PDA

View Full Version : Discussion: Israel, Iran, and the Players Involved.....



MMC
02-09-2012, 08:07 AM
Over the last several weeks we have seen the West ratchet up Sanctions against Iran.....plenty of Sabre-Rattling. Warnings from Other Countries and Iran itself. All signs point to variants that say War is going to break out. :angry:

How many think that the Israelis have good intel? Does any Question their Statistical Record? :coffee:

RollingWave
02-09-2012, 08:36 AM
It's been pretty obviously heading towards war for like half a year now, but it's such a mess if you consider ...

A. there's been warning that Iran is going to get a nuke soon since.... the early 90s.

B. the last time the US went in for WMD turned out reallllllly well.

C. I don't think it's possible to really disarm this situation militarily speaking simply from the air, but with a significant land force involved it seems very unlikly that the US would not also be responsible for the aftermath.

D. If Israel makes a unilateral strike, then we may be looking at the possibility of a very large regional war, that'll be really REALLY ugly.

Personally, Israel certainly feels like a loose cannon, at least a good portion of their government is. them hitting Iran is sort of the equivalent of if Japan or Taiwan throw a few missile at China, aka the whole point is to draw the US into a ugly war that they probably can't back down from. which obviously is unfathomable here, but for Israel to do something like that feels entirely possible (of course, it should be noted that Iran does feel a lot crazier than China too)

MMC
02-09-2012, 08:55 AM
How much Nuke material do you think Iran has already? Also what do you think of Israeli intelligence? Your assessment. Do you think Syria is connected to this issue of Iran with regards to the Israelis perspective? Which they have remained silent upon.

Conley
02-09-2012, 09:44 AM
It's been pretty obviously heading towards war for like half a year now, but it's such a mess if you consider ...

A. there's been warning that Iran is going to get a nuke soon since.... the early 90s.

B. the last time the US went in for WMD turned out reallllllly well.

C. I don't think it's possible to really disarm this situation militarily speaking simply from the air, but with a significant land force involved it seems very unlikly that the US would not also be responsible for the aftermath.

D. If Israel makes a unilateral strike, then we may be looking at the possibility of a very large regional war, that'll be really REALLY ugly.

Personally, Israel certainly feels like a loose cannon, at least a good portion of their government is. them hitting Iran is sort of the equivalent of if Japan or Taiwan throw a few missile at China, aka the whole point is to draw the US into a ugly war that they probably can't back down from. which obviously is unfathomable here, but for Israel to do something like that feels entirely possible (of course, it should be noted that Iran does feel a lot crazier than China too)

Well, I don't really think A and B are relevant because we know they're much closer than they were and there is much more evidence to support WMD claims than were ever present with Iraq. C, unfortunately, is probably true.

Regarding D, who do you think would come to Iran's aid militarily? China and Russia will no doubt continue to supply weapons but I can't see them entering the battle directly. Do you disagree? Their leaders are far more logical than Iran's and none of them want to start WW3.

Conley
02-09-2012, 09:45 AM
Over the last several weeks we have seen the West ratchet up Sanctions against Iran.....plenty of Sabre-Rattling. Warnings from Other Countries and Iran itself. All signs point to variants that say War is going to break out. :angry:

How many think that the Israelis have good intel? Does any Question their Statistical Record? :coffee:

Generally speaking I believe the Israelis have excellent intel. I don't know how well they know Iran or their facilities in this instance.

MMC
02-09-2012, 10:24 AM
Generally speaking I believe the Israelis have excellent intel. I don't know how well they know Iran or their facilities in this instance.

So, do you or don't you think they already have the bomb? I think they must know it well to kill Iranian Scientists in Iran and out of Iran.

According to the Israelis, Iran already has enough to make 4 bombs! That they are not going to wait and allow the Iranians to bring it online with a ballistic misslies system.

Conley
02-09-2012, 10:30 AM
So, do you or don't you think they already have the bomb? I think they must know it well to kill Iranian Scientists in Iran and out of Iran.

According to the Israelis, Iran already has enough to make 4 bombs! That they are not going to wait and allow the Iranians to bring it online with a ballistic misslies system.

I don't think they already have it because they would make it known. It would be the most effective means of deterring a war IMO (threatening to use them if invaded). Between the two I would think a crude missile system would be much easier to develop than a nuclear weapon. We aren't talking about ICBMs and Israel isn't far, nor Saudi Arabia if they really want to go for it.

Mister D
02-09-2012, 10:46 AM
Generally speaking I believe the Israelis have excellent intel. I don't know how well they know Iran or their facilities in this instance.


They've been known for it.

Conley
02-09-2012, 10:50 AM
They've been known for it.

Especially compared to ours. :sad:

MMC
02-09-2012, 10:50 AM
I don't think they already have it because they would make it known. It would be the most effective means of deterring a war IMO (threatening to use them if invaded). Between the two I would think a crude missile system would be much easier to develop than a nuclear weapon. We aren't talking about ICBMs and Israel isn't far, nor Saudi Arabia if they really want to go for it.

http://news.yahoo.com/israels-stance-iran-could-catastrophic-moscow-073017441.html
Speculation has risen in recent weeks, driven in part by comments made by Israeli officials, that the Jewish state may soon launch a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities to slow or halt its controversial programme.

The "noise" about Iran's nuclear intentions "has political and propaganda objectives which are far from being inoffensive," said Ulyanov, head of the security and disarmament department in Russia's foreign affairs ministry.

Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak said last month that any decision by Israel on whether to attack Iran in a bid to halt its nuclear programme remained "very far away."
However Israel's chief of military intelligence, General Aviv Kochavi, told a security conference last week that Iran had enough radioactive material to produce four nuclear bombs .

Russia has so far backed four rounds of UN Security Council sanctions against Iran. But both Russia and China have made it clear that they are not prepared to back any more. .......

MMC
02-09-2012, 10:56 AM
It's on.....this morning over the radio. W.I.N.D AM Radio. Didn't say when. They stated Israel has told the US they will make the attack. In political jargon.....it came over as if the Israelis told the Obama Administration. The US, can sit this one out.

But we know that is not going to happen with us sitting on the sidelines.

Mister D
02-09-2012, 11:35 AM
Especially compared to ours. :sad:

Fo sho. I kinda like the Mossad I must admit.

Conley
02-09-2012, 11:39 AM
Fo sho. I kinda like the Mossad I must admit.

Yeah, I can't help but have mad respect for dem fools.

:afro:

MMC
02-09-2012, 11:43 AM
Yeah, I can't help but have mad respect for dem fools.

:afro:


I think they show others how it works. No one knows anything. Until after the fact! :wink:

Mister D
02-09-2012, 11:48 AM
They don't mess around but I guess that's because Israel is under constant threat.

MMC
02-09-2012, 11:51 AM
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is quoted as saying it is likely Israel will launch the attack this spring. CBS News (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#) correspondent David Martin reports that Panetta believes specifically that there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June.

"The United States could be targeted as a result of that," Panetta said. "We would get blame, whether they like it or not. We would get blame as to being involved."

Earlier this week, the Associated Press reported that officials in Israel — all of whom spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to discuss Iran — were concerned that the measures, while welcome, were constraining Israel in its ability to act because the world expected the effort to be given a chance.
Barak appeared to confirm this, suggesting that the sanctions needed to be given a chance to work. But he also said there was a growing sense around the world that failure would in effect justify military action.....snip~

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57370759/growing-concern-israel-may-strike-iran-this-spring/

Conley
02-09-2012, 12:07 PM
But before this they were saying it'd have to be November, before Hanukkah. Then they were going to wait until the New Year. Now it's April, May, or June. Sooner or later they'll be right but I'm not going to believe anything until the first strike is made. From a military standpoint it makes sense to have had them on alert for all this time and periodically sending out mixed messages that suggest an attack is imminent. One of these times the drill will be real.

MMC
02-09-2012, 12:12 PM
The officials say that Israel must act by the summer if it wants to effectively attack Iran's program.
A key question (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#) in the debate is how much damage Israel, or anyone else, can inflict, and whether it would be worth the risk of a possible counterstrike.

In comments Friday to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak called for even tougher sanctions against Iran and said time was running out for the world to act.
"We are determined to prevent Iran from turning nuclear," he said. "It seems to us to be urgent, because the Iranians are deliberately drifting into what we call an immunity zone where practically no surgical operation could block them."

Complicating the task is the assessment that Iran is stepping up efforts to move its work on enriching uranium — a critical component of bombmaking — deep underground. Iran's enrichment site at Fordo near the Iranian city of Qom, for instance, is shielded by about 300 feet (90 meters) of rock.

