• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

justabubba said:
we see this today. the Palestinians recognize if they stand down they will be run over. only by exercising their military options can they cause israel to want to negotiate to return the land it took and upon which it is now building
Click to expand...

Wait. Are you justifying 'military action' by Hamas against Israel.
 
EagleAye said:
No they aren't. Israel never signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty. They had nukes before it was created.
Click to expand...

yes, israel wants the UN to enforce against iran a treaty that israel refuses to sign
 
justabubba said:
yes, israel wants the UN to enforce against iran a treaty that israel refuses to sign
Click to expand...

So should the whole treaty (with its many signatories) be null and void because Israel refuses to sign it?

I don't think worldwide treaties should revolve around what only Israel agrees or disagrees with, do you?
 
EagleAye said:
So should the whole treaty (with its many signatories) be null and void because Israel refuses to sign it?

I don't think worldwide treaties should revolve around what only Israel agrees or disagrees with, do you?
Click to expand...

No, but international pressure should have been placed on Israel to sign it. I.e. no support from the U.S. unless the treaty is signed.
 
Well, if Israel refused to sign it, they should get no benefit or protection from it, right?


Let 'em all have nukes. Even the playing field.

(Don't really mean that. Just trying to make a point.)
 
TheNextEra said:
No, but international pressure should have been placed on Israel to sign it. I.e. no support from the U.S. unless the treaty is signed.
Click to expand...

Well that's a separate issue isn't it? Iran DID sign the NPT, and now the IAEA has indications that Iran has violated it. If Iran has not done so, then they should allow IAEA inspectors to verify this, which is NOT what Iran is doing now. The latest inspection tour ended up being talks only, no inspections allowed. It hardly inspires confidence in Iran's alleged peaceful intent.
 
EagleAye said:
Well that's a separate issue isn't it? Iran DID sign the NPT, and now the IAEA has indications that Iran has violated it. If Iran has not done so, then they should allow IAEA inspectors to verify this, which is NOT what Iran is doing now. The latest inspection tour ended up being talks only, no inspections allowed. It hardly inspires confidence in Iran's alleged peaceful intent.
Click to expand...
and you are spot on
as far as you have gone

what you have not wandered into is the question about why ISRAEL - a nation which refuses to cooperate internationally with nuclear non-proliferation - should be listened to about its concerns that iran is failing to cooperate with UN's enforcement of the NPT

israel, because of its on intransigence, should be a voice unheard in this discussion

just as we need to force iran's compliance, we similarly need to do the same for israel. not respond to its concerns that another nation in the region is on the cusp of doing what it has done. expand the construction of nuclear weapons
 
justabubba said:
and you are spot on
as far as you have gone

what you have not wandered into is the question about why ISRAEL - a nation which refuses to cooperate internationally with nuclear non-proliferation - should be listened to about its concerns that iran is failing to cooperate with UN's enforcement of the NPT

israel, because of its on intransigence, should be a voice unheard in this discussion

just as we need to force iran's compliance, we similarly need to do the same for israel. not respond to its concerns that another nation in the region is on the cusp of doing what it has done. expand the construction of nuclear weapons
Click to expand...

Since Israel has not signed the treaty, no one has a legal recourse to force Israel to reveal it's nuclear secrets. If we were to "force" Israel to sign the NPT, It would be under duress. I think, legally, that would nullify the agreement. So that's a "no go" as well, unless you believe that's an acceptable way to handle treaties. I doubt you do.

I really think that it's important to stay on point here. Can we at least agree the world doesn't need any more nuclear weapons? I expect you'll agree to that, and for the moment (until you say you want more nukes), I'll presume you do. By constantly re-directing the issue from Iran to Israel, you are giving defacto acceptance to Iran obtaining nuclear weaponry, claiming Israel as an excuse. Perhaps this isn't your intent, but it still has that effect. If Israel has nukes, they have them, but what we are trying to do in the current situation is not allow a country to make any more. If we persist in going backward all the time, we'll never manage to go forward. What I propose, is that we stay on point and concentrate on Iran. By this means, we can go forward and prevent any more nuclear weapons. I think less nukes is better than more nukes, don't you?
 
EagleAye said:
Since Israel has not signed the treaty, no one has a legal recourse to force Israel to reveal it's nuclear secrets. If we were to "force" Israel to sign the NPT, It would be under duress. I think, legally, that would nullify the agreement. So that's a "no go" as well, unless you believe that's an acceptable way to handle treaties. I doubt you do.

I really think that it's important to stay on point here. Can we at least agree the world doesn't need any more nuclear weapons? I expect you'll agree to that, and for the moment (until you say you want more nukes), I'll presume you do. By constantly re-directing the issue from Iran to Israel, you are giving defacto acceptance to Iran obtaining nuclear weaponry, claiming Israel as an excuse. Perhaps this isn't your intent, but it still has that effect. If Israel has nukes, they have them, but what we are trying to do in the current situation is not allow a country to make any more. If we persist in going backward all the time, we'll never manage to go forward. What I propose, is that we stay on point and concentrate on Iran. By this means, we can go forward and prevent any more nuclear weapons. I think less nukes is better than more nukes, don't you?
Click to expand...
while i would prefer iran would not make nuclear arms i understand why it needs to do so
because israel - which tends to make unprovoked "preemptive" strikes into the sovereign territory of other nations possesses a cache of nuclear arms
ideally, israel gives its nuclear weapons up so that iran no longer feels compelled to match it in a race to achieve nuclear parity/Mutually Assured Destruction

once iran has the nuclear weaponry in its own arsenal, then israel will no longer feel free to blast other nations such as iran and its allies, with impunity
israel does not want to have its military wings clipped. which is why it is banging the war drums to try to get the USA on board to bless (and assist) its efforts to take out iran's nuclear development assets

recognizing that israel will not be inclined to relinquish its nuclear weapons i would propose that we GIVE iran one. that's all it needs to establish a MAD scenario. if we were wise enough to do this, iran would have no need to develop its own nuclear capacity. one which we can be assured will exceed a singular device

and recognizing that we are not going to provide that one N weapon to iran, that state is off on a tear to produce its own
don't like it. but certainly understand it. if i were an iranian and saw what israel does to the Palestinians and other arabs, i would also expect my country to develop whatever weaponry would keep israel at bay

the government of israel - to distinguish from the nation and population of israel - is a cancer in the region. it needs to be dealt with
hopefully, next week, Obama will begin that journey with bibi
 
justabubba said:
while i would prefer iran would not make nuclear arms i understand why it needs to do so
because israel - which tends to make unprovoked "preemptive" strikes into the sovereign territory of other nations possesses a cache of nuclear arms
ideally, israel gives its nuclear weapons up so that iran no longer feels compelled to match it in a race to achieve nuclear parity/Mutually Assured Destruction

once iran has the nuclear weaponry in its own arsenal, then israel will no longer feel free to blast other nations such as iran and its allies, with impunity
israel does not want to have its military wings clipped. which is why it is banging the war drums to try to get the USA on board to bless (and assist) its efforts to take out iran's nuclear development assets
Click to expand...


I think this is the most logical statement of the situation I have seen expressed in this thread. Well done! Until there is nuclear parity between Israel and Iran, Israel has no incentive to negotiate a peaceful coexistence with its neighbors.
 
justabubba said:
while i would prefer iran would not make nuclear arms i understand why it needs to do so
because israel - which tends to make unprovoked "preemptive" strikes into the sovereign territory of other nations possesses a cache of nuclear arms
ideally, israel gives its nuclear weapons up so that iran no longer feels compelled to match it in a race to achieve nuclear parity/Mutually Assured Destruction

and recognizing that we are not going to provide that one N weapon to iran, that state is off on a tear to produce its own
don't like it. but certainly understand it. if i were an iranian and saw what israel does to the Palestinians and other arabs, i would also expect my country to develop whatever weaponry would keep israel at bay

the government of israel - to distinguish from the nation and population of israel - is a cancer in the region. it needs to be dealt with
hopefully, next week, Obama will begin that journey with bibi
Click to expand...

The Hamas in Gaza has a habit of launching Katyusha rockets into Israel, predictably, Israel responds with airstrikes. The Hezbollah kidnapped an Israeli soldier and refused diplomatic attempts to return him, and Hezbollah also launched Katyusha rockets into Israel. Predictably, Israel attacks into Lebanon. The line of cause and effect is extremely linear and easy to follow.

Looking from the opposite direction, the Palestinians in the West Bank have tried to cooperate with Israel and police themselves. Predictably, Israel has NOT launched airstrikes there in a long time. Iran has NOT launched rockets, missiles, or airstrikes at Israel. Predictably, Israel has NOT launched airstrikes at Iran. Once again, the line of cause and effect is extremely linear and easy to follow.

The moral of the story is astoundingly clear. Don't strike Israel, and Israel will NOT strike you. Iran has nothing to fear from Israel so long as they do not attack Israel. Consequently, nuclear weapons are not necessary either. All Iran must do is NOT attack anyone else. Understanding that this peaceful approach is predictably effective, anyone claiming they need nukes to defend themselves from Israel, especially when Israel has NOT attacked them yet, must certainly have ulterior motives.
 
justabubba said:
...................................

the government of israel - to distinguish from the nation and population of israel - is a cancer in the region. it needs to be dealt with
hopefully, next week, Obama will begin that journey with bibi
Click to expand...


You know, I really try to keep an open mind to other people's opinions.... but when I start reading those kind of words like "Israel is a cancer" or "Israel is a tumor" etc... I can not take anything said in that context seriously.


That's exactly like Ayatollah Khomeini from Iran sounds.
 
Mya said:
You know, I really try to keep an open mind to other people's opinions.... but when I start reading those kind of words like "Israel is a cancer" or "Israel is a tumor" etc... I can not take anything said in that context seriously.


That's exactly like Ayatollah Khomeini from Iran sounds.
Click to expand...

did you notice the overt effort to distinguish the fine people and nation of israel from his cancerous government
and to evidence the symmetry which exists that is also true of iran. the nation and the people are first rate. the iranian government - like israel's - needs replacing
 
EagleAye said:
The Hamas in Gaza has a habit of launching Katyusha rockets into Israel, predictably, Israel responds with airstrikes. The Hezbollah kidnapped an Israeli soldier and refused diplomatic attempts to return him, and Hezbollah also launched Katyusha rockets into Israel. Predictably, Israel attacks into Lebanon. The line of cause and effect is extremely linear and easy to follow.

Looking from the opposite direction, the Palestinians in the West Bank have tried to cooperate with Israel and police themselves. Predictably, Israel has NOT launched airstrikes there in a long time. Iran has NOT launched rockets, missiles, or airstrikes at Israel. Predictably, Israel has NOT launched airstrikes at Iran. Once again, the line of cause and effect is extremely linear and easy to follow.

The moral of the story is astoundingly clear. Don't strike Israel, and Israel will NOT strike you. Iran has nothing to fear from Israel so long as they do not attack Israel. Consequently, nuclear weapons are not necessary either. All Iran must do is NOT attack anyone else. Understanding that this peaceful approach is predictably effective, anyone claiming they need nukes to defend themselves from Israel, especially when Israel has NOT attacked them yet, must certainly have ulterior motives.
Click to expand...

iran has not initiated hostilities against another nation in 200 years
pity we cannot say that about israel for 200 MONTHS
 
justabubba said:
did you notice the overt effort to distinguish the fine people and nation of israel from his cancerous government
and to evidence the symmetry which exists that is also true of iran. the nation and the people are first rate. the iranian government - like israel's - needs replacing
Click to expand...


I still think using those words is inflammatory and disrespectful. I am sorry but that's the way I feel.
 
Mya said:
I still think using those words is inflammatory and disrespectful. I am sorry but that's the way I feel.
Click to expand...

you need to read up on the ignore function
i recommend it to you
 
Mya said:
You know, I really try to keep an open mind to other people's opinions.... but when I start reading those kind of words like "Israel is a cancer" or "Israel is a tumor" etc... I can not take anything said in that context seriously.


That's exactly like Ayatollah Khomeini from Iran sounds.
Click to expand...

Actually, your post sounds like the same misinterpretation of what Iran said.
 
justabubba said:
you need to read up on the ignore function
i recommend it to you
Click to expand...



It should not be necessary to ignore another member of this great Forum, but unfortunately if he spews out fundamentalist, inflammatory, garbage then he should be ignored not only by myself but by everybody,
 
Mya said:
It should not be necessary to ignore another member of this great Forum, but unfortunately if he spews out fundamentalist, inflammatory, garbage then he should be ignored not only by myself but by everybody,
Click to expand...

You know, I really try to keep an open mind to other people's opinions.... but when I start reading those kind of words like "Israel is a cancer" or "Israel is a tumor" etc... I can not take anything said in that context seriously.
Click to expand...

Israel's government has done good things?
Has our government?
 
justabubba said:
iran has not initiated hostilities against another nation in 200 years
pity we cannot say that about israel for 200 MONTHS
Click to expand...

Pity that we must say Israel has been under attack within the last 4 DAYS.

Gazans fire rockets at South under storm’s cover
02/18/2012 12:35

Two other rockets from Gaza hit the South, explode in open fields;

On Saturday, a Grad-type rocket was launched in the direction of the Negev’s largest city, Beersheba, triggering air raid sirens. Two other rockets exploded in fields in the farming districts of the western Negev.

Two rockets exploded in the Eshkol farming region of, hitting open fields, according to police.

Last week, Ashkelon Regional Council head Yair Farjun told The Jerusalem Post that Israel could not “tolerate” endless rocket attacks on civilians.
Click to expand...
Gazans fire rockets at South under storm
 
Mya said:
It should not be necessary to ignore another member of this great Forum, but unfortunately if he spews out fundamentalist, inflammatory, garbage then he should be ignored not only by myself but by everybody,
Click to expand...

You are not a believer in freedom of speech, eh?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom