Is Israel preparing to attack Iran ?

Denis Irwin

<H2>Israel is remaining silent on reports it has rehearsed an attack on nuclear sites in Iran.

A massive military exercise in the eastern Mediterranean earlier this month involved more than a hundred Israeli F16 and F15 fighters, according to American officials.
They have said it looked like a practice drill for a possible operation taking out Iran's nuclear installations.
The Israelis are keeping their enemies guessing. Officials here will only say the Israeli Air Force is "prepared for all the threats Israel faces" and that it regularly drills to prepare for such threats.

But the operation in the Mediterranean was unprecedented in both its scale and its scope. Reports claim it extended to the west exactly as far as Iran's nuclear sites lie to the east.
The operation is said to have included refuelling tankers to test the Israeli Air Force's ability to carry out bombing missions 1,500 kilometres from home. And Israeli rescue helicopters were also involved reportedly, to practise extracting downed airmen.
Intelligence analyst Alon Ben David told Sky News that the exercise practised Israel's capability but also was intended to make a point

"It seems that Israel was interested that the world would see this great exercise, in sending a message to the world that we are preparing ourselves for the day that we might have to confront Iran."
Bomb Iran, or let Iran have the bomb.
It is not an enviable choice. Israel would far rather someone else dealt with the Iranian threat. Either diplomatically or militarily.
But Israeli patience with the diplomatic option is running out, according to analysts like the Jerusalem Post's defence correspondent Yaakov Katz.
"The growing assessment within Israel is that the sanctions will not be effective. As a result Israel is preparing for what's called the last resort and that is the military option."
</H2>

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1319884,00.html

Victor

Denis Irwin wrote: »

Is Israel preparing to attack Iran ?

No, they were posturing.

Manic Moran

The operation is said to have included refuelling tankers to test the Israeli Air Force's ability to carry out bombing missions 1,500 kilometres from home.

I'd hope that it's not a capability the Israelis have lost. Not as if they've not done it before, Tunisia comes to mind.

NTM

nacho libre

It's racheting up the pressure on America and the EU to do Israel's bidding.
Also making the Iranian's sweat.

I don't think it will be as easy for Israel to attack Iran facilities as it was Iraq in the eighties. if it was i suspect they would have gone ahead and done it already. The Israeli's tend to act first and ask questions later.
Just consider what they did in Syria recently without any warning.

ejmaztec

I think that the Israelis wouldn't find it an easy option to go after Iran. Whilst the Iranian air force might be using a lot of reverse-engineered American, French and Russian crocks, they seem to have honed their missile skills. A couple of years ago, during an excercise, they launched a large number of missiles that the West had never seen before.

ChocolateSauce

I think it's cage-rattling. They want the Iranians to know not only that they can do it, but that they are trained and ready to do it. They won't strike for the moment.

I wouldn't put money on the outcome, however, should Iran acquire a bomb...

silverharp

theozster wrote: »

however, should Iran acquire a bomb...

then they will be treated with respect like say India and pakistan which I'm sure were threatened before they got the bomb. the sooner they get the bomb the better, then talking can begin.

Manic Moran

ejmaztec wrote: »

A couple of years ago, during an excercise, they launched a large number of missiles that the West had never seen before.

Doesn't necessarily mean that they're any good, mind.

A more interesting thing to note is that of late, Israel's been working closely with Turkey, whilst Greece and Syria had become closer to balance the two out. Israel's choice of Greece for this exercise could be a signal to either Turkey or Syria as well.

NTM

dlofnep

I was about to post on this. I find the very idea of Israel attacking Iran to be irony at it's finest form. Israel is an aggressive state, with history of aggresion towards neighbouring states. It has a large nuclear arsenal.

With countries like the US and Israel trying to police the area - Is it no wonder that Iran would want weapons to defend itself against an impending attack? Iran doesn't even have nuclear weapons.

The world is bad enough as it is - The last thing we need is these hypocrites in Israel trying to push their weight around, causing more problems.

julius128

Israel should not even think about attacking Iran as Israel is the same size of only one of city in Iran.

Iran has the fourth biggest Army in the world and they can easily missile the Israel from any part in Iran.

I dont belive they are doing neuclar weapen in Iran but even if they do, why all neighbours of Iran they can have Neuclar weapen except them.
Because they are not allied of US?

toiletduck

julius128 wrote: »

Iran has the fourth biggest Army in the world

And do tell how their troops are to get to Israel, through the hundreds of thousands of allied troops in Iraq perhaps? Saddam had one of the largest armies in the world before the Gulf... doesn't mean a thing tbh. Your missile part is true though.

I dont belive they are doing neuclar weapen in Iran but even if they do, why all neighbours of Iran they can have Neuclar weapen except them.
Because they are not allied of US?

Isreal is the only nuclear power in the area.

Tbh I think this to be posturing and feeding into the delusions of those who have predicting an attack on Iran consistently over the past 5 years :pac:

wes

toiletduck wrote: »

Isreal is the only nuclear power in the area.

Iran has a border with Pakistan and India is right beside Pakistan. Parts of Iran are closer to the sub-continent than the Middle East.

Then there is the US/UK armies (whom have nuclear weapons) in Afghanistan and Iraq, both countries which border Iran.

toiletduck

wes wrote: »

Iran has a border with Pakistan

True, forgot about that.

irish_bob

pakistan is a U.S allie

sajnadoordia

irish_bob wrote: »

pakistan is a U.S allie

they cant do this coz it will be having the worst effect on the americans in IRAQ and NATO in afghanistan.

Kev_ps3

If Isreal ever attacked Iran then they would be destroyed. And rightfully so..

LordSutch

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

If Isreal ever attacked Iran then they would be destroyed. And rightfully so..

Destroyed by who? you can bet your bottom dollar that if Israel decides to do anything on that scale it is planned & calculated to the Nth degree . . . .

Remember the six day war?

marcsignal

ArthurF wrote: »

Destroyed by who? you can bet your bottom dollar that if Israel decides to do anything on that scale it is planned & calculated to the Nth degree . . . .

Remember the six day war?

True, it would be one unholy bloodbath, and an awful thing for everyone in the region, as I feel the backlash would include all of the Arab states forgetting whatever differences they have, and uniting against Israel. It would be regional disaster, to say the very least.

I'm not Anti-Israel, Israel absolutely has the right to exist 'in peace' with its neighbours. The war crimes/crimes against humanity the IDF indulge in, however, are another issue entirely. There have been hundreds of threads about that already, and it's been debated to death.

Personally I think the problem is more likely related to scaremongering in the US by the Pro-Israel lobby there, than Israel itself.
Certain individuals in this lobby enjoy positions of power and privilige in the US (thousands of miles safely away from the problem), which they nurture, by wrapping themselves in a 'spurious mantle' of 'protecting Israel's intrests'.

Kama

My general feeling is that the Israeli states 'right to exist' (terrible and propagandistic rewording of inter-state recognition, but whatever) is most threatened by the actions of the Israeli state itself. Fundamentalist territorial demands on the God-gave-it-to-me Eretz Yisrael lines, backed up by military force, does not equal legitimacy, but undermines it.

As to the OP, undoubtedly they are preparing to militarily, in a sense that is the job of their military, but I'd agree that it is most likely sabre-rattling. The problem, as marc alluded, is that the lobby in America are too far to suffer the fallout, and hence have less of a disincentive to indulge in risky escalation.
Chickenhawks tbqh...

CPT. SURF

Personally I think the problem is more likely related to scaremongering in the US by the Pro-Israel lobby there, than Israel itself.

+1

I know what you mean. It seems like the words 'attack' and 'Iran' are pumped out almost weekly now. I dont know where it all comes from but it really is starting to sound like the boy who cried wolf now...

Kama

I'm in the States right now, and a year ago before that. Both times, the news spews forth 'IranIranIranIranIran'. My 2c is that its to keep the fear levels up, and reinforce the fortress mentality.

marcsignal

For years during the Northern Ireland conflict, the Irish people were misrepresented in the US by Irish Republican groups who were there raising funds for the IRA.

It's not exactly the same thing, but misrepresentation is misrepresentation, and imo the Pro-Israel lobby in the US have a lot to answer for. Thankfully there are now respected Jewish academics in the US, such as Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chompsky, and Peter Novick, who have been highlighting similar acts of outright deception by organisations such as the ADL, WJC and AIPAC, who claim to have Israels' best interests at heart.

