This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Does the Iranian Government Have A Right To A Nuclear Bomb?
Submitted by James E. Miller of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada,
As Reuters reported last week, the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, has confirmed that while the Iranian government is still enriching uranium at an increasing rate, there is no evidence of a weapons program under development. Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei still maintains that the nuclear program is entirely peaceful. According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, senior Obama administration officials say the 2007 intelligence report which confirmed that Iran’s government put a stop to its efforts to create a nuclear bomb in 2003 is still accurate. Just last February, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta also confirmed that the government is not pursuing a weapons program.
The nonexistence of a nuclear weapons program hasn’t stopped the neoconservatives in Congress and the press or the Obama administration from denouncing Iran publicly in the name of American hegemony. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney remains willing and eager to use military force to halt the country’s nuclear development. At a speech before the Veterans of Foreign War convention in July, Romney called the prospect of Iran having a nuclear weapon the greatest “danger in the world today” and castigated President Obama for not doing more to stop the continuing enrichment. The Obama administration hasn’t been sitting idly by however when it comes to Iran. Under pressure from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, perhaps the largest pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington, Obama signed into law the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act in July which would give “a blank check drawn on the U.S. taxpayer” to Israel “to maintain its qualitative military edge” according to former CIA officer Philip Giraldi. With Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu playing a game of nuclear blackmail with the White House in an effort to goad Obama into launching a preemptive attack on Iran, U.S. National Security Director Tom Dinilon reportedly presented an attack plan to the war-ready Netanyahu recently.
Should Netanyahu pull the trigger and strike Iran before the U.S. elections as he is rumored to be determined to do, it is highly likely that both President Obama and the U.S. Congress will come to the rescue by ordering the deployment of the military. The Israeli news source Yediot Ahronoth recently reported that the White House told the Iranian government they would not assist in an Israeli strike if American interests were let be in the Persian Gulf yet the Obama administration has denied the allegation. The U.S. military literally has the country surrounded with bases; as if already prepared for a full blown assault. A campaign in Iran will be added to the lengthy list of Middle East excursions this decade that include Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and Libya. The drums for war are indeed being pounded upon not by the general public but by well-connected interest groups looking to profit from bloodshed.
The United States isn’t the only country whose leaders are opposed to Iran’s government possessing nuclear arms. The European Union’s embargo of Iran’s oil exporters came into effect on July 1st in an effort to curb the nuclear program. In fact, many Western nations including Canada and Japan have colluded to ban their citizens from doing business in Iran. Following the U.S.’s lead, it has been decided by the power players in the international community that Iran is not allowed to have nuclear arms.
The idea that the U.S. government should be the sole decider of what governments are allowed to own what weapons is demonstrative of the hegemonic desires of the ruling establishment. It is automatically assumed that because the government of Iran refuses to bow down to the American empire, it should be stripped of its sovereignty. There is no consideration of the question at the heart of the matter: should people have the right to own nuclear weapons in a free society?
It is certainly not outside the bounds of moral considerations to agree that people should have the right to defend themselves from harm’s way or if they feel genuinely threatened. This includes the right to own small arms for defensive purposes. Denying someone the right to own arms is denying them the right to protect their own life. In the context of violent behavior, the act of simply owning a firearm or weapon in no way constitutes a threat towards another. In a society where property rights are respected and upheld, gun control is a coercive intrusion into peaceful living.
But does the notion that man has a natural right to own the means to protect his life apply to nuclear weapons?
At first glance it may appear so since the mere possessing of a nuclear bomb does not constitute a threat toward anyone. There is a clear difference between owning a gun and a thermonuclear device however. As Murray Rothbard explains:
…while the bow and arrow and even the rifle can be pinpointed, if the will be there, against actual criminals, modern nuclear weapons cannot. Here is a crucial difference in kind. Of course, the bow and arrow could be used for aggressive purposes, but it could also be pinpointed to use only against aggressors. Nuclear weapons, even ‘conventional’ aerial bombs, cannot be. These weapons are ipso facto engines of indiscriminate mass destruction.
Nuclear weapons are bound to kill innocents just because the radius of damage is so encompassing. Since they can’t be pinpointed, nuclear weaponry can’t be used purely for defensive purposes on Earth. The only plausible scenario for the justified stockpiling of a nuclear bomb is if there exists a threat beyond Earth. Economist Walter Block calls this the proportionality thesis. Because the universe is conceivably wide enough where the setting off of a nuclear device may not harm an innocent person, ownership of an atom bomb can be permissible.
Nuclear weaponry has only one function; the annihilation of vast amounts of people and property. There is no other use. In a free society on Earth (which is thus far the only planet known to have the resources to sustain rational beings like humans) there would be no need for anyone to own nuclear arms. For the state that operates off of the power-lusting of its controllers, the incentives change. Through educational indoctrination and media propaganda the nation-state becomes synonymous with its inhabitants. Americans, Canadians, Brits, etc., are affiliated with their government even when certain atrocities are committed solely by individuals of authority. This mistaken identify provides the perfect cover for the various political classes to scheme for further power grabs. Wars between states are often fought not for the defense of the citizenry but for other motives outside of protecting life. They are neither an economic stimulant nor a dignified crusade; they are destructive and horrifying. War is really mass murder financed through violent means; both of which are unlawful under natural law. Ultimately it is the various minions of the state seeking national glory and resources located in the jurisdiction of another nation-state who conduct war.
For the U.S. government to even begin to lecture Iran’s on whether or not it should have the right to develop a nuclear weapon ignores the very fact that it remains the one and only government on the planet to ever used the atom bomb to exterminate millions. American school children are often told that the use of the nuke was necessary to save the troops who were going to invade Japan during World War II even though such an explanation is dubious. As John V. Denson points out, President Truman kept to a policy of no-surrender even while the Japanese government was willing to admit defeat as long as the emperor could remain in power. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were carried out as a demonstration of force to the Russians. Many of his advisers, including General Eisenhower, had pressured him to not go ahead with the nuking but Truman would have none of it. Establishing the United States government as a supreme world power was more important than the lives of innocent women and children.
It should also be noted that while it is widely believed that Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, threatened to wipe the nation of Israel “off the map,” this was a mistranslation. On October 25, 2005, Ahmadinejad reportedly gave a speech titled “The World Without Zionism” in which he supposedly uttered the infamous remark. But as Arash Norouzi, co-founder of the Mossadegh Project, explains, the words “Israel,” “map,” and “wipe out” were never actually uttered.
So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in Farsi:
“Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.”
That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word “regime.” pronounced just like the English word with an extra “eh” sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase ”rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods” (regime occupying Jerusalem).
So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want “wiped from the map”? The answer is: nothing.
None of this is to say that Iran’s government is filled with respectable men trying to do what is best for Iranians. It has its own history of brutal murders and political suppression. This despicable behavior is not an excuse to distort facts however. As history has shown, campaigns of misinformation are often orchestrated to make way for war. And unfortunately for Americans and Iranians alike, war may very well be on the horizon.
The heightening tension between the United States government and Iran’s is based off of the fallacious notion that nuclear weapons have a legitimate purpose outside of killing enormous amounts of people. Yet they have no other real purpose in the end. Governments possess nuclear weaponry because there is little recourse for state-sanctioned murder. The millions of innocent lives that stand to be vanquished off the face of the Earth have little meaning to the power-tripping political elite. So while the Iranian government’s pursuance of nuclear weapons should be condemned, the United States government, the Israeli government, and others capable of waging nuclear war are in no place to criticize.
»
- 17364 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Define "right."
Wow, first time I've seen so many comments by ZH'ers getting junked by each other....pretty sensitive topic with all the closely held beliefs and witnessing all the discension among the like-minded posters is without a doubt interesting.
Tyler, looky what you started!
Fuck the Nuclear Weapons threat. It’s all about how we can create thousands of well-paying, shovel-ready jobs while securing additional oil from a friendly and secure neighbor’s. While the mouth breathers are feed with Keystone oil pipeline opportunities, the program will be sold as building the next Intercontinental Railroad shovel-ready oil pipeline program.
In four days, a government propaganda site is going to get exposed. Fear is no longer a vehicle for the masses, instead those perpetrating it will be exposed. When dumbass’s pass laws & have no idea how the internet works.. They’ll be exposed and laughed upon. Only four days left, someone’s poor foreign policy is going to expose the true threat. Faces & names will follow suit.
:)
Fuck, the warmongers are out in force tonight.
Talking about rights in this context is foolish. A-jad would laugh his ass off at your logic.
No........they have a right to many nuclear bombSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
This is not about rights; it is about trust. Can the Israels trust the Iranian leadership? For that matter, can the Saudis? Can the IAEA be trusted? Or the Obama Administration?
I don't know the answer, but the article seems rather prejudicial. It seems as though it is taking sides.
Nothing I can do will change a thing. But, I won't delude myself that Iran's motives are peaceful.
I'm sure that if they really want one, Israel will be happy to sell them one. Nobody wants them to have a nuke more. But Iran doesn't need it, because Russia and Pakistan have already pledged to use theirs to defend Iran if anyone should be stupid enough to attack them with a nuclear weapon.
It is goofy to use the word "rights" with regard to weapons.
Reality is simply de facto.
Every country, corporation or church in the world is some version of organized lies, operating organized robbery. Those which are now the biggest were simply the best at being dishonest, and backing that up with violence in the past.
Different organized crime gangs compete with each other. Those which were most successful got to call themselves countries, or churches, or corporations, or whatever. Their social habits to do that have become totally insane, since their real technologies have become billions and trillions and quadrillions of times more powerful, while they still keep on repeating the same old bullshit social stories about who they are, and why they do that.
The fundamental dilemma is that progress in science and technologies, astronomically amplifying human powers to be more dishonest and violent, has had almost nothing whatsoever to match that with, as regards political wisdom, or ecological spirituality, or whatever else kind of enlightenment that would be required to not end up using those powers to destroy ourselves, in an omnicidal orgy.
The western powers, an Anglo-American (Zionist) empire, that already have lots of nuclear bombs, want to assert a global hegemony, and somehow contain Russia and China, and so forth, to be restrained to have to operate within the international banksters' systems.
The deeper source of the conflict between Islamic countries and the Western countries is over the power to make money out of nothing. Since that money buys control over all other resources, all of the fights for resources got displaced to become fights to control the money system, and especially the fights to control the creation of new money out of nothing.
That is what is going on behind the scenes, as we approach World War Three!
IT IS GLOBAL ELECTRONIC FIAT MONEY FRAUD, BACKED BY ATOMIC WEAPONS.
Iran, or any other country, that challenges the established global hegemony of the international banksters are entering into that realm.
However, beyond the atomic bombs, there are also lots of other runaway weapons of mass destruction ... Even if Iran does not actually build atomic bombs, they could have made biological weapons, which could be released in Europe and/or North America, which would then summarily cause those places to collapse into chaos.
Of course, that is insane. However, the original idea that the established systems of runaway financial frauds can continue to be triumphant, without resistance, is also an insane idea too!
One way or another, sooner or later, the astronomical amplification of technological power is going to blow the established social systems to hell! Adapting to powers that are literally many orders of magnitude greater than anything previously existing in human history MIGHT be theoretically possible. That would take radically different militarism, doing radically different death controls, in order to maintain a radically different human ecology and political economy, which was theoretically consistent with the sciences and technologies that made human beings become so many orders of magnitude more powerful.
However, ALL of the established and prevailing social systems exist NOW due to their history of having been good at being dishonest and violent in the past. All of the biggest and most successful were those that were most dishonest and most violent in the past. Thererfore, going through the necessary transformations goes totally off the scale of anything we can currently imagine as practically possible.
It is irrelevant whether Iran, or any other country, church or corporation, has a "right" to mass destruction weapons. That is goofy way to even talk about these issues.
The only theoretical solutions are for the different organized crime gangs to negotiate better with each other, on the basis of saner attitudes towards what it means to become so many orders of magnitude more powerful, and thus, render all previous social and political systems utterly obsolete. Obvously, we are NOT going to get there in a linear way! Since those who most control the world now are there because they used to be the best at being liars, who could back their lies up with force, their world is going to rush through its insanities towards an unknowable future.
Just one superduper biological weapon, dispersed sufficiently anywhere in the world, would drive our entire civilization to collapse into chaos. Any more world war would just be more overkill beyond comprehension.
The problem now is that the international banksters, that have set up the established global money system, ARE controlling things through fraud, backed by violence. THEY WANT TO KEEP THINGS THAT WAY! They want to stop anybody else from being able to challenge or change that system in any signficant ways.
As English speakers, mostly in North America, we are members of the dominant global empire, although almost none of us are members of the elites of that group. I do NOT believe that almost any of us are capable of thinking in sufficiently different ways about the murder system, that backs up the money system, although, theoretically, that is what ALL of us SHOULD DO.
I amuse myself and pass the time by attempting to day dream of some philosophical ways for human beings to adapt their social and political behaviors to the relative triumph of their scientific and technological advancement. However, I have run into a head-on collision with the fundamental nature of militarism being based on the past triumph of deceits. Thus, the history that made War King, then made Fraud King.
The power to make money out of nothing became the surpreme symbolic robbery!
The international banksters are the Fraud Kings that intend to continue their regime and reign. They are able to use various national sovereignties to attack any others that refuse to play only their game, and no others.
That is what the question of whether or not Iran is going to have effective deterrence is really all about. That question itself is several orders of magnitude bigger than anything that ever existed before in known human history ... what a wild, wild, wild, totally untested, ride we are all on NOW!!!
So "nuclear weapons don't kill people, people kill people" wouldn't be a valid argument?
Let's see:
The US put a substantial military force on the ground in Iraq... which borders Iran on its western side.
The US put a substantial military force on the ground in Afghanistan... which borders Iran on its eastern side.
Iran's mortal enemy, Israel, has nukes yet refuses to admit it whilst refusing to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Gee, what would the US do if it lacked nukes, and China (having nukes) had armed forces on the ground in Mexico and Canada whilst another mortal enemy of ours (pick one) had nukes. I think we would develop a nuke ASAP.
If people think Iran has the basic right to defend itself from enemies who have nukes, it seems reasonable Iran would want nukes.
Why is it that the only country who has actually used nuclear weapons, gets to be the arbitrator of what countries are entitled to posess them?
>There is no consideration of the question at the heart of the matter: should people have the right to own nuclear weapons in a free society?
Yes. After all, who is aggressed against if someone assembles pieces of their own propery to form a nuclear weapon?
Also, aren't there legitimate uses for nuclear bombs that don't involve murdering innocent people?
Here are some ideas I can think of:
-Bunker busting
-Destroying a mass of armed aggressors
-A mass suicide pact
-Mass demolition of vacant buildings
-Shock-and-awe demonstrations to intimidate rogue governments and other criminals
-With fusion weapons, perhaps excavating or reshaping land, affecting volcanoes, or countering tidal waves
-Experimentation (e.g. generating micro-blackholes)
-Exterminating out-an of-control dinosaur population on an island
-Fireworks shows
-Conversation pieces
-Defense against alien aggressors and meteors
"Defense against alien aggressors and meteors"
it's like throwing rocks to a dinosaur.
This is comment of the year in my book.
Of course it is, because you are an extremly sane man who loves nuclear weapons and can't get enough of them.
Hey, I am the anarcho-libertarian radioactive boyscout, and I want to own a nuclear device for my own personal experimentation.
http://www.dangerouslaboratories.org/radscout.html
I should be allowed to do so. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO RESTRICT MY FREEDOM
But Rothbard, the founder of anarcho-capitalism, said that no one can ethically employ nuclear weapons. Why do you pretend that he said the opposite?
You are the one who has defended the use of nuclear weapons and yet you condemn Rothbard because you've pretended that he also supports their use even though he doesn't. How sane is that?
Dr. Acula has very clearly demonstrated several non-violent potential uses for nuclear devices.
Since these uses exist and negate your argument, you actually support the right for every individual to have their very own nuclear device.
No, you have supported the possession of nuclear weapons throughout this thread. Then you pretend that I support them and condemn me for it. That is just plain crazy, dude.
Anarcho-capitalism is predicated on nonviolence. No force is to be used unless it is used against an aggressor to stop an ongoing assault. Can you present a rebuttal to that point of view without resorting to ad hominem attacks and straw men?
There are non-violent uses for nuclear devices, and you have said that would be your only objection against individual ownership of nuclear devices. So you support individuals having nuclear devices, just not states.
I do not advocate a society where every individual has their own nuclear device. Nor do I advocate all countries having them. I recognize the need for *some* nuclear devices to be held by countries such as the US, although I would much prefer to live in a world where such horrible weapons did not even exist.
I never said any such thing. You must have imagined that during one of your hallucinatory episodes.
So even if there are non-violent potential uses for nuclear devices, you do not support individuals being allowed to own them?
So you admit that you could find no such quote by me? What, and no apology?
My objection is as I've stated: against indiscriminate killing. If someone possess a nuclear device which was designed and is to be employed for a peaceful purpose then that certainly does not qualify as weaponization. I have my doubts about such uses but as long as safety measures were strictly adhered to and no individual's person or property is threatened then I have no objection. It's really no different than saying that I oppose the use of poison gas to kill people but there's nothing immoral about building a safe and well maintained chemical plant.
Krugman is going to send you a mash note over that one.
WRONG ... The question of ownership is one of intent. Why do they want it? In the case of Iran their goal has been clearly stated by them hundreds of times.
One can own a gun in this country but if their intent is to premeditatively use it to shoot up a college campus or theater should they be allowed ownership..particularly if they have made numerous public announcements of their intent?
Not a big fan of all of this article. Maybe I read it wrong, but there's a touch of wishful thinking in regards to possession of nuclear weapons.
"Nuclear weaponry has only one function; the annihilation of vast amounts of people and property. There is no other use. In a free society on Earth (which is thus far the only planet known to have the resources to sustain rational beings like humans) there would be no need for anyone to own nuclear arms."
What is a "free" society?
Sure, no need for anyone to own nuclear arms, but that is easy to say and probably do in a scenario where nobody at the moment has any nukes.... and there is no global conflicts to speak of that would drive one group to develop ever stronger weapons.
When the genie is out of the bottle, how can you put it back in? What options are left? M.A.D. Nuclear deterrence for all (ie everybody gets a gun) or nobody gets it? If nobody gets it aka "the only option is not to play" wouldn't be easy, because those who already accumulated the power would not want to relinquish it. When the forbidden fruit of knowledge has been eaten, you just can't forget it. To get a MAD scenario, well... your risks have gone up exponentially, but once again how do you put the genie back in the bottle? If somehow there is an agreement to ban and destroy nuclear weapons that is successfully enacted, how can you ensure a fair international polity if the old structures are still in place? You had 100000 nukes, so you get 10000000 conventional weapons in return?
Yes, the idea is there are some sociopathic elites pulling the strings, but these elites would be battling one another for control with the rest as pawns. The illusion of ushering in a new "free society" though noble is only a temporary solution as eventually the despots will return in stealth and power taken once again. The lessons of the past will be forgotten.
Hmm... rambling now. bah.
Needless to say I am in your camp on not liking the article, howerver.
"Nuclear weaponry has only one function"
There have beenonly two occurences in history of atomic bombs being used.
There main function is deterrence. Destruction is not close to the top and is considered a truly last resort tactic.
How do you achieve deterrence if deterrence does not imply use?
Is that why the US govt nuked Japan while it was begging for terms of surrender? To deter it?
They wanted to show the power of the bombs, they wanted to terrify the world into submission. They are weapons of terror, and at the moment, when in the hands of the US and Israeli regimes - they are clearly in the hands of madmen.
Cite one credible source that proves japan was begging for terms of surrender?
You are so full of shit..who taught you history Franklin Marshall Davis?
Glomar, nothing personal, but you are underinformed on the matter.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/denson7.html
The above two are quickly found, but one can find many others. Here is one that contains three basic views, the third (unnecessary) containing quotes from many American officers.
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/nuclearflower/nuclearbomb.htm
From the last link:
One of the most notable individuals with this opinion was then—General Dwight D. Eisenhower. He wrote in his memoir The White House Years:
"In 1945 Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives."
Other U.S. military officers who disagreed with the necessity of the bombings include General Douglas MacArthur (the highest-ranking officer in the Pacific Theatre), General Carl Spaatz (commander of the U.S. Strategic Air Forces in the Pacific), and Brigadier General Carter Clarke (the military intelligence officer who prepared intercepted Japanese cables for U.S. officials), and Admiral Ernest King, U.S. Chief of Naval Operations and Under-secretary of the Navy Ralph A. Bard.
Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the USA Pacific Fleet:
"The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan."
Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman:
"The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender."
<---Israel
<---Iran
The World's BIGGEST FUCKIN ROYAL FUCKIN PAIN IN THE ASS!
The crazy N Koreans developed nukes, and nobody cared because they dont got no oil. Dont bullshit me about govt morals over nukes, its about the damm oil.
No country is entitled to a nuke unless it has its own Constitutional equivalent to the American Second Amendment.
It would certainly decrease the marketability of a lot of these Globalist jackasses...domestic versions included...
Of course they have the right. What could possibly be wrong with a Medieval Theocracy having nuclear weapons at it's disposal?
Future first Medieval Theocracy on the West, aka USA?
It is a known fact that Iranians are on par with Americans when it comes to accepting evolution.
Having a nuclear weapon is like having the bigger TV on the block.
It's usually a sign nobody is really coming over to play with you because they like you, they are there for the chips, dips and beer.
"Nuclear weaponry has only one function; the annihilation of vast amounts of people and property. "
I'm really not sure about that. Nuclear weapons might be useful for some constructive purposes such as opening a pass through an isthmus or mountain range. Or to create giant underground caverns. Just because they've never been used for that purpose, doesn't mean they shouldn't be.
you play too much minecraft
Mindcraft? ..Is that like tricknology ....
BTW dude you never cited where in my comment I stated Iran attacked Iraq.... can't do it do just go away ..you offer what..midcraft?
You offer mind-crap.
you stated here. watch you mouth troll
Iran already attacked Iraq and squandered millions of lives before sounding recall without using nukes, just conventioanl gass attacks and using young children to clear mine fields.
DW,
Friend there is such a deep reservoir of Jew hatred on this blogsite that no amount of facts or logic is ever ging to penetrate it ....
TYLER DURDEN has to be complicit. Twice he's had this guest writer on. If he vetted him he gave commisive aprroval, If he did not vet the author he is imcompetent.
What say you TYLER?
I barely trust our own government with their weapons, why the hell would I trust Iran?
Morally, it could be argued that they should "have a right" to defend themselves with nukes, and it really would give them a more level field to deal with the world community; however, how this plays out will be different. The world stage isn't a moral debate, but rather a fight of ideologies and those with the power direct the rules. There's no benefit to us if the Iranians have nukes. It would probably make future negotiations less favorable for us. As an American, I do not want them to be armed with nukes.
Not a moral arguement. A Machiavellian one.
The US govt has threatened the use of, and used such weapons - and the US govt no longer answers to anyone. It does not need taxpayers money to keep it going, it can print money out of nothing - why should it care what you think.
There is a wealth of real and documented information, along with decades of observational data that Iran is not an aggressive regime. That intends niether to develop or acquire nuclear weapons.
The US govt is best likened to a rampaging werewolf, that is virtually immune to any weapons that most can muster to use against it. It has rampaged across the middle and central east, killing millions, including children - destroying homes and cities - terrorizing the inhabitants of these nations. A nuclear weapon is like a silver bullet, and may .. may stop it .. but what if you miss? What if the strike only wounds it? A single bomb is not likely to be enough, the monster is too large. Iran is doing the rational thing, seeking to not provoke the beast - hiding quietly and hoping it will go away.
However, it (the western controlling regime, US, Israel, UK etc) will not go away - it will not be pacified with sacrifices either - so giving it some blood will not slake its thirst for destruction - somehow it must be destroyed.
Iran is hoping that time and an increasing conciousness in the western peoples will lead to them rightly, rising up against their psychopathic rulers - or that it will run out of money. As a last resort, Iran places it hopes on China and RUssia - that they will clearly spell out nuclear consequences for an attack on Iran.
You are of course kidding.
"There is a wealth of real and documented information, along with decades of observational data that Iran is not an aggressive regime"
They have surpressed all internal debate with death. They treat women as chattel. Their people riot in the street only to be shot down.
History ..try reading up on a country persia that was one helluva an aggressive country. read herodotus,book seven ...ever heard of Xerxes? Remember September 3rd 1979 when Iran invaded US territory?
Ok.over to the pygmy wall.
James Miller has brought forth one of the great emetic pieces ever written.
To start, one has to believe the UN's reports. I don't. The UN has been anti freedom ,anti USA for at least four decades.
Then one has to believe obama and Leon Panetta. I don't. Then you are presented with another obama promise that the US is committed to helping Israel when it is well know that obama doesn't like Israel. To further this point in Islam if your father is Islamic then his sons are by that religion Islamic too. To deny Islam under those conditions is to have a fatwa pronounced on you. We know nothing of obama much less his true religious faith.
This article continues with everal paragraphs outlining Americas desire for regional hegemony in the ME. It is well known that the US has committed to other Arab countires who do not want an Iran with nuclear bombs. Iran already attacked Iraq and squandered millions of lives before sounding recall without using nukes, just conventioanl gass attacks and using young children to clear mine fields.
There is Mr Miller's version of the spoken and written threat that Mr. Amadajin has utter but no mention of the Iranian clerics backing him up 100% on the call to annililate Israel. Are we to believe all there pronouncements,every one of them have consistently been misinterpreted by the entire world? Hard to buy into that.
By now Mr. Miller's credibility on the facts is under serious erosion. What is his background? His agenda? It's certainly not a balanced one. See his affliliations at the end.
He then attempts to cover the Iranian question of nuclear ownership by covering it with this increadible question:
" There is no consideration of the question at the heart of the matter: should people have the right to own nuclear weapons in a free society?"
This is so tranparently unctious as to be the true emetic although the entire piece is trash, Iran is NOT a free society. It is a society brutality run by fanatical religious clerics. Amadadajin has stated inside the UN building that Israel cannot continue to exist.
Continuing ,Mr Miller gives great care in pointing out the lack of precision when nuclear weapons are used: that millions of civilians will die. Well the ME is full of regimes that have killed millions by convention means,including Iraq which used non conventional gas attack on the Kerds in northern Iraq.
Mr. Miller fails entirely in pointing out that since 1947 until today the two big dogs of nuclear power have never had to use them because of MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction, a rational thought. Under Islam they await an apocalypic event, and the coming of the final prophet,coming of the last Islamic messiah. coming of the last Islamic messiah.
moving along in the piece he attempts to rewrite US history with our use of atomic bombs used on Japan. Only on the radical left is the argument still made that we did it basically for fun. He totally dismisses all of the studies that indicate we would have greatly suffered if we had invaded Japanese teritory. By now Mr. Miller's piece should have never been given space on this site. It's junk propanganda.
His last paragraph begins, " The heightening tension between the United States government and Iran’s is based off of the fallacious notion that nuclear weapons have a legitimate purpose outside of killing enormous amounts of people" I have already pointed out that since 1947 the object of nuclear ownership has worked not to kill but to deter killing via MAD. IT IS A WEAPON OF LAST RESORT....BUT NO SUCH IDEOLOGGY EXISTS IN iSLAM.tHEY WANT THE BOB TO KILL THE jEWS. And it worked and is still working between the superpowers who donot desire a nuclear exchange.But regioanlly, particularly in the ME where you have one side with a religiously driven philosophy of TOTAL domination over the entire worlld the MAD concept loses out to blind hatred. The Muslim world is truly the chien enrage, mad dog of this planet.
James Miller. world authority on nuclear weaponry and Islam?..hardly. James E. Miller holds a BS in public administration with a minor in business from Shippensburg University, PA.
James Miller is no stranger to Zero Hedge, tyler allowing him propanganda space on 07/14/2012 10:23 -0400 where is held court on Socialism. His writings are clearly not to inform but to shape public opinion against Israel. The Ludwig von Mises Institue is headed by Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr., a virulently anti Semite propagandist and listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center (not my favorite citation here) as a hate group. Apparently the SPLC got this one right.
Tyler, I hope you present this person simply to introduce us to other thinking on the isssue of ME nukes. We have now been sufficiently propangandized. However this piece is trash.
who attacked who?????????????????????
iraq attacked iran. FACT
The war began when Iraq invaded Iran, launching a simultaneous invasion by air and land into Iranian territory on 22 September 1980 following a long history of border disputes, and fears of Shia Islam insurgency among Iraq's long-suppressed Shia majority influenced by the Iranian Revolution. Iraq was also aiming to replace Iran as the dominant Persian Gulf state. Although Iraq hoped to take advantage of the revolutionary chaos in Iran (see Iranian Revolution, 1979) and attacked without formal warning, they made only limited progress into Iran and were quickly repelled by the Iranians who regained virtually all lost territory by June 1982. For the next six years, Iran was on the offensive
Kindly point out where in article I made the claim that Iran attacked Iraq.
LOL you're an idiot sorry
Iran already attacked Iraq and squandered millions of lives before sounding recall without using nukes, just conventioanl gass attacks and using young children to clear mine fields.
In two subsequent posts you've said that Iraq attacked Iran and then switched to Iran attacked Iraq. Maybe if you spent less time aching to call others trolls (Mr. 27 weeks) you could keep better track of your ramblings.
Hey show me where I said what you claim i said ..or anyone else out there care to help this goat fucker prove his point?
trust me, reading your biography is freaking funny hahahahahhahahahahaah
You two are a match made in hell. Thanks so much for bringing the level of discourse down to a new low.
I see a few of you prefer UN reports and verification. That you subscribe to allowing maniacs to have nukes. Who knows what your thinking is . I think you just don't like my avatar or identify more strongly with aSshippensburg grad who works for an anti semite.
naw that can't be it ..it's the avatar.
All US intelligence agencies and the Pentagon agree that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons. The only evidence ever presented that they are came from the MEK. Do you seriously trust the Iranian Mujahedin more than US intelligence?
I am an anti semite who would love to see Israel defeated, demilitirised, and with Palestinians left in charge of it's people. Iranians aren't the only people unhappy with Jews.
The intellectual movements which have trashed our societies such as Freudianism, socialism, politicial correctness and multiculturalism are all Jewish. Holywood pours out a poison of anti-white, anti-christian hatred for our population to swallow. Their banks own us. Left wing Jews betrayed US nuclear secrets to first to the Soviet Union and then to Israel.
I am looking forward to seeing Jews properly fucked. I just hope that Palestinains don't suffer in the process.
Well that puts you in the company of the biggest mass murders in world history,Hitler and Stalin. Enjoy your eternity in hell.
Funny, Glomar. Both Hitler and Stalin were financed by Rothschilds.
Sounds good. Have their people contact my people and send along the pay check.
Dude ... the Arabs don't want to defeat the Jews, they want every one of them on the planet DEAD ..... you're siding with a fanatical religion that has an open position of mass murder.
Who next after the Jews?
Shall we kill all the ni....blacks, then the Mexicans..the Kurds...you open the door to sanctioned mass murder you are never going to be able to shut it. You good with that or are you such a humanitarian that you just confine your mass murdering thoughts to the zjews?
Your victim routine would go down so much better if your people didn't steal US military secrets and sell them to the USSR leading to the deaths of over a hundred US intelligence assets. Why do you hate America?
Suggestion to Mises Institute: move to Israel & see how you feel about the matter :)
a few years ago, there was an unusual spike, in microbiologist deaths. bio-weapons developers. some of it was ethnic specific pathogens. kinda makes the nukes not look so bad
I'm interested in reading more on that. Any links?
