NationStates Jolt Archive

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7085213.stm)
Aljazeera (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0B4D1D04-CF95-4ED1-81F2-8B5E24360711.htm)

Shaul Mofaz told Israel Radio that ElBaradei's policies "endanger world peace" and described his attitude to Iran's activities as "irresponsible".

ElBaradei is expected to issue another report on November 22 on the progress of Iran's nuclear programme.

The findings will be a key part of further discussions at the United Nations on whether to impose a third set if sanctions on Tehran.

Mofaz said: "The policies followed by ElBaradei endanger world peace.

"His irresponsible attitude of sticking his head in the sand over Iran's nuclear programme should lead to his impeachment."

Heh, I'm guessing the report isn't going to be hinting at an advanced weapons program, then?

I am very cynical of this move and I've lost any respect I might previously have had for Mr Mofaz. I do wonder what "policies" of the IAEA head he's referring to. The policies of logical investigation as opposed to barking a poltical line, perhaps?

Seeing as ElBaradei and the IAEA have seemed to be at least partly interested in performing a fair and thorough look into the actual policies and activities of Iran, I'll trust their word on this issue more than those of the politicians, so I'm looking forward to the report at the end of the month. But I'm guessing that's why guys like Mr Mofaz are already slinging mud at him, it's the only way politicians know of fighting factual discourse.

But yes, thoughts on Mofaz's statements, please.

How the feck does the IAEA have 'policies'? Classic case of blaming the messenger for the message. The Israel Right is just upset that the IAEA is not pandering for war like it is.

How the feck does the IAEA have 'policies'? Classic case of blaming the messenger for the message. The Israel Right is just upset that the IAEA is not pandering for war like it is.

QFT.

Also, I wonder if El Baradei is a danger, what is the Israeli cabinet, with its constant "we-are-ready-to-strike-a-sovereign-country-without-war-declaration"?

You can't let a little thing like facts get in the way.

:p

You can't let a little thing like facts get in the way.

:p

You know, if all the rhetorically charged factually blind people were gathered together in an enclosed space, do you think it would warp reality?

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7085213.stm)
Aljazeera (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0B4D1D04-CF95-4ED1-81F2-8B5E24360711.htm)



Heh, I'm guessing the report isn't going to be hinting at an advanced weapons program, then?

I am very cynical of this move and I've lost any respect I might previously have had for Mr Mofaz. I do wonder what "policies" of the IAEA head he's referring to. The policies of logical investigation as opposed to barking a poltical line, perhaps?

Seeing as ElBaradei and the IAEA have seemed to be at least partly interested in performing a fair and thorough look into the actual policies and activities of Iran, I'll trust their word on this issue more than those of the politicians, so I'm looking forward to the report at the end of the month. But I'm guessing that's why guys like Mr Mofaz are already slinging mud at him, it's the only way politicians know of fighting factual discourse.

But yes, thoughts on Mofaz's statements, please.

Well, Mr ElBaradei would surely be delighted if the Mossad shared any reliable insights it may have gained with the IAEA. Otherwise Mofaz should just stfu.

Oh, and on that occasion, why don't the Israelis disclose all their own nuclear activities and ambitions to the IAEA ?... ElBaradei's delight would be immeasurable.

Well, Mr ElBaradei would surely be delighted if the Mossad shared any reliable insights it may have gained with the IAEA. Otherwise Mofaz should just stfu.

Well I expect that's why Mofaz is saying it, he knows Iran is not developing nukes so he wants to blame someone.

Mofaz is a known idiot. People should not listen to him.

Who cares about Shaul Mofaz?

He is the voice of just a few people.

Let us not make him important, 'cause he's not, lucid spoken.

Maybe he doesn't like my girl as well. Who cares?

Mofaz is a known idiot. People should not listen to him.Israel Deputy Prime Minister.

Who cares about Shaul Mofaz?

He is the voice of just a few people. ...Israel Deputy Prime Minister.

Israel Deputy Prime Minister.

Israel Deputy Prime Minister.

So? Deputy PM's and Vice Presidents are often morons with too much influence who got their position because nobody thinks they can do any damage there.

Remember "Mister Potatoe Head"?

Israel Deputy Prime Minister.

So? Bush is an idiot as well, and he is the president of the United states!

Besides, people don't get elected to this position, but are there because of political considerations. He doesn't have to have a certain skill, he can be dumb as a puppet and still be there.

Israel Deputy Prime Minister.

Israel Deputy Prime Minister.

So ?

Israel, that's about 6,426,679 (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/is.html#People) people


Now the world. That's about 6,602,224,175 (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html#People) people.


So he is representing 0,097% of the world.

That’s almost nothing.

So he is representing 0,097% of the world.

He is representing nobody. I can't think of even a single person in my close environment that would seriously consider voting for him. As said - He's an idiot. He was a good option several months ago, but then he opened his mouth.

He is representing nobody. I can't think of even a single person in my close environment that would seriously consider voting for him. As said - He's an idiot. He was a good option several months ago, but then he opened his mouth.

On top of that, Israel has several people who hold the title "deputy prime minister."

Of course facts about the Israeli government won't stop Jew haters like UB and EA/AP. (their hatred is of Jews, not Israel as has been documented in their months of posting)

That being said, Mofaz is an idiot, but that is true of most of the current cabinet. I'm awaiting the return of Bibi.

I'm awaiting the return of Bibi.

Really?! I refer to him as the chief-idiot! The man is a snake and an egoist liar.

Really?! I refer to him as the chief-idiot! The man is a snake and an egoist liar.

Bibi isn't great, but he is infinitely better than Olmert. Although, Olmert has a huge chance to redeem himself at the end of this month.

The next PM will be either Bibi or Barak as they are the heads of their respective parties. Kadima will become irrelevant in the next election cycle.

Politicky wankerinig. As to be expected.

So? Bush is an idiot as well, and he is the president of the United states!The problem is that the US gov has nuclear weapons and Israel Gov does not have nuclear weapons..
thats why having WARMONGER idiots in the US gov is much more dangerous. :D

The problem is that the US gov has nuclear weapons and Israel Gov does not have nuclear weapons, thats why having idiots in the US gov is more dangerous. :D

But...but...the Israelis have a substantial quantity of nuclear arms...

But...but...the Israelis have a substantial quantity of nuclear arms...see?? I can do it even without the invisible messages.

;)

see?? I can do it even without the white text.

;)

Good work...try it more often.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7085213.stm)
Aljazeera (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0B4D1D04-CF95-4ED1-81F2-8B5E24360711.htm)



Heh, I'm guessing the report isn't going to be hinting at an advanced weapons program, then?

I am very cynical of this move and I've lost any respect I might previously have had for Mr Mofaz. I do wonder what "policies" of the IAEA head he's referring to. The policies of logical investigation as opposed to barking a poltical line, perhaps?

Seeing as ElBaradei and the IAEA have seemed to be at least partly interested in performing a fair and thorough look into the actual policies and activities of Iran, I'll trust their word on this issue more than those of the politicians, so I'm looking forward to the report at the end of the month. But I'm guessing that's why guys like Mr Mofaz are already slinging mud at him, it's the only way politicians know of fighting factual discourse.

But yes, thoughts on Mofaz's statements, please.

Mr. Mofaz has to act tough because (I think) he is being tested. I don't know the credibility of Wikipedia, but when you put down his name (Shaul Mofaz), it states that he was born in Tehran, Iran in 1948. Also the previous Israeli president (Moshe Katsav) is reported to be from Iran. So when Mofaz is in a position to overlook the security of the Israeli Jews and the "enemy" happens to be from the country he originated from, he is in a hard position. If he mentions that Israel should have a dialogue with Iran, everyone might look at him as being mad or even worst, maybe a traitor.

I don't know the credibility of Wikipedia, but when you put down his name (Shaul Mofaz), it states that he was born in Tehran, Iran in 1948.

Yes, it's correct.

The IAEA is as ridiculous as the UN. What action did North Korea face for lying about their program and violating the agreements? Let's see, nothing? Who can take anything the IAEA says seriously?

The UN and and all it's underling organizations are a complete joke. They are nailing a list of laws to a door and have no will to enforce them.

People are kidding themselves if they don't think ElBaradei is a biased political hack, just like Blix. He's more interested in making excuses for Iran's actions, like you know threatening to exterminate the Israelis, taking Western hostages, openly funding terrorism, and you know, just sending troops and volunteers to Iraq to help terrorists.

I wish they were a fraction as interested in stopping Iran from having the ability to cause World War 3 and a nuclear holocaust than they are in preventing any kind of US actions.

And for the record, I don't support an attack on Iran. I believe that their leadership, government and religious should be assassinated. Dictatorships are easy to topple. Western governments simply don't have the will to do what's necessary.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7085213.stm)
Aljazeera (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0B4D1D04-CF95-4ED1-81F2-8B5E24360711.htm)

Heh, I'm guessing the report isn't going to be hinting at an advanced weapons program, then?

I am very cynical of this move and I've lost any respect I might previously have had for Mr Mofaz. I do wonder what "policies" of the IAEA head he's referring to. The policies of logical investigation as opposed to barking a poltical line, perhaps?

But yes, thoughts on Mofaz's statements, please.
I find the following quote very interesting and extremely ironic:

Shaul Mofaz told Israel Radio that ElBaradei's policies "endanger world peace" and described his attitude to Iran's activities as "irresponsible".
Israel's policies do not "endanger world peace"? After all, it is Israel that illegally has nuclear weapons? It is Israel that continues to defy the UN?

Israel is the target of at least 65 UN Resolutions and the Palestinians are the target of none. (http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/un.html)

Seeing as ElBaradei and the IAEA have seemed to be at least partly interested in performing a fair and thorough look into the actual policies and activities of Iran, I'll trust their word on this issue more than those of the politicians, so I'm looking forward to the report at the end of the month. But I'm guessing that's why guys like Mr Mofaz are already slinging mud at him, it's the only way politicians know of fighting factual discourse.
I agree!!

People are kidding themselves if they don't think ElBaradei is a biased political hack, just like Blix.
Your proof to the contrary?

Israel's policies do not "endanger world peace"? After all, it is Israel that illegally has nuclear weapons? It is Israel that continues to defy the UN?

Israel is the target of at least 65 UN Resolutions and the Palestinians are the target of none. (http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/un.html)



Just for classification, do you know if these are general body resolutions, or UNSC?

The IAEA is as ridiculous as the UN. What action did North Korea face for lying about their program and violating the agreements? Let's see, nothing? Who can take anything the IAEA says seriously?

The UN and and all it's underling organizations are a complete joke. They are nailing a list of laws to a door and have no will to enforce them.

People are kidding themselves if they don't think ElBaradei is a biased political hack, just like Blix. He's more interested in making excuses for Iran's actions, like you know threatening to exterminate the Israelis, taking Western hostages, openly funding terrorism, and you know, just sending troops and volunteers to Iraq to help terrorists.

I wish they were a fraction as interested in stopping Iran from having the ability to cause World War 3 and a nuclear holocaust than they are in preventing any kind of US actions.

And for the record, I don't support an attack on Iran. I believe that their leadership, government and religious should be assassinated. Dictatorships are easy to topple. Western governments simply don't have the will to do what's necessary.Senator Lieberman? is that you? :D :D :D :D

Senator Lieberman? is that you? :D :D :D :D

Ba-Zing! :D

The IAEA is as ridiculous as the UN. What action did North Korea face for lying about their program and violating the agreements? Let's see, nothing? Who can take anything the IAEA says seriously?

The UN and and all it's underling organizations are a complete joke. They are nailing a list of laws to a door and have no will to enforce them.

People are kidding themselves if they don't think ElBaradei is a biased political hack, just like Blix. He's more interested in making excuses for Iran's actions, like you know threatening to exterminate the Israelis, taking Western hostages, openly funding terrorism, and you know, just sending troops and volunteers to Iraq to help terrorists.

I wish they were a fraction as interested in stopping Iran from having the ability to cause World War 3 and a nuclear holocaust than they are in preventing any kind of US actions.

And for the record, I don't support an attack on Iran. I believe that their leadership, government and religious should be assassinated. Dictatorships are easy to topple. Western governments simply don't have the will to do what's necessary.

The fundamental problem with the UN is that they require the agreement of the major powers in order to do anything. All ElBaradei can do is negotiate diplomatically or press for sanctions...neither of which seem to be doing anything. My question is simple, what can the UN do without the support of the major powers? (nada) Which country is willing to give it's troops to the UN so that they could take a stronger line on Iran? (none, at the moment)

As for North Korea, what was the UN supposed to do? They already sanctioned North Korea and clearly that didn't work. Hostile actions against North Korea would have been dubious considering the size of their army and it's proximity to South Korea.

I don't think that it's the UN that doesn't have the "will" to enforce the laws, they just don't have the means with which to enforce them.

So what's the point in the IAEA if they don't do anything about it?

If North Korea can straight up lie about what they are doing and not face any actions, then why would anyone listen to anything the IAEA says?

Just for classification, do you know if these are general body resolutions, or UNSC?
I do believe that they are all UNSC Resolutions.

Pertinent United Nations Security Council Resolutions Since 1967 As They Relate to Israel (http://www.mediamonitors.net/michaelsladah&suleimaniajlouni1.html)

People are kidding themselves if they don't think ElBaradei is a biased political hack, just like Blix.

Your proof to the contrary?
Still waiting for your proof.

Look at the statements he's made. It's the same as Blix. Despite the fact that Saddam had pushed the inspectors out of the country and violated the agreements he was bound to in a million ways, his entire purpose was to stop any kind of military conflict. Even though the agreements called for military force to intervene, his agenda was always excuses for Iraq.

Despite all of the things than Iran has done, ElBaradei's agenda is 100% to stop any kind of military action to prevent Iran from getting nukes. Just look at his statements and tell me that he isn't acting as an apologist.

Look at the statements he's made. It's the same as Blix. Despite the fact that Saddam had pushed the inspectors out of the country and violated the agreements he was bound to in a million ways, his entire purpose was to stop any kind of military conflict. Even though the agreements called for military force to intervene, his agenda was always excuses for Iraq..

He said he hadn't found any weapons and wanted more time to ensure none were there. He was right. The war was wrong, thus so are you.

He said he hadn't found any weapons and wanted more time to ensure none were there. He was right. The war was wrong, thus so are you.
I typed my reply without reading yours....bang on!! :)

Look at the statements he's made. It's the same as Blix. Despite the fact that Saddam had pushed the inspectors out of the country and violated the agreements he was bound to in a million ways, his entire purpose was to stop any kind of military conflict. Even though the agreements called for military force to intervene, his agenda was always excuses for Iraq.

Despite all of the things than Iran has done, ElBaradei's agenda is 100% to stop any kind of military action to prevent Iran from getting nukes. Just look at his statements and tell me that he isn't acting as an apologist.
Your opinion does not equal fact. Posting relative information might improve your chances of actually proving your point.

As far as Blix is concerned, quess what? He was right.....the US found zero WMD and certainly no nuclear capabilities whatever. He wanted more time.....Bush was unwilling to have Blix prove him wrong. And the result? Catastrophe!!

