Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Israel's nuclear programme

  1. Dec 23, 2003 #1
    Israel's nuclear programme

    While Israel has never admitted to having nuclear weapons, few international experts question the Jewish state's presence on the world's list of nuclear powers.
    Its nuclear capability is arguably the most secretive weapons of mass destruction programme in the world.

    Unlike Iran and North Korea - two countries whose alleged nuclear ambitions have recently come to the fore - Israel has never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, designed to prevent the global spread of nuclear weapons.

    Complete text http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3340639.stm
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 23, 2003 #2
    Free Vanunu!

    Its nice to have you here Carlos!

    I’m bloody ashamed of the way ASIO let MOSSAD kidnap Vanunu from Australia. Menashe wrote all about the saga in “Profits Of War” (which incidentally was shredded by publishers at a CIA request).

    Here’s some info;
    http://www.vanunu.freeserve.co.uk/
     
  4. Dec 23, 2003 #3
    The Whistleblower

    Background info;

    “Mordechai Vanunu -
    The world's first nuclear hostage
    "I have sacrificed my freedom and risked my life in order to expose the danger of nuclear weapons which threatens this whole region. I acted on behalf of all citizens and all of humanity"
    Mordechai Vanunu

    Mordechai Vanunu was a technician at Dimona, Israel's nuclear installation, from 1976 to 1985. He discovered that the plant was secretly producing nuclear weapons. His conscience made him speak out and in 1986 he provided the London Sunday Times with the facts and photos they used to tell the world about Israel's nuclear weapons programme. His evidence showed that Israel had stockpiled up to 200 nuclear warheads, with no debate or authorisation from it own citizens.
    On 30th September 1986, Mordechai was lured from London to Rome. There he was kidnapped, drugged and shipped to Israel. After a secret trial he was sentenced to 18 years for 'treason' and 'espionage' though he had received no payment and communicated with no foreign power. He was held in complete isolation for 11 years, only allowed occasional visits from his family, lawyer and a priest, conducted through a metal screen.
    Just to clarify. Before Vanunu went to London, ASIO did a number on him. Vanunu had sought political asylum in Australia before going to London.
     
  5. Dec 27, 2003 #4
    Re: Free Vanunu!

    This is a shame indeed.

    I have respect for many Jewish heros, such as the one you listed above. Someone accused me of disliking the Jewish people. Incorrect. I simply dislike Zionist/supremacist types. There are many Jewish intellectuals that I greatly respect, such as Noam Chomsky (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/index.cfm), Israel Shamir (http://www.israelshamir.net/), Dr. John Hartung (http://members.aol.com/toexist/), Edward Said (http://www.edwardsaid.org/modules/news/), Michael Levin (http://web.gc.cuny.edu/philosophy/levin.htm), Israel Shahak (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...f=sr_1_1/102-2444775-1856916?v=glance&s=books), Norman Finkelstein (http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/), and many many more.

    Keep in mind that almost half of Israeli Jews are opposed to Zionism and Sharone, I bear this half no ill-will or resentment, I respect them as fellow human beings.

    I see two different Israeli politics: jewish nationalism and zionism. Jewish nationalism is just wanting to keep the borders closed to any further immigration and preserving jewish culture, but at the same time respecting the national sovereinty of neighboring nations. I see this as fine. But zionism is the belief that Isreal should imperialize the rest of the world, this is what I dislike.

    Regards,

    Carlos Hernandez
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2003
  6. Dec 27, 2003 #5

    drag

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Re: Re: Free Vanunu!

    Greetings !
    Amazing political knowledge...
    I wonder, what are the sources of this extensive
    information, if you don't mind disclosing them ?

    Israel's possesion of nuclear weapons is and was well known
    unofficialy. The signing of the treaty would create
    a number of problems - it will provide arab countries with
    precise info - which is much less detering. Also,
    it will constantly be used by many countries as an excuse
    to start their own nuclear programs and receive less
    official critisizm for it.

