BF2S Forums Fair Trade?

Israel has been building nuclear plants in secret for decades, a whistle blower by the name of Mordechai Vanunu was kidnapped when caught and has spent the last 20 years in jail for exposing Israel's secret nuclear program.

Also Israel is the biggest proliferator in the region. Not Syria, not Iran.
Israel is armed to the teeth and attacks everyone but the other country should shut up and receive this without flinching?

one more thing i will add. 189 countries have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which is a treaty to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. 5 nations on the list have nukes. Only 4 countries haven't signed this treaty. Israel with being one of them who hasn't signed and the only nation in the middle east who hasn't.


ISRAEL ARE HYPOCRITES!!!
LONG LIVE IRAN!!!

and to your question, a fair deal but would Israel come clean about its nuclear weapons program?? it still remains a mystery

Or how about this, the entire Islamic and Arab world that surrounds Israel, stops threatening to destroy it in every speech made, and Israel would loose the need to constantly have their guns cocked.

CameronPoe wrote:

How about this: Iran suspends its nuclear program in exchange for Israel decommissioning their entire nuclear arsenal. Sound fair?

Sounds Fair, realistic - No. The day Isreal decommissions its nuclear arsenal is the day where a stronger voice for Islamic unity will create an ever more agressive approach to Isreal. Possibly.

Last edited by NantanCochise (2008-06-04 05:04:30)

imortal wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

How about this: Iran suspends its nuclear program in exchange for Israel decommissioning their entire nuclear arsenal. Sound fair?

Hardly fair.  After all, it was Jordan, Eqypt, and Syria that have invaded Isreal in the past.  Iran is scarcely Isreal's sole threat.

Forget the Isreal conflict.  If someone handed the US that option, I would not like it.  To place your trust that the people you view, if not as your enemey, then as a real threat, to honor their word; would you disarm yourself and leave you and your nation at the mercy of those who wish you harm?

Here is a more valid question.  Isreal has had nukes now for HOW long?  ANd how many nations seriously lose sleep in fear of a sudden and unprovoked attack by Isreal?  Who is lying awake in bed, wondering if Isreal will nuke their city?

How many people worry that the United States will just nuke their country?  Not many at all.  They may hate the US, but they trust it, in their own way.

Some small points:

1. Israeli declaration of independence - provocation of intial war.
2. Israeli invasion of Egypt at behest of UK & France to spark Suez Canal Crisis - instigator of war.
3. 6 day war - extension of the conflict initiated by Israel in points 1 & 2 above (with what preceded point 1 including targetting of civilian buildings, etc. with explosives).

PS Nations losing sleep in fear of a sudden attack by Israel - see points 1 & 2 above and the collective punishment exercises in Lebanon (twice) and Gaza.

PPS I'm sure Iran is worried about US nukes and more general US military action (all options on the table, bunker busters, etc.), as is North Korea. Why do you think they're trying to develop nukes (a deterrent to such actions)?

Your post simply suggests a preference for Israel over Iran rather than tackling the fact that the core issue here is that Iran is as deserving of the right to self determine and the right to parity of esteem on the international stage as nations such as China, Saudi Arabia and other 'less savoury' states. You seem to pointblank refuse to realise that the nuclear weapons would be a deterrent. No rational human being would contemplate a nuclear strike by Iran that would in itself bring the total and utter annihilation of Iran. You seem to labour under the delusion that Iran is devoid of rational thought and instincts of self-preservation.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-04 05:25:40)

CameronPoe wrote:

imortal wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

How about this: Iran suspends its nuclear program in exchange for Israel decommissioning their entire nuclear arsenal. Sound fair?

Hardly fair.  After all, it was Jordan, Eqypt, and Syria that have invaded Isreal in the past.  Iran is scarcely Isreal's sole threat.

Forget the Isreal conflict.  If someone handed the US that option, I would not like it.  To place your trust that the people you view, if not as your enemey, then as a real threat, to honor their word; would you disarm yourself and leave you and your nation at the mercy of those who wish you harm?

Here is a more valid question.  Isreal has had nukes now for HOW long?  ANd how many nations seriously lose sleep in fear of a sudden and unprovoked attack by Isreal?  Who is lying awake in bed, wondering if Isreal will nuke their city?

How many people worry that the United States will just nuke their country?  Not many at all.  They may hate the US, but they trust it, in their own way.

Some small points:

1. Israeli declaration of independence - provocation of intial war.
2. Israeli invasion of Egypt at behest of UK & France to spark Suez Canal Crisis - instigator of war.
3. 6 day war - extension of the conflict initiated by Israel in points 1 & 2 above (with what preceded point 1 including targetting of civilian buildings, etc. with explosives).

PS Nations losing sleep in fear of a sudden attack by Israel - see points 1 & 2 above and the collective punishment exercises in Lebanon (twice) and Gaza.

PPS I'm sure Iran is worried about US nukes and more general US military action (all options on the table, bunker busters, etc.), as is North Korea. Why do you think they're trying to develop nukes (a deterrent to such actions)?

Your post simply suggests a preference for Israel over Iran rather than tackling the fact that the core issue here is that Iran is as deserving of the right to self determine and the right to parity of esteem on the international stage as nations such as China, Saudi Arabia and other 'less savoury' states. You seem to pointblank refuse to realise that the nuclear weapons would be a deterrent. No rational human being would contemplate a nuclear strike by Iran that would in itself bring the total and utter annihilation of Iran. You seem to labour under the delusion that Iran is devoid of rational thought and instincts of self-preservation.

I am amazed how you insist that the Israeli conflict has anything to do with Israel. The Jews have been shit on by the Islamic and Arab world throughout history, Israel has only been around for 60 years.

It is most definitely up to the surrounding nations to offer the olive branch. The Jews can ill-afford to let their guard down, given the history of their persecution in the region.



Israel has never been a threat to anyone that does noy fuck with it.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

I am amazed how you insist that the Israeli conflict has anything to do with Israel. The Jews have been shit on by the Islamic and Arab world throughout history, Israel has only been around for 60 years.

Wow. The Israeli conflice apparently has nothing to do with the creation of the state of Israel. lol. Jewish-Arab relations were far better than Euro-Arab relations for centuries (why else would there have been thousands in Palestine in the first place and 25,000 in Iran to this day) - they took a distinct nosedive when tens of thousands of Euro-oppressed Jews landed on their shores in the early part of last century. Funny that...

lowing wrote:

It is most definitely up to the surrounding nations to offer the olive branch. The Jews can ill-afford to let their guard down, given the history of their persecution in the region.

It's a fair trade - like for like. None of those other nations have nukes and Israel is still far superior militarily to all of those nations thanks to the US taxpayer.

lowing wrote:

Israel has never been a threat to anyone that does not fuck with it.

Wow. Building settlements and taking land is not deserving of retaliation now. Wow. Don't ever complain about Mexicans sponging your welfare and flying Mexian flags in south-western USA.

1. Then there was that whole reason why the Jews were in Europe in the first place ( driven from their land?). Perhaps Jewish relations were at its peak when they were held in bondage?

2. So you are gunna be pissed off and claim foul, because Israel actually has the means to defend itself? Kinda biased but ok.

3.Building settlements on land used by its enemies to try and destroy Israel. I guess the spoils of war apply to everyone else in history, and not the Jews.

Either,
Israel keeps its Nukes and stops feeding from Americas Breast.

Or,
Israel decommissions its nukes while still under US protectorate. Still getting billions in Military aid, while happy that any country who messes with Israel will have US military might and/or nukes land on their door step.

At the minute Israel has both. I don't understand why they need nukes when they are basically just another US state and would be protected as such. If they cut ties with the USA then they would have an argument for nukes. The only people they need nukes for is Pakistan (our loving friends)

lowing wrote:

1. Ahhhh, so you must have a specific time frame where the Jews were accepted in that region without any problems or persecution. Do tell.

Under Saladin? Under the Ottomans? "Traditionally Jews living in Muslim lands, known as dhimmis, were allowed to practice their religion and to administer their internal affairs but subject to certain conditions." Doesn't sound much different to how the Euros treated them tbh. If they were so oppressed then it comes as quite a surprise that there would be so many of these 'dhimmis' at the turn of the last century. They were as oppressed there as they were anywhere else in the world. They came to Europe for the same reason Mexicans swim the Rio Grande.

lowing wrote:

2. Sorry, rhetoric counts, when you are surrounded by an enemy that historically has tried to carry out such threats.

Logic > Rhetoric

lowing wrote:

3. The military action was that of the Arab and Islamic world, not Israel's. Israel was on the defensive right up until the point where they they kicked the ever lovin' shit out of their aggressors

There is no such thing as an 'Arab' world or an 'Islamic' world - you speak as if they all love each other over there when the fact is they don't. Sunnis, Shias, Syrians, Moroccans, Afghans, Persians - they're all distinct things with differing priorities. Pan-Arabism failed, in case you hadn't heard... The beauty of today's situation for Israel is that the Arab world is more fragmented than it has ever been in the annals of history.

Israel was not on the defensive - Israel created the problem when it came into existence. For it to have been on the defensive would be to presume that it existed perpetually, which, as we all know, is not true.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-04 08:18:14)

oug wrote:

The proposition is fair. Which means that Israel - being the side with the advantage - would never go for it.

Nor would the Iranian. Welcome to the real world.

Who said conflict and ones weapons in comparison to anothers had to be fair?

CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:

so israel would give up its weapons, and iran would stop nuclear ambitions?  i find the latter part highly implausible since the iranians already refuse to let IAEA inspectors in the country to ensure they are developing peaceful nuke fuel.  the burden of proof is squarely on the iranians.  every day they should death to the USA and Israel, fight a proxy war in Iraq and Lebanon, fund terrorism.  i mean how much proof do you need that the regime there is complete wackos. 

you are free to hate israel, but i simply do not trust the iranians one bit.  they are masters of double speak - just like arafat was.

Why are Israel exempt from the rigours of international law whereas Iran aren't? Why the double standards? Is it any wonder the west is so resented across the developing world? And don't play the 'Israel are a fair, free and democratic society card' because quite frankly they aren't when you look at their human rights record, immigration policy (which essentially is undemocratic as it is designed to dilute the Israeli Arab proportion of the total vote), the ethno/theocentric nature of their state and their contraventions of the 4th Geneva Convention vis a vis expansionism.

CameronPoe wrote:

Why are Israel exempt from the rigours of international law whereas Iran aren't? Why the double standards? Is it any wonder the west is so resented across the developing world? And don't play the 'Israel are a fair, free and democratic society card' because quite frankly they aren't when you look at their human rights record, immigration policy (which essentially is undemocratic as it is designed to dilute the Israeli Arab proportion of the total vote), the ethno/theocentric nature of their state and their contraventions of the 4th Geneva Convention vis a vis expansionism.

Ok, so let's say Israel gives up its nukes.

What exactly does that accomplish?