NOYB wrote:

BTW why did you run away from the thread about Turkey?

What about it?

I take it you didn't comprehend the question? He asked WHY did you run
away from the thread about Turkey?

wrote in message
ups.com...

NOYB wrote:

BTW why did you run away from the thread about Turkey?

What about it?

I take it you didn't comprehend the question? He asked WHY did you run
away from the thread about Turkey?


NOYB was toying with DSK. He pulls that **** constantly if you let him.
Don't let him. It's a game he plays.

"NOYB" wrote in message
...

"Scooby Doo" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in :

washingtonpost.com
Israel Warns of Iran Nuclear Plans

By GAVIN RABINOWITZ
The Associated Press
Monday, August 1, 2005; 7:33 PM



JERUSALEM -- Israeli officials expressed alarm Monday over Iran's
decision to resume uranium processing, warning that unless the
international community steps up pressure on the Islamic state, Iran
will develop nuclear weapons.


Back atcha:

August 1, 2005 Issue
Copyright © 2005 The American Conservative

Deep Background

In Washington it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around
the
administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for
Iran.
The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's
office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with
drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-
type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-
scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical
nuclear
weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets,
including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites.
Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be
taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the
case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being
involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States.
Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly
appalled at the implications of what they are doing-that Iran is being
set
up for an unprovoked nuclear attack-but no one is prepared to damage his
career by posing any objections.

Stay with the action. ;-)

I posted that here a week ago when I wrote:

" The plans are already drafted to destroy Iran should another 9/11-type
attack occur...particularly if it's with WMD. " (NOYB, July 27th)

How big a "mass" does a weapon need to kill in order to fit your definition?

On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 08:00:30 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:


I fowarded my suggestion to the State of Israel:

Complete the Wall of Division, and allow no "Palestinians" to cross it
into Israel for any reason whatsoever.

Let "Palestine" make it on its own, or with the help of its Muslim Arab
neighbors and friends.

Under such circumstances, how long would it take for the "Palestinians" to
kill off each other?

Well, those aren't the circumstances, are they? Even after the
withdrawal, Israel will continue to control Gaza's borders, coastline,
and airspace. It reserves the right to undertake military operations at
will. Israel will continue to tax Gaza products entering Israel, but will
not tax Israeli products entering Gaza, and will continue to collect
custom duties on any foreign products entering Gaza.

Under those circumstances, Gaza doesn't stand a chance. It sounds to me
like Israel is setting up a Palestinian prison, not an independent country.

Doug Kanter wrote:
NOYB was toying with DSK. He pulls that **** constantly if you let him.
Don't let him. It's a game he plays.


It's the only way he can pretend he's "winning."

Another possibility (which I've suggested before) is that he is actually
an extreme leftist (maybe Trotskyite), determined to highlight the right
wing's follies by being enthusiastic about them.

DSK

On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 08:45:07 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:


I don't know what the answer is for Gaza. It is the canard of canards.
Perhaps the oil-soaked sheiks can build a road through Sinai and a bridge
into Jordon and then another road to "Palestinian" territory. But
wait...the Egyptians and Jordanians don't want anything much to do with
the "Palestinians" either.

Strawman, Harry. Like it or not, it is not an Egyptian or Jordanian
problem. It is an Israeli problem and it doesn't seem to be going away.


The Arab Muslims have all the real estate in that part of the Middle East
but for the bit of land comprising Israel. I'm sure the Arab Muslims can
afford to help out their less fortunate "Palestinian" brothers and
sisters, and bring them into the 14th Century.

And what bit of land is that, Harry? Every time I look, Israel's borders
keep getting bigger. Between the settlements and the wall, it's difficult
to tell. I have no answers either, but from my view, Israel's treatment
of the Palestinians is more than a little heavy handed and IMO it is
doubtful there will be any lasting peace while it continues.

On 2 Aug 2005 04:10:21 -0700, wrote:


NOYB wrote:

BTW why did you run away from the thread about Turkey?

What about it?

I take it you didn't comprehend the question? He asked WHY did you run
away from the thread about Turkey?

I take it you didn't comprehend the question? I asked, "So what percent of
terrorists do you think are WASP types like McVey, or
old women?"

