| Israel Fuming As Its Push for 3rd War on Muslim Country is Set Back |
|
|
| Friday, 07 December 2007 | |
|
At the Annapolis peace talks last month, the Israeli team - Prime MInister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defense Minister Ehud Barak - didn't have high expectations for making headway on the Palestinian issue, but they were confident of pressing their case on Iran to a receptive White House. Instead, Barak was taken aside by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and told that new intelligence persuaded the Americans that Iran wasn't such a big threat after all. The Israelis politely disagreed. As Barak later told Israeli Army Radio, "It seems Iran in 2003 halted for a certain period of time its military nuclear program, but as far as we know it has probably since revived it." He added: "We are talking about a specific track connected with their weapons building program, to which the American [intelligence] connection, and maybe that of others, was severed." The Israeli defense minister implied that the new U.S. assessment was "made in an environment of high uncertainty." Israeli intelligence sources told Time that for the past five years, Mossad, Israel's equivalent of the CIA, had made spying on Iran its top priority, and that its assessment is that Iran would be weapons-ready by 2009. Israeli officials believe their intelligence services are privy to all the information on Iran gathered by their American counterparts, and vice versa. "We stand naked in front of each other, hiding nothing," claimed one Israeli intelligence officer, adding that the two nations' spy agencies often work in tandem to avoid any overlap. Israelis believe the U.S. has reached different conclusions from the same information because it does not feel the threat of Iran's missiles as acutely as Israel does. Ephraim Halevy, ex-chief of Mossad and now an academic, tells TIME that what hasn't changed, is that the view - reiterated in the NIE - that Iran is "capable of producing a nuclear weapon." He adds, "You put that together with Iran's devious ways and evasive tactics with the U.N. atomic inspectors, and you have a very real threat." Dr. Ephraim Kam, Deputy Director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, concurs. "Even if it's true that Iran has shut down its military nuclear program, it can start it up at any time," he says. Israeli intelligence officials plan to ask Washington for clarifications about the NIE report. "It has many inner contradictions," says one cabinet official involved in intelligence matters. Israeli officials don't want to disagree too openly or publicly with the Americans, but they also don't want world opinion to dismiss the threat of Iran becoming a nuclear power. Foreign Minister Livni has instructed Israeli embassies to maintain a focus on the menace that she says Iran poses to Israel and the West. For Israel, Iran remains enemy Number 1. As the cabinet official put it, " It's not as if Iran has become Switzerland, only making chocolate. The Iranians still have missiles that can hit us, and they still support Hezballah and Hamas, and they are still calling for the destruction of Israel." That's why Washington's new assessment of Iran's capabilities and intentions is unlikely to reassure those responsible for Israel's security. Source: Time           Readers have left 33 comments.
Tahira:
Quote
It's an indication of the contempt that the "American Israel Public Affairs Committee" has for America, and the blind loyalty it has to Israel, that it ignores the advice of American Intelligence and instead promotes fictions that suit Israel.
(1)
2007-12-08 09:25:59
TeddyBear:
Quote
NIE is full of people who are against Bush politically. SOme of these people have previously stated that Iran DID have an active nuclear weapons programme. They do NOT state that Iran has ceased its weapons programme. They say that they no longer have enough intelligence data to be able to state it with the same certainty.
