|
OT--Israelis turn up the heat on Iran
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. However, Israeli experts said the world, led by the U.S., should deal with the problem. Iran says its nuclear enrichment program is for peaceful purposes, but Israel and the United States believe Tehran is pursuing nuclear weapons. "If the Americans, Europeans and Russians will not take Iran to the (U.N.) Security Council and put real pressure on them, they will produce nuclear capabilities," said Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the parliamentary Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. Israel has repeatedly warned that Iran, which already posses the Shahab-3 missile _ a weapon capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and reaching Europe, Israel and U.S. forces in the Middle East _ is a threat to the Jewish state. "There is a growing understanding in the international community that the Iranian nuclear program is not benign," said Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev. Despite the mounting concern over the resumption of uranium processing and the recent election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a hard-liner, as Iran's president, officials said that Israel was relying on the international community, in particular the U.S., to stop Iran. "Israel has already said that its policy today is to leave the stage to the international players, the United States and Europe," said Efraim Halevy, the former head of Israel's Mossad spy agency. "I think Israel is acting wisely." Officials questioned Israel's ability to destroy Iran's nuclear installations. Israeli warplanes bombed the unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak near Baghdad in 1981. They said Iran's nuclear installations, unlike the Iraqi reactor, are dispersed throughout the country _ many in populated areas, with sophisticated defense systems. "I believe this is beyond our abilities," said Uzi Even, a former lawmaker and a Tel Aviv University expert on nuclear weapons. Iran should fear the U.S., not Israel, Steinitz said. "The Americans have proven their ability to strike many sites simultaneously." |
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. 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? By golly, that Bush-Cheney team really gets the job done! BTW why did you run away from the thread about Turkey? DSK NOYB wrote: washingtonpost.com Israel Warns of Iran Nuclear Plans ... Officials questioned Israel's ability to destroy Iran's nuclear installations. Israeli warplanes bombed the unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak near Baghdad in 1981. They said Iran's nuclear installations, unlike the Iraqi reactor, are dispersed throughout the country _ many in populated areas, with sophisticated defense systems. "I believe this is beyond our abilities," said Uzi Even, a former lawmaker and a Tel Aviv University expert on nuclear weapons. Iran should fear the U.S., not Israel, Steinitz said. "The Americans have proven their ability to strike many sites simultaneously." |
"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. 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. 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". 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? By golly, that Bush-Cheney team really gets the job done! BTW why did you run away from the thread about Turkey? What about it? |
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? 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? 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. DSK |
"HarryKrause" wrote in message ... Scooby Doo wrote: "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. However, Israeli experts said the world, led by the U.S., should deal with the problem. There is a Middle Eastern country which has always categorically refused international inspection of its nuclear program, but it's not Iran. There is a Middle Eastern country about whose espionage against the United States Reagan Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger said "It is difficult for me to conceive of a greater harm to national security", but it's not Syria. There is a Middle Eastern government run by the former mastermind of a terrorist organization, but it's not the Palestinian Authority. There is a Middle Eastern country that has engaged in the brutal military occupation of disputed territory for over a generation in defiance of dozens of United Nations resolutions, but it's not Pakistan. There is a Middle Eastern regime so beholden to religious absolutists that a de facto ban on interfaith marriage has been in place for years, but it's not the Taliban. There is a Middle Eastern country whose military in the past 36 months has killed and maimed numerous neutral foreign nationals including journalists, but it's not Lebanon. There is a Middle Eastern country implicated in the ongoing investigation of the fabrication of the "yellow cake uranium from Niger" story leading up to the Iraq invasion, but it's not Saudi Arabia. Anybody want to venture a guess as to the single country referenced in the preceding seven paragraphs? Middle Eastern? North Carolina? I was going to guess West Virginia...but only because one of its elected officials is a former mastermind of a terrorist organization. |
"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) |
It really bothers you that there is a Jewish State, doesn't it.
