Iran not a threat to Israel...

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**JEB_Stuart**

Sorry my question was referring to the post immediately preceding yours...

**dogma**

JEB_Stuart wrote:Well Hitler did declare war on us.... And Britain gave the traditional homeland of the Jewish people back to them after Romans had given them the boot almost 2000 years earlier because they felt bad from the Holocaust. It was the West's solution to a problem they felt they had caused. Unfortunately they didn't factor in the rise in power of things like OPEC and various ME countries, the Cold War, the collapse of the British Empire, the decline of Europe, etc. And none of them have ever given a gak about the Palestinians, not the Arabs or the Jews. The Arabs just use them as a convenient ploy, like the Russians did with all the Slavs in the Balkans pre-WWI.

That's broadly true, though I would certainly insert some details between British renunciation and Arab expansion (just to make the progression more analog, its just like any other history when examined closely). However, considering the Palestinians as Arabs is off base. They were Arabs, sort of, but now they aren't (the politics of the Ottoman Empire, in addition to the various Crusades/Missions, partially broke their connection to the peninsula). Not really anyway. The sellout that you referred to, in addition to the nominal affects of isolation have ensured that the Palestinians have become a distinct, seriously unrepresented of late, people.

Honestly, they're more like the Catalan than than Slavs. At least if the Catalan lived in squalor, rather than Spain.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

grizgrin wrote:
Think we will have to agree to disagree on this one, as I think it's come to opinions.

Honestly, that's where most FP disputes end. Questions of foreign character are always perplexing once the initial questions of interest are done away with.

That said, I do respect your opinion; especially because you've been able to present it with such civility.

**Frazzled**

When Iran goes nuclear, Kuwait, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey will go nuclear. Iraq will go nuclear slightly the moment US troops leave. They have to.

We will have a nuke shootout within ten years. Hopefully the CHinese will not have pumped out all the oil off FLorida by then. We will need it.

**dogma**

The pursuit of nuclear weapons isn't simply about concerns of Realpolitik. Especially in those instances in which states have protection from the nuclear umbrella of another state (US).

We won't have nuclear war within 10 years. None of those states you mentioned have an active nuclear program. Even if they started today we're looking at 10 years to fruition, not to mention the fact that they won't necessarily use anything they develop.

Kuwait will never go nuclear. They simply don't have the resources.

**Kilkrazy**

JEB_Stuart wrote:And the fact that Pakistan won't use those bombs because its mortal enemy India is right across the border with its own nukes. And those countries don't hate each other for religious reasons, they hate each other for geographic reasons. So, no KK that is not the only difference.

I didn't say 'only' difference. I know Pakistan has a rivalry with India over Kashmir, and Pakistan developed their nukes in response to India developing nukes.

My point was that Pakistan could shop its nukes around the Muslim world, but doesn't because they are reasonably close allies of the west. The same isn't true of North Korea or Iran.

**Frazzled**

In less than six months Iraeli bombers will be over Iranian airspace. Israel will not permit Iran to have the bomb.

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-42553620090918

**gorgon**

Frazzled wrote:In less than six months Iraeli bombers will be over Iranian airspace. Israel will not permit Iran to have the bomb.

And in that case I hope we have the guts to tell the Israelis that they're on their own. Bully for them taking out Iran's nuke capability, but there's no way we can afford getting caught up in any more regional conflicts.

**Frazzled**

Agreed. I support Israel in this but we don't need to be everyone's cop. I'm done with us being the world's cop.

**dogma**

Yeah, I essentially agree. Though I doubt we'll keep our hand completely clean. My disagreement is simply one speculative dispute.

**grizgrin**

feth, if Israel did Seven Day Iran, would we be able to KEEP out?

**dogma**

No, not if the Iranians made an attempt to engage in a land campaign, but the distance between the two states (and the structure of the Israeli military) would limit the conflict to strategic action.

**Orlanth**

Israel is the true threat to peace.

Just read the article:

'Israel can lay waste to Iran'

'Failing that, Israel has urged sanctions targeting Iran's sensitive energy sector'

'Israel, which bombed an Iraqi reactor in 1981 and carried out a similar sortie against Syria in 2007, as hinted at pre-emptive strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities if it deems diplomacy a dead end.'

**Ahtman**

The first time I saw the title as I scanned the posts I thought it said "I am not a threat to Iran".

I thought, "good for you Dogma...good for you".

**youbedead**

gorgon wrote:
Frazzled wrote:In less than six months Iraeli bombers will be over Iranian airspace. Israel will not permit Iran to have the bomb.

And in that case I hope we have the guts to tell the Israelis that they're on their own. Bully for them taking out Iran's nuke capability, but there's no way we can afford getting caught up in any more regional conflicts.

Yes but if iran has no nuclear weapons then they can only engage in conventional warfare. while isreal has stated it is very willing to use its nuclear arsenal if it is ever attacked.
Result iran is glassed and any remaining forces are wiped out by the IAF.

**Zathras**

Frazzled wrote:In less than six months Iraeli bombers will be over Iranian airspace. Israel will not permit Iran to have the bomb.

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-42553620090918

Lot easier now for the IAF to strike Iran....

Iranian Military Planes Crashes in Annual Parade
By THOMAS NEWDICK
Published: 22 Sep 2009 18:49
TEHRAN - Iran's sole Simorgh AWACS aircraft was lost during a military parade Sept. 22, one of two Iranian military aircraft that crashed in Tehran while participating in a display to mark the anniversary of the start of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War.

The Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force operated a single Simorgh, a former Iraqi Air Force Adnan. The Adnan AWACS was in turn a modification of a Soviet-built Ilyushin Il-76 transport.

The Simorgh collided with one of the Air Force's Northrop F-5E Tiger II fighters over the area of the Imam Khomeyni Shrine, southern Tehran. According to eyewitnesses, the crash occurred immediately after the parade. Apparently, no mayday call was issued.

Both aircraft crashed in flames. Initial reports indicate that seven crewmembers were killed in the crash.

In total, Iraq built three AWACS aircraft, one Baghdad, and two Baghdad-2s, the latter later renamed Adnans. One Adnan and the Baghdad were evacuated to Iran during the 1991 Gulf War, while the second Adnan was destroyed on the ground by a coalition air strike in January 1991.

The exact status of the Iranian Simorgh and its onboard systems was long uncertain. However, photographs suggest that the aircraft was equipped with a newly fitted functioning radar suite.

I really doubt the ones they got from Iraq during Desert Storm are airworthy.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?c=MID&s=TOP&i=4289949