Seen this one Niss?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOg7SyKoahk

Lots of stuff happened before you were born and they don't talk about this part at the synagogue!

Just in case you think I'm siding with one side or another, I suggest you ask a native activist just how it was we WASPs ended up "owning" the land we live on today. None of our closets are free of skeletons. The history books are written by the victors!

[BoostedNihilist]

But like I pointed out in my first post better the devil you know then the devil you don't

Appeasing Hegemony?!?! You Dirty Appeaser! (j/k)

My solution, shit can the whole thing then we have no devil to worry about... I think gw is almost there. Israel and Iran should both be in the 'dead pool' it's just a matter of time. Hopefully we can manipulate the situation enough so they (Israel and Iran) bomb themselves back to the stone age and devolve into less than 3rd world nations, then neither would be a threat.

By the way, the above was tongue in cheak.


I am not an anti-semite and I do not have and negative feelings towards muslims.. christians.. well.. they are people too...

Personally, I am getting sick of the entire situation. Our collective dirty hands backed this bullshit endeavour from the get-go and now there's some nasty business coming. There is no obvious solution, and there is no obvious beginning to a complex solution so wtf? I'm not a Jew or a Muslim yet 'you people' are driving the biggest conflict in the global political system, which if you buy into the rhetoric will almost certainly involve nuclear weapons and atrocities.

Personally, I'm sick of having to pick sides and wish you guys (Iran and Israel) would both just grow up, or @#$! off.

[niss]

I am very familiar with the king david hotel bombing. Alot of people convineintly use this example but they choose to ignore the fact that A) it was used as a british command post and was a military target B) Ample warning was given to the occupants to leave for safety which was ignored.

I know you are trying to remain neutral Blakey and I agree that everyone has skeletons but that isn't exactly the same thing as a blowing up a disco or a city bus.

[BoostedNihilist]

How come Bush does not invade Zimbawbe and take Mugabe out, Saddam was a pussy cat in comparison.

Since they (The USA) got their ass kicked in Somolia noone gives a shit about Africa.

I read a really good book that really put world policy and war in Africa in perspective. It was called The Zanzibar Chest.. Aidan Hartley. He was a reporter in East Africa and that book has some stories.

[niss]

How about some good propaganda?

‘A Huge Day’

The start of peace talks between Israel and Syria could re-align regional politics and change Damascus's relationship with Iran, says a veteran Israeli negotiator.
Kevin Peraino
Newsweek Web Exclusive
Updated: 5:22 PM ET May 21, 2008

For weeks, the Middle East has been buzzing with talk that Turkey has been mediating secret peace negotiations between Israel and Syria. On Wednesday, the speculation ended: both governments confirmed the reports, issuing statements just minutes apart. The dialogue, according to the Israeli version, is intended to be "serious and continuous" and would aim for a "comprehensive peace in accordance with the Madrid Conference terms of reference." The brief mention of the Madrid Conference, Israeli-Arab negotiations that were cosponsored by Washington and Moscow in 1991, is particularly important because it may signal renewed U.S. involvement, according to former Israeli foreign ministry official Alon Liel, who spent nearly two years between 2004 and 2006 in secret talks with a Syrian mediator. Shortly after the announcement, Liel spoke with NEWSWEEK's Kevin Peraino. Excerpts:

NEWSEEK: Is this the real thing?
Alon Liel: I think it's a breakthrough.

Do you think this was done with an American blessing?
I think it was coordinated with the Americans. The fact that the three leaders agreed on the Madrid framework means that the Americans will be a part of it. Not only would the Americans be involved, but the Palestinians. The leaders see the talks as including the Syrians and the Palestinians, which is very, very meaningful.

Why do you think the Madrid language is so important--because the talks would be multilateral instead of bilateral?
Exactly.