If Iran gets to have one, I want one too.
No, not one owned by the government, my very own personal nuke.
Golly you're so right. But why stop there. Lets give all the unstable multi party nations a few nukes so they can use them in the same reponsible manner they've used their economies.
Free nuclear missiles for the entire world .... how long before the first one is ignited? A day,a week?
The Hutu's and the Tutsi's need them for "peaceful means also.
What a shame that you fail to recognise the significance of Hitlerian language from Iran's leaders directed at Israel. You miss too the relevance of the found out lies and subterfuge from Iran about its nuclear program.
The whole history of nuclear power is predicated on lies and subterfuge
The whole history? Are your expectations such that you believe all covert programs should immediately become public knowledge?
You are another here on this site who makes a sweeping claim unsupported by even one example. Care to provide some?
“Nuclear Diversion in the U.S.? 13 Years of Contradiction and Confusion” investigates the period between 1957 and 1967 when the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC) received over 22 tons of uranium-235 – the key material used to fabricate nuclear weapons. NUMEC’s founder and president Zalman M. Shapiro was head of a local Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) chapter and a sales agent for the Defense Ministry of Israel in the U.S. In the early 1960s the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) began documenting suspicious lapses in security at NUMEC’s plant at Apollo, Pa. In 1965 an AEC audit found NUMEC could no longer account for over 200 pounds of highly enriched uranium. Subsequent estimates spiraled to almost 600 pounds.
The passage of time has removed any remaining doubts that NUMEC diverted uranium to Israel. Rafael Eitan, who visited NUMEC in 1968, was later revealed as the top Israeli spy targeting U.S. nuclear, national defense, and economic targets when his agent (U.S. Navy analyst Jonathan Pollard) was arrested spying for Israel in 1985. According to Anthony Cordesman, “there is no conceivable reason for Eitan to have gone [to the Apollo plant] but for the nuclear material.” CIA Tel Aviv station chief John Hadden called NUMEC “an Israeli operation from the beginning,” a conclusion supported by its startup financing and initial ties to Israeli intelligence. Why both the Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon administrations failed to credibly investigate NUMEC as a diversion challenge is also now obvious.
http://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2010/05/09/declassified-gao-report/
Up arrow from me, Crock. Now back to 911 with that vein of thought.
Contemporize, man.
Why not just cut to the chase and admit that government is not now, never was and never will be your friend and begin living your life like a free man? Or would you rather spend your life monkishly cataloging evidence that the government is not your friend?
I have spent years teaching students this. It has cost me jobs, too.
But the idea of no government still puts us at the mercy of those in power.
This philosophical quandary is really more about human nature than about what ism we choose.
With morally upright and good people in government, the best ism is monarchism, absolutism.
With morally challenged people (or worse), no ism will work, regardless of how many checks and balances you use. A lack of government could be far, far worse than having one.
I've met good cops, good teachers, good people in many professions--and terrible ones, too.
Thanks for the compliment, though (monkishly). That is nice, I think.
I will continue to consider your Libertarian points.
Even Adam Smith argued that capitalism needs restraints and oversight.
Come on Sandman give us two facts to support your brainless twitter .....
if you're american i think it's better if you look for what LIES your gov is telling you.
same if you're european
You fail to cite even one instution or government that we should trust ..can you give us ywo or three examples?
Come on you pygmy brains ...use that brain cell...you cowards.
i trust in 3 people. my cousin, my father and my mother.
Ar-P
I was wrong and you were right re: Iran vs, iraq and who attacked first ... good catch,my bad.
Habu
The Shah was building an atomic bomb - South Africa was building an atomic bomb - Brazil was building an atomic bomb. Britain would not have started research or passed it onto the USA for the Manhattan Project if Heisenberg has not been working on a bomb in Germany. The whole thing is an absurdity. It caused the US real problems in Korea once it decided not to use the Bomb it had to rebuild conventional forces which were - at least in aircraft terms the Sabre with GE copies of RR engines were outclassed by MIGs flying with copies of RR jet engines sold to the USSR in 1946.
The ability to fight a war rests on conventional forces, the ability to resist defeat relies on atomic weapons
Your Anglo-Centric view of history is flattering to the Brits! The US had plenty of weapons left over from WWII ! We couldn't match the Red Chinese in cannon fodder ! We won a truce which Korea and China are still miserable and rabid over ! I'd say we won ! China is on an irreversible Capitalist/Democratic path and North Korea will follow ! I love my KIA "Soul" !
In 1943 Winston Churchill gave Rolls-Royce jet technology to the USA. The Federal Government ordered GE to work on jet engines and P&W to work on turbo-props. Stafford Cripps as Chancellor of the Exchequer and former Ambassador to MOscow sold Rolls-Royce jet engines to the USSR in 1946./
Re. Does the Iranian Govt have a Right to A (HYPOTHETICAL) Nuclear Bomb?
Does the Israeli Govt have A Right to 50+ ACTUAL Nuclear Bombs?
Does the US Govt have A Right to 500+ ACTUAL "NuKular" Bombs?
Do TPTB have A Right to Start a Nuclear/Nukular conflagration, on a false premise, as a diversion to cover their criminal tracks?
Do THEY really LIKE "the smell of seared-flesh in the morning"?
And would THEY really risk destroying the world in an attempt to save themselves?
Who ARE these "people"?
Those criticss who ostensibly support allowing Iran nuclear weaponry especially in light of their sateted goals and history owe at lest more than a twitter like response.
It would of course follow by your logic that Chavez,Castro and other sbe allowd to place nuclear missiles in their countries ....thus denying the USA any reflective response time. How about allowing private nukes...say Golman Sachs buys a ship capable of lauching a few nuclear tipped cruise missiles?
I mean if countires can have them why not the Bank of China or Gazprom?
it's very hard to educate political pygmies.
Come on all you anti Semites..you got no game just blind hatred ..show me some stuff beyond a twitter.
If one does not want to pay to kill your enemies for you does that make one antisemitic?
Feeble ..impotent reply. zTry harder if you've got the stones.
The US is not going to war for you again. The military and intelligence agencies are against it and they are not going to let themselves be played this time. They also know that tangling with Russia and China over your bogus fear of Iranians is not a winning move.
Feel free to go it alone, if you've got the balls.
The really big question here is:
"Is an entity that is breaking a specific moral code - i.e. though shall have no nukes - morally entitled to start aggression against another entity for breaking that same code?"
I suspect the mullahs are up to no good.
However, would they destroy Israel in order to save it?
