I Urge Israel To Take Out Iran's Nuke Plant. You?

[GHook93]

WE have the capability to do it.

WE have the needed bunker-buster type bombs.

WE can fly over Iraq. It's not at all clear that Israel can.

ISRAEL is the one who faces immediate and furious and insane reprisals -- no matter who takes out the Iranian nuclear plants.

So it boils down to three options.

(1) We permit Israel to act as our surrogate and do the deed. Our help would be needed to get to Iran.

(2) We stop acting like pussies and we do it ourselves (at great immediate risk to Israel).

(3) We elect to do nothing and have nobody act like a surrogate, and Iran ends up with nukes.

What we should do is an open question, but I will bet you that I know exactly what we WILL do. Option #3. President Obama is simply not up to the job.

Bottom line! If there is an attack on Iran, which I hope there is not, then it sure as hell better be Israel and NOT America!

 

[Si modo]

WE have the capability to do it.

WE have the needed bunker-buster type bombs.

WE can fly over Iraq. It's not at all clear that Israel can.

ISRAEL is the one who faces immediate and furious and insane reprisals -- no matter who takes out the Iranian nuclear plants.

So it boils down to three options.

(1) We permit Israel to act as our surrogate and do the deed. Our help would be needed to get to Iran.

(2) We stop acting like pussies and we do it ourselves (at great immediate risk to Israel).

(3) We elect to do nothing and have nobody act like a surrogate, and Iran ends up with nukes.

What we should do is an open question, but I will bet you that I know exactly what we WILL do. Option #3. President Obama is simply not up to the job.

Bottom line! If there is an attack on Iran, which I hope there is not, then it sure as hell better be Israel and NOT America!

Just a note: We have made several strikes of strategic targets in different nations in the past and war has not ensued - not that I am advocating that or not.

 

[Anguille]

did i miss something? i didn't see any suggestion that Israel nuke Iran. The suggestion was that Israel take out Iran's nuclear capability.

They need some target practice before they try that sort of thing again.

 

[Shorebreak]

On Sept. 20 this year the Kremlin announced that Israel has promised not to strike Iran.

Additionally, Putin and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei have stated that an American attack on Iran will be viewed by Moscow as an attack on Russia - us engagement in Iran will mean war with Russia.

First, do you have any proof to these false assertions? No, then STFU
Second, just like we promised to protect Georgia? Russia doesn't want to take on the US, just like we don't want to take on Russia. Russia would bitch a ton, but they would do nothing. Much like we did with Georigia!

The September 20th promise not to attack Iran (so STFU...)
Kremlin says Israel promised not to strike Iran | Reuters
Medvedev says Israel not intend to attack Iran _English_Xinhua
Medvedev: Israel not planning Iran strike - Russia- msnbc.com
DEBKAfile - Medvedev: Israeli officials promised they are not planning to attack Iran
Israel Told Russia It Is Not Planning Military Attack On Iran, Dmitry Medvedev Says In CNN Interview | World News | Sky News
Russia President Dmitry Medvedev: Israel Has No Plans To Attack Iran - cbs3.com
Medvedev: Israel Not Planning Iran Strike - CBS News
The Moscow Times | News | Medvedev: Israel Won’t Attack Iran

and an attack on Iran will be viewed as an attack on Russia...
Asia Times Online :: Middle East News - Attack Iran and you attack Russia

Now you know why Israel and the US are arming and training Georgia. Look at a map. .

WRONG! The reason is Georgia is a good payer and orders the arms!

Well, since you're so smart, I've got some great oceanfront real estate for you in Arizona. Cheap.

(I should have thought of that myself, actually. It's all about arems dealing profits. There's no policy objective involved, despite the fact that the play in Georgia is actually mapped out in published policy recommendations. I guess I shouldn't believe everything I read, even when it actually happens. Thanks for correcting me on this one.)

You also know why Obama has been continuing Bush's missile shield games in Poland.

Do your homework, Obama scrapped the plan a while back!

Do you know what the word "analyze" means? Or do you simply take everything at face value? Why do you think the missile shield was dropped? Remember - it was always sold as a defense against a rogue missile from Iran. Why do you think it was dropped? if you believe the canned reason provided by the White House, I've got more oceanfront property for you. It's in Kansas. Give me a call and I'll get you a great price.

 

[Mr Natural]

C'mon baby let the end times roll!

 

[Contumacious]

It's a no brainer. Self defense. Whena leader publicly decalres a desire to kill you and then is as close to nuke weapons as Iran is...bah!

Hope you like $20 a gallon gas. WHAT A FUCKING MORON!!! If you want the ME to go up in flames fine but most of us with a brain don't.

What is wrong with you man, it is indeed our responsibility our honor to take bullets for the zionuts.

It is indeed our responsibility our honor to pay $20.00 a gallon, or more, to secure the Talmudist State.

Apologize.


.

 

[The T]

*I* heartily encourage ISRAEL to do whatever is necessary to ensure the safety of their people. *PERIOD*

 

[Cold Fusion38]

I want ANY of you PRO-Nuking Iran to tell me if you know the difference between a PREEMPTIVE war and a PREVENTITIVE war. Just a hint one is legal the other isn't. Oh one more hint we started the ILLEGAL type when we attacked IRAQ. Need any more help. Look it up and tell me what kind of war Israel would be waging if they attack Iran, which by the way will be a FATAL error especially if they use a nuke.

 

[GHook93]

I want ANY of you PRO-Nuking Iran to tell me if you know the difference between a PREEMPTIVE war and a PREVENTITIVE war. Just a hint one is legal the other isn't. Oh one more hint we started the ILLEGAL type when we attacked IRAQ. Need any more help. Look it up and tell me what kind of war Israel would be waging if they attack Iran, which by the way will be a FATAL error especially if they use a nuke.

You are talking about the legality of war, wow you are a bright one! Should the Frogs have said to Hitler, Please turn around Hitler you are conducting an illegal war!

In reality there is NO SUCH THING as a legal war. That is something you brain dead liberals cooked up to condemn America and Israel!

 

[Si modo]

I want ANY of you PRO-Nuking Iran to tell me if you know the difference between a PREEMPTIVE war and a PREVENTITIVE war. Just a hint one is legal the other isn't. Oh one more hint we started the ILLEGAL type when we attacked IRAQ. Need any more help. Look it up and tell me what kind of war Israel would be waging if they attack Iran, which by the way will be a FATAL error especially if they use a nuke.

If you read through the thread carefully, no one is advocating nuking Iran (unless Iran nukes another first, that is).

 

[GHook93]

*I* heartily encourage ISRAEL to do whatever is necessary to ensure the safety of their people. *PERIOD*

While I agree with that statement, I don't think bombing Iran is accomplishes those ends!
In '67 Israel's enemies were mobilizing at her borders and getting ready to attack, Israel HAD to attack and was MORE than just in kicking the shit out of the Arabs in 6 day (more like 6 hours).

But this case is different. Iran is not moblizing at Israel's borders (although she arms to the teeth Israel's enemies in Gaza and Lebanon). She has no method to invade. She has no air force or navy worth a damn that could compete with even Israel's jurior cadets. Lastly, her missile capabilities are nothing more than a paper dragon. Nevertheless an attack by Israeli would cause repercussions that would be detrimental and in the end NOT WORTH IT! This is much different situation then '67 and IT NEEDS TO BE TREATED AS SUCH! Let the Islamic Revolution of Iran die on its own. Its going to happen sooner rather than later!

 

[Cold Fusion38]

*I* heartily encourage ISRAEL to do whatever is necessary to ensure the safety of their people. *PERIOD*

While I agree with that statement, I don't think bombing Iran is accomplishes those ends!
In '67 Israel's enemies were mobilizing at her borders and getting ready to attack, Israel HAD to attack and was MORE than just in kicking the shit out of the Arabs in 6 day (more like 6 hours).

But this case is different. Iran is not moblizing at Israel's borders (although she arms to the teeth Israel's enemies in Gaza and Lebanon). She has no method to invade. She has no air force or navy worth a damn that could compete with even Israel's jurior cadets. Lastly, her missile capabilities are nothing more than a paper dragon. Nevertheless an attack by Israeli would cause repercussions that would be detrimental and in the end NOT WORTH IT! This is much different situation then '67 and IT NEEDS TO BE TREATED AS SUCH! Let the Islamic Revolution of Iran die on its own. Its going to happen sooner rather than later!

Wow you just illustrated the difference between PREEMPTIVE and PREVENTITIVE war. A+ for you GHook.

 

[GHook93]

*I* heartily encourage ISRAEL to do whatever is necessary to ensure the safety of their people. *PERIOD*

While I agree with that statement, I don't think bombing Iran is accomplishes those ends!
In '67 Israel's enemies were mobilizing at her borders and getting ready to attack, Israel HAD to attack and was MORE than just in kicking the shit out of the Arabs in 6 day (more like 6 hours).

But this case is different. Iran is not moblizing at Israel's borders (although she arms to the teeth Israel's enemies in Gaza and Lebanon). She has no method to invade. She has no air force or navy worth a damn that could compete with even Israel's jurior cadets. Lastly, her missile capabilities are nothing more than a paper dragon. Nevertheless an attack by Israeli would cause repercussions that would be detrimental and in the end NOT WORTH IT! This is much different situation then '67 and IT NEEDS TO BE TREATED AS SUCH! Let the Islamic Revolution of Iran die on its own. Its going to happen sooner rather than later!

Wow you just illustrated the difference between PREEMPTIVE and PREVENTITIVE war. A+ for you GHook.

Funny we are on the same side of an Israel thread, but there is still so much hostility!

 

[The T]

*I* heartily encourage ISRAEL to do whatever is necessary to ensure the safety of their people. *PERIOD*

While I agree with that statement, I don't think bombing Iran is accomplishes those ends!
In '67 Israel's enemies were mobilizing at her borders and getting ready to attack, Israel HAD to attack and was MORE than just in kicking the shit out of the Arabs in 6 day (more like 6 hours).

But this case is different. Iran is not moblizing at Israel's borders (although she arms to the teeth Israel's enemies in Gaza and Lebanon). She has no method to invade. She has no air force or navy worth a damn that could compete with even Israel's jurior cadets. Lastly, her missile capabilities are nothing more than a paper dragon. Nevertheless an attack by Israeli would cause repercussions that would be detrimental and in the end NOT WORTH IT! This is much different situation then '67 and IT NEEDS TO BE TREATED AS SUCH! Let the Islamic Revolution of Iran die on its own. Its going to happen sooner rather than later!

I agree with Letting their internal affairs of IRAN be IRAN'S demise. The young people of Iran will be the DOWNFALL of that brutal theocracy. It's still happening, but we just aren't hearing of it. Enough said on that side of it.

All I stated was this "*I* heartily encourage ISRAEL to do whatever is necessary to ensure the safety of their people. *PERIOD* "

There was no pretense as to the premise of the discussion. I just support Israel, PERIOD. (And I don't think they would do such a thing if unprovoked, albiet I know what they did to IRAQ, for I was on duty in Northern Greece when that went down).

But still I am for their efforts of self-preservation *IF provoked*.

 

[MaggieMae]

did i miss something? i didn't see any suggestion that Israel nuke Iran. The suggestion was that Israel take out Iran's nuclear capability.

And you presume that the moderate Arab states would be troubled by Iran being de-nuked. I think that's a leap.

How would they "take out" (bomb) Iran's nuclear sites without the risk of setting off a nuclear explosion? Does the IAEA yet know how far along Iran has come with building weapons grade bombs from uranium or plutonium (which they have)?

Iran's neighbors are Saudi Arabia (quasi friendly) and Jordan (friendly for now), and Syria and Iran (NOT friendly). Israel might be resting on its laurels from successfully taking out Syria's nuclear facility, but I'll bet that wasn't enough to deter Syria completely. After all, thereafter weren't they trying to buy some nuclear goodies from North Korea?

There is much more to making radioactive material explode than detonation. There will be no nuclear chain reaction unless the HEU is at critical mass which depends on the material's density, mass, and geometry. Few store HEU at these conditions unless it is in a warhead and it's beyond stupid to have a warhead at a production facility. Iranians are not stupid, either.

They don't have to have it contained in a warhead. It's dangerous shit, and under certain conditions, even mishandling it could cause an explosion. One would think that a bomb dropped in the immediate vicinity of this material wouldn't just go 'boom' and that's that, but further damage highly possible.

Managing Military Uranium and Plutonium in the United States and the Former Soviet Union: Technical Background - Harvard - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs

 

[Contumacious]

In reality there is NO SUCH THING as a legal war.

Let me show you what legal wars are:

1) The Palestinian Jihad against the invading zionuts

2) The 2008 Hezbollah Talmudist war where Lebanese patriots repelled the invading Zionists

3) The Afghan resistance to the invading neocrazies

etc, etc, etc.

Capisce?

.

 

[GHook93]

How would they "take out" (bomb) Iran's nuclear sites without the risk of setting off a nuclear explosion? Does the IAEA yet know how far along Iran has come with building weapons grade bombs from uranium or plutonium (which they have)?

Iran's neighbors are Saudi Arabia (quasi friendly) and Jordan (friendly for now), and Syria and Iran (NOT friendly). Israel might be resting on its laurels from successfully taking out Syria's nuclear facility, but I'll bet that wasn't enough to deter Syria completely. After all, thereafter weren't they trying to buy some nuclear goodies from North Korea?

There is much more to making radioactive material explode than detonation. There will be no nuclear chain reaction unless the HEU is at critical mass which depends on the material's density, mass, and geometry. Few store HEU at these conditions unless it is in a warhead and it's beyond stupid to have a warhead at a production facility. Iranians are not stupid, either.

They don't have to have it contained in a warhead. It's dangerous shit, and under certain conditions, even mishandling it could cause an explosion. One would think that a bomb dropped in the immediate vicinity of this material wouldn't just go 'boom' and that's that, but further damage highly possible.

Managing Military Uranium and Plutonium in the United States and the Former Soviet Union: Technical Background - Harvard - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs

Very true, but if one nuke goes off in Israel expect (which Iran surely does) a MASSIVE Nuclear strike across the Middle East. 100 nukes for Iran. 100+ aimed at Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Mecca, Medina, Egypt, Libya etc! Iran know if Israel gets nuked Iran would be hit HARD by Israel's nukes along with the rest of the middle east. I think that is more than enough from preventing one of their nukes from widing up in Israel. Hell Pakistan is FULL of Islamo terrorist hell bent on sending 1.1 mil Indians up in smoke, yet none of their nukes have ended up in India. MADD as work!

Trust me I don't want a nuclear Iran, but I think a strike is well premature!

 

[Cold Fusion38]

While I agree with that statement, I don't think bombing Iran is accomplishes those ends!
In '67 Israel's enemies were mobilizing at her borders and getting ready to attack, Israel HAD to attack and was MORE than just in kicking the shit out of the Arabs in 6 day (more like 6 hours).

But this case is different. Iran is not moblizing at Israel's borders (although she arms to the teeth Israel's enemies in Gaza and Lebanon). She has no method to invade. She has no air force or navy worth a damn that could compete with even Israel's jurior cadets. Lastly, her missile capabilities are nothing more than a paper dragon. Nevertheless an attack by Israeli would cause repercussions that would be detrimental and in the end NOT WORTH IT! This is much different situation then '67 and IT NEEDS TO BE TREATED AS SUCH! Let the Islamic Revolution of Iran die on its own. Its going to happen sooner rather than later!

Wow you just illustrated the difference between PREEMPTIVE and PREVENTITIVE war. A+ for you GHook.

Funny we are on the same side of an Israel thread, but there is still so much hostility!

Well I am MORE than happy to try to bury it if you are.(olive branch)

 

[MaggieMae]

we are not going to prevent a war with iran, its impossible at this point.

Besides Iran has been at war with us for 30 years

and through proxy war with israel

maybe you should stfu

On Sept. 20 this year the Kremlin announced that Israel has promised not to strike Iran.

Additionally, Putin and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei have stated that an American attack on Iran will be viewed by Moscow as an attack on Russia - us engagement in Iran will mean war with Russia.

Now you know why Israel and the US are arming and training Georgia. Look at a map. You also know why Obama has been continuing Bush's missile shield games in Poland. Again, look at a map. Who is the missile shield defending from? Non-existant nuclear missiles in Iran? Or an existing arsenal in Russia. This is why Russia has resumed flying it's long range bombers to Cuba.

So how can Israel attack Iran? They can't do it without our help. But we can't do it without facing a potential strategic response from Russia.

Unless we have overwhelming cause that can be used as justification for an attack. In other words, unless our attack is conducted as a response.

The only question is what kind of event would we need Iran to commit in order to justify a heavy-handed response? And knowing that they are already in the jaws of the tiger and will be attacked with minimal provocation, what kind of event would Iran intentionally commit, if any?

Of course, we could take the Sunday editorial caricature approach and picture Iranians to be a bunch of mindless, gaping, sloberring mullahs with no sense of reality who are jumping at an opportunity to have their countrymen bombed back to the 12th century like Iraq, but we all know that's not the truth. Iran has a careful, conservative government (except for the loose cannon Adjiminima-bob, who is tolerated by the Supreme Council whom he reports to) and I highly doubt that they'd slit their own throats by provoking round two of shock and awe.

The only thing wrong with your post is that Obama has scrapped the missile defense shield because the shield is a threat to improving relations with Russia, and Russia DOES have nuclear warheads. Lots of them.

 

[Si modo]

How would they "take out" (bomb) Iran's nuclear sites without the risk of setting off a nuclear explosion? Does the IAEA yet know how far along Iran has come with building weapons grade bombs from uranium or plutonium (which they have)?

Iran's neighbors are Saudi Arabia (quasi friendly) and Jordan (friendly for now), and Syria and Iran (NOT friendly). Israel might be resting on its laurels from successfully taking out Syria's nuclear facility, but I'll bet that wasn't enough to deter Syria completely. After all, thereafter weren't they trying to buy some nuclear goodies from North Korea?

There is much more to making radioactive material explode than detonation. There will be no nuclear chain reaction unless the HEU is at critical mass which depends on the material's density, mass, and geometry. Few store HEU at these conditions unless it is in a warhead and it's beyond stupid to have a warhead at a production facility. Iranians are not stupid, either.

They don't have to have it contained in a warhead. It's dangerous shit, and under certain conditions, even mishandling it could cause an explosion. One would think that a bomb dropped in the immediate vicinity of this material wouldn't just go 'boom' and that's that, but further damage highly possible.

Managing Military Uranium and Plutonium in the United States and the Former Soviet Union: Technical Background - Harvard - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs

Your fear that bombing an HEU production facility would cause detonation is unfounded, and your own link shows that.