Iran has strategic missle -- threatens Israel

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Comparing Israel to Nazi Germany is the height of absurdity. And it isn't in a war for resources, so comparing it to Japan is pretty stupid too.

So why are they denying the Palestinians access to drinking water?

[Ted Striker]

BECAUSE THEY ARE EVIL AND EAT PALESTINIAN BABIES!!!1111

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
Iran is already the major sponser of terrorism in the region, and probably around the world.

Last time I heard, it was the US that granted military aid to nearly 100 dictatorial countries in the world.

[Ted Striker]

I wasn't aware we were proping up the Swedish regime.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
BECAUSE THEY ARE EVIL AND EAT PALESTINIAN BABIES!!!1111

Relax, I was just nitpicking about the idea that the war wasn't about resources.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
I wasn't aware we were proping up the Swedish regime.

[Ted Striker]

[Drake Tungsten]

And air power has never won a war. Yes, we can bomb the **** out of most anyone, and it won't accomplish much of anything.

Who wants a war? I just want to blow the **** out of Iran's nuclear facilities...

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

If it's against your vaunted international law, do something about it. Otherwise, it's not really against the law, is it?

There were many attempts to do it, by using UN-Resolution.

But almost everytime a draft for Resolution against Israel is brought before the Security Council it is stopped by the US using their Veto Rights

[Ted Striker]

USA

[Edan]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

And air power has never won a war. Yes, we can bomb the **** out of most anyone, and it won't accomplish much of anything.

Who wants a war? I just want to blow the **** out of Iran's nuclear facilities...

[Zevico]

Agathon--you're right that the situation wouldn't seem to change so much if Iran had nuclear weapons. However, this is because the situation at present is a result of inaction (for whatever reason, perhaps Ned's suggestion of trying to prevent war) by the USA and European countries such as France or Germany. Theoretically, these countries could pressure Iran (or attack it, whatever) and thereby force it to cease supporting terrorists.
If Iran receives nukes, the amount of pressure that Europe and the USA could place on it is far decreased. Regime change would no longer be an option, as Iran would be likely to attempt at a nuke at someone--not necessarily Israel, but perhaps even places in Europe.

Imran: you make a good point; the chances of outright war with Arab nations such as Syria or Saudi Arabia do increase after this instance. However, keep in mind that it is not in these regimes' interest to go to war with Israel. They certainly didn't want to in 81', and Israel is more powerful militarily than it was back then. At the same time, the only thing Syria's army has been procuring is rust. Saudi Arabia is unlikely to try anything-they're unstable enough as it is (and I don't think I have an army to speak of). Iraq has no army to speak of anymore (as if it had one before the war either).
Egypt is a possible threat in this regard, but it is at peace with Israel as well, and declaring war won't win any brownie points with Europe and the USA.
Iran has no border with Israel and would have to use another country to get to Israel with an army. I doubt Syria would risk the displeasure of America by allowing Iranian troops through. I also doubt Iran's army is in any way competent or a viable threat against Israel.
The way it could be said is this: if the Arab countries were capable of putting up a fight and winning against Israel, they would have tried it already. However, they appear to have learnt from history and have settled for supporting terrorism instead.
Even if -all- of them attacked, the result would be a lackluster assault or even a defense (given Israel's penchant for pre emptive strikes); that in turn would result in cease fires as soon as Israel got close to the Arab capitals.

[Edan]

SA, Kuwait backed Iraq in the Gulf War to keep the Balance of Power.

Kuwait did what now?

[germanos]

Originally posted by Edan


Kuwait did what now?

The Gulf War: as in the Iraq-Iran war.
Most (non-USA) people consider that the first Gulf War.

[Imran Siddiqui]

the chances of outright war with Arab nations such as Syria or Saudi Arabia do increase after this instance. However, keep in mind that it is not in these regimes' interest to go to war with Israel. They certainly didn't want to in 81', and Israel is more powerful militarily than it was back then.

Who said it would be an 'outright' war? The Arab states have shown how powerful terrorist and guerrilla wars can be. All they have to do is increase funding for terror groups. Saudi Arabia, for one, knows the US isn't going to do anything to it.