2007-11-25
17:22:40
·
20 answers
·
asked by
BUSH/ISRAEL =warcriminal
5
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
They have 200 of them and they have atked more countries than any other nation in the region.For iran, they never atked any nation for 400 years.To be more clear, israel threatened to atk iran many times since the revolution
2007-11-25
17:23:53 ·
update #1
They have 200 of them and they have atked more countries than any other nation in the region.For iran, they never atked any nation for 400 years.To be more clear, israel threatened to atk iran man
2007-11-25
17:26:10 ·
update #2
Well thats not the point.Did Iran atk anybody with or without a nuke?
2007-11-25
17:26:45 ·
update #3
So what if we cant trust iran? we cant trust china, russia or even pakistan and idia for the matter
2007-11-25
17:27:45 ·
update #4
what did iran get away with so far.Our goverment got away with overtrowing democracy and putting a dictator in iran and also giving Iraq chemical weapons which killed tens of thousands of iranians
2007-11-25
17:29:12 ·
update #5
Israel was atked because it illegally occupied palestine
2007-11-25
17:29:51 ·
update #6
LOL iran atks our troops as we speak?
Got a link or any evidence supporting that man?
2007-11-25
17:34:14 ·
update #7
typical hypocrasy.If somebody have nuclear weapons, it stops Israel from occupying the land.Do u think palestine would have been occupied if they had nuke to defend themselves?
It also disables Bush from atking them for oil
2007-11-25 17:25:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
6⤋
I don't think it's Bush wanting or not wanting people to have nuclearn weapons in the middle east. He, rightly so, has his fears that a lot of these countries may build a bomb and may possibly build the bomb incorrectly so that it could go off at the wrong time. Also, we have gone through a position of using the bomb and know what harm it causes. A lot of these countries are just not really aware of how strong these bombs really are, they don't realize that they are or would be attacking countries close to home and the fall out could actually effect them. Also, there is the fact that they could be a little trigger happy having the bomb.
Israel is a different story, Bush has no contol over them, well actually nobody in the US has ever really had any control over them. We work hand and hand pretty much. But when it comes to the bomb, face it, we got the bomb, they got the bomb at the same time. Almost everyone at Los Alamos was Jewish and they were going to make sure that Israel was covered just as the US was covered. Israel has some of the best brains, bo they could get the bomb figured out anyway. We have no say in what they do, they are brighter then we are and we know it.
2007-11-26 01:51:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by lochmessy 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Shequel worth more dinar
no other Arab nations want Iran to have nukes and that's a fact. As far as Israel, they have 1/100th of the land mass. Weer given Jordan n the Balfour Declaration, then taken and no able to move from Europe to Palestine before WW2, so tlhey are a democracy and have over 2 million Arabs living in Israel that have the same rights as Israelis. You think Iran would be that open? take care.
2007-11-26 01:26:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by R J 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
BecauseBush relies on Israel to do his dirty work in the Middle East, and together with Israel dominate the politics of that area.Besides Bush is suppurated by the Zionist Lobby., starting with AIPAC
2007-11-26 06:02:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because Miami Beach is Tel Aviv Beach
2007-11-26 01:38:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mr. Spock 4
·
4⤊
0⤋
Israel doesn't threaten other nations with annihilation. That is unless others threaten theirs.
Israel would prefer to live and let live, but the fanatical factions in the Arab nations won't allow that to happen.
And for some reason so many people hate Jews for absolutely no reason. Don't you think they have a right to protect themselves?
No you don't, because you would like them to be wiped off the map right?
2007-11-26 01:36:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋
Bush doesnt want anybody to have nuclear weapons because it will tip the balance of power away from the United States and to Iran... An nuclear armed Iran will be the new powerhouse in the Middle East and would probably work to subvert any efforts at peace in that region. A nuclear armed Iran could get away with anything and that is what Bush will not tolerate... President Bush has made it known to Israel that he will not allow for Iran to become nuclear armed. I believe that before the expiration of his term, he will launch a limited scale attack on Iran, on its Nuclear facilities... Thats just my opinion though...
By the way, did you forget to take your medicine this morning?
2007-11-26 01:27:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by soobielover26 3
·
2⤊
6⤋
Thank you for the revisionist history. If you recall, in every instance that Israel has gone to war, she was attacked first. Second, Israel is the only democracy in the region and therefore our only natural ally. We and the more moderate Arab countries tolerate each other because they want our money and we need their oil. Bottom line, if we become energy independent you can kiss OPEC goodbye.
2007-11-26 01:27:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by I_Walk_Point 3
·
2⤊
4⤋
TEHRAN (AFP)---Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Sunday launched a new verbal attack on Israel, saying a "countdown" has begun that will end with Lebanese and Palestinian militants destroying the Jewish state.
In a speech to mark the 18th anniversary of the death of revolutionary founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the president said last summer’s war between Israel and Lebanese militant group Hezbollah started the process.
"In Lebanon, the corrupt, arrogant powers and the Zionist regime did all they could in an unfair 33-day war. But after 60 years its (Israel’s)
greatness fell apart," Iranian media quoted Ahmadinejad as saying.
"The countdown to this regime’s destruction started through the hands of Hezbollah’s children," he said in a speech to visiting foreign guests in Tehran.
"We will witness the destruction of this regime in the near future thanks to the endeavours of all Palestinian and Lebanese fighters," he added.
Ahmadinejad sparked outrage shortly after coming to power in 2005 for saying that Israel should be "wiped from the map" and then repeatedly predicting that the state would disappear.
Iranian officials have expressed bewilderment over the uproar caused by the comments, saying he was merely restating one of Khomeini’s central beliefs that the Jewish state was doomed to destruction.
The president went on to court further controversy when he labelled the Holocaust as a "myth" and invited several researchers who have played down the mass slaughter of Jews in World War II to a Tehran conference.
But in recent months -- until now at least -- Ahmadinejad has largely
avoided rhetorical outbursts against Israel amid public criticism from moderate quarters over his provocative comments.
Backer of anti-Israel groups
Despite having no borders with Israel, Iran has become one of the most vocal backers of militant groups fighting the Jewish state and its leaders pepper their speeches with attacks against the "Zionist regime."
Iran openly cheered on Hezbollah in its battled against Israel’s army in the 2006 war but vehemently denies that it provides military or financial support to the Shiite militant group.
It maintains a similar position towards Palestinian groups like Hamas,
denying that its support for them is anything other than moral in nature.
But Iran has also helped rebuild bridges in war-ravaged Lebanon and sent millions of dollars in aid to the Hamas-led Palestinian government to help it overcome drastic aid cuts from Western countries.
I
ran’s policy of non-recognition of Israel was a direct result of the
Islamic revolution of 1979 that was led by Khomeini.
Before then, the US-backed regime of the shah was one of the Jewish state’s strongest supporters in the region and there was considerable trade between the two sides.
2007-11-26 02:25:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
If America would let Israel deal with its own problems America would have less problems....
Then again if we take Israel off of the short leash we keep them on... Well they would create a whole new bunch of problems.
Its a lose lose situation!!
2007-11-26 01:28:02
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
3⤋