Historic Deal Signed With Iran!

arybvtcw0eolkf

nacho libre wrote: »

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told his cabinet it was a "historic mistake" and that his country would not be bound by the agreement.


That sounds like a threat from Bibi. Will Israel and their new best friend Saudi Arabia increase co-operation in order to weaken Iran.
Congress will likely come to Bibi's rescue anyway by scuppering the deal and authorizing new sanctions on Iran.

Whats wrong with Bibi's statement?.

Iran have declared Israel is their enemy, its entirely acceptable not to accept something which favors your declared enemy.

I'm not entirely in agreement with most (or all) off Bibi's policies but you can't have a one sided war either. You can't declare an enemy and not expect retaliation, sanctions or at least some hostilities to something which favors you.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Zebra3 wrote: »

The Israeli criminals living on stolen land in the West Bank in breach of international law are tipping the balance of the State of Israel towards religious extremism.

They're not and well you know it.. The Zionist lobby is the USA is pushing Israel in that direction, much to the disapproval of the ordinary Israeli on the streets who would rather see the settlements stopped and live in peace with the Palestinians.

Although there is a large amount of trust there too, and who could blame them after the Israeli disengagement from Gaza only for those Egyptians (woops they're Palestinians now) to elect Hamas ~ I'd be weiry too!.

The Diabolical Monocle

Skylinehead wrote: »

Source? I've heard of it as a hypothetical last resort, but never "all countries within range". Methinks you made that bit up.

Nico Freezing Topographer wrote: »

BWAHAHAHAHA

brimal wrote: »

This is just comical :pac:

Nodin wrote: »

It makes no sense whatsoever. Why nuke neutral and friendly states? Silly stuff.

Nico Freezing Topographer wrote: »

Well I for one don't believe we're on the eve of destruction!.


/gets tinfoil hat just in case.

Nico Freezing Topographer - Do you have any political sympathies or leanings towards Israel ?

The Diabolical Monocle

Tl;DR - Israel does indeed have a protocal known as the Samson option - this option will

be exercised by the Israeli military if Israel is ever on the brink of destruction.


I here present evidence.


What is it - ? It is a plan to nuke most certainly the middle east, very possibly

Europe, and maybe even the planet as far as possible if Israel ever gets over-run/beaten

in war.
(nuclear warheads estimated at between 80 and 400 with 11,000 km range).


(please excuse any repeated paragraphs - i know theres one or two in there)


In 2003, a military historian, Martin van Creveld, thought that the Al-Aqsa Intifada then in progress threatened Israel's existence.[29] Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst's The Gun and the Olive Branch (2003) as saying:
We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: 'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.


In 2002 the Los Angeles Times, published an opinion piece by Louisiana State University professor David Perlmutter in which he wrote: "What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace activists to join us in the ovens? For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away--unlike the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews or Rwandans--have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?"


Evidence presented below.

Includes referenced quotes, facts, and comments as well as articles from well reputed

authors, philosophers and newspapers (one of which is Israeli) and various websites.
As well as members of the American Philosophical Society, professors from two American

universities and one professor and military historian from Jerusalem university,

alongside a high ranking Israeli military official.
(and Ive more but this will have to do for now)



In 1999 the US Department of Energy placed Israel sixth on its list of nations

possessing nuclear weapons. The document claims Israel has 300kg to 500kg of weapons-

grade plutonium, enough to produce at least 250 nuclear warheads.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel

Current stockpile: estimated 80–400 warheads[2][3][4]
Maximum missile range: 11,500 km with 1000 kg payload; probably significantly greater

with smaller payload

So thats everywhere west of Israel to Miami, any country in Europe could at the very

least in theory be hit.



Concerning any prospective contributions to Israeli nuclear deterrence, recognizable

preparations for a Samson Option could serve to convince certain would-be attackers that

aggression would not be gainful. This is especially true if such Israeli preparations

were combined with certain levels of disclosure, that is, if Israel’s “Samson” weapons

were made to appear sufficiently invulnerable to enemy first-strikes, and if these

weapons were identifiably “countervalue” (counter-city) in mission function.

The Samson Option, by definition, would be executed with countervalue-

targeted nuclear weapons. It is likely that any such last-resort operations would come

into play only after all Israeli counterforce options had been exhausted.

Concerning the previously mentioned “rationality of pretended

irrationality,” Samson could enhance Israeli nuclear deterrence by demonstrating a

national willingness to take *existential risks*.

- http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/3322


Louis Rene Beres.

LOUIS RENÉ BERES is Professor of Political Science and International Law at Purdue

University. Educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971), he is the author of ten books and

several hundred published articles dealing with Israeli security matters, including

SECURITY OR ARMAGEDDON: ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR STRATEGY (Lexington Books, 1986). Professor

Beres served as Chair of "Project Daniel," a private small-group effort to counsel

former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on existential nuclear threats to Israel. He

was born in Zurich, Switzerland, on August 31, 1945.


