Israel's prime minister (WHO HAVE SHITLOADS OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS, INCIDENTALLY!) has urged the world to draw a "clear red line" over Iran's nuclear programme.

In a speech at the UN, Benjamin Netanyahu said time was running out to stop Tehran from having enough enriched uranium to build a nuclear bomb.

Israel and Western countries suspect Iran is seeking such a capability. Tehran says its programme is peaceful.

Earlier, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas asked the General Assembly to upgrade the Palestinians' UN status.

Mr Netanyahu told delegates at the annual meeting of the assembly that Iran could have enough material to make a nuclear bomb by the middle of next year, and a clear message needed to be sent to stop Tehran in its tracks.

"Red lines don't lead to war, red lines prevent war," he said. "Nothing could imperil the world more than a nuclear-armed Iran."

He said sanctions passed over the past seven years had not affected Tehran's programme. "The hour is very late," he told delegates. "The Iranian nuclear calendar does not take time out."

He said he was convinced that faced with a "clear red line, Iran will back down".

He added that he was confident the US and Israel could chart a common path on the issue.

On Tuesday, in his own address to the General Assembly, US President Barack Obama stressed the US would "do what we must" to stop Tehran acquiring nuclear arms.

However, while the Obama administration has not ruled out a military option, it says sanctions and multilateral negotiations with Iran must still be given time to work.

Earlier this month, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the US was not prepared to commit to drawing "red lines".

On Wednesday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused Western countries of nuclear "intimidation".

"Continued threat by the uncivilised Zionists [Israel] to resort to military action is a clear example of this bitter reality," he told the General Assembly.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas highlighted the Palestinians' UN status, saying he would continue to seek full membership.

But he said negotiations had begun with "regional organisations and member states" aimed at adopting a resolution making Palestine "a non-member state of the United Nations during this session".

"In our endeavour," he added, "we do not seek to delegitimise an existing state - that is Israel - but rather to assert the state that must be realised - that is Palestine."

Currently, the Palestine Liberation Organisation only has "permanent observer" status. Last year, a bid for full-member status failed because of a lack of support at the UN Security Council.

The change would allow Palestinians to participate in General Assembly debates. It would also improve their chances of joining UN agencies and the International Criminal Court.

Last year, Palestinians joined the UN cultural agency Unesco, despite Israeli and US opposition.

Mr Abbas also denounced Israeli construction in and around East Jerusalem. "It is a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Palestinian people via the demolition of their homes," he said.

It's a mystery why the jews put netanyahu in public office, instead of in a lunatic asylum.

They also have interventionist tendencies in international affairs

At least under Israeli law the public can vote Netanyahu and the Right Wing Military Industrial interests out of power in October next year, the real issue might be the right Wing and Military industrial factions subverting that process, launching war and doing a re-run of the Bush government plan to get re-elected (Iraq)?

Like it or not, Iran having the nuclear weapon would not bode well for Israel, or world peace in general, i don't know what your perspective of Islam or it's influence on the state of Iran is, but to me there is a fair amount of quite outlandish rhetoric about the Mahdi, judgement day, and quite a strong tendency towards religious fucktardary.

They also have interventionist tendencies in international affairs, fair play if Iran was historically an isolationist country developing an interior nuclear power program, I wouldn't be worried, that unfortunately is not the case as History shows, in current times you can see Iran has been quite open about it's role in destabilizing and funding guerrilla movements in other countries, yes I agree the Anglo American World Empire has done so too, but I guess in terms of a Nuclear powered Iran in the hands of a Religious extremist, it's better the devil we know?

At least under Israeli law the public can vote Netanyahu and the Right Wing Military Industrial interests out of power in October next year, the real issue might be the right Wing and Military industrial factions subverting that process, launching war and doing a re-run of the Bush government plan to get re-elected (Iraq)?

Novum, i'm not a Zionist

Israel is a beacon of democracy and freedom in a very violent and somewhat backwards part of the world.

I think Israel should remain for the Jews and as a sanctuary for other deemed unbelievers, who would definitely face persecution in the surrounding area, if the Jews were allowed Israel and afforded peace by the Muslims of the area, you would not have the massive bloodshed you do now, these Palestinians will just not move on quietly, or rather their supposed muslim brothers will not accept them into their country.

Guevarista wrote:
If you werent Mo0n5tar on DIF then ignore this post

www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=110106

Have you never played devil's advocate?

Guevarista wrote:
So you were taking the piss then.

To me it just appears your looking for a way to interpret my posts that makes it easier for you to dismiss them,

before you thought I was a zionist, now you think I was just taking the piss

all i've ever tried to do is make people think, some people who are anti-semitic needed more encouragement than others, many of my threads were dedicated to their spiritual and mental development as human beings, the methods I used to achieve that aim are not beyond question, so have at them.

Did you ever read any Nietzsche?

That was not the purpose of mo0n5tar, again you just jump to simple conclusions, carry on.

t.qkme.me/366fmi.jpg

In common parlance, a devil's advocate is someone who, given a certain argument, takes a position he or she does not necessarily agree with, for the sake of argument. In taking such position, the individual taking on the devil's advocate role seeks to engage others in an argumentative discussion process. The purpose of such process is typically to test the quality of the original argument and identify weaknesses in its structure, and to use such information to either improve or abandon the original, opposing position.