Will Israel Vs Iran start world war 3?

paddylanger

Higher wrote: »

Israel doesn't need permission from America, they certainly didn't need it in 1967 when they launched preemptive strikes and this has not changed. If Israel finds itself in difficulty it can count on the extraordinarily powerful Israeli lobbies in America to guarantee both military and economic support from politicians.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/17/world/middleeast/israels-peres-criticizes-talk-of-unilateral-iran-strike.html

so you obviously know more that current president and former prime minister of israel?



Even your first comment is blown out of the water from people more closely related to the situation..... or is mr peres talking nonsense too?

I wont even expect you to read the full article. but at the bottom there is the news report of a petrol bomb thrown at a palestinian taxi injuring a palestinians family by israeli citizens .

Even the new york times mentions palestine in an article about the Israel Vs Iran potential conflict and you refuse to even discuss it here?

Cheerful Spring

Reportedly a deadline has been set by the Israel government. I will not spoil what the deadline says.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58K8UDkg8vU&feature=player_embedded#!
Even though the source for this is Fox News America. It shouldn't be overlooked.

paddylanger

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Reportedly a deadline has been set by the Israel government. I will not spoil what the deadline says.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58K8UDkg8vU&feature=player_embedded#!
Even though the source for this is Fox News America. It shouldn't be overlooked.

it shows how much uncertainty there is, even in israel. obviously hearsay is still a difficulty for the former ambassador. he must not have heard his own minister say "wipe off the map" catch phrase is not true. Maybe they should send out a memo so every one is on the same page.

but millions of americans will believe its true after hearing it on fox..... unfortunately.

Also in my opinion the israelis really want Romney to win this election. its funny to see the wheels in motion. hence the huge amount of pressure before the election....

Could even be war before christmas at this rate.....

southsiderosie

MOD NOTE:

paddylanger, normally we lock OPs that start out as extended blog posts. But you said you were looking for other points of view.

paddylanger wrote: »

Again i'm just trying to tease things out and trying to inquire and hopefully see valid reasons for all points of views.

Given both the tone of your subsequent posts, and the torrents of information embedded in them, this is increasingly hard to believe.

paddylanger wrote: »

We could go round in a circle and make this thread very boring for everyone else. but that was not the reason i started this thread.

Well given that you are driving the thread in circles, and you don't actually seem particularly interested in taking anyone else's views on board, then why did you start this thread? Because at this point, it is hard to see this as anything but an exercise in soapboxing. Per the charter:

This forum is for discussion and debate, we will not tolerate soapboxing. If you are here to "shout everyone down" with your opinions, we will see you as a negative contributor to the forum and will take appropriate action.

This is an important and timely topic, but your beating people over the head with walls of text and then tacking 'I don't know much/want to learn more' onto the end of the post does not qualify as rational debate. Please read the charter, take a look at some other threads in this forum, and adjust accordingly.

paddylanger

i do apologise if i have caused offense to either higher or samharris or anyone else. i was looking for more information on the topic. but i reacted to being told that my opinion was wrong, anti american and israel bashing. which was not my intent.

I based all the information i had on jewish and american sources for that exact reason. but forgive me if i came across badly .

As i said feel free to give me and the other posters more information. while i might not agree with opinions i do always agree with facts and knowledge. it is all we have. i certainly didnt intend for this thread to start world war 3.

it is a subject that a lot of the world is passionate about and i have said that i hope their are no more war or loss of lives, anyones lives. regardless of race , religion or beliefs.

but saying that my opinion is utterly wrong or pick n choosing what to discuss isn't of any use either. you cannot review a film by just watching half of it, you can only review and have an opinion on half a film, while others see the whole film, and of course have different opinions on it.

I believe that religion, nations divides mankind and only causes conflict. the success of the Nasa mars probe with people from all countries involved proves that we can achieve more by working together . focusing on how much we are the same rather than emphasizing our differences. it concerns me greatly that people i have never met or likely will never meet will decide the destiny of the world.

so again if i offended anyone i hope you can forgive me.

JustinDee

paddylanger wrote: »

Democracy exists or it doesn't. the people that palestine voted for to represent them was their choice not israels, not americas. America is the so called leader of the free world. yet they will not let the palestinians be free even after democracy...

There is no democracy in Gaza as there is no opposition candidate or party allowed to stand there. It is now six years Gazans had an election. Hamas will do whatever they can to maintain their iron grip on the place, postponing elections yet again as recently as around month ago with any excuse possible.

golden lane

Duiske wrote: »

You obviously are interested in the words if you are willing to quote them as fact.

i said what i heard an israeli spokesman say......and that is what matters.....what the israeli's think, is what they will act on......

this forum thrives on speculation......

Run_to_da_hills

If This Document Is Correct Israel's Attack On Iran Would Be Like Nothing Seen Before

American blogger Richard Silverstein claims to have acquired an "Israeli briefing document" that outlines an Israeli attack on Iran and its nuclear facilities. While the validity of the report is seriously in question, it does outline a rather spectacular 21st century attack. Arutz Sheva translated the document from its original Hebrew and writes:

The Israeli attack on Iran “will begin with a coordinated strike, including an unprecedented cyber-attack which will totally paralyze the Iranian regime and its ability to know what is happening within its borders. The internet, telephones, radio and television, communications satellites, and fiber optic cables leading to and from critical installations will be taken out of action. The electrical grid throughout Iran will be paralyzed and transformer stations will absorb severe damage from carbon fiber munitions which are finer than a human hair, causing electrical short circuits whose repair requires their complete removal.”

