If Israel tries to attack Iran.

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

Then neither does USA except the F-22. [factually incorrect] Nope. Yes. See: F-35, B2, F-22, falcon htv-2, etc. That is a very mature industry. I was talking about the fighter aircraft. And they do not use the F-35.

- Just like the US [LOL, we use old hardware for routine sh*t and use mult-billion stealth bombers for the kind of purpose at the hand of this discussion] Well apperantly not with fighter aircraft which you brought up. Correct, we do not use those aircraft to destroy bunkers. Israel would have to use old aircraft to destroy those bunkers, though, due to their arsenal. I'm not talking about only destroying bunkers. You said the Israeli airforce use antique military hardware which is not true. It's a top notch airforce. They have pretty much the same fighter aircraft as the US. Optimized for Israel.

coolbeans90

Your dad is indeed crazy. America attacking Israel is not even possible.

20 damn pages? wow

thats rubbish , I seriously doubt the US would do such a thing.

although the chance of Israel attacking Iran is increasing by the month , if sanctions don't work , then Im afraid its going to be war.

at the same time I doubt the region is suddenly going to flare up, as I doubt the Saudis , Jordanians, Egyptians, etc, are all going to suddenly join in the war, since they are neither friends of Iran or Israel.

Darkman2007

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

thats rubbish , I seriously doubt the US would do such a thing.

although the chance of Israel attacking Iran is increasing by the month , if sanctions don't work , then Im afraid its going to be war.

at the same time I doubt the region is suddenly going to flare up, as I doubt the Saudis , Jordanians, Egyptians, etc, are all going to suddenly join in the war, since they are neither friends of Iran or Israel.

BossPerson

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

thats rubbish , I seriously doubt the US would do such a thing.

although the chance of Israel attacking Iran is increasing by the month , if sanctions don't work , then Im afraid its going to be war.

at the same time I doubt the region is suddenly going to flare up, as I doubt the Saudis , Jordanians, Egyptians, etc, are all going to suddenly join in the war, since they are neither friends of Iran or Israel.

BossPerson

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

thats rubbish , I seriously doubt the US would do such a thing.

although the chance of Israel attacking Iran is increasing by the month , if sanctions don't work , then Im afraid its going to be war.

at the same time I doubt the region is suddenly going to flare up, as I doubt the Saudis , Jordanians, Egyptians, etc, are all going to suddenly join in the war, since they are neither friends of Iran or Israel.

Redinko

Then neither does USA except the F-22. [factually incorrect] Nope. Yes. See: F-35, B2, F-22, falcon htv-2, etc. That is a very mature industry. I was talking about the fighter aircraft. And they do not use the F-35. You reponded to a point where I stated The U.S. had a mature industry. See: initial post format.

- Just like the US [LOL, we use old hardware for routine sh*t and use mult-billion stealth bombers for the kind of purpose at the hand of this discussion] Well apperantly not with fighter aircraft which you brought up. Correct, we do not use those aircraft to destroy bunkers. Israel would have to use old aircraft to destroy those bunkers, though, due to their arsenal. I'm not talking about only destroying bunkers. You said the Israeli airforce use antique military hardware which is not true. It's a top notch airforce. They have pretty much the same fighter aircraft as the US. Optimized for Israel. Perhaps I overstated the antiquity of Israel's air force - it was said in relation to the fact that we sell them hardware (which I presumed used), however that is irrelevant to my primary point of argument: they do NOT have the means to eliminate Iran's capacity to develop a nuclear weapon b/c they do not have the resources to do so. And no, they do not have the same all the same fighter aircraft. (F-22s) or more importantly to this discussion, bombers. Top notch military hardware is used in combat scenarios as previously discussed.

themajormayor

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

thats rubbish , I seriously doubt the US would do such a thing.

although the chance of Israel attacking Iran is increasing by the month , if sanctions don't work , then Im afraid its going to be war.

at the same time I doubt the region is suddenly going to flare up, as I doubt the Saudis , Jordanians, Egyptians, etc, are all going to suddenly join in the war, since they are neither friends of Iran or Israel.

