Hypothetical Israel vs Iran campaign thread *READ FIRST POST*

[Camera]

Iran attack decision nears, Israeli elite locks down


In in-depth overview Reuter$ tries to explain Israeli officials' silence on possible Iran strike. 'They've gone into lockdown mode now,' senior Western diplomat says. 'Whatever happens next, we won't find out until it happens'

Reuter$

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...230878,00.html

[Popsiq]

NOTE!

This thread is for informed debate on a specific subject.

Informed debate on a hypothectical?

That can easily get into the realm of the fantastic.

And so it happened on page 1.

What WMD's does Iran have these days?

'Hypothetical' chemical and biological weapons are claimed to be 'produceable'. Although Iran signed the declaration against the use of such weapons and failed to retaliate when attacked with chemical weapons during the Iraq war, she can't be trusted not to have a 'reserve' like other more 'civilized' nations. Nor can she be trusted not to use them if she did.

In like fashion having signed and thus far adhered to the NNPT, Iran can't be trusted to run a domestic atomic energy program because A) she 'hypothetically' doesn't need it like the Emirates do and B) given a chance, she'd 'hypothetically' weaponize at the drop of a hat like other more 'civilized' nations did.

So unless she has massive hypothetical stockpiles of fecal material - equivalent to, or greater than the amount of BS generated by such 'informed debate', I don't think, theorectically, we have much to worry about coming from Iran.

[Climber]

Who is she?

[Popsiq]

Who is she?

"She" is Irania.
As opposed to using 'he' or 'it'.

[Climber]

"She" is Irania.
As opposed to using 'he' or 'it'.

OK, Didnt know Iran was a she, but never mind.

[JGXL836]

Barak: World’s inaction in Syria shows we cannot depend on others to protect us

As for Iran, defense minister says, ‘the metaphorical sword is now on our neck’

http://www.timesofisrael.com/barak-w...iranian-nukes/

[Camera]

'Security officials oppose Iran strike'


Top defense officials, majority of nine-minister security forum are reportedly against mounting military strike against Islamic Republic's nuclear facilities at this time

Attila Somfalvi

The majority of Israel's defense chiefs are against a military strike in Iran at this time, Ynet has learned.

Although officially, Israel's stance on the matter is that all options are viable, political sources told Ynet on Wednesday that IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen Benny Gantz, Mossad Chief Tamir Pardo and several top section chiefs in the Mossad are against a strike at this time.

Such opposition has been noted within Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's special nine-minister security forum.

Netanyahu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman support an attack on Tehran's nuclear facilities, but Vice Premier Moshe Yaalon, Kadima Chairman Shaul Mofaz and ministers Dan Meridor, Benny Begin, Eli Yishai and Yuval Steinitz are against it.

"Without Gantz' support the chances of mounting a strike are slim," a political source told Ynet. "Israel has to push the international community to impose further sanctions on the Iranian economy. That's what's important right now."
Israel, he added, must urge crippling financial sanctions against the Islamic Republic: "The sanctions should reduce the Iranian economy to rubble. The United States and Europe still seem hesitant on that, mostly for political reasons and a fear of soaring oil prices.

CONTINUED: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...236477,00.html

[EITAN88]

What's with all these statements about "not attacking at this time"?

Talking as if the F-16s are on the runway, ready for takeoff is idiotic.

[Camera]

In Obama we trust?

By HERB KEINON
05/31/2012 23:56

US says it will prevent Tehran from getting nuclear weapons; whether Israel believes this will ultimately decide how J'lem acts.



http://www.jpost.com/International/A...aspx?id=272266

This question was raised at the INSS annual conference by senior Israeli and US defense and political decision makers. There was no unequivocal answer.

[IRN34]

One Million People to Flee Israel in Case of Iran's Reprisal for Israeli Attack TEHRAN (FNA)- The Iranian Supreme Leader's top military aide dismissed the possibility of a US or Israeli military move against Iran as "weak", and stressed that Iran's crushing reprisal for an Israeli attack will force one million Israelis to flee in the first one or two weeks of the conflict.

[JGXL836]

^ Internal propaganda.

[Elemental666]

That sort of an article fits iran-defence.net more than mp.net, those guys love these kind of stuff.

[Camera]

Co-chair of Bipartisan Policy Center to Congress: Israel needs bombs, refueling tankers for strike on Iran

Former Senator calls on Congress to provide Israel with 200 bunker busters and aerial refueling military aircrafts.


By Amir Oren

Former Senator Charles Robb co-chairman of the Bipartisan Policy Center said that in order to perform a successful attack on Iran Israel's aerial refueling capabilities and bunker-buster bomb stores need to be enhanced. Robb, who was giving testimony at a Congress subcommittee, presented the material gaps in the IDF's preparedness for an attack on Iran, and called on the United States to provide Israel with KC-135 aerial refueling military aircrafts and 200 bunker-busting munitions to supplement the 100 Israel already holds.

CONTINUED: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...-iran-1.440300

[Camera]

Francois Hollande and French officials say Israel will humiliate Iran if the two engaged in combat: http://www.timesofisrael.com/french-...-against-iran/

[Camera]

A good analysis by David Horowitz about the close US-Israeli partnership on the Iranian issue and also its limits: http://www.timesofisrael.com/the-uns...ation-on-iran/