The Turkish premier says the international community should take action to disarm Israel as part of the efforts to make the Middle East a nuclear weapons-free zone.
Speaking to reporters on Sunday before leaving for the nuclear security summit in Washington, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the international community has turned a blind eye to Israel's nuclear program.
Pointing out that Israel is believed to be the sole possessor of nuclear weapons in the Middle East and is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Erdogan said, "Until now, we haven't seen any request or intent from the international community with regards to Israel's (armament). We are going to ask the international community: why haven't you addressed this issue?"
The Turkish premier announced that he would raise the issue at the Washington summit and call on all 47 countries attending the forum to pressure Tel Aviv to relinquish its nuclear arsenal.
Erdogan said Iran's nuclear program has come under scrutiny as a result of its membership in the International Atomic Energy Agency whereas Israel, which has not signed the NPT, is "free to do what it wants."
Israel reportedly possesses 250 to 300 nuclear warheads.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to cancel plans to attend the Washington summit after learning that Cairo and Ankara would demand that Tel Aviv sign the NPT at the meeting.
I thought Erdogan was America's b*tch, so why is he complaning about Israel ? Nukes are no good to them anyway, too powerfull. They are probably under U.S control against Russia and China.
The unfair advantage Israel has in having nuclear weapons when its Arab enemies don't is unacceptable. They should relinquish them as a matter of emergency. I mean, it's not like the Israeli military is weak without nuclear weapons anyway.
The unfair advantage Israel has in having nuclear weapons when its Arab enemies don't is unacceptable. They should relinquish them as a matter of emergency. I mean, it's not like the Israeli military is weak without nuclear weapons anyway.
"Unfair advantage"'?! The Israelis don't consider the survival of their nation some sort of sport. What we, or Erdogan, think the Israelis should or shouldn't do is irrelevant; they will only dispose of their nuclear weapons when their security is guaranteed by other means. At the very least, that will mean not having any 'Arab enemies', which means a peace deal acceptable to both sides, and with guarantees in place to enforce it.
"Unfair advantage"'?! The Israelis don't consider the survival of their nation some sort of sport. What we, or Erdogan, think the Israelis should or shouldn't do is irrelevant; they will only dispose of their nuclear weapons when their security is guaranteed by other means. At the very least, that will mean not having any 'Arab enemies', which means a peace deal acceptable to both sides, and with guarantees in place to enforce it.
But my point is this: Israel is already the most powerful nation in the Middle East. It could easily defeat its Arab neighbours with its military not having nuclear weapons. If it were a third world nation with a small army of undisciplined children with second hand AK--47s, I might see the justification of Israel having nuclear weapons.
Seems like Turkey is leaving away the hundreds years old jewish influence, or maybe its just a game for simple people, who doesnt understand the whole theater...
This country is dying because of a lack of men, not a lack of programs.
Can't trust Israel with nukes anymore than you can trust Iran with nukes >.>
The U.S. is the most untrustworthy state in this regard, they are now threatening to use nuclear weapons against Iran. Why is there no outcry in the world? Iran having nuclear weapons would create a balance of power. Either all countries get rid of nuclear weapons or all countries should have the right to develop them.
Last edited by Argamemnon; 04-13-2010 at 04:28 PM.
I actually don't watch the news anymore as part of my recovery .. and no I am not surprised but I'll have to say they are not my govt. no Govt. out there represents a Muslim..
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
But my point is this: Israel is already the most powerful nation in the Middle East. It could easily defeat its Arab neighbours with its military not having nuclear weapons. If it were a third world nation with a small army of undisciplined children with second hand AK--47s, I might see the justification of Israel having nuclear weapons.
Honestly, I don't see how there can be any justification for having any kind of nuclear weapon, especially when the amount is in the hundreds or even thousands.
"Unfair advantage"'?! The Israelis don't consider the survival of their nation some sort of sport. What we, or Erdogan, think the Israelis should or shouldn't do is irrelevant; they will only dispose of their nuclear weapons when their security is guaranteed by other means. At the very least, that will mean not having any 'Arab enemies', which means a peace deal acceptable to both sides, and with guarantees in place to enforce it.
A very VERY skewed viewpoint to put it mildly. You have a faulty understanding of the Israeli/Palestine conflict. Theres plenty of books that give a very different view, some of the best are
Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History
Supporters of this book will not include Alan Dershowitz, author of The Case for Israel (2003). Very little of Dershowitz's widely acclaimed defense of Israel's occupation policies escapes Finkelstein's withering scrutiny. Behind Dershowitz's firm assurances that Israel is dealing with its adversaries justly and humanely, Finkelstein discerns ugly realities, including brutal torture of Palestinian prisoners and lethal disregard for Palestinian children and noncombatants. In Finkelstein's assessment, Israel is grievously violating Palestinian rights because its leaders deliberately choose to ignore both the humanity of the Palestinian people and the justice of international law. And in the claim that will perhaps stir the fiercest debates, Finkelstein asserts that when Dershowitz and his allies defend Israel with shoddy and mendacious scholarship, they actually stoke the very anti-Semitism they claim to be combating. Neither anti-Semitism nor global antipathy toward Israel will persist, Finkelstein avers, if Israel and its partisans will honestly confront and redress the malign consequences of current Israeli policies. This book, which has already sparked intense controversy, belongs in collections seeking to represent multiple points of view on significant topics of international interest.
Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel, and the Palestinians (Updated Edition)
First published in 1983, Fateful Triangle is a comprehensive indictment of what Noam Chomsky calls the "disgraceful and extremely dangerous" policy the United States has enacted towards Israel, particularly with regard to Israel's actions concerning the Palestinians. Supporters of Israel must willfully overlook or deny that nation's long history of human rights violations and military aggression, Chomsky writes, and they will continue to do so as long as Israel is strategically useful towards "the U.S. aim of eliminating possible threats, largely indigenous, to American domination of the Middle East region." In the course of elaborating his argument, Chomsky cuts through the myths and distortions that appear in mainstream media accounts; the ****ing facts that he so systematically assembles portray a government more brutally and overtly racist, perhaps, than even apartheid-era South Africa. Three new chapters, drawing upon material from Z magazine and other publications, incorporate such developments as the Palestinian uprising, Israel's war on Lebanon, and the ongoing "peace process."
Some debates
Finkelstein versus Dershowitz debate, part 2 of 11
Chomsky and Dershowitz debate Israel and Palestine 2/14
The rest of the debates can be found on youtube if you are interested.
A "different view" on what? I made no comment on the Israeli/Palestine conflict based on 'faulty understanding' or otherwise. I merely briefly explained why the Israelis will not 'denuclearize' in the current circumstances, not that much explanation is needed. Nothing you quote or link to has the slightest relevance to that. If you have something that suggests the Israelis WILL get rid of their nukes if Erdogan (or anyone else) just asks nicely, then please post it. If not, then try and read a little more carefully next time.
Nukes are the best weapons so far, so you would have to be mad to get rid of them. If all nations had nukes there would be peace or very short wars, not these constant pitiful skirmishes that are a total waste of time. Fear is the only way to control people and if you don't fear God fear the nukes.
People are unable to stay out of other peoples business and they can't stop being a pack of brigands. The wisdom of the Prophets has fallen on deaf ears. The old Pagan ways have never stopped, they only have superficial skins of modernizim and technology. Conquest and the "will to power" prevail. We are blessed with intelligence but cursed with our nature.
You have to play the game if you get behind you will be crushed or enslaved. You have to have the best defence at all cost.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
) is now threatening Iran with nuclear annihilation?
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks