World may back [Israel in] Iran op as part of deal [with palestinians]

[p-brane]

The Times reported Thursday that...

A deal taking shape between Israel and Western leaders will facilitate international support for an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities in exchange for concessions in peace negotiations with the Palestinians and Arab neighbors ....http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443824234&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Assuming the article is true, the question is whether this is a bluff. I for one can't recall the Israelis ever bluffing about anything.

 

[otheadp]

Dang...

I remember in 1967 before the IDF launched its preemtive strike the generals were giving hell to the prime minister at the time, "what are you waiting for? we are ready with everything - stop dragging your feet and delaying"... but what the PM was doing was talking to different governments and gathering international support, which is what is being done right now.

Not only will Israel launch an attack, but it will be backed up diplomatically and probably logistically and even militarily by other countries. The US is not the only country who's worried about a nuclear Iran.

 

[otheadp]

I mean, I hope there won't be a necessity to launch a strike, but you have to choose the lesser evil.

 

[pjdude1219]

I mean, I hope there won't be a necessity to launch a strike, but you have to choose the lesser evil.

violation of another states right to switch to a non fossil fuel eletrical source?

 

[p-brane]

violation of another states right to switch to a non fossil fuel eletrical source?

That right is not in question. The issue is the insistence of the iranians that instead of allowing the russians to enrich the uranium required by their nuclear reactors as fuel, that they be allowed to enrich the uranium themselves in abeyance of the Nonproliferation treaty they signed in exchange for economic assistance. Also, as part of this agreement, they agreed to keep their nuclear program completely transparent, including subjecting it to a rigid program of inspection by the IAEA. What was eventually discovered was that Iran has been secretly building a nuclear program in abeyance of the treaty right from the moment they signed it.

Since Iran has a history of attacking and "influencing" (controlling) other countries by paramilitary proxies which they fund and arm, most notably hezbullah, the possibility of the Iranians developing nuclear weapons is not something that the world can abide. In fact, as you know, iran's (illegitimate) president has openly and repeatedly threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", something that they could achieve only by a nuclear attack.

 

[StrawDog]

That right is not in question. The issue is the insistence of the iranians that instead of allowing the russians to enrich the uranium required by their nuclear reactors as fuel, that they be allowed to enrich the uranium themselves in abeyance of the Nonproliferation treaty they signed in exchange for economic assistance. Also, as part of this agreement, they agreed to keep their nuclear program completely transparent, including subjecting it to a rigid program of inspection by the IAEA. What was eventually discovered was that Iran has been secretly building a nuclear program in abeyance of the treaty right from the moment they signed it.

The reality is not as simple as you stated. All that was "discovered" was that Iran was acquiring materials for manufacturing centrifuges. Which, of course, is needed in reactor fuel manufacture.

Since Iran has a history of attacking and "influencing" (controlling) other countries by paramilitary proxies which they fund and arm, most notably hezbullah,

There is no direct and concrete evidence for this claim, and even if there was, it is no different to US funding and arming of militants, which the CIA pursues on an industrial scale. And which of course is now biting the US in the back as can be seen in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This exposes your hypocrisy (or naivety).

the possibility of the Iranians developing nuclear weapons is not something that the world can abide.

The only nuclear danger today is the USA, which has an unique and proven history of DEPLOYING nukes.

In fact, as you know, iran's (illegitimate) president has openly and repeatedly threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", something that they could achieve only by a nuclear attack.

This is a debunked fallacy (over and over and over) and only exposes your ignorance.

 

[p-brane]

There is no direct and concrete evidence for this claim [that Iran has a history of attacking and "influencing" (controlling) other countries by paramilitary proxies which they fund and arm, most notably hezbullah]

This is your standard umbrella rebuttal. You don't need all the facts to distinguish between the plausible and implausible. At this point, the idea that hezbullah is not a satellite of iran is implausible in the extreme, and I believe factually wrong. As all decision makers know, you have to decide on the basis of the information you have and not the information you wish you had.

Do not call me ignorant or insult me in any other way ever again.

