War on Iran! Close, Inevitable or Ordained/Sanctified?

[darkbeaver]

http://www.unobserver.com/layout5.php?id=4929&blz=1According to some this is just nonsense

de link she's not right 967638

 

[darkbeaver]

Warning: mysql_fetch_row(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /usr/www/users/garyo/layout5.php on line 13

what means dis

 

[Zzarchov]

To be fair, China, Russia, France, Britain and the USA are all in violation the Non-proliferation treaty.

There seems to be some confusion between what the treaty says on paper and what it means.

On paper is obvious, what it really says is no nation outside the big 5 is getting nukes, if you try, we will see you as a threat and pre-emptively nuke you in the same manner we are mere milliseconds from nuking each other (this is a cold war document).

 

[darkbeaver]

To be fair, China, Russia, France, Britain and the USA are all in violation the Non-proliferation treaty.

There seems to be some confusion between what the treaty says on paper and what it means.

On paper is obvious, what it really says is no nation outside the big 5 is getting nukes, if you try, we will see you as a threat and pre-emptively nuke you in the same manner we are mere milliseconds from nuking each other (this is a cold war document).

Actually what it means is that certain nations will get nukes irregardless of the treaty or treatys. Everyone does what they can get away with, that's an indication of the general decline to conflict I think. We the people don't need a war like is proposed.

 

[Zzarchov]

This concept of "we the people" is what confuses me.

There are obviously groups of people who aren't "we the people" otherwise we would get exactly what we wanted.

So if you can envision other groups who want to do "we the people" harm, why can you not envision them being the majority in some parts of the world?

 

[darkbeaver]

This concept of "we the people" is what confuses me.

There are obviously groups of people who aren't "we the people" otherwise we would get exactly what we wanted.

So if you can envision other groups who want to do "we the people" harm, why can you not envision them being the majority in some parts of the world?

The concept "We the people" shouldn't confuse you, if you are with the people.
Where is this place where the majority want to harm "we the people"?

 

[Just the Facts]

Both sides doing the same thing, yet that's not how our media portrays it of course.

How is it being portrayed? It was widely speculated that Israel is conducting exercise that would be "useful" in the event of an attack on Iran, and Iran is conducting tests of missiles that would be "useful" in the event of an attack on Israel.

Am I missing something?

 

[lone wolf]

How is it being portrayed? It was widely speculated that Israel is conducting exercise that would be "useful" in the event of an attack on Iran, and Iran is conducting tests of missiles that would be "useful" in the event of an attack on Israel.

Am I missing something?

We must have the same middle-of-the-road perspective in our viewfinders. Chest thumpers choose to interpret each others' motives and dare the other side to strike first. Seems to me I've watched cats do the same thing. They're not far removed from critters are they?

 

[Zzarchov]

Uh huh, and who exactly is it that funds Israel?

There is a strong Israel lobby in America, and America's military is a big supporter of Israel.

Because they both influence each other does not mean one pulls the others strings. America has a strong lobby in Canada, Canada has a strong lobby in America.

Who controls who? If we use the same logic we use with Israel, Canada controls America.

But the end result is, America can easily ignore a mere lobby group from Israel, Israel cannot so easily ignore a few billion dollars from America.

Its just another version of the "Jews control the world" conspiracy.

Israel spends a few million lobbying for various causes, America spends a few billion influencing Israeli causes, and the master is somehow Israel?

Meanwhile Saudi interests spend a few billion influencing America (and thus Israel who seems to keep fighting Saudi enemies) and its not a Saudi conspiracy (and its really not so im clear).

 

[Zzarchov]

The west isn't going to be westernizing anything Zzarchov, in ten or fifteen years we'll be easternized.

No..Iran is very much westernized. Nor will we be easternized (assuming you mean Chinese or middle eastern as Japan is already western)

 

[darkbeaver]

Uh huh, and who exactly is it that funds Israel?

