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.

 

Israel may 'go it alone' against Iran

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 11:30 AM
link   


Israel is carefully watching the world's reaction to Iran's continued refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, with some high-level officials arguing it is now clear that when it comes to stopping Iran, Israel "may have to go it alone," The Jerusalem Post has learned.


Wow

I sure hope this doesnt happen. But it looks like it might




posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 11:37 AM
link   
ROFLMAO they couldnt even defeat hezbolah and they expect to defeat Iran?
if they try this they are likely to get their *#% handed to them on a silver platter.

what is worse though is if they do attack it will very likely esculate to include numerous other middle eastern countries and then drag in western ones like us as well



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 11:42 AM
link   
is it possible this is an underlying tactic to pull the US into the war? even to the point that this plan could have been constructed by the US Gov't? Up until now we've been fighting a proxy war, but this sounds like the big step that will get us involved. i truly would like to see israel get their butt's handed to them for being over zealous, but im not prepared to back a US entry into that hell hole.

Edited for language...sorry

[edit on 8/24/2006 by bokinsmowl]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 11:46 AM
link   
i dont think it needs an underlying tactic to drag the us into war, from i've seen "dubya" is pretty intent on taking on iran and possibly other middle eastern countries already.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Iran's intent is to acquire a nuclear weapon to destroy Israel. Isn't that pretty much what the Iranian president says he wants, "Israel wiped off the face of the Earth?" There is a very good reason why 6 major powers are working tirelessly to negotiate with Iran to cease the enrichment process it is working at break-neck speed to amass.
LINK: Why hide this then?

Do you really think Iran is going through all this trouble and spending billions for "peaceful energy needs." Iran sits on one of the largest resevoirs of oil on the Earth, it doesnt need this energy. And yet it's people live in virtual poverty. They have been offered this energy for free if they stop the enrichment, they declined.

Some have said Israel had trouble in Lebanon so how could they possibly take on Iran? Israel didn't drop a nuke on Lebanon. Israel is running out of time to strike Iran, if they wait until Iran also has the bomb, that window of opportunity will be closed and its 'game over.'

I think that Israel feels like that if Iran wants a nuke so bad, they will give them one, but Iran will have to catch it from 30,000 feet. Better get out your sunblock.



[edit on 24-8-2006 by super70]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by bokinsmowl
is it possible this is an underlying tactic to pull the US into the war? even to the point that this plan could have been constructed by the US Gov't? Up until now we've been fighting a proxy war, but this sounds like the big step that will get us involved. i truly would like to see israel get their butt's handed to them for being over zealous, but im not prepared to back a US entry into that hell hole.

Edited for language...sorry

[edit on 8/24/2006 by bokinsmowl]


I think that's completely what's going on. There's plans that IF we get attacked again with what their calling a "Second 9/11" then we would connect it to Iran. We have war plans drawn up for Iran, we just need something to justify it. Yeah, Bush is ready to go to war no matter what but this one is different. I don't think his approval rating can take much more..then to go start a war without justification? He'd be impeached...hopefully. So, basically, if we aren't going to get attacked, then what's the other option? Send in Israel. They do our dirty work. Their our lap dog. We send them in to get it started and we come in and finish it. That's how it's going to work. This plan to "go at it alone" doesn't surprise me one bit.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by super70
Iran's intent is to acquire a nuclear weapon to destroy Israel. Isn't that pretty much what the Iranian president says he wants, "Israel wiped off the face of the Earth?" There is a very good reason why 6 major powers are working tirelessly to negotiate with Iran to cease the enrichment process it is working at break-neck speed to amass.
LINK: Why hide this then?

Do you really think Iran is going through all this trouble and spending billions for "peaceful energy needs." Iran sits on one of the largest resevoirs of oil on the Earth, it doesnt need this energy. And yet it's people live in virtual poverty. They have been offered this energy for free if they stop the enrichment, they declined.

Some have said Israel had trouble in Lebanon so how could they possibly take on Iran? Israel didn't drop a nuke on Lebanon. Israel is running out of time to strike Iran, if they wait until Iran also has the bomb, that window of opportunity will be closed and its 'game over.'

I think that Israel feels like that if Iran wants a nuke so bad, they will give them one, but Iran will have to catch it from 30,000 feet. Better get out your sunblock.



[edit on 24-8-2006 by super70]


lmao..couldnt have said it any better



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 03:01 PM
link   
I think that isreal would not be able to defeat iran. Unless another allie steps in. If this is the case it will be world war III .



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Good for them!

maybe they'll start driving hybrids.


We reap what we sow.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 03:16 PM
link   


I think that isreal would not be able to defeat iran. Unless another allie steps in. If this is the case it will be world war III .


Israel has nuclear weapons, Irans doesn't (yet.)
Read previous post for more in depth information concerning the crisis.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by R3KR
I think that isreal would not be able to defeat iran. Unless another allie steps in. If this is the case it will be world war III .


don't underestimate Israel. They may be a small country but their pretty scrappy. They didn't exactly beat Hezbollah but that's different. Guerilla warfare isn't what Iran would use. They would rely on their military "might" and what little of that they have despite what they try and say and they would lose to Israel. Alot of Israel's equiptment comes from us. But just in case it's in question who would win that war, we would of course come to the aid of Israel and we'd take Iran out. Maybe MAYBE the Iranian Israeli conflict would be close but, Iranian and American conflict..yeah..forget about it. There isnt enough tough talk in the world to save them in that battle.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:03 PM
link   


Iran's intent is to acquire a nuclear weapon to destroy Israel. Isn't that pretty much what the Iranian president says he wants, "Israel wiped off the face of the Earth?" There is a very good reason why 6 major powers are working tirelessly to negotiate with Iran to cease the enrichment process it is working at break-neck speed to amass.


I think the Iranians have said a number of times that they want the dissolution of the state of Israel. Whether that involves the use of nuclear weapons, nuclear blackmail, conventional weapons, political pressure, or a box of cookies with a nice note, is anybody's guess, right?

I think it's a safe bet that if Iran had any real desire for a nuke, just to drop on Israel, they could buy one for that purpose. It seems to me that Iran wants nukes for detterence, just like Israel.

I know, I know, everyone says that Iran is comprised of a bunch of religious fanatics with a fatalistic love of death and glory, who would all love nothing better than to die in a nuke fight.

My suspicion is that Iranian politicians are not so different than other politicians. The fatalistic religious rhetoric is great for pacifying the people, but it's not a great way to keep your money and power and prestige. Most successful people are not overly religious, at least not in the sense that they'll sacrifice their wealth and power for religious ideals. It remains to be seen if Iranians are a different breed, but I doubt it.

The Iranian people suffer for the sins of their leaders just like the rest of us. I think dropping nukes on Iran would be a great tragedy - punishing a whole bunch of innocent Persians for the politically-expedient rhetoric of a select, powerful few.



Do you really think Iran is going through all this trouble and spending billions for "peaceful energy needs." Iran sits on one of the largest resevoirs of oil on the Earth, it doesnt need this energy. And yet it's people live in virtual poverty. They have been offered this energy for free if they stop the enrichment, they declined.


Yes and no. No, energy is not their only goal (probably, IMO at least) but it is a reasonable goal. Just because they have a large, finite supply of energy is no reason not to invest in nuclear power. In addition to oil reserves, Iran has a great deal of Uranium ripe for enrichment.

I don't doubt that they want nuclear weapons, to achieve parity with Israel, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they don't want to invest in nuclear energy. Oil runs out, and every barrel they don't have to use is another barrel they can sell to fund other programs.

They have been offered the energy for free as long as they agree to cede control over it. If your neighbor wanted you to stop construction on a backyard pool, and told you that you could use his pool for free any time you liked as compensation for your sacrifice, would you do it? I think it would depend entirely on how much you trusted your neighbor, and how he had treated you in the past.

I know you don't want to get into that discussion...

They declined because they want the power to make their own decisions, as a sovereign nation. I think part of it is a pride issue, part of it is PR (hard to keep poor people focused on the evil outsiders to the West if you're taking handouts from those same evils and submitting to their control), and part of it is practical necessity.

The oil isn't going to last forever. When it runs out, or becomes unprofitable to extract, Iran will be in a bit of a pickle. It will either have to produce its own energy, or it will have to rely on outsiders for its survival.

If you had any sense, you would be making the same exact decision in their position. Another analogy that fits is this one: you have a pantry full of food, and the grocery store wants to prevent you from building a garden - they promise to supply you with all the food you need, as long as you don't provide for yourself. Most sensible people desire self-sufficiency, and they do so rightly. There are few things more satisfying than standing on your own two feet, so to speak.

This is all my opinion, obviously, so take it with a grain of salt.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:18 PM
link   


The Iranian people suffer for the sins of their leaders just like the rest of us. I think dropping nukes on Iran would be a great tragedy - punishing a whole bunch of innocent Persians for the politically-expedient rhetoric of a select, powerful few.


If nukes were dropped on Iran, it would be on military targets. I think that's not such a bad idea. No, you don't go drop it on the innocent people. That's wrong. But you drop the nukes on military targets. You completely de-militarize that country and they'll surrender if their smart. If their not smart enough to surrender, they have nothing to fight with.



The oil isn't going to last forever. When it runs out, or becomes unprofitable to extract, Iran will be in a bit of a pickle. It will either have to produce its own energy, or it will have to rely on outsiders for its survival.


This is why we should switch to ethanol. If we're not going to cripple them militarily, why not cripple their economy? If we go to ethanol, that destroys them. Their entire economy goes off their oil sales. If we go, then China will follow. And Russia, Japan, everyone will switch to ethanol and the middle east and whatever little economy they have will collapse.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Well, if israel goes it alone that will be a very very interesting war. How in hells name are they going to have a land war? unless its via syria first? OR are the Iranians going to march across the top of Iraq via the united states armed forces??

It doesn't bode well then if you think about it, because it will be a war of long range missile attacks.

Read a book called future war 2006. In it, a war erupts between Iran and israel because of weapons of mass destruction. the war rages til 2008, when the first female american president nukes israel to stop the conflict. Scary huh??

I support israel though, as iran is the threat, and Israel will do the world a favour if it wipes tehran and its facist theocracy off the map forever.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:19 PM
link   
I can't see how Israel could go it alone without our help. Maybe an air campaign would be sufficient enough to slow down Iran's nuclear ambitions. But what of the repercussions? Iran has land, sea, and air military capabilities as well as Russia and China in their corner. And we can't forget the rest of their Muslim allies.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightbreid
I can't see how Israel could go it alone without our help. Maybe an air campaign would be sufficient enough to slow down Iran's nuclear ambitions. But what of the repercussions? Iran has land, sea, and air military capabilities as well as Russia and China in their corner. And we can't forget the rest of their Muslim allies.


Israel has us and europe in their corner. Russia and China don't want a fight with us. Well, they DO but they can't afford to take that risk. Yes they could do damage to us too but we could take them out as well. Economically, they cant afford to risk it.

As for the middle eastern allies...who? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? OoOoO SCARY! They'd go down quicker than Iran would. Iran is the most powerful middle eastern country and they stand no chance against us and israel.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Iran's goal with it's nuclear program is largely regional prestige and gaining popular support.

They see themselves as a natural great power in the region, they see nuclear technology as the key to underlining this fact. It's also politically very popular in Iran, even among segments of the population that have no use for the theocracy. Never underestimate the power of national pride as a motivator, or as a political tool.

As for the much-promoted "threat to Israel", let's face it: even if they build the bomb, they still have no way of neutralizing Israel's ability to retaliate. Israel has Jehrico missiles in silos that would require a direct hit to take out, they just bought two more subs that can carry nuclear cruise missiles.

The best thing Iran can hope for is to acheive some kind of MAD deterrence situation.

As for Israel taking on Iran by itself, good luck


Given their recent poor performance against Iran's protoges Hezbollah, I think taking on Iran proper is biting off more than they can chew. It's a threat floated specifically for the purpose of persuading the US to do it for them.

While I think Bush himself would like nothing better than to get the ball rolling before 2008, his administration as an entity is divided, with Condi insisting on a diplomatic track, and Rummy and Cheney and the rest of the "neocon" crowd chomping at the bit for war ASAP. Given how well Iraq turned out, I think Bush is hesitating: and good for him. A war with Iran will make the disaster in Iraq look positively quaint.

BTW to the previous poster: if you think Saudi Arabia or Egypt are "allies" of Iran (SA especially), you need to do a little more homework...

[edit on 8/24/06 by xmotex]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
Iran's goal with it's nuclear program is largely regional prestige and gaining popular support.

They see themselves as a natural great power in the region, they see nuclear technology as the key to underlining this fact. It's also politically very popular in Iran, even among segments of the population that have no use for the theocracy. Never underestimate the power of national pride as a motivator, or as a political tool.

As for the much-promoted "threat to Israel", let's face it: even if they build the bomb, they still have no way of neutralizing Israel's ability to retaliate. Israel has Jehrico missiles in silos that would require a direct hit to take out, they just bought two more subs that can carry nuclear cruise missiles.

The best thing Iran can hope for is to acheive some kind of MAD deterrence situation.

As for Israel taking on Iran by itself, good luck


Given their recent poor performance against Iran's protoges Hezbollah, I think taking on Iran proper is biting off more than they can chew. It's a threat floated specifically for the purpose of persuading the US to do it for them.

While I think Bush himself would like nothing better than to get the ball rolling before 2008, his administration as an entity is divided, with Condi insisting on a diplomatic track, and Rummy and Cheney and the rest of the "neocon" crowd chomping at the bit for war ASAP. Given how well Iraq turned out, I think Bush is hesitating: and good for him. A war with Iran will make the disaster in Iraq look positively quaint.

BTW to the previous poster: if you think Saudi Arabia or Egypt are "allies" of Iran (SA especially), you need to do a little more homework...

[edit on 8/24/06 by xmotex]


Iraq failed because of our disaster idea to occupy. We took out their military fairly quick. If we mount an air assault on Iran and DONT occupy and turn it into a ground war, Iran doesn't stand a chance. I hope you don't think they could take us out if we only attacked from the air..

I know their not direct allies. But ya know, you can hate your brother but when somebody else picks on your brother, you stand up for him. Their united in their religion. Their united in defending the middle east from the United States "New Middle East" plan. Egypt not long ago warned against an attack on Iran. They would stand up for Iran. Would it be through military action? I don't know. But if they don't..that only furthers Iran's isolation and gives them more of a chance of being wiped out completely.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   


The best thing Iran can hope for is to acheive some kind of MAD deterrence situation.


M.A.D.... This would seemingly be a good idea if Iran were a rational country. See link:
MAD won't work on Iran



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:56 PM
link   
In the event Israel attacks Iran, most of the countries in the Arab League will fight against Israel. Israel will be forced to fight a war on ALL fronts and they will be squeezed in. Iran will target American forces in Iraq and unlease a massive force of terrorists. The U.S. will be forced to defend themselves which means joining the war against Iran. A massive U.S. led air campaign will follow destroying Iran's facilities. Iran will move its troops to the border and possibly move into Iraq to fight only the Americans. The fighting will be long and hard. Casualtied in the thousands. Iran will use oil as a weapon. China and Russia will grow nervous of the war. NO nuclear weapons will be used.

Now that being said, the chances of Israel going it alone is very slim and suicidal not to mention it will shroud the Middle East in hell.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join