PDA

View Full Version : Israel planning to use nuclear weapons against Iran.



Goku
01-08-2007, 05:25 PM
How much more terror will this rogue state unleash?


Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons, according to a report in the Sunday Times of London.

The paper cites several Israeli military sources saying that two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear “bunker-busters.”

The Israeli Foreign Ministry denied the report.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's office said it would not respond to the story.

"We don't respond to publications in the Sunday Times," said Miri Eisin, Olmert's spokeswoman.

Israeli Minister of Strategic Threats Avigdor Lieberman also declined to comment on the report

According to the Sunday Times, under the plans, conventional laser-guided bombs would open “tunnels” into the targets. “Mini-nukes” would then immediately be fired into a plant at Natanz, exploding deep underground to reduce the risk of radioactive fallout.

“As soon as the green light is given, it will be one mission, one strike and the Iranian nuclear project will be demolished,” said one of the sources.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,242243,00.html

:raging:

Iran responded:


Iran warns Israel of any military action against Islamic Republic



07.01.2007, 14.53




TEHERAN, January 7 (Itar-Tass) - The Iranian Foreign Ministry warned Israel of “any military action” against the Islamic Republic. An appropriate statement was made by spokesman of the Iranian Foreign Ministry Mohammad Ali Hosseini, addressing a news conference on Sunday.

“Any military action against Iran will not remain unanswered, and an aggressor will regret very soon at his decision,” the diplomat emphasized.

“Such boasting (Eds: claims that Israel can inflict a military strike on Iran) points at weakness of the opposite side and will not influence the will of the Iranian nation to continue peaceful nuclear activities,” he added.

According to Hosseini, “the Iranian nuclear programme is implemented in compliance with international norms and is of peaceful nature”.
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2....7301&PageNum=0

This is absolutely terrible, innocent people in Iran might die or suffer from radioactive chemicals similar to what the Japanese suffered when the US nuked 2 of Japan's cities in 1947.

What a terrible mistake it was to allow Israel to develop nukes. I really hope Iran has the strength and capability to protect itself and counter this ruthless assult.

If there ever was a time for Muslim nations to Unity, this is it.

May Allah SWT bring peace to the world, Ameen.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Woodrow
01-08-2007, 09:53 PM
Originally Posted by Goku
How much more terror will this rogue state unleash?



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,242243,00.html

:raging:

Iran responded:



http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2....7301&PageNum=0

This is absolutely terrible, innocent people in Iran might die or suffer from radioactive chemicals similar to what the Japanese suffered when the US nuked 2 of Japan's cities in 1947.

What a terrible mistake it was to allow Israel to develop nukes. I really hope Iran has the strength and capability to protect itself and counter this ruthless assult.

If there ever was a time for Muslim nations to Unity, this is it.

May Allah SWT bring peace to the world, Ameen.
Minor correction:

Japan's cities in 1945.
Reply

Jayda
01-08-2007, 09:55 PM
this is shameful...
Reply

IzakHalevas
01-08-2007, 10:21 PM
according to a report in the Sunday Times of London
According to a report which has been denied numerous times? Hmmm... I wonder the state of Iranian intell if they are getting there intell from news reports.


Oh wait, what an idiot I am! When a country says "we will wipe you off the map" the country recieving the threat shouldn't be worried or think of possibl defending itself! What logic used here!
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Trumble
01-08-2007, 10:29 PM
Originally Posted by Goku
How much more terror will this rogue state unleash?
They haven't 'unleashed' anything until they drop those bombs, but I would be very surprised if a plan to attack Iranian nuclear facilities didn't exist. Whether that plan involves nukes, and how likely it's implementation may or may not be are different matters.. Israeli security is usually pretty tight and I suspect such a story would only get into the papers if the Israelis wanted it there to give Iran something to ponder on.

Nobody seriously doubts the Iranian nuclear project is to develop weapons, despite increasingly implausible denials. The Israelis simply consider Iranian nukes to be too great a threat to their own security, and Ahmenijad's stated intention to destroy Israel hasn't exactly helped in that regard.


This is absolutely terrible, innocent people in Iran might die or suffer from radioactive chemicals similar to what the Japanese suffered when the US nuked 2 of Japan's cities in 1945.
Just as innocent people in Israel might die or suffer if Iranian nukes get dropped on them, and I doubt those bombs would be exploding 'deep underground'. That is the scenario the Israelis wish to avoid.

What a terrible mistake it was to allow Israel to develop nukes. I really hope Iran has the strength and capability to protect itself and counter this ruthless assult.
'Allow'? Who exactly was capable of stopping them? The trouble is that Israel does not intend to have the same regrets in relation to Iran.
Reply

Kidman
01-08-2007, 10:56 PM
According to a report which has been denied numerous times? Hmmm... I wonder the state of Iranian intell if they are getting there intell from news reports.[/B]


[B]Oh wait, what an idiot I am! When a country says "we will wipe you off the map" the country recieving the threat shouldn't be worried or think of possibl defending itself! What logic used here!
Umm.. your wording is wrong. He said Israel SHOULD be wipped off the map. There has been numerous discussions about this... and it was not an a agressive move against Israel, and was said as retaliation against the aggressions the state of Israel did to the surrounding nations.

Please don't mis-interpret the words to make you or your jewish buddies look innocent.

Kidman
Reply

Agnostic
01-08-2007, 11:24 PM
Actually he said "Must be wiped off the map" anyway you put it its definitely a threat
Reply

wilberhum
01-08-2007, 11:58 PM
Originally Posted by Agnostic
Actually he said "Must be wiped off the map" anyway you put it its definitely a threat
You bet it is. And Israel is not going to ignore it.
Reply

Kidman
01-09-2007, 12:16 AM
Hmm... either Israel wiped off the map, like the world used to be before they started their reverse holocaust, or the whole middle east wiped off because that is what Israel is getting at.

When was the last time Iran attacked any nation???

Before Israel, Jews and Muslims lived peacefully, now there is hate and destruction and racism.

Please watch the movie "Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land" you can find the link below.

http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle14055.htm

Kidman
Reply

Goku
01-09-2007, 12:23 AM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
Minor correction:

Japan's cities in 1945.

Yep, thanks Brother. :thumbs_up

Originally Posted by IzakHalevas
Oh wait, what an idiot I am! When a country says "we will wipe you off the map" the country recieving the threat shouldn't be worried or think of possibl defending itself! What logic used here!
Iran's President Ahmadinejad clarified that later by saying he meant Israel should be moved to Europe. Its not likely that he actually meant bombing Israel. If the Iranians wanted to do that, it probably would've been done by now. I wouldn't want that to happen, just as i wouldn't want Iran to be bombed.
Reply

Goku
01-09-2007, 12:42 AM
Originally Posted by Trumble
They haven't 'unleashed' anything until they drop those bombs,
Not yet to the Iranians, but to the Palestinians and Lebanese, they have. 1,200 Lebanese dead, a million displaced, as a result of Israel's disproportionate but deliberate use of force against "Hizbollah" but actually targetted Lebanese civilians and their infastructure, causing £13billion pounds of damage to Lebanon's infastructure in what was a prospering economy and an attractive place for tourists. Lebanon was also known as the "Paris of the middle east" before Israel invaded them in the 1980s and bombed the poor innocents in th 2006 conflict. And the Palestinians have been suffering since the creation of Israel in 1947.

The Israelis take thousands of Lebanese and Palestinian prisoners and encroach on the Palestinians' right to live in a free, soverign state, but 7 of their soldiers get kidnapped as a last resort to try and get Israel to release the prisoners it keeps unlawfully and Israel goes beserk on innocent civilians. Is such a state trustworthy with nukes? I think not, not to mention Israel is an occupier. (Re: captured lands in 1967, UN wants Israel to end occupation.)

I do want peace in the Middle East, which i believe can be achieved if Israel withdraws from land captured in 1967 and subsequently Hamas recognises Israel's right to exist- a 2 state solution

but I would be very surprised if a plan to attack Iranian nuclear facilities didn't exist. Whether that plan involves nukes, and how likely it's implementation may or may not be are different matters.. Israeli security is usually pretty tight and I suspect such a story would only get into the papers if the Israelis wanted it there to give Iran something to ponder on.

Nobody seriously doubts the Iranian nuclear project is to develop weapons, despite increasingly implausible denials. The Israelis simply consider Iranian nukes to be too great a threat to their own security, and Ahmenijad's stated intention to destroy Israel hasn't exactly helped in that regard.
I dont agree with the statement that Israel should be wiped off the map. However, i dont think Iran would use nukes first, even average citizens know the dangers of nukes. Iran also faces a threat from Israel, and not just by words. The west did nothing when Israel was developing nukes, and now they are lashing out at Iran and N.Korea for the same thing, that is hypocrasy. Israel bombed Iraq's nuclear factories in the 1980s and plans to do that to Iran, it seems Israel is trying to be the military power of the middle east, which can have disasterous consequences for Arab and Muslim nations neighbouring it, as shown by the Israel-Hizbollah war.



Just as innocent people in Israel might die or suffer if Iranian nukes get dropped on them, and I doubt those bombs would be exploding 'deep underground'. That is the scenario the Israelis wish to avoid.
Yes, innocents in Israel would suffer if Iran were to use nukes. I dont want to see either Israel or Iran bombed. But clearly Israel, by making plans to attack Iran with nukes nonethless, is acting first, not as a retaliation.


'Allow'? Who exactly was capable of stopping them? The trouble is that Israel does not intend to have the same regrets in relation to Iran.
The West could easily have stopped Israel from developing nukes. It is rumoured that Britain actually supplied hard water to Israel. The US was pissed at first, but accepted it. Because of that, neighbouring nations may feel threatened and inclined to do the same to prevent a gap between military power.
Reply

wilberhum
01-09-2007, 01:12 AM
Originally Posted by Kidman
When was the last time Iran attacked any nation???
Kidman
They pay Hesballah to do it for them.
Reply

searcheroftruth
01-09-2007, 01:38 AM
i think Israel will nuke Iran's weapon facilities but the act could spark something far greater,
Reply

Keltoi
01-09-2007, 07:29 AM
Very simple really. If these reports are circulating in the press that is usually an indication that the Israeli government wanted them to be there. It was basically a message to Iran to beware of any hostile action on the nuclear front.

As for the debate on semantics about whether the Iranian president meant "wipe Israel off the map" or "Israel SHOULD be wiped off the map", I fail to see the point really. If a world leader comes out and says another country should be destroyed that is an aggressive statement, and will be taken as such.
Reply

north_malaysian
01-09-2007, 08:21 AM
Israel has nuclear weapons? Is it? Why I dont know about it? :-[
Reply

Trumble
01-09-2007, 10:37 AM
Originally Posted by north_malaysian
Israel has nuclear weapons? Is it? Why I dont know about it? :-[
Israel has had nukes for forty years.. and not a few Israelis would argue that's one reason why there still IS an Israel. You will understand from that why some posters are a little skeptical about the 'rogue state' and 'terror' stuff regarding actually using them. Not to mention concerned that the Middle East is likely to be far more dangerous place for everybody living in Israel, Iran and everywhere in between if the Iranians acquired them as well.

For the record the necessary reactor was provided by the French (De Gaulle was perfectly well aware of what it was for) not the Americans. The Americans didn't even discover the facility until a U2 spy plane flew over it and even then it took them a couple of years to figure out what it was.
Reply

Kidman
01-09-2007, 03:58 PM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
They pay Hesballah to do it for them.
Umm... they give Hezbollah money to protect themselves.... not to attack. Hezbollah reacted under self-defence when they took the Israeli Soldiers... they didn't want to gain anything from that action except to get their own prisioners back... they weren't attacking, or trying to take Israeli land.

Now I know your speaking of Ignorance when you have these one liner statements where you try to be a lil smart. I don't really know why you support Israel to go ahead and attack whoever they want without any care for civilian life, but your reason is for yourself.
Reply

AvarAllahNoor
01-09-2007, 07:01 PM
If this was to take place what would be the outcome?

The Israeli government has "completely denied" reports published in the Sunday Times claiming that Israel is preparing an imminent attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

According to the British newspaper “two Israeli air force squadrons” are currently in training for a strike on three targets in Iran using “tactical nuclear weapons”.

Top storiesLeading Zionist Dies In Israel
Warning Over Hitler Film

The Sunday Times said “military sources” had confirmed that Israel was intending to use “low-yield nuclear 'bunker-busters'”, to hit underground nuclear plants in Natanz, Isfahan and Arak.

However, Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev told TJ that the reports have no basis at all and said that Israel is still aiming to encourage Iran to stop its nuclear proliferation through diplomatic means.

“If diplomacy succeeds, the problem can be solved peacefully,” Regev said.

Israel has become increasingly concerned about Iran's nuclear programme in recent years, especially after the country's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced in October 2005 that “Israel must be wiped off the map”.

Not only does Ahmadinejad openly deny Israel's right to exist and the validity of the Holocaust, he has also vocally supported the Palestinian violent “resistence”, recently calling Israel “a threat”.

