Can Iran survive an Israeli nuclear attack?

sorry to bring this up, but i just couldnt take it...

some members here believe that Iran can actually defeat Israel. how?

this is the current situation...
1- Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities is inevitable
2- Iran threatens to retaliate

now... doesnt Iran understand the consequences of striking back against Israel? I mean, Israel is sitting on top of 300+ nukes... you cant just retaliate against them! its like, "ur dying to die", its suicide! its great that Iran has the Shihab-3, but its not that effective without a nuke. on the other hand, Israel has the Jericho 2 missiles with a range of 3,500km and can be armed with a nuke. wats better, Shihab-3 or Jericho 2 w/ nuke? kinda obvious...

now back to my question, if Iran retaliates, will they be able to survive a massive wave of nuclear attacks?

DJAghetto

I completely agree. Iran would be absolutely stupid to retaliate against an Israeli strike. But not b/c Israel would nuke them. I firmly believe it will take a rather serious event to trigger a nation to use nuclear weapons. I don't think Iranian retaliation would be serious enough for nuclear bombing. Israel could just conventionally pound the hell out of Iran, forcing them into submission. Plus the US would most likeley be fighting alongside Israel. Iran has no chance. They should disarm immediately.

Oh yeah check out this link:
www.atsnn.com...

If Israel nukes Iran, would Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, Syria and others attack Israel?
How about Russia?
The Soviets once had nukes in place to retaliate against Israel in 1973 if the Israelis decided to use their own nukes.

That could happen again.


[edit on 5-10-2004 by AceOfBase]

I don't believe Israel would use nuclear weapons against, Iran or anyone else, unless they are first attacked with un-conventional weapons.

Iran at one point, and possibly still, had chemical weapons. If they were to use them against Israel, they could conceivable go nuclear.

Look at the way they respond to Palestinian attacks. Small Rocket attack gets you 200 tanks. They hit back with a bigger stick. But I seriously doubt they would go nuclear just because of a missile strike.

Oh, and the US probably won't get involved. Of course they will say in the UN, "bad Israel", but vote against any resolution.

Originally posted by AceOfBase
How about Russia?
The Soviets once had nukes in place to retaliate against Israel in 1973 if the Israelis decided to use their own nukes.

That could happen again.


[edit on 5-10-2004 by AceOfBase]

in case ur wondering, Israel did threaten the USSR and the Soviets DID backed off... btw, this is not the only threat Israel made to the USSR...

I think everyone underestimates Iran. At this point in time all nations in the Middle East are rather edgy. Some of them, regardless of their current political or geographic position are still allies of Iran. I dont think Hezbollah would sit by idly and watch their state sponsor get destroyed.

Is Hezbollah sponsored by any states? Yes, Iran and Syria. The group receives �substantial amounts of financial, training, weapons, explosives, political, diplomatic, and organizational aid from Iran and Syria,� the State Department reports. Hezbollah was founded as a catspaw for Iran, Middle East experts say. While Iran gave Hezbollah more funding and support in the 1980s than in the 1990s, it still often gives Hezbollah its orders and its ideological inspiration. And because Lebanon has been under Syrian control since 1990, Hezbollah could not operate in Lebanon without Syria's approval, Middle East experts say.

If it indeed takes orders from Iran, then an attack on Iran by Isreal will bring about terror attacks from the north and possible attempt of ground force attacks into Israel. Now an official declaration of war and military action on Iran may not trigger a pre-emptive strike by Syria, but a large scale military assault on Lebanon may indeed prompt a counter attack. So then we have ground forces fighting it off on the border of Israel-Lebanon/Syria. Large scale ground attacks against Iran would be counter-productive due to the extrmeley rough and mountain terrain on the Iran-Iraq border. Of course U.S. forces may or may not amass forces on the Afghani border, but I doubt NATO would approve, and most the U.S. offensive ground forces are in Iraq anyways. You may have Israel doing bombing runs on Iran, but Iran would definetly be lobbing missles at Isreal.

And like phreak_of_nature stated, Israel would not respond to a conventional attack with WMD. Even the U.S. would frown upon that. The only peope I am afraid with the ukes right now is North Korea. The stability of the pacific region is alot more important to me as of this moment than the Middle East. Saudi Arabia will always remain neutral on these issues because they livelihood depends on the oil and it will always be flowing regardless of everyones actions because the whole world needs it and it is their only major source of income.

Regardless, all the governments of the Middle East and America are going over every possible military scenario and attack routes daily I am sure as to make sure of very minimal involvement. I know that Israel will not risk attacking Iran so its useless to continue debating it. Doing so would throw the whole region in chaos. Israel is a small nation and although very powerful would suffer heavy damage from the combinesd efforts of Lebanon/Syria and Iran. That would be their highest priority. Even if they were being bombarded by American forces from Iraq their priority will remain on Isreal and destroying it as much as possible.

Anyways, how much is a trip to Israel cost I would like to go on vacation there soon

They should just borrow our earthquake machine and level Tehran.

That'll fix that.

its like, "ur dying to die", its suicide!

isnt that the point of the new fad called "terrorism"?

Originally posted by DJAghetto
sorry to bring this up, but i just couldnt take it...

some members here believe that Iran can actually defeat Israel. how?

this is the current situation...
1- Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities is inevitable
2- Iran threatens to retaliate

now... doesnt Iran understand the consequences of striking back against Israel? I mean, Israel is sitting on top of 300+ nukes... you cant just retaliate against them! its like, "ur dying to die", its suicide! its great that Iran has the Shihab-3, but its not that effective without a nuke. on the other hand, Israel has the Jericho 2 missiles with a range of 3,500km and can be armed with a nuke. wats better, Shihab-3 or Jericho 2 w/ nuke? kinda obvious...

now back to my question, if Iran retaliates, will they be able to survive a massive wave of nuclear attacks?

The US can get away with pre-emptive attacks. Israel can't.
If Israel attacks Iran will fight back. If Israel uses nuclear weapons
the end result will be Israel will be dissolved as a country, the people
relocated, and its' (and the US influence) on the Middle East ended.
The world has had enough of this religious nonsense.. using nuclear
weapons even in an attempt to survive as a country, is not acceptable.

People the question should be "Can the region survive a nuclear attack" not "Can Iran survive an Israeli nuclear attack"

We all know that Israel is not the only country in the middle east region to have nuclear capabilities, so I will be very afraid as now if Israel even attempt to use its nuclear power to attack Iran, and as US is concern he will just sit back and enjoy the fireworks.

Originally posted by mockan
using nuclear weapons even in an attempt to survive as a country, is not acceptable.

how about 'to survive as a nation'?

in case u didnt know, Israel is the only Jewish state in the world.

there's only 13 million Jews in the world
if the Jews are in exile again, another terrible event will happen again in Jewish History(holocaust, scapegoats, etc.)...

I think we should give the Native Americans their own country and arm them with nukes so they don't get wiped out.

We'll just pick a state at random and kick out all of the people who live there and let them relocate somewhere else.

The Native Americans have even more right to thier own country than the Israelis.

[edit on 5-10-2004 by AceOfBase]

Originally posted by AceOfBase
I think we should give the Native Americans their own country and arm them with nukes so they don't get wiped out.

We'll just pick a state at random and kick out all of the people who live there and let them relocate somewhere else.

The Native Americans have even more right to thier own country than the Israelis.

[edit on 5-10-2004 by AceOfBase]

the Land of Israel was originally belonging to the Jewish nation.
there's a difference...
the native american land was stolen, the Promised Land was taken back...

Originally posted by DJAghetto

the Land of Israel was originally belonging to the Jewish nation.
there's a difference...

Ahem...........the Jewish and Palestinian used to be one nation sharing their ancestry, once were divided into the Jewish Palestinians and the non Jewish by the British, it was a migration of Arabs to the area and the "Palestinian" that Israel is fighting now is of Arabs descend..

Originally posted by AceOfBase
I think we should give the Native Americans their own country and arm them with nukes so they don't get wiped out.

We'll just pick a state at random and kick out all of the people who live there and let them relocate somewhere else.

The Native Americans have even more right to thier own country than the Israelis.

[edit on 5-10-2004 by AceOfBase]

Didn't they try something similar to this in the 1800's? Wasn't it called the Indian Territories, that is until the white man decided to come and take that from them too.
Now it's called Oklahoma.

Originally posted by marg6043
Ahem...........the Jewish and Palestinian used to be one nation sharing their ancestry, once were divided into the Jewish Palestinians and the non Jewish by the British, it was a migration of Arabs to the area and the "Palestinian" that Israel is fighting now is of Arabs descend..

and you need to open a history book!
seriously...
who was there before the arabs? JEWS!!!

CASE CLOSED...

back to the topic...

As I recall Israel slaughtered everything in their path to get the land they "rightfully" own.

Originally posted by DJAghetto
and you need to open a history book!
seriously...
who was there before the arabs? JEWS!!!

CASE CLOSED...

back to the topic...

That land was not unpopulated before the Jews took it over.
There was already a civilization there.

The Jewish Kingdoms were established on the land of others even back then.

They held it for about 400 years.
The Arabs have held it for much longer so I would guesss that they have more right to claim it as theirs.

[edit on 5-10-2004 by AceOfBase]

Jeremiah 29:7
"Seek out the welfare of the city to which I have exiled you and pray for it to the Almighty, for through its welfare will you have welfare."

So the land they "rightfully" took they also were punished to give it up.

Originally posted by alienpyro
As I recall Israel slaughtered everything in their path to get the land they "rightfully" own.

As I recall the Jews used acts of terrorism to drive the Brits out of Palestine so that they could form an independent nation.
Wars change political boundaries, and possesion is 9/10 of the law.

What's done is done. Do you ask all of those who were born there to leave, No. And I do mean all, Arab & Jew a like.

BTW... The topic is Can Iran survive an Israeli nuclear strike. Not who was in the holy land first.