Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: AKIron on June 20, 2008, 02:34:23 PM
-
Rule 7
-
Whatever the response it will likely be in one of two areas. Either they already have a nuke ready or they will launch a retaliatory air strike. That will end up destroying what's left of the iranian air force. The nuke can be delivered by air, missile or ship.
There will not be a large scale ground action response possible except by a joint arab operation. In either case it's going to be a large destabilizing situation.
-
missiles into israel, silkworms missiles into shipping lanes in the straight, and hamas and hezbollah cells in USA causing chaos and death here in the states...
-
Could be ship hitting sand time. What do you think Iran's response would be to an attack by Israel?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,369465,00.html
Public outrage, a call for international censure, claims of innocence, issuance of fatwa, declaration of holy war, comparisons to Hitler, denouncement of the Zionist state, about a million 7.62 rounds fired into the air amidst flag burning, a heavy and persistent smell of flatulance.
Then a whole lot of nothing.
-
(http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/2332551/2/istockphoto_2332551_gun_powder_barrel.jpg)
Who's got a match?
-
slipknot has it right.
-
Maverick - they don't have a nuke. Unless you somehow have more knowledge about Iranian capabilities than MI6, the CIA and Mossad - because I'm pretty sure something would have happened by now if the respective masters of those organisations had even the slightest hint of a nuke ready to be used.
The Israelis are sabre rattling to show that they mean business and would not countenance any further Uranium enrichment. And it takes more than enrichment to make and deliver a bomb, anyways.
Hopefully, an attack could be avoided.
-
slipknot's insight and location suggest he is part of this well-orchestrated show of force :noid
-
What do you think Iran's response would be to an attack by Israel?
-war against Israel (Ezekiel 38)
- total destruction of the Babylon described in Jeremiah 50,Isaiah 13,Daniel,Revelation 17.
-
Enough laser-guided bunker-busters, one on top of the other, will bore down far enough :aok
-
I think bombing Iran should be a last resort. From what I've read(no, I'm not an expert) there are faction in Iran that are quite pro democracy. Hopefully, we can give them time to develop further.
-
Israel has an established track record with bombing nuclear facilities, such as in Baghdad in 1981. It was even done on a Sunday to prevent workers from being injured, and, was bombed before going into production to avoid any nuclear health related injuries to those in the area. Israels justification in 1981 is the same as it is today towards Iran. They will not allow themselves to be attacked by nuclear weapons. And as Iran is following suit, Iraq claimed it was not for nuclear weapons.
Its been done before, Israel is capable of doing it again and bombing all the facilities in one strike.
-
Israel has an established track record with bombing nuclear facilities, such as in Baghdad in 1981. It was even done on a Sunday to prevent workers from being injured, and, was bombed before going into production to avoid any nuclear health related injuries to those in the area. Israels justification in 1981 is the same as it is today towards Iran. They will not allow themselves to be attacked by nuclear weapons. And as Iran is following suit, Iraq claimed it was not for nuclear weapons.
Its been done before, Israel is capable of doing it again and bombing all the facilities in one strike.
yes, I believe we all know this...ummm okayyyy.
-
-war against Israel (Ezekiel 38)
That one alone pretty much sums it up. You do NOT want to mess with Israel. Period, end of story.
Track record? Look what happened when Israel was threatened by not one but a few countries at once :O http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761570433/six-day_war.html (http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761570433/six-day_war.html)
-
There is a reason we have a big part to play with israel.
And we have for a very very very long time.
Our tanks, our guns, our aircraft, almost everything was developed here, and fielded there.
fairly sure if for some reason israel started to fall as a state, you would shortly find american foot prints in the same sand helping to defend her.
-
There is a reason we have a big part to play with israel.
And we have for a very very very long time.
Our tanks, our guns, our aircraft, almost everything was developed here, and fielded there.
fairly sure if for some reason israel started to fall as a state, you would shortly find american foot prints in the same sand helping to defend her.
That, and it would be the right thing to do
-
total destruction of the Babylon described in Jeremiah 50,Isaiah 13,Daniel,Revelation 17
Err... Babylon no longer exists as a city and was a ruin 200 years before the birth of Christ. Furthermore, it's remains are 50 miles from Baghdad.
So in summary - wrong country, wrong target. So much for allowing the bible to dictate foreign policy! :lol
-
Err... Babylon no longer exists as a city and was a ruin 200 years before the birth of Christ. Furthermore, it's remains are 50 miles from Baghdad.
So in summary - wrong country, wrong target. So much for allowing the bible to dictate foreign policy! :lol
.......... or so the Germans would have us believe....
-
Yikes, I posted a fox news link and mentioned the ship hitting the sand and asked what might be Iran's response. Not sure what's offensive about that, oh well. If someone was offended by this my apologies but Iran as a threat to world security is not going away even if we ignore it.
Israel's exercise certainly could be seen as saber rattling. However, they have a history of following through on their threats. I have little doubt that if Iran is in fact pursuing development of nuclear weapons they will be attacked. I hope slipknot is correct in his assessment but I doubt it.
-
-war against Israel (Ezekiel 38)
- total destruction of the Babylon described in Jeremiah 50,Isaiah 13,Daniel,Revelation 17.
Beside the fact that I dont believe in this religious texts in which some hypersensitive people may believe:
Babylon was an old city-empire of the semitic race. It existed centuries before the iranians entered the region.
The semitic Babylon was finally conquered by the achaemenid iranians of the aryan race and became part of their Persian Empire.
Today Babylon is in the country called Iraq. So - if you really want to believe in the religeous prophecies the total destruction of Babylon/Iraq already was accomplished.
-
Beside the fact that I dont believe in this religious bla bla:
Careful what you say, some may be hypersensitive and consider this offensive.
-
Careful what you say, some may be hypersensitive and consider this offensive.
OK - I modified the text. :)
Nevertheless it remains a funny fact that someone would compare Babylon with Iran.
If there was a typical semitic high culture city-nation then it would be Babylon.
Iran on the other side conquered the semitic states but it was never one. In fact the semitic arabs are the traditional enemy of Iran. One of their leader, Saddam, attacked us and fought an 8year war against us. And he considered himself the reborn leader of the old Babylon.
So its ridiculöous for an iranian if someone take Babylon for Iran. Hope that this sentence wont be considered as an insult by hypersensitive Babylon-Fans. ;)
-
Yeah... I'm liking where this thread is goin'. Religion debates on the internet are always fun.
-
So its ridiculöous for an iranian if someone take Babylon for Iran. Hope that this sentence wont be considered as an insult by hypersensitive Babylon-Fans.
