israeli soldiers kill 9 in international waters

[SeanyTheSailor]

[hide=Rules on Contiguous Zones]1. In a zone contiguous to its territorial sea, described as the contiguous zone, the coastal State may exercise the control necessary to:

 

(a) prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations within its territory or territorial sea;

 

(b.) punish infringement of the above laws and regulations committed within its territory or territorial sea.

 

2. The contiguous zone may not extend beyond 24 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.[/hide]

If one would wish to argue it, technically Israel was acting within International law if they suspected arms being transported by the ship, unless it was farther then the listed distance from shore.

 

Edit: @312Ownage Thank you and I meant not posting on Arabs, rocket, etc. as it was off topic to this topic.

I think for now this is as close as we are going to get. So the question is, where did this all go down. If it went down outside the 24 mile zone it doesn't appear they have a leg to stand on.If it happened inside that, while it at first seems and excessive amount of force, I would say they are within their rights.

 

@fakeitormakeit2 It's fine man. Pretty much any time you start talking about the situation over there tempers and emotions flare. And believe me, I am THE KING of getting off-topic in off topic, I've argued for pages about stuff not directly linked to the topic.

 

Edit: Also does anyone know what types of "troops" were used? A source I read said "commandos" but we all know that media is never sensationalist [/sarcasm]. IF they were commandos (which to me implies special forces) it seems very fishy, why send people trained to get in, destroy, and get out to search a ship which is quite possibly harmless.

 

Another edit: Before kinggabe said it wasn't just Israel, a source I'm reading(This) which in the past to me has seemed fairly good says that Egypt is assisting with the blockade. So he/she is right. However I don't think they were involved in the "raid".

 

ANOTHER Edit: I've read more of the article(actually just read what the picture says) apparently Egypt has re-opened it's border to Palestine as of Tuesday. I guess they are trying to save face.

[SeanyTheSailor]

Well in the argument that they fought in self defense, many accounts claim that at least two of the dead activists were found to have been killed execution style.

i didn't wanna say this but... how would you define execution style?

[qeltar]

I see nobody was able to answer my question. No big surprise there. And so much for the "ship full of rabblerousers and terrorists".

[SeanyTheSailor]

Well in the argument that they fought in self defense, many accounts claim that at least two of the dead activists were found to have been killed execution style.

i didn't wanna say this but... how would you define execution style?

Apparently it was a downward angle from above the head... as in the victims were either kneeling or lying down when they were killed.

In the mob its entirely possible they tripped or were pushed over. Not saying it makes it any better, but its not unlikely.

 

@qeltar what was your question

[SeanyTheSailor]

Well in the argument that they fought in self defense, many accounts claim that at least two of the dead activists were found to have been killed execution style.

i didn't wanna say this but... how would you define execution style?

Apparently it was a downward angle from above the head... as in the victims were either kneeling or lying down when they were killed.

In the mob its entirely possible they tripped or were pushed over. Not saying it makes it any better, but its not unlikely.

 

@qeltar what was your question

By downward angle I mean like the back of the head at close range. Any opportunity to do that could easily have been avoided in favor of incapacitation.

I'm trying to play devils advocate here so if you think I'm just trolling i'm not(I guess i kinda am but i'm not doing it specifically to make u mad). I don't see how they could know it was from close range yet. Also are you sure it was from the back or are you just inferring that.

[magekillr]

I think the point he's trying to make is that posting cherry-picked anecdotes is not convincing. Does it really matter that you found one anonymous Israeli who feels one way or another? Who cares?

 

The point wasn't the way that particular Israeli felt, the point was that there were other ways to do this. I was answering the guy's question. I could have snipped everything else out and left his "this is how they could have handled it." It wasn't to show this man/woman's opinion, merely an alternative way of handling the situation.

 

Sheesh. Chill out.

[sees_all1]

Here's an interesting aspect of this that the Israeli toadies will never give a rational answer to.

We're being asked to believe that the Israelis are the good guys and the ship was filled with evil! EVIL! Hamas-affiliated terrorists who want all Jews to die.

Funny thing, though.

While some of the Israeli soldiers were indeed attacked (which was wrong), they were not killed. The soldiers were in fact taken into custody on the ships, and could have easily been killed if the protesters had wanted to.

But they weren't killed.