There is a strong Israel lobby in America, and America's military is a big supporter of Israel.

Because they both influence each other does not mean one pulls the others strings. America has a strong lobby in Canada, Canada has a strong lobby in America.

Who controls who? If we use the same logic we use with Israel, Canada controls America.

But the end result is, America can easily ignore a mere lobby group from Israel, Israel cannot so easily ignore a few billion dollars from America.


Its just another version of the "Jews control the world" conspiracy.

Israel spends a few million lobbying for various causes, America spends a few billion influencing Israeli causes, and the master is somehow Israel?

Meanwhile Saudi interests spend a few billion influencing America (and thus Israel who seems to keep fighting Saudi enemies) and its not a Saudi conspiracy (and its really not so im clear).

I don't understand any of that.

 

[scratch]

I don't understand any of that.

Lost me at the beginning.

 

[earth_as_one]

Uh huh, and who exactly is it that funds Israel?

There is a strong Israel lobby in America, and America's military is a big supporter of Israel.

Because they both influence each other does not mean one pulls the others strings. America has a strong lobby in Canada, Canada has a strong lobby in America.

Who controls who? If we use the same logic we use with Israel, Canada controls America.

But the end result is, America can easily ignore a mere lobby group from Israel, Israel cannot so easily ignore a few billion dollars from America.

Its just another version of the "Jews control the world" conspiracy.

Israel spends a few million lobbying for various causes, America spends a few billion influencing Israeli causes, and the master is somehow Israel?

Meanwhile Saudi interests spend a few billion influencing America (and thus Israel who seems to keep fighting Saudi enemies) and its not a Saudi conspiracy (and its really not so im clear).

Related:

A Beautiful Friendship?
In search of the truth about the Israel lobby's influence on Washington


[SIZE=-1]By Glenn Frankel[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Sunday, July 16, 2006; W13[/SIZE]

All David Ben-Gurion wanted was 15 minutes of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's time.
Israel's founding father, one of the indomitable political leaders of the 20th century, came to Washington in December 1941 yearning to present the case for a Jewish state directly to the American president. He took a two-room suite at the old Ambassador Hotel at 14th and K for $1,000 a month and cooled his heels for 10 weeks, writing letters and reports and making passes at Miriam Cohen, his attractive American secretary. But Ben-Gurion didn't get the meeting. Not then, not ever. Not even a pair of presidential cuff links.

Now let's fast-forward 64 years to late May and a news conference in the East Room of the White House. That tall, freckled, slightly nervous-looking man with the rust-colored hair standing alongside President Bush at matching lecterns is Ehud Olmert, 12th prime minister of Israel. The two leaders and their advisers have just spent two hours together in the Oval Office. Bush is reaffirming the "deep and abiding ties between Israel and the United States" and praising Olmert's "bold ideas" and commitment to peace. Afterward, they'll adjourn for a private session without aides or note-takers and then go to dinner together. And the next day Olmert will address a joint session of Congress, whose members will interrupt his speech with 16 standing ovations. Ben-Gurion, whose remains rest in a simple grave overlooking the Negev Desert, would be stunned.

It's not that Olmert is a more commanding figure than Ben-Gurion. Far from it. No, it's about power. And not just Israeli power. It's really about the perceived power of the Israel lobby, a collection of American Jewish organizations, campaign contributors and think tanks -- aided by Christian conservatives and other non-Jewish supporters -- that arose over the second half of the 20th century and that sees as a principle goal the support and promotion of the interests of the state of Israel.

Thanks to the work of the lobby and its allies, Israel gets more direct foreign aid -- about $3 billion a year -- than any other nation. There's a file cabinet somewhere in the State Department full of memoranda of understanding on military, diplomatic and economic affairs. Israel gets treated like a NATO member when it comes to military matters and like Canada or Mexico when it comes to free trade. There's an annual calendar full of meetings of joint strategic task forces and other collaborative sessions. And there's a presidential pledge, re-avowed by Bush in the East Room, that the United States will come to Israel's aid in the event of attack.