Probably just an honest mistake on Ghi's part. I do think that it is a pretty funny one though. :D
I don't think Israel will allow Iran's nuclear program to get to the point where they can build nuclear weapons. They will pull off an air strike similar to the one in 81.
-
Yeah... I'm liking where this thread is goin'. Religion debates on the internet are always fun.
It's also a good way to hijack a thread, too. The Isreali's will more than likely bomb any potential Iranian weapons' facility's. They did with the Iraqi's, and they just recently hit the Syrian's. Look at the responses' in both of those incidents.
-
It's also a good way to hijack a thread, too. The Isreali's will more than likely bomb any potential Iranian weapons' facility's. They did with the Iraqi's, and they just recently hit the Syrian's. Look at the responses' in both of those incidents.
Amadmanjihad has been doing a lot of sabre rattling himself in the last few years. If Israel strikes his nuke facilities without a response from Iran he will lose face, unrecoverably. Perhaps he is only a paper tiger, time may tell and it could be soon.
-
OK - I modified the text. :)
I wasn't offended but it seems there may be some around here that are pretty easily.
Something from today.
"The U.N. nuclear watchdog chief warned in comments aired Saturday that any military strike on Iran could turn the Mideast into a "ball of fire" and lead the country to a more aggressive stance on its controversial nuclear program."
Am I missing something here? Wouldn't the middle east becoming a ball fire kinda prevent Iran from continuing it's nuke development program more aggressively? Sounds like this guy is hedging his bet.
-
That one alone pretty much sums it up. You do NOT want to mess with Israel. Period, end of story.
Track record? Look what happened when Israel was threatened by not one but a few countries at once :O http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761570433/six-day_war.html (http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761570433/six-day_war.html)
The war described in Ezekiel 38, is future not history: Persia /Iran did not yet attack Israel after its rebirth in "48, as described below.
"""
Ezekiel 38;
4 I will turn you around, put hooks in your jaws and bring you out with your whole army—your horses, your horsemen fully armed, and a great horde with large and small shields, all of them brandishing their swords. 5 Persia, Cush [c] and Put will be with them, all with shields and helmets, 6 also Gomer with all its troops, and Beth Togarmah from the far north with all its troops—the many nations with you.
7 " 'Get ready; be prepared, you and all the hordes gathered about you, and take command of them.8 After many days you will be called to arms. In future years you will invade a land that has recovered from war, whose people were gathered from many nations to the mountains of Israel, which had long been desolate 8 They had been brought out from the nations, and now all of them live in safety. 9 8....
Sorry i don't want to hijak the thread, just answering what i think about the initial Q:
"What do you think Iran's response would be to an attack by Israel?"
-
I don't think that anyone is this thread has mentioned the fact that Iran chooses to fight it's wars by proxy. you're not going to see big air an naval battles........you're going to see random acts of terror...such as moms, dads and kids blown up at a nebraska mcdonalds.....etc....
-
Err... Babylon no longer exists as a city and was a ruin 200 years before the birth of Christ. Furthermore, it's remains are 50 miles from Baghdad.
So in summary - wrong country, wrong target. So much for allowing the bible to dictate foreign policy! :lol
The books of Revelation ,including ch .17 were written in aprox.70AD, and are visions of future ,total destruction of a "great city" ,"in 1 hour" "Mystery Babylon" "Daughter of Babylon" not history of literally ancient city of Babylon wich btw. was never total destroyed by Persia but remained inhabited hundreds of years after
-
The war described in Ezekiel 38, is future not history
Considering when the Bible was written, the future IS now. What is written in Ezekiel 38 could happen anytime. Only The Man himselfs knows exactly when.
(BTW, I was not referring that to the 6 day war in my earlier post, if thats what you were thinking)
-
So basically, the bible the predicts the destruction of a city at some point in the future, which could have been in the last 2500 years?
Wow. That is specific.
Specific bullpoop.
Carthage was pretty much levelled in 150 BC. Dresden looked good in 1945. Grozny in the '90s looked like a great place to hang out. Or do we have other vague predictions to triangulate this great prediction? Perhaps we can rope in Nostradamus into this as well?
Weirdos.
-
So basically, the bible the predicts the destruction of a city at some point in the future, which could have been in the last 2500 years?
Wow. That is specific.
Specific bullpoop.
Carthage was pretty much levelled in 150 BC. Dresden looked good in 1945. Grozny in the '90s looked like a great place to hang out. Or do we have other vague predictions to triangulate this great prediction? Perhaps we can rope in Nostradamus into this as well?
Weirdos.
Certainly there is much more predicted than just the end of an unnamed city. Even an apparent skeptic such as yourself must find at least interesting predictions from over 2000 years ago of world war and apocalypse centered in a region that has been of little interest for the past couple of thousand years? Consider that all the world's focus is on this relatively tiny region to the extent that any major power's attempt to take control of the middle east would likely spark a war of unimaginable proportions. Perhaps the prophesied battle of Armageddon doesn't sound quite so far fetched?
-
Yes. Wild theorising using an overactive imagination and vague translations of ancient texts, often written in dead languages, has me quivering in my boots. Anyone can predict the future.
Sometime in the future men will die.
Easy.
Even an apparent skeptic such as yourself must find at least interesting predictions from over 2000 years ago of world war and apocalypse centered in a region that has been of little interest for the past couple of thousand years?
The middle east is where these mystics lived, spouted their spiel and then died... with no experience of the outside world or other continents than their own. And would you believe it... their prophesy is centred on this place? Oh, the insightfulness! The genius! What a turn up for the books!
People want to believe in 'the sky is falling' scenarios. They jazz up otherwise boring lives and maybe justify mundane existences with the hope that it will all end in a great 'levelling' event. I guess it is kind of like the ultimate form of Marxism, in an ironic way.
Fortunately, most Christian types I've known weren't obsessed with the concept like many on here are.
-
Dang, beat me to it :P
I think there's more to learn from than nostrabogus and other mystical crackpots, in writing like Campbell's noticing the folklore trend away from mysticism, and the gap/yearning it has left in "modern" people and their empiricism/rationalism. It's a lot more interesting and telling to see the clockwork producing the theories, than just taking the theories for granted. Especialy if the theories are as vague as 5$ automated fortune teller ticker-tapes.The middle east is where these mystics lived, spouted their spiel and then died... with no experience of the outside world or other continents than their own. And would you believe it... their prophesy is centred on this place? Oh, the insightfulness! The genius! What a turn up for the books!
:lol
-
I think the bottom line here is, while the rest of the world pontificates around these countires and tries every so-called diplomatic pollitically correct method of dealing with thier continued push toward nuclear capability. Israel simply will not take their crap and deal with it swiftly and decisively.
