It wasn't the Arabs who were going to ambush him; this was going to be another opportunity for Obama to kick Israel in the cojones.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa: Everybody knows Israel has nuclear weapons, but Israel has never officially acknowledged their existence. Until that happens, they cannot be a part of any nuclear non-use or non-proliferation treaties. Do you see that as a good thing?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
BlackBlade, yes. Of all the nations on the planet, Israel is the one that can be trusted not to use them unless completely pushed the wall. You've seen the pressure and attacks that've been directed at Israel even since we've had nukes, and even that hasn't been enough to get us to use them.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is there a particular reason NOT to announce you have nukes? I mean, I thought the whole point of having nukes (in this day and age) was as a deterrant.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: BlackBlade, yes. Of all the nations on the planet, Israel is the one that can be trusted not to use them unless completely pushed the wall. You've seen the pressure and attacks that've been directed at Israel even since we've had nukes, and even that hasn't been enough to get us to use them.
I have a very favorable view of Israel presently, but why not commit that course of action to paper? By doing so it flies in the face of countries that intentionally spread lies about your intentions, thus making them less listened to, and less able to create conflict.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The difficulty with a theocracy with nukes is that "God works in mysterious ways" and could at any time decide that it's OK for his chosen people to nuke the infidels.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:The difficulty with a theocracy with nukes is that "God works in mysterious ways" and could at any time decide that it's OK for his chosen people to nuke the infidels.
Which is precisely the reason Israel requires nuclear weapons as a foundation of its policy, actually.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: BlackBlade, yes. Of all the nations on the planet, Israel is the one that can be trusted not to use them unless completely pushed the wall. You've seen the pressure and attacks that've been directed at Israel even since we've had nukes, and even that hasn't been enough to get us to use them.
I have a very favorable view of Israel presently, but why not commit that course of action to paper? By doing so it flies in the face of countries that intentionally spread lies about your intentions, thus making them less listened to, and less able to create conflict.
Oh, please. All anyone would hear was Israel officially stating that it has nukes.
You have to understand... the Arabs have a really hard time grasping the way other cultures think. When Israel won't make an official statement one way or another, it carries a lot more deterrant power. Because they know what they'd do in our position. If we make an official statement that we won't use them for anything short of our utter annihilation, all that'll do is erode that deterrance (to whatever small effect it has now) for the sake of what? Begging other nations to stop believing lies?
The reason to stop believing lies is that they're lies.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: The difficulty with a theocracy with nukes is that "God works in mysterious ways" and could at any time decide that it's OK for his chosen people to nuke the infidels.
That's just dumb. Israel has a track record. So do the Arabs.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: Is there a particular reason NOT to announce you have nukes? I mean, I thought the whole point of having nukes (in this day and age) was as a deterrant.
quote: If Israel were to declare itself a nuclear weapons state, Arab countries, too, would be clamoring for freedom to produce their own nuclear weapons, and the NPT could fall apart. If the US were to openly embrace Israel's nuclear program, it would stand accused of double standards, which could erode American standing in the Arab and Muslim world even further. As such, the US and the international community would find it difficult to accord Israel any recognition and acceptance of its nuclear weapons status, as will soon be the case with India.
posted
Lisa: If you bank on ambiguity, you also have to accept that your enemies will act in ways hard to predict. If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, a large part of why they might use it against Israel is that they have no concrete reason to believe you won't. Israel has been very efficient at actively stopping nations nearby they consider threats from getting nuclear weapons (Iraq, Syria) if they get one, perhaps they have reason to believe you'd strike first so as to prevent them from striking at all.
You are right, in the sense that the mystery behind Israel and their nuclear program cows some nations into submission, but for others it just scares them into doing stupid things. Think back on the Cuban Missile Crisis, that was a prime example of how two nations keeping their methods secret from each other nearly exchanged nuclear blows. It was a major reason SALT and START could happen down the road, it was also why a phone line between the Kremlin and The White House was created.
Israel might lose some of your aforementioned mystique, but it gains support from other countries in the world, including the more rational of your former enemies. Egypt has come along way in terms of its relationship with Israel, so has Jordan. The precise reason some Arab countries were going to bring up Israel at this treaty process is precisely because they aren't going to stop purchasing nukes, when Israel has already got theirs.
