Benjamin Netanyahu's Recipe for Disaster

ndm

I was struck, reading pretty much simultaneously, two different readings on Obama and the World. One from the British ultra-right seemingly insistent on irrelevance and one from the American center-left that seems rooted in the real world.

Melanie Phillips writes in the adjacent cube:

-- The destruction of US sovereignty and legal and cultural integrity at home and the appeasement of tyrants abroad by a President who holds his own nation in such contempt that he wants to emasculate its powers of self-government and grovel to its mortal enemies - it’s certainly change, all right, but whether such a national suicide programme is one that Americans can actually believe in is quite another matter.

Meanwhile, the ever entertaining M.J. Rosenberg writes on TPMCafe:

-- In this week's New Yorker, Seymour Hersh reports that, just before leaving office, Dick Cheney told the Israelis that Obama is a wimp and could be ignored.

-- Netanyahu appears to have bought into the Cheney thesis and is now testing it by insulting the President on the day he is sworn in as Prime Minister. Let's see if Obama let's him get away with it. My guess is that Bibi just made the first major blunder of his tenure.

I think I will have to go with MJ on this one. At least he understands what he is talking about.

Alf Tupper

I can't find the piece, but I remember reading something from you recently Alex, in which you seemed - perplexed was it? - to hear that you were widely regarded as showing a leftish bias.

Items such as this might explain. Not because you attack Netanyahu; more in the way that you conjure such strained arguments - at all costs it seems - in defence here of Iran.

You can't see, and you can't/won't see that you can't see:

1. The Iranian regime has more than its share of 'nutters'

2. The USSR for all its faults, was rational in the most important sense that it viewed war as we do ourselves.

3. Tehran will be more of a threat than Moscow, because its facilities are much more likely to be accessed by third parties.

4. No world leader can afford to 'get into' the question of Tehran's risk analysis because it's simply a massive unknown - that's the point.

Lastly, were your confidence in the integrity and intention of Tehran sound, then why in an ideal world, would you rather they had no nuclear capability?

NJ

"In an ideal world Iran would not develop a nuclear capability. Of course in an ideal world, Bejamin Netanyahu wouldn't be Prime Minister of Israel either."...10/10 for flippancy.

Alex Massie

Alf Tupper,

To take your points in order:

1. Yes there are "nutters" in the Iranian regime but the people who control the - still unbuilt - nukes are not the Ahmadinejads.

2. There were plenty of people who thought the USSR irrational and who condemned Reagan's desire to engage with the Soviets.

3. That's why I think it preferable that Iran does not get the bomb.

4. Yes, this is a "massive unknown" but so too is bombing Iran without any kind of guarantee that such a mission will achieve its stated objectives. The consequences of that are also an "unknown unknown".

As for your last point, it's the proliferation issue that is the problem. I've written about this before.

SteveL

I find your arguments, Alf, to be underwhelming. Which Massie argument is 'strained.'

What, exactly, is a 'nutter' and what is your basis for this claim? Frankly, the GW Bush administration seemed to have its share of nutters if this can be construed to include those who thought the US could, through invasion, install a democratic government in Iraq that would recognise Israel, welcome a permanent US military presence and be a bulwark against Iran, not to mention the influence of people who think that war in the mideast is a critical step leading to the second coming of Jesus.

Iran doesn't view war the same way we do? What do you mean, exactly, and what is the basis for this claim?

What is the basis for the claim that Iranian facilities are much more likely to be accessed by third parties?

Who knows what you mean by your last point.

This all seems premised on a baseless caricature of Iran.

ndm

In criticizing Alex Massie for being insufficiently of the right, Alf Tupper might want to ponder why he believes ignoring reality to be so much a part of what it currently takes to be of the right.

It is possible to ignore reality for some time but at some point doing so no longer becomes tenable. And, frankly, Alex Massie strikes me as being far more closely attached to reality than are some of his colleagues - not to mention her name or anything.

Alf Tupper

Alex.

'Still unbuilt' is no comfort - we know they're imminent.

Ahmedinejad is not the problem, it's the popular base his rhetoric is fashioned to satisfy that is the worry; that will be there and nuke-capable when he is gone.

What people thought of the USSR is surely not the point.
What matters is that they factored in potential population loss in the same way we did and do - the calculus of mutually assured destruction held sway. Not so this opponent.

As for guarantees forget it. Guarantee has no place in war. It's just one desperate necessity after another that faces us I'm afraid.

