i think a very rational question would be, if you had iran as a neighbor and isreal as a neighbor which would you prefer to have a finger on the red button of a nuke? if you answered iran, i would love to understand why.

For which you will not get a rational answer.

i think a very rational question would be, if you had iran as a neighbor and isreal as a neighbor which would you prefer to have a finger on the red button of a nuke? if you answered iran, i would love to understand why.

I would prefer none to have a nuke.

But if one does than all should.

It is no different than all standing on a cliff together.

Knowing if one pushes the button all fall.

Lets also remember Iran has 20% enriched & you need 93% enriched for a warhead.

Of all the hoopla over the years about Israel having nukes how much follow up was ever done?

Israel flat out refuses to confirm or deny...What is done about it? Zilch

I dont care for situational morals

Now before someone brings on the ...but..but...but...

Some of those guys are zealots & want to die as its a victory...

Lets not....

Do we actually KNOW how much Iran has?

I deleted a photo in very poor taste. I know the rules are very relaxed here but have some common sense.

Thanks Vic, I didn't like it much either.

I really don't feel we need that sort of shock value to make a point, most of us are more than aware of the effect of that type of weaponry regardless of the user or victim.

I deleted a photo in very poor taste. I know the rules are very relaxed here but have some common sense.

With all due respect cdnvic you deleted a whole post not a photo.

In that post was 3 pictures. Yes one may be considered harsh as it showed a chard body.

But how is a historic map of the occupation changes of a country poor taste?

Why not just delete the photo you deem poor in taste instead of the whole post that was not poor in taste?

Leave behind the historic map as it was key to the topic being discussed.

Or delete the whole thread as it makes no sense now when reading back & seeing Koheesti quote selective parts of a post that not longer exists.

Thanks

I would prefer none to have a nuke.

But if one does than all should.

So if a policeman in New York City has a gun, everyone else - including criminals - should have one?

Thanks for revealing exactly where you are coming from. It might help other members put your political advice in perspective.

Yeah I think they have more to worry about NOW with Israel than some media fed story.

If the Palestinians stopped shooting "illegal" missles at civilians in Israel, Israel would not have to strike back. Payback is a mother...!

If the Isrealis stopped their illegal confiscation of Palestinian land, Palestine would not have to strike back. Payback is a mother...!

It ain't Palestinian land until they sign a peace treaty and they have adamantly refused to do so.

http://www.fotosearch.com/ARP123/lionla_c/

I would prefer none to have a nuke.

But if one does than all should.

So if a policeman in New York City has a gun, everyone else - including criminals - should have one?

Thanks for revealing exactly where you are coming from. It might help other members put your political advice in perspective.

I see true to form you have already convicted by comparing a country thought to have nukes to a convicted criminal.

Yet Israel who will neither confirm or DENY is allowed un-guilty status?

Mueng gun on the letting other know where You are coming from

PS: you need better clip art

I would prefer none to have a nuke.

But if one does than all should.

So if a policeman in New York City has a gun, everyone else - including criminals - should have one?

Thanks for revealing exactly where you are coming from. It might help other members put your political advice in perspective.

American politics is very confusing, I know quite a few Dems who are pro-gun, anti-immigration, pro-death penalty....

At least with Republicans you know where you stand.

Do I? Tell me it's so, General, tell me it's so...

I would prefer none to have a nuke.

But if one does than all should.

So if a policeman in New York City has a gun, everyone else - including criminals - should have one?

Thanks for revealing exactly where you are coming from. It might help other members put your political advice in perspective.

That makes no sense....little surprise there...

You are equating a country not yet proven guilty with a convicted criminal.

Yet a country like Israel who will not confirm nor Deny they hold much worse is somehow equated with policemen?

Perhaps you could think up a better analogy?...Or not

As for your attempt to pidgin hole...try again as you have not a clue.

On the other hand I have a good idea where you are coming from..... How were the cupcakes today?

If the Isrealis stopped their illegal confiscation of Palestinian land, Palestine would not have to strike back. Payback is a mother...!

It ain't Palestinian land until they sign a peace treaty and they have adamantly refused to do so.

I guess that would be like the west signing an agreement with the native indians then sticking them on a worthless piece of land called a reservation? Oh wait I forgot your policemen analogy. As such I guess it is law?

American politics is very confusing, I know quite a few Dems who are pro-gun, anti-immigration, pro-death penalty....

At least with Republicans you know where you stand.

Do I? Tell me it's so, General, tell me it's so...

First, it's anti-ILLEGAL-Immigration. Those who support it like to leave off the "illegal" to make the opposition seem more unreasonable. Second, Unions overwhelmingly support Dems and unions do not like cheap, non-union labor taking jobs away from union members.

Republicans aren't all the same either. Many foreigners I've run across seem to think Republicans are all very religious, racist, anti-gay, old white men. That's the way the opposition likes to portray them anyway.

I guess that would be like the west signing an agreement with the native indians then sticking them on a worthless piece of land called a reservation? Oh wait I forgot your policemen analogy. As such I guess it is law?

The American West - Indians practically wiped out by mostly white Americans of English, Irish, Scottish descent.

Israel/Palestine - partitioned by the Brits.

Iraq - borders drawn by the Brits.

India/Pakistan - borders drawn by the Brits.

Great track record, eh?

I would prefer none to have a nuke.

But if one does than all should.

So if a policeman in New York City has a gun, everyone else - including criminals - should have one?

Thanks for revealing exactly where you are coming from. It might help other members put your political advice in perspective.

That makes no sense....little surprise there...

It would to most people.

Great track record, eh?

The Brits?

Yes & much to be learned from their mistakes.

It would to most people.

sigh....appropriate in depth response when you have nothing of substance to add.....again

Hey but we are very impressed at how you have discovered & almost mastered the use of juvenile clip art though.

Very befitting your IQ group

I could care less what you think of my IQ. I'm certainly not impressed by yours, but why should I write an in depth reply to something so blatantly obvious?

Yeah I think they have more to worry about NOW with Israel than some media fed story.

If the Palestinians stopped shooting "illegal" missles at civilians in Israel, Israel would not have to strike back. Payback is a mother...!

If the Isrealis stopped their illegal confiscation of Palestinian land, Palestine would not have to strike back. Payback is a mother...!

It ain't Palestinian land until they sign a peace treaty and they have adamantly refused to do so.

http://www.fotosearch.com/ARP123/lionla_c/

So, according to you, where these Palestinians have been living for centuries is not theirs...because they don't want to sign a treaty with a group of European-descendant, American-backed, Jews that have invaded and confiscated their homes?????

Where is the rationale????????????

These Jews have won a number of wars against them that they initiated and Israel's right to exist has been recognized by practically every country on Earth. Have you ever heard the term “spoils of war”?

These Jews have won a number of wars against them that they initiated and Israel's right to exist has been recognized by practically every country on Earth. Have you ever heard the term "spoils of war"?

If we take Israel's right to exist as a given for the sake of this argument, can you define Israel's borders? If so, why are Israeli-occupied lands continually expanding?

So, according to you, where these Palestinians have been living for centuries is not theirs...because they don't want to sign a treaty with a group of European-descendant, American-backed, Jews that have invaded and confiscated their homes?????

Where is the rationale????????????

So all those Jews living there in biblical times are fictional?

So, according to you, where these Palestinians have been living for centuries is not theirs...because they don't want to sign a treaty with a group of European-descendant, American-backed, Jews that have invaded and confiscated their homes?????

Where is the rationale????????????

So all those Jews living there in biblical times are fictional?

Not at all. Living where, exactly? Does religious or even genetic descendancy bestow certain rights? If so, what of the American Indians? What's your point?

Post deleted, please do not get personal.

what of the American Indians? What's your point?

The Indians got screwed.

My point is that that land has been occupied by both peoples for millennia. Neither side has exactly covered themselves in glory, and any attempt to portray one as saintly and the other as the bad guy is just foolish.

These Jews have won a number of wars against them that they initiated and Israel's right to exist has been recognized by practically every country on Earth. Have you ever heard the term "spoils of war"?

If we take Israel's right to exist as a given for the sake of this argument, can you define Israel's borders? If so, why are Israeli-occupied lands continually expanding?

They have taken land that they have conquered from countries that have attacked them (for self protection).

These Jews have won a number of wars against them that they initiated and Israel's right to exist has been recognized by practically every country on Earth. Have you ever heard the term "spoils of war"?

If we take Israel's right to exist as a given for the sake of this argument, can you define Israel's borders? If so, why are Israeli-occupied lands continually expanding?

Didn't Israel give the Gaza strip back to the Palestinians not long ago? Then the first thing the people-unworthy-of-their-own-land (Palestinians) did was launch rockets at their neighbors. I'd say that's proof positive that they aren't responsible or deserving enough to have their own country. Without a doubt it would just join the list of failed states if they did and that would just lead to more trouble.

Back to the thread topic - does anyone know off the top of their head what the Obama Admin's position on the Israeli/Palestinian issue is?

Back to the thread topic - does anyone know off the top of their head what the Obama Admin's position on the Israeli/Palestinian issue is?

Smile, be popular, and hope the questioner gets tired and goes home.

Didn't Israel give the Gaza strip back to the Palestinians not long ago? Then the first thing the people-unworthy-of-their-own-land (Palestinians) did was launch rockets at their neighbors. I'd say that's proof positive that they aren't responsible or deserving enough to have their own country. Without a doubt it would just join the list of failed states if they did and that would just lead to more trouble.

I'm afraid that I agree. They have taken the stupidest political option at every opportunity.

Back to the thread topic - does anyone know off the top of their head what the Obama Admin's position on the Israeli/Palestinian issue is?

Smile, be popular, and hope the questioner gets tired and goes home.

I'm starting to think that you are a genius.