It really bothers you that they resisted destruction by their Arab neighbors and have a military that is the envy of the world. What doesn't bother you is that these people that you claim are being brutalized have been blowing up restaurants and buses full of innocent civilians. I think you have an agenda on this subject, and its not necessarily an objective one. Sherwin D. Scooby Doo wrote: "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. However, Israeli experts said the world, led by the U.S., should deal with the problem. There is a Middle Eastern country which has always categorically refused international inspection of its nuclear program, but it's not Iran. There is a Middle Eastern country about whose espionage against the United States Reagan Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger said "It is difficult for me to conceive of a greater harm to national security", but it's not Syria. There is a Middle Eastern government run by the former mastermind of a terrorist organization, but it's not the Palestinian Authority. There is a Middle Eastern country that has engaged in the brutal military occupation of disputed territory for over a generation in defiance of dozens of United Nations resolutions, but it's not Pakistan. There is a Middle Eastern regime so beholden to religious absolutists that a de facto ban on interfaith marriage has been in place for years, but it's not the Taliban. There is a Middle Eastern country whose military in the past 36 months has killed and maimed numerous neutral foreign nationals including journalists, but it's not Lebanon. There is a Middle Eastern country implicated in the ongoing investigation of the fabrication of the "yellow cake uranium from Niger" story leading up to the Iraq invasion, but it's not Saudi Arabia. Anybody want to venture a guess as to the single country referenced in the preceding seven paragraphs? |
Iran should fear the U.S., not Israel, Steinitz said. "The Americans have proven their ability to strike many sites simultaneously." Yeah baby! - and don't you forget that either !!! The Americans are the heavy-lifters of the world, always have been, and always WILL be, bar none! We Americans have a saying, and live by it: Work hard, play hard. And if someone threatens the things we value, or the things we need for pleasure, look the F out, cause be it Hitler, Saddam, whoEVER!, yer going daaaaawn my bra-ther! |
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 01:55:23 GMT, Scooby Doo
wrote: ~~ snippage ~~ Anybody want to venture a guess as to the single country referenced in the preceding seven paragraphs? Massachusetts? Whoops - that's New England. Hmmmm - I KNOW!!! I KNOW!!! Georgia!!! In Jimmy Carter's peanut field!!! |
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 01:18:28 -0500, sherwindu
wrote: It really bothers you that there is a Jewish State, doesn't it. Doesn't bother me at all. It really bothers you that they resisted destruction by their Arab neighbors and have a military that is the envy of the world. Pretty cool actually. What doesn't bother you is that these people that you claim are being brutalized have been blowing up restaurants and buses full of innocent civilians. Who - the Israelis? I thought they only used missiles on people in wheel chairs? I think you have an agenda on this subject, and its not necessarily an objective one. I have no agenda - beyond finding out who the hell scratched my Contender. :) |
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. |
|
"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. |
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "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? More than one American...or more than 1000 Muslims. |
"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "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? More than one American...or more than 1000 Muslims. Meaningless, as expected. |
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? NOYB wrote: Diplomacy would have done nothing to halt either action from taking place. I didn't say 'diplomacy' I said 'foreign policy.' Neither President Bush's soapy smile nor his saber-rattling have succeeded, unless you have a very odd definition of 'success.' Of course, he could have used Clinton-style diplomacy: send $4 billion their way and *hope* that they stop (a la N. Korea). Or he could have spent less, and simply bought the nuclear material from Russia directly. Would have cost less. Of course, it wouldn't have helped his campaign donors reap immense profits. BTW if you're going to mention Clinton, you should also mention that his policies *were* successful. 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... Really? You mean about 5% to 10% of them are committed by foreigners, don't you? ... and not a part of some large domestic insurgency. Actually, a lot of it *is* terrorism, but then OTOH any attacks against uniformed military personell are not terrorism, by definition. And insurgency is defined as resistance to civil authority, nyet? In other words, you are finally 'fessing up that you have no facts, so you quibble over semantics. Thanks. DSK |
BTW if you're going to mention Clinton, you should also mention that his
policies *were* successful. Scooby Doo wrote: At getting the USS Cole attacked? And at tracking down those responsible. At providing missle technology to communist China? When did this happen? Any documentation, or is this just fascaist fantasy? Oh and remember, Clinton's brother was a cocaine dealer too... At ignoring the opportunity to apprehend Osama Bin Laden? TWICE? Really? The fascist fantasy lore is up to twice now? And can you explain why Clinton should apprehended Bin Laden before Sept 11th, when President Bush let him go afterwards? At erecting the wall between intelligence agencies blamed for the inability to connect the pre-9-11 dots? Funny, intel under Bush has only gotten worse, here it is years after Sept 11th and they're still fighting reform. DSK |
NOYB wrote: "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. Man, you are stupid!! To think that the entire Arab Muslim population is still living in the 10th century is BEYOND dumb. It never ceases to amaze me at how narrow minded you are. If someone doesn't follow lemming-like behind BushCo, in your eyes they are stupid. If someone doesn't worship the same way as you, they are backward types. If someone doesn't live in Naples, Fl, they are inferior to you. Well, except for the swampbillies there. |
"Scooby Doo" wrote in message ... DSK wrote in : BTW if you're going to mention Clinton, you should also mention that his policies *were* successful. At getting the USS Cole attacked? At providing missle technology to communist China? At giving Hollywood the script for Black Hawk Down? At ignoring the opportunity to apprehend Osama Bin Laden? TWICE? At erecting the wall between intelligence agencies blamed for the inability to connect the pre-9-11 dots? It sounds like it's OK with you that Bush not only allowed WMDs to vanish, but actually set up the situation to ASSURE that they would. |
NOYB,
Here is some interesting reading concerning moderate Muslims. From Christian Scientist Monitor - Saving Islam From Terrorists http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0910/p08s03-comv.html The Islamic Verdict on Suicide Bombings http://thetruereligion.org/modules/w...p?articleid=61 Attacks are "injustice, oppression and tyranny" - The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia http://thetruereligion.org/modules/w...p?articleid=65 What Does Islam Say about Terrorism? http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch3-11.htm "NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... "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. |
"Scooby Doo" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in : "Scooby Doo" wrote in message ... DSK wrote in : BTW if you're going to mention Clinton, you should also mention that his policies *were* successful. At getting the USS Cole attacked? At providing missle technology to communist China? At giving Hollywood the script for Black Hawk Down? At ignoring the opportunity to apprehend Osama Bin Laden? TWICE? At erecting the wall between intelligence agencies blamed for the inability to connect the pre-9-11 dots? It sounds like it's OK with you that Bush not only allowed WMDs to vanish, but actually set up the situation to ASSURE that they would. What does Bush have to do with Clinton's foreign policy failures? Changing the subject to evade questions isn't a particularly credible debate tactic. You're blaming Clinton for absurd things. I thought it was time to lend some balance to your comments. |
"DSK" wrote in message ... 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? NOYB wrote: Diplomacy would have done nothing to halt either action from taking place. I didn't say 'diplomacy' I said 'foreign policy.' Neither President Bush's soapy smile nor his saber-rattling have succeeded, unless you have a very odd definition of 'success.' Of course, he could have used Clinton-style diplomacy: send $4 billion their way and *hope* that they stop (a la N. Korea). Or he could have spent less, and simply bought the nuclear material from Russia directly. Would have cost less. Of course, it wouldn't have helped his campaign donors reap immense profits. BTW if you're going to mention Clinton, you should also mention that his policies *were* successful. Bull****. N. Korea continued to develop nukes well after Clinton bribed them in the mid-90's. Saddam continued to aid and abet terrorists, commit genocide against his own people, and threaten his neighbors. And al Qaeda grew emboldened by Clinton's withdrawal of troops from Somalia. Success my ass. 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... Really? You mean about 5% to 10% of them are committed by foreigners, don't you? No. According to the al-Jaafari, PM of Iraq, those numbers are not accurate. ... and not a part of some large domestic insurgency. Actually, a lot of it *is* terrorism, but then OTOH any attacks against uniformed military personell are not terrorism, by definition. The attacks have been predominantly against civilian populations. And insurgency is defined as resistance to civil authority, nyet? In other words, you are finally 'fessing up that you have no facts, so you quibble over semantics. Thanks. |
"sherwindu" wrote in message ... It really bothers you that there is a Jewish State, doesn't it. It really bothers you that they resisted destruction by their Arab neighbors and have a military that is the envy of the world. What doesn't bother you is that these people that you claim are being brutalized have been blowing up restaurants and buses full of innocent civilians. I think you have an agenda on this subject, and its not necessarily an objective one. Sherwin D. As much as I admit to support the Bush administration, I have a problem with Israel. My issue is that they lead the world in slave sex trade and no one seems to really care. I thought when I lived in Japan, that Japanese men were ****ed up - into weird ****. Nothing compares to the Israelis and what **** they are into. I am not sure why we must protect Israel so much, when they showed they can protect themselves just fine. I think one of the reasons we are in Iraq (not the only reason) is that Iraq was a bigger threat to Israel than to the U.S. |
wrote in message ups.com... NOYB wrote: "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. Man, you are stupid!! To think that the entire Arab Muslim population is still living in the 10th century is BEYOND dumb. Harry stated that the entire Palestinian community is still living in a period prior to the 14th Century. Why didn't you chastise him for his statement? Of course, you failed to recognize the significance of the time period I mentioned and how it relates to the current mindset of the Muslim community. I guess subtlety doesn't work on you. |
"Dan J.S." wrote in message
... As much as I admit to support the Bush administration, I have a problem with Israel. My issue is that they lead the world in slave sex trade and no one seems to really care. Slave sex trade??? |
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Dan J.S." wrote in message ... As much as I admit to support the Bush administration, I have a problem with Israel. My issue is that they lead the world in slave sex trade and no one seems to really care. Slave sex trade??? I've never heard anything about the prowess of Israel in the slave sex trade. I guess that's because juuuue's all control the media. ;-) |
Scooby Doo wrote:
How many convictions? Oh, yeah, zero. Really? I suggest you count again. LORAL Technologies. Run by Bernard Schwartz, the single most generous contributor of soft money to the Democratic National Committee. Google "LORAL China" Ah yes, the old "Clinton gave missile technology to China" fantasy scrambles for some distant bearing on actual fact. Tell me, do you actually believe this malarkey or are you just sucking up to the other pea-brained fascists who are already in residence? Funny you call those who criticize Clinton "fascists", when it was WJBC himself who said that the Framers created a "radical" constitution with "radical freedoms", and that "we've moved to limit those". Really? I missed it when he said that, although I was listening when President Bush insisted that being President meant that he didn't have to answer questions. At erecting the wall between intelligence agencies blamed for the inability to connect the pre-9-11 dots? Funny, intel under Bush has only gotten worse, here it is years after Sept 11th and they're still fighting reform. The architect of the wall, Jamie Gorelick, was *ON* the 9/11 Commission. You mean, the panel that Bush refused to testify for? Got any idea what he was hiding? DSK |
BTW if you're going to mention Clinton, you should also mention that his
policies *were* successful. NOYB wrote: Bull****. N. Korea continued to develop nukes well after Clinton bribed them in the mid-90's. Really? That must explain why they only started up their enrichment plant... relatively easily verifiable by satellite... after President Bush started calling them names. ... Saddam continued to aid and abet terrorists There is no proof that Saddam Hussein has ever had any links whatever to anti-US terrorism. The White House has said so many times, when will you get with the program? ... commit genocide against his own people Is this our business? We don't interfere in other countries that carry out far worse genocides. ... and threaten his neighbors. Yep, the first President Bush told him it was OK to invade Kuwait, and sold him weapons (including WMDs) to fight Iran. ... And al Qaeda grew emboldened by Clinton's withdrawal of troops from Somalia. ??? I thought they were all PO'd because of US troops on Saudi Arabian soil, and President Bush caved in to them? Success my ass. Is that the goal you're working toward? Sorry, but I think Clinton only goes for women. DSK |