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Did you bother to read this article before posting it? The conclusion is
that the Israelis can't mount a realistic threat, and probably wouldn't
anyway.



NOYB wrote:
I didn't read it that way. I read it as a canard...meant to mislead the
Iranians and lull them into a sense of complacency.

Really? In other words, this article saying that it would be almost
impossible for the Israelies to attack Iran's nuclear sites... and listing
some pretty solid reasons why... is all a smokescreen to cover up Israel's
intention to really attack?

Yes.



Do you always assume gov't spokespeople are lying, or is it only
'conservative' ones?



... I also read it as a strong warning to the US: "you guys take care
of this problem, or we'll do it for you...and then you can live with the
total ****-storm that would follow an Israeli attack against an Arab
nation".


Gee, that'd be nice. Maybe you should read it again, only consider some of
the facts conveyed in the article this time.

And why no answer to my questions?

Do you consider the ramp-up of Iran's nuclear program a success for the
Bush Administration's foreign policy? How about President Bush's
schmoozing with Vladimir Putin, asking him to not give (or sell,
actually) the Iranians any nuclear material, which they went ahead and
did anyway?

Diplomacy would have done nothing to halt either action from taking place.
Of course, he could have used Clinton-style diplomacy: send $4 billion
their way and *hope* that they stop (a la N. Korea).





Big success, right? Just like the decrease in *reported* terrorism because
of the Bush/Cheney policy of supressing reports!

BTW why did you run away from the thread about Turkey?


What about it?


Last heard from, you were stamping your little feet and ranting that there
was no insurgency in Iraq. Has a brief cooling-off period allowed some
reality to sink in? Maybe I shouldn't mention it.

The attacks in Iraq are terrorist attacks committed by foreigners...and not
a part of some large domestic insurgency.

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
Scooby Doo wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote in
:

Who - the Israelis? I thought they only used missiles on people in
wheel chairs?

And bulldozers on pacifists with bullhorns.


I fowarded my suggestion to the State of Israel:

Complete the Wall of Division, and allow no "Palestinians" to cross
it into Israel for any reason whatsoever.

Hey! That was *my* idea!

" Sure I can. In fact, I've posted it here before...and Harry agreed with
it. Permanently wall off Israel from the Palestinian settlements until a
couple of generations of bad blood has passed. Hell, it took 40+ years of
the Berlin Wall before those that remember the hatred had passed on."
(NOYB, March 2003)

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
thunder wrote:
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 08:00:30 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:


I fowarded my suggestion to the State of Israel:

Complete the Wall of Division, and allow no "Palestinians" to cross it
into Israel for any reason whatsoever.

Let "Palestine" make it on its own, or with the help of its Muslim Arab
neighbors and friends.

Under such circumstances, how long would it take for the "Palestinians"
to
kill off each other?

Well, those aren't the circumstances, are they? Even after the
withdrawal, Israel will continue to control Gaza's borders, coastline,
and airspace. It reserves the right to undertake military operations at
will. Israel will continue to tax Gaza products entering Israel, but
will
not tax Israeli products entering Gaza, and will continue to collect
custom duties on any foreign products entering Gaza. Under those
circumstances, Gaza doesn't stand a chance. It sounds to me
like Israel is setting up a Palestinian prison, not an independent
country.



If the United States had Iran as its northern neighbor, we'd probably do
the same.


We *do* have Iran as our neighbor...ever since we annexed Iraq.

Still, I think the answer for Israel is to keep all "Palestinians" not now
within it borders out, and allow no day workers, familial visits,
humanitarian hospitalizations, nothing, zip, zilch, nada. Any
"Palistinans" now within Israel's borders are free to emigrate to
"Palestine" any time they like and to take whatever belongings they have
with them.

I don't know what the answer is for Gaza. It is the canard of canards.
Perhaps the oil-soaked sheiks can build a road through Sinai and a bridge
into Jordon and then another road to "Palestinian" territory. But
wait...the Egyptians and Jordanians don't want anything much to do with
the "Palestinians" either.

The Arab Muslims have all the real estate in that part of the Middle East
but for the bit of land comprising Israel. I'm sure the Arab Muslims can
afford to help out their less fortunate "Palestinian" brothers and
sisters, and bring them into the 14th Century.

That's assuming the rest of the Arab Muslims come out of the 10th Century
any time soon.