Redinko

[QUOTE="Redinko"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]Many countries are actually against Iran anyways (saudi arabia), so they wouldnt mind the Iranian regime crumblingBossPerson

[QUOTE="Redinko"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]Many countries are actually against Iran anyways (saudi arabia), so they wouldnt mind the Iranian regime crumblingDarkman2007

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="Redinko"]I doubt any country in the region will be okay with an Israeli strike especially without clear evidence that Iran has the bomb.

Redinko

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Redinko"]I doubt any country in the region will be okay with an Israeli strike especially without clear evidence that Iran has the bomb.

Redinko

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

Then neither does USA except the F-22. [factually incorrect] Nope. Yes. See: F-35, B2, F-22, falcon htv-2, etc. That is a very mature industry. I was talking about the fighter aircraft. And they do not use the F-35. You reponded to a point where I stated The U.S. had a mature industry. See: initial post format.Did I say it didn't have a mature industry?

- Just like the US [LOL, we use old hardware for routine sh*t and use mult-billion stealth bombers for the kind of purpose at the hand of this discussion] Well apperantly not with fighter aircraft which you brought up. Correct, we do not use those aircraft to destroy bunkers. Israel would have to use old aircraft to destroy those bunkers, though, due to their arsenal. I'm not talking about only destroying bunkers. You said the Israeli airforce use antique military hardware which is not true. It's a top notch airforce. They have pretty much the same fighter aircraft as the US. Optimized for Israel. Perhaps I overstated the antiquity of Israel's air force - it was said in relation to the fact that we sell them hardware (which I presumed used), however that is irrelevant to my primary point of argument: they do NOT have the means to eliminate Iran's capacity to develop a nuclear weapon b/c they do not have the resources to do so. And no, they do not have the same all the same fighter aircraft. (F-22s) or more importantly to this discussion, bombers. Top notch military hardware is used in combat scenarios as previously discussed.Israel sells hardware to countries too including the US. This is how it works, it's international trade even in the military industry. For example you can look up the Iron dome, Merkava, trophy system etc etc Israel develops its own and buys alot too. Such a small country cannot rely on its own military industry only. Maybe they don't have the means to eliminate Irans nuclear development but I'll look into that. Did you see the Israeli Air Force Boeing 707? They also have hercules planes, probably not optimal for stealth but they should be able to carry the bunker buster. In any case I don't think it makes the IAF antique though. I doubt many countries could pull it off if not Israel could. And as I said they have the same fighter aircraft EXCEPT F-22

coolbeans90

[QUOTE="Redinko"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]Saudi Arabia ways wassupBossPerson

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="Redinko"]That's a cheeky thing to say, especially to someone who has lived in SA for 8 years... My point is, it will inflame the region if Israel strikes a Muslim country with no other reason than "OMG ahmadinejad = hitler!!!!!!!"

themajormayor

[QUOTE="themajormayor"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]maybe not Saudi citizens, but the monarchy is definitely on Israel and America's side with this. There's an article I read on this by Noam Chomsky that goes in a lot of detail about this, but I cant find the link to it..BossPerson

[QUOTE="Redinko"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] I don't think you understand the politics of the region. at this point in time, with the exception of Syria , and to an extent Iraq , every other country in the region considers Iran to be an annoyance at best , and a threat at worst. sure they will condemn it in public, but thats where it will end.Darkman2007

By the way, what exactly are those justifications? That ahmadinejad will start a nuclear holocaust of the Jews? That's BS. Iran has thousands of Jews. Besides, if Iran nukes Israel it will damage the mosque in Jerusalem.

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

[QUOTE="themajormayor"] If it's written by Noam Chomsky it doesn't say anything though...themajormayor

Then neither does USA except the F-22. [factually incorrect] Nope. Yes. See: F-35, B2, F-22, falcon htv-2, etc. That is a very mature industry. I was talking about the fighter aircraft. And they do not use the F-35. You reponded to a point where I stated The U.S. had a mature industry. See: initial post format.Did I say it didn't have a mature industry? I took your response to mean that.

