Israel leaks plans for nuclear strike on Iran. The details were leaked (on purpose it appears) from Israeli military personal in order to test the waters, prepare the world, and/or put pressure on others to act first. One source: "As soon as the green light is given, it will be one mission, one strike and the Iranian nuclear project will be demolished." Glad I don't live in the Middle East.
posted by bhouston on Jan 6, 2007 - 102 comments

The French Pro-Nuclear Proliferation Lobby "...I have no hesitation in saying that we must consider giving the Arab side a large enough force, including a large enough nuclear force, to persuade Israel that it cannot simply do whatever it wants. That is the policy my country (France) pursued in the 1970s when it gave Iraq a nuclear force..." -- Paul-Marie Couteaux, Member of the European Parliament
posted by kablam on May 25, 2004 - 25 comments

Mordechai Vanunu: The political prisoner you've never heard of. He's spent over 11 years in solitary confinement. His treatment was condemned by Amnesty International as "cruel, inhuman, and degrading." His crime? Blowing the whistle on Israel's nuclear program in 1986. Why does America allow an ally, and a democratic one, to engage in such police state actions?
posted by skallas on Mar 1, 2004 - 54 comments

Is Libya next? This story in Israel's Ha'aretz has a very very interesting lead: "The U.S. agrees with Israeli assessments that Libya has renewed its efforts to acquire a nuclear bomb, and that those efforts have been stepped up since 1999, when the UN sanctions on the country were removed." Not only that, Ariel Sharon says that he believes the Iraqis might be helping build said nuclear bomb, and that Libya might attain nuclear capability before Iraq does. And not only that, the always-exciting "unnamed experts" suggest that Pakistan and North Korea might have a hand in this as well. Libya is still on the State Department list of nations that support terror, so why hasn't this story been getting any play stateside? Is it really overstating the case to suggest that Bush's new doctrine of preemptive strikes without hard evidence, if applied across the board, could very well lead to world war?
posted by textureslut on Sep 24, 2002 - 76 comments

new counterbalance to israeli nuclear capability if you can't beat 'em join 'em (sort of)
posted by johnnyboy on Jul 6, 2002 - 2 comments