Israel does military excercise seemed directed at Iran
Oh,this is now the most serious signal that Israel at any moment can strike Irans Nuclear Plants.
Iran Nuclear Standoff
Moderator: S2k Moderators
-
brunota2003
- S2K Supporter
- Posts: 9476
- Age: 34
- Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 9:56 pm
- Location: Stanton, KY...formerly Havelock, NC
- Contact:
Heh...I don't think Israel has much to worry about if they were to attack. They talk about missiles and such...anyone ever heard of an EMP? Electromagnetic Pulse. The American EA-6B's are designed for that exact purpose:
Electronic Warfare.
Kind of hard to fire your radar based missiles accurately, when all of your electronics are destroyed and non-repairable. Yes, they still pose a threat, but if Israel goes into Iran without a few of our EA-6B's "accidentally" setting off their EMP's, well, that's their loss.
BTW, it was one single EA-6B that caused all of New York to go offline a while back...and that was just an accident.
Electronic Warfare.
Kind of hard to fire your radar based missiles accurately, when all of your electronics are destroyed and non-repairable. Yes, they still pose a threat, but if Israel goes into Iran without a few of our EA-6B's "accidentally" setting off their EMP's, well, that's their loss.
BTW, it was one single EA-6B that caused all of New York to go offline a while back...and that was just an accident.
0 likes
-
Meso
- Category 5
- Posts: 1609
- Age: 38
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:14 pm
- Location: South Africa
- Contact:
Good god.
"The Middle East will never like us", It's not just the middle east that is opposed to the idea of someone killing civilians.A lot more countries would actually voice their real opinions if they weren't so intimidated by the U.S and didn't decide to join in being the United State's lapdog like most countries seem to do,especially Israel.Everyone has another agenda when it comes to it,so much of it is economical and got to do with dominance.It's pretty clear that the U.S and Israel are so 'buddy-buddy' cause they share a common enemy,they can help each other out with that.
But I've said this before,you can't expect some countries to be able to carry nuclear devices and expect some to not.That's just hypocrissy,I'm sure it's very comforting when you sit in a country knowing that you have all the power and you can control the world cause the rest are helpless against any of your attacks since you forced them all to get rid of their defences.
Fact is I hate most of the middle east in most aspects,I hate any religion as it causes more blood shed than anything else and for no reason,and has throughout history in almost every religion too (Especially some of the elements of some religions that promote violence).And I highly dislike the middle eastern governing system and their laws are pathetic.But fact remains that there are lots of decent people there and you have to take that into consideration.I've heard the quote "You need to break some eggs to make an omelette",sure great saying if you're talking about a game of sport.These are human lives which is just macabre and sick.
The question with all this is,should it be expected for a country to disable nuclear projects,yes it should.But that should apply to everyone not just countries some find a threat to themselves.Let's for a second imagine the United States and Iran both had nuclear projects and the Iranians told the United States to disable theirs cause they're a risk,there is no way in hell that it would be done.Iran is in serious need of some arms as they have Israel and the United States almost ready to pounce on them,which would happen whether they had nuclear weapons or not.
While I do agree about the middle east being a danger,any country with nuclear weapons is a danger (If I'm not mistaken there wasn't even nuclear weapons found and they say they don't plan on building,just nuclear energy).Iran needs new leadership and less religion and they wouldn't be a worry.As with many countries,and I support an end to nuclear weapons as well as an end to other war causing acts.But the way to do things is definitely not to go kill everyone there.And maybe there are no recent posts on it,but I have seen posts where it was implied that Middle Eastern lives are not equal to that of American lives and that it's not a big deal if hundreds of thousands of them die.I also disagree with Iran not recognizing Israel,but until they launch an attack no attacks should be carried out on them.The U.S could easily intervene after an attack and it would still cause far less casualties than the "Bomb them all,no one cares" attitude that some display.Iran is really not that much of a threat that tends to be displayed in my opinion,especially not to the United States
"The Middle East will never like us", It's not just the middle east that is opposed to the idea of someone killing civilians.A lot more countries would actually voice their real opinions if they weren't so intimidated by the U.S and didn't decide to join in being the United State's lapdog like most countries seem to do,especially Israel.Everyone has another agenda when it comes to it,so much of it is economical and got to do with dominance.It's pretty clear that the U.S and Israel are so 'buddy-buddy' cause they share a common enemy,they can help each other out with that.