Louis René Beres, a professor of Political Science at Purdue University, chaired Project

Daniel, a group advising Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. He argues in the Final Report of

Project Daniel and elsewhere that *the effective deterrence of the Samson Option would

be increased by ending the policy of nuclear ambiguity*.[25] In a 2004 article he

recommends Israel use the Samson Option threat to “support conventional preemptions”

against enemy nuclear and non-nuclear assets because “without such weapons, Israel,

having to rely entirely upon non-nuclear forces, might not be able to deter enemy

retaliations for the Israeli preemptive strike.”



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

The original conception of the Samson Option was only as deterrence. According to

United States journalist Seymour Hersh and Israeli historian Avner Cohen, Israeli

leaders like David Ben-Gurion, Shimon Peres, Levi Eshkol and Moshe Dayan coined the

phrase in the mid-1960s. They named it after the biblical figure Samson, who pushed

apart the pillars of a Philistine temple, bringing down the roof and killing himself and

thousands of Philistines who had captured him, mutilated him, and gathered to see him

further humiliated in chains. They contrasted it with ancient siege of Masada where 936

Jewish Sicarii committed mass suicide rather than be defeated and enslaved by the

Romans.




Amos Rubin, economic adviser to former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir -
"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.

(Transfer of nuclear technology under international law: Case study of Iraq, Iran and

Israel. Namira Negm)


Martin Van Creveld, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University in

Jerusalem, was quoted in 2003 giving explicit support of the Samson Option: "Most

European capitals are targets for our air force ... we have the capability to take the

world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes

under."

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Samson_Option#cite_ref-40


Martin Levi van Creveld (born 5 March 1946) is an Israeli military historian and

theorist.
Van Creveld was born in the Netherlands in the city of Rotterdam, and has lived in

Israel since shortly after his birth. He holds degrees from the London School of

Economics and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where he has been on the faculty since

1971. He is the author of seventeen books on military history and strategy, of which

Command in War (1985), Supplying War: Logistics from Wallenstein to Patton (1977, 2nd

edition 2004), The Transformation of War (1991), The Sword and the Olive (1998) and The

Rise and Decline of the State (1999) are among the best known. Van Creveld has lectured

or taught at many strategic institutes in the Western world, including the U.S. Naval

War College
.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_van_Creveld

Interviewing Van Creveld.
Interviewer: Do you think that the world will allow that kind of ethnic cleansing?

Creveld: That depends on who does it and how quickly it happens. We possess several

hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions,

perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force.

Interviewer: Wouldn't Israel then become a rogue state?

Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too

dangerous to bother." I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to

prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are

not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the

capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen,

before Israel goes under.

Interviewer: This isn't your own position, is it?

Creveld: Of course not. You asked me what might happen and I've laid it out.

- http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1154.htm


The Samson Option: Israel's Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy is a 1991 book

by Seymour Hersh. It details the history of Israel's nuclear weapons program and its

effects on Israel-American relations. The "Samson Option" of the book's title refers to

the nuclear strategy whereby Israel would launch a massive nuclear retaliatory strike if

the state itself was being overrun, just as the Biblical figure Samson is said to have

pushed apart the pillars of a Philistine temple, bringing down the roof and killing

himself and thousands of Philistines who had gathered to see him humiliated.

Hersh quoted Ariel Sharon saying: “We are much more important than (Americans) think. We can take the Middle East with us whenever we go”.


- Seymour Myron "Sy" Hersh (born April 8, 1937) is an American Pulitzer Prize-winning

investigative journalist and author based in Washington, D.C. He is a regular

contributor to The New Yorker magazine on military and security matters. He has also won

two National Magazine Awards and is a "five-time Polk winner and recipient of the 2004

George Orwell Award."[5]
He first gained worldwide recognition in 1969 for exposing the My Lai Massacre and its

cover-up during the Vietnam War, for which he received the 1970 Pulitzer Prize for

International Reporting.


Yale professor Gaddis Smith reviewed the book for Foreign Affairs, calling it a

"fascinating work of investigative history" that succeeded in sifting "hard fact from

the decade's rumors and half-confirmed reports" on the Israeli program.[11] New

Scientist's review stated that the book "breaks new ground" by revealing that "US

officials helped to suppress the information they gathered on Dimona," i.e., Israel's

Negev Nuclear Research Center.[12] The book spent three weeks on Publishers Weekly's

bestseller list.[13]
Some Jewish and Israeli publications were much more critical of the book. The American

Israel Public Affairs Committee's newsletter "Near East Report" said that the book has

"many inaccuracies,"[14]



