factualizing frog wrote:
Rex Caruthers wrote:
it’s been 65 years since Nagasaki.

so you and Murphy aren’t batting above the Mendoza line since before Mickey Mantle entered the league.

I'm looking at this from an acturial view,try buying a Derivative that pays off if Israel Nukes someone,that might be expensive.

factualizing frog wrote:
@ Rex Caruthers:

Holy Wombats, Rex.
Even Dyer is nuts enough to be only luke-warm on nuking Iran prophylactically.
That’s so off the table, it’s not even under it

Glad to hear it,but I'm a disciple of Murphy, "If you can use Nukes,you will use them,it's been 65 years since Nagasaki.

@ Rex Caruthers:
1) No, Israel can not stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons without using nuclear weapons against Iran.

In that case,I would not support a Nuke attack on Iran as a First Strike,and only as a second strike if Iran,first, attacks Israel with a Nuke.

2) The problem should be addressed byh the Gulf States, their allies, and the nations reliant on the materials exported from the Gulf, and certainly not Israel alone

"Should Be" It's up to them,but I would not support us assisting anybody on a First Strike on Iran.

"Then what’s your problem with preventing an outstandingly evil bunch of theocrat thugs like Iran from acquiring them?"

Israel can stop Iran without using her Nukes,Right? I am aGAINST THE uSE OF nUKES on Iran,NOT NECESsARILY AGAINST iSRAEL FIGHTING iRAN conventionally. See POST # 25

Israel has an army, and wars kill people. That gives anti-Semites a more tangible reason to oppose Israel.

I don't oppose Israel,and if Israel feels threatened by Iran,Israel should battle Iran. However I would not support American support of Israel in that war if Israel was the first striker,if it was a defensive war,I would support our helping Israel. No Nukes,under any circumstances

Regarding Vietnam,I just carfully reread Podhoretz's book on The Vietnam War. He admits that not only did we lose that War,but surprisingly,NPOD agreed with Macarthur,that we couldn't have won under any realistic scenario. Why fight a war you can't win,especially with Draftees?

Regarding AntiSemitism,a new book on AntiSemitism in England claims that Shakespeare/Shylock,Dickens/Fagin,Chaucer/Prioress's Tale are the most important anti-semitic influences on the English.

@ Rex Caruthers:

Gorilla feathers……

The problem isn’t who’s got them, it’s who’s likely to use them for ill.

I don't want anybody using them for GOOD or for ILL

Why Israel and not other, far more egregious examples?”

US Slams Mention of Israeli Nukes at IAEA Meeting
Warns Mentioning Israel's Arsenal Will Harm 'Nuclear Free Mideast' Push
by Jason Ditz, June 10, 2010
US officials reacted angrily today at the inclusion of Israel’s nuclear arsenal as a topic of discussion for the IAEA meeting, insisting that it was “untimely and uncalled for.”
http://news.antiwar.com/2010/06/10/us-slams-mention-of-israeli-nukes-at-iaea-meeting/

A: Good, we have settled most of the issues before us. Now let us settle the matter of the 500lb gorilla.
B: What 500lb gorilla?
A: The one at the other end of the table.
B: Shhh--we don't want to single him out. That wouldn't be fair.
A: But he's the only 500ib gorilla in the room
B: That's why mentioning him would be singling him out unfairly.
A: I don't follow--we could mention the 500lb gorilla if there were another one?
B: Yes.
A:But I thought the whole purpose of this meeting was to rid the Middle East of 500lb gorillas.
B: Exactly.
A: But we can't mention the 500lb gorilla at the table.
B: What 500lb gorilla?

narciso wrote:
Moving down non combatants, unlike those fighters in a Sbarro pizzeria, or a Passover service in Netanya

Everybodys doing it; the mistake is to say,because we're the good guys,it's ok. The bad guys just do it and keep their mouth shut;they're not out to win a popularity contest like the US and Israel.

Outside of Hollywood and Washington DC, most people (esp. soldiers) are happy to accept that trade-off.

Well then let's accept the Trade Off: the ever increasing world wide disdain for Israel in exchange for the Israeli Army taking few casulties while mowing down Gazans. But,let's not whine about unfair anti-semitism. Or unfair anti-Americanism,as we mow down non-combatants with Drones.

@ Rex Caruthers:
Not quite. Probably one order of magnitude off. But such “kill ratios” are the norm for well-trained, well-equipped, higher technology forces in battle with irregular and/or technologically inferior fighters.

Always very bad PR for the higher Tech military Force.

I find a 1,000-to-1 fatality rule generally applies

This is an unfortunate use of ratio in that it seems to be the inverse ratio of Israeli deaths to their opponents when they go to war. If this is inaccurate,my apologies.