Posted on 03/04/2015 7:33:23 AM PST by Laissez-faire capitalist
What say you?
Or maybe Israel just reserves the right to share nuclear technology with its allies should Israel be existentially threatened. Same reason Israel might have submarines to guaranty a retaliatory ability. Keeps them guessing.
Not a chance (BS flag goes here: ). . Not so long as Israel is threatened by insane rabid islamoNazis who are 100 times as numerous and who rule 100 times as much land. It’s tough, very tough being peaceful and “good neighborly” when you’re surrounded by the dregs of Satan’s Legions Hellbent on destroying you. The issue is Iran, not Israel. We need to fix what jimmy Carter broke in Iran. Asap.
A "fail" right in the first sentence.
Regards,
It is awfully odd that the nuke eliminating left wants the one nation threatening to erase Israel to have a nuke.
Counter-point:
Does the NPT contain a clause that allows Israel to share nuclear technology with its allies should Israel be existentially threatened?
That’s the best you have?
Cheerios!
BTW, I went from the top to the bottom and checked everything that the spellcheck missed and I did see that and did change it - or at least I attempted to —— thank you very much.
But your Ad Hominem and Red Herring is still duly noted.
REGARDS!
I would like to see a news article that shows this so as to have it to, ahem, “wave it around” as needed.
I haven’t seen an article like this that shows someone on the left arguing for what you describe (though I imagine that there are some on the left who entertain this thought)
What? No laissez-faire?
What is a possible counter-point to H.) and a counter to the counter-point in post #7?
Back in 2011 Huffpo didn’t seem to be too terribly concerned about it. They were mostly interested in juicy gossip like schoolgirls.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/10/sarah-palin-emails-released_n_874247.html
Again, for the umpteenth time, laissez-faire deals almost exclusively with economics and economic systems, but some here stretch it in an attempt to at least hint that it should influence and dictate all aspects of life.
Not even the most ardent of supporters in this school of thought would dare stray into that realm.
Never mind. I’m replying to the wrong thread.
The American Thinker, The Washington Post, Business Insider, Front Page Magazine, several Israeli newspapers and on and on (today and yesterday) are talking about Iran, Israel and the NPT.
You may be right, but there are many fallible men and women who have offered a plethora of opinions and interpretations on a host of scriptures so that it seems as if no one may know the proper interpretations of many scriptures.
Sure, there are a host of scriptures that cannot be taken any other way than one, like Jesus saying about Himself that there is only One begotten Son:
“For God so loved the world that He gave his ONLY begotten son, that whosoever should believe in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”
From this and other related scriptures we get a host of interpretations as to whether everlasting life can be lost or if it cannot be lost - and so on.
No problem. Have a good day.
I. Why do some people insist that Israel commit national suicide? In the world we live in, where Israel is encompassed on every side by implacable enemies who demand her destruction, that’s what signing the NPT would require. The NPT requires that all nuclear armed signatories negotiate in good faith to disarm. This Israel cannot do.
Israel has had plenty of leftist governments and is likely to have one again in a few weeks, yet none saw fit to sign on to the non-proliferation treaty. Maybe it’s a Jewish racial thing, or maybe it’s a sober assessment of the treaty’s implications for Israel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.