UN resolution calls for Israeli nuclear transparency

[natepro]

You gotta give the guy credit though, his speeches certainly have a flair for the dramatic.

When you wear a Member's Only jacket, you've got to have something.

[Patsfan56]

When you wear a Member's Only jacket, you've got to have something.

I wonder if he wears Drakkar Noir...

I'm also hoping if Matt and Trey do another Team America it deals with Iran. I would so love that.

[flips333]

Ummm I honestly do not know enough about the reality of the situation day to day living in gaza, israel, egypt, lebanon, or iran to have any clue what should be done in this region. It's a **** show. My guess is that we will back whomever protects are interests in the region regardless of our "relationship with Israel" or any set of people's desire for democracy or theocracy.

Honestly I think alot of the anti israel sentiment comes from people disliking that which is in power, or that which can bully. But seriously if Canadians started lobbing rockets at buffalo, Detroit and Seattle. The US would most certainly entertain similar drastic measures.
Where I draw the line is the creation of settlements... those people just seem like *******s throwing gas on a fire. However All those countries did try and wipe Israel off the map. I wish they could be forced to accept the otiginal UN charter but good luck with that.

[Labgrownmangoat]

Last paragraph first. There is a difference between "anyone in the US government" and the official head of state, our President. Secondly when our President does say something that the public does not agree with, it takes about a nanosecond for the response to be noted, and backtracking to begin.

Secondly, (last paragraph) perpetuity is a very long time as is forever. When the government of Iran is no longer led by Islamist clergy, and Islamist presidents, when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or worse is no longer head of state, and someone of moderation is head of state, ask me again.

This is not aimed at you Lab, because I know you know the difference, I am not writing about Islam, I am writing about Islamists.

On the last part first, I understand, and no worries.

As for the stuff above that, yes, Ahmedinijad is a loose cannon. However, he's not one that can actually carry out anything. His real political power is minimal, as I understand it. It's tricky to draw an analogy to an American political position because we don't have a parliamentary system with a Prime Minister, instead combing the head of state and head of government roles into one President. Maybe it would be like the speaker of the house or the secretary of state, he's a person with the power to influence but not determine policy.

Dealing with your comments on others in the government disagreeing, as I recall that's pretty much how it went down in Iran after Ahmedinejad's comments. The Interior Minister immediately walked back his comments in 2006. The Prime Minister, their head of government, acknowledged the Holocaust as an historical fact, as did his chief foreign policy advisor. Link.

First paragraph. He has made multiple statements. Another one would be," Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury”. So no, it was not just one throw away quote.

After a little more research, I am coming to agree with you on the nature of his comments. They're reprehensible. That said, we still disagree on their significance.

On a tangent, let me ask this. If the situation were entirely reversed and Gaza and the West Bank were filled with impoverished, unemployed, virtually imprisoned Jews, and Israel was filled with Muslim Palestinians living a first-world life, what would world Jewish leaders be saying about the situation? Any possibility they would want to get rid of the state holding their fellow Jews?

[cabernetluver]

After a little more research, I am coming to agree with you on the nature of his comments. They're reprehensible. That said, we still disagree on their significance.

On a tangent, let me ask this. If the situation were entirely reversed and Gaza and the West Bank were filled with impoverished, unemployed, virtually imprisoned Jews, and Israel was filled with Muslim Palestinians living a first-world life, what would world Jewish leaders be saying about the situation? Any possibility they would want to get rid of the state holding their fellow Jews?

We will get a better handle on who is right, about the significance, following the next election. He is about to be termed out, but his successor is pre-screened. It is not exactly an open system.

The answer to your tangential question would be more of improving their lot by moving them to safer real estate. Look up the MS St. Louis.

This is not to say that I agree with your characterization of Gaza and the West Bank. The reality is not close to that in that they do have the ability to change their lot in life. This is not to say that Israel is without blame, it is just to say, this is not near as one sided as you painted it.

I do not want to derail this thread with a fuller discussion of this, I just did not want to give you the false impression that I agreed with your characterization. Should you care to carry this further, then another thread would be appropriate in my opinion.

[Labgrownmangoat]

We will get a better handle on who is right, about the significance, following the next election. He is about to be termed out, but his successor is pre-screened. It is not exactly an open system.

The answer to your tangential question would be more of improving their lot by moving them to safer real estate. Look up the MS St. Louis.

This situation bears very little, if any, resemblance to the situation in St. Louis apart from poverty. There are no security walls, checkpoints, embargoes, or religious discrimination that I know of in St. Louis, to provide but just a few of the many, many differences.

If you prefer to answer my prior question about role reversal in the other thread, that's fine by me.

[cabernetluver]

This situation bears very little, if any, resemblance to the situation in St. Louis apart from poverty. There are no security walls, checkpoints, embargoes, or religious discrimination that I know of in St. Louis, to provide but just a few of the many, many differences.

If you prefer to answer my prior question about role reversal in the other thread, that's fine by me.

My point was, to answer your question, which is in fact what the St Louis was all about, is they would be moved. As far as the other factors, some apply some don't.