Israel seeks war on iran to keep lid on 9/11

BaalsTears

Senate Member
Jan 25, 2011
5,732
0
36
Santa Cruz, California
The NPT is a joke. The US is one of the worst offenders. More nukes than you can fit in a small state and will never dismantle any of them guaranteed. Israel is just as bad but at least they didn't sign onto the thing.

My belief is that either everyone can have all the nukes they want or nobody has any. This BS of the US having tons while telling anyone who isn't an ally they can't have them needs to stop. America is not the parent of the world nor the policeman.

We should just gather up all of them but one and send them on a 1 way trip to Pluto. The last one can be used to destroy any machines or equipment used to manufacture the stupid things.
Everyone is going to have nuclear weapons sooner or later. The more nuclear weapons states that exist the less viable the doctrine of mutually assured destruction becomes.

That was 23 years ago, and Iraq didn't have the ability to strike back. Iran has an arsenal of missiles capable of reaching Israel.

Trench also warfare worked in WWI, but the French Marginot Line was a fiasco in in WW II.
Who are you talking to?
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Perception is all that matters. The world doesn't operate by narrow Western legalisms. Iran has successfully gamed the system in the opinion of others. So obviously the non-proliferation treaty can be gamed. Thus, there's no reason others can't successfully play the same game.

Btw, Iran isnt in compliance with its disclosure obligations under the NNPT. There are going to be many more nuclear weapons states. I bet that really hurts folks on the left who want a nuclear free world.
"Iran isnt in compliance with its disclosure obligations under the NNPT. " How?
Every declared Iranian is under close observation by the IAEA. Iran has respected the 20% HEU limit. Every gram of uranium is tracked so it can't be diverted. How is Iran not in compliance with the mandatory parts of the NPT or the voluntary protocols that they signed???

BTW, did you also believe that Iraq had stockpiles of WMDs ready for launch in 30 minutes... because the same news sources that erroneously made that claim, also erroneously claim that Iran has violated the NPT.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
later Iraq fired some primitive scuds at Israel with limited effect.

... but Iran is a completely different ball game. They have solid fuel missiles which are mobile and can be fired quickly. I suspect that Iran will be able to inflict real pain on Israel.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
later Iraq fired some primitive scuds at Israel with limited effect.

... but Iran is a completely different ball game. They have solid fuel missiles which are mobile and can be fired quickly. I suspect that Iran will be able to inflict real pain on Israel.

Like the blind firing into cities? Most likely.

They would be very foolish to target US bases in the area after Israel pummels them. Then their military will be set back quite a few years.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
later Iraq fired some primitive scuds at Israel with limited effect.

... but Iran is a completely different ball game. They have solid fuel missiles which are mobile and can be fired quickly. I suspect that Iran will be able to inflict real pain on Israel.

But they're not threatening to bomb anyone, right?

So what does this mean: "In circumstances in which they (the Israelis) have prepared everything for an attack, it is possible that we will make a pre-emptive attack."

Isn't that a threat to bomb someone?
 

B00Mer

Make Canada Great Again
Sep 6, 2008
47,123
8,142
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.canadianforums.ca
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Like the blind firing into cities? Most likely.

They would be very foolish to target US bases in the area after Israel pummels them. Then their military will be set back quite a few years.
I doubt Iran would attack the US targets unless they were attacked by the US. I doubt Iran would attack the US if the US just allowed Israeli war planes to pass through US controlled airspace to drop "Made in the USA" bombs. Iran would likely target just Israel and try to avoid drawing the US into the conflict. I would expect Iran to fire many missiles towards Israel at once in response and then wait for Israel's reaction. If Israel fires back with conventional weapons, then I would expect a tit for tat exchange to go on. If Israel or anyone else uses a nuclear weapon of any type against Iran, I would expect Iran would clandestinely develop nuclear weapons and announce their possession of nukes with a test. Likely Iran has many empty caves, not all of which are known outside Iran and many warehouses of spare parts... Also I would expect every piece of heavy equipment in Iran to start digging...

Blindly firing missiles in the general directions of cities and civilians is a war crime.

I believe Iran's missiles are accurate enough to hit specific buildings in cities. If Israel attacks Iran's nuclear facilities, I would expect that Iran would target Israeli nuclear facilities... at least initially.

Bull's eye #1:
Negev Nuclear Research Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I imagine Israel has other nuclear facilities, all of which would be fair game in a reprisal attack if Israel attack's Iranian nuclear facilities.

But they're not threatening to bomb anyone, right?

So what does this mean: "In circumstances in which they (the Israelis) have prepared everything for an attack, it is possible that we will make a pre-emptive attack."

Isn't that a threat to bomb someone?
Link please

found it:
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/w...commander-says/article4561930/?service=mobile

You left out "But we do not see this at the moment.”

That's not a threat. Its a warning to Israel not to create a tense situation which could lead Iranian war planners to believe the war was about to begin.
 

PoliticalNick

The Troll Bashing Troll
Mar 8, 2011
7,940
0
36
Edson, AB
There are going to be many more nuclear weapons states.

