So, when will Israel be attacking Iran's Nuclear Plants then?

[Jon Miller]

and at some point things will lead to other things

and some will be deployed..

I don't want that day to ever come

and I am not going to just sit and say there is nothing to be done..

now I don't know if Israel doing a strike on Iran is the answer..

but I don't think people should just sit back and say there is nothing that can be done

I would much rather the world controlled by a few powers who are at peace with one another (and all having nuclear arms)

then there existing more nations, some of which have conflict with eachother, and all having nuclear weapons...

now generally I prefer more nations, as it allows more variety..

Jon Miller

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by germanos
Iran's president's rethoric is for internal use. There is no better way to silence internal opposition (to the mullah's) then to point at an external enemy. Striking at Iran will strengthen the grip of the mullah's and fanatical nutjobs.

The funny thing is, Ahmadinejad got alot of votes precisey because he isn't a cleric.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

The funny thing is, Ahmadinejad got alot of votes precisey because he isn't a cleric.

point?

[MOBIUS]

I'm just waiting for Iraq to become a democracy just like Iran...

[MOBIUS]

Could everyone please post in this thread (PS: I Told You So!) instead of Az's copycat thread...

[MOBIUS]

So, Iran is flicking the world a big fat finger right now and accelerating their nuclear programme in the fact of western threats, reckon the day when a 'pre-emptive' military strike is ordered is drawing nearer and nearer, especially with those missiles they just received from North Korea that might end up with an extended range of up to 3,500kms...

Will America and Israel sit idly by while Iran continues to develop it's nuclear capabilities?

Looks like Bush really did get Iran and Iraq mixed up when trying to evaluate the true threat in the region - unless they had such amazing strategic foresight that they actually attack WMD less Iraq because they correctly predicted that they would need a compliant forward land base from which to attack Iran's nuclear installations?

[atomant]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


why do you want to go back to MAD?

we were lucky that MAD worked for so long.. but it was really close to failling many many times.. and the results would have been catostrophic if it had

right now the only MAD relationship is India/Pakistan.. and we should be doing all we can to end that

MAD isn't a stable equilibrium, it is unstable, and can end at anytime

I don't want to move back towards a MAD world.. I want nukes to be shelved, I want protection against nukes (if possible), I want countries that call for others to cease to exist not to have nukes

JM

MAD only works when both states are relatively sane. I think it was Mao that said to the effect that even in a nuclear war, a quarter of the suvivors will be chinese. perhaps the government of Iran is working under the same premise 9i.e more irnaians than isrealis)?

[SlowwHand]

Monday at 0600 hrs.

[chequita guevara]

Re: So, when will Israel be attacking Iran's Nuclear Plants then?

Late October.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Shogun Gunner
What is wrong with that country...

They looked at North Korea, which has nukes, and did not get attacked; looked at Iraq, which did not have nukes, and saw it get taken over, and did the math.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
The Israelis have a history of aggressive international pre-emptive strikes across the entire region - including the USS Liberty of their own allies!

We weren't allies in 1967. Israel was viewed with some suspicion by the U.S. because it was seen as too close to the USSR. After the Six Days War, the U.S. decided that Israel could be a very useful ally.

[Sirotnikov]

chegitz is right mostly.

Israel was not seen as such an important asset, and Israel itself had not seen the US as a strong relationship. The US was, at the time, very difficult due to a certain project Israel was building with the french.

Israel did, however, see the US as its potencial future superpower ally, and that is the main reason why I think it is out of the question that Israel would intentionally attack an american ship.

I think it was a mistake by overzealous and over confident Israeli pilots that was not caught in time.

Israelis do tend to make mistakes you know. Dozens of soldiers were killed in each war from friendly fire. Every once in a while it happens in the territories right now.

[MOBIUS]

Another potential answer to a question I asked over a year ago...

Israelis prepare public for conflict with 'genocidal' Iranian regime

Senior Israeli politicians and analysts appear to be preparing the public for military conflict with Iran as the Iranian President again refused to bow to international demands to curb its nuclear ambitions, and Tehran announced fresh military manoeuvres.

Israeli opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu told a security forum in Herzliya yesterday that individual states and companies should go beyond the UN economic sanctions. He argued that the first step should be to invoke financial sanctions to "divest genocide" and "delegitimise the regime of Iran through economic and political pressure".

The hawkish Likud leader added: "Either it will stop the nuclear programme without the need for a military operation, or it could prepare for it. When we are talking about rallying public opinion on genocide, who will lead the charge if not us? No one will come defend the Jews if they do not defend themselves. This is the lesson of history."

Talking to journalists, Mr Netanyahu said he doubted that the "genocidal regime" of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was "deterrable". This view was shared by Shmuel Bar, an Islamic specialist at the Herzliya centre, who said that the US and Iran were engaged in "very dangerous brinkmanship". He said that seen from Tehran, "the conspiracy theory goes that the US, with the UK and Israel, will take action to topple the Islamic regime, and that this has nothing to do with the nuclear issue."

Tehran has shown no sign of yielding to UN demands to halt uranium enrichment. "The resolution was born dead and even if they issue 10 more it will not affect Iran's economy and policies," Mr Ahmadinejad said yesterday in a televised speech.

Looks like we're edging ever closer to D-Day...

Just wondering, does anyone know how good that air defence system those nice Russians recently sold the Iranians is?

[Arrian]

Will America and Israel sit idly by while Iran continues to develop it's nuclear capabilities?

Surely you want them to, no? The moment Israel or the US actually did something, you'd be whining like a stuck pig.

...

Personally, I don't see that there is a whole lot we can do but hope MAD holds. They're gonna get nukes eventually. Were I in their position, I'd absolutely be trying to get them. Nukes = immunity.

-Arrian

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Arrian


Surely you want them to, no? The moment Israel or the US actually did something, you'd be whining like a stuck pig.

So basically you're saying that I would be doing a good job imitating your irrational bleating on this thread...?

For someone who claims the moral high ground in an argument, you sure look like a dick launching into an unprovoked attack in this one...

Personally, I don't see that there is a whole lot we can do but hope MAD holds. They're gonna get nukes eventually. Were I in their position, I'd absolutely be trying to get them. Nukes = immunity.

And the best yet, you then go on and say that you don't see what we can do and agree with what I think...

Basically the way I see it is that if Iran is attacked, it risks sending the entire global economy into meltdown. The stakes are simply too high.