The Jerusalem Report said that it was "yet another pretentious, self-serving and

therefore unreliable effort to stir up a controversy for its own sake and make a fast

buck. LOOOOOOOL

http://readingchomsky.blogspot.ie/2009/06/q-session-part5.html

Chomsky (continued): As for the Samson option, that's actually real. I mean, I said before that if the United States essentially tells Israel, "you've got to withdraw", they'll almost certainly do it. But they do have an option. It was called – It goes back to the 1950s. [If] you look at the Israeli records back to the 1950s, when they were a weak state, not a powerful state, they did say – the top leadership, you know, the Defense Ministry and others (this is the Labor government) – that if anybody crosses us, "we will go crazy". That was the phrase that was used: "we'll be a crazy state; we'll do something so wild that they'll be forced to do what we want."

Well, they couldn't really do that back in the 1950s. But once they have nuclear weapons options, they can. And in fact if you read US military journals, you find analyses saying that the Israeli nuclear weapons are a threat to us. You know – not that they're going to attack us, but they'll do something that will cause such, you know, blow-up in the world that we'll get in real trouble. Okay, that's the "Samson option". It goes back to the biblical story of Samson who, you remember, killed a lot of Philistines, and then they caught him and blinded him. And he was in a Philistine temple. He'd gotten his strength back; his hair grew. (You've all learned this stuff.) And he stood between two pillars, and he pulled down the pillars, and the ceiling fell, and he killed more Philistines in his death than in his lifetime. He was basically the first suicide-bomber, who killed lots of Philistines. He's a hero, you know. But that's the Samson option: "we'll bring the temple down, even if we kill ourselves." And it's real, you know. And it's a danger. The more we strengthen Israel's military capacity, the greater the threat to us. I mean, the former head of the Strategic Command, General Lee Butler, after he left it – . (That's, you know, the part of the military that controls strategic weapons, including nuclear weapons.) He was very straight about it; he said, the greatest threat in the region is that Israel has this extraordinary destructive capacity, which first of all impels others to try to match it, but also is an enormous danger in itself.


http://www.carolmoore.net/nuclearwar/israelithreats.html

Israeli Israel Shahak wrote in 1997: "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."[33] Zeev Schiff opined in 1998 that "Off-the-cuff Israeli nuclear threats have become a problem."[34] In 2003 David Hirst noted that “The threatening of wild, irrational violence, in response to political pressure, has been an Israeli impulse from the very earliest days” and called Israel a candidate for “the role of 'nuclear-crazy' state.”[35] Noam Chomsky said of the Samson Option “the craziness of the state is not because the people are insane. Once you pick a policy of choosing expansion over security, that's what you end up getting stuck with.”[36] Efraim Karsh calls the Samson Option the “rationality of pretended irrationality,” but warns that seeming too irrational could encourage other nations to attack Israel in their own defense.






In 1999 the US Department of Energy placed Israel sixth on its list of nations

possessing nuclear weapons. The document claims Israel has 300kg to 500kg of weapons-

grade plutonium, enough to produce at least 250 nuclear warheads.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel

Current stockpile: estimated 80–400 warheads[2][3][4]
Maximum missile range: 11,500 km with 1000 kg payload; probably significantly greater

with smaller payload

So thats everywhere west of Israel to Miami, any country in Europe could at the very

least in theory be hit.



Concerning any prospective contributions to Israeli nuclear deterrence, recognizable

preparations for a Samson Option could serve to convince certain would-be attackers that

aggression would not be gainful. This is especially true if such Israeli preparations

were combined with certain levels of disclosure, that is, if Israel’s “Samson” weapons

were made to appear sufficiently invulnerable to enemy first-strikes, and if these

weapons were identifiably “countervalue” (counter-city) in mission function.

The Samson Option, by definition, would be executed with countervalue-

targeted nuclear weapons. It is likely that any such last-resort operations would come

into play only after all Israeli counterforce options had been exhausted.

Concerning the previously mentioned “rationality of pretended

irrationality,” Samson could enhance Israeli nuclear deterrence by demonstrating a

national willingness to take *existential risks*.

- http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/3322


Louis Rene Beres.

LOUIS RENÉ BERES is Professor of Political Science and International Law at Purdue

University. Educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971), he is the author of ten books and

several hundred published articles dealing with Israeli security matters, including

SECURITY OR ARMAGEDDON: ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR STRATEGY (Lexington Books, 1986). Professor

Beres served as Chair of "Project Daniel," a private small-group effort to counsel

former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on existential nuclear threats to Israel. He

was born in Zurich, Switzerland, on August 31, 1945.


