103 thoughts on “Germany Sells Israel Nuclear-Armed Submarines – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. Well, it is very simple what ever the Israeli Government asks for it will be given to them by Germany.
    No German, let alone a German politician can take a stand against the Israeli Government otherwise he’ll be branded as a Anti-Semite and must fear prosecution and can no longer politically survive. No chance.
    It’s just that simple!

    Germany will even help and support Netanjahu in case he chooses to nuke Iran.

    1. Actually, I’m not so sure about that.
      The reflexive obedience to every Israeli demand is still very much rooted in the German media and the political class. But people aren’t buying this anymore. You have surely read about the recent poll concluding that 59% of Germans consider Israel to be an aggressive state, 70% think that Israel pursues its interests without regards for other nations and 60% think Germany owes no special obligation to Israel.
      It’s speculation, but I’m reasonably sure that if you had conducted the same survey in different age groups, the younger generations would have shown an even greater aversion to Israel’s policies and German complicity in them. The mood is changing, much as traditional media, still largely in the hands of old conservative men, would like to sweep this under the rug.

      And lo and behold: Even the media and politicians are taking note. The fact alone that SPIEGEL launched this story now, and the major resonance it has found in all German media, is testament to that. Because, as everybody even slightly invested in the topic already knew, there is absolutely nothing new in the SPIEGEL’s findings. They could have written the same story at any point during the last two decades. That’s for how long it’s been an open non-secret that Israel’s U-Boats are nuclear weapon carriers – at the very least.
      But the SPIEGEL chose to publish this story *now*. Why? My answer: Because it is somewhat of a test balloon. When German journalists published their conditioned-reflex condemnations of Gunter Grass, they probably noticed that they didn’t connect with the large majority of their readership. And apparently some of them actually got to think that maybe the “You can criticize Israel freely in this country” formula they threw around in this context isn’t just newspeak meaning the opposite of what it actually says. Maybe you *could* substantially criticize Israel after all and maybe you would *not* be crucified by the public for it. So they decided to float this story to test this.

      It is also notable that the major German opposition parties, in contrast to their usual response of falling into line when it comes to Israel, are actually starting to ask the right questions: Why didn’t Merkel insist on substantial Israeli concessions in the area of settlement construction and easing the Gaza blockade in return for greenlighting the latest submarine delivery.

      We may very well be looking at a watershed moment for the German-Israeli “special relationship”. Sute, this may still turn out to be much ado about nothing. But I like to be optimistic for a change.

      1. Koshiro,

        And lo and behold: Even the media and politicians are taking note. The fact alone that SPIEGEL launched this story now, and the major resonance it has found in all German media, is testament to that.

        I think this may have been deliberate. To make people question why Iran is being targeted for sanctions when Israel is nuclear armed.

        All the Middle Eastern countries should be nuclear powers.

    2. RE: “No German, let alone a German politician can take a stand against the Israeli Government…” ~ Thomas

      MY REPLY: Uri Avnery refers to an “extreme kind of pro-Semitism” that is actually “disguised anti-Semitism” on the part of the Germans.* Personally, I think it might be more a consequence of the Germans’ feelings of guilt; but whichever the case, the consequences of the Germans acting as enablers to right-wing Israeli governments might well turn out to be just as deadly as the German anti-Semitism of the 1930s and the 1940s.

      SEE: Gunter the Terrible, By Uri Avnery, The Palestine Chronicle, 4/13/12

      Stop me if I have told you this joke before:
      Somewhere in the US, a demonstration takes place. The police arrive and beat the protesters mercilessly.
      “Don’t hit me,” someone shouts, “I am an anti-communist!”
      “I couldn’t give a damn what kind of a communist you are!” a policeman answers as he raises his baton.
      The first time I told this joke was when a German group visited the Knesset and met with German-born members, including me.
      They went out of their way to praise Israel, lauding everything we had been doing, condemning every bit of criticism, however harmless it might be. It became downright embarrassing
      , since some of us in the Knesset were very critical of our government’s policy in the occupied territories.
      For me, this extreme kind of pro-Semitism is just disguised anti-Semitism. Both have a basic belief in common: that Jews – and therefore Israel – are something apart, not to be measured by the standards applied to everybody else. . .

      ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.palestinechronicle.com/view_article_details.php?id=19233

      * I would add that Christian Zionism is also an “extreme kind of pro-Semitism” that is actually “disguised anti-Semitism”. But unlike with the Germans, I do not believe it is a consequence of any guilt.

      1. RE: “the consequences of the Germans acting as enablers to right-wing Israeli governments might well turn out to be just as deadly as the German anti-Semitism of the 1930s and the 1940s.” – me (above)

        FOR EXAMPLE, FROM WIKIPEDIA [Samson Option, as of 5/25/12]:

        (excerpts) The Samson Option is a term used to describe Israel’s alleged deterrence strategy of massive retaliation with nuclear weapons as a “last resort” against nations whose military attacks threaten its existence, and possibly against other targets as well.[1] . . .
        . . . Some have written about the “Samson Option” as a retaliation strategy. In 2002, the Los Angeles Times published an opinion piece by Louisiana State University professor David Perlmutter which has been seen as justifying a Samson Option approach.[19] He wrote:

        “Israel has been building nuclear weapons for 30 years. The Jews understand what passive and powerless acceptance of doom has meant for them in the past, and they have ensured against it. Masada was not an example to follow—it hurt the Romans not a whit, but Samson in Gaza? What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. . .[20]

        . . . In 2003, Martin van Creveld [professor of military history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem – J.L.D.] thought that the Al-Aqsa Intifada then in progress threatened Israel’s existence.[21] Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst’s “The Gun and the Olive Branch” (2003) as saying:

        “We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. . . Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.”[22]

        Ron Rosenbaum writes in his 2012 book How the End Begins: The Road to a Nuclear World War III that in the “aftermath of a second Holocaust” Israel’s surviving Dophin-class nuclear missile submarines would retaliate not only against Israel’s attackers, but “bring down the pillars of the world (attack Moscow and European capitals for instance)” as well as the “holy places of Islam.” He writes that “abandonment of proportionality is the essence” of the Samson Option.[23] . . .

        SOURCE – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

        ALSO SEE – “The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy”
        LINK – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Samson_Option:_Israel%27s_Nuclear_Arsenal_and_American_Foreign_Policy

      2. P.S. RE: “Gunter the Terrible”

        MY COMMENT: Also note that Germany is a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and it has knowingly assisted the nuclear weapons program (as to delivery/launching of nuclear-armed missiles) of a country that has not signed the NPT!

    3. Germany’s Merkal, and Canada’s Harper views may be pro Israel but they do not reflect the majority of their populations.

      German poll finds majority of population consider Israel ‘aggressive’
      The figures showed a sharp rise from the 49% of Germans who replied similarly only three years. Additionally, 70% of those polled today answered that “Israel pursues its own interest without consideration for other nations”.
      Earlier this month, a group of suspected neo-Nazis attacked a booth distributing pro-Israel material during an otherwise peaceful “I like Israel” event in the west German city of Siegen.

      According to the pro-Israel initiative’s chairman, Sacha Stawski: “The boundaries between anti-Semitism and anti-Israel are shrinking rapidly. In Germany, this is becoming apparent.”

      1. Conflating an old story about “suspected Neo-Nazis” knocking over a hasbara stand by the “I like Israel” organization with this is pure propaganda by European Jewish Press.

        It was absolutely clear from the poll that the reason for Israel’s dwindling popularity, which is a worldwide phenomenon, is found in its ruthless and aggressive policies. By the way: The same poll found 65% of Germans are in favor of immediate recognition of a Palestinian state.

        1. @ Koshiro
          Yeah, but you know, Chayma, is convinced that the high percentage of Europeans who dislike Israel is due to good old anti-semitism (cf. her comments on the BBC-poll that Richard posted a couple of weeks ago).
          Rather amazing from someone who claims to be a Muslim (I’m mean she should be aware that Islamophobia could drive a poll the other way), and who talks about the Palestinian cause as “our cause”, isn’t it ?
          And isn’t it amazing that Chayma presents the German poll through an article by a Jewish super-Zionist organization ?
          She starts out with some ‘objective’ news, and then it starts rolling: first the figures, then the Neo-Nazis, and then finally: the usual Hasbara-explanation by a Zionist mouthpiece.
          Cognitive dissonnace or a Hasbara-submarine ?

          1. Deir, please don’t try to pretend that you represent the Muslim community. Do you look in the mirror when you flatter yourself?

            Oh and your harping about ‘super zionism’, makes your rabid ‘super anti Zionism’ fetish unable to withstand even the EJP.

          2. @ Chayma
            I’ve never pretended to represent neither the Muslims nor the Palestinians. I state my OWN opinions, and they very rarely concern religion, as this conflict isn’t a religious conflict. Still, it is amazing how someone who claims to be a Muslim buy into the “anti-Israeli feelings really are an expression for antisemitism”.

            Chayma, I’ve told you before a long time ago, and my feelings are confirmed again and again: I don’t trust, and don’t even try to pretend that the Palestinian cause is “our cause”. Mayby “Muslims for Israel” would be a better choice !
            Anti-Israeli feelings in Europe are due mainly to antisemitism, links to Israel Matzav (one of your first comment on this blog), link to an Italian neo-con, full-time member of the Hasbara, pushing for a war on Iran etc etc
            Maybe you’re just plain stupid, and think neutrality is posting a ‘pro-palestinian’ link, and then a ‘pro-Israeli’ link, or maybe you think you’re a journalist here.
            (I’m sorry, Richard, but I had to get this off my heart).

          3. Deir you are an anti Zionist extremist, and thus you have zero credence criticising the Hazbara or super zionist or whatever you call it.

            Unlike you, i’m not afraid of opinions from the far right or the far left, both need to be listened to though not necessarily agreed with.

            Your attempts to censor anything here that is not rabidly one sided anti Israel is pathetic. Your attempt to discredit the EJP for example

          4. Deir said:

            Still, it is amazing how someone who claims to be a Muslim buy into the “anti-Israeli feelings really are an expression for antisemitism”.

            Deir twisted my comments in that thread. A bad habit she has, becuase she thinks I am not anti Israel enough, and that I like to read what the right wing have to say.

            By the way, i read stuff far more right wing that Israel Matzav is, and far more left than even Mondoweiss.

            What is Deir afraid of?

            Here is Khaled Abu Toameh, a Muslim who lives in Israel who believes exactly the same. Yet this extremist who lives in France, thinks she knows Israel better than a Muslim living there..

            A pathetic attempt to prove that ‘good Muslims’ should only find fault with Israel, hence her snide remark trying to disparage ‘Muslims for Israel’.


            Pro-Palestinian or Anti-Israel?
            By: Khaled Abu Toameh
            Published: April 27th, 2012


            But as far as many of the pro-Palestinian activists in the West are concerned, the interests of the Palestinians are not as important as hating Israel.

            Anti-Israel messages and campaigns serve only the radicals in this region who do not want either peace or coexistence.

            The time has come for the emergence of a genuine pro-Palestinian camp in the West that would focus less on Israel and more on helping the Palestinians.

          5. Maybe you’re just plain stupid, and think neutrality is posting a ‘pro-palestinian’ link, and then a ‘pro-Israeli’ link, or maybe you think you’re a journalist here.

            Stop trying to pigeon hole me, and mind your own business.

            Go and open your blog, a radical anti Israel one, where you have like minded extremists if you don’t like a diversity of opinion.

            I am not anti Israel or anti Zionist, and that is why you don’t like me.

          6. No problems with “Muslims for Israel”, and no problems with you not being anti-Israel or anti-Zionist (who cares anyway…) but don’t pretend that the Palestinian cause is “our cause”, as you did just a day or two ago in a post to Mary. And you’ve done so before, first time I fell down my chair: you’re a pro-Israeli and should play your cards openly instead of creeping in through the backdoor.

          7. Deir

            you’re a pro-Israeli and should play your cards openly instead of creeping in through the backdoor.

            You create a straw man here. I have never claimed to be anti Israel, but you assume that anyone who isn’t virulently anti Israel, is immediately pretending to be pro Palestinian if they do support them.

            In your eyes, you are either pro Palestinian or pro Israeli, but you cannot be both. How do you describe Khaled Abu Toamah then? He makes your comments look like the scribbligns of a silly bigoted amateur. He is pro Israel and pro Palestinian.

            Thank you for confirming what I said, that you are paranoid Hazbara phobe hidden everywhere.

            As for your HasbaraPhobia, it’s silly.

            Dear Deir, One should be able to counter any misinformation, from either side.

            Nobody is forcing you to read my comments, just skip them if you don’t like them.

          8. I’m not going to wast more time on you. I’ve stated my case. As far as Khaled Abu Toameh is concerned, what’s your interest in knowing my opinion ? Ask Richard what he thinks about Khaled Abu Toameh.

          9. Ask Richard what he thinks about Khaled Abu Toameh.

            Feh-fooya! (a Yiddish expression–you can guess it’s meaning). He is not “pro-Palestinian.” He’s a crass opportunist (as are a number of Israeli journalists, so in that he doesn’t stand out). Much of his writing is actually harshly critical of Palestinians. It has to be to write for JPost, but I presume he believes what he writes.

            Where have you ever read anything he’s written that’s pro Palestinian? In the JPost??? I’d like to see what you consider pro Palestinian & appearing in JPost.

          10. How do you describe Khaled Abu Toamah then?
            Uncle Tom with a computer. Tries to secure a cozy position for himself by licking his supposed betters’ boots clean. Disgusting, really.

            The time has come for the emergence of a genuine pro-Palestinian camp in the West that would focus less on Israel and more on helping the Palestinians.
            Weapons-grade balonium. Israel is oppressing, robbing, killing Palestinians on a daily basis. Helping the Palestinians and trying to stop these activities are synonymous.

            Your attempt to discredit the EJP for example
            Dunno what you’re talking about. Seems to me Deir just judges EJP by what they do: That is, stir unrelated stories together and severely misrepresent them in order to create the false impression that growing aversion to Israel is based on anti-semitism instead of Israel’s policies.

          11. Koshiro

            Regarding Deir and her objection to my citing the EJP:

            growing aversion to Israel is based on anti-semitism instead of Israel’s policies.

            Deir is being riduculous here. In another thread she objected to my saying that some Europeans support the Palestinians because they don’t like Jews.

            I have personally met some of these types, therefore it is true. I also made it clear, that it doesn’t mean that ALL Europeans do, and most do support the Palestinians for the right reason ie. Israels disregard for the rule of law. Here the US is soley to blame.

            I’m not sure why she has appointed herself the policeman here, with a baton that has the following warning inscribed:

            “Anyone who does not make it a career choice to attack Israel, or find fault at every level, is a Hasbara-ist pretending to be pro Palestinian, will be snarked and needled and mocked and harassed”

            She actually left this website once, after throwing a hissy fit at Richard because she deemed him not anti Zionist enough.

          12. Richard,

            Where have you ever read anything he’s written that’s pro Palestinian? In the JPost??? I’d like to see what you consider pro Palestinian & appearing in JPost.

            You are highly critical of Israel to the extent that many on the right believe you are anti Israel. Would you agree with them? I don’t believe you are anti Israel.

            Similarly, Khaled Abu Toameh’s criticism of the Palestinians doesn’t mean he is not pro Palestinian. I agree with what he said above, because I have experienced it myself.

            I’ve discovered that the extreme left is just as bad as the extreme right. The one sided picture painted by either side to taint the other is riduculous. Also, Deir likes to keep the religious angle out of this conflict which is something i totally disagree with.

            In any case, as someone who actually lives there, and mixes with both peoples, Khaled has more credence than Deir.

            As for your comment about the Jerusalem Post, let’s just say, if your articles appeared there, it wouldn’t mean they would be suspect, i’d still like them. If Khaled’s stuff had appeared in a far left publication, it wouldn’t change my view one iota nor the facts presented.

            As i’ve said before, a fact is a fact no matter where it is presented.

          13. No [Uncle] Toameh doesn’t have more credibility than Deir Yassin. There are thousands of people living in Israel whose view of the conflict is completely deformed compared to others who live abroad and have a more reasonable, balanced & accurate picture of reality.

            But my views will not appear in the JPost nor will Toameh’s appear in a left wing publication because he’s right wing & I’m left wing.

          14. Koshiro

            Uncle Tom with a computer. Tries to secure a cozy position for himself by licking his supposed betters’ boots clean. Disgusting, really.

            You’re talking of Khaled Abu Toameh?

            I disagree with you. What he said above, was factually correct. His criticism the Palestinians, doesn’t mean he is licking the boots of his ‘supposed betters’. You’re assuming he doesn’t genuinely like some Israeli’s or some aspects of Israel, or feels some loyalty towards his own country, or feels offended at the UNFAIR criticism levelled at Israel, is a tad bigoted don’t you think?

            You sound just like those on the extreme right, who think anyone criticising Israel is in the pay of their enemies. Richard is often maligned for this, and accused of being in the pay of Saudi’s and others because he does not cover Israel’s sins.

            Being harshly critical doesn’t mean you’re licking the boots of the enemies of those you’re criticising.

          15. “She actually left this website once, after throwing a hissy fit at Richard, because she deemed him not anti-Zionist enough”
            Don’t lie about me, Chayma.
            I left because Richard changed his mind on who was behind the Eilat-attack – initially stating it was the Palestinians – without acknowledging he was wrong.
            Maybe you should talk up needling in a gossip club after all…

            Your comments on the BBC-poll are all there for people to read.
            You can have the opinions you want, but, once again, don’t pretend that the Palestinian cause is “our cause”. Stating your point by an article by Khaled Abu Toameh says just about everything about you.
            “Muslims for Israel” would be a good place for you, you could meet Wafa Sultan, Walid Shoebatn …
            This is my last comment on this topic. Please continue

            @ To people who don’t know: EJP is a supra-national European Hasbara press agency, it’s the French CRIF on a European level. Earlier this year, a Jewish Parliament was also created in Bruxelles, just next to the EU, in fact the HQ is in the same building if my memory is correct.
            Stange to present a German poll on attitudes towards Israel through an article by such an agency, IMHO.

          16. His criticism the Palestinians, doesn’t mean he is licking the boots of his ‘supposed betters’.
            That’s in fact what it does mean.
            Someone who says he’d rather be a 2nd class citizen in Israel than a 1st class citizen in Ramallah – failing to mention that “1st class citizen in Ramallah” means “3rd class subject under Israel’s thumb” just oozes subservience and Quislingitude. A useful pawn for Israel’s supremacy over its Palestinian helots, bought by a few material privileges and an appeal to his vanity by allowing him to publish his boot licking in Zionist newspapers.

            In a way, he also reminds me of Heinrich Mann’s “Der Untertan”. In fact the difficult to translate term “Untertan” and the connotations so aptly described by Mann perfectly describe what Toameh is: A loyal subject, subservient to those he unquestioningly recognizes as his social betters (the Israeli establishment), and on the other hand eager to look down on those he considers beneath him (Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, or otherwise not as fortunate as him.)

            I’ve never taken any notice of you until this thread, but let me tell you this: It does not take any statements by Deir or anybody else to form an opinion of you and your views – your adolation for Toameh, a disgusting figure lacking all dignity and integrity, is more than enough.

          17. Deir

            Youi’re sounding increasingly desperate, Wafa sultan is an alawite, and Shoebat’s mother is a christian. He grew up in a secular household,


            to form an opinion of you and your views – your adolation for Toameh, a disgusting figure lacking all dignity and integrity, is more than enough.

            One could say the same about you, reading your unsubstantiated, bigoted screeds.

            The fact remains, did what Khaled say was true or not? That’s all that matters.

            How you deduced my ‘adulation’ of Khaled from the above i don’t know.

            A loyal subject, subservient to those he unquestioningly recognizes as his social betters (the Israeli establishment), and on the other hand eager to look down on those he considers

            It appears to me that you seem to think so, and are projecting here, without substantiating. With a 20% Muslim population, you’d think the establishment would have a few more voices then, than just Khaled.

            Sorry, but your unsubstantiated claim discredits you here.

            To use your own logiic, one could then say that Richard too, is living amongst his ‘social betters’ in the USA and looking down on those he considers inferior in Israel, yet you’re happy to spew your bigotry of low expectations. Behold the duplicity.

            The fallacy of this logic means that every person anywhere should go and live with their own (not sure if you mean tribe, or race or relgion here) to show their solidarity, and any criticism of their failings means they are subservient to their ‘masters’ whomever those may be. Furthermore, it means that there should be no refugees or asylum seekers anywere, leave alone emigration, where there is political upheaval or war.

            This logic is absurd. This is why the anti Zionist left, cannot be trusted, as their views and opinions are every whit as absurd and bigoted as those on the right.

          18. I think that’s uncalled for. In fact, I think Deir Yassin and Koshiro are flexible in their political views & not doctrinaire at all. I have dealt with truly intolerant leftists (& rightists) here & believe me they ain’t them.

          19. Deir

            This is my last comment on this topic. Please continue

            Would that were so…but how many times have you said that? And then returned with your hasbaraphobia?

            Please continue..

          20. The fact remains, did what Khaled say was true or not?
            The question alone is an insult. He starts with the baseless assertion “There is a feeling in the West Bank and Gaza Strip that most of these groups and individuals are more interested in campaigning against Israel than helping the Palestinians” and from there proceeds to sanctimonious lecturing of foreign activists.
            If I want to know what kind of assistance Palestinians in the occupied territories want, I’ll just ask them, thank you. That’s because I actually respect the Palestinians as autonomous people, rather than considering them unruly subjects to be shown the proper way by their betters.
            Should it turn out that they would really love some moral lecturing about the virtues of democracy rather than keeping the ‘only democracy of the Middle East’ from stealing their land and bulldozing their livelihoods, I’ll listen. Ain’t happening, though.

            I’ll certainly not ask Toameh, whose hypocrisy in criticizing Palestinians living under occupation from the comfort of his Jerusalem home, rather than taking his own advise and criticizing his Israeli government, is staggering.

            To use your own logiic
            I’ll cut this short: You didn’t use my own, or any other, logic in your following rambling, either because you simply didn’t understand what I wrote or because you opted to intentionall misrepresent it.

          21. How can one claim to be a Muslim without knowing that the Alawites are indeed self-described Muslims and considered so by Shia-sources, a major Sunni Fatwa, and most importantly by the Syrian State ?
            And how can one claim to be a Muslim and think that having a Christian mother and growing up in a “secular” household prevents one from being a Muslim ?
            And how can one totally miss my poin about “Muslims for Israel”t: both Sultan and Shoebat left Islam long ago, that makes them just as much Muslims as some to claim to be but the Hasbara doesn’t care: fake gays, fake Muslims, it doesn’t matter, it’s all about branding Israel.
            The MFA also ask for minority-profiles to intervene on the net.

          22. I don’t think Chayma supports the Palestinian cause. She seems more interested in Israel’s success. I already got the impression that she’s, shall we say, unclear as to whose interests she is arguing for.

            Chayna, Deir Yassin is one of the best writers representing the Palestinian cause I’ve seen on any blog, and I’ve been around the internets a lot. I find him to be a quite acceptable representative of the Muslim community. Personally, I find anyone who equates anti-Israel opinions with anti-semitism a bit dodgy, especially if they say they’re a Muslim.

          23. I have stopped arguing with Chayma after I tried once. As she cannot follow the logical thread of an argument it just drives you crazy as you do not get anywhere. Leave it Deir Yassin.(And by the way: Of course you are a woman and not a man!)

          24. Thanks, girls 😀
            Hey Mary, I’m a woman too.
            You’re right, Elisabeth, but when I see someone who certainly is NOT pro-Palestinian by any means saying to Mary that this and that is not good for “our cause”, I simply can’t stand by without intervening. This is a fraud and should be exposed.

          25. Mary

            Personally, I find anyone who equates anti-Israel opinions with anti-semitism a bit dodgy, especially if they say they’re a Muslim.

            I’ve never said, Deir is an anti semite, I said she is an extremist, and a paranoia, fearful of HasbaraPhobe,

            And i’ve no problem with anti Israel sentiment either, it’s Deir who thinks anyone who is not anti Israel is immediately sent here by some phanton hasbara, superzion whatever conspiracy she believes in.
            Deir is no authority on Islam, she thinks its something you sweep under the carpet. Again what is she afraid of?

            I’ve never objected to anyone either pro or anti here.


            Again you create straw men, and chide when people don’t live up to them. Who are you to define what pro palestinian means? and if someone doesn’t live up to your expectations, they’re not the fraud, you are, for trying to impose your narrow definitions.

            Stop being the policewoman. You only expose how silly you are.

            You’re also a hypocrite, and a liar. There are differing opinions amongst the Ulema on whether or not Alawites are Muslims. I believe they are not, though i’ve no objection to you or others believing they are are. But that doesn’ make me a liar, it makes you grossly ignorant or a liar yourself.

            Not sure why you even brought her up. You jump about from subject to subject, then say,
            “I don’t care”
            So why bring it up? Why waste my time?
            The point here was that you inferred Wafa Sultan and Shoebat were ex Muslims or Muslims, but they never were. Shoebat’s family confirmed his fake account (the Jerusalem Post no less exposed him) and he never had an Islamic education, I doubt he even knew how to pray, hence his calling himself an ex Muslim is false, as is Wafa Sultan, she’s an atheist and an ex alawite. Even if you believe alawites are Muslims, it’s fake, because Wafa Sultan claims to speak for mainstream Sunni Islam which alawites are not part of, she has had no education there, she hasn’t had a religious education, so she can’t possibly be an ‘expert’ on Islam, any more than Robert Spencer and the rest of the fake crowd of ‘Islamic historians’ and ‘experts’ are.

            By the way, what happened to your vow, not to respond? You’re boring and a waste of time. Go away Deir,

          26. Richard

            Toameh is being paid to mouth constant criticism of the Palestinians by an Israeli right wing paper. No one’s paying me except my readers.

            Are your readers paying you to mouth constant criticism of Israel or not?

            Would you do so anyway, even if they were not? That’s what I meant by Toameh, that even if he weren’t paid by the right wing paper, he’d still have those same views.

          27. My readers don’t pay me enough for me to do anything on their behalf. JPost pays Toameh to be a House Arab. I’m not sure he’d have these views were he forced to write for an Arab paper, were he to be able to find such a job.

            BTW, my readers offer me far less in the way of donations than what JPost offers Toameh.

          28. Richard,

            Actually, it wasn’t me it was Deir who led the thread off topic by dissing Toameh. She was inferring that this link shouldn’t be posted here or something. My post was a response was a response to that.

            Part of the problem here is that you havn’t got a list of writers that we should not quote, nor a list of references that we should not use, and to my knowledge you havn’t appointed Deir the policewoman here to call anything that doesn’t meet with her approval ‘hasbara’. I dont’ tell others what links to post or not to post. Either you should not permit people to tell others what links to post or not, or you should have a list that we can refer to and not post anything deemed ‘hasbara’. Though that would clash with the mission of the site. It says, it promotes Israeli democracy. Well Khaled Abu Toameh is part of Israel democracy in that he gets to express his thoughts freely, just like the left leaning thinkers do.

            The fact remains that what Toameh said in the link I posted above is truth.

            That’s my last word on this subject.

          29. My comment rules do offer examples of some publications that I consider treif. Toameh is not a writer I would ban here. He’s just not anyone I find especially credible.

          30. The fact remains that what Toameh said in the link I posted above is truth.
            Toameh’s drivel did not contain a single factual statement, only value judgments, speculation and unfounded opinion. It’s not that what he says is not true, it does not even have the potential to be true or untrue.

            That’s Mandy Patinkin by the way, award-winning actor and APN activist. I don’t agree with APN on everything, but at least he got his head screwed on straight and his heart in the correct place. Unlike certain other people.

          31. Chayma writes:
            “Actually it wasn’t me but Deir who lead the thread off topic by dissing Toameh. She was inferring that the link shouldn’t be posted here or something.”
            This is simply sick ! I mean, the thread is there for everyone to read. Chayma posts Khaled Abu Toameh to ‘prove’ that I’m an “extremist” and I answer that she should ask Richard – a “non-extremist” – what HE thinks about Abu Toameh.
            No, this thread went off topic when Chayma posted an article by the Zionist mouthpiece EJP claiming that the poll – mentioned first by Koshiro – was in fact an expression for German antisemitism. Just as she posted an Italian neo-con claiming exacly the same thing on the thread about the BBC-poll.
            And when I stated that I find it weird to represent a poll through such a biased organization – particularly when one claims to be a Muslim – Chayma posted Uncle Toameh.
            When people start manipulating the chronology, it’s because they have no arguments and are trapped in their own lies.

  2. All that you write applies equally to the Islamic regime of iran. A nuclear armed régime in iran will guarantee its survival regardless of what the Iranian peoples want. It will become a major threat to stability in ME which exactly what US Israel and most arab countries fear. I find it curious that that you find this arguments compelling only as regard to Israel.

    You wonder why Israel requires second strike ability when no arab country has yet a firsts strike ability. The answer is simple and runs counter to your argument. Israel with a second strik ability can allow itself deeper territorial concessions. A second strike ability serves a partial compensation for lose of strategic depth entailed in any territorial based peace plan. The safer Israel feels the more risk she can take for the sake of peace/

    1. What piffle. Weapons for peace is the oldest bullshit story there is, and yet here you are, promoting it. “Deeper territorial concessions,” meaning what, exactly? Are you kicking the dead horse called the “peace process”?

      Israel is the biggest loose cannon in the middle east, and it has proved that again and again. There is a movement started, and its purpose is to disarm Israel of its nuclear weapons. A petition of 1 million signatures will be presented to the UN’s general assembly and to its Security Council. The world’s peace-loving people will not allow Israel to continue to be the neighborhood bully in the middle east.

      1. “World’s peace-loving people”

        Which people are they? What state in the Security Council is going to disarm Israel? Not a million signatures and not two million can achieve this. Do you really think Europe and US want to see Israel without advanced weaponry, including nuclear weapons?

      2. The question was posed: “Can anyone say that they’d trust Israel’s judgment in using such a weapon as an absolute last resort to stave off national catastrophe?”

        Why can one not pose the same question about Iran, assuming they are able to develop nuclear weapons capabilities?

        I don’t see why one cannot argue that either country is capable of using nuclear weapons if they felt their national survival depended on it.

        The blog post notes that Israel has killed around 15,000 Arabs since 1948.

        Iran has killed over 200,000 Arabs since 1980.

        1. Bob, if Iran already has nuclear weapons then Israel is walking into a trap.

          How could a starving country like North Korea, build nuclear weapons and an oil rich Iran, who has had nuclear secrets sold to it from it’s ally Pakistan not be nuclear capable already?

          All is not as it appears.

          1. I’ve always been suspicious of the nuclear enrichment programme in Iran, simply because it’s not the most cost-effective way to acquire a nuclear capability from the natural and industrial resources present in Iran.

            Their old heavy water reactor and the Thorium fuel cycle could have given them nuclear weapons in a very unobtrusive way years ago. Iran, like India, has far more Thorium available than Uranium and it’s actually easier to make a nation’s first bomb by this route, which is precisely what India did. Breeding fissile material (U-233) from Thorium is easier and cheaper because the product can be separated from the feedstock by purely chemical means and there’s no need for highly complex centrifuges or other tricks.

            Also, the South Africans managed to produce highly enriched uranium without centrifuges: there are several other ways of enriching Uranium.

            The centrifuges are there because the world’s politicians can understand what they are for and therefore they respond to their deployment in a predictable manner. Either there’s no bomb programme at all, or it’s already been completed in a more efficient and more covert way.

            The concrete halls of gleaming centrifuges are political tools, not industrial ones.

          2. They’re not nuclear capable already because they are signatories of the NPT and have mostly been open to inspection, Chayma. And because whenever they try to build a nuclear facility it seems Israel tends to drop bombs on it.

            This gets argued again and again here, but the fact remains that Iran has no nuclear weapons program. Stop worrying so much about your beloved Israel “walking into a trap.”

            Sorry, but you’re the first person, no, the second (unless you’re the same person I’m thinking of on Facebook) who claims to be a Muslim and yet seems to be more concerned about Israel’s well being than about anyone else living in this region. I find this rather odd.

            I also find it more than odd that you would give Toameh, Shoebat et al any credibility at all, and defend them as Christians or atheists, when it’s common knowledge that their bread and butter is to attack Islam and Muslims.

          3. @ Mary
            Yeah, Uncle Toameh, that’s the real stuff, isn’t it.
            I came across this article by him from June 04, posted at “Gatestoneinstitute” (David Horowitz, Dore Gold…). It just says about it all.
            The title of the article is “Where Are All the Moderate Arabs and Palestinians ?”. Where have we heard that before ? It’s the worst piece of Hasbara s… that I’ve read for a long time.
            I really urge people to read it to understand what kind of a person Uncle Toameh is. Simply disgusiting, and even if you don’t know him, if someone buys his crap, it’s a sign that you’re already brainwashed by Hasbara.

        2. @ Bob Mann
          I don’t know what Richard’s “ten to fifteen thousand Arabs it [Israel] killed since 1948” refers to. May he’s only thinking about Palestinians. If we include Lebanese, Syrians, Jordanians and Egyptians, this figure doesn’t reach far.
          Figures from B’Tselem http://www.btselem.org/statistics
          Palestinian casualties by IDF and by Israeli civilians/ In the Occupied Territories and within the Green Line:
          > dec 09.1987 (start of the first Intifada) -28.09 2000
          > 29.09 2000-26.12.2008: 4905
          > Cast Lead: 1397
          > Since Cast Lead: 293
          Total dec 1987 – 2011: 8.146
          I don’t know how many Arabs were killed by Iran neither how many Iranians were killed by Iraq, but I know that the agressor was Saddam, encouraged by the Western world (I’m not trying to whitewash his misdeeds).

        3. I don’t accept unsubstantiated numbers thrown around ESP w no context or explanation. Now substantiate that number or withdraw it. Besides, it’s totally off topic anyway. And have you forgotten that Iraq killed 1 million Iranians during their war. So if Iran killed 200K Iraqis what’s that supposed to prove?? Anyone can quote alleged statistics to support their prejudices as you have done.

          What you’re also neglecting is that Israel already has 200 nukes & Iran has none. So if you ask me which country most frightens me in terms of damage it can do to the region, it’s Israel hands down. If you ask me whether Iran’s having nukes scares me,I say sure in a theoretical way since they don’t have them. But I sure as he’ll can’t blame Iran for wanting them when Israel threatens to attack them virtually daily. AND Israel already has the nukes.

          So when Israel shows some willingness to join NPT or to establish a ME nuclear free zone, then I can come down harder against Iran. Till then, I know whe the greatest danger lies.

          1. The numbers are from the Iran-Iraq War.

            Here is a citation

            By the summer of 1982 Iraq was on the defensive and remained so until the end in August 1988. The death toll, overall, was an estimated 1 million for Iran and 250,000-500,000 for Iraq.


