Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Matzav)   Who said: "Nuclear demilitarization...is alien to the reality and political culture of the area" ? Was it from A) Iran B) Syria C) Israel?   (matzav.com ) divider line
    More: Stupid, political culture  
•       •       •

515 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Sep 2012 at 11:01 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



46 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-09-20 09:24:43 AM  
Nuclear demilitarization in the Middle East, according to the Israeli position, will be possible only after the establishment of peace and trust among the states of the area

Oh well that should be like the day after tomorrow. A week, tops. No later than the end of the month, worst case scenario.
 
2012-09-20 09:37:59 AM  

Mugato: Nuclear demilitarization in the Middle East, according to the Israeli position, will be possible only after the establishment of peace and trust among the states of the area

Oh well that should be like the day after tomorrow. A week, tops. No later than the end of the month, worst case scenario.


i give it 2 hours after the first bomb drops
 
2012-09-20 09:52:38 AM  
Is this some sort of tacit admission by Israel that they actually have nukes or what
 
2012-09-20 09:53:55 AM  
I bet the Jews said that.
 
2012-09-20 10:08:53 AM  
A) Iran.

/DNRTA
 
2012-09-20 10:22:37 AM  
India, North Korea, Pakistan, Israel

Which countries have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation agreement.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-20 10:40:38 AM  

Jackson Herring: Is this some sort of tacit admission by Israel that they actually have nukes or what


It's been an open secret for some time. Once you send a guy to prison for revealing your nuclear program it sort of makes it apparent that you have a nuclear program.
 
2012-09-20 10:42:15 AM  

Apos: A) Iran.

/DNRTA


*clicks on article*


Oh. Close enough.
 
2012-09-20 10:51:13 AM  
D) Barney the Dinosaur?
 
2012-09-20 11:05:47 AM  
"Do as we say, not as we do" is the core principle of Israel's policy toward Iran.
 
2012-09-20 11:09:18 AM  
I'ma say.... Israel?

*Clicks*

How about that.
 
2012-09-20 11:11:43 AM  
If you've got nukes use them, you pussies.
See how that goes for you.
 
2012-09-20 11:13:01 AM  

Jackson Herring: Is this some sort of tacit admission by Israel that they actually have nukes or what


Half of the "nuclear ambiguity" policy is not openly admitting you have nukes to avoid any sanctions for it. The other half is to make sure every one of your enemies knows you have nukes.
 
2012-09-20 11:13:03 AM  

vpb: Jackson Herring: Is this some sort of tacit admission by Israel that they actually have nukes or what

It's been an open secret for some time. Once you send a guy to prison for revealing your nuclear program it sort of makes it apparent that you have a nuclear program.


The whole "secret program" thing is weird. I mean, they obviously have nukes, so it isn't like people can try to shut down the program now. So why keep your deterrent a secret?

/strangelove.jpg
 
2012-09-20 11:16:54 AM  
Since no one seems to seriously doubt that Iran is working on developing a nuclear weapon despite sanctions and opposition from much of the world, why would signing an agreement that basically says "we promise not to build The Bomb" make sense for anyone there?
 
2012-09-20 11:17:15 AM  
Iran should say they'll stop trying to build the bomb once Israel admits to their undeclared arsenal and destroys them all.

That would be fun.
 
2012-09-20 11:18:51 AM  
The Duchy of Grand Fenwick?
 
2012-09-20 11:22:46 AM  
"It is evident that no independence is possible for a country which does not have nuclear weapons, because without them it is forced to rely on a country that does and therefore to accept its policies."

Charles de Gaulle, 1963.
 
2012-09-20 11:23:28 AM  
Israel declaring it's nukes should be a condition for us supporting them vs. Iran.
 
2012-09-20 11:24:00 AM  

shpritz: Half of the "nuclear ambiguity" policy is not openly admitting you have nukes to avoid any sanctions for it.


Under what treaty would you sanction them?

skullkrusher: Since no one seems to seriously doubt that Iran is working on developing a nuclear weapon despite sanctions, a treaty to that effect and opposition from much of the world, why would signing an agreement that basically says "we promise not to build The Bomb" make sense for anyone there?


Iran, and every other ME country except Israel has already signed a treaty. why would they give up their weapons ont he promise of a treaty that Syria, Iraq and Iran have all broken or are trying to break?
 
2012-09-20 11:25:09 AM  
FTFA: Nuclear demilitarization in the Middle East, according to the Israeli position, will be possible only after the establishment of peace and trust among the states of the area, as a result of a local initiative, not of external coercion."

So, the only real solution is for the US to stay the hell out of the Middle East, and let Israel deal with its own farking problems. I couldn't possibly agree more.

Israel expressed its strong opposition today to an Arab initiative, supported by the administration of Barack Hussein Obama, to hold a conference that would debate the possibility of a nuclear-free Middle East.

you mad, bro?
 
2012-09-20 11:26:42 AM  
Oh yeah, and subby.

This

"This is an idea born in other areas and alien to the reality and political culture of the area. Nuclear demilitarization in the Middle East, according to the Israeli position, will be possible only after the establishment of peace and trust among the states of the area, as a result of a local initiative, not of external coercion."

Is a lot different than this.

"Nuclear demilitarization...is alien to the reality and political culture of the area" ?

There is cutting stuff out, and then there is reshaping sentences.
 
2012-09-20 11:27:10 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Israel declaring it's nukes should be a condition for us supporting them vs. Iran.


We should make it contingent on Israel signing the NPT, implementing all of it's requirements and revealing all past proliferation activity they have engaged in.
 
rpl
2012-09-20 11:56:35 AM  

liam76: "This...alien...cult...in the Middle East, ... will be possible ... after the establishment of ... states .... as a result of ... external coercion."


So you admit it!
 
2012-09-20 12:02:47 PM  
Nuclear demilitarization in the Middle East, according to the Israeli position, will be possible only after the establishment of peace and trust among the states of the area

Interesting angle from a government that is forever working to destabilize the region.
 
2012-09-20 12:05:09 PM  

liam76: Oh yeah, and subby.

This

"This is an idea born in other areas and alien to the reality and political culture of the area. Nuclear demilitarization in the Middle East, according to the Israeli position, will be possible only after the establishment of peace and trust among the states of the area, as a result of a local initiative, not of external coercion."

Is a lot different than this.

"Nuclear demilitarization...is alien to the reality and political culture of the area" ?

There is cutting stuff out, and then there is reshaping sentences.


Actually, no, the meaning didn't change much at all.
 
2012-09-20 12:07:21 PM  

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Nuclear demilitarization in the Middle East, according to the Israeli position, will be possible only after the establishment of peace and trust among the states of the area

Interesting angle from a government that is forever working to destabilize the region.


It's almost like they never want conditions to arise where they would have to declare their nukes.
 
2012-09-20 12:10:33 PM  

vernonFL: India, North Korea, Pakistan, Israel

Which countries have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation agreement.


I thought India and Pakistan were originally signatories but then left the agreement.
 
2012-09-20 12:12:19 PM  

liam76: Oh yeah, and subby.

This

"This is an idea born in other areas and alien to the reality and political culture of the area. Nuclear demilitarization in the Middle East, according to the Israeli position, will be possible only after the establishment of peace and trust among the states of the area, as a result of a local initiative, not of external coercion."

Is a lot different than this.

"Nuclear demilitarization...is alien to the reality and political culture of the area" ?

There is cutting stuff out, and then there is reshaping sentences.


Of course, Israel having nukes (and not even admitting it) does nothing to establish trust.
 
2012-09-20 12:17:38 PM  

liam76: shpritz: Half of the "nuclear ambiguity" policy is not openly admitting you have nukes to avoid any sanctions for it.

Under what treaty would you sanction them?


Doesn't the NPT have restrictions on the relationships between it's members and rogue nuclear states? I'm pretty sure some of the aid we get from the US would not be legal if we admitted to having nukes.
 
2012-09-20 12:23:05 PM  
Typical Zionist hypocrisy is typical.

Snowball in hell will melt.
 
2012-09-20 01:00:41 PM  

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: liam76: Oh yeah, and subby.

This

"This is an idea born in other areas and alien to the reality and political culture of the area. Nuclear demilitarization in the Middle East, according to the Israeli position, will be possible only after the establishment of peace and trust among the states of the area, as a result of a local initiative, not of external coercion."

Is a lot different than this.

"Nuclear demilitarization...is alien to the reality and political culture of the area" ?

There is cutting stuff out, and then there is reshaping sentences.

Actually, no, the meaning didn't change much at all.


Ok, subby. Changing the order fo the words and cutting most out didn't change much.


Tyrone Slothrop: Of course, Israel having nukes (and not even admitting it) does nothing to establish trust


What do you think the surround countries (in violation of treaties) trying to get nukes, and blaming Israel for all their problems does to trust?

shpritz: Doesn't the NPT have restrictions on the relationships between it's members and rogue nuclear states? I'm pretty sure some of the aid we get from the US would not be legal if we admitted to having nukes


No. It has restriction on importing nuclear technology. As a non signer we can't give that to Israel.
 
2012-09-20 01:38:12 PM  

liam76: What do you think the surround countries (in violation of treaties) trying to get nukes, and blaming Israel for all their problems does to trust?


Balances it out? There is no valid reason Israel should continue to enjoy the advantage of their undeclared nukes while saying anyone else that wants parity is somehow being untrustworthy.

They have no moral authority on the subject.
 
2012-09-20 02:46:24 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: There is no valid reason Israel should continue to enjoy the advantage of their undeclared nukes while saying anyone else that wants parity is somehow being untrustworthy.


Unless you think having to follow a treaty you signed and not follow a treaty you didn't is a valid reason.

HotWingConspiracy: They have no moral authority on the subject


Yeah they do. It proves coutries like Iran and the other ME NPT signatories who have/are trying to develope nukes can't be trusted.
 
2012-09-20 02:56:40 PM  

liam76: HotWingConspiracy: There is no valid reason Israel should continue to enjoy the advantage of their undeclared nukes while saying anyone else that wants parity is somehow being untrustworthy.

Unless you think having to follow a treaty you signed and not follow a treaty you didn't is a valid reason.

HotWingConspiracy: They have no moral authority on the subject

Yeah they do. It proves coutries like Iran and the other ME NPT signatories who have/are trying to develope nukes can't be trusted.


Israel is a rogue nation that has proliferated nuclear arms to repressive regimes.
 
2012-09-20 03:10:35 PM  
Holy shiat. Israel has bigger balls than the Fark Squirrel. And the US is ever obedient.
 
2012-09-20 03:11:37 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Israel is a rogue nation that has proliferated nuclear arms to repressive regimes


Applying "rogue nation" to a country for not following a treaty they are a member of doesn't really help your case.

They were alleged to have offered weapons to SA, that isn't the same as prolifierated.

But keep saying what makes you feel good rather than talk about facts.
 
2012-09-20 03:18:15 PM  

liam76: Philip Francis Queeg: Israel is a rogue nation that has proliferated nuclear arms to repressive regimes

Applying "rogue nation" to a country for not following a treaty they are a member of doesn't really help your case.

They were alleged to have offered weapons to SA, that isn't the same as prolifierated.

But keep saying what makes you feel good rather than talk about facts.


Ignoring the legal framework that nearly every other county follows makes them a rogue.

I would call a country that tortured POWs a rogue nation even if they were not signatory to the Geneva conventions wouldn't you? I most certainly would not take that county's complaints about another country's treatment of prisoners as anything other than rank hypocrisy.

If Israel is concerned about proliferation they should sign the NPT, follow it's mandates, and reveal the full extent of their past proliferation activities. Until they do so their complaint are utterly hollow.
 
2012-09-20 03:28:01 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Ignoring the legal framework that nearly every other county follows makes them a rogue.


So not signing a treatymeans you are ignoring it? What does that make the countries that have signed it and are ignoring it?

Giving up a tactical capability that some of your neighbors (who have sworn to wipe you out) are trying to get despite signing a treaty that they won't would make them stupid.


Philip Francis Queeg: I would call a country that tortured POWs a rogue nation even if they were not signatory to the Geneva conventions wouldn't you? I most certainly would not take that county's complaints about another country's treatment of prisoners as anything other than rank hypocrisy.


Torture of a human being is on par with developing technology? Bit of a stretch even for you.


Philip Francis Queeg: If Israel is concerned about proliferation they should sign the NPT


Yeah, histroy has shown that won't do fark all to stop their enemies from trying to get nukes.


Philip Francis Queeg: and reveal the full extent of their past proliferation activities.


Why bother? Peopel like you will still ignore peopel who are actually breaking the treaty and pull shiat out of their ass to insult Israel with.
 
2012-09-20 03:36:23 PM  

liam76: Philip Francis Queeg: Ignoring the legal framework that nearly every other county follows makes them a rogue.

So not signing a treatymeans you are ignoring it? What does that make the countries that have signed it and are ignoring it?

Giving up a tactical capability that some of your neighbors (who have sworn to wipe you out) are trying to get despite signing a treaty that they won't would make them stupid.


Philip Francis Queeg: I would call a country that tortured POWs a rogue nation even if they were not signatory to the Geneva conventions wouldn't you? I most certainly would not take that county's complaints about another country's treatment of prisoners as anything other than rank hypocrisy.

Torture of a human being is on par with developing technology? Bit of a stretch even for you.


Philip Francis Queeg: If Israel is concerned about proliferation they should sign the NPT

Yeah, histroy has shown that won't do fark all to stop their enemies from trying to get nukes.


Philip Francis Queeg: and reveal the full extent of their past proliferation activities.

Why bother? Peopel like you will still ignore peopel who are actually breaking the treaty and pull shiat out of their ass to insult Israel with.


Israel developed nuke decades before any of their neighbors started trying. Israel, and Israel alone is responsible for their decision to develop and proliferate nuclear weapons outside of the NPT structures. As a non-signatory they have zero legal or moral standing to complain about the actions of other nations in violation of that treaty.

So since "developing a technology" is no big deal, I assume you agree that military action to stop a nation from "developing a technology" is not justified?
 
2012-09-20 03:48:51 PM  

liam76: HotWingConspiracy: There is no valid reason Israel should continue to enjoy the advantage of their undeclared nukes while saying anyone else that wants parity is somehow being untrustworthy.

Unless you think having to follow a treaty you signed and not follow a treaty you didn't is a valid reason.


Well that's pretty farking convenient.

HotWingConspiracy: They have no moral authority on the subject

Yeah they do. It proves coutries like Iran and the other ME NPT signatories who have/are trying to develope nukes can't be trusted.


No, they simply don't. They have undeclared nukes which makes them an obstacle to stability in the region, not a driving force.
 
2012-09-20 04:15:15 PM  
Israel is the #1 reason behind all of our problems in the Mideast. They are the #1 and #2 (through appeasement of Egypt) source of foreign aid and the reason the terrorists are attacking us. So that's fine. We made out bed but at least farking admit it.
 
2012-09-20 06:07:26 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: liam76: HotWingConspiracy: There is no valid reason Israel should continue to enjoy the advantage of their undeclared nukes while saying anyone else that wants parity is somehow being untrustworthy.

Unless you think having to follow a treaty you signed and not follow a treaty you didn't is a valid reason.

Well that's pretty farking convenient.


Yes it is convenient to not have to follow a treaty you didn't sign, where calling it "convenient" is lost on me is how you over look countries breaking that treaty and then expect Israel to trust a similiar treaty for their enemies to really stop trying to get nukes this time.

HotWingConspiracy: No, they simply don't. They have undeclared nukes which makes them an obstacle to stability in the region, not a driving force


Guys who weren't party to a treaty doing their own thing - obstacle to peace.

People who signed a treaty and broke it - not obstacle to peace.

Got it.


Philip Francis Queeg: Israel developed nuke decades before any of their neighbors started trying. Israel, and Israel alone is responsible for their decision to develop and proliferate nuclear weapons outside of the NPT structures.


Can you back this up with anything, or are you going to continue to lie?

As far as developing their own, yes Israel is responsible, and there is nothing illegal about it.

Philip Francis Queeg: So since "developing a technology" is no big deal, I assume you agree that military action to stop a nation from "developing a technology" is not justified?


Are you missing the part where Iran signed a treaty not to develop that technology?

And yes I think developing a technology alone is not a decent justification for military action.
 
2012-09-20 06:29:27 PM  

liam76: Philip Francis Queeg: Israel developed nuke decades before any of their neighbors started trying. Israel, and Israel alone is responsible for their decision to develop and proliferate nuclear weapons outside of the NPT structures.

Can you back this up with anything, or are you going to continue to lie?

As far as developing their own, yes Israel is responsible, and there is nothing illegal about it.

Philip Francis Queeg: So since "developing a technology" is no big deal, I assume you agree that military action to stop a nation from "developing a technology" is not justified?

Are you missing the part where Iran signed a treaty not to develop that technology?

And yes I think developing a technology alone is not a decent justification for military action.


South Africa also acquired the technology to build nuclear weapons. South Africa developed at least six nuclear warheads, which it later acknowledged, along with a variety of missiles and other conventional weapons. These projects were undertaken with some cooperation from Israel -- another technologically advanced, militarily powerful, nuclear-capable nation surrounded by hostile neighbors.

South Africa eventually built its own nuclear bombs, albeit possibly with Israeli assistance. But the collaboration on military technology only grew over the following years. South Africa also provided much of the yellowcake uranium that Israel required to develop its weapons.

The documents confirm accounts by a former South African naval commander, Dieter Gerhardt - jailed in 1983 for spying for the Soviet Union. After his release with the collapse of apartheid, Gerhardt said there was an agreement between Israel and South Africa called Chalet which involved an offer by the Jewish state to arm eight Jericho missiles with "special warheads". Gerhardt said these were atomic bombs. But until now there has been no documentary evidence of the offer.



Do you condemn Israel's actions in proliferating nuclear weapons technology and attempting to sell nuclear weapons to a repressive regime? Or, like Israel, is your only interest in the issue the need to justify military action against Iran?
 
2012-09-20 07:34:55 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Do you condemn Israel's actions in proliferating nuclear weapons technology and attempting to sell nuclear weapons to a repressive regime?


proliferating
1: to grow by rapid production of new parts, cells, buds, or offspring
2: to increase in number as if by proliferating : multiply

Israel traded tritium for uranium with South Africa. They didn't sell nuclear weapons technology. They traded for materials they needed. You make it out like they were causally selling them tot he highest bidder.

As for the alleged attempts to sell to SA, no I don't agree. Just as I don't agree that you act like it was a fact they were offering them.

So lets back it up, and maybe you can answer my question.

Are you missing the part where Iran signed a treaty not to develop that technology? They are doing more than just developing technology, they are doing it against a treaty (that gave them a leg up in it).
And yes I think developing a technology alone is not a decent justification for military action. Israel has developed it and been in a number of conflicts where they proved they will show restraint. They aren't a theocracy run by a faith that has wiping out a neighboring nation (even if it caused them to lose most of their people) as a an acceptable loss and part of their end of world philosophy.
 
2012-09-20 07:36:58 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Or, like Israel, is your only interest in the issue the need to justify military action against Iran


I meant to quote that bit before I repeated the parts I have in bold above.

But I am sure once again you will ignore what I said any and any fact that disrupts your imagined world where Iran having nukes means they may use them on Israel.
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report