TG:British threat to Israel over Dubai Hamas assassination

[ABQCOWBOY]

Apparently they're not nearly as bad *** as we thought.

If they're nearly as clever as advertised, they'd steal identities from one of their many enemies (a LOT to choose from), rather than from one of their few friends.

EDIT : I now see from previous comments that Israel doesn't give a rats *** what any other nation thinks. Well, I guess time will tell if THAT strategy pays off.

I think the same can be said for how most of the world views Israel. Iran has openly stated that they will use Nukes on Israel. The world does not seem to be doing much to prevent Iran's development of these weapons.

[stevenaa]

They should have communicated with the UK before stepping on toes... really it's the least they could do considering the benefits they enjoy.

You're assuming they didn't. Would it be the least bit shocking if the UK knew? Wouldn't surprise me in the least.

[Mickalino]

I think the same can be said for how most of the world views Israel. Iran has openly stated that they will use Nukes on Israel. The world does not seem to be doing much to prevent Iran's development of these weapons.

Iran is a much larger foe than Hamas, as their bombs are a wee bit bigger than the Palestinians. So, my curiosity has me wondering what greater clandestine operations they have going on in Iran. Whatever Israel does to Iran, the **** is gonna hit the fan. No rhyme intended. And welcome to World War III

[Chicken Fried]

Materials? Are you kidding me?! The US and western allies are the only reason Israel is allowed to do damn near any of the things they are doing. They were ALLOWED to become a nuclear state. They were ALLOWED to continue to take actions frowned upon by the UN. They are provided with weapons and financial aid that their enemies are denied. They break the rules in terms of human rights and rules of engagement constantly and no one comes down on them because the west favors their position.

Yet they thumb their noses at everyone when it suits them. If there is a war in Iran it will involve the US and western allies and it will be done to preserve Israel first and foremost. They exist because the nations that collaborated to create the current state of Israel choose to allow it. The only people they are sticking their neck out against... is us (as defined by the US and it's allies). They should have communicated with the UK before stepping on toes... really it's the least they could do considering the benefits they enjoy.

I consider Israel as our one true ally. I don't care what the reasons are for that being so. I don't trust any other country. England, I believe, is not a dedicated ally. France, well, we know the story with them. Poland? Yes, but they can't do much if anything. Australia? Don't know.

It's a joke that you think a war with Iran will be primarily led by the US. Israel and Iran are about as hostile toward one another as you can get. You've heard the threats Iran has given Israel. If a war starts, it's because Israel want to blow the **** out of the #1 enemy. The US would never try to start a war with a nuclear capable country. It takes a real risk-taker, and that's Israel.

Ummm, I hope that Israel gets the best weapons that their enemies are denied. WTF are you talking about? If we supply Israel we need to supply Hamas?

And who gives a **** about the UN. They're about the most worthless organization ever created.

[Chicken Fried]

are you serious? have you never been aware of the things that went on with the killing of members of the IRA over the years by "England"? (I assume you mean the UK but I'll accept your lack of geographical knowledge) :doh:

There have been major investigations of British security forces with claims of a shoot-to-kill policy in Northern Ireland and, rather more worrying, strong rumours that sections of British security/army were working hand in hand with Unionist terrorists.

OK, yes, because I said England instead of the UK, I have a lack of geographical knowledge. Sure.

That doesn't prove that the "UK" has balls; I have yet to see them risk their image in the war on terror.

[jpyaks3]

I consider Israel as our one true ally. I don't care what the reasons are for that being so. I don't trust any other country. England, I believe, is not a dedicated ally. France, well, we know the story with them. Poland? Yes, but they can't do much if anything. Australia? Don't know.

Now why exactly do you believe this? I mean stuff like the USS Liberty incident, Israeli spies selling US secrets to the Chinese, that doesn't seem like things our one true ally would do.

The truth is Israel looks out for Israel they don't give a flying **** about the United States or US interests. Now no one can really fault them for that because you shouldn't expect a state to look out for someone else's interests first but to think that Israel really cares what the United States wants is kind of naive, we wield some influence over Israel because we give them 3+ billion dollars a year in military and non-military aid but Israel looks out for Israel first and foremost.

[jpyaks3]

I think the same can be said for how most of the world views Israel. Iran has openly stated that they will use Nukes on Israel. The world does not seem to be doing much to prevent Iran's development of these weapons.

Where has Iran openly said they will use their nuclear weapons on Israel?

[The Brave Little Toaster Oven]

I consider Israel as our one true ally. I don't care what the reasons are for that being so. I don't trust any other country.

