No, the Iran Deal Doesn’t Let Them Develop a Nuclear Weapon

Max Fisher at Vox has been doing an excellent job of debunking all of the arguments being used against the nuclear deal with Iran. To hear conservatives tell it, the deal actually gives Iran nuclear weapons, which could hardly be further from the reality.

Myth #1: The Iran deal is abject surrender and will make it easier for Iran to get a nuclear bomb

This is probably the most common talking point about the Iran deal, and certainly the most common one against it: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been making it for months, as have some Republicans.

This is total nonsense and is, in fact, the exact opposite of what is happening. Iran has accepted enormous cuts to its nuclear program, not to mention invasive and politically humiliating inspections…

It’s worth looking at what actual arms control experts say: that the deal is very good at limiting Iran’s nuclear program and is favorable to the United States. Given that many of those analysts were initially pessimistic, that they took this as a welcome surprise tells you something.

One nuclear weapons expert, Aaron Stein, told us the that deal “makes the possibility of Iran developing a nuclear weapon in the next 25 years extremely remote.”

Perhaps the most important provision is that they have to get rid of 70% of their centrifuges and can only keep those that cannot enrich uranium or plutonium very highly. That, along with a limit of 3.67% on enrichment, which is good only for peaceful generation of nuclear power but not for a bomb (weapons-grade requires enrichment to 90%), makes it nearly impossible for them to create a nuclear weapon.

POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • StevoR

    Michael Oren has slightly better credentials here I think :

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Oren

    Have already commented on this at Mano Singham’s blog.

    I do think someone who was a former ambassador and is an author historian and expert kinda outranks mere journalist Max Fisher here.

    I also think, as stated before, that whilst it is good there is a deal I’m not sure how good the deal really is and wish it were better. I have reservations as a lot of folks who should know also do. Time will tell. Hopefully not at a catastrophic cost ..

  • StevoR
  • eric

    Stevo, his claim that the deal allows Iran to produce nukes in as little as three months catapults him right into woo land. If that’s what he believes, I don’t give any credibility to the rest of his claims. If he’s lying or exaggerating the timeline for emphasis, he’s still not credible.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    I do think someone who was a former ambassador and is an author historian and expert kinda outranks mere journalist Max Fisher here.

    He sure as hell doesn’t outrank the MANY diplomats and other experts who have voiced support for the Iran deal in grownup terms.

    Time will tell. Hopefully not at a catastrophic cost.

    We’ve already seen a taste of the catastrophic cost of the chickenhawks’ alternative policy. I’m not that worried about the hypothetical costs of this treaty.

    See also…

    …just the latest place where all of your childish racist warmongering bullshit objections were thoroughly debunked.

  • shakeb

    Louie Gohmert is being totally reasonable about the Iran deal talking about Iran deal calling it “far worse than the deal that Neville Chamberlain made with Hitler”

    Also talks about Iran bringing a shipboard nuke to the East Coast or Gulf of Mexico and using it to generate an EMP killing an estimated 10million Americans in the aftermath. That the Iranians lack both a nuke and the ability to project naval power that far is apparently no issue. The US Navy gets ~150billion/yr including nuclear powered warships and bases all over the world to be able to project naval power 13,000 miles away. Those nuclear powered ships and widespread bases are what it takes to put ships halfway across the world. There’s a lot of ocean to push yourself across to project that kind of power.

    https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/gohmert-iran-will-launch-emp-attack-on-us-killing-millions

    http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/louie-gohmert-tens-millions-americans-may-die-due-iran-nuclear-deal#sthash.q1aBGn2G.dpuf

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    I also find it amusing that StevoR spouts a lot of blatantly racist BS about how the Iranians can’t be trusted because they “don’t think like us,” and then dodges the charge of racism by insisting he has Persian friends. Who the fuck does he think he’s fooling?

  • http://www.thelosersleague.com theschwa

    What about Article 7?

    “Article 7 – Iran is permitted to have one (1) nuclear weapon, but it must promise to never, ever use it.”

    THAT was a huge giveaway and a mistake. Thanks, Obama!!

  • colnago80

    Re StevoR @ #2

    Ah yes, Prof. Singham, the left wing equivalent of Don Black and David Duke who favors allowing Iran to have nuclear weapons if Israel has them. Singham is a blot on this otherwise excellent blog network who would be more appropriately blogging at Glenn Greenwald’s Intercept site. Or maybe Counterpunch. Advocating allowing the mad mullahs who run Iran to have nuclear weapons, as Singham does, is equivalent to calling for the annihilation of the State of Israel.

    However, removing the sanctions from Iran will just provide them with more money to stir up trouble in Syria and Yemen and encourage their wholly owned Hizbollah subsidiary to destabilize Lebanon. They don’t need nuclear weapons to do that.

  • colnago80

    And by the way, AFAIK, I have not been banned from commenting at Singham’s blog, despite the entreaties of a few commentors there. I just don’t care to cast pearls before swine.

  • Artor

    What, no fact-free rants from Colnago yet? I’m sure he’ll be along soon to explain how the experts are all wrong, and this will have Israel nuked into a glowing crater within the year.

  • Artor

    Damn. I said his name. Sorry, guys.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    shakeb “The US Navy gets ~150billion/yr including nuclear powered warships and bases all over the world to be able to project naval power 13,000 miles away.”

    THATS ALL?!!! THATS ONLY HALFWAY AROUND THE WORLD!!! WE NEED TO DOUBLE THEIR BUDGET!!!

  • howardhershey

    As always, the real question is “What is the alternative?” Given that this agreement was agreed to not only by Iran and the U.S., but also China, Russia, Germany, France, and Great Britain, (and a representative of the European Union) what happens if the U.S. unilaterally spits in their faces? Is it at all likely that they all or even some (say China and Russia; I find it remarkable that they agreed to the economic penalties in the first place) will agree to stronger constraints on Iran or will they accept the agreement and start trading with Iran? Will Iran say that the agreement is null and void? If the sanctions fall apart (very likely) regardless of whether the U.S. accepts the agreement or not, what remaining options are available? War? Are the claims that a war launched against Iran’s nuclear facilities will be surgical and without other consequences in retaliation (like hitting shipping in the Persian gulf) mere chickenhawk bullshit equivalent to the bullshit that Iraq would be a simple in-and-out quickie one-night stand? Are we really willing to fight a genocidal war of choice?

    Most likely Iran has come to the conclusion that nuclear weapons have limited utility in the context of the area and their goals. Would even the most extreme religious fanatics in Iran be willing to destroy Jerusalem and their religious structures in order to “save them” from Israeli control? They also might realize which way the wind blows and the consequences to their own country from a nuclear attack.

  • colnago80

    On paper, what Fisher describes looks good. The devil is in the details, particularly the inspection regime where the mad mullahs insist that military sites are off limits for inspections. All this stuff that Fisher and Stein prattle on about is meaningless in the absence of a strict inspection system. Inspections anywhere, anytime should have been our red line. Nothing else is acceptable. Neville Obama gave up on that early on, which is why it deserves the epithet Neville.

  • eric

    Just to give a rough outline of how crazy that “three month” statement is, Stevo’s hero likes to compare Iran to NK, so let’s do that. It took NK three underground nuclear tests over the course of 7 years (2006-2013) to get to the point where the Pentagon thinks they have a package small enough to launch on a missile. Iran has not yet even built a test device. They are literally years, maybe even decades behind the North Koreans.

    Another ludicrous comment was his comparison to negotiations with NK, which gets things completely backwards. He tries to argue that we are doing with Iran what we did with NK, and so historically we can expect the same result; proliferation. But we aren’t at all doing the same thing, we’re doing pretty much the opposite. NK never signed a deal, and US economic sanctions have never been lifted. NK talks collapsed without agreement (several times). Result of sanctions with no inspection regime: about ten years’ of development time, then nukes. In contrast, would you like to discuss a real example of a country that signed treaties, agreed to safeguards, inspections, and dismanteling of their nuclear weapons program? It’s South Africa circa 1991. Result: no proliferation in 23 years, and none expected.

    The ultimate irony with pointing out that Iran is more like South Africa is this: one suspected reason why SA – and remember, this was the apartheid regime – was as close to gaining nukes as they were, is that the Israelis were collaborating with them on developing the technology. IOW the treaties and inspections accomplished a rollback despite Israeli efforts to proliferate this technology.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Ah yes, Prof. Singham, the left wing equivalent of Don Black and David Duke…

    Ah yes, once again an Iran-hating chickenhawk proves himself to be an utter moron. In case his masturbatory fixation on “Tsar-bombes” and the possible rape of Hitler’s grandmother didn’t prove that already…

  • eric

    Inspections anywhere, anytime should have been our red line. Nothing else is acceptable.

    How absurd. We made a lot less than that work with South Africa, with Ukraine and the other FSU countries, and with the Russians themselves (though admittedly in the latter, we’re inspecting for reductions and security, not complete eradication). In fact we’ve made a lot less than that work with the chemical weapons and biological weapons conventions too. No country accedes to the demand you set as your baseline. The US doesn’t either, not for nukes, not for CW, not for BW. Your “red line” is so utterly unrealistic in terms of international relations that its basically just a way to hide a “no agreement ever” position behind a nicer façade.

  • colnago80

    Raging Bee @ #16

    I have no knowledge as to whether the alleged encounter between Maria Schicklgruber and Leo Frankenberger was non-consensual.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    …the mad mullahs…

    Name me just ONE currently-in-power mullah who is as “mad” as, say, any of the prominent Republicans who oppose this treaty. Go ahead, just give us a name, and a cite to some actual evidence that he is, indeed, “mad” by any reasonable definition.

    Seriously, dude, you need to read some recent news: Khomeini is dead, and none of the current mullahs are as blatantly crazy as he was. Your “mad mullahs” crap is nothing but pure racist fantasy of the “dark-skinned heathen savages” variety.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    eric, exactly. There is no agreement good enough. Now that we’re on the same side, can we start bombing Iran now?

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Raging Bee, all of the mad mullahs are mad. That’s why they call themselves that.

  • colnago80

    Re Raging Bee @ #19

    I think that the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is not saner then his predecessor.

  • colnago80

    Re eric @ #17

    If the mad mullahs who run Iran have nothing to hide at those military sites, they should have no objection to their inspection by international inspectors.

  • Chris J

    @colango80:

    On paper, what Fisher describes looks good. The devil is in the details, particularly the inspection regime where the mad mullahs insist that military sites are off limits for inspections. All this stuff that Fisher and Stein prattle on about is meaningless in the absence of a strict inspection system. Inspections anywhere, anytime should have been our red line. Nothing else is acceptable. Neville Obama gave up on that early on, which is why it deserves the epithet Neville.

    https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/07/15/irans-refusal-allow-notice-inspections-legit-u-s-history-iraq/

    I wonder how many times I have to post this same link before colnago80 realizes how unreasonable is “red line” is?

  • Chris J

    For people unfamiliar with the history of arms control generally and in the Middle East in particular, this might seem like a bad deal. If Iran doesn’t have anything to hide, why wouldn’t it allow the IAEA to go anywhere at anytime?

    The answer is twofold:

    First, all countries have things they legitimately want to hide, such as conventional military secrets and the security procedures of their leaders.

    Second, during the 1990s the U.S. demonstrated with Iraq that it would routinely abuse the weapons inspections process in order to uncover such legitimate secrets — and use them to target the Iraqi military and try to overthrow the Iraqi government.

  • colnago80

    Re Chris J @ #24

    You can post that until hell freezes over. Nothing published at the Intercept, the personal blog of self hating Jew and self hating gay man Glenn Greenwald is credible. And yes, he didn’t write that particular story. However, if Mr. Schwarz chooses to associate himself with

    Greenwald, then he must not complain as those who get into the pen with the pigs will inevitably exit with a coating of mud. And by the way, citing child molester Scott Ritter as a source is even worse then associating with Greenwald.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Re Chris J @ #24

    You can post that until hell freezes over. Nothing published at {source}, the {site} of {person} is credible. And yes, {person}didn’t write that particular story. However, if {author} chooses to associate with {person}, then {author} must not complain as those who get into the pen with the pigs will inevitably exit with a coating of mud. And by the way, citing {other person} as a source is even worse then associating with {person}.

  • Chris J

    I think this may be one of the first times I’ve seen a legitimate “ad hominem” on the internet. Well done, colnago80, well done.

    So how about you pretend I’m saying that stuff? Just for funsies.

    Every sovereign state has things it wants to hide, and it’d pretty much accepted in international politics that this is true. Anytime, anywhere inspections would be unduly intrusive into a state’s operations, and might open that state’s leaders to assassination attempts. And, by the way, the US has already proven it will use the guise of “weapon inspections” to do so. The sources for this history come from government websites as well as reputable news sites.

    No country would admit anytime, anywhere inspections of all military bases. Not Israel, not the US, not Britain, not China, nobody. Iran especially couldn’t; not with current relations with the US and the US’s history with Iraq. This demand is an impossible ultimatum that would force Iran to refuse any sort of deal.

    But I guess that’s what you really want; total submission either by unreasonable demands or war. This is why you aren’t on the negotiating team.

  • Chris J

    Out of curiosity I did a little research on Glenn Greenwald… Not seeing a whole lot that would label him a “pig,” or any other negative descriptor. I’ll admit I haven’t seen all of his work, so I might be missing something that would paint him in a more negative light, but then again. If colnago80 is utterly against him, then that’s a good indication that I should view him favorably.

  • dmcclean

    I just don’t care to cast pearls before swine.

    You know, I always thought colnago80 was just a dumbass, but now it seems certain that he is just trolling us. That is one hell of a one-liner.

  • Holms

    #18 colnago80

    I have no knowledge…

    Business as usual.

  • Holms

    Oops, I posted without refreshing. Not since Ptolemaic astronomers refused to look at Jupiter through a telescope has there been a more blatant example of an ignoramus intentionally keeping himself ignorant than post #26.

  • colnago80

    Re Chris J @ #28

    I’m not much interested in what Iran, the world’s most egregious supporter of terrorist activities, wants. I only care what I want and that is to insure that the mad mullahs who run that country never get their shithooks on nuclear weapons. Allowing them to obtain nuclear weapons would be the equivalent of the German Nazi dictator developing nuclear weapons during WW2. Fortunately for the world, he listened to Werner Heisenberg who told the German authorities that 100 Kg of 100% pure U235 would be required to sustain a chain reaction, which would take 30 years to manufacture.

  • colnago80

    Re Holms @ #32

    I thought it was the Pope who refused to look through the telescope.

  • Chris J

    @colnago80:

    It’s not about what Iran in particular wants, it’s about what could be expected of any country in a similar situation. Anywhere, anytime inspections are impossible to accept by anyone, no matter how good or evil their reasons are.

    I only care what I want

    O_O

    So basically, you’re just upset that the negotiation involved… negotiation. Got it.

  • daved

    Ah, yes, the “mad mullahs.” Colnago, back in mid-season form.

    That’s how you dehumanize those you don’t like. They’re “mad.” Thus, they cannot be reasoned with, nothing they want makes any sense, and it’s perfectly legitimate to use force against them, for any reason. After all, they’re not really human.

    The mullahs are not “mad,” at least not any more than average. They’re not nice guys either, and I don’t like them and I’d be perfectly happy if they all vanished. But they’re not crazy in any realistic sense.

  • Holms

    #34

    It was anyone that did not want to learn that they were wrong, hence the analogy to you.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    colnago80 @ # 7: … Prof. Singham, the left wing equivalent of Don Black and David Duke …

    What racist hate groups has Singham organized to merit such equivalency?

    Or do you mean to tell us Black & Duke teach theoretical physics on the side?

    colnago80 @ # 9: … I just don’t care to cast pearls before swine.

    In years of posting here, you have yet cast a single pearl before anybody.

  • busterggi

    I have it on good authority that Iran is secretly being run by Hitler’s brain in a jar – the complete lack of evidence proves it.

  • Broken Things

    @cologno8

    I’m not much interested in what Iran, the world’s most egregious supporter of terrorist activities, wants.

    That’s just a stupid statement. The biggest supporter of terrorist activities in the region is Saudi Arabia. Wahhabi Islam originated there, and ISIS is only their enemy because they are a threat to the House of Saud, not because they don’t agree on who to beat, behead, etc. Iran does not support ISIS or Boko Haram, the two main threats in the ME and Africa. As for the biggest supporter of terrorist activities in the world, the US, with it’s decades of support for right-wing governments in South America, Indonesia, South Korea and Israel (and now the Shia militias in Iraq) is almost certainly on top of that list. The Taliban were our creation, in case you forgot. The US arms the world for fun and profit, and watches for opportunities amid the ashes. Also, wouldn’t you be much happier over at Red State?

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Holms “#34 It was anyone that did not want to learn that they were wrong, hence the analogy to you.”

    Hardly. What do you have? Experts? Facts? Good Faith arguments? Come on! Colnago80 and I have all the best minds on our side, like John Bolton and Bill Kristol.

  • colnago80

    Re Broken Things @ #40

    Hizbollah is the biggest and best armed terrorist organization in the Middle

    East and is the wholly owned subsidiary of Iran. It’s Hizbollah that’s keeping Assad in power in Syria and has seized power in Lebanon. The presence of Hizbollah in Syria is entirely responsible for the rise of the ISIL.

  • colnago80

    Re Modus @ #41

    Good faith arguments that depend on child molesters.

  • colnago80

    Re daved @ #36

    I would say that someone who believes that the destruction of the world will bring on the 12th Imam, which the ayatollah does, is as certifiable as Matthew Hagee who thinks that the destruction of the world will take place this September.

  • Broken Things

    The presence of Hizbollah in Syria is entirely responsible for the rise of the ISIL.

    Wow. Just wow. That ranks right up there with your previous statement. ISIL is the extremist remains that arose from the ashes of our little mis-adventure in Iraq. Many are former Baathists, revolting against the sectarian Shia government that we installed after we trashed the place and before we left. They are using weapons we supplied to the Iraqi army, including tanks and RPGs. Hezbollah is in no way responsible for their rise.

  • colnago80

    Re Broken Things @ #45

    The ISIL got their start in Syria, and was the response of Sunni extremists to the presence of Shiite Hizbollah (Syria is 75% Sunni). The march out of Syria didn’t occur until the Spring of 2014 long after ISIL affiliated cannon fodder had joined the rebellion against Assad. If Iran, who wholly owns Hizbollah, had stayed out of the fighting in Syria, Assad would have been ousted long ago and it is doubtful that the ISIL would have formed, at least to the extent they have. It now appears that Assad is for the high jump but it is too late to prevent ISIL from ending up holding a large part of what was once Syria. That train left the station in 2014. As the ISIL march across iraq got underway, it was joined by the remnants of the Baathist followers and former Iraqi Army grunts who had been given their walking papers in the ill advised dismantling of the Iraqi Army after the takeover by US troops.

    Oddly enough, Israel is the main beneficiary of the Hizbollah presence in Syria as their best fighters are engaged there and are not available to pester Israel. As far as Israel is concerned, Hizbollah and ISIL can duke it out in Syria with their blessings.

  • http://www.ranum.com Marcus Ranum

    Here goes the “mad mullahs” bullshit again. As if, if Iran were suicidal and willing to die en masse, they don’t have a pretty good conventional military with lots of cruise missiles and intermediate range ballistic missiles capable of doing atrocious (but suicidal) damage. If they’re so crazy suicidal, they’d have already done it.

    PS – Pakistan is also governed by “mad mullahs”

    PPS – Israel is governed by “mad mullahs” with messianic/samsonic dreams

    PPPS – The US is governed by “mad mullahs” too

    Anyone who wants to really be educated about proliferation needs to study the actual non-proliferation treaty. It is nuclear blackmail on paper and basically says “sign here and we promise we won’t use nukes on you first.” Such a deal! India , Israel, Pakistan, South Sudan – those are the countries that haven’t signed. India is a preferred trade partner. Israel is an imperial outpost of Europe in the middle east. Pakistan is propped up by everyone and nobody gives a shit about South Sudan. The whole Iran thing is window-dressing to maintain the US and its imperial satrapies’ nuclear monopoly in the region.

  • Holms

    #43

    You realise your are fully relying on a logical fallacy (ad hominem) for your denial, right? I’d link to wiki or something, but you would just dismiss it on the grounds that it would show you where you err. Oh I’m sorry, you pronounce that ‘anti-semitism.’

  • colnago80

    Re Marcus Ranum @ #47

    You don’t seem to like the USA very much. Why don’t you vote with your feet and try somewhere else beside Central Pennsylvania.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    colnago80 @ # 42, fixed: Hizbollah IDF is the biggest and best armed terrorist organization in the Middle East and is the wholly owned subsidiary of Iran USA.

    You’re welcome!

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    You don’t seem to like the USA very much. Why don’t you vote with your feet and try somewhere else beside Central Pennsylvania.

    Nor do I. For someone who purports to know so much about history, it should be a relatively uncontroversial statement that the United States for the past century has been one of the worst international actors in terms of sponsoring terrorism such as supplying and fomenting multiple violent overthrows of democratically elected governments in order to install friendly brutal dictatorships.

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    @Marcus Ranum

    The whole Iran thing is window-dressing to maintain the US and its imperial satrapies’ nuclear monopoly in the region.

    Honestly, I’m pretty ok with that part. I think that’s a good plan. In general, the less countries with nuclear weapons the better.

    @Pierce R. Butler in 50

    Nicely said.

  • The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge

    Pierce Butler @ 50:

    A-Fucking-Men!

    Isn’t it about time this shitstain Zionist maniac was fucking banned? I absolutely cannot get my head around anybody being so dead-set against Iran possessing a few primitive nuclear weapons, but being willing to acquiesce in the fucking Israelis–The. Fucking. Israelis!!!!–having dozens of them. If I were going to take out somebody’s nuclear facilities in a first strike like this bloodthirsty piece of shit wants to….

    Who in the region has demonstrated that they are willing to do anything, no matter how outrageous, and have absolutely no impulse control at all? Iran having nuclear weapons might be the only stabilizing factor that would prevent Nut n’ Yahoo or his successors from going completely apeshit.

    “Mad Mullahs”, forsooth! If I could take away Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and give them to Iran, I’d take that deal in a hot minute!

  • eric

    @23:

    If the mad mullahs who run Iran have nothing to hide at those military sites, they should have no objection to their inspection by international inspectors

    They don’t. They object to your “any site at any time” version of it. As did the US when the same idea was floated for the CWC and BWC. So…why are you accusing the US of running a secret bioweapons program? We have the exact same position on unlimited international inspection as Iran does.

    Hows about this. You design an inspection program to be implemented by the IAEA to ensure no further development of nuclear weapons’ capability beyond what a nation already has. You make the rules on inspections etc.. Then we’ll propose that both Israel and Iran submit to it.

  • jws1

    If this is Israel’s reaction to this deal, in which Iran gives up so much, then what about the two-solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? In short, Israel doesn’t want peace, it wants regional domination ala Monroe Doctrine.

  • addicted44

    Can we first come up with an alternative before criticizing the deal?

    Because the alternative is that the sanctions regime would have collapsed without Iran giving up anything. Europe is economically scarred because of internal issues (read Greece) and have been bearing significant pain because of the Russian sanctions. They were extremely close to abandoning the sanctions one way or the other.

    And the other major players putting pressure through sanctions were Russia and China who would have dropped them in a jiffy.

    The fact that Iran gave up anything is quite a feat.

  • addicted44

    The mad mullah stuff is so stupid considering W was the one talking about going on crusades, and then starting a war against Iraq.

    If anyone has been acting out on ridiculous religious beliefs in any sort of effective manner in the past decades it’s been the US.

  • llewelly

    eric:

    … where the Pentagon thinks they have a package small enough to launch on a missile …

    Notably, no evidence of any re-entry capability is forthcoming … which means they would be limited to low earth orbit detonations. Further limitations include terrible precision, and the fact that the longer range estimates for their missiles require a very minimal payload. For the time being, if the North Koreans cannot drive the weapon to the target, they can’t deliver it.

    That would be very different for Iran. Iran doesn’t need much in the way of long range missiles to deliver a nuclear weapon to its enemies. However even so I don’t think delivery would be an insignificant issue.

    But, I suspect the weakest point in the deal is the fact that the US right is going to extreme efforts to undermine all trust in it. Which enables the Iranian Colnagos to do likewise. The Iranians aligned with Rouhani will do their best to prevent that, but, well, we will see. If the deal does fail, my amateur guess is that it will take Iran about 5 years to develop a rather shoddy weapon with about half the explosive power of the weapon used on Hiroshima.

    And I think we’ll have plenty of warning. Military secrets are actually far harder to keep than people often suppose, especially in modern times. There’s no way to minaturize uranium enrichment enough to make it hard to locate by satellite. And the “secret sites” have leaked sensitive information in the past – that’s how we found out about he NSA and Israeli that got destructive malware into their enrichment machines, and damaged them. Obama did not press for the ability to visit the sites because it isn’t necessary.

    That is important, because there is not much chance that everyone would simply stand around and do nothing while Iran develops a nuclear weapon. Any clear evidence of steps would be used to support all manner of countermeasures – ranging from sanctions to covert operations as we have seen before. Even an “Osirak” style bombing would not be out of the question, though I am very much against any such thing personally.

    It’s also worth saying that the Iranian colnagos do not have the kind of control over the government they would need to actually deliver a nuclear weapon. If that remains the case, Iranian nuclear weapons wouldn’t be used for anything other than posturing. You see, Israel has really effective precision bombing ability. And Iran does not have particularly redundant infrastructure. They’ll be terrified of retaliation, because they’ll know it would end them.

    The real danger to the deal is the very thinking Colnago is so in love with. Naturally, that is why Colnago loves such thinking – he knows that if the deal fails, that justifies his fearmongering. That’s why Colnago insists on pretending the “mad mullahs” – his comrades in celebratory nuclear violence – have total control over Iran. That’s who he wants to be in power in Iran.

  • Anri

    Y’see, colnago80 is fully justified in calling these people “mad mullahs” because they want to use nuclear weapons on someone and don’t care about the potential civilian casualties.

    ….waaaaait a second…!

  • http://helives.blogspot.com heddle

    The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge says @53

    Isn’t it about time this shitstain Zionist maniac was fucking banned?

    I hope not. Two of the best things about this blog are 1) it is not Pharyngula and therefore blessedly lacks a pharyguloidal idiot star chamber that calls for banning and 2) Ed’s character is so much better than PZ’s that you need a log scale to get them on the same plot.

  • Lofty

    I have seen a mad mullah and he rides an Italian brand bicycle with nooclah warheads strapped to it.

  • StevoR

    @ 4. Raging Bee rages :

    “I do think someone who was a former ambassador and is an author historian and expert kinda outranks mere journalist Max Fisher here.”– StevoR

    He sure as hell doesn’t outrank the MANY diplomats and other experts who have voiced support for the Iran deal in grownup terms.

    Actually Michael Oren *does* outrank them. How many of them are listed ahead of him or have served with as much distinction diplomatically for as long or written as many books or articles. Name & cite one of his critics who has done all of what Oren has or more. Bet ya can’t!

    “Time will tell. Hopefully not at a catastrophic cost.” -StevoR

    We’ve already seen a taste of the catastrophic cost of the chickenhawks’ alternative policy. I’m not that worried about the hypothetical costs of this treaty.

    Yes, you are not an Israeli who’s nation is threatened by extermination nor, it seems, do you have the slightest sympathy with a nation of six million Jewish individuals who are threatened with genocide by the Iranian regime. Yet you have the gall to call me rude names and say that I’m lacking in empathy and respect for human life! Well, fuck you anti-Semite.

    Israeli and Jewish lives matter. Maybe not to you but to decent humans they do.

    (Mano Singham’s blog thread) …just the latest place where all of your childish racist warmongering bullshit objections were thoroughly debunked.

    Yeah ’bout that – turns out to be not so true. I don’t see any actual arguments there about the substance of what I’ve written.

    NB. for those hard of logic and comprehension e.g. Raging Bee – personal attacks against me are NOT an address of the substance of my arguments – there or here.

    @6. Raging Bee :

    I also find it amusing that StevoR spouts a lot of blatantly racist BS about how the Iranians can’t be trusted because they “don’t think like us,” and then dodges the charge of racism by insisting he has Persian friends. Who the fuck does he think he’s fooling?

    Iranian / Persian is an ethnicity not a race. I suspect the number of Iranians that actually support the theocrats in power in that nation is a lot lower than it seems – but you, Raging Bee, seem happy to be fooled by that brutal, murderous, religious extremist regime and take them at their word. You are the fool here.

    Yes I did have Iranian neighbours who I liked, got on well with and still feel fond of although I haven’t sen them in years and yes, they were huge fans of the Pahlavi Shah and hated the Ayatollahs and I think they’d know a fair bit more than you do about this. Actually I think almost everyone knows more about this than you do. Given you seem to kn w pretty much nothing except how to insult and abuse those who disagree with you.

  • StevoR

    @ 59. Anri : Guess you’ve never listened to Ahmadinejad then and failed to notice how insane he is?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/06/13/irans-president-mahmoud-a_n_3434408.html

    Read and learn and think and remember the guys who put this klown in charge are still running the place.

    Also guess you missed all the regular hate speech about “Greater and lesser Satans” death to the USA /Israel ad nauseam ..

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    I absolutely cannot get my head around anybody being so dead-set against Iran possessing a few primitive nuclear weapons, but being willing to acquiesce in the fucking Israelis–The. Fucking. Israelis!!!!–having dozens of them.

    Not to mention Pakistan, a failed or failing state that’s infested with lawless, atheist-killing fanatical jihadis, whose intelligence agency pretty much created the Taliban (where to they rank on colnago’s list of “world’s greatest supporters of terrorism?”), which has been on the brink of nuclear war with India for many years with no sign of relenting, and which could fall apart at any time. The fact that colnago can stay in years-long freakout mode about a nuclear Iran, and have nothing at all to say about a nuclear Pakistan, is even clearer proof of how infantile, bigoted, stupid, and quite possibly brain-damaged he is.

    Isn’t it about time this shitstain Zionist maniac was fucking banned?

    I would support such a ban, simply because colnago has repeatedly proven himself simply too immature and childish to participate in the grownup conversations that make this place worth my time. Whatever his opinions or their popularity, he’s simply not equal to the level of discourse that takes place here. In fact, he’s starting to approach the level of Larry Fafarman, who was banned without a word of complaint from anyone here. (Also, his infantile obsession with Hitler’s alleged Jewish roots, based on a story made up by a former Nazi after the War, really makes him sound more like a Nazi sympathizer than a sincere Zionist.)

  • StevoR

    @ 62. Iranian / Persian is an ethnicity not a race..

    Ahem, make that a nationality instead. Although I guess kinda an ethnicity too – and they are all individuals but quite a lot have been brain-washed into believing some seriously evil shit. Oh & those who haven’t a lot of them would agree with me and be on my side here too plus wanting their oppressive Islamist regime removed.

  • eric

    Llewelly:

    Notably, no evidence of any re-entry capability is forthcoming … which means they would be limited to low earth orbit detonations.

    As you say later though, an ICBM isn’t the worry; them loading it on a Ghadr is the worry. I just browsed a report on Iranian missile technology that says we expect them to gain ICBM capability by the turn of the century. Not exactly something to fret about.

    If the deal does fail, my amateur guess is that it will take Iran about 5 years to develop a rather shoddy weapon with about half the explosive power of the weapon used on Hiroshima.

    IMO the first thing they’ll build is a test device, not only because from an engineering standpoint its practically a necessity but because as NK shows, testing itself can garner attention and respect. Should everything fail and they keep operating everything at full steam, I’d say that maybe they get that far in 5 years. IIRC, it took Pakistan about 10 years to build a HEU-based weapon (they had a Pu-based weapon in 2-3 years, but that is because they either had a working reactor when they started their weapons program or someone gave them some plutonium). Oran’s three months? Don’t make me laugh. The only way the Iranians get nuclear capability in three months is if another country hands them a working device – not a core, not HEU, but an actual weapon.

    Iranian nuclear weapons wouldn’t be used for anything other than posturing.

    I’m inclined to agree. If Pakistan can keep it in their pants for 30+ years while fighting actual hot wars with India, I don’t doubt Iran can do the same while they conduct their cold/proxy wars with Israel. Moreover Israel may not even be Iran’s main audience. I suspect at least some of the desire to be a nuclear weapons power is to stick a finger in the eye of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey because the Iranians feel like they don’t get the cultural respect they deserve. “You dismiss us as Shias? Who’s the preeminent Islamic nation now, bitches?”

    The real danger to the deal is the very thinking Colnago is so in love with. Naturally, that is why Colnago loves such thinking – he knows that if the deal fails, that justifies his fearmongering. That’s why Colnago insists on pretending the “mad mullahs” – his comrades in celebratory nuclear violence – have total control over Iran. That’s who he wants to be in power in Iran.

    Hmmm…not so sure that logic works. If our side scraps the deal, that doesn’t say anything one way or the other about the intentions of the Iranian leadership. Colnago seems insistent that our side scrap the deal. If he then blames the scrapping on Iranian ill intent, that would be even more irrational than usual. So, the deal can fail with no justification for the fearmongerers. Obviously I’m hoping it doesn’t.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Guess you’ve never listened to Ahmadinejad then and failed to notice how insane he is?

    Guess you’ve never heard the news about how he got voted out of his job in favor of someone better?

  • StevoR

    @Raging Bee : I’m almost tempted to ask for your banning from here given your lack of ability to comprehend what people have actually written and said* and your penchant for personal abuse but, nah, who would give me as as much incredulous laughter and amaze me with such total stupidity and bias and be such an easy example of the idiocy of the Israel-bashers lines were you not here to do so?

    * For instance, you call me a war-monger in a thread where I specifically and repeatedly opposed the advocacy of war and stated I’m glad there was a deal although it was a bad one, go figure.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    If our side scraps the deal, that doesn’t say anything one way or the other about the intentions of the Iranian leadership.

    If “our” side (no, those warmongering bigoted assholes aren’t really on my side — they’re a threat to everything I consider worth protecting) scraps the deal, they’ll blame it on the Iranians. That’s how their minds work — they just keep on screaming for war and hate, refusing to even consider any other option, and then they blame everyone else but themselves when things don’t work out as planned. They have absolutely no sense of personal responsibility, and that is why they should never be allowed to influence real policy debates.

  • StevoR

    @ 67. Raging Bee : With the people who backed him behind the scenes still in charge.

    With Iran still being an “Islamic Republic” officially committed to spreading its extremist Shiite “revolution” (from back in the 1970s) and arming,training and supporting Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and so on ..

    Also still the same people who crushed several attempts by mainstream good Iranians at toppling them from power by murderous brute force. yeah those are the guys you really want to defend? Oh and they hang gay people, support murder and terrorism, call for extermination of other nations and you are just fine with that aren’t you?

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    StevoR: you accuse me of “personal abuse,” and then, in the same comment, call your critics “Israel-bashers” for the umpteenth time? You’ve shot yourself in the foot so many times, and so efficiently, it’s a wonder you can stand up at all. Your threat to ask for my banning has no credibility, and doesn’t bother me one bit.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Also still the same people who crushed several attempts by mainstream good Iranians at toppling them from power by murderous brute force. yeah those are the guys you really want to defend? Oh and they hang gay people, support murder and terrorism, call for extermination of other nations and you are just fine with that aren’t you?

    First, Iran’s actions are no worse than similar — and far less disciplined — actions just outside its borders. You really think gays and atheists are any safer just outside Iran than inside? And second, how, exactly, will scuttling this deal, and keeping up the hostility that has marked the past thirty-odd years of US-Iran relationship, change any of that for the better? Please try to remember that the Iranians have been doing all of those bad things in the absence of any progress in US-Iranian relations. So it’s pretty hard to make any sort of case that a deal with Iran in any way enables or condones (or has ANYTHING to do with) atrocities that have been going on already for decades.

  • Nick Gotts

    I also find it amusing that StevoR spouts a lot of blatantly racist BS about how the Iranians can’t be trusted because they “don’t think like us,” and then dodges the charge of racism by insisting he has Persian friends. Who the fuck does he think he’s fooling?

    He fools himself – that’s what’s important.

  • colnago80

    Re Raging Bee @ #72

    You really think gays and atheists are any safer just outside Iran than inside?

    They are a hell of a lot safer in Israel, as are Christians. In fact, Israel is the only country in the Middle East where Muslims aren’t killing each other.

    Now I’m sure that ole Bee will cite yesterday’s knife attack on people in a gay ride parade in Jerusalem to contest my assertions re gays and lesbians. I would note that the miscreant was arrested and incarcerated. In Iran, he would have been given a medal.

  • colnago80

    By the way, IMHO, ordinary Iranians are no more untrustworthy then anybody else. It’s the mad mullah that run the place who are untrustworthy.

  • StevoR

    @73. Nick Gotts : You base that on what exactly?

    You do not know me you just know I keep beating you in arguments here.

    I also note that, once again, you have failed to address the substance of my arguments or actually address the points which I have raised. (Ditto Raging Bee here too.)

  • dmcclean

    :consults map:

    Yup, #74 is a total non-sequitur.

    I guess I didn’t really need a map, I could’ve just read who the author was.

  • StevoR

    @71. Raging Bee : And another comical failure of reading comprehension on Raging Bee’s part once again – I expressly noted that I wouldn’t ask for your banning here RB on the grounds that you provide me with too many chuckles inadvertently at your own expense. On which point, thankyou again!

    Incidentally, if you don’t want to be called an Israel basher then an obvious solution presents itself – don’t bash Israel. What I said wasn’t personal abuse merely an observed statement of fact. You do bash Israel and single it out for disproportionate and unfair criticism then you have to face the logical consequences and obvious results of your doing so. I could’ve been far ruder about you and still equally accurate in doing so.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Incidentally, if you don’t want to be called an Israel basher then an obvious solution presents itself – don’t bash Israel.

    Quote me actually bashing Israel on this thread, or admit your name-calling has no basis in reality.

  • colnago80

    Re Raging Bee @ #79

    You have certainly bashed Israel on other threads on this blog.

  • http://helives.blogspot.com heddle

    #77,

    Yup, #74 is a total non-sequitur.

    Regardless of its accuracy, how is #74 (and I assume you mean the first paragraph of the response in #74, since you referred to having to consult a map) a “total non-sequitur”?

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    It’s the mad mullah that run the place who are untrustworthy.

    You only named ONE “mad mullah,” and you never cited any evidence that he is “mad” (as in insane or mentally unstable) by any reasonable definition of that word.

    Also, those people you admit are okay are taking more power over their own government than they had earlier.

    Your arguments are purely racist and have no basis in reality.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    I also note that, once again, you have failed to address the substance of my arguments or actually address the points which I have raised. (Ditto Raging Bee here too.)

    You’re both a liar and a hypocrite. It is you who continually ignore and avoid points I have repeatedly made about the inconsistency of your fearmongering.

  • colnago80

    Re Raging Bee @ #82

    The ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the one who calls the shots in Iran so his insanity is far more dangerous then any of his compatriots.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Yes, you are not an Israeli who’s nation is threatened by extermination…

    No, I’m an American, living near DC all my life, whose nation was threatened with extermination by Soviet and Chinese nuclear missiles. So if I can face that threat without becoming a flaming hysterical racist, then you have no excuse for your hysterical racism, even if you yourself really do live in Israel.

  • StevoR

    @83. Raging Bee : For example?

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    colnago: his “insanity” is still not proven. Your flaming ignorant racism still is.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    StevoR: the examples are already posted for all to see. I don’t have to repeat everything I’ve said.

  • StevoR

    @85. Raging Bee : You know full well that I live in Adelaide , South Australia.

    This doesn’t mean I can’t empathise and support those human individuals who do live in Israel and imagine myself in their place and think about how they feel and what they’d want as a result of that .

    In fact, if you had enough imagination and empathy and knowledge (gained by reading and listening to those who are Jewish and Israeli esp. ) you could imagine yourself as an Israeli and visualise yourself in their position too – you may even want to try that thought experiment one day – today even!

    Go on. Show us you can do it!

  • StevoR

    @88. Raging Bee : Yet you seem to do it anyhow ..

    Also I see no links and no evidence from you to back up your claim there.

    I am not surprised by that having successfully debated with you before.

  • StevoR

    @85. Raging Bee : Also I am neither hysterical (a misogynist term which shames you by its use here) nor racist.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    You know full well that I live in Adelaide , South Australia.

    Exactly — you’re pretending to represent the interests of Israel, and using their interests (as you imagine them) to justify a position that is clearly ignorant, irrational, hateful and racist. And on top of all that, you’re talking about Israelis as if they were the ONLY humans with legitimate security concerns. This is, again, a racist position that has no bearing on the much greater reality of the Middle East.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Also I am neither hysterical (a misogynist term which shames you by its use here) nor racist.

    You can say that as many times as you want — your own words still prove otherwise.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Also I see no links and no evidence from you to back up your claim there.

    What, you need a URL to prove that the USSR didn’t start WW-III? Or that Pakistan is a greater security threat than Iran?

  • matty1

    @89 I wonder if you can “empathise and support those human individuals who do live in Israel Iran and imagine myself in their place and think about how they feel and what they’d want as a result of that”?

    Is it possible that whatever their political or religious view people in Iran have found their lives significantly worse as a result of sanctions? Have they perhaps found that their oppressive government benefited from being able to blame sanctions for problems rather than accept responsibility and that this prevented improvements in human rights?

    What would empathy then demand?

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    In fact, if you had enough imagination and empathy and knowledge (gained by reading and listening to those who are Jewish and Israeli esp. ) you could imagine yourself as an Israeli and visualise yourself in their position too – you may even want to try that thought experiment one day – today even!

    Why does every major US foreign-policy action have to be filtered through the lens of Israel’s interests (as imagined by someone who’s nowhere near there, I must add)? Why is Israel the ONLY ethnic group we have to empathize with? And why the fuck do we need an AUSTRALIAN to judge whether we’re empathizing with Israel enough?

    Your “empathize with the poor endangered Israelis” routine is nothing but a fraud. You’re just an anti-Iranian bigot looking for any excuse you can find.

  • colnago80

    Re Raging Bee @ #85

    Well, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, apparently under the influence, once promised to bury us. He later amended that promise by claiming that what he meant was that Communism would bury Capitalism.

  • colnago80

    Re Raging Bee @ #94

    What, you need a URL to prove that the USSR didn’t start WW-III? Or that Pakistan is a greater security threat than Iran?

    They came close in 1963 during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Many of us still remember that episode and thought that the mushroom clouds might sprout at any moment.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Thanks for proving my point, colnago — all that hysteria and fearmongering about a nuclear USSR turned out to be unfounded, even though the USSR was a tyrannical regime with lots of ideological fanaticism and anti-American rhetoric. So why do we have to get hysterical all over again about a nuclear Iran?

  • colnago80

    Re Raging Bee @ #99

    The Soviet leaders after Stalin were more or less sane. The ayatollahs are stark raving bonkers.

  • StevoR

    @ Raging Bee :

    .. you’re pretending to represent the interests of Israel, and using their interests (as you imagine them) to justify a position that is clearly ignorant, irrational, hateful and racist.

    Nope.

    Also no evidence provided to back those abusive and extraordinary claims I note without surprise.

    I’m none of those things you wrongly accuse me of being.

    .. on top of all that, you’re talking about Israelis as if they were the ONLY humans with legitimate security concerns.

    Nope.

    Prove otherwise, oh you cannot.

    “Also I am neither hysterical (a misogynist term which shames you by its use here) nor racist.”

    You can say that as many times as you want — your own words still prove otherwise.

    Really? Which words when and where? No links, no evidence and oh yeah, no surprise from me.

    Also no attempt to imagine yourself in an Israeli human’s position, RB – also no surprise from me ’bout that either.

    What, you need a URL to prove that the USSR didn’t start WW-III? Or that Pakistan is a greater security threat than Iran?

    Huh? Not what was I was saying and what a surprise (not!) a reading fail on your art yet again, Raging Bee. LOL.

    Incidentally, that last sentence above, whoah, talk about a matter of subjective opinion!

    Why does every major US foreign-policy action have to be filtered through the lens of Israel’s interests (as imagined by someone who’s nowhere near there, I must add)? (1) Why is Israel the ONLY ethnic group we have to empathize with? (2) And why the fuck do we need an AUSTRALIAN to judge whether we’re empathizing with Israel enough? (3)

    Numbering added for reference.

    1) Not what I said or am arguing for – but y’know they are a major ally and ethical partner with a lot in comon and one of the good guys in the region.

    2) It isn’t and I never said otherwise. I also strongly support the Kurds for instance.

    3) Well, you don’t, but clearly it helps and if no one else is going to do so, why should n’t I? Clearly there are more than enough here who hate Israel and will try to attack it constantly -example one, look in a mirror Raging Bee.

    Would actually be really nice of more folks here took the Israeli perspective and argued for it here and didn’t put up with the shit the Israel-bashers keep fecally vomiting out of their fingers! But, since its me and just a few others, then damned if I’ll let anti-Semitic Israel bashing shit go unchallenged.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    You’ve said that before, colnago, but you still haven’t given us any examples of “stark raving bonkers” behavior. Which means your criticism is nothing but bigoted stereotyping.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    … then damned if I’ll let anti-Semitic Israel bashing shit go unchallenged.

    Yeah, can’t let any instance of imaginary anti-Semitism go unchallenged. Keep on challenging those imaginary demons, for as long as you keep on imagining them. Need an exorcist?

  • dingojack

    Stevo — ‘ethical’?!? What like all those ‘ethical’ war crimes committed* during the latest conflict in Gaza? With ‘ethical’ friends like those…

    Dingo

    ———

    * by both sides, but the Israelis with bigger, more deadly weapons, and in urban areas, such as White Phosphorus.

  • karmacat

    I have included a link to an interview with Jeffrey Lewis by Max Fisher. Lewis is an expert on nuclear weapons non-proliferation and these kind of experts are the best ones to consult.

    It is a good interview. He acknowledges the limitations of the agreement but also speaks about what makes it a good agreement. The bottom line, as someone else said here, is what is the alternative? We can’t go and bomb Iran and if you don’t lift some sanctions, then Iran has no motivation to change.

    http://www.vox.com/2015/7/15/8967147/iran-nuclear-deal-jeffrey-lewis

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    The mad mullah stuff is so stupid considering W was the one talking about going on crusades, and then starting a war against Iraq. If anyone has been acting out on ridiculous religious beliefs in any sort of effective manner in the past decades it’s been the US.

    And the insanity of our Christian Reich has only got worse since then, not better. And they’re running a major national party that currently controls two of three branches of the US government. So yeah, calling Iran’s leaders insane is pure delusional bullshit.

  • pocketnerd

    Thus Spake ZaraRagingBee, #64:

    Also, his infantile obsession with Hitler’s alleged Jewish roots, based on a story made up by a former Nazi after the War, really makes him sound more like a Nazi sympathizer than a sincere Zionist.

    That’s maybe the strangest thing about Colnago — the whole Frankenberger thing is usually a shibboleth for hardcore anti-Semites who insist the Axis and the Allies were both Secretly Controlled By The Jews. (Dun dun DUNNN!) Seriously, it’s something you more typically hear from “volkish” neo-pagans and hardcore reactionaries who are ideologically sympathetic to Nazis but hate the “socialist” part of “national socialism.”

    It’s deeply weird to see a neo-Zionist going on about it; just about the only Frankenberger conspiracy theorists who support a Jewish state in the Middle East are the Christian Identity barrel-strokers, and then only because they think Jesus won’t come back if He doesn’t get to smite the shit out of Israel. I’m hoping Colnago’s obsession with the topic is merely another manifestation of his general paranoid crankery, and not an indicator of something altogether nastier.

  • StevoR

    @104. dingojack : The last Gaza war. That Hamas started by kidnapping and killing teenage kids then firing rockets at unarmed civilians?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wT-a-WWJgBg&index=75&list=PL6C415956A52928F0

    Cenk Uygur says it all here really.

    Israel didn’t want that war – did not start it, no one won it. Hamas gotta take all the blame for that one. Where and whastand did it get them? What a stupid, needless, waste of life. Not Israel’s fault.

  • dingojack

    ‘He started it!’ What, are nations run by six-year olds now?

    Who started it isn’t even vaguely relevant, their conduct during the conflict is the issue. And neither side comes out looking good. Perhaps its time for a few prosecutions and some disclosure of a few unpalatable truths.

    Dingo

  • colnago80

    Re Dingo @ #109

    Actually, US Joint Chief’s of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey is on record as stating that he found the IDF’s efforts to avoid collateral damage extraordinary. The high command of the IDF placed their soldiers in jeopardy by these efforts. The time has long passed where the IDF should stop playing pattycakes with Hamas and apply Hama rules to the Gaza Strip. Carpet bombing is the correct strategic choice.

  • colnago80

    Re Dingo

    I will paraphrase Franklin D. Roosevelt’s comments on the leaders of Germany, Italy, and Japan just after Pearl Harbor: The Hamas Government in the Gaza Strip has been asking for it for a long time and now they’re going to get it.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Colnago’s continued blithering about “Hama rules” (the gassing of civilians by their own government), once again proves he’s ignorant, sadistic, bigoted, childish, and downright unserious. He’s nothing but a hateful bigot who doesn’t even want to grow up. So yeah, another reason to ban the little shit.

    I will paraphrase Franklin D. Roosevelt’s comments on the leaders of Germany, Italy, and Japan just after Pearl Harbor…

    “I will try to pretend I’m smart by misquoting what a smart person said about a totally different subject.”

  • StevoR

    @109. dingojack : “What, are nations run by six-year olds now?”

    Worse we’re ruled by the likes of Tony Abbott, Canada (of all freakin’ places!) is ruled by Harper, Britain has Cameron in charge and ,, oh, for fucks sake, Trump is currently the leading Republican in line to potentially take over the leadership of the US of A!

  • StevoR

    ‘Course Trump won’t win and Hillary Rodham Clinton will – but still.

  • colnago80

    Re Raging Bee @ #112

    Actually, Hafaz Assad didn’t use poison gas in the artillery assault on the City of Hama which killed 20,000+ people. Standard high explosives were sufficient for the task.

  • colnago80

    Re Raging Bee @ #112

    Ishmael Haniyeh and he fellow terrorists who run the Gaza Strip are no better then Schicklgruber, Mussolini, and Tojo.

  • StevoR

    Worst of all, (relatively?) not just”the likes of Tony Abbott” but that exact massive douchebag is actually our PM! How the fuck did that happen again?! I thought we were better than that? Fuck!

  • dingojack

    Oooooh, shall we ask Jaleel White* what his opinion is too?

    The International Criminal Court is the relevant authority in this case.

    Dingo

    ———

    * who, of course, is best known for playing ‘Steve Urkel’ in the sitcom Family Matters

  • StevoR

    @115. Colnago80 : “Actually, Hafaz Assad didn’t use poison gas in the artillery assault on the City of Hama which killed 20,000+ people. Standard high explosives were sufficient for the task.”

    Just imagine the reaction if Israel had done that .. which of course it wouldn’t do. Because Israel aren’t the brutal, bloodthirsty monsters that the Syrian dictatorship – let alone Da’esh actually are.

    But, of course, everything bad in South West Asia is automatically somehow, somehow – even without any connection whatsoever! – Israel’s and only Israel’s fault according to some idiots ..

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Ishmael Haniyeh and he fellow terrorists who run the Gaza Strip are no better then Schicklgruber, Mussolini, and Tojo.

    And the Iran-haters degenerate into total flailing incoherence. Argument over, I guess.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    …everything bad in South West Asia is automatically somehow, somehow – even without any connection whatsoever! – Israel’s and only Israel’s fault according to some idiots ..

    Who exactly? Citation required.

  • StevoR

    The ICC Dingojack? I don’t have faith in them any more than I have faith in the UN.

    Which if memory serve shad Syria on their human rights commission once.

    Dictators debating club. The UN needs but lacks membership standards – which would rule out about 2 /3rds of their present members. Possibly more.

  • StevoR

    @121. Raging Bee : look in a mirror. Think ’bout what you’ve said here.

    Not just you sure – but certainly you.

    Nick Gotts too,

  • StevoR

    @ 120. Raging Bee : Because the key differences ‘twixt Hamas an those others are .. what??

    Oh yeah, its RB raging away here – evidence never provided because, well, dunno, why can’t you actually back up your arguments with evidence Raging Bee, none there maybe?

    (Trying and failing to recall even a single instance where Raging Bee has backed up RB’s claims with something vaguely credible. Even anything at all really.)

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    @121. Raging Bee : look in a mirror.

    What, you wrote the citation I asked for in lipstick on a mirror?

  • zenlike

    StevoR says

    @115. Colnago80 : “Actually, Hafaz Assad didn’t use poison gas in the artillery assault on the City of Hama which killed 20,000+ people. Standard high explosives were sufficient for the task.”

    Just imagine the reaction if Israel had done that .. which of course it wouldn’t do. Because Israel aren’t the brutal, bloodthirsty monsters that the Syrian dictatorship – let alone Da’esh actually are.

    The irony is of course that you are quoting someone who just before advocated for the exact same thing. Self-awareness zero.

  • StevoR

    @ ^ zenlike : In fact I wasn’t quoting anyone.

  • StevoR

    OKay I did quote colnago80 who advocated something worse.

    But Assad did what he did in reality.

    Which tends to get overlooked wa-aay too easily.

  • StevoR

    Also you did miss my point here I think ..

  • StevoR

    @125 . Raging Bee : LOL. Yup. I did .

    Or maybe its just your reflection.

    Gee, go figure..

  • http://polrant@blogspot.com democommie

    I’m visiting my brother in Longmont, CO and tomorrow we’re going up to Omaha for a family b’day party and general bon homie and gluttonous drunkitudishness.

    The weather here is sunny, dry and mountain viewish; the beer is cold and the company pleasant if mildly conservative.

    I can’t really give much of a fuck about Iran having nukes at the moment and doubt, really, that their launching a nuke is going to be the moment that brings about the end of the world.

    Chillax, have some brewskis and try the ribs at Georgia Boys.

  • StevoR

    @ ^ democommie : Good advice. Have fun. Thanks.

  • StevoR

    @127-1`28 I was thinking of “quote” quotes not blockquotes if ya get ma drift .. yeah, okay fucked up there.

  • dingojack

    Yeah Stevo – the UN should totally exclude any country who has ever been involved in questionable behaviour (as a body designed to talk about issues of international law, international trade, trans-border health emergencies and so on should, according to you, ‘the expert’) — that would leave (Well the US is out, Russian Federation is out, the UK is out, Australia is out, Israel is out…) … um… let’s see — nobody at all! Brilliant!

    That’ll make those big problems oh so much easier to solve, and that’ll totally reduce the chance of some bone-headed chicken-hawk provoking a major international war! Why oh why didn’t anyone think of it before?!

    And instead of ICC, perhaps we should just follow the advice of some random US general and/or the Knesset about what constitutes a violation of International Law, because they’re proven themselves so knowledgeable, so wise & so impartial before. Rather than listening to the opinions of (ooh, I dunno) actual legal experts trained in actual International Law. I mean, what would they know, right?

    @@

    Dingo

  • StevoR

    @ ^ Dingojack : Russia just vetoed the idea of an independent investigation into the “downing” by (oh yeah Russia) of MH17 y’know?

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-30/russia-vetoes-proposal-for-un-backed-tribunal-over-mh17/6658620?section=world

    I think something is badly broken here. Something being the whole way the UN works – or rather doesn’t.

  • StevoR

    The whole international law and governance system as it, err, doesn’ t work now. Can’t be trusted or relied on or considered anything but a joke.

    Wish that weren’t so – really do – but it is for now and can’t see anything better anytime soon.

  • StevoR

    Need to scrap the UN, scrap what we have now and start again.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    The whole international law and governance system as it, err, doesn’t work now.

    Yeah, and years of US neocon warmongering hasn’t helped, has it?

    …can’t see anything better anytime soon.

    Our point exactly.

  • Holms

    #68 War Crimes Apologist StevoR

    @Raging Bee : I’m almost tempted to ask for your banning from here given your lack of ability to comprehend what people have actually written and said [For instance, you call me a war-monger in a thread where I specifically and repeatedly opposed the advocacy of war and stated I’m glad there was a deal although it was a bad one, go figure.

    WHAT A FUCKING JOKE. How could you possibly not include me in your fake and / or ludicrous ban threats? What about all the times I’ve (correctly) addressed you as “War Crimes Apologist StevoR”? Oh hey not to mention the obvious (to everyone sensible) fact that if you and War Crimes Enthusiast colnago80 have yet to be banned for sheer offensiveness, then no one else ever will be.

    ___

    #108 War Crimes Apologist StevoR

    @104. dingojack : The last Gaza war. That Hamas started by kidnapping and killing teenage kids then firing rockets at unarmed civilians?

    The correct response for three murder is to arrest and engage in criminal proceedings. It is emphatically *not* ‘start a war’. So, that would be collective punishment… which I distinctly recall pointing out to you a year ago. It’s a war crime. Oops, there’s why we call you a war crime apologist.

    Oh and you’ve also forgotten that there were murdered Palestinians in reprisal, even before the war started. I guess you’re okay with shelling a couple thousand Israelis in retribution then? …No? Oh, only when Palestinians are doing the dying? Funny that.

    ___

    #110 War Crimes Enthusiast colnago80

    Actually, US Joint Chief’s of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey is on record as stating that he found the IDF’s efforts to avoid collateral damage extraordinary. The high command of the IDF placed their soldiers in jeopardy by these efforts.

    Eye witness accounts and footage completely disproving this account, leaving it merely a polite fiction for only the most foolish to believe.

    The time has long passed where the IDF should stop playing pattycakes with Hamas and apply Hama rules to the Gaza Strip. Carpet bombing is the correct strategic choice.

    And that right there is a call for a war crime.

    ___

    #116 War Crimes Enthusiast colnago80

    Ishmael Haniyeh and he fellow terrorists who run the Gaza Strip are no better then Schicklgruber, Mussolini, and Tojo.

    Good thing this “Shickelgruber” is just a figment of your imagination.

    ___

    #123 War Crimes Apologist StevoR

    @121. Raging Bee : look in a mirror. Think ’bout what you’ve said here.

    Not just you sure – but certainly you.

    RB asked you for a citation of anyone blaming ‘everything that goes wrong in SW Asia being solely caused by Israel,’ and I notice you failed to cite any text. So, point ton RB and nick Gotts I guess for your unbacked smear.

    ___

    #127 War Crimes Apologist StevoR

    @ ^ zenlike : In fact I wasn’t quoting anyone.

    #128

    OKay I did quote colnago80 who advocated something worse.

    Just like zenlike said: self awareness is not your thing.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Russia just vetoed the idea of an independent investigation into the “downing” by (oh yeah Russia) of MH17 y’know?

    Sort of like how they refused to allow any independent investigation of the downing of KAL-007. Yeah, the fall of Soviet Communism made such a huge difference for Russia, didn’t it?

  • dingojack

    Yeah — let’s go back to the 18th/19th century – but this time, with nukes!!

    With that level of military/legal/diplomatic genius — I can see why you voted yourself chief global strategist of the local branch of the Chicken-Hawk Brigade!

    @@ Dingo

  • Holms

    Oh and I see you live in the same city as me. Damn, that means there is the slim chance I might actually meet your wilfully obtuse, racist self in person.

  • StevoR

    Or needs to be reformed totally outta sight from what it is now. Into something vastly better and more powerful. And vastly less corrupt and biased and subject to the whims of evil dictators and evil powers.

    Coz what we have now, international~wise. Ain’t working. All fucked up.

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    Oh, only when Palestinians are doing the dying? Funny that.

    The really funny bit is where people like StevoR say that the fact that the Palestinians did all the dying proves how humane the ISRAELIS are. I kid you not.

  • freemage

    StevoR:

    Do you have a response to the call for ‘what else could we have actually done’? Near as I can tell, colnago’s sole position is that if the ‘mad mullahs’ aren’t willing to submit to regular proctology exams searching for enriched uranium, then Sanctions Forever (even though the international resolve for such has been weakening constantly, and if it fails, colnago has no solution other than pre-emptive genocidal warfare).

    I don’t think anyone here wants a nuclear Iran. But the point is that we may, ultimately, not have a choice in the matter. Do you have any solution for that conundrum other than colagno’s massive bombing proposals?

  • StevoR

    @ 141. dingojack : Yeah, expressing my opinion here is just the same as voting myself leader of everywhere I guess ..oh wait.

    @142. Holms : Its alright you wouldn’t know me if you saw me – just like you don’t really now me here either ya just think ya do – wrongly because ya suck at reading and really understanding.

    @1389. Holms : No links and no evidence provided as per usual. Unsuprised. You ain’t as funny as RB and I wouldn’t have have either of you banned. Even if I could which I can’t. Doesn’t change anything else I’ve said about you though. You are an anti-Semitic Israel-basher, you can’t read or understand for shit and, well, you generally suck. Think about that if you will.

  • StevoR

    @145. freemage : Continued sanctions and diplomatic pressure. As I said on Mano Singham’s blog linked at #2 above.

  • StevoR

    @ 144. Raging Bee : Yeah I said that didn’t I? Oh wait, nope. Mebbe check the actual words someone has written here before spewing shit about them eh? Just a thought?

  • http://motherwell.livejournal.com/ Raging Bee

    @1389 [I presume you mean @139?]. Holms : No links and no evidence provided as per usual.

    Um…the evidence was YOUR WORDS AS DIRECTLY QUOTED AND REFERENCED. And once again, your only response is to keep on saying “nuh-uh!” over and over again.

  • colnago80

    Re Holms @ #139

    If the IDF really had the balls to lower the hammer on Hamas, they could make a parking lot out of the Gaza Strip, as US General Curtis LeMay once suggested for North Vietnam.

  • colnago80

    Re StevoR @ #146

    Don’t feel too bad, both Raging Bee and I live in Northern Virginia, he in Fairfax Co. and I in Falls Church.

  • Holms

    #146

    @139. Holms : No links and no evidence provided as per usual. Unsuprised.

    I directly quoted you from this very thread, with the post number; clearly, you didn’t even read my post. Since you are slow or disingenuous (or both), here: in my comment #139 I quoted you justifying the offensive against Palestinians by citing the murder of three Israelis and the rocket fire from the Gaza strip. But starting a war against the many for the crimes of the few is a war crime: collective punishment. By justifying / endorsing actions that are war crimes, you are therefore a warcrimes apologist.

    You ain’t as funny as RB and I wouldn’t have have either of you banned. Even if I could which I can’t.

    And there it is, an admission that you knew prefectly well your ‘threats’ were a fucking laugh. Walk the threats back, good boy.

    Doesn’t change anything else I’ve said about you though. You are an anti-Semitic Israel-basher, you can’t read or understand for shit and, well, you generally suck. Think about that if you will.

    Since I performed your request of citing my claim that you are a war crimes apologist – even though that claim was perfectly obvious – please return that gesture by citing these accusations against me or admit said accusations are unsupported by… anything I have ever said. Some cautionary notes before you try (assuming you even bother; I suspect you know you can’t find shit):

    – Anti-semitism means attacking / disparaging etc. people for simply being jewish. It does not include criticisms of jews based on their actions, words or policies.

    – Since you demanded direct quotes plus source, I require the same. And no you can hardly complain about that, you even had the cheek to demand I source quotes from this very thread.

    – Consider using good faith arguments this time? Maybe?

    – I ‘generally suck’? SICK BURNS BRO.

  • matty1

    Colnago80

    If the IDF really had the balls to lower the hammer on Hamas, they could make a parking lot out of the Gaza Strip, as US General Curtis LeMay once suggested for North Vietnam.

    And the thought of that makes you happy?

  • colnago80

    Re Matty1 @ #153

    No.

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    In fact, if you had enough imagination and empathy and knowledge (gained by reading and listening to those who are Jewish and Israeli esp. ) you could imagine yourself as an Israeli and visualise yourself in their position too – you may even want to try that thought experiment one day – today even!

    As long as the leadership of Israel obstructs the peace process and refuses to recognize one of the following solutions, then I don’t give a rat’s ass what it’s like to be them. If I was in Israel, I would try to move, because I don’t want to live in a obnoxious regime like Israel that trying to be the new apartheid.

    Solution 1- Admit to a two-state solution, and make Jerusalem into a neutral city-state for everyone. And start destroying illegal settlements.

    Solution 2- Admit to a one-state solution, where the one state is a free and fair representative secular democracy. And start destroying illegal settlements.

    Until Israel reaches one of those two conditions, then I’ll bash Israel all day long.

    And the evils of Palestine does not excuse the evils of Israel. That just means I’ll bash both all day long.

  • colnago80

    Re EL @ #155

    Excuse me, who walked away from the negotiating table in 2000 when the two sides were actually close to an agreement. It was Yasir Arafatty, who could not accept the condition that there would be no right of return for Palestinian refugees. This is still the Palestinian position to this day and there is no Israeli government of either the left or the right that would accept such a demand and expect to remain in power for 10 minutes.

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    @colnago

    That’s 10 years ago. Today, Israel is still expanding settlements, and the leadership have appealed to open racism and have openly and repeatedly stated an adamant refusal of a two-state solution. It’s verboten that a secular one-state solution is also off the table. Thus: fuck Israel.

    You make reference to the fact that we shouldn’t expect a party with a reasonable platform to stay in power. Great! Thus: Fuck the majority of the Israeli public too.

    tl;dr

    Fuck Israel.

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    Grammar correction:

    “A secular one-state solution is also verboten.”

  • colnago80

    Re EL @ #157

    EL’s arithmetic skills are as sparse as his political skills. 2000 was 15 years ago.

    I assume that EL’s response means that he agrees that the Palestinian demand for the so-called right of return. Then I suppose that he also would be in favor of the right of return of Native Americans and First Nations in Canada to the land expropriated from their ancestors. Give back Toronto and New York City. Ho, ho, ho and need I say ho,ha, ha.

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    I assume that EL’s response means that he agrees that the Palestinian demand for the so-called right of return.

    I never said that. I never stated that. I said that the events of 15* years ago are no excuse for the behavior of the Israeli leadership and public today. Those events of 15 years ago are immaterial to discussions of who is being unreasonable today. And today, both Palestine and Israel are being wholly unreasonable.

  • colnago80

    Re EL @ #160

    The fact is that the Palestinians are still demanding the right of return, something that no Israeli Government will agree to. I really don’t see how we can make progress when this is a non-negotiable demand on their part. At no time have they ever indicated, either publicly or privately that this demand is, in fact, negotiable.

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    @colnago80

    Listen. I don’t give a fuck if we can make progress. I give a fuck that the Israeli government clear position from their spokespersons is that a two-state solution will never happen, and non-Jew citizens will always be second-class citizens, and Israeli will continue their land-grab settlement expansions. I agree that progress probably cannot be made if Israel were to change course, but if Israel changed course at least I could honestly say that Israel has the moral high ground. No such thing is true now.

  • Holms

    #161 War Crimes Enthusiast colnago80

    The fact is that the Palestinians are still demanding the right of return, something that no Israeli Government will agree to. I really don’t see how we can make progress when this is a non-negotiable demand on their part. At no time have they ever indicated, either publicly or privately that this demand is, in fact, negotiable.

    With but one change:

    “The fact is that the Israelis are still denying the right of return, something that no Palestinian Government will agree to. I really don’t see how we can make progress when this is a non-negotiable demand on their part. At no time have they ever indicated, either publicly or privately that this demand is, in fact, negotiable.”

    Just a quick reversal reveals that you admit that Israel too is being intractable on that same point. Did… did you just criticise Israel?? I think you did! Accidentally of course, but it clearly demonstrates your double standard here: Palestinian leaders are bad for having something non-negotiable, Israelis also have something that is non-negotiable, oopsies better give them a free pass on it.

  • The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge

    The fact is that the Palestinians are still demanding the right of return, something that no Israeli Government will agree to. I really don’t see how we can make progress when this is a non-negotiable demand on their part. At no time have they ever indicated, either publicly or privately that this demand is, in fact, negotiable.

    Why the everlasting fuck should it be negotiable? Their country has been occupied by a foreign army since 1948. They’re not even demanding that that occupying army go back where it came from–which I would–they just want to return to the territory they were expelled from during the occupation. Of course, their original homes have been appropriated by the foreign troops….

  • colnago80

    Re EL @ #162

    The high moral ground. Who gives a flying fuck about the high moral ground. In the Middle East, those who seek the high moral ground will be trampled underfoot.

    Re Battleaxe @ #164

    Ah yes, the Government of Israel should do what the Governments of the US and Canada decline to do; these latter two entities decline to return New York and Toronto to their original owners, Native Americans and First Nations. But I guess that the Statute of Limitations has run out for those folks. When is it going to run out for the Palestinians?

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    The high moral ground. Who gives a flying fuck about the high moral ground. In the Middle East, those who seek the high moral ground will be trampled underfoot.

    We had this discussion before. You present a false dilemma. Israel can live in a two-state solution, with destroying current illegal settlements, and making Jerusalem into an independent city-state for all. Israel can also live in a single state solution where the state is secular and non-religious, like modern US first amendment jurisprudence. The leadership of Israel could publicly state acceptance of one or both outcomes and take concrete steps towards one of those outcomes, such as destroying all illegal settlements, without endangering the Israeli people. That’s your false dilemma. I refuse to buy into it. Rather, you are just being an apologist for systematic apartheid bordering on genocide.

  • The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge

    165:

    But I guess that the Statute of Limitations has run out for those folks. When is it going to run out for the Palestinians?

    Well, you disgusting fucking shitstain–why didn’t it run out for the Jews after 1900 years?

    More importantly, you waste of skin: I am totally behind the idea of the Jewish people being given a territorial state in reparations for their suffering in The Holocaust. The original Zionists (not the bloodthirsty shitweasels who have appropriated that term) were probably correct that that is the only possible protection for any people against such outrages.

    What I have to have explained to me-and I’ve never heard anyone even try to give such an explanation–is WHY in the name of shit this wouldn’t have been at the expense of the country that injured them?!!!!

    Pomerania and Silesia were ethnically cleansed of Germans after the war anyway. Instead of bodily shifting Poland to the west (against their will), return Poland to its 1939 borders, give Silesia back to Germany, and give Pomerania to the Jews. Problem solved.

    The only reason the Jews weren’t indemnified at the expense of Germany is pure and simple racism. Sure, you’re handing an innocent, uninvolved third party’s country over to foreign invaders, but they’re swarthy, don’chaknow–so it’s all right.

  • colnago80

    Re Battleaxe @ #167

    Hey, why not Eichmann’s 1935 proposal to move all of Europe’s Jews to Madagascar? It is doubtful that the former Soviet Union would have agreed to Pomerania as they proposed to give it to Poland in exchange for land taken from the latter and added to the former. However, this is all academic as we sit here today as Israel has now been around for 67 years and ain’t going nowhere. What should have been done in 1948 is no longer of any relevance.

  • colnago80

    Re EL @ #166

    How are you planning to persuade the Palestinians to forgo their demand of the right of return? They have shown every indication that any persuasion is an exercise in futility. They still think they are eventually going to win even if it takes hundreds of years.

  • colnago80

    Re Battleaxe @ #167

    Of course, the real culprit here is the British who promised Palestine to both the Arabs and the Jews before the end of WW1. They promised it to the latter to persuade the publishers of the New York Times to not oppose the entrance of the US into WW1 on the side of Great Britain (those publishers were originally German Jews). This is typical British imperialism. It’s called divide and conquer, stirring up communal warfare between different ethnic groups occupying the same land . They did it in the Indian Subcontinent, they did it in Palestine, they did it in Ireland, and they did it in Canada. The French don’t call Great Britain perfidious Albion for nothing.

  • The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge

    Just eat shit and die, you pustulent smegma-sucking fucknozzle.

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    @colnago

    How are you planning to persuade the Palestinians to forgo their demand of the right of return? They have shown every indication that any persuasion is an exercise in futility. They still think they are eventually going to win even if it takes hundreds of years.

    I don’t see a point in here. What does this have to do with Israel’s current position of being against a 2-state solution, being against a 1-state secular solution, its continued illegal settlement activities, and its policies that borderline on ethnic cleansing? I think you’re trying to make a rebuttal or something, but I don’t see the logic. It seems to be “Palestine does something bad, so if Israel does something bad in return, then it’s ok”. Sorry, ethics and morality doesn’t work like that.

  • dingojack

    Stevo (#146) – re-read mine #144 again, more carefully this time. @@

    Dingo

  • StevoR

    @ ^ dingojack : Okay, I presume you mean your #141 though? Raging Bee wrote #144 which is a flat out lie.

    Yeah — let’s go back to the 18th/19th century – but this time, with nukes!!

    With that level of military/legal/diplomatic genius — I can see why you voted yourself chief global strategist of the local branch of the Chicken-Hawk Brigade!

    Umm .. well, I’m not arguing for that nor I am claiming leadership merely expressing my views. Not arguing for war or electing myself to anything.

  • colnago80

    Re Battleaxe @ #171

    Battleaxe has the mentality of an 8 year old.

  • colnago80

    Re EL @ #172

    The Palestinians will not accept either a 2 state solution or a 1 state solution unless Israel agrees to the “right of return”. How do you propose to convince them to give up on this demand?

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    @colnago80

    The Israelis won’t accept a single state secular solution where non-Jews are full citizens and where they have to destroy their illegal settlements, and the Israelis won’t accept a 2-state solution where Jerusalem is an independent city-state for all and where they have to destroy their illegal settlements. How do you propose to convince them to give up on this position?

  • Holms

    #165 War Crimes Enthusiast colnago80

    Re EL

    The high moral ground. Who gives a flying fuck about the high moral ground. In the Middle East, those who seek the high moral ground will be trampled underfoot.

    You’ve just acknowledged that Israeli actions are not moral. Of course it’s been obvious to us all along, but it’s nice to see you accidentally admit it.

    Re Battleaxe

    Ah yes, the Government of Israel should do what the Governments of the US and Canada decline to do; these latter two entities decline to return New York and Toronto to their original owners, Native Americans and First Nations.

    Except the topic being discussed by Battleaxe was not the handing over of control of territory, but the right of return. Thus the analogue for New York and Toronto that you bring up should not be ‘hand them over to first nations’ but rather ‘allow first nations people to live, work and cote there.’ Which is precisely what they are allowed to do, meaning your analogy is dishonest as usual.

    ___

    #169

    Ah yes, the Government of Israel should do what the Governments of the US and Canada decline to do; these latter two entities decline to return New York and Toronto to their original owners, Native Americans and First Nations.

    Why dissuade them of that demand at all, when it is entirely compatible with the one-state solution in particular?

    ___

    #174 War Crimes Apologist StevoR

    Strange… no mention of the fact that I did indeed quote you and demonstrate that you are a war crimes apologist. I guess you no longer dispute it?

  • colnago80

    Re Holms @ #178

    Except the topic being discussed by Battleaxe was not the handing over of control of territory, but the right of return.

    I hate to spoil your attempt at a perfect squelch but what the Palestinians mean by the right of return not only involves allowing Palestinian individuals to return but also return to them of any property that was left behind when they and/or their antecedents left is to be returned, which makes it absolutely analogous to the situation relative to New York and Toronto.

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    @colnago80

    You didn’t answer my questions. You’re being evasive. Again: The Israelis won’t accept a single state secular solution where non-Jews are full citizens and where they have to destroy their illegal settlements, and the Israelis won’t accept a 2-state solution where Jerusalem is an independent city-state for all and where they have to destroy their illegal settlements. How do you propose to convince them to give up on this position?

  • colnago80

    Re EL @ #180

    You sir are remarkably ignorant for a grown man. In the year 2000, then President Clinton proposed a 2 state solution the consisted of 100% of the

    Gaza Strip and 95% of the West Bank, which would have required Israel to close all settlements outside the agreed upon boundary between Israel and the

    West Bank, which was acceptable to the Government of Israel. Arafatty turned it down and walked out, not because he objected to the geographic terms but because it would have required him to drop his demand for return of refugees.

    This has been the Palestinian demand from day one and 67 years later, it is still the Palestinian demand. Until they agree to drop this demand there will be no peace agreement. If that doesn’t meet with your approval, tough shit. As was once said, the Palestinians have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

  • EnlightenmentLiberal

    @colnago

    That is one problem, but there were a bunch of other problems with the deal too.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clinton_Parameters

    Negotiations Affairs Department

    Palestinian Liberation Organization

    http://www.nad-plo.org/etemplate.php?id=76

    The first problem seems to be the very creation of Israel in that place in 1948 rather than Wyoming or some other place that no one cares about. The second problem seems to be the creation of Israel at all – as understood as a Jewish state. Remind me again why I should think it’s a good idea to preserve a theocracy? Not seeing it. Or preserve a country based on ethnic identity? Again, not seeing it.

    I grant you colnago that there is no easy answer to this problem, the right of return, or at least I don’t have it.

  • colnago80

    Re EL @ #182

    he first problem seems to be the very creation of Israel in that place in 1948 rather than Wyoming or some other place that no one cares about.

    Well, I think that the inhabitants of Wyoming might be a little out of sorts (Oregon has also been suggest in the past). However, maybe the 1935 suggestion by Eichmann of Madagascar would have made some sense (and just because the man who made the suggestion was a scumbag is no reason to reject it out of hand). Certainly nobody gives a shit about Madagascar.

    However, you are quite correct that most Arabs have not accepted the presence of a Jewish State in their midst, although some of the leaders are rapidly coming to the conclusion that Israel is the least of their problems at this point in time. The Sunnis and the Shiites seem to hate each other at least as much as they hate Israel. They blew their best opportunity to do something about it in 1948 and the difference in military capability between the parties has tilted ever more heavily in favor of Israel since then.