I bet that really hurts folks on the left who want a nuclear free world.

So you are completely happy with idiotic presidents and mindless dictators all pointing nukes at each other playing chicken?

I am pretty centerist, downright Texas conservative when it comes to the size and role of govt, and I would like a nuke free planet.:canada:
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
12,394
1,363
113
60
Alberta
I prefer the guys with the nukes not be in a position where they might fall to a bunch of religious zealots. Much as some might hate the US and Russia they managed to keep a cap on their silo's. And I guess I should end this post by saying that Japan could have avoided being bombed if they'd stuck their hands in the air like the Germans.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
The US and Russia aren't exactly peace loving. Iraq was an unprovoked war crime and the American people still haven't held their war criminals responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Russia did as bad or worse in Chechnya. The UK jumped in bed with the US during the Iraq war crime. That would leave just France and China as the only nuke powers which haven't started unprovoked wars.

How many wars has Iran started?

Also I'm sure Iran noticed what the US and UK do to countries with oil that they don't like who can't defend themselves.

If Iraq had nukes and the ability to drop them on Washington DC, the Iraq war wouldn't have happened and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians who were killed during the US led unprovoked war crime would still be alive.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Almost at the top....

Draghi, Papademos, Monti: All come from Goldman Sachs.
They are going to fix Europe!
I'm very confident!

I can't see the top but I can game it up. Logically there has to be a top because(for this example anyway) there's a bottom. They only stay at the top if they remain hidden. Ten thousand years of gaming the planet has provided near unbeatable security and a ruthlessness commoners like us cannot even imagine. But these lids and suits don't always win so stay happy. I'm quite certain that they are absolutely necessary to the natural scheme of things as well. They fuel the half curve known as the good times. And we fuel the half known as the bad. Eternally at war, that is as clear as up and down. If everyone knows good that isn't good.

I prefer the guys with the nukes not be in a position where they might fall to a bunch of religious zealots. Much as some might hate the US and Russia they managed to keep a cap on their silo's. And I guess I should end this post by saying that Japan could have avoided being bombed if they'd stuck their hands in the air like the Germans.


Hi how are you, fine I hope.
1. religious zealots already control the biggest stockpile ever.
2. they may have kept their silos capped but they distributed fissile material by hook and crook
3. Japan was nuked as a warning to any and all who had inclinations to do their own things, just plain large scale murder
4. many millions of Germans were butchered and starved in the camps after the war, the first two years were hell
 

BruSan

Electoral Member
Jul 5, 2011
416
0
16
Re: Israel seeks war on Iran to keep lid on 9/11

I can't see the top but I can game it up. Logically there has to be a top because(for this example anyway) there's a bottom. They only stay at the top if they remain hidden. Ten thousand years of gaming the planet has provided near unbeatable security and a ruthlessness commoners like us cannot even imagine. But these lids and suits don't always win so stay happy. I'm quite certain that they are absolutely necessary to the natural scheme of things as well. They fuel the half curve known as the good times. And we fuel the half known as the bad. Eternally at war, that is as clear as up and down. If everyone knows good that isn't good.




Hi how are you, fine I hope.
1. religious zealots already control the biggest stockpile ever.
2. they may have kept their silos capped but they distributed fissile material by hook and crook
3. Japan was nuked as a warning to any and all who had inclinations to do their own things, just plain large scale murder
4. many millions of Germans were butchered and starved in the camps after the war, the first two years were hell

Religious zealots do not control Washington's politics nor their military. Safeguards assure that. Iran; well, they call what those nuts believe a religion but it's not. They're driven by far baser instincts alone.

A nation having the number of nukes at it's disposal as the U.S. and NOT using them to quell the camel shaggers who have caused more problems and killed more people over the intervening decades speaks volumes about civilized restraint.

Iran? Restraint is not in their vocabulary. They are literally in lust for a potent weapon to threaten and USE with no thought to a resultant doomsday scenario. Retardation is their very Hallmark.

Japan was nuked because to do otherwise would have doomed the world to another year of war with thousands of American and other allies deaths to invade a country prepared to Kamikazi itself into oblivion. The Emporer was a schmuck who was totally disconnected from his peoples suffering. Much like many Arab dictators of this century.

Germans butchered in camps after the war? Nonsense they got better treatment in camps even during the war than they offered the jews. Their emmigration stats to countries where they were prisoners says all that needs saying about your infantile following of an old, old script written by mentally challenged despots.

You are patently full of crap! You know it, we know it but adhere rigidly to the same regimen as Iran "there was no holocaust". What label was that again on the petri dish you percolated in?

Keep on cooking though bro; you'll eventually hit a recipe someone will taste without throwing up.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
You left out "But we do not see this at the moment.”

That's not a threat. Its a warning to Israel not to create a tense situation which could lead Iranian war planners to believe the war was about to begin.

That's not a threat? It's a warning?

Apologize much?

Pa fukin thetic. You. Are.

If I think you're going to do something, I'll kill you.

That's not a threat?

Iraq was an unprovoked war crime.

Not according to YOUR logic. It was a warning that had to be followed up with action.