Israeli Nuclear policy....?
Italian Guy
Milforum Hitman
You kidding me ? I'm gonna drop this. Democracies are the good guys, countries allowing you freedom of speech, of movement, of thought, human rights are the good guys. Thats my childish criteria.
Oh man you've lived under communism you should now that pretty well.
Oh man you've lived under communism you should now that pretty well.
Communism isn't the direct opposite of democracy. Capitalism is.ItalianGuy4US said:
Democracy isn't sacred. Take Israel for example, now I don't know who outnumbers who in Israel, but if the majority is let's say the Palestinians, and they want to kill all Jews, than it would be democratically correct to kill all Jews! I don't think that's what we want now, is it? (For equality purposes I'd like to add that it's possible here to exchange the terms "Jew" and "Palestinian" in this post. It's only meant as an example, not to put anyone down)
BTW, don’t forget Hitler was democratically elected. The world isn't black and white, good and bad, it's different shades of grey all the way.
Even Hitler did good things in his life (Constructing highways and such), so even he wasn't 100% bad. (More like 99.999999989635678%
)I do agree with your "countries allowing you freedom of speech, of movement, of thought, human rights are the good guys." statement, but still no-one is all good or all bad.
Italian Guy
Milforum Hitman
Yeah sorry I resorted to flaming and apologize. Sorry Marksman I know you're one of the good guys :lol: .
Anyways what I meant was that democracy HAS TO BE the best, the good guy. C'm on. I know Europeans ( 1217 ) are way too used to go around philosophying without sense of practice, but this is it.
And- 1217, the case about Israel compared as Nazi Germany, there's a little detail being part of democracy which I would like you to remember: it's called constitution. I don't think the Jews would agree on the basis of a hypothetical Constitution where mass murdering the Jews would be legal, if agreed upon by the majority of citizens. Before playing in a democracy, you gotta create a widely-shared constitution.
Secondly, dude, sorry to disappoint you but Nazi Germany wasn't really a democracy. Hitler may have come to power with regular elections, but there was no freedom of movement or of speech for its citizens. Nor were human rights mentioned in the constitution.
Which is, DEMOCRACY does not mean ONLY that the majority rules. It involves much more.
Anyways what I meant was that democracy HAS TO BE the best, the good guy. C'm on. I know Europeans ( 1217 ) are way too used to go around philosophying without sense of practice, but this is it.
And- 1217, the case about Israel compared as Nazi Germany, there's a little detail being part of democracy which I would like you to remember: it's called constitution. I don't think the Jews would agree on the basis of a hypothetical Constitution where mass murdering the Jews would be legal, if agreed upon by the majority of citizens. Before playing in a democracy, you gotta create a widely-shared constitution.
Secondly, dude, sorry to disappoint you but Nazi Germany wasn't really a democracy. Hitler may have come to power with regular elections, but there was no freedom of movement or of speech for its citizens. Nor were human rights mentioned in the constitution.
Which is, DEMOCRACY does not mean ONLY that the majority rules. It involves much more.
Uncle_Sam
Active member
Even Hitler did good things in his life (Constructing highways and such), so even he wasn't 100% bad. (More like 99.999999989635678% )
Mod Edit: Sorry Uncle Sam: i just had to change the color...the yellow was just not readable.
He wasn't bad for his country, but he was bad 100% for the world.
Israel should have a nuclear arsenal, my oppinion. Although I am against every small country haveing Nukes. Nobody gave Jewish people peace for 3 milleniums, I think nukes are only solution for them, so nobody will attack them!
Mod Edit: Sorry Uncle Sam: i just had to change the color...the yellow was just not readable.
He wasn't bad for his country, but he was bad 100% for the world.
Israel should have a nuclear arsenal, my oppinion. Although I am against every small country haveing Nukes. Nobody gave Jewish people peace for 3 milleniums, I think nukes are only solution for them, so nobody will attack them!
I did not mean to compare Nazi-Germany directly with Israel, and I don't think I did. It's even in two different paragraphs. Hitler was elected, so started out as a democratically elected official.ItalianGuy4US said:
BTW in my opinion the ideal government would be a single, highly intelligent dictator (for lack of a better word) who had the best in mind for the country and it's citizens. In real life, no one man could probably handle the responsibilities and the power that would come with that position, so I'll settle for a democracy.
All I'm trying to say is that who are the good guys and who are the bad guys depends on your point of view. To get slightly back on topic, I for one sometimes find it hard to keep to my convictions that the Israelis are the good guys, if I see how innocent looking palestinains are homeless and blaming the Israeli gouvernment. Both groups do good and bad things, no country is all saints, not even Israel or the US. (Or the Netherlands for that matter.) I guess I'm on thin ice here, and I find it hard to get my exact opinion on the screen, but please try to understand what I'm trying to say before cutting me down...[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=DEMOCRACY said:
Italian Guy
Milforum Hitman
Yeah I sure do, bro. Its walking on eggshells here-
Well let's agree on democracy as not perfect but the least of all evils. It really is.
On top of that, I believe that we should be brave enough sometimes to call the evil EVIL and the enemy ENEMY. You said define who the good and bad guys are depends on your point of view: exactly, of course you have a personal opinion here: voice it. My view is evident. I'm not saying Palestinians are 100 % bad guys, I'm not saying Israel's 100 % good either. But if I believe Israel is way better than Palestinians for its democratic system, its concern for human rights, its freedom of everything and so on, well let me call it for what it is.
Well let's agree on democracy as not perfect but the least of all evils. It really is.
On top of that, I believe that we should be brave enough sometimes to call the evil EVIL and the enemy ENEMY. You said define who the good and bad guys are depends on your point of view: exactly, of course you have a personal opinion here: voice it. My view is evident. I'm not saying Palestinians are 100 % bad guys, I'm not saying Israel's 100 % good either. But if I believe Israel is way better than Palestinians for its democratic system, its concern for human rights, its freedom of everything and so on, well let me call it for what it is.
Mark Conley
Active member
hello: i shall be be briefly off-topic.
Hitler was never elected. head on over to the hitler post in the history topic section, and i ll tell you why there.
By the way, i still think israel needs to keep its nuke program just the way it is.
Mark
Hitler was never elected. head on over to the hitler post in the history topic section, and i ll tell you why there.
By the way, i still think israel needs to keep its nuke program just the way it is.
Mark
silent driller
Active member
Keep em and threaten to use em. It may prevent some of the ist ings in the country.
Italian Guy
Milforum Hitman
Yep I bow to Mark's infinite knowledge.
Italian Guy
Milforum Hitman
Mark Conley said:
How quickly though ? I dont hink it can be done within a certain reaction limit in case of nuclear attack. I mean it doesnt make sense. But I might just be ignorant.
I am finally back!!! Missed you guys...
A couple of points first:
- Don't blame Israel for coming up with the separating of the nuke components in order to tell anyone on their face and without lying that they do not have nuclear weapons....after all, they learned from the masters that created Binary ammunitions. These are shells or missiles with all the different chemicals components separated in order to tell the world they are not chemical weapons. The components only mix and turn into lethal chemical agents after having been fired...by the way...that happens to be US...like U.S!
It is a good legal way to go around international treaties and oversight WITHOUT LYING!
Like stating a ******** cannot be considered as having sex, thus, stating "I did not have sex with....blah blah" is not lying!!!!
- Israel did not develop its nuke to protect itself against Iranian or Iraqi nuclear ventures...it just started it first! Is it bad? I guess in sieged Israel, the only democratic system in that part of the world (I did not really say Democracy), people and government know / knew it would be a matter of time before the enemies will try or come up with nukes and beating them at the nuclear race was a matter of priority and survival. Who care who was there first, the chicken or the egg? Both are necessary!
- As far as over-nuking oneself, remember the MAD theory! I guess Israel does not want to put all its (nuke) eggs in the same basket while preserving its capacity to simultaneously destroy a couple of countries if needed. RemeMber that the country is small and that it has most often than never been attacked by coalitions of countries.
- I'd venture to say that nuke or military power is safer under a "democratic" control than under a dictatorship. The word "safer" is relative but we have to make do with it. Nuke proliferation is a current fact of life and technology is now more simple, affordable and mastered. Eventually, whether we like it or not, we know that nukes will end up in non-governmental entities that have nothing to loose.... yes, Sweet Dreams!
- Should Israel disarm or reduce its nuke? Should they aknowledge them?
I don't know....their call...they know how many in their inventory are aleready obsolete against current anti missile defense... keeping everybody in the dark is the best deterrence, isn't it? Furthermore, the deterrence works both ways: towards its traditional enemies and toward the so-called superpowers. When America, the European Union or Russia deal with the region, they have to keep in mind that they cannot afford to corner Israel and force them to use its last resort "equalizers".
A couple of points first:
- Don't blame Israel for coming up with the separating of the nuke components in order to tell anyone on their face and without lying that they do not have nuclear weapons....after all, they learned from the masters that created Binary ammunitions. These are shells or missiles with all the different chemicals components separated in order to tell the world they are not chemical weapons. The components only mix and turn into lethal chemical agents after having been fired...by the way...that happens to be US...like U.S!
It is a good legal way to go around international treaties and oversight WITHOUT LYING!
Like stating a ******** cannot be considered as having sex, thus, stating "I did not have sex with....blah blah" is not lying!!!!
