A nuclear Middle East

LobsterMobster wrote:

If Iran had a nuclear arsenal, Israel might be more hesitant to attack. Isn't that a good thing?

Yea... Unless your just biding your time to topple their government so hopefully someone more friendly can manage their oil supplies. Makes it hard to pull an Iraq on them when they already have a nuke to wave around.

I honestly think thats the real issue.

The probability they get a nuke and commit kamikaze by actually using it? extremely low.
The probability with a nuke they get invaded? extremely low.

I think their motivation is pretty logical and self explanatory.

jowner wrote:
LobsterMobster wrote:

If Iran had a nuclear arsenal, Israel might be more hesitant to attack. Isn't that a good thing?

Yea... Unless your just biding your time to topple their government so hopefully someone more friendly can manage their oil supplies. Makes it hard to pull an Iraq on them when they already have a nuke to wave around.

I honestly think thats the real issue.

The probability they get a nuke and commit kamikaze by actually using it? extremely low.
The probability with a nuke they get invaded? extremely low.

I think their motivation is pretty logical and self explanatory.

Yeah, the problem is trying to not get blown up by someone else's working nukes before you can perfect your own.

I didn't think Iran was a primary supplier of oil for the US?

Oil is roughly fungible... it comes in a few grades, some of which are better than others. Basically, there's a big pool of oil out there, with the suppliers pouring it in and the consumers sucking it back out. It doesn't much matter where individual currents in the oil are going, what matters is the total supply. If Iran goes offline, the supply will be constrained, and prices will go up all over the world, all at once, even in countries that don't directly deal with Iran.

I didn't think Iran was a primary supplier of oil for the US?

I am pretty sure that Canada provides, %-wise, the most oil to the US right now.

(Looking at the data here, we provide a little over 25% of the crude oil imported into the US. The next closest country is Saudi Arabia, which provides little over half what we provide.

Israel is suspected in a series of leaks of information from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The leaks were designed to ratchet up international pressure on Iran and, to some degree, justify the assassination last year of two Iranian nuclear scientists.

Unfortunately, some of those leaks have backfired on Israel. At the end of last month, the Associated Press published one of those leaks, a diagram supposedly showing that Iranian scientists had run a simulation of a nuclear explosion with a yield about 50 kilotons. It turned out that the diagram wasn't anything more than could be found in a college physics text book.

OG_slinger wrote:

Israel is suspected in a series of leaks of information from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The leaks were designed to ratchet up international pressure on Iran and, to some degree, justify the assassination last year of two Iranian nuclear scientists.

Unfortunately, some of those leaks have backfired on Israel. At the end of last month, the Associated Press published one of those leaks, a diagram supposedly showing that Iranian scientists had run a simulation of a nuclear explosion with a yield about 50 kilotons. It turned out that the diagram wasn't anything more than could be found in a college physics text book.

Wait, something doesn't make sense here. Why would Israel leak part of an IAEA report that turns out to be nothing more than what could be found in a college physics textbook? "An article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists declared: 'This diagram does nothing more than indicate either slipshod analysis or an amateurish hoax.'" Whatever anyone thinks of the Israeli intelligence community in terms of goals or morals, two phrases I don't think anyone associates them with are "slipshod analysis" and "amateurish hoax."

Something is fishy here.

CheezePavilion wrote:

Wait, something doesn't make sense here. Why would Israel leak part of an IAEA report that turns out to be nothing more than what could be found in a college physics textbook? "An article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists declared: 'This diagram does nothing more than indicate either slipshod analysis or an amateurish hoax.'" Whatever anyone thinks of the Israeli intelligence community in terms of goals or morals, two phrases I don't think anyone associates them with are "slipshod analysis" and "amateurish hoax."

Something is fishy here.

Because it was a scary diagram about nuclear explosions that was written in Persian?

Seriously, though. We invaded Iraq over aluminum tubes and yellow cake. This is just throwing sh*t at the wall and seeing what sticks. In this case, though, sticking involves at least a massive bombing campaign and, at most, another regime change invasion and protracted occupation that's doomed to fail.

OG_slinger wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

Wait, something doesn't make sense here. Why would Israel leak part of an IAEA report that turns out to be nothing more than what could be found in a college physics textbook? "An article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists declared: 'This diagram does nothing more than indicate either slipshod analysis or an amateurish hoax.'" Whatever anyone thinks of the Israeli intelligence community in terms of goals or morals, two phrases I don't think anyone associates them with are "slipshod analysis" and "amateurish hoax."

Something is fishy here.

Because it was a scary diagram about nuclear explosions that was written in Persian?

Seriously, though. We invaded Iraq over aluminum tubes and yellow cake.

Well that's my point: I don't think anyone, whatever their other opinions of Israeli intelligence, considers them Bush-era levels of incompetent.

In one of the episodes of Toffi and the Gorila (low quality parody where Toffi wears a bikini top and the Gorila is a hand puppet) Toffi claimed that the USA attacked Iraq because Sadam Hussain said George W. Bush's father a "maniac". The monkey agreed with the action because "it's immoral to call an old man names". I found the video but it's in Hebrew and NSFW. There is an anti-israeli guy that put a English subtitles to their reenactment of Jesus Crucifixion.

So AP said Israel leaked them some intelligence - no big deal. It's not like the world has any interest on keeping what's going on in Iran secret .Wikileaks happened and everything is still fine.

CheezePavilion wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:

Israel is suspected in a series of leaks of information from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The leaks were designed to ratchet up international pressure on Iran and, to some degree, justify the assassination last year of two Iranian nuclear scientists.

Unfortunately, some of those leaks have backfired on Israel. At the end of last month, the Associated Press published one of those leaks, a diagram supposedly showing that Iranian scientists had run a simulation of a nuclear explosion with a yield about 50 kilotons. It turned out that the diagram wasn't anything more than could be found in a college physics text book.

Wait, something doesn't make sense here. Why would Israel leak part of an IAEA report that turns out to be nothing more than what could be found in a college physics textbook? "An article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists declared: 'This diagram does nothing more than indicate either slipshod analysis or an amateurish hoax.'" Whatever anyone thinks of the Israeli intelligence community in terms of goals or morals, two phrases I don't think anyone associates them with are "slipshod analysis" and "amateurish hoax."

Something is fishy here.

It wouldn't be the first time that similarly amateurish "intelligence " was presented by the Israelis to manipulate the US into doing their bidding.

One Sudanese aspirin factory comes to mind.

Paleocon wrote:

One Sudanese aspirin factory comes to mind.

Those Sudanese aspirins are really effective. One pill managed to cure 3 Israelis and one unborn child's headaches and coronary vascular problems permanently.

I think the Sudanese admitted it was a weapon factory. We are currently trying to find a way to return some of their citizens home. People who escape Sudan and Eritrea can't be shipped back home due to their oppressive government. Some of the "refugees" (they are mostly illegal work immigrants) claim that if their government discover they went to Israel they may be jailed or killed ( why did they enter in the first place) . This topic probably deserves its own thread.

The attacks in Sudan and Syria can show you that Israel doesn't hesitate attacking "enemy" states. I've read on rotter.net(it's a Hebrew news forum ) that Israel asked the Jordanian's permission to attack Assad's chemical weapon stockpiles because of their proximity to Jordan and the Jordanians refused.

Assad is on the brink of using his chemical weapons. As far as I read it's mostly Sarin gas . I'm not sure if we got atropine injectors with our gas masks but I think we should probably get a kit for the baby too. I've read that he just lost Haleb to the rebels.

The problem with nuclear/chemical/biological weapons is generally government stability and the prevalence of international terrorists like al-Qaeda in the region. As I stated before Sarin was used as a terror weapon in the past. The problem with the use of WMDs is that the victim of such attack can counter it with an exaggerated response in order to prevent farther attacks so the death toll would probably rises pretty fast. This is probably one of the main reason none is crazy enough to use them unless he's a dictator who doesn't care about his people. I've read the rebels claims Assad's military is already using white phosphorous as a weapon. I also read his military is out of bomb so they throw naval mines and explosive barrels and then detonate them with standard ordinance.

Niseg wrote:

So AP said Israel leaked them some intelligence - no big deal. It's not like the world has any interest on keeping what's going on in Iran secret .Wikileaks happened and everything is still fine.

Sure. We shouldn't be concerned at all that the international agency that's been tasked with figuring out if Iran actually has a nuclear weapons program is lousy with Israeli spies. We can still totally trust the information that comes out of them...

OG_slinger wrote:
Niseg wrote:

So AP said Israel leaked them some intelligence - no big deal. It's not like the world has any interest on keeping what's going on in Iran secret .Wikileaks happened and everything is still fine.

Sure. We shouldn't be concerned at all that the international agency that's been tasked with figuring out if Iran actually has a nuclear weapons program is lousy with Israeli spies. We can still totally trust the information that comes out of them...

The IAEA can believe whoever it wants. I don't really care because Iran can be considered a threshold state. Them having nuclear weapons is just a matter of time and/or will. I doubt they'll use such an expensive weapon on Israel , the only country in the region that can effectively intercept it and potentially retaliate with nukes of its own(I'm still not sure we have nuclear weapons though most think we do) .

I'm not really sure about the history of leaking ,and I haven't kept track on incidents where the Mossad leaking stuff to the newspaper. Disinformation can be a useful weapon but it looses its sting when it's proven wrong. It's still useful if you use it as a limited time distraction . Israel has plenty of resources to spy on Iran . This include a population of 250000 Iranian Jews, and 4 spy satellite (one of them uses radar) the public knows about (mass productions and military alliances can do wonders) . Getting good intelligence isn't a problem and they'll use it in a way that best serves the country.

None in Israel wants to attack Iran but we leave the decisions in the hands of "experts" . I once heard one of those expert said that the casualty isn't the deciding factor in military operations. I still think they are lying which made the IDF loose it's edge. Some people claim that we are in the immoral condition where civilians shield soldiers because the politicians value the lives of soldiers too much.The public has mixed feeling because none here wants anyone to die but the supporters of the right are usually willing to pay the price for "peace" ( the current meaning is not getting bombarded ,shot, or explode on a bus/street/mall).

Niseg wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

One Sudanese aspirin factory comes to mind.

Those Sudanese aspirins are really effective. One pill managed to cure 3 Israelis and one unborn child's headaches and coronary vascular problems permanently.

I think the Sudanese admitted it was a weapon factory. We are currently trying to find a way to return some of their citizens home. People who escape Sudan and Eritrea can't be shipped back home due to their oppressive government. Some of the "refugees" (they are mostly illegal work immigrants) claim that if their government discover they went to Israel they may be jailed or killed ( why did they enter in the first place) . This topic probably deserves its own thread.

You think incorrectly.

The owner of the Sudanese aspirin factory even had Kroll come in and do an independent audit of the wreckage. They determined that not only was it NOT a weapons factory, but the "intelligence" the Israelis cited as evidence of chemical weapons precursors was Roundup(tm) a common commercial herbicide that was applied to the surrounding chainlink fence to get rid of weeds.

In short, it was amateur hour for foreign intelligence.

If you want actual actionable intelligence in the Middle East, forget the Israelis. Talk to the Brits and Jordanians.

Paleocon wrote:
Niseg wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

One Sudanese aspirin factory comes to mind.

Those Sudanese aspirins are really effective. One pill managed to cure 3 Israelis and one unborn child's headaches and coronary vascular problems permanently.

I think the Sudanese admitted it was a weapon factory. We are currently trying to find a way to return some of their citizens home. People who escape Sudan and Eritrea can't be shipped back home due to their oppressive government. Some of the "refugees" (they are mostly illegal work immigrants) claim that if their government discover they went to Israel they may be jailed or killed ( why did they enter in the first place) . This topic probably deserves its own thread.

You think incorrectly.

The owner of the Sudanese aspirin factory even had Kroll come in and do an independent audit of the wreckage. They determined that not only was it NOT a weapons factory, but the "intelligence" the Israelis cited as evidence of chemical weapons precursors was Roundup(tm) a common commercial herbicide that was applied to the surrounding chainlink fence to get rid of weeds.

In short, it was amateur hour for foreign intelligence.

If you want actual actionable intelligence in the Middle East, forget the Israelis. Talk to the Brits and Jordanians.

Well I don't get the motivation then. Was Israel trying to corner the market on aspirin production?

CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
Niseg wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

One Sudanese aspirin factory comes to mind.

Those Sudanese aspirins are really effective. One pill managed to cure 3 Israelis and one unborn child's headaches and coronary vascular problems permanently.

I think the Sudanese admitted it was a weapon factory. We are currently trying to find a way to return some of their citizens home. People who escape Sudan and Eritrea can't be shipped back home due to their oppressive government. Some of the "refugees" (they are mostly illegal work immigrants) claim that if their government discover they went to Israel they may be jailed or killed ( why did they enter in the first place) . This topic probably deserves its own thread.

You think incorrectly.

The owner of the Sudanese aspirin factory even had Kroll come in and do an independent audit of the wreckage. They determined that not only was it NOT a weapons factory, but the "intelligence" the Israelis cited as evidence of chemical weapons precursors was Roundup(tm) a common commercial herbicide that was applied to the surrounding chainlink fence to get rid of weeds.

In short, it was amateur hour for foreign intelligence.

If you want actual actionable intelligence in the Middle East, forget the Israelis. Talk to the Brits and Jordanians.

Well I don't get the motivation then. Was Israel trying to corner the market on aspirin production?

I think Occum would point to utter and complete Israeli incompetence.

Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
Niseg wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

One Sudanese aspirin factory comes to mind.

Those Sudanese aspirins are really effective. One pill managed to cure 3 Israelis and one unborn child's headaches and coronary vascular problems permanently.

I think the Sudanese admitted it was a weapon factory. We are currently trying to find a way to return some of their citizens home. People who escape Sudan and Eritrea can't be shipped back home due to their oppressive government. Some of the "refugees" (they are mostly illegal work immigrants) claim that if their government discover they went to Israel they may be jailed or killed ( why did they enter in the first place) . This topic probably deserves its own thread.

You think incorrectly.

The owner of the Sudanese aspirin factory even had Kroll come in and do an independent audit of the wreckage. They determined that not only was it NOT a weapons factory, but the "intelligence" the Israelis cited as evidence of chemical weapons precursors was Roundup(tm) a common commercial herbicide that was applied to the surrounding chainlink fence to get rid of weeds.

In short, it was amateur hour for foreign intelligence.

If you want actual actionable intelligence in the Middle East, forget the Israelis. Talk to the Brits and Jordanians.

Well I don't get the motivation then. Was Israel trying to corner the market on aspirin production?

I think Occum would point to utter and complete Israeli incompetence.

Such utter and complete Israeli incompetence that they don't even know their own goals? I think the razor cuts pretty sharply against that.

CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
Niseg wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

One Sudanese aspirin factory comes to mind.

Those Sudanese aspirins are really effective. One pill managed to cure 3 Israelis and one unborn child's headaches and coronary vascular problems permanently.

I think the Sudanese admitted it was a weapon factory. We are currently trying to find a way to return some of their citizens home. People who escape Sudan and Eritrea can't be shipped back home due to their oppressive government. Some of the "refugees" (they are mostly illegal work immigrants) claim that if their government discover they went to Israel they may be jailed or killed ( why did they enter in the first place) . This topic probably deserves its own thread.

You think incorrectly.

The owner of the Sudanese aspirin factory even had Kroll come in and do an independent audit of the wreckage. They determined that not only was it NOT a weapons factory, but the "intelligence" the Israelis cited as evidence of chemical weapons precursors was Roundup(tm) a common commercial herbicide that was applied to the surrounding chainlink fence to get rid of weeds.

In short, it was amateur hour for foreign intelligence.

If you want actual actionable intelligence in the Middle East, forget the Israelis. Talk to the Brits and Jordanians.

Well I don't get the motivation then. Was Israel trying to corner the market on aspirin production?

I think Occum would point to utter and complete Israeli incompetence.

Such utter and complete Israeli incompetence that they don't even know their own goals? I think the razor cuts pretty sharply against that.

I think they were sincerely convinced that it was a chemwar factory since it was part of the Oil for Food program. Either that or they were simply trying to deny a humanitarian vendor to Iraq. Considering the often silly list of prohibited items on the Gaza blockade list, the latter seems a very real possibility.

Niseg wrote:

The IAEA can believe whoever it wants.

You're not getting it, Niseg. Israel has cast doubt on anything coming from the IAEA because they "leaked" sh*tty intelligence. Now even if the IAEA uncovers a smoking gun of a nuclear weapons program in Iran the agency will have to beat back charges that the evidence was simply planted by the Mossad to get the rest of the world (i.e., the US) to attack Iran.

Niseg wrote:

None in Israel wants to attack Iran but we leave the decisions in the hands of "experts".

IMAGE(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02364/b_2364410b.jpg)

Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

Well I don't get the motivation then. Was Israel trying to corner the market on aspirin production?

I think Occum would point to utter and complete Israeli incompetence.

Such utter and complete Israeli incompetence that they don't even know their own goals? I think the razor cuts pretty sharply against that.

I think they were sincerely convinced that it was a chemwar factory since it was part of the Oil for Food program. Either that or they were simply trying to deny a humanitarian vendor to Iraq. Considering the often silly list of prohibited items on the Gaza blockade list, the latter seems a very real possibility.

Okay, that makes more sense. The issue is that there's a difference between having that backfire and having this backfire. That backfires, no big deal. This backfiring has some major effects. It's one thing to do something amateurish when the stakes are low risk; it's another to do something so shoddy when the stakes are this high-risk and going by the article, so easily discovered.

CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

Well I don't get the motivation then. Was Israel trying to corner the market on aspirin production?

I think Occum would point to utter and complete Israeli incompetence.

Such utter and complete Israeli incompetence that they don't even know their own goals? I think the razor cuts pretty sharply against that.

I think they were sincerely convinced that it was a chemwar factory since it was part of the Oil for Food program. Either that or they were simply trying to deny a humanitarian vendor to Iraq. Considering the often silly list of prohibited items on the Gaza blockade list, the latter seems a very real possibility.

Okay, that makes more sense. The issue is that there's a difference between having that backfire and having this backfire. That backfires, no big deal. This backfiring has some major effects. It's one thing to do something amateurish when the stakes are low risk; it's another to do something so shoddy when the stakes are this high-risk and going by the article, so easily discovered.

I think this sort of behavior from Israel is likely to become more and more commonplace largely because of the moral hazard presented by unconditional support. There are no consequences attached to atrocious behavior, so there is little to no risk attached to audacious acts even if they stand little to no chance of actually succeeding.

Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

Well I don't get the motivation then. Was Israel trying to corner the market on aspirin production?

I think Occum would point to utter and complete Israeli incompetence.

Such utter and complete Israeli incompetence that they don't even know their own goals? I think the razor cuts pretty sharply against that.

I think they were sincerely convinced that it was a chemwar factory since it was part of the Oil for Food program. Either that or they were simply trying to deny a humanitarian vendor to Iraq. Considering the often silly list of prohibited items on the Gaza blockade list, the latter seems a very real possibility.

Okay, that makes more sense. The issue is that there's a difference between having that backfire and having this backfire. That backfires, no big deal. This backfiring has some major effects. It's one thing to do something amateurish when the stakes are low risk; it's another to do something so shoddy when the stakes are this high-risk and going by the article, so easily discovered.

I think this sort of behavior from Israel is likely to become more and more commonplace largely because of the moral hazard presented by unconditional support. There are no consequences attached to atrocious behavior, so there is little to no risk attached to audacious acts even if they stand little to no chance of actually succeeding.

That's kind of a stretch, saying they're getting sloppy because of our unconditional support. I feel like you're starting to mix two different arguments here.

CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

Well I don't get the motivation then. Was Israel trying to corner the market on aspirin production?

I think Occum would point to utter and complete Israeli incompetence.

Such utter and complete Israeli incompetence that they don't even know their own goals? I think the razor cuts pretty sharply against that.

I think they were sincerely convinced that it was a chemwar factory since it was part of the Oil for Food program. Either that or they were simply trying to deny a humanitarian vendor to Iraq. Considering the often silly list of prohibited items on the Gaza blockade list, the latter seems a very real possibility.

Okay, that makes more sense. The issue is that there's a difference between having that backfire and having this backfire. That backfires, no big deal. This backfiring has some major effects. It's one thing to do something amateurish when the stakes are low risk; it's another to do something so shoddy when the stakes are this high-risk and going by the article, so easily discovered.

I think this sort of behavior from Israel is likely to become more and more commonplace largely because of the moral hazard presented by unconditional support. There are no consequences attached to atrocious behavior, so there is little to no risk attached to audacious acts even if they stand little to no chance of actually succeeding.

That's kind of a stretch, saying they're getting sloppy because of our unconditional support. I feel like you're starting to mix two different arguments here.

Just saying that if there are no consequences to sloppy work, why the hell not just phone it in?

edit: also, the Israeli intelligence services have been eating out on their work in the 1970's for four decades, but the fact of the matter is their work has really suffered as of late. They were convinced that their little adventure into Lebanon was going to be an easy jaunt and they got their asses handed to them. They haven't put together a quality intelligence product in a very long while.

Paleocon wrote:

Just saying that if there are no consequences to sloppy work, why the hell not just phone it in?

edit: also, the Israeli intelligence services have been eating out on their work in the 1970's for four decades, but the fact of the matter is their work has really suffered as of late. They were convinced that their little adventure into Lebanon was going to be an easy jaunt and they got their asses handed to them. They haven't put together a quality intelligence product in a very long while.

They just want to be like us.

Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

That's kind of a stretch, saying they're getting sloppy because of our unconditional support. I feel like you're starting to mix two different arguments here.

Just saying that if there are no consequences to sloppy work, why the hell not just phone it in?

Except in this case, it makes Iran look good and it makes any IAEA opinion suspect. It's one thing to say they'll just phone it in when there are no consequences; it's another thing to make the argument that general standards have slipped so far that it's come to this because of the times that it was phoned in that they're now doing sloppy work even when there *are* consequences.

edit: also, the Israeli intelligence services have been eating out on their work in the 1970's for four decades, but the fact of the matter is their work has really suffered as of late. They were convinced that their little adventure into Lebanon was going to be an easy jaunt and they got their asses handed to them. They haven't put together a quality intelligence product in a very long while.

That's why I said "Whatever anyone thinks of the Israeli intelligence community in terms of goals or morals, two phrases I don't think anyone associates them with are 'slipshod analysis' and 'amateurish hoax.'" If I'm mistaken about that, it certainly makes this more likely.

CheezePavilion wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

That's kind of a stretch, saying they're getting sloppy because of our unconditional support. I feel like you're starting to mix two different arguments here.

Just saying that if there are no consequences to sloppy work, why the hell not just phone it in?

Except in this case, it makes Iran look good and it makes any IAEA opinion suspect. It's one thing to say they'll just phone it in when there are no consequences; it's another thing to make the argument that general standards have slipped so far that it's come to this because of the times that it was phoned in that they're now doing sloppy work even when there *are* consequences.

edit: also, the Israeli intelligence services have been eating out on their work in the 1970's for four decades, but the fact of the matter is their work has really suffered as of late. They were convinced that their little adventure into Lebanon was going to be an easy jaunt and they got their asses handed to them. They haven't put together a quality intelligence product in a very long while.

That's why I said "Whatever anyone thinks of the Israeli intelligence community in terms of goals or morals, two phrases I don't think anyone associates them with are 'slipshod analysis' and 'amateurish hoax.'" If I'm mistaken about that, it certainly makes this more likely.

The general murmurings around town are that the US intelligence organizations work pretty much hand in glove with folks from the UK, Canada, and other countries with which our interests are so closely aligned, but that the Israelis have been banished to outside the gates ever since the rather high profile embarrassments like the Pollards et al. There is a whole lot of mistrust in the professional intelligence community toward the the Israelis on both motives and competence. And I can't say I blame them much.

It's just so tough to believe. Like if Paleocon suddenly said, "Gurkhas? What a bunch of whining milquetoasts."

EDIT: To give big ups to Niseg for the Super Troopers reference.

In one of the episodes of Toffi and the Gorila (low quality parody where Toffi wears a bikini top and the Gorila is a hand puppet)