Would anyone here like to discuss Israel's nuclear program??

Question

watch .. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73_DAVsuXCs
it is only 5 min

how come Iran does not get to have nuclear power but israel gets away with that....

and if you are scared that someone might learn something about the truth of israel.. go ahead and report me,,,, if this question was deleted, then this will be proof of israel being an exception to international law... which is not fair

"DANIEL W".. did you actually listen to that edited speech about israel off the map... or did you hear all that he had to say... look it up.. CNN and FOX edited his speech out... never trust US media

as a matter of fact.. when i heard the entire speech i was pissed off, because he wasn't really going to wipe it of the map...

Answer 1

Iran and Israel ?

From most answerers here I read something like :

Iran : Threats !
Israel : Dont threat. !

What they DONT SAY is :

Iran threat but do nothing to other country.............

Israel dont threat but : Dreadedededed... BOOOMM!!! BOOOM! to here and there .

Maybe, we should tell Iran ...........be quiet, .....do what they think it's right. .....DONT THREAT , but ready when it's needed.

But muslims have problem. They tend to tell what they think in open. They are militants, they are so brave. They have nothing to worry. They are very strong inside. That's what ISLAM do to us.

So we are a threat anyway, whether we threat or we dont.
Mind you the : Laa illaha ilallah ..........makes the soul who believe and hold it : soooooo strong!!!

I am not surprised. As long as all muslims, shiite, sunni, wahabbi, shalaf etc united ......we can all live in peace. ( include the other believers ........as we strongly believe in Q: 109.).

Muslims should not fight among each other about khilafiah matters , that's the start.

That's only my opinion tho......

Answer 2

People who Say Israel has never threatend to attack a nation are wrong...Iran has threatend plenty of times...but mostly they don't threat......they never threatend lebanon.....and they never threaten the palestinians..they just go in bomb.....bomb so more...wait for an orphaned palestinian to blow something up and use that as justification to bomb some more......

I hate Iran...but Iran is less likely to go on the war path then israel...by the way the Iranian president never said Israel should be wiped off the map.......he feels the isreali govt should be dismantled....

Answer 3

Actually, Khalid, if someone reported you it would only be "proof" that someone didn't like you or felt your question was more appropriate to, say, Current Affairs than Israel. (I suppose you could post it on the Iran page but...wait a minute...there isn't one!)

Reporting you would not be proof that Israel is an exception to international law, but I suppose it's asking too much to expect logical thought from someone with festering hatred.

I didn't report you because unlike most Muslims, I don't believe in censorship or fatwas. I prefer my Jew-haters out in the open where everyone can see them.

Iran is the epitome of irresponsible behavior. Iran has threatened Israel with annihilation--more than once. Rafsanjani recommended nuking Israeli back in 2001. Iran has been testing long range missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads, and has been pretty clear about where they expect them to reach. Your contention (and Dead Persian's) that this is a mistranslation is deceitful. Ahmadinejad is perfectly clear about what he wants and intends, as was Hitler before him.

The world blew Hitler off, and the death toll from WW2 and the Holocaust was in the tens of millions. The government of Iran is also clear about what they want. Ignoring them will, in the long run, cost more lives than preventing Iran from achieving nuclear weapons in the first place.

I could add that the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia also feel threatened by a nuclear Iran, but should a good Muslim really be concerned with that? I mean, what's the loss of a few million Muslims in "collateral damage" when there's Jew-nuking to be done? (Ask your Imam.)

In advocating genocide against a UN member nation, Iran is violation of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which prohibits incitement to genocide. Just one more good reason to shut them down.

The oft-stated willingness of Muslims to "martyr" themselves in killing the infidel, and Iran's aggressive Iranian support for these ventures, should make everyone realize that Iran is quite serious. Like a Palestinian suicide bomber, Iran's leadership may be quite willing to sacrifice a chunk of the country in order to kill the Jews and hasten the return of the "12th imam."

