Israel raises the bar with Iran

[danzig]

For first time Israel has said flat out (http://www.washtimes.com/world/20050...065r_page2.htm) that if US and Europe cant reign in Iran's nuclear program that it will be forced to so itself. This is imo a possibly major headache for the world if Israel does follow thru with it and could very well spark a war between Iran and Israel. With Iraq basically in the middle it could very well spill over into a nice little regional war. Think we are fast approaching a point where unless some compromise/solution is made its going to turn messy.

Anyway commentary aside, my point is any opinions on how Israel could carry this threat out? Simple bombings like done vs Iraq in the 1980s wont work, the Iranians have learned from that mistake and have multiple sides and rather harden sites. Plus distance from Israel to Iran makes flights rather difficult since it would basically require the US to assist or atleast turn the other way and whistle while Iraqi airspace was used. So what other options? Cant imagine any special forces/ground troop operation in a lightning fast raid but it would seem that would be the only real way to get their objective done but the response to such an act would be uncertain. Any ideas? And please if want to debate whether it should be done pick another thread or start one Im more interested in HOW Israel could do it not whether they SHOULD which is an entirely different question.

[nahirean]

For first time Israel has said flat out (http://www.washtimes.com/world/20050...065r_page2.htm) that if US and Europe cant reign in Iran's nuclear program that it will be forced to so itself. This is imo a possibly major headache for the world if Israel does follow thru with it and could very well spark a war between Iran and Israel. With Iraq basically in the middle it could very well spill over into a nice little regional war. Think we are fast approaching a point where unless some compromise/solution is made its going to turn messy.

Anyway commentary aside, my point is any opinions on how Israel could carry this threat out? Simple bombings like done vs Iraq in the 1980s wont work, the Iranians have learned from that mistake and have multiple sides and rather harden sites. Plus distance from Israel to Iran makes flights rather difficult since it would basically require the US to assist or atleast turn the other way and whistle while Iraqi airspace was used. So what other options? Cant imagine any special forces/ground troop operation in a lightning fast raid but it would seem that would be the only real way to get their objective done but the response to such an act would be uncertain. Any ideas? And please if want to debate whether it should be done pick another thread or start one Im more interested in HOW Israel could do it not whether they SHOULD which is an entirely different question.

Won't be much of a war.. Israel would demolish Iran..

[Mr.Flint]

For first time Israel has said flat out (http://www.washtimes.com/world/20050...065r_page2.htm) that if US and Europe cant reign in Iran's nuclear program that it will be forced to so itself. This is imo a possibly major headache for the world if Israel does follow thru with it and could very well spark a war between Iran and Israel. With Iraq basically in the middle it could very well spill over into a nice little regional war. Think we are fast approaching a point where unless some compromise/solution is made its going to turn messy.

Anyway commentary aside, my point is any opinions on how Israel could carry this threat out? Simple bombings like done vs Iraq in the 1980s wont work, the Iranians have learned from that mistake and have multiple sides and rather harden sites. Plus distance from Israel to Iran makes flights rather difficult since it would basically require the US to assist or atleast turn the other way and whistle while Iraqi airspace was used. So what other options? Cant imagine any special forces/ground troop operation in a lightning fast raid but it would seem that would be the only real way to get their objective done but the response to such an act would be uncertain. Any ideas? And please if want to debate whether it should be done pick another thread or start one Im more interested in HOW Israel could do it not whether they SHOULD which is an entirely different question.

Id say a special forces op. since they can easily blend with the locals, it probably would utilize some of the local dissedent guerillas,
on the other hand i wouldnt rule out an air strike, considering the fact that Israel has bunker busters and probably a highly accurate intel.
I dont think that Jordan would refuse to open air space for such mission (they are not very friendly to Iran) , and in Iraq the Kurd autonomy is somewhat friendly to Israel so utilizing their air space or bases wouldnt be much of a problem.
The main question here is what Iran expecting the most? an air strike or a ground op?