Its the exact same reason Pakistan felt it needed nukes, because India was going to get them.
-----
Mucus: I'm not sure why that follows, Arab nations already KNOW Israel has nukes.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
*shrug* I don't know why, but it seems to be the case. Officially "knowing" appears to have different consequences in the UN and other international treaties from informally "knowing."
quote:In another sign of Arab disenchantment, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said Tuesday that his country will press the summit to focus on what is widely believed to be a secret nuclear weapons program in Israel and pressure it to join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
"The priority of Arab countries should be to force Israel to join the NPT and place its nuclear facilities under the IAEA guarantees," Aboul Gheit said, referring to the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency.
quote:Arab countries will walk away from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty if Israel ever officially acknowledges it has nuclear weapons, the Arab League announced in a statement Wednesday.
quote:They said that if Israel admitted to having the weapons, they would call on the UN Security Council to pressure Israel to destroy its nuclear arsenal and bring its other atomic installation under international inspection.
If this did not happen, Arab countries would leave the treaty and not sign any new one until Israel itself joined.
While no Arab country is known to be actively seeking nuclear weapons, several countries in the region have expressed interest in starting civilian nuclear programs with foreign cooperation.
posted
I see the value in Israel not coming forth and admitting it has nukes. I do not see the value in not participating in a conference aimed at reducing the threat of nuclear conflict. Other than the United States, is there a country that is more of a target for nuclear attack than Israel?
Israel should be chomping at the bit for a chance to reduce the possibility of A. Arab neighbors getting nukes, and B. Non-state actors with a grudge against Israel getting nukes.
Obama's current plan of action supports both of those things, and this conference is a means to get it as well. Surely even you, Lisa, see the value in that.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seriously. Lyrhawn, you're a little starry-eyed. I thought you were more down-to-earth than that. The idea that any kind of conference whatsoever will prevent, or even slow down, any Arab aggression is just beyond silly.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It seems from the article rivka linked that obama had no intention of ambushing Isreal. Otherwise, why would the US warn them of plans from Arab countries to make Isreal's nukes a major point?
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Seriously. Lyrhawn, you're a little starry-eyed. I thought you were more down-to-earth than that. The idea that any kind of conference whatsoever will prevent, or even slow down, any Arab aggression is just beyond silly.
Yeah. We should stop all forms of diplomacy. That'll show 'em.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Seriously. Lyrhawn, you're a little starry-eyed. I thought you were more down-to-earth than that. The idea that any kind of conference whatsoever will prevent, or even slow down, any Arab aggression is just beyond silly.
posted
In any case, Israel didn't pull out of the conference. It's just the PM who isn't going. Shame.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Seriously. Lyrhawn, you're a little starry-eyed. I thought you were more down-to-earth than that. The idea that any kind of conference whatsoever will prevent, or even slow down, any Arab aggression is just beyond silly.
I wasn't aware of the behind the scenes plotting from Middle East nations to co-opt the conference for the expressed purpose of attacking Israel. It's sort of a curious line to walk, in that there IS a double-standard at play with the West's view towards Israel having nukes, and the West's view towards others having nukes, but just because there's a double standard doesn't mean it isn't justified. Furthermore, IS it really a double standard? We don't like a lot of players in the nuclear family who have nuclear weapons, but good luck prying them away. Regardless, I guess I don't blame Netanyahu for withdrawing his attendance, and even applaud him for still sending a representative. It's unfortunate that his expertise on the matter will be lost.
Lisa -
A couple things. First off,
quote:Israeli leader dodges Obama's ambush
Doesn't seem to mix well with rivka's article:
quote:Other Israeli officials, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Obama administration had assured Netanyahu that the assembly -- attended by more than 40 world leaders -- would not divert its attention to Israel. Then, a few days later, the officials said, Washington warned Israel that eight or nine Muslim nations attending the conference would in fact seek to shine a spotlight on Israel.
So it's your contention that Obama attempted to ambush him, but was foiled when he warned him that he was being ambushed? Seriously? And then you redirect anger from Arab states towards Obama? How in any way is that an attempt to ambush him when he is forewarned of the consequences before hand? You'd have preferred it if Obama had not invited him at all?
