Corwin

50kt in a major city is something that never becomes 'obsolete.'

Yes, they'd piss a lot of people off, probably including us. If they were really the monsters you seem to think they are... why would they care?

Political reasons? Nope. Why would they need alliances anymore?

Economic reasons? Also nope. They'd have a handle on oil reserves and they already pretty much control the diamond market.

Somone would nuke them back? Maybe... maybe not. Again.... if they were the bloodthirsty monsters you seem to think they are.... why would they care?

Sauron

Irrelevant. The usefulness of a weapon is not defined by its payload. I'm surprised you would even hold such a ridiculous position.

The usefulness of a weapon is defined by the willingness of its owner to use it. You could have a tri-cobalt weapon with a payload of 500 MT - but if the owner were the Dalai Lama or Pope John Paul II, then the weapon may as well not exist.

It isn't payload that matters. Your argument betrays a naivete and simplicity of thinking.

Wow. Not really plugged in to reality, are you?

1. Because they arent' stupid enough to bite the hand that feeds them. Even a rabid dog knows better than to bite the hand that throws it a bone. The USA sends several billion dollars a year in aid to Israel. The trade ties to Europe are worth probably ten times that.

2. And if Israel were to use nuclear weapons, then all the progress it has made with Egypt, Jordan, etc. would evaporate. It would be back to square one.

3. Finally, given the location of various countries, the nuclear fallout could drift over NATO members, or other key US allies (such as Saudi Arabia). Those countries would expect the USA to fulfill its treaty obligations to them.


Israel would have been dead in the cradle without such alliances.


Israel has no "handle" on oil reserves.

And the diamond market isn't going to keep an entire national economy afloat.

[Insults removed--attack the message, not the poster.]

Corwin

And clearly the owners of THESE weapons have shown restraint.

Doesn't exactly sound like a bunch of bloodthirsty monsters to me.

And after the use of atomic weapons? Gee... suddenly they don't need that aid anymore.... nobody left to fight.

If Israel were to use nuclear weapons, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, etc would evaporate.

Depending on the weapon used, there would be little or no fallout to fall. (Thermonukes produce very little, most of it short range.) Saudi Arabia could expect to be part of this parking lot, btw. After all... we're talking about evil here, remember?

Gee.... remembering such obligations would suggest a level of trustworthiness..... not at all what I'd expect of an evil, agressive, expansionist, treaty breaking rogue nation....

They would if they wiped out the existing inhabitants. You mentioned naievete?

It's not a terribly large nation.... they don't have our budgets. Also, expect prices to increase after such an action.... you're underestimating the money involved both in the gemstone market and in industrials....

Evolutionary theory 'doesn't make any sense' to creationists either.

Sauron

Translation: your original argument bombed.

1. I claimed that the current military scenario made such weapons obsolete.
2. You lamely responded 50kt in a major city is something that never becomes 'obsolete.'
3. Then I responded that payload isn't what counts.
4. Now you're trying to base your argument, off of my previous point. Nice to know that you admit I'm correct - even though you can't bring yourself to admit it.

But in point of fact, your statement actually is not correct. Israel has not shown "restraint". It has shown a keen sense of self-interest. For all the reasons I listed earlier:

1. Because they arent' stupid enough to bite the hand that feeds them. Even a rabid dog knows better than to bite the hand that throws it a bone. The USA sends several billion dollars a year in aid to Israel. The trade ties to Europe are worth probably ten times that.

2. And if Israel were to use nuclear weapons, then all the progress it has made with Egypt, Jordan, etc. would evaporate. It would be back to square one.

3. Finally, given the location of various countries, the nuclear fallout could drift over NATO members, or other key US allies (such as Saudi Arabia). Those countries would expect the USA to fulfill its treaty obligations to them.

Why use nukes, when the same result can be achieved with conventional weapons?

You really don't know much about the US-Israel military and economic alliances, do you?

Even if the Arab states didn't exist, Israel would still need aid from the US. Its economy is in far worse shape than the US economy. And Israel also relies on unofficial aid from Jews living abroad - much of which would evaporate, if Israel used nuclear weapons.

Yawn. Non sequitir comment, totally unrelated to the topic.
Here; let me refresh you:

1. I said Israel would be idiotic to use nukes.
2. You said "why wouldn't they care"?
3. I responded, "Because they'd lose all the progress they made."

Pointing out that surrounding countries would suffer doesn't answer my point. As usual.


Incorrect. Thermonuclear weapons produce substantial fallout.

Ah, I see. The troll emerges from underneath the bridge.

1. Saudi did nothing - why should they suffer?

2. Evil - who decided that Saudi was evil? The same Israelis who rationalize away the ethnic cleansing of Arabs from their homes and lands?


Which Israel has not shown. Recall that Israel and the US were on opposite sides in the 1956 war.

My point exactly. Israel is expansionist and opportunistic.


What oil reserves? The front-line Arab states dont' have any oil.

Naivete? Sounds more like you, for not realizing that oil and frontline states don't go together very well.


1. Howler of a stupid argument. They may not be large, but they most certainly don't control the diamond market. That's primarily controlled by the DeBeers cartel, which is centered in South Africa and in Brussels.

2. As for diamond production, the key producers in the world are Australia and the former USSR.

3. A rise in cosmetic diamonds is irrelevant. You are trying to paint it like a $10.00 rise in the price of a barrel of crude oil. How pathetic of you. It isn't that critical. Not even industrial diamonds are that critical - especially since they can be artificially manufactured.


I'm well acquainted with evolutionary theory.
Your views are more like creationism, than anything Darwin ever proposed.

Corwin

Restatement of the same issues. (With less coherence this time.)

The fact remains.... if they were really the evil monsters you seem to think they are, why would they care about any of these? Nukemall.

Clearly the same result isn't being achieved.

Oh but them evil Zionists will keep sending money!

Pfft. They need three things for their populace. Food, water, shelter. They can produce all of these. They also have a great deal of technical know-how. (More so than most nations in the region actually....) They would also have a great deal of newly cleared space and resources.

Doesn't exactly sound like a problem to me. Assuming you're willing to kill several million people.... kinda suggests they aren't in fact willing to do this... doesn't it?

Pointing out that the surrounding countries wouldn't BE there anymore does.

Incorrect. Thermonuclear weapons, (being based on fusion, frequently with a fission nuke primer) produce a fair amount of gamma radiation, which is blocked by a substantial amount of air. (Or any other matter.)

Nuclear weapons, (fission weapons) produce a fair amount of fallout which can spread... (Uranium and Plutonium left over from the blast.) The Tsar Bomba was a thermonuke, and produced an enormous amount of fallout... it was also detonated at roughly 50 megatons and had an enormous fission nuke as a trigger.

It's actually the Israelis I'm referring to here, since the implication is that they're evil monsters. (And if they'd nuke Jordan, do you honestly think they wouldn't nuke Saudi Arabia?)

And yet they've still maintained a basic alliance and have kept their agreements.... (they're no longer in Sinai, remember? Among other situations? Oh that's right... you can't bring yourself to accept that the Israelis have actually been keeping their cease fires overall... until they start getting shot at again.)


An expansionist nation that's actually willingly ceded territory, (remember Sinai?) but hasn't made any serious land grabs in about 30 years.... hmmmmm.....

And one of the benefits of mounting an explosive weapon on a rocket, or putting it in a large plane, is not having to worry as much about trifling little details like range.....

And who does DeBeers go through?

Oh yeah.... predominantly jewish owned cutters and sellers.

You mean you didn't know that? Hmmm... don't know as much about the diamond industry as you think, now do you?

And all those diamonds? Yeah... go through the same markets. And have to be cut by the same people. DeBeers doesn't sell directly to the public.

Actually a rise in cosmetic diamonds would be a hell of a lot. How many are bought? It all adds up. Again, remember that Israel doesn't have a trillion dollar budget, nor do they need one.

By the way.... artifical industrial diamonds are hellishly expensive.... it takes a LOT to make them. They don't cost anywhere near what gem quality stones do.... but it's like artifically producing hydrogen or antimatter.... you can do it... but t'ain't free.

I suspect you are... it's a question of attitude, not specific knowledge.

slept2long

I made a mistake in editing. I had a response that the map would have clarified but erased it.

slept2long

I'll look into this. Can't say I am familiar enough to agree or disagree.
Actually they prepared to attack but got beat to the punch. Again! Some allies huh? All they do is bring the army of the country they are trying to defeat onto your land.

When will the Pals learn they have no friends in the world and they should just pack up and leave? I say that half seriously.

Jat

Originally posted by Loren Pechtel

Some of the top bad guys can be hard to catch but that's a matter of keeping things secret, not their ability to get away from forces actually after them.

The Israeli use of such cowardly weapons more often then not kills more innocent civilians than their target. If American police tried the same thing everyone would speak up loudly against it.

As others have said, freedom fighters attack the opposing force. Terrorists attack the opposing civilians.

Like the carpet bombing of German cities and the vaporization of two Japanese cities as well? I suppose that there were nothing but soldiers in each of these targets? But hey, they were only collateral damage and thus acceptable. And of course the American founding fathers only waged war against the British army and not many of their own colonists who didn't want to be part of their revolution. I suppose that many of them kindly gave all of their property to them and then either left with nothing or killed themselves?

You redefined them as freedom fighters instead of terrorists--but in doing so you accepted the initial claim.

You're the one who is doing the redefining here, not I.

Jat

When did Egypt get the Gaza Strip back?

Jat

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That's a good one, Information Minister.