            200,000 was on the low end of the estimated number of Iraqis killed by Iran.

            The reason I included those numbers was in response to a poster who wrote about Iran in the context of the post you made. I did not introduce the subject into the discussion.

            I am not sure what prejudice you think citing the casualty number supports or why you would refer to them as alleged statistics.

            Iran is just as capable as Israel of using nuclear weapons “as an absolute last resort to stave off national catastrophe” – were they to acquire the capability to do so.

            That’s my only point.

          2. It’s a bit disingenuous to claim Iran killed 200k “Arabs” when those same Arabs killed 5 times as many Iranians. Iran in fact has no history whatsoever of pre emptive attacks on any other states, which is more than can be said for Israel. So the world has a right to be far more concerned about Israel’s possession of these weapons than Iran’s (who doesn’t even have them).

          3. Iraq offered a cease fire that was rejected by Iran which extended the war for an additional six years. Iran chose to invade Iraqi territory rather than accept a peace agreement. This led to tens of thousands of Iraqis killed by Iran, as well as further numbers of Iranian casualties, all of which could have been avoided had the peace proposal been accepted by Iran.

            Israel has no history of using nuclear weapons, yet you still speculate in your post above, that under that right circumstances, they could be moved to use them.

            Iran is similarly capable of the same, were they to acquire such weapons. That is why I think it is important to support those who wish to prevent them from doing so (which is most world leaders and peoples).

            I also would support those who call on countries that do have nuclear weapons to take steps towards disarmament. Normally support for nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation go hand in hand.

            I would think that those who are committed to a peaceful world would hope to achieve both objectives.

            What about the idea, for instance, of the Middle East being a nuclear-free zone?

        4. The answer to your question is very simple: Iran is 1.6 million square kilometers. It’s almost impossible to threaten its existence in any meaningful way.

          Israel is 22’000 square kilometers. An army of several 100’000 men can overrun it in under a week, and in nuclear terms, one bomb and it’s game over.

          1. Nonsense from someone who hasn’t got a clue about military matters.

            Iran’s population, like any other modern nation’s, is concentrated in a few urban centres. Attacking these with nuclear weapons would mean the deaths of millions, possibly tens of millions of people not only by the direct effects of those weapons but also due to the widespread destruction of critical infrastructure.

            And of course, it is definitely possible to conquer a country like Iran by conventional military means and take control of its power centres. Israel couldn’t do it, for a number of reasons, but the US could. It would still not be possible to control the entire land area of the country, but this is not necessary either. The nation of Iran would still be destroyed in any meaningful sense.

    2. Bran, you say that “a nuclear armed régime in iran will guarantee its survival regardless of what the Iranian peoples want.

      Do you think the Iranian regime is going to nuke their own country?

      It is totally crazy to compare this to the Israeli situation where the opposition is not internal but external.

      And because of its nuclear arms the régime in the US will no doubt guarantee its survival regardless of what the American peoples want too, right?
      Finally: Sadly enough, the more secure Israel is, the less willing to compromise.

    1. Well, we could start by threatening to bomb them back into the stone age, sorta like what Israel is threatening re: Iran.

      1. “The world’s peace-loving people” should threaten to bomb Israel back into the stone age?

        That seems a bit incongruous.

        1. You don’t recognize sarcasm? Realistically, you do what the world is doing to Iran. You pressure them with sanctions.

  3. The very fact of selling subs to Israel ist known since many years. If I remember right, a israeli engineering company participated in the construction of this type of submarine. Propably they hold even patents on construction details of some parts of this boats? DER SPIEGEL wrote, that a half dozen of Israeli specialists are working permanently until today on the german HDWT dockyard in Kiel, keeping an eye on the subs under construction.

    The third boat of the first lot of tree was delivered back in 1977. They had been build in the UK, based on german plans.

    After having been confrontated with german engineering in parts of iraki scud rockets raining down on Israel, german cancellor Kohl made a 1200 million compensation gift to Israel, in which two Dolphin-class subs, worth 880 million were part of.

    Those boats equipped with for additional torpedo tubes of 650mm diameter are expected to be able to launch israeli cruise missiles of the type Popeye Turbo. This cruise missile with a range of 1500 km and a total weight of 1,5 tons can deliver nuclear warheads.

    The official german position was, that Germany delivers conventional subs to Israel and what Israel may do with them afterwards is up to them. But there was talking about a new silent hydraulic launching system for the cruise missiles. If this launching system for nuclear cruise missiles was installed on the german dockyard one can’t speak of conventional boats anymore?

    By the way, to my knowledge this is the first time that Germany delivers a weapon to another country that in theory is able to attack every point of a defenseless Germany! Launched from the northern Adria, lets say from a line between Venice or Trieste, the whole german territory would be in the range of this cruise missiles.

    To endanger the own people would have been called an act of treason in other times, today Mrs. Merkel calls it “part of Deutsche Staatsräson…”

    Cancellor Schröder signed the contracts for boat 4 and 5 on his very last day in office.

    Cancellor Merkel sets up 3 preconditions for boat 6 and received nearly nothing but was again asked to pay a thirth part of the boat, same old story…

    Meanwhile boats number 7,8 and 9 are discussed.
    Payment conditions top secret like always!

    1. Propably they hold even patents on construction details of some parts of this boats?
      Not bloody likely. Israeli capabilities in the area of military shipbuilding are embryonic at best.

      Some technical details: We are talking about two distinct classes of submarines here. The original Dolphin-Class were conventional, dieselelectric submarines, based on the German 209 class.

      The new boats have fuel cell based AIP propulsion systems and are based on the newer 212a and 214 classes.

      All submarines with torpedo tubes can in theory launch cruise missiles, and all cruise missiles can in theory be equipped with nuclear warheads. It does not even necessarily take the oversized torpedo tubes the Dolphins have – the US Tomahawk cruise missile was specifically designed to be launched from a standard 533mm torpedo tube. Then again, the Israeli weapons are likely to be a lot less sophisticated.
      What you do need for this is the proper fire control system. I suspect that integrating said fire control systems, or preparing the boats for installing them after delivery, is the job of the Israeli technicians at HDW. This means, of course, that HDW and consequently the German government knew exactly what kind of weapon Israel intended to fire from these submarines all along.

      Let me add that for everyone with even the slightest professional interest in naval matters, such as myself, has known this for years, nay decades.

  4. “Israel would never deliberately kill more than say the ten or fifteen thousand Arabs its killed since 1948. ”

    At least that many Lebanese and Palestinians died in the siege of Beirut. The combined figure of Arab deaths in the Arab Israeli conflict has got to be way higher than ten or fifteen thousand.

    (Apologies if this is a double post, I posted already but it didn’t seem to go through. If it is, please delete).

    1. Yep, I was just tryng to make the whole addition but it takes a long time to verify all the sources. More than 17.000 Lebanese and 2.000 PLO-combattants in 1982, (Sabra and Chatila are NOT included).

