Israel might attack Iran in June?

KIERAN1 · 03-02-2012 12:56AM #1

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta of the United States estimates that the government of Israel will decide to attack Iran in the coming months, according to a Thursday report by the Washington Post. Panetta believes Israel will attack in April, May or June, before Iran enters what Defense Minister Ehud Barak has referred to as a "zone of immunity" to start building a nuclear weapon.

Netanyahu doesn’t want to leave the fate of Israel dependent on American action.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/is-israel-preparing-to-attack-iran/2012/02/02/gIQANjfTkQ_story.html?hpid=z5

Dubhlinner · 03-02-2012 01:09AM

Sort of almost funny thing is that Iran would never nuke Israel first.

What having nukes would mean is Israel would lose the upper hand - ie they could not threaten to nuke Iran over anything anymore; because that would mean they'd be nuked back.

Hannibal · 03-02-2012 02:19AM

Israel is one of most aggressive nations on earth and armed to the teeth with WMD. Israel allows no UN weapons inspectors into the country and is one of three countries along with India and Pakistan who haven't signed the Non-proliferation Treaty. India and Pakistan have both openly admitted and displayed their nuclear weapons yet Israel continuosly avoids it.

Mordechai Vanunu done the decent thing in 1986 and leaked to the world the details of Israel's nuclear weapons program, yet he was drugged and kidnapped in Italy convicted in a behind closed doors trial and sentenced to 18 years with the first 11 in solitary confinement. He is now released but isn't allowed talk to foreigners, use phones, use the internet or leave the state of Israel. Are these the actions of a free and peaceful country?

Israel uses the forged passports of friendly countries to assasinate people abroad yet how are we supposed to trust them in relation to Iran and why won't the Americans stand up to Israel? They have imposed a near 50 year trade embargo against Cuba for nationalising the property of US citizens and corporations for the good of the Cuban people yet they describe Israel as one of it's closest allies.

Iran hasn't started a war since 2 years before the foundation of the United States, it's a peaceful country and it is being further radicalised by the isolation the US and Israel are trying to push it into.

dlofnep · 03-02-2012 02:31AM

CNN reporting on it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gXPPjVXk5g

If Israel goes this alone, they have some serious balls.

JustinDee · 03-02-2012 08:28AM

Dotsey wrote: »

Iran hasn't started a war since 2 years before the foundation of the United States, it's a peaceful country and it is being further radicalised by the isolation the US and Israel are trying to push it into.

Don't confuse what I'm about to say as justifying any attacks, but the above is naivete in extremis.
Have you any idea on how involved Iran via their intelligence service and their Pasdaran was and still is in Lebanon, Syria, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, North Africa. Thats not even getting started on how they deal with their own political opponents in-country.

"Peaceful Country" my keyster.

RichardAnd · 03-02-2012 09:59AM

If I were the ruler of what I (and many others) consider to be a terrorist state, I don't think I'd be announcing my plans of invasion to the global media and thus rob myself of the element of surprise! Seriously, is that not a bit strange?

JustinDee · 03-02-2012 10:15AM

RichardAnd wrote: »

If I were the ruler of what I (and many others) consider to be a terrorist state, I don't think I'd be announcing my plans of invasion to the global media and thus rob myself of the element of surprise! Seriously, is that not a bit strange?

Its just a media snippet and as always, the usual suspects will latch onto it. The usual anonymous armchair experts from the university of wikigoogle here will thank each other for the same old blinkered and cherry-picked lines.

token101 · 03-02-2012 11:03AM

dlofnep wrote: »

CNN reporting on it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gXPPjVXk5g

If Israel goes this alone, they have some serious balls.

They haven't a notion of going ahead with it alone! I'd be willing to bet that in 5 years time we'll still be at the same aggressive impasse.

Israel continously building settlements is wrong, but to be fair to them, they are surrounded by declared enemies and one who says openly they should be 'wiped off the map'. It's hard to blame them for being so crazy about defence. If there's genuine regime change in Iran, Syria over the next few years it might improve relations like it did with Egypt for a while. But I won't be betting on that one!

NinjaK · 03-02-2012 11:17AM

Yet Iran are the aggressive bad guys and Israel are just trying to survive in a dangerous region. At this stage only the really dumb believes that.

dlofnep · 03-02-2012 11:26AM

token101 wrote: »

Israel continously building settlements is wrong, but to be fair to them, they are surrounded by declared enemies and one who says openly they should be 'wiped off the map'.

To be fair, this statement was never said. What was said made reference to the removal of Zionism, which is a perfectly valid statement to make.

Jonny7 · 03-02-2012 11:30AM

It's the US secretary of defense, its his job to say these things.

The Iranian parliament chants "death to America", "death to Israel" on a regular basis.

It's just rhetoric, sabre rattling and posturing.

No one, not even the Russians, want Iran to weaponise.

JustinDee · 03-02-2012 11:35AM

dlofnep wrote: »

To be fair, this statement was never said. What was said made reference to the removal of Zionism, which is a perfectly valid statement to make.

Unless you are fluent in Farsi, you are at the mercy of all the second-hand articles which claim it was said and which claim it wasn't.

It was originally said by Nasser in 1966, by the way.

dlofnep · 03-02-2012 11:43AM

JustinDee wrote: »

Unless you are fluent in Farsi, you are at the mercy of all the second-hand articles which claim it was said and which claim it wasn't.

It was originally said by Nasser in 1966, by the way.

To accusations are towards Ahmadinejad. And no, I'm not fluent in Farsi - but all official accounts have stated that it was in reference to the Zionist regime. And if that is the case, then the statement is perfectly valid and with merit.

Jonny7 · 03-02-2012 12:20PM

dlofnep wrote: »

To be fair, this statement was never said. What was said made reference to the removal of Zionism, which is a perfectly valid statement to make.

Yeah but it's not like he's made just one misread quote on Israel/Zionism now is it.

Brussels Sprout · 03-02-2012 12:30PM

I can't see this happening for a lot of reasons. Politically it'd be a disaster with absolutely no winners in the long run but aside from that logistically it would be an extremely difficult task.

In the past Israel (more than likely) have swooped in and out to execute scientists or blown up individual buildings in other countries. This is an entirely different prospect though. Whether the Iranians are planning nuclear weapons or not the fact remains that they have spread their nuclear sites all across this vast vast country. Israel do not have any aircraft carriers or forward command posts so they'd have to fly sorties to and from Israel which would make it an extremely long drawn out and complex process.

The only chance they'd have is if the Americans joined in and if Israel were to attack Iran first then it would make it extremely difficult for the Americans to join them politically as I don't think even the British would support them.

Border-Rat · 03-02-2012 12:33PM

RichardAnd wrote: »

If I were the ruler of what I (and many others) consider to be a terrorist state, I don't think I'd be announcing my plans of invasion to the global media and thus rob myself of the element of surprise! Seriously, is that not a bit strange?

Unless you plan to attack before then, convincing people an attack will occur on xx-date increases surprise if you plan to attack, say in 2 weeks. Psychological effect on the victim.

Jonny7 wrote: »

It's the US secretary of defense, its his job to say these things.

The Iranian parliament chants "death to America", "death to Israel" on a regular basis.

It's just rhetoric, sabre rattling and posturing.

No one, not even the Russians, want Iran to weaponise.

Then why are the Russians arming Iran. :pac:

Jeboa Safari · 03-02-2012 12:40PM

Dotsey wrote: »

Mordechai Vanunu done the decent thing in 1986 and leaked to the world the details of Israel's nuclear weapons program, yet he was drugged and kidnapped in Italy convicted in a behind closed doors trial and sentenced to 18 years with the first 11 in solitary confinement. He is now released but isn't allowed talk to foreigners, use phones, use the internet or leave the state of Israel. Are these the actions of a free and peaceful country?
.

