Iran says will fire Shihab-3 missiles if Israel attacks

[UoUo]

Iran says will fire Shihab-3 missiles if Israel attacks

By Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondent and Haaretz Service



Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani on Wednesday said that Iran would not hesitate to use its Shihab-3 ballistic missiles if Israel ventures to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.




Asked whether Iran will use the Shihab-3 long range missile if Israel attacks Iran, the defense minister said that Shihab-3 is "one" of the weapons.

"We will strike Israel with all weapons at our disposal, if the Zionist regime ventures to do so."

Shamkhani was responding to a statement made by Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz on Israel Radio's Persian-language broadcast last week, in which he implied that Israel would destroy Iran's nuclear reactors, as it did with Iraq's in the early 1980s, if it deemed this necessary for Israel's safety.

Senior Iranian army officers and government officials warned Tuesday that Iran will respond with overwhelming military force to any Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities

"The Zionist regime knows that the armed forces of the Islamic republic, and especially its air force, have such high capabilities that if [Israel] carries out a military attack against Iran, it will be digging its own grave," said the commander of the Iranian Air Force, General Seyed Reza Pardis, to the Iranian news agency Mehr. Iranian President Mohammed Khatami, said that Israel would be "swept away" if it dared to attack Iran



And i say : Just try....

[96B]

Was it F-16s the IAF used to strike the Iraqi nuclear plant back in the early eighties?

[Vance]

Uh oh! Iran shoutin' the insults at our Isreali brothers. Not cool. You can talk the talk, but you can't walk the walk...

[UoUo]

Was it F-16s the IAF used to strike the Iraqi nuclear plant back in the early eighties?

Nooo....i think it was the F-16A...or maybe F-16B.

[AirZone]

I say:
1) Arrow missile
2) Jerhico missile
3) F15I

:bash:

[Javehn]

Those bleedy fundamentalists just want to show they are "cool" on pissing compettition , after Israeli officials said that they would damage atomic infrastructures in Iran , if they wan't stop to build it . They never get they hands dirty , they have enough dogs to do the dirty work , like Hisballah .

About the bombing , that was F16 escorted by F15 , 7 june , 1981 . One of the pilots were by the way Israeli austronaute Igal Ramon (may he RIP ).

[WARPIG]

As if the Israeli AF would just run a couple of sorties at a nuclear plant without taking out the rest of the offensive capabilities.
Just another Iranian rhetoric spinner pissing for distance.

[IDFM203]

Shamkhani was responding to a statement made by Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz on Israel Radio's Persian-language broadcast last week, in which he implied that Israel would destroy Iran's nuclear reactors, as it did with Iraq's in the early 1980s, if it deemed this necessary for Israel's safety.




I don’t think a lot of you guys understand fully what happened here.....the Israeli defence Minster actually spoke in Farsi (he was born in Iran) to Iranians..

You see I don’t have a problem with a lot of Iranians, its the Islamic fundamentalists and their nuclear ambitions that have me and Israel worried.

Here is a whole amazing (truly a must read!!) article on the conversations between the Israeli defence minister and callers from Iran

Israel Defense Minister Converses with Radio Listeners in... Iran

DEBKAfile Special Report
This week, Israel’s Iranian-born defense minister Shaul Mofaz made the unique gesture of answering questions from listeners in Iran – in their own language - in a live broadcast over Israel Radio’s Farsi-language service.

The questions came thick and fast.

In answer to one, he promised everything would be done to protect the environment against radioactive fallout should Israeli forces destroy Iran’s nuclear capability.

Shaul Mofaz was only six when his family emigrated from Iran to Israel. His knowledge of Farsi is rudimentary at best. But that didn’t stop the Israeli defense chief from getting his message across to a stream of callers from the Islamic Republic who appealed to him for help on Israel Radio’s Farsi service this week.

One caller from a city in central Iran asked when Israel and the Jews would finally repay their historical debt to Cyrus the Great and rescue the Iranian people from the dread ayatollahs, just as US President George W. Bush had helped the people of Iraq and Afghanistan throw off their oppressors.

(It was in 538 BC that Cyrus, king of Persia, fulfilling the word of God as spoken by the Prophet Jeremiah, issued a proclamation allowing the Jews to return to Zion from their exile in Babylon and rebuild their Temple in Jerusalem.)

Mofaz, admitting he was not in the miracle business, wished the Iranian people success in their struggle for freedom. But then a stream of callers pleaded for Israel to intervene to help overthrow the Islamic regime. The defense minister replied it was up to the Iranian people to determine its fate. But he also mentioned the United States role in the region and said the Americans still had much work to do after prevailing in Afghanistan and Iraq. Iran and Syria were still there as key elements of Bush’s axis of evil.

This reply brought forth a chorus of listeners who wanted to persuade the Israeli minister that the Teheran regime was more of a danger to the region and the world than Saddam Hussein had ever been.

Mofaz gently parried these demands. He also refrained from answering a listener, apparently calling from the Kurdish region of northern Iraq, who wanted a rundown of Israel’s attitude on the Kurdish question and Iraq’s future.

Many of the questions focused on Iran’s nuclear weapons program. One caller wanted to know how Israel would respond to Iran’s efforts to build an atomic bomb or stage a nuclear attack. Mofaz said that, should it became necessary to destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities, Israel would take steps to ensure the safety of Iranian civilians.

Some callers asked for a response to the Iranian defense minister Hossein Dehghan’s statement on Sunday, December 14, that Iran had no choice but to develop increasingly powerful weapons to overcome the technological threats posed by its strongest enemies, the United States and Israel. Mofaz denied any threat. The Jewish state had no offensive intentions towards Iran; nor did it nurture any hostility toward the Iranian people. In the past, Iran and the Jewish states had enjoyed warm and productive relations. But if Israel came under attack, he emphasized, it would defend itself with all the measures it deemed necessary.

A woman caller, a Muslim, then recalled tearfully the disappearance eight years ago of the son of Jewish neighbors who had never been heard of since being caught in flight across the border with Pakistan. In the last decade, 12 Iranian Jews have been caught fleeing by way of Pakistan and never seen again.

Mofaz reiterated Israel’s commitment to protect Jews all over the world. He promised to investigate these cases and see what could be done to help.

At the end of the 50-minute program, Mofaz said he would never have imagined the depth of sympathy for Israel entertained by ordinary Iranians - in sharp contrast to the violence and hate emitting from the rulers of the Islamic Republic. The gap between regime and people was dramatic. A lot of this sympathy is born of the Iranian people’s historic resentment of their Islamic rulers and the Arabs, who invaded their country 1,400 years ago, destroyed Iranian culture and forced the populace to embrace Islam.

Israel Radio’s Farsi service has become a byword among a wide audience in Iran. Just last week, an Iranian legislator who voiced sharp criticism in parliament of the Iranian government was asked sarcastically whether he was not Menashe Amir, director of Israel Radio’s Farsi service, in disguise.

Mofaz’s warm dialogue with ordinary Iranians occurred in the same week as harsh comments from Iran’s supreme leader and strongman, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on the capture of Saddam Hussein last Saturday December 12. The ayatollah voiced the wish that “Bush and Sharon” share the same inglorious fate suffered by the former Iraqi dictator. Cynically parroting the words of President George Bush about Saddam, Khamenei thundered, “The world would be a better place without them.”

Tehran’s hostility is not confined to belligerent language.

DEBKAfile’s military sources reported on December 15 that Russia has sold Iran advanced 300-A air defense missile systems – over Washington’s objections - to defend its controversial nuclear reactor in the southern town of Bushehr. Their deployment was discovered by chance Sunday, when two of the missiles while being installed flew out of control. One hit a minibus, killing two bus passengers and injuring 20; the second caused heavy damage to town buildings – far more extensive than admitted by Tehran. The official Iranian news agency IRNA, reporting on the incident, said a self-targeting weapon – which it did not identify -- failed to trigger its auto-destruct mechanism and slammed into the minibus.

The diplomatic fallout from this discovery will be considerable.

Israel too is watching Iran’s constant weapons upgrades with a wary eye.

On Tuesday, December 16, Israeli Shin Beit director Avi Dichter, in a rare public appearance, named Iran as the world’s No. 1 terror state and Israel’s most dangerous security threat. Tehran, he said, targets both Israel and Jews everywhere. He cited Tehran’s hand behind the 1994 bombing of the Buenos Aires Jewish community in which 85 died and more than 200 were wounded. Dichter accused the Iranians of continually hatching trouble right up to the present. Beyond backing, financing and arming the virulently anti-Israel Lebanese Shiite terror group, the Hizballah, Tehran has marked out Israel’s Arab citizens for exploitation as a potential fifth column. He described Iranian agents are actively recruiting hirelings in the Arab community

http://debka.com/article.php?aid=746

Shalom :D

[Argyll]

I would not use statements like Just try,you just never know you might get what you wish for,any Nation who thinks they are beyond untouchable is living in a dream land,as sadly the USA found out to it's cost on 9'11.

Some Isreali's here seem to think that their Nation is impregnable,and are full of bravado about their technology,sometimes that alone does not work!!
The Germans thought the same in 1939!!
Never under or overestimate you're enemies capabilities ;)

[UoUo]

I would not use statements like Just try,you just never know you might get what you wish for,any Nation who thinks they are beyond untouchable is living in a dream land,as sadly the USA found out to it's cost on 9'11.

Some Isreali's here seem to think that their Nation is impregnable,and are full of bravado about their technology,sometimes that alone does not work!!
The Germans thought the same in 1939!!
Never under or overestimate you're enemies capabilities ;)

LoL man...you got me wrong....the fact is israel does not dout her Enemy's...and israel does evreything to devloped systems that can face The enemy....i said "just try" cuz we just developed the "arrow" that can Face the iranian missile.

Have a nice day.

[IDFM203]

I would not use statements like Just try,you just never know you might get what you wish for,any Nation who thinks they are beyond untouchable is living in a dream land,as sadly the USA found out to it's cost on 9'11.

Some Isreali's here seem to think that their Nation is impregnable,and are full of bravado about their technology,sometimes that alone does not work!!
The Germans thought the same in 1939!!
Never under or overestimate you're enemies capabilities ;) hey don’t confuse UoUo for Israel (sorry UoUo ;) :D ) no one in Israel is saying “just try” as if we want this to actually happen!!!

Believe me we don’t underestimate them, they actually worry us a bit.. Yes we are a strong military and have all sorts of awesome capabilities, but when faced with a nation that has missiles that can hit any city in Israel and now they are in the process of developing nuclear weapons and has a Islamic fundamentalism at the controls of all this. Well that is indeed worrisome even to all the bravado Israelis (which yes I can be one of those at times ;) )

With that said, and faced with that threat, Israel nonetheless does have the capability and the necessary tools to adequately defend itself if the need should arise.!!! (which we are very close to that need :( )

Shalom :D

[WARPIG]

thanks for the insight idfm203!
I jumped the gun on this.
It still sounds like Ali Shamkhani is posturing around. Reminds me of the rhetoric that came from Iraq.

[IDFM203]

thanks for the insight idfm203!
I jumped the gun on this.
It still sounds like Ali Shamkhani is posturing around. Reminds me of the rhetoric that came from Iraq.your welcome :D

They are posturing but they are building these weapons as well and with military parades that have death to Israel themes in them and all their Islamic fundamentalist ideology where they preach the destruction of Israel, well its a bit worrisome.

P.S. I bet you must of liked that third paragraph in the article that I made in bold :D

Shalom :D

[Javehn]

Ali Shamhani is an asshole , forgive me for expression (just like all fundamentalists ) . He have made same talking for several of times to an Israel about the exchange of POW's between Israel and Hisballah , and about Israeli POW fighter pilot Ron Arad's wereabouts . He just want to release steam , and to show they can react for Israeli threats.
However , Israel took this threat seriosly , and allready the army is deploying in the face of the threat .

ולבחור שכותב שטויות , אם אין לך משהו חכם לכתוב , בשם כל ישראלים פה אני מבקש שתפסיק , ואל תביך אותנו . באמת , מה אתה , ילד קטן ?

[budanski]

The Zionist regime knows that the armed forces of the Islamic republic, and especially its air force, have such high capabilities that if [Israel] carries out a military attack against Iran, it will be digging its own grave," said the commander of the Iranian Air Force, General Seyed Reza Pardis

Considering that Islamic nations are on something like a nine war losing streak, they really oughta lay off the trash talk. rofl

[UoUo]

Ali Shamhani is an asshole , forgive me for expression (just like all fundamentalists ) . He have made same talking for several of times to an Israel about the exchange of POW's between Israel and Hisballah , and about Israeli POW fighter pilot Ron Arad's wereabouts . He just want to release steam , and to show they can react for Israeli threats.
However , Israel took this threat seriosly , and allready the army is deploying in the face of the threat .

ולבחור שכותב שטויות , אם אין לך משהו חכם לכתוב , בשם כל ישראלים פה אני מבקש שתפסיק , ואל תביך אותנו . באמת , מה אתה , ילד קטן ?

וואו..ביג דיל..מה כבר אמרתי ? קצת גאווה לאומית..וחוץ מזה כבר הסברתי את דברי

[budanski]

Cmon now, you know I havent finished 'Hooked on Hebrew' ;)

[Javehn]

Ok , quick hebrew lesson :
"Humus , chips , salat " - that what Shawarma guy will ask you what you want inside .
"Eyfo tachana (ch-****ounsed as h ) merkazit yashana ? " - where is old central bus station .

"Ze kasher ? " - i am not shure how to translate it ... well - "It's kosher" ?

"Mashehu po masriach " - "something ain't "kosher" here ! "

Now , if you noticed , i haven't use the word "kosher" in last sentence . This is important , because hebrew is anchient and most suffisticated language .

For furthore learning , you have to pay me 120 Us dollars . I will recieve VISAcart credit by Internet .

[budanski]

You take Paypal?

[Javehn]

Ok , i have openned dummy company based on Madagaskar . It is called "Amnesty Madagascar" , and you can start donnate to it .

[AirZone]

Ok , quick hebrew lesson :
"Humus , chips , salat " - that what Shawarma guy will ask you what you want inside .
"Eyfo tachana (ch-****ounsed as h ) merkazit yashana ? " - where is old central bus station .

"Ze kasher ? " - i am not shure how to translate it ... well - "It's kosher" ?

"Mashehu po masriach " - "something ain't "kosher" here ! "

Now , if you noticed , i haven't use the word "kosher" in last sentence . This is important , because hebrew is anchient and most suffisticated language .

For furthore learning , you have to pay me 120 Us dollars . I will recieve VISAcart credit by Internet .

rofl rofl rofl
i loved that "excuse" ;)


btw... חומוס עם טחינה, קצת ירקות, מלפופנים חמוצים וקצת כרוב.. אה וגם המון עמבה
זה המתכון המוצלח ללאפה
rofl

if you wonder its a recipy for what to put in your lafa...uhh...shawarma woot

[FallenAngel]

The Iranian Air Force General sounds like he thinks he can win against the best pilots in the world- the IAF ;) The Israelis also have that Arrow system to counter ballistic missiles as well :)

And as for any ground action, there is that small problem of 100,000+ US troops between Iran and Israel who, I am willing to bet, just won't stand aside.

[UoUo]

The Iranian Air Force General sounds like he thinks he can win against the best pilots in the world- the IAF ;) The Israelis also have that Arrow system to counter ballistic missiles as well :)

And as for any ground action, there is that small problem of 100,000+ US troops between Iran and Israel who, I am willing to bet, just won't stand aside.

woot woot

[Tane Angle]

Remember how confident everyone was in the Patriot Missiles, even the more recent models? But in Iraq this past year, single missiles would be launched and we'd miss them. Only one missile in the sky, and they missed. Even if the Arrow is an improvement, anti-missile missiles in general don't have a wonderful track record. Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[AirZone]

True...thats why there are many more systems that Israel is working on it atm (like the laser system)


anyway... israel are doing tests all the time to see how the arrow works and it works GREAT


but you can never be 100% sure

[Seiyuuki]

How is that laser system thingy coming along?

[Javehn]

No one in the military itself didn't trust a bit on Patriot . But there were no other alternative , and army deployed dense consentration of Patriot batteries , in hope that maybe this way it will take something out . The target of deploying Patriot batteries was also reassuring people , rather then actually shoot down missiles.
However , Arrow is Strategic system , that designed specially to shoot down missiles . I used the world strategic system , because Arrow is fool system deployed in all of Israel in overlapsing circles consisting several subsystem , rather then one single battery . It's designed from early 90's just to answer to longe range missiles threat , and was very succesfull in early tests against missiles.Nothing incommon with Patriot system that was designed from begining against Aircrafts.

Have a good one also...And , don't mix drugs with other drugs and Alcohol . ;)

[IDFM203]

Just to add to what Javhen is saying...............

Here is a great site with tons of awsome flash presentations about the Arrow

http://www.mod.gov.il/pages/homa/NEWCUT/hp5.html
(Especially click on “interception process”)

These are some test concepts to show how it was tested (well they were actual tests that worked.......actually most of the tests were succesful)
http://www.mod.gov.il/pages/homa/NEWCUT/images/AWST9full.jpg
http://www.mod.gov.il/pages/homa/NEWCUT/images/awst8.jpg

Shalom :D

[Javehn]

http://www.idf.il/newsite/movies/23_12_03_Tunnels_heb.wmv

And if we allready on this subject , take a little movie (courtesy of IDF site ) . This one taken inside private house in Rafiah , where you can see smugle tunnel inside the house . It's mostly on hebrew , and i will ask my Israeli partners here to translate it , before i will knock out (it's kinda late in my place ) . This house was ofcorse demolished ( very logical , no ? ) but tommorow Amnesty will be prepaired to shout "Apartehid" , and EU concil will call Israel to order . As you can hear on the movie , there is a firefight going on outside the house during this movie (brave tankers , yea ) .
Enjoy , i will ask again for my Israeli partners to translate ..

No one ?? Ok
Here is the explaining from IDF site to the movie


IDF Activity in Rafah to Uncover Weapon Smuggling Tunnels
As part of ongoing activities to uncover weapons smuggling tunnels along the Israel-Egypt border, IDF forces have been operating in the Rafah area since December 23, 2003. During these operations, IDF forces carried out searches in a residential building suspected of harboring a smuggling tunnel. During the search, a tunnel 800 meters in length and 17 meters deep was indeed discovered and destroyed in a controlled manner by IDF sappers.

During the operation, an exchange of fire erupted between armed terrorists and the IDF. IDF forces returned fire, identifying direct hits among the terrorists.

In addition, during the operation, terrorists detonated a number of explosive devices, fired 15 anti-tank missiles and hurled dozens of grenades. IDF forces left the Rafah area at the conclusion of the operation.

It is important to note that since the beginning of the year, IDF forces uncovered over 40 weapons smuggling tunnels along the Israel-Egypt border.

Since the beginning of the year, there has been a steep rise in hostile terrorist activity against Israeli citizens and IDF forces. Since the beginning of the current conflict, terrorists have fired 298 anti-tank missiles, 892 mortars, 143 Qassam rockets, detonated 347 explosive devices, hurled 908 grenades and opened fire in over 4,000 incidents at Israeli citizens and IDF soldiers in the Gaza Strip.

The discovery of a tunnel in a residential structure is another example of the cynical use by terrorist organizations of the Palestinian civilian population, by putting their safety at dire risk.

The IDF will continue its operations to uncover weapon smuggling tunnels, in order to prevent them from arming themselves and gaining the means to carry out attacks against the Israeli population.

[usa320]

Afghanistan, Iraq...****, when will the rest of these looney fundementalists learn that blabbing their mouths will only land them in the same place as the countries listed at the start of this horrible run-on scentence.

[Argyll]

and when will people like you realise that there is still a hell of a lot to do in both places,you really want to open up a 3rd front without ending the other 2?

[citizen-k]

One of my teachers was a an Arrow project manager - if the Arrow is half a bitch as she was the Iranian Shihabs don't stand a chance!!! :|

[GazB]

What is the big deal?

Israel has threatened to attack Iranian nuclear sites and Iran has said any attacks on those military site will result in a missile strike on Israel. What do you expect them to say? If Israel attacks us we will do nothing?

Arrow presumably relies on radar... if Iran really wanted to attack Israel then the first missile would be detonated high above the atmosphere over Israel and for approximately 30mins no radar or radio will work (ie EMP). Even if the Arrow system is hardened against EMP it will be useless for at least 30 minutes. All you could do was assume there were as many missiles as you think Iran has coming toward you, unless you have IR sensing satellites over Iran and they weren't knocked out by the EMP too. Suffice to say if they just launched the one and you wipe them off the map with nuclear missiles then you will look the bad guy, though they will be gone. Of course if they launch all of their missiles assuming you will anyway in the hope of catching yours on the ground and you launch all of yours immediately then you both could be gone. A very thorny issue.

(BTW the only fully operational ABM and fully tested system in the world is around Moscow).

[citizen-k]

What is the big deal?

Israel has threatened to attack Iranian nuclear sites and Iran has said any attacks on those military site will result in a missile strike on Israel. What do you expect them to say? If Israel attacks us we will do nothing?

Arrow presumably relies on radar... if Iran really wanted to attack Israel then the first missile would be detonated high above the atmosphere over Israel and for approximately 30mins no radar or radio will work (ie EMP). Even if the Arrow system is hardened against EMP it will be useless for at least 30 minutes. All you could do was assume there were as many missiles as you think Iran has coming toward you, unless you have IR sensing satellites over Iran and they weren't knocked out by the EMP too. Suffice to say if they just launched the one and you wipe them off the map with nuclear missiles then you will look the bad guy, though they will be gone. Of course if they launch all of their missiles assuming you will anyway in the hope of catching yours on the ground and you launch all of yours immediately then you both could be gone. A very thorny issue.

(BTW the only fully operational ABM and fully tested system in the world is around Moscow).
rofl rofl rofl




(BTW the only fully operational ABM and fully tested system in the world is around Moscow).


and again... rofl rofl rofl

[duck]

The russian Buk-M1-2 is a remarkable system and has a proven record in test intercepts. The SA-20 "Triumf" is another example of russian systems capable of intercepting ballistic missiles.

[aktarian]

The Iranian Air Force General sounds like he thinks he can win against the best pilots in the world- the IAF ;) The Israelis also have that Arrow system to counter ballistic missiles as well :)

When you'll get the chance try to get some maps. When you do that try calculating distances between Israel and Iran. You'll notice some interesting things.

[Javehn]

Duck wrote:


The russian Buk-M1-2 is a remarkable system and has a proven record in test intercepts. The SA-20 "Triumf" is another example of russian systems capable of intercepting ballistic missiles.

Very good , and way to go for Russia , what can i say .. I don't bellieve neither Shihab , or Scuds are ballistic missiles . But those are the missiles that Arrow suppose to get down .

Aktarian wrote :


When you'll get the chance try to get some maps. When you do that try calculating distances between Israel and Iran. You'll notice some interesting things.


And your point is ... ???

Edited : Made a little mistake here , sorry ..

[UoUo]

The Iranian Air Force General sounds like he thinks he can win against the best pilots in the world- the IAF ;) The Israelis also have that Arrow system to counter ballistic missiles as well :)

When you'll get the chance try to get some maps. When you do that try calculating distances between Israel and Iran. You'll notice some interesting things.


That the all point...israel can strike iran with aircraft....but iran can't strike israel with aircraft.

[Argyll]

And I suppose you guys are the top Israeli scientists who are part of the Anti ICBM srtategy?,you also might THINK you know all the answers,but I doubt that you all know half of the capabilities other than what's spoon fed to you by your Government.
You're basing your answers in nothing but speculation and info that you simply do not possess at 1st hand.

I also think the point Gaz was making about distance is that therein between Iran and Israel lies Iraq,who have all the US anti missile systems in place!,and the also the range of your own ASAT/AICBM !

I got to laugh at you Javehn coz by saying the things you do doen't make you too smart either!!.
You nor I know what Gaz does for a living or whether he has this info because of his "in the know",but I doubt for one tiny nanaosecond that you are "in the know " either!

[aktarian]

That the all point...israel can strike iran with aircraft....but iran can't strike israel with aircraft.

Israel can hardly strike with aircraft. The range is too great. They probally could but there would be very little margin for error. And Iranian program isn't neatlly concentrated as Iraqi was. And IRIAF would know what to expect while IrAF never knew what hit them.

I also find it very interesting that Israel begun making noise about this after IRan signed additional protocols to NPT.

[Javehn]

I got to laugh at you Javehn coz by saying the things you do doen't make you too smart either!!.
You nor I know what Gaz does for a living or whether he has this info because of his "in the know",but I doubt for one tiny nanaosecond that you are "in the know " either!

Ah , common ... I know it doen't make me smart . Well , you nor i know , you right about that one ! And , Nanaoseconds are a little time to doubt , man ! Sorry , i couldn't resist , just a little harmless joking :( . But still you would have to clarify yourself . :) If you want laugh at me , please , i can make you funny faces if you nead . :)
Here you go :oops: :roll: :backhand: :bash: rofl :fork: :petting: woot p-) :slap: :-*$

About what GazB said , maybe they can do that ( in which i doubt , but if they could ) , you were right about torny issue . No one can predict what will be the scenario . But i think we can agree that it wan't be in the best interests of Iran to do so . Even if the country controlled by Fundamentalists , they are not suicidal , when in the same region placed not only IDF , but also American army right in they back yard . This scenario can turn right into Clansey book .

To Aktarian , if it will come to that , Israel will find the way to strike it . How ? F16I , Air refuel , ground operation (not by army ) , you name it . If it neads to be done , there are enough ways how to do it . But , if it will came to that , and there is a very long way to that . And i am not shure , which noise Israel making .. Can you clarify , please ?

[Argyll]

Yeah be cool Javehn.
All I'm saying is that to put complete faith in technology is being extremely sceptical.you can run 10000 simulations with 100% success,but 1st time with the real thing could end up a natural fookin disaster!
Remember what happened to the Space shuttle,they said the chances of that happening were pretty slim.....the rest is history.
You see I have this huge problem with this "leaning" on these rogue states,all it does is add to an already volatile situation,the War on Terror in the Stan is nowhere near finished,there is a lot of **** going on there that is not the focus of attention like Iraq.
My own view is that it would've been better to focus on one objective and Mission,and fullfil that one,instead of opening another one such as Iraq,both these Missions are long term,lets get them all nipped and tucked before anymore nonsense about starting on someone else!!
What you are presuming is that Iran might act alone,in a military conflict,how can you possible know that?How do you know they have not mead a "deal" with some other Fundamentalist or any other state for that matter?
People are concerned about the Iranians and the North Koreans,but what about the 2 states who have a thousand year history of hate towards each other,who have both tested Nuclear weapons,and are in possesion of ICBM's,who both have fundamentalists living in their midst,and yet it appears that these 2 were allowed to arm themselves without so much as **** from the US/UN or the West for that matter?
I'm talking about India and Pakistan....look at the links to AQ through Pakistan and you'll see that the situation there is also pretty volatile,the revalation that Libya has WMD's is also pretty scary,how do we know that old Numbnuts Ghaddafi has not been profiting from "selling" on to the right bidder some of his Bio ****?

[Mr. Nielsen]

So far I haven't seen any claim that Iran posesses any nuclear bombs. And without it, the Shihab-3 missile is just a 800-kg bomb with much less accuracy than an air-dropped one. And not much of a deterent.

[Russian Texan]

You got the cash - Russia got the stuff ;)

Dump those capitalist made Patriots and let communists save your country :)
S 300PMU
http://www.rusarm.ru/video/S300PMU.WMV

S 300V
http://www.rusarm.ru/video/S300V.WMV

TOR
http://www.rusarm.ru/video/TORM1.WMV

Tunguska
http://www.rusarm.ru/video/TUNGM1.WMV

Buk M1
http://www.rusarm.ru/video/BUKM1.WMV

Russia also offers great variety of airplanes, helicopters, APCs, small arms, etc. and even T90 (now available with cruise control)

http://www.rusarm.ru/video/VIDEO.HTM

Rosoboronexports also offers special "Hannukah" discount. Offer is not valid after Iran launches its attack

[aktarian]

To Aktarian , if it will come to that , Israel will find the way to strike it . How ? F16I , Air refuel , ground operation (not by army ) , you name it . If it neads to be done , there are enough ways how to do it . But , if it will came to that , and there is a very long way to that .

Are you aware of what distance we are talking about here? 1.500 km through Jordan-Iraq, 1.900 km through Saudia and 2.600 km through Turkey (that's distance to Bushehr but other facilities would need to be hit as well and they are more inland, add couple of 100 km.). Since Turkey and Saudia woun't allow overflights they'll have to be amde in secret. Which will be complicated for return, when they'll be alerted. And flying through Saudia or Iraq would open US to criticism that they knew this and helped. Tanking, unless buddy-buddy would have to be done over other countries, something that is risky. Flying over sea (from Eritrea) would mean 4.000 km (14h). And that would mean flying by Bandar Abbas based F-14s. Again this is only regarding Bushehr.

That's not counting IRIAF, Iranian air defences etc.

Pride comes before fall....




And i am not shure , which noise Israel making .. Can you clarify , please ?

This. That they'll hit Iran.

[UoUo]

Hmmm..after all i hope USA do the job....couple of B-2 will do the job....

Go Usa woot woot

[Saranof]

I still can't see
If Israel and China can have Nuclear arms, why can't Iran? We don't bomb France for having them.

[Vance]

Cause Iran is full of crazy Islamic Jihad mofos. Not cool, when you're the white devil from America.

[Mr. Nielsen]

I still can't see
If Israel and China can have Nuclear arms, why can't Iran? We don't bomb France for having them.

France and China are among the 5 states recognized as having the bomb, when the NPT were signed. And are basicly allowed to have them. But I believe that as part of the treaty they should actually work towards getting rid of their own bombs.

Iran has signed the NPT treaty, and are now signing up for even further inspections. Israel on the other have never signed the NPT treaty, but is widely believed to have accumulated huge amounts of weapons of mass destruction.

[UoUo]

Israel will never ever use WMD agains any nation what so ever....iran is a country lead by crzy people...that can use WMD to achive thier goals...

[IDFM203]

I still can't see
If Israel and China can have Nuclear arms, why can't Iran? We don't bomb France for having them.

France and China are among the 5 states recognized as having the bomb, when the NPT were signed. And are basicly allowed to have them. . why does France have them?? Why does china have them?? Who is ever threatening them with total annihilation??

Israel is a small nation that has been surrounded by many enemies much larger its size and its case for these weapons far outweigh those nations and even now U.S. and Russia for Israel has had and still has many nations that are much bigger then her and that still wish to destroy the nation and those nuclear arms is a deterrent for the Arabs to not start another war.

Israel has had something now for thirty years and it hasn’t ever used it and at the same time since it has had the full nuclear deterrent, Israel has not been attacked as well!!




Iran has signed the NPT treaty, and are now signing up for even further inspections. Israel on the other have never signed the NPT treaty, but is widely believed to have accumulated huge amounts of weapons of mass destruction. ok so for arguments sake, say Israel has them and inspectors go in and determines that, I mean what do you want it to do??

Tell me you want them to get rid of it…ok so then tell me if you believe that if Israel gets rid of them, Israel wont be attacked either conventionally or unconventionally?? It’s a serious question.

Also one last note to others………Iran and its Islamic fundamentalist leaders, have stated very clearly in the past its intentions to destroy Israel….Israel has never stated that at all………all it might do is destroy those weapons that can destroy it but by no means is Israel going to destroy Iran nor does it have any intention to do so.

P.S. putting faith in iran's signuture as full complince is something you might do in the comfort of your european home but it is not something Israel can sanly do!!

shalom :D

[Falco]

Most of the countries that have WMD aren't "senseless". France has never vowed to destroy a country, neither has china in recent times. Irak and Iran on the other hand ...

[Marxist203]

I think that sounds pretty reasonable...as Iran has just as much right to defend themselves as the Israeli's do.

[Javehn]

Whould you trust Al-Kaeda , if they had WMD ?? Even if Iran is a law state , it's fundamentalistic terror suporting country (they beloved baby is Hesbollah , that blew up U.S. marine barrack in 1983 .Maybe you also remember a little hostige crisis in 1984 i bellieve , something about U.S. embessy in Teheran , familiar ?).As a fundamentalists , the wan't hesitate to use it , incase they would have a chance, with little regarding to consequinses .

[IDFM203]

I think that sounds pretty reasonable...as Iran has just as much right to defend themselves as the Israeli's do.big difference is that Israel’s is solely for defence while Iran’s is for offence.

They have made very clear over the year’s their intentions to destroy the whole land of Israel while Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran.

Shalom :D

[Argyll]

C'mon guys ,there are AQ fundamentalists in Pakistan too,and Musharaff has survived 2 attempts on his life in less than a week,tell me that there's nothing to worry about there then?

[UoUo]

C'mon guys ,there are AQ fundamentalists in Pakistan too,and Musharaff has survived 2 attempts on his life in less than a week,tell me that there's nothing to worry about there then?

Musharaff isn't a crazy fundamentalists...the leadr's of iran are very very fundamentalists.

[duck]

There were reports shortly after 9/11 of joint American-Israeli commando teams ready to secure Pakistani nuclear sites in case of a fundamentalist coup. I guess that would mean Sayaret Matkal and its American counterparts taking on parts of the Pakistani army with US air support. Better keep Musharraf alive and kicking.

[IDFM203]

C'mon guys ,there are AQ fundamentalists in Pakistan too,and Musharaff has survived 2 attempts on his life in less than a week,tell me that there's nothing to worry about there then?actually yes I am worried about that as well!!

Islamic fundamentalist regimes (or in Pakistan’s case its very close to that) that have or building these weapons, with their fundamentalist ideology, well yes they do worry me be it Iran or Pakistan. Because they have offensive intentions with them and that is indeed very worrisome

-edit- duck where did you see that?

Shalom :D

[Argyll]

I wasn't talking about Musharaff! Who do you think is behind the attempts on his life...........Al Bloody Quiada thats who.
Pakistan's failure to close of it's border basically allowed fook knows how many AQ types to slip back into Pakistan,they are the danger.
Kill him and you got big probs ahead,the next PM might not take to kindly to the Indian situation,or the situation in the ME as a whole!!

[aktarian]

Israel is a small nation that has been surrounded by many enemies much larger its size and its case for these weapons far outweigh those nations and even now U.S. and Russia for Israel has had and still has many nations that are much bigger then her and that still wish to destroy the nation and those nuclear arms is a deterrent for the Arabs to not start another war.


Interesting how Iran can't use this argument. :roll:



ok so for arguments sake, say Israel has them and inspectors go in and determines that, I mean what do you want it to do??

Place Israel under same sanctions as India and Pakistan were for not signing it and testing their nukes.




Tell me you want them to get rid of it…ok so then tell me if you believe that if Israel gets rid of them, Israel wont be attacked either conventionally or unconventionally?? It’s a serious question.

No they woun't. Israel's air force is at elast as big as it's neighbours combined. Their ground forces are at least generation ahead.



big difference is that Israel’s is solely for defence while Iran’s is for offence.

They have made very clear over the year’s their intentions to destroy the whole land of Israel while Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran.

Shalom :D

Yes, we all know Iranians use every oportunity to attack their neighbours. :roll:

[IDFM203]

Interesting how Iran can't use this argument. :roll: .
Ok so how can Iran use the same argument that nations have threatened to annihilate it, as Israel has been threatened as such (by Iran amongst a few others in that region)??

Iraq is no more a threat to them…. Israel never has made any offensive intentions to destroy iran other then to say that it might destroy the nukes (remember Iran has threatened to destroy the whole Israel, big difference in the level of threats)…....what other then offensive purposes does Iran need this for??

Remember Iran or its rulers are a Islamic fundamentalist nation that believes religiously that the Jews cant be on any inch of Israel and as such have said throughout the years that they want to rid all Jews of the land of Israel…….I don’t recall ever hearing Israel saying anything like that about Iran!!


Place Israel under same sanctions ok so France and the U.S. and Russia and etc Should not get sanctions but Israel should?? Especially considering that Israel is a small nation that has been surrounded by many enemies much larger its size and its case for these weapons far outweigh those nations need for them for Israel has had and still has many nations that are much bigger then her and that still wish to destroy the nation and those nuclear arms is a deterrent for the Arabs to not start another war in another attempt to annihilate it!!


"Tell me you want them to get rid of it…ok so then tell me if you believe that if Israel gets rid of them, Israel wont be attacked either conventionally or unconventionally?? It’s a serious question."

No they woun't. Israel's air force is at elast as big as it's neighbours combined. Their ground forces are at least generation ahead. . oh it is?? With all the American f16’s that Egypt, Saudi Arabia and UAE and all the migs in those nations as well as others, I think what you just said is not true. Anyways I didn’t bother to do a google search for it moot point, for even if your correct that they wont start……..

Well that’s your belief; a belief that as someone that is living in safety in Europe can afford to have!!

Israel on the other hand cannot afford your level of naive comfort from those Islamic fundamentalist regimes that have threatened to annihilate it.

Yes Israel is stronger militarily now but the nuclear deterrent is a much greater deterrent for the Arab nation's to not even think about starting again………..with out nukes, they will try to bridge the gap and they will be embolden again to attack.

Remember Israel’s nuke is a bigger deterrent to the huge numeric disadvantage that the Arabs have against Israel

"big difference is that Israel’s is solely for defence while Iran’s is for offence.

They have made very clear over the year’s their intentions to destroy the whole land of Israel while Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran."


Yes, we all know Iranians use every oportunity to attack their neighbours. :roll: wow :roll: ………………they don’t attack Israel now for like you said above, they cant destroy Israel conventionally ……but unconventionally they are a serious threat and they are indeed worrisome, especially because of their threat's over the years to actually act on destroying Israel when given that ability (which the nukes do in fact give them that ability)


shalom :D

[duck]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the Bush administration has a written-down principle of going thermonuclear if the existence of Israel is threatened.

[duck]

Ah, there it was.

http://www.gopusa.com/caroldevinemolin/2002/cdm_0318.shtml

"NPR's naysayers are also miffed that the United States has clearly developed contingency plans to place Israel, Taiwan and South Korea under our "nuclear umbrella" in the event that a military conflict spins out of control and threatens the very existence of these allies.
Planning for this possibility should not be surprising, given that US policy reflects a long standing commitment to the security of these three nation-states. Many critics have underscored that Israel is already a nuclear power and does not need us to directly intervene in its wars. But the NPR is all about evaluating contingencies and options. And it's not inconceivable that Israel' s population, and its ability to defend itself, could be radically harmed by a series of horrific biological or chemical attacks. Clearly, the US would get involved under these circumstances, and would probably consider a nuclear response to such a massive and barbaric assault upon Israel. In truth, the US has become the guarantor of Israel, Taiwan, and North Korea's survival, providing assurance that our nation will not permit these allies to be overcome by enemies. Again, this speaks to deterrence, placing aggressors on notice that some acts are totally unacceptable, and will inevitably trigger a cogent response from the United States"

[One?]

Just like Israel claims that its nukes are for defensive purposes Iran also wants to defend itself.

If Israel attacks Iran, then Iran has all the right to defend itself. Just like the US went after those who bombed it.

[aktarian]

Iraq is no more a threat to them…. Israel never has made any offensive intentions to destroy iran other then to say that it might destroy the nukes (remember Iran has threatened to destroy the whole Israel, big difference in the level of threats)…....what other then offensive purposes does Iran need this for??

Syria is not a threat to ISrael because they are much weaker and there is peace with Jordan and Egypt.



Remember Iran or its rulers are a Islamic fundamentalist nation that believes religiously that the Jews cant be on any inch of Israel and as such have said throughout the years that they want to rid all Jews of the land of Israel…….I don’t recall ever hearing Israel saying anything like that about Iran!!

And what is Israel? State of Jews which never renounced plans for greater Israel.



ok so France and the U.S. and Russia and etc Should not get sanctions but Israel should?? Especially considering that Israel is a small nation that has been surrounded by many enemies much larger its size and its case for these weapons far outweigh those nations need for them for Israel has had and still has many nations that are much bigger then her and that still wish to destroy the nation and those nuclear arms is a deterrent for the Arabs to not start another war in another attempt to annihilate it!!

Perhas you should look ckloselly to NPT. It defines 5 countries that are nuclear powers and forbids others from geting them.




oh it is?? With all the American f16’s that Egypt, Saudi Arabia and UAE and all the migs in those nations as well as others, I think what you just said is not true. Anyways I didn’t bother to do a google search for it moot point, for even if your correct that they wont start……..

And with Israel buying same number of F-16s when anybody else does...



Well that’s your belief; a belief that as someone that is living in safety in Europe can afford to have!!

Israel on the other hand cannot afford your level of naive comfort from those Islamic fundamentalist regimes that have threatened to annihilate it.

One thing is gunuine concern. Other is unfounded panic mongering in order to achieve one's goals.



Yes Israel is stronger militarily now but the nuclear deterrent is a much greater deterrent for the Arab nation's to not even think about starting again………..with out nukes, they will try to bridge the gap and they will be embolden again to attack.

So you admit Israel is stronger and still need nukes? Interesting.



Remember Israel’s nuke is a bigger deterrent to the huge numeric disadvantage that the Arabs have against Israel

There is numerous advantage in ground forces but there is huge technological gap. And that's not counting air force.



wow :roll: ………………they don’t attack Israel now for like you said above, they cant destroy Israel conventionally ……but unconventionally they are a serious threat and they are indeed worrisome, especially because of their threat's over the years to actually act on destroying Israel when given that ability (which the nukes do in fact give them that ability)


shalom :D

Tell me something. If Iranians are so bloodthirsty as you claim they are why didn't they invade Afghansitan in 1996? They were preparing to and had every reason to do so and nobody could blame them for doing it (and a lot of people would be gratefull if they would)? But now you say they will attack Israel, strongest country in region? Any explanation would be apreciated.

[S'13]

How is that laser system thingy coming along?

Reported by CNN

Anti-rocket laser cannon gets funding

Wednesday, October 29, 2003 Posted: 1527 GMT (11:27 PM HKT)
JERUSALEM (AP) -- Israel and the U.S. are to spend at least $57 million for development of a laser cannon that can shoot down short-range missiles, an Israeli legislator and security officials said Tuesday.

A recent Israeli delegation successfully lobbied Congress to approve the new funding package for the joint U.S.-Israeli Nautilus laser weapon project, said Israeli lawmaker Yuval Steinitz, who was part of the delegation.

Israel wants the Nautilus to help protect its northern border towns from Katyusha rockets, fired by the Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah during Israel's 18-year occupation of southern Lebanon that ended in 2000. Israel claims that Hezbollah now has 11,000 rockets aimed at Israel.

Congress approved $57 million to fund the project, and Israel will also contribute funding, Steinitz said, but could not say how much.

There is, however, no public record of congressional approval for Nautilus funding. It may fall under the classified portion of the 2004 Defense Authorization bill, passed by Congress and signed by U.S. President George W. Bush on September 30.

The laser beam system was successfully tested at the U.S. White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, in February 1996. However, since then, development of the project had been held up by skeptics in the U.S. Congress, said an Israeli security official.

New funding is now needed to transform the technology into a practical weapon, said Steinitz, who is the chairman of the parliamentary foreign affairs and defense committee.

"Now we have to make it an efficient, compact weapon that can be used in the battlefield and in the war on terrorism," Steinitz said.

The Nautilus uses a high power radar to track and lock onto the incoming projectile. Then a Mid-Infrared Advanced Chemical Laser (MIRACL), which looks like a large spotlight, shoots out an intense beam that destroys the rocket.

The White Sands test marked the first time that a rocket has been destroyed in flight by a laser beam. The laser has also proved its ability to shoot down artillery shells.

Israeli security officials said that the potential to use this technology in the war against terrorism was a major factor in convincing Congress to renew support for the project.



http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/06/07/anti.rocket.laser/story.anti.rocket.laser.jpg

[IDFM203]

Syria is not a threat to ISrael because they are much weaker and there is peace with Jordan and Egypt. whoa before I even get into Israel I thought we were talking about Iran!!
I will (and have gotten)get into Israel and why it has had it all these years as a deterrent against a collective attack or against a future Islamic fundamentalist regime (which btw Egypt can turn into any time) threatening it and address other nation’s that still harbour goals to destroy the whole Israel,. But you first have not answered my question!!
Again
“Ok so how can Iran use the same argument that nations have threatened to annihilate it, as Israel has been threatened as such (by Iran amongst a few others in that region)??

what nation has threatend to annihilate iran??

Iraq is no more a threat to them and they dont claim any more to want to destroy Iran…. Israel never has made any offensive intentions to destroy Iran other then to say that it might destroy the nukes (remember Iran has threatened to destroy the whole Israel, big difference in the level of threats)…what other then offensive purposes does Iran have this for??


And what is Israel? State of Jews which never renounced plans for greater Israel. what does that have to do with anything?? Again you’re sidestepping!! (btw they did renounce, lets not forget that most Israelis are secular and unlike iran, the government is secular and the whole Oslo process proved that Israel was willing and had given up land and was willing to give up more…….I mean most Israelis support giving up land………….but again this has nothing to do with what we are discussing)

So I ask again. With regards to Israel and Iran.

Remember Iran or its rulers are a Islamic fundamentalist nation that believes religiously that the Jews cant be on any inch of Israel and as such have said throughout the years that they want to rid all Jews of the land of Israel…….I don’t recall ever hearing Israel saying anything like that about Iran!!


Perhas you should look ckloselly to NPT. It defines 5 countries that are nuclear powers and forbids others from geting them. hehe ;) yes I understand that the world powers gave themselves a pass……………….but I ask again what makes them not allow other responsible countries, which Israel is (it has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used it) to not have them??…… again… Especially considering that Israel is a small nation that has been surrounded by many enemies much larger its size and its case for these weapons far outweigh those nations need for them for Israel has had and still has many nations that are much bigger then her and that still wish to destroy the nation and those nuclear arms is a deterrent for the Arabs to not start another war in another attempt to annihilate it!

We are not talking the NPT as it is the word of god and the all knowing truth and whther what’s right or wrong!!……if they can have it with less of a threat to their national existence, Israel most certainly can have it especially since it has faced a much greater threat to its very existence……Iran faces no such defensive threat, plus it has offensive intentions in that region and has threatened to destroy the whole Israel for years now!!

Israel's air force is at elast as big as it's neighbours combined ok so I did the google search (I knew id’ be forced to do at some point)

ok Israel has a total of 481 combat aircraft Vs I took only 8 biggest Arab nations that have a total of 2354 combat aircraft!!! (And yes they have f16’s as well as migs)

yes as big as combined :roll:



One thing is gunuine concern. Other is unfounded panic mongering in order to achieve one's goals. . again from your safe home in Europe you might not be concerned about the Islamic fundamentalist threats to destroy Israel but we are and we take them seriously……we simply have no choice but to take them seriously!!

Israel has made no threats to destroy Iran, as Iran has for years threatened to destroy the whole Israel, nor is Iran part of greater Israel (if you choose to use that argument), so what other then pure defence does Israel have in wanting Iran’s nukes to be destroyed??


Yes Israel is stronger militarily now but the nuclear deterrent is a much greater deterrent for the Arab nation's to not even think about starting again………..with out nukes, they will try to bridge the gap and they will be embolden again to attack.

So you admit Israel is stronger and still need nukes? Interesting. .
yes ……listen Israel’s nukes are not to win a war per say but they are to deter a war from ever starting.

Without nukes the Arabs can always start to think that they can win and while yes Israel is a strong military and would probably win, the loss of lives to Israel would be huge!! So this is not about winning a war but it is about deterring one from ever happening again.

Israel still needs them now for besides Iran, the Arab would has a large percentage (even in Egypt) of its populations that want to destroy Israel, even those that signed a “peace” deal with it, still have huge populations that do not recognize that deal and for the future Israel needs to have this deterrent against any nation from ever getting another Nasser with all his Arab nationalism, to think about another attempt.(which can most certainly happen) or another Islamic fundamentalist ruler.


Remember Israel’s nuke is a bigger deterrent to the huge numeric disadvantage that the Arabs have against Israel

There is numerous advantage in ground forces but there is huge technological gap. And that's not counting air force. . again Israel can win a war (albeit with a lot of loses to itself) but it has nukes to deter one from ever starting again……………yes Israel is more advanced now but the Arabs have much more numbers and some of them are modernizing and all that can “fool” them into trying again.


”wow :roll: ………………they don’t attack Israel now for like you said above, they cant destroy Israel conventionally ……but unconventionally they are a serious threat and they are indeed worrisome, especially because of their threat's over the years to actually act on destroying Israel when given that ability (which the nukes do in fact give them that ability)”


Tell me something. If Iranians are so bloodthirsty as you claim they are why didn't they invade Afghansitan in 1996? They were preparing to and had every reason to do so and nobody could blame them for doing it (and a lot of people would be gratefull if they would)? But now you say they will attack Israel, strongest country in region? Any explanation would be apreciated.your condensantion is noted! :roll:

Ok first of all I never said the Iranians are bloodthirsty so don’t put words into my mouth!!

Secondly I have nothing against Iranian’s per say , it’s the large Iranian Islamic fundamentalist elements and their rulers that are worrisome and that I have a problem with.

They have made very clear their intentions over the years to destroy Israel and you might not, but Israel and I do in fact take them seriously.

As for Afghanistan, well I don’t know what that has to do with Israel but all I can say is that I don’t see why Iran would want to attack Afghanistan when it is already a Islamic nation and in 1996 the taliban were fighting and they won so what’s the need for Iran to invade a already Islamic or at the time a Islamic fundamentalist nation (which it still has elements of fundamentalism there)??

Shalom :D

[Groove]

The "Nuclear Situation" in the middle east is a little bit "strange" for me. Everybody knows that Israel have Nuclear Weapons. But they bomb everyone who could build A-Weapons in this region.

So how Isreal can make the "rules" for who have to WMD and who not there. Okay Israel always try to make ppl "hysteric" that as soon as for example Iran would have the A-Bomb and the rockets which could strike Israel they would use it INSTANTLY. Its funny how Israel tries to "rule" the middle east.

But why should Iran nuke Israel ? Its a small country and they would strike Iran as counter-attack. Arabs arent that dumb i think like most of the ppl here think. They had a rich coulture long time before Europeans had any remarkable civilzation.

I often ask myself why the arabs hate Israel and how is it possible to be the anti-semitsm to be existing today too. Did the Isreal ppl asked it themself too ? Its really strange because where i come from Poland there was a big Jewish community until the Nazi Bastards came and "cleaned" the area :(

But i think nobody can answer this questions really.

I hope you dont think im pro-arab or anti-israel. This were just my thoughts about the A-Weapon situation in the middle-east.

Greetings

Groove

[UoUo]

A. Iran is not an arab country.
b. Iran lead by much more crzy people then you can imgine.

[Mr. Nielsen]

About the Iran-Taliban theme.

It is widely known that Iran had for years supported the Anti-Taliban Northern Alliance. And in 1998 and serious crisis erupted between Iran and the Taliban regime, because of the killing of Iranian diplomats in Afghanistan. At the time Iran held "war-games" with 70.000 troops at the border, and Iran threatened invasion.

I think there are several reasons why Iran didn't invade. Among them are that there huge war weariness in the Iranian population, after eight years of war with Iraq. The war costing enormous casualties and ruining the Iranian economy. Without the air power of the US, the war would likely be prolonged. Also, the Taliban was supported by Pakistan until 911.

[duck]

The Pakistanis were in a hurry to get their troops and military advisors supporting the Taliban out of Afghanistan before the air campaign began. I don't think they are very satisfied with the present situation that diverts resources from Kashmir and the Indian border. Only Osama in his flat in Karachi must be smiling while giving orders to his friends at the Pakistani intelligence services, unrest and chaos are all he needs.

[Groove]

Well but i dont think they would "drop" some WMD on Israel cause they know the counter-reaction....

UoUo you ignored my question :

So how Isreal can make the "rules" for who have to WMD and who not there.

Would nice to hear an explain from someone from Israel.

Greetings

Groove

[UoUo]

Well but i dont think they would "drop" some WMD on Israel cause they know the counter-reaction....

UoUo you ignored my question :

So how Isreal can make the "rules" for who have to WMD and who not there.

Would nice to hear an explain from someone from Israel.

Greetings

Groove

Israel don't make the rules...israel want the best for her people....defend the jewish people from WMD.

[IDFM203]

Well but i dont think they would "drop" some WMD on Israel cause they know the counter-reaction....

UoUo you ignored my question :

So how Isreal can make the "rules" for who have to WMD and who not there.

Would nice to hear an explain from someone from Israel.

Greetings

Groovego read everything I wrote in this thread......I already explained all this!!

I also explained why the Islamic fundamatalists (You know the same fundamentalist ideology that has sucide bombers) rulers of Iran wants to destroy Israel

P.S. you don’t have to read it or belive it, you can continue to have your head buried deep in the sand as if I care, though we don’t have your luxury of doing that.

Shalom :D

[Groove]

Its simply not possible to discuss such things with members or former members ot the IDF i think. No Problem for me as you get drilled and fed up with the "right" informations.

But i can understand your situation down there. Im just always wondering why all this arabs hate all your ppl in Israel. Ever asked this seriously to yourself ?

Greets

Groove

[UoUo]

Pure propogand sense the day they born...that unswer the que' no ?

BTW : ia m just 17...i was't in the IDF yet.

[Groove]

Thx 4 info UoUo. And i always thought because this territorry "thing".

Groove

[UoUo]

Thx 4 info UoUo. And i always thought because this territorry "thing".

Groove

It is about trritorry as well...but like i said before....the palstinians commited terror's attack pre 1967.... i mean...even before we got there land....

BTW : the first war with arabs was in 48....then we got ****...no land...the U.N divided the land for 2 ..1 country for the palstinian..and 1 for the jews...the jews got most of the sout (desert !!)..and the palstinian got the north...the palstinian refuse to take th ofer...and start a war agains israel..

The arab world vs israel

[Groove]

As im catholic i really would like to travel to your country UoUo. Its amazingly rich of history for jews/arabs/christians... But on other hand i dont like to get myself blown away sitting in Jerusalem or elsewhere drinking or eating some traditional meals :(

Sometimes this forum makes me sad :(

Groove

[UoUo]

:hug:

Don't woory man...someday...i can asure you ... peace will come.. (who remmber that germmany was the most evil country on the planet ?..and now they are peaceful country)...

And i will invite you to visit here...to eat "humus" in ramallah...and to go for a walk in the sky skapers of tel aviv....or to visit the west wall in jeruslem...

Peace

Shalom

Salam

woot

[aktarian]

whoa before I even get into Israel I thought we were talking about Iran!!
I will (and have gotten)get into Israel and why it has had it all these years as a deterrent against a collective attack or against a future Islamic fundamentalist regime (which btw Egypt can turn into any time) threatening it and address other nation’s that still harbour goals to destroy the whole Israel,.

And Iran can't use this argument. Interesting



But you first have not answered my question!!
Again
“Ok so how can Iran use the same argument that nations have threatened to annihilate it, as Israel has been threatened as such (by Iran amongst a few others in that region)??

what nation has threatend to annihilate iran??

Iraq. And relations with Pakistan aren't rosy, specially after military agreement with India. Not to mention US.




Iraq is no more a threat to them and they dont claim any more to want to destroy Iran…. Israel never has made any offensive intentions to destroy Iran other then to say that it might destroy the nukes (remember Iran has threatened to destroy the whole Israel, big difference in the level of threats)…what other then offensive purposes does Iran have this for??

If you say Iraq isn't a threat to Iran than you can't say Egypt is a threat to Israel. And Syria isn't.


what does that have to do with anything?? Again you’re sidestepping!! (btw they did renounce, lets not forget that most Israelis are secular and unlike iran, the government is secular and the whole Oslo process proved that Israel was willing and had given up land and was willing to give up more…….I mean most Israelis support giving up land………….but again this has nothing to do with what we are discussing)

Iranians declared themselves as islamic state and act on it. Israel is only acting on it. Seing how it's illegal to raise pigs in Israel, McDonald's can't serve dairy products and meat at same time and defence minister got in troubles because F-15s they purchased landed in Israel on Saturday Israel is acting a lot like religios state. Well, you know what they say about people living in glass houses.



So I ask again. With regards to Israel and Iran.

Remember Iran or its rulers are a Islamic fundamentalist nation that believes religiously that the Jews cant be on any inch of Israel and as such have said throughout the years that they want to rid all Jews of the land of Israel…….I don’t recall ever hearing Israel saying anything like that about Iran!!


See above.



hehe ;) yes I understand that the world powers gave themselves a pass……………….but I ask again what makes them not allow other responsible countries, which Israel is (it has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used it) to not have them??…… again…

Fine. Give Iran nukes and wait 30 years. If they don't use them (seeing how you consider this measure of "reason") they can keep them. If they use them, they'll have to give them up.




Especially considering that Israel is a small nation that has been surrounded by many enemies much larger its size and its case for these weapons far outweigh those nations need for them for Israel has had and still has many nations that are much bigger then her and that still wish to destroy the nation and those nuclear arms is a deterrent for the Arabs to not start another war in another attempt to annihilate it!

I ask aain, why can't Iran use same arguments that it's surronded by enemies, was attacked etc.




We are not talking the NPT as it is the word of god and the all knowing truth and whther what’s right or wrong!!……if they can have it with less of a threat to their national existence, Israel most certainly can have it especially since it has faced a much greater threat to its very existence……

Israel's conventional military is better than neighbours. IRan's isn't. IRan also doesn't have world's sole superpower comited to their defence. Israel does. Iran has every reason to develop them.



Iran faces no such defensive threat, plus it has offensive intentions in that region and has threatened to destroy the whole Israel for years now!!


Israel has no realistic threat. Iran does.



ok so I did the google search (I knew id’ be forced to do at some point)

ok Israel has a total of 481 combat aircraft Vs I took only 8 biggest Arab nations that have a total of 2354 combat aircraft!!! (And yes they have f16’s as well as migs)

Last time I checked Israel has 4 neighbours and one of them has no air force (they have some helicopters though).



again from your safe home in Europe you might not be concerned about the Islamic fundamentalist threats to destroy Israel but we are and we take them seriously……we simply have no choice but to take them seriously!!

Neither does ISrael. At least not threats that can be defeated with nukes.



Israel has made no threats to destroy Iran, as Iran has for years threatened to destroy the whole Israel, nor is Iran part of greater Israel (if you choose to use that argument), so what other then pure defence does Israel have in wanting Iran’s nukes to be destroyed??

So Israel can throw their weight around, being unchecked and undeterred by anybody.



Yes Israel is stronger militarily now but the nuclear deterrent is a much greater deterrent for the Arab nation's to not even think about starting again………..with out nukes, they will try to bridge the gap and they will be embolden again to attack.

Seeing how even you admit ISrael is stronger than neighbours why do they need nukes anyway?



yes ……listen Israel’s nukes are not to win a war per say but they are to deter a war from ever starting.

Without nukes the Arabs can always start to think that they can win and while yes Israel is a strong military and would probably win, the loss of lives to Israel would be huge!! So this is not about winning a war but it is about deterring one from ever happening again.

Arabs can also look at military balance (or lack of it), political climate and see they'll loose.



Israel still needs them now for besides Iran, the Arab would has a large percentage (even in Egypt) of its populations that want to destroy Israel, even those that signed a “peace” deal with it, still have huge populations that do not recognize that deal and for the future Israel needs to have this deterrent against any nation from ever getting another Nasser with all his Arab nationalism, to think about another attempt.(which can most certainly happen) or another Islamic fundamentalist ruler.

And Israel can elect some maniac who will want to attack neighbours.



again Israel can win a war (albeit with a lot of loses to itself) but it has nukes to deter one from ever starting again……………yes Israel is more advanced now but the Arabs have much more numbers and some of them are modernizing and all that can “fool” them into trying again.[quote="IDFM203"]

How are they modernising? They are buying US hardware (suplies of which will be cut if they start making noise about attacking Israel). those who don't have acess to US hardware aren't modernising in any significant way.

[quote=IDFM203]
”wow :roll: ………………they don’t attack Israel now for like you said above, they cant destroy Israel conventionally ……but unconventionally they are a serious threat and they are indeed worrisome, especially because of their threat's over the years to actually act on destroying Israel when given that ability (which the nukes do in fact give them that ability)”

What threat? Who? Who ahs nukes (besides Israel)?



your condensantion is noted! :roll:

Ok first of all I never said the Iranians are bloodthirsty so don’t put words into my mouth!!

No, you said they'll attack Israel as soon as they can. Same thing.



Secondly I have nothing against Iranian’s per say , it’s the large Iranian Islamic fundamentalist elements and their rulers that are worrisome and that I have a problem with.

They have made very clear their intentions over the years to destroy Israel and you might not, but Israel and I do in fact take them seriously.

And their actions speak louder than words.



As for Afghanistan, well I don’t know what that has to do with Israel but all I can say is that I don’t see why Iran would want to attack Afghanistan when it is already a Islamic nation and in 1996 the taliban were fighting and they won so what’s the need for Iran to invade a already Islamic or at the time a Islamic fundamentalist nation (which it still has elements of fundamentalism there)??

Shalom :D

They planned to because Taliban killed Iranian diplomats, were massacring Hazaris (shi'ias). Not to mention huge problems with drug trafficking from Afghanistan and frequent clashes with Iranian police/border guards.

They didn't attack their weak neighbour, who had no serious outside support and little means to hit back but they will attack strongest country in region, armed with nukes and backed by US. Yes, makes perfect sense. :roll:

[S'13]

[quote=IDFM203]whoa before I even get into Israel I thought we were talking about Iran!!
I will (and have gotten)get into Israel and why it has had it all these years as a deterrent against a collective attack or against a future Islamic fundamentalist regime (which btw Egypt can turn into any time) threatening it and address other nation’s that still harbour goals to destroy the whole Israel,.

And Iran can't use this argument. Interesting

No because Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran...




But you first have not answered my question!!
Again
“Ok so how can Iran use the same argument that nations have threatened to annihilate it, as Israel has been threatened as such (by Iran amongst a few others in that region)??

what nation has threatend to annihilate iran??

Iraq. And relations with Pakistan aren't rosy, specially after military agreement with India. Not to mention US.

I think that considering the present circumstances, Iraq can't be seen as threat even though it threatend Iran in the past, and so can't be taken as an example.





Iraq is no more a threat to them and they dont claim any more to want to destroy Iran…. Israel never has made any offensive intentions to destroy Iran other then to say that it might destroy the nukes (remember Iran has threatened to destroy the whole Israel, big difference in the level of threats)…what other then offensive purposes does Iran have this for??

If you say Iraq isn't a threat to Iran than you can't say Egypt is a threat to Israel. And Syria isn't.

Egypt may have a peace treaty with Israel but we don't know what the future holds. Why can't Syria be considerd a threat?



what does that have to do with anything?? Again you’re sidestepping!! (btw they did renounce, lets not forget that most Israelis are secular and unlike iran, the government is secular and the whole Oslo process proved that Israel was willing and had given up land and was willing to give up more…….I mean most Israelis support giving up land………….but again this has nothing to do with what we are discussing)

Iranians declared themselves as islamic state and act on it. Israel is only acting on it. Seing how it's illegal to raise pigs in Israel, McDonald's can't serve dairy products and meat at same time and defence minister got in troubles because F-15s they purchased landed in Israel on Saturday Israel is acting a lot like religios state. Well, you know what they say about people living in glass houses.

There are plenty of restaurants serving non kosher foods. McDonald's have restaurants that serve kosher foods and others that serve non kosher foods for those of us who want to taste a cheeseburger. In Christian communities the raising of pigs is permitted. Also it's permitted in zoos and research centers.




hehe ;) yes I understand that the world powers gave themselves a pass……………….but I ask again what makes them not allow other responsible countries, which Israel is (it has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used it) to not have them??…… again…

Fine. Give Iran nukes and wait 30 years. If they don't use them (seeing how you consider this measure of "reason") they can keep them. If they use them, they'll have to give them up.

Brilliant! If your plan doesn't work we won't be alive to tell you you were wrong... :roll:




Especially considering that Israel is a small nation that has been surrounded by many enemies much larger its size and its case for these weapons far outweigh those nations need for them for Israel has had and still has many nations that are much bigger then her and that still wish to destroy the nation and those nuclear arms is a deterrent for the Arabs to not start another war in another attempt to annihilate it!

I ask aain, why can't Iran use same arguments that it's surronded by enemies, was attacked etc.

Because it's not surronded by enemies...





We are not talking the NPT as it is the word of god and the all knowing truth and whther what’s right or wrong!!……if they can have it with less of a threat to their national existence, Israel most certainly can have it especially since it has faced a much greater threat to its very existence……

Israel's conventional military is better than neighbours. IRan's isn't. IRan also doesn't have world's sole superpower comited to their defence. Israel does. Iran has every reason to develop them.

Iran is not in the same position as Israel.




Iran faces no such defensive threat, plus it has offensive intentions in that region and has threatened to destroy the whole Israel for years now!!


Israel has no realistic threat. Iran does.

Please explain.




ok so I did the google search (I knew id’ be forced to do at some point)

ok Israel has a total of 481 combat aircraft Vs I took only 8 biggest Arab nations that have a total of 2354 combat aircraft!!! (And yes they have f16’s as well as migs)

Last time I checked Israel has 4 neighbours and one of them has no air force (they have some helicopters though).

Could you elaborate?




Israel has made no threats to destroy Iran, as Iran has for years threatened to destroy the whole Israel, nor is Iran part of greater Israel (if you choose to use that argument), so what other then pure defence does Israel have in wanting Iran’s nukes to be destroyed??

So Israel can throw their weight around, being unchecked and undeterred by anybody.

If it's for it's peoples well being and defence then...




Yes Israel is stronger militarily now but the nuclear deterrent is a much greater deterrent for the Arab nation's to not even think about starting again………..with out nukes, they will try to bridge the gap and they will be embolden again to attack.

Seeing how even you admit ISrael is stronger than neighbours why do they need nukes anyway?

Israel may be able to win a war againts it's enemies but like IDFM203 wrote, the whole idea is that there won't be a war in the first place and that's where the nuclear deterrent comes in.




Israel still needs them now for besides Iran, the Arab would has a large percentage (even in Egypt) of its populations that want to destroy Israel, even those that signed a “peace” deal with it, still have huge populations that do not recognize that deal and for the future Israel needs to have this deterrent against any nation from ever getting another Nasser with all his Arab nationalism, to think about another attempt.(which can most certainly happen) or another Islamic fundamentalist ruler.

And Israel can elect some maniac who will want to attack neighbours.

That's what they said about Sharon...





”wow :roll: ………………they don’t attack Israel now for like you said above, they cant destroy Israel conventionally ……but unconventionally they are a serious threat and they are indeed worrisome, especially because of their threat's over the years to actually act on destroying Israel when given that ability (which the nukes do in fact give them that ability)”

What threat? Who? Who ahs nukes (besides Israel)?

Unconventional weapons include chemical and biological weapons.




your condensantion is noted! :roll:

Ok first of all I never said the Iranians are bloodthirsty so don’t put words into my mouth!!

No, you said they'll attack Israel as soon as they can. Same thing.

The tone and way in which you say something can make a world of difference.




Secondly I have nothing against Iranian’s per say , it’s the large Iranian Islamic fundamentalist elements and their rulers that are worrisome and that I have a problem with.

They have made very clear their intentions over the years to destroy Israel and you might not, but Israel and I do in fact take them seriously.

And their actions speak louder than words.

Absolutely true! They openly support Hizballa and Palestinian terrorist groups and supply them with weapons (Karine A for example).

[S'13]

What is the big deal?

Israel has threatened to attack Iranian nuclear sites and Iran has said any attacks on those military site will result in a missile strike on Israel. What do you expect them to say? If Israel attacks us we will do nothing?

I hope you will agree that there is a bit of a difference between attacking a military structure used to create nuclear weapons to the launching of a missile which will most probably hit a civilian center and harm civilians.

[IDFM203]

S13 did a great job :D ……I am just going to add a bit of my own to his statements…I will put mine right underneath his.





[quote=IDFM203]whoa before I even get into Israel I thought we were talking about Iran!!
I will (and have gotten)get into Israel and why it has had it all these years as a deterrent against a collective attack or against a future Islamic fundamentalist regime (which btw Egypt can turn into any time) threatening it and address other nation’s that still harbour goals to destroy the whole Israel,.

And Iran can't use this argument. Interesting

No because Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran...
Again, Iran has threatened over the years to destroy Israel, and Israel has threatened to destroy the nukes (And not Iran) that it wants to use to destroy Israel.




But you first have not answered my question!!
Again
“Ok so how can Iran use the same argument that nations have threatened to annihilate it, as Israel has been threatened as such (by Iran amongst a few others in that region)??

what nation has threatend to annihilate iran??

Iraq. And relations with Pakistan aren't rosy, specially after military agreement with India. Not to mention US.

I think that considering the present circumstances, Iraq can't be seen as threat even though it threatend Iran in the past, and so can't be taken as an example.
boy your grasping for straws :roll: ……when has Pakistan threatened to annihilate Iran?? They have relation’s you know!! Iraq was more of sadam against Iran not the Iraqi people against the Iranian people, saddam has gone now and Iraq has not threatened to annihilate Iran.

I ask again, what nation has threatened to annihilate Iran??.





Iraq is no more a threat to them and they dont claim any more to want to destroy Iran…. Israel never has made any offensive intentions to destroy Iran other then to say that it might destroy the nukes (remember Iran has threatened to destroy the whole Israel, big difference in the level of threats)…what other then offensive purposes does Iran have this for??

If you say Iraq isn't a threat to Iran than you can't say Egypt is a threat to Israel. And Syria isn't.

Egypt may have a peace treaty with Israel but we don't know what the future holds. Why can't Syria be considerd a threat?
This is not if I say something so that automatically cancels something else…..whatever game your playing I am not having any part o that.

Here’s a fact….a majority of Egyptians don’t recognise the “peace” deal that their government signed back in the late 70’s and as such Egypt most certainly is a threat in the future…..Syria?? What are you talking about?? Besides their conventional army, They have tons of missiles and rockets And biological and chemical munitions that they can add to it.

And they also besides Iran has over the years threatened to annihilate Israel.



what does that have to do with anything?? Again you’re sidestepping!! (btw they did renounce, lets not forget that most Israelis are secular and unlike iran, the government is secular and the whole Oslo process proved that Israel was willing and had given up land and was willing to give up more…….I mean most Israelis support giving up land………….but again this has nothing to do with what we are discussing)

Iranians declared themselves as islamic state and act on it. Israel is only acting on it. Seing how it's illegal to raise pigs in Israel, McDonald's can't serve dairy products and meat at same time and defence minister got in troubles because F-15s they purchased landed in Israel on Saturday Israel is acting a lot like religios state. Well, you know what they say about people living in glass houses.

There are plenty of restaurants serving non kosher foods. McDonald's have restaurants that serve kosher foods and others that serve non kosher foods for those of us who want to taste a cheeseburger. In Christian communities the raising of pigs is permitted. Also it's permitted in zoos and research centers. wow this is your funniest statement ;) ……I mean all you have to do is go to a religious person in Israel and tell him that Israel for the most part is a religious state…he will laugh at your face….yes they have religious parties and they do make some noise but for the most part most of Israel and Israelis are secular, the Sabbath is full of cars on most of the streets, people dress in a very western way even the women, you can buy non kosher anywhere (yes even pig).

But any way’s back to topic, again Israel has giving up land and most Israelis support that and not a greater Israel so its not a religious government like Iran where Iran wants to destroy Israel on religious grounds, even if Israel is religious (as you falsely say), it has no such religious leaders in power or rulings that say we need to destroy Iran based on our religion.



hehe ;) yes I understand that the world powers gave themselves a pass……………….but I ask again what makes them not allow other responsible countries, which Israel is (it has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used it) to not have them??…… again…

Fine. Give Iran nukes and wait 30 years. If they don't use them (seeing how you consider this measure of "reason") they can keep them. If they use them, they'll have to give them up.

Brilliant! If your plan doesn't work we won't be alive to tell you you were wrong... :roll:

just to add, they have said that they want to destroy Israel in the past and they have military parades with the death to Israel themes on it, so you can wait and not be worried but its not something that any sane individual should ask us to do.

btw I have “seen” you kind of talk before……like with Iraq in the late 70’s….all I can say is that if Israel had your thinking, and it has not attacked Iraq’s reactor, well lets just say that the gulf war would have looked much different. (btw I am not comparing saddam to Iran’s religious leader for Iran’s potential to use theirs is much greater then saddams potential to use his…although he most probably would have used it eventually)




Especially considering that Israel is a small nation that has been surrounded by many enemies much larger its size and its case for these weapons far outweigh those nations need for them for Israel has had and still has many nations that are much bigger then her and that still wish to destroy the nation and those nuclear arms is a deterrent for the Arabs to not start another war in another attempt to annihilate it!

I ask aain, why can't Iran use same arguments that it's surronded by enemies, was attacked etc.

Because it's not surronded by enemies...
Oh so Iran is a small nation that is surrounded by nations and people that have threatened to destroy it??? Again who?? :roll:




We are not talking the NPT as it is the word of god and the all knowing truth and whther what’s right or wrong!!……if they can have it with less of a threat to their national existence, Israel most certainly can have it especially since it has faced a much greater threat to its very existence……

Israel's conventional military is better than neighbours. IRan's isn't. IRan also doesn't have world's sole superpower comited to their defence. Israel does. Iran has every reason to develop them.

Iran is not in the same position as Israel.

so let me get this straight….now your saying Israel shouldn’t have any nukes but Iran that is a Islamic fundamentalist state should have them. :roll:

Again Israel’s nukes are to deter all the Arabs nations combined (for they fight combined) to not attack again for conventionally speaking, besides their modernization’s of their militaries as a lot of them are doing, their numbers dwarf tiny Israel and without the threat of nukes, they will always try again.

Oh and you still haven’t given me one good and sane reason other then offensive needs, that Iran needs these weapons.




Iran faces no such defensive threat, plus it has offensive intentions in that region and has threatened to destroy the whole Israel for years now!!


Israel has no realistic threat. Iran does.

Please explain.
Wow with the “stroke” of the keyboarded you have managed to fool yourself simply inot forgetting the nations and the millions and millions of Arabs that have still as their goal to destroy Israel :roll:

Oh again Iran has threatened for years to destroy Israel

again who has threatened to annihilate iran??




ok so I did the google search (I knew id’ be forced to do at some point)

ok Israel has a total of 481 combat aircraft Vs I took only 8 biggest Arab nations that have a total of 2354 combat aircraft!!! (And yes they have f16’s as well as migs)

Last time I checked Israel has 4 neighbours and one of them has no air force (they have some helicopters though).

Could you elaborate?
Yes that’s Lebanon………Syria and Egypt both have bigger air forces and add Jordan….also those four aren’t the only ones that fight against Israel…….like for example Iran .(I have gone over and over again how they have threatened to annihilate Israel)




Israel has made no threats to destroy Iran, as Iran has for years threatened to destroy the whole Israel, nor is Iran part of greater Israel (if you choose to use that argument), so what other then pure defence does Israel have in wanting Iran’s nukes to be destroyed??

So Israel can throw their weight around, being unchecked and undeterred by anybody.

If it's for it's peoples well being and defence then...
also again your sidestepping……..so I repeat” Israel has made no threats to destroy Iran, as Iran has for years threatened to destroy the whole Israel, nor is Iran part of greater Israel (if you choose to use that argument), so what other then pure defence does Israel have in wanting Iran’s nukes to be destroyed?




Yes Israel is stronger militarily now but the nuclear deterrent is a much greater deterrent for the Arab nation's to not even think about starting again………..with out nukes, they will try to bridge the gap and they will be embolden again to attack.


Seeing how even you admit ISrael is stronger than neighbours why do they need nukes anyway?
Israel may be able to win a war againts it's enemies but like IDFM203 wrote, the whole idea is that there won't be a war in the first place and that's where the nuclear deterrent comes in.




Israel still needs them now for besides Iran, the Arab would has a large percentage (even in Egypt) of its populations that want to destroy Israel, even those that signed a “peace” deal with it, still have huge populations that do not recognize that deal and for the future Israel needs to have this deterrent against any nation from ever getting another Nasser with all his Arab nationalism, to think about another attempt.(which can most certainly happen) or another Islamic fundamentalist ruler.

And Israel can elect some maniac who will want to attack neighbours.

That's what they said about Sharon...when has Israel threatened to annihilate its neighbours??? And again your sidestepping…I mean you didn’t address what I just said above instead you did you usual and threw in something that’s not relevant to what I said.



”again Israel can win a war (albeit with a lot of loses to itself) but it has nukes to deter one from ever starting again……………yes Israel is more advanced now but the Arabs have much more numbers and some of them are modernizing and all that can “fool” them into trying again.”

How are they modernising? They are buying US hardware (suplies of which will be cut if they start making noise about attacking Israel). those who don't have acess to US hardware aren't modernising in any significant way. Israel has been making noise but in fact their arms purchases from the U.S. have gone up!!

The fact is that Egypt is a modern U.S and soviet equipped army.. Saudi Arabia is as well… and some other Arab nations… then the other ones have their soviet equipment and they have chemical and biological with tons and tons of missiles and they have their huge numeric advantage. And then there’s Iran that is modernizing its military where its buying from north Korea and china and Russia…and a few other nations are doing the same.



”wow :roll: ………………they don’t attack Israel now for like you said above, they cant destroy Israel conventionally ……but unconventionally they are a serious threat and they are indeed worrisome, especially because of their threat's over the years to actually act on destroying Israel when given that ability (which the nukes do in fact give them that ability)”

What threat? Who? Who ahs nukes (besides Israel)?

Unconventional weapons include chemical and biological weapons.

also iran is close to having them!!!

besides what S13 said, also their large number’s in attack are like a nuke!! I have said
Israel’s nukes are in part as a deterrent to their huge numerical advantage and to them from starting another war!!



your condensantion is noted! :roll:

Ok first of all I never said the Iranians are bloodthirsty so don’t put words into my mouth!!

No, you said they'll attack Israel as soon as they can. Same thing.

The tone and way in which you say something can make a world of difference.
No I said the fundamentalist Iranian religious rulers and these fundamentalist elements want to destroy Israel (as they have said they have said in the past) and not the rest of the Iranians.




Secondly I have nothing against Iranian’s per say , it’s the large Iranian Islamic fundamentalist elements and their rulers that are worrisome and that I have a problem with.

They have made very clear their intentions over the years to destroy Israel and you might not, but Israel and I do in fact take them seriously.

And their actions speak louder than words.

Absolutely true! They openly support Hizballa and Palestinian terrorist groups and supply them with weapons (Karine A for example).
Also again they haven’t in the past because conventionally they couldn’t but nukes give them the ability to back up those words that they have been doing for years.




They didn't attack their weak neighbour, who had no serious outside support and little means to hit back but they will attack strongest country in region, armed with nukes and backed by US. Yes, makes perfect sense if you can make Islamic fundamentalism make sense or be able to ratinlise it as it partinas to Israel or a suicide bomber based on his religion (not on mere “occupation”) make sense then I guess you have a more of a understanding then I am :roll: . Kudos to you ;) :roll:

Shalom :D

[aktarian]

No because Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran...


So what are those nukey on subs for?




I think that considering the present circumstances, Iraq can't be seen as threat even though it threatend Iran in the past, and so can't be taken as an example.

...and later...

[quote=S'13]

Egypt may have a peace treaty with Israel but we don't know what the future holds. Why can't Syria be considerd a threat?


So ISrael can see Egypt as potential threat in future despite peace treaty and Iran can't see Iraq as potential threat in future? Why?

Why Syria isn't a threat? Because their military is weak. As I'm sure you are aware of.


Brilliant! If your plan doesn't work we won't be alive to tell you you were wrong... :roll:

And If Israel decides that tomorow they woun't be "reasonable" anymore?



Because it's not surronded by enemies...

It is. Look at any map.



Iran is not in the same position as Israel.

No. Israel's position is much stronger.



Please explain.

Israel's military is stronger than it's neighbours and can count on full US support. Iran can't.



Could you elaborate?

Syria, Jordan, Egypt have air forces. Lebanon, AFAIK, doesn't (besides some helicopters)



If it's for it's peoples well being and defence then...

...then Iran should be alowed to get nukes.



Israel may be able to win a war againts it's enemies but like IDFM203 wrote, the whole idea is that there won't be a war in the first place and that's where the nuclear deterrent comes in.


And seeing similar things Iranian leadership decided that geting nukes is good idea.




That's what they said about Sharon...

I'm sure you expained to them that they are antisemites...



Unconventional weapons include chemical and biological weapons.

Which Israel also has.



The tone and way in which you say something can make a world of difference.

Saying that some country will atack another one as soon as they get nukes is acusing them of beeing bloodtrhirsty and warmongering. I pointed to you that Iranians aren't.



Absolutely true! They openly support Hizballa and Palestinian terrorist groups and supply them with weapons (Karine A for example).

And don't attack other countries, even with good reasons.

[Javehn]

Oh , whas up in here , yo ? DJ Aktarian is spinning the plates ?? Sorry , it's late in my place , getting a bit crazy . By the way , i have to tell that the new "Lord of the rings" have a lot of , how to say it , gayish **** going on , between all those funky ass hobits .

So , please ,mr Aktarian , give Iranian government the WMD , and bless him with Allahu Akbar . Cose , Allahu Akbar his witness , they could use it !! How do i know ? A little sence , maybe , who knows ...Note , i didn't said he will use , but he just might to !!

Let's see you reason with them ...

And for feck sake , dudes , they had an earthquake there .God damnit .
I don't think they are thinking about nuking someone right now .

[UoUo]

So ISrael can see Egypt as potential threat in future despite peace treaty and Iran can't see Iraq as potential threat in future? Why?



Cuz iraq don't have any army ?



Why Syria isn't a threat? Because their military is weak. As I'm sure you are aware of.


:roll: and what with all the WMD they have ? and just cuz they have weak army don't mean they aren't a threat.



It is. Look at any map.


:roll: Ho...yeah....turkmanistan....afganistan....pakistan (a muslim and a Ally to iran) sudi arabia (maybe maybe they only threat)..iraq (don't have Any army)..and turkey..


All of them are arab/muslim countries...israel suronded by 22 arab countries....




Which Israel also has.]

Point ?

[StarvingStudent47]

Oh , whas up in here , yo ? DJ Aktarian is spinning the plates ?? Sorry , it's late in my place , getting a bit crazy . By the way , i have to tell that the new "Lord of the rings" have a lot of , how to say it , gayish **** going on , between all those funky ass hobits .


Hold up one freakin' second. I normally have a lot of respect for you, Javehn, but this is waaaaaaay out of line. Return of the King is the greatest movie of all time, and Meriadoc Brandybuck is my hero. So screw you!!!

;) (just kidding, thought this thread could use some levity. But I still think Return of the King is the greatest movie of all time, and that Merry rocks)

[IDFM203]

I see that you didn’t answer my post but chose to answer S13 (which I have added to……I mean your responses to S13 I have clealy dwelt with here as well )…

there is a saying.”silence is as if agreenment” ;)

Just to give the benefit of the doubt that you were say tired ;) and just missed my post here is a repost….

"S13 did a great job :D ……I am just going to add a bit of my own to his statements…I will put mine right underneath his.





[quote=IDFM203]whoa before I even get into Israel I thought we were talking about Iran!!
I will (and have gotten)get into Israel and why it has had it all these years as a deterrent against a collective attack or against a future Islamic fundamentalist regime (which btw Egypt can turn into any time) threatening it and address other nation’s that still harbour goals to destroy the whole Israel,.

And Iran can't use this argument. Interesting

No because Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran...
Again, Iran has threatened over the years to destroy Israel, and Israel has threatened to destroy the nukes (And not Iran) that it wants to use to destroy Israel.




But you first have not answered my question!!
Again
“Ok so how can Iran use the same argument that nations have threatened to annihilate it, as Israel has been threatened as such (by Iran amongst a few others in that region)??

what nation has threatend to annihilate iran??

Iraq. And relations with Pakistan aren't rosy, specially after military agreement with India. Not to mention US.

I think that considering the present circumstances, Iraq can't be seen as threat even though it threatend Iran in the past, and so can't be taken as an example.
boy your grasping for straws :roll: ……when has Pakistan threatened to annihilate Iran?? They have relation’s you know!! Iraq was more of sadam against Iran not the Iraqi people against the Iranian people, saddam has gone now and Iraq has not threatened to annihilate Iran.

I ask again, what nation has threatened to annihilate Iran??.





Iraq is no more a threat to them and they dont claim any more to want to destroy Iran…. Israel never has made any offensive intentions to destroy Iran other then to say that it might destroy the nukes (remember Iran has threatened to destroy the whole Israel, big difference in the level of threats)…what other then offensive purposes does Iran have this for??

If you say Iraq isn't a threat to Iran than you can't say Egypt is a threat to Israel. And Syria isn't.

Egypt may have a peace treaty with Israel but we don't know what the future holds. Why can't Syria be considerd a threat?
This is not if I say something so that automatically cancels something else…..whatever game your playing I am not having any part o that.

Here’s a fact….a majority of Egyptians don’t recognise the “peace” deal that their government signed back in the late 70’s and as such Egypt most certainly is a threat in the future…..Syria?? What are you talking about?? Besides their conventional army, They have tons of missiles and rockets And biological and chemical munitions that they can add to it.

And they also besides Iran has over the years threatened to annihilate Israel.



what does that have to do with anything?? Again you’re sidestepping!! (btw they did renounce, lets not forget that most Israelis are secular and unlike iran, the government is secular and the whole Oslo process proved that Israel was willing and had given up land and was willing to give up more…….I mean most Israelis support giving up land………….but again this has nothing to do with what we are discussing)

Iranians declared themselves as islamic state and act on it. Israel is only acting on it. Seing how it's illegal to raise pigs in Israel, McDonald's can't serve dairy products and meat at same time and defence minister got in troubles because F-15s they purchased landed in Israel on Saturday Israel is acting a lot like religios state. Well, you know what they say about people living in glass houses.

There are plenty of restaurants serving non kosher foods. McDonald's have restaurants that serve kosher foods and others that serve non kosher foods for those of us who want to taste a cheeseburger. In Christian communities the raising of pigs is permitted. Also it's permitted in zoos and research centers. wow this is your funniest statement ;) ……I mean all you have to do is go to a religious person in Israel and tell him that Israel for the most part is a religious state…he will laugh at your face….yes they have religious parties and they do make some noise but for the most part most of Israel and Israelis are secular, the Sabbath is full of cars on most of the streets, people dress in a very western way even the women, you can buy non kosher anywhere (yes even pig).

But any way’s back to topic, again Israel has giving up land and most Israelis support that and not a greater Israel so its not a religious government like Iran where Iran wants to destroy Israel on religious grounds, even if Israel is religious (as you falsely say), it has no such religious leaders in power or rulings that say we need to destroy Iran based on our religion.



hehe ;) yes I understand that the world powers gave themselves a pass……………….but I ask again what makes them not allow other responsible countries, which Israel is (it has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used it) to not have them??…… again…

Fine. Give Iran nukes and wait 30 years. If they don't use them (seeing how you consider this measure of "reason") they can keep them. If they use them, they'll have to give them up.

Brilliant! If your plan doesn't work we won't be alive to tell you you were wrong... :roll:

just to add, they have said that they want to destroy Israel in the past and they have military parades with the death to Israel themes on it, so you can wait and not be worried but its not something that any sane individual should ask us to do.

btw I have “seen” you kind of talk before……like with Iraq in the late 70’s….all I can say is that if Israel had your thinking, and it has not attacked Iraq’s reactor, well lets just say that the gulf war would have looked much different. (btw I am not comparing saddam to Iran’s religious leader for Iran’s potential to use theirs is much greater then saddams potential to use his…although he most probably would have used it eventually)




Especially considering that Israel is a small nation that has been surrounded by many enemies much larger its size and its case for these weapons far outweigh those nations need for them for Israel has had and still has many nations that are much bigger then her and that still wish to destroy the nation and those nuclear arms is a deterrent for the Arabs to not start another war in another attempt to annihilate it!

I ask aain, why can't Iran use same arguments that it's surronded by enemies, was attacked etc.

Because it's not surronded by enemies...
Oh so Iran is a small nation that is surrounded by nations and people that have threatened to destroy it??? Again who?? :roll:




We are not talking the NPT as it is the word of god and the all knowing truth and whther what’s right or wrong!!……if they can have it with less of a threat to their national existence, Israel most certainly can have it especially since it has faced a much greater threat to its very existence……

Israel's conventional military is better than neighbours. IRan's isn't. IRan also doesn't have world's sole superpower comited to their defence. Israel does. Iran has every reason to develop them.

Iran is not in the same position as Israel.

so let me get this straight….now your saying Israel shouldn’t have any nukes but Iran that is a Islamic fundamentalist state should have them. :roll:

Again Israel’s nukes are to deter all the Arabs nations combined (for they fight combined) to not attack again for conventionally speaking, besides their modernization’s of their militaries as a lot of them are doing, their numbers dwarf tiny Israel and without the threat of nukes, they will always try again.

Oh and you still haven’t given me one good and sane reason other then offensive needs, that Iran needs these weapons.




Iran faces no such defensive threat, plus it has offensive intentions in that region and has threatened to destroy the whole Israel for years now!!


Israel has no realistic threat. Iran does.

Please explain.
Wow with the “stroke” of the keyboarded you have managed to fool yourself simply inot forgetting the nations and the millions and millions of Arabs that have still as their goal to destroy Israel :roll:

Oh again Iran has threatened for years to destroy Israel

again who has threatened to annihilate iran??




ok so I did the google search (I knew id’ be forced to do at some point)

ok Israel has a total of 481 combat aircraft Vs I took only 8 biggest Arab nations that have a total of 2354 combat aircraft!!! (And yes they have f16’s as well as migs)

Last time I checked Israel has 4 neighbours and one of them has no air force (they have some helicopters though).

Could you elaborate?
Yes that’s Lebanon………Syria and Egypt both have bigger air forces and add Jordan….also those four aren’t the only ones that fight against Israel…….like for example Iran .(I have gone over and over again how they have threatened to annihilate Israel)




Israel has made no threats to destroy Iran, as Iran has for years threatened to destroy the whole Israel, nor is Iran part of greater Israel (if you choose to use that argument), so what other then pure defence does Israel have in wanting Iran’s nukes to be destroyed??

So Israel can throw their weight around, being unchecked and undeterred by anybody.

If it's for it's peoples well being and defence then...
also again your sidestepping……..so I repeat” Israel has made no threats to destroy Iran, as Iran has for years threatened to destroy the whole Israel, nor is Iran part of greater Israel (if you choose to use that argument), so what other then pure defence does Israel have in wanting Iran’s nukes to be destroyed?




Yes Israel is stronger militarily now but the nuclear deterrent is a much greater deterrent for the Arab nation's to not even think about starting again………..with out nukes, they will try to bridge the gap and they will be embolden again to attack.



Seeing how even you admit ISrael is stronger than neighbours why do they need nukes anyway?
Israel may be able to win a war againts it's enemies but like IDFM203 wrote, the whole idea is that there won't be a war in the first place and that's where the nuclear deterrent comes in.




Israel still needs them now for besides Iran, the Arab would has a large percentage (even in Egypt) of its populations that want to destroy Israel, even those that signed a “peace” deal with it, still have huge populations that do not recognize that deal and for the future Israel needs to have this deterrent against any nation from ever getting another Nasser with all his Arab nationalism, to think about another attempt.(which can most certainly happen) or another Islamic fundamentalist ruler.

And Israel can elect some maniac who will want to attack neighbours.

That's what they said about Sharon...when has Israel threatened to annihilate its neighbours??? And again your sidestepping…I mean you didn’t address what I just said above instead you did you usual and threw in something that’s not relevant to what I said.



”again Israel can win a war (albeit with a lot of loses to itself) but it has nukes to deter one from ever starting again……………yes Israel is more advanced now but the Arabs have much more numbers and some of them are modernizing and all that can “fool” them into trying again.”

How are they modernising? They are buying US hardware (suplies of which will be cut if they start making noise about attacking Israel). those who don't have acess to US hardware aren't modernising in any significant way. Israel has been making noise but in fact their arms purchases from the U.S. have gone up!!

The fact is that Egypt is a modern U.S and soviet equipped army.. Saudi Arabia is as well… and some other Arab nations… then the other ones have their soviet equipment and they have chemical and biological with tons and tons of missiles and they have their huge numeric advantage. And then there’s Iran that is modernizing its military where its buying from north Korea and china and Russia…and a few other nations are doing the same.



”wow :roll: ………………they don’t attack Israel now for like you said above, they cant destroy Israel conventionally ……but unconventionally they are a serious threat and they are indeed worrisome, especially because of their threat's over the years to actually act on destroying Israel when given that ability (which the nukes do in fact give them that ability)”

What threat? Who? Who ahs nukes (besides Israel)?

Unconventional weapons include chemical and biological weapons.

also iran is close to having them!!!

besides what S13 said, also their large number’s in attack are like a nuke!! I have said
Israel’s nukes are in part as a deterrent to their huge numerical advantage and to them from starting another war!!



your condensantion is noted! :roll:

Ok first of all I never said the Iranians are bloodthirsty so don’t put words into my mouth!!

No, you said they'll attack Israel as soon as they can. Same thing.

The tone and way in which you say something can make a world of difference.
No I said the fundamentalist Iranian religious rulers and these fundamentalist elements want to destroy Israel (as they have said they have said in the past) and not the rest of the Iranians.




Secondly I have nothing against Iranian’s per say , it’s the large Iranian Islamic fundamentalist elements and their rulers that are worrisome and that I have a problem with.

They have made very clear their intentions over the years to destroy Israel and you might not, but Israel and I do in fact take them seriously.

And their actions speak louder than words.

Absolutely true! They openly support Hizballa and Palestinian terrorist groups and supply them with weapons (Karine A for example).
Also again they haven’t in the past because conventionally they couldn’t but nukes give them the ability to back up those words that they have been doing for years.




They didn't attack their weak neighbour, who had no serious outside support and little means to hit back but they will attack strongest country in region, armed with nukes and backed by US. Yes, makes perfect sense if you can make Islamic fundamentalism make sense or be able to ratinlise it as it partinas to Israel or a suicide bomber based on his religion (not on mere “occupation”) make sense then I guess you have a more of a understanding then I am :roll: . Kudos to you ;) :roll: "


Also UoUo did a good job answering you last post after you ignored mine but one pointn he didn’t answer so I will.



No because Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran...


So what are those nukey on subs for? the nukes are for a second strike capability only!! Meaning that it now gives Israel a double deterrent factor to others that might think that by attacking and destroying Israel in one shot that it will end israels ability to retalite for now it wont.

Again these nukes are a detternt for there to even be a war.

Now again Israel has had nukes for thirty years it has never used it….it has never threatened to destroy Iran. Israel’s nukes on the subs are not an offensive threat to Iran at all.

-Edit- Israel offers to help out like it has done in Turkey and in other places and guess what Iran says....hmmm :roll:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1072420674113

Shalom :D

[Seiyuuki]

Hmmm...Iran and Israel going at each others with hundreds of thousands of international troops caught in the middle with two countries going through the unstable process of reconstruction...that make for an interesting scenario.

[GazB]

"The russian Buk-M1-2 is a remarkable system and has a proven record in test intercepts. The SA-20 "Triumf" is another example of russian systems capable of intercepting ballistic missiles."

They are both very interesting systems but in the end they are just modified medium and long range SAMs. I was referring to the Moscow ABM system using Galosh and Gazelle missiles. ( a ballistic missile is like a bullet it is accelerated to max speed and then falls back to earth... obviously the higher the speed, the longer the range or vice versa. the Israeli system is designed to counter short range slow missiles. The Russian system is designed to intercept 16,000km range ballistic missiles travelling much faster... 9-10km/s.

"So far I haven't seen any claim that Iran posesses any nuclear bombs. And without it, the Shihab-3 missile is just a 800-kg bomb with much less accuracy than an air-dropped one. And not much of a deterent."

And if they don't have nuclear weapons what is the justification for the attack?

"Cause Iran is full of crazy Islamic Jihad mofos."

So is Pakistan, why not bomb them too?

"Israel will never ever use WMD agains any nation what so ever"

That is a lie. Why would they need them if there were no circumstances where they would use them.

"Israel has had something now for thirty years and it hasn’t ever used it and at the same time since it has had the full nuclear deterrent, Israel has not been attacked as well!! "

Not attacked while you have nuclear weapons... sounds like the sort of security most countries in the region would like. Why can't they have it?

"big difference is that Israel’s is solely for defence while Iran’s is for offence. "

The problem is that only Israel thinks Israel is perfect and innocent and good. Any unbiased person would just assume both sides are capable of being bad so why not let both have the same capability? (A biased person would either agree with you or disagree, but then you don't care whether the person is biased or unbiased, though I think you would think anyone who agreed with you was unbiased and anyone who disagreed was biased.... against you.) In any event this should be a good test of the S-300s the Iranians bought from Russia.

"They have made very clear over the year’s their intentions to destroy the whole land of Israel while Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran. "

Rubbish. They want to destroy the "Nation" of Israel, not the land the Nation of Israel occupies.

"Musharaff isn't a crazy fundamentalists...the leadr's of iran are very very fundamentalists."

He is a military dictator of a country that created and supported the taleban in Afghanistan. The wonderful utopia that Afghanistan became under the Taleban was supported by Pakistan directly (though with financial aid from the CIA).

"they don’t attack Israel now for like you said above, they cant destroy Israel conventionally ……but unconventionally they are a serious threat and they are indeed worrisome, especially because of their threat's over the years to actually act on destroying Israel when given that ability (which the nukes do in fact give them that ability) "

If Israel didn't have WMDs then it would be easier to oppose other nations in the region aquiring such weapons. While Israel has such weapons then other nations in the region can prove a case of need for themselves.

"what other then offensive purposes does Iran have this for?? "

What else would stop the US or Israel from interfering in Irans existance? I doubt they would want another Shah of Iran like the one the CIA gave them... why shouldn't they own their own oil?

"It is about trritorry as well...but like i said before....the palstinians commited terror's attack pre 1967.... i mean...even before we got there land.... "

So Israel didn't occupy any Palestinian land before 1967...???

The real problem in the region was created by the british unfortunately. They seemed to think they owned the place and drew up lines on a map to make countries that never really existed and actually picked out people to become royal families for each of these countries. That is why there is no such country as Kurdistan (with the Kurds split between northern Iraq, turkey and Persia (later Iran)). This manipulation of borders and people seem to be the colonial right of the west and continued with the relocation of the Jews. 6 Million died in death camps in Europe so they were owed something. Amusing really as far more communists were also killed, usually worked to death, yet we owed them nothing.

"I think that considering the present circumstances, Iraq can't be seen as threat even though it threatend Iran in the past, and so can't be taken as an example. "

The US currently controls Iraq and has made it clear on several occasions that Iran could be next. I think that constitues a real threat.

"Why can't Syria be considerd a threat?"

Because currently Syria couldn't fight its way out of a wet paper bag.

"Brilliant! If your plan doesn't work we won't be alive to tell you you were wrong..."

The Arabs and Persians have already taken that gamble... have you no spine? His plan involves waiting while Iran has nuclear weapons for 30 years. Any strike by iran in the next 30 years would presumably result in the complete annialation of Iran by either Israeli and/or US nukes. I'd be happy to move to Israel to make that bet.

"Because it's not surronded by enemies...'

Yes it is. Iraq under US occupation, Afghansitan with a few US soldiers and former Soviet republics are hardly best friends with Iran.

"Iran is not in the same position as Israel. "

No, it is surrounded by enemies or potential enemies, does not get on well with the world only superpower, does not have a super air and tank force etc etc.

"Absolutely true! They openly support Hizballa and Palestinian terrorist groups and supply them with weapons (Karine A for example)."

So what?

"I hope you will agree that there is a bit of a difference between attacking a military structure used to create nuclear weapons to the launching of a missile which will most probably hit a civilian center and harm civilians."

There is also a difference between seeking security and being aggreesive... until you prove that Iran is seeking an offensive capability rather than a defencive one then you are the aggressors in this.

"if you can make Islamic fundamentalism make sense or be able to ratinlise it as it partinas to Israel or a suicide bomber based on his religion (not on mere “occupation”) make sense then I guess you have a more of a understanding then I am "

Whether it makes sense to you is immaterial. the point is that the Mullahs like to send suicide bombers... they don't reserve the priveledge to die for their cause for themselves. The use of nuclear weapons would undoubtedly lead to the mullahs themselves giving their lives.. which I doubt would happen.

[aktarian]

Cuz iraq don't have any army ?

And Egypt has peace treaty with Israel now.



:roll: and what with all the WMD they have ? and just cuz they have weak army don't mean they aren't a threat.

And Israel is stronger in that field as well.



:roll: Ho...yeah....turkmanistan....

Not a threat



afganistan....

With US troops in it....



pakistan (a muslim and a Ally to iran)

Pakistanis backed Taliban, Iran was close to invading Taliban ruled Afghanistan, Iran has defence agreement with India. BTW, isn't Iraq also muslim country? That didn't prevent them from attacking muslim Iran.



sudi arabia (maybe maybe they only threat)..

Not a threat



iraq (don't have Any army)..

See Afghanistan



and turkey..

See Afghanistan



All of them are arab/muslim countries...israel suronded by 22 arab countries....

22? WTF? Last time I checked it was 4.




Point ?

Deterrence, second strike etc...

[aktarian]

I see that you didn’t answer my post but chose to answer S13 (which I have added to……I mean your responses to S13 I have clealy dwelt with here as well )…

there is a saying.”silence is as if agreenment” ;)

Just to give the benefit of the doubt that you were say tired ;) and just missed my post here is a repost….

You said you just added to his posts. Since it was late here I assmed answering him would be answering you as well. But NP, I'll answer you as well.




"S13 did a great job :D ……I am just going to add a bit of my own to his statements…I will put mine right underneath his.



I think that considering the present circumstances, Iraq can't be seen as threat even though it threatend Iran in the past, and so can't be taken as an example.
boy your grasping for straws :roll: ……when has Pakistan threatened to annihilate Iran?? They have relation’s you know!! Iraq was more of sadam against Iran not the Iraqi people against the Iranian people, saddam has gone now and Iraq has not threatened to annihilate Iran.

I ask again, what nation has threatened to annihilate Iran??.

Iraq has threateend to destroy Iran. And acted on it. India and Pkiastan have relations, you know. Not perfect though. Just because both are muslim it doesn't mean they are friends. Taliban and NA were both muslims and look how that one went. Ditto Iran and Iraq. Iran has defence agreement with India. Under which India can use Iran as bases for attacks on Pakistan. Do you think Pakistanis will like that?




Egypt may have a peace treaty with Israel but we don't know what the future holds. Why can't Syria be considerd a threat?
This is not if I say something so that automatically cancels something else…..whatever game your playing I am not having any part o that.

Here’s a fact….a majority of Egyptians don’t recognise the “peace” deal that their government signed back in the late 70’s and as such Egypt most certainly is a threat in the future…..Syria?? What are you talking about?? Besides their conventional army, They have tons of missiles and rockets And biological and chemical munitions that they can add to it.

And they also besides Iran has over the years threatened to annihilate Israel.

Here's a fact. Iraq is under Us ocupation. One they it woun't be anymore. Who can say what will happen then. If Egypt can be seen as future potential threat to Israel than Iraq can be seen as same by Iran.

And besides, Iran didn't invade Afghanistan when they planned to and could win, so why would they attack Israel and be nuked?


There are plenty of restaurants serving non kosher foods. McDonald's have restaurants that serve kosher foods and others that serve non kosher foods for those of us who want to taste a cheeseburger. In Christian communities the raising of pigs is permitted. Also it's permitted in zoos and research centers. wow this is your funniest statement ;) ……I mean all you have to do is go to a religious person in Israel and tell him that Israel for the most part is a religious state…he will laugh at your face….yes they have religious parties and they do make some noise but for the most part most of Israel and Israelis are secular, the Sabbath is full of cars on most of the streets, people dress in a very western way even the women, you can buy non kosher anywhere (yes even pig).

But any way’s back to topic, again Israel has giving up land and most Israelis support that and not a greater Israel so its not a religious government like Iran where Iran wants to destroy Israel on religious grounds, even if Israel is religious (as you falsely say), it has no such religious leaders in power or rulings that say we need to destroy Iran based on our religion.

And Israel is state of the Jews and all Jews are citizens of Israel. Basing your citizenship on religion, wow, that's secularism at it's best. "God told me this is my land" sounds familiar?



Brilliant! If your plan doesn't work we won't be alive to tell you you were wrong... :roll:

just to add, they have said that they want to destroy Israel in the past and they have military parades with the death to Israel themes on it, so you can wait and not be worried but its not something that any sane individual should ask us to do.[/color]


And besides, Iran didn't invade Afghanistan when they planned to and could win, so why would they attack Israel and be nuked?




btw I have “seen” you kind of talk before……like with Iraq in the late 70’s….all I can say is that if Israel had your thinking, and it has not attacked Iraq’s reactor, well lets just say that the gulf war would have looked much different. (btw I am not comparing saddam to Iran’s religious leader for Iran’s potential to use theirs is much greater then saddams potential to use his…although he most probably would have used it eventually)

Did people advocate Iraq getting nukes so they could parry ISrael's nuclear monopoly?




Because it's not surronded by enemies...
Oh so Iran is a small nation that is surrounded by nations and people that have threatened to destroy it??? Again who?? :roll: [quote]


I answered this in my previous post.


[quote]Iran is not in the same position as Israel.

so let me get this straight….now your saying Israel shouldn’t have any nukes but Iran that is a Islamic fundamentalist state should have them. :roll: [quote]

No, I'm saying that if Israel has them Iran should have them as well. Monopoly makes people do crazy things. Just look at evolution of US nuclear doctrine during Cold war. It went from fighting nuclear war to massive retaliation to measured response to avoidance of nuclear war. In acordance with growth of Soviet nuclear arsenal. Nukes make peopel think clearer. Look at Kargil tensions. Don't you think that without nukes India and Pakistan would be at fighting war?


[quote]

Again Israel’s nukes are to deter all the Arabs nations combined (for they fight combined) to not attack again for conventionally speaking, besides their modernization’s of their militaries as a lot of them are doing, their numbers dwarf tiny Israel and without the threat of nukes, they will always try again.

And Iranian are needed to prevent others from attacking them.




Oh and you still haven’t given me one good and sane reason other then offensive needs, that Iran needs these weapons.

Defensive needs.



Please explain.
Wow with the “stroke” of the keyboarded you have managed to fool yourself simply inot forgetting the nations and the millions and millions of Arabs that have still as their goal to destroy Israel :roll:

Wow, with stroke og the key you gave arabs military capability they don't have and forgot US support for Israel.



Oh again Iran has threatened for years to destroy Israel


And besides, Iran didn't invade Afghanistan when they planned to and could win, so why would they attack Israel and be nuked?



again who has threatened to annihilate iran??

Iraq.



Could you elaborate?
Yes that’s Lebanon………Syria and Egypt both have bigger air forces and add Jordan….

Bigger my arse.



also those four aren’t the only ones that fight against Israel…….like for example Iran .(I have gone over and over again how they have threatened to annihilate Israel)

Fine, if you will add other Arabs to Arab side of equation then add US and Turkish air forces on Israeli side (with which Israel has efence agreements).


If it's for it's peoples well being and defence then...
also again your sidestepping……..so I repeat” Israel has made no threats to destroy Iran, as Iran has for years threatened to destroy the whole Israel, nor is Iran part of greater Israel (if you choose to use that argument), so what other then pure defence does Israel have in wanting Iran’s nukes to be destroyed?

So they can throw their weight around, unchecked by anybody.



That's what they said about Sharon...when has Israel threatened to annihilate its neighbours??? And again your sidestepping…I mean you didn’t address what I just said above instead you did you usual and threw in something that’s not relevant to what I said.

Id id answer it. You said unfriendly regime could come to power in egypt. And I said Israel could elect maniac to power.




Israel has been making noise but in fact their arms purchases from the U.S. have gone up!!

That's excellent step to fight a war agaisnt US backed state :roll: . How long would Egyptian air force alst in face of US arms embargo (which would follow if they started making noise in Israeli direction?




The fact is that Egypt is a modern U.S and soviet equipped army.. Saudi Arabia is as well… and some other Arab nations… then the other ones have their soviet equipment and they have chemical and biological with tons and tons of missiles and they have their huge numeric advantage. And then there’s Iran that is modernizing its military where its buying from north Korea and china and Russia…and a few other nations are doing the same.

Try US equiped. Oh, they still have some Soviet weapons but old ones. And Israel is modernising and buying from US.



Unconventional weapons include chemical and biological weapons.

also iran is close to having them!!!

besides what S13 said, also their large number’s in attack are like a nuke!! I have said
Israel’s nukes are in part as a deterrent to their huge numerical advantage and to them from starting another war!!

And Iran uses same arguments and is called agressive.



The tone and way in which you say something can make a world of difference.
No I said the fundamentalist Iranian religious rulers and these fundamentalist elements want to destroy Israel (as they have said they have said in the past) and not the rest of the Iranians.[quote]

And they didn't attack weak Afghanistan when they could win so why would they attack Israel and get nuked?

[quote]
Absolutely true! They openly support Hizballa and Palestinian terrorist groups and supply them with weapons (Karine A for example).
Also again they haven’t in the past because conventionally they couldn’t but nukes give them the ability to back up those words that they have been doing for years.

And they know Israel will retaliate wih nukes. So why do it?



the nukes are for a second strike capability only!! Meaning that it now gives Israel a double deterrent factor to others that might think that by attacking and destroying Israel in one shot that it will end israels ability to retalite for now it wont.

Second strike agaisnt who? Nobody else has nukes. How do you paln to use nukes second if there's nobody around to use them first?





Again these nukes are a detternt for there to even be a war.

Iranains use same arguments.




Now again Israel has had nukes for thirty years it has never used it….it has never threatened to destroy Iran. Israel’s nukes on the subs are not an offensive threat to Iran at all.

No? Then why are they on subs? Israel can reach other states without them.




-Edit- Israel offers to help out like it has done in Turkey and in other places and guess what Iran says....hmmm :roll:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1072420674113

Shalom :D

Can you post link where one can just click it and read without going throughregistration? It would be much apreciated.

[aFgHaNibOi]

aktarian,
Nice post! :)

[UoUo]

When can continum with for a long time...

The point is that israel or usa will stop the WMD that iran developed...maybe iran will fire few missile...but i prefer this insted of nukes.

[Javehn]

Wait just one second , mr Starving Student !! You want to say that nothing wrong going on in "Lord of the rings" ? "Merry" and "Pippin" are just straight readhead hobbits , who just likes to spend a lot of time , and to hug together ? How about they haircat , and they look ?
How about Prodo , and the other hobbit gay...Oh , sorry i mean guy , sorry ? Man , the other hobbit just dreams to "lift" mr Prodo. That's why he is getting annoyed on Golum/Smiegel all the time - he stands on his way !

I have a scenario how this crisis will resolve : Bunch of specially trained paratroopers cook platoon , lead by Stivan Siegel (he is a jew , no ?? ) , and with cover from the "120-th MASHINES , YA " platoon , lead by T300-AMV Arnold , will raid on the factory , while armed only with forks . They will engage the kitchen in the facility , making the food diariac . The bunch of Irani scientists will run to bathroom one by one , where they will be exterminated one by one , when the last words they will here are "Resistance is futile , bi-aches ! "

[AirZone]

Wait just one second , mr Starving Student !! You want to say that nothing wrong going on in "Lord of the rings" ? "Merry" and "Pippin" are just straight readhead hobbits , who just likes to spend a lot of time , and to hug together ? How about they haircat , and they look ?
How about Prodo , and the other hobbit gay...Oh , sorry i mean guy , sorry ? Man , the other hobbit just dreams to "lift" mr Prodo. That's why he is getting annoyed on Golum/Smiegel all the time - he stands on his way !

I have a scenario how this crisis will resolve : Bunch of specially trained paratroopers cook platoon , lead by Stivan Siegel (he is a jew , no ?? ) , and with cover from the "120-th MASHINES , YA " platoon , lead by T300-AMV Arnold , will raid on the factory , while armed only with forks . They will engage the kitchen in the facility , making the food diariac . The bunch of Irani scientists will run to bathroom one by one , where they will be exterminated one by one , when the last words they will here are "Resistance is futile , bi-aches ! "

rofl rofl rofl

אתה מטורף :hug:

[IDFM203]

I am just going to respond to what’s directly related to Iran and Israel…everything else is sidestepping and I will avoid it for now (not to mention I have answered all of it before)



And if they don't have nuclear weapons what is the justification for the attack? .
If they don’t have any Israel indeed wont attack those sites.

It hasn’t attacked Iran for fifty years of Israel’s existence and it wont unless they have nukes that can destroy it. ( and then it will go after only those sites)


"Cause Iran is full of crazy Islamic Jihad mofos."

So is Pakistan, why not bomb them too? . Pakistan has threatened to annihilate Israel?? But actually I am worried about them….I mean if musharaf falls then we’ll come back to this topic again…

Also Pakistan is not a direct threat now for they have India that’s threatening their existence (if cerin events unfold), Iran has no such threats to its exsistence and thus it is more urgent a threat to Israel.


"Israel will never ever use WMD agains any nation what so ever"

That is a lie. Why would they need them if there were no circumstances where they would use them. . I will amend what he said…Israel will never use nukes in a first strike and it wont be the first to use it…..

It is for a deterrent to any nations that if attacked by nukes Israel deserves the right to respond.

Its called MAD (mutual assured destruction)… just like what you (yeah yeah, I know your in new Zealand ;) ) and the US had.

It’s a deterrent factor meant to never be used.


"Israel has had something now for thirty years and it hasn’t ever used it and at the same time since it has had the full nuclear deterrent, Israel has not been attacked as well!! "

Not attacked while you have nuclear weapons... sounds like the sort of security most countries in the region would like. Why can't they have it? .

Because they have made offensive threats to annihilate other nations like Israel!!

Israel has not made any such offensive threats.

Iran has had offensive intentions that go beyond mere self-defence.


"big difference is that Israel’s is solely for defence while Iran’s is for offence. "

The problem is that only Israel thinks Israel is perfect and innocent and good. . no that’s what you think we think but none of us think so (a lot of “thinking” there ;) )….but hey I guess its all perception, like how we think that you think that Russia thinks that Russia is perfect and innocent and good.


Any unbiased person would just assume both sides are capable of being bad so why not let both have the same capability? . any unbiased person can think anyone is capable of doing bad, that I will agree with.

The fact is that Israel has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used them
The fact is that Iran has threatened to destroy Israel
The fact is that Iran fights Israel through their proxies.

With those facts, any unbiased person should make the right conclusion…but as I have said before, in my opinion there is no such thing as a unbiased person.


In any event this should be a good test of the S-300s the Iranians bought from Russia. . this is just pure speculation on my part from public sites, but how do you think that will do against
this (http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/missile_systems/air_missiles/delilah/Delilah.html)
(especially the bottom half……..also note that part was written in 1994)


"They have made very clear over the year’s their intentions to destroy the whole land of Israel while Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran. "

Rubbish. They want to destroy the "Nation" of Israel, not the land the Nation of Israel occupies. . yes so they hate Jews (that answers to groove)

Anyway’s the only way to destroy the Jews is to destroy Israel…how else can they do it?

Yes they would like other ways but in the absence of any other way they will go with the nukes.


"they don’t attack Israel now for like you said above, they cant destroy Israel conventionally ……but unconventionally they are a serious threat and they are indeed worrisome, especially because of their threat's over the years to actually act on destroying Israel when given that ability (which the nukes do in fact give them that ability) "

If Israel didn't have WMDs then it would be easier to oppose other nations in the region aquiring such weapons. While Israel has such weapons then other nations in the region can prove a case of need for themselves. . I mean no disrespect, But boy if your thinking that other nations are basing their justification on what Israel does or doesn’t do then your more naive about the middle east than I thought.

Also other nations don’t need them against Israel for Israel has never threatened to annhilate them nor has it ever used nukes on them even after it had them for over thirty years.


"what other then offensive purposes does Iran have this for?? "

What else would stop the US or Israel from interfering in Irans existance? .first of all when has Israel threatened to annihilate Iran?? They have had nukes now for thirty years and they could have attacked any time but they didn’t fire a single shot at Iran.

As or the U.S. well first of all they also have never threatened to annihilate Iran.

Also even if the rulers of Iran have a legitimate defensive concern for their power and fear that the U.S. will remove them, they also have their offensive intentions to wipe of a nation from the planet and as such that negates their justifications to have nukes to prevent the U.S. from doing to it what it did in Iraq.

when a nation has nukes with offensive intentions that overrides any concerns for any deffenive excuses that they might have (especially in Iran's case where that excuse is rather thin)


"Why can't Syria be considerd a threat?"

Because currently Syria couldn't fight its way out of a wet paper bag. . first of all they have strength in numbers and size….secondly they have tons of missiles and biological and chemical warheads

Also last I checked, Syria doesn’t fight wars alone, it gets other Arab nations to join it.

Now if you don’t believe that there could be another Yom kipper war (perhaps without the surprise) by the other arab nations if Israel didn’t have nukes then that’s your naive belief and its not something I can change you mind about, all I can say is that we don’t have your luxury of your naive comfort.


"Brilliant! If your plan doesn't work we won't be alive to tell you you were wrong..."

The Arabs and Persians have already taken that gamble... have you no spine? . Not when your faced with total annihilation.

Its not a question of spine but rather a question of another 6 million Jews dying horrible deaths.


His plan involves waiting while Iran has nuclear weapons for 30 years. Any strike by iran in the next 30 years would presumably result in the complete annialation of Iran by either Israeli and/or US nukes. I'd be happy to move to Israel to make that bet. .

You can take that bet, its not something that Israel can afford to rationally do.

Again Iran is controlled by Islamic fundamentalists that want to see Israel destroyed (these are their words)


"Because it's not surronded by enemies...'

Yes it is. Iraq under US occupation, Afghansitan with a few US soldiers and former Soviet republics are hardly best friends with Iran. . those nations have threatened it with total annihilation??

also again iran has offensive intentions to destroy a nation!!


"Iran is not in the same position as Israel. "

No, it is surrounded by enemies or potential enemies, does not get on well with the world only superpower, does not have a super air and tank force etc etc. .

Again it is surrounded by enemies that have threatened to annihilate it??

And again they have offensive intentions to destroy a nation!!



"Absolutely true! They openly support Hizballa and Palestinian terrorist groups and supply them with weapons (Karine A for example)."

So what? .
Of course that’s your answer…..well its not "so what" to us for Iran is far from Israel and has no business interfering but yet it does and that’s just proves their hostile intentions towards Israel for its not only mere words by them.


"I hope you will agree that there is a bit of a difference between attacking a military structure used to create nuclear weapons to the launching of a missile which will most probably hit a civilian center and harm civilians."

There is also a difference between seeking security and being aggreesive... until you prove that Iran is seeking an offensive capability rather than a defencive one then you are the aggressors in this. . yes and Israel was the aggressors in 1981 with regards to Iraq’s reactor…yeah we know already how a lot in the outside world (wrongly) view things :roll:

So lets go over this again

Iran has over the year’s threatened to destroy Israel
Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran!

Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.

Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land.

Iran has military parades with the death to Israel theme written on them.

cocnclusion=You don’t need to be Sherlock holms to figure out their offensive intentions.


"if you can make Islamic fundamentalism make sense or be able to ratinlise it as it partinas to Israel or a suicide bomber based on his religion (not on mere “occupation”) make sense then I guess you have a more of a understanding then I am "

Whether it makes sense to you is immaterial. . yes I know that you feel that what makes sense is immaterial :roll:

Their brand of islam doesn’t make sense but yet a lot of people die because of it...thats all i need to know to be worried about them having nukes.


the point is that the Mullahs like to send suicide bombers... they don't reserve the priveledge to die for their cause for themselves. The use of nuclear weapons would undoubtedly lead to the mullahs themselves giving their lives.. which I doubt would happen. now whether you doubt it or not is immaterial.

After all that I have brought down your basic assurance to Israel not being wiped off the face of the earth is that you doubt it would happen…….well that might be fine for you in new zeland (or russia ;) )but its not fine for us…..we actually take what they say to be series….we simply have no choice!!



"UoUo"Cuz iraq don't have any army ?"

And Egypt has peace treaty with Israel now.

First of all Iraq has no army, Egypt does and it has a large and modern one.
Second of all, I am not sure about this but I don’t think the Iraqi people hate Iran now and if they got a army they would attack Iran.
Thirdly Egypt ‘s majority of the population carries on with their hatred of Israel as if there was never any “peace” deal signed.

They also have a large Islamic fundamentalist elements that can potentially turn Egypt into another Iran.

And lastly for this disscution….Iran has threatened offensive threats to annihilate Israel



:roll: and what with all the WMD they have ? and just cuz they have weak army don't mean they aren't a threat.

And Israel is stronger in that field as well. .
Yes and its those WMD that is a deterrent which follows the MAD principle.

When it comes to WMD its not a question of who has more for Syria has enough to kill every Jew even if they have less so the MAD principle defiantly applies here.


All of them are arab/muslim countries...israel suronded by 22 arab countries....

22? WTF? Last time I checked it was 4. ... 4 WTF?? last I checked there are much more nations that surround Israel in the outer rings that have threatened its very existence.



"Point ?"

Deterrence, second strike etc...exactly!! boy we both agree for once ;)


now In your other reponses here to UoUo you have admitted that the surrounding nations are no threat except for U.S. troops there so I have responded to that to GazB.



"S13 did a great job :D ……I am just going to add a bit of my own to his statements…I will put mine right underneath his.


Iraq has threateend to destroy Iran. And acted on it. No saddam did and acted on it. He’s gone now and that threat is gone.


Iran has defence agreement with India. Under which India can use Iran as bases for attacks on Pakistan. Do you think Pakistanis will like that? for anyone to believe that Pakistan and Iran are going to go to war is not living in the real world even if they aren’t the best of friends, none of those nations have threatened to annihilate each other nor have they ever threatened to attack each other

And again all you have is your weak Pakistan argument

But I keep coming to this….Iran has threatened offensive intentions to annihilate a nation!!


And besides, Iran didn't invade Afghanistan when they planned to and could win, so why would they attack Israel and be nuked? I already explained that.” As for Afghanistan, well I don’t know what that has to do with Israel but all I can say is that I don’t see why Iran would want to attack Afghanistan when it is already a Islamic nation and in 1996 the taliban were fighting and they won so what’s the need for Iran to invade a already Islamic or at the time a Islamic fundamentalist nation (which it still has elements of fundamentalism there)??

Yes they might have had grievances (which you claim they were preparing to invade...I am not sure about that but whatever) but it was not a Islamic fundamentalist crusade as it is the threat against Israel for afganisthan is a islamic nation already.


And Israel is state of the Jews and all Jews are citizens of Israel. Basing your citizenship on religion, wow, that's secularism at it's best. "God told me this is my land" sounds familiar? . yeah but most Jews are secular that don’t follow the ways of the torah (the old testament)

Expect for citizenship, everything is secular based, the laws are not from the bible but from the secular courts, most people do not obey the Sabbath and alot of people eat non kosher and they dress very western even the women. Etc…

Again most Jews gave up parts of gods land and were willing to give up more.

Israel is a secular Jewish nation.


And besides, Iran didn't invade Afghanistan when they planned to and could win, so why would they attack Israel and be nuked? go see my response before to your Afghanistan issue.


Did people advocate Iraq getting nukes so they could parry ISrael's nuclear monopoly? I don’t understand your question? (why would the world want iraq to have nukes??)

At the time the whole world condemned Israel for taking out saddms nukes…ten years later they owed Israel the biggest apology (though of course we’ll never get it :roll: )

No, I'm saying that if Israel has them Iran should have them as well. Monopoly makes people do crazy things. oh yeah so Israel has had that monopoly for thirty years and what has it done to exercise that nuke power??

Also Israel’s are for self defence while Iran’s has made it very clear their offensive intentions to destroy Israel when it gets that ability.

Also Israel in a way hasn’t had a monopoly….the Arabs strength in volume has been a type of nuke and Israel’s nukes are meant to counter balance that huge numeric disadvantage to where the Arabs realise that their size means nothing any more.


“Again Israel’s nukes are to deter all the Arabs nations combined (for they fight combined) to not attack again for conventionally speaking, besides their modernization’s of their militaries as a lot of them are doing, their numbers dwarf tiny Israel and without the threat of nukes, they will always try again.”

And Iranian are needed to prevent others from attacking them. . good so you recognise Israel’s need now ;)

As for Iran, Again what others have threatened to annihilate it?

Also they have made offensive intentions to destroy another nation!!


“Oh and you still haven’t given me one good and sane reason other then offensive needs, that Iran needs these weapons.”

Defensive needs. . I still haven’t seen a nation threaten to destroy Iran as they have themselves threatened offensively to destroy another nation


Wow, with stroke og the key you gave arabs military capability they don't have and forgot US support for Israel. ahh but now the U.S. is supporting some of Israel’s enemies as well ;)

And also I didn’t add any military capability to them, though you forget that some of them are modernizing and some of them have independently bigger air force and of course bigger ground forces then Israel

also combined are much bigger then israel (and they have fought aginst israel combined)

You’re forgetting about all the missiles that they have and all their chemical and biological warheads that they have
And lastly your forgetting that there still are Arab nations and millions and millions of Arabs that have still as their goal to destroy the whole Israel


“again who has threatened to annihilate iran??”

Iraq. no that was saddam, he’s gone now

Try again!!

Could you elaborate?
Yes that’s Lebanon………Syria and Egypt both have bigger air forces and add Jordan….

Bigger my arse. ….

Well then its bigger then your arse ;) (http://www.csis.org/mideast/reports/mbmeVIAI122798.pdf). (half way through are charts………..now yes Israel’s quality is better but they are much bigger and with Egypt, they have very modern armaments)

Fine, if you will add other Arabs to Arab side of equation then add US and Turkish air forces on Israeli side (with which Israel has efence agreements). haha :roll: no heres the fact, the U.S. and turkey while having defence agreements, they never have fought with Israel even during Israel’s wars and even when Israel was in serious trouble the U.S. didn’t fight but at the last minute they sent over armaments to counter what the soviets were giving to the Arabs………..now on the other hand, the Arabs states have fought together.

Big difference in the defence agreements!!

If it's for it's peoples well being and defence then...
also again your sidestepping……..so I repeat” Israel has made no threats to destroy Iran, as Iran has for years threatened to destroy the whole Israel, nor is Iran part of greater Israel (if you choose to use that argument), so what other then pure defence does Israel have in wanting Iran’s nukes to be destroyed?

So they can throw their weight around, unchecked by anybody. so let me understand this correctly. Iran hasn’t had nukes for years but yet Israel hasn’t attacked it once nor has it thrown its weight towards her….hmm yeah your logic is not faulty ;) :roll:


Id id answer it. You said unfriendly regime could come to power in egypt. And I said Israel could elect maniac to power. . yes because most of their population wants to see Israel destroyed…Israel does not have that percentage of its population that wants to see another Arab nation destroyed.

But I guess anything can happen in this world, hell there can be another Hitler come from Europe, even elected by their citizens, I mean yes anything is possible that I will not discount, but its much more plausible that Egypt will have a Islamic fundamentalist at its controls then Israel would have “a manic” at its helm.


. How long would Egyptian air force alst in face of US arms embargo (which would follow if they started making noise in Israeli direction? [quote] what so after Egypt say becomes a Islamic fundamentalist state and starts making serious noise and the U.S. say cuts them off, what? their modern planes or their army melt in the desert heat?? Even if the U.S. cuts them off now, Egypt is a dangerous enemy with what they already have.
[quote]
“The fact is that Egypt is a modern U.S and soviet equipped army.. Saudi Arabia is as well… and some other Arab nations… then the other ones have their soviet equipment and they have chemical and biological with tons and tons of missiles and they have their huge numeric advantage. And then there’s Iran that is modernizing its military where its buying from north Korea and china and Russia…and a few other nations are doing the same.”

Try US equiped. Oh, they still have some Soviet weapons but old ones. And Israel is modernising and buying from US. . yeah but the modern gap is narrowing …..and that bodes ill for Israel for they are at a huge numeric disadvantage against the Arabs.


“ besides what S13 said, also their large number’s in attack are like a nuke!! I have said
Israel’s nukes are in part as a deterrent to their huge numerical advantage and to them from starting another war!! “

And Iran uses same arguments and is called agressive. how does Iran have the numeric disadvantage that Israel has?? What nations have threatened to annihilate Iran and how has their size been like what Israel has had to face??

Also they have had offensive intentions for years to destroy a nation!! That’s aggressive!!


the nukes are for a second strike capability only!! Meaning that it now gives Israel a double deterrent factor to others that might think that by attacking and destroying Israel in one shot that it will end israels ability to retalite for now it wont.

Second strike agaisnt who? Nobody else has nukes. How do you paln to use nukes second if there's nobody around to use them first? first of all Iran is close or it has already

Second of all there are other Arab nations that have WMD’s

Third of all they are a second strike deterrent to Arab nations that think destroying Israel either conventionally or unconventionally will negate Israel’s ability to retaliate for it wont.

Its just another factor in Israel’s strong deterrence being that it is a small nation surrounded by much larger enemies that still want to see it destroyed.

Again Israel has had nukes for thirty years and hasn’t used it, its not like all of a sudden now with subs they will use it first.



Again these nukes are a detternt for there to even be a war.

Iranains use same arguments. . except that they have had offensive intentions to destroy a nation

Also they don’t have Israel’s huge numeric disadvantage nor do they have any nation that has threatened to annihilate her.


“Now again Israel has had nukes for thirty years it has never used it….it has never threatened to destroy Iran. Israel’s nukes on the subs are not an offensive threat to Iran at all.”

No? Then why are they on subs? Israel can reach other states without them. ill go along with this one for a second, tell me what other states other then the ones that it could have hit before with their nukes but yet didn’t, does Israel want to hit with nukes and why.



“-Edit- Israel offers to help out like it has done in Turkey and in other places and guess what Iran says....hmmm :roll:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1072420674113 “

Can you post link where one can just click it and read without going throughregistration? It would be much apreciated. oops sorry that was not intentional.

Here ill just post the article.



Iran rebuffs 'Zionist' help

Iran refused Israeli help in dealing with its catastrophic earthquake, saying the Islamic Republic would accept aid from all countries of the world, except Israel.

Jahanbakhsh Khanjani, a spokesman for Iran's Interior Ministry, said, "The Islamic Republic of Iran accepts all kinds of humanitarian aid from all countries and international organizations, with the exception of the Zionist regime."

Foreign Ministry had announced that Israeli non-governmental organizations were "looking into offering their help" to victims of the earthquake in southeastern Iran.

According to the Jewish Telegraph Agency, the American Jewish World Service said it hopes to raise money for humanitarian aid in response to the 6.3-magnitude quake. More details can be obtained by calling visiting the group's Web site at www.ajws.org.

Also, an Israeli organization TOPAZ has opened a mailbox to help the children of Iran who were affected by the Earthquake. Topaz is an Israeli organization that fights child labor. It also provides support and education programs aimed at exploited or abused children and serves as a lobby in various arenas. The organization can be reached at 051- 605682.

Friday's 6.7-magnitude earthquake struck about 5:30 a.m., local time, collapsing buildings in the city of Bam in southeastern Iran, severing power lines and shutting down water service. As of Saturday morning, the Iranian government put the death toll at over 20,000.

Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom issued a statement following the earthquake, saying, "The Israeli people and government send their condolences to the Iranian people. The government and people of Israel feel the pain of this human tragedy facing the Iranian people, and despite all the differences of opinion, at these moments a mobilization of the entire international community is needed to help the injured and the families of the victims."

Large-scale Israeli assistance following a massive earthquake in 1999 in northwestern Turkey that killed over 15,000 people, and a huge earthquake in western India in 2001 that killed some 20,000 people, helped strengthen ties between Israel and those two countries.

In 1999 Israel airlifted to Turkey doctors and equipment for a field hospital, as well an emergency rescue team comprising 250 persons, sophisticated rescue equipment, and rescue dogs.

And in 2001, Israel dispatched a field hospital and some 150 people to India to assist in rescue and medical efforts following the earthquake in Bhuj. The help Israel provided in these cases is still mentioned often by Turkish and Indian officials when discussing their ties with Israel.

Israel regards Iran as its greatest external security threat, and Iran has recently threatened Israel with missile attack if the latter attacked Iran's nuclear facilities.

Iran has appealed for international aid.

"We need sniffer dogs and detection equipment, blankets, medicines, food, but also prefabricated houses because winter is coming very quickly," an interior ministry statement said.

Belgium, Germany, Spain, Greece, Russia and Turkey were among the first to respond.

The United Nations is dispatching a team of experts to Iran.

The International Red Cross (IRC) is preparing an appeal for about $US8 million to help victims of the deadly earthquake that devastated part of south-eastern Iran, a spokesman told AFP.

The appeal will cover emergency supplies such as tents, blankets, and possibly field hospitals, IRC and Red Crescent Societies spokesman Roy Probert said.

The United States will offer humanitarian aid to Iran after an earthquake in the southern part of the country killed at least 5,000 and injured 30,000, the White House said Friday.

"I extend my condolences to all those touched by this tragedy," President George W. Bush said in a statement Friday. "The thoughts of all Americans are with the victims and their families at this time, and we stand ready to help the people of Iran."

A senior administration official said it was too early to say what form the aid might take. The Red Cross, the Iranian Red Crescent Society and the United Nations are assessing damage, and the U.S. assistance will reflect what those organizations and what Tehran say Iran needs, the official said.

Bush said: "We are greatly saddened by the loss of life, injuries, and widespread damage to this ancient city."

With Agencies


Shalom :D

[StarvingStudent47]

Wait just one second , mr Starving Student !! You want to say that nothing wrong going on in "Lord of the rings" ? "Merry" and "Pippin" are just straight readhead hobbits , who just likes to spend a lot of time , and to hug together ? How about they haircat , and they look ?
How about Prodo , and the other hobbit gay...Oh , sorry i mean guy , sorry ? Man , the other hobbit just dreams to "lift" mr Prodo. That's why he is getting annoyed on Golum/Smiegel all the time - he stands on his way !

Hey! Are you saying that fraternal brotherhood isn't a legitimate bond?! Sure, it's okay in Black Hawk Down, but throw some furry feet and cloaks into the mix, and all of a sudden there's rampant homo******ity?! BULL!!!

...okay, okay, I admit it, the Fellowship is one big circle jerk. The only straight boy there is Frodo. Here's the proof:
Secret Diaries of Cassandra Claire (http://home.nyu.edu/~amw243/diaries/)

None of this changes the fact that you're a pervy hobbit fancier, though.

[Groove]

IDF,


Again most Jews gave up parts of gods land and were willing to give up more.

You dont believe this for yourself or ? I mean all the Russian Jewish which came to Israel. They need place and work and so on. Your country is in economic trouble. I dont believe you would give up land - i mean not you personally but the most ppl in Israel.

(Do you have maybe some statistics for me in english ? )

At least Sharon is your prime minister and i dont think he is the "land-back-giver". He made some statements about illegal Settlements in Westjordan but your army removed only some.

Greetings

Groove

[Javehn]

I suggest for know to close this subject , sence people of Iran suffer from a destress right know , and that not ok to talk about those things in this moment .

May god help the people of Iran .

[IDFM203]

I agree with you but I just want to clear up one last thing with groove (iran is not even mentioned in my post)


IDF,
Again most Jews gave up parts of gods land and were willing to give up more. "

You dont believe this for yourself or ? listen I don’t want to go over the whole debate again.

This was in response to Israel being a religious state as if all Jews keep all that land because of the bible and I simply said that Israel is a secular jewish state where even parts of the bible were given up.

Now the fact is that during the Oslo years Israel gave up every city and every town where the Palestinians lived to where they have full control of over 95 percent of their own lives. (meaning us Israelis never went into those cities or towns)A lot of that land was on Israel’s god given land but it still gave it.

Also barak was willing to give up much much more.

So if one is using the religious argument, well Israel had given up parts of gods land to them and was willing to give up much more


Now as for sharon now that’s a whole other story but its not a religious one. I mean he is not even religious as most Israelis aren’t as well.

I believe in holding that land not because of any biblical reason but because of security reasons in the absence of a true peace partner on the other side. (but I am sure you will say that we are not a true peace partener.....fine, lets not go round and round here..........this is off topic to this thread)


I mean all the Russian Jewish which came to Israel.


They need place and work and so on. what does Russian have to do with this?? Most Russians live inside of the green line (the borders before the 1967 war) anyways, so what does that have to do with the 1967 borders….unless of course you want Israel to give up also tel aviv, hiafa and jeruslam and etc..


(Do you have maybe some statistics for me in english ? ) I will ask the Israelis to find this for I have done enough research to last a week but from what I have constantly read over 70 percent of Israelis would give over the west back and gaza if there would be a real peace.

In fact now there is a large percentage (I am not one of them) that would give over the west bank even if there was no peace agreement by them….(which I think is a mistake but that’s a security issue and its too long for me to rehash)

Shalom :D

[Groove]

Thx for info ! With "The Russians" i meant the immigration wave after the colapse of UDSSR....

I meant the masses of ppl and not "the russians" as themselfes :)

Greetings

Groove

[IDFM203]

Thx for info ! With "The Russians" i meant the immigration wave after the colapse of UDSSR....

I meant the masses of ppl and not "the russians" as themselfes :)

Greetings

Groovehehe :D yes I understood that..I meant what you meant as well

but anyway's I ansewerd it!

Shalom :D

[aktarian]

First of all Iraq has no army, Egypt does and it has a large and modern one.
Second of all, I am not sure about this but I don’t think the Iraqi people hate Iran now and if they got a army they would attack Iran.
Thirdly Egypt ‘s majority of the population carries on with their hatred of Israel as if there was never any “peace” deal signed.

They also have a large Islamic fundamentalist elements that can potentially turn Egypt into another Iran.

And lastly for this disscution….Iran has threatened offensive threats to annihilate Israel

One day Iraq will have an army. Can you gurantee that Iran will be safe.

Oh, so that I don't forget. Iran didn't attack weak Afghanistan when they could so why would they attack US backed Israel and be nuked in response?



Yes and its those WMD that is a deterrent which follows the MAD principle.

When it comes to WMD its not a question of who has more for Syria has enough to kill every Jew even if they have less so the MAD principle defiantly applies here.

And ISrael has enough to kill every Syrian. and Syrians know it.



4 WTF?? last I checked there are much more nations that surround Israel in the outer rings that have threatened its very existence.



Then add US to Israeli side of equation because they will protect ISrael.



now In your other reponses here to UoUo you have admitted that the surrounding nations are no threat except for U.S. troops there so I have responded to that to GazB.

No, nations themselves aren't a threat. US troops there are.



for anyone to believe that Pakistan and Iran are going to go to war is not living in the real world even if they aren’t the best of friends, none of those nations have threatened to annihilate each other nor have they ever threatened to attack each other

And again all you have is your weak Pakistan argument

Pakistan is only one thing.





But I keep coming to this….Iran has threatened offensive intentions to annihilate a nation!!


So do I. Iran didn't attack weak Afghanistan when they could so why would they attack US backed Israel and be nuked in response?



I already explained that.” As for Afghanistan, well I don’t know what that has to do with Israel but all I can say is that I don’t see why Iran would want to attack Afghanistan when it is already a Islamic nation and in 1996 the taliban were fighting and they won so what’s the need for Iran to invade a already Islamic or at the time a Islamic fundamentalist nation (which it still has elements of fundamentalism there)??

Iran didn't invade Afghansitan when they could and had reasonable chances of sucess (depending on their goals and forces commited). So why would they attack Israel and be nuked in response?

As for both being islamic regimes. I seriously doubt that US extreme religious right and conservative circles in catholic church would get along very well. And both are christians.






Yes they might have had grievances (which you claim they were preparing to invade...I am not sure about that but whatever) but it was not a Islamic fundamentalist crusade as it is the threat against Israel for afganisthan is a islamic nation already.

No, it wasn't Islamic crusade. Nobody said it was.





go see my response before to your Afghanistan issue.


You too.



I don’t understand your question? (why would the world want iraq to have nukes??)

At the time the whole world condemned Israel for taking out saddms nukes…ten years later they owed Israel the biggest apology (though of course we’ll never get it :roll: )


You said situation now is similar to late 1970s regarding Iraq's nuclear program.



oh yeah so Israel has had that monopoly for thirty years and what has it done to exercise that nuke power??

Getting free hand.



Also Israel’s are for self defence while Iran’s has made it very clear their offensive intentions to destroy Israel when it gets that ability.

Israel says they are for defence. Forgive me for not taking Israeli word at face value.



Also Israel in a way hasn’t had a monopoly….the Arabs strength in volume has been a type of nuke and Israel’s nukes are meant to counter balance that huge numeric disadvantage to where the Arabs realise that their size means nothing any more.

So when Arabs realise size doesn't amtter ISrael will give up its nukes?



good so you recognise Israel’s need now ;)

I'm recognising similarities between ISraeli claims and Iranian position.




As for Iran, Again what others have threatened to annihilate it?

Covered that.



Also they have made offensive intentions to destroy another nation!!

And didn't act on actions which constitute declaration of war.



I still haven’t seen a nation threaten to destroy Iran as they have themselves threatened offensively to destroy another nation


Covered that



ahh but now the U.S. is supporting some of Israel’s enemies as well ;)

And selling Israel weapons to offset that.



And also I didn’t add any military capability to them, though you forget that some of them are modernizing and some of them have independently bigger air force and of course bigger ground forces then Israel

And US is sellingweapons to ISrael to offset sales to Arabs.



also combined are much bigger then israel (and they have fought aginst israel combined)

They fought together and 1 (or 2, depending on your view) of those countries was removed from equation.



You’re forgetting about all the missiles that they have and all their chemical and biological warheads that they have
And lastly your forgetting that there still are Arab nations and millions and millions of Arabs that have still as their goal to destroy the whole Israel

And you are ignoring Israeli capabilities in same filed.



no that was saddam, he’s gone now

Try again!!

If it was Saddam who attacked Iran than it was Nasser/Saddat who attacked Israel (acording to ISraeli claims) and they are gone too....




so let me understand this correctly. Iran hasn’t had nukes for years but yet Israel hasn’t attacked it once nor has it thrown its weight towards her….hmm yeah your logic is not faulty ;) :roll:

They didn't because they needed each other. Now they don't anymore.



yes because most of their population wants to see Israel destroyed…Israel does not have that percentage of its population that wants to see another Arab nation destroyed.

But I guess anything can happen in this world, hell there can be another Hitler come from Europe, even elected by their citizens, I mean yes anything is possible that I will not discount, but its much more plausible that Egypt will have a Islamic fundamentalist at its controls then Israel would have “a manic” at its helm.

Really? Seeing how Egypt cracked down on islamic militants with support from population and how ISrael elected sharon it's much more likelly for ISraelis to elect maniac than Egypt becoming fundamentalist state. Besides Egypt never had serious leanings toward islamic fundamentalism.



what so after Egypt say becomes a Islamic fundamentalist state and starts making serious noise and the U.S. say cuts them off, what? their modern planes or their army melt in the desert heat?? Even if the U.S. cuts them off now, Egypt is a dangerous enemy with what they already have.


You know, palnes are notorious for their need of maintanance and need for spares. US cuts support and Egyptian planes become unservicable for lack of spares. They can't fly...



yeah but the modern gap is narrowing …..and that bodes ill for Israel for they are at a huge numeric disadvantage against the Arabs.

No, it isn't. US guranteed Israel it will maintain it's technological edge. Jordan buys F-16, ISrael get's more modern F-16s. Ditto UAE...



how does Iran have the numeric disadvantage that Israel has?? What nations have threatened to annihilate Iran and how has their size been like what Israel has had to face??

Not numerical disadvantage. Surounded by unfriendly states.



Also they have had offensive intentions for years to destroy a nation!! That’s aggressive!!

And they didn't attack afghansitan when they could and Afghansitan practically declared war ont hem. SO why would they attack ISrael and be nuked in response?



first of all Iran is close or it has already

We'll see...



Second of all there are other Arab nations that have WMD’s

Which ISrael matches. But we are talking about nukes here.



Third of all they are a second strike deterrent to Arab nations that think destroying Israel either conventionally or unconventionally will negate Israel’s ability to retaliate for it wont.

Perhaps you shoudl look up definiton of second strike. Second means after somebody. You can't be second to use them if there isn't anybody to be first.



Its just another factor in Israel’s strong deterrence being that it is a small nation surrounded by much larger enemies that still want to see it destroyed.

Noiw again, why can't Iran use same arguments?



Again Israel has had nukes for thirty years and hasn’t used it, its not like all of a sudden now with subs they will use it first.


Egypt has peace with ISrael for 30 or so years. You make it sound like they are about to break it. India has nukes for 30 or so years. Why is world worried aboutt heir nuclear arsenal?



except that they have had offensive intentions to destroy a nation

Also they don’t have Israel’s huge numeric disadvantage nor do they have any nation that has threatened to annihilate her.

And they didn't invade Aghansitan when they could and Afghansitan practically declared war ont hem, so why would they attack ISrael and be nuked in response?



ill go along with this one for a second, tell me what other states other then the ones that it could have hit before with their nukes but yet didn’t, does Israel want to hit with nukes and why.

Why is Israel developing missiles with nulcear warhead if not for longer reach?




Iran rebuffs 'Zionist' help


I guess thay had their reasons. I don't know what they are but I'm sure they are there.

[Javehn]

IDF,


Again most Jews gave up parts of gods land and were willing to give up more.

You dont believe this for yourself or ? I mean all the Russian Jewish which came to Israel. They need place and work and so on. Your country is in economic trouble. I dont believe you would give up land - i mean not you personally but the most ppl in Israel.

(Do you have maybe some statistics for me in english ? )

At least Sharon is your prime minister and i dont think he is the "land-back-giver". He made some statements about illegal Settlements in Westjordan but your army removed only some.

Greetings

Groove

Something funky going on between IDFM and groove ? ;) rofl

Yes , common , you really don't bellieve it IDFM , sence you only are the Israeli one , and he is from Poland , and knows much better what is going on . Well , you got lucky , sence i happends to be Russian jew . I will publish the numbers in Israel-Palestine conflict thread .

To Actarian - please , i would answer . Sorry , that my answers would seem very short , i have simester exams tommorow , and i combining between studying and writing this . Very bad choice , if i my add so . :)


One day Iraq will have an army. Can you gurantee that Iran will be safe.

Oh, so that I don't forget. Iran didn't attack weak Afghanistan when they could so why would they attack US backed Israel and be nuked in response?


Israel don't takes the Irani threat that seriosly , as i said in the beggining . It's was just simply steam release , maybe this duscission made it look like something else :) . We discusted here , how could Israel protect itself , incase that scenario could happend .


And ISrael has enough to kill every Syrian. and Syrians know it.

Exactly :)
Do you know what is horror balance ? Those are strategical weapons designed to create horror factor , so the countries would never have to use it . It exist basicly , for non use of it . Israel have very very strict so called "ROE" to use WMD , and never considered any use of it .

On events of 1973 , when Israeli army overruned from all the direction , and syrians were almost on Kineret river shores (total anihilation for Jewish people in Israel , if they would pass the Kineret . Israeli army wouldn't ever take the momentum to drive them away from that point ) the use of it were suggested by one person who said that second holocaust is on it's way , but overruled ammidiatly by everybody in army and government . Eventually IDF managed to move Syrians and Egypt out , but it did cost many dead soldier to IDF (and as i said , Israeli army is very untolorable to death of a soldiers ).


Then add US to Israeli side of equation because they will protect ISrael.

Well , you right , you wrong , who knows ... Allies quick changed , and becoming an enemies . Rome Empire was very good ally of Jewish people 2000 years ago . But , time has spoken , and they drove as out of our promissed land .
There is some speaking : Trust on allies , but don't get fat doing nothing yourself (sounds better in origin language ) , or you will get cought with your pense down . U.S. had a policy against Israel , up to the 60 , when USSR started to supply weapons to Egypt and Suria . Only then they would change the policy towards Israel. In 1948 , U.S possed imbargo on Israel , not allowing any weapons to get there ...

Well , sorry , my time getting precios now. So , Israeli WMD registered as weapons of defence , and the innitial range of it was not to go further then Egypt and Suria.

Israeli army - defence army , and you can see it best in its NAvy- Navy supposed to be the long strategic arm of country , and the might of it shows the might of one country(look at U.S) . If you considered to have 6 small ****y boats , and couple "toy" submarines offensive navy , well ....

But , to that fact , we had eat some **** . 1992 during defence shield tens of scuds fell inside of Israel . Then , that was clear that this small circle must grow further , to include new threats.

You want to disarm Israel from it's WMD ? Please , welcome . First you have to proove that we wanted to use it for a bad manner . The thing you don't know is , that Israel is crauling U.N. supervisors - if you take a trip threw Israel , i am giving you 30 minutes ,andl you will see first U.N. machine . They visiting every millitary base on different basis (weekly , monthly , half year , depend on the type of the base ) , to check it out . That goes for every military base .

Sorry , i can't answer to you more here ..

[GazB]

"Iraq has threateend to destroy Iran. And acted on it."

There are two types of Muslim. One has Clerics and the other does not. Saddam and his party was based on the type that does not have clerics. The Iranians and the majority of the Iraqis... the ****es do have clerics. That is why Bush snr left Iraq High and dry after calling the Iraqis to rise up and overthrow Saddam it was the Turks and the Saudis that don't have clerics that warned bush that if the Shia get into power then they will have more in common with Iran and might become too friendly to the Persians... the US wanted them friendly to the US or no one at all so they provided no aid for the uprising and so Saddam crushed them.

"India and Pkiastan have relations, you know. Not perfect though. Just because both are muslim it doesn't mean they are friends."

Actually India split on religious lines... Banglidesh and Pakistan are Muslim and India is Hindu.

"Taliban and NA were both muslims and look how that one went. Ditto Iran and Iraq. "

This is quite correct. Though they are different types of muslims.

"Wow with the “stroke” of the keyboarded you have managed to fool yourself simply inot forgetting the nations and the millions and millions of Arabs that have still as their goal to destroy Israel "

We are talking about Iran what have Persians to do with arabs?

"Also Pakistan is not a direct threat now for they have India that’s threatening their existence (if cerin events unfold), Iran has no such threats to its exsistence and thus it is more urgent a threat to Israel. "

They have the last remaining superpower on their doorstep that has described them as part of an axis of evil. If I seriously compared Israel To Nazi Germany would you consider me a friend or potential threat?

"I will amend what he said…Israel will never use nukes in a first strike and it wont be the first to use it….."

That is also a lie. Assuming none of your arab neighbours have nuclear weapons then you are saying that you wouldn't use them... even if your survival depended upon it? BS.

"Its called MAD (mutual assured destruction)… just like what you (yeah yeah, I know your in new Zealand ) and the US had. "

That is all Iran wants. At the moment there is no way in the world Iran is any kind of conventional threat to Israel. They are not weaklings but have no power projection capability at all. The only realistic threat to them is your nukes on missiles or a dodgy very long range strike that would stretch even your airforce to the limit. All they want is a balance to your nuclear threat. Considering the shift in power with the US occupying Iraq, the US support for the Northern Alliance against the Iranian faction there (under Hekmatyr) I think they are feeling vulnerable... and who can blame them. Their current government seems quite moderate compared to others in the region. (Regarding a previous post somewhere the only target the Saudi government could attack and not be overthrown for would be Israel... attacking anyone else (other than the unpopular US) would be enough to overthrow a royal family that is about as unpopular as any other in the region... their policy that locals are not criminals so any illegal activitiy must have been purpetrated by a foreigner is amusing and has lead to lots of tourists being arrested for crimes they didn't commit)).

"It’s a deterrent factor meant to never be used."

Of course... in Iranian hands it will be what they use at barbeques when the gas bottle runs out...

"Because they have made offensive threats to annihilate other nations like Israel!!

Israel has not made any such offensive threats."

Yes, he who is open with their threats must be more dangerous than the best armed and best equipped nation in the region that already has nuclear weapons. Did it cross your mind that it might have just been rhetoric to keep the populous happy and distracted from their own problems. You'd think if they were prepared to commit suicide by launching a nuclear missile strike on Israel that they would be more openly attacking Israel physically? Saddam only used chem weapons on his internal enemies and against Iranian human wave attacks. Ie first against those who could not retaliate and then in desperation to avoid being overrun by a numerically superior enemy. When it came to fighting the coalition two times he failed to use such weapons even though the second time the clearly stated aim was to remove him from power.
Why?

"With those facts, any unbiased person should make the right conclusion…"

And what is the right conclusion? The West helped the Chechen rebels in Chechnia. Does that mean that britain and the US can't be trusted with nuclear weapons. Both the West and the East have promised to destroy each other in various speeches. The only country in the world to use nuclear weapons in anger is the US... can they not be trusted to have them then?

"this is just pure speculation on my part from public sites, but how do you think that will do against
this
(especially the bottom half……..also note that part was written in 1994) "

I have read a lot of stuff about this or that missile being stealth. The Radar system used by S-300 is bigger than the SPY-1 radar used on the AEGIS cruisers and it has special tower systems for low flying targets too.

Even if you could mount a mission and destroy a site or two do you really think that will stop them? I doubt after the raid on the iraqi site that they will have all their eggs in one basket. An attack will likely accelerate any work being done because nuclear tipped missiles being declared operational is the only real counter they have to stop Israel or the US atacking them.

"Anyway’s the only way to destroy the Jews is to destroy Israel…how else can they do it? "

If they consider Israel a holy land I doubt they want to level it.

'I mean no disrespect, But boy if your thinking that other nations are basing their justification on what Israel does or doesn’t do then your more naive about the middle east than I thought. "

It is just that the argument that Iran can't be allowed to have nuclear weapons is a little hollow coming as it does from countries that actually have them too.

"As or the U.S. well first of all they also have never threatened to annihilate Iran."

they have interfered with the politics of iran and got an A$$hole into power there. How would you like the CIA picking your next ruler? Not to meniton shooting down their airliners.

"when a nation has nukes with offensive intentions that overrides any concerns for any deffenive excuses that they might have (especially in Iran's case where that excuse is rather thin) "

So I guess the US, who has interferred with soverign countries world wide should hand in all its WMDs then? Since when was it a rule that countries that don't like Israel are not allowed WMDs?

"Not when your faced with total annihilation. "

So for the last 30 years they were to assume your nuclear weapons would only destroy military targets...

"Again Iran is controlled by Islamic fundamentalists that want to see Israel destroyed (these are their words)"

And Israel is run by Jewish religious nutters that don't care about anyone else but other Jews. Why should we accept what you say? If your posession of nuclear weapons creates stability then Iran having similar capability should further reduce the likelyhood of problems in the region. Afterall Stalin getting Nuclear weapons doesn't seem to have started WWIII. It seemed to reduce the likelyhood of it.

"those nations have threatened it with total annihilation??"

Why would those leaders care if their nation is destroyed or not... all they are likely to care about is themselves... and I doubt they would be left in power. I am sure they would consider an Iran with loose American values worse than annialated.

"Of course that’s your answer…..well its not "so what" to us for Iran is far from Israel and has no business interfering but yet it does and that’s just proves their hostile intentions towards Israel for its not only mere words by them. '

So British and US support for the Chechens should mean that the Russians should launch ICBMs at Britain and the US?
What business is it of the west what happens in the Caucasas? (apart from Caspian Sea Oil of course).

"yes and Israel was the aggressors in 1981 with regards to Iraq’s reactor…yeah we know already how a lot in the outside world (wrongly) view things"

Quite true, you risked millions of peoples lives... how can you be trusted?

"Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land. "

They think you have stolen their holy land. If they currentl occupied it you would think exactly the same way they do and would support any faction trying to get it back. It is a case of circumstance. In such a case that the roles were reversed you would be changing your tune, but i would be saying the same thing... you had a right to nuclear weapons if they have them. Does that make me right or you wrong... :-)

"yes I know that you feel that what makes sense is immaterial"

No, what I said was whether it makes sense to YOU is immaterial. That is not the same thing.

"Second of all, I am not sure about this but I don’t think the Iraqi people hate Iran now and if they got a army they would attack Iran."

Who would be in control of Iraqs army... and what does the US think of Iran? Will it be built to fight Saudi Arabia and Kuwaite or Syria and Iran?

"4 WTF?? last I checked there are much more nations that surround Israel in the outer rings that have threatened its very existence. "

And if The peruvian president made an antisemetic joke at a cocktail party would you add Peru to the list? Intent and ability are two different things.

"But I keep coming to this….Iran has threatened offensive intentions to annihilate a nation!!"

But it has never actually tried in the entire history of Iran. Perhaps it is just the standard speech to get elected in the region, or perhaps it is what their allies want to hear. The fact that they have never directly acted on these threats make them meaningless.

"At the time the whole world condemned Israel for taking out saddms nukes…ten years later they owed Israel the biggest apology (though of course we’ll never get it ) "

What for? For driving underground and accelerating their nuclear weapons program? Yeah... thanks.

"very clear their offensive intentions to destroy Israel when it gets that ability. '

This is new. When have they actually said that when they get nuclear capability they will attack israel?

"Also Israel in a way hasn’t had a monopoly….the Arabs strength in volume has been a type of nuke and Israel’s nukes are meant to counter balance that huge numeric disadvantage to where the Arabs realise that their size means nothing any more."

The fact that the huge monopoly of numbers hasn't prevailed in the past even without the nucelar defence being required suggests that is not true.

'As for Iran, Again what others have threatened to annihilate it?

Also they have made offensive intentions to destroy another nation!! "

The US has called it a part of the axis of evil. The only remaining superpower wants to invade and install a new government. That sounds like reason enough to me.

"As or the U.S. well first of all they also have never threatened to annihilate Iran. "

They have threatened to violate it sovergnty and invade. Close enough in my book.

"and as such that negates their justifications to have nukes to prevent the U.S. from doing to it what it did in Iraq.
when a nation has nukes with offensive intentions that overrides any concerns for any deffenive excuses that they might have (especially in Iran's case where that excuse is rather thin) "

So Israels defence concerns are negated by the wars they started too I guess... come on hand over you WMDS...

"how does Iran have the numeric disadvantage that Israel has?? "

Because the Iranians can't count the US navy. :-)

"I guess thay had their reasons. I don't know what they are but I'm sure they are there."

The same reason the US refused an offer of help during the Apollo 13 mission from the Soviets without consideration. They would rather lose astronauts than accept help from an enemy.

[oldsoak]

I dont think the Israelis would "go nuclear" unless the felt they were headed for another holocaust. This episode strikes me as sabre rattling on both sides - fortunately the two parties are sufficiently far away from each other to avoid coming to blows -yet . Hopefully it will reach a point where we'll have a kind of MAD out there. Israel will be the poisoned prawn - anyone attempting to swallow it will die with the prawn so everyone will leave each other alone. ( We did it in the west for forty years, why not here ? )
IMHO, the Israelis developed their nukes and delivery system because they felt that it was only a question of time before their neighbours did. One cannot stop the growth of technical knowledge and engineering ability in ones neighbours. If the Germans could build a V2 with 1940's technology, how long would it be before the Arabs reached that level ? And the nukes ? The US developed warheads in the 50's - over forty years ago. They genuinely feel - rightly or wrongly - that they must have ascendancy because they think they are lost if they dont. The one thing that worries them most of all is that fundamentalism justifies eating the prawn and dying. Just MHO.

[IDFM203]

”First of all Iraq has no army, Egypt does and it has a large and modern one.
Second of all, I am not sure about this but I don’t think the Iraqi people hate Iran now and if they got a army they would attack Iran.
Thirdly Egypt ‘s majority of the population carries on with their hatred of Israel as if there was never any “peace” deal signed.

They also have a large Islamic fundamentalist elements that can potentially turn Egypt into another Iran.

And lastly for this disscution….Iran has threatened offensive threats to annihilate Israel”

One day Iraq will have an army. Can you gurantee that Iran will be safe. Iraq never wanted to destroy Iran, it was saddam he is gone now.

As for guarantee there is no guarantee to anything but it is highly unlikely.

But again, Iran has threatened OFFENSIVE intentions to destroy a nation



Oh, so that I don't forget. Iran didn't attack weak Afghanistan when they could so why would they attack US backed Israel and be nuked in response? Islamic fundamentalism and Iran’s rulers that are strict followers of that had no such offensive threats against Afghanistan being that it was already a Islamic state and a fundamentalist one when the taliban won!! There were no infidels like the Jews controlling that state.

The other reasons for attacking weren’t as strong as removing the “infidels” from what they consider a holy Muslim land!!(Israel)



Yes and its those WMD that is a deterrent which follows the MAD principle.

When it comes to WMD its not a question of who has more for Syria has enough to kill every Jew even if they have less so the MAD principle defiantly applies here.

And ISrael has enough to kill every Syrian. and Syrians know it. .
True as you see the MAD principle works.

Very good we have made prograss ;)



“4 WTF?? last I checked there are much more nations that surround Israel in the outer rings that have threatened its very existence.”



Then add US to Israeli side of equation because they will protect ISrael. no again you cannot.
I agree with menachem bagen when he said “There is no guarantee which can guarantee an international guarantee."
the fact is that Administrations change, sentiment changes, willpower and determination change
I also agree with Golda Meir who said to one president, possibly LBJ, “something like "By the time you'd get here we wouldn't be here."


Anyways they are never coming anyway’s’ I repeat “no heres the fact, the U.S. and turkey while having defence agreements, they never have fought with Israel even during Israel’s wars and even when Israel was in serious trouble the U.S. didn’t fight but at the last minute they sent over armaments to counter what the soviets were giving to the Arabs………..now on the other hand, the Arabs states have fought together.

Big difference in the defence agreements!!”

There is absolutely no agreement or even any official understanding that the U.S. will send troops in time of its need.,

The Arabs on the other hand have always fought together.!!

As such Israel has much more threats then just those 4 that immediately surround it. The Arabs don’t and they have collectively their huge numeric advantage.


“now In your other reponses here to UoUo you have admitted that the surrounding nations are no threat except for U.S. troops there so I have responded to that to GazB.”

No, nations themselves aren't a threat. US troops there are. .good that took you a while to admit ;) :D

So now we are left with the U.S., so again the U.S. has never threatened to destroy Iran
Secondly like I said before, even if Iran’s leaders themselvs have what to fear from the U.S. their OFFENSIVE intentions to wipe out another nation is much more of a negative to them having nukes, then their reasons for wanting them.

Also Iran’s nukes are not a threat to the U.S. so it can’t really do anything anyway to their homeland but against Israel it most certainly is a threat no matter what the U.S. does or doesnt do.


Pakistan is only one thing. yes and as you see it’s a weak argument.

All you have is the U.S…..see above for that.



“But I keep coming to this….Iran has threatened offensive intentions to annihilate a nation!!”

So do I. Iran didn't attack weak Afghanistan when they could so why would they attack US backed Israel and be nuked in response? well I already explained Afghanistan,

As for nuked in response….I agree if one looks at things the way we do….but Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t have your western rationalisations with them.

The bottom line is that these Islamic fundamentalists have threatened for years to destroy Israel.
Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran!

Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.(thus proving its not mere words)

Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land.

Iran has military parades with the death to Israel theme written on them.


“I don’t understand your question? (why would the world want iraq to have nukes??)

At the time the whole world condemned Israel for taking out saddms nukes…ten years later they owed Israel the biggest apology (though of course we’ll never get it :roll: )”

You said situation now is similar to late 1970s regarding Iraq's nuclear program. the same principles are there indeed (though they are a bit different in that Iran is a actually a bigger threat to use it due to their Islamic fundamentalist followings in that Israel is “occupied” by infidels and they want to wipe out to “cleanse” that Muslim land of all infidels))……….and we see that the result was that Israel did the right thing even though we had people like you sounding off just like your doing here.


oh yeah so Israel has had that monopoly for thirty years and what has it done to exercise that nuke power??

Getting free hand. I am not even going to address that in other aspects other then to say how did Israel have a free hand against Iran??

Israel has had nukes now for thirty years what has it done against Iran??


Also Israel’s are for self defence while Iran’s has made it very clear their offensive intentions to destroy Israel when it gets that ability.

Israel says they are for defence. Forgive me for not taking Israeli word at face value. . haha oh but we should take your word on things :roll:

Oh and this isn’t about words here. Fact Israel has had them now for thirty years and it hasn’t used it, any unbiased person can see that its for self defence only but again in my opinion there is no such thing as a unbiased person.


“Also Israel in a way hasn’t had a monopoly….the Arabs strength in volume has been a type of nuke and Israel’s nukes are meant to counter balance that huge numeric disadvantage to where the Arabs realise that their size means nothing any more.”

So when Arabs realise size doesn't amtter ISrael will give up its nukes? . they only realise that due to the nukes!! You take that a way and then size matters again big time.


good so you recognise Israel’s need now ;)

I'm recognising similarities between ISraeli claims and Iranian position. yes you merely say that but you haven’t proven any similarities nor is your case even remotely strong on your arguments.

Israel’s are for self defence while Iran has no such self defence needs as Israel has plus Iran has made clear its offensive threats to annihilate Israel


As for Iran, Again what others have threatened to annihilate it?

Covered that. no I still haven’t see you list one nation that has threatened to annihilate Iran as Iran has threatened to annihilate Israel.


Also they have made offensive intentions to destroy another nation!!

And didn't act on actions which constitute declaration of war. they don’t have the nukes yet.
Second of all, they have declared a war when they actively help their proxies fight against Israel even though Israel hasn’t ever fired a shot at Iran.

They openly call Israel a mortal enemy.
They have threatened to annihilate Israel for years now.

Even with all that Israel has never threatened to annihilate or to destroy Iran, all it has said is that it might go after those sites that are to be used to destroy it.


ahh but now the U.S. is supporting some of Israel’s enemies as well ;)

And selling Israel weapons to offset that. no they don’t for Israel is at a huge numeric disadvantage now even against Arab U.S. arms.

(you read my links there right?)


“And also I didn’t add any military capability to them, though you forget that some of them are modernizing and some of them have independently bigger air force and of course bigger ground forces then Israel “

And US is sellingweapons to ISrael to offset sales to Arabs. the same as above.

Also besides the U.S. weapons which are a lot now to the arabs, they also have tons of missiles and all their soviet stuff that all together it is a huge numeric advantage for them that Israel cannot match nor even come close.


also combined are much bigger then israel (and they have fought aginst israel combined)

They fought together and 1 (or 2, depending on your view) of those countries was removed from equation. Iraq was the only one removed……….there is still Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iran,

Remember that the next war doesn’t mean that the ones that didn’t participate before wont again, Israel is still surrounded by 22 Arab nations where a large majority of thier populations that still want to see Israel destroyed and till that completely changes, Israel needs to worry about all of them.


You’re forgetting about all the missiles that they have and all their chemical and biological warheads that they have
And lastly your forgetting that there still are Arab nations and millions and millions of Arabs that have still as their goal to destroy the whole Israel

And you are ignoring Israeli capabilities in same filed. no I am not, hence the MAD principle that Israel rightly has...I am glad that we kind of agree now ;)


“no that was saddam, he’s gone now

Try again!! “

If it was Saddam who attacked Iran than it was Nasser/Saddat who attacked Israel (acording to ISraeli claims) and they are gone too.... no that’s not the same for in Nasser and saddat had a large majority that supported those attacks and wanted it,

With Iraq it wasn’t the people that wanted it but it was saddam that forced this war and forced his people to fight.


They didn't because they needed each other. Now they don't anymore. even if your 80’s claims are totally true, that all stopped in the late 80’s so Israel has had over 15 years now and still it hasn’t done a thing.

So again I repeat “so let me understand this correctly. Iran hasn’t had nukes for years but yet Israel hasn’t attacked it once nor has it thrown its weight towards her….hmm yeah your logic is not faulty ;) :roll


“yes because most of their population wants to see Israel destroyed…Israel does not have that percentage of its population that wants to see another Arab nation destroyed.

But I guess anything can happen in this world, hell there can be another Hitler come from Europe, even elected by their citizens, I mean yes anything is possible that I will not discount, but its much more plausible that Egypt will have a Islamic fundamentalist at its controls then Israel would have “a manic” at its helm.”

Really? Seeing how Egypt cracked down on islamic militants with support from population and how ISrael elected sharon it's much more likelly for ISraelis to elect maniac than Egypt becoming fundamentalist state. Besides Egypt never had serious leanings toward islamic fundamentalism. no Egypt's leader cracked down without the support of the population. Yes some supported but a lot didn’t as well.

Secondly Egypt has a large Islamic fundamentalist population just like Iran had and it is much more plausible that Egypt can turn into another Iran then Israel to elect a manic.

Also even the secularists there want to see Israel destroyed…the Egyptian newspapers are more anti Semitic then the nazi papers ever were.

The fact is that Egypt’s population is very hostile towards Israel and most of them still want to see Israel destroyed….Israel has no such percentage of its population that wants to see Egypt destroyed.



"what so after Egypt say becomes a Islamic fundamentalist state and starts making serious noise and the U.S. say cuts them off, what? their modern planes or their army melt in the desert heat?? Even if the U.S. cuts them off now, Egypt is a dangerous enemy with what they already have."

You know, palnes are notorious for their need of maintanance and need for spares. US cuts support and Egyptian planes become unservicable for lack of spares. They can't fly.. yeah but when they make that noise it will be because they are close to doing something…..its not like they are going to make noise and then wait 15 years.

Also these are modern planes and they are not going to break down immediately after the U.S. cuts off ties and also the Egyptians do have some abilities to do their own maintenance and they do have some spare parts to say the least.
.

“yeah but the modern gap is narrowing …..and that bodes ill for Israel for they are at a huge numeric disadvantage against the Arabs.”

No, it isn't. US guranteed Israel it will maintain it's technological edge. Jordan buys F-16, ISrael get's more modern F-16s. Ditto UAE... first of all there is no guarantee to anything.

Second of all, the gap isn’t tied but its getting closer.

Third of all, they have their huge numeric advantage so that coupled with a narrower technological gap is indeed very worrisome.

as for quality, I belive it was Stalin that once said "quantity has a quality all its own"


Also they have had offensive intentions for years to destroy a nation!! That’s aggressive!!

And they didn't attack afghansitan when they could and Afghansitan practically declared war ont hem. SO why would they attack ISrael and be nuked in response? I already addressed what you just said but what you just said doesn’t by any means address my statement here.

Their offensive intentions to destroy a nation are what’s aggressive!!


Second of all there are other Arab nations that have WMD’s

Which ISrael matches. But we are talking about nukes here. yes and Iran is getting them with their offensive intentions.

As for the other nations that have WMD and are not Islamic fundamentalists, well the MAD principle applies.


Third of all they are a second strike deterrent to Arab nations that think destroying Israel either conventionally or unconventionally will negate Israel’s ability to retaliate for it wont.

Perhaps you shoudl look up definiton of second strike. Second means after somebody. You can't be second to use them if there isn't anybody to be first. . yes indeed after, very good we both agree ;)


Its just another factor in Israel’s strong deterrence being that it is a small nation surrounded by much larger enemies that still want to see it destroyed.

Noiw again, why can't Iran use same arguments? . because they don’t have the same arguments as Israel.

Also they have had offensive intentions to wipe out another nation.


Again Israel has had nukes for thirty years and hasn’t used it, its not like all of a sudden now with subs they will use it first.


Egypt has peace with ISrael for 30 or so years. You make it sound like they are about to break it. well they have a huge Islamic fundamentalist population (and even their secular population is very hostile toward israel) and as such I don’t know when Egypt is going to be a threat but they most certainly can be at any time and as such Israel needs to maintain its strong deterrent.

Btw you can believe whatever you want but Ill just say that there hasn’t been war in thirty years because of Israel’s nukes…..heck that’s one of the reasons why egyp signed that “peace” deal for they knew they were never going to be able to destroy Israel now becouse of israels nukes so they opted for the best solution at the time to get back the Sinai.



India has nukes for 30 or so years. Why is world worried aboutt heir nuclear arsenal? India has been a nuclear power or thirty years??

Oh and you’ll have to ask the world for that. (my guess would be that they fear India and Pakistan might use them while they have never feared Israel from using what it has.)

Anyways this has no relevance to what we are discussing.


Why is Israel developing missiles with nulcear warhead if not for longer reach? .
No you’re repeating that conclusion. I am asking ok so you say longer reach so again “ill go along with this one for a second, tell me what other states other then the ones that it could have hit before with their nukes but yet didn’t, does Israel want to hit with nukes and why


Iran rebuffs 'Zionist' help”

I guess thay had their reasons. I don't know what they are but I'm sure they are there.haha :lol: wow that’s all you got :lol: …I expected a better effort.

So again why do you think Israel didn’t get that chance to help (Iran rejected any help from Israel :( ) like in did when Turkey (http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0fiz0) had their big earthquake.

Remember Israel has never fought a day against Iran……







"Wow with the “stroke” of the keyboarded you have managed to fool yourself simply inot forgetting the nations and the millions and millions of Arabs that have still as their goal to destroy Israel "

We are talking about Iran what have Persians to do with arabs? . true that was in response to what aktarian wrote it had nothing to do with Iran.

Yes the arabs have wanted to destroy Israel as well as Iran’s Islamic fundamentalists and their rulers that have for years threatened to destroy Israel


"Also Pakistan is not a direct threat now for they have India that’s threatening their existence (if cerin events unfold), Iran has no such threats to its exsistence and thus it is more urgent a threat to Israel. "

They have the last remaining superpower on their doorstep that has described them as part of an axis of evil. . yes but the U.S. has never threatened to annihilate Iran as Iran has threatened for years to annihilate Israel

Now the U.S. perhaps has threatened to remove Iran’s rulers BUT Iran has had offensive intentions to wipe out a nation and as such that huge negative is much more powerful then their excuses for denfese against the U.S.

Also their nukes are no threat to the U.S. mainland but they are definitely a threat to Israel regardless of what the U.S. does or doesn’t do.


"I will amend what he said…Israel will never use nukes in a first strike and it wont be the first to use it….."

That is also a lie. Assuming none of your arab neighbours have nuclear weapons then you are saying that you wouldn't use them... even if your survival depended upon it? BS. . again we have the same policy as Russia and the U.S has with their MAD principle, you disagree with that then there is nothing I can do to change your opinion.


"Its called MAD (mutual assured destruction)… just like what you (yeah yeah, I know your in new Zealand ) and the US had. "

That is all Iran wants. .that’s a lie!!

They have made it clear over the years their offensive intentions, either wit speeches are actual military parades with death to Israel written on them (for further on this read my responses to akatarian)

At the moment there is no way in the world Iran is any kind of conventional threat to Israel. .true that’s why they are getting nukes.

They are not weaklings but have no power projection capability at all. The only realistic threat to them is your nukes on missiles or a dodgy very long range strike that would stretch even your airforce to the limit. All they want is a balance to your nuclear threat. . yes but Israel has had nukes for years and hasn’t used it once nor has it even threatened to use it against Iran nor has it ever threatened to destroy iran…..there is no need defensive need for a balance.

On the other hand Iran has for years threatened to destroy Israel and it has made its offensive intentions very clear.

"Because they have made offensive threats to annihilate other nations like Israel!!

Israel has not made any such offensive threats." .indeed it has not…..it might have threatened to attack those sites but it has never threatened to destroy Iran as Iran has in fact for years threatened to destroy Israel.

Yes, he who is open with their threats must be more dangerous than the best armed and best equipped nation in the region that already has nuclear weapons. .indeed yes in this case for Israel has had what you have said for thirty years and yet hasn’t used it once against Iran.

Iran only hasn’t attacked Israel with full force (well it does with its proxies) and despite all their threats because conventionally they couldn’t but with nukes they most certainly can.



Did it cross your mind that it might have just been rhetoric to keep the populous happy and distracted from their own problems. You'd think if they were prepared to commit suicide by launching a nuclear missile strike on Israel that they would be more openly attacking Israel physically? . yes it has occurred by me but after seeing suicide bombings it has occurred by me to not take any chances or to rely on what we think that they are thinking.

Fact: they have threatened for years to destroy Israel
Fact: they consider Israel a mortal enemy even though Israel has never fought against Iran nor has it ever threatened to destroy Iran.
Fact: they have military parades with death to Israel on it.
Fact; they fight Israel through their proxies
Fact; they are getting nukes and their rhetoric has not changed against Israel

Saddam only used chem weapons on his internal enemies and against Iranian human wave attacks. Ie first against those who could not retaliate and then in desperation to avoid being overrun by a numerically superior enemy. When it came to fighting the coalition two times he failed to use such weapons even though the second time the clearly stated aim was to remove him from power.
Why? .
saddam does not describe to the Islamic fundamentalist brand of Islam….big difference in the way saddam views his nukes and the way the Islamic fundamentalist rulers of Iran view theirs.

(off topic…just curious, so you believe saddam has nukes by the time of the war??)

"Anyway’s the only way to destroy the Jews is to destroy Israel…how else can they do it? "

If they consider Israel a holy land I doubt they want to level it. . yes but they have no other way to remove all the jews…heck, Allah will worry about what happens to the land after they do Allah’s work in removing the infidels from there.

'I mean no disrespect, But boy if your thinking that other nations are basing their justification on what Israel does or doesn’t do then your more naive about the middle east than I thought. "

It is just that the argument that Iran can't be allowed to have nuclear weapons is a little hollow coming as it does from countries that actually have them too. . I hear you except one major difference……Israel has never threatened offensive threats to destroy Iran like Iran has had offensive threats to destroy Israel.

"when a nation has nukes with offensive intentions that overrides any concerns for any deffenive excuses that they might have (especially in Iran's case where that excuse is rather thin) "
[quote] Since when was it a rule that countries that don't like Israel are not allowed WMDs? .since Israel never had offensive intentions to destroy Iran while Iran has had offensive intentions to destroy a whole nation.

"Not when your faced with total annihilation. "

So for the last 30 years they were to assume your nuclear weapons would only destroy military targets... . they were to assume the MAD principle.

Also Israel has had them for thirty years and hasnt used it once nor has it ever threatened to destroy a nation so they were to assume the logical assumption of pure self defense but again when did I ever expect anyone to think logically :roll:


"Again Iran is controlled by Islamic fundamentalists that want to see Israel destroyed (these are their words)"

And Israel is run by Jewish religious nutters that don't care about anyone else but other Jews. Why should we accept what you say? . first of all Israel leader’s are not religious. But anyways, whatever you claim that Israel’s leader care about is moot point. fact is that they have never threatened offensively to destroy Iran as Iran’s religious fundamentalist leaders have threatened to destroy Israel for years now.


Afterall Stalin getting Nuclear weapons doesn't seem to have started WWIII. It seemed to reduce the likelyhood of it. . Stalin was a atheist and not a Islamic fundamentalist that believes that Allah is on their side and that they are acting offensively in allahs will

"yes and Israel was the aggressors in 1981 with regards to Iraq’s reactor…yeah we know already how a lot in the outside world (wrongly) view things"

Quite true, you risked millions of peoples lives... how can you be trusted? .I guess that’s the difference in our world views (amongst many)…………Israel saved millions and millions not to mention all those coalition troops in gulf war one and yet you feel that Israel risked million's(BTW how so??)

Oh and how can we be trusted…well again we have had nukes now for thirty years and haven’t used it once!!

"Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land. "

They think you have stolen their holy land. first of all they are not Arab….but yes they believe that we stole Muslim holy land and that’s their belief and I guess its not even about right or wrong nor do I even care to argue that point…the bottom line is that they believe that and that is all that matters and as such they are a serious offensive threat to Israel.


"As or the U.S. well first of all they also have never threatened to annihilate Iran. "

They have threatened to violate it sovergnty and invade. Close enough in my book. . big difference in justification's of nukes that can kill million’s of people.

Plus again they have had offensive intentions to destroy a whole nation (Israel)


"and as such that negates their justifications to have nukes to prevent the U.S. from doing to it what it did in Iraq.
when a nation has nukes with offensive intentions that overrides any concerns for any deffenive excuses that they might have (especially in Iran's case where that excuse is rather thin) "

So Israels defence concerns are negated by the wars they started too I guess... come on hand over you WMDS... . Israel wars were self defence (1967 nasser cut off the striets of tharin (sp??)and kicked out the UN and amassed tons of troops at the border, Israel smartly pre-empted…that’s self defence……………1982, Israel was being bombarded with katushas and it went in to stop that. that’s self defence)

nopw even if you argue what I just said above, Israel never destroyed another nation nor has it even threatened to destroy another nation

Iran’s offensive threats are not merely to start a war but they are to destroy another nation.


"how does Iran have the numeric disadvantage that Israel has?? "

Because the Iranians can't count the US navy. :-) . as Israel cant as well.

fact Israel is at a huge numaric disadvantge while Iran is not.

Shalom :D

[aktarian]

"Iraq has threateend to destroy Iran. And acted on it."

There are two types of Muslim. One has Clerics and the other does not. Saddam and his party was based on the type that does not have clerics. The Iranians and the majority of the Iraqis... the ****es do have clerics. That is why Bush snr left Iraq High and dry after calling the Iraqis to rise up and overthrow Saddam it was the Turks and the Saudis that don't have clerics that warned bush that if the Shia get into power then they will have more in common with Iran and might become too friendly to the Persians... the US wanted them friendly to the US or no one at all so they provided no aid for the uprising and so Saddam crushed them.

That is both true and not true. While shi'ias generally entrust more power to their clerics (due to their history where they seldom had state power) you can't apply this other way. Sunnis are quite capable of forming theoracies. Look at Saudi Arabia (sect of sunni Islam but sunnis nonetheless), Afghansitan...



Actually India split on religious lines... Banglidesh and Pakistan are Muslim and India is Hindu.

I was refering to Iraq-Iran. Jsut because two countries are muslim it doesn't mean they woun't fight.



This is quite correct. Though they are different types of muslims.

Both were sunnis, altough they were split along ethnic lines, with Taliban being predominatlly Pashto and NA Uzbeks and Tadjiks. It was their outlook, not religion that they fought over.

[aktarian]

Iraq never wanted to destroy Iran, it was saddam he is gone now.

Egypt never wanted to destroy Israel. It was Nasser.




As for guarantee there is no guarantee to anything but it is highly unlikely.

So there is no guarantee that Israel woun't use their nukes in offensive manner? If Israel feels threatened because there is no guarantee that Egypt woun't turn than Iran should feel threatened because there is no guarantee Israel woun't use their nukes first.



Islamic fundamentalism and Iran’s rulers that are strict followers of that had no such offensive threats against Afghanistan being that it was already a Islamic state and a fundamentalist one when the taliban won!! There were no infidels like the Jews controlling that state.

So what if it was islamic state? Suadia Arabia is islamic state as well. You don't see Saudia and IRan having excelelnt relations, do you?



The other reasons for attacking weren’t as strong as removing the “infidels” from what they consider a holy Muslim land!!(Israel)

They constituted declaration of war.





True as you see the MAD principle works.

Very good we have made prograss ;)

You know what M in mad stands for? Mutual. You can't have mutual if only one side has capability. There is no MAD between Iran and Israel.





no again you cannot.
I agree with menachem bagen when he said “There is no guarantee which can guarantee an international guarantee."
the fact is that Administrations change, sentiment changes, willpower and determination change
I also agree with Golda Meir who said to one president, possibly LBJ, “something like "By the time you'd get here we wouldn't be here."

When did US sentiments changed? No matter which party was in power Israel always got what it wanted.



Anyways they are never coming anyway’s’ I repeat “no heres the fact, the U.S. and turkey while having defence agreements, they never have fought with Israel even during Israel’s wars and even when Israel was in serious trouble the U.S. didn’t fight but at the last minute they sent over armaments to counter what the soviets were giving to the Arabs………..now on the other hand, the Arabs states have fought together.

Syria and egypt ocasioanlly fought together. Others gave some aid.



Big difference in the defence agreements!!”

There is absolutely no agreement or even any official understanding that the U.S. will send troops in time of its need.,

No, but they will send help. there is no agreement that Arabs will send help to countries that border ISrael.



The Arabs on the other hand have always fought together.!!

As such Israel has much more threats then just those 4 that immediately surround it. The Arabs don’t and they have collectively their huge numeric advantage.

They fought together 2. That' not always. That's not even majority.



good that took you a while to admit ;) :D

I never said otherwise. Cuba was never threat to US. Not even in 1962. Soviet presence there was.



So now we are left with the U.S., so again the U.S. has never threatened to destroy Iran

No, but they acted in such way. Removing Mosadeq, helping country which attacked Iran...



Secondly like I said before, even if Iran’s leaders themselvs have what to fear from the U.S. their OFFENSIVE intentions to wipe out another nation is much more of a negative to them having nukes, then their reasons for wanting them.

Also Iran’s nukes are not a threat to the U.S. so it can’t really do anything anyway to their homeland but against Israel it most certainly is a threat no matter what the U.S. does or doesnt do.


No, but they could hit invading US forces, hit their bases in region. While it woun't do anythig to US, it will likelly kill enough US troops to make any US gains too expensive.



yes and as you see it’s a weak argument.

You say it's weak.



All you have is the U.S…..see above for that.


You too.



well I already explained Afghanistan,

No, you draged out some generalistions that don't stand evidence.



As for nuked in response….I agree if one looks at things the way we do….but Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t have your western rationalisations with them.

Yes, it's not as if Iranians ditched their fellow revolutionaries to keep support of country in which they rebelled, it's not as if they took aid from US and Israel (both declared eneies) when they needed it, it's not as if they helped US overthrowing unfriendlly regime. Iranians always act on their rhetoric. :roll:



The bottom line is that these Islamic fundamentalists have threatened for years to destroy Israel.
Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran!

They have also threatened to invade Afghansitan...



Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.(thus proving its not mere words)

You mean giving aid to resistance agaisnt foreign ocupation?



Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land.

They don't like you occupying Palestine. As for hating Jews. they hate thems o much they keep one in MAjlis at all times. Guess so they can hang him when they want to.



Iran has military parades with the death to Israel theme written on them.


And didn't invade Afghanistan.



the same principles are there indeed (though they are a bit different in that Iran is a actually a bigger threat to use it due to their Islamic fundamentalist followings in that Israel is “occupied” by infidels and they want to wipe out to “cleanse” that Muslim land of all infidels))……….and we see that the result was that Israel did the right thing even though we had people like you sounding off just like your doing here.


Actually, Iraq was bigger threat. They fought Israelis twice (or 3 times, depending on your interpretation), had acess to Israel etc. Iran has neither.



I am not even going to address that in other aspects other then to say how did Israel have a free hand against Iran??

Israel has had nukes now for thirty years what has it done against Iran??

Not agaisnt Iran, but free hand in Middle East. Would Israel invade Lebanon if Syria had nukes? Or bomb Tunisia if they had them?



haha oh but we should take your word on things :roll:

I never siad that. You keep saying one should take Israel's word at face value.



Oh and this isn’t about words here. Fact Israel has had them now for thirty years and it hasn’t used it, any unbiased person can see that its for self defence only but again in my opinion there is no such thing as a unbiased person.


Egypt has peace with Israel for thirty years. See any paralels?



yes you merely say that but you haven’t proven any similarities nor is your case even remotely strong on your arguments.

Israel’s are for self defence while Iran has no such self defence needs as Israel has plus Iran has made clear its offensive threats to annihilate Israel

Israel says israeli nukes are for self defence. Iran hes defensive needs as well.




no I still haven’t see you list one nation that has threatened to annihilate Iran as Iran has threatened to annihilate Israel.


Iraq, Pakistan and US can be seen as threats to Iran.



they don’t have the nukes yet.
Second of all, they have declared a war when they actively help their proxies fight against Israel even though Israel hasn’t ever fired a shot at Iran.

I bet Americans are glad that Soviets didn't consider US aid to mujahedeen declaration of war.

And why would ISrael not firing a shot at Iran prevent IRanains from helping resistance movment agaisnt foreign ocupation? Soviets and US didn't fire a shot at each other but thet didn't prevent each other from helping proxies.



They openly call Israel a mortal enemy.
They have threatened to annihilate Israel for years now.

Even with all that Israel has never threatened to annihilate or to destroy Iran, all it has said is that it might go after those sites that are to be used to destroy it.


They openly stated they will invade Afghhanistan and planned to do so.



no they don’t for Israel is at a huge numeric disadvantage now even against Arab U.S. arms.

For every Arab purchase there is coresponding ISraeli one. US even stated so.




(you read my links there right?)


I was hoping you will provide some relevant info, not some outdated numbers.



the same as above.

Also besides the U.S. weapons which are a lot now to the arabs, they also have tons of missiles and all their soviet stuff that all together it is a huge numeric advantage for them that Israel cannot match nor even come close.


Soviet stuff is getting old, obsolete and running out of operational life. And US ofsetts each arab purchase with sales to Israel.



Iraq was the only one removed……….there is still Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iran,

Syrian military is weak. Egypat and Jordan are at peace with ISrael. Suadi arabian military is not capable of fighting without US support, Libya has no power projection and has nuclear sites under inspection. Iran never fought agaisnt ISrael, as you keep saying.



Remember that the next war doesn’t mean that the ones that didn’t participate before wont again, Israel is still surrounded by 22 Arab nations where a large majority of thier populations that still want to see Israel destroyed and till that completely changes, Israel needs to worry about all of them.


And US is even more comited to Israel than it ever was.



no I am not, hence the MAD principle that Israel rightly has...I am glad that we kind of agree now ;)

So Israel has right to have MAD capability vis-a-vis Arabs, but Iran isn0t entitled to one vis-a-vis ISrael?



no that’s not the same for in Nasser and saddat had a large majority that supported those attacks and wanted it,

With Iraq it wasn’t the people that wanted it but it was saddam that forced this war and forced his people to fight.

Of course. When it suits you it was isolated acts of leadership, when it doesn't it was people. :roll:



even if your 80’s claims are totally true, that all stopped in the late 80’s so Israel has had over 15 years now and still it hasn’t done a thing.

So again I repeat “so let me understand this correctly. Iran hasn’t had nukes for years but yet Israel hasn’t attacked it once nor has it thrown its weight towards her….hmm yeah your logic is not faulty ;) :roll


Israel had free hand in Middle east. Nukes helped. Egypt has peace with Israel for years.



no Egypt's leader cracked down without the support of the population. Yes some supported but a lot didn’t as well.

Once peopel realised that main targets for islamists are foreign tourists they helped governemnt. They realised attacks on tourists=>less tourist in Egypt=>less money from tourist=>less money for Egyptians.



Secondly Egypt has a large Islamic fundamentalist population just like Iran had and it is much more plausible that Egypt can turn into another Iran then Israel to elect a manic.

Wrong. Iranians are shi'ias, who place more powers in hands of clerics. egypt never had strong islamist movment. they have it but there is little threat of turning into Iran. Different mindsets. they can't even turn into another Saudi Arabia.



Also even the secularists there want to see Israel destroyed…the Egyptian newspapers are more anti Semitic then the nazi papers ever were.

The fact is that Egypt’s population is very hostile towards Israel and most of them still want to see Israel destroyed….Israel has no such percentage of its population that wants to see Egypt destroyed.

So what if they are hostile? They can't be threat.



yeah but when they make that noise it will be because they are close to doing something…..its not like they are going to make noise and then wait 15 years.

Also these are modern planes and they are not going to break down immediately after the U.S. cuts off ties and also the Egyptians do have some abilities to do their own maintenance and they do have some spare parts to say the least.

When buying foreign planes countries genrally stockpile enough apares for 3 months. Don't you think US will get suspicious if Egypt is starting to buy lot of spares (not to mention ISrael wills tart pressuring US not to sell aditional spares). Planes break down when they run out of spare parts. With US embargo that would be soon. And US isn't willing to train "locals" too much about palne manitenance. That way they are dependant on US.



first of all there is no guarantee to anything.

Second of all, the gap isn’t tied but its getting closer.

Third of all, they have their huge numeric advantage so that coupled with a narrower technological gap is indeed very worrisome.

as for quality, I belive it was Stalin that once said "quantity has a quality all its own"


US is determined to keep gap as it is in faovur of SIrael. And acts on it. US has history of unconditional support for ISrael (more than 30 years,a s this seems to be benchmark for you).



I already addressed what you just said but what you just said doesn’t by any means address my statement here.

Their offensive intentions to destroy a nation are what’s aggressive!!


No, you didn't. You draged out some generalisations, that aren't backed by evidence.



yes and Iran is getting them with their offensive intentions.

Says Israel.



As for the other nations that have WMD and are not Islamic fundamentalists, well the MAD principle applies.


Right. So they aren't realsitic threat.



yes indeed after, very good we both agree ;)

Which of course doesn't make sense since Israel is only one to have nukes.



because they don’t have the same arguments as Israel.

Also they have had offensive intentions to wipe out another nation.


And didn't act on similar intentions agaisnt much weaker nation.



Again Israel has had nukes for thirty years and hasn’t used it, its not like all of a sudden now with subs they will use it first.

As you said, there is no guarantee for anything.



well they have a huge Islamic fundamentalist population (and even their secular population is very hostile toward israel) and as such I don’t know when Egypt is going to be a threat but they most certainly can be at any time and as such Israel needs to maintain its strong deterrent.

Same way one can never tell when Israel decides to use nukes first. And then it's good thing to have nukes of your own to make Israelis think twice.



Btw you can believe whatever you want but Ill just say that there hasn’t been war in thirty years because of Israel’s nukes…..heck that’s one of the reasons why egyp signed that “peace” deal for they knew they were never going to be able to destroy Israel now becouse of israels nukes so they opted for the best solution at the time to get back the Sinai.


There was one war in this 30 time period. Egypt also knew before 1973 that they can't destroy Israel. that's why they wanted peace treaty.



India has been a nuclear power or thirty years??[quote="IDFM203"]

Since 1974. Not 30 years but so close to it makes no difference.

[quote=IDFM203]
Oh and you’ll have to ask the world for that. (my guess would be that they fear India and Pakistan might use them while they have never feared Israel from using what it has.)

People feared Israel will use them.



Anyways this has no relevance to what we are discussing.


It does. You keep harping on that 30 year period that ISrael has nukes and dind't use them. I pointed out that India has them comparable time period and peopel are worried about them. So why shouldn't they be worried about Israel's?



No you’re repeating that conclusion. I am asking ok so you say longer reach so again “ill go along with this one for a second, tell me what other states other then the ones that it could have hit before with their nukes but yet didn’t, does Israel want to hit with nukes and why

Iran.



So again why do you think Israel didn’t get that chance to help (Iran rejected any help from Israel :( ) like in did when Turkey (http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0fiz0) had their big earthquake.[quote="IDFM203"]

Because taking ISraeli help would mean some sort of recognition of Israel?

[quote=IDFM203]
Remember Israel has never fought a day against Iran……

Neither did Soviet Union and US. Or India and Argentina. Your point?

[UoUo]

1 pic worth a thousand words.


http://rotter.net/israel/mecountry.gif

[Groove]

A great Place and the best strategic choice you made with this :)

Besides any bible or thora relations.

Greetings

Groove

EDIT:

If they would attack all together. You wouldnt have enough nukes to stop them ? I mean this must be some million ppl down there in this yellow countries.

[UoUo]

A great Place and the best strategic choice you made with this :)

Besides any bible or thora relations.

Greetings

Groove

EDIT:

If they would attack all together. You wouldnt have enough nukes to stop them ? I mean this must be some million ppl down there in this yellow countries.

Yes...we whould have enough nukes.

[UoUo]

The absurdly that they fight about land...look how much land they got there..... :(

[Operation Ivy]

Ahhh god so much to read

[IDFM203]

“Iraq never wanted to destroy Iran, it was saddam he is gone now.”

Egypt never wanted to destroy Israel. It was Nasser. wrong!! most of Egypt's population wanted to destroy Israel and didn’t need nassar to convince them…..that was not the case with Iraq for it was mostly saddam's personal war which he forced his population to fight….Egypt’s population didn’t need any convincing nor any forcing.


“As for guarantee there is no guarantee to anything but it is highly unlikely.”

So there is no guarantee that Israel woun't use their nukes in offensive manner? like I said to you before, there is no such thing as a guarantee anywhere in the world BUT Israel has had them now for thirty years and hasn’t used it once even though it is still surrounded by 22 Arab nations where most of the populations still want to see Israel destroyed.

Thus Israel has proven itself to be a responsible nuclear nation that has it only for self defense..

Iran on the other hand fights Israel for years through their proxies even though Israel has never fought a day against Iran nor has it ever threatened to destroy Iran but despite that Iran has also for years threatened OFFENSIVE intentions to destroy a nation (israel)


If Israel feels threatened because there is no guarantee that Egypt woun't turn than Iran should feel threatened because there is no guarantee Israel woun't use their nukes first. see above for my answer…..but even if Egypt rulers turn into another Iran, no Israel will not use nukes offensively against Egypt for it hasn’t used it offensively against Iran nor has it even threatened to use it….for with Iran all Israel is saying is that it might destroy Iran’s nuclear sites (and not Iran itself) that that can be used to fulfil Iran’s Islamic fundamentalist leaders wishes for years to destroy the whole Israel.


So what if it was islamic state? Suadia Arabia is islamic state as well. You don't see Saudia and IRan having excelelnt relations, do you? Listen get this clear I never said all Muslim’s get along and yes some of them do fight against each other at times however your Afghanistan example is a non example to the Israel situation with Iran, due to I repeat “Islamic fundamentalism and Iran’s rulers that are strict followers of that had no such offensive threats against Afghanistan being that it was already a Islamic state and a fundamentalist one when the taliban won!! There were no infidels like the Jews controlling that state.

The other reasons for attacking weren’t as strong as removing the “infidels” from what they consider a holy Muslim land!!(Israel)

Listen, a grievance over something that Afghanistan did as you claim that Iran felt, is not the same desire or at the same level that Iran’s Islamic fundamentalists have against Israel and thier will to destroy Israel…there is a big difference in the level of hatred and the level of will.


Btw just for the heck of it, I would be curious for some credible links that Iran was all about to invade or that it even had threatened to destroy Afghanistan.


“True as you see the MAD principle works.

Very good we have made prograss ;) “

You know what M in mad stands for? Mutual. You can't have mutual if only one side has capability. There is no MAD between Iran and Israel. first of all Israel has had that MAD principle not only for Iran (my response was with regards to Syria and others). There are other nations that want to destroy Israel that have WMD’s and thier huge numaric advantage and MAD works for them.

As for Iran (which is another matter then the Arab nations), yes they are close and the reason why Israel wants to take out their nukes is because with Islamic fundamentalism and their constant threats to destroy Israel the rational MAD principle probably wont work there.


When did US sentiments changed? No matter which party was in power Israel always got what it wanted. first of all israe hasnt always gotten what it wanted.

I never said sentiments chenged but it defiantly could….there is a poll out in the U.S. were some percentage wants to see aid to Israel; or even aid to all nations cut off.
So I say again
I agree with menachem bagen when he said “There is no guarantee which can guarantee an international guarantee."
the fact is that Administrations change, sentiment changes , willpower and determination change (these things are highly likly to happen in the real world)

I also agree with Golda Meir who said to one president, possibly LBJ, “something like "By the time you'd get here we wouldn't be here."


“Anyways they are never coming anyway’s’ I repeat “no heres the fact, the U.S. and turkey while having defence agreements, they never have fought with Israel even during Israel’s wars and even when Israel was in serious trouble the U.S. didn’t fight but at the last minute they sent over armaments to counter what the soviets were giving to the Arabs………..now on the other hand, the Arabs states have fought together.”

Syria and egypt ocasioanlly fought together. Others gave some aid. first of all Syria and Egypt and Jordan always fought together (as well as some Lebanese units), and even at times some Iraqi units as well.

Secondly even those three (or two) combined are much much bigger numerically then what Israel has.

Thirdly the aid that they got from the other Arabs was on top of the soviets and it was a lot of military aid.

And in 1948 it was even more then what I listed above for it was actually 7 Arab nations that actively fought.

So again Israel has always fought alone while the Arabs have not.

Also those nations that have sent aid before was because they were weak but a lot of them are not anymore. A lot of them have modern weaponry of their own and they still want to see Israel destroyed (think Saudi Arabia)


Big difference in the defence agreements!!”

There is absolutely no agreement or even any official understanding that the U.S. will send troops in time of its need.,

No, but they will send help. there is no agreement that Arabs will send help to countries that border ISrael. .,there is actually no agreement as well with the U.S. to send help .

Secondly its not about official or not with the Arabs, or what we even know in public or not, but the fact is that the Arabs have always sent aid and they have always fought together.

Israel has not had any nation fight with it as the Arabs have had.


“Secondly like I said before, even if Iran’s leaders themselvs have what to fear from the U.S. their OFFENSIVE intentions to wipe out another nation is much more of a negative to them having nukes, then their reasons for wanting them.

Also Iran’s nukes are not a threat to the U.S. so it can’t really do anything anyway to their homeland but against Israel it most certainly is a threat no matter what the U.S. does or doesnt do.”


No, but they could hit invading US forces, hit their bases in region. While it woun't do anythig to US, it will likelly kill enough US troops to make any US gains too expensive. explain to me how using a nuke in another nation will only destroy those U.S. bases and not kill millions of that other nations inhabitants?

how is that a MAD principle aginst the U.S. homeland being that it is the U.S. that they are after?

even if Iran’s leaders themselvs have what to fear from the U.S. their OFFENSIVE intentions to wipe out another nation is much more of a negative to them having nukes, then their reasons for wanting them.


As for nuked in response….I agree if one looks at things the way we do….but Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t have your western rationalisations with them

Yes, it's not as if Iranians ditched their fellow revolutionaries to keep support of country in which they rebelled, it's not as if they took aid from US and Israel (both declared eneies) when they needed it, it's not as if they helped US overthrowing unfriendlly regime. Iranians always act on their rhetoric. :roll: . one second here, your talking about Iranians and I am talking about Iranian Islamic fundamentalists and their leaders that rule Iran .…there is a difference you know……as for these Islamic fundamentalists (the same ideology that produces suicide bombers) acting on their rhetoric, all I can say is that they have openly declared Israel a mortal enemy that needs to be destroyed for years now and they have indeed fought Israel through their various proxies and all this even though Israel hasn’t fired single shot against Iran, ever……and now they are building nukes….that’s more then a reasonable concern to think that they are a offensive threat to use it to fulfil their wish to destroy offensively a nation (Israel)


Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.(thus proving its not mere words)

You mean giving aid to resistance agaisnt foreign ocupation? whether Israel is a foreign occupier of Lebanon or even the occupied territories (they also actively help some Palestinian groups) is a moot point for me to argue, for what does Iran have to do with that? They are not an Arab nation nor has Iran ever ruled that land.

So Islamic fundamentalism is the only reason and as we see there is no point in me even arguing the occupation charge for the bottom line is that they consider Israel to be Muslim occupied land and they fight to rid the infidels (the Jews) from that land and as such they are a offensive threat to destroy Israel when they get that full power (which the nukes give them that).


the same principles are there indeed (though they are a bit different in that Iran is a actually a bigger threat to use it due to their Islamic fundamentalist followings in that Israel is “occupied” by infidels and they want to wipe out to “cleanse” that Muslim land of all infidels))……….and we see that the result was that Israel did the right thing even though we had people like you sounding off just like your doing here.

Actually, Iraq was bigger threat. They fought Israelis twice (or 3 times, depending on your interpretation), had acess to Israel etc. Iran has neither. so Iraq has fought against Israel!! (boy you seemed to have left that out before :roll: )..anyways, so now your arguing who was the bigger threat…..at least we are past your other absurdity and implication that Israel was wrong to take out that threat (Iraq’s nukes)

As for whose the bigger threat, I made my case already that Islamic fundamentalism at the controls are a much bigger threat but either way they are both big offensive threats (well iraq no more) and as such I don’t rally care to go round and round on whose a bigger threat.


I am not even going to address that in other aspects other then to say how did Israel have a free hand against Iran??

Israel has had nukes now for thirty years what has it done against Iran??

Not agaisnt Iran, but free hand in Middle East. Would Israel invade Lebanon if Syria had nukes? Or bomb Tunisia if they had them? first of all we are talking about Iran here… as for Syria (and Lebanon) and their use of proxies to shall Israel towns and villages which forced Israel to respond to that, well if they had nukes or WMD's at the time well that would bring the level of MAD to another level and Israel would still go after those proxies and Syria’s (which is not ruled by Islamic fundamentalists) nukes and WMD's would not be used due to the MAD principle....also israel never invaded Syria itself!!


"haha oh but we should take your word on things :roll: "

I never siad that. You keep saying one should take Israel's word at face value. I said” Also Israel’s are for self defence while Iran’s has made it very clear their offensive intentions to destroy Israel when it gets that ability. And then you said “Israel says they are for defence. Forgive me for not taking Israeli word at face value” and then I said above and also I say now (again), Israel’s word is based on the concrete proof of not using it for thirty years even though it has been surrounded by 22 Arab nations that have majority populations that want to see Israel destroyed.

I think Israel’s word based on relevnt facts that it is for self-defence has much more relevance then your mistrust for it!!


Oh and this isn’t about words here. Fact Israel has had them now for thirty years and it hasn’t used it, any unbiased person can see that its for self defence only but again in my opinion there is no such thing as a unbiased person.

Egypt has peace with Israel for thirty years. See any paralels? no Egypt has no nor has ever had any real peace with Israel, a majority of their population don’t recognise any “peace” deal…however Egypt’s military has been quite against Israel and that is due to Israel nukes….thus for Israel it is self defence.

Iran on the other hand is ruled by Islamic fundamentalists and them having nukes is a offensive threat to use them.


yes you merely say that but you haven’t proven any similarities nor is your case even remotely strong on your arguments.

Israel’s are for self defence while Iran has no such self defence needs as Israel has plus Iran has made clear its offensive threats to annihilate Israel

Israel says israeli nukes are for self defence. Iran hes defensive needs as well. Israel “says” and Iran “needs” (hmm and there are supposedely "unbiased" people around :roll: )

Anyway’s Iran has no such defensive needs like Israel has but again even if it has its one defensive need (the U.S.) their OFFENSIVE intentions to wipe out another nation is much more of a negative to them having nukes, then their reasons for wanting them.

Also Iran’s nukes are not a threat to the U.S. so it can’t really do anything anyway to their homeland but against Israel it most certainly is a threat no matter what the U.S. does or doesnt do.


no I still haven’t see you list one nation that has threatened to annihilate Iran as Iran has threatened to annihilate Israel.

Iraq, Pakistan and US can be seen as threats to Iran. nope, discounted already the first two before and the U.S. is not threatening Iran but just their leaders but anyway’s read the answer above.


“they don’t have the nukes yet.
Second of all, they have declared a war when they actively help their proxies fight against Israel even though Israel hasn’t ever fired a shot at Iran.”


And why would ISrael not firing a shot at Iran prevent IRanains from helping resistance movment agaisnt foreign ocupation? . I don’t get what your saying here…when has Israel ever fought against Iran or even had proxies to fight against Iran?

They have been fighting Israel for years now through their proxies and yet Israel hasn’t fired a shot at Iran.


no they don’t for Israel is at a huge numeric disadvantage now even against Arab U.S. arms
For every Arab purchase there is coresponding ISraeli one. US even stated so. .that’s not true….the U.S. supposedly gives Israel (well some Arab nations have now the better F16) the qualitative edge but nowhere is there any numeric counter to every purchase.

Also there is more then one Arab nation with U.S. arms


“(you read my links there right?)”

I was hoping you will provide some relevant info, not some outdated numbers. .that link was written in 1998/99!! Second of all the Arabs have got a lot more since then and although Israel has gotten some more as well, the numeric balance (and huge numeric disadvantage for Israel) has not shifted at all.



Soviet stuff is getting old, obsolete and running out of operational life. And US ofsetts each arab purchase with sales to Israel. . first of all, some of their soviet stuff is old but its not obsolete at all nor is it running out of operational life. but anyways, they still have their huge numeric advantage not to mention thousands of missiles not to mention very good quality tanks and they do have alot of good quality mig’s, and also they have north Korea stuff as well.
As for the U.S. stuff, I already explained.

Again with regards to quality yes Israel has the edge although the gap is in fact narrowing due to the influx of U.S. quality arms as well as their huge numeric advantage which as Stalin once said "quantity has a quality all its own"


Iraq was the only one removed……….there is still Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iran,

Syrian military is weak. Egypat and Jordan are at peace with ISrael. Suadi arabian military is not capable of fighting without US support, Libya has no power projection and has nuclear sites under inspection. Iran never fought agaisnt ISrael, as you keep saying. Syria is not weak they still have plenty…Egypt and Jordan only have a deal they signed and nothing more for most of their populations don’t recognise it and Iran has fought Israel through thier proxies…I have kept on saying that Israel never fought Iran and not the other way around as you put it now.

Also most of the Arab world’s population still want to see the whole Israel destroyed, when that dramatically and solidly changes, then we can discuss Israel’s nukes.


“Remember that the next war doesn’t mean that the ones that didn’t participate before wont again, Israel is still surrounded by 22 Arab nations where a large majority of thier populations that still want to see Israel destroyed and till that completely changes, Israel needs to worry about all of them”

And US is even more comited to Israel than it ever was. I already explained how the U.S. cant ever be expected to fight for Israel and most likely wont.


no I am not, hence the MAD principle that Israel rightly has...I am glad that we kind of agree now ;)
So Israel has right to have MAD capability vis-a-vis Arabs, but Iran isn0t entitled to one vis-a-vis ISrael? because Iran has threatened offensively to destroy Israel without Israel ever threatening to destroy Iran, even after thirty years of Israel having nukes.(or even never fighting against Iran as Iran has fought against Israel).


no that’s not the same for in Nasser and saddat had a large majority that supported those attacks and wanted it,

With Iraq it wasn’t the people that wanted it but it was saddam that forced this war and forced his people to fight”

Of course. When it suits you it was isolated acts of leadership, when it doesn't it was people. :roll: . haha ;) uhh its not about me or you but its about the facts, and those are the facts….you disagree then prove it…you haven’t!!

I already explained in the beginning of this thread the difference.


no Egypt's leader cracked down without the support of the population. Yes some supported but a lot didn’t as well

Once peopel realised that main targets for islamists are foreign tourists they helped governemnt. They realised attacks on tourists=>less tourist in Egypt=>less money from tourist=>less money for Egyptians. . yes those that did it realised that!! There are a lot of Egyptians like the Islamic fundamentalists themselves that don’t.

Secondly also even the secularists there want to see Israel destroyed…the Egyptian newspapers are more anti Semitic then the nazi papers ever were.

The fact is that Egypt’s population is very hostile towards Israel and most of them still want to see Israel destroyed….Israel has no such percentage of its population that wants to see Egypt destroyed



Secondly Egypt has a large Islamic fundamentalist population just like Iran had and it is much more plausible that Egypt can turn into another Iran then Israel to elect a manic

Wrong. Iranians are shi'ias, who place more powers in hands of clerics. egypt never had strong islamist movment. they have it but there is little threat of turning into Iran. Different mindsets. they can't even turn into another Saudi Arabia. . its not about them Turing into a exact carbon copy of Iran…the fact is that they have a large Islamic fundamentalist element as well.

Secondly they have the rest of the population still wants to see Israel destroyed.

Those elements have not changed and those elements can turn inot another ruler that is not as rational with regards to Israel as mubarek is.

That’s what I mean with regards to Iran.


“Also even the secularists there want to see Israel destroyed…the Egyptian newspapers are more anti Semitic then the nazi papers ever were.

The fact is that Egypt’s population is very hostile towards Israel and most of them still want to see Israel destroyed….Israel has no such percentage of its population that wants to see Egypt destroyed

So what if they are hostile? They can't be threat. . indeed they are not a threat due to Israel nukes…..however things can change


yeah but when they make that noise it will be because they are close to doing something…..its not like they are going to make noise and then wait 15 years.

Also these are modern planes and they are not going to break down immediately after the U.S. cuts off ties and also the Egyptians do have some abilities to do their own maintenance and they do have some spare parts to say the least.”

When buying foreign planes countries genrally stockpile enough apares for 3 months. Don't you think US will get suspicious if Egypt is starting to buy lot of spares (not to mention ISrael wills tart pressuring US not to sell aditional spares). Planes break down when they run out of spare parts. With US embargo that would be soon. And US isn't willing to train "locals" too much about palne manitenance. That way they are dependant on US. . first of all you don’t know Egypt spare part situation and times and believe me if Egypt was planning on something they would stockpile extra parts.(and yes the U.S. would get suspicious and so what, that don’t mean the U.S. would cut them off right away)

Secondly their planes wont need spare parts three months after so your point is a non-point.

Thirdly they are already trained in what to do there is no need for more of it.

the U.S. cuting them off doesnt mean that all thier american arms that they now have are now all of a sudden useless!...boy your grasping for straws here :roll:


US has history of unconditional support for ISrael (more than 30 years,a s this seems to be benchmark for you). no it’s not more then thirty years (well ok around 35 years) ….by the 1967 war and before, Israel mostly got its arms from the French and the British and not from the U.S.

In fact the U.S. was a bit harsh in relations against Israel up to that point for fighting with Britain and France in the Suez war of 1956.

So except for signing the UN partition plan and a little help from 1948 till 1967, for the most part the U.S. was not a unconditional supporter or any big ally of Israel’s.


yes and Iran is getting them with their offensive intentions.

Says Israel. .says universal common sense!!

So lets go over this again

Iran has over the year’s threatened to destroy Israel
Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran!

Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.

Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land.

Iran has military parades with the death to Israel theme written on them.

cocnclusion=You don’t need to be Sherlock holms to figure out their offensive intentions.


As for the other nations that have WMD and are not Islamic fundamentalists, well the MAD principle applies.

Right. So they aren't realsitic threat. no they are in fact realistic threats but there the MAD principle applies….it is highly unlikely that the MAD principle applies to Iran’s Islamic fundamentalists and their elements of that in Iran.


"yes indeed after, very good we both agree ;) "

Which of course doesn't make sense since Israel is only one to have nukes. the MAD principle applies to WMD's and the other Arab nations have that.

you know nukes are not the only way to instentlly kill millions ;)

Secondly Iran is close to having nukes.


Also they have had offensive intentions to wipe out another nation.”

And didn't act on similar intentions agaisnt much weaker nation. they didn’t have the same desire to destroy them as they do against Israel…for more see my answer before about that weaker nation and its non-comparison to the iran/Israel situation.


Btw you can believe whatever you want but Ill just say that there hasn’t been war in thirty years because of Israel’s nukes…..heck that’s one of the reasons why egyp signed that “peace” deal for they knew they were never going to be able to destroy Israel now becouse of israels nukes so they opted for the best solution at the time to get back the Sinai.”

There was one war in this 30 time period. yes in large part only because of Israel’s nuclear deterrent which was mostly in full gear after the Yom kipper war.


Egypt also knew before 1973 that they can't destroy Israel. that’s factually false, they had every intention to destroy Israel and in fact they came very close to destroying Israel

But hey I am not going to argue against your noam chumsky religion here for pure faith is something that cant be rationatly reasoned with.


that's why they wanted peace treaty. no they wanted a peace treaty for after they failed in 1973 to destry Israel and get all the land for themselves, they at least could get back the Sinai for they knew that after 1973 and thier last chence hope to defeat totally Israel, they wouldnt be able to surprise Israel any more and now that Israel had the full nuclear deterrent, there was no chance that they were militarily going to destroy Israel or get any land like the Sinai that way, so they did the smart thing to get that land but that was it, It was not for any real intention for any real peace. Most Egyptians did not want a real genuine peace with Israel and they still don’t and they at as if there is no "peace" agreenment signed.


India has been a nuclear power or thirty years

Since 1974. Not 30 years but so close to it makes no difference. no I am not talking about a single nuke or a small capacity, how long have they had their nuclear MAD deterrent for??

Anyways this is moot point and has no relevance to what we are discussing.


Oh and you’ll have to ask the world for that. (my guess would be that they fear India and Pakistan might use them while they have never feared Israel from using what it has.)

People feared Israel will use them. well those people were wrong as we see Israel has not. . Also you asked “India has nukes for 30 or so years. Why is world worried about heir nuclear arsenal? To imply that they are not worried about Israel’s and I gave my answer to that.

But anyways yes I know that there are people that are “worried” about Israel’s nukes but those that “worry” have nothing legitimate to base their “worry” on.


Anyways this has no relevance to what we are discussing.

It does. You keep harping on that 30 year period that ISrael has nukes and dind't use them. I pointed out that India has them comparable time period and peopel are worried about them. So why shouldn't they be worried about Israel's? ahh I got you ;) ….ok let me ask you a question…..why is the world worried about India’s nukes all of a sudden now in recent times?


No you’re repeating that conclusion. I am asking ok so you say longer reach so again “ill go along with this one for a second, tell me what other states other then the ones that it could have hit before with their nukes but yet didn’t, does Israel want to hit with nukes and why

Iran. ok Ill still go along with you, so why other then Israel’s second strike deterrent factor to Iran and to other nations for it’s a sea platform and not land based, or other thenafter Iran nuking Israel, would Israel use nukes on a sub against Iran for?


“So again why do you think Israel didn’t get that chance to help (Iran rejected any help from Israel :( ) like in did when Turkey (http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0fiz0) had their big earthquake”

Because taking ISraeli help would mean some sort of recognition of Israel?

Well so what, their people are dying and Israel could provide very valuable help and the fact that they refused that help in time of a critical need for their people, only further shows the harsh nature and character of the offensive threat that Israel faces.


Remember Israel has never fought a day against Iran……

Neither did Soviet Union and US.. Your point? that’s only because of the MAD principal that both of those nations had against each other.

My point with Iran is that Israel has never fought against it nor has it ever had the desire to fight against it nor has it ever threatened to destroy Iran but yet Iran considers Israel a mortal enemy and wants to destroy it and them having nukes to fulfill their long desires to destroy Israel is clearly a offensive threat….that’s my point!!

Shalom :D

[Groove]

but if iran would nuke israel - would allah clean all the nuclear wasteland ? i mean they would bash they palestinian friends too.

But on other hand once i saw an article that some high percentage of the Indian people dont know what kind of Bomb the nuclear bomb is. So they think its a big bomb and it destroys more. They dont know anything about fallout etc.

Greetings

Groove

[S'13]

but if iran would nuke israel - would allah clean all the nuclear wasteland ? i mean they would bash they palestinian friends too.


These are people who support suicied bombers that were talking about. Common sense isn't exactly their strong side...

[GazB]

"These are people who support suicied bombers that were talking about. Common sense isn't exactly their strong side..."

Yes, why do they use suicide bombers when they should be using B-2 stealth bombers and M1A3 tanks... perhaps that is all they have left?

Common sense is fighting like Iraq did in the open desert where the Israelis could slaughter thousands of arabs for the loss of a few Jews.

They must be insane to use individual arabs to kill up to a dozen occupiers at a time.

Their tactics are obviously repulsive, but certainly not stupid.

Also the "management" are not put at direct risk. Lots of clerics like to preach war, but few will strap on a bomb themselves and lead by example.

To be honest I can't be bothered debating this... all I will say is read my first post in this thread... I stick by that. If Israel can be "trusted" then I think Iran can be too. I can see I am not going to change the mind of an Israeli, and I assure you you won't change mine unless you can come up with better reasons.

[aktarian]

wrong!! most of Egypt's population wanted to destroy Israel and didn’t need nassar to convince them…..that was not the case with Iraq for it was mostly saddam's personal war which he forced his population to fight….Egypt’s population didn’t need any convincing nor any forcing.


And Egypt has 30 years of peace with Israel. Guess Egyptian population changes mind quickly. :roll:



like I said to you before, there is no such thing as a guarantee anywhere in the world BUT Israel has had them now for thirty years and hasn’t used it once even though it is still surrounded by 22 Arab nations where most of the populations still want to see Israel destroyed.

Thus Israel has proven itself to be a responsible nuclear nation that has it only for self defense..

Egypt has peace with Israel for 30 years and didn't go to war. Israel has nukes for 30 years and didn't use them. If you consider that Egypt changing mind after 30 years is realistic (as you seem to do), than Iran can onsider that Israel changing mind is realsitic as well.



Iran on the other hand fights Israel for years through their proxies even though Israel has never fought a day against Iran nor has it ever threatened to destroy Iran but despite that Iran has also for years threatened OFFENSIVE intentions to destroy a nation (israel)


Iran supported resistance movement agaisnt Israeli ocupation.



see above for my answer…..but even if Egypt rulers turn into another Iran, no Israel will not use nukes offensively against Egypt for it hasn’t used it offensively against Iran nor has it even threatened to use it….for with Iran all Israel is saying is that it might destroy Iran’s nuclear sites (and not Iran itself) that that can be used to fulfil Iran’s Islamic fundamentalist leaders wishes for years to destroy the whole Israel.


That's what Israel say. I have troubles taking Israeli words at face value.



Listen get this clear I never said all Muslim’s get along and yes some of them do fight against each other at times however your Afghanistan example is a non example to the Israel situation with Iran, due to I repeat “Islamic fundamentalism and Iran’s rulers that are strict followers of that had no such offensive threats against Afghanistan being that it was already a Islamic state and a fundamentalist one when the taliban won!! There were no infidels like the Jews controlling that state.

No, you said Iran and Afghansitan were good to each other because they were both fundamentalists. Wrong. And just because there was no infidels they had serious troubles with Afghanistan. Taliban ruled. And Al Qaida.



The other reasons for attacking weren’t as strong as removing the “infidels” from what they consider a holy Muslim land!!(Israel)

Before you were saying they had no grievances. Now you are saying they had soem grievances. I'll wait until you are saying they had serious grievances.



Listen, a grievance over something that Afghanistan did as you claim that Iran felt, is not the same desire or at the same level that Iran’s Islamic fundamentalists have against Israel and thier will to destroy Israel…there is a big difference in the level of hatred and the level of will.

Right. You don't even know why they were at each other throats, now you are saying it's small.



Btw just for the heck of it, I would be curious for some credible links that Iran was all about to invade or that it even had threatened to destroy Afghanistan.


http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0XPQ/1998_Sept_21/53423460/p1/article.jhtml

http://www.dnd.ca/admpol/eng/doc/Afghanistan/afg_05_e.htm

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/1998/09/wwwh8923.html




first of all Israel has had that MAD principle not only for Iran (my response was with regards to Syria and others). There are other nations that want to destroy Israel that have WMD’s and thier huge numaric advantage and MAD works for them.[quote="IDFM203"]

No. For MAD both sides must have similar capabilities. If only one side has it that it isn't MAD.


[quote=IDFM203]
As for Iran (which is another matter then the Arab nations), yes they are close and the reason why Israel wants to take out their nukes is because with Islamic fundamentalism and their constant threats to destroy Israel the rational MAD principle probably wont work there.


Iran has history of pragmatic decisions that run agaisnt their "unshakable" principles. If they declared US "Great Satan" why didn't they go to war with them? Becuase they were deterred by US military strenght perhaps?



I never said sentiments chenged but it defiantly could….there is a poll out in the U.S. were some percentage wants to see aid to Israel; or even aid to all nations cut off.

And I'm sure there are similar polls that show:
-US should withdraw from Iraq now
-US should increase aid to ISrael
-US should invade Iran
...



So I say again
I agree with menachem bagen when he said “There is no guarantee which can guarantee an international guarantee."
the fact is that Administrations change, sentiment changes , willpower and determination change (these things are highly likly to happen in the real world)

When did sentiments changed? You said they don't. No matter which party was in office US helped ISrael.



first of all Syria and Egypt and Jordan always fought together (as well as some Lebanese units), and even at times some Iraqi units as well.

1948. They fight together.
1956. They don't fight together
1967. They don't fight together but are attacked separatlly.
1973. They fight together.
1982. They don't fight together.




Secondly even those three (or two) combined are much much bigger numerically then what Israel has.

Not in air forces.



Thirdly the aid that they got from the other Arabs was on top of the soviets and it was a lot of military aid.

And Isael got lot of aid from US. Your point?



And in 1948 it was even more then what I listed above for it was actually 7 Arab nations that actively fought.

So again Israel has always fought alone while the Arabs have not.

No. See above.



Also those nations that have sent aid before was because they were weak but a lot of them are not anymore. A lot of them have modern weaponry of their own and they still want to see Israel destroyed (think Saudi Arabia)


Oh yes, Saudi Arabia. When US pressured them to remove F-15s from base close to Israel. Big threat. US withdraws support and they will collapse in few months.



there is actually no agreement as well with the U.S. to send help .

Secondly its not about official or not with the Arabs, or what we even know in public or not, but the fact is that the Arabs have always sent aid and they have always fought together.

Israel has not had any nation fight with it as the Arabs have had.


US always backed Israel and there was no doubt US will back Israel, same as you said Arabs backed other Arabs.



explain to me how using a nuke in another nation will only destroy those U.S. bases and not kill millions of that other nations inhabitants?

By targeting those bases and not targeting cities?



how is that a MAD principle aginst the U.S. homeland being that it is the U.S. that they are after?

It's not agaisnt US homeland. It's deterrent agaisnt invasion. To be used agaisnt invading forces. Same as Chinese. They don't have enough nukes to destroy US but have enough to cause lot of damage to forces in region. Or to India.



As for nuked in response….I agree if one looks at things the way we do….but Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t have your western rationalisations with them

Their actions state otherwise.



one second here, your talking about Iranians and I am talking about Iranian Islamic fundamentalists and their leaders that rule Iran .…there is a difference you know……

I'm talking about their leaders as well....



as for these Islamic fundamentalists (the same ideology that produces suicide bombers) acting on their rhetoric, all I can say is that they have openly declared Israel a mortal enemy that needs to be destroyed for years now and they have indeed fought Israel through their various proxies and all this even though Israel hasn’t fired single shot against Iran, ever……and now they are building nukes….that’s more then a reasonable concern to think that they are a offensive threat to use it to fulfil their wish to destroy offensively a nation (Israel)


After revolution Homeini stated that Iran is de facto in war with US. I didn't see them invading US. Did you?

And so what if they aided resistance to Israeli ocupation? A lot of countries did that (aid resistance movements agaisnt occupation by their opponents).

Re suicide bombings. Do you know which organisation is responsible for more than 1/2 (and maybe 2/3) of all suicide bombings?



Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Soviet Union never fought agianst US, UK... but they considered them mortal enemies.



Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.(thus proving its not mere words)

And US fought SU through it's proxies. And vice versa. That didn't eman they were about to attack each other directlly.



whether Israel is a foreign occupier of Lebanon or even the occupied territories (they also actively help some Palestinian groups) is a moot point for me to argue, for what does Iran have to do with that? They are not an Arab nation nor has Iran ever ruled that land.

Iran is shi'ia state. There are lot of shi'ias in Lebanon. Hezbollah was shi'a organisation. Besides, one doesn't need to have ethnic ties to help somebody else, do they?



So Islamic fundamentalism is the only reason and as we see there is no point in me even arguing the occupation charge for the bottom line is that they consider Israel to be Muslim occupied land and they fight to rid the infidels (the Jews) from that land and as such they are a offensive threat to destroy Israel when they get that full power (which the nukes give them that).


Yes, and they considered invading Afghanistan and din't. So why would they attack Israel and be nuked in response?



so Iraq has fought against Israel!! (boy you seemed to have left that out before :roll: )..anyways, so now your arguing who was the bigger threat…..at least we are past your other absurdity and implication that Israel was wrong to take out that threat (Iraq’s nukes)

When did I say that?



As for whose the bigger threat, I made my case already that Islamic fundamentalism at the controls are a much bigger threat but either way they are both big offensive threats (well iraq no more) and as such I don’t rally care to go round and round on whose a bigger threat.


Sure, judge threats by ideology, not strenght. by that reasoning Cambodia and Albania were much bigger threat to non-communist world because of their hard-line regimes than Soviet Union. Stangelly how other judged threats by strenght.



first of all we are talking about Iran here…

I thought we were talking about how ISrael had free hand due to it's nukes.



as for Syria (and Lebanon) and their use of proxies to shall Israel towns and villages which forced Israel to respond to that, well if they had nukes or WMD's at the time well that would bring the level of MAD to another level and Israel would still go after those proxies and Syria’s (which is not ruled by Islamic fundamentalists) nukes and WMD's would not be used due to the MAD principle....also israel never invaded Syria itself!!

First of all, Hezbollah (Iranian "proxy" didn't shell Israel until 1992, and you know very well what brought that response.

Secondlly, if Syria had nukes in 1982 I doubt Israel would attack their forces in Lebanon. Soviet Union didn't attack US forces anywhere, because they knew it will bring nuclear war (and vice versa). They didn't reserve right to use nukes only in defence of their homeland.




I said” Also Israel’s are for self defence while Iran’s has made it very clear their offensive intentions to destroy Israel when it gets that ability. And then you said “Israel says they are for defence. Forgive me for not taking Israeli word at face value” and then I said above and also I say now (again), Israel’s word is based on the concrete proof of not using it for thirty years even though it has been surrounded by 22 Arab nations that have majority populations that want to see Israel destroyed.

And Egypt has peace with Israel for 30 years and you consider them potential threat. So anybody can consider ISraeli nukes threat, despite they weren't sed for 30 years.



I think Israel’s word based on relevnt facts that it is for self-defence has much more relevance then your mistrust for it!!


And Egyptian position is based on 30 years of pece. and you mistrust them. So others can mistrust ISrael as well.



no Egypt has no nor has ever had any real peace with Israel, a majority of their population don’t recognise any “peace” deal…however Egypt’s military has been quite against Israel and that is due to Israel nukes….thus for Israel it is self defence.[quote="IDFM203"]

You say that 30 years of Israle not using nukes means they woun't use them in future. I say that Egypt having peace with Israel for 30 years means they will keep it in future. Of course, everything can change, but if you consider Egypt changing it's policy realistic (as you seem to do), than others can consider Israel changing it's policy re nukes realsitic as well.

[quote=IDFM203]
Israel “says” and Iran “needs” (hmm and there are supposedely "unbiased" people around :roll: )

You just switch states and use same arguments....



Anyway’s Iran has no such defensive needs like Israel has but again even if it has its one defensive need (the U.S.) their OFFENSIVE intentions to wipe out another nation is much more of a negative to them having nukes, then their reasons for wanting them.

They have same defensive needs as every country. States have not only right but duty to be prepared agaisnt foreign threats. As for their offensive intentions. They had offensive intentions regarding Afghanistan and didn't act ont hemso why would they attack ISrael and be nuked in response?



Also Iran’s nukes are not a threat to the U.S. so it can’t really do anything anyway to their homeland but against Israel it most certainly is a threat no matter what the U.S. does or doesnt do.


They aren't a threat to US. They would be used as deterrent agaisnt any invasion. They couldn't destroy US, but could cause enough casualties in invading forces to make any US gains too expensive.



nope, discounted already the first two before and the U.S. is not threatening Iran but just their leaders but anyway’s read the answer above.


Seeing past US "regime changing actions" often brought more harm to "liberated" population than good Iran has a lot to fear from US. Who can guarantee US woun't replace ayatollahs with some flunky like shah?



I don’t get what your saying here…when has Israel ever fought against Iran or even had proxies to fight against Iran?

They have been fighting Israel for years now through their proxies and yet Israel hasn’t fired a shot at Iran.


So what id Israel didn't fire a shot at Iran? How does that mean Iran can't aid resitance movements agaisnt ISraeli ocupation? Soviet Union didn't fire a shot at US yet US helped their proxies fight US (and vice versa)?



that’s not true….the U.S. supposedly gives Israel (well some Arab nations have now the better F16) the qualitative edge but nowhere is there any numeric counter to every purchase.

Also there is more then one Arab nation with U.S. arms


In 1990s US stated that it will keep Israeli technolical edge and will offset and arab purchases with coresponding Israeli purchases. and they did. AFAIK next US governemnt didn't change this policy.



that link was written in 1998/99!! Second of all the Arabs have got a lot more since then and although Israel has gotten some more as well, the numeric balance (and huge numeric disadvantage for Israel) has not shifted at all.


Which is 4 years ago!!! ISrael purchased a lot since then. Remeber that thread here about new ISrael F-15s? Were they covered? O Israeli purchases of F-16s?



first of all, some of their soviet stuff is old but its not obsolete at all nor is it running out of operational life. but anyways, they still have their huge numeric advantage not to mention thousands of missiles not to mention very good quality tanks and they do have alot of good quality mig’s, and also they have north Korea stuff as well.
As for the U.S. stuff, I already explained.

Yeah, those T-55s pose a serious threat to Merkavas :roll: . And I'm sure Russia is suplyling parts as before they lost them as allies :roll: .



Syria is not weak they still have plenty…

Wow, and ISrael decided to bobm Syria despite Syrian military might. I reember other thread here saying completlly oposite. and with ISraelis laughing at Syrian threats they will retaliate. So when it suits you Syrians are strong, when it doesn't they are weak. Decide on one thing and stick to it.



Egypt and Jordan only have a deal they signed and nothing more for most of their populations don’t recognise it and Iran has fought Israel through thier proxies…I have kept on saying that Israel never fought Iran and not the other way around as you put it now.

Egypt didn't do anything toward Israel for 30 years. I guess peace holds. Ditto Jordan.



Also most of the Arab world’s population still want to see the whole Israel destroyed, when that dramatically and solidly changes, then we can discuss Israel’s nukes.


Oh yes, and Arab eladers always respect wishes of population. :roll:



I already explained how the U.S. cant ever be expected to fight for Israel and most likely wont.


Sure. Us will ditch ISrael first chance it gets. :roll:



because Iran has threatened offensively to destroy Israel without Israel ever threatening to destroy Iran, even after thirty years of Israel having nukes.(or even never fighting against Iran as Iran has fought against Israel).


And they threatened to attack Afghansitan and didn't so why would they attack Israel and be nuked in response?



yes those that did it realised that!! There are a lot of Egyptians like the Islamic fundamentalists themselves that don’t.

You don't see these attacks anymore, do you? Id say they run out of people to recruit and support of population and they faded away.



Secondly also even the secularists there want to see Israel destroyed…the Egyptian newspapers are more anti Semitic then the nazi papers ever were.

The fact is that Egypt’s population is very hostile towards Israel and most of them still want to see Israel destroyed….Israel has no such percentage of its population that wants to see Egypt destroyed



And Egypt has peace with Israel for 30 years. If you think they might change their mind then others can think ISrael can change it's mind regarding nukes as well.



its not about them Turing into a exact carbon copy of Iran…the fact is that they have a large Islamic fundamentalist element as well.

Population is largelly secular and there is little chance of Egypt turning into fundametalist state. Of couse, it suits Israel and US to see radical islamists under every bed.



Secondly they have the rest of the population still wants to see Israel destroyed.

Those elements have not changed and those elements can turn inot another ruler that is not as rational with regards to Israel as mubarek is.

That’s what I mean with regards to Iran.


And Egypt has 30 years of peace wih Israel. So I guess they'll eep it that way.



first of all you don’t know Egypt spare part situation and times and believe me if Egypt was planning on something they would stockpile extra parts.(and yes the U.S. would get suspicious and so what, that don’t mean the U.S. would cut them off right away)

I don't know Egyptian spare part situation. US does. Or they better, since they are ones selling them. Us would notice egypt is stockpiling spares. Or do you think US is so incompetent they woulnd't?

And US would cut them if they would be seen as threat to ISrael. Or more lieklly, Israel would pressure US to cut them.



Secondly their planes wont need spare parts three months after so your point is a non-point.

Despite what people believe, revolutions don't happen overnight. they simmer and signs are there. And US and ISrael is watching for these signs.



Thirdly they are already trained in what to do there is no need for more of it.

I don't know about Egypt but I Saudi arabia US doesn't train ground personell in anything above most basic maintenance. I doubt Egyptians would be able to keep US planes operational long.



the U.S. cuting them off doesnt mean that all thier american arms that they now have are now all of a sudden useless!...boy your grasping for straws here :roll:


No, but it means they will become useless real fast.



no it’s not more then thirty years (well ok around 35 years) ….by the 1967 war and before, Israel mostly got its arms from the French and the British and not from the U.S.

There is other support besides selling weapons....



In fact the U.S. was a bit harsh in relations against Israel up to that point for fighting with Britain and France in the Suez war of 1956.

So except for signing the UN partition plan and a little help from 1948 till 1967, for the most part the U.S. was not a unconditional supporter or any big ally of Israel’s.


Since 1960s, when it allowed Israeli nuclear program to continue as Israel wanted. Specially after 1967.



says universal common sense!!

So lets go over this again

Iran has over the year’s threatened to destroy Israel
Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran!

Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.

Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land.

Iran has military parades with the death to Israel theme written on them.

cocnclusion=You don’t need to be Sherlock holms to figure out their offensive intentions.


Iran threatened to attack Afghansitan. Iran threatened to attack Israel. Iran is stronger than Afghhanistan. Iran is weaker than Israel.
Iran didn't attack Afghansitan.

One doesn't have to be Sherlock to fill missing part.



no they are in fact realistic threats but there the MAD principle applies….it is highly unlikely that the MAD principle applies to Iran’s Islamic fundamentalists and their elements of that in Iran.


Yes, because only religious fundametalists are capable of irrational decissions and irrational decissions are all they are capable of. :roll:



the MAD principle applies to WMD's and the other Arab nations have that.

you know nukes are not the only way to instentlly kill millions ;)

Secondly Iran is close to having nukes.


And since MAD regarding non-nuclear WMDs held one can safelly asume nuclear MAD will hold as well.



they didn’t have the same desire to destroy them as they do against Israel…for more see my answer before about that weaker nation and its non-comparison to the iran/Israel situation.


They had similar reasons, Afghansitan is closer and weaker.



yes in large part only because of Israel’s nuclear deterrent which was mostly in full gear after the Yom kipper war.


Exactlly. Israeli nuclear arsenal gave themf ree hand to invade.



that’s factually false, they had every intention to destroy Israel and in fact they came very close to destroying Israel

Well, I wouldn't consider sitting on couple of kilometers deep beachhead long way from any population centres "coming close to destroy Israel", but since when did facts prevent you from making acusations.



But hey I am not going to argue against your noam chumsky religion here for pure faith is something that cant be rationatly reasoned with.


I'm not arguing noam Chomsky religion. I'm arguing facts.



no they wanted a peace treaty for after they failed in 1973 to destry Israel and get all the land for themselves, they at least could get back the Sinai for they knew that after 1973 and thier last chence hope to defeat totally Israel, they wouldnt be able to surprise Israel any more and now that Israel had the full nuclear deterrent, there was no chance that they were militarily going to destroy Israel or get any land like the Sinai that way, so they did the smart thing to get that land but that was it, It was not for any real intention for any real peace. Most Egyptians did not want a real genuine peace with Israel and they still don’t and they at as if there is no "peace" agreenment signed.


No, they wanted peace before that so they made peace offer. Which was rejected by Israel. So they started a war to get peace. Sounds stupid but in the end they got what they offered to SIrael prior to war. So I guess if it's stupid and works it isn't stupid.



no I am not talking about a single nuke or a small capacity, how long have they had their nuclear MAD deterrent for??

Regarding who? China? I doubt they will ever have it without massive increase of arsenal and developing capabuilities similar to US and Russian forces. Regarding Pakistan? They likelly have it and chances are they had it soon after their first detonation. They don't need much nukes to wipe Pakistan off the map.



well those people were wrong as we see Israel has not. . Also you asked “India has nukes for 30 or so years. Why is world worried about heir nuclear arsenal? To imply that they are not worried about Israel’s and I gave my answer to that.Oh and you’ll have to ask the world for that. (my guess would be that they fear India and Pakistan might use them while they have never feared Israel from using what it has.)

People feared Israel will use them.


Indians didn't use them either. So why are people worried? Because countries that have them are more likelly to use them than countries that don't have them. Despite what they publicly say.



But anyways yes I know that there are people that are “worried” about Israel’s nukes but those that “worry” have nothing legitimate to base their “worry” on.



Why they don't have legitimate fears?



ahh I got you ;) ….ok let me ask you a question…..why is the world worried about India’s nukes all of a sudden now in recent times?


They were worried since detonation. Because of any war could go nulcear and because they knew it trigered Pakistan's nuclear program.



ok Ill still go along with you, so why other then Israel’s second strike deterrent factor to Iran and to other nations for it’s a sea platform and not land based, or other thenafter Iran nuking Israel, would Israel use nukes on a sub against Iran for?


Because balistic missiles can be detected in flight. Because anybody knows from where Israeli balistic missiles will be launched. OTOH if ISrale uses Harpoon missiles they can be fired from different locations, could avoid detection...



Well so what, their people are dying and Israel could provide very valuable help and the fact that they refused that help in time of a critical need for their people, only further shows the harsh nature and character of the offensive threat that Israel faces.


They took aid from US, so I guees they aren't rejecting help based only on ther rhetoric. As I said, I'm sure they have their resons.



that’s only because of the MAD principal that both of those nations had against each other.

My point with Iran is that Israel has never fought against it nor has it ever had the desire to fight against it nor has it ever threatened to destroy Iran but yet Iran considers Israel a mortal enemy and wants to destroy it and them having nukes to fulfill their long desires to destroy Israel is clearly a offensive threat….that’s my point!!

Shalom :D

US and SU considered each other mortal enemies, despite never having firing a shot at each other (OK, small US intervention in civil war but I don't think there was fighting there). and despite they fact they were allies during WW2.

Soviet declarations about innevitable world revolutuion and innevitable war between capitalism and communism could be seen as offensive threats by US. Luckilly they didn't use their nukes to fight that threat.

[Javehn]

Happy new year , everybody .

Edit : Holly mother of god !! Can you possibly try to right it more longer ?? You understand that no one will read it except to whom it's adressed , and you basicly going to bash with each other with those long respondes. Please , stop !!

To GazB :


Why do they use suicide bombers ....maybe it's all they have left

Take a look here , at first and second page : http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6304

That's all they had left . If they really wanted to fight as combatants , they could (and i personally would much better understand it this way ) . Instead , they choosing the simplest tactic , while trying to picture themselfes , as a despared people without the choice , willing to secrefice themselfes . Hell , they mostly don't even try to bother blow themselfes on millitary , and preffering to do it the way that just would bring them "better score" .


Common sense is fighting like Iraq did in the open desert where the Israelis could slaughter thousands of arabs for the loss of a few Jews.

They must be insane to use individual arabs to kill up to a dozen occupiers at a time.


Can you explain it , please , to me ?

So you saying that if Israel have it , so the Iran can have it . Ok.
But , would you give MWD to politicly unstaible country ? Or to country with unstable political history ? I have nothing to do with people of Iran , they are people just like us , and every rest of the world . But however , take a look at the government on present moment , and that all when another revolution slowly cooking on down there against the government .
Yes , offcorse , nothing can happend , like when it was a revolution ( 3 days "putch") in USSR , nothing happend , but you aware that the battalions of Ballistic missiles was put on high allert ?

[aktarian]

Happy new year , everybody .

From me as well. :hug:




Edit : Holly mother of god !! Can you possibly try to right it more longer ?? You understand that no one will read it except to whom it's adressed , and you basicly going to bash with each other with those long respondes. Please , stop !!

Gladly. If I'm not acused of avoiding/ignorig parts of IDFM203's posts.




So you saying that if Israel have it , so the Iran can have it . Ok.
But , would you give MWD to politicly unstaible country ? Or to country with unstable political history ? I have nothing to do with people of Iran , they are people just like us , and every rest of the world . But however , take a look at the government on present moment , and that all when another revolution slowly cooking on down there against the government .
Yes , offcorse , nothing can happend , like when it was a revolution ( 3 days "putch") in USSR , nothing happend , but you aware that the battalions of Ballistic missiles was put on high allert ?

Pakistan has history of coups. Not a good record. Russia has a history of breaking apart (well Soviet Union, but Russia is sucessor state). Not a good record. US has a history of using nukes. Not a good record. China has a record of launching revolutions that change society and invading neighbours. Not a good record. France & UK have a record of supressing independance movements. Not a good record. India has a history of religious violence. Not a good record. And nobody is advocating they give up nukes because of their hstory.

[Javehn]

Allrighty , thank you ! :hug:


Gladly. If I'm not acused of avoiding/ignorig parts of IDFM203's posts.

Yea , thank you :D . I just happend to be working and studying all together , and even if i wanted to participate in that debate , i have no time to read or respond that thread. I am shure other people also tired to reading the long posts .


Pakistan has history of coups. Not a good record. Russia has a history of breaking apart (well Soviet Union, but Russia is sucessor state). Not a good record. US has a history of using nukes. Not a good record. China has a record of launching revolutions that change society and invading neighbours. Not a good record. France & UK have a record of supressing independance movements. Not a good record. India has a history of religious violence. Not a good record. And nobody is advocating they give up nukes because of their hstory.


That's a good point . However , Pakistan have muslim rule , but not fundamental ( as there are fundamental jews , or christians , or muslims ) , china are just plain comunists and not fundamental crazy people , France and UK have (France is still having colonial record ) but they are stable Democratic countries , and so is India . When you have religion as a very strong motive in country , and even fundamental religion (where the violent acts are done without regards - El-Qaida fundamental movement ) and plus the factor that the country is non politicly stable , where you have movements from
Army , Students , Opposition trying to impose themselfes as government. It's just dangerous to give them such a power . Yes , maybe it looks like a part from Clansey's book , but that surtainly can happend , never the less .

[IDFM203]

“wrong!! most of Egypt's population wanted to destroy Israel and didn’t need nassar to convince them…..that was not the case with Iraq for it was mostly saddam's personal war which he forced his population to fight….Egypt’s population didn’t need any convincing nor any forcing.”

And Egypt has 30 years of peace with Israel. Guess Egyptian population changes mind quickly. :roll: no get this clear. The nation of Egypt and a majority of Egyptians have not had a peace with Israel and have for the past thirty years carried on as if there was never any “peace” deal signed by their leader sadat at that time.

The fact was that in 1973 most of the population wanted to fight against Israel and they still do except that they realise that now they don’t have that power to do so however they are modernizing and they have their huge numeric advantage (go again check out my 1999!!! Link) and they still have that large percentage (which Israel doesn’t have vice versa) that want to see Israel destroyed and with that element always in place things can always turn for the worst.


like I said to you before, there is no such thing as a guarantee anywhere in the world BUT Israel has had them now for thirty years and hasn’t used it once even though it is still surrounded by 22 Arab nations where most of the populations still want to see Israel destroyed.

Thus Israel has proven itself to be a responsible nuclear nation that has it only for self defense..

Egypt has peace with Israel for 30 years and didn't go to war. Israel has nukes for 30 years and didn't use them. first of all Israel’s nukes are a MAD theory not only against Egypt but against other Arab nations in the region as well.

But yes against Egypt, they haven’t attacked because of it.


If you consider that Egypt changing mind after 30 years is realistic (as you seem to do), than Iran can onsider that Israel changing mind is realsitic as well. Israel’s population and Egypt’s are not the same as I explained above and one is much more likely to change then the other.

Secondly again with regards to iran “Israel has never fought against it nor has it ever had the desire to fight against it nor has it ever threatened to destroy Iran but yet Iran considers Israel a mortal enemy and wants to destroy it and them having nukes to fulfill their long desires to destroy Israel is clearly a unwarantted offensive threat”


Iran on the other hand fights Israel for years through their proxies even though Israel has never fought a day against Iran nor has it ever threatened to destroy Iran but despite that Iran has also for years threatened OFFENSIVE intentions to destroy a nation (israel)

Iran supported resistance movement agaisnt Israeli ocupation. yes I know what they did but that doesn’t make it right for them, for Israel never occupied THEIR land.
So the fact that they fought against Israel without Israel ever attacking Iran nor ever threatening to destroy Iran, as Iran has besides fought through their proxies, it has threatened to destroy Israel, only further shows their Islamic fundamentalism and their desire to wipe out the whole Israel; when given that chance.


see above for my answer…..but even if Egypt rulers turn into another Iran, no Israel will not use nukes offensively against Egypt for it hasn’t used it offensively against Iran nor has it even threatened to use it….for with Iran all Israel is saying is that it might destroy Iran’s nuclear sites (and not Iran itself) that that can be used to fulfil Iran’s Islamic fundamentalist leaders wishes for years to destroy the whole Israel.


That's what Israel say. I have troubles taking Israeli words at face value. again I know you have “troubles” taking Israel’s word for it, but you have nothing legitimate to base that on. Israel has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used it once. But I guess if you mistrust France to use theirs or other western nations then I cant really persuade you that Israel wont use theirs but the fact is that Israel has indeed proven itself to be a very responsible nuclear nation.


Listen get this clear I never said all Muslim’s get along and yes some of them do fight against each other at times however your Afghanistan example is a non example to the Israel situation with Iran, due to I repeat “Islamic fundamentalism and Iran’s rulers that are strict followers of that had no such offensive threats against Afghanistan being that it was already a Islamic state and a fundamentalist one when the taliban won!! There were no infidels like the Jews controlling that state.

No, you said Iran and Afghansitan were good to each other because they were both fundamentalists. Wrong. And just because there was no infidels they had serious troubles with Afghanistan. Taliban ruled. And Al Qaida. when did I say that they were good to each other??? All I said was that being that both nations are Islamic fundamentalists and there wasn’t the same need or desire (not even close) to destroy Israel as Iran supposedly wanted to invade Afghanistan.

Ok so you came up with a grievance yes (one incident) but it is still nowhere near on the level of the desire or hatred to wipe out Israel……nowhere before or even in 1996 did Iran want to destroy Afghanistan and nowhere after 1996 (actually your articles are 1998) have they wanted to destroy Afghanistan. And even in 1996 they didn’t want to destroy Afghanistan.

Yes Iran was upset over that incident with the taliban but to even compare that incident with their long hatred (which they have fought already with their proxies) and desire to destroy Israel is beyond pathetic :roll:


The other reasons for attacking weren’t as strong as removing the “infidels” from what they consider a holy Muslim land!!(Israel)



Before you were saying they had no grievances. Now you are saying they had soem grievances. I'll wait until you are saying they had serious grievances. again your putting words into my month, when did I say they had no grievances. Anyways Ill say now that they had one grievance and that one was a heightened situation but it is no in way at all comparable to the level that their intentions against Israel are.

That’s a key difference.


Listen, a grievance over something that Afghanistan did as you claim that Iran felt, is not the same desire or at the same level that Iran’s Islamic fundamentalists have against Israel and thier will to destroy Israel…there is a big difference in the level of hatred and the level of will.

Right. You don't even know why they were at each other throats, now you are saying it's small. yes after clearly reading that one incident to even compare that to the years of Iran threatening to destroy Israel (which they never did threatened to destroy Afghanistan even after that incident) is laughable (in a black humour way).


first of all Israel has had that MAD principle not only for Iran (my response was with regards to Syria and others). There are other nations that want to destroy Israel that have WMD’s and thier huge numaric advantage and MAD works for them.


No. For MAD both sides must have similar capabilities. If only one side has it that it isn't MAD. wrong!!! That’s your definition. Fact is that Syria and other have enough to kill every Jews in Israel and Israel’s MAD is to counter that. period!!

You know the U.S. and Russia didn’t have the same numeric stockpiles but they had enough to kill both populations and the same is with the Arabs WMD with regards to Israel.



Iran has history of pragmatic decisions that run agaisnt their "unshakable" principles. If they declared US "Great Satan" why didn't they go to war with them? Becuase they were deterred by US military strenght perhaps? first of all Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t want to attack the U.S. but they want to see the U.S. destroyed and they cant do that by attacking it.

As for Israel which is what we are talking about here, there too they cant attack Israel in hopes of destroying it, for they know that its impossible, but hitting Israel with nukes is defiantly the only possible way to fulfil their long desire to wipe out Israel and that’s why “Israel wants to take out their nukes is because with Islamic fundamentalism and their constant threats to destroy Israel the rational MAD principle probably wont work there”


“I never said sentiments chenged but it defiantly could….there is a poll out in the U.S. were some percentage wants to see aid to Israel; or even aid to all nations cut off.”

And I'm sure there are similar polls that show:


-US should increase aid to ISrael
whether there are polls to increase or decrease (btw a much bigger percentage want aid cut off then those that want aid to be cut off then those that want to see it increased) the point is that sentiment changes in a democracy and that is always a real possibility in the U.S.


So I say again
I agree with menachem bagen when he said “There is no guarantee which can guarantee an international guarantee."
the fact is that Administrations change, sentiment changes , willpower and determination change (these things are highly likly to happen in the real world)

When did sentiments changed? You said they don't. No matter which party was in office US helped ISrael. yes but at different levels and there have been times when the U.S. cut off aid or withheld stuff that it had promised before…yes nothing serious but again sentiment can change and its not something that a nation can rely on for his vital defence that the sentiment will always stay the same for that’s simply unrealistic when you are dealing with a foreign power that has other interest’s in that region as well.


first of all Syria and Egypt and Jordan always fought together (as well as some Lebanese units), and even at times some Iraqi units as well. "

1948. They fight together.
1956. They don't fight together
1967. They don't fight together but are attacked separatlly.
1973. They fight together.
1982. They don't fight together.

In all the arabs wars that they have fought to destroy the whole Israel they have fought together. In 1948,1967 and 1973…..in 1967 egyp had signed aggression pacts with Jordan and iraq and had cut off the straits of tarin (sp?) and had kicked out the UN troops from there and was ammasing troops to attack on
May 30. Nasser then announced:
The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel...to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations.11

so yes in their wars to destry Israel they have fought togther!! As was my point all along.

The 1956 and the 1982 wars were not wars for the complete destruction of Israel. The 1982 was a war against plo terrisomm and the 1956 war was a combined British and French attack to reopen the suez canal that Nasser wrongly closed.

they have only fought three big wars becouse thats all they could do till realising that they would need more power to destry israel but for fifty year's they have been fighting a low intesity war agnist Israel which has never stopped.


Secondly even those three (or two) combined are much much bigger numerically then what Israel has


Not in air forces. .I cant believe I have to repeat this again…go read my 1998/99!!!! Link. Yes in air forces they independently and of course combined have a numeric advantage….here tAgain (http://www.csis.org/mideast/reports/mbmeVIAI122798.pdf) is that 1998/99 !!(where now the numeric balance has not changed at all) report.


Thirdly the aid that they got from the other Arabs was on top of the soviets and it was a lot of military aid.


And Isael got lot of aid from US. Your point? my point is that all that balanced each other out EXCEPT the numeric disadvantage that Israel had and still has.


And in 1948 it was even more then what I listed above for it was actually 7 Arab nations that actively fought.

So again Israel has always fought alone while the Arabs have not

No. See above. . no you see above.

Fact is that Israel fought alone while the Arabs did not.



Also those nations that have sent aid before was because they were weak but a lot of them are not anymore. A lot of them have modern weaponry of their own and they still want to see Israel destroyed (think Saudi Arabia)

Oh yes, Saudi Arabia. When US pressured them to remove F-15s from base close to Israel. Big threat. US withdraws support and they will collapse in few months. I don’t get what your saying here…they did not move their planes. Secondly they wont collapse in a few months but again they are not a threat alone but they can certainly add when combined to the other threats.

They still want to see Israel destroyed!!


there is actually no agreement as well with the U.S. to send help .

Secondly its not about official or not with the Arabs, or what we even know in public or not, but the fact is that the Arabs have always sent aid and they have always fought together.

Israel has not had any nation fight with it as the Arabs have had.”

US always backed Israel and there was no doubt US will back Israel, same as you said Arabs backed other Arabs. its not about me or you saying…fact is that the Arabs have always fought together to destroy Israel and Israel has never had the U.S. nor anyone else fight with it to defend itself.!!

Those are facts!!


explain to me how using a nuke in another nation will only destroy those U.S. bases and not kill millions of that other nations inhabitants?

By targeting those bases and not targeting cities? we are talking about Iran’s nukes…..I say again how is Iran’s nukes a deterrent against the U.S. when if they hit U.S. bases with nukes there are going to be thousands and thousand if not hundreds of thousands of that other nations inhabitants killed??


how is that a MAD principle aginst the U.S. homeland being that it is the U.S. that they are after?

It's not agaisnt US homeland. It's deterrent agaisnt invasion. To be used agaisnt invading forces. yes so I ask again how can they deter the U.S. without threatening other nations inhabitants?

And again like I have always said to you before, their unwarntted offensive threats to annihilate another nation is a much bigger negative to them having nukes then their reasons for wanting them.


As for nuked in response….I agree if one looks at things the way we do….but Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t have your western rationalisations with them


Their actions state otherwise. no it doesn’t…Islamic fundamentalists blow themselves up all the time.



one second here, your talking about Iranians and I am talking about Iranian Islamic fundamentalists and their leaders that rule Iran .…there is a difference you know

I'm talking about their leaders as well.... ……yes and their leaders are also Islamic fundamentalists!!


as for these Islamic fundamentalists (the same ideology that produces suicide bombers) acting on their rhetoric, all I can say is that they have openly declared Israel a mortal enemy that needs to be destroyed for years now and they have indeed fought Israel through their various proxies and all this even though Israel hasn’t fired single shot against Iran, ever……and now they are building nukes….that’s more then a reasonable concern to think that they are a offensive threat to use it to fulfil their wish to destroy offensively a nation (Israel)

After revolution Homeini stated that Iran is de facto in war with US. I didn't see them invading US. Did you? see answer before on that.


And so what if they aided resistance to Israeli ocupation? A lot of countries did that (aid resistance movements agaisnt occupation by their opponents). yes but those nations don’t have Islamic fundamentalists at the helm and those nations arent close to having a nuclear bomb.


Re suicide bombings. Do you know which organisation is responsible for more than 1/2 (and maybe 2/3) of all suicide bombings? first of all its not 2/3….. second of all I know what your trying to get at and it makes no differentce for hamas has done a lot of suicide bombings and they are Islamic fundamentalists, period!!

hamas goal is to wipe out the whole israel and that is in line with Irans goal.


Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Soviet Union never fought agianst US, UK... but they considered them mortal enemies. yes so that situation is wrong as well. I mean just because they had two different philosophies doesn’t mean they are justified to destroy each other.

Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran nor has it ever fought against Iran and yet they want to see Israel destroyed and you want them to have nukes.


Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.(thus proving its not mere words)

And US fought SU through it's proxies. And vice versa. That didn't eman they were about to attack each other directlly. the U.S. never threatened to offensively destroy the SU, ever.

Iran has threatened offensively to destroy Israel….big difference in both situations



whether Israel is a foreign occupier of Lebanon or even the occupied territories (they also actively help some Palestinian groups) is a moot point for me to argue, for what does Iran have to do with that? They are not an Arab nation nor has Iran ever ruled that land.


Iran is shi'ia state. There are lot of shi'ias in Lebanon. Hezbollah was shi'a organisation. Besides, one doesn't need to have ethnic ties to help somebody else, do they? first of all they help other organisations besides hetballh.

And again. The fact is that they have actively helped organisations that want to see Israel destroyed (yes hetbllh wants that but they also have actively helped some Palestinian groups that have that as their goal) and that tells me that if they have the power (nukes) to do so they will use it.


“So Islamic fundamentalism is the only reason and as we see there is no point in me even arguing the occupation charge for the bottom line is that they consider Israel to be Muslim occupied land and they fight to rid the infidels (the Jews) from that land and as such they are a offensive threat to destroy Israel when they get that full power (which the nukes give them that).”


Yes, and they considered invading Afghanistan and din't. So why would they attack Israel and be nuked in response? Afghanistan and Israel are not at all the same situations and are not comparable on how Iran views both of those nations.!!

As for nuked in response, again Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t have your rational to it.


“As for whose the bigger threat, I made my case already that Islamic fundamentalism at the controls are a much bigger threat but either way they are both big offensive threats (well iraq no more) and as such I don’t rally care to go round and round on whose a bigger threat.”


Sure, judge threats by ideology, not strenght. by that reasoning yes indeed and that particular ideology with nukes are indeed a offensive threat to destroy Israel.



first of all we are talking about Iran here…


I thought we were talking about how ISrael had free hand due to it's nukes. how did you think that…what is this thread about?? Its about Iran and Israel!!

Secondly Israel hasn’t done much other then defensive purposes, against others but anyways to go into other things can take up another 7 pages.



First of all, Hezbollah (Iranian "proxy" didn't shell Israel until 1992, and you know very well what brought that response. first of all before I was talking about the PLO

Secondly after the plo was kicked out, Syria and Iran were using their proxies like hetballhs a to shell Israeli towns..

Let me ask you other then defensive needs why would Israel go in there? I am curious to hear your answer.


I said” Also Israel’s are for self defence while Iran’s has made it very clear their offensive intentions to destroy Israel when it gets that ability. And then you said “Israel says they are for defence. Forgive me for not taking Israeli word at face value” and then I said above and also I say now (again), Israel’s word is based on the concrete proof of not using it for thirty years even though it has been surrounded by 22 Arab nations that have majority populations that want to see Israel destroyed.


And Egypt has peace with Israel for 30 years and you consider them potential threat. So anybody can consider ISraeli nukes threat, despite they weren't sed for 30 years. I already explained how that is a non-comparison.

Fact is that a majority of Egypt’s populations wants to see Israel destroyed.
Fact is that there is no such Israeli percentage that wants to see any Arab nation destroyed.

Also anybody can consider whatever they want, I cant stop that, though the fact is that Israel has never threatened ever offensively to destroy any nation as they have all threatened to destroy Israel and a lot still do!!


I think Israel’s word based on relevnt facts that it is for self-defence has much more relevance then your mistrust for it!!

And Egyptian position is based on 30 years of pece. and you mistrust them. So others can mistrust ISrael as well. the difference is that the mistrust of egypt is bases on the fact that they have a large element’s that wants to see Israel destroyed, there is no such thing to base that on in Israel’s case.


no Egypt has no nor has ever had any real peace with Israel, a majority of their population don’t recognise any “peace” deal…however Egypt’s military has been quite against Israel and that is due to Israel nukes….thus for Israel it is self defence.



You say that 30 years of Israle not using nukes means they woun't use them in future. I say that Egypt having peace with Israel for 30 years means they will keep it in future. Of course, everything can change, but if you consider Egypt changing it's policy realistic (as you seem to do), than others can consider Israel changing it's policy re nukes realsitic as well. you have nothing realistic to base that Israel will realistically change their defensive policy to a offensive policy…with Egypt you do in fact have something realistic (their majority populations that wants to see Israel destroyed) to base it on.

Secondly Israel’s nukes are also a MAD against other Arab nations that still want to see Israel destroyed, so its not just Israel and Egypt as you base to try to negate Israel’s nukes.


Israel “says” and Iran “needs” (hmm and there are supposedely "unbiased" people around :roll: )


You just switch states and use same arguments.... you should switch it to Israel needs and Iran says, for as you have it now, it is something simply in writing but that’s not reality based on the reality on the ground.


Anyway’s Iran has no such defensive needs like Israel has but again even if it has its one defensive need (the U.S.) their OFFENSIVE intentions to wipe out another nation is much more of a negative to them having nukes, then their reasons for wanting them.


They have same defensive needs as every country. States have not only right but duty to be prepared agaisnt foreign threats. they don’t have any major defensive threat except for the U.S. and I already explained how their nukes are not a deterrent against the U.S.


As for their offensive intentions. They had offensive intentions regarding Afghanistan and didn't act ont hemso why would they attack ISrael and be nuked in response? I already explained all that go see my above answers.


“Also Iran’s nukes are not a threat to the U.S. so it can’t really do anything anyway to their homeland but against Israel it most certainly is a threat no matter what the U.S. does or doesnt do.”

They aren't a threat to US. They would be used as deterrent agaisnt any invasion. They couldn't destroy US, but could cause enough casualties in invading forces to make any US gains too expensive. with the U.S. I have already answered and with Israel I already answered on how they have offensive intentions to destroy it.


nope, discounted already the first two before and the U.S. is not threatening Iran but just their leaders but anyway’s read the answer above.


Seeing past US "regime changing actions" often brought more harm to "liberated" population than good Iran has a lot to fear from US. Who can guarantee US woun't replace ayatollahs with some flunky like shah? again all you have is the U.S threats to replace those leaders (and not to destroy Iran) and yet you want them to have nukes so they can kill million’s simply because of that.

And again they have unwarranted offensive intentions to wipe out another nation.


I don’t get what your saying here…when has Israel ever fought against Iran or even had proxies to fight against Iran?

They have been fighting Israel for years now through their proxies and yet Israel hasn’t fired a shot at Iran.


So what id Israel didn't fire a shot at Iran? How does that mean Iran can't aid resitance movements agaisnt ISraeli ocupation? it just further shows that they want to see Israel destroyed. They consider the whole land of Israel to be occupied and they fight through their proxies be it hetbblhs that also wants that (hell Israel pulled out and yet they still fight) and they also actively help some Palestinian groups that have the complete destruction of Israel as their goal.


that’s not true….the U.S. supposedly gives Israel (well some Arab nations have now the better F16) the qualitative edge but nowhere is there any numeric counter to every purchase.

Also there is more then one Arab nation with U.S. arms


In 1990s US stated that it will keep Israeli technolical edge and will offset and arab purchases with coresponding Israeli purchases. and they did. AFAIK next US governemnt didn't change this policy. again there is no numeric counter to every Arab U.S. arms.

Yes Israel gets the technological gap, which is narrwoing (well now the UAE has better f16’s) but numerically there is no such thing that every Arab U.S. armement there must be an Israeli one.



that link was written in 1998/99!! Second of all the Arabs have got a lot more since then and although Israel has gotten some more as well, the numeric balance (and huge numeric disadvantage for Israel) has not shifted at all.


Which is 4 years ago!!! ISrael purchased a lot since then. Remeber that thread here about new ISrael F-15s? Were they covered? O Israeli purchases of F-16s? yes and the Arabs have as well!!!

Also the Egyptians have gotten a lot of Abrams since and they have dramatically improved their quality (as ramov pointed out to me)

Btw I totally forgot but the Arabs also have quality French arms such as mirages and thing like that as well

Again the numeric balance (and huge disadvantage for Israel) has not shifted at all.



first of all, some of their soviet stuff is old but its not obsolete at all nor is it running out of operational life. but anyways, they still have their huge numeric advantage not to mention thousands of missiles not to mention very good quality tanks and they do have alot of good quality mig’s, and also they have north Korea stuff as well.
As for the U.S. stuff, I already explained.

Yeah, those T-55s pose a serious threat to Merkavas :roll: . And I'm sure Russia is suplyling parts as before they lost them as allies :roll: . first of all some Arab nations have tons of Abrams tanks.

Secondly they have a huge numeric advantage that is a quality all on its own even with those t55’s….btw they have more sophisticated Russian tanks then the t55 and you know it.

They also have tons of missiles and that with a lot of U.S. arms as well as a lot of soviet ones (which are a bit better then those t55’s) and their huge numeric advantage, they still are a serious threat if there would be a war again to destroy israel


Syria is not weak they still have plenty…..


Wow, and ISrael decided to bobm Syria despite Syrian military might. I reember other thread here saying completlly oposite. and with ISraelis laughing at Syrian threats they will retaliate. So when it suits you Syrians are strong, when it doesn't they are weak. Decide on one thing and stick to it. … no get this clear Israel will win a war against Syria for yes they are not as strong as Israel (I never said they were or that they were weak, they are weaker then Israel but they are not as weak as you say they are…..believe me in the military we aren’t laughing after learning about the Syrians and their military might even though we thought that we can defeat them) BUT there would be a lot of Jewish lives killed and as such the MAD principle is to deter a war from even starting.


Egypt and Jordan only have a deal they signed and nothing more for most of their populations don’t recognise it and Iran has fought Israel through thier proxies…I have kept on saying that Israel never fought Iran and not the other way around as you put it now.

Egypt didn't do anything toward Israel for 30 years. I guess peace holds. Ditto Jordan. .you keep on using the word peace and that’s false…there hasn’t been a war in thirty years not because they like us or want peace with us, but because of our nuclear deterrent.


Also most of the Arab world’s population still want to see the whole Israel destroyed, when that dramatically and solidly changes, then we can discuss Israel’s nukes.


Oh yes, and Arab eladers always respect wishes of population. :roll: ahh yes that’s the key point……their leaders can be over thrown…I mean we have seen that before..right?

Btw if your only assurance to Israel’s vital security is to ignore that most of the Arab population still wants to see Israel destroyed but yet there are some leaders that also but they are a bit more rational then their wants of their populations, well that’s not any secure assurance at all to Israel to let down its defensive guard.


I already explained how the U.S. cant ever be expected to fight for Israel and most likely wont.

Sure. Us will ditch ISrael first chance it gets. :roll: first of all again they don’t fight with us.

Secondly the U.S. does have other interests in that region…I mean you do know that ;)

Israel already was dropped the first chance that the nation that helped it got (France) things like that can certainly happen and it’s not a great idea to rely a 100 percent on that for your vital security.

Heck that’s why Israel has a arms industry of its own.


yes those that did it realised that!! There are a lot of Egyptians like the Islamic fundamentalists themselves that don’t.

You don't see these attacks anymore, do you? Id say they run out of people to recruit and support of population and they faded away. . that’s what you say but that’s not true…

The fact is that they still have large elements of Islamic fundamentalists (you know Egypt didn’t jail every single Islamic fundamentalist) and they have other elements that have just as mush hatred for Israel and want to see it destroyed as those Islamic fundamentalists do.


Secondly also even the secularists there want to see Israel destroyed…the Egyptian newspapers are more anti Semitic then the nazi papers ever were.

The fact is that Egypt’s population is very hostile towards Israel and most of them still want to see Israel destroyed….Israel has no such percentage of its population that wants to see Egypt destroyed


And Egypt has peace with Israel for 30 years. If you think they might change their mind then others can think ISrael can change it's mind regarding nukes as well. the difference is that with Egypt, they are never changing their mind. They always wanted to destroy Israel. that never changed.

The difference in the future is that they could have Islamic fundamentalists or even secularist that are not as rational as mubrek at the controls….

Israel never has had a population that wanted to see Egypt or another nation destroyed.


its not about them Turing into a exact carbon copy of Iran…the fact is that they have a large Islamic fundamentalist element as well.


Population is largelly secular and there is little chance of Egypt turning into fundametalist state. Of couse, it suits Israel and US to see radical islamists under every bed. the fact is that they exist. Whether you recognise that or not.


first of all you don’t know Egypt spare part situation and times and believe me if Egypt was planning on something they would stockpile extra parts.(and yes the U.S. would get suspicious and so what, that don’t mean the U.S. would cut them off right away)


I don't know Egyptian spare part situation. US does. Or they better, since they are ones selling them. Us would notice egypt is stockpiling spares. Or do you think US is so incompetent they woulnd't?

And US would cut them if they would be seen as threat to ISrael. Or more lieklly, Israel would pressure US to cut them. no the U.S. would notice and I say so what I don’t think that the u.s. would automatically cut them off, there are plenty of bureaucratic bs that the Egyptians can do to obtain a lot of spare parts .

As for the U.S. cutting them off I say again by that time they do that, it is too late for they ready have all the armaments they need.


Secondly their planes wont need spare parts three months after so your point is a non-point.


Despite what people believe, revolutions don't happen overnight. they simmer and signs are there. And US and ISrael is watching for these signs. and there have been signs already….they have large Islamic fundamentalist, their newspapers are more anti Semitic then nazi papers were in 1939.

Anyway yes we'll agree that’s its not going to happen tomorrow.


Thirdly they are already trained in what to do there is no need for more of it.

I don't know about Egypt but I Saudi arabia US doesn't train ground personell in anything above most basic maintenance. I doubt Egyptians would be able to keep US planes operational long. why do you doubt that?? :roll:


the U.S. cuting them off doesnt mean that all thier american arms that they now have are now all of a sudden useless!...boy your grasping for straws here :roll:

No, but it means they will become useless real fast. that’s not true at all…again these modern planes are not like ice cream were they melt in the desert in a short time…..they can keep them operational for years.


no it’s not more then thirty years (well ok around 35 years) ….by the 1967 war and before, Israel mostly got its arms from the French and the British and not from the U.S.


There is other support besides selling weapons.... yes and when Israel needed arms and serious help to defend itself, all it got was words of support, that is not real help at all.


In fact the U.S. was a bit harsh in relations against Israel up to that point for fighting with Britain and France in the Suez war of 1956.

So except for signing the UN partition plan and a little help from 1948 till 1967, for the most part the U.S. was not a unconditional supporter or any big ally of Israel’s.


Since 1960s, when it allowed Israeli nuclear program to continue as Israel wanted. Specially after 1967. when it allowed?haha ;) , what could it have done to stop it?? What you think the U.S. would have invaded the Jewish nation after it recognises that it needed it to prevent another holocoust.

Yes the U.S. wasn’t an enemy of israel but it didn’t help out israel till after 1967.

Saying that they allowed us something which they have no right to even object to, is not saying that they helped us.


Iran threatened to attack Afghansitan. Iran threatened to attack Israel. Iran is stronger than Afghhanistan. Iran is weaker than Israel.
Iran didn't attack Afghansitan.

One doesn't have to be Sherlock to fill missing part. ok lets be Sherlock holms with your statement.

You say Iran threatened to attack Afghanistan check, and then you say Iran threatened to attack israel, wrong!! They threatened to destroy Israel!! There is a big difference in the level of threats. Secondly the Iran/Afghanistan crisis was a recent thing and it was confined to one incident, that is not the case with Israel where they have for years threatened to annihilate Israel

Then you write that Iran is stronger then Afghanistan, check and then you write that Iran is weaker then Israel, yes till now however with nukes that strengths by Israel is thrown out the window!! Because nukes can negate all of that.

Then you say Iran didn’t attack Afghanistan, check…however Iran has been attacking Israel for years now though their proxies…..

So conclusion, you don’t need to be shulcok holms to see that Iran’s hostility towards Afghanistan is nowhere near the same level or desire nor for the same amount of time as it is against Israel

So I say again ‘
Iran has over the year’s threatened to destroy Israel
Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran!

Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.

Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land.

Iran has military parades with the death to Israel theme written on them.

cocnclusion=You don’t need to be Sherlock holms to figure out their offensive intentions.”


no they are in fact realistic threats but there the MAD principle applies….it is highly unlikely that the MAD principle applies to Iran’s Islamic fundamentalists and their elements of that in Iran.


Yes, because only religious fundametalists are capable of irrational decissions and irrational decissions are all they are capable of. :roll: for them its very rational to exercise the full power(nukes) when they get it to fulfil their long very important desires and wishes.


the MAD principle applies to WMD's and the other Arab nations have that.

you know nukes are not the only way to instentlly kill millions ;)

Secondly Iran is close to having nukes.”


And since MAD regarding non-nuclear WMDs held one can safelly asume nuclear MAD will hold as well. yes but again Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist state and that is quite different then Syria and other Arab nations that are not ruled by Islamic fundamentalists.


they didn’t have the same desire to destroy them as they do against Israel…for more see my answer before about that weaker nation and its non-comparison to the iran/Israel situation.


They had similar reasons, Afghansitan is closer and weaker. read my answers before but again Iran’s will to destroy Israel is much more powerful then their will to invade Afghanistan over that incident was.


yes in large part only because of Israel’s nuclear deterrent which was mostly in full gear after the Yom kipper war.



Exactlly. Israeli nuclear arsenal gave themf ree hand to invade. by the yom kipper war Israel didn’t have the full nuclear deterrent and as such that’s why the arabs invaded to destroy Israel

Now since israel has had that full deterrent, it has never invaded to destroy another nation it only went into Lebanon in 1982 in defence to go after the PLO and to stop its northern cites and villages from being shelled by the PLO.



that’s factually false, they had every intention to destroy Israel and in fact they came very close to destroying Israel


Well, I wouldn't consider sitting on couple of kilometers deep beachhead long way from any population centres "coming close to destroy Israel", but since when did facts prevent you from making acusations. wow you got to be kidding me :roll: …the Israeli military was about to collapse, I don’t care where that was, thats a fact and if it would have collapsed (which it was very close to doing) they would have been able to destroy Israel

Yes they came very close but hey when did those historical military facts prevent you from wrongly negating that assertion :roll:


“But hey I am not going to argue against your noam chumsky religion here for pure faith is something that cant be rationatly reasoned with.”

I'm not arguing noam Chomsky religion. I'm arguing facts. yes and noam chumsky says the same thing :roll:



no they wanted a peace treaty for after they failed in 1973 to destry Israel and get all the land for themselves, they at least could get back the Sinai for they knew that after 1973 and thier last chence hope to defeat totally Israel, they wouldnt be able to surprise Israel any more and now that Israel had the full nuclear deterrent, there was no chance that they were militarily going to destroy Israel or get any land like the Sinai that way, so they did the smart thing to get that land but that was it, It was not for any real intention for any real peace. Most Egyptians did not want a real genuine peace with Israel and they still don’t and they at as if there is no "peace" agreenment signed.


No, they wanted peace before that so they made peace offer. Which was rejected by Israel. haha :roll: two words the khartum conference in sudan….look it up.

second of all the arab people were not intrested in any peace with Israel



So they started a war to get peace. Sounds stupid because it is!!

They started a war to wipe out Israel and they came very close to doing so.



but in the end they got what they offered to SIrael prior to war. I already went over this way before, they didn’t offer nothing…yes one minister offering something but it was a ruse and I already proved that before.


So I guess if it's stupid and works it isn't stupid. no its stupid because they wanted to destroy Israel and they failed but Israel was always willing to sign a genuine (or what at leaset it thought it was at first) peace deal and that was finally the case in the late seventies when sadat came to Israel


no I am not talking about a single nuke or a small capacity, how long have they had their nuclear MAD deterrent for??

Regarding who? China? what the hell?? Where did china come from? We are talking about strictly India alone and their nuclear deterrent to anybody….you said that they had that since the 70’s and I ask how so?

How as India had it since the 70’s??


well those people were wrong as we see Israel has not. . Also you asked “India has nukes for 30 or so years. Why is world worried about heir nuclear arsenal? To imply that they are not worried about Israel’s and I gave my answer to that.Oh and you’ll have to ask the world for that. (my guess would be that they fear India and Pakistan might use them while they have never feared Israel from using what it has.)

People feared Israel will use them.

Indians didn't use them either. So why are people worried? Because countries that have them are more likelly to use them than countries that don't have them. yes but now I ask again so if India has as you claim had them for years why all of a sudden is the world worried about its nukes? does pakisthn and thier islamic fundamantlists have anything to do with that? ;) :roll:


But anyways yes I know that there are people that are “worried” about Israel’s nukes but those that “worry” have nothing legitimate to base their “worry” on.

Why they don't have legitimate fears? because Israel has never had offensive intentions to destroy another nation!! Israel has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used it once..

That’s legitimate proof that they are a responsible nuclear nation that only has it for defense.



ahh I got you ;) ….ok let me ask you a question…..why is the world worried about India’s nukes all of a sudden now in recent times?

They were worried since detonation. Because of any war could go nulcear and because they knew it trigered Pakistan's nuclear program. ok I guess here we'll have to agree to disagree……..they are worried because they fear a Pakistan after musharf and not india using it offensivly at all.


ok Ill still go along with you, so why other then Israel’s second strike deterrent factor to Iran and to other nations for it’s a sea platform and not land based, or other thenafter Iran nuking Israel, would Israel use nukes on a sub against Iran for?

Because balistic missiles can be detected in flight. Because anybody knows from where Israeli balistic missiles will be launched. OTOH if ISrale uses Harpoon missiles they can be fired from different locations, could avoid detection... so what your saying is that Israel hasn’t used its nukes offensively against Iran even before it had Russia anti ballistic system (and even now it cant really stop a full offensive nuke attack) for years now but it will use its sub nukes offensively against Iran to avoid detection??

Boy that’s so ridicules :roll: …..anyway's you didn’t address my question….whey would Israel offensively now use nukes against Iran even those on the sub?




They took aid from US, so I guees they aren't rejecting help based only on ther rhetoric. As I said, I'm sure they have their resons. well that just shows that the level of hatred and animosity against Israel is much greater then their hatred against the U.S.

Also I find it quite interesting to say the least that before you seemed to know and justify all their reasons for anything but on this you are at a loss of justification. :roll:

I say again “Well so what, their people are dying and Israel could provide very valuable help and the fact that they refused that help in time of a critical need for their people, only further shows the harsh nature and character of the offensive threat that Israel faces.



that’s only because of the MAD principal that both of those nations had against each other.

My point with Iran is that Israel has never fought against it nor has it ever had the desire to fight against it nor has it ever threatened to destroy Iran but yet Iran considers Israel a mortal enemy and wants to destroy it and them having nukes to fulfill their long desires to destroy Israel is clearly a offensive threat….that’s my point!!




US and SU considered each other mortal enemies, despite never having firing a shot at each other (OK, small US intervention in civil war but I don't think there was fighting there). and despite they fact they were allies during WW2.

to even compare Islamic fundamentalism to the soviet/U.S case is beyond rational and your comparisons are non comparisons.





Anyways I can’t stop you from responding and you have every right to in fact respond (as I do myself), however I have realised now and I am sure you can see it as well that we are just going round and round and repeating ourselves now.


You know its probably only me and you reading this anyways so its not like we are making headways to others…believe me we made our case already to them and they can draw whatever conclusions they want and with us we are just going in circles and as such I think its best to leave it where it's at, I have heard what you have to say and I think you made a weak case and now after this post you have firmly heard what I have to say and I am sure you believe that I have made a weak case.


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here.

Shalom to you and despite all this I sincerely wish you a happy and a healthy new years :D

[Vance]

You guys write f*cking essays. Cool it.

[aktarian]

no get this clear. The nation of Egypt and a majority of Egyptians have not had a peace with Israel and have for the past thirty years carried on as if there was never any “peace” deal signed by their leader sadat at that time.

You mean with bombings, tank battles and such. Must have missed that on the news, sorry. :roll:



The fact was that in 1973 most of the population wanted to fight against Israel and they still do except that they realise that now they don’t have that power to do so however they are modernizing and they have their huge numeric advantage (go again check out my 1999!!! Link) and they still have that large percentage (which Israel doesn’t have vice versa) that want to see Israel destroyed and with that element always in place things can always turn for the worst.

If you claim that Israel can be worried about Egypt change it's 30 year old policy of peace with Israel than Iran can be worried that Israel will change it's 30 year old policy of not using nukes.



first of all Israel’s nukes are a MAD theory not only against Egypt but against other Arab nations in the region as well.

But yes against Egypt, they haven’t attacked because of it.

Get this straight. MAD means mutual assured detruction. YOu can't have mutual if only one side has the capability.



Israel’s population and Egypt’s are not the same as I explained above and one is much more likely to change then the other.

But not impossible to change.



yes I know what they did but that doesn’t make it right for them, for Israel never occupied THEIR land.

SU never ocupied US. Does that make it wrong for US to support mujahedeen?



again I know you have “troubles” taking Israel’s word for it, but you have nothing legitimate to base that on. Israel has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used it once. But I guess if you mistrust France to use theirs or other western nations then I cant really persuade you that Israel wont use theirs but the fact is that Israel has indeed proven itself to be a very responsible nuclear nation.

I have troubles taking Israeli word at face value because they broke it so many times. If other countires would broke their word and said they woun't use nukes first then yes, I'd have troubles taking their word as well.



when did I say that they were good to each other??? All I said was that being that both nations are Islamic fundamentalists and there wasn’t the same need or desire (not even close) to destroy Israel as Iran supposedly wanted to invade Afghanistan.

You said there was no need to invade as both were fundamentalist states.ž



Ok so you came up with a grievance yes (one incident) but it is still nowhere near on the level of the desire or hatred to wipe out Israel……nowhere before or even in 1996 did Iran want to destroy Afghanistan and nowhere after 1996 (actually your articles are 1998) have they wanted to destroy Afghanistan. And even in 1996 they didn’t want to destroy Afghanistan.[quote="IDFM203"]

I got the year wrong. You might think their grievances were small but I bet if soembody would do this to ISrael ISrael would scream that they'll attack. But I guess Iran should just let it go, eh?

[quote=IDFM203]
Yes Iran was upset over that incident with the taliban but to even compare that incident with their long hatred (which they have fought already with their proxies) and desire to destroy Israel is beyond pathetic :roll:


It wasn't just those diplomats. It was much more.



again your putting words into my month, when did I say they had no grievances. Anyways Ill say now that they had one grievance and that one was a heightened situation but it is no in way at all comparable to the level that their intentions against Israel are.

That’s a key difference.


You said there was no need to invade as both were fundametalist states. If there are no grievances one doesn't invade, does one?



yes after clearly reading that one incident to even compare that to the years of Iran threatening to destroy Israel (which they never did threatened to destroy Afghanistan even after that incident) is laughable (in a black humour way).


It wasn't just that one incident. It was much more. And besides, ask any American if they are still pissed off at Iranians for taking over their embassy. I'm sure they are.



wrong!!! That’s your definition. Fact is that Syria and other have enough to kill every Jews in Israel and Israel’s MAD is to counter that. period!!

Look up what MAD means. Both sides have capability to destroy each other. There is no MAD regarding nukes.



You know the U.S. and Russia didn’t have the same numeric stockpiles but they had enough to kill both populations and the same is with the Arabs WMD with regards to Israel.


Not with nukes.



first of all Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t want to attack the U.S. but they want to see the U.S. destroyed and they cant do that by attacking it.

Sure. You call somebody Great Satan to get on his good side. And take over his embassy to improve relations. :roll:



As for Israel which is what we are talking about here, there too they cant attack Israel in hopes of destroying it, for they know that its impossible, but hitting Israel with nukes is defiantly the only possible way to fulfil their long desire to wipe out Israel and that’s why “Israel wants to take out their nukes is because with Islamic fundamentalism and their constant threats to destroy Israel the rational MAD principle probably wont work there”


And hiting Israel with nukes will bring nuclear retaliation on their heads. And they know it. Why didn't they attack US forces in region? Because they knew that US would win that fight and retaliate? Because deterrent works?



So I say again
I agree with menachem bagen when he said “There is no guarantee which can guarantee an international guarantee."
the fact is that Administrations change, sentiment changes , willpower and determination change (these things are highly likly to happen in the real world)

And I say again. Whichever administration was in office Israel got unconitional support.



yes but at different levels and there have been times when the U.S. cut off aid or withheld stuff that it had promised before…yes nothing serious but again sentiment can change and its not something that a nation can rely on for his vital defence that the sentiment will always stay the same for that’s simply unrealistic when you are dealing with a foreign power that has other interest’s in that region as well.


Such as? When did US witheld stuff from Israel? They often say they will but that is for public.



In all the arabs wars that they have fought to destroy the whole Israel they have fought together. In 1948,1967 and 1973…..in 1967 egyp had signed aggression pacts with Jordan and iraq and had cut off the straits of tarin (sp?) and had kicked out the UN troops from there and was ammasing troops to attack on
May 30. Nasser then announced:
The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel...to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations.11

so yes in their wars to destry Israel they have fought togther!! As was my point all along.

The 1956 and the 1982 wars were not wars for the complete destruction of Israel. The 1982 was a war against plo terrisomm and the 1956 war was a combined British and French attack to reopen the suez canal that Nasser wrongly closed.

they have only fought three big wars becouse thats all they could do till realising that they would need more power to destry israel but for fifty year's they have been fighting a low intesity war agnist Israel which has never stopped.


Oh I see. You only want to consider wars where they did fought together so you can say that in all wars they fought together. Ignoring favts that don't suit your theory. Interesting. :roll:



I cant believe I have to repeat this again…go read my 1998/99!!!! Link. Yes in air forces they independently and of course combined have a numeric advantage….here tAgain (http://www.csis.org/mideast/reports/mbmeVIAI122798.pdf) is that 1998/99 !!(where now the numeric balance has not changed at all) report.


That link doesn't cover recent purchases. And that is 5 years ol, so don't push it as fresh news.



I don’t get what your saying here…they did not move their planes. Secondly they wont collapse in a few months but again they are not a threat alone but they can certainly add when combined to the other threats.

They still want to see Israel destroyed!!

The fact that US can pressure them into moving them speaks volumes about independance of Saudi military.

And they would colapse in few months with no spares and no trained technicians to mantain their planes.



its not about me or you saying…fact is that the Arabs have always fought together to destroy Israel and Israel has never had the U.S. nor anyone else fight with it to defend itself.!!

Those are facts!!


US always backed Israel. with weapons and diplomatic suport.



we are talking about Iran’s nukes…..I say again how is Iran’s nukes a deterrent against the U.S. when if they hit U.S. bases with nukes there are going to be thousands and thousand if not hundreds of thousands of that other nations inhabitants killed??


Simply. You taget US bases instead of cities.



yes so I ask again how can they deter the U.S. without threatening other nations inhabitants?

By having nukes. US will know that if they invade IRan Iranians will use them. While US would certanlly respond in kind IRanians will inflict enough casualties on US forces to make any gains far too costlly.



And again like I have always said to you before, their unwarntted offensive threats to annihilate another nation is a much bigger negative to them having nukes then their reasons for wanting them.


And they made threats to afghansitan and didn't act on them so why would they attack Israel and be nuked in response?



no it doesn’t…Islamic fundamentalists blow themselves up all the time.

Of course. One can't take a stroll in any Islamic state without people blowing up around him all the time :roll: .



yes and their leaders are also Islamic fundamentalists!!


Yes they are.



see answer before on that.


Don't foolow you. Iranain leadership declared themselves de facto at war with US and didn't act on it. I don't see how your post answers that.



yes but those nations don’t have Islamic fundamentalists at the helm and those nations arent close to having a nuclear bomb.


US had nuclear weapons when they wer aiding mujahedden. SU had nukes when they were aiding Vietnamese....



first of all its not 2/3….. second of all I know what your trying to get at and it makes no differentce for hamas has done a lot of suicide bombings and they are Islamic fundamentalists, period!!

hamas goal is to wipe out the whole israel and that is in line with Irans goal.


Hamas did a lot of suicide bombings. But there is one group that is responsible for more than 1/2 of suicide bombings. Do you know which one is it?



yes so that situation is wrong as well. I mean just because they had two different philosophies doesn’t mean they are justified to destroy each other.

So it was wrong for US to hreaten SU with nuclear weapons to prevent them from actions US didn't like?



the U.S. never threatened to offensively destroy the SU, ever.

They had nukes pointed at their cities. That's threat enough for me.



Iran has threatened offensively to destroy Israel….big difference in both situations

No. Stalin said war between communism and capitalism is inevitabl. that sounds like threatening with war.



first of all they help other organisations besides hetballh.

Few.



And again. The fact is that they have actively helped organisations that want to see Israel destroyed (yes hetbllh wants that but they also have actively helped some Palestinian groups that have that as their goal) and that tells me that if they have the power (nukes) to do so they will use it.


And backing down from attacking weaker neighbour tells me they will back down from stronger state as well.



Afghanistan and Israel are not at all the same situations and are not comparable on how Iran views both of those nations.!!

They were very similar.



As for nuked in response, again Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t have your rational to it.


That's your opinion.



yes indeed and that particular ideology with nukes are indeed a offensive
threat to destroy Israel.

And Israeli capability to strike back makes that action suicidal.



how did you think that…what is this thread about?? Its about Iran and Israel!!

Secondly Israel hasn’t done much other then defensive purposes, against others but anyways to go into other things can take up another 7 pages.


Sure. That's Israeli position. And we all know Israel doesn lie. :roll:



first of all before I was talking about the PLO

Which is irrelevant for this discussion.



Secondly after the plo was kicked out, Syria and Iran were using their proxies like hetballhs a to shell Israeli towns..

Not untill 1992 and you know what brought that on ISrael.



Let me ask you other then defensive needs why would Israel go in there? I am curious to hear your answer.


To destroy PLO as political force and elave Palestinians without representative. To get water (Litani). To establish pro-Israeli (Maronite) Lebanon which would act as serious threat to Syria.



I already explained how that is a non-comparison.

Fact is that a majority of Egypt’s populations wants to see Israel destroyed.
Fact is that there is no such Israeli percentage that wants to see any Arab nation destroyed.

Also anybody can consider whatever they want, I cant stop that, though the fact is that Israel has never threatened ever offensively to destroy any nation as they have all threatened to destroy Israel and a lot still do!!


Egypt and Israle are good comparisons. We are talking aobut same time period here.



the difference is that the mistrust of egypt is bases on the fact that they have a large element’s that wants to see Israel destroyed, there is no such thing to base that on in Israel’s case.


They have nukes, don't they? That could elad to using them. despite ISraeli claims.



you have nothing realistic to base that Israel will realistically change their defensive policy to a offensive policy…with Egypt you do in fact have something realistic (their majority populations that wants to see Israel destroyed) to base it on.

And we all know Egyptian leadership will do exactlly what Egptian population does, right? They are democracy after all, aren't they? :roll: And what will prevent Israel from changing it's policy? absolutlly nothing.



you should switch it to Israel needs and Iran says, for as you have it now, it is something simply in writing but that’s not reality based on the reality on the ground.


And you should switch to what ISrel says and IRan needs.



they don’t have any major defensive threat except for the U.S. and I already explained how their nukes are not a deterrent against the U.S.


Why their nukes aren't deterrent for US? I seems Korean are so why would IRanain be any different?



I already explained all that go see my above answers.

You keep making this argument and I'm countering it. I'll counter it when you make it.



with the U.S. I have already answered and with Israel I already answered on how they have offensive intentions to destroy it.


And I answered your arguments and you keep making them. If you are planing to amke same arguments all over again expct same counters all over again.



again all you have is the U.S threats to replace those leaders (and not to destroy Iran) and yet you want them to have nukes so they can kill million’s simply because of that.

I support them having nukes to prevent foreign invasions and foreign interference in their affairs. Something every country is antitled to.



And again they have unwarranted offensive intentions to wipe out another nation.


And agian, they made threats to afghanistan and didn't attack so why would they attack Israel and be nuked in response? And no, I'm not tired of repeating this.



it just further shows that they want to see Israel destroyed. They consider the whole land of Israel to be occupied and they fight through their proxies be it hetbblhs that also wants that (hell Israel pulled out and yet they still fight) and they also actively help some Palestinian groups that have the complete destruction of Israel as their goal.


That further shows they had no intentions to fight ISrael directlly. US had no intentions to fight SU directlly. So they aided anti-soviet groups. aNd vice versa.



again there is no numeric counter to every Arab U.S. arms.

Yes Israel gets the technological gap, which is narrwoing (well now the UAE has better f16’s) but numerically there is no such thing that every Arab U.S. armement there must be an Israeli one.



There is such policy. Clinton implemented it when Jordan signed peace treaty with ISrael and got F-16s. I doubt Bush discarded it.



yes and the Arabs have as well!!!

Also the Egyptians have gotten a lot of Abrams since and they have dramatically improved their quality (as ramov pointed out to me)

Btw I totally forgot but the Arabs also have quality French arms such as mirages and thing like that as well

Again the numeric balance (and huge disadvantage for Israel) has not shifted at all.



US offsets any arab purchase. I didn't say Israel has advantage in ground forces.



first of all some Arab nations have tons of Abrams tanks.

Secondly they have a huge numeric advantage that is a quality all on its own even with those t55’s….btw they have more sophisticated Russian tanks then the t55 and you know it.

They also have tons of missiles and that with a lot of U.S. arms as well as a lot of soviet ones (which are a bit better then those t55’s) and their huge numeric advantage, they still are a serious threat if there would be a war again to destroy israel


I never said Israel has advantega in ground forces. And they have qualitative edge in ground forces. I'd rather have Merkavas than 3 times T-55s.



no get this clear Israel will win a war against Syria for yes they are not as strong as Israel (I never said they were or that they were weak, they are weaker then Israel but they are not as weak as you say they are…..believe me in the military we aren’t laughing after learning about the Syrians and their military might even though we thought that we can defeat them) BUT there would be a lot of Jewish lives killed and as such the MAD principle is to deter a war from even starting.


People here were laughing at syrians. Nobody from Israel said don't, they are strong and can hurt Israel. IIRC ISraelis were laughing the hardest.



you keep on using the word peace and that’s false…there hasn’t been a war in thirty years not because they like us or want peace with us, but because of our nuclear deterrent.


And that is exactlly what Iranians want. Deterrent so other will elave them alone.



ahh yes that’s the key point……their leaders can be over thrown…I mean we have seen that before..right?

Btw if your only assurance to Israel’s vital security is to ignore that most of the Arab population still wants to see Israel destroyed but yet there are some leaders that also but they are a bit more rational then their wants of their populations, well that’s not any secure assurance at all to Israel to let down its defensive guard.


And you want IRan to trust their eneimes not to attack on their good word.



first of all again they don’t fight with us.

Secondly the U.S. does have other interests in that region…I mean you do know that ;)

US supported Israel no amtter what. I don't see why that would change. And Israel is US most important interest in region.



Israel already was dropped the first chance that the nation that helped it got (France) things like that can certainly happen and it’s not a great idea to rely a 100 percent on that for your vital security.

Heck that’s why Israel has a arms industry of its own.


French dropped ISrael. US didn't.



that’s what you say but that’s not true…

So there are still attacks on tourists? Must have missed than on the news. :roll:



The fact is that they still have large elements of Islamic fundamentalists (you know Egypt didn’t jail every single Islamic fundamentalist) and they have other elements that have just as mush hatred for Israel and want to see it destroyed as those Islamic fundamentalists do.


Egyptian population is largelly secular.



the difference is that with Egypt, they are never changing their mind. They always wanted to destroy Israel. that never changed.

The difference in the future is that they could have Islamic fundamentalists or even secularist that are not as rational as mubrek at the controls….

Israel never has had a population that wanted to see Egypt or another nation destroyed.


If you say Egypt can change it's mind and rejects peace treaty Israel can change it's mind regarding nuclear weapons as well.



the fact is that they exist. Whether you recognise that or not.


And there are extremists in ISrael as well who want to see Israel expand.



no the U.S. would notice and I say so what I don’t think that the u.s. would automatically cut them off, there are plenty of bureaucratic bs that the Egyptians can do to obtain a lot of spare parts .

As for the U.S. cutting them off I say again by that time they do that, it is too late for they ready have all the armaments they need.


If there is coup US would cut aid. I doubt present gov't would stockpile spares so that regime that overthrows them will have easier job.



why do you doubt that?? :roll:

Because they aren't trained to do so.



that’s not true at all…again these modern planes are not like ice cream were they melt in the desert in a short time…..they can keep them operational for years.

Not without spares and technicians who know how to fix them.



yes and when Israel needed arms and serious help to defend itself, all it got was words of support, that is not real help at all.


Like 1973?



when it allowed?haha ;) , what could it have done to stop it?? What you think the U.S. would have invaded the Jewish nation after it recognises that it needed it to prevent another holocoust.

Hmm. let's see. Economic sanctions, cuting aid. If they wanted to prevent ISrael from geting nukes. Since they allowed them to have it they didn't (and don't)



Yes the U.S. wasn’t an enemy of israel but it didn’t help out israel till after 1967.

Saying that they allowed us something which they have no right to even object to, is not saying that they helped us.


They allowed you to get things Iraq was attacked for supposed to have.



ok lets be Sherlock holms with your statement.

You say Iran threatened to attack Afghanistan check, and then you say Iran threatened to attack israel, wrong!! They threatened to destroy Israel!! There is a big difference in the level of threats. Secondly the Iran/Afghanistan crisis was a recent thing and it was confined to one incident, that is not the case with Israel where they have for years threatened to annihilate Israel

But why would they destroy Palestine if they want to liberate it?



Then you write that Iran is stronger then Afghanistan, check and then you write that Iran is weaker then Israel, yes till now however with nukes that strengths by Israel is thrown out the window!! Because nukes can negate all of that.

Then countries become equal. ISrael would still ahve nukes to respond with.



Then you say Iran didn’t attack Afghanistan, check…however Iran has been attacking Israel for years now though their proxies…..

Helping organisations fight ISraeli ocupation.



So conclusion, you don’t need to be shulcok holms to see that Iran’s hostility towards Afghanistan is nowhere near the same level or desire nor for the same amount of time as it is against Israel

But it was more direct threat, closer and weaker.




So I say again ‘
Iran has over the year’s threatened to destroy Israel
Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran!

Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

US and US didn't fight each other and they considered each other mortal threats.



Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.

Helping organisations fight ISraeli ocupation. I don't support them helping Palestinin terrorists.



Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land.

Liberated. If they hate Jews so much why do Jews have repsresentative in Majlis?



Iran has military parades with the death to Israel theme written on them.

cocnclusion=You don’t need to be Sherlock holms to figure out their offensive intentions.”


And Iran didn't attack weaker Afghansitan. So why attack ISrael and be nuked in response?



for them its very rational to exercise the full power(nukes) when they get it to fulfil their long very important desires and wishes.


It's also irrational to attack nuclear armed country and bring nuclearresponse on their hads.



yes but again Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist state and that is quite different then Syria and other Arab nations that are not ruled by Islamic fundamentalists.


So? Does that prevent them from pragmatical decisions?



read my answers before but again Iran’s will to destroy Israel is much more powerful then their will to invade Afghanistan over that incident was.


And Afghansitan was weaker and closer. And it was more than just that incident.



by the yom kipper war Israel didn’t have the full nuclear deterrent and as such that’s why the arabs invaded to destroy Israel

Now since israel has had that full deterrent, it has never invaded to destroy another nation it only went into Lebanon in 1982 in defence to go after the PLO and to stop its northern cites and villages from being shelled by the PLO.



But my question wasn't that. My question was would ISrael invade Lebanon with syrian presence there if Syrai would have nukes? Not likelly.



wow you got to be kidding me :roll: …the Israeli military was about to collapse, I don’t care where that was, thats a fact and if it would have collapsed (which it was very close to doing) they would have been able to destroy Israel

Yes they came very close but hey when did those historical military facts prevent you from wrongly negating that assertion :roll:

Egyptian beachead was small and they were well away from amny population cnetres. They were reluctant to push much beyond canal and outside SAM umbrella.



yes and noam chumsky says the same thing :roll:

So do you :roll: .



haha :roll: two words the khartum conference in sudan….look it up.

second of all the arab people were not intrested in any peace with Israel

3 words: Sadat's peace offer.



because it is!!

They started a war to wipe out Israel and they came very close to doing so.

By sitting on beachead in Sinai they came close to wiping out Israel? Wow. And they started war to get Siani back, not to destroy Israel. Ask any unbiased historian.



I already went over this way before, they didn’t offer nothing…yes one minister offering something but it was a ruse and I already proved that before.


They offered same as happened in Camp David. Recognition and withdrawal to 1967 borders.


no its stupid because they wanted to destroy Israel and they failed but Israel was always willing to sign a genuine (or what at leaset it thought it was at first) peace deal and that was finally the case in the late seventies when sadat came to Israel


They offered what hapeened at Cam David. ISrael rejected 1971 offere because it called for withdrawal to 1967 borders.



what the hell?? Where did china come from? We are talking about strictly India alone and their nuclear deterrent to anybody….you said that they had that since the 70’s and I ask how so?

How as India had it since the 70’s??

You said how long untill India gets MAD capability. I asked you regarding which country. Regarding China they will need massive increase in their nuclear arsenal (China is big country, you know). Regarding Pakistan, nobody can say because it isn't clear how many nukes Indians have. they might have it, they might have got it a while back.



yes but now I ask again so if India has as you claim had them for years why all of a sudden is the world worried about its nukes? does pakisthn and thier islamic fundamantlists have anything to do with that? ;) :roll:


Tensions in rgion which could elad to war which could lead to nuclear war have something to do with it.



because Israel has never had offensive intentions to destroy another nation!! Israel has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used it once..

That’s legitimate proof that they are a responsible nuclear nation that only has it for defense.

The fact that Egypt has peace with ISrael for 30 years is by that logic legitimate proof they plan to keep it that way.



ok I guess here we'll have to agree to disagree……..they are worried because they fear a Pakistan after musharf and not india using it offensivly at all.


No, they are worried because war between India and PAkistan can turn into nuclear war. Regardless of who starts it.



so what your saying is that Israel hasn’t used its nukes offensively against Iran even before it had Russia anti ballistic system (and even now it cant really stop a full offensive nuke attack) for years now but it will use its sub nukes offensively against Iran to avoid detection??

No, submarines give Israel capability to avoid Iranain defences geared toward previous capabilities.



Boy that’s so ridicules :roll: …..anyway's you didn’t address my question….whey would Israel offensively now use nukes against Iran even those on the sub?


I did answer it. Submarines give Israel capability to avoid early detection thus cuting back Iranian response time.



well that just shows that the level of hatred and animosity against Israel is much greater then their hatred against the U.S.

Also I find it quite interesting to say the least that before you seemed to know and justify all their reasons for anything but on this you are at a loss of justification. :roll:

I say again “Well so what, their people are dying and Israel could provide very valuable help and the fact that they refused that help in time of a critical need for their people, only further shows the harsh nature and character of the offensive threat that Israel faces.

I guess they got enough aid from elsewhere so they aren't desperate to get small increase by taking Israeli help.



to even compare Islamic fundamentalism to the soviet/U.S case is beyond rational and your comparisons are non comparisons.

Why? Both sides fierclly believed in their ideologies. Not exactlly same as religion but close.



Anyways I can’t stop you from responding and you have every right to in fact respond (as I do myself), however I have realised now and I am sure you can see it as well that we are just going round and round and repeating ourselves now.


You know its probably only me and you reading this anyways so its not like we are making headways to others…believe me we made our case already to them and they can draw whatever conclusions they want and with us we are just going in circles and as such I think its best to leave it where it's at, I have heard what you have to say and I think you made a weak case and now after this post you have firmly heard what I have to say and I am sure you believe that I have made a weak case.


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here.

Shalom to you and despite all this I sincerely wish you a happy and a healthy new years :D

You are probally right. If we stop it here nobody will give a damn and people will be glad we did. I think I made my points, you made yours. We disagree on them, but hey, that's life. Happy holidays.

[Herrmannek]

Such long replies should be forbiden :)

[aktarian]

Such long replies should be forbiden :)

Censorship, Censorship. :)

[Falco]

These replies, even though they are long, prove to be very informative. They give another point of view than the one we see on TV where the "oppressed" Palestinians bitch about Israël's "occupation" of their land.

[IDFM203]

no get this clear. The nation of Egypt and a majority of Egyptians have not had a peace with Israel and have for the past thirty years carried on as if there was never any “peace” deal signed by their leader sadat at that time.

You mean with bombings, tank battles and such. Must have missed that on the news, sorry. :roll: haha :roll: your twisting things….again (for the hundredth time) they don’t do this, only due to Israel’s nuclear deterrent….just because they haven’t attacked doesn’t men they have peace with Israel

Pakistan for example never attacked Israel; you think that means that they have peace with Israel? :roll:


If you claim that Israel can be worried about Egypt change it's 30 year old policy of peace with Israel than Iran can be worried that Israel will change it's 30 year old policy of not using nukes. . I say again, they are not changing policy. The “peace” policy is only by the Egyptian government at its present figures but most of their people don’t recognise a peace and they haven’t changed any policy for they never had a peace policy with Israel.


You see most of Israel’s population hasn’t ever in the past nor doesn’t ever want to now offensively destroy a nation, where Egypt’s population has for years and still now wanted to destroy Israel so if they get a leader that attempts to do that (which is plausible) its not a change of the populations policy but rather simply acting on what the population has wanted for years.

Anyway’s as for Iran, again they have offensive intentions to destroy Israel


Get this straight. MAD means mutual assured detruction. YOu can't have mutual if only one side has the capability. . no you get this clear, the Arab’s have the capability with their missiles and biological and chemical warheads which do constitute a WMD capability, to in fact wipe out every single Jewish man women and child and that is a MAD principle.

I say again, MAD doesn’t mean the same stockpiles or weapons, fact is that the Arabs have WMD’s to kill every Israeli and Israel has a MAD principle to counter that.


Israel’s population and Egypt’s are not the same as I explained above and one is much more likely to change then the other.

But not impossible to change. nothing is impossible however it is highly unlikely in Israel’s case due to them for the past fifty years never wanting to destroy another nation and to institute that now they would is preposterous.

Egypt population has for the past fifty years wanted to destroy Israel and still does.



yes I know what they did but that doesn’t make it right for them, for Israel never occupied THEIR land

SU never ocupied US. Does that make it wrong for US to support mujahedeen? .yes it does…ok now move on.


I have troubles taking Israeli word at face value because they broke it so many times. If other countires would broke their word and said they woun't use nukes first then yes, I'd have troubles taking their word as well. . Israel has not broken their word the amounts of times as you say but besides what’s for sure is that they haven’t broken their word any more then western nations, but that’s moot point….with nukes Israel has said they would never use it first and they haven’t for the past thirty years!!

That’s more proof then your lame mistrust of it.


when did I say that they were good to each other??? All I said was that being that both nations are Islamic fundamentalists and there wasn’t the same need or desire (not even close) to destroy Israel as Iran supposedly wanted to invade Afghanistan.

You said there was no need to invade as both were fundamentalist states.ž.read what I say above your statement!!


Ok so you came up with a grievance yes (one incident) but it is still nowhere near on the level of the desire or hatred to wipe out Israel……nowhere before or even in 1996 did Iran want to destroy Afghanistan and nowhere after 1996 (actually your articles are 1998) have they wanted to destroy Afghanistan. And even in 1996 they didn’t want to destroy Afghanistan.

I got the year wrong. You might think their grievances were small but I bet if soembody would do this to ISrael ISrael would scream that they'll attack. But I guess Iran should just let it go, eh? . yes Israel would scream and Iran would scream but both wouldn’t invade on one incident.

Secondly I say again

“You say Iran threatened to attack Afghanistan, check, and then you say Iran threatened to attack israel, wrong!! They threatened to destroy Israel!! There is a big difference in the level of threats. Secondly the Iran/Afghanistan crisis was a recent thing and it was confined to one incident, that is not the case with Israel where they have for years threatened to annihilate Israel

Then you write that Iran is stronger then Afghanistan, check and then you write that Iran is weaker then Israel, yes till now however with nukes that strengths by Israel is thrown out the window!! Because nukes can negate all of that.

Then you say Iran didn’t attack Afghanistan, check…however Iran has been attacking Israel for years now though their proxies…..

So conclusion, you don’t need to be shulcok holms to see that Iran’s hostility towards Afghanistan is nowhere near the same level or desire nor for the same amount of time as it is against Israel

So I say again ‘
Iran has over the year’s threatened to destroy Israel
Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran!

Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.

Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land.

Iran has military parades with the death to Israel theme written on them.

cocnclusion=You don’t need to be Sherlock holms to figure out their offensive intentions.”


Yes Iran was upset over that incident with the taliban but to even compare that incident with their long hatred (which they have fought already with their proxies) and desire to destroy Israel is beyond pathetic :roll: “

It wasn't just those diplomats. It was much more. yes it was perhaps a bit more (though not much more) but it was still nowhere near their long hatred (which they have fought already with their proxies) and desire and will to destroy and annihilate Israel.



again your putting words into my month, when did I say they had no grievances. Anyways Ill say now that they had one grievance and that one was a heightened situation but it is no in way at all comparable to the level that their intentions against Israel are.

That’s a key difference.

You said there was no need to invade as both were fundametalist states. If there are no grievances one doesn't invade, does one? whether one invades or not is not what we are discussing, there was never any will by Iran nor any desire to destroy Afghanistan after that one incident, as they do want to annihilate Israel.

Read above for more clarity on this point.


yes after clearly reading that one incident to even compare that to the years of Iran threatening to destroy Israel (which they never did threatened to destroy Afghanistan even after that incident) is laughable (in a black humour way).


It wasn't just that one incident. It was much more. And besides, ask any American if they are still pissed off at Iranians for taking over their embassy. I'm sure they are. yeah but has the U.S. ever threatened to destroy Iran? You see, most nations in this world have grievances at other nations are they are pissed of at other nations, that’s normal geo politics, however they don’t threaten to offensively annihilate another nation as Iran has done to Israel.


wrong!!! That’s your definition. Fact is that Syria and other have enough to kill every Jews in Israel and Israel’s MAD is to counter that. period!!”

Look up what MAD means. Both sides have capability to destroy each other. There is no MAD regarding nukes. !!there is MAD regarding WMD’s, period!!



“You know the U.S. and Russia didn’t have the same numeric stockpiles but they had enough to kill both populations and the same is with the Arabs WMD with regards to Israel.”


Not with nukes. hey when six million Jews die, they are not going to ask if it was with Arab nukes or if it was with Arab WMD’s….geeeez get a grip on what your saying here as if there is a difference :roll:


first of all Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t want to attack the U.S. but they want to see the U.S. destroyed and they cant do that by attacking it


Sure. You call somebody Great Satan to get on his good side. And take over his embassy to improve relations. :roll: . no they don’t like the U.S. and in fact they want to see it destroyed!! They did all they could do, what I meant to say is that yes they want to attack it but they don’t because they cant achieve their goals of destroying the great saten (the U.S.) by merely attacking because they are very weak. If they were strong and had the ability to invade the U.S. and destroy it they might just do that.

Now them having nukes is a scary offensive capability for them to act on their rhetoric.




And hiting Israel with nukes will bring nuclear retaliation on their heads. And they know it. Why didn't they attack US forces in region? Because they knew that US would win that fight and retaliate? Because deterrent works? again they want to see the U.S. and Israel destroyed and not merely attack it. They gain nothing according to their ideology by simply attacking and getting the response.

Now destroying Israel and not just attacking it is what their goal is (the same for the U.S.) and them having nukes to do that to fulfil their wishes is an offensive threat.

Their goal is to destroy Israel and the U.S. and as such the MAD principle with these Islamic fundamentalists don’t work.


And I say again. Whichever administration was in office Israel got unconitional support. not true, before 1967 Israel did not get unconditional support and after they got but they have at times rejected requests or held back at times some monetary aid.

So I say again
I agree with menachem bagen when he said “There is no guarantee which can guarantee an international guarantee."
the fact is that Administrations change, sentiment changes , willpower and determination change (these things are highly likly to happen in the real world)



.Such as? When did US witheld stuff from Israel? They often say they will but that is for public. yes like bush withholding loans in the early 90’s and there are more cases but I am too tired to do any google search.

And again” yes nothing serious but again sentiment can change and its not something that a nation can rely on for his vital defence that the sentiment will always stay the same for that’s simply unrealistic when you are dealing with a foreign power that has other interest’s in that region as well.


Oh I see. You only want to consider wars where they did fought together so you can say that in all wars they fought together. Ignoring favts that don't suit your theory. Interesting. :roll: no it was you that brought in aspects that suit your needs and all I did was disprove them.

The Arabs have fought together in their wars to destroy Israel…………1982 and 1956 was not their wars to destroy Israel, 1982 was Israel going after the PLO and 1956 was simply the French and the British with the help of Israel opening up the suez canal.

So I repeat “In all the Arabs wars that they have fought to destroy the whole Israel they have fought together. In 1948,1967 and 1973…..in 1967 Egypt had signed aggression pacts with Jordan and Iraq and had cut off the straits of tarin (sp?) and had kicked out the UN troops from there and was amassing troops to attack on
May 30. Nasser then announced:
The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel...to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations.11

So yes in their wars to destroy Israel they have fought together!! As was my point all along.

The 1956 and the 1982 wars were not wars for the complete destruction of Israel. The 1982 were a war against plo terrorism and the 1956 war was a combined British and French attack to reopen the suez canal that Nasser wrongly closed.

They have only fought three big wars because that’s all they could do till realising that they would need more power to destroy Israel but for fifty year's they have been fighting a low intensity war against Israel which has never stopped.


That link doesn't cover recent purchases. And that is 5 years ol, so don't push it as fresh news. oh sorry five years is sooooooooo old ;) :roll:

And I say again that both have purchased since then and as such the numeric balance hasn’t shifted at all in that short time frame.


The fact that US can pressure them into moving them speaks volumes about independance of Saudi military.

And they would colapse in few months with no spares and no trained technicians to mantain their planes. I repeat, I don’t think they got the Saudis to move them!!

As for maintenance yes they do have that training, the U.S. provided them that…what are you saying that as Saudis they are incapable of learning and being competent? ;)

So I repeat” Secondly they won’t collapse in a few months but again they are not a threat alone but they can certainly add when combined to the other threats.

They still want to see Israel destroyed!!”
Also they have modern planes and as someone else pointed out they have a very modern air force and as such again they would not collapse in a matter of months.


its not about me or you saying…fact is that the Arabs have always fought together to destroy Israel and Israel has never had the U.S. nor anyone else fight with it to defend itself.!!

Those are facts!!


US always backed Israel. with weapons and diplomatic suport. worng!! Not always!! Israel fought two major wars for its own survival and had constant battles for 20 years since its independence, all without U.S. weapons!!

Anyways after 1967, yes they have but it’s only been with weapons and diplomatic support.

The Arabs have always got weapons and diplomatic support [b]and other Arab nations troops[b] to back them up.



Simply. You taget US bases instead of cities. with a nuke?? A nuke has too much damage to simply only destroy that base.

So I say again” how is Iran’s nukes a deterrent against the U.S. when if they hit U.S. bases with nukes there are going to be thousands and thousand if not hundreds of thousands of that other nations inhabitants killed??


no it doesn’t…Islamic fundamentalists blow themselves up all the time.

Of course. One can't take a stroll in any Islamic state without people blowing up around him all the time :roll: . . non withstanding your lame sarcasm :roll: , the point is that this ideology and the people that strictly follow it, blows themselves up against what they consider infidels.


yes and their leaders are also Islamic fundamentalists!!

Yes they are. …that doesn’t share your rationalisations.


Don't foolow you. Iranain leadership declared themselves de facto at war with US and didn't act on it. I don't see how your post answers that. they didn’t act because they couldn’t for they didn’t have the power and not because they didn’t want to…


See my response in this thread to this.

Btw their threats against Israel are much more serious then against the U.S. for the U.S. is only the great saten for supporting Israel for they consider Israel to be occupying Muslim holy land and as such their extremist ideology is most potent against Israel.


US had nuclear weapons when they wer aiding mujahedden. SU had nukes when they were aiding Vietnamese....
Yes but those nations don’t have Islamic fundamentalists at the helm, there is a big difference in the U.S. and the SU at the control of nukes and Islamic fundamentalists at the control of nukes.


Hamas did a lot of suicide bombings. But there is one group that is responsible for more than 1/2 of suicide bombings. Do you know which one is it? no it’s not more then half.

Anyways I repeat
“second of all I know what your trying to get at and it makes no difference for hamas has done a lot of suicide bombings and they are Islamic fundamentalists, period!!

hamas goal is to wipe out the whole Israel and that is in line with Iran’s goal.



So it was wrong for US to hreaten SU with nuclear weapons to prevent them from actions US didn't like? yes it was if it was actions that didn’t threaten the U.S. themselves. Then yes it was wrong.


the U.S. never threatened to offensively destroy the SU, ever

They had nukes pointed at their cities. That's threat enough for me. .they never had offensivethreats to use them and that is not merely saying so but the proof to that is for fifty years no one offensively used them!!


Iran has threatened offensively to destroy Israel….big difference in both situations

No. Stalin said war between communism and capitalism is inevitabl. that sounds like threatening with war. . so Stalin was wrong. As Iran is wrong.

Btw I still see differences for Stalin never threatened offensively to wipe out the U.S. In your statement he just thought war was perhaps inevitable but he never threatened to offensively annihilate another nation.

Any nation that threatens offensively to destroy another nation is wrong!! And should not have nukes.



first of all they help other organisations besides hetballh

Few. .few (these are organisations that are huge so even if it was two that is all they need) or not is moot point, the fact is that Iran has actively helped ones that have their stated goal to destroy Israel


And backing down from attacking weaker neighbour tells me they will back down from stronger state as well. . no they backed down after one incident after never having the same will or desire as they do to destroy Israel.

They have never threatened to annihilate Afghanistan even after that incident.

Secondly they have openly stated that they want to see Israel destroyed.

The fact is that they have actively helped organisations that want to see Israel destroyed (yes hetbllh wants that but they also have actively helped some Palestinian groups that have that as their goal) and that tells me that if they have the power (nukes) to do so they will use it.


Afghanistan and Israel are not at all the same situations and are not comparable on how Iran views both of those nations.!!

They were very similar. yes Iran has been attacking Afghanistan for years and they have been threatening to annihilate Afghanistan for years now :roll:



As for nuked in response, again Islamic fundamentalism doesn’t have your rational to it.

That's your opinion. true as is yours your opinion however I have much more experience with Islamic fundamentalism up close then you do but hey when did that ever matter to you :roll:


yes indeed and that particular ideology with nukes are indeed a offensive
threat to destroy Israel.

And Israeli capability to strike back makes that action suicidal. to strike back after you are already destroyed is not suicidal!!


how did you think that…what is this thread about?? Its about Iran and Israel!!

Secondly Israel hasn’t done much other then defensive purposes, against others but anyways to go into other things can take up another 7 pages.


Sure. That's Israeli position. And we all know Israel doesn lie. :roll: yes and we all know that you don’t or that others don’t :roll:


Israel’s actions on the ground for the most part have proven that it’s for defence.


Let me ask you other then defensive needs why would Israel go in there? I am curious to hear your answer.


To destroy PLO as political force and elave Palestinians without representative. To get water (Litani). To establish pro-Israeli (Maronite) Lebanon which would act as serious threat to Syria. ok to further what you say, so why would they want Lebanon to be pro Israel to act as a serious threat against Syria??

As for the PLO they weren’t a political force, they were for years shelling Israeli towns and villages. But of course for you that’s a political force :roll:

As for water Israel, no Israel did not go in to get more water.


They have nukes, don't they? That could elad to using them. despite ISraeli claims. Israel has claimed that for thirty years and they haven’t used it…yeah despite their claims :roll:

Most Israelis don’t want to see Egypt destroyed…most Egyptians do want to see Israel destroyed.

The difference is that the mistrust of Egypt is based on the fact that they have large element’s that wants to see Israel destroyed, there is no such thing to base that on in Israel’s case

Peace with Egypt, is Israel’s population with only Egypt’s rulers and not their population and that is not a real peace on Egypt’s part and never has been


you have nothing realistic to base that Israel will realistically change their defensive policy to a offensive policy…with Egypt you do in fact have something realistic (their majority populations that wants to see Israel destroyed) to base it on.


And we all know Egyptian leadership will do exactlly what Egptian population does, right? They are democracy after all, aren't they? :roll: yes and we all know that mubarak will be in power for ever. :roll:


And you should switch to what ISrel says and IRan needs. haha rofl no I already switched it from your previous statement.

So you should switch it to Israel needs and Iran says, for as you have it now, it is something simply in writing but that’s not reality based on the reality on the ground.


And again they have unwarranted offensive intentions to wipe out another nation.”

And agian, they made threats to afghanistan and didn't attack so why would they attack Israel and be nuked in response? And no, I'm not tired of repeating this. and I am not tired of repeating how weak that comparison is.

Again” You say Iran threatened to attack Afghanistan check, and then you say Iran threatened to attack Israel, wrong!! They threatened to destroy Israel!! There is a big difference in the level of threats. Secondly the Iran/Afghanistan crisis was a recent thing and it was confined to one incident, that is not the case with Israel where they have for years threatened to annihilate Israel

Then you write that Iran is stronger then Afghanistan, check and then you write that Iran is weaker then Israel, yes till now however with nukes that strengths by Israel is thrown out the window!! Because nukes can negate all of that.

Then you say Iran didn’t attack Afghanistan, check…however Iran has been attacking Israel for years now though their proxies…..

So conclusion, you don’t need to be shulcok holms to see that Iran’s hostility towards Afghanistan is nowhere near the same level or desire nor for the same amount of time as it is against Israel

So I say again ‘
Iran has over the year’s threatened to destroy Israel
Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran!

Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.

Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land.

Iran has military parades with the death to Israel theme written on them.

cocnclusion=You don’t need to be Sherlock holms to figure out their offensive intentions.”


it just further shows that they want to see Israel destroyed. They consider the whole land of Israel to be occupied and they fight through their proxies be it hetbblhs that also wants that (hell Israel pulled out and yet they still fight) and they also actively help some Palestinian groups that have the complete destruction of Israel as their goal.


That further shows they had no intentions to fight ISrael directlly. no it just shows that up till them having nukes, that is all the power they has to do against Israel and they used it.

Now they are getting nukes.


There is such policy. Clinton implemented it when Jordan signed peace treaty with ISrael and got F-16s. I doubt Bush discarded it. no there is no such policy…. please provide a link to a U.S. government document that states that.

Again there is no numeric counter to every Arab U.S. arms.

Yes Israel gets the technological gap, which is narrowing (well now the UAE has better f16’s ) but numerically there is no such thing that every Arab (there are other’s besides Jordan)U.S. armament there must be an Israeli one.



US offsets any arab purchase. I didn't say Israel has advantage in ground forces. that’s factually false.

Also in total in air forces the Arabs have a HUGE numeric advantage be it from modern U.S. planes (which in recent times they have been getting collectively more then Israel has gotten) to modern French ones to even modern soviet ones.



I never said Israel has advantega in ground forces. And they have qualitative edge in ground forces. I'd rather have Merkavas than 3 times T-55s. first of all they have bigger air forces. And all you do is say they don’t..I have shown you a link that they do and if you say they don’t how about you show me a link that back up what you say.

As for tanks they have more modern tanks then the T55. (you conveniently :roll: keep on repeating the T55 when they have more modern tanks than that)



People here were laughing at syrians. Nobody from Israel said don't, they are strong and can hurt Israel. IIRC ISraelis were laughing the hardest. no they were laughing at them for only responding with hetballh for yes they are weaker but if an all out war they will lose but they will cause a lot of damage to Israel and its citizens.

Second of all I repeat “no get this clear Israel will win a war against Syria for yes they are not as strong as Israel (I never said they were or that they were weak, they are weaker then Israel but they are not as weak as you say they are…..believe me in the military we aren’t laughing after learning about the Syrians and their military might even though we thought that we can defeat them) BUT there would be a lot of Jewish lives killed and as such the MAD principle is to deter a war from even starting.



you keep on using the word peace and that’s false…there hasn’t been a war in thirty years not because they like us or want peace with us, but because of our nuclear deterrent.

And that is exactlly what Iranians want. Deterrent so other will elave them alone. who wants to enslave Iran??

Second of all they have offensive intentions to annihilate another nation.

I mean if you don’t believe that than why should I believe their defensive claims.

I mean they have said for years that they want to annihilate Israel so why acc. To you if I shouldn’t believe that but I must believe their defensive claims?


ahh yes that’s the key point……their leaders can be over thrown…I mean we have seen that before..right?

Btw if your only assurance to Israel’s vital security is to ignore that most of the Arab population still wants to see Israel destroyed but yet there are some leaders that also but they are a bit more rational then their wants of their populations, well that’s not any secure assurance at all to Israel to let down its defensive guard.


And you want IRan to trust their eneimes not to attack on their good word. but their enemies have had that power for years and they haven’t…..Israel has not for years even though it has had that power.

With Iran’s nukes it will be the first time they will have the power to fulfill their wishes and that is an offensive threat.


“first of all again they don’t fight with us.

Secondly the U.S. does have other interests in that region…I mean you do know that ;) “

US supported Israel no amtter what. I don't see why that would change. And Israel is US most important interest in region. ok why is Israel the U.S. most important interest in that region??yes they are important but why the most?? Why do you think it is?


“Israel already was dropped the first chance that the nation that helped it got (France) things like that can certainly happen and it’s not a great idea to rely a 100 percent on that for your vital security.

Heck that’s why Israel has a arms industry of its own.”


French dropped ISrael. US didn't. if the French and also the British could ( I fogot to add that fact as well), the U.S. could as well.



.Egyptian population is largelly secular. ..that wants to see Israel destroyed

Also there is a large Islamic fundamentalist element and it is in fact growing.



the fact is that they exist. Whether you recognise that or not.


And there are extremists in ISrael as well who want to see Israel expand. those extremists are a tiny minority and on percentage terms doesn’t even come close to the amount of Arab extremists that want to see Israel destroyed.

Also those few extremists don’t act on anything for the most part nor do they have any desires against Egypt or Iran.



If there is coup US would cut aid. I doubt present gov't would stockpile spares so that regime that overthrows them will have easier job. again they have enough already even without spares to do act of they so choose.

I say again by that time they do that, it is too late for they ready have all the armaments they need.

Also they do have plenty of spears for normal maintenance



why do you doubt that?? :roll:

Because they aren't trained to do so. yes they are…why do you think that they are not trained for it?? :roll:

Also what makes you think that they cant have the knowledge they without U.S. training (if the U.S. didn’t give it to them) to be able to maintain it themselves?


that’s not true at all…again these modern planes are not like ice cream were they melt in the desert in a short time…..they can keep them operational for years.

Not without spares and technicians who know how to fix them. .they don’t need to be fixed right away.

Also Egypt does have trained technicians who know how to fix them.


yes and when Israel needed arms and serious help to defend itself, all it got was words of support, that is not real help at all.


Like 1973? wow where did that come from :roll: :roll: ….we were talking there BEFORE 1967!!!


when it allowed?haha ;) , what could it have done to stop it?? What you think the U.S. would have invaded the Jewish nation after it recognises that it needed it to prevent another holocoust.

Hmm. let's see. Economic sanctions, cuting aid. If they wanted to prevent ISrael from geting nukes. Since they allowed them to have it they didn't (and don't) .there was no major aid before 1967, economic sanctions is wrong for another nation to do without any provocation from that nation to the other, and them not doing that does not mean that they helped Israel out.

Them allowing or not allowing is not any help to Israel, its not their business to decide what Israel could have for its vital defence or not especially in those times when they didn’t really help Israel out at all.

Here with your logic Israel has been helping out the Russia for years, you know why, because they didn’t stop them from having nukes.

Your logic here is seriously flawed!!



They allowed you to get things Iraq was attacked for supposed to have. that’s still not any help to Israel…its not for the U.S. to decide what Israel can have or not.

Hey I am sure you agree with that logic I mean you do believe that the U.S. was wrong with Iraq, right??



ok lets be Sherlock holms with your statement.

You say Iran threatened to attack Afghanistan check, and then you say Iran threatened to attack israel, wrong!! They threatened to destroy Israel!! There is a big difference in the level of threats. Secondly the Iran/Afghanistan crisis was a recent thing and it was confined to one incident, that is not the case with Israel where they have for years threatened to annihilate Israel “

But why would they destroy Palestine if they want to liberate it? they would prefer that but they cant so the nukes are the next best thing for they get rid of them and as a result Mohammad comes back and allah takes care of everything else….sounds crazy right? But that’s part of their fundamentalist ideology.


Then you write that Iran is stronger then Afghanistan, check and then you write that Iran is weaker then Israel, yes till now however with nukes that strengths by Israel is thrown out the window!! Because nukes can negate all of that.

Then countries become equal. ISrael would still ahve nukes to respond with. yes but now that Iran has the power to destroy Israel they will use it and saying Israel has the power to respond to it is not saving six million Jews from dying again.



Then you say Iran didn’t attack Afghanistan, check…however Iran has been attacking Israel for years now though their proxies…..

Helping organisations fight ISraeli ocupation. …..there is no occupation to their land, but yes that’s how they see it, and as such that’s a more reason to fear Iran’s offensive intentions to destroy Israel then their reasons or intentions against Afghanistan.(which are no where near as strong as theirs against Israel)



But it was more direct threat, closer and weaker. Afghanistan wasn’t a threat to Iran!! All that happened was one incident in Afghanistan.

Again “Iran’s hostility towards Afghanistan is nowhere near the same level or desire nor for the same amount of time as it is against Israel




So I say again ‘
Iran has over the year’s threatened to destroy Israel
Israel has never threatened to destroy Iran!

Israel has never fought against Iran but yet they consider us a mortal enemy.

US and US didn't fight each other and they considered each other mortal threats. U.S. and U.S. getting tired there a bit ;) ………again the U.S. and the SU are not Islamic fundamentalists.



Iran also fights Israel through its proxies like hetbllh and some Palestinian groups.

Helping organisations fight ISraeli ocupation. I don't support them helping Palestinin terrorists. yes they consider all of Israel to be solely Muslim holy land and they see the Jews occupying that, and they fight for that!!

I think we are saying the same thing here ;)


Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist nation (well its rulers and large elements) that believes every Jew should be wiped off that land.

Liberated. If they hate Jews so much why do Jews have repsresentative in Majlis? those are a few token Jews that doesn’t negate their hostility...I mean are your saying that Iran’s leaders don’t hate Jews? :roll: …I have many Jewish Iranian friends they all left after the they came to power so don’t start spinning this as if they are benevolent to one or two representatives Jews there as if that’s a sign of how they treat Jews in general.

Hitler also had Jewish representatives and he didn’t hate Jews or want them killed :roll:

I mean even the remaining Jews there they arrest and imprison…oh of course their word that they were Zionist spies and gee they never lie :roll:


Iran has military parades with the death to Israel theme written on them.

cocnclusion=You don’t need to be Sherlock holms to figure out their offensive intentions.”

And Iran didn't attack weaker Afghansitan. So why attack ISrael and be nuked in response? they didn’t attack Afghanistan for they did not have the same will or desire as they do against Israel


for them its very rational to exercise the full power(nukes) when they get it to fulfil their long very important desires and wishes.



It's also irrational to attack nuclear armed country and bring nuclearresponse on their hads. yes and suicide bombings and Islamic fundamentalism are irrational.

Boy I am a happy we cleared all that up ;)


yes but again Iran is a Islamic fundamentalist state and that is quite different then Syria and other Arab nations that are not ruled by Islamic fundamentalists.

So? Does that prevent them from pragmatical decisions? well when one of their biggest stated goals is to destroy Israel and they are Islamic fundamentalists (the same ideology that produces suicide bombings) the betting money is not on them being pragmatic.



But my question wasn't that. My question was would ISrael invade Lebanon with syrian presence there if Syrai would have nukes? Not likelly. yes they would…..remember Israel did not invade Syria itself.




Egyptian beachead was small and they were well away from amny population cnetres. They were reluctant to push much beyond canal and outside SAM umbrella. they were aways because that’s were the fighting was but they were about to make the IDF collapse and roll into Israel

Israel’s military doctrine is to fight away but if it collapses it doesn’t matter where its at for Israel is defeated and the Arabs can roll free into anywhere in Israel and kill everyone.

The Israeli military was about to collapse, I don’t care where that was, that’s a fact and if it would have collapsed (which it was very close to doing) they would have been able to destroy Israel



haha :roll: two words the khartum conference in sudan….look it up.

second of all the arab people were not intrested in any peace with Israel

3 words: Sadat's peace offer. yes Israel accapepted sadats offer in the late 70’s What’s your point?



because it is!!

They started a war to wipe out Israel and they came very close to doing so.

By sitting on beachead in Sinai they came close to wiping out Israel? Wow. And they started war to get Siani back, not to destroy Israel. Ask any unbiased historian. .yes I asked and they said that they were about to destroy Israel and that was their goal…most historians recognise that, but hey perhaps you can show me the “unbiased” historians that claim what you do.


I already went over this way before, they didn’t offer nothing…yes one minister offering something but it was a ruse and I already proved that before.


They offered same as happened in Camp David. Recognition and withdrawal to 1967 borders. no they had one Minster say something and that was it…they were still attacking Israel even after their war of attrition ceasefire and their leader refused to even talk to Israel to even present that peace and that shows that it was not sincere.

What changed later is that the attacks stopped and that sadat talked to the Israel and even went there and that showed at the time a sincerity (too bad its only sadats sincerity and not the Egyptian people) which wasn’t at all present before.



no its stupid because they wanted to destroy Israel and they failed but Israel was always willing to sign a genuine (or what at leaset it thought it was at first) peace deal and that was finally the case in the late seventies when sadat came to Israel


They offered what hapeened at Cam David. ISrael rejected 1971 offere because it called for withdrawal to 1967 borders. no they didn’t offer any genuine peace they offered a ruse.

Secondly why would Israel reject that offer and then accept it later when after 1973 even though Israel was beaten they were actually stronger because Egypt couldn’t pull off another surprise and now Israel had a full nuclear deterrent.

The fact is that Israel didn’t accept the first one for it was a ruse because after the 1967 Arab kahrtum conference where they reaffirmed their three no’s no Israel, no recognition and no negation, Israel realised that Egypt’s offer was a ruse as I explained above in greater detail and it wasn’t sincere but in the late 70 sadat made sincere effort and that is what changed things.


what the hell?? Where did china come from? We are talking about strictly India alone and their nuclear deterrent to anybody….you said that they had that since the 70’s and I ask how so?

How as India had it since the 70’s??

Regarding Pakistan, nobody can say because it isn't clear how many nukes Indians have. they might have it, they might have got it a while back. well you seemed so sure before that they had it since the 70’s

It seems like that was nothing more then YOUR speculation not based on any facts.


yes but now I ask again so if India has as you claim had them for years why all of a sudden is the world worried about its nukes? does pakisthn and thier islamic fundamantlists have anything to do with that? ;) :roll:

Tensions in rgion which could elad to war which could lead to nuclear war have something to do with it. yes and please explain how those tensions can lead to another war. (I actually think it can but I want to see your view on how you think it can)


because Israel has never had offensive intentions to destroy another nation!! Israel has had them for thirty years and hasn’t used it once..

That’s legitimate proof that they are a responsible nuclear nation that only has it for defense.

The fact that Egypt has peace with ISrael for 30 years is by that logic legitimate proof they plan to keep it that way. . ok instead of repeating my answers to this from above…..I will try something new just for fun ;) ok so according to your logic now, Israel is a responsible nuclear nation that only has nukes for self defence!!

Either way we come to that conclusion :D


ok I guess here we'll have to agree to disagree……..they are worried because they fear a Pakistan after musharf and not india using it offensivly at all.

No, they are worried because war between India and PAkistan can turn into nuclear war. Regardless of who starts it. hmmm in your opinion who would start that and who do you think the world is concerned about here.

Hint: the world is concerned about one nation over the other ;) can you guess which one? ;)


so what your saying is that Israel hasn’t used its nukes offensively against Iran even before it had Russia anti ballistic system (and even now it cant really stop a full offensive nuke attack) for years now but it will use its sub nukes offensively against Iran to avoid detection??

No, submarines give Israel capability to avoid Iranain defences geared toward previous capabilities. Iran before couldn’t prevent Israel from using its nukes offensively on Iran so why would Israel use its sub nukes offensively on Iran if before it didn’t use its nukes when it could have?!!



Boy that’s so ridicules :roll: …..anyway's you didn’t address my question….whey would Israel offensively now use nukes against Iran even those on the sub?

I did answer it. Submarines give Israel capability to avoid early detection thus cuting back Iranian response time. no you didn’t, heres the question why does Israel want to use nukes offensively against Iran??? (be it from a sub or from other ways)

Israel has never stated that it wanted to use nukes offensively against Iran nor has it ever used it but somehow you think that Israel has a hidden agenda to in fact use it offensively and I am asking you how do you see that and please explain why you insinuate that ridicules notion.




I guess they got enough aid from elsewhere so they aren't desperate to get small increase by taking Israeli help. . there is no such thing in that type of disaster that they got enough help…haha boy I wish other people on this forum were reading what you write. :roll:

Their people were desperate for help and Israel could have provided added help with the other nations.

“Well so what, their people are dying and Israel could provide very valuable help and the fact that they refused that help in time of a critical need for their people, only further shows the harsh nature and character of the offensive threat that Israel faces.

Its amazing that you can rationalize anything against Israel even as preposterous as this :roll:


to even compare Islamic fundamentalism to the soviet/U.S case is beyond rational and your comparisons are non comparisons.

Why? Both sides fierclly believed in their ideologies. Not exactlly same as religion but close. .how is it close…how many Americans or Russians have you seen do suicide bombings against each other??

Their ideologies are not close at all to the Islamic fundamentalists ideology that’s based on religion (On how they interpret it)


If we stop it here nobody will give a damn and people will be glad we did. I think I made my points, you made yours. We disagree on them, but hey, that's life. Happy holidays. ditto to what you just said ;) :D

Shalom :D

[Ballistic]

Seriously, how long can this discussion go on for ?

[mustamato]

This little missile posing any threat to Israel? Bull****. It´s just Israeli propaganda. ShAhab-3.

http://surrealism.50megs.com/shahab3.jpg

http://www.acq.osd.mil/bmdo/bmdolink/bcmt/images/shahab-3.jpg

http://www.acq.osd.mil/bmdo/bmdolink/bcmt/images/images_lg/shahab3.jpg

[aktarian]

I could make another long post with same arguments countering your arguments and you would make another long post countering them with your same arguments and we could do this untill one of us dies, this site shuts down or something along those lines. However this is going nowhere. You have your arguments from which you woun't budge, I have mine from which I woun't budge. It's obvious we woun't convince each other so it's better to stop boring other forum members.