While Israel has officially committed itself to supporting negotiations with Iran, Deputy Defence minister Ephraim Sneh last month said it may be time to consider using force to prevent Iran becoming a dangerous nuclear power.

Iran has continually denied that it is intending to use its nuclear facilities to make weapons, saying that it is only aiming to create an energy source.

However, responding to the Sunday Times report, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini implied that Iran is ready to respond to any threat of attack.

Speaking at a weekly briefing with reporters, Hosseini said that “any attacker would quickly regret their act.”

On Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert arrived in Beijing for talks with Chinese premier Wen Jiabao and President Hu Jintao as well as other local leaders. The visit is seen as an attempt by Israel to secure China's support for strong action against Iran if it refuses to halt its nuclear proliferation.

While China backed a UN Security Council resolution last month imposing sanctions on Iran, like Russia the Chinese have also been seen as having a more lenient stance towards punishing the Iranians.

"In particular, Prime Minister Olmert will raise with his Chinese hosts the importance for international peace and stability, and of a resolute and effective international response to the nuclear ambitions of Iran and its radical leadership," Nadav Eschcar, spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Beijing, said.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said the visit was a chance to "consolidate friendly ties".

"We can have an exchange of views on issues of common interest including the Middle East issue and the Iranian nuclear issue," he told a news conference.
Reply

wilberhum
01-10-2007, 05:45 PM
Originally Posted by Kidman
Umm... they give Hezbollah money to protect themselves.... not to attack. Hezbollah reacted under self-defence when they took the Israeli Soldiers... they didn't want to gain anything from that action except to get their own prisioners back... they weren't attacking, or trying to take Israeli land.

Now I know your speaking of Ignorance when you have these one liner statements where you try to be a lil smart. I don't really know why you support Israel to go ahead and attack whoever they want without any care for civilian life, but your reason is for yourself.
Protedt themselves, what a joke. That is what the government is for. Hezbollah also has every intention to over throw the government.

PS I don't support Israel. I just don't support every action a group takes just because of what there religion is.
Reply

Kidman
01-10-2007, 06:30 PM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
Protedt themselves, what a joke. That is what the government is for. Hezbollah also has every intention to over throw the government.

PS I don't support Israel. I just don't support every action a group takes just because of what there religion is.
The Government didn't do shi*. If it wasn't for Hezbollah, Lebanon would've been taken over by Israel a long time ago. The Government watched as Israel bombed the crap out of their country... killing their women and children. Why do you think Hezbollah wants to take over the government??? They believe the current Government are not doing what's best for it's country... And that is why they have so many supports who have been out in Lebanon in front of the Prime Ministers office rallying for him to leave office.

If Hezbollah wanted, they could've taken the country easily, but they didn't. Actually, they sent out their own troops during this rally to make sure the supporters don't do anything that will cause any type of destruction. If they overthrow the government, they will do it in a democratic way.

PS. I don't support Hezbollah just because I'm Muslim. I support them just as I would support Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and many others who were not muslim.

Kidman
Reply

wilberhum
01-10-2007, 07:54 PM
Originally Posted by Kidman
The Government didn't do shi*. If it wasn't for Hezbollah, Lebanon would've been taken over by Israel a long time ago. The Government watched as Israel bombed the crap out of their country... killing their women and children. Why do you think Hezbollah wants to take over the government??? They believe the current Government are not doing what's best for it's country... And that is why they have so many supports who have been out in Lebanon in front of the Prime Ministers office rallying for him to leave office.

If Hezbollah wanted, they could've taken the country easily, but they didn't. Actually, they sent out their own troops during this rally to make sure the supporters don't do anything that will cause any type of destruction. If they overthrow the government, they will do it in a democratic way.

PS. I don't support Hezbollah just because I'm Muslim. I support them just as I would support Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and many others who were not muslim.

Kidman
Some people like armed gangs some don't. Some people will support anything that terrorizes Israel, some don't.
It is quite easy to see where we differ.
Reply

Kidman
01-10-2007, 09:33 PM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
Some people like armed gangs some don't. Some people will support anything that terrorizes Israel, some don't.
It is quite easy to see where we differ.
Where do we differ? If I support a group because they are defending themselves, their family, and their country, and because of that then I like armed gangs in your opinion? I could say an off the hook statement like you did like:

"Some people like to support those high powered, money hungry, no care for anyone but themselves, some don't. Some people will support anything that bring down the muslims and gives more power to corrupt people like Bush, some don't"

It's quite easy to see where people like me, and people like you, differ.

Kidman
Reply

IzakHalevas
01-10-2007, 09:50 PM
Originally Posted by Kidman
Umm... they give Hezbollah money to protect themselves.... not to attack. Hezbollah reacted under self-defence when they took the Israeli Soldiers... they didn't want to gain anything from that action except to get their own prisioners back... they weren't attacking, or trying to take Israeli land.

Now I know your speaking of Ignorance when you have these one liner statements where you try to be a lil smart. I don't really know why you support Israel to go ahead and attack whoever they want without any care for civilian life, but your reason is for yourself.
Protecting themselves is going across a border and attacking another nation and then crying when the nation you attacked responds harshly. What a joke your reasoning is.

gives Israel millions of dollars to destroy the other islamic countries near Israel...
Funny, all the major wars between Arabs and Israel were started by Arab countries (muslims). Who is trying to destroy who? Just because Israel has humiliated the Arab world in every major war is no reason to harbor such bad feelings.
Reply

Kidman
01-10-2007, 10:42 PM
Originally Posted by IzakHalevas
Protecting themselves is going across a border and attacking another nation and then crying when the nation you attacked responds harshly. What a joke your reasoning is.
My reasoning is anything but a joke... but some people are ignorant about the facts and what went on preceding to the capture of the Israeli soldiers... so let me hopefully educate you before you go on spreading your ignorance.

First off... Israel has Lebanese prisioners, and have had them for over 25 years in their prisons... that they took from Lebanon... hmm... the same way Hezbollah went in and took those soldiers. Israel continued to come into Lebanon, almost whenever they pleased, and take random political figures as their prisioners. Did Lebanon respond by destroying the country??

No, they asked for them back politely. But of course Israel does not care for Hezbollah or what they ask for because to them and the U.S... Hezbollah is a "terrorist Organization" where in every other country they are not considered that. Hezbollah then warns Israel about what will happen and told them their intentions... again Israel did not listen... so what took place is a reasonable reaction to what happened to them. You would agree, if you weren't biased for Israel and if the situation was flipped... i am certain of that.

