DRAFT: Why it's OK for Israel to have nuclear weapons

<p>Iraq was one of two mistakes, either we shouldn't have bothered, although enforcing the sanctions from Gulf War I was a not inconsiderable expense itself. Or we should have gone in prepared to occupy the place as we did Germany.</p> <p>&#160;</p> <p>The problem with Iran is that it's simply too close to Europe and Israel to risk an unstable nuclear power.&#160; If Iran gets nukes, so will the Saudis, and one or both will use them.&#160; It's OK for Israel to have them because they won't use them first. The very same reason why it's OK for Britain and France to have them. KSA and Iran, like North Korea, can not be trusted that way.</p> <p>&#160;</p> <p>We don't need Saudi Arabia for oil, we're completely self sufficient in energy production. We are still involved for two reasons, Allies energy needs, including Britain, and Israel. Other than that we can walk away. We don't like them much either, but better than the Mullahs. If there is a nuclear war in the future, this is where it will start.</p>


Anti-Limey Added Dec 6, 2018 - 4:58am
Israel has 200-plus nuclear warheads targeting Iran. The U.S. invaded Iran's next-door neighbor. The Iranians have sanctions upon them that are essentially an act of war, much like what we did to the Japanese, which led to their offensives in the Pacific and elsewhere. Desperate people usually do desperate things. What the fuck do you think the Iranians are going to do?
Stone-Eater Added Dec 6, 2018 - 1:18pm
Good one. Getting the relation on things....
Gerrilea Added Dec 6, 2018 - 1:33pm
DAC-- So your argument is that since they won't use them, it's okay???
That's like saying I'm armed but I'll never use a weapon.  It makes the weapon and you impotent.  Why have them in the first place if you'll never use them?
Mutually assured destruction?
And why can't Iran participate in that same "game"?  Because you're afraid they will actually use them?
Isn't that the whole point? Then we'd stop our imperialism at their doorstep and clearly you wouldn't like that, now would you?!!
We invade, destroy and then steal the wealth of nation-states that cannot defend themselves.  Clearly Iran has a vested interest in protecting themselves from becoming the next target!
Go back to the Cato Institute or whatever Neo-Con, Neo-Liberal rock you crawled out from under and spread your bullshit elsewhere. 
We've caught on to your "narrative".
Liberal1 Added Dec 6, 2018 - 1:39pm
"It's OK for Israel to have them"
I disagree, mainly because Israel has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons if they are attacked, even by a conventionally armed enemy.  You might want to look into Israel's "Samson Option" before you say again that "they won't use them first."
Israel is currently controlled by a bunch of ultra-right wingers who are fighting to keep control of their power.  THOSE are exactly the kind of people who scare me the most.  They have a track record of going total stupid when cornered and they are currently backing themselves into one.
Gerrilea Added Dec 6, 2018 - 1:59pm
Sunshine K--- You and me both.
If you want to call me an Islamophobe, go ahead.  I do fear them.
Gerrilea Added Dec 6, 2018 - 2:48pm
Michael D--- You're gonna pull the "holocaust" card out?
Please move beyond that evil moment.  Israel and the Jewish people have enemies, they've always have.  Mind you, I'm not one of them.  I've stated before and I do it again: "Israel has a fundamental right to exist and be protected, even if it takes our US military to do so with the death of Americans."  I'm not Jewish but I would defend them as part of my own historic faith and belief system to protect the underdog.
Today, Israel is anything but an underdog. And they've admitted they fund their enemy.  They give coy reasons but clearly they've taken a page out of our playbook.  Create an enemy to rationalize your imperialism.
I won't "bash" them any more but the facts remain.  Learn to live in peace.  Carry that mighty stick with you, if you must, and use it when necessary.  Their covert ops in other nations points to another agenda here and it ain't to save their nation or the lives of it's citizens.
Gerrilea Added Dec 6, 2018 - 3:37pm
Mogg T--- I disagree with your assessment.
Iraq, sitting geographically and politically between American interests and Iran demanded then, and still today America’s intervention for the sake of our interests in the region and globally.
S. Hussein was about to introduce his gold-backed Dinar. It had nothing to do with Iran or a geographic location on the planet. IF that were even remotely accurate then we wouldn't have overthrown the democratically elected gov't in Iran in 1953.  They were our allies and partners at the time.
S. Hussein, we trained and funded and armed to counter the mess our CIA made in Iran.
Any "memorials" or "testaments" for the Bush Crime Family are designed to rewrite history, nothing more.  Iran/Contra, where was he in that whole thing? Former head of the CIA? 
Don't zoom me with platitudes or false authoritarianism. 
Where did all these nations get their arms to fight one another?
Our Government.
It disgusts me to no end the Orwellian world we now exist in and to hear it parroted by the masses, like you Mogg T.
Mustafa Kemal Added Dec 6, 2018 - 3:40pm
" It's OK for Israel to have them because they won't use them first."
I dont really know what this means, since whether is to ok or not is not going to change anything. Moreover, how do you know this?
 Unless we are back to the President is Papa thing and if its not ok, then Israel would have to sit in the corner.
But i suspect the message is subtler -namely that it is "not ok" for Iran to have nuclear weapons. Which is funny, since we just renigged on the Iran nuclear deal, so i guess its really ok.
It is interesting that Isreal  is not a party to the Nuclear Noproliferation treaty. I suppose thats because theyve never admitted they have them and so they might be sanctioned for having them when they were not allowed by the treaty.
Liberal1 Added Dec 6, 2018 - 3:56pm
"For that reason the merest minimum of world powers can be allowed to have them and conventional war must be used with great prejudice when necessary to prevent the spread of nuclear arsenals."
Mogg Tsur, so you are saying the US should have attacked Israel for "procuring" 20 tons of heavy water in 1959, then again in 1965 when they stole 600+ pounds of enriched uranium from the Nuclear Materials & Equipment Corp., and then attacked them yet again when they stole a freighter full of uranium ore in 1968, and then should have attacked them a fourth time in 1985 when they illegally "appropriated" nuclear triggers from a US company, etc.? 
If so, I agree.  The US has been spied upon by Israel as much or more than we have been by the Russians and they have definitely stolen more nuclear weapon materials from us than anyone..