Equating Iran nukes with Holocaust highlights Israel's isolation

Every time time someone attempts to preemptively use the Holocaust to justify their actions, their bigotry, or as a tool to browbeat,,, the tragedy gets watered down. It's a human tragedy that's being used as a weapon.

I happen to think that Netanyahu is the worst leader Israel can have. Nevertheless, I couldn't disagree more with this Editorial. I think the phenomena of contemporary Iran and the Third Reich is not a far-feteched one, but a true, alamrming and explicitly dangerous one. A UN nation-state threatening another UN nation-state with destruction, "erasing it off-the-face-of-the-earth": If that's not an explicit call for a holocaust, then what is? Bibi is right on this one, and his speach on Yom Hashoah was exactly the reasonable, lucid and precise message to convey.

In the case of Iran... their verbal desire to "wipe off the map" the zionist regime/government of Israel has been translated (by whom?) into English as an Iranian desire to kill all the Jews in Israel. Iranian theocratic leaders would unleash nuclear weapon (not yet developed/tested) tipped missles to accomplish this? In the case of the Sovereign Jewish State of Greater Israel, It's leaders have stood on the dais before the UN General Assembly waving newly discovered plans of a WW2 concentration camp and is currently watching reruns of Schindler's List and demanding the world do something about the impending holocaust that the Iranians are about to unleash on the Jewish State. Shoah induced paranoid Jewish leaders would have the world unleash nuclear fire on multiple unspecified Iranian facilities to preempt the perceived Iranian threat of another holocaust? I, as an American citizen am supposed to take sides in this self induced madness? Answer: kiss off.

If threatening a nation with extinction is not a "Holocaust," then what is it?

Again that whining and saying Iran is going to do this , Iran going to do that. but in reality it was Olmert who threatened Iran with nukes It was obama who last week said that USA don't use nukes against any non nuclear nation unless the nation is named Iran. wasn't it in your TV that one of your religious leader (don't exactly recall whom)called Iranian Amalik and said they must be killed even children. wasn't it one of American candidate for presidency who sang on TV let's bomb Iran. now let see what happen when Iran cooperate with west , for 3 year we stopped all Nuclear Activity even research in that matter what was the results moving the discussion from IAEA to UN security council and make two rounds of sanction against Iran and then call Iran Axis of Evil. if they treated you such what was your response , what we have to believe that you don't attack us with nukes out of a whim wasn't it a USA Navy destroyer which entered Iran territorial water and shot down a Passenger jet

The Prime Minister hit the nail on the head regarding Iran and Ahmedinejad. As if threatening to wipe Israel off the map and hosting a holocaust denial conference is not enough for us to understand the intentions of this man. The promises of "never again" are not worth the platform their voiced them. From Cambodia to to Rwanda and Sudan, tens of thousands have been annihilated while world governments play politics. As the Prime Minister suspected, Turkey took the opportunity to use the platform at the nuke conference to say that the "world is turning a blind eye to Israels nuclear weapons." We are talking about the same Turkish Prime Minister that was exposed as an anti semite by Oshrat Kotler on Israels Channel 10.

i find the stance of your leaders scaring. they are pleading for "independency", and nobody else taking "control". in the end it was this what made hitler possible, not anybodies "hatred". i dont think, its the feeling of guilt fading away, but its an increasing awareness, that israel wants to pull out of the achievements the world gained from this history: we have to stay together, we have to build an international community, with common law, where we closely look at the others and welcome them to look the same at us. no, nobody can do what they wish anymore. this is, and has to be past, to make sure the "never again". the jews could have lived as a minority in europe, without IDF - but with a world taking care, and being able and having leverages to control itself. dont we know today, that this "extermination machine" (see ynet) would have been developed and working, even without jewish victims ? its annoying - at least - when this fool says, the world doesnt look and act.

Yes. Look at it: "If Israel is facing a Holocaust, it must act in every way possible to prevent it and even go to war if the international community disappoints us in its efforts to use diplomacy to stop Iran's nuclear program" Of course no "international community" will attack Iran, not the US and nobody else. And Iran will get the bomb. So, do we attack? Or just reply to an attack? ... but to reply would mean to absorb the Holocaust first and only after that bomb them... But the danger is much more complex than that! Iran will use its lackeys - Hezbollah most probably. Which country do we bomb then??? After all, Hezbollah needs only to threaten us with a bomb. What do we do? Sorry Ha'aretz. Proliferation is the problem... Israel can't handle that! And Netanyahu is right!

It is this naive approach which resulted in the holocaust. "It can't happen to us," said the Jewish Germans who received medals for fighting in the first world war. Just because we have a sovereign state with armour to defend ourselves does not mean that Iranian proxies can't release a nuclear device in Tel Aviv. If a suicide bomber could do it, it can happen. The Iranian threat is very real. Stop digging your head in the sand!

