You forgot to mention the IDF infecting the Israeli supplied water to Gaza with Ebola and Bird Flu.
Be more thorough next time.
Israeli - Palestinian Conflict
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
You forgot to mention the IDF infecting the Israeli supplied water to Gaza with Ebola and Bird Flu.
Be more thorough next time.
That's funny. Well done.
Though they did cut off the water supply to 45,000 Palestinians in 2014. But by all means, make a joke.
@Fearless apologies. Genuinely thought you were taking the mick.
Yes they are crap. You's think that any well-equipped imperialist army (certainly with nukes) could wipe out the Palestinian arabs in 5 minutes and expel Israeli Arabs (20% of the population) in another 5 or so.
Even on the 'creeping genocide' stakes, you'd have to put them way behind the Lib Dems.
I'd like to see that.
Russia has the power to completely destroy our planet with the rusty nukes they still have and comparing them to Ukraine is like comparing Monaco vs France
That means the Jews lived in that area from a really long time until the Romans decided to destroy Israel and call that area Philistine (soon or later Greece will claim land over there as well).
See the evil Zionist gloating over a dead dinosaur, Palestineosaurus.
Land-grabbers even renamed it Chassidic Park.
Thanks for the Home jobs 24/7 link, I might give it a go.
read the comments hoping to know the reason she was detained but its just full of anti semitic bullshit. The article seems short on details @kid777 , could you provide context?
There's a video attached to it.
Seems a new wave of immigration to Israel is in the offing ......
http://news.yahoo.com/netanyahu-urges-jews-move-israel-copenhagen-attacks-111012753.html
http://news.yahoo.com/netanyahu-urges-jews-move-israel-copenhagen-attacks-111012753.html
West Banksy
Leaving Denmark to Israel is a lot safer
then you have to let your kids do their service time when they reach the age. But on the bright side no more snow and cold.Relatedly, an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear program would be a net gain for Iran and a huge loss for Tel Aviv.
I think it's the wrong thread anyway.
Relatedly, an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear program would be a net gain for Iran and a huge loss for Tel Aviv.
I think it's the wrong thread anyway.
Perhaps it's the wrong thread but all the middle east conflicts are linked on some level.
The article goes on to state:
All three points make reasoned arguments but I guess it's easier to post smiley than an actual response.
There is a thread on the Iran nuclear program, but I guess everything is linket at some level. Including the US politics thread.
The Arab "street" would likely give the thumb up to whoever stops Iran from acquiring the bomb. Israel declared its independence against the will of the US, bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor into oblivion against the US will and alleged to have eliminated the Syrian too as well. The one the US administration refuse to be convinced ever existed.
If decision makers here reach a conclusion that Iran is being allowed to advance towards the bomb, and if they believe that it's within Israel's capabilities to stop it, then neither the Arab "street" nor the cold shoulder from the US would stop Israel from what would be a clear act of self-defense.
I tried copy-pasting articles before. Wasn't an awful lot harder than posting smileys, especially when posting from a cellphone where I often end up pressing the wrong smiley.
I apologize for not finding the relevant thread. Maybe a kindly mod like @Sultan or @Damien could move the last few posts to the appropriate place.
Not if Iran used it against Israel which I think is as sad as it is obvious. You seem to be arguing that Israel will take whatever decisions it's leaders think will serve its best interests. You do realise they could be wrong in their risk assesment. Bibi has a nasty history of playing up threats as you well know.
Yes. When Arafat and his terrorist mob were allowed into Gaza and the WB he "threatened" that rockets will be launched from there to Israeli cities. He has been warning from the Iranian nuclear program since the 1990's. The fear mongerer that he is...
The risk assessment goes as follows. A fundamental Islamist theocracy is calling for wiping our country off the map and arms all the terrorist organizations in surrounding countries, while at the same time develops a military nuclear capability. Both type I and type II errors are possible in this scenario, and I can see how one is infinitely less dangerous. For everyone involved.
Politicians and public figures say plenty of things they don't follow through on or never meant in the first place. Lets conduct a thought experiment. Lets say Iran manages to get a nuke and manages to put it on a missle and manages to blow up jerusalem. What do you think happens next? I can appreciate that as an Israeli once that happens it will be the end of Israel as you know it and a lot of your countrymen/women will die in the process but in this particular example I want to ask what you think happens to Iran. Is there any scenario where they come out of it a net winner?
Patronising thought experiments would be a lot more fun if Iran was not run by fundamentalist Shiite clerics, who could well have different standards regarding winning/losing.
Nuclear Weapons Can Solve the Israel Problem
Rafsanjani said that Muslims must surround colonialism and force them [the colonialists] to see whether Israel is beneficial to them or not. If one day, he said, the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons currently in Israel's possession [meaning nuclear weapons] - on that day this method of global arrogance would come to a dead end. This, he said, is because the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/582.htm
I would only like to add that Mf. Rafsanjani is what termed in the West a "moderate".
Nuclear Weapons Can Solve the Israel Problem
Rafsanjani said that Muslims must surround colonialism and force them [the colonialists] to see whether Israel is beneficial to them or not. If one day, he said, the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons currently in Israel's possession [meaning nuclear weapons] - on that day this method of global arrogance would come to a dead end. This, he said, is because the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/582.htm
I would only like to add that Mf. Rafsanjani is what termed in the West a "moderate".
Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor acknowledged on Al Jazeera English (4/14/12) that Iranian leaders have never called for Israel to be "wiped" off the map.
Meridor agreed with interviewer Teymoor Nabili's suggestion that the supposed remarks were never actually made; Iranian leaders, Meridor said,
come basically ideologically, religiously, with the statement that Israel is an unnatural creature, it will not survive. They didn't say "we'll wipe it out," you are right, but [that] it will not survive, it is a cancerous tumor, it should be removed.
Hostile words, to be sure, but not the menacing threat endlessly reported in corporate U.S. media in recent years. (Iran, Israel and "wiped off the map" occur together more than 8,500 times in the Nexis news database in the last seven years.)
Of course, Mideast expert and blogger Juan Cole noted long ago that Ahmadinejad never called for Israel to be wiped off the map, but Meridor's interview suggests that there is hope this information might finally penetrate the corporate media bubble.
A New York Times blog (Lede, 4/18/12) wrote up the Al Jazeera interview ("Israeli Minister Agrees Ahmadinejad Never Said Israel 'Must Be Wiped Off the Map.'") Though the Lede's lede was somewhat grudging, suggesting the Persian language was partly to blame for the confusion ("In a reminder that Persian rhetoric is not always easy for English-speakers to interpret…"), it nevertheless indicated a clean break from earlier media insistence that the threatening remarks, coupled with a supposed Iranian nuclear weapons program, posed an existential threat to Israel.
The Times has used the shopworn Ahmadinejad canard on several occasions. "Wipe Israel 'Off the Map,' Iranian Says," was the paper's October 27, 2005headline; a January 19, 2010 report stated matter-of-factly: "The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, says Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. He has also denied the Holocaust and called for Israel to be wiped off the map." Other Times stories have acknowledged doubts about the claim (6/11/06, 1/8/11), but the paper has never conclusively established the context and meaning of remarks, despite the fact that Jonathan Steele, an Iranian expert who writes for the London Guardian, tried to explain it to Timesreporter Ethan Bronner (6/11/06) :
The Iranian president was quoting an ancient statement by Iran's first Islamist leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini, that "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time," just as the Shah's regime in Iran had vanished. He was not making a military threat. He was calling for an end to the occupation of Jerusalem at some point in the future. The "page of time" phrase suggests he did not expect it to happen soon.
Other media outlets have expressed even less doubt that Iran is hell-bent for Israel's annihilation. "Iran's president unleashes another warning to Israel, declaring once again that the Jewish state will be wiped off the map, and soon," remarked CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer (Situation Room, 6/2/08). "Since Ahmadinejad took office four years ago," announced CBS Evening Newsanchor Katie Couric (9/23/09), "he's built a reputation as a provocateur, saying Israel should be wiped off the map." As a recentWashington Post op-ed (4/1/12) by Dennis Ross and David Makovsky explained, "Israel is the only country that Iran has repeatedly threatened to wipe off the map."
Over the years, two key claims have sustained hostility toward Iran in official circles and the media: that it is attempting to manufacture nuclear weapons, and that it wants to wipe Israel off the map.
The first claim, though now contradicted by American officials and the CIA, who say there's no proof Iran is currently working on nuclear weapons, nevertheless survives in the media as sort of unkillable zombie lie.
It remains to be seen if the bogus charge that Iran has vowed to wipe Israel off the map will be as resilient, even after a top Israeli official has acknowledged its inaccuracy.
Meridor agreed with interviewer Teymoor Nabili's suggestion that the supposed remarks were never actually made; Iranian leaders, Meridor said,
come basically ideologically, religiously, with the statement that Israel is an unnatural creature, it will not survive. They didn't say "we'll wipe it out," you are right, but [that] it will not survive, it is a cancerous tumor, it should be removed.
Hostile words, to be sure, but not the menacing threat endlessly reported in corporate U.S. media in recent years. (Iran, Israel and "wiped off the map" occur together more than 8,500 times in the Nexis news database in the last seven years.)
Of course, Mideast expert and blogger Juan Cole noted long ago that Ahmadinejad never called for Israel to be wiped off the map, but Meridor's interview suggests that there is hope this information might finally penetrate the corporate media bubble.
A New York Times blog (Lede, 4/18/12) wrote up the Al Jazeera interview ("Israeli Minister Agrees Ahmadinejad Never Said Israel 'Must Be Wiped Off the Map.'") Though the Lede's lede was somewhat grudging, suggesting the Persian language was partly to blame for the confusion ("In a reminder that Persian rhetoric is not always easy for English-speakers to interpret…"), it nevertheless indicated a clean break from earlier media insistence that the threatening remarks, coupled with a supposed Iranian nuclear weapons program, posed an existential threat to Israel.
The Times has used the shopworn Ahmadinejad canard on several occasions. "Wipe Israel 'Off the Map,' Iranian Says," was the paper's October 27, 2005headline; a January 19, 2010 report stated matter-of-factly: "The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, says Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. He has also denied the Holocaust and called for Israel to be wiped off the map." Other Times stories have acknowledged doubts about the claim (6/11/06, 1/8/11), but the paper has never conclusively established the context and meaning of remarks, despite the fact that Jonathan Steele, an Iranian expert who writes for the London Guardian, tried to explain it to Timesreporter Ethan Bronner (6/11/06) :
The Iranian president was quoting an ancient statement by Iran's first Islamist leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini, that "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time," just as the Shah's regime in Iran had vanished. He was not making a military threat. He was calling for an end to the occupation of Jerusalem at some point in the future. The "page of time" phrase suggests he did not expect it to happen soon.
Other media outlets have expressed even less doubt that Iran is hell-bent for Israel's annihilation. "Iran's president unleashes another warning to Israel, declaring once again that the Jewish state will be wiped off the map, and soon," remarked CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer (Situation Room, 6/2/08). "Since Ahmadinejad took office four years ago," announced CBS Evening Newsanchor Katie Couric (9/23/09), "he's built a reputation as a provocateur, saying Israel should be wiped off the map." As a recentWashington Post op-ed (4/1/12) by Dennis Ross and David Makovsky explained, "Israel is the only country that Iran has repeatedly threatened to wipe off the map."
Over the years, two key claims have sustained hostility toward Iran in official circles and the media: that it is attempting to manufacture nuclear weapons, and that it wants to wipe Israel off the map.
The first claim, though now contradicted by American officials and the CIA, who say there's no proof Iran is currently working on nuclear weapons, nevertheless survives in the media as sort of unkillable zombie lie.