But I've said this before,you can't expect some countries to be able to carry nuclear devices and expect some to not.That's just hypocrissy,I'm sure it's very comforting when you sit in a country knowing that you have all the power and you can control the world cause the rest are helpless against any of your attacks since you forced them all to get rid of their defences.
Fact is I hate most of the middle east in most aspects,I hate any religion as it causes more blood shed than anything else and for no reason,and has throughout history in almost every religion too (Especially some of the elements of some religions that promote violence).And I highly dislike the middle eastern governing system and their laws are pathetic.But fact remains that there are lots of decent people there and you have to take that into consideration.I've heard the quote "You need to break some eggs to make an omelette",sure great saying if you're talking about a game of sport.These are human lives which is just macabre and sick.
The question with all this is,should it be expected for a country to disable nuclear projects,yes it should.But that should apply to everyone not just countries some find a threat to themselves.Let's for a second imagine the United States and Iran both had nuclear projects and the Iranians told the United States to disable theirs cause they're a risk,there is no way in hell that it would be done.Iran is in serious need of some arms as they have Israel and the United States almost ready to pounce on them,which would happen whether they had nuclear weapons or not.
While I do agree about the middle east being a danger,any country with nuclear weapons is a danger (If I'm not mistaken there wasn't even nuclear weapons found and they say they don't plan on building,just nuclear energy).Iran needs new leadership and less religion and they wouldn't be a worry.As with many countries,and I support an end to nuclear weapons as well as an end to other war causing acts.But the way to do things is definitely not to go kill everyone there.And maybe there are no recent posts on it,but I have seen posts where it was implied that Middle Eastern lives are not equal to that of American lives and that it's not a big deal if hundreds of thousands of them die.I also disagree with Iran not recognizing Israel,but until they launch an attack no attacks should be carried out on them.The U.S could easily intervene after an attack and it would still cause far less casualties than the "Bomb them all,no one cares" attitude that some display.Iran is really not that much of a threat that tends to be displayed in my opinion,especially not to the United States
0 likes
-
Derek Ortt
Don't want the following to turn political, just stating my personal opinion and (likely flawed) analysis
if Iran wants to have nukes... they must win that right on the battlefield.
Not all countries are equal, Meso. You have to win that priveledge, just as we have done by the lives of millions of our people. That, unfortunately, is the way the world works. We had to win many of our rights by defeating the British once and fighting them to a draw a second time. Had to get our land by defeating Mexico and Spain
Also, it is a dangerous policy to wait until one is attacked before attacking. That usually does not work very well
if Iran wants to have nukes... they must win that right on the battlefield.
Not all countries are equal, Meso. You have to win that priveledge, just as we have done by the lives of millions of our people. That, unfortunately, is the way the world works. We had to win many of our rights by defeating the British once and fighting them to a draw a second time. Had to get our land by defeating Mexico and Spain
Also, it is a dangerous policy to wait until one is attacked before attacking. That usually does not work very well
0 likes
-
Ed Mahmoud
Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff=Israel does Military Exercice
The Navy and Marines are will soon replace the EA-6B Prowler with a two seat electronic warfare version of the F/A-18 Strike fighter. The EA-6B has a pilot and three operators, the new plane will have just one operator, I guess because of improvements in the technology.
I haven't heard if the canopy will have real gold built into it, like the Prowler, to protect the crew from electromagnetic energy.
I haven't heard if the canopy will have real gold built into it, like the Prowler, to protect the crew from electromagnetic energy.
0 likes
-
Ed Mahmoud
Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff=Israel does Military Exercice
Meso
South Africa had a nuclear weapons program, and did away with it. Israel has had nuclear weapons, originally built with French assistance, for forty years, and has never used them. Even the old Soviet Union never used their nuclear weapons. The US used them twice, to end a war and prevent an invasion of the Japanese home islands that would have killed far more Japanese civilians, and, of course, US troops, than the bombs did.
Iran's leaders have made statements that a nuclear attack on Israel would destroy the Jewish state, and any Israeli reprisal would kill many Muslims, but not destroy the Islamic Republic. Iran publically states they don't accept MAD, and are willing to sacrifice their own citizens to wipe out a non-Muslim state, the size of a wash towel lying on a football field, compared to the Islamic states that surround them.
Besides Israel, Iran is also a threat to their Arab and Sunni neighbors, and an Iranian bomb would trigger an arms race. The Saudis can afford to buy bombs from Pakistan, and may have helped fund their bomb. Unstable countries, with assorted links to Shia and Sunni terrorist groups, its a bad thing.