New York Sun:- "Vann Van Diepen, one of the estimate's main authors, has spent the last five years trying to get America to accept Iran's right to enrich uranium. Mr. Van Diepen no doubt reckons that in helping push the estimate through the system, he has succeeded in influencing the policy debate in Washington." - Why? Worldwide Standard:- "Consider that on July 11, 2007, roughly four or so months prior to the most recent NIE’s publication, Deputy Director of Analysis Thomas Fingar gave the following testimony before the House Armed Services Committee (emphasis added): Iran and North Korea are the states of most concern to us. The United States’ concerns about Iran are shared by many nations, including many of Iran’s neighbors. Iran is continuing to pursue uranium enrichment and has shown more interest in protracting negotiations and working to delay and diminish the impact of UNSC sanctions than in reaching an acceptable diplomatic solution. We assess that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons--despite its international obligations and international pressure. This is a grave concern to the other countries in the region whose security would be threatened should Iran acquire nuclear weapons. This paragraph appeared under the subheading: ‘Iran Assessed As Determined to Develop Nuclear Weapons.’ And the entirety of Fingar’s 22-page testimony was labeled ‘Information as of July 11, 2007.’ No part of it is consistent with the latest NIE, in which our spooks tell us Iran suspended its covert nuclear weapons program in 2003 ‘primarily in response to international pressure’ and they ‘do not know whether (Iran) currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.’" - strange about face! New York Sun:- "The proper way to read this report is through the lens of the long struggle the professional intelligence community has been waging against the elected civilian administration in Washington. They have opposed President Bush on nearly every major policy decision. They were against the Iraqi National Congress. They were against elections in Iraq. They were against I. Lewis Libby. They are against a tough line on Iran. One could call all this revenge of the bureaucrats… The bureaucrats may even think they are stopping another war. It's a dangerous game that may boomerang, making a war with Iran more likely. Our diplomats, after all, hoped to seal this month a deal to pass a third Security Council resolution against Iran. Already on Monday the Chinese delegation at Turtle Bay has started making noises about dropping their tepid support for such a document. Call it the Van Diepen Demarche, since the Chinese camarilla can boast that even America's intelligence estimate concludes the mullahs shuttered their nuclear weapons program more than four years ago." Washington Post (John Bolton):- "Fifth, many involved in drafting and approving the NIE were not intelligence professionals but refugees from the State Department, brought into the new central bureaucracy of the director of national intelligence. These officials had relatively benign views of Iran's nuclear intentions five and six years ago; now they are writing those views as if they were received wisdom from on high. In fact, these are precisely the policy biases they had before, recycled as ‘intelligence judgments.’ "
(2)
2007-12-08 09:38:17
TeddyBear:
Quote
Anyone please tell us what the Two wars by Israel against Muslims countries were because history doesn't seem to have recorded them.
I can think of MANY Wars by Muslim countries AGAINST Israel and so the ambiguous title cannot be referring to wars started by Msulim countries against Israel. Hence it must refer to Wars started by Israel. Well what wars are they?
(3)
2007-12-08 09:42:13
Mashfiq:
Quote
Iran had a right to civil nuclear power, but it is imperative that the West prevented Iran developing nuclear weapons. It must ensure that we remove the threat of any country posed by Iran. However, that is not necessarily through war, all diplomatic avenues must be exhausted, but all options should be on the table. The proliferation of nuclear weapons in the Middle East would pose a serious threat to the region's stability and security.
It is essential that the UK pushes more vigorously for sanctions, including tougher restrictions on individuals involved in Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programmes, the banning of new arms sales to Iran, and action to discourage new investment in Iran's nuclear programme. As Mr Cameron affirmed,"Then we should work with the United States more energetically to ensure that Iran is presented with the right incentives - if it chooses the right path."
(4)
2007-12-08 10:14:23
Zubair:
Quote
Anyone please tell us what the Two wars by Israel against Muslims countries were because history doesn't seem to have recorded them. — TeddyBearI can think of MANY Wars by Muslim countries AGAINST Israel and so the ambiguous title cannot be referring to wars started by Msulim countries against Israel. Hence it must refer to Wars started by Israel. Well what wars are they? Operation focus - despite Israeli propaganda lies that the strike was pre-emptive to stop a massive arab invasion. It was in fact a planned military operation. I suggest you look this up, maybe then we'll start to widen your knowledge and counter the one sided pro-Israel bias that runs through every sentence you type.
(5)
2007-12-08 15:09:51
shan:
Quote
Guys do not bother going down that road with a name like teddybear do you think it will make any diffrence to him whether you give proof after proof.
(6)
2007-12-08 17:30:51
Clifford:
Quote
Of course you know that nothing will stop the spread of Biblical Christianity into Iran.
(7)
2007-12-08 19:06:50
TeddyBear:
Quote
Anyone please tell us what the Two wars by Israel against Muslims countries were because history doesn't seem to have recorded them. — ZubairI can think of MANY Wars by Muslim countries AGAINST Israel and so the ambiguous title cannot be referring to wars started by Msulim countries against Israel. Hence it must refer to Wars started by Israel. Well what wars are they? Operation focus - despite Israeli propaganda lies that the strike was pre-emptive to stop a massive arab invasion. It was in fact a planned military operation. I suggest you look this up, maybe then we'll start to widen your knowledge and counter the one sided pro-Israel bias that runs through every sentence you type. So there aren't TWO previous wars then. Let me emphasise you offered ONE answer to a question that requires TWO answers. But anwer ONE isn't an example of an Israeli War on a Muslim country since Egypt had declared a de facto state of war by closing the straits of Hommux (for example), sending UN observers out of the way andf all the bellicose statements and plans. The fact that Israel pre=-empted is not in the same class as starting a War in the traditional sense. Anyway, Egypt suffered a massive, devastating, embarrassing, overwhelming defeat (for the record).
(8)
2007-12-08 21:37:28
rattled zionists are getting inc:
Quote
Teddy bear you indeed seem to have the brains of a stuffed soft toy. The very fact that Israel was established by terrorising and ethnically cleansing the local population was a declaration of war against all the nations of the region. Also on what moral grounds do you object to Iran possessing nuclear technology when they have attacked no country in the last 60 years; whilst the USA have attacked some 50 countries during this same period. Most of the people on this planet do NOT see Iran as a threat. Only the Zionists and their slave armies in Washington and London see any threat.
(9)
2007-12-08 22:39:37
Zubair:
Quote
Anyone please tell us what the Two wars by Israel against Muslims countries were because history doesn't seem to have recorded them. — TeddyBearI can think of MANY Wars by Muslim countries AGAINST Israel and so the ambiguous title cannot be referring to wars started by Msulim countries against Israel. Hence it must refer to Wars started by Israel. Well what wars are they? Operation focus - despite Israeli propaganda lies that the strike was pre-emptive to stop a massive arab invasion. It was in fact a planned military operation. I suggest you look this up, maybe then we'll start to widen your knowledge and counter the one sided pro-Israel bias that runs through every sentence you type. So there aren't TWO previous wars then. Let me emphasise you offered ONE answer to a question that requires TWO answers. But anwer ONE isn't an example of an Israeli War on a Muslim country since Egypt had declared a de facto state of war by closing the straits of Hommux (for example), sending UN observers out of the way andf all the bellicose statements and plans. The fact that Israel pre=-empted is not in the same class as starting a War in the traditional sense. Anyway, Egypt suffered a massive, devastating, embarrassing, overwhelming defeat (for the record). Number 2 is the continued occupation of Palestinian land. This is an act of aggression in itself. If that weren';t bad enough then the 3rd act of aggression is to allow militant settlers to usurp the palestinian land and abuse their rights, don't believe me then simply scour the internet for the aggressive activities of Hebron's militant settlers who commit their crimes under the noses of Israeli soldiers. Sure the Israeli court passes laws in favour of Hebron's Palestinians but these are tantamount to Crocodile tears if the Israeli army won;t implement those laws and allow palestinian farmers access to their orchards which have been usurped by criminal colonialists aka illegal squatter settlers. You can try and spread as many lies as you want here or try and spin Israel's crimes in any way you like but the World knows the truth and its about time you opened your eyes too. There's no argument you can present that can divert from the truth that Israel is a racist apartheid state that is the only country in the middle east to possess weapons of mass detruction, and openly defies UN and international law because it somehow thinks that it is above the law.
(10)
2007-12-09 00:41:37
Zubair:
Quote
Anyone please tell us what the Two wars by Israel against Muslims countries were because history doesn't seem to have recorded them. — TeddyBearI can think of MANY Wars by Muslim countries AGAINST Israel and so the ambiguous title cannot be referring to wars started by Msulim countries against Israel. Hence it must refer to Wars started by Israel. Well what wars are they? Operation focus - despite Israeli propaganda lies that the strike was pre-emptive to stop a massive arab invasion. It was in fact a planned military operation. I suggest you look this up, maybe then we'll start to widen your knowledge and counter the one sided pro-Israel bias that runs through every sentence you type. So there aren't TWO previous wars then. Let me emphasise you offered ONE answer to a question that requires TWO answers. But anwer ONE isn't an example of an Israeli War on a Muslim country since Egypt had declared a de facto state of war by closing the straits of Hommux (for example), sending UN observers out of the way andf all the bellicose statements and plans. The fact that Israel pre=-empted is not in the same class as starting a War in the traditional sense. Anyway, Egypt suffered a massive, devastating, embarrassing, overwhelming defeat (for the record). Since you like asking questions, perhaps you can answetr one for me? Who is the Deputy Prime Minister of Israel and can you please enlighten us with his views about Palestinians and Arab Israeli citizens?
(11)
2007-12-09 00:43:34
Colin:
Quote
Nowhere in this article does it state that Israel wants to start a third war, or any war. As far as I know, Israel has only ever responded to threats, not started them. Lets make it clear, the only solution in that area is a two-state solution giving palestinians and Israelis guaranteed security and their own borders. Security will also mean the likes of Iran not being able to have nuclear weapons. Nuclear power yes, weapons no. Just think of the consequences if they or mad mullahs like them were able to attack Israel with nuclear weapons ..... what would happen to the region and muslims, does'nt bear thinking about. Be reasonable, two-state solution and no Iranian nukes.
(12)
2007-12-09 11:36:28
TeddyBear:
Quote
Teddy bear you indeed seem to have the brains of a stuffed soft toy. The very fact that Israel was established by terrorising and ethnically cleansing the local population was a declaration of war against all the nations of the region. Also on what moral grounds do you object to Iran possessing nuclear technology when they have attacked no country in the last 60 years; whilst the USA have attacked some 50 countries during this same period. Most of the people on this planet do NOT see Iran as a threat. Only the Zionists and their slave armies in Washington and London see any threat. — rattled zionists are getting incYou seem interested. Perhaps YOU could name the TWO wars that Israel started against Muslim countries rather than some waffle rhetoric that avoids actually answering. "Iran has attacked no-one in 60 years". Er! Iraq/Iran War!!!! That is how much credibility your response has.
(13)
2007-12-09 12:55:59
TeddyBear:
Quote
Here we have ANOTHER missed opportunity. Rather than give non-answers why not simply NOT answer.
Zubair:- "Number 2 is the continued occupation of Palestinian land. This is an act of aggression in itself. If that weren';t bad enough then the 3rd act of aggression is to allow militant settlers to usurp the palestinian land and abuse their rights, don't believe me then simply scour the internet for the aggressive activities of Hebron's militant settlers who commit their crimes under the noses of Israeli soldiers. Sure the Israeli court passes laws in favour of Hebron's Palestinians but these are tantamount to Crocodile tears if the Israeli army won;t implement those laws and allow palestinian farmers access to their orchards which have been usurped by criminal colonialists aka illegal squatter settlers. You can try and spread as many lies as you want here or try and spin Israel's crimes in any way you like but the World knows the truth and its about time you opened your eyes too. There's no argument you can present that can divert from the truth that Israel is a racist apartheid state that is the only country in the middle east to possess weapons of mass detruction, and openly defies UN and international law because it somehow thinks that it is above the law." Since when has the Palestinian area been a "Muslim Country". surely its a mixture of Muslims and Christians. Yes, there are a few left but I suppose you'll manage to force them out. For all your waffle, mantras, false arguments etc you STILL haven't told us who the two Muslim countries Israel has started wars with. I remain confused and confident of my point.
(14)
2007-12-09 13:00:14
TeddyBear:
Quote
Nowhere in this article does it state that Israel wants to start a third war, or any war. As far as I know, Israel has only ever responded to threats, not started them. Lets make it clear, the only solution in that area is a two-state solution giving palestinians and Israelis guaranteed security and their own borders. Security will also mean the likes of Iran not being able to have nuclear weapons. Nuclear power yes, weapons no. Just think of the consequences if they or mad mullahs like them were able to attack Israel with nuclear weapons ..... what would happen to the region and muslims, does'nt bear thinking about. Be reasonable, two-state solution and no Iranian nukes. — ColinColin, agreed. Two States and no Iranian nukes to threaten the peace. People forget that Iran has threatened The USA and Europe by its proxies Hamas and Hezbollah. This isn't just an Israel thing its a World Peace thing. Than you for turning-up and showing some of the posters here some common sense.
(15)
2007-12-09 13:02:56
Mashfiq:
Quote
I agree partially with Colin’s explanation about the Middle East crisis, whilst many of the other bloggers offer conspiracy theories and anti-Israeli ideas.
Firstly, as my previous posted stated, Iran has a right to civil nuclear power, but it is imperative that the West prevents Iran developing nuclear weapons. It must ensure that any threat to Israel or to any neighbouring Arab country by the Persian state is removed. However, this should not be achieved through war, but all diplomatic avenues must be exhausted, and all options should remain on the table. The proliferation of nuclear weapons in the Middle East would pose a serious threat to the region's stability and security. In explaining why Israel has a deterrent is simply explained by the hostile sea of nations which surrounds it and which fails to recognise the legitimacy of this democratic state. Anyhow, if Iran continues its anti-Israel rhetoric, it would be natural for the United Kingdom and its allies to vigorously push for tighter sanctions, including tougher restrictions on individuals involved in Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programmes, the banning of new arms sales to Iran, and action to discourage new investment in Iran's nuclear programme. Secondly, we should work with the United States more energetically and ensure that every avenue is fully exhausted through diplomatic processes. Despite the problems faced by the Palestinians, which I take into full consideration, we must further take into consideration the Qassam rockets and mortar shells which are frequently fired into Israel. These cause casualties and on occasions, there have been reported deaths. While I fully acknowledging Israel's right to defend itself, I also feel Israel should consider showing restraint in the face of attacks launched by Hezbollah or Hamas. It should respond in accordance with the United Nations International law. Finally, we now have a quartet envoy, Tony Blair, who will ensure there is a final settlement to the crisis in the Middle East conflict. And he should be fully supported by politicians from all British political parties. The Arab countries and their friend [Saudi Arabia] should offer to financially to help the Palestinian to rebuild their country and infrastructure and political framework. As the Jewish diasporas’ throughout the world help Israel to build up their country, the Muslim populations should financially support the Palestinians to build up a viable state. Governments actively pledge themselves to the cause of settling the Israel/Palestine question once and for all. What is required above all else is political will, which I believe is there. There are answers, which everyone knows, to the much-vaunted impossible "final issues", such as Jerusalem and the right of return of refugees. The now unfairly disparaged Oslo process in many ways laid some foundations for the way forward in those issues. Adding further, leadership organisations must stop making public statements support terror; rather they should offer their time and money to build up the Palestinian nation.
(16)
2007-12-09 13:10:01
rattled zionists dont know histo:
Quote
Teddy Bear do you have no knowledge of history? The Israeli theft of Arab land was itself the first aggressive war launched by the Zionists.Every Pal/Arab/Muslim action therafter against Israel is self defence. How can the agressor claim self defence when the victim strikes back. Likewise the Iran/Iraq war was launced by Saddam at the behest of Israel/Usa with Iran being forced to fight a defensive war. You guys can repeat all the lies you want. The fact remains that the Zionist movement is being exposed to the people in the west, and you guys are severely rattled.
(17)
2007-12-09 19:00:00
Raashid:
Quote
Can the Zionists here please give an example of when Hamas and Hezbollah have threatened anyone other then Israel?
