You seem to be confusing a pure statement of facts with double standards. Your original question was "who's the real villain". IMO, neither of them are angels. However, if I had to choose, Iran is by far the more oppresent, odious regime. All that has happened in the last 30 years, or so, is one dictatorial regime has been replaced by another, if anything, more vicious than the previous one.
I still don't trust either government and if either ever became a nuclear superpower, God help us all.
But Israel are a nuclear superpower "Israel is not a Party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and refuses to officially confirm or deny having a nuclear arsenal, or having developed nuclear weapons, or even having a nuclear weapons program. Israel has pledged not to be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons into the region, but is also pursuing a policy of strategic ambiguity with regard to their possession. This is sometimes called a policy of "nuclear opacity": Israel neither confirms nor denies that it possesses nuclear weapons, in what has been interpreted as an attempt to get the benefits of deterrence with a minimum political cost. In the late 1960s, Israeli Ambassador to the US Yitzhak Rabin informed the United States State Department, that its understanding of "introducing" such weapons meant that they would be tested and publicly declared, while merely possessing the weapons did not constitute "introducing" them. Israel claims that the Negev Nuclear Research Center near Dimona is a research center. However, there is extensive evidence Israel has nuclear weapons or a near-ready nuclear weapons capability. Extensive information about the program in Dimona was also disclosed by technician Mordechai Vanunu in 1986" Mordechai Vanunu spent a long time in prison for blowing the whistle on their nuclear program
"According to the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Federation of American Scientists, Israel likely possesses around 75–200 weapons" no one think that maybe Tehran feels slightly threatened by this?
The difference being, of course, that Israel would almost certainly only ever use nuclear weapons in self-defence. Iran, on the other hand, would not hesitate to unilaterally attack Israel, if they thought they could get away with it. It is, after all, their stated intent to wipe Israel off of the map.
It is a little known fact that Israel was ready to launch it's Jericho missiles at Saddam during the Scud blitz in the first Gulf war. Had the Scuds contained chemical agents then there is little doubt that the nukes would have flown. Could anyyone have blamed them if they had responded? Will anyone give credit where it's due to Israel for not allowing themsleves to respond to severe provocation? They have had reason to deploy nukes before and have not done so, Iran on the other hand (as has been said) would use any excuse to nuke Israel...........if they thought they could get away with it.
But i have demonstrated the relative belligerence of each nation which basically rubbishes the assumption that Iran would not hesitate to use them. What the hell are you people basing that assumption on?
The Hatred of Judaism by Islamic fundamentalist nutters who HAVE vowed to wipe them off the face of the earth and who believe Israel has no right to exist.
I have demonstrated to you how their hatred of Judaism is a myth. The jews in Iran rejected lucrative Israeli gov,t offers to emigrate to Israel such was their comfortable life. I have also shown how their "intent to wipe Israel off the map" was a complete misquote! Really like, I have presented the evidence but you continue with the same old untrue arguements. You really are just being obtuse in trying to justify an unjustifiable position.
Doesn't suit you that attitude Jacky. I already said : I also said: The cynic in me sees "Genocide" as to me the "regime" is Israel?
If I was born and raised in Iran as a Jew why would I want to move to a foreign country? Because of my religion? That argument does not bear scrutiny
Maybe misquoted, but there is still intent in the original statement. No, you have provided a series of facts that are a basis for your argument. You didn't even consider that it might not be so black and white. You seem to have deliberately omitted anything that would suggest otherwise and whenever anyone has provided counterarguments you are all too quick to rubbish them. Your argument was flawed from the offset because of your predisposed position coupled with your unwillingness to listen. Its quite hypocritical the way criticised people for perhaps favouring Israel, when you are doing the exact same thing for Iran.
Squirtie raises his head once again to claim my facts are biased and yet again fails to provide any of his own. So what aggressive military action has Iran undertook from 1979?