Louis René Beres, a professor of Political Science at Purdue University, chaired Project

Daniel, a group advising Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. He argues in the Final Report of

Project Daniel and elsewhere that *the effective deterrence of the Samson Option would

be increased by ending the policy of nuclear ambiguity*.[25] In a 2004 article he

recommends Israel use the Samson Option threat to “support conventional preemptions”

against enemy nuclear and non-nuclear assets because “without such weapons, Israel,

having to rely entirely upon non-nuclear forces, might not be able to deter enemy

retaliations for the Israeli preemptive strike.”



Amos Rubin, economic adviser to former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir -
"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.

(Transfer of nuclear technology under international law: Case study of Iraq, Iran and

Israel. Namira Negm)


Martin Van Creveld, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University in

Jerusalem, was quoted in 2003 giving explicit support of the Samson Option: "Most

European capitals are targets for our air force ... we have the capability to take the

world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes

under."

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Samson_Option#cite_ref-40


Martin Levi van Creveld (born 5 March 1946) is an Israeli military historian and

theorist.
Van Creveld was born in the Netherlands in the city of Rotterdam, and has lived in

Israel since shortly after his birth. He holds degrees from the London School of

Economics and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where he has been on the faculty since

1971. He is the author of seventeen books on military history and strategy, of which

Command in War (1985), Supplying War: Logistics from Wallenstein to Patton (1977, 2nd

edition 2004), The Transformation of War (1991), The Sword and the Olive (1998) and The

Rise and Decline of the State (1999) are among the best known. Van Creveld has lectured

or taught at many strategic institutes in the Western world, including the U.S. Naval

War College
.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_van_Creveld

Interviewing Van Creveld.
Interviewer: Do you think that the world will allow that kind of ethnic cleansing?

Creveld: That depends on who does it and how quickly it happens. We possess several

hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions,

perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force.

Interviewer: Wouldn't Israel then become a rogue state?

Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too

dangerous to bother." I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to

prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are

not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the

capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen,

before Israel goes under.

Interviewer: This isn't your own position, is it?

Creveld: Of course not. You asked me what might happen and I've laid it out.

- http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1154.htm


The Samson Option: Israel's Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy is a 1991 book

by Seymour Hersh. It details the history of Israel's nuclear weapons program and its

effects on Israel-American relations. The "Samson Option" of the book's title refers to

the nuclear strategy whereby Israel would launch a massive nuclear retaliatory strike if

the state itself was being overrun, just as the Biblical figure Samson is said to have

pushed apart the pillars of a Philistine temple, bringing down the roof and killing

himself and thousands of Philistines who had gathered to see him humiliated.

Hersh quoted Ariel Sharon saying: “We are much more important than (Americans) think. We can take the Middle East with us whenever we go”.


- Seymour Myron "Sy" Hersh (born April 8, 1937) is an American Pulitzer Prize-winning

investigative journalist and author based in Washington, D.C. He is a regular

contributor to The New Yorker magazine on military and security matters. He has also won

two National Magazine Awards and is a "five-time Polk winner and recipient of the 2004

George Orwell Award."[5]
He first gained worldwide recognition in 1969 for exposing the My Lai Massacre and its

cover-up during the Vietnam War, for which he received the 1970 Pulitzer Prize for

International Reporting.



http://www.carolmoore.net/nuclearwar/israelithreats.html

Israeli Israel Shahak wrote in 1997: "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."[33] Zeev Schiff opined in 1998 that "Off-the-cuff Israeli nuclear threats have become a problem."[34] In 2003 David Hirst noted that “The threatening of wild, irrational violence, in response to political pressure, has been an Israeli impulse from the very earliest days” and called Israel a candidate for “the role of 'nuclear-crazy' state.”[35] Noam Chomsky said of the Samson Option “the craziness of the state is not because the people are insane. Once you pick a policy of choosing expansion over security, that's what you end up getting stuck with.”[36] Efraim Karsh calls the Samson Option the “rationality of pretended irrationality,” but warns that seeming too irrational could encourage other nations to attack Israel in their own defense.

(uncertain on the following)

Various websites claim that during an interview with BBC's Alan Hart Golda Meir twice stated that Israel was prepared to destroy the whole world with nuclear weapons.
Hart did indeed spend a lot of time with Meir but so far I haven't been able to reference this.

The above information was sought out with the best of intentions towards finding reputable sources and references. If a source is unreliable it is not an indication of deception or lying.
The combination of the above facts demonstrate that Israel does indeed have a nuclear last response protocol and that there is strong reason to believe that this option targets not only the middle east but also Europe.

I do have more but this will have to do for now.

seanie_c

Nico Freezing Topographer wrote: »

Presently they're taking both non-combatants and combat Syria casualties to Israeli hospitals for treatment.

Yes, and isn't it convenient Israel sold oil and gas drilling rights in Golan Heights?

Isn't it interesting Israel wants to supply Europe with natural gas from Leviathan field but if Assad stays in power, it would be in direct competition with Iran?