(18)
2007-12-09 21:04:31
TeddyBare:
Quote
Teddy Bear do you have no knowledge of history? The Israeli theft of Arab land was itself the first aggressive war launched by the Zionists.Every Pal/Arab/Muslim action therafter against Israel is self defence. How can the agressor claim self defence when the victim strikes back. Likewise the Iran/Iraq war was launced by Saddam at the behest of Israel/Usa with Iran being forced to fight a defensive war. You guys can repeat all the lies you want. The fact remains that the Zionist movement is being exposed to the people in the west, and you guys are severely rattled. — rattled zionists dont know histoSo what is the name of the Muslim Country that counts as ONE war by Israel against a Muslim country? In fact, this is a case of a Muslim country attacking Israel. In 1948 and 1967. Absolutely no-one has stated which TWO Muslim countries Israel has started a war with.
(19)
2007-12-09 23:42:14
I Sidat:
Quote
sometimes i ask the almighty one why is there so much hypocrisy in this world? why can't people understand the simple concept if you are allowed to have something then why can't the next person have the same privlige? Israel is a threat to the entire arab population with its wmds if they can have it why can't iran? if the us can have it why can't north korea if britain can have it why can't anyone else?
And no Iran is not a terrorist country and neither was iraq, please show some form of humanity, that is if you have any.
(20)
2007-12-09 23:50:27
shan:
Quote
israel has commited acts of war against tunisia-lebanon-iraq and syria.
the fact that these nations were not powerful to respond back does not mean these are not wars. if those nations had the power to attack back they would have turned into full blown wars.
(21)
2007-12-10 10:04:22
shem:
Quote
If/When Iran gets close/closser to having nukes Israel will deal with it and do the world a favour as they did with Saddam's facilities Kuwaitis are here to tell the tale.
(22)
2007-12-10 10:48:19
TeddyBare:
Quote
israel has commited acts of war against tunisia-lebanon-iraq and syria. — shanthe fact that these nations were not powerful to respond back does not mean these are not wars. if those nations had the power to attack back they would have turned into full blown wars. shan. One, two, three, four! OK then, you make it that Israel has started wars with FOUR Muslim countries and MPAC UK thinks its TWO. Its obvious that none of you can make your minds up and that none of you can justify your numbers. Your confusion amuses me.
(23)
2007-12-10 17:47:28
Colin:
Quote
10 December 2007
I fear that this weird glitch in the US itelligence machine will let Iran of the hook, derail the international campaign to impose sanctions, and force Israel to try and destroy Iran's nuclear bomb capacity unaided, as it did with Iraq's. I fear, though, that it will not do it so clean and clickly this time.
(24)
2007-12-10 21:15:43
Mohsin:
Quote
Every Nation or community has a history. Their are behavioural patterns to the way a community behaves overall to some degree. Certain communities can be classified under certain groupings to some degree, given their past behaviours from a historical prospective. This insight would give a Good Guage as to what to predict when dealings with such communities/nations. Never trust a SNAKE, not because its the enemy, but because the natural behavioural instinct of a SNAKE, is to BITE/STING. It would BITE you, even when its your ally, simply because that's it's natural instinct. It cannot distinguish between what to and what not to BITE/STING. The same principle can be applied with reference to the Israeli Government. If you do the analysis whatever they agreed they wont do, they always done. And what they agreed they would do, they never done. The Actions, intentions, and honesty of a Nation like Israel, should never be given the benefit of the doubt. Politics is for the Shrewd, manipulative and the corrupted. Israeli politicians are amongst the best in the world in the contexts of political strategies. Best Politically means ? : Best in Shrewdness, Manipulative measures, tact, and hence incorporating other measures like honesty etc. Evaluate the Micro, to understand the Macro picture.
(25)
2007-12-10 21:18:46
RSD:
Quote
While Israel may express concern about Iran's intentions, it is the more immediate neighbours that have more immediate concerns. Iran has and continues to act in a destablising manner throughout the Middle East, funding and supplying insurgent factions. The Iranian government's interest in objectifying Israel is to create an internal diversion from the problems within Iran and its own oppression. In this it is not substantially different from a number of regional governments, where it does differ is in its willingness to effect destabilisation.