- Just like the US [LOL, we use old hardware for routine sh*t and use mult-billion stealth bombers for the kind of purpose at the hand of this discussion] Well apperantly not with fighter aircraft which you brought up. Correct, we do not use those aircraft to destroy bunkers. Israel would have to use old aircraft to destroy those bunkers, though, due to their arsenal. I'm not talking about only destroying bunkers. You said the Israeli airforce use antique military hardware which is not true. It's a top notch airforce. They have pretty much the same fighter aircraft as the US. Optimized for Israel. Perhaps I overstated the antiquity of Israel's air force - it was said in relation to the fact that we sell them hardware (which I presumed used), however that is irrelevant to my primary point of argument: they do NOT have the means to eliminate Iran's capacity to develop a nuclear weapon b/c they do not have the resources to do so. And no, they do not have the same all the same fighter aircraft. (F-22s) or more importantly to this discussion, bombers. Top notch military hardware is used in combat scenarios as previously discussed.Israel sells hardware to countries too including the US. This is how it works, it's international trade even in the military industry. For example you can look up the Iron dome, Merkava, trophy system etc etc Israel develops its own and buys alot too. Such a small country cannot rely on its own military industry only. Maybe they don't have the means to eliminate Irans nuclear development but I'll look into that. I don't think it makes the IAF antique though. I doubt many countries could pull it off if not Israel could. And as I said they have the same fighter aircraft EXCEPT F-22 Point taken on the not-so-antiqueness of the Israeli air force. As I already said, that wasn't the point. And b/c they rely on international weapons industry wasn't a jab at that so much as their capacity to develop a bomb with the intent purpose of cracking open Iran's concrete-buried (designed by Iran to sustain U.S. conventional bombs to date) nuclear facilities on whim. Not many countries could pull off an air strike to (temporarily) cripple Iran's nuclear program. The fact that the U.S. has radar-evasive bombers capable of carrying an enormous payload in addition to the capacity to continually design these enormous bombs to meet the changing needs is what makes them capable of doing so. That said, even the U.S. using air strikes would be a very temporary solution. Iran could just dig deeper, to the point where it would take WMD-magnitude energy to crack. If the U.S. wants to forcefully stop Iran from building a bomb, it will require an invasion.

themajormayor

[QUOTE="Redinko"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]Saudi Arabia ways wassupBossPerson

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="Redinko"]That's a cheeky thing to say, especially to someone who has lived in SA for 8 years... My point is, it will inflame the region if Israel strikes a Muslim country with no other reason than "OMG ahmadinejad = hitler!!!!!!!"

Redinko

[QUOTE="themajormayor"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]Is he too liberal for your taste?

BossPerson

If I'm not mistaken he's against Zionism and Israel's existence as a Jewish state. That for me is anti-semitic. But if he's not then I guess he's not. But this is the impression I've got from him.

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="themajormayor"] Too anti-semitic. Yes I know he's Jewish, it's not a good excuse. I also don't understand the "liberal" label. I'm probably one of the more liberal guys in this forum. themajormayor

If I'm not mistaken he's against Zionism and Israel's existence as a Jewish state. That for me is anti-semitic. But if he's not then I guess he's not. But this is the impression I've got from him.

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="themajormayor"] Too anti-semitic. Yes I know he's Jewish, it's not a good excuse. I also don't understand the "liberal" label. I'm probably one of the more liberal guys in this forum. themajormayor

If I'm not mistaken he's against Zionism and Israel's existence as a Jewish state. That for me is anti-semitic. But if he's not then I guess he's not. But this is the impression I've got from him.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Redinko"]I agree with you that Iran is seen as an annoyance and as a Turk I wouldn't wont them to get a bomb. My point is, there is still no justification yet.

Redinko

By the way, what exactly are those justifications? That ahmadinejad will start a nuclear holocaust of the Jews? That's BS. Iran has thousands of Jews. Besides, if Iran nukes Israel it will damage the mosque in Jerusalem.

thats actually nonense.

yes, Iran has 20,000 Jews in it, but thats hiding the fact that in 1979 , there were over 100,000, and there is a reason they all left , in just a few years afterwards (it wasn't the Mullah's love and affection towards the Jews I can assure you of that), so yes, I would say the regime hates Jews, its willing to live with them if they are dhimmi , thats about it.