        1. I thought the figures would be easily availabe on the net but in fact not. B’Tselem has figures for Palestinians and Israelis since the First Intifada, but the rest seems very unprofessional and/or biased. I mean, I won’t trust Daniel Pipes on this one…
          It seems the 1973-war had most casualties though.
          If I come across anything serious I’ll put it aside, but on Yom Hazikaron/Memorial Day, I came across this amazing information in Haaretz:
          22.993 Israeli soldiers have fallen since….1860! Wonder why they didn’t go back to Masada.
          In fact, it seems to include civilians (a new controversial law, apparently), Mossad-agents (wonder if they are so numerous).

          1. I was curious so I just did a quick back of the envelope, literally, accounting, taking figures from Wikipedia on the main conflicts, adding in the intifada totals, and the 5000 Palestinians that Morris claims were killed by Israels shoot to kill orders for Palestinians crossing the border in the early 1950s. In some instances there is a wide range in estimates of Arabs killed, with Arab estimates usually being lower than Israeli estimates of Arab casualties.

            I didn’t include any 1948 war casualties, which actually extended into 1949, but included the 5000 I mentioned above plus the Arab casualties from the 1956 war, the 1967 war, the War of Attrition, the 1973 war, the 1978 Lebanon invasion, the 1982 Lebanon invasion, the first and second Intifadas, the 2006 attack on Gaza, the 2006 Lebanon War, and the 2008 Gaza attack. I did not include any other casualties that occurred outside of those instances, such as Qibya, Es Samu, the 1954 Gaza raid, Kfar Kassem or the routine killing that goes on outside of the major conflicts.

            The low estimates total I came up with was a little over 60,000 Arabs killed by Israel, and the high estimate total was over 93,000, since the end of the 1948 war. Both totals could easily be a few thousands higher, given figures on the Arab deaths outside of the major conflicts.

          2. Thank you so much, Tree.
            That was very interesting, and as Richard said: very important for the long-term analysis of the conflict.
            Among the casualties that you didn’t include in the final numbers: the 1996 shelling of Qana, the Battle of Karameh, and I’m sure there are plenty others that we’ve forgotten.

            If the Israelis include ‘soldiers’ going back to 1860, maybe the Arab side should include incidents such as the wife of the Palestinian consul to France who had a miscarriage during a bombing of Gaza recently, or an elder Palestinian who died of a heart attack at the Alleby Bridge a couple of years ago when the Israelis prevented medical assistance from arriving. Cancer in Gaza is on the rise, the pollution of the water, people prevented from leaving for medical care abroad etc etc.
            This needs some serious research.

          3. Which planet did Israeli soldiers 1860-1948 come from? The only proper soldiers there in that time frame were Ottoman and British (and a handful of Jordanians and Egyptians during the war of ’48). Jewish fighters for the Zionist side would have to count as “unlawful combatants” (aka “terrorists”, or whatever Israel’s own convenient terminology du jour is).
            Where does Haaretz speak of civilians?

          4. @ Fiddler
            Sorry, I wasn’t clear. The inclusion of civilians among the “fallen soldeirs” wasn”t mentioned in the Haaretz-article.
            I followed that discussion elsewhere, in fact it seems that some bereaved families don’t agree that the State of Israel is using theit loved ones in such a nationalistic way. I could imagine Nurit Peled-Elhanann and her husband don’t agree that their daughter Smardar is considered a “fallen soldier”.
            If you look up the wikipedia-page it states:
            “While Yom Hazikaron has been traditionally dedicated to fallen soldiers, commemoration has now been extended to civilian victims of the ongoing armed dispute” (link included).
            I think maybe Haggai Matar or Yossi Gurvitz discussed the topic too on mag 972, but I’m not sure. I read about the Mossad-agents somewhere but I can’t remember where, thinking that it was an explicit recognition of Mossad working abroad.

            I also read an interesting article somewhere about the fact that Holocaust Day, Memorial Day and Independance Day follow directly in Israel, and what it’s doing to brainwash people about the direct link between these events. (Maybe Mya Guarnieri).

    2. If anyone has any numbers on this please let me know. I’d read that the total number killed in the I-P conflict since 1948 was 20,000. I don’t know if this includes all wars in which Israael has fought but I thought it did. Perhaps I’m wrong and the number is higher.

      The number killed in the 1982 Lebanon war is in dispute. I don’t believe it was high as you’re claiming, but I’d be happy to see the figures if they’re fr credible sources.

      1. Wikipedia article 1982 Lebanon War: The Casualties has:

        It is estimated that around 17,825 Lebanese were killed during the first year of the war, with differing estimates of the proportion of civilians killed. Beirut newspaper An Nahar estimated that 5,515 people, both military and civilian, were killed in the Beirut area alone during the conflict, while 9,797 Syrian soldiers, PLO fighters, and other forces aligned with the PLO, as well as 2,513 civilians were killed outside of the Beirut area.[68] Approximately 675 Israeli soldiers were killed.[69]

        Samuel Katz and Lee E. Russell in their book Armies in Lebanon 1982–84, puts the casualties as follows[70]

        * Israel – 368 dead and 2,383 wounded
        * PLO – 1,500 dead and an unknown amount wounded plus around 8,000 captured
        * Syria – 1,200 dead and around 3,000 wounded plus 296 captured
        * Lebanon – 17,825 dead and around 30,000 wounded.
        * Foreigners – 1,800 foreigners from 26 countries on five continents, allegedly training in the Ein el-Hilweh refugee camp near Sidon, were captured.

        They also state that the extensive PLO political and military infrastructure in Lebanon, which had taken 15 years to build, had been destroyed.

        Lebanese estimates, compiled from International Red Cross sources and police and hospital surveys, calculated that 17,825 Lebanese had died and over 30,000 had been wounded.[71]

      2. I remember my father saying after the 1967 war that an order was given to destroy the Egyptian army, i.e. kill its soldiers no matter if they fight or capitulate. Corpses were covered with sand by bulldozers.

        Maybe we should look at figures published by Egypt?

  5. As an Israeli living in Israel I have known about this from the Israeli media for years. Israeli politicians never lied on this issue since they avoided talking about it. I found this article from 2006. I suspect I have known about this from the Israeli media for +-10 years.

    Another reference from 2008

    Israel has had nuclear weapons probably since the 1960’s. They did not prevent Egypt and Syria from attacking in 1973 and they did not prevent Saddam Hussein from firing rockets at Israel in 1991. Nuclear weapons did not stop Israel from withdrawing from Sinai. Handing over parts of the West Bank and Gaza to Yassir Arafat and signing a peace deal with Jordan that included passing land back to Jordan. So I would suggest that Avner Cohen’s hypothesis is not sustained by past facts. In addition even though Israel was facing military defeat in the first week of the 1973 war there was no threat to use nuclear weapons. It has been widely reported that in the first few days of the 73 war Moshe Dayan (from wikipedia) “.. was close to announcing “the downfall of the “Third Temple” at a news conference, but was forbidden to speak by (then Prime Minister Golda) Meir”.

    1. Wrong. Israel did assemble and ready its nuclear weapons during the Yom Kippur war. This was one of the factors motivating the US to quickly deliver conventional weapons in order to bail out Israel at all costs.

  6. “Israel would never deliberately kill more than say the ten or fifteen thousand Arabs its killed since 1948. ”

    Nitpicking here, but the usual estimate for the number killed in the 1982 Lebanon war is in the 10-20 thousand range. So the total is probably several tens of thousands.

    1. I think the 10-15 thousand figure is the number of Palestinians that have been killed since 1948.

  7. An Israeli second-strike capability could be stabilizing, rather than the opposite, if the Israelis and their government were to think as follows: no need to be alarmed about Iranian nukes. Whatever happens, we will still have a second-strike capability, and that will be enough to deter a nuclear attack on us.

    Unfortunately, I see no evidence that Israelis and their government think along such reasonable lines.

  8. @Koshiro: Slightly redundant reply. Attacking any country on this planet with nukes would decimate it. The point here is that the first war Israel loses will mark the end of its existence. Israel the nation, the ideology, will be no more. It will be actually be existentially finished. Not merely a regime that’s toppled, and back to business as usual. It therefore CAN NOT lose a war, or it’s game over.

    Because of its tiny landmass this can happen during any conflict it enters. Israel in this position of existential destruction will use nukes on its opponent even though it was never nuked itself, or doesn’t face the risk of being nuked.

    This scenario above can not occur in Iran during a conventional war. The Mullahs might use nukes in self defence after they’ve been nuked, but they’ll never be ‘forced’ to use them otherwise. If they lose the war, their regime might be done for, but the resulting country will still be Iran, run by Iranians, and populated by Iranians.

    Short of the genocide of a very large portion of the 70 million population first, there won’t be an existential threat to Iran during a conventional war. That’s pretty much a given.

    And no, the US doesn’t have anywhere near the capacity to occupy Iran… The reasons are extremely obvious, which you should be aware of with all extensive military ‘expertise’ of yours: toys are nice, but if you can’t afford to fly them or man them, and your population at home won’t accept the death toll it takes to get the job done, you might as well not have any of them.

    All the Mullahs in Iran need are sticks and stones, and they can run the country forever.

  9. Why is it not possible that Iran has simply purchased nukes for a defensive arsenal? A “use-only-as needed” type of thing?

    Isn’t Germany violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?

    In November, Israel test-fired a ballistic missile capable of possessing a nuclear tipped warhead.

    Now, Israel possesses submarines that are KNOWN to have been specially fitted to be able to fire nuclear payloads.

    That is basically the primary strategic purpose of these special Dolphin subs that Israel received, to act as a roving, immersible and undetectable, second-strike retaliatory deterrent capable of surfacing and firing a missile at any time to cause a global event.

    Israel, however, shows restraint. It only used A LITTLE White Phosphorous on the Gazans. It wasn’t their fault the little kids’ flesh were burned through to the bone. The hundreds of thousands of people turned homeless overnight. The thousand plus killed.

    Like, Gilad Shalit. Gilad Shalit. Gilad Shalit…

  10. Apologizes to Deir Yassin, all this time I thought you were a man; how sexist of me because I based this idea on your fighting spirit. You’re a great commenter in any case.

  11. Richard,

    I would rather not go far afield & discuss anyone’s past history here. It’s simply not relevant. Please stay on topic.

    Is there any reason why you are not consistent in applying your rule of law here?

    Deir brought up my past history here first. Why didn’t you say this to her?

      1. Particularly that Chayma was deliberately distorting my motives for leaving. Claiming that I left because I didn’t find you “anti-zionist enough” is incorrect and she knows so.
        By the way, I’ve always stated that to me the “test of sincerity” concerning the Palestinian cause is the ROR, and that is more important that One or Two States though I myself have always been a One-Stater.
        Distorting my motives for leaving is not the same as including earlier comments posted by someone to highlight the numerous contradictions in that person’s statements, IMHO.

  12. Richard,

    My readers don’t pay me enough for me to do anything on their behalf. JPost pays Toameh to be a House Arab. I’m not sure he’d have these views were he forced to write for an Arab paper, were he to be able to find such a job.

    Neither Yoshiro nor you, have any way of knowing that is the case. I don’t believe the Jpost is paying Khaled to be a house Arab. I believe they pay him, because his views tie in with their own readerships. That is nothing to hold against him. REmember, they do have a Christian edition, which means they must be getting funds from Christians too. They have a separate Christian edition.

    What Koshiro said, means he is practicing the bigotry of low expectations, and this is not the right reason to support someone.

    His post infers that anything the Palestinians do is perfect, i can find plenty to criticise them for, or rather their leadership. First, the aid being stolen, the corruption, the education system that teaches hate. Apparently, you agree with Yoshiro which is troubling. Khaled rightly criticises them for this, this doesn’t mean that he is licking the boots of his ‘supposed superiors’. I suspect Yoshiro or Koshiro himself has an inferiority complex and is projecting onto the Israelis.

    BTW, my readers offer me far less in the way of donations than what JPost offers Toameh.

    Symantics. Perhaps I should have said if someone offered you such a post at a publication that was like Tikkun Olam here, would you accept it?


    If readership donors amounted to a few hundred thousand, would Yoshiro question his double standard, which is that you are speaking out against Jews and Israel. According to Yoshiro you are immoral for doing this. So why is he here? Why is he condemning Khaled and supporting you? If he really believed Khaled was morally wrong, then he would criticise you, but I don’t believe that is the reason he is criticising Khaled. If Khaled were a traitor to Israel Yoshiro would be praising him. What’s the difference between this, and kahanists who say Arabs are a fifth column regardless of whether they practice any terrorism or not?


    1. Personally, Chayma, i think you should pull your foot out of your mouth and give it rest while you still have a chance. I for one am beginning to think you’re nothing more than a West Bank settler masquerading as “pro-Palestine.” In any event, I’m becoming increasingly appalled by the stands you’re taking.

      I see more boot-licking here on your part than on the Jerusalem Post.

    2. First of all, it’s Koshiro. I don’t know where your assumption it could be “Yoshiro” comes from.

      Second of all…

      His post infers that anything the Palestinians do is perfect,

      … bullshit. Palestinians are humans like any others. There’s good, less good and rotten people among them like anywhere else.
      What Toameh is doing is not criticism of Palestinian leaders for corruption or bad management or whatever: He’s trying to shift blame from Israel to “the” Palestinians. He’s not even trying to obfuscate that: “Focus less on Israel.” Of course, to someone who wants to help the Palestinians free themselves from Israeli occupation, focussing less on Israel is mind-numbingly idiotic – or a transparent attempt at distraction.

      The state of Israel is the oppressor of Palestinians in the OT, and freeing the Palestinians from occupation requires tackling that fact. I do not care for any opinions on the whole issue that refuse to recognize this basic fact.

      Oh, and: Your trying to compare Richard to Toameh is an insult. Richard takes the side of the oppressed. Toameh takes the side of the oppressors. Aligning yourself with the stronger side in subjugating the weaker side is odious no matter what your supposed ethnic allegiances are, but doing so as a member of a discriminated minority lends an extra reek of opportunism to it.
      In Richard’s case it’s exactly the opposite. But I suppose that you, like so many apologists for Israel, subscribe to the false equivalence of oppressor and oppressed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *