It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Israeli Legislators to Washington: If You Don't Stop Iran, We Will

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nathabeanz
And iran is an extremely hostile nation. In the event that isreal did take miltary action against iran, iran would use whatever in its arsenal to retaliate.


Of course Iran would retaliate, but I don't think Egypt or Jordan would join them.




posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
Islam makes up roughly 20% of the Worlds population.

1.2billion people.

If you want the whole of those Islamic Nation's to side together, that will do it.


as opposed to now, where the 1.2 billion muslims love the jewish state?


truth is, I get the feeling the EU and the US are waiting on Israel so they can avoid being the aggressor for once. If Israel does fly in an destroy the nuclear capabilites, you can rest assured they will have some seriously damning evidence.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
as opposed to now, where the 1.2 billion muslims love the jewish state?


I suggest you go to a mosque.

Moderate Muslims teach that they [Jewish people and Christians] are still children of the same book and they shouldn't be harmed unless they are directly attempting to destroy Islam...

An Imam can explain it better than I can, but that is roughly the teachings they give.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Israel attacking Iran would surly make a mess of things in the middle east their will be call of vengeance and blood across the middle east and wider Islamic world and if the governments don’t comply with the publics demand they will be over thrown and replaced by some one who would do some thing to quell the thirst of blood. As it is the governments across the Middle East are very fragile and ripe for revelation.

It does not matter if the country is allied to United States (ie countries like Kuwait, Oman Qatar) or not it will happen as things stand. It will drag whole of middle of east into a very bloody war that could possibly and most likely will go Nuclear.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 05:59 PM
link   
i say let them nuke israeli, who cares... it's not our problem



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ulshadow
i say let them nuke israeli, who cares... it's not our problem


What's a sense of humor!



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 06:40 PM
link   
I know one thing is for sure. If Israel did attack Iran Hebollah would launch an offensive in the northern part of the country. It would get into a war with U.S. because of an airspace issue. Obviously they cant send their tanks because of U.S. ground forces. However they may be able to send in their Bombers and Jets. The U.S. is in a groudn war with no threat from air units. Im sure they have a minial air defense system in place. That is until Iran flies over there to return some gifts the Israelis decided to drop by. Of course after this violation the U.S. will be granted permission by the Iraqi authority to shoot down any and all Iranian aircraft. Thus declaring war with Iran. It goes on and on. It will of course cause alot of civil unrest here.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by DYepes
It will of course cause alot of civil unrest here.


Why?



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by DYepes
Im sure they have a minial air defense system in place. That is until Iran flies over there to return some gifts the Israelis decided to drop by. Of course after this violation the U.S. will be granted permission by the Iraqi authority to shoot down any and all Iranian aircraft. Thus declaring war with Iran. It goes on and on. It will of course cause alot of civil unrest here.


We have plenty of air support in the region -- the Iranian Air Force would be utterly devestated if it tried to cross Iraqi air space. I'm sure they'd just fire missiles at Tel Aviv as retaliation.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Israel being small territorially cannot absorb nuclear strikes and have any hope of fending off its neighbors such as Syria in the aftermath providing anything is left worth fighting over.

Israel cannot afford to take a wait and see stance with Iran because if it is mistaken then its national survival is at risk.

Israel has no choice but to pre-empt an Iranian weaponization program near fruition.

Irans stated policy is the destruction of Israel.

Every country knows this, some choose to cynically support the Iranians for later advantage, some choose to do nothing in a mistaken view Iran can shoulder the responsibility and others are waking up to the danger this presents - probably to late though.

Because Irans nuclear weapon related facilties are well protected underground it may have to resort to first use of nuclear weapons by employing tactical warheads on these facilities and conventional strikes on sites closer to or in population centers.

The first use by Israel will absolutely beget a response from Iran striking cities even though the Israelis targeted no population centers providing they have hedged their bets and possess some small number of warheads mounted on the cruise missiles they have recently obtained.

The question by all should be "who has the most to gain from such an event" not bickering over whether or not Iran has the right to possess nuclear weapons.

From my view of things China gains the most after all is said and done.

Interesting that they are the chief benefactors of the other country in violation of the NPT North Korea.

Only a concerted coordinated effort by all western countries will prevent certain disaster.

The US going it alone with Iran to prevent an Israeli attack will result in the same endgame for China and is not a viable longterm strategy.

As it is some countries place their short term economic gains ahead of common sense.

I fear major disaster is not far off.

[edit on 1-10-2005 by Phoenix]



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 08:03 PM
link   
And what will China will do with his around 400 billions petrol contract?



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
And what will China will do with his around 400 billions petrol contract?


It'll get a better deal with the US cut off from middle eastern oil. They'll have to sell it to someone now won't they.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Speculation is interesting for us guys to indulge in, but when governments start speculating I find it offensive. The Iranians should restart the "Where's the beef?" ad campaign and use it to ask the Ameraelis "Where's the proof?". So far no one has come up with proof that the Iranians are doing anything but run a NPT-allowed nuclear programme. Just because the Americans and the Israelis say they are going for weapons does not make it so! Those two countries have major vested interests in Iran coming a cropper on the international stage. Lies have been used to stage American led wars in the past, they are doing it now and some of you are buying this whole load of crap again.

I feel the only recourse the Israeli's could do against Iran is a strike on the Iranian leaders themselves. They have absolutely no chance of destroying Iran's nuclear programme as its has been specifically designed with Israeli aggression in mind. Short of tactical bunkerbusting nuclear weapons (which I think the Americans are still "wanting" to build, hence I doubt Israel has *yet*), the Isfahan site is safe from attack. Plus the Americans would never condone Israeli use of nuclear weapons. It would gaurantee that Israel would either lose its nukes thereafter, or lose its tacit American support in future.

Israel would definately strike at the mullahs and the Iranian government with conventional weapons. There is civil unrest brewing in Iran as it is and the government would be overthrown in those circumstances, but with one problem: the new revolution would still hate Israel for what it has done.

Syria has a mutal defence agreement with Iran, so you can include Iran/Syria and Israeli in this conflict from the word "go". Syria shares a border with Israel so the violation of Iraqi territory is not an absolute necessity. Syrian land and air units would surely attack Israel in the same manner as they attacked Iran. They would go for the Knesset and Israeli leaders. Iran would retaliate with conventional weapons against the same targets.

The reason I believe that political targets would be the extent of the conflict is because of the precedent set by the Americans in the openning stages of Iraq War II. They went after Saddam atleast twice before the full invasion began. This was due to the desire to be seen as loathed to conflict and of having a "beef" with the Iraqi government, not its people. The Americans were also trying to sure up UN support and still desired the UN to help with Iraq in the future. They could best get this UN support by only killing Saddam.

Both Israel and Iran would be screaming at the UN for action during this conflict. Iran would claim Israel has attacked its sovereignty with no provokation and Israel would cite American/EU claims of suspected weapons programmes (WMDs, remember those?...). Since Israel has only struck at "the heart of its problem with Iran" it would stand a better chance of retaining American and EU support for its actions, it wouldnt it if used nukes or killed thousands of Iranian civilians.

The same is true for Iranians in their inevitable counter-attack. If they aim for the Israeli politicians who attacked them unprovoked, they would also be more likely to gain UN support of the rest of the Middle East, China and Russia. This would be where the real action takes place. Both countries (Iran/Israel) would more or less be open for regime change. Both sides of the power play (US/EU vs Middle East/China/Russia) would connive to get their man into power in Iran. Israel would be left to fend for itself as im sure it has outlived its counterbalancing role for Western influence in the Middle East.

Its not WW3 as we'd expect, but then again this latest round of conflict has been going on since Afghanistan 2001.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Is Israel speaking in term of weeks or months? When will they decide to invade Iran? Early 2006 or next week?



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 11:35 PM
link   
First of all, Israel would not physically invade Iran over the nuclear issue. They might bomb the place (conventional only) and send in some airborne troops to penetrate the site to destroy it before withdrawing, but nothing else. Second, Iran does not have the capability to launch an air attack on Israel, they might persuade the Syrians to do so, but I don't even think that would happen. There would be a great upsurge in suicide bombings, rocket attacks, etc..

Company just came in, will finish this later.



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 12:05 AM
link   
Iran is looking for allies (Syria and Lebanon)

english.aljazeera.net...


Haddad Adel called for unity against what he described as "the ambitions of America and Israel".

Haddad Adel went to Qana, 11km north of the Israeli border, where a bombardment killed Lebanese men, women and children taking refuge in a UN base during an Israeli offensive against Hizb Allah rocket attacks in 1996.
A UN report found the shelling was "unlikely" to have been an accident, as Israel claimed.


So they are seeking for allies and if they get them it will be Syria/Lebanon/Iran/(maybe China/Russia but unlikely) VS USA/Israel/EU?



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 12:17 AM
link   
I think we're getting worked up over nothing.

"Israeli Legislators to Washington: If You Don't Stop Iran, We Will". Really? So if the US does something it would prove to the world that US policy is dictated out of Tel Aviv. Bye Bye allies. Not going to happen. Stretched thin already.

Is Israel going to attack Iran? Doubt it. The US could, stong enough, with HIGH casualties but would lose too much. Israel? Even more to lose imo. It's been said here that Egypt(southwest border) would remain out of the fray, largest military in the region btw. If Israeli imperialism, for want of a better word, comes into play, game over, no reset.

Nukes? Hasn't been done in 60 years. If they pulled that, they'd be alone. Even the US would have to back off then.



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 12:22 AM
link   
By all means let them go ahead.

If Israel feels Iran is a threat to Israel, they should be the ones sticking their necks out, not the US. I find the idea that Iran is a threat to the US totally absurd.

Frankly if the Iranian theocracy and Israeli apartheid state manage to take each other out of the picture, the rest of the planet will be better off for their absence.



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 12:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Is Israel going to attack Iran? Doubt it.


That's very likely, they don't have the military to do that and the support and also if they get nuked, they're all dead...


Originally posted by xmotex
By all means let them go ahead.

If Israel feels Iran is a threat to Israel, they should be the ones sticking their necks out, not the US. I find the idea that Iran is a threat to the US totally absurd.

Frankly if the Iranian theocracy and Israeli apartheid state manage to take each other out of the picture, the rest of the planet will be better off for their absence.


That's for sure, the world less of extremists and people looking for power is a better world!



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo

Originally posted by intrepid
Is Israel going to attack Iran? Doubt it.


That's very likely, they don't have the military to do that and the support and also if they get nuked, they're all dead...


You mean Israel will or will not attack? Would you mind filling me in on your post?




top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join