An Israeli strike would risk shattering the U.S.-led diplomatic front that has imposed four additional rounds of sanctions on Iran and jolt the shaky world economy by causing oil prices to spike. Still, officials say, if Israel feels no alternative but to take military action, it will do so.
Israel possesses dozens of F-16s and F-15s, some customized with long-range fuel tanks, and has bought additional Dolphin submarines from Germany capable of firing nuclear missiles.
It introduced a fleet of huge pilotless planes known as Heron TPs that can reach the Persian Gulf, provide surveillance and be used for aerial refueling — likely a critical aspect of any Iran mission. One of the Herons, which are the size of Boeing 737s, crashed during a test flight Sunday.

The U.S. has sold Israel dozens of 100 GBU-28 laser-guided "bunker-buster" bombs. The 2.5-ton bombs are capable of penetrating more than 20 feet (6 meters) of solid concrete.
It's not clear how much damage the bunker-busters could actually do. Iran's main enrichment site at Natanz is believed to be about 25 feet (6 meters) underground and protected by two concrete walls.
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told The Wall Street Journal last week that even more sophisticated U.S. bunker-busters aren't powerful enough to penetrate all of Iran's defenses.

Many believe Iran would likely unleash its large arsenal of missiles capable of striking Israel — and its local proxies, Hezbollah to Israel's north and Hamas to the south, possess tens of thousands of short-range rockets and missiles. American soldiers in the Persian Gulf might come under fire. Islamist backers of Iran could target civilians all over the world.....snip~

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57368524/israel-sees-narrowing-window-for-attack-on-iran/?tag=contentMain;contentBody

Just so we have a clear picture as to what has been coming down the pipe! :wink:

RollingWave
02-09-2012, 09:42 PM
Regarding D, who do you think would come to Iran's aid militarily? China and Russia will no doubt continue to supply weapons but I can't see them entering the battle directly. Do you disagree? Their leaders are far more logical than Iran's and none of them want to start WW3.


China and Russia entering would not be a regional war, it would be world war 3 so that's not likely to happen at all, by regional war I mean say... Egypt attacking Israel, and the Arab league's stance are reversed due to extreme pressure from the public, yeah the Arabs don't like the Persians and the Sunnis don't like the Shias, but they definately don't like the Jews and Israel even more. hell I'd think if I'm Basher Al-Assad right now the thing that's most likely to save my arse would be the Israeli attacking Iran, since that's one thing that might be able to create enough nationalist sentiment to at least temporarily settle the rebellion. the same could be said of Egypt and the trouble it's government face. (same could be said of most other Arab countries)

We can not continue looking at the 6 day war and assume that Israel would be able to crush the other Arab countries on their own, the Yom Kippur war was already a much closer shave and Egypt's position today is significantly improved compare to then while the Israeli's is probably weaker.

You need to consider this, even for the Iraq war, where the US had a very long and painstaked diplomatic work to prepare for, the Turks ended up refusing the US to attack Iraq from their territory, given the situation now, if a unilater strike happen from Israel first, I think the odds of any of the surronding county letting the US operate from their front is close to nil (if you consider that the Turks won't even let you pass into the black sea.)

And in that case, if Israel's also hit, you end up havnig the only option of going to Israel first and then fight your way towards Iran (or pull off the largest naval invasion EVER), which is ridiculas and much more than the US was intended on doing.

Conley
02-09-2012, 10:16 PM
China and Russia entering would not be a regional war, it would be world war 3 so that's not likely to happen at all, by regional war I mean say... Egypt attacking Israel, and the Arab league's stance are reversed due to extreme pressure from the public, yeah the Arabs don't like the Persians and the Sunnis don't like the Shias, but they definately don't like the Jews and Israel even more. hell I'd think if I'm Basher Al-Assad right now the thing that's most likely to save my arse would be the Israeli attacking Iran, since that's one thing that might be able to create enough nationalist sentiment to at least temporarily settle the rebellion. the same could be said of Egypt and the trouble it's government face. (same could be said of most other Arab countries)

We can not continue looking at the 6 day war and assume that Israel would be able to crush the other Arab countries on their own, the Yom Kippur war was already a much closer shave and Egypt's position today is significantly improved compare to then while the Israeli's is probably weaker.

You need to consider this, even for the Iraq war, where the US had a very long and painstaked diplomatic work to prepare for, the Turks ended up refusing the US to attack Iraq from their territory, given the situation now, if a unilater strike happen from Israel first, I think the odds of any of the surronding county letting the US operate from their front is close to nil (if you consider that the Turks won't even let you pass into the black sea.)

And in that case, if Israel's also hit, you end up havnig the only option of going to Israel first and then fight your way towards Iran (or pull off the largest naval invasion EVER), which is ridiculas and much more than the US was intended on doing.

I disagree about the use of other country's airspace. Leaked diplomatic cables from Saudi Arabia have shown that they have actively encouraged the U.S. to attack Iran (in order to stop their nuclear program) and Iran has not been shy about saying they will attack Saudi oil depots if Israel launches the first shot. Without U.S. intervention Saudi Arabia would be in big trouble. I agree that Turkey is a wild card and would probably demand concessions if they were to permit any actions. Iraq up until our departure may have been dependable but now I would guess they wouldn't give airspace permission. However I think we could ignore that if absolutely necessary and they do have a new weapons deal with U.S. so it's not as if they're going to open fire on our aircraft.

Peter1469
02-09-2012, 10:36 PM
The problem is that the Iranian leaders are not stable. They believe in the apocalyptic Shiite vision of the end of the world. If they destroy Israel or the Great Satan (US) their 12th Imam will crawl out of the well he fell into all those centuries ago and lead the Muslims to world dominance. If the Iranian leaders have to sacrifice their own people to make that happen, they are on record as telling us that they are all for it.

That is the problem. They are not rational actors. We have secret advanced weapons that can drill through Iran's sites. I say use them and don't talk about it. We can even hint that maybe it was ETs preventing a global war on earth.

Conley
02-09-2012, 10:40 PM
The problem is that the Iranian leaders are not stable. They believe in the apocalyptic Shiite vision of the end of the world. If they destroy Israel or the Great Satan (US) their 12th Imam will crawl out of the well he fell into all those centuries ago and lead the Muslims to world dominance. If the Iranian leaders have to sacrifice their own people to make that happen, they are on record as telling us that they are all for it.

That is the problem. They are not rational actors. We have secret advanced weapons that can drill through Iran's sites. I say use them and don't talk about it. We can even hint that maybe it was ETs preventing a global war on earth.

Just like the Nazis allegedly collaborated with aliens on their rocket program. I saw it on the History channel so it must be true. :laugh:

edit: Look at that, aliens are mentioned and boom five seconds later MMC shows up. :grin:

MMC
02-09-2012, 11:42 PM
Just like the Nazis allegedly collaborated with aliens on their rocket program. I saw it on the History channel so it must be true. :laugh:

edit: Look at that, aliens are mentioned and boom five seconds later MMC shows up. :grin:

:spacecraft: I figured you needed a lift.....since you were getting surrounded by Arabs on all sides. :wink:

RollingWave
02-10-2012, 02:19 AM
I disagree about the use of other country's airspace. Leaked diplomatic cables from Saudi Arabia have shown that they have actively encouraged the U.S. to attack Iran (in order to stop their nuclear program) and Iran has not been shy about saying they will attack Saudi oil depots if Israel launches the first shot. Without U.S. intervention Saudi Arabia would be in big trouble. I agree that Turkey is a wild card and would probably demand concessions if they were to permit any actions. Iraq up until our departure may have been dependable but now I would guess they wouldn't give airspace permission. However I think we could ignore that if absolutely necessary and they do have a new weapons deal with U.S. so it's not as if they're going to open fire on our aircraft.

Yeah.. but that was mostly talking about the USA attacking Iran, there is a slight difference with that and Israel doing it. For example, the US neer asked the Israeli to participate in the 03 war, despite being very close and have most likely the best military capacity of any of the allies outside of the US and maybe the UK.

Suffice to say that Israel is a magnet for contention in the region, if they get involved in anything then a lot of pre-assumed positions may change.

Conley
02-10-2012, 09:17 AM
Yeah.. but that was mostly talking about the USA attacking Iran, there is a slight difference with that and Israel doing it. For example, the US neer asked the Israeli to participate in the 03 war, despite being very close and have most likely the best military capacity of any of the allies outside of the US and maybe the UK.

Suffice to say that Israel is a magnet for contention in the region, if they get involved in anything then a lot of pre-assumed positions may change.

Understood. My thinking has always been that if Bush showed no interest in stopping the Iranian nuke program through military action, and Obama has shown no interest, then the most likely scenario has always been Israel initiating the action. I agree that in previous actions any time we could keep Israel out of it we stood a better chance of having the military action more accepted by the rest of the Middle Eastern world.