Pointing out that ElBaradei is a biased hack is my opinion based on his statements, not a scientific fact. I thought that would be fairly obvious.

And WMD was not the sole reason for the Iraq war. Despite the media trying to claim that later, it was most certainly not. Saddam's absolute refusal and obstruction of the useless UN teams were one part of it.

People forget that Saddam violated the agreements for twelve years and any single infraction automatically sanctioned military intervention, any single violation at all. But the UN had no interest in actually enforcing them. They pushed the inspectors out of the country on numerous occasions and nothing was done, it was only excuses. That's why it's so hilarious that people call the Iraq War illegal, when any strike on Iraq since 1991 is completely justified under the agreements signed.

And I remind you that Saddam Hussein thought that he had WMD. His scientists lied to him and the information that every single intelligence organization got was from real info that was false. People always seem to forget that.

And it's no coincidence that the people on this board seemed more concerned about an air attack on Iran's military forces than a nuclear weapon they develop being used by a terrorist which would kill millions and cause WW3. It's any excuse for Iran's behavior for you people. Saying the Israelis should be exterminated or taking hostages is always justified by something.

North Korea told the IAEA that they weren't building nuclear weapons and that's all we heard. There's no evidence. That doesn't mean it's not true. It's a total joke.

And WMD was not the sole reason for the Iraq war. Despite the media trying to claim that later, it was most certainly not. Saddam's absolute refusal and obstruction of the useless UN teams were one part of it..

Bollocks. They were asking for more time at the end, not saying they were blocked.



People forget that Saddam violated the agreements for twelve years ..

Israel has been in violation for fourty years. Four decades. Why havent they been invaded or put under sanctions?



And I remind you that Saddam Hussein thought that he had WMD. His scientists lied to him ..

Thats not mentioned in the Iraq Survey Group report. Why?



and the information that every single intelligence organization got was from real info that was false...

....no comprende le shite-talk. Try again, in anglais.

Pointing out that ElBaradei is a biased hack is my opinion based on his statements, not a scientific fact. I thought that would be fairly obvious.

And WMD was not the sole reason for the Iraq war. Despite the media trying to claim that later, it was most certainly not. Saddam's absolute refusal and obstruction of the useless UN teams were one part of it.

People forget that Saddam violated the agreements for twelve years and any single infraction automatically sanctioned military intervention, any single violation at all. But the UN had no interest in actually enforcing them. They pushed the inspectors out of the country on numerous occasions and nothing was done, it was only excuses. That's why it's so hilarious that people call the Iraq War illegal, when any strike on Iraq since 1991 is completely justified under the agreements signed.

And I remind you that Saddam Hussein thought that he had WMD. His scientists lied to him and the information that every single intelligence organization got was from real info that was false. People always seem to forget that.

And it's no coincidence that the people on this board seemed more concerned about an air attack on Iran's military forces than a nuclear weapon they develop being used by a terrorist which would kill millions and cause WW3. It's any excuse for Iran's behavior for you people. Saying the Israelis should be exterminated or taking hostages is always justified by something.

North Korea told the IAEA that they weren't building nuclear weapons and that's all we heard. There's no evidence. That doesn't mean it's not true. It's a total joke.
Nice rant....too bad it is devoid of reality. :eek:

As far as ElBaradei is concerned, if you could post something that could augment your claims, rather than giving us your opinion, then we could actually debate the issue?

Nodina, you are going to say that 12 years of obstruction, booting out UN inspectors and blatantly lying about treaty violations is bollocks? That military action against Iraq wasn't acceptable at any time after they violated the agreements they signed? Forgive me for even addressing you, I promise it won't happen again.

I just told you to read all of his statements and tell me that he is not biased and an apologist for Iran. Much like Blix was for Iraq. It is my opinion of course, not a scientific fact, it can't be.

It's impossible to prove someone is biased in such a case, only reading into what they say. It's obvious that ElBaradei doesn't want Iran to face any kind of action and he continues to attack the US for publicly wanting action instead of holding Iran accountable for it's statements.

Nodina, you are going to say that 12 years of obstruction, booting out UN inspectors and blatantly lying about treaty violations is bollocks? That military action against Iraq wasn't acceptable at any time after they violated the agreements they signed? Forgive me for even addressing you, I promise it won't happen again.

I just told you to read all of his statements and tell me that he is not biased and an apologist for Iran. Much like Blix was for Iraq. It is my opinion of course, not a scientific fact, it can't be.

It's impossible to prove someone is biased in such a case, only reading into what they say. It's obvious that ElBaradei doesn't want Iran to face any kind of action and he continues to attack the US for publicly wanting action instead of holding Iran accountable for it's statements.Blix and ElBaradei possess an integrity unknown to Americans. US warmongering just did and does not impress them.

Nodina, you are going to say that 12 years of obstruction, booting out UN inspectors and blatantly lying about treaty violations is bollocks? .

In the greater scheme of things, yes. And there were no weapons.



That military action against Iraq wasn't acceptable at any time after they violated the agreements they signed? .

Unacceptable and illegal.


It's obvious that ElBaradei doesn't want Iran to face any kind of action and he continues to attack the US for publicly wanting action instead of holding Iran accountable for it's statements.

Why can't the Americans be made accountable for their statements? Why can't the Brits or the Israelis?

Mr. Mofaz has to act tough because (I think) he is being tested. I don't know the credibility of Wikipedia, but when you put down his name (Shaul Mofaz), it states that he was born in Tehran, Iran in 1948. Also the previous Israeli president (Moshe Katsav) is reported to be from Iran. So when Mofaz is in a position to overlook the security of the Israeli Jews and the "enemy" happens to be from the country he originated from, he is in a hard position. If he mentions that Israel should have a dialogue with Iran, everyone might look at him as being mad or even worst, maybe a traitor.Waw, an Aryan Jew. How ironic.

You must remember he's from Kadima.

Kadima has failed on all it's promises to voters. EVERYTHING. ALL OF IT.

Their only grasp at remaining in power is scaring people with the OMG IRANIAN THREAT. They will fudge any facts to remain in power.

Same as McCain and his band of faux-Republicans.

I believe that their leadership, government and religious should be assassinated. Dictatorships are easy to topple. Western governments simply don't have the will to do what's necessary.

I believe that people like you, who only believe that violence solves everything, if you all were to suddenly drop dead, the world would be a much happier place.

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en-commons/thumb/9/9e/300px-Vasnetsov_Grave_digger.JPG

Naughty grave-digger!

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en-commons/thumb/9/9e/300px-Vasnetsov_Grave_digger.JPG

Naughty grave-digger!

*slaps forehead*

I can't believe I didn't see the post date disparity.

After all, it is Israel that illegally has nuclear weapons?
Actually, there are five nations that are exempt from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty because they are permanent members of the Security Council (US, Russia, UK, France, China) and five which are not bound by the Treaty because they are not signatories: India, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea, Cuba. North Korea has entered into other agreements (and are not very compliant); Cuba has never pursued a nuclear-weapons program but has reserved its right to do so. Israel, like India and Pakistan, never joined the agreement; unlike them, Israel has never publicly acknowledged owning nuclear weapons (although everybody knows anyway)-- but there is nothing "illegal" about having them.

*slaps forehead*

I can't believe I didn't see the post date disparity.

At least you didn't do the original grave-digging ;)

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en-commons/thumb/9/9e/300px-Vasnetsov_Grave_digger.JPG

Naughty grave-digger!
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a205/ulteriormotives/Zombie-Killer-Avatar2.png

Kill it! Kill it now!
*slaps forehead*

I can't believe I didn't see the post date disparity.
That's because the disparity is split between two pages.