the justification is partly that, partly the fact that Iran will try and destabalise the region, and the fact that Iran might just try to throw a bomb into Tel Aviv .

and I really don't think Iran gives a damn about wheter there is a mosque in Jerusalem , weve both seen cases of Muslims destorying mosques during a war (most recently in Iraq)

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

Then neither does USA except the F-22. [factually incorrect] Nope. Yes. See: F-35, B2, F-22, falcon htv-2, etc. That is a very mature industry. I was talking about the fighter aircraft. And they do not use the F-35. You reponded to a point where I stated The U.S. had a mature industry. See: initial post format.Did I say it didn't have a mature industry? I took your response to mean that.Nah I was just trying to say the IAF is modern since it was using the same hardware as the USAF.

- Just like the US [LOL, we use old hardware for routine sh*t and use mult-billion stealth bombers for the kind of purpose at the hand of this discussion] Well apperantly not with fighter aircraft which you brought up. Correct, we do not use those aircraft to destroy bunkers. Israel would have to use old aircraft to destroy those bunkers, though, due to their arsenal. I'm not talking about only destroying bunkers. You said the Israeli airforce use antique military hardware which is not true. It's a top notch airforce. They have pretty much the same fighter aircraft as the US. Optimized for Israel. Perhaps I overstated the antiquity of Israel's air force - it was said in relation to the fact that we sell them hardware (which I presumed used), however that is irrelevant to my primary point of argument: they do NOT have the means to eliminate Iran's capacity to develop a nuclear weapon b/c they do not have the resources to do so. And no, they do not have the same all the same fighter aircraft. (F-22s) or more importantly to this discussion, bombers. Top notch military hardware is used in combat scenarios as previously discussed.Israel sells hardware to countries too including the US. This is how it works, it's international trade even in the military industry. For example you can look up the Iron dome, Merkava, trophy system etc etc Israel develops its own and buys alot too. Such a small country cannot rely on its own military industry only. Maybe they don't have the means to eliminate Irans nuclear development but I'll look into that. I don't think it makes the IAF antique though. I doubt many countries could pull it off if not Israel could. And as I said they have the same fighter aircraft EXCEPT F-22 Point taken on the not-so-antiqueness of the Israeli air force. As I already said, that wasn't the point. And b/c they rely on international weapons industry wasn't a jab at that so much as their capacity to develop a bomb with the intent purpose of cracking open Iran's concrete-buried (designed by Iran to sustain U.S. conventional bombs to date) nuclear facilities on whim. Not many countries could pull off an air strike to (temporarily) cripple Iran's nuclear program. The fact that the U.S. has radar-evasive bombers capable of carrying an enormous payload in addition to the capacity to continually design these enormous bombs to meet the changing needs is what makes them capable of doing so. That said, even the U.S. using air strikes would be a very temporary solution. Iran could just dig deeper, to the point where it would take WMD-magnitude energy to crack. If the U.S. wants to forcefully stop Iran from building a bomb, it will require an invasion. Well what can I say except that I agree with you. I never claimed Israel could pull this off. In fact I read a report on this a long time ago and it said pretty much what you said. So yeah I agree. There were other problems mentioned as well. It was something in the line that US could maintain a constant bombardment by deploying something or some sh*t while Israel could only drop the bomb and then return to Israel. I'm no military so I don't know how to describe it.

coolbeans90

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]Anti- Semetic???.........here we go again. Just because he suggests that Israel is engaging in self destructive policies with their settlements and such, he is all of a sudden anti- semetic? He has said many time he is PRO-ISRAEL, he just believes Israel should engage in more diplomatic and peaceful policies....... anti- semetic? Really Major? Really? Redinko

If I'm not mistaken he's against Zionism and Israel's existence as a Jewish state. That for me is anti-semitic. But if he's not then I guess he's not. But this is the impression I've got from him.

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]Anti- Semetic???.........here we go again. Just because he suggests that Israel is engaging in self destructive policies with their settlements and such, he is all of a sudden anti- semetic? He has said many time he is PRO-ISRAEL, he just believes Israel should engage in more diplomatic and peaceful policies....... anti- semetic? Really Major? Really? BossPerson

If I'm not mistaken he's against Zionism and Israel's existence as a Jewish state. That for me is anti-semitic. But if he's not then I guess he's not. But this is the impression I've got from him.

I don't think you understand what Zionism is. And BTW Jews are a people. Israel was founded as the home for the Jewish PEOPLE not the Jewish religion. So if you are against the existence of a state for the Jewish people but at the same time support the existence of a state for the Palestinian people for example then yes I think you're anti-semitic.

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]Anti- Semetic???.........here we go again. Just because he suggests that Israel is engaging in self destructive policies with their settlements and such, he is all of a sudden anti- semetic? He has said many time he is PRO-ISRAEL, he just believes Israel should engage in more diplomatic and peaceful policies....... anti- semetic? Really Major? Really? Redinko

If I'm not mistaken he's against Zionism and Israel's existence as a Jewish state. That for me is anti-semitic. But if he's not then I guess he's not. But this is the impression I've got from him.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

Then neither does USA except the F-22. [factually incorrect] Nope. Yes. See: F-35, B2, F-22, falcon htv-2, etc. That is a very mature industry. I was talking about the fighter aircraft. And they do not use the F-35. You reponded to a point where I stated The U.S. had a mature industry. See: initial post format.Did I say it didn't have a mature industry? I took your response to mean that.Nah I was just trying to say the IAF is modern since it was using the same hardware as the USAF.

- Just like the US [LOL, we use old hardware for routine sh*t and use mult-billion stealth bombers for the kind of purpose at the hand of this discussion] Well apperantly not with fighter aircraft which you brought up. Correct, we do not use those aircraft to destroy bunkers. Israel would have to use old aircraft to destroy those bunkers, though, due to their arsenal. I'm not talking about only destroying bunkers. You said the Israeli airforce use antique military hardware which is not true. It's a top notch airforce. They have pretty much the same fighter aircraft as the US. Optimized for Israel. Perhaps I overstated the antiquity of Israel's air force - it was said in relation to the fact that we sell them hardware (which I presumed used), however that is irrelevant to my primary point of argument: they do NOT have the means to eliminate Iran's capacity to develop a nuclear weapon b/c they do not have the resources to do so. And no, they do not have the same all the same fighter aircraft. (F-22s) or more importantly to this discussion, bombers. Top notch military hardware is used in combat scenarios as previously discussed.Israel sells hardware to countries too including the US. This is how it works, it's international trade even in the military industry. For example you can look up the Iron dome, Merkava, trophy system etc etc Israel develops its own and buys alot too. Such a small country cannot rely on its own military industry only. Maybe they don't have the means to eliminate Irans nuclear development but I'll look into that. I don't think it makes the IAF antique though. I doubt many countries could pull it off if not Israel could. And as I said they have the same fighter aircraft EXCEPT F-22 Point taken on the not-so-antiqueness of the Israeli air force. As I already said, that wasn't the point. And b/c they rely on international weapons industry wasn't a jab at that so much as their capacity to develop a bomb with the intent purpose of cracking open Iran's concrete-buried (designed by Iran to sustain U.S. conventional bombs to date) nuclear facilities on whim. Not many countries could pull off an air strike to (temporarily) cripple Iran's nuclear program. The fact that the U.S. has radar-evasive bombers capable of carrying an enormous payload in addition to the capacity to continually design these enormous bombs to meet the changing needs is what makes them capable of doing so. That said, even the U.S. using air strikes would be a very temporary solution. Iran could just dig deeper, to the point where it would take WMD-magnitude energy to crack. If the U.S. wants to forcefully stop Iran from building a bomb, it will require an invasion. Well what can I say except that I agree with you. I never claimed Israel could pull this off. In fact I read a report on this a long time ago and it said pretty much what you said. So yeah I agree. There were other problems mentioned as well. It was something in the line that US could maintain a constant bombardment by deploying something or some sh*t while Israel could only drop the bomb and then return to Israel. I'm no military so I don't know how to describe it.

themajormayor

Pretty colors. Ahaha!

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="themajormayor"]

If I'm not mistaken he's against Zionism and Israel's existence as a Jewish state. That for me is anti-semitic. But if he's not then I guess he's not. But this is the impression I've got from him.

themajormayor

I don't think you understand what Zionism is. And BTW Jews are a people. Israel was founded as the home for the Jewish PEOPLE not the Jewish religion. So if you are against the existence of a state for the Jewish people but at the same time support the existence of a state for the Palestinian people for example then yes I think you're anti-semitic.

[QUOTE="Redinko"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] justification or not, if Israel believes Iran is developing a nuclear weapon , or is on the brink of developing one , it might attack. and it seems that Israel and most others believe it is developing one, and in politics, that means more than wheter something is justified or not.Darkman2007

By the way, what exactly are those justifications? That ahmadinejad will start a nuclear holocaust of the Jews? That's BS. Iran has thousands of Jews. Besides, if Iran nukes Israel it will damage the mosque in Jerusalem.

thats actually nonense.

yes, Iran has 20,000 Jews in it, but thats hiding the fact that in 1979 , there were over 100,000, and there is a reason they all left , in just a few years afterwards (it wasn't the Mullah's love and affection towards the Jews I can assure you of that), so yes, I would say the regime hates Jews, its willing to live with them if they are dhimmi , thats about it.

the justification is partly that, partly the fact that Iran will try and destabalise the region, and the fact that Iran might just try to throw a bomb into Tel Aviv .

and I really don't think Iran gives a damn about wheter there is a mosque in Jerusalem , weve both seen cases of Muslims destorying mosques during a war (most recently in Iraq)

So wait let me get this right, Iran is willing to live with thousands of Jews but is a few short years away from nukeing millions of jews without being provoked. LOL do you really believe that? You do know that once they nuke Tel Aviv, Tehran will be the next city to go. A city with around 16 million Irianians.

The Mosque in Jersalem is Islam's third holiest site. No one can call themselves a Muslim and not care if that mosque gets damaged.

Oh jeez. That dark blue really fvcks with your eyes.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Redinko"]Zionism =/= Jewish. However, I can see how someone who is a Zionist would use "anti-semitic" as a convenient smear

BossPerson

you mean anti zionism? being anti zionist is essentially saying the Jews do not deserve a state of their own (just like there is a German state, or a French state, or a Chinese state) if one says that Israel shouldn't be a Jewish state then he is essentially saying he doesn't want the Jews to have a state

Well what can I say except that I agree with you. I never claimed Israel could pull this off. In fact I read a report on this a long time ago and it said pretty much what you said. So yeah I agree. There were other problems mentioned as well. It was something in the line that US could maintain a constant bombardment by deploying something or some sh*t while Israel could only drop the bomb and then return to Israel. I'm no military so I don't know how to describe it.

The U.S. has military bases in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. A few years ago (back when you might have read that report) we had bases in Iraq as well. Not to mention aircraft carriers. These are all a bit closer than Israel and then there's the fact that the U.S. has a sh!t ton of aircraft. But it probably wouldn't be fully utilized unless an invasion were imminent.

Anyway, I'm out.

themajormayor

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"]Isnt zionism just Zionism is essentially Jewish nationalism and the wish to recreate the Jewish state. if someone is an Anti Zionist , then he is saying "Jews do not deserve a state, they should not have a national identity) so its essentially hating Jews as a nation , which is an evolution of the hate of Jews for religion or ethnicity. and yes, its quite possible to have Jews who oppose Zionism , but I would tell them they are more traitors than anything, no better than WWII collaborators.Darkman2007

you mean anti zionism? being anti zionist is essentially saying the Jews do not deserve a state of their own (just like there is a German state, or a French state, or a Chinese state) if one says that Israel shouldn't be a Jewish state then he is essentially saying he doesn't want the Jews to have a state

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]His quote: "I objected to the founding of Israel as a Jewish state. I don't think a Jewish or Christian or Islamic state is a proper concept. I would object to the United States as a Christian state." Also, being against zionism is not anti-semetic. Being against Israel's existence is. But saying one is anti-semetic for being against zionism is like saying one is anti-islam for saying Iran shouldnt be an islamic state.BossPerson

I don't think you understand what Zionism is. And BTW Jews are a people. Israel was founded as the home for the Jewish PEOPLE not the Jewish religion. So if you are against the existence of a state for the Jewish people but at the same time support the existence of a state for the Palestinian people for example then yes I think you're anti-semitic.