Any nuke of size would render their Palestinian allies dead and the land mass bare.
I think nukes for them mean regional economic/political hedgemony and a warning to TPTB.
Darius is no longer around, so I do not think there is a geographical (war of conquest) threat.
Using GOLD is why the PTB be mad at them, just like Moammar.
Use FIAT or face NATO, Bit-chez!
And, for you Zionistas, since the winds are shifting in a muslim direction, don't count on any help from Dick O'Bama.
So Iran's protestations that they are not making nukes .... suddenly is dismissed .... and replaced with a defense of their right to make nukes ? As breathtaking as a nuclear updraft ! Monedas 1929 Comedy Jihad Joke Discovery Mechanism
The article I read suggests that no one has a right to nuclear weapons as they kill massively and indiscriminately. What article did you read?
South Africa had the right http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/23/israel-south-africa-nuclear-... .
Let's take a look at the number of time Israel has been premeditatively attacked by Muslim countries or factions ie. Hezbollah,Black September.
948 Arab–Israeli War
Reprisal operations
Suez Crisis
Six-Day War
War of Attrition
Yom Kippur War
Palestinian insurgency in South Lebanon
1982 Lebanon War
South Lebanon conflict
First Intifada
Second Intifada
Gaza War
Ok hot dogs now you list the number of times Israel has attacked premediatatively an Arab country.
Of course I left out Munisch 1972.
Go for it.
When someone breaks into a home occupied by others, and holds them hostage at gunpoint - they cant claim that attempts to evict them by the owners or their neighbors contitutes an attack.
Whose home did who break into?
I think you need a bit of a history lesson - being such a strong proponent of Israel, perhaps you familiarize yourself with how it came into being in the first place.
i bet he is payed to come here telling everyone BS
The Zionist bombing of the King David Hotel remains the most deadly terrorist attack in Jerusalem to this day. And that was just the beginning.
The spirit of the King David Hotel The historic truth is different: In the 60 years since the attack at the King David Hotel, Israel has hurt some two million civilians, including 750,000 who lost their homes in 1948, another quarter million Palestinians who were forced to leave the West Bank in the Six-Day War and hundreds of thousands of Egyptian civilians who were expelled from the cities along the Suez Canal during the War of Attrition. And now tens of thousands of Lebanese villagers are being forced to abandon their homes, and air force pilots are once again bombing Beirut and other cities. Hundreds of civilians have been killed. Regrettably. It's all in the spirit of the King David Hotel. One can always say there was a mishap.http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/the-spirit-of-the-king-davi...
Look at Syria .... a civil war of competing terrorist factions .... the spoils of which are the bragging rights to attack Israel again ! It's funny .... when Muslims look stupid and cruel .... their hatred for Israel soars ?
http://www.usslibertyveterans.org
http://www.gtr5.com
Glomar, there is a lot of history that you are missing, honestly. Start with the Balfour Declaration. Learn the Jewish side of this history, the rabbis who were against Israel to start with, the Rothschilds who persuaded (along with western powers) other nations to refuse Holocaust refugees. Then learn what the original boundaries of Izrahole were. Then learn about how the first inhabitants terrorized the Palestinians, who were peaceful, and forced them to flee. Learn the whole story, man. Learning is hard work. It's fun, but it requires patience and dedication. Try this Jewish-run site for starters:
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
Nice story, tell it to Reader's Digest!
SWEATING BULLETS!!!!!!!!!
"the United States government, the Israeli government, and others capable of waging nuclear war are in no place to criticize."
Bullshit.
Neither the US or Israel have ever threatened to erase another country from the face of the earth.
Apologists/haters/holocast deniers like you are one of the reasons this world is as fu@#$d up as it is.
Go do some more of the lords work and screw some more working people out of their 401k's.
"We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: 'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under. --Martin van Creveld
My sentiments exactly, Martin ! Thanks for that, Crock !
Israel's submarine based missiles can hit just about any spot on Earth. Their Samson Option is designed to inflict maximum damage to the entire planet should they suffer a military defeat. Why do you want them to blow you up?
Wow, two more up arrows from me for the Crock.
Spot on.
Now apply that thinking to a more careful examination of the evidence of 911.
TYLER, are you still an anti Semite? Man up dude.
About two years ago, right after Iran promised to nuke Israel as soon as it had the capability, O'Bowel said Iran had the right to nuclear capabilities.
VOTE O'BOWEL, EXTERMINATE THE JEWS......
The UN should declare ME Christians and Jews as endangered species with as much right to exist as the Snail Darter fish !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdaWyFVKy4A
I break your camera! Don't take picture!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQnr13ZE-cM
Are the Palestinian Christians seeking assylum in Syria ? They are probably moving to Israel proper .... where there is law and order ! Nice touch, interviewing drunks ? Jesus was a Jew .... his followers are the Christians ! To this day, Muslims stone to death other Muslims who don't toe the party line ! Stonings are relatively rare in Israel .... sarcasm deliberate !
So you believe that Palestinian Christians who say that Israelis are mistreating them are now moving to Israel? How can you dismiss these Christians and their plight with such a shoddy attempt at humor? It's clear that your voiced support for Middle Eastern Christians is a ruse designed to support the very Israelis who oppress them.
The Jews and the Muslims both oppress Christians all over the ME, but our government will only support two of the three. Guess which element the Luciferian elite leave to hang on their own?
More to the point, why does Israel have 254 Nuke war heads when they didn't sign the 1991 treaty agreement. And Iran is being threatened because they may have the capibility of builfing one? Who is really threatened now?
If Israel didn't have those 254 weapons .... there would no longer be an Israel .... there would be no Starbucks in Haifa .... no place to watch the sea and chuckle over the Syrians .... having it their way ! Have the Muslims no shame ? Of course they hate Israel .... they hate themselves .... and each other .... Allah can't be very proud of them !
That's silly nonsense. Israels nuclear weapons aren't keeping anyone at bay but Russia. But the time will come when the bear is tired of games.
And that time is drawing very near.
Ok I've waxed most all of you anti Semites. It's time for the gym..
Spririted colloquy ..to bad tyou Jew haters could come up with anything substantial.
Have a nice day.
Thanks for helping me defend Israel ! I could have done it alone .... but it was more fun ganging up on the Jew haters !
So as a lover of the Jewish people you hope to see more and bigger wars in their future?