It's in the economic interests of Israel that Syria be completely destroyed, whether Assad stays in power or not makes little difference.

I know its popular (in Ireland) to vilify Israel for all the evils in the world, but open your eyes!.

Ireland can't be that bad in the eyes of Israelis when they committed Irish troops to help protect Israeli theft of resources in Golan Heights while Syria falls apart....

Let's not delude ourselves here, those "rebels" in Syria have no interest in a democratic Syria and neither does Israel while it colludes with Saudi Arabia on planning the destruction of Iran.

rockatansky

Nico Freezing Topographer wrote: »

Seriously?.

Just in recent times the IDF were the first to open two field hospitals within 24 hours of the Haiti earth quake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzOAwIMcErg

And they've done similar in the Philippines and Turkey!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKRgAF1KpJk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAMpEqkQhOs

Presently they're taking both non-combatants and combat Syria casualties to Israeli hospitals for treatment.

I know its popular (in Ireland) to vilify Israel for all the evils in the world, but open your eyes!.

Probably to ease a guilty conscience.

seanie_c

They can deflect attention away from their mistreatment of Palestinians at home while being the good Samaritan around the world.

Good PR but only effective on fools.

Zebra3

Nico Freezing Topographer wrote: »

They're not and well you know it.. The Zionist lobby is the USA is pushing Israel in that direction, much to the disapproval of the ordinary Israeli on the streets who would rather see the settlements stopped and live in peace with the Palestinians.

Although there is a large amount of trust there too, and who could blame them after the Israeli disengagement from Gaza only for those Egyptians (woops they're Palestinians now) to elect Hamas ~ I'd be weiry too!.

The US is not pushing Israel towards religious extremism. :rolleyes: All the US wants is to use Israel as a way of giving aid to its military-industrial complex. Most Israelis want to continue and expand their illegal colonies and want the Palestinians to leave and go to wherever. These policies have been carried out for decades with the support of the governments elected by the Israeli people.

"The Israeli disengagement from Gaza"? Don't make me laugh. Israeli criminals were moved from Gaza to the West Bank. Not really a disengagement now, was it? :rolleyes: And not really a disengagement when you leave people living in a ghetto. Like saying the Germans withdrew from the Warsaw ghetto and left the jews to their own devices.

Palestinians were Egyptians? Because Gaza was controlled by Egypt for a short period of time? :rolleyes:

And how dare those Palestinians vote freely. Shame on them. :rolleyes: It's not like Israelis ever vote in a bunch of murdering thugs.

WakeUp

Its been a long time since the Americans put their own national interest before that of Israels in the middle east but thats what they have done making a deal with Iran. Apparently behind the scenes negotiations had been going on for months between the US and Iran in Oman and the Israels/Saudis/Gulf states hadnt a clue they were taking place. They didnt have time or knowledge to politically undermine any potential deal similar to what the Saudis attempted when they got the French to throw a spanner in the works a few weeks ago. The Americans being able to keep a lid on it was well played and the reason a deal was struck, the Israelis & Saudis must be freaked out.
The deal is only interim and sanctions can be reversed but it looks like the Americans are serious and that has to be a good thing. Leaving the Israelis and Saudis to themselves in their strange alliance against Iran. Wonder what they are thinking right now.

Jonny7

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Tl;DR - Israel does indeed have a protocal known as the Samson option - this option will

be exercised by the Israeli military if Israel is ever on the brink of destruction.

It's just deterrence propaganda, essentially saying, if any country threatens us we will nuke them off the face of the earth

The whole firing missiles at Europe thing is when loons embellish it with their own imagination, like Crevald

force eleven

theblaqueguy wrote: »

Another great deal created by the obama administration
He has to be written into the history books as the greatest US president ever!

Ultimate troll comment. One of the US's worst actually, when all factors taken into consideration. Certainly one of the weakest.

This deal is a positive, but it's not a long term one.

nacho libre

Nico Freezing Topographer wrote: »

Whats wrong with Bibi's statement?.

Iran have declared Israel is their enemy, its entirely acceptable not to accept something which favors your declared enemy.

.

Does it work both ways? I have a feeling you would not see Iran as justified in scuppering a deal that sought to bring about a definitive form of a rapprochement between Israel and say Palestine, because Iran deemed it favourable to Israel. The reality is, as you've implied is, no deal will be acceptable to Israel under Bibi, but that's ok because it seems Israel is always justified in its actions to those who support it.

Hoop66

Jake1 wrote: »

Likewise, looks like a stunningly beautiful country.

It's probably the most beautiful country I've ever been to.

I lived in Tehran for 3 years in the 70s (76-79). I was back there for a week in 1999. It might sound like a joke, but the underground dance music scene in Tehran is thriving.

What gets me most is the way the country is portrayed in our media as some sort of backward arab hellhole where people live in fear of religious police.

The majority of people that I know who are still there live their life not that differently than they did before the Islamic revolution. There is a certain amount of having to be careful when out in public, especially in certain areas of Tehran, but their life hasn't changed that much.

The Diabolical Monocle

Jonny7 wrote: »

It's just deterrence propaganda, essentially saying, if any country threatens us we will nuke them off the face of the earth

The whole firing missiles at Europe thing is when loons embellish it with their own imagination, like Crevald

Perhaps Chomsky is a loon then when he emphasizes that "it is real".

Propaganda indeed.


Its not just saying "if any country threatens us we will nuke them off the face of the earth". Its also saying 'if we go everyone we can take goes with us'.

Oh look.

In the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Arab forces were overwhelming Israeli forces and Prime Minister Golda Meir authorized a nuclear alert and ordered 13 atomic bombs be readied for use by missiles and aircraft.

The Israeli Ambassador warned President Nixon of “very serious conclusions" if the United States did not airlift supplies. Nixon complied.

Silly ol' Nixon falling for that propaganda.




Let us assume these readied nukes are only for the middle east countries, and not for Germany,any other European country that was in the axis, or the Vatican.

At the very least we can clearly see the psychology of the countries military leadership is a vengeful and desperate one of causing as much destruction to civilian populations as possible.

Now lets see who had their finger almost on the button -

General Moshe Dayan: 'We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under'.

wes

Only reading about this today, and its certainly good news. Hopefully hard liners in both the US and Iran don't scupper things.

There is also Netanyahu, who nothing short of bombing Iran, or complete surrender to everything Israel wants, will satisfy him. I am still not sure what business Israel has in this, considering they have not signed the NPT, and quite frankly until they do, there is no position to lecture Iran or anyone else on Nuclear issues.

nacho libre

Mossad must be bucking they didn't get wind of the secret talks between Iranian officials and the US facilitated by Oman. The chief of mossad is going to have a flee in his ear over this from the Israeli government.

Nodin

nacho libre wrote: »

Mossad must be bucking they didn't get wind of the secret talks between Iranian officials and the US facilitated by Oman. The chief of mossad is going to have a flee in his ear over this from the Israeli government.

O I'd imagine they knew. Knowing and doing something about it are two different ball games though. At the end of the day the US is the big dog.

BuilderPlumber

wes wrote: »

Only reading about this today, and its certainly good news. Hopefully hard liners in both the US and Iran don't scupper things.

There is also Netanyahu, who nothing short of bombing Iran, or complete surrender to everything Israel wants, will satisfy him. I am still not sure what business Israel has in this, considering they have not signed the NPT, and quite frankly until they do, there is no position to lecture Iran or anyone else on Nuclear issues.

Hardliners have no place in government anywhere. Hardliners always share the following traits: they are essentially weak, narrowminded individuals who capitulate to the demands of violent thugs and front for them in return for high office, they usually offer poor governance and blame other countries for their own problems, they spout a lot of hate filled rhetoric and never offer anything constructive, a crazy desire to take huge risks, an inflated opinion of their own self importance, they usually end up disgraced or worse in their own country.

For years, hardliners like the Bush regime, most Israeli governments, and the 2005-1013 Iranian regime all did a lot of damage to the world. All these unhelpful governments are the cause of where we are at in the world today. Thankfully, two of them are gone.

True, Israel's hate filled regime continues on for now but its days are numbered too sooner or later. Netanyahu and his predecessor Olmert made ex-Iranian president Ahmadinejad look like a saint. Israel is the only country in the Middle East to have repeatedly invaded other countries around it and threatens others. Israel's regime also has nuclear weapons it does not admit to and is perhaps the only economy in the world based near 100% on war and rumours of war.

Zebra3

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Let us assume these readied nukes are only for the middle east countries, and not for Germany,any other European country that was in the axis, or the Vatican.

If the rest of the world think that Israel is gonna do that, they'll wipe it out before they lose their oil supply countries to centuries of radiation.

Seaneh

Zebra3 wrote: »

If the rest of the world think that Israel is gonna do that, they'll wipe it out before they lose their oil supply countries to centuries of radiation.

The country with the worlds largest oil reserves is nowhere near the Arabian Peninsula, it's a few thousand miles south and west of Israel.

As long as oil is worth more than $50 per barrell, Venezuela is the most important oil producer on the planet.

It won't be long before Venezuela and Canada are the worlds largest exporters of oil because they will just undercut Opec and up their output (well, if Venezuela and Ecuador leave Opec and set up their own South America Oil group with Bolivia and Brazil, which they have been considering for a while now) and sell their oil for $50-75 per barrel.


Either way, it won't be long until Oil is old hat anyway and we start using liquid natural gas as our main fossil fuel, which is far more plentiful, and which will make Iran and Russia the two big dogs (about 1/3rd of the world proven reserves between them). This is the real reason Israel and the Saudi's (and their vassal state, Qatar) want to destabilise Iran and keep Syria a non-functioning state. The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline would mean Qatar (and the Saudi's by extension) lose out on the European market and the Israeli's would have to compete directly with the worlds largest producer when trying to sell their (pretty small reserves of) gas to Europe.

Zebra3

^^That all may well be the case, but the US and others aren't go let Israel nuke the rest of the ME any time soon.

Xeyn

Seaneh wrote: »

The country with the worlds largest oil reserves is nowhere near the Arabian Peninsula, it's a few thousand miles south and west of Israel.

Not disputing your statements, but the Arabian oil reserves still dwarf that of Venezuela. Venezuela has slightly larger oil reserves than Saudi but the combined Arab countries still hold the lions share and are very important to the production line globally.
Venezuela has the advantage of a relatively untapped oil reserve which you quite rightly pointed out could potentially be very important in the future.

Seaneh

Zebra3 wrote: »

^^That all may well be the case, but the US and others aren't go let Israel nuke the rest of the ME any time soon.

Ah yeah, obviuosly. It's not in anybodies benefit to do anything that stupid.

Especially in the case of Iran and Qatar, because the world, especially America, will need their gas, eventually.

BuilderPlumber

Seaneh wrote: »

The country with the worlds largest oil reserves is nowhere near the Arabian Peninsula, it's a few thousand miles south and west of Israel.

As long as oil is worth more than $50 per barrell, Venezuela is the most important oil producer on the planet.

It won't be long before Venezuela and Canada are the worlds largest exporters of oil because they will just undercut Opec and up their output (well, if Venezuela and Ecuador leave Opec and set up their own South America Oil group with Bolivia and Brazil, which they have been considering for a while now) and sell their oil for $50-75 per barrel.


Either way, it won't be long until Oil is old hat anyway and we start using liquid natural gas as our main fossil fuel, which is far more plentiful, and which will make Iran and Russia the two big dogs (about 1/3rd of the world proven reserves between them). This is the real reason Israel and the Saudi's (and their vassal state, Qatar) want to destabilise Iran and keep Syria a non-functioning state. The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline would mean Qatar (and the Saudi's by extension) lose out on the European market and the Israeli's would have to compete directly with the worlds largest producer when trying to sell their (pretty small reserves of) gas to Europe.

This is very true. I have heard that Saudi Arabia (and its satellites: i.e. all the Arabian peninsula states) has traditionally funded chaos in the region for decades so as to keep itself the region's only stable oil producer.

Israel's intentions are more complex I feel. Personally, I can't see why Israel and Iran are enemies (there is no history of animosity between them) and it is more of an excuse to justify arms budgets (on Israel's behalf) and anti-Israel rhetoric means Persian Iran gains more acceptance with violent, neighbouring Arab states and with its own restive Arab and Sunni minorities.

I cannot see Israel and Saudi Arabia working against Iran. Israel's real enemies are Sunni Arab states and these also are Iran's traditional enemies. Of course, Israel and Iran were secret allies during the Iran/Iraq war (Saddam was a common and real enemy). However, I also cannot see Israel accept anyone other than itself as a nuclear power in the middle east.

Saudi Arabia virtually invented intolerant, Talibanistic Islam and initially it was the best thing since sliced pan for the Americans: it scared the hell out of those atheistic communists in the USSR. I'd say Saudi Arabia were largely responsible for the direction Iran's 1979 revolution took. They also were largely responsible for setting up the Iran/Iraq war. They were totally responsible for everything in Afghanistan since 1979 not to mention al Qaeda. And the West tolerated all the low IQ madmen that ruled in Iran and Afghanistan back in the 1980s because it was winning the soft war against communism that ultimately brought down the USSR.

Nowadays, this manufactured intolerant Islam has replaced Soviet communism as the biggest threat to democracy and stability in the world. But we forget that this was a Saudi Arabian and Western creation. Another shameful episode is that the West supported the Khmer Rouge secretly too: they were enemies of Vietnam afterall!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Getting back to Iran and the current agreement: over the past 34 years, Iran has experienced one of the darkest periods of its history. Revolution, poor leadership from Khomeini, corrupt leadership from Khamenei, war with Iraq, persistent internal regime bickering, and Ahmadinejad's poor and unprofessional governance to name a few. Between 1980-89, Iran was in effect without a proper leadership: a dying old man was meant to be the main man, there was constant battling between the presidents and prime ministers (and numerous assassinations) while Khmer Rouge-like peasant zealots were imposing their narrow intolerant version of Islam on a largely educated and sophisticated people.

After 1989, Iran saw more stabilities with Khamenei and Rafsanjani setting up shop. Khatami in 1997 almost ushered in a new era and a true end to Iran's period of hell. 9/11 and George W Bush ended all this and Ahmadinejad's government seemed to bring back the 'Tehran Taliban' types. Ahmadinejad always came across to me as weak and incoherent with his attitudes and pandered to too many poorly thought out 'causes'.

Now, Iran has a more intelligent government largely similar to the Khatami and Rafsanjani ones (in fact, comprising of many of the members of these) and Bush is no longer US president. Hopefully, things will change. The West needs to improve relations with an Iran that wants to come in from the cold and be partners rather than enemies. Iran needs to set up a process where people are given social freedoms (to dress in, eat and drink what they please), political freedoms (freeing political prisoners and the gradual removal of unelected bodies), and a stop to wasting Iranian money on corrupt organisations like Hamas. A lot of this has commenced already and while it all can't be fixed overnight, we are for now heading in the right direction.

nacho libre

Nodin wrote: »

O I'd imagine they knew. Knowing and doing something about it are two different ball games though. At the end of the day the US is the big dog.

I'm not so sure of that. Israel in the past has not cared about pissing off the US, if it deemed it to be to their advantage. It maybe mossad did in fact know, but i find it very strange Israel didn't try to undermine the talks due to their influence on the US congress- well it maybe the case that they still can if congress, through pressure from the Israeli lobby, effectively wreck the deal by passing even tougher sanctions against Iran.

scopper

Regarding the Samson option I do not want to have to state the obvious but (strategically speaking) if it were true and other nations believed it then it would have the opposite effect; namely every nation destroying Israel because, in essence, the threat posed by such an option would be too menacing. It's a silly idea.

nacho libre

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

.

I cannot see Israel and Saudi Arabia working against Iran. Israel's real enemies are Sunni Arab states and these also are Iran's traditional enemies. Of course, Israel and Iran were secret allies during the Iran/Iraq war (Saddam was a common and real enemy). However, I also cannot see Israel accept anyone other than itself as a nuclear power in the middle east.
hmer Rouge secretly too: they were enemies of Vietnam afterall!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


.

Saudi Arabia and Israel have worked together in the past, but i think it was deemed best to keep it quiet at the time for fear of the arab street. It maybe that once again they see it in their common interest to form a temporary alliance, even if they both are hostile to each others ideology. this is the nature of geo- politics, today's enemy might be a useful short term ally tomorrow and vice versa.

BuilderPlumber

nacho libre wrote: »

Saudi Arabia and Israel have worked together in the past, but i think it was deemed best to keep it quiet at the time for fear of the arab street. It maybe that once again they see it in their common interest to form a temporary alliance, even if they both are hostile to each others ideology. this is the nature of geo- politics, today's enemy might be a useful short term ally tomorrow and vice versa.

Yes, this is true. Countries often secretly work together when it suits them to. Israel's out and out enemy is basically Syria. Baathist Iraq was obviously another. Egypt was another in the past too but not anymore.

Israel has often played the Arab v Persian rivalries and the Sunni v Shia too. A whole lot of countries being enemies is not 100% true either. It is not fashionable for Arab or Muslim countries to recognize Israel openly but they can do secret deals when they share a common enemy: I believe Israel and Iran and probably Israel and Saudi are a lot friendlier to each other than we are lead to believe. Israel and Iran are a bulwark against Arab and Sunni dominance of the region (they worked together against Saddam) while Israel and Saudi share the same side against the Syrian Assad regime for example.

The Diabolical Monocle

Zebra3 wrote: »

If the rest of the world think that Israel is gonna do that, they'll wipe it out before they lose their oil supply countries to centuries of radiation.

Maybe it still hasn't gotten through to you yet.
The samson option is a suicide protocol.

Its to be used in the case where Israel is facing inevitable defeat/massacre by an enemy army.

The concept is to take everyone they can with them, either for being the direct enemy or for not coming to Israels rescue.

Probably cause they're surrounded by Muslim countries intent on wiping them out and their civilian population would have nowhere to go, no way to escape. (much in the same way samson couldn't escape .....and so ....took the whole fvcking temple with him)

So tell me how the rest of the world is going to do fvcking anything - they have launch times of minutes.
Their army live to counter air to surface weapons, they've got the best aircraft money can buy.

You'd do well to set up a defense to nuclear weapons estimated in the hundreds.

Maybe direct quotes on the subject from *Noam Chomsky, *Mosha Dayan and military historians and professors weren't enough for you.

*Feel free to google these names, education is good.

wes

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Probably cause they're surrounded by Muslim countries intent on wiping them out.

Except that they have made peace with some of there neighbors (Egypt and Jordan) and the entire Arab League still have peace offer on the table, which every Israeli government has ignored since it was made. The simple fact is that successive Israeli governments are far more interested in colonizing the West Bank, than any kind of peace deal.