How do you think the USA would react to an openly hostile Mexico developing Nucelar capability? It's a lot easier to get all proper and dimplomatic if it's not on your doorstep.
-
:noid
-
Yes. Wild theorising using an overactive imagination and vague translations of ancient texts, often written in dead languages, has me quivering in my boots. Anyone can predict the future.
Sometime in the future men will die.
Easy.
The middle east is where these mystics lived, spouted their spiel and then died... with no experience of the outside world or other continents than their own. And would you believe it... their prophesy is centred on this place? Oh, the insightfulness! The genius! What a turn up for the books!
People want to believe in 'the sky is falling' scenarios. They jazz up otherwise boring lives and maybe justify mundane existences with the hope that it will all end in a great 'levelling' event. I guess it is kind of like the ultimate form of Marxism, in an ironic way.
Fortunately, most Christian types I've known weren't obsessed with the concept like many on here are.
And yet they prophesied a 200 million strong army in this battle. A number that was hardly conceivable then yet one which China boasts today.
-
Especialy if the theories are as vague as 5$ automated fortune teller ticker-tapes.
I just love it when maths is brought into the equation... and on cue:
And yet they prophesied a 200 million strong army in this battle. A number that was hardly conceivable then yet one which China boasts today.
Like Dr. Evil in Austin Powers, the prophesy merchants would dream up some vast number to emphasize their point. These stories were first told orally before being written down - all the more reason to exaggerate and use superlative after superlative.
-
nostradamus was 75% wrong. pardon me for interjecting but the bible has a 100% accuracy record when it comes to prophesy. yup that's right 100%.
I will point you to some facts written millenia ago completely describing our world today and how we get our information. open your mind to the source, weigh the information on it's merit alone if you are objective enough to do so. I will not write the subject verses for you. if you are sufficiently interested go find a copy of the book of revelations and read chapter 11 commencing at verse 7. my commentary here is my interpretation of what I read.
two men who are speaking on God's behalf in jerusalem, upon the orders of the one world power will be executed publically before the whole world to see. these corpse will be left to decompose in the hot middle eastern sun. the world (which at this time will mostly be void of believers in the one true God) will gloat over the deaths of these men and revel in their demise even as their bodies fester and fall apart. three and one half days will pass after which time they will be resusitated again before the eyes of the whole world. with the whole world watching and with the news being proclaimed in every language these men will be lifted into God's bosom.
there is further prophecy concerning the identity of these men and there are clues as to who they are which is also in the bible. these are men who were born millenia ago, never suffered death precisely for this mission they are to perform (more on their identities in some future posting). back to the topic. how is it possible for the whole world to see an event in real time and in every language? riddle me that. how was it possible for a person who some claim was clearly deranged to have come up with the concept/vision so far back in history that the lexicon of the time did not contain the verbage he needed to communicate his idea?
-
Perhaps the prophesied battle of Armageddon doesn't sound quite so far fetched?
It isn't far fetched at all..In fact that's what all religions have in common.The nutbag belief that we live a grovelling worthless existance,and the common desire to bring on the apocolypse.
From Bin Laden's attempt to start the ball rolling to the wacko jewish settlers in the West Bank.
Isreal must be protected and Iran must not be allowed to violate the non-proliferation treaty.
-
pardon me for interjecting but the bible has a 100% accuracy record when it comes to prophesy. yup that's right 100%.
What about all the other religions and their "prophesies"?...How can you eliminate dozens(or hundreds) of other "books" and embrace one?Why not be consistant and go one "book" further? Then we can begin intelligent discussion.
-
their prophesies are not 100% fulfilled, they are not inerrant. you have to have 100% accuracy or else it's BS. I didn't make the rules up I just work here, you may want to take it up with management and not with me.
-
their prophesies are not 100% fulfilled, they are not inerrant. you have to have 100% accuracy or else it's BS. I didn't make the rules up I just work here, you may want to take it up with management and not with me.
I tell you what.If you can prove a 100% accuracy rate,I'll order a case of Pat Robertson Protein Shakes.
I'll even ignore the prophesy in the Bible that says the sun revolves around the earth...Whoops!
-
I'll even ignore the prophesy in the Bible that says the sun revolves around the earth...Whoops!
Can you quote that? I mean from the bible itself, not someone's interpretation.
-
100% accuracy in your mind, Storch. I'll answer the main point of your post, as I think it covers the rest:
...how was it possible for a person who some claim was clearly deranged to have come up with the concept/vision so far back in history that the lexicon of the time did not contain the verbage he needed to communicate his idea?
It's simply a matter of the percentages game. How many dozens, hundreds, thousands of other prophesies have not come true? Repeatedly throw a dart at a dart-board whilst blindfolded and you'll get a bulls-eye eventually.
-
Can you quote that? I mean from the bible itself, not someone's interpretation.
Hi Iron..Here are the references to the earth standing still.
Job38:4,1Samuel 2:8,Psalms 93:1,Joshua 10:12
-
Hi Iron..Here are the references to the earth standing still.
Job38:4,1Samuel 2:8,Psalms 93:1,Joshua 10:12
I know of those, you mentioned the sun revolving around the earth.
-
The Bible does not explicitly state the earth revolves around the sun(you are correct)...The writers of the Bible assumed everyone already knew (thought) that.So it only makes reference to the earth as the center of our known universe.
If the Bible had made reference to us and other planets orbitting the sun,that would be slam dunk evidence that the Bible is God's word and of his existence.
But the good book gets it all wrong and is in itself evidence that God is man-made..And it shows.
-
dp
-
Err... Babylon no longer exists as a city and was a ruin 200 years before the birth of Christ. Furthermore, it's remains are 50 miles from Baghdad.
So in summary - wrong country, wrong target. So much for allowing the bible to dictate foreign policy! :lol
obviously you don't read the bible,(and if you do, you have no comprehension) the Babylon, they are referring to is Israel.
-
obviously you don't read the bible,(and if you do, you have no comprehension) the Babylon, they are referring to is Israel.
Wrong. The Babylon they are referring to is the city of Babylon whose ruins are south of Baghdad.
Here's a website evangelising the prophesies in the bible. Perhaps you should take up their errors with them.
http://www.biblebasics.co.uk/arch/arch12.htm
-
Non-scholarly religious debates are worse than banging my head against the wall. :rolleyes:
This thread is hopelessly off-track.
-
Hi Iron..Here are the references to the earth standing still.
Job38:4,1Samuel 2:8,Psalms 93:1,Joshua 10:12
so lets see
JOB 38: " were where you when i laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding."
1Samuel: 2-8 "He raises the poor from the dust and lifts the beggar from the ash heap,, to set them among princes and make them inherit the throne of glory, for the pillars of the earth are Yahaveh's (The LORDS), and he has set the world upon them."
Joshua:10-12,then Joshua spoke to Yahaveh in the day when Yahaveh deliverd up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel:"sun stand still over Gibeon;and Moon, in the valley of Aijalon."
10-13, so the sun stood still,and the moon stopped, Till the people had revenge upon there enemies. is this not written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and did not hasten to go down for about a whole day.
10-14, and there has been no day like that, before it or after it, that Yahaveh, heeded the voice of a man; for Yahaveh fought for Israel."
So much for your earth standing still "quotes"
here is a prophesy for ya
Joel 2-5; "with a noise like chariots over Mountaintops they leap,like the noise of a flaming fire that devours the stubble, like a strong people set in battle array."
i wounder how this writer knew people would leap over mountaintops? imagine what the people of his day thought about that!
to you people who believe this world when it says "there is no God" i pity you, for you follow Satan and will inherit his cup!!
for he is the GOD of this world!!
-
Wrong. The Babylon they are referring to is the city of Babylon whose ruins are south of Baghdad.
Here's a website evangelising the prophesies in the bible. Perhaps you should take up their errors with them.
http://www.biblebasics.co.uk/arch/arch12.htm
sorry but i dont listen to what men say the bible says, i read it for myself and ask Yahaveh for understanding!
-
nostradamus was 75% wrong.
Yes was wrong , but but his predictions are pointing to Persia also, and may lead to another possible answer to the initial question in topic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfltcV_f4xM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfltcV_f4xM)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7soQzdDp0Rg&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7soQzdDp0Rg&feature=related)
I been watching this movie during Cold War when a WW3 between Russia and West could blow up anytime and was 100% fantasy at that time. But,in the last 20 years, the world has changed a lot in the direction predicted by Nostradamus : the end of Cold War , New York was already hit by islamic terrorists and the tensions between Israel,West vs islamic fascists and Persia are rising every day. I don't believe all of it, but scenario in this documentary has more chances to became reality than was 20 years ago.
-
100% accuracy in your mind, Storch. I'll answer the main point of your post, as I think it covers the rest:
It's simply a matter of the percentages game. How many dozens, hundreds, thousands of other prophesies have not come true? Repeatedly throw a dart at a dart-board whilst blindfolded and you'll get a bulls-eye eventually.
no not in my mind. run the numbers for yourself on just prophecy in the hebrew bible and you will see. 100% accurate 100% of the time. it is infallable and quite impressive.
-
The Bible does not explicitly state the earth revolves around the sun(you are correct)...The writers of the Bible assumed everyone already knew (thought) that.So it only makes reference to the earth as the center of our known universe.
If the Bible had made reference to us and other planets orbitting the sun,that would be slam dunk evidence that the Bible is God's word and of his existence.
But the good book gets it all wrong and is in itself evidence that God is man-made..And it shows.
Thank you for admitting there was no "whoops". In regards to the earth being the center of the universe, though again I don't think you will find any proclamation of this in the Bible, perhaps the earth is in fact the center of the universe, well, at least as much as any other point in the universe. http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/ExpandUni.html
-
to you people who believe this world when it says "there is no God" i pity you, for you follow Satan and will inherit his cup!!
for he is the GOD of this world!!
[/quote]
Your not giving me a choice there bro.How samaritain of you....I choose to follow neither.
-
I suppose the references to bible prophecy were inevitable in a thread about war in the middle east though it was not my intent to induce them. I believe Israel will attack Iran's nuke development sites eventually, maybe sooner rather than later. Of course no one knows for sure what Iran's response will be, not even amadmanjihad himself if he is still in leadership. More important perhaps than Iran's response will be Russia's and China's reaction to an Israeli attack. We do indeed live in interesting times.
-
I suppose the references to bible prophecy were inevitable in a thread about war in the middle east though it was not my intent to induce them. I believe Israel will attack Iran's nuke development sites eventually, maybe sooner rather than later. Of course no one knows for sure what Iran's response will be, not even amadmanjihad himself if he is still in leadership. More important perhaps than Iran's response will be Russia's and China's reaction to an Israeli attack. We do indeed live in interesting times.
Good point-Nobody know's what either Russia or China will do...They've been pretty quiet about this whole thing.
-
to you people who believe this world when it says "there is no God" i pity you, for you follow Satan and will inherit his cup!!
for he is the GOD of this world!!
Your not giving me a choice there bro.How samaritain of you....I choose to follow neither.
its not me, there is only one way to salvation,
lets see with out looking it up,
" i wish you were either hot or cold, but because you are lukewarm i will spew you out..."
here is a real easy one
"for Yahaveh so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that who so ever BELIEVES in him, should not parish but have ever lasting life..."
all it takes is FAITH and BELIEF.
you do have a choice, we all have a choice, for me its quit easy!!
but than again when you have felt Yahaveh in your heart, and felt his spirit, LOL so very easy!
i admit sometimes i wish someone would just put a gun to my head and tell me to denounce Yahaveh or die, than i would not have to live in this very messed up world.
-
Cirkey!
We cannot even talk about Israel here on the boards without getting into a Holy War. :uhoh
Kinda makes you wonder if we all wouldn't be crying "JIHAD!" if we were living next door to it as well... :rolleyes:
-
I wouldn't of thought Israel has the military capability to pull off a one hit punch on Irans Nuclear facilities, seems too many targets spread out over a vast area. A single tactical strike in Iraq or Syria is one thing. Full air campaign is another.
If it's time for Iran to be put in place with a strike then so be it, but it could only effectively be done by a super power. In reality it would be a disaster for the Middle East and for world economies if it did take place.
<S>...-Gixer
-
I wouldn't of thought Israel has the military capability to pull off a one hit punch on Irans Nuclear facilities, seems too many targets spread out over a vast area. A single tactical strike in Iraq or Syria is one thing. Full air campaign is another.
If it's time for Iran to be put in place with a strike then so be it, but it could only effectively be done by a super power. In reality it would be a disaster for the Middle East and for world economies if it did take place.
<S>...-Gixer
I'm inclined to agree with you that a strike won't help oil prices or the world economies. However, Israel is more concerned about surviving than the price of gasoline.
-
I'm inclined to agree with you that a strike won't help oil prices or the world economies. However, Israel is more concerned about surviving than the price of gasoline.
Yes I agree but is a nuclear strike by Iran 100% guaranteed to take place? Of course no one wants to gamble such a terrible scenario but at the same time a strike on it's facilities isn't any guarantee either, at best put them back a few years at worst speed up their development for a guaranteed strike in self defence.
Middle East including Israel has always been a mess, even more so under Bush's polices since his "axis of evil" and "mission accomplished". Sooner we can be rid of the dependency for Middle East oil the better, of course that might be 20 plus years away.
<S>...-Gixer
-
Israel probably isn't capable of delaying Irans program by much, let alone destroying it.
They might be able to get one attack thru but even that is questionable. They would have to fly thru a lot of hostile territory with conventional aircraft, would have to refuel, would have to attack numerous targets, and probably would have to go back and do it all again.
The reality is the Iranians learned from the attack on Iraqs Osirak reactor which is why they dispersed their program and hardened many of the facilities. They also have a much more sophisticated air defenses then Saddam had, featuring the Russian Tor-M1 system. They arent yet in a position to defeat a determined attack I dont think but the window is closing.
And with several dozen high priority targets they would have to hit you really begin to wonder if the Israelis could pull it off. That is without using their own nuclear weapons.
To seriously damage Irans program it would take a sustained air offensive on the order of shock and awe. I believe Irans air force and air defense assets would have to be destroyed first. And only America could sustain such an offensive.
-
Israel probably isn't capable of delaying Irans program by much, let alone destroying it.
They might be able to get one attack thru but even that is questionable. They would have to fly thru a lot of hostile territory with conventional aircraft, would have to refuel
I'm stunned i'm on an aviation realted board reading people who think this kind of stuff......
-
I'm stunned i'm on an aviation realted board reading people who think this kind of stuff......
Stunned as how, If I might ask?
-
Stunned as how, If I might ask?
for starters........not understanding that the usa supplies airborne re-fueling to the israeli air force.
-
for starters........not understanding that the usa supplies airborne re-fueling to the israeli air force.
Yes...but it takes more than just tankers. It would take larger numbers of aircraft, MANY more, to hit all the targets' needed to halt/slow any Iranian weapons' program. Plus, these strikes would most likely be the longest-ranged operations ever undertaken by the IAF. The Osirak strike was at the limits' of their range unrefueled; This will be twice as far, roughly. Also, SAR for any downed pilots will be problematic, at best, unless maybe they can make it out and get picked up in the Gulf, or perhaps make it to Iraq, since it's under friendly control. With U.S. cooperation, they could probably stage out of Iraq, but where this puts us, or Maliki's gov't., in relations to Iran, is a different thing.
-
Yes...but it takes more than just tankers.
I said...that was ONE example...and a prime exampe at that.
It would take larger numbers of aircraft, MANY more, to hit all the targets' needed to halt/slow any Iranian weapons' program.
Iran's command and control, and power grids would be down in three days...they have ONE oil refinery..it's huge..but there is only one.
the country would be in stand-still mode in 72 hours.
-
Only if neccesary.
It would be a huge challange to hit all the enrichment sites in the large nation.
-
Only if neccesary.
It would be a huge challange to hit all the enrichment sites in the large nation.
you don't have to hit them all.
-
you don't have to hit them all.
why leave any capability.
-
for starters........not understanding that the usa supplies airborne re-fueling to the israeli air force.
Gee really? No kidding?
So do tell a USAF vet exactly why you are stunned?
This, "cutting into a thread with unsupported stupidity", is really starting to grind on me.
Then you'll notice he followed up this silly post with two completely irrelevantly stupid posts.
-
Yes...but it takes more than just tankers. It would take larger numbers of aircraft, MANY more, to hit all the targets' needed to halt/slow any Iranian weapons' program. Plus, these strikes would most likely be the longest-ranged operations ever undertaken by the IAF. The Osirak strike was at the limits' of their range unrefueled; This will be twice as far, roughly. Also, SAR for any downed pilots will be problematic, at best, unless maybe they can make it out and get picked up in the Gulf, or perhaps make it to Iraq, since it's under friendly control. With U.S. cooperation, they could probably stage out of Iraq, but where this puts us, or Maliki's gov't., in relations to Iran, is a different thing.
The Osirak strike was undertaken by very early model F-16s. The F-16I was given conformal tanks to be able to make this kind of strike, and I'd imagine they've gotten some engine upgrades since then too.
The Syrians are using air defense systems equivelent to the Iranians. They didn't even know they'd been attacked.
You don't have to destroy every piece of a research operation either, just the expensive and hard to replace pieces.
-
The Osirak strike was undertaken by very early model F-16s. The F-16I was given conformal tanks to be able to make this kind of strike, and I'd imagine they've gotten some engine upgrades since then too.
The Syrians are using air defense systems equivelent to the Iranians. They didn't even know they'd been attacked.
You don't have to destroy every piece of a research operation either, just the expensive and hard to replace pieces.
So what pieces are that ?
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=vjzq9ygxxqb&thumb=4
Anyone ever look at a map of the region? From Israeli air bases to Tehran is about 1,000 miles as the crows fly, and thru 3 or 4 other countries that are hostile. One of which, Saudi, has its own operational AWACs that it didn't have at the time of Osirak. So exactly where would you put a tanker aircraft? Where it would be safe? And able to refuel jets? And those Jets would be flying the entire run on the deck which just gobbles fuel. The ranges given on Internet sights usually specify optimum altitudes and fuel burn rates. They sure dont quote burn rates 50' off the grass at mach .9 .
So now you have all these conventional fighter jets crossing all this hostile territory, loaded down with all this fuel which reduces payload. And they have to strike all these sites, or, a lot of them http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles_pdfs/Iran/iran_nuclear_sites.pdf
And if your going to hit them you may as well hit their other WMD sites. Dont forget Iran isn't only about making nuclear bombs. They are well along the way of producing the entire process of home grown enrichment, weaponization, and delivery. In other words creating an entire Industrial process, from A to Z, of making nukes/WMDs and delivering them onto targets. That means they will have their own assembly lines for weapons, missiles, targeting systems, launch systems, command and control systems...ect The entire shebang!
I dont think the Israelis have the ability to derail this. And they sure dont have the capability to sustain a rolling, 3 day, air offensive. To even suggest that is ludicrous.
-
Gee really? No kidding?
So do tell a USAF vet exactly why you are stunned?
This, "cutting into a thread with unsupported stupidity", is really starting to grind on me.
Then you'll notice he followed up this silly post with two completely irrelevantly stupid posts.
pssss......you're the one that made the moronic re-fuel comment............stop your whinning and kill the drama......
-
And they sure dont have the capability to sustain a rolling, 3 day, air offensive.
THe IAF is well trained, led and supplied, they can sustain an air offensive for as long as they need to.
-
THe IAF is well trained, led and supplied, they can sustain an air offensive for as long as they need to.
RACK HIM!!
-
THe IAF is well trained, led and supplied, they can sustain an air offensive for as long as they need to.
1,500 miles from their supply and support?
They have no aircraft carriers. They will have no AWACs they can bring with. They have no heavy bombers. They have limited refueling capability. They have no way of taking out the air defenses of all the hostile countries they have to fly threw to get to Iran. No, no! Its a one shot deal. They have one shot at it and there is no way they can sustain an air offensive so far from their own bases.
At least two of the countries they will have to fly thru have American and Euro air defense assets. Three actually if you inclide Iran which still operates HAWK batteries. An old but still effective system. The IAF is going to have to penetrate by stealth, attack with surprise, and then egress by stealth again. They would be lucky to even make it to the targets undetected.
pssss......you're the one that made the moronic re-fuel comment............stop your whinning and kill the drama......
You havnt said one thing in this thread that has made sense you nit-wit so I guess this post is par for the course. You really have no idea what your talking about do you?
-
1,500 miles from their supply and support?
That's not what you said originally now is it? You said:
And they sure dont have the capability to sustain a rolling, 3 day, air offensive.
That is just ludicrous.
The IAF is one of the finest Air Forces on this planet. If there is a way, and they feel the need, they will eradicate Iran's nuclear program.
-
At least two of the countries they will have to fly thru have American and Euro air defense assets. Three actually if you inclide Iran which still operates HAWK batteries. An old but still effective system. The IAF is going to have to penetrate by stealth, attack with surprise, and then egress by stealth again. They would be lucky to even make it to the targets undetected.
The Syrians apparently have that new Russian air defense system that is supposedly *top shelf* stuff. They got hit by an IAF strike and never saw it coming. Iran has the same system now.
-
The Syrians apparently have that new Russian air defense system that is supposedly *top shelf* stuff. They got hit by an IAF strike and never saw it coming. Iran has the same system now.
Elfie you arent saying "how" they will do so. Your just saying they "will".
Syria, and the SAF, is a chipshot compared to taking on the Iranians so far from your own bases.
The IAF raid on the eastern Syrian site was easy compared to what they would have to pull off in Iran. First off this site wasnt an active reactor yet so there was no threat of a contamination disaster. The facility was above ground and its destruction put a big dent in Syrian efforts to weaponize cause they have a comparatively small/centralized program compared to oil rich Iran.
Iran went a different route regarding enrichment to weapons grade material. They are using an enrichment process that lends itself well to a decentralized, dispersed program. Actually they are investing heavily into several different types of enrichment technologies which makes hitting them effectively even more problematic. Add to that the fact that several of the targets are active reactors, near active reactors, or that the enrichment targets have highly radioactive materials present. I assume the Israelis have figured a Chernobyl type disaster would do nobody any good.
In other words the Iranians are not putting all their eggs into one basket as Saddam and the Syrians did. They are actively pursuing both uranium enrichment and Plutonium development in a widely dispersed program which features many targets, some of them hardened, and all of them well protected and a long, long way from Israeli airspace.
You cant really compare these two prior attacks with what they would have to pull off in Iran. The IAF doesnt have invisible heavy bombers or a navy that could launch 500 long range cruise missiles without even blinking. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/index.html
-
That's not what you said originally now is it? You said:
That is just ludicrous.
The IAF is one of the finest Air Forces on this planet. If there is a way, and they feel the need, they will eradicate Iran's nuclear program.
I don't think anyone doubts' the Isreali resolve on this one Elfie, It's just that Rich is right. This would not be as easy a job as Osirak or Syria. Keeping an element of suprise, whilst flying over 1,000 miles or more of hostile countries' that only have to pick up a phone to Tehran, would be a good trick.
Now, with sneakiness and subterfuge, they could pull it off by staging out of an American airbase in Iraq. I don't really doubt that the U.S. would co-operate, and we pretty much tell Maliki what to do anyways, so that would most likely be the trump card. Hell, they could even paint the planes in U.S. markings, fly them from Isreal to Iraq, R/R, hit their targets' in Iran the next day flying multiple sorties if they have to, and fly home when the op is done. But doing it all from Isreali Airspace is problematic, at best.
-
Indeed there are difficult logistics involved. This was the operational function of the exercise Israel just conducted. They now know whether this endeavor is feasible. If they believe it can be accomplished it likely will be at least attempted if Iran remains uncooperative with the UN.
-
As an Israeli, I find this argument very amusing. The heart of the matter is that all other western countries are such rutabagas, that you can't even argue how they will stage an imaginary theoretical strike - it is just un-thinkable. I don't mean to offend, but this is the truth.
As for "how it can be done" I will only say that you are discussing the yesterday instead of today.
-
That's not what you said originally now is it?
our boy rich46yo seems to be doing that a lot in this thread.
he also needs to learn how to take a punch to the gut and admit when he was wrong.....without crying like a girl.
first he didn't know we re-fuel their planes in flight...(then pretended like he did).....now it appears he does not know we supply AWACS..
-
As an Israeli, I find this argument very amusing. The heart of the matter is that all other western countries are such rutabagas, that you can't even argue how they will stage an imaginary theoretical strike - it is just un-thinkable. I don't mean to offend, but this is the truth.
As for "how it can be done" I will only say that you are discussing the yesterday instead of today.
To tell you the truth, Bozon, many of us americans' can't really discuss what our gov't. will do next, either-They just seem to get a wild hair up their ass, and do things' unpradictibly...Honestly, like turning from Afghanistan and going into Iraq. Lotsa people were thinking some other Terr. supporting country first, like Syria or Iran. As for the How, I imagine we'd use CV airstrikes, or B-2's, or Tomahawks, or any of a number of different ways we have to effect such a raid. The U.S. has quite a few different arrows in it's quiver.
-
speaking of israel.........I'm not jewish......but I would join the IDF just to hang out with the ladies in that fine force....my god some of those girls are stunning. nothing beats a great looking lady carrying a gun...
http://www.i-d-f.eu/idf_girls/slides/idf_195.html
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fearweb/sets/72057594062802639/
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/40/98412760_4441807976.jpg?v=0)
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/42/98412680_04abb8df7d.jpg?v=0)
-
our boy rich46yo seems to be doing that a lot in this thread.
he also needs to learn how to take a punch to the gut and admit when he was wrong.....without crying like a girl.
first he didn't know we re-fuel their planes in flight...(then pretended like he did).....now it appears he does not know we supply AWACS..
Now hes babbling like a complete nincompoop.
