Well..that's a tad cynical.

No war mongers here... move along...

To be fair, they just learned how to consistantly spell his name right last month, and there's no way they're going to let that go to waste.

Raiden333: they just learned how to consistantly spell his name right

CONSISTENTLY

To eesy a targett.

Why is Israel so afraid of Iranian nukes?

Right now, the only middle eastern country that has nukes is...Israel.

I'm not surprised the Likudniks are rooting for Mahmoud. They need a visible existential threat to unite their terrified base. If Iran didn't pose a credible threat to Israel-- or, more accurately, if it was difficult or impossible to convince the average Israeli that Iran posed an existential threat to them-- then Likud would never win another election, and they know it.

Does this REALLY surprise anyone?

Raiden333: To be fair, they just learned how to consistantly spell his name right last month, and there's no way they're going to let that go to waste.

That can be the only reason I can think of. From my understanding, the other guy is more pro-West, anti-terror and represents more of the populace. He probably isn't perfect, but sounds like someone we can work with. Avoiding a war with nuclear or future nuclear powers=good when you don't have to sell your soul to do so.

Sygerrik: They need a visible existential threat to unite their terrified base.

Funny, in Israel those who are the most scared of Iran having nukes are Labournikim and the leftists, those on the right are much less concerned about it.

Don't let facts go in the way of spouting nonsense though

vernonFL: Why is Israel so afraid of Iranian nukes?

Right now, the only middle eastern country that has nukes is...Israel.

In case this isn't a troll, i'm pretty sure Pakistan is nuclear as well and counts as middle east.

If it is, then I took the bait.

vernonFL: Why is Israel so afraid of Iranian nukes?

Right now, the only middle eastern country that has nukes is...Israel.

Does the United States count as a Middle Eastern country? Every time I read an article or hear a story about the region we seem to be mentioned.

booga booga booga!

Masterstuff: vernonFL: Why is Israel so afraid of Iranian nukes?

Right now, the only middle eastern country that has nukes is...Israel.

In case this isn't a troll, i'm pretty sure Pakistan is nuclear as well and counts as middle east.

If it is, then I took the bait.

i'd say pakistan is part of the indian subcontinent, but that's just me

And since this a Israeli source truth is everything opposite.

Masterstuff: vernonFL: Why is Israel so afraid of Iranian nukes?

Right now, the only middle eastern country that has nukes is...Israel.

In case this isn't a troll, i'm pretty sure Pakistan is nuclear as well and counts as middle east.

If it is, then I took the bait.

yeah, wiki says Pakistan isn't part of the traditional middle east (but is part of the Bush created "new middle east", which is neither middle nor east, but basically is all muslim countries)

Masterstuff: vernonFL: Why is Israel so afraid of Iranian nukes?

Right now, the only middle eastern country that has nukes is...Israel.

In case this isn't a troll, i'm pretty sure Pakistan is nuclear as well and counts as middle east.

If it is, then I took the bait.

I don't think Pakistan is really considered to be part of the Middle East.

But maybe this was a troll, and I took the bait.

opiumpoopy: Raiden333: they just learned how to consistantly spell his name right

CONSISTENTLY

To eesy a targett.

Yeah, Firefox spellcheck has spoiled me. I'm on my "work" computer right now, where I'm not authorized to install anything and the only internet browser is IE 6.

I always mix up those damn A's and E's at the end of words.

DWT Samus: Masterstuff: vernonFL: Why is Israel so afraid of Iranian nukes?

Right now, the only middle eastern country that has nukes is...Israel.

In case this isn't a troll, i'm pretty sure Pakistan is nuclear as well and counts as middle east.

If it is, then I took the bait.

yeah, wiki says Pakistan isn't part of the traditional middle east (but is part of the Bush created "new middle east", which is neither middle nor east, but basically is all muslim countries)

Don't trust wiki very much, but I can understand that explanation and it makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the correction.

/========The More I Know=============*

The "sophisticated assessment" sounds a lot like Al-quaeda endorsing Bush, because his inflammatory rhetoric would show the true face of the American religious fanaticism.

mikeandeichmann: I don't think Pakistan is really considered to be part of the Middle East.

It isn't really. South Asia, Indian Subcontinent, etc.

The article quotes an anonymous official. No sale.

And I would also say that a nuclear israel frightens me more than a nuclear iran.

tl;dr version of the article:

They're hoping for an Ahmadenijad win for the same reason Bin Laden was hoping for a Bush win and then a McCain win: Because right-wing warhawk fark-ups are easy to drum up hate and propaganda against.

Wow. The stupid is off the charts in this one.

DWT Samus: i'd say pakistan is part of the indian subcontinent, but that's just me

It is. Too bad religion trumps lines on the map.



Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan of Pakistan, known by his people as the Father of the Islamic Indian Sub-Continental Bomb.

Visible vocal threat = external point to project all things domestically wrong/unjust/etc.

For example, I'm sure Ahmadinejad would have vastly preferred McCain to be elected president, and likely enjoyed having back-to-back terms of GWBush.

Raiden333: opiumpoopy: Raiden333: they just learned how to consistantly spell his name right

CONSISTENTLY

To eesy a targett.

Yeah, Firefox spellcheck has spoiled me. I'm on my "work" computer right now, where I'm not authorized to install anything and the only internet browser is IE 6.

I always mix up those damn A's and E's at the end of words.

IE6. You're shiatting me. Your company has something against Windows Update? If security is their concern you'd think they'd want at least that.

They need a kook so they can preemptively strike Iran, you know, in the name of peace...or something.

Cinaed: Visible vocal threat = external point to project all things domestically wrong/unjust/etc.

For example, I'm sure Ahmadinejad would have vastly preferred McCain to be elected president, and likely enjoyed having back-to-back terms of GWBush.

Ahmadinejad wasn't elected until 6 months into Bush's 2nd term

Stop worrying, big babies.

Our leadership can handle it come moderate dictator or not.

Blah. Hardly matters what they want. They aren't going to strike Iran.

Sorry, wrong picture, but you get my point about our capable leadership.

veale728: Ahmadinejad wasn't elected until 6 months into Bush's 2nd term

Ah, my bad.

Masterstuff: Pakistan is nuclear as well and counts as middle east.

Not a troll. Pakistan has nukes but I don't count Pakistan as the middle east. They are more 'south asia' to me. I'll have to check my Risk board.

HotWingConspiracy
Blah. Hardly matters what they want. They aren't going to strike Iran.

Wasn't there an article here the other day about Israel having just completed some massive war games? No conspiracy here; it was public information. Under the theory that Israel's leadership needs to keep up the crisis to keep power, an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities followed by a regional war would make perfect sense. The collapse of the United States Empire over the next decade (yes, I really do think it will be that rapid) might allow radical Islamists to take power in Arabia, Egypt, and Iraq. So who knows?

Tatsuma: Sygerrik: They need a visible existential threat to unite their terrified base.

Funny, in Israel those who are the most scared of Iran having nukes are Labournikim and the leftists, those on the right are much less concerned about it.

Don't let facts go in the way of spouting nonsense though

Citation?

I didn't believe it either, but here is a Haaretz poll.

Link (new window)

Some 80 percent of left-wing voters and 67 percent of right-wing voters expressed deep concern over a nuclear Iran. Respondents describing themselves as centrists were the most fretful, with 88 percent saying they feared Iran would obtain the bomb.

Cubicle Jockey: Haaretz poll

"Some 85 percent of respondents said they feared the Islamic Republic would obtain an atomic bomb"

I wonder if they really said "feared" and not "predicted". and if they really did say "feared" I wonder whether the question was leading.

"Some 23 percent of Israelis would consider leaving the country if Iran obtains a nuclear weapon, "

I wonder how many would consider leaving the country if Iran DOESN'T get THE BOMB.


"Age was also a factor for respondents"

Israel is a Socialist country, and Zionism is a Socialist movement. But young folks are losing interest. Thus the old are more left leaning.

By pure coincidence, old folks tend to be more nervous. And sadly a lot of older Israelis are understandiably nervous about major political farkups.

Posted on the odd chance that any of you morans can add 2 and 2

Meh, don't put too much thought into that. I don't consider Haaretz an actual legit source of information. They write opinion and rumor as if it was actual fact all the time and when its disproved they retract their statement later on once nobody cares anymore. It's like wiki in news form.

EsteeFlwrPot: Meh, don't put too much thought into that.

In short, there is no evidence for the claim that leftistsIsraelis are more afraid of Iran.

ilambiquated: EsteeFlwrPot: Meh, don't put too much thought into that.

In short, there is no evidence for the claim that leftistsIsraelis are more afraid of Iran.

No I meant don't put much thought into Israel wanting Akmawhatever to win... Don't try to drag me into whatever argument you're trying to make.

This is no surprise

No shiat. AIPAC has been gunning for Ajad to win. They don't want peace.

[shrug]
Better the devil you know than the devil you don't, is my guess.

Ahmadinejad, with all his faults and nuclear rhetoric, is at least a known quantity. Why start all over with some unknown and possibly worse maniac?

ilambiquated: Tatsuma: Sygerrik: They need a visible existential threat to unite their terrified base.

Funny, in Israel those who are the most scared of Iran having nukes are Labournikim and the leftists, those on the right are much less concerned about it.

Don't let facts go in the way of spouting nonsense though

Citation?

Yeah, don't expect one from him.

Some American neocons are openly saying the same thing: that they NEED Ahmadinejad as an existential threat to scare people into supporting their preferred policies.

Link

This is, almost literally, political terrorism: rooting for a greater threat to your nation in order to get your way. It's one of the most disgusting things I've seen in a while in western politics, and that's saying something.

I don't understand how ANYONE could defend this, tacitly or otherwise.

Tatsuma: Funny, in Israel those who are the most scared of Iran having nukes are Labournikim and the leftists, those on the right are much less concerned about it.

Uhuh. It's the LEFT using it as a political issue in elections, huh? They're the ones trying to generate crippling fear over Iran, right?

Give us all just a tiny break...

Gyrfalcon: [shrug]
Better the devil you know than the devil you don't, is my guess.

Ahmadinejad, with all his faults and nuclear rhetoric, is at least a known quantity. Why start all over with some unknown and possibly worse maniac?

1. It seems unlikely that he is worse.
2. Chaos of change aside, wouldn't it be a good sign that the populace wanted reform and favored a less fundamentalist leader? Seems to me that the less Islamistic they get, the more likely they will be to be willing to coexist with Jews.

Smackledorfer: Gyrfalcon: [shrug]
Better the devil you know than the devil you don't, is my guess.

Ahmadinejad, with all his faults and nuclear rhetoric, is at least a known quantity. Why start all over with some unknown and possibly worse maniac?

1. It seems unlikely that he is worse.
2. Chaos of change aside, wouldn't it be a good sign that the populace wanted reform and favored a less fundamentalist leader? Seems to me that the less Islamistic they get, the more likely they will be to be willing to coexist with Jews.

Regardless of who gets "elected" President, the Grand Ayatollah is still running the country. Which is why I say they might as well stick with Ahmadinejad, who at least is a known quantity.

well, they seem to be getting what they asked for. now let's see how it plays out.

Gyrfalcon: [shrug]
Better the devil you know than the devil you don't, is my guess.

Ahmadinejad, with all his faults and nuclear rhetoric, is at least a known quantity. Why start all over with some unknown and possibly worse maniac?

As sure as fear breeds anger, complacency breeds slavery.

Looks like the hard-core Zionists believe that Ahmadinejad will help them to advance their goals.

Do you know who ELSE helped to advance hard-core Zionist goals?