German civilians had to die to stop Adolf Hitler. Iranian civilians may have to die to stop the next madman bent on destroying Israel and attacking the West.
South Africa had a nuclear weapons program, and did away with it. Israel has had nuclear weapons, originally built with French assistance, for forty years, and has never used them. Even the old Soviet Union never used their nuclear weapons. The US used them twice, to end a war and prevent an invasion of the Japanese home islands that would have killed far more Japanese civilians, and, of course, US troops, than the bombs did.
Iran's leaders have made statements that a nuclear attack on Israel would destroy the Jewish state, and any Israeli reprisal would kill many Muslims, but not destroy the Islamic Republic. Iran publically states they don't accept MAD, and are willing to sacrifice their own citizens to wipe out a non-Muslim state, the size of a wash towel lying on a football field, compared to the Islamic states that surround them.
Besides Israel, Iran is also a threat to their Arab and Sunni neighbors, and an Iranian bomb would trigger an arms race. The Saudis can afford to buy bombs from Pakistan, and may have helped fund their bomb. Unstable countries, with assorted links to Shia and Sunni terrorist groups, its a bad thing.
German civilians had to die to stop Adolf Hitler. Iranian civilians may have to die to stop the next madman bent on destroying Israel and attacking the West.
0 likes
-
wbug1
Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff=Israel does Military Exercice
An attack on Iran would completely destabilize the Middle East, and send the price of oil to the stratosphere, as if it weren't bad enough already. 
0 likes
-
Ed Mahmoud
Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff=Israel does Military Exercice
wbug1 wrote:An attack on Iran would completely destabilize the Middle East, and send the price of oil to the stratosphere, as if it weren't bad enough already.
True, but the state sponsor of the terrorist group Hezb'Allah in possesion of nuclear weapons can't be very good either.
Until 9/11, Hezb'Allah had killed more US citizens than any other terrorist group, and Iran has had three decades to plant Hezb'Allah terror sleeper cells in the US.
0 likes
-
Meso
- Category 5
- Posts: 1609
- Age: 38
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:14 pm
- Location: South Africa
- Contact:
You know what else kills American troops by even greater numbers.... Wars.
Yeah,South Africa had a nuclear weapons program and was actually the only country to volentarily disable the weapons
But no country has ever used except America,so it's not saying much that 'so and so' never used them.But like I said,there is no evidence of nuclear weapons in Iran and you can't expect them to give up their nuclear power stations..
But it's too soon to go and bomb a country over weapons they may not even poses.I think that the U.S has a right to be on the offensive and be ready for a planned attack to stabilize and neutralize should Iran attack (Doubt it would be with a nuclear bomb,they know that would spell the end for their country,America could own them so quickly)
And even if they do manage to perform an attack and kill some.. If they do and the U.S has a good neutralization plan the attack would likely cause less deaths than a "bomb the hell out of them now!" attitude.
Like I said I hate the governments way of thinking in Iran.But there are also countries that are more anti-western and countries that stand more of a danger to the average citizen,Zimbabwe being one of them.
I do think that an attack may be needed,but it needs to be strategized,non-bias and not without good evidence that there are nuclear weapons or not before they launch the first attack (like I said,I doubt that first attack would be a nuke,I dont think anyone is that stupid)
Yeah,South Africa had a nuclear weapons program and was actually the only country to volentarily disable the weapons
But no country has ever used except America,so it's not saying much that 'so and so' never used them.But like I said,there is no evidence of nuclear weapons in Iran and you can't expect them to give up their nuclear power stations..But it's too soon to go and bomb a country over weapons they may not even poses.I think that the U.S has a right to be on the offensive and be ready for a planned attack to stabilize and neutralize should Iran attack (Doubt it would be with a nuclear bomb,they know that would spell the end for their country,America could own them so quickly)
And even if they do manage to perform an attack and kill some.. If they do and the U.S has a good neutralization plan the attack would likely cause less deaths than a "bomb the hell out of them now!" attitude.
Like I said I hate the governments way of thinking in Iran.But there are also countries that are more anti-western and countries that stand more of a danger to the average citizen,Zimbabwe being one of them.
I do think that an attack may be needed,but it needs to be strategized,non-bias and not without good evidence that there are nuclear weapons or not before they launch the first attack (like I said,I doubt that first attack would be a nuke,I dont think anyone is that stupid)
0 likes
-
HURAKAN
- Professional-Met
- Posts: 46086
- Age: 38
- Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 4:34 pm
- Location: Key West, FL
- Contact:
Maybe we need more talk and less bombs.
The history of America is full of compromises and we may need to make a few more. If not, then more wars will follow and we have seen that Muslims don't easily give up. There is no easy answer to the conflict but we must find one if we don't want to continue burning millions of dollars every day and innocent people to continue dying across the Fertile Crescent.
The history of America is full of compromises and we may need to make a few more. If not, then more wars will follow and we have seen that Muslims don't easily give up. There is no easy answer to the conflict but we must find one if we don't want to continue burning millions of dollars every day and innocent people to continue dying across the Fertile Crescent.
0 likes
-
Cryomaniac
- Category 5
- Posts: 1289
- Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:26 pm
- Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire, UK
- Contact:
-
wbug1
Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff=Israel does Military Exercice
Terrarr, I'd be more afraid of being shot by someone in a major US city than being blown up by an Islamic terror group.
0 likes
-
cycloneye
- Admin
- Posts: 145322
- Age: 68
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
- Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico
Re:
Cryomaniac wrote:I personally have no doubt at all that Israel will attack Iran at some point. The cynical part of me is thinking that that is why they made a truce with Hamas, to free up the military for an attack on Iran.
Hmm,I didnt thought of that,maybe your are into something.
0 likes
-
Ed Mahmoud
Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff=Israel does Military Exercice
wbug1 wrote:Terrarr, I'd be more afraid of being shot by someone in a major US city than being blown up by an Islamic terror group.
New York had just under 500 homicides in 2007. Of those, only about 70 were committed by strangers, the rest were the result of domestic disputes.
al Qaeda killed just under 3000 New York workers in a couple of hours.
If terror groups get a nuclear weapon, they can kill more than that.
About the wars killing Americans - if the French and British acted when Hitler violated the armstice by remilitarizing the Ruhr, then millions of troops from all sides, six million Jews and three million others (gays, Gypsies, enemies of the state) wouldn't have died in camps, and millions more German, Polish, French, Russian, Italian, Serbian, etc. civilians wouldn't have died.
0 likes
-
Ed Mahmoud
Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff
Re: Israeli truce with Hamas.
Bad idea. Mohammad taught the concept of the hudna*, or strategic truce. When things were going poorly on the battlefield, sue for peace, re-arm, then strike when conditions are more suitable for victory. Israeli helicopter gunships were starting to kill the ring-leaders of the rocket attacks launched from Gaza. Hamas is probably being armed by Iran, despite the apparent Sunni/Shia differences. The 'enemy of my enemy' thing.
The Israelis are kufr yehudis, and a temporary truce can be broken at any time it suits Hamas.
In 628 AD, the Prophet Mohammad signed a ten year hudna, or truce, with the Quraysh, a tribe of Arab Jews. Two years later, he marched on the Quraysh, took all the woman as sex slaves, the children as slaves, and had all men old enough to have pubic hair beheaded.
Bad idea. Mohammad taught the concept of the hudna*, or strategic truce. When things were going poorly on the battlefield, sue for peace, re-arm, then strike when conditions are more suitable for victory. Israeli helicopter gunships were starting to kill the ring-leaders of the rocket attacks launched from Gaza. Hamas is probably being armed by Iran, despite the apparent Sunni/Shia differences. The 'enemy of my enemy' thing.
The Israelis are kufr yehudis, and a temporary truce can be broken at any time it suits Hamas.
In 628 AD, the Prophet Mohammad signed a ten year hudna, or truce, with the Quraysh, a tribe of Arab Jews. Two years later, he marched on the Quraysh, took all the woman as sex slaves, the children as slaves, and had all men old enough to have pubic hair beheaded.
0 likes
-
Derek Ortt
Iran, blah blah blah
How will they strike Israel back? They wont be able to fly over Iraqi airspace or their bombers will end up buried in the Iraqi desert
By striking the US forces? Surely they know that will merely result in the gloves being taken off against them and that their country will be smashed into oblivion.
It is us who holds the power. If we stop worrying about the "war of public opinion" (which does not win battles unless we let it)... we'd be a far better and safer place
How will they strike Israel back? They wont be able to fly over Iraqi airspace or their bombers will end up buried in the Iraqi desert
By striking the US forces? Surely they know that will merely result in the gloves being taken off against them and that their country will be smashed into oblivion.
It is us who holds the power. If we stop worrying about the "war of public opinion" (which does not win battles unless we let it)... we'd be a far better and safer place
0 likes
-
Cryomaniac
- Category 5
- Posts: 1289
- Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:26 pm
- Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire, UK
- Contact:
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests