Secondly, why does the U.S. seem to always call the shots for Israel? Are they not an independent nation? If they want to defend themselves against Syria (which they have in bombing a nuclear facility) and Iraq (the same) and Iran, then are they free to do so?
Nevertheless, it would be best if Syria, Isreal, Iran, etc, etc let go of chemical and nuclear weapons. If not, this will continue to be a thorn in the ME that will continue to fester.
Just me two cents...
The Putin-offered Obama deal raised this specter.
The Kerry gaffe laid the foundation...
Re giving them up — good luck with that.
Israel can take all the pressure this piss ant little President has to give. She knows that her final option of delivering all those fricking Muslims to their Allah is in her hands if she needs it.
The rest of the world can suck it.
Israel is the LAST people on the planet who should be asked to disarm themselves.
Israel will never give up their nukes.
The problem with your analysis is that Israel would be disarming itself with no assurance any other Middle East country would comply.
“No.”
Jupiter missiles out of Turkey ...
No!
I have no doubt that Israel will relinquish some of their tactical nuclear weapons... at a time and target of their own choosing.
“If Syria must get rid of its chemical weapons, the reasoning goes, why can’t Israel do the same?”
Reasoning? There’s no reasoning there.
fock that, Israel needs all the weaponry it can get, why would they give up nuclear while Iran develops theirs?
How about hell no, nuclear and chemical won’t go
Israel must and will retain the capability to deter enemies and defend itself against vastly larger forces.
Obama can kiss off on this one. He and Putin set up this charade to bring up the subject of Israel’s nuclear counter fire.... America managed to get S. Africa to transfer her WMD before forcing the white government out, however there were three other nations that benefited from the same program that allowed development of nuclear weapons. Each of the four nations were kept from being full members of the UN by China and Russia, or the Arab bloc. During the cold war, it was a time when if war between super powers erupted, proxies at all levels would respond to the larger confrontation. The USSR armed it’s proxies with Chemical Weapons on their own order of battle, with the same equipment and deployment of their forces - hence the US/NATO ability to destroy these forces in the Middle East at will, given the failure of the equipment to keep pace in a technologically changing world with the USSR’s demise. US Clients or proxies were given a continuous and uninterrupted flow of weapons technology. Reviving the cold war by Russia today is a bad idea since they themselves are still rebuilding after Gorby sought peace from a point of weakness. Those other three nations have never been invaded by their neighbors since the suspected 1878-1979 explosions off S. Africa’s coast which were suspected to be nuclear. Two of the three countries today are thriving Tigers in Asia and the third has her ancient capital in Jerusalem.
LOL thats funny
EXPORT!
Air delivery works.
> If Syria must get rid of its chemical weapons, the reasoning goes, why can’t Israel do the same?
Because Israel is NOT controlled by 7th century religious nutjobs who desire to force their evil religion upon everyone. The islam party would use them to terrorize and kill millions.
Only ignorant and/or leftists do not understand this fact.
If only the defenders would lay down their arms, the fighting would soon end.
(With the death or enslavement of the defenders).
Aggressors of the world - UNITE!