Regarding this, they were hardly going to let him away with it. The penalty for treason in Ireland used to be death, and at the moment is life in prison with a minimum of 40 years.

dlofnep · 03-02-2012 12:44PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

Yeah but it's not like he's made just one misread quote on Israel/Zionism now is it.

Perhaps you can cite some quotes?

Ahmadinejad is certainly a nut, and an ardent critic of Israel - but I seriously doubt he wants to attack it.

Lemming · 03-02-2012 12:50PM

Border-Rat wrote: »

Then why are the Russians arming Iran. :pac:

They're not. They're selling them (i.e. making money from it) arms, because US-aligned interests wont due to varying degrees of trade embargoes. Russia is not acting out of any sense of benevolence; they've spotted a chance to make money & grow their own industrial military complex at the same time.

brimal · 03-02-2012 12:52PM

Dotsey wrote: »

Mordechai Vanunu done the decent thing in 1986 and leaked to the world the details of Israel's nuclear weapons program, yet he was drugged and kidnapped in Italy convicted in a behind closed doors trial and sentenced to 18 years with the first 11 in solitary confinement. He is now released but isn't allowed talk to foreigners, use phones, use the internet or leave the state of Israel. Are these the actions of a free and peaceful country?.

And what if this happened in Iran?

He would have been hung publicly by crane in front of thousands chanting his demise.

Hannibal · 03-02-2012 01:27PM

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Regarding this, they were hardly going to let him away with it. The penalty for treason in Ireland used to be death, and at the moment is life in prison with a minimum of 40 years.

and in Britain the penalty was to be hung, drawn and quartered.

It was described as treason but it was in the world's best knowledge to know of this, if a North Korean, Iranian, Iraqi etc came out and supplied evidence of their respective countries producing WMD they would be applauded for it. Israel is an overly aggressive country who are presently sitting in a timebomb which they are doing their best to ignite, their cruel treatment and denial of basic human rights to the Palestinian people is testament to this.

I wonder of the wests soft approach has anything to do with their skin being a lighter colour than that of the Iranian people.

brimal wrote: »

And what if this happened in Iran?

He would have been hung publicly by crane in front of thousands chanting his demise.

that's hypothetical but he might aswell have being killed rather than all these barbaric restrictions placed on him by a supposed peaceful nation.

Like what would you rather? to be hung, or be placed for 11 years in solitary confinement then a whole host of restrictions placed upon you.

The US ally of Saudi Arabia still beheads people for lesser offences including sorcery, witchcraft and sexual misconduct and up until recently stoning and crucifiction were used.

Border-Rat · 03-02-2012 01:36PM

Lemming wrote: »

They're not. They're selling them (i.e. making money from it) arms, because US-aligned interests wont due to varying degrees of trade embargoes. Russia is not acting out of any sense of benevolence; they've spotted a chance to make money & grow their own industrial military complex at the same time.

Russia never acts out of benevolence. But this doesn't change the fact that Russia, despite massive protests, is arming Iran with anti-air systems. This is also a tactical move on Russia's part. The fact that they asked for money doesn't change the fact that deliveries have been made.

tfitzgerald · 03-02-2012 01:42PM

One of them is worse than the other . But I have to say my support would be more for Iran than israel . Those crowd don't give a sh1t about anyone

brimal · 03-02-2012 01:50PM

tfitzgerald wrote: »

One of them is worse than the other . But I have to say my support would be more for Iran than israel . Those crowd don't give a sh1t about anyone

Those crowd? I presume you mean the Israeli government, not Israelis in general.

Dotsey wrote: »

that's hypothetical but he might aswell have being killed rather than all these barbaric restrictions placed on him by a supposed peaceful nation.

Like what would you rather? to be hung, or be placed for 11 years in solitary confinement then a whole host of restrictions placed upon you.