It remains to be seen if the bogus charge that Iran has vowed to wipe Israel off the map will be as resilient, even after a top Israeli official has acknowledged its inaccuracy.
Cheers Sults. I knew we weren't that uptight about forum rules here
Yes Iran has extremist elements in positions of power. Israel does too, as does America etc. Perhaps Iran even has more of them. The hypothetical wasn't meant to be fun, rather it should remind you of the consequences to those Shi'te clerics and the country they rule should they go down this path. I imagine the phrase wiped off the map would be used a lot. I think Iran is capable of rational actions, if you don't then aren't you just playing a waiting game? If you don't believe Iran to be capable of diplomacy, if you think they would risk their own people and country to blow yours up, then what the hell are you waiting for?
Iran's cabinet has more members with PHDs from American universities than the actual US cabinet itself. They aren't just a bunch of crazy nutters. I've heard way more rhetoric about Iran come from Israel than the other way round.
I think that is little more than semantics @Sultan
Cheers Sults. I knew we weren't that uptight about forum rules here
Yes Iran has extremist elements in positions of power. Israel does too, as does America etc. Perhaps Iran even has more of them. The hypothetical wasn't meant to be fun, rather it should remind you of the consequences to those Shi'te clerics and the country they rule should they go down this path. I imagine the phrase wiped off the map would be used a lot. I think Iran is capable of rational actions, if you don't then aren't you just playing a waiting game? If you don't believe Iran to be capable of diplomacy, if you think they would risk their own people and country to blow yours up, then what the hell are you waiting for?
Truth is I have no idea. I am not sure Israel could cause real damage there if it acted alnoe. Moreover, recent reports suggest Israel has been warned by the US not to attack (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/191966#.VQFuGY7LLEs).
Dan Meridor is a moderate whose opinions I respect but not necessarily share. Iran has moderate leaders too who probably never said Israel should be "wiped off the map". A prominent one's take on the issue is that: "Israel is a wound on the body of the world of Islam that must be destroyed."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-are-latest-flashpoint-in-war-of-perceptions/
I'm sure you could easily find an array of such moderate quotes and videos if you only cared to look. Unlike many, we (and our elected leaders in particular) don't have the luxury of ignoring these calls in light of the developing nuclear program in Iran.
Nothing an outraged post on the caf wouldn't rectify if an attack happened.
Hum the very source you quoted states that he actually said this and the quote you have was a misquote.
"Quds day, which is in memorial of Imam [Khomeini], is a day that people present the unity of Islam against any type of oppression or aggression. And in any case, in our region, it is an old wound that has been sitting on the body of the Islamic world, in the shadow of the occupation of the holy land of Palestine and the dear Quds. And this day, in fact, is a remembrance that Muslim people will not forget this historical right and will always stand against oppression and aggression."
You're always going to hear explanation (to Western media) why what was said was in fact meant to be something else.
'Cancerous tumour' Israel will soon be destroyed, says Ahmadinejad
http://www.france24.com/en/20120817...us-tumour-israel-nuclear-war-protest-zionist/
Cheers for the medical aid, Mahmoud.
'Cancerous tumour' Israel will soon be destroyed, says Ahmadinejad
http://www.france24.com/en/20120817...us-tumour-israel-nuclear-war-protest-zionist/
Cheers for the medical aid, Mahmoud.
That article is nearly 3 years old, @holyland red. Also, as you know, he is no longer in power.
There's an actual video that shows the quote you used was misquoted, the entire article you used as a source is discussing the fact that it was a misquote.
But one is misquoted, the other doesn't translate well from Farsi while the third has been out of office for a couple of years now. We're not going into a debate here which has already been done, probably somewhere in the 57 pages of the relevant thread.
As long as you don't just fancy spending some time arguing on the internet, I'm sure you'd agree that Israel has every reason to feel nervous about a nuclear Iran. I reckon many other countries do too. It's quite obvious that many feel Iran should get nukes because it would create an unfavourable reality for Israel in the ME. Fair enough, as long as we're not dragged to discussion of the actual meaning of "Death to Israel".
Last edited: