Put your Hate aside, and ListenHome by Patrick Van Roy March 20, 2015 121 7 yrs Tweet Click to rate this post![Total: 0 Average: 0] America Israel Post navigation Previous postNext post 121 thoughts on “Put your Hate aside, and Listen” A blood thirsty, genocidal lunatic. The Israeli Milosevic.Shame on you for supporting this monster Troll. no shame on you Petr. Netanyahu is the only Leader in the world speaking the truth about what the rest of us are facing. Your refusal of that is what will get you and your neighbors killed. The world is facing a threat that grows everyday from millions of people that say Allah is God and you bow before him or die. If you choose to bow do so. I don’t, and Netanyahu is the only Leader in the world that is standing up to that threat. Bibi just backtracked and says he wants a two-state solution. He is clearly an anti-semite. He’s like the US politicians, saying one thing to get or keep the nomination, another thing to succeed in the general election, and another to govern in the real world. one major difference between and the US politicians. He’s willing to stand up to Obama. It is going to cost his country dearly, because our leader is a petty shallow dictator. Who it will cost the most however are the Democrats and the permanent politicians of both sides in Washington. Okay. Most Israelis don’t vote on the basis of the Israeli situation. But you think most Americans do? Your refusal of that is what will get you and your neighbors killed. What absolute rubbish The world is facing a threat that grows everyday from millions of people that say Allah is God and you bow before him or die If you choose to bow do so. I don’t, and Netanyahu is the only Leader in the world that is standing up to that threat Really? How many of the IDF were in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban, (remember them? They used to be the bad guys), or are currently in Iraq/ Syria fighting ISIS? If the IDF fought in Afghanistan it would have inflamed the permanently inflamed Muslim world even more So Netanyahu isn’t the only Leader in the world that is standing up to that threat then? Bibi said in that FOX propaganda piece that ISIS were only a dozen miles away. Where are the IDF? I seriously doubt that Bibi and the other hawks on the Israeli right give two shits anout what inflames the Muslim world Phantom. Oh they do. I have much to criticize Bibi and the Israeli hawks and their US enablers, but underestimating the Islamic extremist threat is not a criticism that I can make. Oh they do I completely disagree Underestimating the Islamic extremist threat is not a criticism that I can make Underestimating is a totally different concept to what I refer to above. //I seriously doubt that Bibi and the other hawks on the Israeli right give two shits anout what inflames the Muslim world // They do. Every possible danger in the Muslim world, from Morocco to Iran, is welcome to them as it gives them further excuse for their not-an-inch approach to the stolen Palestinian land. If it didn’t exist, they’d have to invent it. Mind you, it does exist, and whatever little hope of a just peace a while ago has totally disappeared behind the horizon now that the whole Arab world is in turmoil. BTW, does anyone else think it’s in the long term good that BiBi is elected. Under Barak the Israelis talked and procrastinated and made a few pious declarations and procrastinated again, all the time while robbing more Palestinian land and building more settlements than any other right-wing government before them. You could expect more of the same if Herzog had won. As long as the US is in the driving seat for any peace deal, while standing behind Israel the way it has been for the past few decades, there can be no just settlement, as neither Israel nor the US wants one. Some other players will have to get involved before there’s any movement on that score. The US-Israel may look formidable now, but it won’t be the top dog forever. They do. Every possible danger in the Muslim world, from Morocco to Iran, is welcome to them as it gives them further excuse for their not-an-inch approach to the stolen Palestinian land. If it didn’t exist, they’d have to invent it. That’s a fair point which I will concede Noel. It’s a tactic, rather like the default setting of both unionism in the state of NI and the Spanish government using political violence to justify an entrenched position I think that we all know that a huge part of the Muslim world would like nothing more than to have the Jewish state destroyed. This is an existential threat that is concurrent with all the issues that exist with the Palestinians. I see grave threats long term. Like the man said, the future’s uncertain and the end is always near. If Israel gave into all requests from the Palestinian Authority, ie went back to 1967 borders gave back all of the West Bank Would their security situation be better or worse as respects attacks from Palestinians / Arab World / Iran? Would the borders be more defensible or less defensible? Would it be a final settlement for coexistence among the peoples or a way station to extermination of the Jewish state? These are the proper questions that all must ask. There are no good choices in the Middle East. That’s true to an extent Phantom but it has no a absolutely relation as to why the IDF aren’t engaging ISIS or what Bibi thinks of inflaming the Muslim world. Who knows until they are actually tried? That is of course unless they are merely rhetorical questions? Many Israelis think that a return to 1967 borders would make the state entirely indefensible. They don’t want to try a situation where their borders can’t be defended. Look at the map. Ben Gurion Airport would be about 4 miles from a presumably unfriendly border, in easy reach of missiles. The Tel Aviv suburbs, not much further. I think that it is important to think through their concerns, also. http://www.defensibleborders.org/images/map4.jpg http://www.defensibleborders.org/images/map4.jpg It is important to think of their concerns but that concern doesn’t give them a carte blanche. Russia were afraid of NATO on their borders so they invaded Georgia and the Ukraine. You don’t get to conquer and subjugate your neighbours to alleviate your own security risks. Look at the map. Ben Gurion Airport would be about 4 miles from a presumably unfriendly border, in easy reach of missiles. The Tel Aviv suburbs, not much further So it’s ‘what we have, we hold?’ I’ve heard that before. See Noel’s point about excuses above. I do not see a good solution for the next quarter century. I wish that I did. We won’t know if solutions will work until they’re actually tried Phantom. I remember reading that a two state solution based on the ’67 borders could be acceptable to Hamas. I’ll bet that it would be very acceptable to them. The missile gangs would be so much closer to the airport! And Hamas never said that it would be a settlement. I recall them as saying that it would be a long term truce. There is a universe of difference between a settlement and a truce. //Would their security situation be better or worse as respects attacks from Palestinians / Arab World / Iran?// It would be infinitely better. If Israel were to withdraw from Palestine, it could do so practically on any conditions it wished in terms of security: a major international buffer zone to the east, membership of a western military alliance with cast-iron guarantees of military defence from the West should it be attacked, a demilitarisation of Palestine etc. Occupation and colonisation of someone else’s land means the occupying power will always be unstable, always at risk. It can’t expect or deserve anything else. I can listen to that. But do you not agree that a significant number of Palestinians, other Arabs and other Muslims will still regard the smaller Israel as an invader, an occupier, the illegitimate occupier of lands that should be won back at some point? If the mighty Israel can’t stop rockets from coming out of Gaza, what would stop new rocket ” war ” with missiles launched from much closer in to the Tel Aviv and Jerusalem population centers? What good is a buffer zone? The missiles will fly over it. I recall them as saying that it would be a long term truce I don’t recall that http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/05/24/136403918/hamas-foreign-minister-we-accept-two-state-solution-with-67-borders http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.587047 But even if that were the case surely a ‘long term truce’ would be better than what currently exists? A long term truce might be preferable, provided that there was zero possibility of any rockets being used to attack Israel. Can you guarantee that counselor? Me? I’m an Irishman living in the Basque Country it’s highly unlikely that I could guarantee anything. Hamas Foreign Minister makes no mention of any long term truce in the article above. //What good is a buffer zone? The missiles will fly over it.// Exactly. What good is an occupation zone. //But do you not agree that a significant number of Palestinians, other Arabs and other Muslims will still regard the smaller Israel as an invader, an occupier, the illegitimate occupier of land// Yes, I do. The same as a certain number of republicans in NI will always continue to regard NI as occupied land and will always want to mount some military campaign. Their presence should, however, not prevent all sides from reaching a fair deal. With a proper deal in place, they will always be isolated, as the main body of the people will start doing what people everywhere do: get on with their lives, enjoying themselves and making money. I admit the larger context of the Arab world, howver, make that much more difficult now than probably ever before. At any rate, I don’t for a second believe the need for security is the reason Israel is holding on to the West Bank. In fact, once proper security for Israel starts being discussed, Israel always gets very anxious that it will be obliged to give the Palestinians back their land, and soon declares the proposals taboo. Israel – at least political Israel – is more interested in territory than in peace, as the militarily stronger party usually is. Despite what they tell you, Israel is simply not suffering enough from the present status quo to want to change it. The Palestinian issue was hardly even mentioned in the recent election campaigns; for the majority of the people of Israel the Palestinian conflict is as far away as Iraq. This “1967 borders” stuff is pie in the sky, dead-end stuff. It ain’t going to happen. Israel would be 12 miles wide at one point and one armoured thrust away from being split in two, on top the the millions who would be brought within rocket range. Proponents of the 1967 borders need eeds to forget about that map. It simply won’t happen. Now having said that … Phantom – If the IDF fought in Afghanistan it would have inflamed the permanently inflamed Muslim world even more Yes, but so does the blatant outrage of continously stealing Palestinian lands for settlers. It’s within Washington’s power to halt that, and it would go a significant way to making some kind of peace possible. But what does Washington do instead? It sends the money for settlement building, it pays for the IDF to enforce them, it covers for Israel at the UN by vetoing resolutions against Israel. Washington, in theory, has massive leverage over Israel, but always it acts in Israel’s interests, even when that’s obviously unfair. This also inflames ME opinion. I forgot to add … What Washington does it insulate Israel from the costs of its policies. It can act with literal impunity, and so sometimes that’s what it does, and that’s no good to anyone. Paul you never cease to provide the example that even a semi intelligent man can be a total fool in the face of reality. Petr’s refusal to grasp and your blind denial are suicidal views. The Islamic horde is at war with you as well as everyone else. They believe they have to bathe the world in blood to bring the return of their messiah and they’ve deemed that now is the time. The only reason they haven’t fully engaged the world outside of their region in their crusade, is right now they are killing each other vying for who will get to control the millions that in the glory of their god are coming to chop your head off, rape your wife and daughter while they roast marshmallows over your sons burning corpse. People like you are the reason that 1000s will have to die at your and our doorsteps before our governments will react. Those deaths could have been prevented, but now are just an inevitability waiting for it’s moment. Paul you never cease to provide the example that even a semi intelligent man can be a total fool in the face of reality I see the intellectual giant has arrived. What a devastatingly inciteful analysis. Troll, this may be your thread but if it’s all the same to you I’m going to engage only with grown ups. It would be infinitely better. If Israel were to withdraw from Palestine, it could do so practically on any conditions it wished in terms of security: a major international buffer zone to the east, membership of a western military alliance with cast-iron guarantees of military defence from the West should it be attacked, a demilitarisation of Palestine etc. If only that was true. Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza hasn’t worked out too well from the point of view of the security of Israeli citizens. Bibi’s re-election shortens the odds on an Israeli attack on Iran considerably. It could happen this year. The geography between Israel and Iran has not become any easier. And Obama may tell them ” do not expect us to bail you out if you bite off more than you can chew “ Surely not even Bibi would be insane enough to attack Iran? He can’t get there. Not on a sustained basis he can’t. The geography is very bad for Israel on this thing. And if he can’t have a sustained campaign, little can be accomplished, regardless of the merits of what he may want to do. Surely not even Bibi would be insane enough to attack Iran? Of course he would, unless the USA vetoes him. My hunch is he will wait for a GOP Israeli-lapdog POTUS (any of the declared candidates except Rand Paul) and then go for it. But he might decide on an attack this year, especially if the nuclear talks end in failure, as they probably will, and Obama is an obvious lame duck POTUS. Without US backup lined up well in advance this ain’t happening unless Bibi is crazier than a Greyhound bus full of mullahs. And Obama will not say ” yes ” to this. I cannot possibly imagine it. //If only that was true. Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza hasn’t worked out too well // Maybe I should have been clearer: When I said withdrawal from the West Bank, I did not mean that Israel continues to control Palestine’s borders and airspace, prevent imports and exports and does everything it can to destroy its economy. No, I didn’t mean that. Any attack on Iran would be catastrophic. The Middle East would totally erupt. Noel You will know that I am not an apologist for Israel, unlike quite a few hereabouts. But Gaza is Hamastan. There would be no restrictions if it agreed to recognise Israel and cease the rocket attacks and other hostilities. What interest does Israel have in continued warfare here? If you attack the king you better kill him. If you attack Iran you’d better kill its nuke / military But I don’t think that that can happen, now without the US going all in, which would be impossible. The reaction as Paul says would be much larger than the reaction to the two Iraq wars or Afghanistan. Phantom Bibi’s speech to Congress this month was a plea for US support against Iran. He will have that 100% as soon as a GOP neo-con is in the White House. Then it will be war. I still can’t see it. Unless you get a sick in the head imbecile like Michele Bachman in there, which can’t happen. What about Rubio? Or Walker, or Cruz, or Carson. Or Bolton (a nailed-on warmonger). I’ve never heard of Bolton as presidential timber Cruz won’t get votes outside the Republican precincts Carson is a seriously smart guy ( a real brain surgeon ! ) but I dunno a lot about his foreign policy views. Same deal with Walker. I know what he has done in Wisconsin, but I don’t know much more. Phantom – Netanyahu would attack Iran in the morning, but Israel will always try to get the US to do its attacking first. The geography isn’t that bad. The Saudis just as much enemies of Tehran and might well look the other way to IDF jets crossing their airspace. Jordan is an even more direct airspace and that’s majority Sunni. Israel is limited by logistics; that’s the reliance on US help with (say) sustained radar jamming, munitions stores up front and replenishment, and bailing them out in the case of things going wrong. If Natanyahoo was willing to take a flyer and shed Israeli blood, which he might feel up for once a gov is formed, he’d go for it. I don’t see a President Rubio. Nope nope nope. His accomplishments are few, and don’t think that he can capture lots of hispanic votes because he cannot Saudi Arabia won’t look the other way for weeks and months and more. which is what it would take Saudi Arabias Shiites would burn the country down. Any attack on Iran which took weeks, let alone months, should be blocked by The Pentagon, regardless of who’s in Congress and the White House. (Say) 48-72 hour attacks on Iran’s air-defence and then nuclear installations, followed up by ground force degradation could be sustained militarily despite the political ramifications, but someting going into weeks would be a catastrophic. Sufficient US forces aren’t in the region to contain that kind of thing, and it would come down to US forces doing the containing. The only real way this could work would be Israel helps with a massive first strike The US commits all its regional forces And Russia is exceptionally helpful and maybe joins in. And its so not happening. Pete Yes, totally agree. This is well possible this year. Phantom Russia does not want another nuclear weapons state near its borders. I think Putin could be persuaded to let it happen. Russia gets along well enough with Iran, and any Russian cooperation would change that. And it won’t make its own Muslims in Chechnya etc too happy. Phantom Russia’s Muslims are Sunni. They will be delighted if Iran is attacked. Excellent take here from Jonathan Friedland: “The result was not the worst of it. Indeed, buried in the detailed numbers of this week’s Israeli election were odd crumbs of consolation. No, what made Binyamin Netanyahu’s emphatic win so dispiriting were the depths he plumbed to secure victory. He made two moves in his desperate, and ultimately successful, effort to woo back those Israeli rightists who had drifted from Likud into the hands of more minor nationalist parties. Netanyahu reassured them that they could forget the lip service of the past few years, the diplomatic niceties he had served up since returning as prime minister in 2009: there would be no Palestinian state on his watch. On election day itself, he sank lower still. In a Facebook video, he posed in front of a map of the Middle East, as if in a war room, and used the idiom of military conflict to warn that “Arab voters are advancing in large numbers towards voting places” and that this was “a call-up order” for Likud supporters to head to the polling stations. It’s worth pausing to digest the full meaning of that move. The enemy against whom Netanyahu was seeking to rally his people was not Islamic State or massed foreign armies, or even the Palestinians of the West Bank or Gaza. He was speaking of the 20% of the Israeli electorate that is Palestinian: Arabs who were born in, live in and are citizens of Israel. A prime minister was describing the democratic participation of one-fifth of the country he governs in the language of a military assault to be beaten back.” Link here Even when attacked by the great Satan? Paul you’re not a grown up. You are just a petty man who is in denial of the reality of the world. Engage with who you choose. The fact that you can’t engage with anyone that may challenge the lens of denial that you view what is happening in the world only reenforces your denial. Reading what you people have written here doesn’t surprise me. You are however wrong. Twice