Dear Jeremy,
You said in your article (“American and Israeli Alliance Safeguards Democracy,” Daily Nexus, Nov. 1) that “radical” Islamic entities “violate human rights on a regular basis.” What about Israel? Just several months ago, Israeli soldiers killed people on peace ships in international waters claiming that the kitchen knives on the ship were deadly weapons. Is this your definition of protecting human rights?
You said that radical Islamists aim to destroy modernization. How? By wearing their traditional clothes? Give us some concrete examples. You also said that the U.S. cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran. Of course, no country on earth can tolerate another country with a nuclear weapon. How about guaranteeing that the two countries you mentioned (U.S. and Israel) do not have nuclear weapons either? I would be more scared to know that those two nations have nukes, especially if we take into account that the U.S. is one of the most aggressive countries in the world (if you look at the records of the last decade), and Israel has been a frequent, shameless violator of human rights.
The lie that Iraq had nuclear weapons was one of our major reasons for going to war. Then what happened? In the end, the western world accepted that Iraq indeed did not have any such weapons. Just because some people were in the mood for war, many innocent children died. Children died — this is a fact.
But the notion that Iran has nuclear weapons is not a fact. Right now, it is not known whether Iran resumed any nuclear weapon work, but if we don’t change our approach to these kinds of problems, we will end up with a case similar to Iraq where more innocent children die.
As college students, I believe we have the responsibility to base our claims on real facts when we write articles.
Let hope and peace shine upon us.
Couldnt agree more. If nukes are bad, they’re bad for all. China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States — were the Allied nations that defeated the Axis Powers comprising Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan and Fascist Italy in WWII. On the strength of their victory over 65 years ago, they have assumed the exclusive right to acquire and maintain vast nuclear arsenals and other weapons of mass destruction as well as to perpetuate the authority to impose their will on the rest of the world through the UN Security Council. France, which was under occupation for most of… Read more »
This is just filled with so much uninformed drivel it’s hard to know where to start. First off, the 5 permanent members don’t have an exclusive right to acquire and maintain nuclear weapons, what you’re trying to talk about is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and they don’t use the Security Council to perpetuate their authority, you’re being very naive if you think that US global dominance comes from the Security Council. Also, when exactly was China an imperialist power? On to your second paragraph, with the exception of Israel, which is intentionally ambiguous about its nuclear capabilities, India, Pakistan,… Read more »
good piece
The NPT was introduced in 1968 only after all five UNSC permanent members had acquired substantial nuclear weapons arsenals. Their intention was to give themselves the exclusive right to nuclear weapons by preventing others from acquiring the same. Usually a country that tried to develop such weapons after that was labeled a “rogue” state, sometimes temporarily, but for longer periods in certain cases Article IV of the NPT not only recognizes the right of all countries to peaceful uses of nuclear energy, it also allows non-nuclear states to seek assistance from the more advanced countries in doing so. However, Article… Read more »
Esra’s logic makes one wonder how her circuits are wired.
Peace activists? Esra obviously did not see the video of the peace activists, or her definition is so profoundly warped she would feel comfortable with Saudi Arabian-type double-speak.
She then implies there is little difference between Iran having nuclear wepaons versus America or Israel having the same. No doubt Esra would have made the same case for Adolph Hitler.
Hitler “the top genocider” is not our subject of matter right now, lets not twist what I was saying. About my logic, let’s think about how USA looks like outside of this country. If you don’t know let me tell you how it looks like: a violent bloodthirsty country, just look at the records of last decade. That will be enough. That is why I said I would be scared to death to know these US has nukes. When it comes to human rights, western points of view(i.e. the article I was referring to) is wrong at one point: They… Read more »
Esra,
I know this will fall on deaf ears. I’d guess you are another I’m-sure-of-everything-don’t bother-me-with-the-facts social justice major.
Anyway, if anyone is open to learning please listen to the following short presentation:
youtube.com/watch?v=NX6vyT8RzMo
First of all I am not defender of Hamas etc, and I wrote my article as a response to another article which was not based on facts. My main point was as all college students we have to be based on facts when we write our articles. Now I see some people say I am just saying words to say them especially about the event where Israel kills the Peace activist, I am not making up these: I have tons of references and here is couple: http://www.paltelegraph.com/palestine/gaza-strip/6206-new-uss-liberty-israel-kills-peace-activists http://english.pravda.ru/hotspots/conflicts/31-05-2010/113576-israel_butchering_peace_activis-0/ Whatever you say or think, that won’t change the fact that that… Read more »
Esra,
You’re pretty funny, in a sad sort of way.
Pasting an article from a Palestinian newspaper as proof of anything concerning the Flotilla incident is like going to the following site for women’s rights insights.
http://www.homa.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=56&Itemid=53
Don’t you get it? Taqiyya is the Muslim way.
Arafat, i would be happy to see a reference of yours proving that event was not happened in international waters.