- Israel did not develop its nuke to protect itself against Iranian or Iraqi nuclear ventures...it just started it first! Is it bad? I guess in sieged Israel, the only democratic system in that part of the world (I did not really say Democracy), people and government know / knew it would be a matter of time before the enemies will try or come up with nukes and beating them at the nuclear race was a matter of priority and survival. Who care who was there first, the chicken or the egg? Both are necessary!
- As far as over-nuking oneself, remember the MAD theory! I guess Israel does not want to put all its (nuke) eggs in the same basket while preserving its capacity to simultaneously destroy a couple of countries if needed. RemeMber that the country is small and that it has most often than never been attacked by coalitions of countries.
- I'd venture to say that nuke or military power is safer under a "democratic" control than under a dictatorship. The word "safer" is relative but we have to make do with it. Nuke proliferation is a current fact of life and technology is now more simple, affordable and mastered. Eventually, whether we like it or not, we know that nukes will end up in non-governmental entities that have nothing to loose.... yes, Sweet Dreams!
- Should Israel disarm or reduce its nuke? Should they aknowledge them?
I don't know....their call...they know how many in their inventory are aleready obsolete against current anti missile defense... keeping everybody in the dark is the best deterrence, isn't it? Furthermore, the deterrence works both ways: towards its traditional enemies and toward the so-called superpowers. When America, the European Union or Russia deal with the region, they have to keep in mind that they cannot afford to corner Israel and force them to use its last resort "equalizers".
Mark Conley
Active member
Hi eric! glad to see you back...
lets look at your post...and savor the momment...ummmmm now on with the steak sauce!
This is a different outlook on the topic...yes i guess a weapon non-use can be just as effective as its use.
not bad! looking forward to your next post!
lets look at your post...and savor the momment...ummmmm now on with the steak sauce!
Eric said:I am finally back!!! Missed you guys...
A couple of points first:
- Don't blame Israel for coming up with the separating of the nuke components in order to tell anyone on their face and without lying that they do not have nuclear weapons....after all, they learned from the masters that created Binary ammunitions. These are shells or missiles with all the different chemicals components separated in order to tell the world they are not chemical weapons. The components only mix and turn into lethal chemical agents after having been fired...by the way...that happens to be US...like U.S!
Not bad...Yes, we came up with a binary nerve gas weapon system in order to make the storage and transport of the devices safer and more expediant to the troops that were to use them...not as a means to confim or deny their existance though.
It is a good legal way to go around international treaties and oversight WITHOUT LYING!
well in Israel's case...they dont violate any treaty I know of...because they havent signed any dealing with nuclear weapons. Oversight is another issue of the treatys
like stating a ******** cannot be considered as having sex, thus, stating "I did not have sex with....blah blah" is not lying!!!!
In this mans case..i would suspect that it wasnt sex...just another appetizer to the main course. of course, it was his definition...
- Israel did not develop its nuke to protect itself against Iranian or Iraqi nuclear ventures...it just started it first! Is it bad? I guess in sieged Israel, the only democratic system in that part of the world (I did not really say Democracy), people and government know / knew it would be a matter of time before the enemies will try or come up with nukes and beating them at the nuclear race was a matter of priority and survival. Who care who was there first, the chicken or the egg? Both are necessary!
Israel survived as a nation without a hint that they had nuclear weapons for almost 20 years...I guess that the wars interim to their development, with the massed attacks by a multi-nationed force suggested to them that a force equalizer was in order...
- As far as over-nuking oneself, remember the MAD theory! I guess Israel does not want to put all its (nuke) eggs in the same basket while preserving its capacity to simultaneously destroy a couple of countries if needed. RemeMber that the country is small and that it has most often than never been attacked by coalitions of countries.
wouldnt disagree there...
- I'd venture to say that nuke or military power is safer under a "democratic" control than under a dictatorship. The word "safer" is relative but we have to make do with it. Nuke proliferation is a current fact of life and technology is now more simple, affordable and mastered. Eventually, whether we like it or not, we know that nukes will end up in non-governmental entities that have nothing to loose.... yes, Sweet Dreams!
nor here....
- Should Israel disarm or reduce its nuke? Should they aknowledge them?
I don't know....their call...they know how many in their inventory are aleready obsolete against current anti missile defense... keeping everybody in the dark is the best deterrence, isn't it? Furthermore, the deterrence works both ways: towards its traditional enemies and toward the so-called superpowers. When America, the European Union or Russia deal with the region, they have to keep in mind that they cannot afford to corner Israel and force them to use its last resort "equalizers".
This is a different outlook on the topic...yes i guess a weapon non-use can be just as effective as its use.
not bad! looking forward to your next post!