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

Necrifer

Pretty colors. Ahaha!

[QUOTE="Redinko"]

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

If I'm not mistaken he's against Zionism and Israel's existence as a Jewish state. That for me is anti-semitic. But if he's not then I guess he's not. But this is the impression I've got from him.

themajormayor

I'm against Zionism being used as a justification to confiscate land and build illegal settlements.

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"]Isnt zionism just Zionism is essentially Jewish nationalism and the wish to recreate the Jewish state. if someone is an Anti Zionist , then he is saying "Jews do not deserve a state, they should not have a national identity) so its essentially hating Jews as a nation , which is an evolution of the hate of Jews for religion or ethnicity. and yes, its quite possible to have Jews who oppose Zionism , but I would tell them they are more traitors than anything, no better than WWII collaborators.Darkman2007

you mean anti zionism? being anti zionist is essentially saying the Jews do not deserve a state of their own (just like there is a German state, or a French state, or a Chinese state) if one says that Israel shouldn't be a Jewish state then he is essentially saying he doesn't want the Jews to have a state

[QUOTE="themajormayor"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]His quote: "I objected to the founding of Israel as a Jewish state. I don't think a Jewish or Christian or Islamic state is a proper concept. I would object to the United States as a Christian state." Also, being against zionism is not anti-semetic. Being against Israel's existence is. But saying one is anti-semetic for being against zionism is like saying one is anti-islam for saying Iran shouldnt be an islamic state.BossPerson

I don't think you understand what Zionism is. And BTW Jews are a people. Israel was founded as the home for the Jewish PEOPLE not the Jewish religion. So if you are against the existence of a state for the Jewish people but at the same time support the existence of a state for the Palestinian people for example then yes I think you're anti-semitic.

[QUOTE="themajormayor"][QUOTE="Redinko"]Zionism =/= Jewish. However, I can see how someone who is a Zionist would use "anti-semitic" as a convenient smear

Redinko

I'm against Zionism being used as a justification to confiscate land and build illegal settlements.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

[QUOTE="Redinko"]That's exactly my point: actions are taken without proper justification and the result is something called blow back.

By the way, what exactly are those justifications? That ahmadinejad will start a nuclear holocaust of the Jews? That's BS. Iran has thousands of Jews. Besides, if Iran nukes Israel it will damage the mosque in Jerusalem.

Redinko

thats actually nonense.

yes, Iran has 20,000 Jews in it, but thats hiding the fact that in 1979 , there were over 100,000, and there is a reason they all left , in just a few years afterwards (it wasn't the Mullah's love and affection towards the Jews I can assure you of that), so yes, I would say the regime hates Jews, its willing to live with them if they are dhimmi , thats about it.

the justification is partly that, partly the fact that Iran will try and destabalise the region, and the fact that Iran might just try to throw a bomb into Tel Aviv .

and I really don't think Iran gives a damn about wheter there is a mosque in Jerusalem , weve both seen cases of Muslims destorying mosques during a war (most recently in Iraq)

So wait let me get this right, Iran is willing to live with thousands of Jews but is a few short years away from nukeing millions of jews without being provoked. LOL do you really believe that? You do know that once they nuke Tel Aviv, Tehran will be the next city to go. A city with around 16 million Irianians.

The Mosque in Jersalem is Islam's third holiest site. No one can call themselves a Muslim and not care if that mosque gets damaged.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]isnt zionism just being against israel existing as a jewish state? You cant still support israel's existence without saying that it should be a jewish state in the same way iran is a muslim state....BossPerson

you mean anti zionism? being anti zionist is essentially saying the Jews do not deserve a state of their own (just like there is a German state, or a French state, or a Chinese state) if one says that Israel shouldn't be a Jewish state then he is essentially saying he doesn't want the Jews to have a state

[QUOTE="Redinko"]

[QUOTE="themajormayor"] Being against the right for Jews to engage in self-determination but support it for other people=anti-semitism.themajormayor

I'm against Zionism being used as a justification to confiscate land and build illegal settlements.