now the Israelis were ready to go against Iran. Once at the end of GWs presidency with the aid of the US when Democrats leaked a false intelligence report to the NYTs to thwart it. The second was two years ago and they were talked out of it by this administration. You view an Israeli attack as a fools suicide mission, their view is it is a fools suicide not to. With or without the backing of the United States. They view it in simple terms. Do they die on their feet or do they die cowering. They believe either way they are likely to die. Having faced being slaughtered to near extinction once unable to defend themselves, they have chosen to die fighting. That is what you fail to grasp. What Obama has done you look at as a joke a game, especially the other Americans who comment here. I do, but at the same time don’t care what you think of my opinion. I give it any way and time will judge who is right and who is wrong. The American public is not enthralled with our President. His tenure as our leader has been a complete failure. The pundits can shout and bicker otherwise, but other than being the first Black President all he has wrought is pain and suffering on both the domestic and foreign front. There is not one aspect of his Presidency that can be viewed as anything other than a failure. His crowning failure is his deal with the Iranians who are playing him for the academic idiot that he is. The world is at war. The Russians are marshaling in the North and West, The Islamists are swarming in the South. Israel may well be the first nation to fall it will not be the last. If you think that people of the United States will sit idly by as the Israelis get slaughtered because this President refuses to help them you are sadly mistaken. Even Democrats were horrified yesterday when the Whit House announced that they would no longer back Israel in the UN. The mood outside the Bubbles of NY and Washington is that this President is guaranteeing that Iran gets a nuclear Bomb, that this President sent his election teams over to Israel to aid Bibi’s rivals in defeating him to remove the obstacle of Israel from his historical legacy of a “Peace Agreement” with Iran. What happened was he pushed the last domino over. He has forced the Israelis into a corner, he is going against the will of the American people in forging an alliance with the Iranians. The American people also understand that his actions are forcing Israel to act for their survival. This betrayal and the events that will unfold as a result of it are what Obama will be remembered for. Neville Chamberlain is viewed in history as a fool. Barrack Obama will be viewed in history as worse than a fool. He will be viewed as one of the causes of the coming bloodshed. That is the last piece that I shake my head at you all over. Most of you believe that this war is not going to expand. It is and millions are going to die. Interesting developments not mentioned by the MSM to any great degree. Arab Media Praises Neanyahu’s speech. “Both the Saudis and the UAE have been working with South Korea on developing nuclear facilities for some time. These agreements aren’t new. What is new is that UAE and Saudi Arabia now announce new nuclear contracts so soon after they saw the US dismiss, deride and attack Netanyahu’s speech. Meanwhile, Kuwait and Qatar announce that they host the South Korean President. These announcements and meetings send a message: the US is wrong about Iran. The message is clear: we don’t trust the US.” Link Paul you’re not a grown up. You are just a petty man who is in denial of the reality of the world Engage with who you choose. The fact that you can’t engage with anyone that may challenge the lens of denial that you view what is happening in the world only reenforces your denial Yet more searing analysis from the erudite colossus. As I said previously Troll; I’m only going to engage with grown ups who know what they’re talking about. That’s an interesting link Anabel, now that South Korea is helping Middle Eastern countries to develop nuclear capabilities I wonder will the warmongers advocate war with SK as a ‘rogue state’ etc? Oh wait! look who they live next door to, probably not. Those warmongers who wish to send other people to fight their wars while they can sit back with popcorn and watch it unfold on FOX news should maybe read this to get a bit of perspective of those who have actually fought and who they supposedly honour. “You Grow Up Wanting to be Luke Skywalker, Then Realize You’ve Become a Stormtrooper for the Empire” Iran’s President is sounding upbeat today about a deal. Now I know that could be just political spin and hype but what if Iran really wants to do a genuine deal that proves they have no intention of making nuclear weapons and an end to sanctions to improve their economy and the lot of their people. Wouldn’t that be a good and welcoming event in a world of such gloom. Or is it the case that there is really nothing Iran could do however demonstrable that would convince the US Republicans to agree a deal ? It’s looking fairly positive on the face of it Colm: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-31999158 Kerry indicating that “substantial progress” had been made is good news. I may bay be a colossus erudite but I am not wrong. Another thing that the MSM haven’t pushed is the cooperation Israel is getting from Jordan, and from Saudi Arabia. One of Phantoms “reasons” that Israel can’t successfully bomb Iran is the distance that they have to fly. Their inflight refueling has become routine, however a large part of that obstacle has been removed. Saudi Arabia granted Israel Permission to fly through their Air Space to bomb Iran. The Saudis know that they don’t have the equipment to do it, that the US with Obama at the helm will NEVER do it, so they will gladly let the Jews do it. I may bay be a colossus erudite but I am not wrong Didn’t your mother ever teach you that self praise is no praise? Until you come back with something interesting to contribute I’ll continue to debate with adults thanks. Troll Do you subscribe to the view that no deal is ever going to be possible with Iran and that no attempt should be tried. Even if Iran demonstrated a genuine willingness to prove no nuclear weapon making would you still believe military action needs to be taken to destroy Iran’s military ? Saudi Arabia granted Israel Permission to fly through their Air Space to bomb Iran. Saudi,doesn’t even allow El Al to fly over its lands. The El Al flights to India must take a long detour down the Red Sea to fly to India. It is highly unlikely that Saudi Arabia would allow the Israeli Air Force overflight rights in order to attack a Muslim country. And if they did allow it, no responsible Saudi or Israeli source would announce it publicly. A very small number of people would know such a thing – and it would not include anyone here, or any other blogger, or writers for any newspaper. Phantom you need to do your research go through past issues of The Times of London, Jerusalem Post, etc etc. You don’t need a subscription to Stratfor although with the European travel that you do you should pay to get more detailed information. Colm personally if it was me making the decision I would with out a hesitation destroy Irans Military capabilities whether they were pursuing A Bomb or not. They are the largest State Sponsor of Terrorism. Not only should their military capabilities be destroyed I would also bomb their oil fields and ports. That however is nothing that will happen now or in the immediate future no matter who is President or what Israel does or doesn’t do. It is highly unlikely that Saudi Arabia would allow the Israeli Air Force overflight rights in order to attack a Muslim country I don’t know how verifiable this is Phantom. It’s dated from June 2010 and as no attacks have occurred it may have been wishful thinking more than anything else: http://tribune.com.pk/story/20844/saudis-to-allow-israel-to-use-its-airspace-against-iran-report/ Personally I think such a decision would lead to civil war in SA. SA is a not just a repressive regime it is the seat of the family that has been the Royal Family of the Arab world for over a millennia. You will not at anytime see a civil war in that country. Certainly not by the people. Allowing the Israelis to fly over also keeps their hands clean. They can have their Iranian Problem dealt with by the Jews. They can not be accused by the other Arab Nations of attacking fellow Muslims, any deaths on both sides can be completely blamed on the Jews. They can even after it’s done claim they outraged by the fact that the Jews violated their airspace. The Saudis are threatened by Iran. It has become certain now that not only will the Americans NOT stop Iran from getting it’s bombs it is making the way smoother for them. If you think the majority of the Arab Nations want to see Iran gain that edge you are sadly mistaken. It can only lead in two directions. A Nuclear Arms race that will cost them Billions that they don’t want to spend or be defenseless against a Nuclear armed Iran. Allowing the Jews access to hamper and delay those two options not only makes sense it’s prudent. The Troll, on March 21st, 2015 at 4:02 PM Said: Colm personally if it was me making the decision I would with out a hesitation destroy Irans Military capabilities whether they were pursuing A Bomb or not. They are the largest State Sponsor of Terrorism. We have been here before, and no Iran isn’t. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_terrorism lol Harri you believe Iran is NOT a State sponsor of Terrorism? Oh it’s not on a wiki list. Well shit than it’s settled. You really can’t be serious, and if you are you don’t even belong in this conversation. If that is what you actually believe that Iran is not a sponsor of terrorism the depth of your ignorance is a void that can never be breached, it is so far removed from reality. Allowing the Israelis to fly over also keeps their hands clean They can not be accused by the other Arab Nations of attacking fellow Muslims Now that you seem to be acting like an adult rather than spewing infantile bile I’ll interact. Do you see how contradictory the above comments are? allowing them to use Saudi air space? You, an American living thousands of miles away from SA have claimed that ‘Saudi Arabia granted Israel Permission to fly through their Air Space to bomb Iran’ you don’t thing that others in the ME are capable of coming to the same conclusion? If this happens the SA Royal Family will become pariahs in the Arab world and likely in their own country too. Lol Harri you believe Iran is NOT a State sponsor of Terrorism? Do you believe that SA isn’t? //SA is a not just a repressive regime it is the seat of the family that has been the Royal Family of the Arab world for over a millennia. // Troll, you’re talking through your arse again. The Saudi family didn’t emerge until the 18th Century, and didn’t become rulers of most of what’s now Saudi Arabia until the 19th Century. The first of the Saud dynasty to become king was Abdul Aziz “Ibn Saud”, who declared himself monarch in 1932. They were insignificant players in an insignificant country within the Arab world. Most of the dynasty were impoverished camel herders. That didn’t change until Americans discovered huge oil deposits there in the 1930s. Paul it is you who is being the child in your reasoning period. You are jumping through hoops that don’t exist. At least not to the Saudis. You are under some impression that weighing the consequences of allowing an Israeli fly over verses the consequences of a Nuclear armed Iran are even on the same page. You are also misguided if you don’t understand that not only the Saudis but the Majority of the Middle Eastern Nations don’t want a Nuclear Iran, and are petrified what Iran will do if they achieve it. They may hoot and holler in rage when the Israeli’s attack, but the sighs of relief will be seen in the lack of action to stop the Israelis or lack of any Military response against Israel by anyone except Irans proxies Hamass, Fatah, Hezbooha etc. No nation will launch a retaliation against the Jews. Noel and the ruling tribe before that came from what region? Saudi Arabia is the seat of the Arab world. It is Mecca. Since Islam was founded that is the seat of Arab power. The Troll, on March 21st, 2015 at 5:10 PM Said: lol Harri you believe Iran is NOT a State sponsor of Terrorism? You can LoL as much as you want Troll, but I did not say that did I? Read it again. //Noel and the ruling tribe before that came from what region? Saudi Arabia is the seat of the Arab world. It is Mecca.