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.

 

When, NOT If Israel Will Bomb Iran?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2009 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Well, I’ve listened to both Pres. Obama and PM Netanyahu speak after their conference ended today. I’ve heard nothing new today since this “stuff” began in Jimmy Carter’s term. 1978. Except now PM Netanyahu is attempting to add the counter-productive ranting of Iran’s Pres. Ahmadi-Nejad to the heretofore already insoluble mix.

PM Netanyahu has made an obvious (to me) effort to DERAIL the real talks over illegal Israeli settlements, walls, illegal embargoes and other Israeli actions that it - ISRAEL - alone controls, with the Arabs who alone are immediately effected. There is nothing named ‘Iran’ in the Arab-Israeli dispute. IF Netanyahu can bring the Iran wild card into the negotiations then Netanyahu will have the best of both worlds. The US will be CARRYING ISRAEL’S WATER against Iran and Israel’s ethnic cleansing of old Palestine can go forward unabated.

THIS IS NOT A GOOD OMEN.

Bravo Obama! He did not take the bait.

Obama replied IF we can settle the Arab Israeli problem, IRAN will (likely) take care of itself. Then came Netanyahu’s fall back position: he says he is “ready to resume negations” with the Arabs. But Sir! After negations have gone on 30 years, what issues remain that have NOT already been addressed?

We are still at the very same IMPASSE we were at in 1999. For its own reasons - US public opinion - Israel wants to look as if it is the good guy, a sincere negotiator while every day moving ahead in its policy of ethnic cleansing all of the Old Palestine Mandate. Truth is, Israel is engaged in a LOW intensity WAR with the Arab inhabitants of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. And the Arabs are losing.

DANGEROUS SCENARIO. Suppose these talks fail. Suppose Iran is not scared of the US. Suppose Iran goes forward with its nuclear weapons program. I am under the impression it is at the point when they are using the centrifuge method to enrich uranium. From WW2 statements it takes about 20 kg of U235 to make a bomb. Half that much plutonium will work but Iran can’t make plutonium. Yet. Because uranium is a very heavy element - akin to gold - I figure the 20 kg is about the size of a tennis ball. I suppose they would use the implosion method to detonate it. That is, use a filler to mix with the U235 into a softball size component. Then implode it, crushing it into the tennis ball size whereupon reaching CM - the critical mass - the chain reacion takes place and in a few microseconds, you have a working atom bomb!

If Israel decides to attack the two major sites in Iran where research and enriching are believed to be taking place. Wikipedia says the F14E - Strike Eagle - operated by the IDF has a one way ferry range of 2,400 miles. The F16s operated by the IDF are said to have a 2,620 miles one way ferry capability. Mapcrow website says it is 1,279 miles from Tel Aviv to Tehran. www.mapcrow.info...

That means either jet plane type is theoretically capable of making a round trip carrying one or 2 of Israel’s rumored 50-300 nuclear weapons. Which by the way is in violation of the N-PT with US concurrence. Nuclear weapons non-proliferation treaty. Which North Korea and Pakistan and India are also. Well, Bush43 gave India his stamp of approval. Which piqued Pakistan.

Iran rightly asks us, WHY and on WHAT legal or moral authority to you oppose us obtaining nuclear weapons?

Q. What would happen
in the 24 hours to 7 days following such a strike by Israel on Iran following the Bush/Cheney/Rice doctrine of waging preemptive war? (Especially if it involves those elusive WMDs).

[edit on 5/18/2009 by donwhite]




posted on May, 18 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
DANGEROUS SCENARIO. Suppose these talks fail. Suppose Iran is not scared of the US. Suppose Iran goes forward with its nuclear weapons program.


Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program, just like Iraq didn't. They've clearly stated that it's against their religion, and they claim to be an "Islamic State".

But that doesn't matter, as Iran with a nuclear weapon is a safer bet than Israel with a nuclear weapon.


Originally posted by donwhite
Iran rightly asks us, WHY and on WHAT legal or moral authority to you oppose us obtaining nuclear weapons?

Q. What would happen
in the 24 hours to 7 days following such a strike by Israel on Iran following the Bush/Cheney/Rice doctrine of waging preemptive war? (Especially if it involves those elusive WMDs).
[edit on 5/18/2009 by donwhite]


If they strike Iran for just building a nuclear power plant, we're talking total explosion of anger in the middle east. We're talking a "real" war for America, not some fake stuff. The Real Deal.

Iran is no joke. We're talking zillions of hardcore fight to the death folks with decent weaponry. When America decides to invade Iran, it will be their grave. We're talking real war, not stuff where you just roll right in. Iraq found that out the hard way.



posted on May, 18 2009 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by MegaCurious
If they strike Iran for just building a nuclear power plant, we're talking total explosion of anger in the middle east. We're talking a "real" war for America, not some fake stuff. The Real Deal.


Yeah, because fighting in Iraq and A-stan isn't a "real war". They are only the worst kind; dealing with insurgents.


Originally posted by MegaCurious
Iran is no joke. We're talking zillions of hardcore fight to the death folks with decent weaponry. When America decides to invade Iran, it will be their grave. We're talking real war, not stuff where you just roll right in. Iraq found that out the hard way.


Saddam said that Iraq would be our grave. We invaded twice.

I have a hunch that if the US decided to invade Iran, we'd already have the idea that it wouldn't be like Iraq and plan accordingly. But thanks, I'm sure that JCS is reviewing your input at this time.



posted on May, 18 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Obama will not wage war on Iran. There is no point. Israel will lose all credibility if they attack Iran over non existent Iranian nuclear weapons. They are already feeling the heat over their attacks against civilians in Gaza. The two state solution is the way to go and Israel is grasping at straws to distract from that end.



posted on May, 18 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   
Fortunately, the entire civilized world understands that Israel counterattacked Gaza, especially after Israel warned Hamas to stop launching against Israel for weeks on end.

The entire civilized world knows that a nuclear Iran cannot be tolerated, and have stated most clearly that this will not be permitted.

Even the Arab states are fearful of a nuclear Iran.

The threats by President Ahmahjackoff against Israel were well understood, translations be damned.

Iran is the most impotent of nations, therefore the only way to get on the world stage is to hold the Persian Gulf hostage.

The danger in that is that the entire Western world will not permit them to do so.

Oh, they can strike some ships, they can create a lot of havoc in in the short term, but they'll pay one hell of a heavy price.

No, everyone is quietly cheering Israel on, hoping they won't have to do the task themselves.

Iran is about as popular as a dose of the clap.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by dooper
 




. . the entire civilized world understands that Israel counterattacked Gaza, especially after Israel warned Hamas to stop launching against Israel for weeks on end.



1. Proportionality. Gaza has been under a severe blockade since the 2006 election. The 1.3 million Arab inhabitants of Gaza were and are unarmed. The invasion by the well trained and heavily equipped IDF pitted an army against angry civilians. The exercise failed in every measure to make Israel more secure.

2. Provocation. The Arabs were shooting what I call “bottle rockets” into nearby Israel. Almost none of the 100s of rocket caused fatalities. I have bought more powerful rockets from roadside fireworks stands in the good old days. That was not sufficient provocation to justify the response of the IDF.




The civilized world knows that a nuclear Iran cannot be tolerated, and have stated most clearly that this will not be permitted. Even the Arab states are fearful of a nuclear Iran. The threats by President Ahmadi-Nejad against Israel were well understood, translations be damned.



Translations are crucial. From Farsi (Persan) to American English has got to be difficult and I'd even say problematic. I notice that Americans frequently cannot understand other Americans. And besides that, bravado out of context is not to be taken seriously. Pres. Ahmadi-Nejad knows that for a dimes worth of rhetoric, he can cause America a $1's worth of acid reflux

Iranians of every stripe hold America’s gratuitous intrusion into their domestic affairs a wrong that needs to be redressed. We callously sentenced Iranians to the harsh despotic rule of the Shah kept in office by his secret police, the dreaded SAVAK, notorious for murder and torture of Iranian dissidents. We may pretend it did not happen, and many Americans are not aware of it, but every person in Iran is.

The UN’s Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty - NPT - has no moral force remaining. After the US permitted its junior partner - Isreal - to brazenly defy the treaty - Israel got its plutonium from France but some sources say France got it first from the US - America surrendered its leadership role. We may have lost the world's last and best chance to ger rid of nuclear weapons around the world. (For which there will be a penalty!)

Many people say Israel now has between 50 and 300 nuclear weapons. It seems likely Israel launched its nuclear weapons program just after the Six Day War. 1967. The Jewish people won the 1948-49 War of Independence as they call it. Then Israel joined with France and Great Britain to block Nasser’s seizure of the Suez Canal. 1956.

Different motives have been ascribed to Eisenhower’s decision to ORDER the 3 countries OUT of Egypt. I like the one in which it is said Ike wanted France and Britain to KNOW the US was in charge of the Middle Eat. Because both France and Britain were dependent on the US, Ike wanted them to realize they were passe. Israel owed France because it was France that supplied them with weapons in the 1947-1967 period. The US took over the job of weapons supplier after 1973. It is said Israel threatened Pres. Sadat with the destruction of the Anwar Dam shoiuld Israel's survival be threatened. That would have killed perhaps 80 million Egyptians.

I predict we will do no more to Iran that we have done to North Korea. There is nothing more we can do. Sanctions don’t work because no one really respects them. Sanctions are for American domestic consumption. We are not going to pre emotively attack Iran. And unless Isreal wants to go it alone in this world, they should not attack Iran either.

If we resolved to remove Israel’s stock pile of atom bombs, and take North Korea’s and Pakistan’s and India’s, then we could look with some authority to Iran NOT to make its bombs. But that effort would require the Big 5 to give up their bombs too. China. France. The UK. The US. and RF. Until then, this is all hot air.


[edit on 5/21/2009 by donwhite]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 06:10 AM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 


In the event Israel launched air strikes on Iran's scatted Nuclear program Iran would very step up its proxy war with Israel via increased Hezbollah and Palestine terrorist activity . Iran knows from past experiences that US support will also prevent Israel from being defeated by convental military means . The advent of the Missile Defense System somewhat throws a spanner into the works of Iran launching a missile armed with a nuke at Israel or Europe . So following Iran's MO it is more likely that the Iranian regime would supply Nuclear to terrorist organizations .

I agree that US meddling has done enough harm in Iran already . Assuming Irans Nuclear program is to be taken out Israel should do the job . Its there own backyard and they sure do receive enough defense aid from the US .



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Terapin
Obama will not wage war on Iran. There is no point. Israel will lose all credibility if they attack Iran over non existent Iranian nuclear weapons. They are already feeling the heat over their attacks against civilians in Gaza. The two state solution is the way to go and Israel is grasping at straws to distract from that end.


Completely wrong............Israel will take out Irans Nuke program which will trigger a russian invasion of Israel. Obama will sit on his hands, and Israel will be defended by God himself and destroy the russian army.

God Bless Israel...........



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 




In the event Israel launched air strikes on Iran's scatted Nuclear program Iran would very step up its proxy war with Israel via increased Hezbollah and Palestine terrorist activity. So following Iran's MO it is more likely that the Iranian regime would supply Nuclear to terrorist organizations.



I think it is foolish beyond belief that we can even discuss seriously that Israel would launch a nuclear attack on anyone, including Iran. Don’t you remember that childhood ditty “Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me?” Consider the difficulty inherent in translations - Farsi to Hebrew to English. How many trustworthy Americans are fluent in Farsi, in Hebrew or for that matter, in English? Going further and taking into consideration the context of the offending speeches, it seems to me the US and Israel are running a serious and potentially highly dangerous game of DIS-INFORMATION against Iran and Iran's Pres. Ahmadi-Nejad, with NO good motives visible and NO happy outcome foreseeable.

I have no idea what plutonium costs. It is my understanding that plutonium is “made” from U238 left over from making uranium bombs. I believe this U238 (92) is bombarded with protons and it trans-mutes into Neptunium (93). The neptunium then decays into plutonium (94). Although the plutonium to Israel was done so long ago unless the people who did it tell all, I doubt we could find out exactly WHERE the Israeli weapon grade material really came from.

First off, we KNOW the French do not give away anything. I doubt the Israeli had enough money to buy it, so that leaves either the plutonium or the money to have come from the US. We let the nuclear cat out of the bag. And now nuclear proliferation is getting worse not better. Because of the intricate political entanglement of US ties to Israel, we cannot go to the UN to re-invigorate the NPT regimen. It looks as if it will be an “every man for himself” world. Thank you America, Thank you Israel.




The advent of the Missile Defense System somewhat throws a spanner into the works of Iran launching a missile armed with a nuke at Israel or Europe.



Haven’t I explained often that the MDS is a left over Reagan era defense industrial complex extravaganza (boondoggle) of multi-billion dollar proportions which is HARD to kill. It does not work, it cannot work and it is ridiculous. But under our system of governance by lobbyists it is very difficult to do the right thing. Warning: Do not make any plans that depend on a MDS!



I agree that US meddling has done enough harm in Iran already. Assuming Iran’s nuclear program is to be taken out Israel should do the job. Its there own backyard and they sure do receive enough defense aid from the US.



it is frightening to hear the phrase “Iran’s nuclear program is to be taken out” used in casual conversation. It means the Bush/Cheney/Rice doctrine of ‘preemptive strike’ is still alive and well. All this (war) talk is really well a coordinated propaganda campaign following on Herr Dr. Goebbels acute observation, “A big lie told often enough becomes the truth.” Sieg Heil!

[edit on 5/22/2009 by donwhite]



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 


WTF ?
How did you take the idea of a Nuclear rather then a convental air strike from my post ?
Now I do have some concerns about Missile Defense System but surely if you oppose any kind of military strike on Iran's Nuclear Program wouldn't it pay to have some insurance ?
The reality of the situation is that if Israel feels they need they will lanuch some kind of military or covert action against the Iranian Nuclear program .



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 03:42 AM
link   
it would make sense for them to bomb iran now and try to bring in regime change. i think the election is soon in Iran.

maybe if they bomb iran the people will try a new leader. think there is 4 or 5 candidates, including the current leader. ahmandinijad. (cant spell it)




posted on May, 23 2009 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by grantbeed
it would make sense for them to bomb iran now and try to bring in regime change. i think the election is soon in Iran.

maybe if they bomb iran the people will try a new leader. think there is 4 or 5 candidates, including the current leader. ahmandinijad. (cant spell it)



Yes regime change, thats what Iran needs, not like that is a new idea
1953 Iranian coup d'état
operation Ajax



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 04:48 AM
link   
What was happening in Iran recently where the Grand Poobah was talking junk about President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Was there some kind of breakdown between the puppet and the puppet masters?



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by TurkeyBurgers
 




What was happening in Iran recently where the Grand Poobah was talking junk about President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Was there some kind of breakdown between the puppet and the puppet masters?



I think over here we have a poor understanding of the Islamic Republic of Iran. My understanding is admittedly superficial. In a parliamentary state, the prime minister is the head of government, and the president or monarch is the head of state. We have a merged office in our president which keeps him busy doing things that have little to nothing to do with governing.

Here’s my take. The Supreme Leader in Iran is a senior ayatollah chosen by a Council of Ayatollahs. You get to be an ayatollah by proving yourself worthy of respect and being fully conversant with the Koran and Islam. The Council passes on every law and every policy of the government to assure it does not conflict with Islam as they see Islam. The Supreme Leader makes the public announcement speaking for the Council.

I think below that Council there is the Iranian Parliament much like other secular parliamentary countries. That is, there is a president, today’s Ahmadi-Nejad, and also a prime minister who runs the day to day business of government.

Q. When does an issue cross the line of being strictly in the province of the secular government and become an item for the Council to deal with?

A. I don’t know but I assume it is up to the Council. That if true, would give the council a veto on the secular government. I suspect the closest equivalent we have over here is the Mormon Church and the state of Utah. (Which Mike the “Huck” used to quash Mitt Romney’s run for the roses).

[edit on 5/23/2009 by donwhite]



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 




How did you take the idea of a Nuclear rather then a conventual air strike from my post?



I have read the Iranians have two places where enriching uranium is taking place. Both are deep underground. Those very heavy (Fuhrer) bunker busters we have weigh in at 8,000-12,000 lbs and as far as I know are carried into war only by our ancient B52s. Fitted with hardened nose cones and impact initiated time delay, they are said to penetrate 50-100 feet before exploding. The F15 and F16 the IDF would employ will do well to carry a single 500 lb weapon. Assuming they plan on a round trip and not a one-way suicide bombing. This is why I assume any one planning to bomb Iran’s nuclear facility would use a nuclear weapon.




Now I do have some concerns about Missile Defense System but surely if you oppose any kind of military strike on Iran's Nuclear Program wouldn't it pay to have some insurance?



Reflect on 1991. Saddam jury-rigged some old USSR Scud single stage 400 km “missiles” to give them 750 km range and like the Germans V2, “aim in their direction and fire!” It was probably our own Patriot anti-missile that killed 22 US personnel in Saudi Arabia although we claimed not so. We speedily sent a full battalion of Patriots to Israel to keep the Israeli public from forcing the Israeli government ordering the IDF into action against Iraq.

Had the IDF attacked Iraq, the entire Arab component of the great coalition would have withdrawn! And our permission to use Saudi Arabia as a staging ground would have been revoked. Fortunately the Patriots pacified the public although they were 99.44% worthless as anti-missiles. What you don’t know won’t hurt you!

The only remotely feasible anti-missile defense system involves using nuclear warheads to meet the incoming missiles. And it is very hard to image what would happen to the ionosphere if we explode 500 or 1,000 nuclear bombs up there.




The reality of the situation is that if Israel feels the need they will launch some kind of military or covert action against the Iranian Nuclear program.



Based on Israeli actions in the recent past, I agree. They are a rogue state. The war hawks have gained control of Israel and for a hawk to show ‘weakness’ is next to death. Or electoral defeat.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by heliosprime
 


What are you even talking about? Russia has no capability to invade Israel. Not to mention the little issue of no common border. Amphibious? Against the Sixth Fleet? Good luck with that...

Whether or not Iran has a weapons program, Israel views them as a threat. When Israel views someone as a threat, you've got a problem. The Israeli's take the "never again" very seriously.

This saber rattling has been going both ways...

The Obama administration is going to come to the same conclusion that all the previous administrations since the founding of Israel have come to. The Israeli's are going to do what they feel is in their best interests, not ours, not Europes, no one but Israel. All we can really hope to accomplish, is to mitigate the damage.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 




Whether or not Iran has a weapons program, Israel views them as a threat. When Israel views someone as a threat, you've got a problem. The Israeli's take the "never again" very seriously. This saber rattling has been going both ways...

The Obama administration [will] come to the same conclusion that all the previous administrations since the founding of Israel have come to. The Israeli's are going to do what they feel is in their best interests, not ours, not Europe’s, no one but Israel. All we can really hope to accomplish is to mitigate the damage.



Oer the last 4 months I have read 3 books that gave me a new vision on what you have said so succinctly above, “Never Again!” See abbreviated reviews below. Every country in which the Jews have lived - maybe excluding the era under the Moors on the Iberian peninsula from 711 AD t0 1492 AD - has betrayed the Jews. Including America. See Note 1.

Let’s admit there is just cause for this seemingly inflexible position. We - the West and America - compounded this problem by giving the Jews surviving from World War 2, a place where no one - no one of us - thought was worth the argument over. The old League of Nations Palestine Mandate entrusted to Great Britain. Because we are white and Arabs are dark we thought not to ask them about it. The UN managed to obtain an Armistice in 1949, and from that time until this time we have let the issue fester. Perhaps once, under Yitzhak Rabin, in 1995, there could have been a “Land for Peace” deal. But even Rabin’s Labor Party never had a majority in the Knesset.

Today the Labor Party has shrunk to the #4 party in Israeli politics with 13 seats. Largely made up of old socialists. Kadima, said to be a center party, 28 seats. Likud, the right wing party of Netanyahu, 27 seats. A far right wing religious party Shas polled 11 seats. Avigdor Liberman a 51 year old Russian born Jew leads the right wing party Yisrael Beiteinu that polled 15 seats. He has called for expelling Arab citizens from Israel. Ethnic cleansing.

I see two things that have been out there since 1967 but which we did not want to see. Israel is engaged in ethnic cleansing of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. They care not a whit about Gaza. Israel stalls whenever the US pushes them to Camp David or to Oslo, but then it’s business as usual.

The United States ought to pay all the Arabs $1 million per family to compensate them in lieu of their Right of Return and resettle them in the US. End of Middle East in turmoil. End of OPEC. We would save enough money in 6 months on the price of oil to make it all back. Plus Palestinians are a survivor people who would add to our mix.


Note 1. The MS St. Louis
sailed from Hamburg in May 1939, carrying one non-Jewish and 936 (mainly German) Jewish refugees seeking asylum from Nazi persecution. On June 4, 1939, the St. Louis was also refused permission to land her passengers in Florida under orders from President Roosevelt. The St. Louis then tried to enter Canada but was denied permission to land there as well. On its return to Europe, 288 passengers were accepted by the UK. By using the survival rates for Jews in the various countries, Thomas and Morgan-Witts estimated three hundred sixty-five of the 620 passengers who returned to continental Europe survived the war. The St. Louis’ Captain Gustav Schroeder himself was later awarded the Order of Merit by the Federal Republic of Germany and was named as one of the Righteous Among the Nations at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in Israel in recognition of his heroism in attempting to rescue his passengers. en.wikipedia.org...

BEST BOOK.
A History of the Jews in the Modern World published by Vintage Books written by Howard M. Sachar. 2005. Mr. Sachar has a good story to tell. The history of Jews in modern times - from the 18th century to the present - is an epic saga and the author attempts to hit all the high points. He deals with the six continents on which Jews have lived. (Only Antarctica does not come into play). He concludes with an assessment of Jewish prospects in the 21st century.

The result is a rich and balanced account of the emergence of Jews as major players in the worlds of commerce, culture and politics - and also as victims of vicious and at times murderous anti-Semitism. Sachar, an emeritus professor at George Washington University, is the author of 15 previous books. In this he focuses on political history to trace the fortunes of Jews as the countries in which they lived.

There is no other book that attempts as this one does to recount the history of Jews in modern times in all its geographical variations. This is a wide-ranging comparative study that provides a comprehensive - and readable - overview of modern Jewish history. Reviewed by Paula E. Hyman Copyright 2005, The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved.

SECOND CHOICE. The First World War by Penguin, written by Hew Strachan. 2003. Although the title does not reveal, this books includes the fate of many Jewish communities in the Russian Empire, in Poland, and in other Central European and Eastern European countries as well as in France and Greta Brittan during the War and immediately thereafter. DW

CONFIRMATION. 15 Stars: Eisenhower, MacArthur, Marshall: by NAL Trade Books Written by Stanley Weintraub, 2007. Review from Booklist. Weintraub, who has written many World War II histories, here inspects the interrelationship of the U.S. Army's three highest-ranking generals of the war: Douglas MacArthur, George Marshall, and Dwight Eisenhower.

Ike's story bounces between those of the other two for he served directly under them before Marshall selected him in mid-1942 to command American forces in Europe. MacArthur, by then already a military celebrity, was commander in the Southwest Pacific; Marshall managed the two from the newly built Pentagon. After the war, as the three assumed posts in the developing cold war, each took on an aura of presidential possibility. Culminating with the Korean War's ramifications for the trio, Weintraub's densely detailed chronicle can prime readers for future reading, whether individual biographies or battle histories. By Gilbert Taylor. END

This book deals particularly with the Holocaust and the Warsaw Uprising and the response by the US, UK and USSR. DW



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by heliosprime
 


What are you even talking about? Russia has no capability to invade Israel. Not to mention the little issue of no common border. Amphibious? Against the Sixth Fleet? Good luck with that...



Russia army is already building such infrastructure in the area.


Russia's bridge-building battalion on Monday will get down to planned restoration work in Lebanon. Sappers will be the first to arrive at the site of work to check the areas of stationing of the personnel and equipment for dud projectiles and fragmentation bombs. After that military engineers will specify field projects at the site. They will bring to the site metallic structures for building bridges later.



Deputy Chief of Logistic Services of the Russian Armed Forces Lieutenant-General Ivan Tsygankov who is in command of the Russian military mission told Itar-Tass that the battalion will install two-row bridges in Damour (18 kilometers south of Beirut) and Abou Zibli (in the border area in the country’s south) and they will build an additional support at one of the facilities.


www.rebuildlebanon.gov.lb...

Russia has a "pack" with Iran and has supplied significant arms such as antiaircraft missles, etc. When Israel take out Irans nuke sites, russia will be outraged and when Obama does not "stop" russia from overreacting, the build-up in Lebanon will begin.

In biblical terms this will be the invasion of "gog and magog".....



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 


Don you may find this article to be of interest . A thirty thousand pound bomb Barnes Wallis would be proud . The problem for Israel right now is of course getting the Massive Ordnance Penetrator over the target areas. Mind you if Israel has its own versions of Wallis at work then watch out something will happen at some point .

Are you saying that the Missile Defense System would have the same thirty percent hit ration as the Patriot anti-missile battery's did during the first Gulf War ?

The Palestine situation aside of course hawks are more likely to get elected in Israel , look at how man times that country has been invaded in its short history .



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 




A thirty thousand pound bomb Barnes Wallis would be proud. The problem for Israel is of course getting the Massive Ordnance Penetrator over the target areas. Mind you if Israel has its own versions of Wallis at work then watch out something will happen at some point.



There certainly would be a whole lot less adverse reaction to the dropping of an ordinary high explosive bomb (even if huge), than there would be to even a smallish nuclear bomb. Although the B52 can carry about 40 tons of ordinance, the bomb bay is long but not wide. I recall working on a B36 when an hydrogen bomb was onboard. 1954 at Loring AFB, Maine. The B36 had a forward and an aft bomb bay and the two together could carry 84,000 pounds of bombs. The H-bomb took up most of the front bomb bay and had only a few inches of side clearance. 43,000 lbs they said.




Are you saying that the Missile Defense System would have the same thirty percent hit ratio as the Patriot anti-missile battery's did during the first Gulf War? The Palestine situation aside of course hawks are more likely to get elected in Israel, look at how man times that country has been invaded in its short history.



Well no, not exactly. I do not accept the Patriot system has a 30% hit ratio to launches. The counting of hits is done by the guys who want to use them and by the guys who want to sell them. This is the problem with all the ANTI missile defense tests. And if you read the reports closely, you will detect some ambiguities or carefully phrased qualifiers in the reports.

You’ll never see this: “We test fired a shipboard missile in the mid-Pacific, and as the incoming warhead simulator approached the target at 25,000 mph, we launched our Never Fail 2 anti-missile missile at 25,000 mph and the two missiles hit HEAD-ON!” Reports are always equivocal. And etc.

As to Israel and the Palestinians. I am tired of investing energy and interest in the solving of this vexing problem. The 2 state solution has been known by everyone on the planet since 1967 and 1974. Just as the Israelis 'SLAPPED' Sec. State Rice in the face when she visited Israel and ASKED PM Olmert to stop the settlements while she was there they kept on building even as she was talking! Now, President Obama asks PM Netanyahu to stop the settlements and the Israeli keep on building them. What’s the definition of insanity? To keep doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome!

Today on Fareed Zarkari GPS he asked why was Israel making so much of Iran getting a nuclear weapon. Fareed reminded the Israeli have 200 nuclear devices. Iran would have 1. Why would Israel consider that an EXISTENTIAL threat? It’s all Israeli BULLS***!

The Israeli rule: Keep’em talking, keep on building. It’s called ETHNIC CLEANSING.

[edit on 5/24/2009 by donwhite]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join