"DSK" wrote in message ... BTW if you're going to mention Clinton, you should also mention that his policies *were* successful. NOYB wrote: Bull****. N. Korea continued to develop nukes well after Clinton bribed them in the mid-90's. Really? That must explain why they only started up their enrichment plant... relatively easily verifiable by satellite... after President Bush started calling them names. So all N. Korean nuclear weapon research sat dormant for 6 years, eh? ... Saddam continued to aid and abet terrorists There is no proof that Saddam Hussein has ever had any links whatever to anti-US terrorism. The White House has said so many times, when will you get with the program? There's plenty of proof. He paid the families of terrorist suicide bombers in Israel. He harbored terrorists like Abu Nidal and Ramzi Yousef. His intelligence agents met with al Zarqawi and Mohammed Atta. That's all what you'd call "proof". ... commit genocide against his own people Is this our business? We don't interfere in other countries that carry out far worse genocides. Sure we do. Maybe not all, but a lot of them. ... and threaten his neighbors. Yep, the first President Bush told him it was OK to invade Kuwait, You've been spending too much time on liberal conspiracy web pages. and sold him weapons (including WMDs) to fight Iran. Nope. Bush wasn't President when those weapons went to Iraq. ... And al Qaeda grew emboldened by Clinton's withdrawal of troops from Somalia. ??? I thought they were all PO'd because of US troops on Saudi Arabian soil, That's not what emboldened them. Read bin Laden's 1996 Fatwah: " But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where- after vigorous propaganda about the power of the USA and its post cold war leadership of the new world order- you moved tens of thousands of international force, including twenty eight thousands American solders into Somalia. However, when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu you left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you. Clinton appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge , but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You have been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear. It was a pleasure for the "heart" of every Muslim and a remedy to the "chests" of believing nations " |
"Scooby Doo" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in : "Scooby Doo" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in : "Scooby Doo" wrote in message ... DSK wrote in : BTW if you're going to mention Clinton, you should also mention that his policies *were* successful. At getting the USS Cole attacked? At providing missle technology to communist China? At giving Hollywood the script for Black Hawk Down? At ignoring the opportunity to apprehend Osama Bin Laden? TWICE? At erecting the wall between intelligence agencies blamed for the inability to connect the pre-9-11 dots? It sounds like it's OK with you that Bush not only allowed WMDs to vanish, but actually set up the situation to ASSURE that they would. What does Bush have to do with Clinton's foreign policy failures? Changing the subject to evade questions isn't a particularly credible debate tactic. You're blaming Clinton for absurd things. I thought it was time to lend some balance to your comments. Clinton's foreign policy featured appeasement and using the military for humanitarian efforts inappropriate to their abilities. This led to the "we can get away with it" attitude partly responsible for the Cole and Mogadishu incidents. The missile-tech-to-China deal involved Loral Technologies, a company run by Clinton cronie Bernard Schwartz, the single most generous donor to the Democratic National Committee. Clinton AAG Jamie Gorelick was the architect of the intelligence wall. Clinton appointees also considered terrorist attacks as criminal acts rather than acts of war, and they didn't believe they could produce enough evidence to secure a criminal conviction of bin Laden. Clinton's fingerprints are on each of these incidents, which is why I mentioned them. I could provide a similar list of GWB foreign policy failures, should someone wish to argue that his policies "were successful". Wisely, nobody has made such an argument that I've seen. At least you're allowing for Bush's nonsense. You're excused from study hall. |
NOYB wrote: "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Dan J.S." wrote in message ... As much as I admit to support the Bush administration, I have a problem with Israel. My issue is that they lead the world in slave sex trade and no one seems to really care. Slave sex trade??? I've never heard anything about the prowess of Israel in the slave sex trade. Really? Are you BLIND??? Here's a place to start, then do a google search. Try Israel sex slave. http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/israel.htm |
John H. wrote: 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?" Perhaps you need to learn how to follow a thread??? |
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Dan J.S." wrote in message ... As much as I admit to support the Bush administration, I have a problem with Israel. My issue is that they lead the world in slave sex trade and no one seems to really care. Slave sex trade??? It's HUGE. Israel is one of the leaders in that space. They have huge sex slaves rings that take women from former Russian states and sell them all over the world, and the Israeli government is doing very little about it. There were some arrests recently when there was some UN pressures along with some U.S. concerns. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:17 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com