Posted on 01/08/2007 7:37:04 AM PST by SJackson
I'm not so sure of that.
I think the people would have to force the government to take action.
Tar and Feather futures are looking good.
Yes. I am remembering certain Iraqi nuclear reactors that were under construction several decades ago.
This will only go so far...
Israel wants Iran to think that those 'evil Jews' just might do it.
Israel do not let military plans leak unless they want them leaked.
This shows Israel's restraint instead of an immediate military action.
Through Mutual Defense Treaties (pacts).
And that's the same way stupid WWI started - mutual defense pacts. All because a GD anarchist killed Archduke Ferdinand and Serbia wouldn't turn the maggot over. And then WWII with Poland and GB, etc, etc, etc.
"The next country that uses a nuke starts WWIII (or IV or V, take your pick of terms). And personally I don't want to get incinerated by a Russian nuke because Israel has a problem with Iran."
Put the bong down, Condor51.
If Israel nukes all Muslims everywhere in the Mid Ease, and the 'Stans', Russia would be happy to be rid of them.
Look at Russian history under Stalin. He spent quite a bit of time and effort killing Muslims in the Caucasus.
PS Israel's problem with Islamic terrorists today, OUR's
tomorrow - 'member 9/11?
You'd rather be incinerated by an Iranian nuke because Isreal didn't act?
(Of course, that's not terribly likely, because nearly half of this country would vote to surrender to Islam's demands rather than stand and fight for the future of mankind.)
why would Russia nuke the US to protect Iran?
No.
In a fight for your continued existance, you don't abstractly ponder the implications that using a tool to save your life might allegedly set a precidence for some criminal to abuse a similar tool against someone else.
"Detatched reflection is not required in the presenece of an upraised knife."
I wasn't aware Russia had a mutual defense treaty with Iran.
The US definitely doesn't have one with Israel.
If true, Russia would attack Israel, what was left, not the US.
This is all pie in the sky stuff, but to the extent there's validity in your fabrication, it underlines the importance of preventing Iran from obtaining nukes.
"In a fight for your continued existance, you don't abstractly ponder the implications that using a tool to save your life might allegedly set a precidence for some criminal to abuse a similar tool against someone else."
Sure you do. Israel's existence was directly threatened this past summer by the animals who seek to destroy it. Instead of inflicting collateral damage to make a point that Israel's enemies have nowhere to hide, Israel chose to fight a war based on negative CNN coverage.
You really think with Iran having a nuke Israel would launch a preemptive strike? If that is the case, they would have done it before Iran could set in motion a defensive strategy to prevent an Israel strike.
Iran with a nuke only guarantees one thing, that Israel will be forced to fight a conventional war against Syria and the Hezzies with Iranian and European support.
A preemptive nuke strike opens up the idea of a nuclear exchange in regional conflicts.
Last summer's Israel-Hezbollah conflict could be fought over time and on CNN. However bad it turned out, Israel still viably exists.
Iran's leader has made it abundantly clear that he's building a nuke to erase Israel from the map. Should that happen, Israel won't viably exist.
It's the difference between the neighbor's kid bullying your kid, vs. the neighbor publicly promising to kill you and is now setting up rifle & bipod with a clear view into your bedroom window.
...that there will be a bright flash near Tel Aviv shortly thereafter.
Iran also promised that we were going to be non-existent. I don't see us doing too much about it.
Any thought of Iran nuking Israel is ridiculous. I would think the first reason is if Israel is nuked, the Palestinians will also be destroyed, since a nuke hitting Tel Aviv will also have a severe impact on the West Bank and Gaza.
As of yet, I don't see the Palestinians having any concerns about being wiped off the face of the earth by their sponsors.
In addition, the Jordanians, Lebanese and Syrians don't seem to be complaining about the thought that they will also lose thousands of people from radiation sickness and god knows what else.
No, Iran having a nuke just makes it easier for a conventional war because it neutralizes Israel's nuclear capabilities. And if Israel isn't willing to inflict collateral damage, then Israel will not exist, because their enemies already proven that they will attack cities.
"Get a sense of proportion."
I have a sense of proportion. If Israel isn't willing to kill the enemy 5 miles from their border, they are not going to launch a nuke and kill thousands of people to stop Iran from building a nuke. Especially if Iran puts civilians in the way?
I still contend that the only way to stop Iran is to threaten China and Europe by taking out Irans capacity to pump oil. And that can be accomplished with minimal casualties and have the most impact.
"Any thought of Iran nuking Israel is ridiculous."
And the other way around too. If they were really planning to do that, first of all they wouldn't write about It in their own newspapers.
This a very deep thought... Would you prefer to be incinerated by Iranian nukes?
Funny Guy!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.