Roadmap to Tehran

Politics International Politics
41

I was looking forward to Tainan Cowboy’s response to my request he back up his accusation of untruthfulness but I guess it’s not to be as that whole exchange has vanished for some reason – not because I objected to being accused though.

Meanwhile . . .

"The Pentagon’s top military intelligence officer said yesterday that North Korea has the ability to arm a missile with a nuclear device, stunning senators he was addressing and prompting attempts by other defense and intelligence officials later to play down the remarks. . .

The statement by Vice Adm. Lowell E. Jacoby before the Senate Armed Services Committee marked the first time that a U.S. official had publicly attributed such a capability to North Korea. . .

But several Senate staff members who witnessed the testimony and have access to U.S. intelligence on North Korea indicated that Jacoby’s comments did in fact reflect some recent information they had seen, although they expressed surprise that the admiral had gone public with the new assessment.

“He may not have meant to say it in a public forum,” one staff member speculated."

[color=blue]Anyone like to guess on whose watch North Korea finally mastered the technical ability to arm a missile with a nuclear device?[/color]

42

spook:

All this occurred during the Clinton administration and it was negotiated by Carter. Not verifiable compliance? Really say it ain’t so.

So you want us to invade North Korea or what? Up to you? Hmmm?

43

spook - yes, the exchange was deemed a ‘personal attack’ and removed by the ‘sensitive mod.’ So be it, I assure you it was not meant to be that, just a clarification of dates & time lines.
I posted this previously - surely you read the post. It clearly stated the precise language used in the Pentagon reports and the Israeli annoucement. As to your “stump clearing” comment, I know thats just a bit of levity you injected - understood.

But to refresh your memory:

[quote]spook wrote:
The Pentagon has just notified Congress (26 April) that it plans to “sell” 100 Lockheed Martin Corp GBU-28 laser guided bunker-busting bombs to Israel.
Israel reports it plans to take delivery of the GBU-28s in time for an early summer “stump clearing operation.”[/quote]

[quote=“tainancowboy”]spook -
interesting post. Upon further research it seems that no support for your main premise can be found. What can be found is this…
Quote:
Israel seeks to acquire ‘bunker busters’
By JPOST STAFF AND AP, Apr. 27, 2005 6:47 | Updated Apr. 27, 2005 12:35

The Pentagon has informed the US congress that Israel has requested to purchase 100 laser-guided smart bombs, which could potentially be used to target and destroy underground bunkers, Israel Radio reported.

The cost of the deal would reach $30 million.

Pentagon officials said that the deal would not effect the balance of power in the Middle East, although American military experts suggested that Israel could use the bombs to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.

The laser-guided bombs, manufactured by the Lockheed Martin Corporation, can be carried by F-15 fighter jets.

Congress has a 30-day deadline to decide on whether or not to allow the deal to go forth.

Israel may be seeking to use the so-called ‘bunker busters’ if and when it decides to target Iranian nuclear facilities.
jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? … 4568594299

It would seem that you are playing rather fast & loose with timelines.
Do you have a link to support your original statement?[/quote]and[quote]Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:56 am
Oh my…I neglected to mention that the JPost quote is an (excert) from the complete article.
Clicking the supplied link allows one to read this article from yesterdays edition.[/quote]
Another part of my censored post was my comment that I did not believe you were “anti-Jew” on a personal basis, that you merely filtered information thru lenses that gave what may be construed as “anti-Israel” results in interpretation.
And as we know, interpretation of information can be the key factor in decision making. Any biases or pre-judgements brought in at this stage heavily influence the results presented.

44

spook - yes, the exchange was deemed a ‘personal attack’ and removed by the ‘sensitive mod.’ So be it, I assure you it was not meant to be that, just a clarification of dates & time lines.
I posted this previously - surely you read the post. It clearly stated the precise language used in the Pentagon reports and the Israeli annoucement. As to your “stump clearing” comment, I know thats just a bit of levity you injected - understood.

But to refresh your memory:[/quote]

[quote]spook wrote:
The Pentagon has just notified Congress (26 April) that it plans to “sell” 100 Lockheed Martin Corp GBU-28 laser guided bunker-busting bombs to Israel.
Israel reports it plans to take delivery of the GBU-28s in time for an early summer “stump clearing operation.”[/quote]

[quote=“tainancowboy”]spook -
interesting post. Upon further research it seems that no support for your main premise can be found. What can be found is this…
Quote:
Israel seeks to acquire ‘bunker busters’
By JPOST STAFF AND AP, Apr. 27, 2005 6:47 | Updated Apr. 27, 2005 12:35

The Pentagon has informed the US congress that Israel has requested to purchase 100 laser-guided smart bombs, which could potentially be used to target and destroy underground bunkers, Israel Radio reported.

The cost of the deal would reach $30 million.

Pentagon officials said that the deal would not effect the balance of power in the Middle East, although American military experts suggested that Israel could use the bombs to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.

The laser-guided bombs, manufactured by the Lockheed Martin Corporation, can be carried by F-15 fighter jets.

Congress has a 30-day deadline to decide on whether or not to allow the deal to go forth.

Israel may be seeking to use the so-called ‘bunker busters’ if and when it decides to target Iranian nuclear facilities.
jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? … 4568594299

It would seem that you are playing rather fast & loose with timelines.
Do you have a link to support your original statement?[/quote]and[quote]Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:56 am
Oh my…I neglected to mention that the JPost quote is an (excert) from the complete article.
Clicking the supplied link allows one to read this article from yesterdays edition.[/quote]

"U.S. OKs Bunker Buster Bombs for Israel

By Associated Press

April 27, 2005, 6:52 PM EDT

WASHINGTON – The Bush administration has authorized the sale of as many as 100 large bunker-buster bombs to Israel. One expert said the move should serve as a warning to Iranians with nuclear ambitions. . . ."

[color=blue]So I said “plans to sell” on April 28th and the Associated Press said “authorized the sale” on April 27th. Where’s the lack of veracity on my part? My only failing was that I didn’t have a good public source to support my claim when I made it but I didn’t claim that I did, nor that I had used the very limited public sources of information available at that point to base my claim on, which is why I didn’t provide any links.

If I do state something as fact that later turns out to be untrue I have an obligation to admit my mistake and will do my best to do so.

It’s a fact that I criticize Israel and its American supporters frequently but no more than any other country and its policies and supporters are criticized here at Forumosa. My criticisms of Israel stand out though because I’m nearly the only one making them. Israel, though a major factor in Middle East events, is almost never openly discussed in the U.S. and Britain.

I welcome constructive advice from anyone who sees anti-Semitism in my posts because I sincerely don’t want to contribute to the religious bigotry already rampant in the world. At the heart of my frequent criticisms of American and Israeli policies in the Middle East though is disillusionment that our generation, entrusted with the legacy of Judeo-Christian moral codes, more often than not violates them in the name of defending them. This one from the Law of Moses for example:[/color]

9th Commandment: Thou shall not testify falsely against thy neighbor.

45

[quote=“spook”]Also from the report:

"In recent months (2005), Pentagon leaders have been angered in particular by what they consider an upgrading of spare parts for China’s fleet of Israeli-supplied Harpy attack drones.

“Technology has made its way inappropriately to China via Israel,” the official said. “There have been many violations of technology transfer agreements.”

[color=blue]Where in the major U.S. media did you see reports that the Pentagon just excluded Israel from involvement in the development of the F-35? How many people here were aware of this or that Sharon pushed Bush at their meeting in Crawford last week to release a convicted U.S. spy?

How about a show of hands to gauge the level of general awareness of these events?"[/color][/quote]

I had heard of neither of these things, although I had read about the impending bunker buster sales. Thanks for the new info. (I admit being overly dependent on US news sources, which undoubtedly is partially responsible for my lack of knowledge about a lot of the goings-on in Isreal.)

Recently there was an interesting study on pro-Isreal bias in the NYT:

[quote]For example, we found that in 2004, at a time when 8 Israeli children and 176 Palestinian children were killed

46

spook -
Please forgive me for denying your rights to succor offered by such compadres. I had no idea you were unable to express your views or that your rights to freedom of speech or expression were being hindered.
By having access to the internet you obviously have been curtailed from the wide range of expression made available to one and all. This has no doubt forced your views to conform to the evil MSM of the evil USA. :loco:
Please accept my offer to pesonally seek remedy for such a grievous denial of your personal rights and freedoms.

47

All I ask is to not have my character publicly defamed with repeated, unfounded accusations of religious bigotry and hatred.

The only standard here should be truth or falseness, not conformity with some ideological party line.

48

That seems like a fair request, IMO.

Let’s all remember to keep discussion civil and address each other’s messages and not persons.

I’m not pointing the finger at anyone in particular, just asking that we all remember the Rules.

I have no problem with anyone taking spook to task for his ideas and his concern re Israel as it relates to or influences US foreign policy… but, let’s remember that such can be done without resorting to accusations of religious bigotry.

49

Tigerman:

I will take that message to be delivered to me.

In my defense, what do you call someone who repeatedly brings up Israel as the main or sole reason that the US invaded Iraq and is contemplating action against Iran? What do you call someone who frequently suggests that the Jewish lobby in America has inordinate influence? What do you call someone who suggests that our friendship and alliance with Israel are to blame to a large extent for the anti-Americanism in the Middle East and Arab World?

Let’s put the shoe on the other foot. What if someone (like me) were to constantly bash the Germans and French even in threads where these two countries were not being discussed? I would then I believe be labeled by other posters as Anti-German and Anti-French and lo and behold you know what? They’d be right. Similarly, I believe that Spook’s constant obsessive and excessive interest in Israel and by extension the Jews qualifies for the same type of label, no?

Finally, anyone who wants to label me any of the following has my blessing:

  1. Anti-Islamofascist
  2. Anti-Communist
  3. Anti-moral relativist
  4. Anti-nihilist
  5. Anti-multiculti
  6. Anti-Carter
  7. Anti-UN

So, open season on me. Let the labeling begin. I do not mind in the least.

50

The only standard a claim should be judged by is whether it is true or false, not whether it is repeated, frequent or who it is directed at.

That’s the only legitimate standard that Bill Cosby, Lawrence Summers – and myself – should be held to, not the standard that special pleaders would hold us to – that our speech is just inherently wrong and it doesn’t matter whether it’s true or false.

51

Fine Spook:

Then just answer the following questions:

  1. Do you believe that the US invaded Iraq primarily or to a large extent to protect Israel? and that it had nothing to do with Saddam’s wmds or threat to his neighbors?

  2. Do you think that the US pressure on and interest in Iran’s nuclear weapons program is about primarily or to a large extent protecting Israel?

  3. Do you believe that the US relationship with Israel is largely to blame for the Arab and Muslim hostility to America?

  4. Do you believe that the Israelis KNEW about 911 before it happened?

  5. Do you believe that Israel is a threat to the US as in the Israel weapons and technology sales to China?

  6. On a scale of 1 to 10, how strong do you think that the Jewish-Israeli lobby is in Washington? If very strong, how is it able to be so strong given that the Arab population easily dwarves Israel’s and given that many of the Arab states have oil wealth and important strategic positions.

  7. Do you think that Jews have an inordinate amount of influence on American policy? Do they speak with one united voice?

  8. Do you think that Israel has a right to exist?

  9. Who do you blame more for the impasse in the Roadmap to Peace? Israel or Palestine? Why?

  10. Would you equate Arafat’s dictatorship with Israel’s democracy? Please explain.

52

There’s a year’s worth of discussion here if it’s to be done right. I’m game if you are. I have the advantage though because I’ve already posted viewpoints with references on most of these issues so I’ll just need to quote myself. To do it in twenty-five words or less though just invites demagoguery.

First, some “rules of the debate” questions for you:

How do you define “anti-Semitism”?

Does The Passion of the Christ, for example, fit within your definition of anti-Semitism?

Is it okay to criticize Israeli policies and the alliance between the U.S. and Israel or do you consider any criticism of either de facto anti-Semitism whether true or not?

53

anti-Semitism to me is a belief that the Jews somehow control the world, particularly media and finance and that they represent a unified force that somehow has plans to dominate the world.

Passion of Christ is not anti-Semitic.

Finally, criticism is acceptable but when it is brought into subjects that are obviously (to most) not related then one has to wonder about obsession.

So to wit, as I frequently bring the French and Germans into discussions that are not related to France or Germany, you too, bring in Israel to discussions where it is very very hard to see a link unless one were to be anti-Semitic.

54

[quote=“fred smith”]Tigerman:

I will take that message to be delivered to me. [/quote]

It actually wasn’t. It was for everyone, on every side of the debate. Call it a pre-emptive measure. :wink:

55

I’d call that person someone who believes that Israel and the Jewish lobby have too much influence on US foreign policy.

Well, we know that when you bash the Germans and the French that you are basically deriding their governments and to a certain extent, their peoples for electing and or otherwise supporting certain of their policies. However, even as you do that, we know that you enjoy visiting both France and Germany, and we can imagine that you have many friends in both places. As such, we know that you are not anti-German or anti-French on a personal level/basis. However, when we use the term “anti-Semite”, even if we mean it to refer only to criticism or opposition to certain governmental policies or actions, it conotes the idea of racial, ethnic and or religious bigotry, each of which are applicable at a personal level/basis.

I don’t think any of us believe that spook dislikes, on a personal level/basis, all Israelis and or Jews. At least, I don’t get that impression from reading his posts. I do believe that spook is overly concerned with the amount of influence that Israel and or the jewish lobby has on US foreign policy… but, I don’t think that makes him an anti-Semite any more than your disgust with the governments of France and Germany make you a hater of German and French people.

I know both you and spook, and I have great respect and admiration for the both of you.

56

I see your point Tigerman but would still like to see how (and if) spook will answer my questions before siding with you on the subtle nuances of being anti-Israel and anti-Semitic. I shall, however, remain anti-French and even more so anti-German until 2006. When oh when will I finally have the satifaction of toasting Schroeder’s demise? Where shall I enjoy this immense pleasure? Hotel Adlon, Berlin? Steigenberger, Dusseldorf? Atlantic, Hamburg? Park, Bremen? spa, Baden Baden? Wiesbaden? Horseback-riding Celle? Boating in Sassnitz? Heringsdorf? I just cannot decide but the dilemma is proving to be a most enjoyable one.

Allow me my moments of fun.

57

Fred Smith,
I fail to follow your logic. You disagree with the French Government. This does not make you Anti-Catholic. How does disagreeing with the Isreali Govenrment make one an Anti-Semite? I believe you are mixing politics and religion. There are many, many Jews who disagree with the actions of Isreal. Are they also Anti-Semitic?

58

You have obviously not read my statements above. I admit that I am anti-French and anti-German and believe that likewise Spook is anti-semitic. Anyway, I am not sure what this has to do with you but … feel free to stick around to see if Spook answers the questions that I have asked THIS time. They have been asked before. I have answered all his questions so I fail to understand why he has once again run off. Just answer the questions spook.

Again, I do not see that Spook is truly anti-Israel governmentwise. He seems to bring up Israel and the Jewish lobby about EVERYTHING. That to me is anti-Semitic but like I said that is my opinion and I am sure that you are entitled to yours. I just see no reason so far to change mine. Sorry but that’s how I see it. I believe that Spook’s comments and excessive interest in Israel and Jews could be construed as anti-Semitic. I have done so, though I am in no way demanding others agree with me.

59

[quote=“peachka”]Fred Smith,
I fail to follow your logic. You disagree with the French Government. This does not make you Anti-Catholic. How does disagreeing with the Isreali Govenrment make one an Anti-Semite? I believe you are mixing politics and religion. There are many, many Jews who disagree with the actions of Isreal. Are they also Anti-Semitic?[/quote]

(emaphasis mine.)

Since you didn’t answer Peachka, I’ll ask: Does being Anit-French make you Anti-Catholic?

60

Oh I see. No it would not make me anti-Catholic but I do not think that traditionally those who have been anti-Semitic have been so because of the religious aspects of Judaism but because of the ethnicity and supposed traits that went along with that. I think therefore that there is a difference in these two situations, wouldn’t you agree?