Re: Those Nice, Nuke-Pursuing Iranians

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 10:04:21 -0500, "Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
>"The Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:15:16 -0500, "Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"The Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>> >message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 09:39:51 -0500, "Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"The Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>> >> >message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:52:21 -0500, "Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >"dapra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Ed wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > "Margie K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> >
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >>How come the leftists don't care about Iranian or North Korean
>> >Nukes?
>> >> >I
>> >> >> >> >>thought nuclear weapons were bad?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > No, Margie, apparently ONLY the Israeli nuclear weapons are
>bad.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> According to best estimates, Israel has 200, Iran has none, North
>> >Korea
>> >> >> >> has 0-8 nukes.
>> >> >> >> One can understand why a nation, what is on Bush's hit list of
>the
>> >> >"axis
>> >> >> >> of evil", wants to have a few nukes to deter Bushs aggression. He
>> >> >> >> already took out one, under trumped up charges and false
>pretenses.
>> >And
>> >> >> >> of course the neocons are eager to extend the list in the name of
>> >their
>> >> >> >> new world order.
>> >> >> >> Israel has by far the best conventional military in the Middle
>East.
>> >I
>> >> >> >> have no idea why they need 200 nukes. A few ok, but 200? A
>deranged
>> >> >> >> Israeli leader could bomb the whole Europe and the Middle East
>back
>> >> >into
>> >> >> >> the stone age.  It's understandable, that the Europeans think the
>US
>> >> >and
>> >> >> >> Israel, with their aggressive posture, are #1 and #2 threats to
>> >peace.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >The point of it is this:  Israel will never, NEVER use one single
>nuke
>> >> >> >unless another nation acts against Israel first, in such a way that
>it
>> >> >will
>> >> >> >endanger her very existence.  Whether the threat comes from an Arab
>> >> >country
>> >> >> >or elsewhere, the fact that Israel has such a large arsenal should
>be
>> >the
>> >> >> >best deterrant from anyone attacking her.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 'Israel' does not have the capability to counter a nuclear attack
>from
>> >> >> the US.   Its nuclear capability is not a deterrent.  It would do
>well
>> >> >> to remember that.
>> >> >
>> >> >Well, the LAST thing Israel will ever have to worry about is a nuclear
>> >> >attack from the US.
>> >>
>> >> That is correct.   After a nuclear attack from the US, 'Israel' will
>> >> have nothing to worry about ever again.  LOL!!!
>> >
>> >Naaaah..... Israel will have nothing to worry about because a nuclear
>attack
>> >against Israel from the US will never happen.  LOL!!!
>>
>> They said all kinds of things would never happen.  It's just a matter
>> of time, Rosenberg:  if 'Israel' starts in any way to become a threat
>> to the West, KABOOM - it's gone.
>
>Why would Israel be any kind of threat to the West?  You're really paranoid,
>revvy.

It's run by irrational, hysterical, unbalanced semites.  Just like the
rest of the Middle East.  It's a racial thing.

>Now a threat to the Muslim world, yes.  Israel SHOULD be a threat to the
>Muslim world as long as those extremist Islamists run things there.

Oy vey.