« Nuclear Iran | Main | How the nuclear attack on Israel will go down »

September 26, 2009

Comments

"Why don't we build the framework here for the evacuation of the Jews of Israel to the USA"

What about buying a strip of land in Brazil for them?

Iran will get a nuke eventually. Any sovereign state that wants to do so and has an IQ above 80 will do it sooner or later. The best you can do is delay it.

Anything that stops American/Israeli aggression is a good thing.

I've actually pointed this out to anti-semites - that the destruction of Israel means millions of Jewish refugees in the US, and that they should therefore be more Zionist than Theodore Herzl. But they are too hostile towards Jews to think rationally about this.

Oh, please.

David needs to stop shitting his pants.

Israelis aren't going anywhere.

Perhaps Israel is preparing to nuke Iran?

What rubbish. Not even your average Neocon thinks Iran is much of a threat. What sense would it make for Iran to nuke Israel? First, you would have to kill almost every single Jew living there in order to reclaim the land. This would mean killing a bunch of "Palestinians" too. Second, nuking Israel would mean nuking Jerusalem, the site of a semi-important mosque. Third, the land would be radioactive and unlivable for several years. Fourth, Tehran and probably most of Iran would be nuked in retaliation. Finally, nuking Israel would remove the scapegoat of choice for most of the Middle East's dictators.

"but I still think that the United States has the ability to take away Iran’s enriched uranium and Iran's capacity for enriching more of the stuff."

Of course we do. At not much greater cost or danger than the yearly Red Flag exercises held over Nevada.

But we won't do it. Certainly not with the administration we've got.

I hope Israel has enough of her own nukes to serve as a credible MAD threat against Iran. Although if their leadership is as fanatical as some claim even that won't matter.

That would almost be welcome. Imagine 4 million of our fellow landssmen coming here and voting for other than Democrats instinctively. Imagine thousands of hot Israeli babes competing with our whiny JAPs. Worse things could happen.

It's really frustrating. Sub Chat has become almost unreadable due to all the Islam-will-Conquer-the-World panty piddling paranoia. Is this site going to go down the same metaphorical toilet?

Peter

"What sense would it make for Iran to nuke Israel?"

The holocaust didn't make sense either, but it still happened.

One problem with Israeli Jews moving to the US is the fact that they would start assimilating/interbreeding with the rest of us. Since they are smart, I wouldn't mind this, but they would lose their cultural distinctiveness. For the Israeli Jews who want to make sure that Jewish culture and religion survive, and not just the genes, they might have no choice but to take their chances in Israel.

"I hope Israel has enough of her own nukes to serve as a credible MAD threat against Iran"

Israel doesn't have to serve as a credible MAD threat by itself. The potential backlash from the world at large is more than enough.

We are able to take care of ourselves.

"I've actually pointed this out to anti-semites - that the destruction of Israel means millions of Jewish refugees in the US, and that they should therefore be more Zionist than Theodore Herzl."

Not only that, but a safe, stable Israel will attract lots of Jewish immigrants from North America.

"But they are too hostile towards Jews to think rationally about this."

I agree 100%. They (and web anti-semites are usually white nationalists) hate Jews the way that most blacks hate whites, although the white nationalists are unaware of the irony -- that they are acting just like the blacks they despise.

Moreover, but the WNs condemn Zionist Jews for doing exactly what they want to do themselves, i.e. set up a homeland with policies designed to maintain the ethnic character of that homeland.

Why does everyone give a rat's behind about Israel? Seriously, I'd like to know. They have no oil, they don't control the Suez canal, they're no longer a strategic counterweight to the USSR...

...so why does anyone care?

"By the way, the war on terrorism is a hoax."

I'm not sure I'd call it a 'hoax,' but I do get the sense that they are arresting and prosecuting folks who, left to their own devices, would not have posed a serious threat.

That said, it seems likely to me that some percentage -- perhaps ten or twenty percent -- of these wannabe jihadists really do have the skills and cojones to go through with their plans.

How do we stop these people? Seems to me the easiest way is to do the same thing we do with online pedophiles, i.e. to set traps for them.

"What about buying a strip of land in Brazil for them?"

There has been talk of alternate locations for a Jewish homeland for a long time now. None of these ideas ever really got off the ground due to religious and historical concerns.

Anyway, it seems to me that if Iran succeeds in building a nuclear bomb, it's unlikely under any circumstances that they would simply lob it at Israel.

A more likely scenario is that Iran gives the bomb to some proxy group to use, so that they can plausibly deny responsibility if necessary.

"What about buying a strip of land in Brazil for them?"

I made the same suggestion on the Israeli Water Engineer's blog a few months ago ( https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=20062101&postID=3006395206167742960&isPopup=true ):

"Brazil has plenty of land, much of it undeveloped, particularly in its poorer north. The world might be better off with this sort of arrangement:

1) The holiest sites for every religion are placed under NATO control or nominal UN control but using NATO troops (i.e., not Pakistanis). Any Muslim, Jew, or Christian who wants to see the holy sites gets to see them.

2) Every building in Israel gets an objective appraisal, as do all land and infrastructure improvements Israel has made there since its modern founding. Added to that total is some additional sum for the hardship and expense of relocating. We can speculate on what this total amount would be, but let's call it $X. The U.S., the EU, and the Gulf states pay this fee of $X.

3) Israel then buys a coastal strip of land -- perhaps twice as big in area as the current State of Israel -- from Brazil for, say, $.5X. Israel uses the other $.5X to improve the land, build new cities there, etc.

This seems like it would be a win-win-win for Israelis, Brazilians, and Americans. Israelis would get their own land in the Western Hemisphere, far from their Arab enemies, and it would be one with more natural resources than their current land. They could still take vacations to visit their holy sites in the Middle East. Americans would eliminate a perennial foreign policy headache of attempting to placate American supporters of Israel while trying to appease Arab countries at the same time. Brazilians (and other Latin Americans) would get an economic shot in the arm, by having a first world economy plugged into South America.

The only losers in this deal would probably be the Palestinians. Free of any excuses of colonization or oppression, the onus would be on them to construct a viable country. Chances are, without the conflict with Israel, the Palestinians' sense of national identity would fade within a generation. Their children might even beg Israel to move back."

Iran would get annihilated if they nuked Israel. I can't see their leadership throwing the privileged life away just to kill 100,000 Jews or so? Of course, the Jews should still improve the resiliency of their civil defenses and emergency management apparatus, but I don't think they should "retreat" from their homeland.

Unforchunately we're entering a period where more and more States will have Nuclear weapons. I would hope DARPA or some other government sponsored organization would be working on a system that used 'waves' of some sort that caused nuclear weapons to become impotent?

"By the way, the war on terrorism is a hoax." (Richard Hoste)

Maybe, but it is a good excuse for the US to secure important resources and geography in order to maintain and expand global hegemony. Certainly you don't have a problem with that? Do you?

I agree with John Standos on this, why is everybody so sure that israel will be nuked by the persians/arabs, who realize that a whole lot of their precious palestinian brethren will be wiped out together with this holy mosque on the rock? They will use it to threaten ofcourse, but Israel already has their own nukes so it would be cold war/MAD all over again. Not that this is much fun but evacuating Israel is hysterical.


"Anything that stops American/Israeli aggression is a good thing" (Richard Hoste)

What exactly do you have against American aggression? I can't figure out why people care about what we do overseas? If you want to complain about loses of civil liberties, that I can understand, but what do you care if we're expanding American power overseas?

Seriously, WTF?


I think this is just a case of Israeli projection bias. They say that Iran wants to nuke them because deep down they entertain the idea of actually nuking Iran.
Or perhaps by denouncing Iran, Israel issues a veiled threat: don't mess around with nukes, because we might respond, or get our American "partner" to retaliate.

What's the official Neocon position on this?

>>>First, you would have to kill almost every single Jew living there in order to reclaim >>>the land

They're up for it.

>>> This would mean killing a bunch of "Palestinians" too.

Bonus

>>>nuking Israel would mean nuking Jerusalem, the site of a semi-important mosque.

So they'll have to store their weapons somewhere else.

>>>the land would be radioactive and unlivable for several years.

More insurance that the Jews will never return.

>>>Tehran and probably most of Iran would be nuked in retaliation.

Not if you do it right.

>>>nuking Israel would remove the scapegoat of choice for most of the Middle East's >>>dictators.

No shortage of scapegoats for that ilk.

@HS: "I still think that the United States has the ability to take away Iran’s enriched uranium and Iran's capacity for enriching more of the stuff."

I'm still waiting for a well reasoned explanation of how we'll go about doing this, and how we'll handle the inevitable consequences.

There's a term for acting impulsively and not thinking about consequences. It's called "low future time orientation." You might have heard of it :-)

It would be worth it if the US gave a huge every Israeli a condo in Florida in exchange for leaving Israel. How much would that cost compared to the aid we send them every year? Won't ever happen, though.