Netanyahus speech sounds terribly familiar: http://www.netanyahu.org/con1.html Quote: Two decades ago it was possible to thwart Sadaam?s nuclear ambitions by bombing a single installation. Today nothing less than dismantling his regime will do. For Sadaam?s nuclear program has changed. He no longer needs one large reactor to produce the deadly material necessary for atomic bombs. He can produce it in centrifuges the size of washing machines that can be hidden throughout the country ? and Iraq is a very big country. Even free and unfettered inspections will not uncover these portable manufacturing sites of mass death. Knowing this, I ask all those who oppose the President?s plan ? do you believe that action can be taken against Sadaam only after he builds nuclear bombs and uses them? Do these critics believe that a clear connection between Sadaam and September 11 must be established before we have a right to prevent the next September 11? I think not. Netanyahu got what he asked for, the result was more than a million innocent iraqi civillians killed and the country contaminated by DU weapons used against them....

Rather than always alluding to the obvious potential of another Holocaust for we Jews; we maybe should focus some on what could happen if the nukes fell into the hands of other nations that have inflicted Genocide on another racial or ethnic group of which the Rwandan Murders and the Crotian/Serbian Killings are prime examples both relevant and very recent.

This is another show of leadership which does not lead. Netanyahu uses the Holocaust platform to scare us the citizens of Israel? His big talk did not resonate anywhere else in this world which is made to go round by the $$. A hypocrite use of the day where Holocaust Survivors get once a year some recognition from a political establishment which for the rest of the year does not give a damn about their welfare. Why did he not go to that international conference indeed...

They are not in concentration camp, they are in their houses. Iran should not have nukes, neither should Israel, India , Pakistan, etc.

Where in his speech did Netanyahu suggest Israelis flee Israel? He did not suggest it. Unfortunately, Israel does not have the military might to defend itself against a nuclear attack, so a preemtive strike against Iran is the only choice if Iran doesn't back down from its threats.

I think Mark of Lewiston recently described the essence very precisely: Since Israel is not willing to drop Eretz Israel / Judea and Samaria to reach peace in light of facing an existantial threat, this obviously is not really an existatial threat. Words may be heavy and impressive but (the absence of) deeds speak their own language.

If Israel can live with a nuclear Pakistan, which remains vulnerable to an extremist pro-Taleban, Sunni takeover, I can't see why it can't live with a nuclear Iran, under a rather less extremist version of Shi'ism. Yes, it would be unpleasant. But living in Britain in the 1950s was uncomfortable, with Krushchev threatening to sink the place on the first day of war. I don't recall losing any sleep over it, though. If I was an Iranian, whether or not I approved of the mullahs,I would want my country to be nuclear armed. Not only would I be aware of being surrounded by other (and inherently or potentially hostile) nuclear states (Russia, China, Pakistan, India, Israel, the US sixth fleet and potentially Saudi Arabia). I would also be aware of how the absence of nuclear weapons facilitated the invasion of Iraq. What's needed is a different regime in Teheran, which doesn't consider itself at war with Israel or the West, but which still might want nuclear weapons.

To argue, or even simply imply, that Iran is as bad as Nazi Germany is to invite the reverse; that Nazi Germany was no worse than modern Iran. However, if one made the latter statement, I suspect many Israelis and Jews would find it offensive. Clearly ****ANYBODY**** with even the slightest cognitive ability can tell the difference between the two. To imply a similarity is to practice deception, and a clumsy, transparent deception at that.

he spent the first 2 months of his reign as jewish emporer hiding under the bed from obama and only coming out to do childish drive bys at axelrod and rahmbo saying 'they are self hating jews!!'....this is your leader...sad isn't it?

is to vulgarize and cheapen the Holocaust. People no longer looks at this most horrible event with the same sentiment. And it is due to Israel and its political ruling class using it to make political cheap shots. And that is so vulgar and counterproductive. People like Bibi and so many other Israelis have made this most inhuman event, banal.

The editorial is mistaken on 2 fronts: 1) When Netanyahu uses the name "Holocaust" he talks about the MAGNITUDE of destruction that befell upon the Jewish people. A Nuclear bomb may have a similar or even worse MAGNITUDE of effect (i.e. the murder of millions) 2) The fact that Israel is strong and can defend itself does NOT take away from Netanyahu's argument re: "Holocaust" intentions of Iran. There were strong and defiant Jews who fought in Auschwitz and blew up the Crematorium - but many of those were still gassed - are they less part of the Holocaust because they fought back ?

Dangerous Hysterical Screams by Bibi and other Israelis Unfortunately, Bibi's hysteria about Iran requires medical intervention. Bibi is a Prime Minister of Israel and should devote all of his time to the Israeli problems. There are always enough of them. Bibi isn't a Prime Minister of the Middle East, Secretary of the United Nations or the President of the United States. He reminds me of his psychotic counterpart President Ahmadenijad. Bibi should compare the video of himself with that of the crazy Iranian. Extremely similar picture. I support Bibi 100% in his struggle against the pro-Islamic President Obama. But Israel wouldn't be able to prevent Iran or other Middle Eastern countries at some point to attempt or even acquire the nuclear bomb. It doesn't mean an end of Israel, but I am afraid of Bibi having a heart attack. Take it easy, Bibi, don't believe Obama, he wouldn't do anything against Iran and he easily controls you with this issue.