 

[Baron Max]

Assuming the article is true, the question is whether this is a bluff. I for one can't recall the Israelis ever bluffing about anything.

And are we to assume that all of this is being made public so the news media can be in position to videotape the whole thing for history? And we'll all know the exact route of the fighter/bomber jets? And we'll know the exact timing for all of it?

...so the Iranians can have the anti-aircraft missile batteries ready and waiting?

I don't know ....perhaps there are some things in life that should be kept a secret, huh?

Baron Max

 

[p-brane]

And are we to assume that all of this is being made public so the news media can be in position to videotape the whole thing for history? And we'll all know the exact route of the fighter/bomber jets? And we'll know the exact timing for all of it?

...so the Iranians can have the anti-aircraft missile batteries ready and waiting?

Well, this is more or less what happened in iraq in 1991 and 2003. Of course, I can't know what the real story is. But this is just a recreational forum (a fact that seems to have been overlooked by some), so what I think doesn't matter.

 

[StrawDog]

This is your standard umbrella rebuttal. You don't need all the facts to distinguish between the plausible and implausible. At this point, the idea that hezbullah is not a satellite of iran is implausible in the extreme, and I believe factually wrong. As all decision makers know, you have to decide on the basis of the information you have and not the information you wish you had.

Do not call me ignorant or insult me in any other way ever again.

OK.
1. Plausibility is subjective. Hence the need for verifiable facts. (see IRAQ)
2. Provide evidence for "the idea that hezbullah is not a satellite of iran". (spelled Hezbollah)
3. You can believe all you like, but the evidence is essential.
4. You are ignorant of the FACTS surrounding the "wiping off the map" fallacy. I have personally debunked this (with references), about 3 times on the forum.

 

[p-brane]

...evidence is essential.

Who said it wasn't? But am I to understand that you believe there's no evidence at all one way or the other? Maybe you recognize information as fact only when it serves your purposes? This must be the case since my claims are in fact the positions of virtually every intelligence agency in the western world, and none of them have made any secret of their findings. The idea that you are somehow completely unaware of this is implausible in the extreme. The alternative is that you're incredibly naive. In fact, the iranians haven't tried to entirely conceal these international adventures since if they did, they wouldn't be able to use them as leverage in their negotiations with the rest of the world.

However, perhaps I'm misjudging your posts. What specific piece of evidence are you waiting for? What great point have all - save yourself and a gifted few - missed?

...the "wiping off the map" fallacy. I have personally debunked...

Have you also debunked his holocaust denial? Maybe you should put all your "personal debunkings" in a single thread so that we all may learn from them.

:roflmao:

 

[StrawDog]

Who said it wasn't? But am I to understand that you believe there's no evidence at all one way or the other? Maybe you recognize information as fact only when it serves your purposes? This must be the case since my claims are in fact the positions of virtually every intelligence agency in the western world, and none of them have made any secret of their findings.

"Western World". Can you see the irony? Where does one find these "claims" so I can peruse them? (as no doubt YOU have?)

The idea that you are somehow completely unaware of this is implausible in the extreme. The alternative is that you're incredibly naive. In fact, the iranians haven't tried to entirely conceal these international adventures since if they did, they wouldn't be able to use them as leverage in their negotiations with the rest of the world.

I was not aware they were using leverage, nor was I aware there was "negotiations". What is there to negotiate?

However, perhaps I'm misjudging your posts. What specific piece of evidence are you waiting for? What great point have all - save yourself and a gifted few - missed?

The point that you MAY have missed is simply that Iran is a peaceful sovereign nation, and thus has EVERY legal right to nuclear energy, as well as Nuclear weapons if they so choose. If this is an unacceptable position, then in fairness, ALL nations that posses Nuclear weapons should scrap them, including Israel.

Have you also debunked his holocaust denial? Maybe you should put all your "personal debunkings" in a single thread so that we all may learn from them.

Don`t be disrespectful to my race. How in the world do you leap from willful media distortion of Ahmadinejad`s words to Holocaust denial??? Your lack of knowledge on the topic is patently clear.

 

[p-brane]

Don`t be disrespectful to my race

:wtf:

 

[Michael]

I hope Iran gets nukes.

 

[Baron Max]

I hope Iran gets nukes.

Me, too! I hope Iran gets thousands of nukes ...big suckers, too! No, wait, it would be better if they had millions of smaller ones, then they could affect lots more people and more area of land.

Yep, more nukes is the answer to all the world's problems. Perhaps we should manufacture the damned things like AK-47s and M-16s ...make 'em cheap enough for everyone to buy one or two of 'em.

Baron Max

 

[iceaura]

...the "wiping off the map" fallacy. I have personally debunked...
”

Have you also debunked his holocaust denial? Maybe you should put all your "personal debunkings" in a single thread so that we all may learn from them.

Those misrepresentations and lies about Should-be-out-on-his-ass over there in Iran have been so thoroughly and completely debunked, by several people on this forum and in the world at large, that they are no longer serious.

He did not say that. Find another propaganda tack.

Personally, I can't see getting too worked up about a historically peaceful and non-aggressive country like Iran, with its sophisticated ruling class and general civilization, getting nukes even if they were trying - and there is no evidence in public view that they are.

I'd be worried about Pakistan. Maybe, if things get rougher in Pakistan, we can persuade the Iranians to secure the Pakistani nukes until things settle down - they're right next door, and the nukes would be safe from terrorist hands there.

 

[StrawDog]

I'd be worried about Pakistan. Maybe, if things get rougher in Pakistan, we can persuade the Iranians to secure the Pakistani nukes until things settle down - they're right next door, and the nukes would be safe from terrorist hands there.

The US does not seem concerned, as they are (knowingly) fomenting the unrest in Pakistan. Why do you think this is?

 

[p-brane]

Those misrepresentations and lies about Should-be-out-on-his-ass over there in Iran have been so thoroughly and completely debunked, by several people on this forum and in the world at large, that they are no longer serious.

When did Ahmadinejad himself openly and plainly explain - both to his own people and the rest of the world - that he did not mean to actually threaten with - indeed, guarantee - Israel's annihilation? It's always been other people and not Ahmadinejad himself who've attempted to put the kind of spin on his remarks that they think will create some level of plausible deniability for him. In fact, Iranians themselves - being the sophisticated and civilized people that they are - have made it quite clear that the conduct by their president of iran's foreign policy has been a source of embarrassment for them, especially his widely covered public displays of unqualified hatred of the jewish people.

Personally, I can't see getting too worked up about a historically peaceful and non-aggressive country like Iran

Rather than engaging directly, iran prefers to act through proxies including paramilitary organizations like hezbullah and hamas, and even governments -like syria for example.

...there is no evidence [that the iranians are trying to acquire nuclear weopons] in public view.

So it's only evidence that is "in public view" that matters? :wtf:

I'd be worried about Pakistan. Maybe, if things get rougher in Pakistan, we can persuade the Iranians to secure the Pakistani nukes until things settle down - they're right next door, and the nukes would be safe from terrorist hands there.

Baiting like this is an insult. Don't do it again. (Though if it turns out that you're serious, have a nice life and goodbye).

 

[WillNever]

More nukes is a bad thing, not a good thing. And it isn't a rogue state's inherent "right" to develop nuclear weapons, when that state is on a warpath as Iran surely is. They want weapons to be respected and to be formidable in the case of a military conflict that either they or someone else will start.

More nukes is bad, regardless of who has them. That is why Russia and the USA both are in the process of disarmament.

 

[Challenger78]

Me, too! I hope Iran gets thousands of nukes ...big suckers, too! No, wait, it would be better if they had millions of smaller ones, then they could affect lots more people and more area of land.

Yep, more nukes is the answer to all the world's problems. Perhaps we should manufacture the damned things like AK-47s and M-16s ...make 'em cheap enough for everyone to buy one or two of 'em.

Baron Max

ooh, Can I have one too ?