Given the hostility of the Muslims in the region (of which you and the other hateful posters on this page are wonderfully representative) to the presence of a Jewish state, I'd say few countries need nuclear weapons *more* than Israel, or are more justified in maintaining them.

Answer 4

first of all, israel should not have nuclear weapons.

second of all, the reason people make such a big deal about iran having them while they do not make a big deal about israel having them is because of iran's explicit threats to actually use them to attack other nations, whereas israel has not threatened anybody with them, and has been in wars with them but still not used them against their attackers, considering that iran has stated that it is their intention to make war on certain nations and destroy them.

needless to say, while people may not like that israel has nuclear weapons, they don't actually fear that israel will use them, whereas they have pretty strong reason to believe that iran will actually use nuclear weapons.

hence, they consider it a big deal for iran to have a nuclear program.

Answer 5

Israel is our best pal. it is the only democratic government interior the section. and that they have had their nukes for years and characteristic no longer used them. Iran is a theocratic dictatorship that has vowed to wipe Israel off the map and is now springing up the nukes with which to do it. What else desires discussing?

Answer 6

Not really, but the thing is Iran is full of freeks wanting war with Israel and they would not restrain themselves from using a nuclear weapon. Israel on the other hand has proved that it won't use the nuclear deterrent casually. The best thing would be if nobody possessed the nuclear weapons and only harnessed the technology for the good of everybody.

Answer 7

Israel doesn't have any plans to use nuclear weapons. They are mostly just a deterrent. Iran has explicitly stated that they would like to blow Israel off the map. You don't give a gun to a known violent criminal, just like you don't give nuclear weapons to a country who wants to start a war.

Everyone knows that Israel has nulear weapons, it's not really a secret and they've had them for a long time and have never used them. Countries such as North Korea haven't even mastered the technology yet but their chomping at the bit to set them off. (As they already have) Iran has expressed similar intentions.

And also there's that whole NPT thing.

Answer 8

The difference is Iran has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Israel has not.

Also Israel has apparently had Nuclear weapons since the 1960s and they've had at least one major war since then (1973 Yom Kippur War) and they've never used them.

Iran's leader has stated that israel should be "wiped off the map", Israel has never said that it wants to wipe any country off the Map.

Answer 9

1. Iran signed a treaty saying they would not proliferate

2. Israel has never threatened to wipe another country off the face of the earth.

You wouldn't give a loaded gun to a five year old when he's promised to kill a classmate, would you? So you don't give nuclear capability to Iran.

Answer 10

According to the Catholic Just War doctrine, any retaliation that causes more human loss than allowing the aggressors to run their course, is unjust. It is therefore difficult for me to imagine any situation in which a justification could be found for using nukes, even for defensive purposes. A nuclear defense would cause far more suffering and damage than allowing the enemy to have what they want. If a traditional defense in such a case was untenable, then the lawful course would be surrender--something national pride makes incredibly difficult.

Another thing to consider, Khalid, is that our current president is in league with the Zionists. Note that I did not say "Jews" for those who would accuse me of anti-semetism. I said "Zionists" or those persons of many races who believe that the current secular nation-state of Israel is sanctioned by God. This is derived from a 150 year old interpretation of biblical prophecies. The reasoning behind this interpretation are a bit complicated, but before I digress, let me try to explain:

Evangelical Christianity is the most politically active form of Christianity in the states. While there is much I deeply admire about this group--fidelity to doctrine the inspiration of scripture being at the top of the list--I have to criticize their understanding of Biblical prophecies.

They believe that in order for Christ to return, the temple at Jerusalem has to be physically rebuilt. These same evangelicals have a lot of influence over President Bush. In fact, they count him among their ranks. US policy is shaped by this.

Or at least, that's my analysis of the situation. Pray for peace. I just pray that my country, in trying to hasten the coming of Christ, doesn't pave the road for the Antichrist.