I disagree with that...I swear Israel must have some kind of secret on us the way we bend over backwards for them. I like Israel, but I am not very trusting when it comes to them because they have been known to steal our secrets and technology. They are a good ally in the Middle East, but I wouldnt call them our one true ally...theyll stab us in the back if given the chance to advance themselves. Have you heard of the USS Liberty incident when Israel bombed a US ship in 1967?

[Chicken Fried]

Now why exactly do you believe this? I mean stuff like the USS Liberty incident, Israeli spies selling US secrets to the Chinese, that doesn't seem like things our one true ally would do.

The truth is Israel looks out for Israel they don't give a flying **** about the United States or US interests. Now no one can really fault them for that because you shouldn't expect a state to look out for someone else's interests first but to think that Israel really cares what the United States wants is kind of naive, we wield some influence over Israel because we give them 3+ billion dollars a year in military and non-military aid but Israel looks out for Israel first and foremost.

You're right. "One true ally" was too strong a phrase. I should have said "our best ally." Any country will stab another in the back for an advantage, but I think Israel would do it less than other countries. Israel has been a crucial ally in the Middle East for us. They aren't perfect, but they're the best we've got, and that means a lot in a world where you really can't trust anybody. I don't know much about Israel selling US military secrets to China. I'll look more into that.

To summarize my thoughts: if we were in a massive war, and we could only choose one country to go in with, I'd pick Israel over Britain. They have an edge to them, a certain passionate hatred for all things Islamic terrorists. I just don't see Britain as being quite as dedicated.

[Chicken Fried]

I disagree with that...I swear Israel must have some kind of secret on us the way we bend over backwards for them. I like Israel, but I am not very trusting when it comes to them because they have been known to steal our secrets and technology. They are a good ally in the Middle East, but I wouldnt call them our one true ally...theyll stab us in the back if given the chance to advance themselves. Have you heard of the USS Liberty incident when Israel bombed a US ship in 1967?

I think the reason we bend over backwards for them is to make sure that they stay friends with us despite our supplying of their military for them. They are unquestionably our strongest ally in the Middle East, and we can't afford to lose that.

[SkinsHokieFan]

You're right. "One true ally" was too strong a phrase. I should have said "our best ally." Any country will stab another in the back for an advantage, but I think Israel would do it less than other countries. Israel has been a crucial ally in the Middle East for us. They aren't perfect, but they're the best we've got, and that means a lot in a world where you really can't trust anybody. I don't know much about Israel selling US military secrets to China. I'll look more into that.

To summarize my thoughts: if we were in a massive war, and we could only choose one country to go in with, I'd pick Israel over Britain. They have an edge to them, a certain passionate hatred for all things Islamic terrorists. I just don't see Britain as being quite as dedicated.

Yea, I wouldn't trust Israel to do much of anything for us.

Google the USS Liberty incident. Or PM Mark the Homer as his dad was on the USS Liberty.

If anything, we'll end up being dragged into an uneccessary war because of Israel

[Mickalino]

Where has Iran openly said they will use their nuclear weapons on Israel?

Probably referring to that old "wipe Israel off the map" comment they've made at least a couple times

[Madison Redskin]

Probably referring to that old "wipe Israel off the map" comment they've made at least a couple times

That is a lot of bluster from a blowhard. Nikita Khrushchev proclaimed that he would "bury" the United States.

[Mickalino]

That is a lot of bluster from a blowhard. Nikita Khrushchev proclaimed that he would "bury" the United States.

True......and I remember Saddam saying before the 10-day-long Gulf War I, that it would be the "Mother of all Battles"

[Madison Redskin]

True......and I remember Saddam saying before the 10-day-long Gulf War I, that it would be the "Mother of all Battles"

They don't hold a candle to this guy....

s27Oq5ot0ZI&feature=related

[skinfan133]

I don't care if we have to supply them with all of their materials. They are the only ones willing to stick their neck out. England, France, and Spain would NEVER try anything like this. The fact is, a terrorist leader is dead, and it was Israel that did it. I don't understand why you're so upset. Would you rather the leader be alive and planning terrorism while Israel meanwhile doesn't hurt anyone's feelings?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

[jpyaks3]

Probably referring to that old "wipe Israel off the map" comment they've made at least a couple times

Well that is a pretty controversial quote, both in the translation of the quote and the content. But that doesn't refer to nuclear weapons at all and can be interpreted any number of ways. But since that quote gets trotted out all the time it might be good to take a look at what was actually because there is a lot of dispute there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel#.22Wiped_off_the_map.22_or_.22Vanish_from_the_pages_of_time.22_translation

The translation presented by IRIB has been challenged by Arash Norouzi, who says the statement "wiped off the map" was never made and that Ahmadinejad did not refer to the nation or land mass of Israel, but to the "regime occupying Jerusalem". He says that the Iranian government News Agency IRIB/IRNA translation is the source of the confusion.

---------------------------------------------------------

Ahmadinejad was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini in the specific speech under discussion: what he said was that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time." No state action is envisaged in this lament; it denotes a spiritual wish, whereas the erroneous translation—"wipe Israel off the map"—suggests a military threat. There is a huge chasm between the correct and the incorrect translations. The notion that Iran can "wipe out" U.S.-backed, nuclear-armed Israel is ludicrous.[25][26][27]

[Destino]

That is a lot of bluster from a blowhard. Nikita Khrushchev proclaimed that he would "bury" the United States.

Maybe but if you happen to live in Israel you have to take it seriously as the US did with the USSR when they made similar threats.

[thehogs]

That doesn't prove that the "UK" has balls; I have yet to see them risk their image in the war on terror.

just what exactly is it we are supposed to do to raise our 'image' and increase the risk to match your requirements? we have troops dead and wounded in Afghanistan and Iraq with special service people working behind the lines alongside similar US units. We have been pretty good at killing Irish terrorists for a long time and have a bunch of legislation that allows the police to arrest anyone for farting on the premis of having a weapon of mass destruction - all part of the 'war on terror'. Is it becasue we dont have many Hamas kills against our name that we fall below your estimations?

[Chump Bailey]

I consider Israel as our one true ally. I don't care what the reasons are for that being so. I don't trust any other country. England, I believe, is not a dedicated ally.

That's ridiculous - very much so...

[Jrew1223]

Iran

It is widely thought that the President of Iran wants Israel to be wiped off the map, but his statement was a mistranslation.

“Your suggestion is to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth?” – Washington Post

“Out suggestion is very clear. Let the Palestinian people decide their fate in a free and fair referendum.” – President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

“We will never start a war. We have no intention of going to war with any state.” – Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, June 2006

“The United States makes the UN work when it wants it to work and that is exactly the way it should be because the only question, the only question for the United States is what’s in our national interest. And if you don’t like that then I’m sorry but that’s the fact.” – John Bolton, U.S. Embassador to the U.N. 2005-2006

Notes

- Ahmadinejad doesn’t have the power to make final decisions in Iran. This power belongs to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.

- Khamenei makes all decisions on foreign policy and supports the Saudi peace plan.

- The Saudi peace plan is one that will normalize relations with Israel if Israel withdraws from the OPT.

- Khamenei controls foreign policy, military policy, and nuclear policy.

- Ahmadinejad upholds the constitution.

Iran’s “Grand Bargain”

- If the U.S. promises to remove Iran from Axis of Evil, no attack on Iran, and allow Europe to invest in Iran.

- Then Iran promises to full nuclear inspections, cut of Hezbollah and Hamas, and normalize relations with Israel if they withdraw from the OPT.

- This bargain was created and approved by Ayatollah Khamenei and was sent to Washington D.C. via a Swiss diplomat who was censured for even acknowledging it and the USA chose escalation over peaceful resolution.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

- Just a figurehead in the political system with no real power to carry out the perceived threats that the American media claims that he makes.

- As with any politician, he says what he needs to say in order to rally up his base around himself.

- In order to understand why these are the things that are needed to say to stay popular, people have to know the history of modern Iran.

The American Version of the History of Modern Iran

- For many Americans, the history of Iran begins in 1979 with the Islamic Revolution and the hostage crisis.

- A group of students held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.

- The American show “Nightline” was created to give a daily report on this crisis thus burning the image into the minds of the average American.

- To truly understand the history thought requires you to go back to 1953.

The Iranian Modern History Pre-Revolution

- In 1951, Mohammad Mossadegh was the first popularly elected Prime Minister of Iran.

- He saw that the wealth needed to build up Iran’s infrastructure and economy was leaving the country because during the last 50 years Iran’s oil reserves were under British control at the hands of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. (Today called British Patroleum)

- He became even more popular with Iranians when he nationalized the oil fields which would give the oil wealth back to the Iranians.

- Britain was upset and took the matter to the World Court and lost.

- They tried to hit Iran’s economy by blockading the gulf and halting trade.

- They courted US help in a regime change but Truman was not interested.

- When Eisenhower became president, Britain convinced him to help under the cold war pretext that Mossadegh relied on Iran’s communist party for power.

- The newly formed CIA sent people to Iran under the code name Operation Ajax to engineer a coup.

- In 1953, the U.S. overthrew Iran’s democratically elected president and installed a Pro-U.S. Dictator the Shah who had previously been weakened by the new parliament which was a short democratic experiment designed to limit his powers.

- The Shah was back with full powers and the oil began flowing once again.

- During the Shah’s 25 year reign he became increasingly arrogant and held his people in check with his secret police which were created by the CIA and Mossad with the intention of squashing any dissenters.

- The shah massacred any demonstrations against him and also took any means to prevent political opposition.

- In the 1970’s the situation was so dire that there was a strike that halted Iran’s economy.

- Millions of people flooded Tehran demanding the removal of the Shah he was removed and replaced by Ayatollah Khomeini.

- The US Embassy in Tehran was where the coup was orchestrated that installed the Shah so it was symbolic to take it hostage by the students.

- The students were convinced that there would be a US attempt to stop their revolution and they were right as President Carter sent a NATO General to instigate a military coup but it failed.

- The US and Iran had an extradition treaty that required the US to return the Shah to Iran as an indicted criminal.

- The Students demands were as such: Return the Shah to Iran for trial (he had been admitted to America for medical treatment), Return the Shah’s wealth to the people of Iran, Promise of no more U.S. interference in Iran, and an apology (admission of guilt) for its past actions in Iran.

- The apology never came, but 20 years later Madeline Albright acknowledged America’s role in the overthrow of Mossadegh.

Iranian History 1979 – Current

- Ayatollah Khomeini created a government ruled by Islamic law.

- Within a year of the revolution Saddam Hussein invaded Iran without provocation seeking control of Iran’s oil in the Khuzestan region and key oil shipping water ways.

- The Iran-Iraq war lasted from 1980 to 1988 and was devastating with at least a half a million Iranians killed and this war further cemented resentment of the U.S. Government as they were playing both sides.

- America was supporting Iraq by providing money, technology, and intelligence which included satellite photography that helped Iraqi bombing raids.

- The US helped provide Hussein with weapons by providing agricultural credits and pressuring gulf states to give him billions in loans so he could buy weapons from Western Europe, China, and Russia.

- The US Department of Commerce issued licenses to export materials for Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.

- The US continued its support even after it learned that Iraq was using chemical weapons against Iran.

- Iraq also used chemical weapons against its own people to eliminate a Kurdish uprising.

- The goal of the Imperialism though was balance of power in the region.

- The US also armed Iran to make sure that neither country would gain enough power and be settled in as to prevent any kind of alliance between them against US Hegemony.

- Ayatollah Khomeini had promised democracy but just ended up becoming the next dictator or Iran taking the same measures as the Shah to crush opposition.

- After he died, the Supreme Leader became Ayatollah Khamenei who leads the theocracy to this day.

Iran-Contra Scandal

- President Reagan needed money to fund an unjustified war against Nicaragua, but was forbidden to do so by congress.

- US arms were illegally sold to Iran through Israel and South Africa and the proceeds went to the Nicaraguan Contras.

- This allowed Reagan to get around congress to support and campaign of kidnapping, rape, torture, and murder for which the US was convicted of by the World Court for the unlawful use of force: State Sponsored International Terrorism.

- The ruling was ignored.

What Does This Mean for the Future?

- India was told there would be no deal unless they voted against Iran in the IAEA.

- America violated with impunity article four of the Non-Proliferation Treaty requiring it to give information to the signatories for the pursuit of nuclear capabilities for peaceful uses.

- Washington’s greatest fear is that there will be a creation of an Independent Shiite Alliance among the countries that have the oil.

- Washington is afraid that this alliance will join with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization linked to the Asian Security Grid.

- US economic rivals China and Russia are members with Iran as an observer and the US is shut out.

- Also the Japanese and Saudis are holding financial reserves in Dollars propping up the US economy and if the energy grid expands then they may diversify causing the value of the dollar to plummet.

Just some of my notes on Iran... I thought they might be useful...

-J

[Redskins Diehard]

Yea, I wouldn't trust Israel to do much of anything for us.

Google the USS Liberty incident. Or PM Mark the Homer as his dad was on the USS Liberty.

If anything, we'll end up being dragged into an uneccessary war because of Israel

Or operation susannah/the Lavon Affair.

Claiming they deserve our support is one thing. Saying they are an ally is another. What has the nation of Israel ever done FOR us?

[JMS]

Materials? Are you kidding me?! The US and western allies are the only reason Israel is allowed to do damn near any of the things they are doing. They were ALLOWED to become a nuclear state. They were ALLOWED to continue to take actions frowned upon by the UN. They are provided with weapons and financial aid that their enemies are denied. They break the rules in terms of human rights and rules of engagement constantly and no one comes down on them because the west favors their position.

The United States since 1982, has used it's security council veto in defense of Israel more than all other security council members have used their veto; combined.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/john-mearsheimer/the-israel-lobby

Yet they thumb their noses at everyone when it suits them. If there is a war in Iran it will involve the US and western allies and it will be done to preserve Israel first and foremost. They exist because the nations that collaborated to create the current state of Israel choose to allow it. The only people they are sticking their neck out against... is us (as defined by the US and it's allies). They should have communicated with the UK before stepping on toes... really it's the least they could do considering the benefits they enjoy.

I think the reason the UK, France, Germany and Ireland would be pissed is because Israel's actions put their citizens at risk. These assassins were disguised as their citizens, so what's to stop future Arab states from detaining Brits, Frenchmen, Germans or Irish citizens in the future, or terrorist organizations from preemptively attacking these countries citizens. Israel's actions put a big bullseye on these countries citizens. That's why they're pissed.

Far from being professional, this is a major screw up. Screw up are not typically words used with the Mossad, which is why I wonder if this is their operation. Typically Israel picks on NewZealand or other countries which are mostly neutral in global affairs, not the 3 of the most important countries in Europe. Much less targetting Israel's own citizens.

[Chicken Fried]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

On July 2, 2003, the National Security Agency released copies of the recordings made by an EC-121 aircraft that flew near the attacks from 2:30 p.m. to 3:27 p.m., Sinai time (1230 to 1327 Z), and the resultant translations and summaries.[7] These revelations were elicited as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by Florida bankruptcy judge and retired naval aviator Jay Cristol. Two linguists who were aboard the EC-121 when the recordings were made, however, have claimed separately that at least two additional tapes were made that have been excluded from the NSA releases up to and including a June 8, 2007 release.[2]

English transcripts of the tapes — recorded by U.S. warplanes — indicate that Israel still believed it had hit an Egyptian supply ship even after the attack had stopped. [8] [9] After the attack, the rescue helicopters are heard relaying several urgent requests that the rescuers ask the first survivor pulled out of the water what his nationality is, and discussing whether the survivors from the attacked ship will speak Arabic. [10]

The NSA reported that there had been no radio intercepts related to the attack made by the Liberty herself, nor had there been any radio intercepts made by the U.S. submarine Amberjack.

Within an hour of learning that the Liberty had been torpedoed the Director, NSA, LTG Marshall S. Carter, USA, sent a message to all intercept sites requesting a special search of all communications that might reflect the attack or reaction. No communications were available. However, one of the airborne platforms, a U.S. Navy EC-121, had collected voice conversations between two Israeli helicopter pilots and the control tower at Hazor Airfield following the attack on the Liberty.[11]

The NSA-translated tapes show that the helicopters were first dispatched to rescue Egyptians (control tower to helicopter 815 at 1234Z: "The ship has now been identified as an Egyptian ship"), and that they demonstrate confusion as to the identification of the target ship. (e.g. control tower to helicopter 815 at 1310Z "The first thing is for you to clarify what nationality they are. Notify me immediately.") Cristol adds: "The tapes confirm that the helicopter pilot observed the flag at 3:12 p.m." (1312Z) which would coincide with the audio tapes the Israel Air Force released to Cristol of the radio transmissions before, during and after the attack. The English translations of the Israeli Air Force tapes are published in Appendix 2 of Cristol's book The Liberty Incident.

On October 10, 2003, The Jerusalem Post ran an interview with Yiftah Spector, one of the pilots who participated in the attack [12], and thought to be the lead pilot of the first wave of planes. Spector said the ship was assumed to be Egyptian, stating that: "I circled it twice and it did not fire on me. My assumption was that it was likely to open fire at me and nevertheless I slowed down and I looked and there was positively no flag." The interview also contains the transcripts of the Israeli communications about the Liberty. The journalist who transcribed the tapes for that article, Arieh O'Sullivan, later confirmed that "the Israeli Air Force tapes he listened to contained blank spaces."[2]

The Liberty's survivors contradict Spector. According to subsequently declassified NSA documents: "Every official interview of numerous Liberty crewmen gave consistent evidence that indeed the Liberty was flying an American flag - and, further, the weather conditions were ideal to ensure its easy observance and identification."[60]

There is no conclusive evidence.

[JMS]

Where has Iran openly said they will use their nuclear weapons on Israel?

I'mADinnerJacket has stated Israel will be consumed by pillars of fire, numerous times... a not so subtle refference to nuclear weapons which his country is widely reported to be building.

And Israel has a tendency to take folks seriously who profess mass murder against her..