A Mideast Arms Race, Avec Au France
May. 25th, 2004 07:53 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
richardf8I discovered this in the conservatism community (from which, to my shame, I have not yet been banned).
French
EU Parliamentarian calls for sanctions against Israel and proposes providing nuclear weapons to Arab states.
Most chilling is the final paragraph:
There is, however, another serious imbalance for which we are in part responsible, namely the imbalance of forces. I have no hesitation in saying that we must consider giving the Arab side a large enough force, including a large enough nuclear force, to persuade Israel that it cannot simply do whatever it wants. That is the policy my country pursued in the 1970s when it gave Iraq a nuclear force. We have now destroyed it. So we will carry on with our policy of imbalance and what is happening today is merely the annoying but inevitable result of our collective blindness and cowardice.
The folks in conservatism basically used this to say "neener neener the French gave Saddam nukes!" But there is a larger and more chilling theme here.
In the 1970s Israel was fresh from the Yom Kippur war of 1973 in which all of its neighbors decided, as they had in 67, to attack it at once. It is in this period of the history of the conflict that France decided to pursue a policy of providing Arab states with nuclear materials. Israel caught on by '83 and destroyed the reactor in question. But it raises certain questions.
It is not difficult for me to imagine the frustration France must have felt when the Israeli's took out the reactor they had given Hussein. So much for their plan to Nuke the Jewish State. Having missed that opportunity, the French are now proposing that Europe provide nuclear technology to who? Iran? Syria? Saudi Arabia? The same nations that have not let the Israelis know the quiet enjoyment of their state since its foundation?
I can understand, given Ariel Sharon's abuses of power, how an EU parliament might be sympathetic to such a plea. It is the reason I consider Sharon a greater danger to Israel even than Arafat. But the French proposal, and the French history strikes me as blatantly anti-semitic. They propose to provide nuclear arms to countries that have openly stated that they desire Israel's utter destruction.
So again, I must raise the question:
Did the UN in 1948 establish the State of Israel in the midst of enemies with the intention that no Jew living there would ever know peace, and the belief that it would eventually be destroyed by its neighbors. Was the establishment of the state of Israel their way of outsourcing "The Final Solution To The Jewish Problem?" Since France, at least, seems bent on equipping Israel's enemies to destroy it, it would appear so.
French
EU Parliamentarian calls for sanctions against Israel and proposes providing nuclear weapons to Arab states.
Most chilling is the final paragraph:
There is, however, another serious imbalance for which we are in part responsible, namely the imbalance of forces. I have no hesitation in saying that we must consider giving the Arab side a large enough force, including a large enough nuclear force, to persuade Israel that it cannot simply do whatever it wants. That is the policy my country pursued in the 1970s when it gave Iraq a nuclear force. We have now destroyed it. So we will carry on with our policy of imbalance and what is happening today is merely the annoying but inevitable result of our collective blindness and cowardice.
The folks in conservatism basically used this to say "neener neener the French gave Saddam nukes!" But there is a larger and more chilling theme here.
In the 1970s Israel was fresh from the Yom Kippur war of 1973 in which all of its neighbors decided, as they had in 67, to attack it at once. It is in this period of the history of the conflict that France decided to pursue a policy of providing Arab states with nuclear materials. Israel caught on by '83 and destroyed the reactor in question. But it raises certain questions.
It is not difficult for me to imagine the frustration France must have felt when the Israeli's took out the reactor they had given Hussein. So much for their plan to Nuke the Jewish State. Having missed that opportunity, the French are now proposing that Europe provide nuclear technology to who? Iran? Syria? Saudi Arabia? The same nations that have not let the Israelis know the quiet enjoyment of their state since its foundation?
I can understand, given Ariel Sharon's abuses of power, how an EU parliament might be sympathetic to such a plea. It is the reason I consider Sharon a greater danger to Israel even than Arafat. But the French proposal, and the French history strikes me as blatantly anti-semitic. They propose to provide nuclear arms to countries that have openly stated that they desire Israel's utter destruction.
So again, I must raise the question:
Did the UN in 1948 establish the State of Israel in the midst of enemies with the intention that no Jew living there would ever know peace, and the belief that it would eventually be destroyed by its neighbors. Was the establishment of the state of Israel their way of outsourcing "The Final Solution To The Jewish Problem?" Since France, at least, seems bent on equipping Israel's enemies to destroy it, it would appear so.
