by AlicetheCurious » Wed May 31, 2006 9:50 am
Well, Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, has regularly been inspected by the IAEA, has violated no international laws and has invaded no other country. So, according to our resident weasel (and, may I add, a credit to weasels everywhere), "we" (meaning we REAL humans) should bomb that country to smithereens and pulverize those jihad-monkey raghead sand-niggers (even the babies, especially the babies) to a bloody, preferably radioactive pulp.<br><br>"Excuse me," say the fanatic swarthy Arab Islamofascist subhumans, "Iran does not HAVE ANY nuclear weapons...in the entire Middle East, Israel is not only the ONLY state that does, conservative estimates say that its nuclear arsenal is at least 5 times those of India and Pakistan (the only two other countries that have nuclear WMD and are not signatories of the Nonproliferation Treaty) combined." <br><br>"There you go, I'm not surprised," I can just hear the weasel sighing, "I guess that's the kind of antisemitic back-talk you'd <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>expect</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> from medieval, bloodthirsty, Islamofascist dune-koons."<br><br>Weasels aren't known for their listening skills, so I don't hold out much hope for this one in particular. But for anybody who is interested, I would like to present the nuclear map as viewed from the sand-nigger perspective. Any other "fucking locals" (as the US troops so charmingly call the people they liberate from life, limb and property) are free to join in.<br><br>So, in the entire Middle East, whose finger IS on the trigger? Hmm, let's see..<br><br>A Jewish supremacist state, in violation of 65, count 'em, 65 UN resolutions (without the US' use of its veto power, they would have been a lot more), most of which deal with Israel's violation of the Geneva Conventions on Human Rights, and its commission of war crimes;<br><br>A state whose military leaders include highly-decorated generals unable to travel to many European countries, because they are wanted for war crimes and crimes against humanity;<br><br>A highly-militarized expansionist state, that has illegally occupied territories of ALL FOUR of its immediate neighbours, in the process murdering tens of thousands of civilians, destroying or stealing precious agricultural land and water resources, and transferring its own armed settlers into occupied territories in violation of international law, to terrorize and torment unarmed civilians with impunity, for the sole reason that they are not Jewish;<br><br>A highly-militarized, expansionist state with an estimated 100 to 200 nuclear warheads (enough to kill every Arab man, woman and child in the Middle East), that has REFUSED to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, or to allow UN inspectors to monitor its nuclear arsenal;<br><br>A state that has repeatedly issued subtle and not-so-subtle threats to actually USE nuclear weapons:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> Israel has made countless veiled nuclear threats against the Arab nations and against the Soviet Union (and by extension Russia since the end of the Cold War). One chilling example comes from Ariel Sharon, the current Israeli Prime Minister <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>"Arabs may have the oil, but we have the matches."</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br> <br>...According to [Israeli human rights activist] Israel Shahak, ..."Israel is preparing for a war, nuclear if need be, for the sake of averting domestic change not to its liking, if it occurs in some or any Middle Eastern states.... <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Israel clearly prepares itself to seek overtly a hegemony over the entire Middle East..., without hesitating to use for the purpose all means available, including nuclear ones.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->"<br><br>...<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>[Israeli Foreign Minister] Shimon Peres: "acquiring a superior weapons system (read nuclear) would mean the possibility of using it for compellent purposes - that is forcing the other side to accept Israeli political demands, which presumably include a demand that the traditional status quo be accepted and a peace treaty signed." </strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->From a slightly different perspective, Robert Tuckerr asked in a Commentary magazine article in defense of Israeli nukes, "What would prevent Israel... from pursuing a hawkish policy employing a nuclear deterrent to freeze the status quo?"<br><br> .....Another major use of the Israeli bomb is to compel the U.S. to act in Israel's favor, even when it runs counter to its own strategic interests. As early as 1956 Francis Perrin, head of the French A-bomb project wrote "We thought the Israeli Bomb was aimed at the Americans, not to launch it at the Americans, but to say, 'If you don't want to help us in a critical situation we will require you to help us; otherwise we will use our nuclear bombs.'" During the 1973 war, Israel used nuclear blackmail to force Kissinger and Nixon to airlift massive amounts of military hardware to Israel. The Israeli Ambassador, Simha Dinitz, is quoted as saying, at the time, "If a massive airlift to Israel does not start immediately, then I will know that the U.S. is reneging on its promises and...we will have to draw very serious conclusions..." Just one example of this strategy was spelled out in 1987 by Amos Rubin, economic adviser to Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, who said <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>"If left to its own Israel will have no choice but to fall back on a riskier defense which will endanger itself and the world at large... To enable Israel to abstain from dependence on nuclear arms calls for $2 to 3 billion per year in U.S. aid."</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> ....<br><br>...According to Seymour Hersh, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>"the size and sophistication of Israel's nuclear arsenal allows men such as Ariel Sharon to dream of redrawing the map of the Middle East aided by the implicit threat of nuclear force."</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> .... Ze'ev Shiff, an Israeli military expert writing in Haaretz said, "Whoever believes that Israel will ever sign the UN Convention prohibiting the proliferation of nuclear weapons... is day dreaming," and Munya Mardoch, Director of the Israeli Institute for the Development of Weaponry, said in 1994, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>"The moral and political meaning of nuclear weapons is that states which renounce their use are acquiescing to the status of Vassal states. All those states which feel satisfied with possessing conventional weapons alone are fated to become vassal states."</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>..... Seymour Hersh warns, "Should war break out in the Middle East again,... or should any Arab nation fire missiles against Israel, as the Iraqis did, a nuclear escalation, once unthinkable except as a last resort, would now be a strong probability." <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Ezar Weissman, Israel's current President said "The nuclear issue is gaining momentum (and the) next war will not be conventional." </strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Russia and before it the Soviet Union has long been a major (if not the major) target of Israeli nukes. It is widely reported that the principal purpose of Jonathan Pollard's spying for Israel was to furnish satellite images of Soviet targets and other super sensitive data relating to U.S. nuclear targeting strategy. (Since launching its own satellite in 1988, Israel no longer needs U.S. spy secrets.) Israeli nukes aimed at the Russian heartland seriously complicate disarmament and arms control negotiations and, at the very least, the unilateral possession of nuclear weapons by Israel is enormously destabilizing, and dramatically lowers the threshold for their actual use, if not for all out nuclear war.<br><br>Seymour Hersh sites other threats in <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>The Samson Option</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Referring to the U.S. failure to support Israel's invasion of Egypt in 1956, including in the face of nuclear threats from the Soviet Union, one unnamed former Israeli official told Hersh in the late 1980s: "You Americans screwed us...We got the message. We can still remember the smell of Auschwitz and Treblinka. Next time we'll take all of you with us."</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.carolmoore.net/nuclearwar/israelithreats.html">www.carolmoore.net/nuclea...reats.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>The weasel said:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Succinctly and accurately stated. Nuclear weapons in and of themselves, like all inanimate objects, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>are morally neutral</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> [<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>HUH! Really?</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->]. Whether they're a <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>force for good</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> or evil depends on whose finger is on the trigger.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>In other words, according to weasel morality, it is good that the power to destroy millions of humans, cause unbearable suffering, infinite generations of mutated babies and to blight the earth forever, that such cosmic power over the earth and all its inhabitants, belong to us and to the people we like. You know, moral giants like Bush, you know, like that.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