Second,
quote:[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lisa: Seriously. Lyrhawn, you're a little starry-eyed. I thought you were more down-to-earth than that. The idea that any kind of conference whatsoever will prevent, or even slow down, any Arab aggression is just beyond silly.
I'd call it idealism, but regardless, you've misinterpreted my point. The point of the Conference isn't to get together, hold hands, and sing Kumbaya. The point of the Conference is to build a coalition and to direct that coalition's focus towards a consensus. Those who choose to place themselves outside the majority will then be prosecuted by the majority using whatever tools they deem necessary to bring them in line. So no, not by any stretch of the imagination did I think putting them all in a room would get an aggressive nation to simply change his mind. But it's a great opportunity to see where people stand and to build a larger network of nations committed to making something happen in the future. That's how international diplomacy works in the 21st century. Very, very few nations can get anything done constructively by themselves anymore.
I'm neither as naive as you think I am, nor as cynical as you are. I still think constructive actions can be taken by international partnerships under the right circumstances.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Seriously. Lyrhawn, you're a little starry-eyed. I thought you were more down-to-earth than that. The idea that any kind of conference whatsoever will prevent, or even slow down, any Arab aggression is just beyond silly.
Sure, why try anymore? Dirty A-rabs.
Whistled. No ethnic slurs.
Right, Lisa, you can impune and denigrate an entire ethnic group, and I can't sarcastically mock your attitude. *Wow* You are a hypocrite.
I take comfort only the fact that you are so blindly fanatical that you can't possibly appreciate the irony of your race-hate, colliding at every moment with your chosen role as racial victim and martyr. You are an example of everything that is wrong in the middle east. With both sides. You're the bad element. It's you who wants it to continue. It's you who will perpetuate the violence forever if you can. You sicken me.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I take comfort only the fact that you are so blindly fanatical that you can't possibly appreciate the irony of your race-hate, colliding at every moment with your chosen role as racial victim and martyr.
posted
Yeah, Lisa, I agree that there are good tactical reason for Israel to have and not comment on having a nuclear arsenal. If they admit it to having one, then every neighbor and Mid-Eastern state will demand parity. If they admit having one, then that becomes an excuse for a first strike by some enemy. Yet having it out their un-denied should act as a deterrent for any neighbor from invading.
Yet your title and accusations against President Obama is a cheap and un-supported and childish whine of "whah. He was mean to me so he's a bad guy. Whah, whah."
There are times in which you should be supported, and there are more times when Israel should be supported. Yet there are times when in Israel's and your human imperfection, that support can not be given. You may be of the Chosen people, and Israel may be the Chosen land, but both are as imperfect as the rest of us. Stop whining when we catch you at it.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Darth_Mauve: Yet your title and accusations against President Obama is a cheap and un-supported and childish whine of "whah. He was mean to me so he's a bad guy. Whah, whah."
There are times in which you should be supported, and there are more times when Israel should be supported. Yet there are times when in Israel's and your human imperfection, that support can not be given. You may be of the Chosen people, and Israel may be the Chosen land, but both are as imperfect as the rest of us. Stop whining when we catch you at it.
This is the same old story, Lisa. Your logic and good points are couched in rhetoric and in tones that make them impossible for people to hear. I wish you could tone down the fieryness a noch or two, because I always feel compelled to step in and remind that you are not the representative of our people.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: Yeah, I'm missing how that was comforting in the slightest myself as well.
Comforting in that the problem is not that I am being unclear- but that I can be sure that she is in fact bat**** crazy.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
For an alternative to Jews who stand up for Israel's brutality and nefariousness, here's a website run by Jews who speak out against these very things:
quote:Originally posted by contents under pressure: For an alternative to Jews who stand up for Israel's brutality and nefariousness, here's a website run by Jews who speak out against these very things:
quote:Originally posted by contents under pressure: For an alternative to Jews who stand up for Israel's brutality and nefariousness, here's a website run by Jews who speak out against these very things:
<snort> The sidebar ads for books by Norman Finkelstein and Joe Sacco pretty much speak for themselves.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by contents under pressure: For an alternative to Jews who stand up for Israel's brutality and nefariousness, here's a website run by Jews who speak out against these very things:
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
