In 1967 Israeli was told outright by Syria of the attack. They didn't discover it. But that aside, with Israel knowing about it, they should have re-enforced thier forces and had their airforce on alert and as soon as they saw a jet take off from Egypt, they should have attacked.
Quote:
Israel hasn't yet been attacked. They initiated force. If they had not, they would have lost the war and there would be, in all likelihood, no Israel today.
Wrong of them to do?
|
Yes it was wrong of them. What if Syria was lying? What if Egypt wasn't going to attack? Israel was wrong to attack first. It is always wrong to attack first. Israel would have won even if Egypt attacked first.
Quote:
|
In the late 70s Iraq built a nuclear reactor, with French selling it tech
|
True statement
Quote:
|
with which they intended to fortify nuclear materials for a bomb
|
Baseless speculation
Quote:
|
Israel fighters went and blew it up in 1981.
|
True statement
Quote:
|
If they hadn't, Hussein probably would have had nukes in 1991 with which to back up his use of force at that time
|
Baseless speculation
Quote:
|
Or, perhaps the Iraqi initiation of force against the WTC in 1993 would have had a stronger bomb to load in the Ryder
|
Iraq didn't attack the WTC in 1993, Ramzi Yousef (An Iraqi individual citizen who wasn't sent by the Iraqi government) did. But if Iraq did attack in 1993 they were perfectly justified in doing so since they were the victims of unwarranted, unconstitutional, and unnecessary attacks by the United States in 1991. They were also starved and kept from life saving medications.
Quote:
|
Wrong of the Israelis to do?
|
Absolutely. Without a doubt they were wrong and so was America.
America had no justification to attack Iraq in 1991 and still doesn't in 2003. Israel had no justification to blow up an Iraqi nuclear reactor or to attack Egypt first.