[2ndDivisionVet]

Ten billion dollars is a lot of money for a tiny country.

[Nextrush]

From your lips to God’s ears.

[FredZarguna]

What?

Al Kibar?

Sorry. I thought Israel had attacked El Kabong. I wuz gonna say ...

[Dogbert41]

For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

They are saying “Peace” and “Security” a lot lately. A lot!

[Signalman]

If the ragheads in Iran drop, or attempt to drop a nuke on Israel, Israel will retaliate massively, from land air and sea. Iran will be a memory.

[tet68]

I for one will not be surprised if Israel strikes
first, they have to, the time they didn’t almost
cost them the war.

[faithhopecharity]

USA Is Iran’s Great Satan number one target. Yet O protects and now finances the iranis islamoNazi nuke bomb and ICBM factories. No other president, no American president of either party would ever have done anything like this to the USA. Pray for America.

[marron]

the harder Secretary of State Kerry presses Israel to make an agreement with Mahmoud Abbas, the more likely it becomes that Israel will strike Iran.

Actually, I see the reverse. The more the US gives way to Iran and Israel's other enemies, the more certain they are to believe they can attack successfully. Appeasing Iran guarantees Iran will eventually strike. Appeasing Fatah guarantees they will continue to attack Israel.

A peace agreement that is not rooted in a genuine desire for peace on the part of Israel's enemies is a guarantee of war. It will happen and sooner than later. If there were any desire at all for peace, no agreement would be necessary, everyone would just go about their business. Almost by definition any peace agreement is going to be phony because if you need one at all, its not going to be real. And a phony one is a tripwire for war.

Just keep pushing. She'll blow.

[Mark17]

Yes, having bunker buster bombs would make it easier to guarantee total destruction of some of Iran's highly fortified nuclear reactors buried deep in the mountains.

Do you supposed nucs could be considered bunker buster bombs?

[fella]

The Blood Moons are coming soon.

[bert]

The presumption and examples in the article point to air power. The facts point elsewhere.

It seems to me that based on various predictions in say 2009, the Iranian efforts have already been delayed by several years. The precise delay is unknown. The delay was not accomplished by aircraft delivered bombs, but by severe action on the ground at disbursed locations.

Scientists were exterminated. The centrifuge controls were destroyed. Under ground facilities in at lest two locations were exploded.

These are what is known. We don’t know what else is unknown. What we know is that Iran still doesn’t have a bomb.

[gingerbread]

Trying to figure out what Israel will or will not do is similar to contemplating your navel. All these blurbs of “ISRAEL SHOULD DO THIS” or “ISRAEL SHOULD DO THAT” is a complete waste of time. With Israel’s ability to spy on everybody, they probably know ahead of time, when another country will attack them. Now, will Israel allow their country to be attacked? DON’T THINK SO.

[GOPJ]

Nothing is beyond Israel's capacity. That has been the lesson of Israel's existence since its inception. Also, no surprise is out of Israel's reach, nor should it be. Yes, having bunker buster bombs would make it easier to guarantee total destruction of some of Iran's highly fortified nuclear reactors buried deep in the mountains.

There are NO VICTIMS in Israel...

None.

It's a country of fighters.

If Iran tries to shove Israelis into a dangerous corner Israel will come out fighting. Iran will be blown to kingdom come..