Israel Poised to Attack Iranian Nuclear Sites

Human Events ^ | 06/23/2008 | Robert Maginnis

[bvw]

Yes, the massive support for Obama, as representing a delusional madness against any war and war-act, no matter how needed is the most strong of forces that move us closer to actual war. For if we were united as a nation and group of nations against rogue nations like Iran, Syria and Korea, those nations, all or some, would be far more likely to stand down in rhetoric and actual support for terror and war.

[Former Proud Canadian]

If you look at the possible routes for attack, this campaign would be much easier and safer if the IAF could utilize airfields in Iraq for refueling and emergency landing.

Personally, I think it is the least the US could do for "allowing" Israel to do the west's dirty work. The trick is for the US to turn this aid to its political advantage. It can be done.

[mkjessup]

An attack on Iran's nuclear project would be successful but would leave their regime of terror whole and intact and bent on murderous revenge at any cost. If the nuclear program is taken out Israel will need to take the leadership out also. Otherwise they will be back. The attacks would not just be against Israel but all of the Western countries. The USA would be drawn into this conflict within months. Perhaps this is Israels design. The nuclear facilities in Iran do need taking out. I do not know if Israel has the ability to take out the leadership of Iran. To kill them you must know where they are at.

Very good points you make. I tend to believe that the Iranian people, even as they have been brainwashed into viewing the U.S. and Israel, would find the reality of Israeli planes, missles and bombs pulverizing their little Third World Hellhole to be utterly humiliating and degrading, and it would quickly destroy the faux aura of Iranian invincibility that Ahmanutjob and his crew have been trying to sell to the public and the world. That *might* be enough to provoke a general uprising, but that's far from a foregone conclusion.

An attack on Iran probably would inspire the mad dog jihadists and terrorist scumbags to strap on their Sunday-go-to-meetin'-bomb-vests, and we would most likely see an upsurge in the number of terrorist attacks on a global scale.

The key point is: we'll see continued terrorist attacks in one form or another until the Islamic hordes win, and we're all dead, or until we kill each and every last one of them, because the words 'surrender' and 'compromise' are not in their ROP vocabulary. We're going to have to fight them all sooner or later and if our ally Israel has the guts to step up and be the point of the spear doing the job, we better be willing and ready to back them up 100 percent.

[valkyry1]

From another article

“But many analysts say Iran’s nuclear sites are too numerous, distant and fortified for Israel to take on alone”

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSDAH32979820080623?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

[valkyry1]

A good article on the issue from 2006

http://francona.blogspot.com/2006/03/iran-israels-air-strike-options.html

[Enchante]

"Iran's feeble, maybe even nonexistent nuclear weapons program"

Are you actually stupid enough to believe this, or are you simply eager for a world in which the deranged Mullahs have nuclear weapons? Either way you are unfit to be pronouncing on any foreign policy issue, ever.