If the standoff at sea involves activists seeking martyrdom, however, controlling them without killing them will often be even harder in a maritime situation than it is on land.
At some point, the Israelis may indeed have to choose interdicting arms shipments through kinetic action in foreign ports.
egg-cell-ent narc. excellent. I promise not to doubt you as long as you produce proof.
this is marvelous, and certainly provides a basis for thinking that Obama studied literary theory under said and hated doing so.
it's an excellent reason to think that when you, in your comment about Palestinian politics, put in that aside about Obama studying off Said, could not possibly be implying that Obama had been thereby indoctrinated by Said so that Obama might somehow fairly to be said to be mirroring Said's bs thinking about same.
sorry, narc, entirely my fault for thinking that you had some kind of reason behind your parenthetical addition beyond a display of your erudition for our delight.
I am impressed and delighted and my doubts dissolved.
@ Rex Caruthers:
1) No, Israel can not stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons without using nuclear weapons against Iran.
2) Iran's acquisition of nuclear weaponry is not a task for Israel.
Iran, as it acquires nukes, will become an immediate threat to the Saudis and the rest of the Gulf States ahead of Israel. 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.
I don’t want anybody using them for GOOD or for ILL
Then what's your problem with preventing an outstandingly evil bunch of theocrat thugs like Iran from acquiring them?
Adding Iran to the list of possible users can only increase the chances of usage..... even if your calculations don't include factoring in that Iran increases the risk of usage far beyond the norm for owners.
George Jochnowitz wrote:
yeah, George, that was the theory that our last administration used.
@ CK MacLeod:
Yes she does talk "bungled" Tsar. Not sure that she was saying that the particular situation should have been "bloodless" except for the Israelis.
narciso wrote:
What gave me away?
@ CK MacLeod:
Wow, did she bury that implication.
and that's some alternative she's suggesting.
kinda iffy, eh?
@ CK MacLeod:
got a link to that implicit JED thing? I wanna read something from her that I can like and not merely appreciate.
@ narciso:
your folks are from Palestine?
Rex Caruthers wrote:
so you and Murphy aren't batting above the Mendoza line since before Mickey Mantle entered the league.
@ 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.
@ narciso:
egg-cell-ent narc. excellent. I promise not to doubt you as long as you produce proof.
this is marvelous, and certainly provides a basis for thinking that Obama studied literary theory under said and hated doing so.
it's an excellent reason to think that when you, in your comment about Palestinian politics, put in that aside about Obama studying off Said, could not possibly be implying that Obama had been thereby indoctrinated by Said so that Obama might somehow fairly to be said to be mirroring Said's bs thinking about same.
sorry, narc, entirely my fault for thinking that you had some kind of reason behind your parenthetical addition beyond a display of your erudition for our delight.
I am impressed and delighted and my doubts dissolved.
Hail, narc, hail
@ Rex Caruthers:
1) No, Israel can not stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons without using nuclear weapons against Iran.
2) Iran's acquisition of nuclear weaponry is not a task for Israel.
Iran, as it acquires nukes, will become an immediate threat to the Saudis and the rest of the Gulf States ahead of Israel. 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.
narciso wrote:
narc, your last link was no more than an erroneous bunch of crap.
I'll be more than happy to go with you, but you're required to put something close to the vicinity of the neighborhood of fact up by way of proof.
pull the quotation from the book... or gimme a page number.... or something.
Then what's your problem with preventing an outstandingly evil bunch of theocrat thugs like Iran from acquiring them?
Adding Iran to the list of possible users can only increase the chances of usage..... even if your calculations don't include factoring in that Iran increases the risk of usage far beyond the norm for owners.
@ Rex Caruthers:
Gorilla feathers......
The problem isn't who's got them, it's who's likely to use them for ill.
@ narciso:
Your link quotes the LA Times and offers this article to back up that very suspicious English class.
Here's the linked article
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/10/nation/na-obamamideast10
I missed the part where the Times says that there was that enrollment in English.
Did see a lot of stuff about how Obama likes the guy and his family and doesn't agree with his opinions.
But, point out where I missed the English class thing. It's a 5 pager and I only skimmed through twice.
@ narciso:
Well we're movin on up,
To the east side.
To a deluxe apartment in the sky.
Well, we're moving on down,
On the non-com side,
We finally blew a piece out the pizza pie.
@ CK MacLeod:
nothing I see there says "Obama was a student off"
@ CK MacLeod:his writings continue to give offense.
the evil Said did and said ain't yet interred with his bony self.
narciso wrote:
Is that true? Did Obama study with Said? got a link that shows that to be true?
Said annoys the warts off me.