"What If Israel Bombed Nuclear Facilities In Iran?" Topic

Sorry Kyote, I tried.

I normally agree with Lion, but I don't here; it is possible to talk about the wargaming aspects of modern events without getting into the political dimensions and stirring up trouble. Possible but not probable.

I tried to stay out of this, but when we reached the point where there was an entire wall of anti-Israeli quotes I figured I'd go ahead and say something.

V/R,
Jack

Well politics came into it with the "Iranians want the apocalypse" theme, followed by "Israel can do what it likes because they're the good guys".
I happen to disagree with both those premises.

Not completely sure what Iran or many in the region really want. But I think possibly Iran wants to regain it's lost empire … as do the Turks … The Saudis just want to be the big moslem kid on the block. If for no other reason, Mecca and Medina are in their country. Add to the mix, The Turks and Saudis are primarily Sunni and Iran is Shia' … Well there goes the neighborhood. As for Israel … they just want to survive. As anyone can see, they are a small nation which is 80% Jewish [yes, 20% in Israel are Arabs !] surrounded by moslems … Who at any given time want or wanted Israel gone. Regardless of the fact, that in '48 the UN approved the creation of the Jewish state … Which inturn, caused Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, etc., to declare war and cross the borders of the "New" Jewish state. Within a day or two of the UN declaration of the Jew nation. And it's been a messy unstable affair ever since … sadly …

Israel is an island in a sea of hostility and has to be constantly vigilant in order to survive, but her current president's intractability on the Palestinian issue isn't helping her cause with her traditional allies in America and Europe.

Not to mention Bibi's ceaseless attempts to undermine the Geneva talks, making Israel appear unreasonable when the US and Europe are trying hard in good faith to hammer out a nuclear deal with Iran. Instead, Israel takes every opportunity to kill Iranian generals in airstrikes when they're in Syria leading the fight against Sunni Islamists.

Note that of all the nations that invaded Israel in the past, Iran wasn't one of them.

I've always been sympathetic to Israel in the past, but her recent actions and policies make it increasingly difficult to remain so.

Israel is an island in a sea of hostility and has to be constantly vigilant in order to survive

And you wonder why the Israelis believe that Iran is really going to nuke them like their propaganda says they will as soon as Iran has enough nukes to do the job?

The last time a politician said he was going to exterminate the Jews, it was the 1920s.

"I've always been sympathetic to Israel in the past, but her recent actions and policies make it increasingly difficult to remain so."

Spot-on.

Bibi's reelection has put the Palestinians in the driver's seat for new negotiations. Bibi stated very clearly that he does not and will not support a Palestinian state.

Therefore, the Palestinians can claim that it is hopeless to negotiate with Israel, and ask for independent recognition, since they have no other choice.

Therefore, the Palestinians can claim that it is hopeless to negotiate with Israel, and ask for independent recognition, since they have no other choice.

And in turn more blood will be shed … again … Seems there is no way out … Other than endless conflicts.

Awkward problem for you Lion is that the Iranians, unlike the Israelis, have never invaded anyone since 1945.

Nor, according to Mossad, do they have any likelihood of getting nukes if the near future.

Israel is NOT alone in a sea of hatred, it has good relations with Jordan and Egypt.

Much of the remaining hatred, increasingly it has earned and indeed seems to enjoy.

Jews have a right of self-defense in Israel, Stu. Not so in France, or the UK for that matter, where all must rely on The Authorities for protection. I think you honestly can't see the difference, but there is one.

Everyone has a right of self defence in the UK, don't know about France, based on an assumption that you will try to avoid conflict if possible and will use an appropriate level of force in response to an assault.

Not sure what you mean about a Jewish right but everyone should be the same under the law surely?

Awkward problem for you Lion is that the Iranians, unlike the Israelis, have never invaded anyone since 1945.

Iran-Iraq war? Well, I guess Iraq did start that one, but after 1982 Iran was invading Iraq (or occupying Iraqi territory, however you care to spin it).

Iran has also only been invaded once since 1945 (in 1980), while Israel has been in wars in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973…

So tell me who is more reasonably paranoid about nations publicly threatening their national survival.

Israel has rockets called Jericho's(sat launchers if I remember correctly ) what other types do they have with the range to hit iran
what I am thinking Jericho's or whatever equipped with gps guided bunker busters ,take out the most important/critical components

Awkward problem for you Lion is that the Iranians, unlike the Israelis, have never invaded anyone since 1945.

You are right. They prefer to finance terrorist groups to proxy their attacks on foreign countries. Well spotted, Stu!

let him who is without blame etc..

Tell me who of the big players hasnt?

QUESTION:

If the Iranians get radiated with Uranium, do they become Uranians?

Dan

Tell me who of the big players hasnt?

Moving the goalposts? So soon in the discussion? Tsk, tsk…

Zippy – odd how the Israelis get snippy when Palestinians claim the same right of self-defence…

And for the record, whereas we don't have a lot of guns here, we do have the right to use lethal force to defend ourselves if we feel threatened.

Nice to see you back, Stu, and latto too.

Goalposts are still where they were basileus, Im just asking if theres more than one team playing the game.
Iran isnt the only country we know which has used proxies to conduct terrorism, there are other countries on that list arent there?

Yes, of course… problem is that we were talking about Israel and Iran, not "other countries". Therefore your contention that Iran, somehow, has a less aggressive foreign policy than Israel because she hadn't launched any invasion of late doesn't fit the known facts, i.e. that Iran has financed, trained and armed groups like Hezbollah in order to impose her political will on foreign countries. May be Hezbollah doesn't wear the uniforms of the Revolutionary Guard, but they are the spear tip of Iran's military power in Levant.

Iran has also only been invaded once since 1945 (in 1980), while Israel has been in wars in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973…

One small point of clarification.

In the 50s the west backed a coup that installed a despotic, brutal dictator in Iran. Not an invasion but certainly foreign intervention resulting in decades of oppression, torture, and corruption.

As usual we suffered blowback when Islamic extremists rebelled against our man in Tehran and which we still deal with to this day.

Now, given the fact the Israeli nukes are also held against International Law, what would be the reaction if the Iranians attacked the Israeli facilities?

Given the tone of the recent campaign by Netanyahu, they could reasonably claim the right to first-strike before an attack…..

Basileus – contrary to what I sometimes write Im not particularly pro Iranian, but I do get narked when they and Israel (mainly) get held to different standards of behaviour. Which happens a fair bit round here… naturally contrary I suppose.
Not sure I argued Iran has a less aggressive foreign policy – possibly verbally (slightly) and physically (a lot)more restrained than israel(syria maybe excluded) but wanting to extend its influence like most countries.

Zippy – good to see you can't tell the difference between being against Israeli colonialism and anti-Semitism.

As I have complained about that slander I hope you enjoy your time in the Dawghouse.

Now, given the fact the Israeli nukes are also held against International Law, what would be the reaction if the Iranians attacked the Israeli facilities?

Given the tone of the recent campaign by Netanyahu, they could reasonably claim the right to first-strike before an attack…..

Stu

There is no "International Law" on nukes per se. Just an agreement between the two superpowers and their lackeys to stop other countries from acquiring nukes. After all they wanted to preserve their monopoly on nuclear deterrance, didn't they?

Israel is the only country in the Middle East where you can practice your religion without State interference. It is the only country over there where a homosexual can be so openly without being murdered. It is the only country where a woman is not a second-class citizen. It is the only country where the civil and penal laws are not dictated by the conflicting interpretations of religious authorities about the actual meaning of the musings of a long deceased prophet.

Ask the Druzes why they being Muslim have cast their lot with Israel. Ask them why the so-called "racist" Israel not only allows but actively protects their faith, their customs and their language.

Not so bad for a bunch of colonialist oppresors, don't you think?

Point of order: the Druze are NOT Muslim. They're less Muslim than the Mormons are Christian (sorry, LDS types, but one of the foundation points of Christianity is the Nicean Crede. Don't believe in that, you're not Christian according to everyone else who is, and a lot of people who aren't Christian.)

Israel is the only country in the Middle East where you can practice your religion without State interference.

There was another one until fairly recently. Iraq had the one of the largest Jewish populations in the Arab world under Saddam and Christians had their own bishop in Baghdad.

I say no nukes at all in the Middle East – including Israel.

So if even one country has nukes, I say give out free old nukes to each of the other countries, to even the field.

Dan

Okay … Let's try this again.

Then, once there's peace across the land once again, dealing with any remaining governments should be a lot easier.

Dan

Point of order: the Druze are NOT Muslim.

Yep. I was mistaken. They are not Muslim.

Something else while we're sorting out the players … About 20% of Israeli citizens are Arabs. And as we see, not all those Arabs are moslem either … Just a point of clarification … or muddy the waters further ? Your call …

They're also very much treated like second-class citizens.

Netanyahu just used the idea of them voting to scar ehis own crowd to the polling booths.

Israel is the only country in the Middle East where you can practice your religion without State interference.

Try selling that idea to Reform or Conservative Jews who make Aliyah. Freedom of religious practice for non-Orthodox Jews is a bit of an issue over here…

It is the only country where the civil and penal laws are not dictated by the conflicting interpretations of religious authorities about the actual meaning of the musings of a long deceased prophet.

Actually, in Israel personal status and family relations come under the jurisdiction of religious tribunals which apply Jewish Halakha and Muslim Sharia (amongst others) depending on your community. Oh yes, and the legally recognised Jewish community does not include Reform or Conservative Jews, only Orthodox…

There is no "International Law" on nukes per se. Just an agreement between the two superpowers and their lackeys to stop other countries from acquiring nukes. After all they wanted to preserve their monopoly on nuclear deterrance, didn't they?

While more-or-less true, Basileus, the big reason Israel hasn't seen a lot of censure over their nuke program is that the chance of Israel sharing nuke tech is very low. Granted that they did share a little with South Africa, but that tiny program was dismantled before the end of apartheid. And there has been no further "leak" since the 1980s.

Also, there seems to be a certain "critical mass" (pardon the pun) of nukes, where countries that have a low number of nukes seem to think that a nuclear war is winnable, but as soon as they reach ~200 weapons they shift into Mutually Assured Destruction.

Legion 4: " … Just a point of clarification … or muddy the waters further ? Your call …"

Are you kiddin'!!! Clarification for sure. Thanks.

Dan

Israel is the only country in the Middle East where you can practice your religion without State interference.

Not actually true…. Both Tunisia and Lebanon have freedom of religion, and Tunisia still has a Jewish community.

You are correct regarding homosexuals and wrong regarding womens rights.

For a start plenty of Jews regard women as second class citizens….

For a start plenty of Jews regard women as second class citizens….

Not the Law. Not the State. Not the Civil and Penal codes. A lot of Britons, and Spanish, and Germans also consider women as less than a first class citizen, but they are a minority and the Law doesn't abide by their bigotry.

"Israel is the only country in the Middle East where you can practice your religion without State interference."

Israel has different rules/rights for different ethnic groups, and can certainly not be thought of as an enlightened democracy. Not to mention extrajudicial killings.

Wow!
Just came off the KatieL thread to see this one…

So, is it a good observation that the longer the thread the greater chance of folks getting dog-housed?

Basileus – indeed.

But women have theoretical parity under the law in quite a for Muslim states as well, examples being Tunisia and Lebanon.

Butt attitudes on a whole range of subjects between extreme Islamists and Extreme Orthodox Jews are remarkably similar.