Are you serious? The second option every time.

Iran has no respect for it's own people, it runs a medievil, barbaric regime and is decades or centuries behind Israel on human rights.

'Peaceful' country? My arse.

cursai · 03-02-2012 02:02PM

It seems to me that there both nuts. Israel just has more hot women and white people.

tricky D · 03-02-2012 02:18PM

token101 wrote: »

I'd be willing to bet that in 5 years time we'll still be at the same aggressive impasse.

Probably true, just like the notion that Iranian nuclear arms have been imminent for the last 20 or so years according to Israel.

Anyway, the window of opportunity for Israel probably closed 2 or 3 years ago. Iran's development sites are now too deep and distributed for effective disabling strikes.

Cork boy 55 · 03-02-2012 02:30PM

cursai wrote: »

It seems to me that there both nuts. Israel just has more hot women and white people.

Perisan women are hot thats why they cover them,

I read somewhere that Tehran is the plastic surgey captial of the world. :P

Anyway :pac:

breaking news is telling me that

"Iran will help any nation or group that confronts the "cancer" Israel, the Islamic Republic's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has said.
Israel was a tumour that should be cut, he said.
He also said that the country would continue its controversial nuclear programme, and warned that any military strike by the US would only make Iran stronger."

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/iran-chief-warns-against-cancer-israel-538445.html

WTF stay classy Iran :cool:

They won't be any raids (if any) for a two months due to winter weather over some of the aiming points, also there is an Iranian election in march
which might be a Game changer or not.

Border-Rat · 03-02-2012 02:56PM

But Israel is a cancer. Literally as well as figuratively, what with the amount of DU they expend on children.

JustinDee · 03-02-2012 03:27PM

Dotsey wrote: »

I wonder of the wests soft approach has anything to do with their skin being a lighter colour than that of the Iranian people

Forgetting the rest of the bilge in your post, its obvious that there is no such thing as a non-white Israeli, isn't it? Ffs...

Hannibal · 03-02-2012 03:42PM

brimal wrote: »

Those crowd? I presume you mean the Israeli government, not Israelis in general.

Are you serious? The second option every time.

Iran has no respect for it's own people, it runs a medievil, barbaric regime and is decades or centuries behind Israel on human rights.

'Peaceful' country? My arse.

You are aware of the Gaza strip aren't you?

JustinDee · 03-02-2012 03:50PM

Dotsey wrote: »

You are aware of the Gaza strip aren't you?

Yep. Gaza. Formerly occupied by Egypt until 1967 then Israel.
An election took place followed by a fairly bloody putsch in which all opponents of Hamas were expelled.
Democracy was hailed as the victor and is often quoted as some form of success there by those slamming Israel for anything. Strangely enough, there has been no election since that day in 2006. There aren't even any opposition allowed to set up a clinic for prospective constituents.
Even in this day of alleged 'unity' party politics between Hamas and Fatah.

kumate_champ07 · 03-02-2012 03:52PM

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Regarding this, they were hardly going to let him away with it. The penalty for treason in Ireland used to be death, and at the moment is life in prison with a minimum of 40 years.

i think youre getting prison mixed up with pension!

Hannibal · 03-02-2012 03:53PM

JustinDee wrote: »

Forgetting the rest of the bilge in your post, its obvious that there is no such thing as a non-white Israeli, isn't it? Ffs...

I didn't say white, but certainly Western society always leans towards those who look more presentable to them.

Also never forget the big Jewish money men in Manhattans banks that are the real muscle flexers behind the US government hence the soft approach towards Israel. There's no doubt that the major threat to the worlds peace is in the Middle East from Libya, Egypt, Israel, Palestine, Syria, Iran, Iraq and into Afghanistan are all unstable

Hannibal · 03-02-2012 03:55PM

JustinDee wrote: »

Yep. Gaza. Formerly occupied by Egypt until 1967 then Israel.
An election took place followed by a fairly bloody putsch in which all opponents of Hamas were expelled.
Democracy was hailed as the victor and is often quoted as some form of success there by those slamming Israel for anything. Strangely enough, there has been no election since that day in 2006. There aren't even any opposition allowed to set up a clinic for prospective constituents.
Even in this day of alleged 'unity' party politics between Hamas and Fatah.

How many members of that Hamas government that were democratically elected are presently in Israeli custody for being members of Hamas?

JustinDee · 03-02-2012 03:59PM

Dotsey wrote: »

I didn't say white, but certainly Western society always leans towards those who look more presentable to them.

Also never forget the big Jewish money men in Manhattans banks that are the real muscle flexers behind the US government hence the soft approach towards Israel. There's no doubt that the major threat to the worlds peace is in the Middle East from Libya, Egypt, Israel, Palestine, Syria, Iran, Iraq and into Afghanistan are all unstable

Oh ffs. The top ten richest in the US. How many are Jewish?
Know the most powerful lobbies in the US? It is of white, protestant, Ivy leaguers.
One would think that paranoia about Jews and their money would get tired after all these centuries.

Why do people just repeat what they read?

JustinDee · 03-02-2012 04:03PM

Dotsey wrote: »

How many members of that Hamas government that were democratically elected are presently in Israeli custody for being members of Hamas?

How many are being let go now?

You won't deflect anything away from how Hamas runs Gaza ruthlessly, undemocratically and unopposed with your question like that. Nothing in it can even begin to justify what they do and how they do it.

brimal · 03-02-2012 04:04PM

Dotsey wrote: »

You are aware of the Gaza strip aren't you?

You are aware of Iran's human rights abuses aren't you?

Capital punishment to minors, death by stoning, mass televised hangings, death for practising Christianity, death to homosexuals, censored internet, radio, tv. etc.

500+ people killed so far this year and counting.

Have a read and tell me which country is more 'barbaric'

Ellis Dee · 03-02-2012 04:10PM

dlofnep wrote: »

If Israel goes this alone, they have some serious balls.

If launching wars of aggression means that the aggressor has "some serious balls", then few in history have been as spectacularly gonadally endowed as Hitler. But he bit off more than he could chew, not least when he attacked the Soviet Union, and the zionazin terrorist rogue state that now occupies Palestine will most likely emulate him in that way, as it has already done in so many others.:rolleyes:

Any attack on Iran will only make the people close ranks in defence of their homeland and the consequences for both the zionazi regime itself and all who support or facilitate its aggression will be grave. IAF planes would have to cross either Jordan or Saudi-Arabia, and it will be perfectly legitimate for Iran to retaliate against those states.:)

Anyway, unless the zionazis use nuclear weapons on Iran, they are unlikely to achieve anything more than slowing down the Iranian nuclear programme. In fact, it is not at all certain that the Iranians are developing nuclear weapons; as a sovereign nation, they have a right to do so, but it may be that for now they are merely enriching uranium for power production and use as medical isotopes. However, an attack by the zionazi regime will mean that they go full steam ahead to get nukes, because the only thing that will ever steer the zionazis onto a course towards peace with their neighbours is breaking their nuclear monopoly.:cool:

The outstanding British journalist Robert Fisk makes some very significant points in this article:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-weve-been-here-before--and-it-suits-israel-that-we-never-forget-nuclear-iran-6294111.html

Pro. F · 03-02-2012 04:14PM

brimal wrote: »

Have a read and tell me which country is more 'barbaric'

Why the constant arguing about which country is more barbaric, more repressive, more a pain in the ass?

They both commit human rights abuses, they are both in a tricky situation and they are both a threat to humanity because they might start nuclear war.

Hannibal · 03-02-2012 04:23PM

Pro. F wrote: »

Why the constant arguing about which country is more barbaric, more repressive, more a pain in the ass?

They both commit human rights abuses, they are both in a tricky situation and they are both a threat to humanity because they might start nuclear war.

thats exactly the point

KIERAN1 · 03-02-2012 04:51PM

Dubhlinner wrote: »

Sort of almost funny thing is that Iran would never nuke Israel first.

What having nukes would mean is Israel would lose the upper hand - ie they could not threaten to nuke Iran over anything anymore; because that would mean they'd be nuked back.

I think Israel has already figured this out their battle calculations would leave them with no doubt Iran would never strike first. It would be good bye Iran, been habitable for human life, so Iran, would be suicidal to fire off first. And let us be realistic here Israel probably would go rogue and destroy other middle eastern states if attacked with nuclear weapons.

Israel, however has probably made a no assumption with this- can the nation of Israel trust Iran to keep nuclear weapons safe from the hands of terrorists. I guess the answer would be no, and probably is the main reason Israel will go ahead with an attack in the near future.

Israel only needs to be hit and attacked with one or two nuclear devices to pretty much destroy it and been a viable state were to live. Israel can not allow Iran to get nuclear weapons as long it still supports organisations like Hezbollah - ( Israel fairly recently got involved in another skirmish with these guys in 2006) So the stakes are high here.

Israel, has a window of two years to attack not 1- Western intelligence believes it will take two years for Iran to build a missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead. But Israel believes by September this year if they haven't hit Iran by then doing so after would be pointless.

Israel in Nov 2011 also claimed they've a 9 month window before Iran will have the components to build three to four nukes and store them.

Its now Feb 3. So Sep looks like the closing date. But realistically would they do this on their own without help from their European allies and the US?

paky · 03-02-2012 05:02PM

iran should be obliterated with all the other fascist muslim dictatorships. they execute their citizens for the most minor offences. if they treat their own citizens like this, what chance has the rest of the world when they get their hands on a nuclear weapon?

Hannibal · 03-02-2012 05:06PM

paky wrote: »

iran should be obliterated with all the other fascist muslim dictatorships. they execute their citizens for the most minor offences. if they treat their own citizens like this, what chance has the rest of the world when they get their hands on a nuclear weapon?

What about Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait etc who are friendly to the American needs?

don't forget Israel describes itself as a "Jewish state for a Jewish people" so that in itself is also fascist although they are not a dictatorship

KIERAN1 · 03-02-2012 05:10PM

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I can't see this happening for a lot of reasons. Politically it'd be a disaster with absolutely no winners in the long run but aside from that logistically it would be an extremely difficult task.

In the past Israel (more than likely) have swooped in and out to execute scientists or blown up individual buildings in other countries. This is an entirely different prospect though. Whether the Iranians are planning nuclear weapons or not the fact remains that they have spread their nuclear sites all across this vast vast country. Israel do not have any aircraft carriers or forward command posts so they'd have to fly sorties to and from Israel which would make it an extremely long drawn out and complex process.

The only chance they'd have is if the Americans joined in and if Israel were to attack Iran first then it would make it extremely difficult for the Americans to join them politically as I don't think even the British would support them.

The Iraq war of 2003 never had the potential to ignite a wider conflict this one does and that's what so scary to me at least.

Just say Israel does attack Iran sometime this year before the end of 2012.

Will America be involved with attacking Iran, as well?

What will other Arab countries do if their populations rise up in support of Iran?

How many European countries will support and possible might join with Israel to fight? The UK is likely to support this attack once it starts.

Syria has a military pact with Iran to defend each other if attacked by a foreign nation. Will Syria join Iran if Israel or America attack? - Or will domestic concerns keep them out of fighting this war?