Your saying were going to refuel their planes and provide AWACs? I guess your on the inside eh?
If we were going to do all that then why wouldnt we just attack Iran ourselves? You ninny!
-
Your saying were going to refuel their planes and provide AWACs?
exactly babe.
(http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2913/499/400/f-16i.0.jpg)
they also have five B707's of their own to do the same.
-
speaking of israel.........I
That last one looks mighty useful.
-
exactly babe.
(http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2913/499/400/f-16i.0.jpg)
they also have five B707's of their own to do the same.
Yeah...I know. I spent 4 years in USAF. I know how it works.
The problem is they are the biggest sitting ducks imaginable. They have to be protected, have to be flying high to refuel, and cannot be hidden from radars. So again I ask you to take a look at the map of the region and tell me again how refueling tankers are going to get from point A to a point where they can be of use to IAF fighters coming out of Iran? The only possible scenario would be to have them stationed out in the Gulf of Oman. Possibly to far away to do any good. Some of the targets the IAF would have to hit are right at the end of the operational envelope of their 16s and 15s in the first place so theres no real room for error. Tankers cannot refuel aircraft while flying under radars in hostile territories!
Also most of those tankers are also tasked for nuclear ordinance delivery support. They are assets the Israelis could not afford to lose. Or did you think the Saudis, Jordanians, Syrians, Oman...ect would allow IAF tankers to circle in their airspace to refuel fighter bombers going to Iran?
America aiding the Israelis would cause no end to trouble in Iraq and would probably incite the Iranians to strike back at us with direct military action, and, increased support for terrorism in Iraq. Why would we go to that trouble without just attacking them ourselves? Especially since we are the only ones who can do the job right in the first place. Be that as it may that may be the only option for the IAF, to land and refuel in Iraq at American bases. But again, why would we do that to support a very limited strike against only a few targets in Iran? If were going to go to all that trouble why not just unleash the Yank air forces and truly set the Iranians back a very long time?
Go ahead and post another pretty picture or another smart bellybutton one liner. Thats about all you've contributed to this thread with anyways.
-
Public outrage, a call for international censure, claims of innocence, issuance of fatwa, declaration of holy war, comparisons to Hitler, denouncement of the Zionist state, about a million 7.62 rounds fired into the air amidst flag burning, a heavy and persistent smell of flatulance.
Then a whole lot of nothing.
then n00ks unleashed by Isreal in defence. They cannot win a "holy war" (from what they will call it) with just tanks and infantry. They will end up using Nuclear Weapons to defend themselves. And they will defend their promised land. :aok
-
I don't think anyone doubts' the Isreali resolve on this one Elfie, It's just that Rich is right. This would not be as easy a job as Osirak or Syria. Keeping an element of suprise, whilst flying over 1,000 miles or more of hostile countries' that only have to pick up a phone to Tehran, would be a good trick.
Now, with sneakiness and subterfuge, they could pull it off by staging out of an American airbase in Iraq. I don't really doubt that the U.S. would co-operate, and we pretty much tell Maliki what to do anyways, so that would most likely be the trump card. Hell, they could even paint the planes in U.S. markings, fly them from Isreal to Iraq, R/R, hit their targets' in Iran the next day flying multiple sorties if they have to, and fly home when the op is done. But doing it all from Isreali Airspace is problematic, at best.
If it can be done, the IAF already knows how to go about doing it, or at least they have a good idea. Before the Osirak strike no one would have imagined that IAF fighters could fly so far undetected and destroy their target and even more amazing, return to base with no losses. Before the latest strike against Syria no one would have imagined an air strike could be undertaken against the latest Russian air defense systems with impunity.
I do agree that there are difficulties in undertaking a task of this magnitude, yet if anyone can over come these difficulties it would be Israel and the IAF. They have shown time and time again that they are perfectly capable of doing the difficult and nearly impossible tasks. I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I would never bet against Israel and her defense forces.
-
As an Israeli, I find this argument very amusing. The heart of the matter is that all other western countries are such rutabagas, that you can't even argue how they will stage an imaginary theoretical strike - it is just un-thinkable. I don't mean to offend, but this is the truth.
As for "how it can be done" I will only say that you are discussing the yesterday instead of today.
The only Western country that even has a remote chance of pulling off a strike like this is the US, and I seriously doubt if we would do it. World wide opinion of us is already very low and a strike like this would only make that worse.
-
So I guess that Israeli Air Exercise shut down any arguments over whether they can reach out and touch Iran :)
Officials said that more than 100 Israeli F-16s and F-15s took part, flying more than 900 miles, roughly the distance from Israel to Iran's Natanz nuclear enrichment facility, and that the exercise included refuelling tankers and helicopters capable of rescuing downed pilots.
-
Those are good points, Elfie. The IAF does have the experience in such things. However, before Osirak (and Syria, too) They didn't have the major practice exercise spread around the press, either. As a matter of fact, both operations' had very good security, being as both were complete suprises. I'm sure the Iranian intelligence agencies' have seen the press reports, and are taking action. The previous strikes on Osirak and Syria had the element of suprise; I'm afraid that an Iranian strike at this time has lost it. They never should have let the rehearsal make it to the press.
-
I would not be at all surprised if not only we assist israel in this.......but I expect france and britain to join us as well.
-
I would not be at all surprised if not only we assist israel in this.......but I expect france and britain to join us as well.
Maybe if it becomes the kind of prolonged air campaign that Desert Storm was.
-
Maybe if it becomes the kind of prolonged air campaign that Desert Storm was.
it won't.
I mean the initial will take about 72 hours.
followed by some "never before has the world had to come together to prevent such an evil since 1945" type media blitzes. "we went out of our way to prevent collateral damage, yada yada yada......and we are prepared to rebuild a new iran should the people assist in taking the old regime down."
I think that's what sarkozy was doing in israel these last few days.
-
then n00ks unleashed by Isreal in defence. They cannot win a "holy war" (from what they will call it) with just tanks and infantry. They will end up using Nuclear Weapons to defend themselves. And they will defend their promised land. :aok
Using Nuclear weapons' is not such a casual thing, Angelsandair. It would have to be a weapon of last resort, As in...T-72's on the outskirts of Tel Aviv. And then, do the Isreali's use them on their home territory? That would be a kind of "scorched earth" defence. They could Use them on an enemy nation's city's if their own were threatened, but That will provoke retaliation in Kind.
-
it won't.
I mean the initial will take about 72 hours.
followed by a "never before has the world had to come together to prevent such an evil since 1945" type media blitzes. "we went out of our way to prevent collateral damage, yada yada yada......and we are prepared to rebuild a new iran should the people assist in taking the old regime down."
I think that's what sarkozy was doing in israel these last few days.
Your making an assumption, that the Iranians' will fold like the Iraqi's under Saddam, right? And that we(The U.S.) Are prepared to engage Iran whilst still in Iraq and Afghanistan? Because any air campaign that didn't have the objective of simply neutralizing Iranian atomic capability, would otherwise be full out war. We aren't in a position to embark on one of those again, at this moment in time. Maybe in a year or two, if things' drastically improve in Iraq and Afghanistan, But I don't see it happening at this moment.
-
If it can be done, the IAF already knows how to go about doing it, or at least they have a good idea. Before the Osirak strike no one would have imagined that IAF fighters could fly so far undetected and destroy their target and even more amazing, return to base with no losses. Before the latest strike against Syria no one would have imagined an air strike could be undertaken against the latest Russian air defense systems with impunity.
I do agree that there are difficulties in undertaking a task of this magnitude, yet if anyone can over come these difficulties it would be Israel and the IAF. They have shown time and time again that they are perfectly capable of doing the difficult and nearly impossible tasks. I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I would never bet against Israel and her defense forces.
Oh it can be done. Im not saying it cant.
Except the countries they will have to overfly have made great improvements in their air defenses since Osirak. Countries like Saudi, the Gulf States, Turkey, Jordan, Iran, and soon Iraq, now deploy some top notch stuff from America, Europe, and Russia. Irans Tor M1 system is itself a formidable point defense system and it doesnt have to be networked to perform well.
The game has changed since Osirak and the Iranians themselves have learned the lessons from earlier IAF OPs.
So I guess that Israeli Air Exercise shut down any arguments over whether they can reach out and touch Iran
That was a Political stunt. Everyone knows the actual attack would be far different then some practice maneuver ran over the Med. You guys all play this game. Try taking off and flying straight to point B at 10,000' and check and see how much fuel you burned. Next take off and fly over hilly and mountainous terrain while NOE, hugging the earth and flying to waypoints instead of a straight line. All the while at full throttle in the dense ground air. Now after doing all that look at your fuel burn.
Osirak and the Syrian facility were pieces of cake in comparison.
-
Those are good points, Elfie. The IAF does have the experience in such things. However, before Osirak (and Syria, too) They didn't have the major practice exercise spread around the press, either. As a matter of fact, both operations' had very good security, being as both were complete suprises. I'm sure the Iranian intelligence agencies' have seen the press reports, and are taking action. The previous strikes on Osirak and Syria had the element of suprise; I'm afraid that an Iranian strike at this time has lost it. They never should have let the rehearsal make it to the press.
The Osirak and Syrian strikes certainly were huge surprises to pretty much everyone except the Israelis. Complete surprise has been lost, yet day/time of any potential strike is still unknown and could still come as a surprise to the Iranians. (Assuming of course that a strike does happen.) If the Israelis are planning a strike then it obviously would have been best if this exercise had not become known to the press. Otoh, the exercise could have just been saber rattling by the Israelis. Except....the Israelis aren't really known for saber rattling. :D
-
Will Israel attack Iran?
Hope so.
-
Using Nuclear weapons' is not such a casual thing, Angelsandair. It would have to be a weapon of last resort, As in...T-72's on the outskirts of Tel Aviv. And then, do the Isreali's use them on their home territory? That would be a kind of "scorched earth" defence. They could Use them on an enemy nation's city's if their own were threatened, but That will provoke retaliation in Kind.
If Isreal bombs Iran, they could call upon all Muslims to fight a "holy war" Which could bring in the whole middle east against Isreal :O
-
Why prolong the envitable?
-
Why prolong the envitable?
:noid
-
If Isreal bombs Iran, they could call upon all Muslims to fight a "holy war" Which could bring in the whole middle east against Isreal :O
last time that happened...israel kicked their ***** in seven days....
-
6 Days.
-
6 Days.
God rested on the seventh day.
-
God rested on the seventh day.
Nice cover for your lack of history.
-
Islamic facism..Get used to it..It will be around yer whole lifetime.
-
Nice cover for your lack of history.
bless you my son.
-
last time that happened...israel kicked their ***** in seven days....
And they were considering their nuclear option at one point during Yom-Kippur. War's a funny thing; However you think you are gonna do at the outset, it's hard to make happen at the end, sometimes. Of the Japanese, only Yamamoto actually had a real idea, and he just about called the ball right when he said that Japan would run the Pacific for maybe 6 months' to a year. After that, he warned that it would be an uphill struggle.
Isreal's difference in situation is that alot of what happens' to them, depends on us. We are still their major source of arms, even though they themselves have developed an indiginous arms industry. We still supply much of their munitions. If in our coming election, whoever is elected (Let's say Obama, for instance) decides to cut foreign/military aid to Isreal, what does that hold for them? Especially if a Chinese supplied Arab nation tries to wage a more protracted conflict? Bombing Iranian enrichment centers might be the thing that starts' just such a fight. Maybe that's why the press leak about the exercise...a hope that they can use that to bring the Iranians' to the table and agree to stop weaponizing, without courting a war which might not have American support.
-
And they were considering their nuclear option at one point during Yom-Kippur. War's a funny thing; However you think you are gonna do at the outset, it's hard to make happen at the end, sometimes. Of the Japanese, only Yamamoto actually had a real idea, and he just about called the ball right when he said that Japan would run the Pacific for maybe 6 months' to a year. After that, he warned that it would be an uphill struggle.
Isreal's difference in situation is that alot of what happens' to them, depends on us. We are still their major source of arms, even though they themselves have developed an indiginous arms industry. We still supply much of their munitions. If in our coming election, whoever is elected (Let's say Obama, for instance) decides to cut foreign/military aid to Isreal, what does that hold for them? Especially if a Chinese supplied Arab nation tries to wage a more protracted conflict? Bombing Iranian enrichment centers might be the thing that starts' just such a fight. Maybe that's why the press leak about the exercise...a hope that they can use that to bring the Iranians' to the table and agree to stop weaponizing, without courting a war which might not have American support.
for the record..........I dig your posts and takes on things. well thought out and wonderfully written. you should post more.
-
for the record..........I dig your posts and takes on things. well thought out and wonderfully written. you should post more.
Ty. After a while, jumping the fence to look at something from both sides can tire you out. Really, one a topic comes up on here, It takes a while to post, mainly because of the sit-back-and-think factor.
EDIT: Especially on any topic concerning Middle-eastern politics and diplomacy. Its' been a Train-Wreck over there since the time of Col.T.E. Lawrence.
-
God rested on the seventh day.
Very nice.