Didn't [U.S. Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice say recently that she supports indirect talks between Syria and Israel?
The Americans have always said that they have nothing against [Israeli Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert talking to [Syrian President Bashar] Assad--but that they wouldn't participate. It was hypocritical because they knew that if they didn't enter the talks, nothing would change. I see, from today, the Americans as a player. I think this is probably related to a change in the American position.

What do you see as the most problematic potential sticking point in the upcoming negotiations?
I think the most complicated area will be the relationship between Syria and Iran. I see a big battle here. Syria will want to maintain contact with Iran. Once you have such a statement, imagine the feeling of Iran. It's not only Olmert taking a risk, it's also Assad taking a very big risk. Both leaders are doing something very courageous. Also, Syria will have to bring about a change of behavior regarding Hamas.

Is it realistic to expect Syria would completely sever ties with Iran, Hizbullah and Hamas as part of a deal?
I'm not sure Syria and Iran can be strategic allies [after a peace deal]. A comprehensive peace agreement will necessitate meaningful changes. I don't think Syria can have peace and normal relations with both Israel and Hizbullah, or Israel and Hamas. It's almost mutually exclusive.

Could you see a day when Hizbullah is carrying out military operations against Syria as a result?
I really don't know how Hizbullah will act. I don't think they'd want to destroy--in a stupid way, from their perspective--this ongoing contact they have [with Damascus]. I don't know about the Iranian reaction. Nobody should start speculating.

Less than a year ago Israel bombed Syria, and many believe the Mossad was behind the assassination of Hizbullah leader Imad Mugniyeh in Damascus earlier this year. What do you make of the timing?
[The talks] wouldn't happen if it weren't in the strategic interests of both countries. It's in the very basic interest of Syria to preserve ties with the West. For Israel, peace is a must. These are things that are far beyond the military developments. From day one it was clear that it will happen because it's a vital interest of both sides.

Do you think a deal is possible before Bush leaves office?
He might get an agreement before the end of his term. But it doesn't really matter whether it's December 2008 or February 2009.

Olmert is unpopular and in the midst of what appears to be a serious police investigation. Is he really politically strong enough to make peace right now?
I don't know. Maybe Olmert won't be the one to finalize it. But it's not Olmert personally--it's the state of Israel. It's an official move, nothing personal. Olmert is not alone.

How do we know this announcement isn't just timed to deflect attention from Olmert's scandals?
It's not spin. It's a real thing. It might be helpful to Olmert politically. But I don't care who brings the peace--I'll welcome it. When you see a statement published simultaneously in Damascus, Ankara and Jerusalem--it's short, but extremely meaningful. It's done in good faith. It's a real thing, and I'm really happy. For me, it's a huge day.
[url]URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/138141[/url]

[BoostedNihilist]

speaking of being judged by a double standard, this was in the youtube contents regarding the king david bombing.. I thought it appropriate in that context

Are you kidding me? If Osama Bin Laden called someone up at the WTC and said that Al Qaeda was about to fly planes into the buildings and they had 15 minutes to evacuate, would that justify the attack? Is that ample time to give a warning to evacuate? How does this justify a terrorist attack in the first place? I've never heard of anything more absurd in my life!

[Guido]

I had the privilege this weekend to listen to a "missionary" (I put missionary in quotes, because in the United Church, our missionaries aren't necessarily trying to convert people as in other denominations) who'd just come back from a trip to Israel / Palestine.
She had visited the holocaust museum and was reading some of the notes that had been left by Jews in the concentration camps in Germany. One of the quotes she brought up struck me. It was from an older woman who'd managed to survive through the war and it said something along the lines of, "I hope that we never do this to anyone else."
Israel is not attempting to live peacefully with the Palestinians. They are attempting to force them out by whatever means possible. The Bible may say that Israel is the Jews' land, but y'know what? Things have changed.
Are you aware that Palestinian children have rocks thrown at them by Israelis as they walk to school each day? Miraculously, when it was made clear that international observers were in the area, the attacks diminished significantly.

