Will Israel eventually have a pre-emptive strike on Iran?

Page 3 of 3 [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3


Will Israel eventually have a pre-emptive strike on Iran?
Yes 43%  43%  [ 10 ]
No 17%  17%  [ 4 ]
No, Iran will strike first so its not pre-emptive 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
No, the US will get the job done 13%  13%  [ 3 ]
Undecided 22%  22%  [ 5 ]
I thought Israel and Iran were allies 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Yes, but they will miss and hit US soldiers in neighbouring Iraq 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 23

jc6chan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,257
Location: Waterloo, ON, Canada

12 Feb 2010, 9:47 am

Wombat wrote:
But did anyone say "Sorry, our bad. We will go home now"

No. We are still killing them.

Um, the US wishes its troops would come home NOW, but they feel the responsibility to stabilize the country first before leaving.



Tensu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,661
Location: Nixa, MO, USA

12 Feb 2010, 9:52 am

When I first asked him what he thought about nuclear Iran, My Dad told me that this had happened before. I forget which country he said it was, but a while back another nation in the middle east where Islam was the dominant religion had a Jew-hating leader and was gong nuclear. The Isreali air force flattened his nation and he abandoned his ambition.

I see no need to assume history will not repeat itself.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

12 Feb 2010, 10:01 am

Tensu wrote:
When I first asked him what he thought about nuclear Iran, My Dad told me that this had happened before. I forget which country he said it was, but a while back another nation in the middle east where Islam was the dominant religion had a Jew-hating leader and was gong nuclear. The Isreali air force flattened his nation and he abandoned his ambition.

I see no need to assume history will not repeat itself.


Your needs may not be sufficient.



jc6chan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,257
Location: Waterloo, ON, Canada

12 Feb 2010, 10:59 am

Tensu wrote:
When I first asked him what he thought about nuclear Iran, My Dad told me that this had happened before. I forget which country he said it was, but a while back another nation in the middle east where Islam was the dominant religion had a Jew-hating leader and was gong nuclear. The Isreali air force flattened his nation and he abandoned his ambition.

I see no need to assume history will not repeat itself.

I think it was Iraq back in the '70s or something.



Tensu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,661
Location: Nixa, MO, USA

12 Feb 2010, 1:13 pm

I thought it was somewhere in north Africa...



WorldsEdge
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2009
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 458
Location: Massachusetts

12 Feb 2010, 11:51 pm

TitusLucretiusCarus wrote:
the point with the protests is that they are winning over large sections of the police and army (á la Petrograd 1917) who, in the last round of demos, refused orders to fire on the protesters - the only remaining element in all this is a general strike, that would be game over for the ayatollah's regime.


I don't think the situation is at all analogous to that. Even if a majority of Iranians are no longer all that crazy about their theocracy, there is still a large minority that supports the mullahs in charge, vs. the fact that the Romanov monarchy had no support .

Quote:
The anniversary celebrations of the revolution are going on now - this could be bloody or bloody marvellous


Speaking of Russia/the USSR, the day after Trotsky squashed the Krondstadt Uprising they celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Paris Commune. Apparently with no irony of any kind. He also certainly had no problem getting the Red Army to open fire, did he?


_________________
"The man who has fed the chicken every day throughout its life at last wrings its neck instead, showing that more refined views as to the uniformity of nature would have been useful to the chicken." ? Bertrand Russell


TitusLucretiusCarus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 518

13 Feb 2010, 9:25 am

Quote:
I don't think the situation is at all analogous to that. Even if a majority of Iranians are no longer all that crazy about their theocracy, there is still a large minority that supports the mullahs in charge, vs. the fact that the Romanov monarchy had no support .


not entirely correct, the monarchy had plenty of support in both the Black Hundreds and amongst the higher echelons of the officer corps of the military - and there were plenty of monarchists besides these; Kornilov for one, as well as Generals Krasnov and Denikin amongst many others. Thugh you would be correct in that the paricular Romanov in question at the time of the February revolution had no support in continuing his rule, it does not necessarily follow that there was no support for a monarchy (or even a pseudo-constitutional monarchy) - the bourgeois parties were all to happy to accomodate themselves to a monarchy/dictator - the Kornilov affair springs to mind here.

The key word here also is minority against majority.

Russia 1905 may be a better analogy though, that said all analogies are in themselves false as compared to a proper analysis of the material conditions of the day.

Quote:
Speaking of Russia/the USSR, the day after Trotsky squashed the Krondstadt Uprising they celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Paris Commune. Apparently with no irony of any kind. He also certainly had no problem getting the Red Army to open fire, did he?


well, comparing Paris to Kronstadt is to do a major disservice to the Communards - and I'm not entirely sure why you would bring it up other than to attack my political position. Both Lenin and Trotsky have put forward answers to these attacks. Also, though I can't find it now (and I don't expect you to accept it on faith alone) I read a couple of months ago that when the old soviet archives were opened a report on the Kronstadt revolt was found - in it it told of how a 13 year old boy questioned the sailors who had seized the fortress why they had put themselves as a higher priority for food rations, denying the other inhabitants of the island grain rations etc (this at a time when some parts of the country had resorted to eating rats and even, I believe, cannibalism) - the sailors hung him. Like I said I can't find where i read this in my pile of books etc but I'm still looking and I'm fairly certain it is in one of my Zizek books.

edit: while this isn't a source for the above incident it is entirely relevant to accusations around Kornstadt - Trotsky was right



SilverPikmin
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 1 Aug 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 360
Location: Merseyside, England, UK

16 Feb 2010, 5:12 pm

jc6chan wrote:
WorldsEdge wrote:
jc6chan wrote:
WorldsEdge wrote:

And besides, there's at least one group of Arabs who are counted as such but are also staunchly pro-Israel: the Druze.


Pro-Israel Arabs exist? That sounds like an oxymoron to be. Even Mahmoud Abbas whom the US calls "moderate" is really critical of Israel's policies. It's just that he decided not to use violence against Israel.


Please tell me you're not thinking that Arab = Muslim and Muslim = Arab. :roll: In fact, until very recently (I think the 1990s) most people of Arab descent living in the US were Christians of some denomination or other, who had either fled or had ancestors who had fled from the joy of being a Christian in country dominated by the Religion of Peace. And even today somewhere between 5% to 10% (estimates vary) of the population of Egypt remains Christian. And good luck to them. They need it.

In any event, the Druze consider themselves Muslim, but most other Muslims do not, probably in the same way Mormons consider themselves Christian, but a lot of Christians do not think they are. This is because both Mormons and Druze have made additions to these faiths (extra prophets, new holy books) that orthodox followers consider both unacceptable and heretical. But in the West "heretical" means one thing, and in the Islamic world quite another. As in, the Druze historically got slaughtered in pogroms from time to time and the Mormons run one state (Utah) and arguably two more (Arizona and Idaho).

Anyway, the Druze are ethnically Arab, and the Druze serve in Israel's military and die on her behalf. And have been doing so since the 1950s, when they requested that their exemption to the military draft be lifted.


Quote:

http://www.jcpa.org/jl/hit06.htm

A Minority Within a Minority

The Druze are a minority within a minority in the State of Israel, an Arab-speaking community loyal to the state that has suffered hundreds of casualties in its defense, and whose men serve today in high-ranking and sensitive positions within the Israeli military and security forces. Their willingness to accept the burdens of compulsory military service have led to parallel demands for equal rights within Israeli society.

In their struggle to obtain those rights, various problems and conflicts have surfaced from within the community. Some have called for identification with Arab nationalism, partly in reaction to a perception that the Israeli government takes them for granted and now prefers to court the Palestinian Arabs. Most, however, seek full integration within the Jewish state.


Quote:
In the mid-1950s, when Israel was under heavy Arab pressure, the Druze leadership appealed to David Ben-Gurion, then Minister of Defense, to draft Druze men into the Israeli Army on the same basis as Jews, which was possible under the State Defense Act of 1949. That Act called for drafting all individuals in the country, but also allowed the Minister to exempt individuals as well as entire groups. The Druze asked that their exemption be cancelled. There is still considerable controversy among Druze as to why this appeal was made, to what extent it really represented what the members of the community wanted, and whether there might have been some kind of manipulation on the part of the Jewish leadership. Yet the change was made, and the draft of the Druze has been in existence and has been reasonably well accepted throughout the decades. There are not a great many exemptions made on religious and conscientious grounds, and not much more than among the Jews. However, as the equal duties part of the social contract was indeed achieved, so came demands for equal rights as well.

I knew that not all Arabs were Muslim. But what group of Arabs LOVE being occupied by Israel and LOVE the siege and LOVE having their homes evicted because Jewish settlers "need to move in"?


The Druze were always a minority though in the Arab countries; Israel is a sort of haven for them too as it is for the Jews.



Omerik
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 456

16 Feb 2010, 5:45 pm

Sand wrote:
I certainly am not enthusiastic about the religious totalitarianism of Iran but the trend towards a religious totalitarianism in Israel is also not particularly charming.

What trend and what religious totalitarianism? What are you talking about, and what do you know about Israel that I don't?



Omerik
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 456

16 Feb 2010, 6:22 pm

Tensu wrote:
When I first asked him what he thought about nuclear Iran, My Dad told me that this had happened before. I forget which country he said it was, but a while back another nation in the middle east where Islam was the dominant religion had a Jew-hating leader and was gong nuclear. The Isreali air force flattened his nation and he abandoned his ambition.

I see no need to assume history will not repeat itself.

That was Saddam Hussein from Iraq, who got it from the French. Later everyone condemned Israel, and later said the IDF was probably right, when they found out who Saddam was.

Nevertheless, it's a different story now.

jc6chan wrote:
I knew that not all Arabs were Muslim. But what group of Arabs LOVE being occupied by Israel and LOVE the siege and LOVE having their homes evicted because Jewish settlers "need to move in"?

Some Druze insist they're not arabs.
They weren't "brothers" of the arabs. They actually were neutral at the beginning, and later on joined the Israeli forces in the war of independence.

Identity politics is not so simple as it sometimes look...



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

16 Feb 2010, 6:22 pm

Omerik wrote:
Sand wrote:
I certainly am not enthusiastic about the religious totalitarianism of Iran but the trend towards a religious totalitarianism in Israel is also not particularly charming.

What trend and what religious totalitarianism? What are you talking about, and what do you know about Israel that I don't?


http://www.counterpunch.org/cook02162010.html



Omerik
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 456

16 Feb 2010, 6:31 pm

Sand wrote:
Omerik wrote:
Sand wrote:
I certainly am not enthusiastic about the religious totalitarianism of Iran but the trend towards a religious totalitarianism in Israel is also not particularly charming.

What trend and what religious totalitarianism? What are you talking about, and what do you know about Israel that I don't?


http://www.counterpunch.org/cook02162010.html

That's not religious totalitarianism. That's perhaps racism. Israel is racist, it always was.
But since I know the Jaffa and South Tel-Aviv situation a bit - the arabs there don't have to be paranoid, Jews are evicted as well. It's not against their nationality, it's against their poverty. New houses are built for rich people. That's another different problem. I wish they would fight together (some do).

Anyway, even if it's racist, what does it have to do with religious totalitarianism? The new owners will be secular...



wesmontfan
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 144
Location: Near Washington DC

17 Feb 2010, 10:29 pm

WorldsEdge wrote:
jc6chan wrote:
WorldsEdge wrote:

And besides, there's at least one group of Arabs who are counted as such but are also staunchly pro-Israel: the Druze.


Pro-Israel Arabs exist? That sounds like an oxymoron to be. Even Mahmoud Abbas whom the US calls "moderate" is really critical of Israel's policies. It's just that he decided not to use violence against Israel.


Please tell me you're not thinking that Arab = Muslim and Muslim = Arab. :roll: In fact, until very recently (I think the 1990s) most people of Arab descent living in the US were Christians of some denomination or other, who had either fled or had ancestors who had fled from the joy of being a Christian in country dominated by the Religion of Peace. And even today somewhere between 5% to 10% (estimates vary) of the population of Egypt remains Christian. And good luck to them. They need it.

In any event, the Druze consider themselves Muslim, but most other Muslims do not, probably in the same way Mormons consider themselves Christian, but a lot of Christians do not think they are. This is because both Mormons and Druze have made additions to these faiths (extra prophets, new holy books) that orthodox followers consider both unacceptable and heretical. But in the West "heretical" means one thing, and in the Islamic world quite another. As in, the Druze historically got slaughtered in pogroms from time to time and the Mormons run one state (Utah) and arguably two more (Arizona and Idaho).

Anyway, the Druze are ethnically Arab, and the Druze serve in Israel's military and die on her behalf. And have been doing so since the 1950s, when they requested that their exemption to the military draft be lifted.


Quote:

http://www.jcpa.org/jl/hit06.htm

A Minority Within a Minority

The Druze are a minority within a minority in the State of Israel, an Arab-speaking community loyal to the state that has suffered hundreds of casualties in its defense, and whose men serve today in high-ranking and sensitive positions within the Israeli military and security forces. Their willingness to accept the burdens of compulsory military service have led to parallel demands for equal rights within Israeli society.

In their struggle to obtain those rights, various problems and conflicts have surfaced from within the community. Some have called for identification with Arab nationalism, partly in reaction to a perception that the Israeli government takes them for granted and now prefers to court the Palestinian Arabs. Most, however, seek full integration within the Jewish state.


Quote:
In the mid-1950s, when Israel was under heavy Arab pressure, the Druze leadership appealed to David Ben-Gurion, then Minister of Defense, to draft Druze men into the Israeli Army on the same basis as Jews, which was possible under the State Defense Act of 1949. That Act called for drafting all individuals in the country, but also allowed the Minister to exempt individuals as well as entire groups. The Druze asked that their exemption be cancelled. There is still considerable controversy among Druze as to why this appeal was made, to what extent it really represented what the members of the community wanted, and whether there might have been some kind of manipulation on the part of the Jewish leadership. Yet the change was made, and the draft of the Druze has been in existence and has been reasonably well accepted throughout the decades. There are not a great many exemptions made on religious and conscientious grounds, and not much more than among the Jews. However, as the equal duties part of the social contract was indeed achieved, so came demands for equal rights as well.


I like your analogy of the Druze with the Mormons. But you're wrong when you say that "heresy means different things" in Islam and in Christiandom.
They mean very similiar things.

How do you think the Mormons got control of Utah?

it was because in the 1800's they were forced to flee the civilized world and ended up in that worst lunar landscape desert region of North America because- in New England and in the mid-west they kept getting raped and murdered in porgroms by mainstream Christian Amricans!

Much like the Sunni's and Shiites putting aside thier animosity to vent their even greater common hatred of the Druze the often mutualy hostile Protestants and Catholics in 19th centurey America were given to forget their differences to express their greater common hatred of the Mormons.



Omerik
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 456

18 Feb 2010, 11:19 am

Just to add a little further information about the Druze (as much as I know and studied) - the Palestinian identity didn't exist for always. They were arab-speaking Ottoman subjects, mostly muslim. After an Arab nationalism started, it was based on religion, largely (in contrast to Turkish nationalism, after the Ottoman Empire collapsed, which was based on secularism, not religion and not ethnicity).

Some favoured a pan-Syrian identity, and at least some Muslim Syrian leaders thought that Palestine is "theirs", and that the Arabs in Palestine are Syrian. The region was known as Syria-Palaestina after Judeans were evicted, and that's were the name Palestinian comes from - it referred to both Jews and Arabs living here, until the creation of the state of Israel. The original Palaestina was the area of Gaza, and named so for the Phillistines who lived there in biblical times. After Israelites were exiled at most, the Judah tribed expanded north apparently, and Judea was used as a general name for the land of Israel. After the revolt, the Romans changed the name of the land.

Of course, when Druze living in Palestine had to choose between Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Muslims, they didn't automatically join the people of the same language, because they persecuted them. They hoped the Jews would treat them better, and decided to live together with them eventually. On the other hand, Druze who live in the occupied territories don't tend to trust the Israeli side, naturally.

Interesting enough, the Arab revolts were led by a religious leader who seeked help from the Nazis themselves, and new researches show that it's not even sure that all Arabs and Muslims supported his leadership and crazy ideas.

The whole identity issue is very complex and interesting here. What I write here is what I know. You are free to contradict me if you know other claims.