Russia, thinking probably would be the biggest unknown. Russia, however views any attack on Syria and Iran as unacceptable to them. Syria is a strategic ally. Russia has even a naval base at Tartus in Syria. And who wants Russia to be dragged into this?

paky · 03-02-2012 05:20PM

Dotsey wrote: »

What about Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait etc who are friendly to the American needs?

don't forget Israel describes itself as a "Jewish state for a Jewish people" so that in itself is also fascist although they are not a dictatorship

look at it this way, would you prefer to live in a country like america which favours personal freedoms or live in china, russia, or any middle eatern country where individuals have little freedom, if any? the states you mention trade with the US, keeping the balance of power in their favour. iran is a threat to this balance of power as it has the possiblity of creating china and russia as the leading superpowers. tbh we all know what side our bread is buttered on and its better the US and the EU are the leading superpowers, as these places have forms of governments which have been tried and tested and have successfully stood the test of time

KIERAN1 · 03-02-2012 05:27PM

JustinDee wrote: »

Oh ffs. The top ten richest in the US. How many are Jewish?
Know the most powerful lobbies in the US? It is of white, protestant, Ivy leaguers.
One would think that paranoia about Jews and their money would get tired after all these centuries.

Why do people just repeat what they read?

I don't believe this Jewish conspiracy crap. But certain Jewish tycoons have been influencing the debate should America join Israel to attack Iran.

Not many people are aware of this ( media is quiet about this) but two of the main backers of Romney and Gingrich campaign to become the Republican nominee for president. Are Jewish billionaires living in the US who have very ties to the Israel Government.

I forget the name of the backer who supports Gingrich. But the backer is close personal friend to current prime minister is Benjamin Netanyahu of the Likud party.

Border-Rat · 03-02-2012 05:41PM

paky wrote: »

look at it this way, would you prefer to live in a country like america which favours personal freedoms or live in china, russia, or any middle eatern country where individuals have little freedom, if any? the states you mention trade with the US, keeping the balance of power in their favour. iran is a threat to this balance of power as it has the possiblity of creating china and russia as the leading superpowers. tbh we all know what side our bread is buttered on and its better the US and the EU are the leading superpowers, as these places have forms of governments which have been tried and tested and have successfully stood the test of time

America removed Iraq, a buffer state for the West, and gave it to Iran. Fail.

woodoo · 04-02-2012 12:52AM

KIERAN1 wrote: »

I don't believe this Jewish conspiracy crap. But certain Jewish tycoons have been influencing the debate should America join Israel to attack Iran.

That'll be the ones who gain financially from the armaments industry.

JustinDee · 04-02-2012 09:10AM

woodoo wrote: »

That'll be the ones who gain financially from the armaments industry.

Such as whom?
Largest weapons manufacturer for example are Lockheed-martin. Who are the big bad Jewish fellas in charge of that company?

Border-Rat · 04-02-2012 01:59PM

JustinDee wrote: »

Such as whom?
Largest weapons manufacturer for example are Lockheed-martin. Who are the big bad Jewish fellas in charge of that company?

Are you Jewish?

losthorizon · 04-02-2012 02:33PM

brimal wrote: »

You are aware of Iran's human rights abuses aren't you?

Capital punishment to minors, death by stoning, mass televised hangings, death for practising Christianity, death to homosexuals, censored internet, radio, tv. etc.

500+ people killed so far this year and counting.

Have a read and tell me which country is more 'barbaric'

I can tell you that some of what you are saying is totally wrong from first hand experience. As someone who has met Iranian Christians of Armenian descent they have told me there is no problem with practising their fate in Iran. I was on Holiday in Armenia three years ago and met loads of Christian Iranians on holiday as well. I also met some Americans who were going to see their Christian cousins in Iran as well. They were actually bemused at the thought that we might think they might be in danger. There are actually Christian and Jewish members of Parliament. Iran has four offical religions -Muslim, Christianity, Zoroastrianism ( a certain Freddie Mercury Was born into this religion) , and Judaism. The Iranian Christians said I should visit as it was a great country to go to with very friendly people and loads to see and do and its certainly on my list of places.

Don't make judgements about places you know nothing about. Why don't you visit?

Israel might attack Iran in June?

Comments