|
« Gun law
Main |
January 06, 2004
Rogue statesman
What price now the British government's craven cosying-up to the Syrian prime minister Bashar Assad? The idea, put about by HMG, that if his tummy is tickled hard enough he will turn from being a major sponsor of world terror and vicious antisemite into Nelson Mandela on a camel is blown apart by the interview in today's Telegraph. In this, he refuses to follow Libya's example and get rid of his WMD. He also has the gall to say that Israel should give up its nuclear weapons first, and to complain of Israel's 'aggression' towards Syria-- when the only reason Israel has nukes is to defend itself in the last resort against Syria and other Arab states which have been trying to destroy it for half a century, and the only military action Israel has ever taken against Syria is in self-defence. In other words, same old rogue state, same old axis of evil for the forseeable future. Now Mr Blair's carrots have predictably failed to do the trick, let's see if America has the gumption to use the stick it is threatening. Posted by melanie at January 6, 2004
Comments
I think that it was Jonathan Swift who said how foolish it is to try to reason with someone who was never reasoned into his position in the first place. Trying to appease the chinless wonder Baby Assad is a fool's errand and Tony Blair is making a tremendous mistake. Assad is a vicious Hitler wannabe and would love to complete the Final Solution. Posted by: Travis at January 6, 2004 11:47 PMIf it happens at all, I predict Assad won't get beaten by a big stick until George Bush has been reelected. Posted by: snowball at January 8, 2004 02:01 AMI can't understand how any of the lefties in this country can complain about Israels nukes. Israel was attaked by multiple Arab countries bent on its destruction in 67 and 73 and has been constantly attacked by their terrorists for decades. Yet in all this time it has exercised amazing resraint and not once resorted to nukes. No other county in the world needs nukes as much as Israel and no other country has been able to show the same amount of restraint while possessing them as Israel has. (I'm going of that Jack Ryan film when alluring to Israels'possesion of nukes prior to 67) Posted by: Richard at January 8, 2004 12:58 PMWhat is more, the Iranian leader has pointed out that the Islamic world can afford to take a few retaliatory nuclear hits from Israel as long as they manage to get one or two through to destroy Israel itself - along with the disputed territories, and some of Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Egypt as well. Not only would they have wiped out 6 million Israeli Jews and Arabs, they would also have another few million 'glorious' Shahid names that they could use for squares, streets and youth tournaments to keep the 'death dream' alive. What lovely people! Assad the "major sponsor of world terror and antisemite" is presented as some kind of total opposite to Nelson Mandela. But Nelson Mandela is an apologist for terrorists and hates Israel. Not really much contrast there. Posted by: MMT at January 8, 2004 03:28 PMI'd *love* to see the evidence that shows that Nelson Mandela hates Israel... Asad is right about one thing, at any rate. It's intensely hypocritical of America and Britain to justify war against Iraq, and threatening behaviour towards Iran, Syria, N. Korea etc, by pointing to the existence of unauthorised WMD, while doing nothing about the illegal and undeclared weapons held by Israel. Even if one believes that the WMD issue in Iraq etc was a smokescreen, it (quite understandably) gives the impression to the Arab world of double standards. If the US and Israel are truly concerned about WMD, perhaps they should look to their own houses first... Posted by: Chris at January 10, 2004 09:43 PM |
