They’ve called for the destruction of Israel by having the Palestinian diaspora being allowed to return and vote in an election, which would remove the Israeli regime from Tel Aviv. And eventually that’s what’ll happen. Even Israeli leaders admit that once the Palestinians start asking for one man one vote they’re in big trouble, and so it will prove.
Uh huh.
Again you are simply inventing things while the actual truth has already been cited. Why the heck do you keep on doing this? Who do you think you’re fooling? Iran says that the very state of Israel itself is a “cancer” that must be destroyed, and you bullshit us and say they’re talking about an election to change the government?
Why this game?
What the fuck? Now you’re just making stuff up in truly high gear, and alluding to slavery in the US? That’s some truly disgusting rhetorical distortion you’re using there, Dick. Arab citizens get one vote for each man, just like Israeli citizens. Your continued fictional narrative in the service of your agenda, an agenda which includes support for proud anti-semites who want to commit genocide, is disgusting.
-
I always support the underdog and Hassan Nasrallah, peace be upon him is a great underdog. He’s a winner too so it’s all good.
-
Iran haven’t militarily threatened any other country. They’ve said if they’re attacked then they’ll respond but that they won’t attack anybody first. If you’re going to go into kidnappings of foreigners and holding them without trial then again Iran are well down the list, far behind Israeland even America. America supported Arab nations fighting a war which killed a million Iranians so why can’t Iran respond the same way? Why the double standard?
-
I can’t find a linky saying that Israel would take territory up to the Litani river, which of course the sorry IDF tried and miserably failed to do (this was the cause of the Tel Aviv regime’s 3% approval rating and the googlebomb of Ehud Olmert that led to “miserable failure” when the Israeli people realised the IDF had failed to take a few small villages).
But how about this :
For Israel, the goal is to eliminate Hezbollah as a security threat – or altogether, the sources said. A senior Israeli official confirmed that Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah is a target, on the calculation that the Shiite movement would be far less dynamic without him.
“It seems like we will go to the end now,” said Israeli Ambassador Daniel Ayalon. “We will not go part way and be held hostage again. We’ll have to go for the kill – Hezbollah neutralization.”
So it looks like you’re the one full of fiction here. And if you’re going to get into killing kids, then again…
4. Even a bunch of top military people from the beaten army admitted that they’d lost the war.
On 12 September, former defense minister Moshe Arens spoke of “the defeat of Israel” in calling for a state committee of inquiry. He said that Israel had lost “to a very small group of people, 5000 Hezbollah fighters, which should have been no match at all for the IDF”, and stated that the conflict could have “some very fateful consequences for the future.”[238] Disclosing his intent to shortly resign, Ilan Harari, the IDF’s chief education officer, stated at a conference of senior IDF officers that Israel lost the war, becoming the first senior active duty officer to publicly state such an opinion.[239] IDF Major General Yiftah Ron Tal, on 4 October 2006 became the second and highest ranking serving officer to express his opinion that the IDF failed “to win the day in the battle against Hezbollah” as well as calling for Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz’ resignation.[240] Ron-Tal was subsequently fired for making those and other critical comments.[241]
So there are some honest and honorable members of the IDF, people not afraid to admit that they’d been beaten like gongs by the might Hezbollah and then fled back over the border.
5. NEW YORK - Israel ‘s U.N. ambassador on Thursday ruled out major U.N. involvement in any potential international force in Lebanon, saying more professional and better-trained troops were needed for such a volatile situation.
Dan Gillerman also said Israel would not allow the United Nations to join in an investigation of an Israeli airstrike that demolished a post belonging to the current U.N. peacekeeping mission in Lebanon. Four U.N. observers were killed in the Tuesday strike.
That was the original Israeli position. Yet after Hezbollah ate their lunch 3% Olmert was forced to capitulate and Israel ended up with French UN soldiers protecting it from Hezbollah rocket batteries :
Then came the diplomatic spin. It’s true that the aerial battle did not succeed, and the ground battle has become mired, but in the diplomatic battle, we have the upper hand. Read the headlines: Great satisfaction in Jerusalem with the Franco-American proposal. Satisfaction in the government because of the stance of U.S. President George W. Bush (who has not bothered to speak to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert even once since the beginning of the conflict). After all, why did we embark on the war, if not to ensure that French soldiers will protect Israel from the Hezbollah rocket battery.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=748536
Nevermind. You’re repeating the same fictions that’ve been refuted numerous times in this thread alone. And you are championing a group of human filth who initiated an attack by targeting civilians and kidnapped soldiers to trade for someone whose claim to fame is proudly bashing in a 4 year old girl’s skull with the butt of his rifle. You keep ignoring reality while cheer-leading for genocidal anti-semites. Who would’ve thunk that someone who supports a proud group of Jew-haters (and Jew-killers) who cheerfully advocate genocide would also continually make the same errors even after the facts were pointed out, all in the service of a bizarre and counterfactual anti-Israel screed.
Truly, this is novel, and unexpected.
He will announce that they have achieved 20 percent enrichment in their centrifuges. Apparently that is significant.
They’ve called for the destruction of Israel and provided military rockets to wage war toward that end. It’s fact, not a debate.
Yes yes, but they’re underdog racists who want to kill Jews and target civilians. Like the Klan are underdog racists who want to kill blacks and lynched innocents or neo-nazis are underdog racists who want to kill everybody who’s not a ‘pure’ white (supremacist).
There’s nothing wrong with supporting the underdogs. I mean, right?
As for Iran’s stance on destroying Israel, at this point Magiver, honestly, I’d suggest that engaging in factual refutations when dealing with an argument that doesn’t concern itself with facts is a waste of time. The argument will be “Iran never militarily threatened anybody”. If you provide a dozen facts as to why Iran not hasn’t just threatening but has actively attacked others, they’ll be ignored and the claim will be repeated. Again, and again, and again.
Hell, you already provided not one, and not two, but three cites of Iran saying clearly that it wants to destroy the nation of Israel itself. Even when they claim that they just want some sort of elections, but that every “immigrant” Jew will be barred from political representation (but all the immigrants who became known as Palestinians are fine since the nation should be in “Islamic hands”)? Even when it’s blatantly, blazingly obvious from history and current events that “the Zionist Regime” is code for Israel itself, even when Ahmadinejad himself says that Israel itself, as a nation rather than a government “is an illegitimate regime, there is no legal basis for its existence,”… well? What we’ve heard, again and again and again, is that they just want to change its government. If Iran’s Supreme Leader came out and said ‘We do not care about the government, we just want to destroy the state of Israel’, we’d still hear “Well, see, they just want to change the government”.
All the facts in the world won’t change an argument that’s not based on the facts.
It’s an elucidative example; there are certain political positions that are not based on a differing interpretation of factual issues, but an agenda that then, after the conclusion is reached, seeks to ignore certain facts and state other things as factual that simply aren’t. It’s the same thing with anti-vaxers. Or 9/11 Troofers.
Certain arguments cannot be based on facts, so they have no use for them.
What is 20% enriched uranium used for? IIRC that’s quite a bit more than what’s needed for power plants, but way too little for a bomb.
Well:
[
](Federation of American Scientists :: Uranium Production)
[
](http://www.nti.org/e_research/official_docs/norway/HEU_as_Weapons_Material.pdf)
When weighing evidence it is good to examine all the possibilities. 20% enriched uranium can be used for their medical research reactor. A supply of enriched uranium for use in this reactor has been the subject of negotians for months now. Now they don’t have to negotiate.
That said, many news reports note that 20% enrichment is quite the hurdle to get over and enriching the uranium to 80%-90% (weapons grade) is not far away.
Also, 50% enriched uranium can be used for nuclear-powered naval ships.
As I just cited and quoted, you do not need anything above 20% to make a nuclear weapon.
They’ve called for the destruction of the Israeli regime. Israelis are free to continue living there as long as they accept the right of return of all the Palestinian diaspora and the results of free elections following their return. Then Israelis would be free to live in the new state as a minority, like Jews do in Iran. Iran can’t actually threaten Israel militarily, even the Israelis don’t feel threatened and senior government officials have admitted that there’s a lot of scaremongering over Iran for domestic political purposes. So there’s really no need to feel so, uh, sensitive towards what you might see as a “threat” from Iran.
I think the IDF are a bunch of human filth and Hezbollah are a bunch of angels compared to them. If we’re judging it by your metric, number of kids killed, then the IDF have slaughtered far more children than Hezbollah ever have. And don’t forget Hezbollah was only formed in response to Israeli invasion, mass murder and kidnappings in southern Lebanon so it’s Israel’s own fault they got their ass kicked twice by them. I think you’re just upset that Israel got beaten to the extent that even the IDF admitted they lost.
I don’t see why you’re so down on Hezbollah. If they want to form their own statelet in southern Lebanon why shouldn’t they be allowed to? They’ve got a massive electoral mandate, they run a lot of social services for people, why can’t they have what they want? Why shouldn’t the international community recognise them as a state if the overwhelming majority of Lebanese Shiites, at 40% by far the biggest ethno-religios group in Lebanon, want it? Just because some of their people may have been involved in terrorism twenty odd years ago?
Yeah, but what would be the point? The weapon would either 1) require gobs of Tritium which is pretty costly, not easy to make or acquire, or 2) a build a larger weapon to compensate for decreasing enrichment, 3) elements of both or 4) a two-stage weapon which would be redundant anyway…
Most importantly, you’d have to test this kind of weapon to see if it works. That’s going to be very difficult without it being picked up by the verification community giving the unique seismic signature these weapons give off.
Really, it’s wishful thinking. Going from 0.7% to 20% is something to be proud about. Going from 20% to 80%, eh, not so much and certainly not as hard. Why not exponentially increases your chance for success by going the last few yards?
There’s also the case of delivery platform. I note that Iran has a missile program. You’re going to need to miniaturize the weapon (20% HEU? Nadda.). That requires testing, along with the ability to launch, guide, arm, and detonate the weapon. That’s a lot of engineering in itself. Note that all of the 1st stage rockets still use rocket vanes for guidance which is a hit on range and/or payload. They’ve got a long way to go before I start to worry about it.
I’m guessing that Iran will build all the components necessary for a nuclear weapon, but will leave it at that. No conspicuous testing–otherwise they’re just asking for an arms race with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and others. That would make me sleep loose sleep at night.
In regards to the rest of the business about Hezbollah/Israel conflict–it sure seemed like a botched operation for both sides. Hezbollah decided to kidnap some Israeli soldiers and hold them hostage for something in return (a time honored Middle-Eastern tradition). They expect Israel to get mad, drop a few bombs, and then proceed with prisoner negotiations through the backdoor. Oops. Israel, on the other hand, figures, “We’ll show them” and “Oops.” IMHO, the end, it was a loosing contest for both. Hezbollah’s leader more or less admitted that he miscalculated on the Omert’s response and Lebanon took a good pounding, and Israel discovered that they ain’t dealing with bunch of ill-trained martyrs along with the discovery that they got frat-boy cocky. I recall hearing that the Iranians had supplied Hezbollah with communications gear that had cracked the Israel encrypted communications. On the other hand, I don’t think Israel will make the same mistake twice should both parties come to blows again.
With respect to Iran: what’s not to like? You’ve got an enemy Israel you can characture anyway you like, you’re Shia and you figure that star is ascending while the Sunni’s are in decline, and you enjoy tweaking the Western powers after a few hundred’s of years of being their bitch. At least it gives you a sense of some control while your economy is a dung heap, a leadership professing religious values while strutting a sense of entitlement of political power, a growing lot of unemployed people (and growing as their “baby boom” comes of age) and they have their very own home grown military-industrial complex known as the Iranian Revolutionary Guard who benefit handsomely from the sanctions. So the game goes on… sigh 
Thanks FinnAgain and Inbred Mm domesticus.
Here’s an interesting article I found regarding the uses of 20% EU in their medical reactor:
It’s not an ideal modern delivery system, or an ideal modern nuclear weapon, but that doesn’t mean that you couldn’t work something like packing a truck with a rudimentary implosion triggerd bomb. And we don’t know for sure what any target would be in any case. Riydah could be as likely as Tel Aviv, depending on the scenario.
Given NK’s involvement in the region, I’d wager that shipping a bomb to NK to test it wouldn’t be beyond the pale. To say nothing of the possibility of using tested designs from, say, NK or Pakistan. Or, gods forbid, some rogue faction from the old Russian empire.
I didn’t say that they couldn’t or wouldn’t go those extra yards, just wanted to point out that even at 20% you have a viable (if difficult) potential for a nuclear weapon. It’s also a lot less difficult to get a rocket to travel to somewhere in the Middle East than it is to get a viable ICBM. Which, I’d wager, the Russians might be willing to sell sooner or later. And if not, I’d wager China might not always be above some under the table technological sales.
I provided a cite up thread, but IIRC 16 Arab nations have started their own nuclear programs in response to Iran’s. I suggest taking four benadryl about two hours before you need to be asleep.
Possible, but they also started the war by firing rockets at civilians in order to cover the kidnapping. I’m not aware of any nation on the planet that would tolerate rocket barrages at its civilian population centers in tandem with an attack on its military that results in the abduction of soldiers. If, for instance, Mexico tried that in Texas we’d make 2006 look like a tea party.
The response of trying to remove Hezbollah’s capability to launch rockets was doomed to fail without a commitment to Total War, given Hezbollah’s use of human shields and such. Barring that, the only reachable goal was to do damage. The dynamic is such that the only real effective way to put pressure on Hezbollah is to either strengthen the Lebanese government (difficult, given the requirements) or to put pressure on Iran, which is a bit easier in some ways and a lot more difficult in others. Depends on a lot of factors.
I think I posted the poll numbers somewhere in the thread above, but they’ve been pretty consistent in all the recent polls in the last few years. Iranians, overwhelmingly, support democracy and oppose theocracy, support an end to their nuclear program in exchange for external aid and warm relations with the west, would welcome normalized relations with israel, etc…
There is a distinct schism between the Iranian people and the Iranian thugocrats. Confusing the two, as well as ignoring distinctions withing the government and within the populace, isn’t a helpful gloss.
Could you explain some of this more if you don’t mind? In particular, #1 in the quote. I don’t understand the deal with Tritium. The rest made some sense to me.
Thanks a lot for that link Henrichek. I’ve heard about the medical uses for the isotopes, but that blog really put the benefits to Iran in perspective.
Seriously? It sounds pretty nasty to me from what I’ve been reading. Opposition party members beaten and attacked, protesters likewise beaten and attacked (and unconfirmed reports of killings as well).
-XT
It’s the US’ fault.
Obviously. The Iranian thugocrats wouldn’t need to maintain their power by naked force if, hey, look over there!
[