I will never advocate violence. Suicide bombing, all this shit that's happening, is symptomatic of what is being done to both sides. It isn't pretty, and it's not right. Both sides are doing awful, atrocious things. The fact is, however, that Israel shoulders just as much blame as either side. Building a wall around Palestine will not make them safer in the long run. I've heard stories of Israeli soldiers shooting indiscriminately at Palestinians, wounding and killing women and children... horrific stories.

It would seem to me that the oppressed have gradually moved into the role of oppressor.

And before anyone starts screaming anti-semite, another quote from a Jewish woman who was working with Muslim Palestinians towards peace. "Working against the government of Israel, or despising it for that matter, does not make a person anti-Semitic."

[2R]

That is the first i have ever heard that the British soldiers murdered in the King David Hotel were given a warning .A small detail i guess they neglected to include in the history books.
I guess if you live long enough the guys who own the printing press will print whatever history they think people will swallow.As nobody reads history outside of schools anyway

Look at the new history books in Russia they are making Stalin out to be a saint who saved Russia.He done a little bad and a lot of good according to the reviews .Never killed anyone who did not need killing .After all if the Japanese can eradicate the rape of Nanking from their history books ,No reason the Russians cannot make an Amenian bank robber a nice guy ???

I guess if you own the press you can print whatever crap you want .

Pravda

[Youngback]

How come Bush does not invade Zimbawbe and take Mugabe out, Saddam was a pussy cat in comparison.

Nothing but some dried up farms and a lot of poor Africans in Zimbabwe. I'm sure if G Dubya discovered a way to squash Zimbabweans and refine them and put them in a gas tank, he'd be on it like E coli on a Jack in the box burger.

[niss]

speaking of being judged by a double standard, this was in the youtube contents regarding the king david bombing.. I thought it appropriate in that context

Are you kidding me? If Osama Bin Laden called someone up at the WTC and said that Al Qaeda was about to fly planes into the buildings and they had 15 minutes to evacuate, would that justify the attack? Is that ample time to give a warning to evacuate? How does this justify a terrorist attack in the first place? I've never heard of anything more absurd in my life!

I would say this quote is irrelivant as the people in the WTC were not soldiers using it as their HQ. What if the planes were flown into an Army Base?

[Guido]

speaking of being judged by a double standard, this was in the youtube contents regarding the king david bombing.. I thought it appropriate in that context

Are you kidding me? If Osama Bin Laden called someone up at the WTC and said that Al Qaeda was about to fly planes into the buildings and they had 15 minutes to evacuate, would that justify the attack? Is that ample time to give a warning to evacuate? How does this justify a terrorist attack in the first place? I've never heard of anything more absurd in my life!

I would say this quote is irrelivant as the people in the WTC were not soldiers using it as their HQ. What if the planes were flown into an Army Base?

You mean like the Pentagon...?

[niss]

Pentagon was still a little civiliany but more or less yeah.

[bob sacamano]

Yo awesomeniss, israel didn't destroy any country?

Howbout palestine? howbout Lebanon in the July war of 2006? Have you not read the winograd commission report?

Anyways, this debate here is useless with hardcore religious extremists like niss. Might as well go and debate with sam bin laden.

[Dust Devil]

Anyways, this debate here is useless with hardcore religious extremists like niss.

What did Niss say that had anything to do with religion or extremism?

[Wacko]

... so back to the topic... because sanctions were put on India/Pakistan when they were developing their nuclear ambitions NOW no one from the atomic agency or the likes is allowed to inspect the facilities. This is a FAR worse situation than for a country to have a nuclear bomb. At the end of the day, once they have a bomb and you know where it is you can watch it... the world can only speculate as to what Pakistan/India does.

Also, a relatively small reactor "Chernobyl" blew up 20 years ago and the nuclear fallout is still falling from the sky... have one or two more explode and skin cancer will be an afterthought.

In regards to Israel... I'm guessing Uncle Sam sold each and every Nuke them boys have stashed away... why else would you defend a group of people so much?