Activism Change

Israel's Nuclear Arsenel

Question:

<< snip I seriously doubt that if an unprovoked attack upon Israel by Iraq with weapons of mass destruction triggering a nuclear response from Israel would bring other Arab countries into the dispute on the side of Iraq.  Most, I suspect, would hope Israel is successful in putting a permanent end to Saddam.

Just as most were secretly happy in 1981 when Israel did its surgical strike on the nuke plant Saddam Hussein was building "for purely peaceful purposes" — although for some odd reason the only international inspectors he allowed to see the construction site were Russian or Yugoslav… If it hadn’t been for that, there’s every reason to believe Saddam would have had nuclear weapons by the time of Desert Storm. In public, everybody had to shake their fingers at wicked Israel — Reagan included — but in private I’ll bet there was considerable cheering among Hussein’s Arab enemies… @%<

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Newsgroups: alt.activism, alt.conspiracy, alt.current-events.usa,     alt.illuminati, alt.news-media Newsgroups: alt.activism, alt.conspiracy, alt.current-events.usa,     alt.illuminati, alt.news-media ISRAEL1S NUCLEAR ARSENAL AIMED AT IRAQ, WARN BRITS I seriously doubt that if an unprovoked attack upon Israel by Iraq with weapons of mass destruction triggering a nuclear response from Israel would bring other Arab countries into the dispute on the side of Iraq.  Most, I suspect, would hope Israel is successful in putting a permanent end to Saddam.    Are you kidding? Why do you think Arab leaders were to say the least hesitant about a bombing attack on Iraq? Because they like Saddam? Of course not, it was due to their need to appease public opinion which even in supposedly moderate countries such as Egypt have deep-seated long standing hatred or at a minimum a strong anti-western sentiments that focus in large part on the desire to see Israel destroyed or seriously undermined in the region.    Even if the majority of Arab leaders would prefer to sit on the sidelines during a possible Israeli invasion of Iraq or the launching of nuclear weapons at her, the majority of public opinion in most Arab states would put so much pressure on their leaders that they would have to respond in some manner, either with direct support of Iraq or with some kind of other aid.  Are the pictures of radical Palestinians burning the American and Israeli flags in support of Saddam an isolated affair? Most certainly not. Luckily, we managed to avoid the worst in this standoff. Im not sure if we will be so fortunate next time. Biz

You’re being just a bit short sited.  First of all, why would any Arab country come to the aid of Iraq in the above circumstances?  It would more than likely trigger a similar nuclear response on the part of Israel.  Secondly, do you really be believe that the US would not come to the aid of Israel should such aid prove necessary?  Saddam may be mad, but he’s stupid.  I’m sure he’s quite aware that any attack upon Israel with weapons of mass destruction would result in turning the Iraqi deserts into glass. F. Prefect In the beginning the Universe was created.  This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move…..Douglas Adams

Response:

You’re being just a bit short sited.  First of all, why would any Arab country come to the aid of Iraq in the above circumstances?

        fOR  the same reason that the U.S had to put a great deal of pressure oN Israel during the Gulf War to NOT respond to the scuds being launched at her from Iraq: Because we knew damn well that an Israeli response could not only break the coalition we had forged against Saddam but could actually force certain states to come to Iraq’s aid and fight a war vs Israel. Lets consider that for a moment: The Arab states hatred for Israel is so great that many would actually have considered leaving the coalition in spite of the enormous threat to the region that Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait represented at that time just to jump at another opportunity to destroy Israel.  Thats like you and your neighbors being involved in bitter battle as the neighborhood thug  tries to take over the entire area after having beat up or killed dozens of people  and at the height of battle him saying to you " Forget this, lets join forces and go beat up that other little guy around the corner that we both hate so much" and you saying "oh O.K, I guess I can forget about that fact that you have brutally attacked dozens  of people in our neighborhood and have taken over several houses and are threatening to take over more to further your imperialistic goals just to go settle a score with somebody else that we hate so much that everything else is secondary to defeating him,  When do we start?" Keeping this in mind you know have to compare that situation with the one we have today, where there isn’t a coalition and Saddam isn’t occupying and torturing thousands of people in another country and isn’t threatening to invade any others.  Thus we must ask, if the arabs were willing to jump ship back then, what would make them hesitate to back Saddam in an Israeli-Iraqi conflict now??  It would more than likely trigger a similar nuclear response on the part of Israel.  Secondly, do you really be believe that the US would not come to the aid of Israel should such aid prove necessary?  Saddam may be mad, but he’s stupid.  I’m sure he’s quite aware that any attack upon Israel with weapons of mass destruction would result in turning the Iraqi deserts into glass.

Exactly my point. It would trigger an Israeli nuclear response which would be devastating to the region.  Whether we come to her aid could be secondary if she has already responded and remember that a Middle East on the brink of a multi-state conflict would have very, very serious consequences to our economy due to the threat it would present to the precious oil reserves that we rely on to run our economy which is KEY to maintaing our position as the worlds only hegemonic power. Do you  Like cheap oil, and the benefits we derive from it? Then it is critical that we prevent any situation where Israel would be even remotely tempted to start a war and/or launch nuclear weapons….

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Newsgroups: alt.activism, alt.conspiracy, alt.current-events.usa,     alt.illuminati, alt.news-media Newsgroups: alt.activism, alt.conspiracy, alt.current-events.usa,     alt.illuminati, alt.news-media ISRAEL1S NUCLEAR ARSENAL AIMED AT IRAQ, WARN BRITS I seriously doubt that if an unprovoked attack upon Israel by Iraq with weapons of mass destruction triggering a nuclear response from Israel would bring other Arab countries into the dispute on the side of Iraq.  Most, I suspect, would hope Israel is successful in putting a permanent end to Saddam.

        Are you kidding? Why do you think Arab leaders were to say the least hesitant about a bombing attack on Iraq? Because they like Saddam? Of course not, it was due to their need to appease public opinion which even in supposedly moderate countries such as Egypt have deep-seated long standing hatred or at a minimum a strong anti-western sentiments that focus in large part on the desire to see Israel destroyed or seriously undermined in the region.         Even if the majority of Arab leaders would prefer to sit on the sidelines during a possible Israeli invasion of Iraq or the launching of nuclear weapons at her, the majority of public opinion in most Arab states would put so much pressure on their leaders that they would have to respond in some manner, either with direct support of Iraq or with some kind of other aid.  Are the pictures of radical Palestinians burning the American and Israeli flags in support of Saddam an isolated affair? Most certainly not. Luckily, we managed to avoid the worst in this standoff. Im not sure if we will be so fortunate next time. Biz

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Newsgroups: alt.activism, alt.conspiracy, alt.current-events.usa,     alt.illuminati, alt.news-media ISRAEL1S NUCLEAR ARSENAL AIMED AT IRAQ, WARN BRITS Of course Israel has it’s nuclear weapons aimed at Iraq.  This is what all the leftists and peace at all costs supporters fail to realize: Saddam, for all the threat he presents to his Arab  neighbors, has a much more powerful card he could play in his deck: the ability to entice Israel into a full- scale war in which she would fire nuclear weapons upon Iraq and surely draw all of her Arab enemies into a regional coalition against her. I don’t think I need to even mention what the consequences of a full-scale all out regional war between Israel and the rest of her enemies there would have for the U.S and the world.   Lets just say that it would be a mistake to not rid Iraq of Saddam before he decided to pull that card out of his hand and play it.   Biz

I seriously doubt that if an unprovoked attack upon Israel by Iraq with weapons of mass destruction triggering a nuclear response from Israel would bring other Arab countries into the dispute on the side of Iraq.  Most, I suspect, would hope Israel is successful in putting a permanent end to Saddam. F. Prefect In the beginning the Universe was created.  This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move…..Douglas Adams

Response:

Newsgroups: alt.activism, alt.conspiracy, alt.current-events.usa,     alt.illuminati, alt.news-media ISRAEL

Filed under: Media activism

Related Posts

• July Media Bypass - McVeigh 168, Feds 1
• Nixon nasties - The Brookings Institue
• Times article re: U.N. conspiracy freaks
• DOLE TALKS WHILE CLINTON WORKS
• SF: Friend of anarchism sought in SF area
• Who Pays For These Demonstrations?
• HAIL STORM LINKED TO CLIMATE CHANGE
• IRAQIS OUTRAGED AS IRAQI CLERIC CRUSHED TO DEATH UNDER BUSH'S TANKS
• Clinton Did It on Purpose
• Ken McVay pouts over "Hitbox" ranking