Our main point of difference is I think the fact that you, unlike me, see no qualitative difference between the temporal constraints put upon one foe, as against the spiritually derived abandon of another.

Alf Tupper

ndm.

Why would I believe 'ignoring reality to be so much a part of what it currently takes to be of the right'? (Is that what you really meant to ask?

And I really do think you should try and get over your Melanie Phillips thing. She's already married and you'll just have to come to terms with it.

ndm

-- What matters is that they factored in potential population loss in the same way we did and do - the calculus of mutually assured destruction held sway. Not so this opponent.

What evidence do you have that Iran views mutually-assured destruction in a novel way? I venture that the answer is precisely none.

-- Our main point of difference is I think the fact that you, unlike me, see no qualitative difference between the temporal constraints put upon one foe, as against the spiritually derived abandon of another.

This is pure bullshit. It is stupid to claim there is any significant difference in effect between the "temporal" ideology of the neo-cons and the "spiritual" ideology of mad mullahs*. Their ideology is at once both symbiotic and parasitic.

* I deliberately didn't capitalize Mullah because I don't hold all Mullahs responsible for the failures of some.)

Ohad Efrati

why does Netanyahu decline to "get into" a discussion on whether Iran would "risk its own nuclear annihilation at the hands of Israel or America"? Might it be because the obvious answer is that they would not? Otherwise why not just say "yes they would be prepared to risk that"?

Netanyahu would indeed say "yes they would". He has said it in the past.

As to why he declined to "discuss" it, it might be that the fellow from the Atlantic - like Mr. Massie - is simply not willing to look at the kinds of remarks that have been coming from the Iranian regime and their aggressive promotion of Hamas and Hezbollah. Too many foreign observers find it comfortable to assume that those in charge in Iran must be pragmatic sensible people just like they are rather than look at what is actually going on.

elixelx

Alex, have you ever heard the word "basij"? Try googling it; see what you come up with!

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was a "basij" trainer; he used to teach the mentally handicapped, the 10-year-old Downs syndrome children, the heroin addicts, the young thieves etc. how to take the green plastic key to the gates of heaven he issued to them, and then walk into the field of fire of the elite Iraqi Republican Guard!

Consider this; the Republican Guard often ran away from the oncoming basijis because these tough army regulars had no stomach for killing children. Yet the basijis would swarm the Iraqis and tear them limb from limb, all the while shouting "Allah Who?"

I shall say no more! Read some of the 135,000 entries for yourselves all of you on this thread who think that Ahmadinejad is not a Messiah-obsessed fanatic!

Me? I heard about basijis from Shaheen Rouzbahani, married at 14, mother at 15, widowed at 16 because her husband, a heroin addict "volunteered" to accept the green plastic key! I taught her English in London whence she had gone with her second husband; her child from the basij had been left in the care of his grandparents. He still, at age 25, receives a small monthly stipend from the state for his father's sacrifice! Such a human face on such an evil race!

There were about 1 million basijis in the 80's. How many died no one knows, though the history of the Hitler Youth is very similar, and they lost fully 40% of their numbers!

The old man, Ayatollah Khomeini, maintained that human life was meaningless if one was not prepared to lay it down for the Imam who would come. That's why Iran, which 30 years ago was an Aryan, non-Arab Monarchy is today an Islamic Republic. And they think they can win because they love death! They all want to be basij!

So, yes. Netanyahu is right to be worried about the rulers of Iran acting self-destructively. After all, as Ahmadinejad himself said, Israel is a one-bomb problem!

kenny b

"it's not a nice risk to take, but it is one we've taken before"

Except the iranians haven't attacked or invaded any of their neighbours in 200 years.

Meanwhile a certain other country nearby has launched unprovoked attacks on every surrounding country every chance they get.

Who is the real threat to peace?

Ohad Efrati

Alex Massie wrote:

Yes there are "nutters" in the Iranian regime but the people who control the - still unbuilt - nukes are not the Ahmadinejads.

The burden of proof is on those who claim this to show that A-jad is not representative of the regime's views and intentions. Not the reverse.

There were plenty of people who thought the USSR irrational and who condemned Reagan's desire to engage with the Soviets.

Huh? Reagan was mostly criticized for his unflinching stance against the Soviets and military buildup.

That's why I think it preferable that Iran does not get the bomb.

Mighty generous of you to feel this way. It appears difficult for you to express the sentiment that some regimes are more dangerous than others.

Yes, this is a "massive unknown" but so too is bombing Iran without any kind of guarantee that such a mission will achieve its stated objectives. The consequences of that are also an "unknown unknown".

There are very few guarantees in life or in geopolitics. The consequences of doing nothing about Iran are also unknown and might be equally disastrous. This is hard to fathom since we have become so used to the whole "End of history" thing.

Linda Smith

Kenny B: you're as nutty as the Mullahs.

ndm

-- And I really do think you should try and get over your Melanie Phillips thing. She's already married and you'll just have to come to terms with it.

Damn. I do love me some fruit and nut(case).

And as to "basij." I am awfully suspicious whenever someone introduces a Middle Eastern term into a discussion because experience has shown these attempts to be predicated on malice. Anyone shocked by Iranian use of a Dads Army and child soldiers in the Iran/Iraq war might want to visit the fields of Flanders*, and further might want to ponder how Britain would have responded had the ultimate survival of the nation been at risk.

I have always felt there to be a hint of racism to the idea that when a Muslim loses his life mounting an attack it is a wanton act of cowardice but when a Westerner loses his life mounting an attack it is the supreme act of heroism.

* Alex Massie had a good post on this a couple of weeks ago describing the magnitude of the carnage of British rubgy players in WW1.

Conservative Cabbie

"Tehran poses a much smaller threat than Moscow ever did"

I'm not sure Israel feels that way. When did the USSR ever promise genocide?

"I have always felt there to be a hint of racism to the idea that when a Muslim loses his life mounting an attack it is a wanton act of cowardice but when a Westerner loses his life mounting an attack it is the supreme act of heroism."

How many westerners, ndm, deliberately target civilians with suicide bombs? Why is it racist to point that out? Are you saying that using women and children and the mentally handcapped to carry out suicide bombings on your behalf isn't cowardice? Well Ok, you may not be a racist, but you are certainly the most delusional relativist I've come across.

Kenny B

"Except the iranians haven't attacked or invaded any of their neighbours in 200 years."

So you don't consider supplying offensive weapons to Lebanon, Afghanistan, Hamas and recent Iraq to be carrying out attacks?

It does amuse me when the left fall over themselves to defend fascism. Relativism is alive and well in la-la, sorry, liberal land.

THX1138

Cabbie "How many westerners, ndm, deliberately target civilians with suicide bombs" Of course a suicide bomb is an evil but you're just as dead as if your a civilian blown up in a Baghdad square by a suicide bomber or a cruise missile and how brave is to bring death by pressing a button on a laptop.

As for supplying offensive weapons to unpleasant regimes I'd love to know the country that wasn't doing that. The US is supplying one country in the region the biggest weapon of them all and I have no doubt that this is accelerating Iran's desire to get the bomb.

Jeff Targetti

Hello! Anybody home? Does anyone out there understand the "only middle eastern democracy" just inaugurated its first openly social-fascist government? If I am not wrong it's the first time such a coalition controls a nuclear country with 250+ nuclear warheads...Where is now the "filthy beast"? In Teheran or Tel Aviv? Wake up folks and smell the ... crap!!

kal

Judge a state by its actions, what wars did Iran initiate? NONE.
Netanyahu is the chosen leader of Israel's demise. The rogue state that cannot survive its crimes against others despite the silence of the media and the agent leadears of the world.
Gaza was just yesterday, the leaders of Israel will surely pay for these crimes tomorrow.
How is it the world focus is on Iran and not Israel, the clearly rogue nation and the only mid east nuclear power.

Richard T

It seems from many of the comments that Iran has no national interests to look after. Simply run your eye round its borders to the east - 2 unstable sunni polities with the likelihood of taliban influenced or dominated governments, one of which has nuclear bombs and irridentist claims on Iran's provinces; look north at increasing Russian influence in the successor state to the USSR; north west are the caucusus republics where Russia and the USA are playng great power games and there is a wish to get Georgia into NATO; Iraq is unstable but the USA has indulged the Kurds to de-stabilise the minorities in Turkey and Iran. Israel now has an extremist nationalist government preaching war. How in heaven's name do you expect Iran to react? Has it no self interests to defend? Add in the islamic dimension and the forthcoming presidential elections and you might just get a hot reaction, sabre-rattling and the promotion of the nuclear capability.