On Capitol Hill the Israel lobby commands large majorities in both the House and Senate. Polls show strong public support for Israel -- a connection that has grown even deeper after the September 11 attacks. The popular equation goes like this: Israelis equal good guys, Arabs equal terrorists. Working the Hill these days, says Josh Block, spokesman for the premier Israeli lobbying group known as AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, "is like pushing at an open door."

Not everyone believes this is a good thing. In March two distinguished political scientists -- Stephen Walt from Harvard and John Mearsheimer from the University of Chicago -- published a 42-page, heavily footnoted essay arguing that the Bush administration's support for Israel and its related effort to spread democracy throughout the Middle East have "inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized U.S. security."

The professors claim that our intimate partnership with Israel is both dangerous and unprecedented. "Other special interest groups have managed to skew foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert it as far from what the national interest would suggest," they argue. They go on to say that the war in Iraq "was due in large part to the Lobby's influence," and that the same combine is "using all of the strategies in its playbook" to pressure the administration into being aggressive and belligerent with Iran. The bottom line: "Israel's enemies get weakened or overthrown, Israel gets a free hand with the Palestinians, and the United States does most of the fighting, dying, rebuilding and paying."

A sweet deal for Israel, in other words, but a very bad one for America.

Some of the lobby's critics hailed the essay as a much-needed breath of fresh air and praised Walt and Mearsheimer for their courage and -- dare we say it -- chutzpah. Their paper, wrote antiwar activist and media critic Norman Solomon in the Baltimore Sun, "is prying the lid off a debate that has been bottled up for decades."

But the two professors knew they were treading on delicate ground. For generations, the idea of a cabal of powerful Jews hijacking the national interest for its own purposes has fueled anti-Semitism around the world. Supporters of Israel argued that the essay echoed those claims...

...Pro-Israel money helped defeat Republican Reps. Paul Findley of Illinois and Pete McCloskey of California and Sen. Charles Percy of Illinois, all of whom were deemed too sympathetic to Arab causes and too critical of Israel.

Findley says he had always voted for aid to Israel even while criticizing Israeli policy. But his real sin was meeting periodically with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, whom he once praised as "a great champion of human rights." Findley was targeted in the election of 1982: He had served 11 terms; he didn't get a 12th. Two years after that, Percy lost to Paul Simon in a bitter contest in which supporters of Israel poured an estimated $1.8 million into direct contributions and an independent anti-Percy ad campaign. The message to incumbents was clear: Oppose Israel at your peril....

...There's nothing to hide. AIPAC's size, strength and agenda are all public information, much of it displayed on its Web site: the staff of 200 lobbyists, researchers and organizers; the $47 million annual budget; the 100,000 grass-roots members, almost double the number of five years ago; and the recruitment drive on 300 college campuses...

...
Money is an important part of the equation. AIPAC is not a political action committee, and the organization itself doesn't give a dime in campaign contributions. But its Web site, which details how members of Congress voted on AIPAC's key issues, and the AIPAC Insider, a glossy periodical that handicaps close political races, are scrutinized by thousands of potential donors. Pro-Israel interests have contributed $56.8 million in individual, group and soft money donations to federal candidates and party committees since 1990, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. (By contrast, the center says, pro-Arab and pro-Muslim groups donated $297,000 during the same period.) Between the 2000 and the 2004 elections, the 50 members of AIPAC's board donated an average of $72,000 each to campaigns and political action committees. One in every five board members was a top fundraiser for President Bush or John Kerry....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/12/AR2006071201627_pf.html

AIPAC is among the top lobby groups in the US. They have ended careers of politicains who even criticize Israel, let alone talk about reducing or eliminating the level of US military and economic aid to Israel.

I doubt the US lobby in Canada has that level of power and if they do, I would consider that a problem.

As far as I can tell, the US does not have as much influence on Israel as the other way around. can you give examples of pro-US lobby groups interfering in Israeli elections and ending Israeli politician careers?

 

[Just the Facts]

One in every five board members was a top fundraiser for President Bush or John Kerry....

Looks like they pretty much cancel each other out. Ergo, they have no influence on American politics.

 

[Zzarchov]

See EAO, there is your problem with that concept:

"Thanks to its lobby, Israel gets $3 billion a year in foreign aid"


Why isn't the more logical statement

"Thanks to its $3 billion a year in aid, America gets Israel to support American causes"

The simple answer is because then its not a rewrite of "Jews control the world", its the much less interesting story of "superpower buys puppet nation's loyalty" we've seen go back and forth between the Red's and the West for 60 years.

 

[lone wolf]

See EAO, there is your problem with that concept:

"Thanks to its lobby, Israel gets $3 billion a year in foreign aid"


Why isn't the more logical statement

"Thanks to its $3 billion a year in aid, America gets Israel to support American causes"

The simple answer is because then its not a rewrite of "Jews control the world", its the much less interesting story of "superpower buys puppet nation's loyalty" we've seen go back and forth between the Red's and the West for 60 years.

Because you solicit for prostitution not the other way around.

When have the Reds ever supported Israel? - AND before you use that tired weapons from Czechoslovakia, that was a brokered deal for WW2 surplus arms. That's a sale ... NOT support.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=6T_...&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=5&ct=result

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MIL20050717&articleId=699

http://www.tamilnation.org/books/International/israel_soviet.htm

 

[darkbeaver]

Let's discuss the Israeli lobby in Canada.

 

[Zzarchov]

Because you solicit for prostitution not the other way around.

When have the Reds ever supported Israel? - AND before you use that tired weapons from Czechoslovakia, that was a brokered deal for captured arms. That's a sale ... NOT support.

No, but the Red's have supported more than their fair share of Puppet governments during the cold war, ignoring the East Block we have a slew of African nations, and of course their failed exploit in Afghanistan, and their successful exploit in Vietnam against America and China.

No as to the first statement:

You are again incorrect. Prostitutes are indeed solicited by people, that is a great way to meet a woman with two jobs, hooker by night, cop when someone tries to buy her services.

Prostitutes also solicit people by asking such throught provoking questions as "looking for a good time?".

So who forced three billion downs whos throat to support whos agenda (hint, if it weren't an equal partnership, it would seem more likely that Israel is the puppet as it seems to keep making its life harder being at war with America's enemies)

Again though, the concept of a superpower influencing a minor nation into its camp isn't as good a conspiracy story as "Jews control the world", doesn't have the same Zing.

 

[lone wolf]

No, but the Red's have supported more than their fair share of Puppet governments during the cold war, ignoring the East Block we have a slew of African nations, and of course their failed exploit in Afghanistan, and their successful exploit in Vietnam against America and China.

No as to the first statement:

You are again incorrect. Prostitutes are indeed solicited by people, that is a great way to meet a woman with two jobs, hooker by night, cop when someone tries to buy her services.

Prostitutes also solicit people by asking such throught provoking questions as "looking for a good time?".

So who forced three billion downs whos throat to support whos agenda (hint, if it weren't an equal partnership, it would seem more likely that Israel is the puppet as it seems to keep making its life harder being at war with America's enemies)

Again though, the concept of a superpower influencing a minor nation into its camp isn't as good a conspiracy story as "Jews control the world", doesn't have the same Zing.

Poor Zarch.... The slick seems to be drying up in your spin doctor machine....:roll:

Woof!

 

[earth_as_one]

Looks like they pretty much cancel each other out. Ergo, they have no influence on American politics.

Its an example of flipping a coin and offering the choice: Heads I win or Tails you loose.

It doesn't matter whether you are a republican or a democrat. You either support Israel and AIPAC helps you, or you don't support Israel (or don't support Israel enough) and AIPAC hurts you. AIPAC is bipartisan.