Following the coordinated strike, according to the document, “A barrage of tens of ballistic missiles would be launched from Israel toward Iran. 300km ballistic missiles would be launched from Israeli submarines in the vicinity of the Persian Gulf. The missiles would not be armed with unconventional warheads [WMD], but rather with high-explosive ordnance equipped with reinforced tips designed specially to penetrate hardened targets.

“The missiles will strike their targets—some exploding above ground like those striking the nuclear reactor at Arak–which is intended to produce plutonium and tritium—and the nearby heavy water production facility; the nuclear fuel production facilities at Isfahan and facilities for enriching uranium-hexaflouride. Others would explode under-ground, as at the Fordo facility.

“A barrage of hundreds of cruise missiles will pound command and control systems, research and development facilities, and the residences of senior personnel in the nuclear and missile development apparatus,” continues the document exposed by Silverstein. “Intelligence gathered over years will be utilized to completely decapitate Iran’s professional and command ranks in these fields.”

http://www.businessinsider.com/if-this-document-is-correct-israels-attack-on-iran-would-be-like-nothing-ever-seen-before-2012-8

ressem

The original blog post on Silverstein has a comment that points out that the multiple versions of this briefing which have been leaked suggests that Israel is using it to find a leak.

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2012/08/15/bibis-secret-war-plan/#comments

Israel has apparently 4 submarines purchased from Germany. With 300km range cruise missiles would have minimal effect on a hardened structure that has been designed to resist the heavier weapons that the US would use. The ballistic missiles would be unlikely to work.
http://www.economist.com/node/21548918
Even normal buildings are built with high grade concrete due to earthquake risk.

The carbon fiber stuff was used in the first Iraq war. Cutting communication lines is ancient.
Only thing that would be new is the mechanism of taking out comms satellites.

I'm going to say false briefing paper on this one.

Cheerful Spring

I think a strike is more likely with United States help. I think their trying to get United States to assure them. Israel telling their enemy what their going to do and when and how. Doesn't make lot of sense to me you don't do that. It seems to me a strike isn't imminent but who could say for sure? But it seems to me their playing a game trying to get some guarantees or something.

The title of this thread is also misleading. A war between Israel and Iran likely will not involve more than 4 to 5 countries if even that. Russia and China likely will sit on the sidelines for this one and just protest. So i have no idea were a threat to Israel or the western world could otherwise possibly come from.

Lantus

Higher wrote: »

Secondly there is little doubt that Iran are indeed attempting to build a nuclear bomb and while they should be entitled to one in a fair and utopian world, it is not in the interest of stability in the Middle East and would result in a plethora of Sunni states acquiring their own Nuclear Weapons.

We should all be working and demanding that all countries including those that allready have weapons of such mass destruction get rid of them.

Our ability to create these super weapons far outsrips our current intelligence and ability to solve problems in a rational and peaceful manner.

We live in a cruel and stupid world. Giving another country a nuclear weapon, one which believes that a women not clothed properly leads to earthquakes is utter maddness.

Religion is a significant problem to humans everywhere. The belief in myth structures works against the rational approach to solving problems.

We cant outlaw tradition, but we can outgrow it.

OS119

Lantus wrote: »

We should all be working and demanding that all countries including those that allready have weapons of such mass destruction get rid of them.

Our ability to create these super weapons far outsrips our current intelligence and ability to solve problems in a rational and peaceful manner.

We live in a cruel and stupid world. Giving another country a nuclear weapon, one which believes that a women not clothed properly leads to earthquakes is utter maddness.

Religion is a significant problem to humans everywhere. The belief in myth structures works against the rational approach to solving problems.

We cant outlaw tradition, but we can outgrow it.

ah, the tie-dye t-shirt and flowers in your hair approach to policy. if only someone had tried it before...

nuclear weapons, like any other invention, cannot be unmade just because you wish weally, weally hard for it. even if banned, someone will build one - which is why no one will get rid of theirs, and why most countries that don't have one have a contingency plan for getting one, or getting under the umbrella of someone that does.

unlike your own, utterlly bleak view of humanity, i see the fact that a number of countries have held nuclear weapons for many decades, faced existential threats and still not used nuclear weapons as a rather positive sign...

WakeUp

Thankfully rational people in both Israel and the US seem to be coming out on top at the moment. Only a crazy person would believe attacking Iranian nuclear plants - fully functioning ones that cause nuclear disasters of massive proportions on a world wide scale - to be a "good" idea. Thats only one of the ramifications from such idiotic insane action. Israel cant attack on their own unless they use nuclear weapons. They can attack conventionally but would be like cutting the grass it wouldnt sort the issue out permanently. If they believe that radiating large parts of Iran causing a nuclear disaster in the middle east and nuclear fallout around the world on a scale not seen yet, if they believe that will some how make them "safer" then they really have lost the plot. Israel will cease to exist as we know it if they follow through. Attacking Iran is insanity personified. They will only do it with the full backing of the US. If the Israelis were capable of doing this on their own, without resorting to nuclear weapons, it would have happened a long time ago. "Rational" decision/policy makers/analysts in both countries realise that attacking Iran is the idea of a non-rational person/s. Lets hope they continue to come out on top and for once sanity prevails. When people like Brezinski believe its a bad idea to attack Iran - war mongers and their supporters/apologists should take heed. Israel wont attack on their own, in my opinion.

paddylanger

WakeUp wrote: »

Thankfully rational people in both Israel and the US seem to be coming out on top at the moment.