I think the biggest blooper the prominent figures affiliated these organisations, such as "Abraham Foxman" and "Alan Durschowitz" have made in recent times, was to label 'Jimmy Carter' an Anti Semite, because of his recent book 'Israel, Peace not Apartheid'.
I don't think that went down well with the average American. If I'm honest, I think the younger members of the Jewish Community in the US now are actually quite liberal, and they're slowly getting wide to the antics of these Lobby Groups who claim to represent them.

No doubt these men also make a nice cut from any donated money, after all, they are self appointed.....

marco murphy

Personally I think the problem is more likely related to scaremongering in the US by the Pro-Israel lobby there, than Israel itself.
Certain individuals in this lobby enjoy positions of power and privilige in the US (thousands of miles safely away from the problem), which they nurture, by wrapping themselves in a 'spurious mantle' of 'protecting Israel's intrests'.

For what reason but? How much power do they have over the US Administration? Or is influence the word.

marcsignal

Poblachtach wrote: »

For what reason but? How much power do they have over the US Administration? Or is influence the word.

I don't mean they have any 'real individual power' as such, to directly dictate US Foreign Policy, but more that they enjoy positions of power/influence and privilige in US Society, socially, acidemically and in business circles. AIPAC for example, is a very influential Jewish American group, politically. You'll see ALL of the US Presidential Candidates at their AGM's, promising their support for Israel.

Just as an example, according to Professor 'Norman Finkelstein', in his book 'Beyond Chutzpah', Israel and the Holocaust didn't feature much in American Jewish life until after 1967, and when it became politically convenient to immerse themselves in Israel, and remember the Holocaust, individuals like "Alan Durschowitz" and "Abraham Foxman" saw a window of opportunity to make a lot of money. So much so that there's a common, albiet rather dark satarical saying, among some young, more liberal American Jews, that 'There's No Business Like Shoah Business' (Shoah means Holocaust) suggesting that there's a lot of money to be made in stirring up fear and imaginary hatred against Jews today, where it doesn't exist.

It's genuinely a very interesting book, 'Beyond Chutzpah' well worth the read.

Or here's a link to a good documentary about the Pro-Israeli Lobby in the US

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=2894821400057137878

wes

From Time.com:

Iranian Leaders Offer Nuclear Hope

Tuesday, Jul. 01, 2008 By ADAM ZAGORIN/UNITED NATIONS

The beating of the war drums over Iran may get most of the attention, but there are growing signs, also, of progress towards a possible diplomatic solution to the nuclear standoff. This week, the top foreign policy adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declared that Iran could respond favorably to the latest deal offered by Western negotiators, which he described as acceptable "in principle." It remains unclear whether the unusual declaration by Ali Akbar Velayati, who served as Iran's foreign minister from 1981 to 1997, will translate into government policy. But in New York on Tuesday Iran's current foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, reinforced the impression that progress could be imminent in the long-running talks between Iran and the so-called 5+1 group, composed of the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany.

Click here for the rest of the article

A very interesting article and if Iran goes ahead and compromises, it will be far harder for the hawks to make a case for aggression against Iran.

Kev_ps3

wes wrote: »

A very interesting article and if Iran goes ahead and compromises, it will be far harder for the hawks to make a case for aggression against Iran.

They will always make up a reason. This farce that they want nuclear bombs is just one of them, if it fails they'll just move onto something else.

irish_bob

marcsignal wrote: »

For years during the Northern Ireland conflict, the Irish people were misrepresented in the US by Irish Republican groups who were there raising funds for the IRA.

It's not exactly the same thing, but misrepresentation is misrepresentation, and imo the Pro-Israel lobby in the US have a lot to answer for. Thankfully there are now respected Jewish academics in the US, such as Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chompsky, and Peter Novick, who have been highlighting similar acts of outright deception by organisations such as the ADL, WJC and AIPAC, who claim to have Israels' best interests at heart.

I think the biggest blooper the prominent figures affiliated these organisations, such as "Abraham Foxman" and "Alan Durschowitz" have made in recent times, was to label 'Jimmy Carter' an Anti Semite, because of his recent book 'Israel, Peace not Apartheid'.
I don't think that went down well with the average American. If I'm honest, I think the younger members of the Jewish Community in the US now are actually quite liberal, and they're slowly getting wide to the antics of these Lobby Groups who claim to represent them.

No doubt these men also make a nice cut from any donated money, after all, they are self appointed.....

those academics you refered to while brilliant are seen as radical left winger in the usa
they have zero effect among ordinary americans who for the most part are extremly pro israel

marcsignal

irish_bob wrote: »

those academics you refered to while brilliant are seen as radical left winger in the usa
they have zero effect among ordinary americans who for the most part are extremly pro israel

This was certainly true in the past, until very recently. The reason there are more Americans willing to listen to them now, is because of the blooper the Pro-Israel lobby made by calling "Jimmy Carter" an Anti-Semite.

Any time anyone criticized Israel in the US in the past, the Pro-Israel lobbiests' immediate reaction was to resort to 'name calling' and to label them an Anti-Semite, to the point that it almost became a reflex action.

They have been doing this with Professor Finkelstein for years, and they have suceeded in running him out of most of the universities he lectured in. His support grew on campus, and Finkelstein himself admits that it was easy to label him an Anti-Semite because he was relatively unknown.
The fact he is Jewish, and that both his parents endured, and survived the Holocaust first hand, didn't stop them from doing this, and they even accused him of being some kind of warped 'self hating Jew'.

In the case of Professor Finkelstein, his exposure of prominent figures in the ADL, WJC and AIPAC began, when he tried to put in his parents rightful claim for compensation from the Swiss and German Banks as Holocaust victims. This compensation process was engineered by the WJC and ADL, and both organisations raked in Billions in compensation monies from these banks. Finkelstiens parents were awarded $1240 each for their trouble, and he set about exposing where the rest of the money had gone. They have been orchestrating a witch hunt on him since, so it doesn't surprise me at all the Pro-Israel lobbiests label him a Left Wing Radical too.

When "Jimmy Carter" spoke out, they did the same thing, and then suddenly slapped their hand over their collective mouth and said to themselves: "Oh Sh*t! What have we done?" because they realised that you can't just label, possibly one of the most popular former presidents of the United States, an Anti-Semite, without very strong hard evidence to support it. It did not wash well with the average American, and raised a lot of eyebrows in political and academic circles worldwide.

However you are absolutely right, the majority of Americans do support Israel. Whether the average American, or indeed the average American Army/Navy/Air Force Officer, has the stomach to be dragged into another war, this time with Iran, on Israels' behalf, remains to be seen.

dlofnep

ArthurF wrote: »

Destroyed by who? you can bet your bottom dollar that if Israel decides to do anything on that scale it is planned & calculated to the Nth degree . . . .

Remember the six day war?

Israel attacks Iran, they will suffer great losses in doing so. Israel needs not only to worry about Iran retaliating, but the rest of the states in the area who are tired of Israel's oppressive behaviour and would use their weakened state as a prime opportunity to attack Israel.

Do you believe Israel has the right to attack Iran and would be justified in doing so? Please explain your answer. Thank you.

marcsignal

dlofnep wrote: »

Israel attacks Iran, they will suffer great losses in doing so. Israel needs not only to worry about Iran retaliating, but the rest of the states in the area who are tired of Israel's oppressive behaviour and would use their weakened state as a prime opportunity to attack Israel.

Do you believe Israel has the right to attack Iran and would be justified in doing so? Please explain your answer. Thank you.

I think what ArthurF means, and he would be correct, is that, if attacked, Israel would not go down without one hell of a fight.
Let's remember that we are talking about a state with possibly the best trained Army in the world, where every adult male and female in the country, is drafted into military service. Israel is also a state which has always had to have, well laid out contingency plans for it's own defence. Finally they have at least 150 nuclear weapons, which I believe they would use if they were to find themselves on the brink of anialhation.

This would be a regional disaster for every state involved, millions would die, and many many more in the years after from the effects of nuclear fallout. We must also consider the disruption this could possibly cause to oil supplies for the rest of the world, should any major oil producing countries be dragged into the conflict. If oilfields were targeted with nuclear weapons, it would make them inoperable, for years to come, and possibly for decades.

Nuclear explosions in the region many not directly affect us here in Europe, but this type of permanent, or semi permanent disruption to oil supplies, would be disasterous for all European, and possibly World economies.

I think it goes without saying it would be better for everyone, if the whole nasty business was sorted out by proper honest and pragmatic dialogue, with real moves being made for a fair and permanent agreement with regard for the 'two state solution' as proposed by the UN, and humane treatment of the Palestinians by Israel.

Mr.Micro

Iran has been a thorn in the side of GW Bush and he will feel after his purge of Iraq and Aghanistan that Iran will get away before he thankfully leaves office. He used every opportunity at the end of 2007 and this year to play up the threat Iran poses in its nuclear ambitions, especially to Israel. According to latest estimates Iran is between 1-3 years in having the capability to produce nuclear weapons. I do not know if that is true or not but it suits the likes of Bush to believe that. I do believe that it would be a major mistake for Israel to strike against Iran. What happens to the nuclear material if strikes did occur? The whole of the Middle East, Israel included could become contaminated with radioactivity or even some other country by the fallout.

What about terorrist attacks or a full scale war if strikes took place? I do believe that Israel would do it but is it really ready for the consequences? Iran says that it has no intention of developing nuclear weapons and a US National Intelligence Estimate has concluded that it probably gave up a nuclear weapons programme in 2003(BBC news report 3 July 2008). I do not suppose the latter conclusion will matter a jot to the war mongers, as facts are not important.

irish_bob

marcsignal wrote: »

This was certainly true in the past, until very recently. The reason there are more Americans willing to listen to them now, is because of the blooper the Pro-Israel lobby made by calling "Jimmy Carter" an Anti-Semite.

Any time anyone criticized Israel in the US in the past, the Pro-Israel lobbiests' immediate reaction was to resort to 'name calling' and to label them an Anti-Semite, to the point that it almost became a reflex action.

They have been doing this with Professor Finkelstein for years, and they have suceeded in running him out of most of the universities he lectured in. His support grew on campus, and Finkelstein himself admits that it was easy to label him an Anti-Semite because he was relatively unknown.
The fact he is Jewish, and that both his parents endured, and survived the Holocaust first hand, didn't stop them from doing this, and they even accused him of being some kind of warped 'self hating Jew'.

In the case of Professor Finkelstein, his exposure of prominent figures in the ADL, WJC and AIPAC began, when he tried to put in his parents rightful claim for compensation from the Swiss and German Banks as Holocaust victims. This compensation process was engineered by the WJC and ADL, and both organisations raked in Billions in compensation monies from these banks. Finkelstiens parents were awarded $1240 each for their trouble, and he set about exposing where the rest of the money had gone. They have been orchestrating a witch hunt on him since, so it doesn't surprise me at all the Pro-Israel lobbiests label him a Left Wing Radical too.

When "Jimmy Carter" spoke out, they did the same thing, and then suddenly slapped their hand over their collective mouth and said to themselves: "Oh Sh*t! What have we done?" because they realised that you can't just label, possibly one of the most popular former presidents of the United States, an Anti-Semite, without very strong hard evidence to support it. It did not wash well with the average American, and raised a lot of eyebrows in political and academic circles worldwide.

However you are absolutely right, the majority of Americans do support Israel. Whether the average American, or indeed the average American Army/Navy/Air Force Officer, has the stomach to be dragged into another war, this time with Iran, on Israels' behalf, remains to be seen.

jimmy carter is not welll regarded in the usa , he is seen as having been a weak president
i do not agree with this and think hes a very decent man but he wasnt gung ho enough for americans

The Wicker Man

If a guy lived in my street and he was saving up to buy a gun, and he had also told people that I should be wiped off the map,well then I would be damn sure that MY gun was oiled, working and knew where HIS house was.

marcsignal

irish_bob wrote: »

jimmy carter is not welll regarded in the usa , he is seen as having been a weak president
i do not agree with this and think hes a very decent man but he wasnt gung ho enough for americans

I can only partially agree with you on this. At the time he left office Carter's presidency was certainly viewed by some as a failure, however his activities since leaving office, especially his many peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts, have led him to be widely hailed as one of the most successful ex-presidents in U.S. history. I'd also argue that that attempts to villify him have not suceeded, and his popularity as a statesman has actually risen since he has left office.

Riddle101

I think Isreal will find it hard to destroy Iran giving it's disadavantage. I mean Isreal is close to Syria and Iran, two anti-Isreali states. Let's not forget that Hamas and Hezbollah could use an opportunity of war to attack Isreal and help Iran, technically Isreal is in a danger zone and one attack on Iran could trigger a domineos effect which will lead to there downfall. However if America and Britain come in on their side they may stand a chance, but if Obama gets elected he might not help Isreal out.

I think quick decisive action should be taken and a huge UN summit should be held to deal with the problem before a huge war breaks out again

Agent Smith

The Wicker Man wrote: »

If a guy lived in my street and he was saving up to buy a gun, and he had also told people that I should be wiped off the map,well then I would be damn sure that MY gun was oiled, working and knew where HIS house was.

i just love this breakdown!

marcsignal

The Wicker Man wrote: »

If a guy lived in my street and he was saving up to buy a gun, and he had also told people that I should be wiped off the map,well then I would be damn sure that MY gun was oiled, working and knew where HIS house was.

Agent Smith wrote: »

i just love this breakdown!

I agree, it is a damn funny analagy

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

The Wicker Man wrote: »

If a guy lived in my street and he was saving up to buy a gun, and he had also told people that I should be wiped off the map,well then I would be damn sure that MY gun was oiled, working and knew where HIS house was.

you forgot to mention the fact that you have blockades on all the doors and windows of your neighbours house, completely rule his life within his own home and routinely bomb the **** out of it because he fired a few rocks at you.

The Wicker Man

Princess Innocent Knickers wrote: »

you forgot to mention the fact that you have blockades on all the doors and windows of your neighbours house, completely rule his life within his own home and routinely bomb the **** out of it because he fired a few rocks at you.

In my posting,the 'neighbour' is Iran,please read carefully before you jump on the old Palestine bandwagon.:)

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

it's a big street

The Wicker Man

Princess Innocent Knickers wrote: »

it's a big street

Thelma E

if Israel does do anything, it will be very quick, well orchestrated, and no one will see it coming. by the time Iran figures out whats going on, Israeli forces will either be gone, or dug in and being reinforced. they don't mess around, and though some people may call them aggressive, they are surrounded by people who hate them and do what must be done to survive. they do whats in their best interest, which might seem selfish, but i can't condemn them for it. the rest of the Arab world might try and help, but they will most likely squabble amongst themselves and muck things up like they have done in the past.

wes

Thelma E wrote: »

if Israel does do anything, it will be very quick, well orchestrated, and no one will see it coming. by the time Iran figures out whats going on, Israeli forces will either be gone, or dug in and being reinforced. they don't mess around, and though some people may call them aggressive, they are surrounded by people who hate them and do what must be done to survive. they do whats in their best interest, which might seem selfish, but i can't condemn them for it. the rest of the Arab world might try and help, but they will most likely squabble amongst themselves and muck things up like they have done in the past.

They have made peace deals with both Jordan and Egypt, and they are talking to Syria. So there hardly surrounded anymore. A lot of people repeat that to excuse Israel actions, but its simply untrue at this point.

Seems to me that making peace has been better for Israel, than its various acts of aggression. The shoot first attitude has not helped there situation and all it will get them is never ending war.

Cpt.Blackadder

Israel did bomb Iraqs Osirak reactor back in the early 1980,s and stopped Saddam Hussein ever gaining nuclear strike capabilites. They also launched an air strike on a suspicious instillation inside Syria a few months ago.

My gut feeling is if Iran is on the verge of gaining a nuke Israel will take any measures to stop them. Most Arab nations aren't keen on Iran gaining a nuclear arsenal anyway, as Irans Islamic theocracy is viewed by most Arab governments as a threat to their own stability.

gixerfixer

Cpt.Blackadder wrote: »

Israel did bomb Iraqs Osirak reactor back in the early 1980,s and stopped Saddam Hussein ever gaining nuclear strike capabilites. They also launched an air strike on a suspicious instillation inside Syria a few months ago.

My gut feeling is if Iran is on the verge of gaining a nuke Israel will take any measures to stop them. Most Arab nations aren't keen on Iran gaining a nuclear arsenal anyway, as Irans Islamic theocracy is viewed by most Arab governments as a threat to their own stability.

True but Iraq's defences against the attack from Isreal at that time where pathetic,this is a totally different kettle of fish.Iran has spent Billions on defence of it's nuclear programme including some of the most advanced surface to air missiles ever built.Also one of the reasons Israel have not attacked yet is plentyful rumours about the possible use of dirty bombs in some of their long range missiles including the shahab-3 which could reach Israel with ease.My gut feeling is this will come to a head sometime soon (next 3-4 months) and will not be pretty for either side.:(

ejmaztec

Here we go.



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article4301278.ece

First three paragraphs:


Iran test-fired a missile capable of reaching Israel early this morning, as part of war games that escalate the sabre-rattling between the Islamic Republic and the West.

The new version of the Shahab-3 missile was one of nine medium and long-range missiles launched from the desert during wider war gaming in the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway off the south of the country through which passes about 40 per cent of the world's oil.

The aim of the test was to "to demonstrate our resolve and might against enemies who in recent weeks have threatened Iran with harsh language," said the air force commander of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard, General Hoseyn Salami.

LordSutch

ejmaztec wrote: »

Here we go.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article4301278.ece

First three paragraphs:

Iran test-fired a missile capable of reaching Israel early this morning, as part of war games that escalate the sabre-rattling between the Islamic Republic and the West.

The new version of the Shahab-3 missile was one of nine medium and long-range missiles launched from the desert during wider war gaming in the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway off the south of the country through which passes about 40 per cent of the world's oil.

The aim of the test was to "to demonstrate our resolve and might against enemies who in recent weeks have threatened Iran with harsh language," said the air force commander of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard, General Hoseyn Salami.

Methinks General Hoseyn & his Salami should reconsider their "Nuclear War Games" before they go too far!

dlofnep

ArthurF wrote: »

Methinks General Hoseyn & his Salami should reconsider their "Nuclear War Games" before they go too far!

Me thinks ArthurF should stop quoting words like "Nuclear" when Iran has no nuclear weapons, and did not demonstrate nuclear offensive capabilities.

Iran should test as much as they can. Israel is the one who threatened Iran with an attack and has been practicing military tactics for weeks. It makes sense that Iran would do whatever is needed to warn of an attack.

In summary.

Israel has 150 nuclear weapons and is threatening Iran, and has been for some time now.

Iran has no nuclear weapons and has not at any point threatened Israel. Iranian officials have stated time and time again that they have no plans of attacking Israel, yet Israel have publically stated that they will attack Iran.

Hardly rocket science. How on Earth the world can sit back and let terrorist states like Israel (who hide their nuclear weapons from the world sanctioning bodies and try to push their weight around) threaten counties like Iran, but then criticise Iran for demonstrating the will to defend itself?

Riddle101

dlofnep wrote: »

Me thinks ArthurF should stop quoting words like "Nuclear" when Iran has no nuclear weapons, and did not demonstrate nuclear offensive capabilities.

Iran should test as much as they can. Israel is the one who threatened Iran with an attack and has been practicing military tactics for weeks. It makes sense that Iran would do whatever is needed to warn of an attack.

In summary.

Israel has 150 nuclear weapons and is threatening Iran, and has been for some time now.

Iran has no nuclear weapons and has not at any point threatened Israel. Iranian officials have stated time and time again that they have no plans of attacking Israel, yet Israel have publically stated that they will attack Iran.

Hardly rocket science. How on Earth the world can sit back and let terrorist states like Israel (who hide their nuclear weapons from the world sanctioning bodies and try to push their weight around) threaten counties like Iran, but then criticise Iran for demonstrating the will to defend itself?

It's because of the United States that no one wants to do anything. Everyone knows that the US backs Isreal and even more so has be getting on Iran's back for the last year or so. I'm pretty sure the US would diapprove of another country getting involved in the mix and since no one in their right mind is going to go up against the United States, Isreal and Iran are left to their squabble. The US are the only ones that can do anything to stop it but they won't get off their bumbs, hopefully the next president will have a better sense of mind then George Bush and try to do something, otherwise i think the whole world could be in trouble no just Iran and Isreal

dlofnep

Doubt it. Obama has already stated that he considers Iran a threat. He's just George Bush in black skin. He yelps on about change, but sure - that's all fine and well to say when he's trying to become president. Does anyone really expect the US's role in the world to change?

Mr.Micro

Does anyone really expect the US's role in the world to change?

We can always hope, the US needs to earn back its respect and maybe Obama, if elected will start to do that.