I predict that Iran isn't going to do shit, but why are you so emotionally invested in Israel, HS?

"I've actually pointed this out to anti-semites - that the destruction of Israel means millions of Jewish refugees in the US, and that they should therefore be more Zionist than Theodore Herzl. But they are too hostile towards Jews to think rationally about this."

How would Jewish refugees be able to enter the United States by the millions in a very short period? This is a country half way around the world. Sure, Somalis entered the US as refugees in large numbers over the course of several years (after the UN urged their relocation), but certainly not by the millions.

Is this a tacit admission that, yes, maybe the Israel lobby really does have a tremendous hold on our decision making and that Jews would actually be able to pull this off? If so, I'm glad to see someone finally admit it.

As a former enlisted man, I am tired of American Jews wanting to send our military to fight wars for their co-ethnics across the ocean. It's especially obnoxious when Jews themselves fail to serve in any significant numbers in that military.

"Of course we do. At not much greater cost or danger than the yearly Red Flag exercises held over Nevada."

And how would we do that?

The poster makes the point that even if the Iranian nuclear program is stopped, that Israel will be nuked anyway. Many of the most senior people in the Pakistani military would like to see a nuke dropped on Israel. In fact, an Israeli attack on Iran will only make Israel less popular and more likely to be attacked by a Pakistani nuke.

Putting it another way - there are plenty of rich people in the mideast that have already sponsored Pakistani generals by setting up the extended family of the general in a nice set of homes in Dubai or Malaysia. A Pakistani general that looks the other way while bin laden takes a few of his weapons away may figure he will get away with it so long as he is very very rich and is living in a country that will believe him when he says bin laden caught him off guard.

The exact specifics don't really matter - the point is we are or will be in a world where muslims have hundreds of nuclear devices. It is certain that a few of them will be used on Isreal

Sigma, you were wrong on Iraq. Why? You thought they had nuclear weapons when in fact they had large piles of dirt. Do you frequently mistake piles of dirt for nuclear bombs?

How can anyone be sure you aren't wrong on Iran for exactly the same reason(s)?

Recognizing hbd includes recognizing that European Jews are several standard deviations more neurotic than whites. Instead of evacuating the Israelis, it would be cheaper to give all the US Ashkenazim decent anti-anxiety medication.

[HS: Colin Powell deceived me with his fake evidence. If I had all the resources of the CIA available to me, I'm sure I"d make better decisions than the present or former presidents.]

"Why don't we build the framework here for the evacuation of the Jews of Israel to the USA"

This has already been thought out by Stephan Kinsella: "New Israel".

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/kinsella5.html

The Israelis could move to various countries.
Some could go to Australia, to Canada, to the US, to Brazil. In the past, other ethnic groups have immigrated to Canada en mass. For example Doukhobors, and Hutterites, Mennonites.

Israelis who are into farming could buy up land on the Canadian Prairies. Cold winters, it is true, but no Palistinians lobbing missles at them. Besides, with global warming, who knows? I think Canada would be lucky to get some new agriculturists who are educated and well-to-do.

If the Jews abanoned Israel, the Palistinians would move in and loot everthing. Once they had sold everything they could for scrap (wire and pipes, etc) they would probably continue to live much as they do presently--having huge families that they can't support and teaching them to hate Jews and westerners. They would no doubt continue to blame the Jews for all their problems even if the Jews were gone, much as people in Zimbabwe still blame the British colonists for their woes.

"What exactly do you have against American aggression? I can't figure out why people care about what we do overseas? If you want to complain about loses of civil liberties, that I can understand, but what do you care if we're expanding American power overseas?

Seriously, WTF?"

Putting aside moral considerations, where do you think the government gets its money to invade, rebuild and occupy the world?

The US Army is the biggest welfare queen that there is. And they don't push American interests, but the same PC agenda the rest of the government does. "There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states," Wesley Clark said as he led the aggression against Serbia. NATO would've bombed Russia too by now for being un-PC if they couldn't fight back.

I love the "nuke all the Muslims" comments, they are truly awesome. Before we nuke everyone, I say we fly all those who support that idea to Iran. Then we will dig a big ditch, and line up some Muslim women and children there. Then we'll hand you your choice of weapons and you and your like-minded friends kill these people and throw them in said ditch. They're going to die anyway in a nuclear blast, so you might as well show everyone how serious and supportive you are.

Of course we'll record your moment of victory in HD, maybe post it to YouTube. Maybe we'll have a small screening in your home town where you introduce the clip, just like movie starts do when they promote their movies. I'm sure some of the brave and serious commenters here will jump at such an opportunity. Right?

"I've actually pointed this out to anti-semites - that the destruction of Israel means millions of Jewish refugees in the US..."

Why would these non-citizens be coming here? I am sure that a big chunk are former US residents who moved to Israel and they'd be welcome back, but why do we automatically assume that a bunch of Russians, French of Ethopian jews should be imported to the US?

More interesting question would be is what would be the public psyche if this happened? I think Israel has a couple of subs so assume that they get off a few bombs too, but essentially all the dust settles and Israel is gone is Iran is still there. Is it all just a fait accompli and we pass some meaningless sanctions and go on with our lives in the new world order?

Is it good for the gentiles?


"I am tired of American Jews wanting to send our military to fight wars for their co-ethnics across the ocean."

A majority of American Jews oppose the US attacking Iran.

what makes you think the Iranian nukes are for Israel? They could just as easily be meant for Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Iran is the only Shiite-ruled nation in the Middle East, and Pakistan and Saudi are in the hands of virulent anti-Shiite Sunnis. And Pakistan already has nukes.

Not to mention that the Taliban is also in the neighborhood, and they are even more virulently anti-Shiite than Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, plus they may be in a position to get access to Pakistan's nukes at some point.

The history of Sunni and Shiite rivalry is pretty ugly if anyone would care to research it.

"A majority of American Jews oppose the US attacking Iran."

Thank God for that much.

"More interesting question would be is what would be the public psyche if this happened? I think Israel has a couple of subs so assume that they get off a few bombs too, but essentially all the dust settles and Israel is gone is Iran is still there. Is it all just a fait accompli and we pass some meaningless sanctions and go on with our lives in the new world order?"

Yes, Israel has subs that carry nukes. Its non-sub nuke capacity is sheltered deep and it is unlikely the Iranians would be able to serious cripple it.

In the extremely unlikely event that Iran did attempt something, the US should, of course, wipe Iran off the map. Israel should reserve its last strike nukes for Mecca, Medina, Damascus, Riyadh, Khartoum, Tripoli and Beirut. All Shia holy cities in Iran should be included in any strike by the US or Israel. The bargain should be simple: if you attack us, we'll annihilate all of the important sites in the Muslim world and the major population centers of all of our opponents' nations.

Iran should also be made to understand that any nuclear attack on Israel, regardless of its origin, will be met with retaliation on Iran.

I can't believe the amount of Islam-will-Conquer-the-World panty piddling paranoia that has infested this site. It's funny, just over eight years ago the mere mention of "Islamic military might" would provoke widespread laughter.

Peter

Peter- I think your thinking needs to be updated with the results from the 2006 Lebanon war.

>Why would these non-citizens be coming here? I am sure that a big chunk are former US residents who moved to Israel and they'd be welcome back, but why do we automatically assume that a bunch of Russians, French of Ethopian jews should be imported to the US?

Do you really think the US isn't going to let the Jews in if Israel is nuked? What politicians would cross the Jews in that situation? Most gentiles would also feel sympathy for the Jews, so what's in it for politicians to oppose Jewish immigration? The only scenario in which Jews aren't allowed to immigrate after Israel gets nuked is one in which Kevin MacDonald won a stunning upset in a presidential election.

>Is this a tacit admission that, yes, maybe the Israel lobby really does have a tremendous hold on our decision making and that Jews would actually be able to pull this off? If so, I'm glad to see someone finally admit it.

The sky is blue, the Jews are powerful.

>What about buying a strip of land in Brazil for them?

Excepting some hardcore settler types, I think most Israelis would prefer to live in diaspora in a country where there are jobs and money than in some undeveloped jungle mini-Israel.

Damascus, Riyadh, Khartoum, Tripoli and Beirut.
----------------------------------------------
Pay attention. The Iranians are not going to really care if those cities are hit, except for Beirut, where Hezbollah is. In fact, they'd probably cheer if Riyadh were hit.

About the idea that Iran can't get away with nuking Israel - Iran will be the second Islamic country to become a nuclear power. After we let both Iran and Pakistan (and North Korea) get nukes, what makes you think it'll stop there? Next it'll be Syria, then maybe Iraq, and whoever else decides that they want to play with the big boys.

So, if there are 4 or 5 Islamic nuclear powers, how is Israel going to know which one nuked them? If the bomb is smuggled in rather than sent on a missile, they won't. Does Israel have the will or the second-strike capability to nuke all of them at the same time? If that's so now, will it be if liberals ever win elections in Israel?

And, as for the idea that calculating Islamic officials will find it against their interests to nuke Israel, even if that's true, but leaders aren't always calculating and rational. Even if the current leaders aren't dangerous fanatics, maybe the next ones will - none of these countries are particularly stable. If the 1980 version of Iran had had nukes, they probably would have used them.

And how good will the security at their nuclear facilities be? Might it not be possible for some colonel who happens to be a fanatic to divert some nukes to some of his buddies, even if the leaders don't want to use them?

"A more likely scenario is that Iran gives the bomb to some proxy group to use, so that they can plausibly deny responsibility if necessary."

Yeah, that's really likely. I mean, everyone else who built nuclear bombs handed 'em out like candy. I hear France gave Jerry Lewis a few kilotons just cuz he's funny. Hell, SAC gave me a strategic warhead for my bday once.

"A majority of American Jews oppose the US attacking Iran."

Thank G_d someone has some fucking sense.

Peter: "funny, just over eight years ago the mere mention of "Islamic military might" would provoke widespread laughter."

Funny, just over eight years ago, no Islamic nation had nukes. Now one has a bunch, one is close, and several others are emboldened and trying hard.

I reject panty piddling paranoia, but considering that the West was thrown into a tizzy by a few guys armed with pocket knives, I think it is reasonable to feel at least some concern.

I know some Iranians, and the ones I know are a lot of fun. One of them is a very lovely, classy female. It would be sad to see millions of Iranians killed as collateral damage. They are famously "laid back" and "easy going" people personally.

However, if AhmadiniNUTJOB keeps attempting to enrich weapons grade uranium while making public statements to the effect that Israel will be "destroyed", then he will have brought the destruction upon himself. Israel has a moral right to pre-emptively defend herself if any regime is cooking up weapons specifically for a first strike on her. What is such a shame, is that if Iran had a sensible leader and the mullahs were not close to being in power, Israel and the rest of the world probably would not mind seeing Iran having nuclear energy capacity. This is not possible with a -real- extremist like Mahmoud Ahmadinijad at the helm and the mullahs behind him. I hope Iran is led by more reasonable people in ensuing decades.

I can't believe the amount of Islam-will-Conquer-the-World panty piddling paranoia that has infested this site. It's funny, just over eight years ago the mere mention of "Islamic military might" would provoke widespread laughter.

I've said it before and I'll say it again for the benefit of meathead schmucks like Peter. I hope you have that day off. If not, jump, it'll be quicker than burning alive:

http://www.adjunct.diodon349.com/Attack_on_USA/wtc_jumpers.htm

"Pay attention. The Iranians are not going to really care if those cities are hit, except for Beirut, where Hezbollah is. In fact, they'd probably cheer if Riyadh were hit."

It doesn't matter. Some of the comments of Iranian officials have implied that the Muslim world would pay no significant price if Israel were nuked. It needs to be made clear to those that might share such an opinion that they will personally pay a significant price.

"I've said it before and I'll say it again for the benefit of meathead schmucks like Peter. I hope you have that day off. If not, jump, it'll be quicker than burning alive:

http://www.adjunct.diodon349.com/Attack_on_USA/wtc_jumpers.htm"

Yeah, those people who did that are monsters. We all know that the humane kill by dropping bombs on buildings, not flying planes into them.

"Do you really think the US isn't going to let the Jews in if Israel is nuked? What politicians would cross the Jews in that situation? Most gentiles would also feel sympathy for the Jews, so what's in it for politicians to oppose Jewish immigration?"

If they were evacuating from an area that was under nuclear attack, no one would have an issue taking then in as refuges.

The question is in advance of any hostilities, would you be willing to take in a flood of people who have no ties to this country, may not speak the language and have only manual agricultural skills.

Lets suppose Iran test a weapon in November and a million people want to get out of the Middle East- what should we do? BTW- a lot Arabs may want to get out to. How do you discriminate against them?

[HS: I've been told that nearly all Israelis can speak English. They have skills beyond manual agriculture laborers. And the entire Jewish population is Israel is less than the number of "Latinos" we let into the country over a period of a few years.]

