Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 107

Thread: US: Israel Attack on Iran 'Not Prudent'

  1. #46
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Houston TX
    Posts
    268

    Default

    Iran is waiting for an Israeli strike. It gives them a wide open out of the NPT and a good window to pummel Israel with a significant launch of MRBM. Win - win Iran. This article is exactly the view I have and IMO is the most likely outcome of an Israeli strike.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...,3926367.story


    The U.S. and Iran are not keen on tangling with each other and each will do whatever it can to keep from instigating the other. A direct war between the U.S. and Iran means an end game war with all the huge costs and risks associated with that.

  2. #47
    Senior Member JGXL836's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Israel, Sderot
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,960

    Default

    German military expert says Israel can set Iran nuke program back 10 years.

    http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/N...aspx?id=258664

  3. #48
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Houston TX
    Posts
    268

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JGXL836 View Post
    German military expert says Israel can set Iran nuke program back 10 years.

    http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/N...aspx?id=258664

    Israel is free to believe whatever it wants and act accordingly. I see a history of inaction and bluster that shows a significant doubt about its capabilities both to give and receive.

  4. #49
    Senior Member JGXL836's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Israel, Sderot
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StateMachine View Post
    Israel is free to believe whatever it wants and act accordingly. I see a history of inaction and bluster that shows a significant doubt about its capabilities both to give and receive.
    I've been explaining the alleged "inaction" numerous times in many threads, but of course you are also free to believe whatever you want.

    Israel's capabilities both to give and receive have been often underestimated since 1948 by many false prophets in far lands.

  5. #50
    Senior Member Camera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    France
    Age
    55
    Posts
    15,935

    Default

    Both of you posted good reads.
    I'll suggest you to read this Op-Ed by Moshe Arens, former MoD of Israel.






    Only two countries are able to attack Iran: U.S. and Israel

    There are only two countries in the world with the military capability to carry out an effective military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities: the U.S. and Israel.
    By [*******#434141]Moshe Arens[/COLOR]

    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition...srael-1.413881

  6. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,342

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Camera View Post
    Both of you posted good reads.
    I'll suggest you to read this Op-Ed by Moshe Arens, former MoD of Israel.






    Only two countries are able to attack Iran: U.S. and Israel

    There are only two countries in the world with the military capability to carry out an effective military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities: the U.S. and Israel.
    By [*******#434141]Moshe Arens[/COLOR]

    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition...srael-1.413881
    What do they base that theory on? Oh... nothing, well that's disappointing that their headline is only barely mentioned at the end of the article as a simple 'this is so' statement. I can't think of any particular strike capability that Israel and the US share that would make them uniquely capable of bombing Iran if they mean that these are the only two who particularly want to bomb Iran just say so.

  7. #52
    Senior Member Camera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    France
    Age
    55
    Posts
    15,935

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amur_Tiger View Post
    What do they base that theory on? Oh... nothing, well that's disappointing that their headline is only barely mentioned at the end of the article as a simple 'this is so' statement. I can't think of any particular strike capability that Israel and the US share that would make them uniquely capable of bombing Iran if they mean that these are the only two who particularly want to bomb Iran just say so.
    The headline is not good and is different than the title of the original Aren's article in Hebrew (probably changed by an editor). The point is not in the headline, but in the content.

  8. #53
    Member Ai caramba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Em algum lugar perto do mar e das arvores!
    Posts
    201

    Default

    I am sure you could answer me a question:

    What is the feeling of the average Israeli in the streets? Do they see the whole iranian nuclear program as a real danger to their existence? Israel is a very small country and very militarized so i presume the daily life of an idf soldier goes hand to hand to that of a civilian, they share a bus, drink coffee or even buy groceries together, so I presume if there is a feeling of imminent war among troops very likely that reached the civilian population alike. Are the majority of Israelis siding with the government in the whole issue?

    Thanks JGXL836


    Quote Originally Posted by JGXL836 View Post
    I've been explaining the alleged "inaction" numerous times in many threads, but of course you are also free to believe whatever you want.

    Israel's capabilities both to give and receive have been often underestimated since 1948 by many false prophets in far lands.

  9. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,040

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sootan View Post
    Meh, we were lucky that we survived the Cold War without a nuclear exchange. Men should really go out there into space and find aliens, so we can better direct our inherent destructiveness.
    You can bet that without nukes the Cold War would be called the Third World War between the Warsaw pact and the west, and the casualties would have been in the hundreds of millions.

    Nukes literally save lives, because conventional war between two nations becomes virtually impossible with them (due to MAD). The problem is that the nukes holder needs to be a rational player for that to hold. Iran will probably not nuke Israel... probably. But it will be immune to retaliation for waging its proxy wars against Israel, and that is unacceptable.

  10. #55
    Senior Member JGXL836's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Israel, Sderot
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ai caramba View Post
    I am sure you could answer me a question:

    What is the feeling of the average Israeli in the streets? Do they see the whole iranian nuclear program as a real danger to their existence? Israel is a very small country and very militarized so i presume the daily life of an idf soldier goes hand to hand to that of a civilian, they share a bus, drink coffee or even buy groceries together, so I presume if there is a feeling of imminent war among troops very likely that reached the civilian population alike. Are the majority of Israelis siding with the government in the whole issue?

    Thanks JGXL836
    Most of the people I see just say "bomb Iran already" and usually criticize the the government (and the world leaders) for not bombing Iran already. I also see frightened women, especially with little kids.

    Soldiers train as usual for very realistic scenarios of going into Gaza and into Lebanon again. Another Gaza offensive seems pretty close, while Third Lebanon War seems inevitable, but not as close as "Cast Lead II". It doesn't indicate about Iran, and I've heard fighter pilots or top intelligence officers discussing Iran in a grocery shop.

    Yet, there are other indicators. Constant home-front drills, siren checks, talking about casualties and even mass graves over and over again. I guess the government is trying to get the population more prepared for a war, in which our civilian urban areas will be targeted by Iran, Hezbullah, and Hamas from north to south.

  11. #56
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Houston TX
    Posts
    268

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JGXL836 View Post
    I've been explaining the alleged "inaction" numerous times in many threads, but of course you are also free to believe whatever you want.

    Israel's capabilities both to give and receive have been often underestimated since 1948 by many false prophets in far lands.

    No actually that underestimation has switched sides since 2006 when Israel bit off a bit more than it could chew with a much smaller badger.

    But emotions aside, here are the facts as I see them.

    Israel has not not struck in the past years since this issue came to a head because it has not been able to convince/strongarm a U.S.gov president to either attack Iran or commit to joining in after an Israeli strike. GW and BO have given Israel the same answer now for the last 8+ years. "Go ahead. You're on your own."

    Martin Dempsey CJCS was in Israel recently delivering that very message. And the reason is clear. The U.S.gov does not understand what the outcome of an Iran-U.S.gov war would be. It cannot predict with certainty that the U.S.gov would emerge victorious without a massive escalation in the war effort. We are talking Vietnam sized war effort.

    Israel is on its own. I and apparently everyone else, including their desired audience, Iran are of a similar belief that Israel can't do much. And hence Iran marches on crossing every line Israel draws in the sand. The game is open to anyone who is willing to see. Until Israel can get the U.S.gov to join in on its adventure, it is essentially a paper tiger.

    The real war is going on in American media and the halls of D.C. to convince the U.S.gov to immolate itself.

  12. #57
    Senior Member JGXL836's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Israel, Sderot
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StateMachine View Post
    No actually that underestimation has switched sides since 2006 when Israel bit off a bit more than it could chew with a much smaller badger.

    But emotions aside, here are the facts as I see them.

    Israel has not not struck in the past years since this issue came to a head because it has not been able to convince/strongarm a U.S.gov president to either attack Iran or commit to joining in after an Israeli strike. GW and BO have given Israel the same answer now for the last 8+ years. "Go ahead. You're on your own."

    Martin Dempsey CJCS was in Israel recently delivering that very message. And the reason is clear. The U.S.gov does not understand what the outcome of an Iran-U.S.gov war would be. It cannot predict with certainty that the U.S.gov would emerge victorious without a massive escalation in the war effort. We are talking Vietnam sized war effort.

    Israel is on its own. I and apparently everyone else, including their desired audience, Iran are of a similar belief that Israel can't do much. And hence Iran marches on crossing every line Israel draws in the sand. The game is open to anyone who is willing to see. Until Israel can get the U.S.gov to join in on its adventure, it is essentially a paper tiger. The real war is going on in American media and the halls of D.C. to convince the U.S.gov to immolate itself.
    Your interpretation of 2006 war reveals shallow view on subject, but it is not the point here.

    Israel has not struck in the past years because Israel has been trying to convince/strongarm U.S. to attack Iran. GW and BO said that U.S. will attack Iran if Iran gets closer to the bomb, and urge Israel to do nothing.

    Now Israel came to the point where it is clear that if we continue to do nothing, we won't be able to do much later, so we would only have to rely on U.S. This situation is unacceptable for Israel, therefore if U.S doesn't attack soon, Israel will attack Iran as a last resort at all costs.

  13. #58
    Senior Member Camera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    France
    Age
    55
    Posts
    15,935

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StateMachine View Post
    No actually that underestimation has switched sides since 2006 when Israel bit off a bit more than it could chew with a much smaller badger.

    (…)
    A fight against counterinsurgency is not an indicate for striking capacities. Look how long it is for the US to handle the situation in Afghanistan.

  14. #59
    Senior Member Camera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    France
    Age
    55
    Posts
    15,935

    Default

    Lieberman: U.S., Russian warnings against Iran strike will not affect Israel's decision

    Israel’s foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, says in TV interview that Israeli decision is ‘not their business’; says security of Israel’s citizens is ‘Israeli government’s responsibility.’

    By [*******#434141]The Associated Press[/COLOR] and [*******#434141]Reuter$

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...ision-1.414199[/COLOR]

  15. #60
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Houston TX
    Posts
    268

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JGXL836 View Post
    Your interpretation of 2006 war reveals shallow view on subject, but it is not the point here.

    Israel has not struck in the past years because Israel has been trying to convince/strongarm U.S. to attack Iran. GW and BO said that U.S. will attack Iran if Iran gets closer to the bomb, and urge Israel to do nothing.

    Now Israel came to the point where it is clear that if we continue to do nothing, we won't be able to do much later, so we would only have to rely on U.S. This situation is unacceptable for Israel, therefore if U.S doesn't attack soon, Israel will attack Iran as a last resort at all costs.

    It is true that while U.S.gov troops were in Iraq that the U.S. most likely warned Israel off any attack due to vulnerability to insurgent attacks there.

    But today with Iraq evacuated, Israel has nothing blocking it from going ahead. The Secdef Panetta has said that in the case of an Israeli strike the U.S.gov would look to force protection of its assets in the PG.

    [LEFT][*******#000000][FONT=Arial]"If the Israelis made that decision, we would have to be prepared to protect our forces in that situation. And that's what we'd be concerned about." 01/08/12 Face The Nation

    [/FONT][/COLOR][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][*******#000000]According to open sources, Israel has about 50 Jericho 2 BM. That IMO is the only credible strike threat on Iran. Equipped with a penetrator warhead a mach 10 impact might damage the Nantaz facility (assuming undegraded GPS guidance). Fordow is essentially impervious. I highly doubt Israel's F15/F16 being able to reach their targets without being severely degraded and give their munitions even less chance of doing any damage to underground facilities.[/COLOR][/FONT]

    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][*******#000000]I suspect if Israel believes its own hype that the Jericho missile will be the main attack mode. Of course they can expect 50 - 100 1 ton warheads coming back their way relatively quickly. And regardless of the results of that exchange, Iran and the U.S.gov will be avoiding any direct instigation.

    And of course Iran will be exiting the NPT within days.[/COLOR][/FONT]


    [/LEFT]

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •