Slashdot Mirror
The Missile Impasse In the Iran Negotiations
Lasrick writes: Upon resuming talks to end the nuclear crisis with the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, plus Germany) in 2013, Iran made it clear that its missile program was behind a redline and would not be negotiated away. The missile program, Tehran argued, was an entirely separate issue from the nuclear program, part of the country's conventional capabilities and not aimed at deploying non-conventional weapons such as nuclear warheads. Last week, Tehran's missile program arose—seemingly suddenly—as an obstacle with the potential to derail the process altogether. Ariane Tabatabai explores the fascinating history of Iran's missile program, the largest in the Middle East, and asks whether negotiators for countries that hold such diametrically opposed views of the Iranian missile program can reach a compromise. We should know the answer to that within the next day or two.
Or the entire middle east keeps giving Israel the free pass to bomb Iran's missile and nuclear programs back into the stone age, the rest of the world poo poos Israel for it while quietly making sure there's nothing left but rubble, and the status quo resumes.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
As of 2014, 44 people in TOTAL have died from rocket/mortar/explosive attacks launched at Israel (almost all from mortar attacks, btw, which is not the issue being discussed).
In 2012, 263 people died in car accidentsin Israel.
Perhaps Israel should also nuke Detroit?
For reference Israeli security forces (NOT the army) kill more Palestinians than that per year in 'security checks'
Last years 'summer offensive' by the Israeli army (you know, the one to protect themselves from the horrific bloodshed caused by the rockets) killed over 2300 Palestinians. many women and children.
Tell me, what exact definition of civil do you use, because that certainly doesnt look very civil to me.
Or perhaps you mean the version of civil where their navy turns away sanctioned food and medical aid to the Palestinians?
Or the one where the bulldoze Palestinian towns so they can move their own settlers in?
I'm confused, perhaps you can let me know which version of Civil they are.
It's hard to believe that Obama and Kerry are dumb enough to actually trust the Iranians to stick to a "deal" but .... the facts speak for themselves.
I never understood all the Iran bashing. Yes Iran is screwed up but so are a great number of Countries the US does business with regularly. What's the difference? Iran certainly isn't the worst.
For example If I had to pick between living in Saudi Arabia our dearest friend and Iran our worst enemy I would choose Iran in a heartbeat no contest not even close.
Saudi Arabia has more than its fair share of lazy inbred entitled fuckwits who export terror and religious fundamentalism (Wahhabi schools) while treating their women like total shit. 80% of 9/11 hijackers were Saudi citizens yet all the western media is full of nothing but Anti-Iran propaganda and Saudi ass-kissing because various geopolitical calculations disfavoring Persians (Oil and Mecca)
So why DO they want a "deal" at all costs? Do they think it will win political capital? Is this to be another of Obama's great "accomplishments"?
I don't know about "all costs" I think they really want a deal because it is better than any realistic alternative... Also I'm pretty sure making such deals with Iran costs them more political capitol than the Obama administration has left.
And there is nothing "civil" about the state of Israel.
Then goes completely nuts. If you had nukes and people launching rockets at you 24/7 how long do you think you'd be able to stop from eliminating the problem ?
See the Israelis are likely a hell of a lot more civil than you are.
Look at it from the Palestinian perspective.
WWI they're under Ottoman rule with a big Muslim majority and they rebel with the understanding that the allies will give them independence, instead after the war the allies put them under a British mandate and open the floodgates to Jewish immigration.
After WWII with the demographics significantly altered the UN suggests a partition that the Jews favour but the Palestians oppose, the partition is imposed anyways and the Palestinians start a war. They lose the war and lose even more land, and the Palestinians who lived in Israeli territories but fled the war aren't allowed to return and have their land confiscated. This only a half century after another population decided to immigrate with the express intent of founding a nation in their territory and they were given no option of refusing.
Another war in '67 and the Palestinians lose more land.
Then for the next half century Israel not only rules over Palestinian territory but they kick Palestinians off their land and then actively settle the seized land! This isn't just a few incidents, this is systematic, widespread, continuous land theft, it's so bad that as Israel considers pauses in Settlement activity to be significant negotiation concessions!
Any conversation about Israel/Palestine that ignores the reality of actively settling another people's land is completely missing the point.
I stole this Sig
What I thought was hilarious (sorry I can't find a link ATM, it was several years ago I read this and my Google-Foo sucks) was when they did DNA testing to show their claim to the land.....and found more than 90% of the Israelis were 100% of European origin. That makes them no different than the Brits in India or the Dutch in Africa, a colonial conqueror.
And AIPAC can label anybody that says anything against their policies an anti-semite all they want, 5 minutes of watching the behavior of their "security forces" and their policies wrt settlements and its pretty easy to see that Israel 2015 is South Africa 1970,same methods of intimidation and brutality, same disregard for the lives and property of the natives, etc. Its ironic that 70 years after the liberation of the camps and they have gone from being the oppressed to being the oppressors, guess some just never learn from the mistakes of history.
As for Iran? Considering that a former POTUS labeled them an "Axis of Evil" and several prominent neo-cons have stated repeatedly their destruction is part of their plans for the ME, along with a history of the USA actively destroying governments including installing the Shah after murdering their democratically elected president? I'd want a nuke too, pretty much the only way you can insure the USA won't try to pull a "regime change" on your country. Look at the history of CIA involvement in the region post WWII and there isn't a single country there besides Israel that hasn't had repeated attacks by the US government, and Saddam proved that kissing Uncle Sam's booty doesn't gain you any loyalty.
Israel will always have the USA as its attack dog thanks to "When the Jews return to Zion" causing every ultra right winger to fear their deity won't have a place to park his fluffy cloud and without the USSR to balance things out all the other countries in the ME are truly alone. This is why I really don't blame countries like India, Pakistan, and Iran getting or trying to get nukes, all one has to do is look at the history of false flags, CIA coups and outright lies from the US government to realize that the only guarantee of not getting your country bombed into the stone age by the world's largest carrier fleet is to have a nuke.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.