IAEA, Hypocrisy and Israeli Nukes.

[500]

US also helped the Iraqis, but destroyed them three years later.

Israel only helped Iran.

Because King Abdullah I annexed west bank as a result of secret agreement with Meir. Read The Righteous Victim by Avi Shlayim.

Oh yes, Jordan annexed because of Israeli conspiracy and not because they simply wanted these lands for themselves.

The west banned military aids to both parties, however they sent thousands of volunteers and pilots to help Zionists during the Palestine war.

Only US banned military aid, while Britain supplied military aid to Arabs and British officers even led Arab troops to battle

US sent A-4 Skyhawks to Israel before the 1967 war, in addition to massive technical military assistance.

No, first Skyhawk arrived to Israel in December 1967 - 6 months after the six day war.

 

[T-Rex]

At least there are no chances of Israeli nukes falling in hand of terrorist.

They are already in the hands of a state that has reinvented state terrorism. What israel does is pure form of state terrorism and this rogue state has nukes so the terrorists are already in possession of nukes.

 

[spin666]

Israel only helped Iran.
Oh yes, Jordan annexed because of Israeli conspiracy and not because they simply wanted these lands for themselves.

We all know the power of Mosad!

No, first Skyhawk arrived to Israel in December 1967 - 6 months after the six day war.

Damn,I love those A-4's. One of the best(prize/ability) in her time!

 

[T-Rex]

"They are already in the hands of a state that has reinvented state terrorism. What israel does is pure form of state terrorism and this rogue state has nukes so the terrorists are already in possession of nukes," this is the topic, the damn A-4 is not the topic!

 

[nirreich]

"They are already in the hands of a state that has reinvented state terrorism. What israel does is pure form of state terrorism and this rogue state has nukes so the terrorists are already in possession of nukes," this is the topic, the damn A-4 is not the topic!

If terrorists posses nukes, they would use it. For example if Al-Qaeda, god forbid, acquire nuclear capability no doubt it would attack innocent civilians in one of the major cities of the US or Europe.

According to the general knowledge, Israel is a nuclear country since the late 1960's. If it was a terrorist state it could launch nuclear attacks and obliterate all its enemies in the Middle East, such as Syria and Iran.

However, of course, it never happened. Israel explicitly declared it will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons in the ME, e.g. if it posses nuclear capability it would not use it without any substantial provocation. Furthermore, Israel's official position has been that it would agree to NWFZ in the Middle East if there be an overhaul peace and normalisation between Israel and all its regional neighbours.

 

[T-Rex]

If terrorists posses nukes, they would use it. For example if Al-Qaeda, god forbid, acquire nuclear capability no doubt it would attack innocent civilians in one of the major cities of the US or Europe.

According to the general knowledge, Israel is a nuclear country since the late 1960's. If it was a terrorist state it could launch nuclear attacks and obliterate all its enemies in the Middle East, such as Syria and Iran.

However, of course, it never happened. Israel explicitly declared it will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons in the ME, e.g. if it posses nuclear capability it would not use it without any substantial provocation. Furthermore, Israel's official position has been that it would agree to NWFZ in the Middle East if there be an overhaul peace and normalisation between Israel and all its regional neighbours.

Israeli terrorists don't need nukes to kill and terrorise Palestinian children and women, they do it with their tanks and missiles.

 

[nirreich]

Israeli terrorists don't need nukes to kill and terrorise Palestinian children and women, they do it with their tanks and missiles.

So Israel so-called nukes makes no difference. Hence, this thread should be close for moderation.

 

[T-Rex]

So Israel so-called nukes makes no difference. Hence, this thread should be close for moderation.

I've a hunch that your deep desire to close this thread is going remain unfulfilled!

 

[nirreich]

I've a hunch that your deep desire to close this thread is going remain unfulfilled!

What is there more to discuss? The conclusion as you phrase it is that Israel's strategic capabilities are not relevant for its policies and approach, so IAEA would waste its time dealing with it instead of addressing more urgent matters.

 

[bularab]

I even doubt that Israel posess nuclear weapons. Chemical surely, but NOT nuclear.

 

[secularbuster]

I even doubt that Israel posess nuclear weapons. Chemical surely, but NOT nuclear.

Of course, you want to say that israel has the right to enjoy the privilege of your doubt, but remember Iraq was not given this privilege. Everywhere we turn there's nothing but hypocrisy.

 

[nirreich]

Of course, you want to say that israel has the right to enjoy the privilege of your doubt, but remember Iraq was not given this privilege. Everywhere we turn there's nothing but hypocrisy.

Pakistan also enjoyed that privilege until 1988, India until 1974, and North Korea until 2006.

 

[secularbuster]

Pakistan also enjoyed that privilege until 1988, India until 1974, and North Korea until 2006.

How about Iraq?

 

[nirreich]

Saddam's nuclear programme was destroyed by Israel in 1981 and thank god for that - just imagine what this guy would have done if he had nukes. In principle, there should be a world free of nuclear weapons, in practice we should prevent radical regimes which threaten to destabilise world order to develop nuclear weapons. So, although it is not a welcomed situation, it would not change much if a country like Belgium would develop nuclear weapons.

However, countries like Iran, Syria, Myanmar, Sudan, Libya, Venezuela, and Cuba should be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons. If it was possible, the US should have made stronger efforts to prevent Pakistan and North Korea from acquiring nukes in light of their irresponsible proliferation policy (nuclear assistance to radical regimes: Iran, Syria, Libya)

 

[secularbuster]

Saddam's nuclear programme was destroyed by Israel in 1981 and thank god for that - just imagine what this guy would have done if he had nukes. In principle, there should be a world free of nuclear weapons, in practice we should prevent radical regimes which threaten to destabilise world order to develop nuclear weapons. So, although it is not a welcomed situation, it would not change much if a country like Belgium would develop nuclear weapons.

However, countries like Iran, Syria, Myanmar, Sudan, Libya, Venezuela, and Cuba should be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons. If it was possible, the US should have made stronger efforts to prevent Pakistan and North Korea from acquiring nukes in light of their irresponsible proliferation policy (nuclear assistance to radical regimes: Iran, Syria, Libya)

Isreal's so-called non-existent WMD factories also need to be destroyed, if Iraq did not have the right neither does israel.