Comments on: Israel: Nuclear Implications of Corruption? http://demockracy.com/israel-nuclear-implications-of-corruption/ Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:24:57 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: Kevin Van Dyke, Editor http://demockracy.com/israel-nuclear-implications-of-corruption/comment-page-1/#comment-521 Kevin Van Dyke, Editor Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:00:36 +0000 http://demockracy.com/?p=3114#comment-521 Andy, you bring up some good points, especially in your second paragraph. I do have a question about your source on the last point? I saw recently that Bush actually rejected Israeli's plan to hit Iran's nuclear facilities: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-01/11/content_10642112.htm I did see elsewhere that the U.S. independently carried out some covert missions, but I hadn't seen anything to indicate they OK'ed Israel. Let me know if that fourth page article is online somewhere. If so, that's a real smoking gun that should be getting much more attention. (Although the U.S. press seems to be relatively ignoring Israel overall considering what's going on there.) Obama will certainly be inheriting a mess over there. Andy, you bring up some good points, especially in your second paragraph. I do have a question about your source on the last point? I saw recently that Bush actually rejected Israeli’s plan to hit Iran’s nuclear facilities:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-01/11/content_10642112.htm

I did see elsewhere that the U.S. independently carried out some covert missions, but I hadn’t seen anything to indicate they OK’ed Israel. Let me know if that fourth page article is online somewhere. If so, that’s a real smoking gun that should be getting much more attention. (Although the U.S. press seems to be relatively ignoring Israel overall considering what’s going on there.)

Obama will certainly be inheriting a mess over there.

]]> By: Andy Juell http://demockracy.com/israel-nuclear-implications-of-corruption/comment-page-1/#comment-520 Andy Juell Mon, 12 Jan 2009 04:17:55 +0000 http://demockracy.com/?p=3114#comment-520 Tony; I tend to agree with Mr. Costas on most points. Personally, I would enjoy the world a lot more if all nuclear weapons were abandoned, but the nature of our world demands small steps. I am not necessarily a friend of Israel, but they do live in a pretty rough neighborhood. As of today, their conventional arsenal has been sufficient to defend the nation. However, considering what could be massed against them, the mystery of 'if' and 'how many' is a pretty substantial deterrent. We know about the value of deterrents. We invented them. As for disclosure -- won't happen. As for corruption or sexual pandering being a cause for concern. I find that somewhat laughable considering the antics of our own government. However, as Mr. Costas pointed out, Pakistan is a concern. This is not the same Pakistan that was around even five years ago. India and Pakistan have a history, but they know the limits of their disagreements. Pakistan's chief issue in dealing with its own internal affairs has to do with the fact that most of the US Army is within shouting distance of their capitol. That issue and Pakistan's sort of tacit approval is what poses a potential compromise of its nuclear security. And lastly, I would not hold any great expectations of Israel changing its insular approach toward the rest of the world. The pogrom against European Jews in World War II cemented in every Iraelis mind the notion that they would never again be a nation without a state. Any consideration of Israeli policy must travel through that filter. And as aside, George Bush gave Israel the green light to hit Iran's nuclear facilities almost four months ago. At their discretion of course. Sometimes the real news in on the fourth page next to a pizza ad. Andy Juell Tony;
I tend to agree with Mr. Costas on most points. Personally, I would enjoy the world a lot more if all nuclear weapons were abandoned, but the nature of our world demands small steps. I am not necessarily a friend of Israel, but they do live in a pretty rough neighborhood. As of today, their conventional arsenal has been sufficient to defend the nation. However, considering what could be massed against them, the mystery of ‘if’ and ‘how many’ is a pretty substantial deterrent. We know about the value of deterrents. We invented them.
As for disclosure — won’t happen. As for corruption or sexual pandering being a cause for concern. I find that somewhat laughable considering the antics of our own government.
However, as Mr. Costas pointed out, Pakistan is a concern. This is not the same Pakistan that was around even five years ago. India and Pakistan have a history, but they know the limits of their disagreements. Pakistan’s chief issue in dealing with its own internal affairs has to do with the fact that most of the US Army is within shouting distance of their capitol. That issue and Pakistan’s sort of tacit approval is what poses a potential compromise of its nuclear security. And lastly, I would not hold any great expectations of Israel changing its insular approach toward the rest of the world. The pogrom against European Jews in World War II cemented in every Iraelis mind the notion that they would never again be a nation without a state. Any consideration of Israeli policy must travel through that filter.

And as aside, George Bush gave Israel the green light to hit Iran’s nuclear facilities almost four months ago. At their discretion of course. Sometimes the real news in on the fourth page next to a pizza ad.
Andy Juell

]]> By: Craig Costa http://demockracy.com/israel-nuclear-implications-of-corruption/comment-page-1/#comment-464 Craig Costa Fri, 26 Dec 2008 22:31:58 +0000 http://demockracy.com/?p=3114#comment-464 Do we know that there are thieves and rapists that are not teaching in our schools? As history has shown, there most certainly has been. What however has this to do with matters of national security and the deterrence of foreign aggression? Did I miss the part where these allegations of corruption and sexual assault have been proven? If you are worried about characters of devious intent, you must look to many, many other countries before you can point your moral cross hairs on to Israel. JFK, Nixon, Reagan, both Bush's, and Clinton all have been wrapped up in scandal of financial or sexual criminality. Is it by your own criteria then your presumption that we should lift the lid off of the United States' ability to defend herself and deter foreign aggression? I hardly think it would be justified. I again state; Rumors of impropriety in the realms of finance or sexual behavior do not have any bearing on whether or not a country needs to divulge secrets of State. Do we know that there are thieves and rapists that are not teaching in our schools? As history has shown, there most certainly has been. What however has this to do with matters of national security and the deterrence of foreign aggression?
Did I miss the part where these allegations of corruption and sexual assault have been proven?
If you are worried about characters of devious intent, you must look to many, many other countries before you can point your moral cross hairs on to Israel. JFK, Nixon, Reagan, both Bush’s, and Clinton all have been wrapped up in scandal of financial or sexual criminality.
Is it by your own criteria then your presumption that we should lift the lid off of the United States’ ability to defend herself and deter foreign aggression? I hardly think it would be justified.
I again state; Rumors of impropriety in the realms of finance or sexual behavior do not have any bearing on whether or not a country needs to divulge secrets of State.

]]> By: Tony Smith http://demockracy.com/israel-nuclear-implications-of-corruption/comment-page-1/#comment-463 Tony Smith Thu, 25 Dec 2008 22:49:05 +0000 http://demockracy.com/?p=3114#comment-463 Would you want thieves or rapists teaching in our schools? Of course not. Using this same logic, do we want such characters controlling a nuclear arsenal which could destroy the world as we know it? Would you want thieves or rapists teaching in our schools? Of course not. Using this same logic, do we want such characters controlling a nuclear arsenal which could destroy the world as we know it?

]]> By: Craig Costa http://demockracy.com/israel-nuclear-implications-of-corruption/comment-page-1/#comment-456 Craig Costa Sat, 20 Dec 2008 03:21:15 +0000 http://demockracy.com/?p=3114#comment-456 In this I must disagree, or at least ask for clarification. Why would corruption which mostly is dealing in the matters of finance be a reason to lift the lid off of Israel's strongest deterrent? Exposing what may or may not be for the entire world, and most importantly its hyper-aggressive neighbor's. In a country such as our own; are we really qualified to debate a foreign states ability to defend themselves based on charges or allegations of corruption? I think not. For a minute ask yourself how many plots of attack have been thwarted simply because of the uncertainty to whether or not Israel is a nuclear power? Also, you site Pakistan as an example of stability? Pakistan? What protocols have they? If in fact Israel does have nuclear capabilities, and as it is their choice not to share this with the entire world; how do you know that they don't have protocols that are on par with those of the US? It would not make very much sense to neither confirm nor deny the existence of nuclear weapons and then go about informing everyone their protocols should they happen to exist, now would it? You also state that there has been corruption linked to 3 out of 4 past PM's. Ariel Sharon is not coming back, neither is Ehud Olmert. I hardly think Bibi would of been the Finance Minister if his allegations of corruption held any water. Livni is of the same party of Olmert and Sharon. It would be a better campaign ad against her becoming PM than it is arguing their ability to handle matters of national security. From its inception Israel has been the focus of regional terror and attacks from foreign armies. I don't see how accusations of corruption involving matters of finance or sexual assault in any way, shape, or form can be construed as just reason to demand jeopardizing Israel's already tenuous ability to deter aggression. In this I must disagree, or at least ask for clarification. Why would corruption which mostly is dealing in the matters of finance be a reason to lift the lid off of Israel’s strongest deterrent? Exposing what may or may not be for the entire world, and most importantly its hyper-aggressive neighbor’s. In a country such as our own; are we really qualified to debate a foreign states ability to defend themselves based on charges or allegations of corruption? I think not.
For a minute ask yourself how many plots of attack have been thwarted simply because of the uncertainty to whether or not Israel is a nuclear power?
Also, you site Pakistan as an example of stability? Pakistan? What protocols have they?
If in fact Israel does have nuclear capabilities, and as it is their choice not to share this with the entire world; how do you know that they don’t have protocols that are on par with those of the US? It would not make very much sense to neither confirm nor deny the existence of nuclear weapons and then go about informing everyone their protocols should they happen to exist, now would it?
You also state that there has been corruption linked to 3 out of 4 past PM’s. Ariel Sharon is not coming back, neither is Ehud Olmert. I hardly think Bibi would of been the Finance Minister if his allegations of corruption held any water. Livni is of the same party of Olmert and Sharon. It would be a better campaign ad against her becoming PM than it is arguing their ability to handle matters of national security.
From its inception Israel has been the focus of regional terror and attacks from foreign armies. I don’t see how accusations of corruption involving matters of finance or sexual assault in any way, shape, or form can be construed as just reason to demand jeopardizing Israel’s already tenuous ability to deter aggression.

]]>