(26)
2007-12-11 08:20:24
shan:
Quote
rsd says iran continues to act in a destabilising manner in the middle east.
did it escape your knowledge that instead of accusing iran of destabilising the middle east,you should be telling the israleis to end occupation so that peace can prevail in palestine. ever since the day palestine was occupied there has been no peace,as long as there is no justice there will be no peace.
(27)
2007-12-11 18:13:38
IqbalW:
Quote
10 December 2007 — ColinI fear that this weird glitch in the US itelligence machine will let Iran of the hook, derail the international campaign to impose sanctions, and force Israel to try and destroy Iran's nuclear bomb capacity unaided, as it did with Iraq's. I fear, though, that it will not do it so clean and clickly this time. The NIE report is gradually being exposed as Iran duping a few phone tappers. The report has very little credibility.
(28)
2007-12-11 18:58:51
IqbalW:
Quote
Every Nation or community has a history. Their are behavioural patterns to the way a community behaves overall to some degree. Certain communities can be classified under certain groupings to some degree, given their past behaviours from a historical prospective. This insight would give a Good Guage as to what to predict when dealings with such communities/nations. Never trust a SNAKE, not because its the enemy, but because the natural behavioural instinct of a SNAKE, is to BITE/STING. It would BITE you, even when its your ally, simply because that's it's natural instinct. It cannot distinguish between what to and what not to BITE/STING. The same principle can be applied with reference to the Israeli Government. If you do the analysis whatever they agreed they wont do, they always done. And what they agreed they would do, they never done. The Actions, intentions, and honesty of a Nation like Israel, should never be given the benefit of the doubt. Politics is for the Shrewd, manipulative and the corrupted. Israeli politicians are amongst the best in the world in the contexts of political strategies. Best Politically means ? : Best in Shrewdness, Manipulative measures, tact, and hence incorporating other measures like honesty etc. Evaluate the Micro, to understand the Macro picture. Your admiration for Israeli intelligence and political nous shines through.
(29)
2007-12-11 19:00:40
Teddy Bear:
Quote
You can smell them a mile off.
Teddy bear - when you asked that question, you DIDN'T want an answer. You wanted to lay a trap for someone to answer and start some long debate to justify some disillusioned notion that Isreal didn't start a war. You forget something. They started a war when they stepped into Palestine and claimed it to be there's and start bulldozing the damn homes. That, is war. Stuff to what legal document says or what USA or anyone else says in some books. The day a nation steps into Britain and then starts bulldozing, starts building walls, start creating bootleg boxes to check people for going into THEIR OWN COUNTRY - that to me is war. What, you think war is clean. That's why they have departments called INTELLIGENCE. It's a dirty game. Behind the scenes are actions happening but you won't hear that in the news. Try and go and talk to some of my mates in OCCUPPIED PALESTINE and explain to them about what war Isreal started. And while you're at it, explain the bullets in their legs, and the one in their sisters head who got buried, and the ones on the walls and the twenty damn houses they just bull dozed. If someone did that in UK, with you and everyone else in UK - it be a frigging revolution kicking off. It be WAR.
(30)
2007-12-11 19:16:08
RSD:
Quote
This article displays unwittingly an element of the truth about the relationship between the USA and Israel. The Mossad spokesperson states that there is open intelligence sharing, yet history suggests that the USA has never been willing to provide intelligence on the same open basis to Israel as Israel has been willing to share intelligence with the USA. (See the Pollard spying case)This of course reflects the subordinate position of Israel. Yet it also highlights that behind the amity the Israelis do not entirely trust the USA administration. The USA on the other hand needs to maintain the fiction that it can be trusted and does share most intelligence because Mossad has proven itself to be a highly credible source. Further were the relationship to breakdown entirely such control as the USA is able to exert upon Israel might rapidly diminish. There are many Israelis who question the benefits to Israel of the relationship as it now stands and suggest that Israel would in fact benefit from a more distant relationship.
As for Israel being a primary source of instability in the region, it is most probable that the opposite is true. Were it not for Israel there can be little doubt that Syria would have taken control of Lebanon and integrated it into Greater Syria, as this is part of their official policy. And without Israel it is undoubted that Syria would have overthrown the Jordan government in 1970.
(31)
2007-12-11 20:25:12
Barbarossa:
Quote
Every Nation or community has a history. Their are behavioural patterns to the way a community behaves overall to some degree. Certain communities can be classified under certain groupings to some degree, given their past behaviours from a historical prospective. This insight would give a Good Guage as to what to predict when dealings with such communities/nations. Never trust a SNAKE, not because its the enemy, but because the natural behavioural instinct of a SNAKE, is to BITE/STING. It would BITE you, even when its your ally, simply because that's it's natural instinct. It cannot distinguish between what to and what not to BITE/STING. The same principle can be applied with reference to the Israeli Government. If you do the analysis whatever they agreed they wont do, they always done. And what they agreed they would do, they never done. The Actions, intentions, and honesty of a Nation like Israel, should never be given the benefit of the doubt. Politics is for the Shrewd, manipulative and the corrupted. Israeli politicians are amongst the best in the world in the contexts of political strategies. Best Politically means ? : Best in Shrewdness, Manipulative measures, tact, and hence incorporating other measures like honesty etc. Evaluate the Micro, to understand the Macro picture. I dont know who you are - but you are spot on!
(32)
2007-12-11 22:13:06
IqbalW:
Quote
You can smell them a mile off. — Teddy BearTeddy bear - when you asked that question, you DIDN'T want an answer. You wanted to lay a trap for someone to answer and start some long debate to justify some disillusioned notion that Isreal didn't start a war. You forget something. They started a war when they stepped into Palestine and claimed it to be there's and start bulldozing the damn homes. That, is war. Stuff to what legal document says or what USA or anyone else says in some books. The day a nation steps into Britain and then starts bulldozing, starts building walls, start creating bootleg boxes to check people for going into THEIR OWN COUNTRY - that to me is war. What, you think war is clean. That's why they have departments called INTELLIGENCE. It's a dirty game. Behind the scenes are actions happening but you won't hear that in the news. Try and go and talk to some of my mates in OCCUPPIED PALESTINE and explain to them about what war Isreal started. And while you're at it, explain the bullets in their legs, and the one in their sisters head who got buried, and the ones on the walls and the twenty damn houses they just bull dozed. If someone did that in UK, with you and everyone else in UK - it be a frigging revolution kicking off. It be WAR. I find your logic quite strange. Just because Palestinians are suffering does not mean they are the victim. In conflicts BOTH sides can show suffering. Equally Israel could talk about the body parts distributed after a suicide bomb on a bus, in a cafe or disco. I see the point however when the headline says "3rd Country". Israel's conflict with the Palestinians involves only one Country, Israel and one region/people. There has never been any Country that the Palestinians lived-in, in the sense of a legally constituted and recognised Government with sovreignty over its land and borders. I'd be curious to know the names of the two Countries Israel has started wars against just for the intellectual gap I have that needs filling. (Too many Teddy Bears seem to spoil the argument!)
(33)
2007-12-12 12:22:20
|
Israeli officials were shocked and disappointed by the U.S. intelligence agencies' report downgrading the risk of Iran building nuclear weapons. That's because not only do some of the key conclusions of the latest National Intelligence Estimate undercut some of Israel's own assessments, they also seem to dim the likelihood of the U.S. taking military action against Iran's nuclear facilities - a step the Israelis had been quietly urging the White House should sanctions fail to stop Iran's uranium enrichment program. With the new U.S. assessment, one Israeli cabinet official told TIME, "It looks like this ends the military option against Iran for now. Israel won't attack alone. Iran's facilities are too many and spread too far apart."
Search MPACUK.org
Latest Discussions
Recommended Books