I'm not an apologist for the iranian government but the lack of a real politik perspective in reviewing the middle east is disturbing,

Conservative Cabbie

THX

"Of course a suicide bomb is an evil but you're just as dead as if your a civilian blown up in a Baghdad square by a suicide bomber or a cruise missile and how brave is to bring death by pressing a button on a laptop."

Did you misread my comment, or are you being deliberately mischevious in ignoring my use of the word "deliberate"? The West have gone to great lengths to create more accurate weapons to reduce civilian casualties. Middle-Eastern terrorists delight in the targetting of helpless civilians (the more helpless the better). To try and justify that or to equate that to the actions of the West is morally vacuous.

scabbard

"Of course in an ideal world, Bejamin Netanyahu wouldn't be Prime Minister of Israel". Who would be, then?

mark aleshnick

@ linda smith: Instead of launching an ad homonym attack at Kenny B., why not try to answer the question.

How many neighbors have the renegades of the insane israeli state attacked in the last 60 years? Also, who has developed and lied about the existence of 200 nuclear weapons? Who has defied 65 UN resolutions.

I fear the insanity and psychotic peoples of israel far more than Iran. Polls in Europe show that all those nations find the israelis to be far more a threat to world peace than Iran, N. Korea, or any faux named axis of evil.

Try do some reading before you launch your juvenile attacks.

http://www.ifamericansonlyknew.org/

Linda Smith

Mark Aleshnick: You invert the truth.

The Arabs declared War on the Jews - not vice versa as you falsely claim. Israel's neighbours refused to accept UN Resolution 181 of 29 November 1947 setting up two states, one Jewish and one Arab. The Jews accepted Partition; the Arabs refused on religious ideological grounds. As Moslems they refused to accept a Jewish state in their midst and declared war on the Jews. They continually attacked the fledgling state of Israel.

Jordan and Egypt eventually declared peace with Israel when they realised they could not beat Israel. Many Arab States now recognise that they have a common enemy with Israel, Islamism, which is the greatest threat to World Peace.

Hamas and Hezbollah are Islamists who are dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the murder of World Jewry. Israel is not going to commit national suicide to please the antisemites of the world.

As for insanity and psychosis, Iran and the Mullahs rant about an Acopalypse to bring about the reappearance of the 12th Imam. Iran Nuking Israel in their religious fervour is the Acopalypse we sane people fear.

Limagolf

"Netanyahu offered Iran’s behavior during its eight-year war with Iraq as proof of Tehran’s penchant for irrational behavior. Iran “wasted over a million lives without batting an eyelash … It didn’t sear a terrible wound into the Iranian consciousness."

Having an Iranian girlfriend I can only say this is extreme bullshit, squared!

The Iraq war has seared itself into the Iranian mind, just as ww2 seared itself into the Soviet mind. Much of what Iran has done since 1988 should be seen as ways to stop a new bloodletting on such catastropic scale.

The comment also shows a lack of knowledge about the real military history of the Iran-Iraq War. Most combat took place with regular forces and even that was very bloody.

Go talk to some 40-50 y.o. Iranian expats if you are in doubt about the role of the war on the Iranian psyche.

/Limagolf

MH

Either some on this thread are totally ignorant about Iran or they are rolling along with the rest of pundits who have taken on the mission of demonizing Iran.

1. For all those who are not aware the 8 year war between Iran and Iraq was instigaged by the former dictator of Iraq with the full support (military including chemical and biological weapons) provided by the U.S., West Germany, France including assistance from most of the Arab regimes. Iran was on its own, fighting for its independence.

If anyone believes that Iran had no right to defend itself against aggression by the powers at be, then I like to know what the hell is the U.S. and NATO forces doing in Afghanistan, Pakistan and why have they waged an illegal war in Iraq which was no threat to the U.S. to begin with?

2. Interesting how in the U.S. and the rest of the Western world we glorify and place on a pedastal our soldiers, generals, commanders in chief who are risking their life in the battle field to protect our country, but when the Iranians or others do it - they are considered fanatic. This is in reference to Ahmadinejad as being part of the Basij. Yes, he was, he was in the front line risking his life for the freedom and independence of his country. I believe this is quite honorable in fact. Unlike our presidents who hide in the White House or on Downing Street, he was on the battle field.

3. The fact that Iran is an Islamic Republic does not mean that the Mullah's are fanatic and out to destroy themselves or Iran. So in response to Netanyahu "NO IRAN WOULD NOT BE WILLING TO comit national suicide." This is why he did not respond. And that's why raising Iran as a threat to Israel is such a ridiculous idea.

Who is Israel to point fingers at Iran anyway. Israel has the 4th largest most powerful army in the world thanks to the military and financial support provided by U.S. tax payers.

Israel also has by various estimates 200 to 400 nuclear weapons. While Iran has none!

Israel is not a signatory to the NPT, while Iran is. Iran's nuclear facilities are under the watchful eyes of the IAEA 24 hours 7 days a week. Furthermore the spent fuel from its nuclear enrichment is returned to its supplier Russia!

5. Iran has not attacked any country for over 300 years, while the case for Israel is all too obvious. Israel has gotten away with murder with impunity only because the U.S. has stood by this "rogue state". Israel has used DIME, White Phosphorous, DU on the Palestinians and Lebanese civilians - I guess some of you are still of the belief that Israel is the rational country and Iran is not! This is a joke!

6. Neither Iran or its president have threatend to wipe Israel off the map - this is the greatest rumor of the century. Israel always needs to create an enemy for itself to portray itself as the victim. By the time Israel continues it's settlement projects and confiscation of stolen land, water and natural resources of the Palestinians - the Palestinian people will have been wiped off the map; there won't be any Palestinian State to speak off. This is exactly what Bibi is committed too!!

Conservative Cabbie

MH

Whilst the translation has been disputed, he did agree with Ayatollah Khomeini's call for Israel to be "wiped from the pages of history." One could dismiss this as a poor translation, except that following the speech, he appeared at a rally where the crowd were chanting "death to Israel" and endorsed his previous message.

So when he appears at rallies where his political goons chant genocidal phrases, when he distributes weapons and funds to organisations that also wish to rid the world of Israel, and when he supports holocaust denial, I'd say that it is fairly clear that he is indeed happy for Israel to be "wiped from the pages of history.".

THX1138

Cabbie yep sorry I missed the "deliberate" but deliberate or not you're still dead. I somehow doubt that new weapons are more accurate to reduce civilian casualties much more likely the intend is to be better at killing people.

Of course Iran can act and negotiate rationally, didn't Reagan secure the release of the US hostages on the day of his inauguration, how was this done without a negotiation around mutual self interest? I still hate them I just think we can do a deal.

Conservative Cabbie

THX

You may be right, if a deal can be reached that does away with a nuclear Iran and doesn't adversely affect the safety or sovereignty of Israel then great. I am less confident though in the rationality of an administration that executes gay people than your trusting self. Nor do I think that they should be trusted, pandered to or appeased.

mark aleshnick

Linda Smith, I asked three questions - you responded to none, but instead recited a litany of hasbara pablum, and end by invoking the fear of Iran nuking israel.

I repeat my advice that you really do need to do some reading before engaging in adult discussion.

mark aleshnick

The reality is that lazy liguisitic examination of the REAL statements have lead to this "wiped from the pages of history," canard, when the actual reality is that it was the regime NOT the people referred to by both Khomeini and Ahmadinejad:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4527

Linda Smith

Mark Aleshnick: how do you wipe a regime but not the people off the pages of history?

Linda Smith

mark aleshnick displays his ignorance and naivety. I have rather more confidence in the learned opinion of Michael Axworthy, Head of the Iran Section of Britain's Foreign and Commonwealth Office (1998-2000). Michael Axworthy is in no doubt that Iran intends a military implementation of Ahmedinajad's stated wish in 2005 to wipe Israel off the map:

"The formula had been used before by Khomeini and others, and had been translated by representatives of the Iranian regime as 'wiped off the map'. Some of the dispute that has arisen over what exactly Ahmadinejad meant by it has been rather bogus. When the slogan appeared draped over missiles in military parades, that meaning was pretty clear."

Ahmadinejad 13 May 2008 "...this regime would soon be swept away by the Palestinians"..A day later in Gorgan, northern Iran "Israel's days are numbered..the peoples of the region would not miss the narrowest opportunity to annihilate this false regime.
Iranian news channel on 2 June 2008 "Thanks to God, your wish will soon be realised, and this germ of corruption will be wiped off the face of the world"

"Viewed in context, the statements of Iran's leaders and, in particular, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad constitute incitement to genocide of the people of Israel. They are alarmingly similar to the coded statements of incitement that preceded the Rwandan genocide of the Tutsis in 1994, and should therefore alarm all peace-loving peoples."
(Dr Joshua Teitelbaum, Stanford University)

The EU released the following Statement on 25 February 2008:
DECLARATION BY THE PRESIDENCY ON BEHALF OF THE EU ON RECENT ANTI-ISRAELI STATEMENTS
The EU condemns in the strongest terms the statements made by the Iranian President Ahmadinejad, the Speaker of the Iranian Majlis Haddad Adel, the Iranian Foreign Minister Mottaki, and the Commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Jafari. Their comments pointed against Israel are unacceptable, damaging and uncivilised. The EU calls on Iran to stop hostile rhetoric and refrain from all threats towards other states, members of the international community."

