>
> In other words: if the country and people of Israel
> get nuked by the government of Iran, well hey, they
> had it coming to them? I know you've made no secret
> of your contempt for the positions and actions of
> the Israeli government, but ... is your emphasis on
> "innocent and helpless" above because you think that
> there are no innocent and helpless people in Israel?
But Morris's piece is hysterical nonsense. As though Iran could make a nuclear first-strike attack against Israel and not get completely annihilated in retaliation! Israel is _rumored_ to have a couple hundred nuclear warheads; Israel's ally the U.S.A. has thousands of warheads it can launch through any imaginable defense in a matter of days, and that's no rumor. His piece finally rests on the bedrock idea that "all them damn Muslims are completely c-r-a-a-a-z-y!"
Contempt for Israel has nothing to do with Joanna's post. It's kind of awful for you to act as though you think it does. By criticizing Morris, Joanna is hardly advocating the atomic annihilation of Israel; Morris's whole idea of Iran suddenly nuking Israel "out of the blue," out of sheer mad spite and with impunity yet, is simply idiotic rubbish, right on the face of it. I'd guess she doesn't even think Morris's horror-fiction is even worth taking seriously enough to refute. All Joanna is doing is criticizing Morris's tasteless analogy between the Nazi holocaust, which actually happened in the real world, and Morris's disgusting fantasy "holocaust," hand-molded in papier-mache made out of pulped Tom Clancy novels, for the sole purpose of goosing the stupider and more hysterically susceptible of the Jerusalem Post's readership.
Yours WDK - WKiernan at ij.net