So.. both sides had an opportunity to kill some on the other. The "good guy" Israelis took that opportunity and killed 9 civilians. The "bad guy" EVIL! protestors *didn't*.

Explain?

 

Israeli toadies? <_< How is that unbiased?

 

 

If Israel didn't intend for this to be a peaceful mission, they wouldn't have sent their troops in with paintball guns. Heck, they wouldn't have even sent their troops in. They could have just as easily taken pot shots from their helicopters.

 

I'm absolutely certain the people on board the ship had the full intention of killing the soldiers. They threw the soldiers to the ground and beat them with clubs and sticks, wrestled away their guns and shot them. After that, they tossed them overboard. After the first couple of soldiers zip lined in, I'm sure the troops realized the magnitude of the blunder. The incident then wouldn't have been an attack, but a rescue mission. After all, if you saw one of your friends getting beaten by clubs and sticks, what would you do?

At this point, I wouldn't even label them as civilians. There was nothing civil about what was going on that ship.

[magekillr]

If I were an Arab living in Gaza I'd attack Israelis too after all the injustices of the past years.

See except most Arabs, believe it or not, are peaceful and decide to starve and die instead, or like my friends flee the country while the Isareli Military forcefully acquired their village.

 

Don't forget that after acquiring the village, they bulldoze it, sometimes killing peaceful protesters in the process.

 

I have a lot of catching up to do, both with the news and with this topic.

[SeanyTheSailor]

Ugh just as it became civil and we were talking like adults..... every1 comes back raging.

 

Also, so these soldiers had paintball guns.... but if the activists got a hold of these guns they suddenly became lethal? I will never argue that fact that they were defending themselves, the videos posted earlier make that clear, but what I am arguing is that they never should have been there.

 

Edit: You take pot-shots from a helicopter its a massacre, you drop some guys down who get beat up your defending yourself. Also I just realized what u said happened... you do realize no Israeli troops died right... unless something new just came out. maybe you just messed up tense.

 

I just realized my above grammar is horrible... do not care.

[sees_all1]

Also, so these soldiers had paintball guns.... but if the activists got a hold of these guns they suddenly became lethal? I will never argue that fact that they were defending themselves, the videos posted earlier make that clear, but what I am arguing is that they never should have been there.

 

Edit: You take pot-shots from a helicopter its a massacre, you drop some guys down who get beat up your defending yourself. Also I just realized what u said happened... you do realize no Israeli troops died right... unless something new just came out. maybe you just messed up tense.

 

I just realized my above grammar is horrible... do not care.

Israeli troops got shot, that's a fact. There's at least one soldier in the hospital right now with serious wounds - a gunshot to the stomach and a gunshot to the knee. That's also a fact.

 

Which means either their guns were wrestled away from them, or the people on board the ship had guns.

The first troops in weren't armed (from the video footage), but that's not to say they didn't have pistols holstered (which would make sense). At this point I'm speculating, but at the very least its plausible.

I believe when the others saw things were getting hairy, they took paintball guns. When that didn't work, they took other guns.

 

It also appears from the video that there were more than just helicopters dropping troops onto the ship, and there were spotlights on the ship from speedboats/inflatable rafts. Why go through all that trouble if they were in compliance?

[Romy]

If anyone's interested: http://www.flotillafacts.com/

 

 

Some relevant facts (relevant to the discussion going here, that is) from there:

 

• 
  * Israel transfers about 15,000 tons of supplies and humanitarian aid every week to the people of Gaza.
   
  * Israel offered the ship to dock in Ashdod port and they would transfer the aid to Gaza. This offer was made again and again - they refused.
   
  * Israel has said that it will deliver any humanitarian aid that was in the boats to Gaza, as it does daily.
   
  * Israel maintains a maritime blockade to ensure that weapons are not brought in by Hamas to use in attacks against Israel.
   
  * "We fully intend to go to Gaza regardless of any intimidation or threats of violence against us, they are going to have to forcefully stop us," said one of the flotilla’s organizers.
   
  * In the past, terrorist sympathizers have used aid deliveries to smuggle items like potassium nitrate in sugar sacks and used it to make bombs. Israel cannot afford to let goods get to Hamas unchecked.
   
  * This was meant to provoke – it was funded and organized by a Turkish Islamist organization (IHH) that has links to fundamentalist jihadi groups. The ship was flying under the Turkish flag.
   