Regarding the status of the Jewish community in Iran: ""Not allowed to occupy higher positions than Muslims and so are disqualified frm the leading ranks in politics and the military. Not allowed to serve as witnesses in court, and Jewish schools must be managed by Muslims and stay open on Jewish Sabbath. Books in Hebrew prohibited. Subordinate Dhimmi status.....Today the Jewish community serves Ahmedinajad not only as an alibi in his power game, but also increasingly as a deterrent: In the event of an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, this community would find itself hostage and vulnerable to acts of reprisal." (Matthias Kuntzel).

Israel is the central front of the global Islamic jihad for world domination. The goal of the Islamic global jihad is to conquer all unbelievers and spead Islamic theocracy around the world. If you are deluded enough to think the virulently anti-semitic, Holocaust denying, Islamic fundamentalist Ahmedinajad has only got Israel in his sights, you'd better think again. Because in the Iranian President's own words on October 2005:

"We are in the process of an historical war...and this war has been going on for hundreds of years....We have to understand the depth of the disgrace of the enemy, until our holy hatred expands continuously and strikes like a wave......This holy hatred is boundless and unconditional. It will not be mitigated by any form of Jewish or non-Jewish conduct - other than subordination to sharia and the Koran."

Khaled Meshaael, Damascus-based political leader of Hamas: "Just as Islamic Iran defends the rights of the Palestinians, we defend the rights of Islamic Iran. We are part of a united front against the enemies of Islam"

mark aleshnik et al: I can't decide if you are secret Islamists or just traditional jew baiters. Any sane person does not plead their enemies' cause as you do.

Yehuda Rosensweig

So many wrong points:

Britain also perceived that it fought a defensive war in WW1

Netanyahu refuses to be drawn on his beliefs on Iran's willingness to use the bomb because he is playing a very intricate game of poker with the Iranian regime, and doesn't want the latter to anticipate what he will do.

Iran poses a much greater threat to ISRAEL than the Soviets ever did.

In an ideal world, complacent idiots such as Massie would not get prestigious and influential positions as columnists

Fred Talpiot

The Stalinists were philosophically materialists who believed in human progress through a scientific understanding of the forces of history.

The Mullahs are spiritualists who believe a nuclear war will propel them into Paradise as Jihadists.

Dealing with one is not the same as dealing with another.

It is more than offensive that Iran is building weapons to destroy the West using the West's own oil money.

Destroy Iran's nuclear program and remove their ability to build another one.

mark aleshnick

"Mark Aleshnick: how do you wipe a regime but not the people off the pages of history?"

@linda smith Ever hear of Saddam Hussein (Iraq), Noriega (Panama), The peacock Throne (Iran)?

Why do I respond to such ignorant questions? If linda even bothered to read my link, it is clear she had no comprehension whatsoever of the subject matter.

Linda Smith

Mark Aleshnick: The "regime" in Israel is Jewish. The only way to remove a "Jewish regime" is to kill all the Jews.

Regime change is illegal under international law. Israel, threatend repeatedly by Iran that it intends regime change is at liberty to take pre-emptive action to defend itself.

Luc Hansen

Linda: if regime change is illegal why has Israel killed so many and spent so much in its failed attempt to oust Hamas?

Scabbard: Khaled Meshaal? Of a united Israel/Palestine?

Linda Smith

Luc Hansen: Israel attack Hamas in self defence. Hamas's Charter states Hamas's objectives as the destruction of Israel and the murder of the world's Jews.

Linda Smith

Luc Hansen: Could you please explain what you mean by "Of a united Israel/Palestine"

Luc Hansen

Linda, sorry for the delay. My blog http://kbrmrebutted.blogspot.com keeps me busy. What I mean is that Israel is bent on a mission of not permitting a viable State of Palestine. Israel occupies the Palestinian Territories. One day, Palestinians will reject the two state solution and demand their human and democratic rights as citizens of Israel. How could the world deny them?