Not normal HS but it does fit his prurient conspiracy bent:
http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/09/27/2009-09-27_john_edwards_exmistress_rielle_hunter_targeted_by_elizabeth_edwards_in_blog_comm.html

Elizabeth Edwards has been posting to the Internet under the pseudo Cherubim. I knew in the past that she posted to far out wacko site DemocraticUnderground so this in character.

Sample of stuff out there:
http://www.bloggernews.net/119043
Her trying to gin up support after the election for Edwards to be some sort of special economic liason for Obama.

"Yeah, that's really likely. I mean, everyone else who built nuclear bombs handed 'em out like candy. "

I didn't say it's "really likely"; I said it is "more likely." Anyway, the fact is that Muslims (including secular Muslims) have much more of a Jihad mentality then non-Muslims. Do you think it's likely that Russia, in connection with invading Georgia, was likely to have launched missiles at some unpopular third country just to generate support for its actions? Doesn't seem so, and yet Iraq did exactly that back in the 1990s.

Iraq launched missiles at Israel during the Gulf War even though Israel had absolutely nothing to do with the original conflict. That's the kind of people we are dealing with here.

Oh, so when you said "more likely", you meant won't ever happen. Very true, but not worth mentioning. If you are part of the go halfway around the world to exterminate a nation crowd, you have a Jihad mentality too.

"Iraq launched missiles at Israel during the Gulf War even though Israel had absolutely nothing to do with the original conflict. That's the kind of people we are dealing with here."

And the US invaded Iraq after a bunch of Saudis crashed planes in buildings. Iran is not dealing with the most rational of enemies. I mean, you use Iraqis as examples of what Iranians are likely to do. About as reasonable as guessing American policy from Salvadoran gangbanger activity.

"Israel doesn't have to serve as a credible MAD threat by itself. The potential backlash from the world at large is more than enough."

As Israel, I would NEVER rely on the "backlash" from the "world at large" for my security. Never, never, never!

"Why does everyone give a rat's behind about Israel? Seriously, I'd like to know."

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Any country so violently hated by anti-American scum worldwide can't be all bad.

"I agree with John Standos on this, why is everybody so sure that israel will be nuked by the persians/arabs, who realize that a whole lot of their precious palestinian brethren will be wiped out together with this holy mosque on the rock?"

Because the Arabs and Persians DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE PALESTINIANS. The Arabs and Persians love to use "Palestinian suffering" as a propaganda tool to beat Israel over the head, but the Arabs and Persians give NO practical help to the Palestinians, as they easily could.

A lot of Arabs and Persians would expect the Palestinians to "take one for the team" if that meant the destruction of Israel.

"As a former enlisted man, I am tired of American Jews wanting to send our military to fight wars for their co-ethnics across the ocean. It's especially obnoxious when Jews themselves fail to serve in any significant numbers in that military."

Oh baloney. The US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan do NOT benefit Israel. These wars have weakened America and have undermined America's willpower to engage in military action in the Middle East, neither of which benefits Israel. It was OSAMA who wanted us to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, not the Israelis.

"you meant won't ever happen"

No I didn't. I meant exactly what I said, nothing more and nothing less. I realize it's easier to invent and attack strawmen then to address peoples' actual arguments. But if you do so, I will point it out.

"Iran is not dealing with the most rational of enemies."

That's true. There's a continuum of rationality and Muslims are on the weak end.

"I mean, you use Iraqis as examples of what Iranians are likely to do"

They're both Muslim countries and they both hate Israel. The fact is that the Jihadist mentality is a big part of Muslim culture.

No Arab or Persian leader really wants the destruction of Israel, get serious. The Iranian leadership's dedication to Islam is about as sincere as the late Soviet Union's or Chinese dedication to Marxism - it's a fig leaf to keep the masses in line. Speak to any Iranian - the Mullahs are as corrupt and cynical as any Brezhnev era apparatchik. I'm not sure why HS is turning his blog into a mouthpiece for silly alarmist neocon propaganda. Or at least please provide some real evidence for any of your claims about Iran's intentions.

"Unforchunately we're entering a period where more and more States will have Nuclear weapons."


CC01'

huh?

Obama just gave his "dream" speech to the UN about getting rid of all nukes. So he has spoken. So let it be done.

The obvious solution to the whole middle east mess would be to take the land presently controlled by Israel and make it the 51st and 52nd state called Israel and Palestine. Iran, or any other nation, wouldn't dare attack it (but terrorists would), the exact location of the border wouldn't matter much. Freedom of religion would be guaranteed. The US could do whatever it wanted militarily from there. American Christians like Robertson and Palin would be thrilled.

"The US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan do NOT benefit Israel."

So?

"These wars have weakened America and have undermined America's willpower to engage in military action in the Middle East, neither of which benefits Israel."

Yeah, I'm sure that was the goal of nation-building neocons inside and out of the Bush administration: lets weaken American ability to act in the Middle East.

"It was OSAMA who wanted us to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, not the Israelis."

Osama wanted us to invade Iraq?

Presuming Israeli Jews are not as leftist as their average American counterpart, I think we should take them if all in it came to that, as I imagine it would be a net benefit to the country. Certainly more so than taking all these people from corrupt stinkhole Southern Hemisphere countries on "diversity visas".

Canada and Australia would probably take some too. Germany would pretty much HAVE to take them, not that any of them would want to go there. They probably wouldn't want to go anywhere in Europe, as Islamicized as that continent is becoming.

cjwynes - most ambitious Israelis have already left. The Boston area is full of Israelis, so is Germany (ironically). Israel is an economic and cultural backwater. This is an issue the mainstream media rarely addresses. Unless you are full of religious fervor, or are a Russian immigrant who can't get into the US or Germany, why would you stay in Israel? Patriotism is fine, but most people put the future of their children first. And if Obama starts putting the brakes on US subsidies to Israel then the situation there is just going to get worse. You're talking about a country with almost no natural resources, no real geographic advantages and hostile neighbors, plus facing a demographic threat from the Palestinians. Ambitious Israeli Jews are already voting with their feet, and any English speaking Israeli knows he/she can get into the US quite easily. Iran would be idiotic to bomb Israel, the country has no long term future that I can see.

"Yes, there are Muslims living amongst the Israelis, and they too will die in the attacks, but from the Iranian perpsective they will be martyrs in the cause of ridding the Middle East of the Jews "

You example is bad because there are more Jews living in Iran than in any other Middle Eastern nation. If Iran wanted to "kill all the Jews," why would they allow so many of them to live amongst them?

We could turn the bottom half of New York state and possibly the upper half of New Jersey in to a semi-autonomous 'Jewish nation' within the larger USA. Millions of Jews already live within that area of the USA, and addition of a few million more fleeing Israeli Jews wouldn't be too difficult.

I wouldn't let millions of Jews just flood in to USA and settle all over the place though. Many Americans are increasingly anti-Semitic, and that is likely to get even worse rather than better over the next few decades as the USA becomes increasingly unstable demographically and likely economically.

"Osama wanted us to invade Iraq?"

No, but he did want us to drop the sanctions on Iraq, which we did after we invaded. So he got that much at least. And we pulled our troops out of Saudi Arabia -- so he really got two out of three of his initial issues resolved, if you think about it. The third issue was Israel.

"Germany would pretty much HAVE to take them, not that any of them would want to go there."

Germany has actually received a non-trivial number of Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union.

Sabril,

You said Iran giving away nuclear bombs was more likely than something that's as likely as Jeebus and the Toothfairy having a kickboxing match. "More likely" than impossible to likely is a huge range.

Is Iran giving away nuclear bombs just stoopid-silly? or is it 1 in a billion, 1 in a thousand? Are you already cowering under your bed already?

"No, but he did want us to drop the sanctions on Iraq, which we did after we invaded."

Here is what bin Laden actually said:

"First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples. (1)
If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.


Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation. (2)
So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors.


Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula."

I don't see how you can argue that a full scale invasion of Iraq led to the resolution of Osama's complaints about Iraq. Osama was upset by what he perceived as American aggression in Iraq. Going from sanctions to war was hardly an improvement.

I doubt Osama's goal of removing the infidels from Saudi Arabia was really achieved either. Osama hates the Saudi royal family and assumes that it is only in power with American support.

Finally, I doubt that waging a bunch of wars in Muslim lands did anything to alleviate Osama's fears that the US was trying to splinter the Arab world on behalf of Israel.

I would say Osama is achieved somewhere between zero and one of his three objectives, and his third objective didn't speak to the issue of al-Qaeda attacking Israel directly.

"The US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan do NOT benefit Israel."

So?

[So your Jew-hating idea that "the Jews" sent our forces to fight wars for Israel's benefit is stupid and wrong.]

"These wars have weakened America and have undermined America's willpower to engage in military action in the Middle East, neither of which benefits Israel."

Yeah, I'm sure that was the goal of nation-building neocons inside and out of the Bush administration: lets weaken American ability to act in the Middle East.

[Gee, ya think those wars worked out just like they intended? The actual outcome, protracted insurgency that weakens America, is totally different from what the neocon dumbasses expected, which was that Iraqis would welcome their liberators and Iraq would be easily transformed into a shining beacon of freedom and prosperity. Duh.]

Osama wanted us to invade Iraq?

[Yes. The strategy was to provoke America into occupying Muslim countries in order to enrage the world's Muslims and to bog the US down in protracted guerrilla war.]

"Is Iran giving away nuclear bombs just stoopid-silly? or is it 1 in a billion, 1 in a thousand? Are you already cowering under your bed already?"

I would put it in the 10 to 15 percent range.

"Israel is an economic and cultural backwater."

Nonsense. In the space of two generations it has gone from a third world home for refugees to a first world economy, with world-renowned scientists, artists, writers, etc. It's economy is doing better than ours right now.

[So your Jew-hating idea that "the Jews" sent our forces to fight wars for Israel's benefit is stupid and wrong.]

Stop with with the ADL/neocon knee-jerk responses of "Jew hating."

Did I say that "the Jews had sent our forces to fight in Iraq on Israel's behalf?" No, I did not. I said that I'm tired of those American Jews who WANT to use American military force on Israel's behalf.

I believe Bush had it out for Saddam Hussein since before he was elected president. Remember his bizarre warning to Saddam not to interfere in the Bush-Gore battle? Bush wanted Saddam removed for personal reasons, and I believe Bush would have went to war regardless of what others in his administration advised.

But I also believe that many neoconservatives in the administration and in the media, primarily Jews with an emotional attachment to Israel, saw this as a golden opportunity to engage in starry-eyed nation-building in the Middle East. These people worked hard to sell the war to other officials and to the American people.

Why are these people so invested in nation-building in the Mideast as opposed to, say, Africa? Only one guess and it isn't petroleum.

Fred,

Please name an Israeli scientist,writer or artist who is world class and actually lives and works in Israel. Or name a world class Israeli business. Finland or Sweden put Israel to shame, not to mention the countless accomplishments of America's, the UK's or France's Jewish populations. At what point do we recognize that the Zionist experiment has been a horrible failure? It hasn't made Jews safer nor has it made any real contributions to Jewish cultural life. I would argue the existence of Israel has actually helped undermine Ashkenazi culture in a way that would have made the Nazis or Stalin proud. Where 60 years ago Jews had their own proud vital literary European language - Yiddish, now they make do with a bastardized version of an archaic tribal language 3000 years old. And Sephardic Jews have suffered even worse fates - the once vital Jewish communities of Alexandria, Baghdad, Damascus, Istanbul, and Teheran are ghost towns - and it was the Israel experiment that helped make this happen. Israel is slowly turning its own Jews into pseudo-Arabs - in terms of temperament and tolerance for corruption Israelis are already far more "Middle Eastern" than Western Jews. How is that a good thing? What real benefits has the existence of Israel brought to anyone? Can you name any concrete way by which Israel has actually made the world a better place for Jews or Americans?

Stop with with the ADL/neocon knee-jerk responses of "Jew hating."

[It was not a knee-jerk response, it was a specific response to your inane comment that you were "tired of American Jews wanting to send our military to fight wars for their co-ethnics across the ocean. It's especially obnoxious when Jews themselves fail to serve in any significant numbers in that military." I am neither Jewish nor a neocon, but this remark is obviously Jew-hating.]

Did I say that "the Jews had sent our forces to fight in Iraq on Israel's behalf?" No, I did not.

[Yes you did, in the remark I quoted above. How else should we interpret your statement that "I am tired of American Jews wanting to send our military to fight wars for their co-ethnics across the ocean"?]

I also believe that many neoconservatives in the administration and in the media, primarily Jews with an emotional attachment to Israel, saw this as a golden opportunity to engage in starry-eyed nation-building in the Middle East. These people worked hard to sell the war to other officials and to the American people.

[In short, you are again claiming that the Jews sent our forces to fight in Iraq on Israel's behalf, and again I call this a stupid, wrong, Jew-hating idea.]

Why are these people so invested in nation-building in the Mideast as opposed to, say, Africa? Only one guess and it isn't petroleum.

[Of course it is petroleum. If the Middle East didn't have petroleum they wouldn't care about it at all, just like they don't care about Africa.]

The comments to this entry are closed.