Â鶹ԼÅÄ

Wars and ConflictsÌý permalink

Israel

• Message 1.Ìý

  Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Saturday, 29th October 2005

  Would Israel tolerate a nuclear armed Iran. They already have neutralized a previous attempt with an airstrike. This time the Iranians have their facilities secured underground (to a degree anyway) In my opinion this would not at all deter the I.D.F. for long. A repeat performance with an S.F. type operation by Israel is well within their capabilities. What do you guys think ?

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by colonelblimp (U1705702) on Saturday, 29th October 2005

  Possibly not. However, if Israel, which is widely assumed to possess nuclear weapons itself in defiance of the same international protocols that Iran is expected to accept as binding, were to launch such an attack, it would hardly serve to reduce support for the view expressed by the Iranian president.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by U1969296 (U1969296) on Sunday, 30th October 2005

  Hi Expat
  I think that Israel Would Do what Israel would. You are dealing with a very unstable Country(Iran) So.......... The IDF has a very superior response system and i am sure that this senario
  has been looked at, time and time again. The message has gone out Do not, Repeat, do not muck about with Israels Right to survive Would Israel tolerate a nuclear armed Iran. They already have neutralized a previous attempt with an airstrike. This time the Iranians have their facilities secured underground (to a degree anyway) In my opinion this would not at all deter the I.D.F. for long. A repeat performance with an S.F. type operation by Israel is well within their capabilities. What do you guys think ?Ìý

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by jberie (U1767537) on Sunday, 30th October 2005

  Would Israel tolerate a nuclear armed Iran. They already have neutralized a previous attempt with an airstrike. This time the Iranians have their facilities secured underground (to a degree anyway) In my opinion this would not at all deter the I.D.F. for long. A repeat performance with an S.F. type operation by Israel is well within their capabilities. What do you guys think ?
  
  Ìý
  
  I think the "previous attempt" was targeted at Iraq. Nevertheless, I lay my money on Israel. Israel will not tolerate a nuclear armed Iran. Especially not after Friday's outburst by the Iranian lunatic--I mean president--about Israel needing to be wiped off the face of the earth.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Monday, 31st October 2005

  jberie
  
  
  I stand corrected. I believe it was Iraq.
  The question can still stand as is.
  
  Thanks, Matt.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by DaveMBA (U1360771) on Monday, 31st October 2005

  Israel has already been supplied with the bunker busting bombs by the US to do the job and it will do so at the right moment. Much has been made of Friday's comments - they are however made ona regualr basis and have only reached western media at the behest of the Bush/Blair governments to justify an attack on Iran amidst all the rhetoric about Iran helping Shia groups attack UK troops and its alleged threat to the west. The first was of course an entirely predictable result of the illegal invasion of Iraq and the latter is amusing, given that Iran has yet to show any signs of building either the roicket or silo to throw an A-bomb far enough.
  
  Israel is indeed in breach of all the UN nuclear protoicols - but the US has not allowed any action against them. That unsurprisingly is why the ordinary Muslim has thought the US guilty of double-standards.
  
  Two interesting facts:
  Nation with the largest number of UNSC resolutions against it: Israel
  Six natiosn, which have failed to sign up to the Int Criminal Court: 4 Middle Eastern dictatorships (Iraq under Saddam being one), the USA and Israel.
  
  Think about this next time you hear about "freedom" and international obligations.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Wednesday, 2nd November 2005

  jberie
  
  
  I stand corrected. I believe it was Iraq.
  The question can still stand as is.
  
  Thanks, Matt.Ìý
  
  I'm almost 100% certain it was an Iranian facility the Israeli's destroyed last time and not an Iraqi one

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Wednesday, 2nd November 2005

  Would Israel tolerate a nuclear armed Iran. They already have neutralized a previous attempt with an airstrike. This time the Iranians have their facilities secured underground (to a degree anyway) In my opinion this would not at all deter the I.D.F. for long. A repeat performance with an S.F. type operation by Israel is well within their capabilities. What do you guys think ?Ìý
  
  Hiya Expat,
  
  This is a stinker of a question. I think that Israel would have to tolerate a nuclear Iran this time round. The Iranian Presidents comments not withstanding (cos I think he is a dangerous nutter) I believe that MAD would still apply to a nuclear situation within the Middle East. For Israel to strike they would have to cross Western held skies which in turn would imply active Western support for an Israeli strike on an independent country without having declared war (and I know that Iran does not recognise Israel but some diplomatic niceties must be observed!)
  
  With great justifcation the Middle East would errupt with such a strike, and almost certainly we would be saying goodbye to our oil supply for the immeadiate. An Israeli strike might also upset the delicate Iraqi balance, maybe eving giving the Iranians cause to move in on that territory?? (unlikely but you never know)
  
  In an nuclear option, with Iran armed would she use them? We in the west learned the hard way the lessons of Chernobyl. Any nuclear use will damage other than the target. With the wrong winds Iran could be poisening its own land with a strike on Israel (and thats assumming that Israel would be unable to respond in kind) Also would Iran be able to use her weapons with impunity? What of the west and Russia? Would the US allow Iran to attack without the threat of reprisal? Would the Russians allow the US to threaten reprisals? What of the other nuclear powers out there??
  
  The variables are greatly increased once you start using or planning a nuclear option and remember that the only time they have been used in anger was when the US had a monopoly on their usage. Since the SU gained the bomb no one has used them in anger. Oh the world has tettered, threats have been bandied back and fore, but with MAD there is an acknoledgment that the "victor" might find the price too high (if indeed there can be a victor under MAD circumstances)
  
  I am delibratly avoiding the terrorist option here as that is not something you can plan for with certainity. A nationstate has assets and people to consider, a terrorist just has his aims with little regard to long term outcome
  
  But with the pull out from Gaza I feel that Israel might well have to also stomach Iran joining it as a Middle Eastern nuclear military force

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 7.

  Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Wednesday, 2nd November 2005

  jberie
  
  
  I stand corrected. I believe it was Iraq.
  The question can still stand as is.
  
  Thanks, Matt.Ìý
  
  I'm almost 100% certain it was an Iranian facility the Israeli's destroyed last time and not an Iraqi oneÌý
  
  1981: Israel bombs Baghdad nuclear reactor
  The Israelis have bombed a French-built nuclear plant near Iraq's capital, Baghdad, saying they believed it was designed to make nuclear weapons to destroy Israel.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message9

• Message 10

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Wednesday, 2nd November 2005

  Hi Richie,
  I honestly wish I could agree with you. When Israel feels its security is threatened, diplomatic niceties are not at the top of their list. I believe they would hit them fast and hard. An air strike followed by a ground SF assault. Israel does not mess around. They can't afford to. I agree it would degrade the worlds oil supplies. You raised many interesting points.
  
  Cheers

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message10

• Message 11

  , in reply to message 9.

  Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Wednesday, 2nd November 2005

  jberie
  
  
  I stand corrected. I believe it was Iraq.
  The question can still stand as is.
  
  Thanks, Matt.Ìý
  
  I'm almost 100% certain it was an Iranian facility the Israeli's destroyed last time and not an Iraqi oneÌý
  
  1981: Israel bombs Baghdad nuclear reactor
  The Israelis have bombed a French-built nuclear plant near Iraq's capital, Baghdad, saying they believed it was designed to make nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. Ìý
  
  I rather humbly stand corrected

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message11

• Message 12

  , in reply to message 11.

  Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Wednesday, 2nd November 2005

  jberie
  
  
  I stand corrected. I believe it was Iraq.
  The question can still stand as is.
  
  Thanks, Matt.Ìý
  
  I'm almost 100% certain it was an Iranian facility the Israeli's destroyed last time and not an Iraqi oneÌý
  
  1981: Israel bombs Baghdad nuclear reactor
  The Israelis have bombed a French-built nuclear plant near Iraq's capital, Baghdad, saying they believed it was designed to make nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. Ìý
  
  I rather humbly stand correctedÌý
  
  Welcome to the club.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message12

• Message 13

  , in reply to message 12.

  Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Wednesday, 2nd November 2005

  
  I rather humbly stand corrected
  
  Welcome to the club.Ìý
  
  
  
  *cough cough* yes welllll.....
  
  *looks away rather embaresed*

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message13

• Message 14

  , in reply to message 13.

  Posted by Turnwrest (U2188092) on Friday, 4th November 2005

  Would Irael tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran? Not if they could help it. The "MAD" bit does not apply, as they would use conventional weapons on the enrichment plants long before they got anywhere near producing enough fissionable material to make a bomb. The only way Iran could actually get a bomb without that happening is from the large number of incompletely accounted for ex-USSR weapons, or buying it from N. Korea, or a radicalised Pakistan. If a Taliban-style government displaces Musharaf, you can start switching the lights off. There again, why bother? They'll go out on their own soon enough.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message14

• Message 15

  , in reply to message 14.

  Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Monday, 7th November 2005

  It is of course in the interest of nuclear armed countries that no other country enters in the club (here we can say: the less the merrier!). However, according to international law an independent country is entitled to produce any weapon they want unless they have signed a treaty for "arms reduction" etc. As far as I know Iran has signed nothing like that, so it is entitled to do whatever it likes and if anyone tries violently to stop that then that act would be an agression.
  
  On the other hand US or Israel efforts are well understandable (they do not want competitors in the area), however they will have to bent once more international laws since in that case the right is on the side of Iran.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message15

• Message 16

  , in reply to message 15.

  Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Monday, 7th November 2005

  We must also do not forget that the Iranian people (direct heirs to the Persian civilisation) are no Arabs. They are muslims, Shiites to be accurate and normally they were considerbaly less fanatic than Arabs - in the 1950s their society was actually more close to Europe than to middle east...
  
  ... but it was largely the political moves of USA and their indirect support to the muslims that aided Â鶹ԼÅÄini to set in power the current religious regime. Still, despite their religious talk, Iranians are no Arabs and have nothing to do with whatever the US or others accuse them (collaboration with terrorism etc.). It is a country that should have been a very rich but has remained poor largely because of their isolation (supported by US politics) and by the 1980s war with Saddam's Irak (at that time Saddam was the good boy of Americans! later he became the enemy like it usually happens... AL Zarkawi, Bin Laden all US agents that turned against them... strange isn't it?).
  
  Is all that talk about Iran builting nuclear another effort of US efforts to control the area or not?
  
  PS: I am not exactly accusing US for their politics... good for them if they can control this way things down there

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message16

• Message 17

  , in reply to message 16.

  Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Monday, 7th November 2005

  Nick, you forgot about the weather, Global warming, acid rain, crop failures, mad cow disease, Cyprus, the middle east, hungry Africans, third world debt, Oh these scoundrel Americans have a lot to answer for.
  
  Cheers.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message17

• Message 18

  , in reply to message 17.

  Posted by Turnwrest (U2188092) on Monday, 7th November 2005

  Well, I met a considerable number of the Shah's elite when Iran was at its most "Westernised".
  
  If I had been a run-of-the-mill Iranian I'd have supported almost anyone who seemed likely to remove that elite and the system that maintained them in power.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message18

• Message 19

  , in reply to message 18.

  Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Monday, 7th November 2005

  Well, I met a considerable number of the Shah's elite when Iran was at its most "Westernised".
  
  If I had been a run-of-the-mill Iranian I'd have supported almost anyone who seemed likely to remove that elite and the system that maintained them in power.Ìý
  
  I agree Turnwrest. They were in dire need of a revolution. I think the savak had lessons from the Gestapo. The Shah was our front man and we believed everything he told us. The problem was he had no idea himself. Some of the things we did (our govt.) in the name of the cold war can make me shudder, but it’s so easy to look back and criticize.
  
  Cheerz

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message19

• Message 20

  , in reply to message 17.

  Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Tuesday, 8th November 2005

  Hehe Expat,
  
  You know that I have repeatedly been critising US politics and even more those of G. Britain but that not so much to childly say 'you bad guys us good guys' like they do in Hollywood movies.
  
  US is currently the global power and a global power has necessarily to do the 'ugly work' of being the "sheriff". If the global power stays behind and leaves things like that then smaller powers rise to medium and in the long run it will be more difficult to control them. And if USA tries to play the good guy then somebody else will rise to take its place.
  
  If you ask me what is better for the world or worse, I am not going to say this or that...US is not better or worse from any other country that managed to be in the lead - however, I think that UK was even more devious in their international politics. For smaller countries it is much more preferrable to have an Othoman empire or a Nazi Germany as a great power because things are much more straightforward - they simply have to fight against them. UK and US politics do not work like that. It is well known that this world is currently not controlled by USA but by the international capitals moving here or there, for the last 100 years they are invested in USA, if that will not work in future they will move somewhere else, China or India or Australia, wherever.

  Link to this forum: Israel

  Report message20

Back to top