// There was no ruling tribe simply because “Saudi Arabia” did not exist. The area now known as Saudi Arabia is a vast desert, with a small strip of fertile land on the west coast and a few oasis sprinkled about. It was always a place where various tribes of camel herders moved around; there was no central authority. Mecca is not Saudi Arabia, and Saudi Arabia is not Mecca. Mecca was always a separate and very small “Sharifate”. It was under the control of Bagdad, then the Ottoman Turks, etc. It was not part of “Saudi Arabia” or under any Saudi ruler until the past century. Mecca is a holy place for all Muslims of course. But to suggest that the Sharif of Mecca was the leader of the Arab world is like saying the Pope is the leader of the United States. You are under some impression that weighing the consequences of allowing an Israeli fly over verses the consequences of a Nuclear armed Iran are even on the same page Except that I have made no such comment at anytime. What I have done is debate the possible wider consequences of Israel attacking Iraq and what that may mean to the Middle East. Please don’t be disingenuous. yes you did Harri. You refuse to even speak what you have to say plainly. We’ve been down this road before is bullshit. Yes or No is Iran a State Sponsor of Terror in your belief? You are also misguided if you don’t understand that not only the Saudis but the Majority of the Middle Eastern Nations don’t want a Nuclear Iran, and are petrified what Iran will do if they achieve it I don’t think that that’s the case however if you are willing to provide verifiable evidence to support it I’m willing to consider it. No nation will launch a retaliation against the Jews You don’t think Iran will respond to an attack? However, I haven’t suggested that any nation with the exception of Iran will retaliate, what I have suggested is that the Middle East will explode which most but you seem to see. My position in 2006 has been shown to be wrong, based on lies fed to me through the MSM. Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) could only produce a stand-off when both parties, ultimately, were unwilling to die. I suspect on the basis of available pieces (literally) of evidence from New York to Bali that the co-religionists of those who perpetrated all those attacks who rule in Iran would not be inclined to a MAD-type stand-off with Israel. The madmen must have their nuclear toys taken from them. I’m not advocating regime-change: if the Iranians wanted to change their regime, they may choose to do so when said regime loses face when its weapons are destroyed. Posted by: Allan@Aberdeen | October 02, 2006 at 01:16 AM Now where are the Iranian nuclear weapons 9 years onwards? I am not being disingenuous. You are not discussing the consequences of what happens if Iran is attacked by Israel you are engaging in trying to put forth a case of why it won’t. Oh it won’t be successful, the Arab nations won’t allow it, etc etc. Look your argument is a point of view, it is not the only point of view. Instead of dancing around and being a general ass. Just put forth what you believe. and why you believe it. That is what seems to be the hardest thing for you Paul. You are not discussing the consequences of what happens if Iran is attacked by Israel you are engaging in trying to put forth a case of why it won’t. What I am doing is discussing the various outcomes if it does. It’s a hypothetical discussion and at no point have I stated that I think Israel will or won’t attack. Look your argument is a point of view, it is not the only point of view. Instead of dancing around and being a general ass. Just put forth what you believe. and why you believe it Being an ass eh? You’re reverting to being infantile again, perhaps you just can’t help yourself?. If you look at my comments on this thread you’ll see that I have exactly ‘put forth what I believe and why I believe it’ if Israel were to attack Iran. Ok Paul what does the statement the Middle East will explode mean? You see you lack the balls to be specific and honest, and you run from it when called to do so. You mean the Middle East is not exploding now? You mean they will all stop killing each other and pivot to attack Israel? or they will all do nothing except sit there and drink tea? You want to imply things with vague statements, why? and this crap oh Iran will react and attack them… no shit Sherlock really? of course me listing the terror organizations that Iran funds that will immediately attack Israel is to undetailed for you to grasp that is Iran retaliating. We were discussing the other Nation States not Irans. You lack integrity and do not posses the ability to speak straight and honest. You have to hedge what you have to say. You may look at it as nuance, I look at as you lack the spine to be honest. Yes or No is Iran a State Sponsor of Terror in your belief? Of course it is, but you said Iran was the largest, and I disagreed. What part of that do you not get? Read it again. I am not reverting to anything infantile. Oh my Language offends your sensitive persona oh my. Mommy the bad man called me an Ass. Grow the fuck up. If you can’t handle it go join the tea and crumpet crowd. Oh my Language offends your sensitive persona oh my. Mommy the bad man called me an Ass. Grow the fuck up More infantile behaviour? Still, I suppose it’s better you act the tough guy rather than playing the ‘poor me’ victim. How about you just debate the issue at hand rather than engage in infantile language? You want to imply things with vague statements, why? If you lack the intellectual capacity to understand what I mean frankly that’s not my problem. such a petty ass. I play no tough guy, nor a victim. You can put your labels any where or any way you want. It doesn’t add to your opinion. If anything it takes away from it. When you engage in your pettiness it’s because you have nothing of value to bolster your point of view and you’ve lost. I on the other hand curse. Now that obviously bothers you, or makes you think it gives you something to ridicule or use in your favor. It doesn’t. I don’t give a shit if your feelings or sensibilities are offended by language or being called an ass or a fool. The fact that you pretend these bother you is due to a weakness in your ability to defend your belief and your positions. The side game of being offended is a poor support to a position that has no legs. (Sigh), and the intellectual giant puts another thread down the toxic waste pipe. I’ll tell you what Troll, this is going to be my last comment with you on the issue: Go and fuck yourself sideways you pathologically nasty ignorant bastard. I hope you enjoy it. // I have suggested is that the Middle East will explode// I don’t agree. The Middle East has been exploding for the past three or so years, and look where it go them. The people have much more reason to stage an uprising – and anything else would scarcely make the papers – because of the oppression from their respective governments. Israeli warplanes flying overhead won’t make much difference. There comes a time when revolt fatigue sets in; surely even the Arab world can’t continue being outraged forever. I believe the Israelis would get away with it, as far as the Arab world is concerned. That doesn’t mean they will be suggessful. The Iranians have had more than enough time to anticipate an attack and will have whatever nuclear facilities they have safely tucked away under some mountain. Israel can only fight with American help and with American weapons and support; without these, it will get nowhere. Israel will be able to do plenty of damage, but will not destroy Irans nuclear ambitions as much as it will destroy the American hopes of reaching a deal. For what it’s worth, I don’t believe Iran is trying to get nukes. Also, it’s possible, unlikely but possible, that the Obama adm. and the Izzies are playing a good cop/bad cop game. With the Izzies threatening to attack almost every week, it’s possible the Iranians will be more willing to reach a deal with the US, and this will make things easier for Obama. Even if this is not coordinated, it might, hopefully, still have that effect. On a lighter note. Well done to the paddy’s on their Five Nations victory. Paul McMahon, on March 21st, 2015 at 7:19 PM Said: Go and fuck yourself sideways you pathologically nasty ignorant bastard. I hope you enjoy it Indeed, you really do hope that he enjoys it. Pretty soon, not to do so will be prudish. Harri, on March 21st, 2015 at 7:22 PM Said: On a lighter note. Well done to the paddy’s on their Five Nations victory. Not today – maybe tomorrow 🙁 I don’t agree. The Middle East has been exploding for the past three or so years Agreed to an extent Noel in the sense that SA will become a pariah in the Arab world if it permits Israel to use its airspace to attack the Persians and while the Middle East has been unstable this will exacerbate a bad situation to make it a whole lot worse by destabilising relatively stable state like Lebanon Jordan etc. However I think this debate is largely academic as I think that accommodation will be reached diplomatically. The link from me above states that SA have agreed to let Israel use their air space to attack Iran. That link was from 2010. Indeed, you really do hope that he enjoys it. Pretty soon, not to do so will be prudish Still peddling the myth I see Allan. Paul It’s a shame that you can’t play nice Look I tried to engage you on my thread to discuss my topic. You have done nothing but be an ass to me. This comment just got all your comments removed until you apologize. Paul McMahon, on March 21st, 2015 at 7:19 PM Said: Edit Comment (Sigh), and the intellectual giant puts another thread down the toxic waste pipe. I’ll tell you what Troll, this is going to be my last comment with you on the issue: Go and fuck yourself sideways you pathologically nasty ignorant bastard. I hope you enjoy it. I will put your comments back. but not until then. It’s not that you used foul language or told me to go fuck myself. It’s your arrogance. I don’t give a shit if your feelings or sensibilities are offended by language or being called an ass or a fool. This comment just got all your comments removed until you apologize. You probably have a good idea where you can put my comments. Paul I would much rather you just be semi civil. Yes I am an Ass, a fool, a Bastard and an Ignoramus. I however did not attack you personally. I attacked the presentation of your point of view. You however decided it was something personal and told me to mind my own business on my own thread…. Me thread… Me GOD….. Now hopefully you got the point I just made. If not we can and will do this dance again……. Abracadabra Comments Restored….. I however did not attack you personally. I attacked the presentation of your point of view. You however decided it was something personal and told me to mind my own business on my own thread…. The Troll, on March 21st, 2015 at 6:50 PM Said: I am not reverting to anything infantile. Oh my Language offends your sensitive persona oh my. Mommy the bad man called me an Ass. Grow the fuck up. If you can’t handle it go join the tea and crumpet crowd You can shove your toxic thread up there along with my comments Paul the thread isn’t toxic. You are. You put those two comments up like they contradict each other, they don’t. One has nothing to do with the other. One was a finishing statement the other was in response to your comment that you conveniently didn’t include. If you want to continue being infantile you go right ahead. I would prefer you just act semi decent, or go away. SA is a not just a repressive regime it is the seat of the family that has been the Royal Family of the Arab world for over a millennia. Troll, your familiarity with the Arab world clearly matches up to your knowledge of everything else. Until three generations ago the Sauds were the minor tent-dwelling chieftans of a tiny bucket of sand, in what was not yet Saudi Arabia. With Western help they were elevated to keep the newly found oil flowing in the new kingdom which was founded for that bery purpose. SA is about as ancient as nylon, plastic and teflon. Noel Cunning, on March 21st, 2015 at 7:20 PM Said: For what it’s worth, I don’t believe Iran is trying to get nukes. Noel – what is the basis of your belief? Note that I don’t disagree, but I don’t consider ‘belief’ to be sufficient. Pete it’s a side issue. Your right who controlled Mecca 3 generations ago has a direct relevance on how the people in SA will react if their leaders allow the Jews to fly over. I wasn’t clear what I meant and several of you have decided that fact makes what you’re saying correct. It doesn’t. Oh my Language offends your sensitive persona oh my. Mommy the bad man called me an Ass. Grow the fuck up That’s quite funny, despite the typically coarse and unconservative language. The Philly redneck likes to pretend he’s the biggest, baddest man, but he’s clearly never been to West Belfast. I’d pay good money to see Troll shout his gob off there. // what is the basis of your belief? // Allan, if they were really trying to get ’em, they probably would have ’em by now. More importantly, they swore, invoking the holy prophet, that they were not looking for such weapons and that such weapons were in fact “unislamic”. Now, these nutters in Teheran are nothing if not religious. To involke the name of M in vain, as they say, is a mortal sin. Nothing, I mean nothing, not even propaganda, not even a justifiable need for subterfuge, would justify such blasphemy in their eyes. They could have simply said that nukes are immoral. They fact that they instead invoked their religion when there was really no need to do so very much suggests that they were being honest. Noel Cunning, on March 21st, 2015 at 9:33 PM Said: // what is the basis of your belief? // Allan, if they were really trying to get ‘em, they probably would have ‘em by now. Strangely enough….. Allan@Aberdeen, on June 15th, 2013 at 11:28 PM Said: Peter – about this Iranian ‘bomb’ project. I’ve worked with Iranian engineers and I found them to be highly capable. Taking them to be representative of Iranian technical competence then if they wanted the bomb there would have been ways of getting it by now, these being: 1. Build it themselves noting that the technology to do so has been around since 1945. 2. Buy it from any states of the former-Soviet Union 3. Get the scientists of the former-Soviet Union to build the bomb. Noting further that reports of an Iranian nuclear weapons program have been around since 1981 then surely the technical prowess of Iran is such that they would have had the bomb by now if they wanted it? oh are they going to chew me up in West Belfast… oh me oh my. more likely a coward in a ski mask will blow up my children You guys are a pack of children my neighborhood is tougher than yours man,,,, my Dad can beat your dad. Look I’m not a tough guy, I’m not anything except someone that is tired of all your little drama’s. Allan (and others): Everything Iran has done in the last ten years suggests that they want to have the capability of nuclear weapons. They may agree to stop short, but only if they have sufficient enriched uranium that they could make a dash for it within months. Much as I hate to say it, Bibi is right about that and this week will see yet another fudge on the so-called “deadline” for Iran to agree to stop enrichment. If so, that will greatly increase the chances of an Israeli attack, and WW3 could be the result. But unfortunately Bibi is also an ethnic cleansing warmongerer: “I think that anyone who moves to establish a Palestinian state and evacuate territory gives territory away to radical Islamist attacks against Israel. The left has buried its head in the sand time and after time and ignores this, but we are realistic and understand.” If Tzipi Livni and Isaac Herzog are elected, he told a group of “settlers,” “Hamastan B will be established here.” Pledging to continue building “settlements” with money dispensed by gullible Uncle Sam, he hurled his defiance at the Americans, who he claimed were trying – along with the Europeans – to unseat him. The contempt for the West and its values that his words conveyed was underscored by his appeal to right-wing nationalist voters to turn out and vote Likud in order to deflect the efforts of Israeli Palestinians who, he said, were intent on turning out “in droves” on election day in order to defeat him. Every American President since Jimmy Carter has put the two-state solution at the top of their Middle East agenda, and the hope embodied in the peace process has anchored our “special relationship” with the Jewish state in the rough seas that beset the region. As long as the Israelis remained committed to this principle, they could get away with pretending to be “the only democracy” in their neighborhood, and not the ruthless occupiers of a conquered people. And the Americans went along with this delusion – or, rather, self-delusion – at the behest of the powerful pro-Israel lobby, which was, after all, filled with liberals as well as pro-Likud conservatives, who regularly voted Democratic and played an important role in getting the civil rights movement in this country off the ground. That is all changed, now, especially with Bibi’s panicked remarks about “droves” of Arabs – Israeli citizens – being “bused in” to vote. Instead of the Churchillian figure adored by the neoconservative right, the Israeli Prime Minister looks more like George Wallace standing in the schoolhouse door. An alliance that was supposedly built on mutually shared “values” is falling apart at the seams. The growing discord between Washington and Tel Aviv isn’t about the personal antipathy between Bibi and Obama. It’s about the antipathy between the American values of liberal democracy and equality before the law and the religious obscurantism and ruthless militarism of the new Israel – a nation that stands revealed as a modern Sparta, not the Athens we all thought it to be. In his 2011 address to Congress, Netanyahu averred “We’re not the British in India, we’re not the Belgians in the Congo,” and went on to tout the historic “bond between the Jewish people and the Jewish land.” “But there is another truth,” he continued: “The Palestinians share this small land with us. We seek a peace in which they’ll be neither Israel’s subjects nor its citizens. They should enjoy a national life of dignity as a free, viable and independent people living in their own state.” Now that this goal has been repudiated, what Netanyahu can no longer evade is the fact that he and his countrymen are the British in India, and the Belgians in the Congo. And as the great Israeli classical liberal Yeshayahu Leibowitz argued, this has been true since the end of the Six Day War, when the Israelis refused to give up the conquered territories and instead occupied them, setting up a giant prison in which the Palestinians were forced to live – and which also imprisoned the occupiers inside an ideological penitentiary from which, at this point, there is no escape.” Peter, on March 22nd, 2015 at 12:36 AM Said: Allan (and others): Everything Iran has done in the last ten years suggests that they want to have the capability of nuclear weapons. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/20/world/middleeast/Iran-nuclear-timeline.html?_r=0 Whether Iran is racing toward nuclear weapon capabilities is one of the most contentious issues challenging the West Racing? I’ve been reading reports on the ‘Iranian nuclear weapons program’ since the early 1990’s and some before that. It’s just a wall of lies, but what is the intent behind the lies. These groups and agencies don’t lie for no reason. I totally disagree with your or whoever sumation that is of the feud between the Bibi and Obama, your link didn’t go anywhere. However your position is well stated in both comments Peter, thank you. //An alliance that was supposedly built on mutually shared “values” is falling apart at the seams.// You’d never think that from watching Netanyahu’s reception in the US House of Congress recently. It’s also nonsense to suggest that Israel has become racist and sectarian only under Netanyahu. It has for the past half a century being pursuing racist and sectarian policies that would have had the free world up in arms if any other western state were doing the same on behalf of any other ethnic-religious group. Leibowitz is right. Netanyahu is just more blunt about his sectarian supremacy, that’s all. reading the comments above one would think it was the Israelis that are invading their neighboring countries because they don’t pray the right way to Allah, or that it was Bibi leading the chanting in the streets Death to America. As Kerry praised progress on the Nuke deal with Israel. http://www.timesofisrael.com/khamenei-calls-death-to-america-as-kerry-hails-progress-on-nuke-deal/ except it isn’t Some of you look at Israel the same way as you look at England and since in your hearts and minds you support and defend the IRA/SF and their terrorism, you support and defend Palestinian terrorism and those underpinnings in your beliefs gives you sympathy to all the terrorists. You my friends are wrong. Wrong on every point and every front. Iran is the problem NOT Israel. Comments are closed.