Why this man is smiling

Andre

And all Cameron and Brown can argue about is a postal strike....

John Edwards

"There are countries in the world that are happy with what they have and aren't interested in expansion or intruding on their neighbours. Then are states that are actively intervening in the affairs of their neighbours and have interests well beyond their own borders".

Amazing that Dore Gold can say something like that apparently oblivious to how that description applies to Israel.

For example, expansion through settlement building in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, annexation claims on East Jerusalem and Syrian territory on the Golan Heights. Not to mention the Shebaa Farms.

How many times has Israel intervened in the affairs of Lebanon by invading it? How many times has it "intervened" in Gaza or the other Palestinian territories?

"Aren't interested in intruding on their neighbour?" Give me a break.

phil

Churchill continued to warn the world throughout the thirties of the menace of hitler .the indolent world took no notice and it cost fifty million lives .I have no doubt that this message will soon be swamped by others who will of course ignore it .

daniel maris

Andre - And the crazy thing is that once Iran HAS the bomb, everyone will be panicking and with good reason. It seems our societies cannot comprehend the dangers and the risks in advance.

Nothing is cost-free in life but I sincerely believe failure to take pre-emptive action now will be our Rhineland moment and will cost everyone (all around the planet - think what environmental damage Chernobyl did) v. dear .

We need air strikes against the nuclear installations and the power lines and roads and other facilities that serve them - and those strikes need to continue indefinitely. We need an economic blockade of Iranian ports. We need financial war to be declared on Iran. We need to close down all its airports.

We don't need to invade the country.

logdon

Andre
October 21st, 2009 3:52pm

And all Cameron and Brown can argue about is a postal strike....

Or in Cameron's case, all women shortlists?

stanley Jerusalem

Andre
October 21st, 2009 3:52pm

And all Cameron and Brown can argue about is a postal strike....
Sadly, that's about all they are capable of, if that.

stanley Jerusalem

Sorry, Logdon. I'd forgotten that ground-breaking leap forward [toward the abyss].

Dave M

"For example, expansion through settlement building in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, annexation claims on East Jerusalem and Syrian territory on the Golan Heights. Not to mention the Shebaa Farms."

But this territory is historically Israel is it not? Israel doesn't have an annexation claim on East Jerusalem but East Jerusalem is Jerusalem itself - the capital of Israel. Even under the Roman Empire this land was recognised as Jewish or "Iudaica". Israel today is merely land that has been won back fair and square after a war was fought. It has belonged to Israelis for millenia.
I've never quite understood how come it's wrong for Israelis to live in the land they occupied since 1000 B.C. while Britain has settlements in the Falklands, to give just one example. Were the British building temples in the Falklands back in 1000 B.C. (I think not!).
Israel neither poses no threat to other countries as Iran does today via its militant Islam and "death to America" slogans on its missiles.

Dave M

"We need air strikes against the nuclear installations and the power lines and roads and other facilities that serve them - and those strikes need to continue indefinitely. We need an economic blockade of Iranian ports."

I'd go for a quick "in and out" job. Bomb the whole installation area first, land a few thousand troops in the area, dismantle everything in site and then get the heck out -job done. The Iranians are too behind in air power to stop such a hit and run incursion and the whole process could be over within days. You only have to coccupy a small area of land and defend it till the said area is rendered "safe".

Archie

And all under the benevolent gaze of the well-out-of-his-depth nitwit in the White House.

Augustus

The IAEA Director said in an interview: "(Everyone) looked to the future, not the past."
But: "He who controls the past commands the future. And he who commands the future conquers the past."

The world is fortunate that the 1962 Cuban missile crisis did not end in nuclear escalation. Probably more to do with luck than judgement. Wars can lead to extremes, and the prevention of nuclear escalation is by no means guaranteed. This applies all the more in the Near and Middle East where Israel, by virtue of its geograpy alone, would not have a 'second strike capacity' should its territory be threatened. Consequently, if Iran does go nuclear militarily,
a very real and increasing likelihood, Israel must strike those nuclear weapons out of Iran's hands at a relatively early stage in a crisis. Iran in turn would then try to rely on deployment of its capacity before it was lost.

The world's nuclear time bomb is ticking fast towards zero hour some time in the future.
Dictatorships threatening others with nuclear weapons might well get out of hand one day. A new world order where the old stereotypes are now relics of the past, and the nuclear have-nots use atomic energy to pursue national
goals, means a considerable increase in international instability. It means that rogue states and terrorists will have greater access to fissile material with which to intimidate the targets of their
felonious ambitions.

Graeme

According to the BBC article, Iran has more than 1200 KG of uranium. This amount of uranium is enough to build 20 simple gun barrel assembly nuclear bombs like the Little Boy bomb dropped on Japan in 1945. Alternatively, 1200 KG of Uranium could make some 70 to 80 20 kiloton bombs of the implosion type also dropped on Japan. And this is using 1945 technology.Iran is a para-nuclear state like any other state with stockpiles of uranium or plutonium

Sam ARMSTRONG

Excellent article, thank you.

Derek BLADES

Iran is ringed by nuclear-armed and potentially hostile powers - Israel, Pakistan and the United States Gulf fleet.

In that situation it would be irresponsible of the Iranian leaders if they did not try to level the playing field by acquiring their own nuclear deterrent.

As usual, President Obama, has the right answer - nuclear disarmament.

Andre

Derek BLADES If you were Iran would you not make a sustained attempt at peace - especially given the liberal leaning President Obama? Would you not talk to him and talk to Israel? Would you not seek understanding and reconciliation with Pakistan rather than supplying arms and money to the terrorists who seek to overthrow the government there? Would it really be wise to engage in a nuclear arms-race-to-the-death on a some spurious religious imperative? C'mon grow up.

Yehuda

Posters like John Edwards have not learned the history that under international law Judea (including Jerusalem), Samaria and Gaza legitimately ought to be part of the State of Israel, the government of which has decided voluntarily to relinquish some of this land.
They forget, too, that the Golan Heights housed a Syrian artillery network, which used to target Israeli civilians living at the foot of the Golan.
Lebanon has for decades been home to PLO, Amal and Hizballah combatants who targeted Israeli civilians and troops.
The bottom line is that the "Arab world" has not accepted Israel's legitimacy and has chosen to maintain hostilities against it.
John Edwards et al would prefer Israel to sit back and be destroyed, but he can't blame Israelis for choosing to fight back.
That Israel has succeeded in fending off continuous Arab aggression, much of it accompanied by public proclamations of genocidal intent, does not render Israel the guilty party.
The losers are not necessarily right or righteous, John, just because they are losers in every sense of the word.
If the "Arab world" had spent its treasure on education, health, scientific research etc, rather than pursuing perpetual war against Israel, they would today not be near the bottom of the heap in all of these and other areas of human achievement.

elixelx

Q: What constitutes the "inalienable right, the national pride, and the guarantee of a viable national defence" of the Iranian People?
A: Their Nuclear Enrichment Programme...
Iran can no more negotiate that away than the Pope can Priestly Celibacy or the Anathema on abortion.
Q: Would Iran give up its NEP if the Israelis were to stop building settlements, withdraw from the "occupied territories", hand over all of Israel with all the Israelis in handcuffs to the Hamas?
A: Not on your nellie! Remember, you can't just give or negotiate away your "inalienable right, the national pride, and the guarantee of a viable national defence", just because ONE object of hatred has been removed.
Anybody who actually believes that Iran will ever stop before getting the bomb is deluded!
And once Iran has ONE bomb what's to stop it having TWO or TEN...and once it's seen how one can in Iran can earn the respect of the world what's to stop it having a second in Lebanon, a third in Gaza...just small little boys, nothing earth shattering, no really BIG bangs...Maybe a teensy weensy one in Egypt, a suitcase or two in Iraq; and a special delivery container for Los Angeles, the very heart of darkness...
Now that's proliferation, and that's how Iran will play out this scenario!

TD

We have learned nothing from the failures of the 30's. History is about to repeat itself, with many dead. I don't know what Israel has up its sleeve, but it is a very tough adversary and willing to make great sacrifices to protect itself. Iran and I suspect other middle eastern nations (Syria) will suffer enormously because of this. Make sure that you take down the names of the great western powers, as these cowards will be remembered with shame in the future.

Straydingo

John Edwards/Derek BLADES, how does one even try to engage in a debate with people like you?
Clearly, you both live in a world where everything is fluffy, everyone sings Kumbaya, and your enemies forget their hatred of you because you tell them “Make Love Not War” and they throw done their weapons and give you a hug.
Only, one day someone flies a nuke into Parliament House.
Personally, I think its people like you two and those that are in power who share your simpleton views that pose the greatest threat to the West.

Scot Richards

Its somewhat discomfrting to see that even some Coffee House readers can't seem to differentiate between a few overzealous Zionists building houses and farms outside their borders and Iran threatening nuclear devastation.

Even worse, there seem to be a few who think building houses is worse - an act of terrorism, no less.

Derek BLADES

Yehuda, 21 October, told John Edwards that he has "not learned the history that under international law Judea (including Jerusalem), Samaria and Gaza legitimately ought to be part of the State of Israel,..."

John Edwards may not be the only poster who does not know this. I am certainly another one so could you tell us what "international law" you are referring to. And please avoid any reference to Biblical scripts in your reply.

Kiwi

Derek BLADES asks: "so could you tell us what 'international law' you are referring to..."
Maybe this will help:
1) After World War I Great Britain accepted the 1922 Mandate for Palestine, and then — with League of Nations approval — used its article 25 to create two distinct entities within the Mandate-designated area.

2) The territory lying between the Jordan River and the eastern desert boundary "of that part of Palestine which was known as Trans-Jordan" (nearly 78 percent) thus became the Emirate of Transjordan. This new entity was put under the rule of Emir Abdullah, the eldest son of the Sharif of Mecca, as a recompense for his support in the war against the Turks, and of Ibn Saud's seizure of Arabia (Faisal, Abdullah's brother, later received the even vaster Mandate area of Iraq).

3) Turning a blind eye to article 15, Great Britain also decided that no Jews could reside or buy land in the newly created Emirate. This policy was ratified — after the emirate became a kingdom — by Jordan's law no. 6, sect. 3, on April 3, 1954, and reactivated in law no. 7, sect. 2, on April 1, 1963. It states that any person may become a citizen of Jordan unless he is a Jew. King Hussein made peace with Israel in 1994, but the Judenrein legislation remains valid today.

4) The remaining area west of the Jordan River (comprising about 22 percent of the original Mandate) was then officially designated "Palestine" by Great Britain. As stated in the 1937 Royal Commission Report, "the primary purpose of the Mandate, as expressed in its preamble and its articles, is to promote the establishment of the Jewish National Home." This was now greatly restricted.

5) U.N. General Assembly Resolution 181 (November 29, 1947) authorized a Partition Plan in this area: for an Arab and a Jewish state — and for a corpus separatum for Jerusalem. The plan was rejected by both the Arab League and the Arab-Palestinian leadership. Aided and abetted by the neighboring Arab countries, local armed Arab Palestinian forces immediately began attacking Jews, who counterattacked. On May 15, 1948, the armies of five Arab League states joined these militias in the invasion of Israel, but their armies failed in their goal of eradicating the fledgling state.

6) The armistice boundaries (1949-1967) left Israel with roughly 16.5 percent, or 8,000 sq. miles, of the original 1922 Mandate area (about 48,000 sq. miles), while about five percent — less Gaza, which was occupied by the Egyptians — was conquered and occupied in 1948 by British General Glubb Pasha, the commander of Abdullah's Arab Legion. The historic regions of "Judea and Samaria" — their official names as indicated on all British mandate maps until 1948 — were annexed and became the "West Bank" of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in 1950. All the Jews were expelled from the area and from the Old City of Jerusalem; their synagogues, and even tombstones on the Mount of Olives, were destroyed."
The above is a partial transcript presented to the UN Secretary General 10 February 2003. It is based on David G Littman's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Littman_%28historian%29) 'The Truth About the Middle East. Fourteen fundamental facts about Israel and Palestine'.
http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/%28symbol%29/E.CN.4.2003.ngo.221.en?opendocument
Sigh, Derek BLADES, Carl, John Edwards, et al, These are the basic facts, it's not rocket science to look this stuff up yourselves.

Derek BLADES

Kiwi, 23 October, has kindly filled in for Yehuda in telling me what "international law" has assigned the West Bank to Israel.

Picking through Kiwi's long and one-sided history of the founding of Israel, my guess is that he believes that the "international law" concerned is the 1922 Mandate granted by the League of Nations to the United Kingdom. The way in which the United Kingdom carried out its mandate and in particular how it interpreted its mission "to promote the establishment of the Jewish National Home" in the part of Palestine west of the Jordan river continues to be the subject of academic debate. In any event, none of this can be said to constitute “international law” which was what I asked Yehuda to give me.

What Kiwi and Yehuda need to understand is the utter irrelevancy of this history. What the League of Nations did in 1922, what the UN General Assembly said in 1947 and what the United Kingdom did and said in carrying out its mandate have all been surpassed by the events of the last sixty years.

Israel is occupying the West Bank. No country recognises Israel's right to construct settlements in those occupied territories. The Obama team is working with the full approval of every member state of the United Nations, except Israel, to create an independent state of Palestine consisting of the West Bank, Gaza and, hopefully, East Jerusalem.

Kiwi ended his reply to me by citing (with a sigh) some websites he wanted me to look at. Of these only Wikipedia can be described as objective. Kiwi’s potted version of the founding of Israel was based on David Littman’s book “Fourteen fundamental facts about Israel and Palestine”. If you think those are the only relevant facts, Kiwi, I pity you.

Linda Smith

I reckon talking about International Law is totally irrelevant. The only international law that counts is the biggest gun.

Britain set up Jordan etc. etc. because it had the POWER to do it having defeated the Ottoman empire and having won the First World WAR.

You're all barking up the wrong tree. He who wins the war makes the rules.

Jerrold Cohen

Israel has been the biggest terrorist in the region for years and it has a nuclear stash of apparently several hundred nukes. If Iran is smiling maybe the covers are about to come off the Israeli nukes and they may be subject to international pressure to get rid of them

Ali Mostofi

MP

Iranians do not support international terrorism, the regime that is not wanted by the people of Iran is doing all this.

The solution is simple. Please express the situation properly, and then look for civilized Iranians. There are plenty well educated Iranians around, but somehow the powers that be, want to deal with these weirdos instead.

Ali Mostofi

There is also the whole discussion regarding Israel that Iran plays a crucial historical role in. No one mentions that the whole of that area belonged to Iran and if it were not for Cyrus the Great, there would probably not be any Jewish people around.

This man Cyrus the Great was brought up on the Iranian cultural principles that are as old as the Indian enshrined in the Zend Avesta. This is our contribution to world history, and it is a thousand years older that Islam. The book itself links to the Ancients of the Indo-Europeans.

Iranian of the modern era link to this part of their history. They have no affinity to the Seyyed lineage to Mohammed and their agenda. Folks like Mesbah Yazdi are not Iranian first. They want to create a new world order because they deny history.

The reporters of this world need to speak of Iran in the correct perspective. We are peaceful people and have no link to those in Qom.

stanley Jerusalem

If you wish to remind us all of the glory that was Persia,
Ali Mostofi, then you had better be prepared to remind all of those in the Middle East who surround Israel besides their camp followers at the UN that thanks to Cyrus, the grandson of the Jewish Queen Esther, Israel was re-occupied in the year 526, being led by Ezra and Nehemia nad have continued to occupy the same region ever since, despite privations of the most extreme kind from such noble creatures as the Romans, for whom a one-size-fits-all Empire was imposed by force on the Judeans [Jews]. Of course the Judeans[Jews] had occupied the atrea for the prvious 900 years prior to that cheerful lttle fella nebuchadnezzar and his troops, who invaded their land in order to ensure that the Borders of the Egyptian Empire were well policed. Islam came along just 1.300 years later, and pan-Arabism after that.

Ali Mostofi

stanley Jerusalem

What are you saying? I am saying that our morality is well known, and it has nothing to do with Qom.

stanley Jerusalem

I am saying, Mr Mostofi, that if you wish to cite history then you need to cite it in complete context and not selectively.
BTW I omitted B.C.E. when quoting the dates of the Judean return from their Babylonian exile.

phil

On Oct 21 I wrote the third post here on the subject of the thread and of course it has degenerated in to the usual diversion led by the obnoxious and inacurate views of blades .

Ali and Stanley-I at least know Iranian people who despise the present regime and wish to follow decent values ,they are precluded by the vile regime ,that should not deter the rest of the world from encouraging the protesters within that sad state from proclaiming the innate decency of many people who live there , people who wish to live in peace and accord with the rest of the world .