    I really don't think it matters when a democratic country
    possesses nuclear weapons. As long as it makes sure they
    are safe-guarded appropriately. Such a country would
    NEVER use them first. The problem is when non-democratic
    countries construct or acquire such weapons. Since the
    rule is held by force by a small power-thursty bunch -
    there's always the danger that the leader will go insane
    or would loose control of the people and someone presses
    the button.

    Live long and prosper.
     
  7. Dec 28, 2003 #6
    !!!?

    Iraq Didn't even own WMD's, but only becuase USA suspected that they have, they got invaded, but when Israel's unoffcial side insure that Israel owns WMD's , nobody gives a 5h!t !!!
    This is very unfair, acually, Jordan has nothing to defence itself against Israeli WMD's but a paper Jordan signed back in 90's, we cannot afford having WMD's but we must have at least a back up plan if this peace between us and Israel got broken.
    Uoi consider Israel a Democratic country ? Try to know more about "Azmi Bushara" and poeple like him, they got prisoned just for some words they say, just becuase they tell their opinion, or maybe you have to know more about the country you support.


    Still wondering If Israel has WDM's or producing them, why nobody cares about that ?
     
  8. Dec 28, 2003 #7
    (quote)I really don't think it matters when a democratic country
    possesses nuclear weapons. As long as it makes sure they
    are safe-guarded appropriately. Such a country would
    NEVER use them first. The problem is when non-democratic
    countries construct or acquire such weapons. Since the
    rule is held by force by a small power-thursty bunch -
    there's always the danger that the leader will go insane
    or would loose control of the people and someone presses
    the button.(/quote)

    I think nuclear weapons weapons should be banned entirely. Even democratic countries shouldn't possess any WMD's. And certainly not Israel because of the unstable situation in that region. It's just one more reason for the arab countries in the neighbourhood to also start a nuclear programme to "defend themselves". I also don't see any reason why Israel should have WMD's since you are so sure they aren't going to use them. If they would use them somewhere in the future that's even worse, no matter what would cause them to use a nuclear bomb. I don't think there is any justification for using WMD's.
     
  9. Dec 31, 2003 #8

    Phobos

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: !!!?

    remains to be seen

    that, plus the threat of using (or distributing) them

    the threat isn't there

    but I'm sure there is behind-the-scenes discussions about it
     
  10. Dec 31, 2003 #9
    Phobos

    A great American principle of justice: innocent until proven guilty.

    Still, I guess it's too late now, isn't it? That's the peoblem with blowing everything up rather than using diplomacy and waiting for evidence; it can't be undone. And now, as the USA has demonstrated, we can all make whatever whacky claims we want about any nation, forget about requiring evidence to support our claims, and do whatever the hell we want about it.

    The USA has used such as well. And has threatened to do so again. I trust Saddam more than I trust the US government. Saddam never nuked anyone.

    WTF are you talking about?