  * The Israeli government maintains that allowing the illegal flotilla to reach Hamas would have opened a corridor of smuggling of weapons to Gaza and resulting in civilian deaths.
   
  * Turkey permitted the Marmara to fly under its flag. Turkey knew that the IHH (Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation) had organized the Flotilla, and supports the genocidal terrorist organization Hamas, several Jihadist organizations in Bosina, Syria, Iraq, Libya, and elsewhere, and has ties with Al Qaeda. But Turkey did not prevent the Flotilla from disembarking and attacking Israel’s sovereign right to protect itself from terrorists attempting to enter Gaza. Now Turkey is condemning Israel for the unfortunate casualties, and is leading the charge to condemn Israel at the U.N. It is Turkey that should be condemned by the United Nations for its role in this brutal trap set for Israelis.
   
  * Hamas is responsible for the suffering of both Palestinians and Israelis. Their racist charter calls for Islamic domination; their stance is unchanged and they repress any Palestinians that try and counter their regime.
   
  * Any police force in the world would respond to aggression; the provocation is the reason for this regrettable outcome. No country would allow illegal entry of any vessel into their waters without a security check.

 

 

For those who haven't seen it yet, here's Netanyahu's response:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUG12kU8-jE&feature=player_embedded#!

[qeltar]

Ah, nothing like beginning the morning with a fresh, healthy heaping of one-sided propaganda.

 

I could post a similar-but-opposite list of "facts" from the other side. Yawn.

[assassin_696]

Legally

 

The boat was 40 miles offshore, so was nowhere near the contiguous zone. You can still apprehend boats in International Waters if you have good reason to suspect them of terrorist activity, piracy, human trafficking or the slave trade etc. but Israel actually signed a UN act last year which revokes this privilege and gives the flag state (in this case Turkey) sole responsibility for apprehending these ships in International Waters.

 

Reading into it a little more, it's technically not an act of piracy because the Israeli ships had a military commission from the Israeli government, so it would be an act of illegal warfare if the ships were acting on the behalf of the Israeli government and would effectively be Israeli commandos killing Turkish activists on Turkish territory (you see why Turkey is pissed). But if the commandos didn't have the government's authority then they could be prosecuted for murder by Turkey.

[magekillr]

An American citizen is reportedly among the dead:

 

An official from the Turkish Islamic charity that spearheaded the campaign to bust the blockade on Gaza identified the U.S. citizen as 19-year-old Furkan Dogan, originally from the central Turkish town of Kayseri.

 

Dogan, who held a U.S. passport, had four bullet wounds to the head and one to the chest, Omer Yagmur of the Foundation of Humanitarian Relief (IHH), told Anatolia.

 

The agency said the bodies were handed over to relatives after the autopsies.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/06/03/american-reportedly-killed-gaza-flotilla-raid/

 

(the comments are most insightful, thanks, Fox Viewers!)

 

And Joe Biden says, "What's the big deal here?"

 

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0610/Biden_solidifies_defense_of_Israel_Whats_the_big_deal_here.html

 

edit: a bit of sensationalist headlining, but it's from Politico. That is to be expected, I suppose. Read the interview for more context.

[assassin_696]

Reading more and more into this I'll admit the legal issues around this are a lot more complex than I first thought (as ever), but the analysis which makes the most sense is that Israel still acted illegally. I can go into details if necessary.

[sees_all1]

Reading into it a little more, it's technically not an act of piracy because the Israeli ships had a military commission from the Israeli government, so it would be an act of illegal warfare if the ships were acting on the behalf of the Israeli government and would effectively be Israeli commandos killing Turkish activists on Turkish territory (you see why Turkey is pissed). But if the commandos didn't have the government's authority then they could be prosecuted for murder by Turkey.

 

I think before this incident, relations between Turkey and Israel were tense at best. I also think that had this incident occurred in Israeli waters, Turkey would still be ticked off even though Israel would've been justified.

 

I still doubt that this will change the world's opinion of Israel - those that were against Israel before will add this to their list of grievances, those that were for Israel will shake their head, maybe slap Israel on this wrist, but ultimately ignore it.

[1_man_army]

* Israel transfers about 15,000 tons of supplies and humanitarian aid every week to the people of Gaza

 

The problem is that the 15,000 tons, while sounding like a huge amount, is only around a quarter of the amount needed (according to the UN ) and this has severely effected the living conditions of the 1.5M inhabitants of Gaza. If Israel insists on keeping the blockade in place then there at least has to be some way found to severely increase the levels of supply to Gaza without putting security at risk. That would increase Israel's standing and would be a big propaganda coup for Israel against Hamas. The problem with the current measures are that while they may reduce the levels of weaponry getting into Gaza, it plays into the hands of Hamas because it helps them recruit from another generation of dissilusioned young Palestinians. By no means would removing (or atleast lessening) the blockade solve all the regions problems but it would be a positive step provided it could be made to work satisfactorily for both sides (Israel and the people of Gaza)

[Romy]

* Israel transfers about 15,000 tons of supplies and humanitarian aid every week to the people of Gaza

 

The problem is that the 15,000 tons, while sounding like a huge amount, is only around a quarter of the pre-2005 levels and this has severely effected the living conditions of the 1.5M inhabitants of Gaza. If Israel insists on keeping the blockade in place then there at least has to be some way found to severely increase the levels of supply to Gaza without putting security at risk. That would increase Israel's standing and would be a big propaganda coup for Israel against Hamas. The problem with the current measures are that while they may reduce the levels of weaponry getting into Gaza, it plays into the hands of Hamas because it helps them recruit from another generation of dissilusioned young Palestinians. By no means would removing (or atleast lessening) the blockade solve all the regions problems but it would be a positive step provided it could be made to work satisfactorily for both sides (Israel and the people of Gaza)

 

• 
  * Israel offered the ship to dock in Ashdod port and they would transfer the aid to Gaza. This offer was made again and again - they refused.
   
  * Israel has said that it will deliver any humanitarian aid that was in the boats to Gaza, as it does daily.
  

 

That's Netanyahu's speech again, saying Israel agrees to, and agreed to, deliever any humanitarian aid that anyone wants to send:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUG12kU8-jE&feature=player_embedded#!

 

This all flotilla idea wasn't about the aid, it was about provocation. If it really was about aid, they'd have no problem with letting Israel deliever it on it's own, or through Ashdod, etc.

[qeltar]

The problem is that the 15,000 tons, while sounding like a huge amount, is only around a quarter of the amount needed (according to the UN ) and this has severely effected the living conditions of the 1.5M inhabitants of Gaza.

Yep. 15,000 tons divided by 1.5 million people is 20 pounds per person.

 

If Israel insists on keeping the blockade in place then there at least has to be some way found to severely increase the levels of supply to Gaza without putting security at risk.

That's the thing, though: the blockade of Gaza *isn't* about security. It's about punishing the Palestinians for choosing Hamas.

 

I never used to believe Israel could behave this way, but the last few days have prompted me to do a lot of reading, and the fact of this cannot be escaped. There is no reason to justify what they are doing otherwise.

 

That would increase Israel's standing and would be a big propaganda coup for Israel against Hamas. The problem with the current measures are that while they may reduce the levels of weaponry getting into Gaza, it plays into the hands of Hamas because it helps them recruit from another generation of dissilusioned young Palestinians. By no means would removing (or atleast lessening) the blockade solve all the regions problems but it would be a positive step provided it could be made to work satisfactorily for both sides (Israel and the people of Gaza)

Yep. Unfortunately, the Israeli leadership doesn't appear to be nearly as clever as it once was. And it is influenced and led by braindead right-wing hawks who have deluded themselves into believing that this mess is sustainable over the long run. They are too stupid to recognize what has been shown repeatedly throughout history: laying siege to people because you dislike the government they choose doesn't make them hate the government, it makes them hate the ones responsible for the siege.

 

This all flotilla idea wasn't about the aid, it was about provocation.

It was both.

 

And the raid on the flotilla was similarly only partially about security, and also about violently responding to that provocation. More the latter than the former, since as we have all seen, they had superior, non-violent ways of ensuring the boats posed no security threat.

