Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

These threats to people here, even when Iran is getting a nuke are dismissed.

The current U.S Regime would probably be glad to see Israel get nuked off the map. Its not like they are important to us like China.... our new overlords.

Hahaha

Yes. You would laugh. But then Timmy was made in China.

Hopefully this man doesnt speak for his entire country.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
The current U.S Regime would probably be glad to see Israel get nuked off the map. Its not like they are important to us like China.... our new overlords.

Anti-Semite. Reported

Pretty sure you cant report the current US administration.

Originally posted by Ayelewis
Anti-Semite. Reported

I think he was being sarcastic.

Thats what i inferred.

Speaking of which, i half expected your post to remark on the fact that either Israel or Iran didnt exist.

Originally posted by riv6672
Hopefully this man doesnt speak for his entire country.


He doesn't. The official stance of the Iranian government is they want the Israeli government replaced with a more Islamic one, which'd allow jewish citizens much as Iran has some. I.e. they'd basically want Israel to be an allied puppet state.


Which, granted, is still bad, but we aren't talking nuke-happy.

Thanks, i didnt think so, but i couldnt be sure, not with the parties involved.

Iran does not have the right to change the Israeli government, and the Israelis do have the right to defend themselves.

Is this the beginning of WWIII?

I was going to post this in the other thread, but I think it's more germane here.

The commander of the Republican Guard is a hothead, he isn't the final word on what Iran's position is. More disconcerting are the Ayatollah's "red lines" and unworkable preconditions which don't include destroying Israel but which would scupper a deal.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Iran does not have the right to change the Israeli government, and the Israelis do have the right to defend themselves.

Is this the beginning of WWIII?


Yes, yes, and not even close.


Iran is not particularly aggressive, when you get down to it. They like to project influence, but they haven't started a lot of wars.

They also like to let their less important people talk scary, so that their more important ones- the clerics, that is- can then appear calm and reasonable in making deals. It's saber rattling, but they act with consideration. The leaders tend to allow themselves negotiating room.


I'd put them as a lot more rational to deal with than, say, North Korea, which acts more impulsively.

Originally posted by Q99
Yes, yes, and not even close.


Iran is not particularly aggressive, when you get down to it. They like to project influence, but they haven't started a lot of wars.

They also like to let their less important people talk scary, so that their more important ones- the clerics, that is- can then appear calm and reasonable in making deals. It's saber rattling, but they act with consideration. The leaders tend to allow themselves negotiating room.


I'd put them as a lot more rational to deal with than, say, North Korea, which acts more impulsively.

You could have said the same thing about Hitler in 1938.

Iran is a supporter of termism.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You could have said the same thing about Hitler in 1938.

Not really. Iran has had a decades long history of this policy, and even when they are in wars they win they haven't seized territory.

In 1938, Nazi Germany was a fairly new regime that'd been talking expansion pretty much from the start. They'd been working to that aim for most of their existence, significantly militarizing.

In 2015, Iran has been around for three and a half decades. Despite having easily a more competent military than any of their neighbors, they played thing defensively for all of that time.


A thing to understand is they have a different cultural identity than their neighbors. They are Persians, not Arabs, and for the most part, they don't want swaths of territory full of Arabs.





Just so you know, they aren't associated with Al Qaeda or similar groups. Most of the main terrorist networks hate them with a passion for following a different branch of Islam, and they're pretty much third on the target list right below the US and Israel. They're anti-ISIS and anti-Al Qaeda, and have even volunteered to work with the US in fighting both.


Furthermore, if we made deals with them, we'd have more influence with them and could get them to back off against Israel more. The deal in progress limits their capabilities, after all.


Going 'grr, they're bad!' and glaring at them from a distance doesn't help Israel at all, getting them to think they can get along with once-enemies does.

Iran funding terrorism has nothing to do with them being associated with Al Queda.

As a Jew, I am less worried about Iran than others. Israel is militarily and technologically superior to Iran and they would wipe Iran off the map themselves if attacked. Furthermore, it's evident that Obama either doesn't care about Israel or at worst, doesn't like Israel which is irrelevant, because one of the constants of American foreign policy is the support of Israel. That isn't likely to change anytime soon, regardless of who is in the WH.

Originally posted by Q99
Not really. Iran has had a decades long history of this policy, and even when they are in wars they win they haven't seized territory.

In 1938, Nazi Germany was a fairly new regime that'd been talking expansion pretty much from the start. They'd been working to that aim for most of their existence, significantly militarizing.

In 2015, Iran has been around for three and a half decades. Despite having easily a more competent military than any of their neighbors, they played thing defensively for all of that time.


A thing to understand is they have a different cultural identity than their neighbors. They are Persians, not Arabs, and for the most part, they don't want swaths of territory full of Arabs.





Just so you know, they aren't associated with Al Qaeda or similar groups. Most of the main terrorist networks hate them with a passion for following a different branch of Islam, and they're pretty much third on the target list right below the US and Israel. They're anti-ISIS and anti-Al Qaeda, and have even volunteered to work with the US in fighting both.


Furthermore, if we made deals with them, we'd have more influence with them and could get them to back off against Israel more. The deal in progress limits their capabilities, after all.


Going 'grr, they're bad!' and glaring at them from a distance doesn't help Israel at all, getting them to think they can get along with once-enemies does.
We agree that Shakya is wrong, as per usual, but you shouldn't discount just how disruptive Iran is in the Middle East and further abroad. A nuclear deal is a great step forward, but we also need to work toward creating an understanding between Iran and the Sunni powers. The proxy wars between Iran and Saudi Arabia are the #1 cause of terrorism, even more so than America's meddling.

Originally posted by psmith81992
As a Jew, I am less worried about Iran than others. Israel is militarily and technologically superior to Iran and they would wipe Iran off the map themselves if attacked. Furthermore, it's evident that Obama either doesn't care about Israel or at worst, doesn't like Israel which is irrelevant, because one of the constants of American foreign policy is the support of Israel. That isn't likely to change anytime soon, regardless of who is in the WH.
Benjamin Netanyahu has done more to destroy the US-Israel relationship than anyone else. He's the one who decided because he hated Obama he would turn the US-Israel alliance into a partisan issue and hijack congress to deliver a campaign speech while also undermining Obama's diplomatic initiative.

Nobody has done more to destroy the relationship than Obama/Hilary. I think you missed the part where Obama sent representatives to make sure Netanyahu lost the election. He's done nothing in support of Israel and everything to either oppose them or appear to remain neutral. And Netanyahu "hijacked" congress because he had no other recourse, due to Obama becoming increasingly and infuriatingly difficult.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Nobody has done more to destroy the relationship than Obama/Hilary. I think you missed the part where Obama sent representatives to make sure Netanyahu lost the election. He's done nothing in support of Israel and everything to either oppose them or appear to remain neutral. And Netanyahu "hijacked" congress because he had no other recourse, due to Obama becoming increasingly and infuriatingly difficult.
Come on, buddy. One of his campaign advisers working for Netanyahu's opponents is nothing like Netanyahu addressing congress against Obama's wishes DURING an Israeli election season. He was disrespecting America and his own Israeli electorate by doing that.

What do you define as doing nothing? I'm sure it's a different metric than the rest of the world uses. Last I checked we're still paying for Israel's defense and we're still covering their increasingly indefensible actions vis-a-vis Palestine at the UNSC with our veto power. Just because Obama does it with a frown rather than a ear-to-ear grin the way his Republican rivals would do it doesn't mean it isn't happening. This is emblematic of how ungrateful Israelis are. They expect unconditional support from America no matter how meddlesome and unhelpful they are, or how terrible they make us look on the world stage by association.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Come on, buddy. One of his campaign advisers working for Netanyahu's opponents is nothing like Netanyahu addressing congress against Obama's wishes DURING an Israeli election season. He was disrespecting America and his own Israeli electorate by doing that.

He was disrespecting a guy that hasn't show him much respect. We can agree or disagree on the validity of that subject matter. I notice you skipped my point about Obama and his advisers trying to rig the Israeli elections. Talk about incompetence.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Nobody has done more to destroy the relationship than Obama/Hilary. I think you missed the part where Obama sent representatives to make sure Netanyahu lost the election. He's done nothing in support of Israel and everything to either oppose them or appear to remain neutral. And Netanyahu "hijacked" congress because he had no other recourse, due to Obama becoming increasingly and infuriatingly difficult.


No, I think the one blowing off the US for years is the one more responsible, even before that BS political stunt- which, by the way, was purely for his own personal election benefit, and not to help Israel.

Torpedoing the Iranian treaty is bad for Israel, but popular among the far-right in Israel. Netanyahu wanted to appeal to them, so he circumvented normal political protocols in order to deliver... essentially a campaign speech.

People in Israel blasted him for the move, as Israel has long viewed having bipartisan US support as strategically important, which they *had* until the move.



Also, Netanyahu supported Romney against Obama / second article

A bipartisan committee is looking into Obama, but no direct links have yet been found. Second article

Frankly it wouldn't shock me, because, c'mon, Netanyahu really has had it in for Obama for some time, and seems to view the US/Israeli relationship as a way to score points and not as a way to help his own country.

Isreal and Iran are not on good terms with each other, so these type of verbal exchanges are expected. Nothing to be alarmed about.

Isreali officials also issue warnings to Iran on different occasions. Here is an example: http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/04/02/israel-warns-of-military-option-as-iran-talks-drag-on/

He has, because Obama has done nothing to show support for Israel, at least publicly. The relationship will be restored with a new president. Obama is too worried about appeasing Iran and other totalitarian regimes than re-establishing a friendship with Israel. Netanyahu does what he has to to protect his country (not saying he's perfect or absolving him of stupidity).

Originally posted by psmith81992
He has, because Obama has done nothing to show support for Israel, at least publicly. The relationship will be restored with a new president. Obama is too worried about appeasing Iran and other totalitarian regimes than re-establishing a friendship with Israel. Netanyahu does what he has to to protect his country (not saying he's perfect or absolving him of stupidity).
You're in an echo chamber right now. Ignoring all the times Obama has come through for Israel and all the times Neyanyahu has tried to **** him over.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
You're in an echo chamber right now. Ignoring all the times Obama has come through for Israel and all the times Neyanyahu has tried to **** him over.

Simply stating this without providing a shred of proof invalidates your argument. You act as if it was a one way relationship. You conveniently ignore the many times Obama has ****ed over Netanyahu. At least pretend to be objective.

This is why the interwebs is so much fun.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Simply stating this without providing a shred of proof invalidates your argument. You act as if it was a one way relationship. You conveniently ignore the many times Obama has ****ed over Netanyahu. At least pretend to be objective.
Did Obama **** him over before he endorsed Romney in 2012?