Yeah hopefully sense will prevail.

Aipac and friends seem to be backing Romney though. So guess we'll see how big their influence is come election time.

Very interesting perspective here too from Miko Peled. His dad was a general in the IDF and his niece was killed by a suicide bomb by a palestinian.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4ZfnpN4Dfc

while its not directly linked to an israel vs Iran issue it does show some hope that even with extremists on both sides that sensible people can truly consider the problems they all face and hopefully find solutions that include everybody.

Also another cool guy in my humble opinion is Shlomo Sand. he is an israeli professor and got tenure so he then wrote his book. His microphone clicks in and out but it gets sorted after a while. Very interesting lecture though. His book was a best-seller in Israel for 19 weeks in 2009.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EmvANgw9Mk

he is a historian . In the university they have specific historians that deal with israeli history, however he dealt with the rest of the worlds history in his department, which means that his approach was from the outside looking in as he wasn't allowed to overstep his brief. side note he is not a zionist but he is a former refugee that is rightfully proud of his jewish and Israeli culture.

Plus i think Shlomo has given me a better understanding of israel from an israeli's perspective without having extremist views and indeed he does make some very valid and thought provoking points.

He also raises points that when considered from Irans presidents point of view can be interpreted to justify his claims that israel shouldn't be on the map. Not that that was Shlomos intentions, i'm sure .

Shlomo also raises the valid point that israel exists. no matter how it got there. it has be considered as part of any solution in the middle east. similar to northern ireland here, which hopefully we have all learnt that peoples lives are far more precious than a bit of land.

wether you agree with shlomo's book or not . his insight in to his israel is very good.

The Israeli

To WakeUp and paddylanger -

What is more important - a nuclear pollution as a result of bombing from the air or a nuclear wipe out of a country and a regional nuclear pollution?

I agree that if Israel attacks the nuclear pollution and hundreds and probably thousands dead on both sides is a sure thing, but at least it won't be a total disaster. It's like in with cancer: an amputation of a small organ for preventing the chance of a spreading cancer to the brain.

Both options are bad, but one is more risky than the other, and it's the option of not doing nothing.
The Iranian regime is telling day and night (and very often recently) how Israel shouldn't exist and that its end is near. I'm not willing to live in fear of what if a maniac would fulfill its threats..

Israel is waiting till the Americans will get to their red line or to the Israeli final red line after which the Iranian nuclear capabilities would be not destroyable. If Israel gets into the war first, the Americans would have no choice but to join. If the Americans attack first, well, they are in...

The Americans are doing everything they can to force Israel act accordingly to their plans. Israel is waiting for the suctions to affect somehow, and maybe even till the elections in USA because it is very important for our allies (USA), but Israel has its red lines no matter what.

I don't believe the Iran would stop its nuclear military project, and I don't believe that Israel would agree with an Iranian nuclear capabilities -> an attack is inevitable.

Nodin

The Israeli wrote: »

To WakeUp and paddylanger -

What is more important - a nuclear pollution as a result of bombing from the air or a nuclear wipe out of a country and a regional nuclear pollution?
..............

A false dichotomy, as it presumes Iran would actually attack Israel with nuclear weapons. This is unlikely in the extreme.

wes

The Israeli wrote: »

What is more important - a nuclear pollution as a result of bombing from the air or a nuclear wipe out of a country and a regional nuclear pollution?

Considering there is no nuclear weapons program, what your are advocating is a war crime, and just another example of mass murdering extremism, that the West is ok with.

Also, even if Iran did choose to create such weapon in the future, then MAD would apply, and that is what Israel really fears. They would suddenly lost a major advantage in the region, and may have to abandon the extremist greater Israel nonsense.

The Israeli wrote: »

I agree that if Israel attacks the nuclear pollution and hundreds and probably thousands dead on both sides is a sure thing, but at least it won't be a total disaster.

1000s dead over an imaginary WMD program, not a disaster........ It nice to see how little you value lives of Iranians and your own country men, who will die needlessly.

Amazing that we are seeing this farce playing so soon, after the last one.

The Israeli wrote: »

It's like in with cancer: an amputation of a small organ for preventing the chance of a spreading cancer to the brain.

Well, if the cancer doesn't actually exist, then removing any organ is rather stupid.

The Israeli wrote: »

Both options are bad, but one is more risky than the other, and it's the option of not doing nothing.

So unprecedented crippling sanctions is doing nothing? Rather astonishing claim I have to say.

The Israeli wrote: »

The Iranian regime is telling day and night (and very often recently) how Israel shouldn't exist and that its end is near. I'm not willing to live in fear of what if a maniac would fulfill its threats..

I am sure you can prove this claim, that the Iranian regime are saying Israel shouldn't exist day and night?

BTW, it is a bit rich of you to say this, as Israel is actually doing its best to make sure that there can't be a Palestinian state via the constant settlement expansion.........

The Israeli wrote: »

Israel is waiting till the Americans will get to their red line or to the Israeli final red line after which the Iranian nuclear capabilities would be not destroyable. If Israel gets into the war first, the Americans would have no choice but to join. If the Americans attack first, well, they are in...

It would be madness for the US to attack Iran, or join in, if Israel were to attack. It would not end well for anyone.

The best tactic is negotiations, were the US actually offer something, as opposed to there current tactic of offering nothing, but the constant threat of sanctions.

The Israeli wrote: »

The Americans are doing everything they can to force Israel act accordingly to their plans. Israel is waiting for the suctions to affect somehow, and maybe even till the elections in USA because it is very important for our allies (USA), but Israel has its red lines no matter what.

I don't believe the Iran would stop its nuclear military project, and I don't believe that Israel would agree with an Iranian nuclear capabilities -> an attack is inevitable.

An attack is hardly inevitable, despite war mongering extremists on all sides. The fact remains is that Iran has no nuclear weapons program, and they have a right to nuclear technology as long as they follow the NPT (which Israel is not party too btw), but it seems war mongering crazies in the US and Israel, won't even accept that, and don't even want Iran to even have the ability to build a nuclear weapon, if they chose to do so, which is quite frankly ridiculous imho.

War is not a forgone conclusion, and while extremists, try to make out that war is the only option, which they hope will make an actual war more likely.

Cheerful Spring

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000110812

150k Turkish troops waiting to go into Syria?

Chuck Stone

The Israeli wrote: »

If Israel gets into the war first, the Americans would have no choice but to join.

Why no choice? Do you not think the people of the US (Israel's generous benefactors) will be furious if Israel drags the US into a war with Iran?

The Israeli

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Why no choice? Do you not think the people of the US (Israel's generous benefactors) will be furious if Israel drags the US into a war with Iran?

Most Americans would back U.S. strike over Iran nuclear weapon: poll

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/13/us-usa-iran-poll-idUSBRE82C19Y20120313

The Israeli

Nodin wrote: »

A false dichotomy, as it presumes Iran would actually attack Israel with nuclear weapons. This is unlikely in the extreme.

Moving "dirty bombs" to Hezbollah, Al Qaeda and the World Jihad is not completely unlikely, and I'm sure that it's a risk you are willing to take but many people in this region don't want to live while being threatened constantly by a country that is calling to their extinction and is holding nuclear weapons.

wes

The Israeli wrote: »

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/13/us-usa-iran-poll-idUSBRE82C19Y20120313

From your own link:

(Reuters) - A majority of Americans would support military action against Iran if there were evidence that Tehran is building nuclear weapons, even if such action led to higher gasoline prices, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Tuesday.

Nice attempt at spin there.......

Still no evidence of a active nuclear weapons program.

wes

The Israeli wrote: »

Moving "dirty bombs" to Hezbollah, Al Qaeda and the World Jihad is not completely unlikely,

Al Qaeda hate Shia's with a passion, and have been involved numerous sectarian attacks against them, most notable in Iraq. Also, there is no such group as World Jihad.......

The fact that you would suggest that Iran would give weapons to a group that would be just as likely to use it on them is rather astonishing, and shows just how absurd what your saying is, and that you really haven't a clue what your on about.

Also, if Iran gave a weapon to Hezbollah and they used it, then Iran would be attacked with Nuclear weapons. Again, MAD applies to Iran, as it would be very stupid to give nuclear weapons to a 3rd party, as they would be held responsible and face nuclear retaliation.

The Israeli wrote: »

and I'm sure that it's a risk you are willing to take but many people in this region don't want to live while being threatened constantly by a country that is calling to their extinction and is holding nuclear weapons.

You mean like Palestinians who are living with Nuclear armed Israels ongoing ethnic cleansing of them........

The Israeli

wes wrote: »

From your own link:


Nice attempt at spin there.......

Still no evidence of a active nuclear weapons program.

Well, there are quite few, but nothing you would be concerned about.
Where do you think the dead lines are coming from?
What about the destroyed and flattened bases right before UN inspections and other intelligence sources that even you might not be aware of them.

The Iranians -
1) Refuse to allow other countries to enrich uranium for them.
2) Are willing to bring their economy down and nearly starve a big portion of their population.
3) Waste the world's time on fruitless negotiations.
4) Don't cooperate with UN do by allowing them to conduct real inspections, and use cat and mouse tactics.
5) Don't hide their ambitions towards Israel.
6) Increase their uranium production all the time

Conclusion - they build an electric power reactor

I know that you are anti American and Anti Israeli automatically. It's same ole story every time in every subject related thread. A waste of time.

wes

The Israeli wrote: »

Well, there are quite few, but nothing you would be concerned about.

Can't be concerned with what doesn't exist.

The Israeli wrote: »

Where do you think the dead lines are coming from?

Largely from the US, there old pal Israel and various Western countries, who don't want Iran to have any nuclear technology.

Still find it rather funny that a country that hasn't signed the NPT themselves, seem to care so much about it, in regards to other countries. How about signing up and allowing some inspections on Israeli nuclear sites......

The Israeli wrote: »

What about the destroyed and flattened bases right before UN inspections and other intelligence sources that even you might not be aware of them.

So you have proof that they were hiding a nuclear weapons program in those buildings, and that there wasn't any other reason for this? I am sure stuff is pulled down all the time in Iran for various reasons. So unless you can prove they were pulled to hide a weapons program, this is just more of the same spin we have seen before, from basically the same people who said this crap before.

The Israeli wrote: »

I know that you are anti American and Anti Israeli automatically. It{s same ole story every time in every subject related thread. A waste of time.

I am Anti invading countries over imaginary WMDs. If Russia was going to invade a country over imaginary WMDs, I would be against that as well.

Being against extremists calling for another Middle Easter war over imaginary WMDs doesn't make one anti-American or Anti-Israeli, just anti the extremists in those countries.

Also, I rather like a lot of things about the US, and as for Israel, I have no issues with the average Israeli going about there lives like anyone else, however there government is engaged in a decades long slow process of ethnically cleansing another group of people, and I can't quite support such a thing........

Nor can I support another war that will cause more death and destruction, being called for by basically the same Western extremists, that lied last time about Iraq. The fact that these people have not been completely discredited and ignored is imho rather astonishing.

Border-Rat

golden lane wrote: »

the iranian government has vowed to wipe israel off the map.......

now....if i was an israeli, i wonder what i would do..?????

No it hasn't vowed to wipe Israel off the map.

WakeUp

The Israeli wrote: »

To WakeUp and paddylanger -

What is more important - a nuclear pollution as a result of bombing from the air or a nuclear wipe out of a country and a regional nuclear pollution?

I agree that if Israel attacks the nuclear pollution and hundreds and probably thousands dead on both sides is a sure thing, but at least it won't be a total disaster. It's like in with cancer: an amputation of a small organ for preventing the chance of a spreading cancer to the brain.

Both options are bad, but one is more risky than the other, and it's the option of not doing nothing.
The Iranian regime is telling day and night (and very often recently) how Israel shouldn't exist and that its end is near. I'm not willing to live in fear of what if a maniac would fulfill its threats..

Israel is waiting till the Americans will get to their red line or to the Israeli final red line after which the Iranian nuclear capabilities would be not destroyable. If Israel gets into the war first, the Americans would have no choice but to join. If the Americans attack first, well, they are in...

The Americans are doing everything they can to force Israel act accordingly to their plans. Israel is waiting for the suctions to affect somehow, and maybe even till the elections in USA because it is very important for our allies (USA), but Israel has its red lines no matter what.

I don't believe the Iran would stop its nuclear military project, and I don't believe that Israel would agree with an Iranian nuclear capabilities -> an attack is inevitable.

There is so much wrong with what you are saying here that its hard to know where to start. Only things in life that are inevitable are paying tax and ending up in the ground everything else is a mixture of circumstance and choice, war doesnt have to be inevitable there is always another way. If the Iranians wanted to wipe Israel out there are other ways of doing that they dont need nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. Israel is a tiny country with a couple of major cities I see you live in Tel Aviv, do you understand what will happen your city if your country follows through with their insane threats?? are you aware what the Iranian response will be?? If you are not this is what I know from listening to Iranian generals and people from their military speak - in relation to a strike by Israel not a first strike by them - within 60 seconds of Israeli planes entering Iranian airspace they aint waiting till you drop bombs on them as soon as they spot your planes, they will respond with 11000 missiles directly at Tel Aviv a proportion of them ballistic.

Do you know what the blast radius of a Shahab 3 missile is?? 7kms. If even 20 percent of that 11000 breach your untested non-battle proven air defence Tel Aviv will be reduced to rubble which is why they plan on firing everything they have so as not to give you a chance to iron out bugs and to overload your air defences. The Persians are intelligent people yet over in Israel you treat them with arrogance and underestimate them. If Tel Aviv is destroyed its game over for you guys Israel will never recover nor ever be the same. Now what do you think the Israeli response will be to that?? it will be a nuclear response. Can you see where this is going????...

This attack can not be allowed happen its sheer insanity to even imagine doing such a thing for all concerned. This planet belongs to everyone not just Israel. Your leaders are clearly crazy and putting your existance on the line by threatening to do this - not the Iranians. Even if the US strike on your behalf Tel Aviv will still be turned to rubble. If this war happens we all lose, everyone. We need sane heads, diplomacy negotiations and dialogue. The alternative is a horror and loss of life on a scale you cant even begin to comprehend. Am just glad people like yourself dont have your finger on the button as if you did we would have all since perished a long time ago. Your leaders are crazy bonafide bat sh1t crazy for even thinking this up. If they follow through with it, it will be then end of your country as you know it now.

golden lane

Border-Rat wrote: »

No it hasn't vowed to wipe Israel off the map.

you are right.........and we seem to have a problem...?????

well, the israeli's think they do......i wonder why.....

it is only what israel thinks that will make them attack iran.......

and if i was an israeli......and i thought that iran had a nuclear capacity....i would attack....

Border-Rat

golden lane wrote: »

you are right.........and we seem to have a problem...?????

well, the israeli's think they do......i wonder why.....

it is only what israel thinks that will make them attack iran.......

and if i was an israeli......and i thought that iran had a nuclear capacity....i would attack....

Laughable. Iran is a signatory to the NPT. Israel is not. Therefore Israel is a rogue nuclear menace threatening a Sovereign Nation. I think Israel, on these grounds, should be sanctioned or even invaded.

ressem

The Israeli wrote: »

Moving "dirty bombs" to Hezbollah, Al Qaeda and the World Jihad is not completely unlikely, and I'm sure that it's a risk you are willing to take but many people in this region don't want to live while being threatened constantly by a country that is calling to their extinction and is holding nuclear weapons.

Why are nuclear weapons in Iran so much more of a threat than the chemical WMDs that Syria has had for a prolonged time (apparently with Soviet development help)? Syria has gone to full war with Israel in recent memory, unlike Iran, and currently has a civil war?
Is there any reason to believe that Iran's leadership would be stupid enough to give WMDs especially something with a big nuclear "made in Iran" fingerprint to groups that could turn on them?

Is Egypt going to have to bomb-proof it's new planned civilian nuclear reactor? Or how does Israel feel about Turkey's 3 nuclear plants in construction. Unlike Israel, they share a border with Iran and have that old Sunni-Shiite difference.

By the way, on the ground in Tel Aviv, how loud are the protests against Netanyahu's austerity program? Some reports are of Greece-like self-immolations. Enough to require a distraction similar to Ahmadinejad's mouthing off?

Nodin

The Israeli wrote: »

Moving "dirty bombs" to Hezbollah, Al Qaeda and the World Jihad is not completely unlikely, and I'm sure that it's a risk you are willing to take but many people in this region don't want to live while being threatened constantly by a country that is calling to their extinction and is holding nuclear weapons.

A quick goal-post shift there.

The truth is that Israel doesn't want an equivalent power in the region. That simple.

Mr.Micro

ressem wrote: »

By the way, on the ground in Tel Aviv, how loud are the protests against Netanyahu's austerity program? Some reports are of Greece-like self-immolations. Enough to require a distraction similar to Ahmadinejad's mouthing off?

Indeed, nothing like a good war to help get re-elected.

The Israeli

WakeUp wrote: »

There is so much wrong with what you are saying here that its hard to know where to start. Only things in life that are inevitable are paying tax and ending up in the ground everything else is a mixture of circumstance and choice, war doesnt have to be inevitable there is always another way. If the Iranians wanted to wipe Israel out there are other ways of doing that they dont need nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. Israel is a tiny country with a couple of major cities I see you live in Tel Aviv, do you understand what will happen your city if your country follows through with their insane threats?? are you aware what the Iranian response will be?? If you are not this is what I know from listening to Iranian generals and people from their military speak - in relation to a strike by Israel not a first strike by them - within 60 seconds of Israeli planes entering Iranian airspace they aint waiting till you drop bombs on them as soon as they spot your planes, they will respond with 11000 missiles directly at Tel Aviv a proportion of them ballistic.

Do you know what the blast radius of a Shahab 3 missile is?? 7kms. If even 20 percent of that 11000 breach your untested non-battle proven air defence Tel Aviv will be reduced to rubble which is why they plan on firing everything they have so as not to give you a chance to iron out bugs and to overload your air defences. The Persians are intelligent people yet over in Israel you treat them with arrogance and underestimate them. If Tel Aviv is destroyed its game over for you guys Israel will never recover nor ever be the same. Now what do you think the Israeli response will be to that?? it will be a nuclear response. Can you see where this is going????...

This attack can not be allowed happen its sheer insanity to even imagine doing such a thing for all concerned. This planet belongs to everyone not just Israel. Your leaders are clearly crazy and putting your existance on the line by threatening to do this - not the Iranians. Even if the US strike on your behalf Tel Aviv will still be turned to rubble. If this war happens we all lose, everyone. We need sane heads, diplomacy negotiations and dialogue. The alternative is a horror and loss of life on a scale you cant even begin to comprehend. Am just glad people like yourself dont have your finger on the button as if you did we would have all since perished a long time ago. Your leaders are crazy bonafide bat sh1t crazy for even thinking this up. If they follow through with it, it will be then end of your country as you know it now.

You are slightly underestimating the IAF.. All these missiles have to be dragged out of their bunkers. Some of them would have to be fueled. This makes them vulnerable + an accurate and massive attack done by the IAF can eliminate most of the threats. You are also forgetting that Israel has submarines, missiles and air force that can cause a grave damage to Iranian main cities, which is something they are taking into account too.
Many people have under estimated the Israeli capabilities starting from 1948, so you are not the first one.
I have read and heard about possible military developments if Israel attacks. All I can say that you shouldn't take your predictions too seriously.

There aren't other options but those 2:
Nuclear Iran or not nuclear Iran. There is no shame for you to say out loud that you prefer a nuclear Iran.

Iran arms Hezbollah and Hamas even today. People with logic wouldn't like to let people who speak all the time about the extinction of Israel the choice to decide what to do with nuclear bombs or dirty weapons.
Assad is far from a good partner but his rhetoric is pretty different than of Iran. At least because he fears of Israel. Something the Iranians are less concerned about.

liammur

The Israeli wrote: »

You are slightly underestimating the IAF.. All these missiles have to be dragged out of their bunkers. Some of them would have to be fueled. This makes them vulnerable + an accurate and massive attack done by the IAF can eliminate most of the threats. You are also forgetting that Israel has submarines, missiles and air force that can cause a grave damage to Iranian main cities, which is something they are taking into account too.
Many people have under estimated the Israeli capabilities starting from 1948, so you are not the first one.
I have read and heard about possible military developments if Israel attacks. All I can say that you shouldn't take your predictions too seriously.

There aren't other options but those 2:
Nuclear Iran or not nuclear Iran. There is no shame for you to say out loud that you prefer a nuclear Iran.

Iran arms Hezbollah and Hamas even today. People with logic wouldn't like to let people who speak all the time about the extinction of Israel the choice to decide what to do with nuclear bombs or dirty weapons.
Assad is far from a good partner but his rhetoric is pretty different than of Iran. At least because he fears of Israel. Something the Iranians are less concerned about.

I see no problem with Iran having nuclear, I do think it would be a big mistake by Israel to strike Iran. Let's hope some commonsense prevails.

The Israeli

liammur wrote: »

I see no problem with Iran having nuclear, I do think it would be a big mistake by Israel to strike Iran. Let's hope some commonsense prevails.

Chamberlain thought that he was using commonsense too.

Chuck Stone

The Israeli wrote: »

Chamberlain thought that he was using commonsense too.

Ergo not supporting an Israeli attack on Iran is supporting the death of masses of Jews...

Dammit! I hate being an inadvertent mass murderer supporter.

But wait...

In fact, Barak declared on Sep. 17, 2009, “I am not among those who believe Iran is an existential issue for Israel.” And in a Nov. 17, 2011 interview with Charlie Rose, he even denied that the Iranian nuclear programme was aimed at Israel.

Source

Phew.. for a minute there I thought I was a 1940's Nazi.

old_aussie

The Sunni vs Shiite muslims will kick off the next big confrontation.

The Israeli

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Ergo not supporting an Israeli attack on Iran is supporting the death of masses of Jews...

Dammit! I hate being an inadvertent mass murderer supporter.

But wait...



Phew.. for a minute there I thought I was a 1940's Nazi.

You aren't quite grasping what I've meant.
Hitler took Czechoslovakia by force and gambled that the world wouldn't move a finger - and he was right. It was part of the Chamberlai's policy to keep Hitler "happy" thinking that that way he would assure peace.
He was wrong.

Now Iran is showing the middle finger to the world.. Well, to the western world at least, and you applause.

Eggy Baby!

The Israeli wrote: »

Now Iran is showing the middle finger to the world.. Well, to the western world at least, and you applause.

Any country who owns nuclear weapons is flipping a bird to all civilisation. Considering Israel has lots of undeclared nukes (it even went to the bother of persecuting an individual because he spilled the beans on this arsenal) it is just, if not more, guilty in this respect.

The Israeli

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Any country who owns nuclear weapons is flipping a bird to all civilisation. Considering Israel has lots of undeclared nukes (it even went to the bother of persecuting an individual because he spilled the beans on this arsenal) it is just, if not more, guilty in this respect.

Yes, the nuclear policy is a national secret out of many reasons. Especially in what is related to usa.
If somebody bridges so bluntly then they should be punished for that. Like in every normal country.

If you accept Iranians threats and foreign policy then we have no option to discuss this matter.

nyarlothothep

Iran has no nukes, this has been reported by the IAEA and Israel's own intelligence agency Mossad. So where is the evidence of nuclear capability. Secondly if anyone's seen Threads you'll know any kind of nuclear conflict is absurd and stupid. Ok it's not the same scenario, it depicts the after effects of a global conflict but still, I think the same principles of destruction and catastrophe resulting from a war in addition to the fallout are applicable in terms of human misery and suffering which such a war would invariably lead to. An internal coup against a backwards regime so many Iranians hate is the better solution. I was discussing with a friend how a nuclear conflict would play out two years ago and interestingly he stated that it would probably begin as a regional one.

liammur

The Israeli wrote: »

Chamberlain thought that he was using commonsense too.

It would be foolish in the extreme to use 1 event, and base all others on it.

The Israeli

liammur wrote: »

It would be foolish in the extreme to use 1 event, and base all others on it.

It would be foolish to extreme to underestimate this situation and do nothing effective about.

kstand

I dont think its a case of "if", more a case of "when". And that when could well be before Nov 6th and the US Presidential Elections. Clearly Netanyahu doesnt believe that Obama will move away from dialogue with the Iranians so an attack before the election will force Obama's hand - does he renounce the attack and risk losing the huge Jewish vote in the key swing states or back Netanyahu in order to secure those votes (and possibly risk losing others).
The Israelis are possibly the most paranoid people on the planet - geographical location is part of that and some of the rhetoric we have heard coming out of Iran has feulled it. Though I wonder just how much of that was mis-communicated or lost in translation. Certainly the "wipe Israel off the face of the earth" quote attributed to Ahmadinejad seems to fall into the latter category. I wonder how much of this Iranian sabre rattling - and there certainly seems to be some of it - is to garner support within the Arab for their move to get hold of the bomb? It would change the whole balance of the region if they were. And it seems the hawks in Israel are paranoid about that and what it would hold for the future and are going to act.
What the attack would involve is the interesting part. Certainly not a ground assault into Iran - it would/will a war without ground troops. Without US bunker-buster bombs, many are sceptical that they could effectively wipe out all of the Iranian nuclear capability - they could certainly damage it and slow it down, but in the process they would lose the moral high-ground they are currently perceived to occupy, put a huge strain on US relations and encur international wrath for their actions - not to talk of the Iranian response. It is true it seems that there are many Iranian missiles within range of Israel in the border regions and these could be aimed at Tel Aviv and other such towns and cities. But - and this is key to how this could escalate or fizzle out - would the Iranians push for all out war and bombard Israel with missiles which could lead to a severe bombardment of Iran on a possibly nuclear scale, or would they retaliate with a token gesture, take the moral high ground and the international support they would now widely receive before going back and rebuilding their nuclear programme. The Iranians are not fools - they know Israel on their own cant take those installations out and that the US dont want another war. An Israeli attack will achive something short-term, but international support will then row in behind Iran as long as their response deosnt involve wide-scale destruction of Israeli towns and cities. It will cost them a lot, but for the moral high-ground it may well be a price worth paying.

One interesting article I read yesterday surrounded the idea of Israel detonating a high-altitude nuclear warhead over Iran that would create an EMP. This would take out everything from watches to generators. There was even specualtion that they could detonate such a device over the whole region! Their military etc are safe-guarded against such a device and they could restore power within days. Such an attack would cause total chaos inside Iran - no communications, power etc. It would also pave the way for them to fly whatever missions they wanted into Iran. Far-fetched? You might think so - but according to reports, the sale in technology etc to protect systems from soemthing like this has sky-rocketed in recent months across the region.

The Israeli

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Iran has no nukes, this has been reported by the IAEA and Israel's own intelligence agency Mossad. So where is the evidence of nuclear capability. Secondly if anyone's seen Threads you'll know any kind of nuclear conflict is absurd and stupid. Ok it's not the same scenario, it depicts the after effects of a global conflict but still, I think the same principles of destruction and catastrophe resulting from a war in addition to the fallout are applicable in terms of human misery and suffering which such a war would invariably lead to. An internal coup against a backwards regime so many Iranians hate is the better solution. I was discussing with a friend how a nuclear conflict would play out two years ago and interestingly he stated that it would probably begin as a regional one.

If it wasn't about Iran, I might have agreed with you, but because Iran sponsors Hezbollah, Hamas and is probably the one who has ordered the terror act against tourists in Burgas, Bulgaria and tried to do the same in India and says all the time the Israel is cancer which is soon will be removed and stuff, it feels pretty dangerous just to accept their nuclear policy.

Just search on youtube something like "ahmadinejad israel speech" and similar combinations to see what is the worst case scenario if Iran has atomic weapon. It's their only way to fulfill it.

wes

The Israeli wrote: »

If it wasn't about Iran, I might have agreed with you, but because Iran sponsors Hezbollah, Hamas and is probably the one who has ordered the terror act against tourists in Burgas, Bulgaria and tried to do the same in India

Israel protects extremist settlers in the West Bank, and is probably behind various terror attacks in Iran. Strange how you suddendly forget the terror attacks in Iran all of a sudden, and your own countries support for terrorists in the West Bank all of a sudden.

The Israeli wrote: »

says all the time the Israel is cancer which is soon will be removed and stuff, it feels pretty dangerous just to accept their nuclear policy.

Cancer you say.....

The Israeli wrote: »

It's like in with cancer: an amputation of a small organ for preventing the chance of a spreading cancer to the brain.

Some pretty amazing hypocrisy, considering that your the one making comparisons to cancer.

Also, care to provide proof that Iran is saying that Israel is a cancer to be removed all the time. I asked this earlier when you made the following claim:

The Israeli wrote: »

The Iranian regime is telling day and night (and very often recently) how Israel shouldn't exist and that its end is near. I'm not willing to live in fear of what if a maniac would fulfill its threats..

So care to provide evidence of Iran saying there out to destroy Israel on a regular basis. According to you, this seems to happen daily. So I am sure you can easily show these regular statements being made almost every day. So how about some examples from the last week then.....

The Israeli wrote: »

Just search on youtube something like "ahmadinejad israel speech" and similar combinations to see what is the worst case scenario if Iran has atomic weapon. It's their only way to fulfill it.

Youtube is well known for objective and factual information, or more accurately its known for cat video's. To be fair, if the Youtube channel is from a proper source, you can get good informaion, but I am sure you will find competing video's in regards to that speech easily.

Also Ahmadinejad has very little power, the Supreme Leader is the guy who can launch a war. Ahmadinejad has also ran into some trouble with the Supreme Leader recently as well, so has even less power these days. However, you seem to be unaware of basic facts about Iran, seeing as you suggested that they would be friendly enough to Al Qaeda (a group with a murderous hatred of Shia's) to give them as nuclear weapon.

Also for Ahmadinejad's speech, he did not say what you claim:

Hitchens Hacker And Hitchens

--SNIP--
But the actual quote, which comes from an old speech of Khomeini, does not imply military action, or killing anyone at all. The second reason is that it is just an inexact translation. The phrase is almost metaphysical. He quoted Khomeini that “the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time.” It is in fact probably a reference to some phrase in a medieval Persian poem. It is not about tanks.
--SNIP--

Eggy Baby!

The Israeli wrote: »

If you accept Iranians threats and foreign policy then we have no option to discuss this matter.

And where did I say that?

The policy of Western nations regarding Iran is like attempting to pacify a dog by poking it with a stick and pushing it into a corner. The point is they are trying to make Iran do something stupid, presumably related to the straits of Hormuz, in order to justify action against that state.

Tell me with a straight face that that is morally right. Because its not. On the internet we would call that "baiting".

liammur

The Israeli wrote: »

It would be foolish to extreme to underestimate this situation and do nothing effective about.

More a case of overestimating a problem, when in fact 1 may not even exist. George W Bush and Iraq and WMD springs to mind.

JustinDee

liammur wrote: »

More a case of overestimating a problem, when in fact 1 may not even exist. George W Bush and Iraq and WMD springs to mind.

The problem is, so does Nasser during the 60s and 70s (poked and prodded by his Soviet allies) hence the standoffs.

Nodin

The Israeli wrote: »

If it wasn't about Iran, I might have agreed with you, but because Iran sponsors Hezbollah, Hamas and is probably the one who has ordered the terror act against tourists in Burgas, Bulgaria and tried to do the same in India............

Considering the number of Iranians who "somebody" has bumped off over the last while, its not hard to imagine how they might take a similarily dim view.