I didn't love the Jews when that Rabbi beat me to a parking space in West LA .... later I thought, how refreshing, he asserted his rights and didn't beat his back bloody with chains ! If Jews didn't have a little backbone .... they'd still be treated like wandering Gypsies ! Weakness invites attack ! The Jews have no choice .... be vigilant or cease to exist !
But the Israelis have already cast their lot and lost. They refused a two state solution and the Palestinians are out breeding them two or three to one. So there's going to be one state with a vast Muslim majority. Not much of a survival strategy, is it?
If you love the Jews so much, go and become a Jew and swindle the world. I'm sure then your fellow Jew Bernanke will print you up a few billion here and there.
GTFO and go be a Shabbos Goy somewhere else.
Ah, what a wonderfully engineered brainwashed cognitive challenged opinion you provide for us.
Rofl - having done nothing more than come and play the tired anti semite card to a forum that is vastly more politically aware than yourself, you finally realise you are a one trick pony, and so retire defeated, humiliated and thoroughly exposed. An individual with a fanatical point of view that is impervious to change in face of over whelming evidence, logic and humanity.
Glomar, until you demonstrate that you are worth my time, this is my last response to your trolling lunacy. But here, why don't you ask some Iranian Jews what an "anti-semite" is?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/opinion/23cohen.html
They have a pretty good idea:
http://www.cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=09RPODUBAI315
One thing that might ha ve been missed in the debate on this article, I would like to congratulate the ZH team for having the balls to bring this kind of debate to the table. While many talk about free speech, here it is in action - and not many other venues where this kind of question could be openly debated.
Kudo's guys - keep up your incredibly important work.
I wouldn't belong to any blog .... that would have me as a contributor .... but I'll make an exception for ZH .... most of the other blogs are pussies !
We still have the chance to make the Middle East a nuclear free zone. There is only one little country there stopping that. Israel doesn't need 500 nukes to protect itself, and using them to blackmail the rest of the world isn't going to do much to save them in the long run. If any other country in the world lived by Israel's "Sampson Option" the U.S. wouldn't tolerate it, much less support it.
I DEMAND a pre-emptive strike on Israel, as:
1) it has aquited nuclear weapon by repeatedly lying to international community (google: Mordechaj Vanunu) ; does not even care to be a member of IAEA (Iran Is!)
2) it occupies foreign territories, not only refuses to withdraw but constantly threatens extending the occupation, and fullfills its threats!
3) it is the recipient of 1/4 of ALL United Nations resolutions condemning acts commited by a sovereign country
4) it refuses to sign extradition agreements
5) it refuses to let it international inspectors
6) it constantly harrases other sovereign countries out of immense sums of money under the false pretense of Holocaust indemnities; truth is that murdered Jews were citizens of respective countries, not Israel, and there is no law existing that enables a COUNTRY to INHERIT (?) money left by citizens of different country
7) it spews hate and conspires to start several aggressive wars, using its proxies (USA!!) , via a real empire of media / banking / government influence ; this includes the recent hideous open discussion about bombing Iran - a peaceful country which has not attacked any other country in TWO HUNDRED YEARS
8) its spiritual leaders (like Rabbi Ovadya Yosef , spiritual chief of 2-nd biggest party in Kneset) openly claim that the only purpose of life of GENTILES is to SERVE their MASTERS (the JEWS); they wish the GOYIM good health and long life, so that they can work well and long for JEWS , exactly like a HORSE or a COW.
Given the above, I demand an immediate pre-emptive strike on agressive, arrogant, extremely dangerous Zionist Regime .
Praise Jehovah!!!!
Do the mentally ill have a right to carry firearms?
Good point ! Iran should not have nukes .... and Pakistan should be forced turn in their nukes !
Why not? They already have the right to reproduce, which is probably even more damaging to society than if they all carried guns. We have disregarded the natural law of survival of the fittest to a point where we have endangered the perpetuation of the species, which is beginning to look like it may not be such a bad thing after all. Oops.......did I say that out loud?
Right on .... the endangered species are the productive, healthy taxpayers ! Stop watering society's weeds .... and water the roses .... like Monedas !
I see all the beautiful children and families in Syria .... and ask myself who is killing and maiming them .... I have the same compassion for the Jews as I do for those children in Syria .... it's not that complicated ! Hizbollah and Assad are killing each others children .... the dispute is over who has the best plan for killing Israeli children .... it's a living laboratory for perfecting the killing of children .... that is stupid and cruel and insane !
Hezbollah and Assad are on the same side. It's Saudi Arabian Wahhabis (aka Al Qaeda) who are attacking the civilians in Syria. The US has sided with Wahhabis in this conflict. If Russia hadn't shown it's teeth the US would have established a No Fly Zone in support of the Wahhabis by now.
How can you continue to court war when it's obvious that you don''t even know the players in the game? It's as if you believe that ignorance is a virtue.
"vanquished" off the face of the earth? Please get a better thesaurus.
<---Agree
<---Disagree
America AND Israel are Zionist-controlled governments.
Of course they are ZOG. Most Americans have already been branded with the mark of the Jew slave (circumcision) and many are willing Shabbos Goyim. Was there ever ANY doubt as to who called the shots?
The idea that Jews are controlling all of this is fallacious. They don't have the power, and there aren't enough of them.
Look more closely into the Luciferian system.
Some very powerful Jewish (sort of) families/dynasties? Sure.
But the idea that Jews control all of this is mistaken.
Come on, guys... we all know what is going on here -- just NAME THE JEW. Tyler(s) won't do it because I'm sure he doesn't want ZH to end up on the ADL/SPLC shitlist. But the rest of you -- you ALL KNOW what is going on here.
Tyler(s) don't want to end up on Monedas' shit list .... I am the unofficial spokeshole for everything in the Jewish ether .... and am feared by Jews, Gentiles and Muslims .... for my sense of humour and moral sledge hammer mind !
JIDF detected.
All "STATE" actors (leaders) have a will to power which ignores and abuses citizenry, if not at first, eventually.
Nation/State Leaders all seek to increase their power and dominion.
The citizenrys' only power is in number. Citizens are required constantly to keep leaders scared of them and their numbers by protests, demands and civil disobedience.
The minute citizens fail to do this they are abused.
This is a fact of life.
This article misses the main reason for nuclear weapons. It's not to kill millions of people, the main reason is to THREATEN to kill millions of people. It's holding a gun to the head of whatever nation happens to be the enemy of the month.
If anyone has ever scratched their heads asking themselves how Israel is able to exercise so much control over America, here's your answer. Yes, the Jews have something even more powerful than Jewish lobbyists, in which to threaten the United State's congress.