[Custor]

Be easier to bomb Iran with a compliant Iraq than before. American jamming equipment used by Israelis for political reaons happen to temporarily KO the Iranian air defences (poor that they are) and bingo.

Ground op runs a greater risk of capture. A rather bad idea PR wise to have your troops on trial in front of the worlds media.

[Ummon]

That's why I love Israel. Really.

[Erik]

Israel isn't going to do it alone.
The US wil support them in whatever they do, even if this means they are dragged into a war with Iran.
And with US support they could drestroy the nuclear plants, but they can't conquer Iran.
I think they wil smply use large amounts of cruise missiles.

Israel and the US wil yell "Mission accomplished" but the people of Iran (who have to go without electricity because of this) wil hate the US and Israel even more, and their awnser wil be terrorism.

[Ummon]

As long as they hate us (which they do only out of ignorance) but cannot kill millions, it's fine with me.

[Elu Barcino]

As long as they hate us (which they do only out of ignorance) but cannot kill millions, it's fine with me.

It's not only out of ignorance. People always have a reason. I expect many of them feel threatened by the West.

Anyway, I don't think that America would be stupid enough to jump on board with an invasion. They're having enough trouble in Iraq right now, an Israeli invasion of Iran would simply make matters worse because then all the Shias would revolt as well. Not to mention the damage it would do to their already battered international standing.

[Ummon]

They feel threatened by the west.

Nice. I am though wondering why.

The west would leave them alone if they didn't support terrorism and strive to acquire weapons of mass distruction, for example. The west doesn't conquer foreign lands anymore, infact. We do not put their way of life into jeopardy, unless you suggest that showing that there are alternatives is putting that into jeopardy, of course.

In truth, the masters in threatening others in this world, since a long, long time ago, are Islamic peoples. Europe has been invaded by Islam for one millennium, continuously. Now they cannot invade anymore, so they want to scare us into submission. Perhaps they will succeed, who knows.

[Erik]

They feel threatened by the west.

Nice. I am though wondering why.

The west would leave them alone if they didn't support terrorism and strive to acquire weapons of mass distruction, for example. The west doesn't conquer foreign lands anymore, infact. We do not put their way of life into jeopardy, unless you suggest that showing that there are alternatives is putting that into jeopardy, of course.

In truth, the masters in threatening others in this world, since a long, long time ago, are Islamic peoples. Europe has been invaded by Islam for one millennium, continuously. Now they cannot invade anymore, so they want to scare us into submission. Perhaps they will succeed, who knows.

Iran/Persia never tried to conquer Brittain or America.
But Britain did conquer large parts of Iran ("Persia") in colonial times.
And like Tiwaz pointed out: Brittain and the US did help to overthrow the democratic elected leader of Iran, and turned Iran into a brutal dictatorship under the Shah.
Ever since the Iranians got rid of this tyrant the US has opposed Iran, even supporting Saddam in the Iraq/Iran war, resulting in the death of many thousands of Iranians.

So the Iranians have enough reasons to feel threatened by the west, Islam has little to do with it.

[nahirean]

Iran/Persia never tried to conquer Brittain or America.
But Britain did conquer large parts of Iran ("Persia") in colonial times.
And like Tiwaz pointed out: Brittain and the US did help to overthrow the democratic elected leader of Iran, and turned Iran into a brutal dictatorship under the Shah.
Ever since the Iranians got rid of this tyrant the US has opposed Iran, even supporting Saddam in the Iraq/Iran war, resulting in the death of many thousands of Iranians.

So the Iranians have enough reasons to feel threatened by the west, Islam has little to do with it.

Actually, we supplied both sides with arms.

[avesta]

Iran/Persia never tried to conquer Brittain or America.
But Britain did conquer large parts of Iran ("Persia") in colonial times.
And like Tiwaz pointed out: Brittain and the US did help to overthrow the democratic elected leader of Iran, and turned Iran into a brutal dictatorship under the Shah.
Ever since the Iranians got rid of this tyrant the US has opposed Iran, even supporting Saddam in the Iraq/Iran war, resulting in the death of many thousands of Iranians.

So the Iranians have enough reasons to feel threatened by the west, Islam has little to do with it.

thank you, well said.

[ODST]

The west would leave them alone if they didn't support terrorism and strive to acquire weapons of mass distruction, for example. The west doesn't conquer foreign lands anymore, infact. We do not put their way of life into jeopardy, unless you suggest that showing that there are alternatives is putting that into jeopardy, of course.

No. The 'west' would leave them alone if they weren't sitting on top of one of the biggest supplies of oil in the world.

[Ummon]

No. The 'west' would leave them alone if they weren't sitting on top of one of the biggest supplies of oil in the world.

Was the dream cool?

Or more specifically: I wonder where you have garnered this absurd conception. Oil is surpassed as an energy source. The future is not oil, and fighting for oil is fighting a rearguard battle. But even if the US did want Iranian oil, the EU will support actions against Iran only if Iran keeps being aggressive.

So, Iran is actually putting its safety into question. Not the US, nor the EU.

[ODST]

Was the dream cool?

Yeah, wasn't too bad....

Oil is surpassed as an energy source

By what exactly??? Have you seen how much panic and chaos is caused over here when oil prices go up??? Doesn't that show how much we depend upon oil???

Or perhaps I'm missing the point???

I wonder where you have garnered this absurd conception

Perhaps I garnered it from the fact that America (and Britain and France) have put in puppet governments in places like Saudi Arabia (who support terrorists),Kuwait and now probably Iraq. From the fact that despite the House of Saud having (apparently) funded terrorism, they're still in power.

But even if the US did want Iranian oil

I never said they did. What I meant was that we won't leave people in that area alone because they've got a large supply of oil. Which we NEED to keep going.

So, Iran is actually putting its safety into question. Not the US, nor the EU

Fair enough. I just hope that no-one is stupid enough to start yet another war, that may even go nuclear (although I doubt it)

[Tiwaz]

Ummon, you very nicely forget western interference in middle east over the past decades. West has not invaded, until occupying Iraq, but it has been more than willing to meddle.

For example corrupt Shah of Iran who was supported by USA.
Supporting Saddam during cold war.
Supporting Israel which still uses hammer even in situations where it is not suitable.
All the crimes of the colonial age...

And that is tip of the iceberg. They feel they have a good reason to hate west. To assume someone would hate west out of ignorance is being ignorant.

[Carach]

Ummon, you very nicely forget western interference in middle east over the past decades. West has not invaded, until occupying Iraq, but it has been more than willing to meddle.

For example corrupt Shah of Iran who was supported by USA.
Supporting Saddam during cold war.
Supporting Israel which still uses hammer even in situations where it is not suitable.
All the crimes of the colonial age...

And that is tip of the iceberg. They feel they have a good reason to hate west. To assume someone would hate west out of ignorance is being ignorant.

And of course the west were the first to be bad..
Lets not forget that that area of the world has been constantly warring each other for thousands of years...while other nations have matured and moved on they continue to fight each other over completely pointless things, most of it is down to religion, Islam as someone else had said, has been attacking the west for a thousand years.

Still, trying not to sound racist (which is hard to do these days) It is part of the islamic religion to take over the world.

If israel decide to take this course of action. GOOD for them, they are like the beacon of light in an otherwise evil region.

Its like the pull out of gaza, i thought it would never bring peace, because you just cant negotiate with terrorists, and at the end of the day people like HAMAS are terrorists, just hiding behind religion and reasons, just as every other eastern 'freedom fighter' group do.

Iran keep playing chicken with the giants, and sooner of later they are gonna get stomped on, sooner rather than later i hope, we dont want another north korean situation where after developing WMD they think rules dont apply to them. Unstable nations like Iran cannot have such weapons.

Israel however, may have had a secret nuclear program, but they have a stable democracy, not like any major extremists are gonna come into power and nuke the world, unlike some of their neighbours are likely to do given the chance.

[Elu Barcino]

Islam as someone else had said, has been attacking the west for a thousand years.

No, it hasn't. During the 19th century, the West allied with the Ottoman Empire (the only important Islamic state at the time, as the rest just fought each other and had been doing so for over a century) against the Russians, and fought the Crimean War. Islamic extremists only began attacking the West in the mid to late 20th century, apart from the Ottman expansion which ended over two centuries before.

And of course the west were the first to be bad

Well, the West did launch the Crusades, didn't they, even though they were completely unprovoked. And in doing so they created the modern concept of Jihad.

It is part of the islamic religion to take over the world.

Just as it is part of Christianity to try and make everyone Christian. Islam is not unique in trying to convert people, many religions have that aim.

[Wicked]

No, it hasn't. During the 19th century, the West allied with the Ottoman Empire (the only important Islamic state at the time, as the rest just fought each other and had been doing so for over a century) against the Russians, and fought the Crimean War. Islamic extremists only began attacking the West in the mid to late 20th century, apart from the Ottman expansion which ended over two centuries before.

Your taking a rather narrow view there, and actually so was he, it's closer to 1400 years, starting from the 7th century A.D. and working forwards...

Well, the West did launch the Crusades, didn't they, even though they were completely unprovoked. And in doing so they created the modern concept of Jihad.

Completely unprovoked? Right...most of the Middle East, Asia Minor, and North Africa was originally Christian, VERY Christian in fact, your also discounting Spain, southern France, Sicily, southern Italy, and the Balkans, in fact virtually every part of Europe that bordered the Mediterranean, or could be reached after a quick march from it, compared to the damage the Muslims inflicted on Europe the Crusades were a blip on the radar, they actually seem to have caused more permanent damage to the Byzantines (fellow Christians) than to their stated adversaries.

Just as it is part of Christianity to try and make everyone Christian. Islam is not unique in trying to convert people, many religions have that aim.

Actually no, many don't, Judaism and the various sects it spawned are pretty unique in that regard, certainly to the extent that they specifically pursued the goal of conversion through war, or barring that, genocide.

-Wicked

[Carach]

No, it hasn't. During the 19th century, the West allied with the Ottoman Empire (the only important Islamic state at the time, as the rest just fought each other and had been doing so for over a century) against the Russians, and fought the Crimean War. Islamic extremists only began attacking the West in the mid to late 20th century, apart from the Ottman expansion which ended over two centuries before.



Well, the West did launch the Crusades, didn't they, even though they were completely unprovoked. And in doing so they created the modern concept of Jihad.



Just as it is part of Christianity to try and make everyone Christian. Islam is not unique in trying to convert people, many religions have that aim.

Political reasons = why we sided with the ottoman empire.
Crusades launched due to hostile take over of the 'holy land', not unprovoked.
Christianity does not FORCE people to join their religion, we do not have an execution law in england for anyone non-christian. unlike many nations out there in the east. Hell if i was in iran i would be hung from a crane in a football stadium right now.

Part of my point is, they are acting like western nations did hundreds and hundreds of years ago. Uncivilised.
We allow people from those countries to live in my country, live off of MY money (benefit system), while calling everyone that thinks they shouldnt be here a racist, The incident in liverpool not so far away is a damn example, Hot cross buns were banned because they had a cross on them and may offend other religions. wtf is that about ffs? England is a christian nation for starters, why should we be dropping all our culture and beleifs for people that have no reason to be in the country in the first place, to be honest i have no beef with people of other nations living here, but what i dont want is the law being too bias.

anyway enough of that, its offtopic and im increasingly sounding 'extremist'.

On the topic of Iran...they are playing with the big boys and their little games will be noted for the future im sure.

I think while america is tangled up in iraq, they will turn a 'blind eye' so to speak when israel decide to take iranian nuclear sites down through whatever means.