    http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,7567019%5E1702,00.html
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,917834,00.html
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4629052-103681,00.html
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2828985.stm
    http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2828985.stm
    http://www.globalpolicy.org/unitedstates/unpolicy/gen2003/0115us.htm
    http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/veto/2002/1223israel.htm
    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B6E27ADF-9E5B-45CD-A4CD-403A3BCF3D39.htm
    http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,7543145%5E401,00.html
    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/EE06A7BC-F8D2-4CE9-8A9F-DC2A62B2C133.htm
    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/D8B2E59A-F705-48A7-B6F7-588E9F37B5B9.htm
    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/67979658-79FE-4CD1-83A4-7D378A081848.htm
    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/67979658-79FE-4CD1-83A4-7D378A081848.htm
    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/7D5620B5-5846-4AD8-8441-BB1B14B6A48A.htm
    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/D3F4ACBB-A265-4268-AFEC-6996D0F835D0.htm
    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/1BF523F3-A395-451D-9910-36B7BF02B7DB.htm
    http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,7473991%5E401,00.html
    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/AE871B47-A5D9-428E-B8E5-26E52D387622.htm
    http://onenews.nzoom.com/onenews_detail/0,1227,137218-1-9,00.html
    http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/990902/1999090222.html
    http://wwww.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf...7738125ef7c2ca9bc1256c4b00470a79?OpenDocument
    http://abc.net.au/news/2002/11/item20021127185951_1.htm
    http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/07/23/mideast/
    http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/4227466.htm
    http://www.ummah.com/inewsletter/massacres/palestine/index14.htm
    http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/breaking_news/4227466.htm
    http://www.jpost.com/Editions/2002/03/04/News/News.44530.html
    http://wildcat.arizona.edu/papers/95/148/05_3.html
    http://asia.news.yahoo.com/020926/afp/020926130246top.html
    http://srch1.un.org/plweb-cgi/fastw...ator=and&TemplateName=predoc.tmpl&setCookie=1
    http://srch1.un.org/plweb-cgi/fastw...ator=and&TemplateName=predoc.tmpl&setCookie=1
    http://srch1.un.org/plweb-cgi/fastw...ator=and&TemplateName=predoc.tmpl&setCookie=1
    http://srch1.un.org/plweb-cgi/fastw...ator=and&TemplateName=predoc.tmpl&setCookie=1
    http://electronicintifada.net/forreference/keyfigures/sharon.html

    And finally, the diary of Rachel Corrie makes interesting reading: http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,916246,00.html

    Not a threat, huh?
     
  11. Dec 31, 2003 #10
    1>Honestly, what would you do when someone illegal developed them then?

    2> Removal of Nukes in Israel is a death sentence to the entire country. I support a Nuke free Israel, but not without change in the middle east first. Between the tension, the palestinian argument, and Syria's lack of signing the bio/chem treaty. There needs to be some real movement from all sides. The arabs want Israel out of palestine, but Syria won't get out of Lebanon. The Arabs want Israel to sign an NPT when Syria won't sign the chem/bio treaty, and when you've got people like Saddam saying they'll destroy Israel as soon as they get hte chance. The whole region needs help, but ironically, most of the people hate us that want us to come help them with their Israeli problem. hrrmmmm, a tough call none the less.
     
  12. Dec 31, 2003 #11
    Re: Phobos

    1>12 years isn't enough waiting? What is?
    2>Whacky claims?
    I suggest that you, and others that believe the UN inspectors were supposed to go running around like detectives, reexamine the inspection process. See South Africa for the proper means of reentering the world via the UN/IAEA inspection process.
    South Africa said "we are tired of sanctions, and here is documents, witnesses, video tape of the destruction of the weapons". They wanted to help in anyway to prove themselves clean.
    Saddam, on the other hand, had weapons 4 years into the inspection process. Even then, the inspectors couldn't find them until his stepson spoke up. Somehow the inspectors were to do more than their jobs now? They weren't intended to go sifting through the sand. They were intended to validate the claims by the Iraqis that the weapons had been destroyed, and no such evidence was presented. Even Blix said that the soil levels didn't show enough for the entire KNOWN stash to be destroyed there.
    Secondly, unlike other countries, Iraq signed a cease fire on the condition that he destroyed all banned weapons within (I don't remeber the exact number of months) after the signing. He didn't then, we gave more time, and more, and more. Enter 9/11 and some loose ends need to get tied up.
    To say that these were whacky claims, or that waiting didn't happen is to ignore the facts of the last 12+ years.
    3>We have used nukes as a deterrant against nukes and biological weapons. There has been no threat against conventional attacks. This has been a standard policy, and is far greater than say, North Korea (ie. adlibbed - "we will destroy the entire world with nukes if we are attacked in anyway" )
     
  13. Dec 31, 2003 #12
    ohhhhh, rachel corrie - let me show how 'heartless' I can be -


    http://www.twin-towers.net/rachel_corrie_photos.htm



    Notice the first pictures......
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    She is to the side of the bulldozer. She should have stayed there.




    [​IMG]
    Now she is in the middle of bulldozers path. Looking at the path, you can see the bulldozer DID NOT deviate from it's straight path. It went straight forward.

    This site says "She fell in front of the machine, which ran over her and then backed up, witnesses said.(AP Photo/HO, International Solidarity Movement"
    This has been changed so many times. Other accounts say that she climbed on the mound of dirt to yell at the driver and got swept under.

    Regardless, the pictures are odd, and Corrie knew the dangers. She had a run in while sitting in a house that was being bulldozed a couple of days before her death.
    If you think the machine isn't going to stop, from your experience, what moron goes and stands in front of another? This doesn't seem like a very smart move for someone who wanted to live.


    Ohhhh, I found this while looking for those pics online....

    http://www.sicmuse.com/corrie/corrie.htm
    Links are at the bottom :smile:
     
  14. Dec 31, 2003 #13
    This thread isn't about Rachel Corrie...it is about nukes, which in Israel's case help to further destabillize the region.
     
  15. Dec 31, 2003 #14

    kat

    User Avatar

    lol, that's nice bit of propaganda. If anything Israel having nukes has allowed us to have less and has been stabalizing in that it is a significant deterrent against surrounding countries attacking her...again.
     
  16. Dec 31, 2003 #15
    Nope, wrong and wrong, kat...the point of Mutually Assured Destruction is that both sides can destroy each other. Right now, Israel can destroy it's neighbors, so it is only logical(not insane or evil) that Israel's neighbors want nukes of their own. And, of course, Israeli nuke numbers don't affect the American amounts...do they?
     
  17. Dec 31, 2003 #16

    kat

    User Avatar

    Nope, wrong and wrong..again Zero...you ignore the Soviet Union/Arab alliance in regards to the past. Israel neighbors desire to destroy it nukes or no nukes, holding the upper hand at the very least keeps them slightly at bay. And of course..I'm sure that you have numbers to back up that Israeli nukes did not affect American amts. don't you?
     
  18. Dec 31, 2003 #17
    No numbers, but I didn't see your numbers either, which is why I put up a question mark...besides which, Israeli weapons are nearly America's weapons anyway, considering the close ties involved.
     
  19. Dec 31, 2003 #18
    phatmonky

    They were investigated until I think 1998, when the USA pulled out all inspectors. Iraq didn't kick them out. The USA exercise its inlfluence to pull them out. Then later they went back in. And Hans Blix said two important things. 1) The inspection process is working. 2) There is no evidence to support the USA's claims.

    Indeed, whacky claims. First teh USA claimed Iraq had something to do with those 11/9 attacks, and provided no evidence for the accusation. Then they claimed a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda, and couldn't provide evidence for the accusation. Then they accused them of trying to import uranium from Niger, and it was proven the "evidence" was a forgery. So they settled on claims that Iraq was making biological and chemical weapons, again without any evidence. Thus, whacky claims.

    Ah, I see. You're saying that South Africa endnig Apartheid shows that all those claims against Iraq were true, regardless of the lack of evidence. Right.

    I suggest you re-examine events. Perhaps read this: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=138664&sid=6583a1ebfef1b6eca4e8d7aae50a1e0a

    1) An agreement signed under duress has no binding value.

    2) Since no evidence has ever been found of the weapons the USA accused Iraq of possessing... they are gone. Duh.

    What has 11/9 got to do with Iraq?

    Dude, you just ignored all the facts.

    No, the USA used nukes against two civilian populations as a political exercise. And before you pop out the classic bit of conscience-soothing denial "It saved thousands of lives!", read this:
    Let's see, the USA already has nuked people, has one of the world's largest nuclear arsenals, and has threatened to use nukes again. Yeah, I trust that government...

    PS: You didn't read those news articles and other webpages at all, did you?
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2003
  20. Dec 31, 2003 #19
    Yet amazingly does not stop Israel attacking every nation around it...
     
  21. Dec 31, 2003 #20
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Israel's nuclear programme
  1. Independence of Israel (Replies: 31)

Loading...