So, Hezbollah goes in there, and takes 'soldiers' hostage. Wow, they took soldiers, not innocent civilians like Israel took. Then, instead of negociating like Hezbollah was expecting, they take the only route they are good at, and start killing innocent civilians.
Lebanon took the hit... Hezbollah got the blame.

So please, i have heard it all before. Look at this as if the situation was flipped... maybe you can find a better way of looking at the situation and understanding it instead taking a closed-minded point of view.

Thanks,
Kidman
Reply

IzakHalevas
01-10-2007, 11:18 PM
First off... Israel has Lebanese prisioners, and have had them for over 25 years in their prisons... that they took from Lebanon... hmm... the same way Hezbollah went in and took those soldiers. Israel continued to come into Lebanon, almost whenever they pleased, and take random political figures as their prisioners. Did Lebanon respond by destroying the country??
Yeah, are you aware that these people were captured because they had hands in attacking innocent civilians. There would have never been any Israeli prescence in Lebanon today or ever if it were not for Arab agression towards Israel.
Reply

Count DeSheep
01-10-2007, 11:32 PM
Originally Posted by Kidman
I don't support Hezbollah just because I'm Muslim. I support them just as I would support Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and many others who were not muslim.

Kidman

If you really support Gandhi, then maybe you've heard a few of the things he's said and done. "An eye for an eye makes us all blind." MLK, like Gandhi, used peaceful methods to bring the public view to the scene, to witness the horrible acts committed against them. Please tell me, Gandhi supporter, why promote Hezbollah as you "would support Gandhi"? What does Hezbollah do? It doesn't employ the same peaceful methods as Gandhi did. It sends its soldiers to attack from among civilians. How many innocent lives were lost when Mr. Rocket Launcher took position atop a building civilians were hiding in, then opened fire on Israeli forces, hoping that the civilian presence would discourage an attack? If it's ISRAEL that wants to take innocent lives, then why is it that Hezbollah constantly endangers them? Israel was the one who leveled that building, who took those lives, yes, but who is it that used those same people as human shields?

Israel doesn't have the most peaceful government, but neither did the U.S. when Martin Luther King took the stand. Every non-white in the nation was put below the white man. Minorities were assaulted, denied jobs, put down, and threatened. For so much as whistling at a white woman, a young black boy was brutally murdered by white supremacists. But look at the way America is today. No pressurized water guns, no tear gas, no attack dogs...there are so many non-whites living in peace now. Hezbollah chooses its own road when it attacks Israel. It becomes a terrorist organization. Hezbollah is not a world power and cannot EVER hope to defeat Israel by use of terrorist tactics. What does it hope to accomplish? Killing their enemies will only make them come across as murderers. But Palestinians protesting peacefully along the Israeli border will get more attention. Remember, small protests such as that were the starting point of great men like King and Gandhi. Hezbollah’s vicious attacks will do nothing to stop Israeli oppression—and YES, I said OPPRESSION—but rather, they will make Israeli even more prone to violence instead of peace talks. An eye for an eye leaves EVERYONE blind, including the general public. If groups like Hezbollah continue to go “eye for an eye,” their purpose will go unnoticed. But if they stop and follow the example of civil rights activists, then their cause will become widely known, and the rest of the world will not view all Muslims as crazy terrorists, just as they stopped viewing all whites as greedy, oppressive monsters, or all blacks as inferior, superstitious savages.

If any of the information I have provided is incorrect in any way, don't hesitate to let EVERYONE know about it, because what I have said represents what a lot of people know--or rather, what they think they know.
Reply

Keltoi
01-10-2007, 11:39 PM
Originally Posted by Count DeSheep
If you really support Gandhi, then maybe you've heard a few of the things he's said and done. "An eye for an eye makes us all blind." MLK, like Gandhi, used peaceful methods to bring the public view to the scene, to witness the horrible acts committed against them. Please tell me, Gandhi supporter, why promote Hezbollah as you "would support Gandhi"? What does Hezbollah do? It doesn't employ the same peaceful methods as Gandhi did. It sends its soldiers to attack from among civilians. How many innocent lives were lost when Mr. Rocket Launcher took position atop a building civilians were hiding in, then opened fire on Israeli forces, hoping that the civilian presence would discourage an attack? If it's ISRAEL that wants to take innocent lives, then why is it that Hezbollah constantly endangers them? Israel was the one who leveled that building, who took those lives, yes, but who is it that used those same people as human shields?

Israel doesn't have the most peaceful government, but neither did the U.S. when Martin Luther King took the stand. Every non-white in the nation was put below the white man. Minorities were assaulted, denied jobs, put down, and threatened. For so much as whistling at a white woman, a young black boy was brutally murdered by white supremacists. But look at the way America is today. No pressurized water guns, no tear gas, no attack dogs...there are so many non-whites living in peace now. Hezbollah chooses its own road when it attacks Israel. It becomes a terrorist organization. Hezbollah is not a world power and cannot EVER hope to defeat Israel by use of terrorist tactics. What does it hope to accomplish? Killing their enemies will only make them come across as murderers. But Palestinians protesting peacefully along the Israeli border will get more attention. Remember, small protests such as that were the starting point of great men like King and Gandhi. Hezbollah’s vicious attacks will do nothing to stop Israeli oppression—and YES, I said OPPRESSION—but rather, they will make Israeli even more prone to violence instead of peace talks. An eye for an eye leaves EVERYONE blind, including the general public. If groups like Hezbollah continue to go “eye for an eye,” their purpose will go unnoticed. But if they stop and follow the example of civil rights activists, then their cause will become widely known, and the rest of the world will not view all Muslims as crazy terrorists, just as they stopped viewing all whites as greedy, oppressive monsters, or all blacks as inferior, superstitious savages.

If any of the information I have provided is incorrect in any way, don't hesitate to let EVERYONE know about it, because what I have said represents what a lot of people know--or rather, what they think they know.
Very good post, but you also must consider what Hezbollah is. In a large part they are now proxies of Iran. Yes, it would be great to see Hezbollah put down their arms and use Gandhi's form of civil protest and disobedience, but that would go against their very creation. You are correct however, as long as Hezbollah and Hamas continue to attack Israel with terrorist tactics they will only continue the cycle. A fact Gandhi knew very well in relation to his own struggles in India.
Reply

Agnostic
01-10-2007, 11:45 PM
I am trying to look up some of the names of the prisoners that Israel holds, its a little hard to find info on them but I will keep looking. One name that did pop up is Samir Kuntar he was convicted of murdering two Israeli civilians one of them being a four year old girl. He was also one of the prisoners Hizballah wanted released in exchange for the two kidnapped solders.
If he is a represents the prisoners that Hizballah wants freed I can see why the Israeli government wont bargain with them
Reply

rav
01-10-2007, 11:58 PM
"if they [Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide."
-Hassan Nasrallah

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/774649/posts
Reply

Count DeSheep
01-11-2007, 12:29 AM
Originally Posted by Agnostic
I am trying to look up some of the names of the prisoners that Israel holds, its a little hard to find info on them but I will keep looking. One name that did pop up is Samir Kuntar he was convicted of murdering two Israeli civilians one of them being a four year old girl. He was also one of the prisoners Hizballah wanted released in exchange for the two kidnapped solders.
If he is a represents the prisoners that Hizballah wants freed I can see why the Israeli government wont bargain with them
If there is anyone who gets what he's trying to say, please tell me. I've never even HEARD of "Hizballah"...

My guess: "Hizballah" kidnapped two soldiers and wanted to trade off prisoners. One of the Israeli-held prisoners is Samir Kuntar.

Am I right on that?
Reply

Agnostic
01-11-2007, 12:37 AM
Sorry Hezbollah
Sorry about the mispell I cant edit my posts
Reply

Count DeSheep
01-11-2007, 12:46 AM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
Very good post, but you also must consider what Hezbollah is. In a large part they are now proxies of Iran. Yes, it would be great to see Hezbollah put down their arms and use Gandhi's form of civil protest and disobedience, but that would go against their very creation. You are correct however, as long as Hezbollah and Hamas continue to attack Israel with terrorist tactics they will only continue the cycle. A fact Gandhi knew very well in relation to his own struggles in India.
From M-W.com

proxy
Main Entry: proxy
(Insert all the boring stuff here)
1 : the agency, function, or office of a deputy who acts as a substitute for another

Now my actual post:
Acts as a substitute for another. So instead of Iran DIRECTLY attacking Israel, they send in Hezbollah? Oooo...Revelations. So then that leads me to believe that Hezbollah is not just any group of Muslims...they're actually being paid to do it by another government. I knew that Iran was funding it, but this is...different than what I expected...

Random thought: The original story is that attacking Iran is a secret plan. Me gots some questerns...

1. How the heck did the press find out about it?
2. How was it allowed to be published?
3. Won't the Israelis say, "Darn, they know we're coming. Nevermind, then."
4. Even IF the Israelis continue with this plan, and even IF they succeed, me thinks it will be a controlled explosion like the story says. Anti-Semitism is everywhere. I think that the Israeli government is smart enough to realize that dropping a bomb that harms civilians will not do anything to help the "We hate Jews" opinion?
5. If Hezbollah was playing puppet to Iran, why isn't the UN doing anything? If Israel was wrong to do what it did, why isn't the UN doing anything? Then again, it didn't do jack for Rwanda or Sudan...Why start doing their job now?
Reply

Count DeSheep
01-11-2007, 12:47 AM
Originally Posted by Agnostic
Sorry Hezbollah
Sorry about the mispell I cant edit my posts
Heh, it's OK...I cantz ritez 2 gud neethr. XD!
Reply

rav
01-11-2007, 01:50 AM
If Hezbollah was playing puppet to Iran, why isn't the UN doing anything? ...Why start doing their job now?
Okay, a man kills someone right in front of the police. The man goes to kill someone else the next day in front of the police again! Why begin doing your job now police, since you didn't do it in the past... Is this your logic, or am I mistaken?
Reply

north_malaysian
01-11-2007, 05:22 AM
Originally Posted by rav
"if they [Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide."
-Hassan Nasrallah

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/774649/posts
This is a "hidden agenda" of some groups.....
Reply

wilberhum
01-11-2007, 08:21 PM
Originally Posted by Kidman
Where do we differ? If I support a group because they are defending themselves, their family, and their country, and because of that then I like armed gangs in your opinion? I could say an off the hook statement like you did like:

"Some people like to support those high powered, money hungry, no care for anyone but themselves, some don't. Some people will support anything that bring down the muslims and gives more power to corrupt people like Bush, some don't"

It's quite easy to see where people like me, and people like you, differ.

Kidman
Ignoring facts do not change them. You can ignore all the facts you need to justify your statements. I think "self imposed ignorance" is the correct pharse.
Reply

Count DeSheep
01-11-2007, 09:32 PM
Originally Posted by rav
Okay, a man kills someone right in front of the police. The man goes to kill someone else the next day in front of the police again! Why begin doing your job now police, since you didn't do it in the past... Is this your logic, or am I mistaken?
I wasn't seriously hoping the UN won't do anything. I was mocking them.
Reply

Kidman
01-12-2007, 04:16 PM
Originally Posted by IzakHalevas
Yeah, are you aware that these people were captured because they had hands in attacking innocent civilians. There would have never been any Israeli prescence in Lebanon today or ever if it were not for Arab agression towards Israel.
Actually no.. they weren't even tried in court. Is this justice? What about the palestinian kids they have also in their prisons without being tried???

They had nothing to do attacking innocent civilians... all they did was talk about the Government and their misdealings, kinda like what I am doing now, then one day were kidnapped from their own country.

Kidman
Reply

Zulkiflim
01-12-2007, 06:36 PM
Salaam,

I think that Iran should take the proactive measures should Israel do try it.

Iran should atack Israel in defence.
Iran should detonate and bomb any nuclear arsenal that is in Israel.

If you have a formidable weapon,it does not mena you are safe,it just mena you will have to guard and defend that weapon from being blown up in your face.

So Iran should bomb the nuclear warhead in Israel.
Reply

Kidman
01-12-2007, 10:20 PM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
Salaam,

I think that Iran should take the proactive measures should Israel do try it.

Iran should atack Israel in defence.
Iran should detonate and bomb any nuclear arsenal that is in Israel.

If you have a formidable weapon,it does not mena you are safe,it just mena you will have to guard and defend that weapon from being blown up in your face.

So Iran should bomb the nuclear warhead in Israel.
They wouldn't do that because it will kill innocent civilians, Iranians don't stoop to the level of the Israeli's. But they will attack strongfold, hitting the Israeli bases without hesitation... then U.S would come and help then all hell will break loose.

Kidman
Reply

Goku
01-12-2007, 11:41 PM
I dont think US would have public support to go to war with Iran if it happens to be Israel who striked first. The American people are already unhappy with the current Afghan and Iraq wars, and then the new conflict in Somalia.

I hope no one strikes, because if one does, the other replies, it may bring in neighbouring nations.
The most adversely affected would be civilians.
Reply

England
01-12-2007, 11:55 PM
If Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map then I support Israel with their plans. Common sense. If anyone threatened to wipe Britain off the map then there would be immediate plans for military action. With Iran I don't trust them with nukes.
Reply

Trumble
01-13-2007, 02:23 AM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
I think that Iran should take the proactive measures should Israel do try it.

Iran should atack Israel in defence.
Iran should detonate and bomb any nuclear arsenal that is in Israel.

Quite apart from the fact the Iranians are extremely unlikely to know where the Israeli 'nuclear arsenal' is the chances of such 'proactive measures' being successful are remote, to say the least. Ahmednejad isn't stupid enough to try.
Reply

Zulkiflim
01-13-2007, 02:15 PM
Originally Posted by England
If Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map then I support Israel with their plans. Common sense. If anyone threatened to wipe Britain off the map then there would be immediate plans for military action. With Iran I don't trust them with nukes.
Salaam,

exactly,as you agreed it is self defence,now Israel threathen the civillian of Iran with nuclear bombs....so it is right for Iran to attack a provocative regime first.
And for me i dont trust the US or any western goverment with nukes..
Reply

Zulkiflim
01-13-2007, 02:17 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Quite apart from the fact the Iranians are extremely unlikely to know where the Israeli 'nuclear arsenal' is the chances of such 'proactive measures' being successful are remote, to say the least. Ahmednejad isn't stupid enough to try.

Salaam,

Actually the location of where the bombs are is not know but the reactors are very well known in the world media.

So for Iran even if they do not know the location of the wmd,they can easily target and destroy the location where the uranium is enriched.

One bomb only has limited uranium but a palces which is used to enrich uranium will have a heavy weight and one bomb into that area will have a much more devastating affect..i think...
Reply

Trumble
01-13-2007, 02:43 PM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
So for Iran even if they do not know the location of the wmd,they can easily target and destroy the location where the uranium is enriched.
'Easily'? Such a task is never easy even for a far stronger attacking force against a far weaker defending one. I don't know if the Iranians have a significant cruise missile capability (or indeed a cruise missile capability at all); that might do the trick - but the Iranian airforce is third rate compared with the Israelis, and even if a few planes get past defending fighters there's the ground based missiles to worry about.

All that aside, what would be the result of such a strike? The Israelis would still have the bombs. After such an attack they wouldn't have any trouble getting their hands on US supplied enriched uranium, either. The only effective difference is that they would both be mad enough, and have an excuse, to use them. First target, the Iranian nuclear facilities. Second target? Who knows.


as you agreed it is self defence,now Israel threathen the civillian of Iran with nuclear bombs....so it is right for Iran to attack a provocative regime first
Following that logic I assume you would have no objections to an Israeli 'proactive' strike on Iranian nuclear facilities for exactly the same reasons? Or don't you view Ahmenajeds' comments regarding the destruction of the State of Israel as 'provocative'? The trouble with following such nonsensical reasoning is that sooner or later an awful lot of people end up dead.

The Israelis haven't actually 'threatened' anything, BTW. This was an unsourced newspaper not an IDF press release. The target would be the Iranian nuclear facilities (with bombs exploding underground) not 'civilians', although by their very nature nukes aren't that selective.
Reply

Zulkiflim
01-13-2007, 04:46 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
'Easily'? Such a task is never easy even for a far stronger attacking force against a far weaker defending one. I don't know if the Iranians have a significant cruise missile capability (or indeed a cruise missile capability at all); that might do the trick - but the Iranian airforce is third rate compared with the Israelis, and even if a few planes get past defending fighters there's the ground based missiles to worry about.

All that aside, what would be the result of such a strike? The Israelis would still have the bombs. After such an attack they wouldn't have any trouble getting their hands on US supplied enriched uranium, either. The only effective difference is that they would both be mad enough, and have an excuse, to use them. First target, the Iranian nuclear facilities. Second target? Who knows.




Following that logic I assume you would have no objections to an Israeli 'proactive' strike on Iranian nuclear facilities for exactly the same reasons? Or don't you view Ahmenajeds' comments regarding the destruction of the State of Israel as 'provocative'? The trouble with following such nonsensical reasoning is that sooner or later an awful lot of people end up dead.

The Israelis haven't actually 'threatened' anything, BTW. This was an unsourced newspaper not an IDF press release. The target would be the Iranian nuclear facilities (with bombs exploding underground) not 'civilians', although by their very nature nukes aren't that selective.

Salaam,

well as they say one strike is all you need.

that why nuclear weapon is so feared,and is used as ad etterent.

So like i say before,a weapon is of no use to anyone till it has detonated,and the important thing is that you need to ensure the location it is detonated.

As you have pointed outmwhat would such a strike do?
well let see,what would a Isrealis strike do on Iran and the world?

Should Iran keep quite? or should it attack back?

And i would say the purpose of attacking first on Israel is to teach them that their weapons do as much damage to themselves as it does to others.

Would you send a bomb knowing the affects...that is why coutnries that have gone thru war would never want to relive it,,but human memeory fades and men seek wealth and greed or are impassioned by their own needs.


And if Iran attack it would be with weapon ,conventional weapon,Iran has abided by the laws even wehn the US supplied WMD to Saddam in the Iran/Iraq war.

Also we need to reflect on the 1 million cluster bombs dropped by the ISrealis and supplied by the US unto lebanon.
Such power trully are depraved to use banned weapon ont he populace.

Adn Israel have siad nuclear weapon is an option,as did the US,while Ahmednijad has said that Isral is illegal and what not i do not think i have read where he will attack using bombs and what not.

As of now,the aggresors are clear,the US/Israel,if Iran takes a stand and detonate it bombs,especially it news dispersion bomb on Israel and on US forces in Iraq/Iran...i would say it is justified.

I would say,that in man history,peace only comes when both sides have lost much,perhaps it is time to teach the aggresors of the cost of war.
Reply

England
01-13-2007, 05:26 PM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
Salaam,

exactly,as you agreed it is self defence,now Israel threathen the civillian of Iran with nuclear bombs....so it is right for Iran to attack a provocative regime first.
And for me i dont trust the US or any western goverment with nukes..
It is Israel that is in the self defence mode. Iran warned that Israel must be wiped off the face of the map. With Iran building nukes that could come true without action from Israel. Now that is a clear hint of things to come. Israel have every right to make plans to protect their country.
Reply

Zulkiflim
01-13-2007, 06:04 PM
Originally Posted by England
It is Israel that is in the self defence mode. Iran warned that Israel must be wiped off the face of the map. With Iran building nukes that could come true without action from Israel. Now that is a clear hint of things to come. Israel have every right to make plans to protect their country.

Salaam,

The problem is that you view thing from Isrelais perception.

May i ask,when the Isrealis say that the Iranians are planning a nucler bomb,you belif...

when the iranian say they are not,you disbelief..

So may i ask,are you then basing your judgement based on one side?

Just like Israel/US said Iraq has WMD,,do you still beleive it at the cost of 500 000 Iraqis?
that the problem with suspision and disturst.

We already know that Isreal fear anyone whom is powerful enough to chage the powerbalnce in the middle east,but so far has israel been a force of good for the middle east.

you can ask the Palestinian about that..


And i agree,that every coutnry has the right to defence but to attack based on presumtions.
If that were the case then Iran has every right to attack Israel and to arm Hamas as well as Shiites in Iraq.

We already know the US plan for regime chage in the middle east,perhaps it is time to bring the pain in the middle east towards the west..so that people can learn what is the "birthpang" of democracy can feel like..
Reply

England
01-13-2007, 06:17 PM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
Salaam,

The problem is that you view thing from Isrelais perception.

May i ask,when the Isrealis say that the Iranians are planning a nucler bomb,you belif...

when the iranian say they are not,you disbelief..

So may i ask,are you then basing your judgement based on one side?

Just like Israel/US said Iraq has WMD,,do you still beleive it at the cost of 500 000 Iraqis?
that the problem with suspision and disturst.

We already know that Isreal fear anyone whom is powerful enough to chage the powerbalnce in the middle east,but so far has israel been a force of good for the middle east.

you can ask the Palestinian about that..


And i agree,that every coutnry has the right to defence but to attack based on presumtions.
If that were the case then Iran has every right to attack Israel and to arm Hamas as well as Shiites in Iraq.

We already know the US plan for regime chage in the middle east,perhaps it is time to bring the pain in the middle east towards the west..so that people can learn what is the "birthpang" of democracy can feel like..

I view things from Israeli perspective? It wasn't the Israelis that told me the Iranian PM warned that Israel must be wiped off the map. It was the Iranian PM himself. It cannot be ignored. Again it wasn't the Israelis that told me the Iranians are developing nukes.
Reply

Bittersteel
01-13-2007, 06:35 PM
true and it wasn't the Iranian President either.I think it was foolish of Ahmadinejad to say such words at such a critical time.luckily for the Iranians the Israel-Lebanon war last year distracted Israel somewhat.

Iran got hundreds of nuclear facilities and there still isn't evidence that they have made bombs.Israel has planned to target some ,which some defence analysts said may not destroy the entire nuclear programme.
Reply

wilberhum
01-13-2007, 06:46 PM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
Salaam,

I think that Iran should take the proactive measures should Israel do try it.

Iran should atack Israel in defence.
Iran should detonate and bomb any nuclear arsenal that is in Israel.

If you have a formidable weapon,it does not mena you are safe,it just mena you will have to guard and defend that weapon from being blown up in your face.

So Iran should bomb the nuclear warhead in Israel.
Gee I wonder why the world is constantely at war. May be it is because so many think it is the only solution.
Reply

wilberhum
01-13-2007, 06:51 PM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
Salaam,

The problem is that you view thing from Isrelais perception.
The problem is that you view things from the anti-Israel perception.
And rufuse to see that there are always two sides of a problem and almost never is either side is either entirely right or entirely wrong.
Reply

Bittersteel
01-13-2007, 07:14 PM
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publ...ry17009811.php

It(the original report IIRC) said that two squadrons are training in GIbraltar or somewhere for long range strikes against the Iranians.It could be true and it could be false.
Reply

England
01-13-2007, 07:36 PM
Originally Posted by Emir Aziz
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publ...ry17009811.php

It(the original report IIRC) said that two squadrons are training in GIbraltar or somewhere for long range strikes against the Iranians.It could be true and it could be false.

Does it? Where? That article says that the Israelis deny plans to strike Iran.
Reply

Trumble
01-13-2007, 07:45 PM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
well let see,what would a Isrealis strike do on Iran and the world?

Should Iran keep quite? or should it attack back?

And i would say the purpose of attacking first on Israel is to teach them that their weapons do as much damage to themselves as it does to others.
You are contradicting yourself; Iran could not both 'attack back' and 'attack first'. As I said, the Israelis haven't actually threatened anything, let alone done anything in this context.

The Iranians are realists, too; it's not as if Israel hasn't been attacked before. The only thing it taught anybody was that "attacking Israel is bad for your armed forces' health".

And if Iran attack it would be with weapon ,conventional weapon,Iran has abided by the laws even wehn the US supplied WMD to Saddam in the Iran/Iraq war.
The US didn't supply WMD to Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war. Some US companies provided 'precursor' chemicals and potentially dual-purpose goods. So did the French, Germans, Chinese and lots of other people.

Such power trully are depraved to use banned weapon ont he populace.
They are not 'banned' weapons, even if some people (including me) would like them to be.

Adn Israel have siad nuclear weapon is an option,as did the US
Please provide a source showing that either government said that.

As of now,the aggresors are clear,the US/Israel,if Iran takes a stand and detonate it bombs,especially it news dispersion bomb on Israel and on US forces in Iraq/Iran...i would say it is justified.
Neither the US or Israel has taken any military action against Iran at all.. so how are the aggressors 'clear'? Quite apart from which, it's irrelevant from the Iranian perspective whether that action would be 'justified' or not, it would be totally disastrous for them. The idiocy of launching an unprovoked attack on US troops should be evident. As to Israel, you vastly over-rate the Iranian military capability. Unlike those who have attacked Israel in the past (who still failed misreably) Iran doesn't share a border with Israel, and indeed is some considerable distance from it. The planes would be detected and shot down long before they dropped their bombs. The only consequences for Iran would be humiliation, and the inevitable US or Israeli response.

I would say,that in man history,peace only comes when both sides have lost much,perhaps it is time to teach the aggresors of the cost of war.
Peace is best when neither side loses anything at all. As, in the scenario you propose,the Iranians would be the aggressors (at least as far as the Israelis and American's are concerned) it is Iran and the Iranian people that would pay that price.
Reply

budda
01-22-2007, 06:18 AM
Israel supposedly has several hundred nuclear weapons stockpiled. They are locked and loaded to take the whole Middle East with them should they fall. Still think its worth destroying Israel Ahmadinejad?
Is it worth the lives of 400-500 million people and you entire country?
Reply

Pygoscelis
01-22-2007, 06:44 AM
Originally Posted by Trumble
You are contradicting yourself; Iran could not both 'attack back' and 'attack first'.
The US did that in Iraq, so they wanted us to believe at the time. :D
Reply

Pygoscelis
01-22-2007, 06:45 AM
If Iran doesn't have a nuclear arms program, it better get one fast. It may already be too late for them. Nukes are the only proven deterrent against US agression.
Reply

Zulkiflim
01-22-2007, 07:13 AM
Originally Posted by England
I view things from Israeli perspective? It wasn't the Israelis that told me the Iranian PM warned that Israel must be wiped off the map. It was the Iranian PM himself. It cannot be ignored. Again it wasn't the Israelis that told me the Iranians are developing nukes.
Salaam,

Yes you do view thing from the ISrealis perspective.

Do you believe that Iran is trying to make a nuclear weapons?

Do you beleive that Iran will make use of the nuclear weapon onto its enemies?

If you do then you alrady show distrust towards the Iranina goverment.

And the Ahmednijad has called for Israel to be destroyed,not the jews to be killed..

Whil the US and Isrelais have said that using nuclear weapons is on the table,a nuclear weapon that will kill and maim generation thruout the middle east.

So tell me,,,which is better?
Reply

Zulkiflim
01-22-2007, 07:18 AM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
The problem is that you view things from the anti-Israel perception.
And rufuse to see that there are always two sides of a problem and almost never is either side is either entirely right or entirely wrong.

Salaam,

I view things simply tru my eyes.

And you assumtion that neither side is entirely wrong or entirely right..

That hyrpocrisy cost Iraq and afghan more than 1 million lives lost.

Like i say,for you and your talk and politics,it does not affect your everyday life.

Your talk ,our blood ,our life.

Isnt that nice.

And the simple fact of this is TRUST.

The US/Europeana nd ISrealis have no proof of Iran trying to make nuclear weapons,they just wnat to stop the knowledge of enrichment.

As i had prvioulsy said,the hyprocrisy of the western world towards a freindly middle east coutnry,with dictators in place are astounding,
In the past under the Shah,the US even agve Iran a nuclear reactor as a research tool.

So there is no trust.

So far in this,the US call the Iranian goverment..a regime..
As does the Isrealis..

And Ahmednijad has called for th destruction of Israel.

But what have both done..
LEt us see,,,Israel and the US lied to invade 2 countries ,murder 1 million humans being.

So for all their lies,what has it taught you?
Reply

Zulkiflim
01-22-2007, 07:20 AM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
Gee I wonder why the world is constantely at war. May be it is because so many think it is the only solution.
Salaam,

It is not all but we muslim should learn from the west..

the west places any democratic goverment as a regime if it not liked by the western power.

They paint a bad picture while covering up their own hyprocrisy.

So it is time we learn from them,,how to not be like them.

We should learn to be protectors not aggresors,we should build up our own weapons and should the west/isreal tries to attack,then their death first than ours.
Reply

Zulkiflim
01-22-2007, 07:35 AM
Originally Posted by Trumble
You are contradicting yourself; Iran could not both 'attack back' and 'attack first'. As I said, the Israelis haven't actually threatened anything, let alone done anything in this context.

[PIE]Salaam, Actually it is not a contradiction,in the term of the current world order,the US has already made the first step towards regime change,,those are already fighting words,and it is LAW ..a law which the Isrealis support.

And the ISrealis have threathned many times even saying that nuclear weapon is on the table and what not.

I would just say that despite my many post on Isrelais/US threthning the Iranina with nuclear attack,yet you still deny it,,speak much already about what you choose to believe.

May i ask,do you also support the use of the word regime for Iran? as coind by the west?
[/PIE]

The Iranians are realists, too; it's not as if Israel hasn't been attacked before. The only thing it taught anybody was that "attacking Israel is bad for your armed forces' health".

[PIE]Attacking anyone is bad for your own armd forces health,that is why the US always fight its war ovrseas,where US citizns wont be killed.

Like i said earlier,the Isrealis may take pride in having nuclear weapons,even the US,but having them in their onw land first already is dangerous enough.
[/PIE]



The US didn't supply WMD to Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war. Some US companies provided 'precursor' chemicals and potentially dual-purpose goods. So did the French, Germans, Chinese and lots of other people.

[PIE]I would say you cna search google about the involvement of the US and thir aiding and sponsoring and egging other countries to give saddam wmd..

In the end the US and its citizens have much to answer for,actually the western world does..[/PIE]


They are not 'banned' weapons, even if some people (including me) would like them to be.



Please provide a source showing that either government said that.



Neither the US or Israel has taken any military action against Iran at all.. so how are the aggressors 'clear'? Quite apart from which, it's irrelevant from the Iranian perspective whether that action would be 'justified' or not, it would be totally disastrous for them. The idiocy of launching an unprovoked attack on US troops should be evident. As to Israel, you vastly over-rate the Iranian military capability. Unlike those who have attacked Israel in the past (who still failed misreably) Iran doesn't share a border with Israel, and indeed is some considerable distance from it. The planes would be detected and shot down long before they dropped their bombs. The only consequences for Iran would be humiliation, and the inevitable US or Israeli response.

[PIE]Do you know what is a precursor to war?
Hyperbole,propaganda,invading enemy airspace.

May i ask,do you know that the US has m,ade it into law to increase democracy thru submersive channels in Iran?

It is liken to AlQaeda p[lanting sleeper cell in the US and ISrael,,would you like that?

Also the US has made known that it does intent and to use nucelar weapons and it is a possibility.Those are threats either to force compulsion but in military talk, those outright war talk.


And i take it that the you have sleeping in the world.
Do you know what is happeing in Iraq and Afghan?

Are the US now facing humiliations,with your western president growing whiter hair daily,with firing left and right,and just last week 27 more US invaders death,,Alhamdulilah..


So even if you have best weapons to SHOCK and AWE,all it does harm you back a thousand fold.

And Israel inshallah will be wiped off the map.

[/PIE]


Peace is best when neither side loses anything at all. As, in the scenario you propose,the Iranians would be the aggressors (at least as far as the Israelis and American's are concerned) it is Iran and the Iranian people that would pay that price.

[PIE]And in the scneario i propose it is a simple fact,when you are threathend with nuclear weapon what should you do?

The US has said that Iran gaining the ability to enrich uranium is liken to placing dirty bombs in the US itself..

No trust...

But all in all,let us compare..
Here we have the US/Israel/western world lieing about wmd and Al Qada to the cost of 1 million Iraqis/Afghans..

All a lie..

And now they base another of their great suspicioan wihtout proof to attack/invade another country..

All i cna say is when they say jump,,do you say HOW HIGH?

[/PIE]
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-30-2009, 09:59 PM
  2. Replies: 48
    Last Post: 05-29-2008, 05:35 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-26-2008, 05:35 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-05-2007, 04:38 PM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-10-2006, 08:26 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!