Netanyahu says relationship with Obama no bearing on Iran deal

[Guest shiloh357]

She is the only one here who doesn't see the annihilation of Israel as a problem.   She only sees Israel deterrent to annihilation as the problem.    She also fails to recognize that Israel has never used a nuke on anyone, while it is the Arab Muslims nations who are vowing to wipe Israel off the map with nukes if they get a nuke.    Iran's nuclear ambitions  are centered on the destruction of Israel and they have made no secret about that.  But that is completely lost on littleflower.

[thereselittleflower]

 

To be clear, The Samson Option being spoken of is this:

 

'We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force………. Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother….. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen, before Israel goes under."

 

 

I couldnt find that on a single credible site except one, and even that quoted something else entirely. Where is this from?

 

 

 

That's fair.   I'll have to look up the source of that quote, I've been reading through a bunch of stuff and have had several things happen since I posted that, so I've lost track of the source  -  a daughter got engaged while we were up visiting her, and another was in an accident the next day.   

 

This might be of interest though:

 

Dimona's supporters had convinced most of the leadership that only nuclear weapons could provide the absolute and final deterrent to the Arab threat, and only nuclear weapons could convince the Arabs—who were bolstered by rapidly growing Soviet economic and military aid—that they must renounce all plans for military conquest of Israel and agree to a peace settlement. With a nuclear arsenal there would be no more Masadas in Israel's history, a reference to the decision of more than nine hundred Jewish defenders—known as the Zealots— to commit suicide in A.D. 73 rather than endure defeat at the hands of the Romans.

 

In its place, argued the nuclear advocates, would be the Samson Option. Samson, according to the Bible, had been captured by the Philistines after a bloody fight and put on display, with his eyes torn out, for public entertainment in Dagon's Temple in Gaza. He asked God to give him back his strength for the last time and cried out, "Let my soul die with the Philistines." With that, he pushed apart the temple pillars, bringing down the roof and killing himself and his enemies. For Israel's nuclear advocates, the Samson Option became another way of saying "Never again."

 

[in a 1976 essay in Commentary, Norman Podhoretz accurately summarized the pronuclear argument in describing what Israel would do if abandoned by the United States and overrun by Arabs: "The Israelis would fight . . . with conventional weapons for as long as they could, and if the tide were turning decisively against them, and if help in the form of resupply from the United States or any other guarantors were not forthcoming, it is safe to predict that they would fight with nuclear weapons in the end. ... It used to be said that the Israelis had a Masada complex . . . but if the Israelis are to be understood in terms of a 'complex' involving suicide rather than surrender and rooted in a relevant precedent of Jewish history, the example of Sarnson, whose suicide brought about the destruction of his enemies, would be more appropriate than Masada, where in committing suicide the Zealots killed only themselves and took no Romans with them." Podhoretz, asked years later about his essay, said that his conclusions about the Samson Option were just that—his conclusions, and not based on any specific information from Israelis or anyone else about Israel's nuclear capability.]

 

http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres10/SamsonOption.pdf

[thereselittleflower]

It's sad that there are people who feel that to defend their position, they have to misrepresent what others think or say or do, and believe they know more about the thoughts and understanding and motives of one they so judge than that one does him or herself.  After a while, all one can do is simply ignore it.  

 

MAD is for deterrence only.     It's purpose is to deter the use of nuclear arms of another country.    

 

It has a major flaw.   It only works as long as it works as a deterrence.   The moment deterrence no longer works, MAD becomes a madhouse, for then it virtually ensure retaliation if one country is attacked with nuclear weapons, and then mutually assured annihilation commences.

 

This response to the use of nuclear weapons can't stop the attack that is on the way - those nuclear weapons will hit, and the destruction of the nation being attacked first is assured.    There is limited time to mount a response, and the response can't save the nation so being attacked.    All it can do is destroy the attacking nation as well.

 

Since nothing positive can come out of such a response, for the nation responding because nuclear weapons have been launched against it is not going to stop annihilation about to hit it,   then this simply becomes a matter of revenge.   "If you're taking us out, we are going to take you out with us."   What good will such a response accomplish?

 

As christians, how can we be followers of Christ and support revenge, especially of this nature and magnitude?

 

The scriptures say:

 

Romans 12:19

Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY," says the Lord.

 

Zechariah 8:17

'Also let none of you devise evil in your heart against another, and do not love perjury; for all these are what I hate,' declares the LORD."

 

 

 

We are to be peacemakers, not supporters of destruction in vengeance.

 

 

Matthew 5:9

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

 

 

We are to obey the 2 Great Commandments:

 

Deuteronomy 6:5

"You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.

 

Luke 10:27

He answered, "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"

 

Leviticus 19:18

'You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the sons of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the LORD.

 

 

Galatians 5:14

For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

 

 

Who is my neighbor?

 

Christ himself tells us:

 

Luke 10

25And a lawyer stood up and put Him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 26And He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?” 27And he answered, “YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND;AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.” 28And He said to him, “You have answered correctly; DO THIS AND YOU WILL LIVE.” 29But wishing to justify himself, he said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

The Good Samaritan

      30Jesus replied and said, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. 31“And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 32“Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33“But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, 34and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35“On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you.’ 36“Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers’ hands?” 37And he said, “The one who showed mercy toward him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do the same.”

Edited July 16, 2015 by thereselittleflower

[Guest shiloh357]

No one has misrepresented anyone.   Your posts have made your position clear.  Your lopsided vilification of Israel and while completely ignoring the unique threats that Israel faces, coupled with lies, misinformation, quoting from anti-Semitic websites and your willingness to believe any and all conspiracy theories against Israel no matter how ridiculous or implausible pretty much indicates how you think and I am not the only one who has noticed or pointed it out to you.   So, you're not being misrepresented.   The racist hate that characterizes your posts speaks for itself.

 

Yes, MAD is for deterrence and no one has disputed that.   And it has worked as a deterrent.   That's the point we are making.  It's effectiveness as a deterrent is why the Arab nations bankroll terrorism by Palestinian inside Israel.  It's why there has not been another invasion of Israel.   The certifiable threat of Israel's nukes has kept Israel from having to defend itself against another regional war aimed at its annihilation speaks to the effectiveness of the MAD in Israel's case.

 

The thing you seem to miss is that because it is a deterrent and because it is a last resort, not a first resort it is most assuredly true that a nuclear strike made by Israel will not be an act of self-preservation.   In the Sampson option, Israel's death is a foregone conclusion.  It is the understandable response that ensure that even if Israel is destroyed the Arab world will pay a heavy, heavy price and several of the Arab nations will themselves be destroyed.    It' not a chance the Arab nations want to take.

 

The revenge thing is a nonissue because the Sampson option isn't an act of revenge.   It is the last act of defiance against those who seek Israel's destruction.

 

But even if you can make the case that it is an act of revenge, I would point out that its only Israel's response to annihilation that you are criticizing in this and your other posts.  

 

Your argument only finds fault with Israel's response not the goal of annihilation that makes Israel's response necessary in the first place.    You seem to have no problem quoting from those who approve of Israel's destruction that doesn't seem to present you with any moral dilemmas.   It's Israel's response to genocide that you have a problem with.  That's the only point at which you seem to find your morally selective outrage.

[thereselittleflower]

Iran is biblical Persia.  Ezekiel 38: 1-5.   Iran will be part of a coalition of nations that will descend on Israel in a failed attempt to destroy Israel.  .   

 

 

How is Ezekiel 38 about what is still yet future to us?

[ayin jade]

a daughter got engaged while we were up visiting her, and another was in an accident the next day.   

 

Congrats on the one and I hope the other wasnt hurt or at least not hurt much.

[Guest shiloh357]

Ezekiel 38 is about a war still future to us.  That's my point.   Persia (Iran) is prophesied to attack Israel as part of a coalition of nations and Persia along with those nations, according to Ezekiel 39 will be supernaturally defeated by God.

[thereselittleflower]

Samson Option ensures Israel will strike with nuclear weapons if it is going to lose.

 

This is simply and purely revenge by plain and clear definition:

 

re·venge

rəˈvenj/

noun

 

1. 1.

   the action of inflicting hurt or harm on someone for an injury or wrong suffered at their hands.

 

 

The Sampson Option will, as a last resort, inflict hurt or harm on those who cause injury or suffering at their hands.

 

This is, very simply and clearly, revenge, vengeance:

 

venge·ance

ˈvenjəns/

noun

 

1. punishment inflicted or retribution exacted for an injury or wrong.

 

 

Christians who support such actions of revenge and vengeance do so in direct and total disobedience to Christ.

[Guest shiloh357]

And btw, someone with such deeply held anti-Semitic views has NOTHING to say to anyone about what it means to be a Christian.  

[thereselittleflower]

 

a daughter got engaged while we were up visiting her, and another was in an accident the next day.   

 

Congrats on the one and I hope the other wasnt hurt or at least not hurt much.

 

 

 

Thank you so much, we are so excited for our daughter who got engaged, and for our daughter who was in the accident, she was shaken up, but it was a low enough speed impact we hope the worst is a little stiffness and soreness.