Does only Israel have the rights to have nuclear weapons in the middle east? - Page 9

joetalmadge · 05-29-2008, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobcat

I do it so yours won't be so conspicuous all the time.

Well at least you admitted to making an asinine statement. There's hope yet.

Quote:

I'm not claiming anything. I'm just not would putting the cart in front of the horse. You have to establish that Israel does have nuclear arms first. Apparently, no one has done that.

But you have been claiming there is no proof of Israel having nukes, and that is like saying that no-one knows if Iran is trying to get them.

Quote:

Jimmy Carter is not the IAEA.

No his information is more accurate.

Quote:

Wow, good job. Those are the very four nations who are NOT signed onto the UN's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Guess what? They don't need the argument either.

Well duh! And as I said Israel is in some good company. 4 nations who do not want to have their hands tied by morality, law, or inspections. Which makes them dangerous indeed....for their neighbors.

joetalmadge · 05-29-2008, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobcat

I am and I do. As I'm sure you're aware there are many explanations for the exodus of Palestinians during the war. However, I'm not just gravitating on the ones that paint the Israeli's in the worst light. Samuel Katz pointed out that the "fabrication" that Jews forced the Palestinian exodus "can probably most easily be seen in the simple circumstance that at the time the alleged cruel expulsion of Arabs by Zionists was in progress, it passed unnoticed. Foreign newspapermen who covered the war of 1948 on both sides did, indeed, write about the flight of the Arabs, but even those most hostile to the Jews saw nothing to suggest that it was not voluntary." (Katz, Battleground-Fact and Fantasy in Palestine)

And to hell with what Jabotinsky, Ben Gurion, Usshiskin, Sharett said. 'Transfer' (Ethnic Cleansing) Zionist Quotes Kindly explain Deir Yasin? Lyddah, Ramleh?

Quote:

The Washington Report: Expulsion of the Palestinians- Lydda and Ramleh in 1948

Posted on February 10, 2002

By Donald Neff

July/August 1994, Page 72
It was 46 years ago when Israel turned its forces against the all-Palestinian towns of Lydda and Ramleh. On July 13, 1948, Israeli troops forcefully compelled the entire population of as many as 70,000 men, women and children to flee their homes. Systematic looting followed. Swarms of new Jewish immigrants flocked to Lydda and Ramleh, and within days these ancient towns were transformed from Palestinian to Jewish municipalities.
Lydda and Ramleh lay east of Jaffa, between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, and were to be part of the Palestinian state-as was Jaffa-according to the United Nations Partition Plan of 1947. However, since serious fighting had begun in April 1948, Israel had not only secured its own territory designated by the U.N. as part of the Jewish state but was now expanding its control into areas designated Palestinian. Jaffa had already been "cleansed" of its Palestinian population and come under Israeli control.
The initial attack against Lydda-Ramleh was led on April 11 by Lt. Col. Moshe Dayan, who was later Israel's defense minister and foreign minister. Israeli historians describe him as driving at the head of his armored battalion "full speed into Lydda, shooting up the town and creating confusion and a degree of terror among the population."1
Two American news correspondents witnessed what happened in the ensuing assault. Keith Wheeler of the Chicago Sun Times wrote in an article titled "Blitz Tactics Won Lydda" that "practically everything in their way died. Riddled corpses lay by the roadside." Kenneth Bilby of the New York Herald Tribune wrote that he saw "the corpses of Arab men, women and even children strewn about in the wake of the ruthlessly brilliant charge."2
All men of military age were sent to camps and all transport commandeered. The residents of Lydda were promised that if they congregated in mosques and churches they would be safe. On July 12, a brief firefight broke out in Lydda between Israeli soldiers and a Jordanian reconnaissance team in which two Israelis were killed. In retaliation, the Israeli commander issued orders to shoot anyone on the streets. Israeli soldiers turned their wrath at those cowering in mosques and churches, killing scores of them in Dahmash mosque alone. Palestinians venturing from their homes were also shot and killed. At least 250 Lyddans were killed and many others wounded.3
That same day, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion ordered all the Palestinians expelled. The order said: "The residents of Lydda must be expelled quickly without attention to age." It was signed by Lieutenant Colonel Yitzhak Rabin, operations chief of the Lydda-Ramleh attack and later Israel's military chief of staff and its prime minister in 1974-77 and again today since 1992.4 A similar order was issued about Ramleh.
The next day the massive forced exodus of the Palestinians began. The Ramlehans were luckier than their neighbors from Lydda. Most of the Ramleh expellees were driven into exile in buses and trucks. The Lyddans were forced to walk.
The exodus was an extended episode of suffering for the refugees. The commander of Jordan's Arab Legion, John Bagot Glubb Pasha, reported: "Perhaps 30,000 people or more, almost entirely women and children, snatched up what they could and fled from their homes across the open fields .... It was a blazing day in July in the coastal plains-the temperature about 100 degrees in the shade. It was 10 miles across open hilly country, much of it ploughed, part of it stony fallow covered with thorn bushes, to the nearest Arab village of Beit Sira. Nobody will ever know how many children died."5 The Washington Report: Expulsion of the Palestinians- Lydda and Ramleh in 1948

