--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "peterklutz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "peterklutz" <peterklutz@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" > > <jpgillam@> > > > > wrote: > > <snip> > > > > > Apparently one big reason the U.S. is coming down so > > > > > hard on Iran is that if we don't do it, Israel will, and then > > > > > the world of Islam will *really* be pissed. > > > > > > > > Except that I've been reading that Israel doesn't think > > > > Iran is that much of a threat to it. > > > > > > Where did you read that - Al Jazeera dot com? > > > > Uh, no, a post by Steve Clemons on TPM Cafe. See > > some quotes and a link at the end of this post. > > > > Not sure why you'd think that would be an Al Jazeera > > position. Seems to me the Al Jazeera position would > > be exactly the opposite. > > > > The context was criticism of the administration's > > fear-mongering, as opposed to Israel's purportedly more > > sensible perspective. That Israel is likely to attack > > Iran, so we need to do it first, is a talking point of > > Bush's supporters, so of course it has been given great > > prominence in the mainstream media. > > > > > "On 7 September 1997, the CBS newsmagazine Sixty Minutes broadcast > > > an alarming story in which former Russian National Security Adviser > > > Aleksandr Lebed claimed that the Russian military had lost track of > > > more than 100 suitcase-sized nuclear bombs, any one of which could > > > kill up to 100,000 people." > > > > > > http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/News/Lebedbomb.html > > > > And the relevance of this to Israel's position on Iran's > > nuclear capabilities is what, exactly? > > The relevance is to your un-informed, biased, wish-full, > a-naivite-that-will-get-everyone-killed position.
Actually that was Steve Clemons's position (you know, the post I quoted from that you weren't able to comment on and snipped). > A hundred nuclear suitcases on the loose (at least); an Iran that is > threatning the extinction of another state whilst purportedly not > yet having the Bomb. And this is why we should bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, to keep Iran from obtaining and using one of these nuclear suitcases that's floating around? I'm not sure how that would work, exactly. In fact, I should think it might *inspire* Iran to get hold of a few nuclear suitcases. Or are you advocating wiping the country out entirely? Just how many countries would you like to wipe out in order to feel safe from nuclear suitcases? Remember, we'd probably need to get rid of Great Britain and a whole lot of other nations where terrorists are known to live. > Are you this stupid or is this some sort of game your playing..? Funny, I was going to ask the same of you. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
