i confess i knew very little about this war. i saw a documentary about it on the military channel the other night. the reason israel was able to avoid a total defeat is largely because american spy planes told the idf where the heavy concentrations of arab troops were. was that a morally correct thing for us to do? without american intelligence, the idf would have been defeated comprehensively.you think perhaps that sort of thing is well remembered in the arab world?
You should have stopped after the first sentence. To suggest that Israel would have "defeated comprehensively" without information fromt he SR-71s is totally absurd. In fact, one could make a better argument that the Arabs weren't attempting to obtain a complete victory. The most important American contribution was the emergency airlift. Keep in mind, at that time the Soviets were lavishly arming the Egyptians and Syrians. Moreover, it was American pressure (and promised military aid) which helped convince Israel NOT TO PRE-EMPTIVELY ATTACK as Arab forces mobilized. p.s. Before Israel could be "comprehensively defeated" much of Egypt and Syria would have been nuked out of existence.
issael murdered american aboard the uss liberty in 1967. a deliberate, murderous attack. your thoughts.
Are you saying Isreal has nukes? Why was this thread started and why do people have such a fascination with Israel?
Because Israel stands against all the norms in international law that many people want to encourage. Because Israel is an outlaw state under the protection of the world's only remaining superpower and has dragged the US further into down into its methods and tactics. Because of many other reasons, all threatening to erode the very principles that even if imperfectly and often hypocritcally, still the US and the West could point as their own. But not to worry, the Federal Republic of Micrnnesia has become a strong ally of Israel, joining the US as one of the few natoins on the planet who side with Israel in the United Nations. http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Governmen...ith+Micronesian+Pres+Urusemal+22-Jun-2005.htm
I think the very poster who started this thread is trying to thread-jack it after getting an answer from BenReilly that didn't suit his paranoid little brain.
Wasn't this war started by Lidnuks and American Imperialist Crusaders who used the war to take over the oil fields of Gaza Strip and South Lebanon?
No. That was before their time. But by their own explicit admission, including in an Israeli newspaper, they played the key role in starting the last Iraq war. Besides their own admission, of course, all those who have discussed the "neocons" and their role in the Iraqi adventure, including practically every prominent American statesmen and newspaper, must all be anti semites who believe in the Protocals of the Elders of Zion!
No, this was the war where the Israeli's destroyed the Nuclear Bomb facilities in Tehran on their way to starting a proxy terror war against all Arab nations while making the US impose economic sactions and getting the US to drop Britney SPears music videos all over the Arab World and Iran. Yeah that's the ticket.
When people don't have a point to make, they resort to nonsense, insults, and shooting down easy strawmen. Otherwise, I did not realize that it was even in dispute that Israel has been pushing the US and the "international community" to "confront Iran"! As for the Likudniks and their role in the Iraqi adventure, I could quote General Zinney, General Brent Scrowcroft, and many others, but their own admission is the best evidence you need to have. Here from an "anti-semetic" newspaper, the Haaretz in Israel, quoting anti-semites Likudniks
I'm glad you now believe everything printed in Haaretz, including every editorial. Israel, unlike Iran, is a democracy where newspapers can viciously attack the government as well as right-wing supporters in America. It's a fine left-wing newspaper, but if you believe a handful of intellectuals can determine the course of history, you're pretty foolish and are totally clueless about how decisions are made. Unlike you, these "neo-cons" are passionate supporters of America, and while strong supporters of Israel, have a Pax America worldview that envisions Israel as both a beneficiary and slave of America. Like you, I have little use for them, but at least I understand them perfectly since I actually know some of them intimately. While I find some of your absurd attacks somewhat amusing, I fear that you will become positively insufferable if/when America launches airstrikes on Iran. If you're so worried about Jews, maybe you shouldn't go to great lengths to be utterly offensive. You might also try to learn a little bit about America. With some notable exceptions, America has never had the hang-ups about Jews that has plagued Europe and now much of the Moslem world. America also has a winner's mentality that seeks opporunity, not scapegoats.
I'm sorry, IM. You are a very articulate poster - but IMO, you have zero credibility on anyting related to international relations or goverment in general. Zero. Zip. Nada. The posts that put it over the top for me when you start showing happy shiney women in the government; Women who were not allowed to vote. Go home, please. Stop spreading your manure.
Who told you women are not allowed to vote in Iran?? Who? And I have zero credibility? Women not only have the "right to vote" in Iran, they comprise half the electorate. Of the 30 million who voted in Iran's last election, from a total of 47 eligible voters (everyone over 15), I am sure somewhere around half were women! You live in a fantasy world. As for my views on Iran, they have credibility with the most knowledgable people about Iran. People who have worked at high levels in the US government (including in the National Security Council), who are professors at places like Harvard, who have reviewed my work on Iran. That my views don't have credibility with ignorant people like you is not my problem. Get yourself some education on the subject and don't pretend you know what you are talking about. You absolutely don't.
I posted an article from the horse's mouth and has nothing to do with the bias of the paper per se. It had little to do with someone attacking the neocons. It was a few of the neocons talking. So these folks are "clueles" about history too? Listen, I have not ever suggested that they alone determined things. I have not gone as far as the premise in that article. But it sure is curious that what these folks can take a positioin that implies an even greater influence than I have suggested, and that is not "anti-semetic". But if someone who is not pro-Israeli" says the same thing, they are an anti-semite. I get it. I have had contacts with some of them too. Unfortunately, I also know well their tactics. I don't approve of their ideology, but I abhor their tactics. As for being passionate supporters of America, they are passionate supporters of their ideology. It is influenced by a lot of things, including a passionate loyalty to their vision of Israel. I have my own passion about America. It is just that right now, my views on it and what is good for are not in vogue. You are Jewish. Have I personally insulted you? I have been personally insulted and attacked by a lot people, including many Jews. "Jews" are not my concern or issue. The issue is about Israel. Its influence in American politics. Its role in international affairs. Its role even in corrupting some things I hold dear. Like the truth. Now, admitedly, since Israel is a project for a "Jewish homeland", many Jews might not like my views on Israel. Fine with me. I don't like their views about Iran either! As for why this "tactic", if they are so powerful? Why not search for appeasement instead? First, not my choice. If it was, I might have been more practical and taken a more pragmatic appraoch. Secondly, however, a part of me does not want to accept that we live in a world where might is all that is left of right. I guess, despite being agnostic, I have a hard time seeing how such a world is a going to be a good one even from my utiliiatrian perspective.
yes, israel has nukes. israel is interesting for many reasons. getting back to the yom kippur war, were the attacks by egypt and syria morally justified?
Yes I know that. I think you missed that I was not being serious, I thought the Brittnay Spears comment was a dead give away.
I don't mean to imply anything, since I am very ignorant on the issue, but someone I know tells me that Jews drink the blood of baby Iranians. I'd like to hear some thoughts. Discuss.
Well, babies if you can afford it. I hear the cheap stuff isn't even made from virgins, they'll abduct anyone for their blood.
Fixed. Indeed, that is a far more accurate description of the arguments used against Iran, than any arguments I have used against Israel. I guess this is what irks me the most. It is no secret that Israel is and has been lobbying very hard to get the US to "confront" Iran. Indeed, not a day passes by without some such exhortation by Israel, Aipac, and Israel's friends among the neocons. This is no secret. Either you believe Israel is right to push the US towards that posture, or you don't? It seems to me, based on the tenor of arguments here, that most of you do support that posture. Then why are you embarrassed about it? Perhaps the reason is that American Jewish community does not want to get "blamed" for the consequences if the "Iranian adventure" proved disastrous? If so, it means you don't even have the courage of your convictions. On the other hand, if you are embarrasssed because you don't support the undeniable effort and energy is Israel is putting into the issue, then speak out. Or is it that speaking out against Israel is not allowed, especially if you are Jewish? Whatever you do, stop corrupting the political process by lies and misleading lables. And then accuse others of doing what you are doing. Whatever I have said about what the neocons are doing, they have said it themselves. On the other hand, I don't recall saying any of the nonsense being thrown around against me here.