Will Israel attack Iran???

b12mearse

What do you guys think?

Manic Moran

If they think they need to, I'm sure they will.

NTM

Manic Moran

Manic Moran wrote: »

If they think they need to, I'm sure they will.

NTM

Just to expand this a little further.

Do you think Israel still has the belly for a wider conflict, ie a simultanious attack on Syria & Iran?.

They'd probably have to anniliate Hezbollah's infrastructor inside Lebanon too, so lets include Lebanon on their northern border.

.

Agamemnon

I think they might attack Iranian nuclear facilities but they wouldn't go any further than that.

Ping Chow Chi

Payton Purring Poultry wrote: »

Just to expand this a little further.

Do you think Israel still has the belly for a wider conflict, ie a simultanious attack on Syria & Iran?.

They'd probably have to anniliate Hezbollah's infrastructor inside Lebanon too, so lets include Lebanon on their northern border.

.

I think it would probably be a limited stike on some targets in Iran and probably a prolonged war by proxy with Hezbollah with Lebanon being the big loser.

oncevotedff

b12mearse wrote: »

What do you guys think?

Iran appears to be heading towards being a nuclear power. Israel cannot afford that scenario so it is likely that at some stage they will attack Iran.

NeilMcEoigheann

if they do, I full on hope that the Islamic world comes down on them so hard.
its disgusting what they are doing.

irlande_euroluv

If they attack Iran, they'll get a good kicking like they did in Lebanon in '06.

marco murphy

NeilMcEoigheann wrote: »

if they do, I full on hope that the Islamic world comes down on them so hard.
its disgusting what they are doing.

Why the Islamic world and not the US or whatever. The world should unite like they did against South Africa. We should be talking about the 100+ UN resolutions ignored by Israel

irlande_euroluv wrote: »

If they attack Iran, they'll get a good kicking like they did in Lebanon in '06.

:pac:

dlofnep

If they do, I hope Iran slaps the utter shíte out of them.

is_that_so

Politically it would be an absolute nightmare for all and I have no doubt the US are keeping a close watch. As others have commented Lebanon is of more concern. What will also influence the politics is how Ahmadinejad deals with the current political problems in Iran.

I can't see the justification for an attack as it will cause the Middle East to explode and put Israel under threat from pretty much everywhere. That said I have no doubt the scenario is being talked about a lot and if this piece in today's Times is to believed it is a possibility however remote.

Three years after Israel fought a bloody war in Lebanon against Hezbollah, there are fears that hostilities could erupt again — this time with the militant group better armed than ever.

According to Israeli, United Nations and Hezbollah officials, the Shia Muslim militia is stronger than it was in 2006 when it took on the Israeli army in a war that killed 1,191 Lebanese and 43 Israeli civilians.

Hezbollah has up to 40,000 rockets and is training its forces to use ground-to-ground missiles capable of hitting Tel Aviv, and anti-aircraft missiles that could challenge Israel’s dominance of the skies over Lebanon.

... Israeli planners have no doubt that, should they make the fateful decision to attack Iran, they will provoke massive retaliation on an unprecedented scale ...

Link

marco murphy

is_that_so wrote: »

Politically it would be an absolute nightmare for all and I have no doubt the US are keeping a close watch. As others have commented Lebanon is of more concern. What will also influence the politics is how Ahmadinejad deals with the current political problems in Iran.

I can't see the justification for an attack as it will cause the Middle East to explode and put Israel under threat from pretty much everywhere. That said I have no doubt the scenario is being talked about a lot and if this piece in today's Times is to believed it is a possibility however remote.



Link

Thanks for the article.

The problems in Iran will blow over I reckon. The media and instigators in the "west" are trying to stir the pot.

daveydave25

they will attack at some stage through america. israel can wipe them out and the world if it wants. they have over a 150 nuclear warheads as it is. israel is a major theat to international security.

NeilMcEoigheann

Perestroika wrote: »

Why the Islamic world and not the US or whatever. The world should unite like they did against South Africa. We should be talking about the 100+ UN resolutions ignored by Israel

because america are supporting them selling them weapons and so on.

marco murphy

NeilMcEoigheann wrote: »

because america are supporting them selling them weapons and so on.

You're right, but one day those inside should rectify that

Mahatma coat

Should Iran attack Israel???

if its perfectly justifiable for Israel to attack Iran in the eyes of a lot of posters here why would naked agression from Iran be any different??

Should we tolerate agressive and uncomprimising Rouge Nuclear states, its got to be the same rule for all, so if Israel is 'allowed' to have Nuclear weapons why cant Iran??

Manic Moran

Just because Farmer Joe has a shotgun license doesn't mean that the Gardai have to grant one to the bloke on the other side of the road.

NTM

marco murphy

But, but, Iran doesn't have Nuclear weapons.

darno

the iran people are ok,,,but irans president is pure evil he wants do destroy
israel so his messiah can come his name is machdi

dlofnep

Manic Moran wrote: »

Just because Farmer Joe has a shotgun license doesn't mean that the Gardai have to grant one to the bloke on the other side of the road.

NTM

What is this supposed to mean?

Manic Moran

It addresses the concept of "If they've got one, why can't I?"

NTM

Tipsy Mac

I think Iran obtaining nuclear weapons is the only sure way of bringing a long term peace of kinds between the 2 countries. I would see Israel as being too powerful within the region at the moment with its US supplied hardware and so it can bully other countries without worry of response.

dlofnep

Manic Moran wrote: »

It addresses the concept of "If they've got one, why can't I?"

NTM

No it doesn't, unless you are suggesting Israel shows an element of responsibility with their weapons - Which they do not.

Manic Moran

I see. You your argument is that if one questionable state has the things, any other questionable state should also have them?

I'm not convinced that is entirely conducive to long-term stability.

NTM

teddy_303

I don't think it would do Israel any harm to be shown an equal and opposite deterrent to the one which they offer so freely... I hope Israel burns...

Their use of Phosphorous bombs and cluster bombs against civilians, children and the elderly is as disgusting as it is illegal.

Agamemnon

I think Ahmadinejad is half-hoping for some small-scale Israeli attack against Iran - it would help him unite the country after the unrest over the election.

irlande_euroluv

irlande_euroluv wrote: »

If they attack Iran, they'll get a good kicking like they did in Lebanon in '06.

At best Israel got a bloody nose in '06 and nothing else.

To me that war only proved that Israel's blockade of The Gaza is very neccesary, why?.. Because the tunnels used to such good effect by Hezbollah around Bint Jabail were built right under the nose of the Irish battlion & later Ghana Batt - to an extent that Israel must also take some of the blaim for that as they wouldn't allow UNIFIL operate with an agressive mandate - they seen the error of their ways with the agreed mandate under which UNIFIL II operates under.

Israel is not allowing that to happen again - its hard to stop it completely, but the blockade goes a long way in doing so.

Then the Gaza conflict sent a very, very strong message to Israel's neighbours 'The price for attacking us has just risen to a price you can't afford anymore', and even the Gaza conflict was pretty limited too, more a bitch slap to Hamas than a proper balls out war.

As was said earlier in the thread, if Israel needs to hit Iran it will. And history has shown us that if Israel feels its time to knock the enemy at its doors back to the stone age its got the belly, and the tools to do so.

.

dlofnep

Manic Moran wrote: »

I see. You your argument is that if one questionable state has the things, any other questionable state should also have them?

No, I'm of the belief that neither should have nuclear weapons. But if Israel has them, then it gives them an awfully unbalanced weight at the bargaining table, something that they do not deserve. Israel should be fully decommissioned, by force if required.

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm not convinced that is entirely conducive to long-term stability.

NTM

And building illegal settlements, and disregarding basic human rights is? There will never be long-term stability because Israel continues to defy international law.

Manic Moran

So in a nutshell your argument boils down to 'two wrongs make a right.'

NTM

dlofnep

Manic Moran wrote: »

So in a nutshell your argument boils down to 'two wrongs make a right.'

NTM

What? I've absolutely no idea how you extracted that from what I just said.

I said, I believe that Israel should be decommissioned of all it's illegal nuclear weapons.

Manic Moran

You are correct, I apologize.

I made an assumption based on the theory that the disarming of Israel is somewhere on the level of likelihood as Ireland entering the Space Race.

NTM