Oh yes it was voluntary allright! I can't wait for the rationalization from you!

Bobcat · 05-30-2008, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joetalmadge

Well at least you admitted to making an asinine statement. There's hope yet.

For some of us, but when you give a person the correct facts, and they still come to the same fallacious conclusion, one begins to wonder....

Quote:

But you have been claiming there is no proof of Israel having nukes, and that is like saying that no-one knows if Iran is trying to get them. No his information is more accurate.

Read my lips: If you don't have an iota of objective evidence to prove Israel has nukes, yours and Jimmy Carter's opinions and pronouncements count for squat.

Quote:

Well duh! And as I said Israel is in some good company. 4 nations who do not want to have their hands tied by morality, law, or inspections. Which makes them dangerous indeed....for their neighbors.

And it's not curious coincidence to you that none of these 4 nations, who are not signatories to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, are currently being strong-armed to give up their nukes like Iran is?

So, let's review: You, who have no evidence, no basis in international law, think you can deprive a sovereign nation of a weapon you cannot prove they have, based on no international norm or treaty, just because you say so....

Duh, I think, is about right.

Bobcat · 05-30-2008, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joetalmadge

And to hell with what Jabotinsky, Ben Gurion, Usshiskin, Sharett said. 'Transfer' (Ethnic Cleansing) Zionist Quotes Kindly explain Deir Yasin? Lyddah, Ramleh?
Oh yes it was voluntary allright! I can't wait for the rationalization from you!

Rabin wrote in his memoirs:

Quote:

What would they do with the 50,000 civilians in the two cities … Not even Ben-Gurion could offer a solution, and during the discussion at operation headquarters, he remained silent, as was his habit in such situations. Clearly, we could not leave [Lydda's] hostile and armed populace in our rear, where it could endanger the supply route [to the troops who were] advancing eastward. … Allon repeated the question: What is to be done with the population? Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture that said: Drive them out! … 'Driving out' is a term with a harsh ring … Psychologically, this was one of the most difficult actions we undertook. The population of [Lydda] did not leave willingly. There was no way of avoiding the use of force and warning shots in order to make the inhabitants march the 10 to 15 miles to the point where they met up with the legion. (Soldier of Peace, p. 140-141)

War is hell.

Desidude666 · 05-30-2008, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobcat

Dude, Israel is not a signatory of the UN's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Iran is. Why did they sign the paper if they're not going to abide by the treaty? Israel, in contrast, has made no promises to anyone, and no one has convincingly shown that they actually have nukes.

It's funny you should also say this because when India tested it's nukes in 1998, it was bombarded with sanctions that lasted 5 years. What makes Israel any more different. India is also a non-signatory to nuclear non-proliferation protocol, what makes Israel all that special? It receives aid of 30 billion on top of this nonsense. Today everyone wants to limit India's WMD capabilities, example being the nuclear tech. transfer by Washington, what about Israel? Indemnified? Your arguments are biased, as are the contemporary diplomatic channels.

Come on now, let's be realistic. Iraq wasn't allowed nukes, Israel, for that matter, isn't any different. For Iraq's sake, the Israelis had actually conducted secret operations to quell their research and their nuclear reactor, it's a famous incident. Then you've the US invasion, for the sake of 'WMD'. So are you saying that there are distinctions? No, there aren't, between Israel, Iran and Iraq. I don't find religious distinctions all that acceptable.

You may claim democracy in Israel, for which I could easily point to the various 'Gestapho' like structures in Israel that are beyond government control. It's an illusion that terrorists are only muslims. A fanatic Jew/Christian can be equally as harmful to the world. Let's not kid ourselves with the apparent. Israel isn't supposed to have nukes, and the powers that have aided it in acquiring nukes have broken their side of the protocol thus bringing Israel in the picture.

Israel does not, and never had, the capabilities to build nukes, it had direct foreign aid, countries that are signatories, or want others signed up. Since it is undeclared, the purpose of having nukes has failed completely. Because it's funny because the recent statements from Tehran did not consider nuclear incineration before making statements about 'wiping Israel' off the face of the 'universe'. Who the hell is actually even considering their nukes anyway? Deterrence has failed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobcat

The US has allowed the UN to work its diplomacy with Iran, ineffectively in my opinion. You make it sound like the president of the US just needs to knock on Israel's door and tell them to clean up their act.

The US has never taken the UN seriously. In fact, not only did the Israelis concealed their WMDs they do not even have to answer to the UN or the Global Atomic Agency to meet the required standards so Chernobyls can be evaded. Where do their plutonium get processed? And are they meeting security standards? No! You have somehow missed my point in the earlier post, their workers working at these facilities developed cancer-like symptoms and they couldn't claim compensation because they were threatened that they'd face what Vanunu did.

It's not if they have it, it makes no sense and Israel in itself is a little too volatile to possess WMDs. It has never held back and has always trusted on reciprocal violent military endeavours than negotiation. They have a bad bad track record, and happen to sit in a neighbourhood that just may blow up the next 'Fat Boy'. Any sane intellectual can see it coming.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobcat

You blame the US a bit too much. It's the UN's responsibility to police nuclear proliferation. The US just doesn't tell the UN, or any other nation in the world, what to do. We're just a member state in this regard, with no more powers than any other nation on the security council.

Yes, they will suggest it... only for pro Israeli countries such as US and France to veto everything. Kennedy did send his inspection team but they were famously bamboozled. US is paying Israel 30 billion a year... for what is it for again?

If they need independent deterrence, pay all the money back right now. If not, for Pete's sake at least be honest about it and don't be such a Jew about it (pun intended).

Djinn · 05-30-2008, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joetalmadge

And your point is? Hussein never stated he had nukes; show me the source!

Well, not nukes specifically, but back in the 1980s, Saddam claimed to have a WMD arsenal vastly larger than what he had in reality.

joetalmadge · 05-30-2008, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobcat

So, let's review: You, who have no evidence, no basis in international law, think you can deprive a sovereign nation of a weapon you cannot prove they have, based on no international norm or treaty, just because you say so....

Duh, I think, is about right.

Nowhere have I said that Israel should be deprived of nukes! You made that up! Tsk, tsk, tsk! I don't have to prove Israel has nukes. You're the only person I know of, who has access to the media sources totally overwhelmingly agreeing that they do, who has decided that there is no proof! I sure hope you are not teaching evolution. To take a stand that Israel has not been proven to have nukes is an empty, shallow, argument, as have been most of your arguments.

Let's see there was that claim a few months back that Israel has shrunk in size since Independence; then there was the argument that the palestinians all left peacefully; and now apparently the fact that Olmert admitted having nukes, Carter stating they did; and Vanunu being kidnapped and tried for treason for proving it, rings hollow to you.

You are, as all zionists I have known, clinging tightly to mythology. Your ilk would have denied that the American Indian was deprived of land by the Europeans; or mistreated ( I know, I know, they left voluntarily. Those reservations were much more appealing than the freedom of the plains!); and insisted that the European immigrants were simply acting legally. History has passed you by! World opinion has passed you by! Go back to rereading "Exodus", Dershowitz, Peters, it'll soothe your narrow world.

joetalmadge · 05-30-2008, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Djinn

Well, not nukes specifically, but back in the 1980s, Saddam claimed to have a WMD arsenal vastly larger than what he had in reality.

And you are comparing the blatherings of a Dictator with the slip of a Democratically elected leader!

joetalmadge · 05-30-2008, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobcat

War is hell.

Ah another back track on an issue. First it was "the palestinians all left peacefully," and now it's "so women and children were massacred and force marched: hey shit happens!" Slowly the carapace cracks and crumbles, and reveals it's immoral core.

Bobcat · 05-30-2008, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joetalmadge

Ah another back track on an issue. First it was "the palestinians all left peacefully," and now it's "so women and children were massacred and force marched: hey shit happens!" Slowly the carapace cracks and crumbles, and reveals it's immoral core.

No, I said they were forced out as a consequence of war. Your article bears out everything I've said. The Arab refugees were people who fled because of the war that the Arab states started. Nascent Israel asked for peace and offered friendship and cooperation to its neighbors. The Arabs rejected this offer and answered it with war, which fortunately failed. The refugees you are describing were caused by military expediency, as opposed to a deliberate program to displace people for political reasons. So, I still stand by my comments, and you have no leg to stand on.