[1_man_army]

[hide]

* Israel transfers about 15,000 tons of supplies and humanitarian aid every week to the people of Gaza

 

The problem is that the 15,000 tons, while sounding like a huge amount, is only around a quarter of the pre-2005 levels and this has severely effected the living conditions of the 1.5M inhabitants of Gaza. If Israel insists on keeping the blockade in place then there at least has to be some way found to severely increase the levels of supply to Gaza without putting security at risk. That would increase Israel's standing and would be a big propaganda coup for Israel against Hamas. The problem with the current measures are that while they may reduce the levels of weaponry getting into Gaza, it plays into the hands of Hamas because it helps them recruit from another generation of dissilusioned young Palestinians. By no means would removing (or atleast lessening) the blockade solve all the regions problems but it would be a positive step provided it could be made to work satisfactorily for both sides (Israel and the people of Gaza)

 

• 
  * Israel offered the ship to dock in Ashdod port and they would transfer the aid to Gaza. This offer was made again and again - they refused.
   
  * Israel has said that it will deliver any humanitarian aid that was in the boats to Gaza, as it does daily.
  

 

That's Netanyahu's speech again, saying Israel agrees to, and agreed to, deliever any humanitarian aid that anyone wants to send:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUG12kU8-jE&feature=player_embedded#!

 

This all flotilla idea wasn't about the aid, it was about provocation. If it really was about aid, they'd have no problem with letting Israel deliever it on it's own, or through Ashdod, etc.

[/hide]

 

I know they were offered to go to Ashdod in this case and I know what Israel has said on this matter but I'm talking about the blockade more generally. The problem is that right now there still aren't enough supplies getting through at the moment, hopefully in light of Netanyahu's speach (which I'll take time to listen to later) the numbers will increase significantly enough to improve things for everyone. Hopefully, this will also lead to the end of arbitrary confiscation of aid and supplies that has happened at times as well (again, I'll listen to the speach later to see if this is included).

 

Again, I'm not commenting on the particulars of this specific instance as I haven't had enough time in the last few days to keep up with it and I don't want to debate using old info.

[magekillr]

This all flotilla idea wasn't about the aid, it was about provocation.

 

It was about both, as qeltar stated, and the Free Gaza Movement will gladly admit!:

 

According to the Free Gaza Movement's Web site, the group intended for the boat to cross the Israeli-declared "special security zone" to deliver 100 hearing aids to a Palestinian charity as a form of humanitarian aid. A story in Israel-based Haaretz said the organizers were attempting to provoke a clash with the navy that would end with arrests. A spokesman for the group said, "We hope that the Israeli government will have some wisdom. To drag us in and arrest us and say somehow we are a danger is absurd."

 

This was what was said during their first sailing back in 2008. This is why it's totally absurd to suggest that they had weapons for Hamas.

 

If it really was about aid, they'd have no problem with letting Israel deliever it on it's own, or through Ashdod, etc.

 

Yeah right. Israel would seize anything that's listed on its blockade, especially building materials. The blockade is about regime change, as I and others have stated, not weapons. To suggest otherwise is to completely ignore what's actually listed on the blockade's banned list. The objective is to make life in Gaza miserable, while avoiding something newsworthy like a famine; it's to prevent Gaza from having an economy of its own, making them totally dependent on foreign aid.

[Romy]

[hide]

* Israel transfers about 15,000 tons of supplies and humanitarian aid every week to the people of Gaza

 

The problem is that the 15,000 tons, while sounding like a huge amount, is only around a quarter of the pre-2005 levels and this has severely effected the living conditions of the 1.5M inhabitants of Gaza. If Israel insists on keeping the blockade in place then there at least has to be some way found to severely increase the levels of supply to Gaza without putting security at risk. That would increase Israel's standing and would be a big propaganda coup for Israel against Hamas. The problem with the current measures are that while they may reduce the levels of weaponry getting into Gaza, it plays into the hands of Hamas because it helps them recruit from another generation of dissilusioned young Palestinians. By no means would removing (or atleast lessening) the blockade solve all the regions problems but it would be a positive step provided it could be made to work satisfactorily for both sides (Israel and the people of Gaza)

 

• 
  * Israel offered the ship to dock in Ashdod port and they would transfer the aid to Gaza. This offer was made again and again - they refused.
   
  * Israel has said that it will deliver any humanitarian aid that was in the boats to Gaza, as it does daily.
  

 

That's Netanyahu's speech again, saying Israel agrees to, and agreed to, deliever any humanitarian aid that anyone wants to send:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUG12kU8-jE&feature=player_embedded#!

 

This all flotilla idea wasn't about the aid, it was about provocation. If it really was about aid, they'd have no problem with letting Israel deliever it on it's own, or through Ashdod, etc.

[/hide]

 

I know they were offered to go to Ashdod in this case and I know what Israel has said on this matter but I'm talking about the blockade more generally. The problem is that right now there still aren't enough supplies getting through at the moment, hopefully in light of Netanyahu's speach (which I'll take time to listen to later) the numbers will increase significantly enough to improve things for everyone. Hopefully, this will also lead to the end of arbitrary confiscation of aid and supplies that has happened at times as well (again, I'll listen to the speach later to see if this is included).

 

Again, I'm not commenting on the particulars of this specific instance as I haven't had enough time in the last few days to keep up with it and I don't want to debate using old info.

 

Unlike Qeltar's post, this IS about security. Israel is not trying to punish anyone, and despite the probably very disrespecting comments I'll get for saying this: Israel is after peace. Israel tries and tried to negotiate things. Anyone who wanted to make peace with Israel (Eygept, Jordan) achieved it, despite right-wingish governments.

 

Secutiy is a priority for any country. In Israel, it's 10 times as important, if not more. The blockade is a necessity.

[1_man_army]

I didn't say that security wasn't important for Israel, my point was there must be a way to increase supplies into Gaza while at the same time maintaining Israel's security. Both are needed in the long run. I know it isn't simple but there must be a way found that is acceptable to both parties.

[qeltar]

Unlike Qeltar's post, this IS about security.

Then why are so many things banned from Gaza that have nothing to do with security?

 

Israel is not trying to punish anyone, and despite the probably very disrespecting comments I'll get for saying this: Israel is after peace.

No, Israel *used* to be after peace. Now it is after "security", thanks to people like you. The two are not the same.

 

The other side is just as much to blame for the lack of peace. The difference is that it used to be that the other side was a lot *more* to blame.

 

Secutiy is a priority for any country. In Israel, it's 10 times as important, if not more. The blockade is a necessity.

Blockading weapons, maybe. The rest? Not even close to a necessity.

 

Attacking those ships was likewise not necessary for security reasons. This much has been proven beyond any reasonable counterargument. It contained no weapons of any significance, and was miles off shore.

 

You are digging your own collective graves, and dragging many of us down with you.

 

ETA: Superb article that shows just how idiotic Israel has become: Operation Make the World Hate Us.

[magekillr]

Regarding peace and security, while the two are different, they are inseparable. Security through peace should be the goal, not "first we must have security, then we can have peace!" Israel isn't going to get anymore "secure" than they already are, other than sending their settlers into the West Bank to give them the illusion of being more secure through more land. Ok, actively sending is too strong; it's more like a wink and nod type deal. Hamas would be gone with the establishment of elections between both the West Bank and the Strip, as this poll indicates:

 

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/palestinians_would_elect_fatah_government/

 

As you can see from the poll's results, support for Hamas remains the same as it ever was, and it isn't going down. With both regions voting together, Fatah would be elected, not Hamas. Fatah recognizes Israel and has agreed to peace talks. Although, Hamas has said it would recognize Israel’s existence (though not its Jewish nature) in the context of a withdrawal to 1967 borders. Hamas has repeatedly expressed willingness to negotiate with Israel without preconditions, as well.

 

Another interesting aspect of that poll is that ONE THIRD of the Palestinians would accept Israeli citizenship. I mean, that's like saying one third of Americans during the Cold War would accept Soviet citizenship.

 

And all of their grievances with Iran? While Iran has not violated any part of the treaty, I believe they're seeking what Japan has: ability to develop weapons, but not an actual stockpile. Turkey may have worked out a perfectly reasonable compromise through Brazil and Iran regarding this subject. And yet, the one country who has managed to do what the US and Europe has failed to do (Turkey), Israel has in one fell swoop taken away any goodwill that was previously had before. Tensions between the two were strained enough from their siege in 2008, but now all bets could be off. I hope not, as no one wants a nuclear armed Iran; not Europe, not the US, not Israel, and especially not Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

 

edit: Wow, qeltar. I was JUST about to cite that TNR piece, no lie. Good piece, btw (even though I have a few objections, but the TNR usually isn't that good on this issue, especially Jon Chait).