Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 4
Iran wants to nuke Israel
Topic Started: Oct 28 2005, 05:42 PM (1,423 Views)
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
the americans are behind walls in the green zone

Well, that's not exactly accurate today.

Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Iran must never be allowed to possess nukes as it is currently constituted. That is the bottom line and all options on the table must lead there.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
bachophile
Oct 28 2005, 09:58 PM
quagmire...well, i dont think the iraq situation was handled well, the americans are behind walls in the green zone while iraq is being run by dissedent sunnis waiting for the day to blow everyone up.

that quagmire.

We have 150,000 troops all in the Green Zone? It must be pretty crowded in there along with the Brits and the rest of the coalition.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bachophile
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
yea, i think the iranians will be surprised one day.

as for iraq, i think even the administration didnt think that they would be in this position 2 years down the road, with no end in sight.

the bottom line is american boys are still being killed and this is intolerable.

stop playing a defensive war and become proactive, or else just pull out.
"I don't know much about classical music. For years I thought the Goldberg Variations were something Mr. and Mrs. Goldberg did on their wedding night." Woody Allen
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
stop playing a defensive war and become proactive, or else just pull out.

Now I can agree with you on that.
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
We have a fairly determined fifth column.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Amanda
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
bachophile
Oct 28 2005, 10:55 PM
israel is in the unenviable position to not be able to withstand even one first strike, so its policy has always been one of deterrance.

but when u hve irrational people running a country, normal logic doesnt work.

my guess is that israel will never allow the nukes to come online, but that may not entail an overt military strike.

it could mean covert ****ing up of their systems, to the point where its incapacitated.

im sure the technology exists.

I'd like to think so, but I don't know, bach. jon-nyc (who BTW supports the idea of an Israeli first strike against Iran - conditionally) contends that the Iranians built their pre-weapons program with the full intent of making it inaccessible. So jon says that it is now impossible to destroy it, because it's almost all hidden with only a fraction above ground.

It's disconcerting that US intelligence is so at odds with Israeli intelligence - the US declaring loudly recently that based on the latest analysis of satellite photos, the closest Iran could come to nuclear warheads was five years - or was it ten?? Something about the time required to build up enough fissionable material.

Shalom says maybe six months. Quite a discrepancy!

US intelligence doesn't have a great track record. I almost have the feeling in this case, there may even be buy-outs of information suppliers, so that they are deliberately being misleading and vague, to win Iran time. I suspect corruption and bribery, everywhere at this point.

They COULDN'T be as stupid as they sound, could they? What is the motive of this new president? Is he trying to rally the Iranians around him patriotically/religiously and thereby win more backing for his extremist religious policies? Does he want Iran to be the new leader of the Muslim world, and is all his rhetoric intended to fan those fires?

On the surface of it, the one bright spot here appears to be that he has sounded off in such a blatant and seemingly lunatic way. It has even shut up the elements in the US (and globally) trying to be optimistic and argue for time and diplomacy.

The silence is deafening in those quarters, isn't it? Good! Then Israel won't be told any longer to "trust the untrustworthy" this time, taking others' words for it - others angry at Israel's "endangering the regional stability". This Iranian jihadist, has made it clear in all corners of the world that it is Iran which IS destabilizing the region - and not just for Israel but for the whole world.

I'm SO glad. But frankly, his speaking so clearly and crazily, seems too good to be true.

Is there something else going on...besides his seeking stardom with his people, as the new leader - and in the whole Muslim world? Is he truly so convinced Allah backs him, that he has no strategy except faith and a call to arms? Or is there something else behind the scenes? Is it possible he wants to (and is willing) to call Israel's first strike wrath on his people, but with some plan?

Maybe he feels it will gain them sympathy if there are massive civilian Hiroshima-like casualties (surely they will place every orphanage and hospital within range, on top of the most desirable targets). Could it be a kind of national suicide attack - using themselves as bait? Is it possible that there is a second strike nuclear capability from another source, which has been kept a close secret? Maybe the plan is, that if Israel shoots their bolt in Iran preemptively, there will be retaliation from elsewhere once Israel is effectively disarmed - even if only temporarily.
[size=5]
We should tolerate eccentricity in others, almost to the point of lunacy, provided no one else is harmed.
[/size]

"Daily Telegraph", London July 27 2005
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Friday
Senior Carp
Quote:
 
They COULDN'T be as stupid as they sound, could they? What is the motive of this new president?


Amanda, I too have been wondering about this.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
JBryan
Oct 28 2005, 07:51 PM
Try and think of this as a chess game.


Exactly.

JBryan
Oct 28 2005, 08:00 PM
Iran must never be allowed to possess nukes as it is currently constituted. That is the bottom line and all options on the table must lead there.


Exactly.

This is neither the first nor the last time some stupid Middle Eastern leader has called for the elimination of Israel. It thus is hardly a "sky is falling" moment.

At the same time, it cannot be viewed as meaningless.

However, Iran is no where near capable of eliminating Israel. There is time and many options available to ensure they never will be.

The question was raised whether anyone cares about such a threat to Israel. I think many of us do. But I also think many of us are not about to get carried away into some sort of hysterical panic, like Bush led leading up to the invasion of Iraq.

A jbryan said above -- think of this as a chess game. This latest strident rhetoric is simply another move by Iran.
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
I wouldn't say anyone cared. To the contrary, its just that everyone in their right mind spent the last couple of days shaking their head at the preposterousness of the statement.

This is brinkmanship from a position of weakness. In 1963 Castro at least had reason to believe Khrushchev would stand firm. Iran has nothing except Castro's wannabe, Hugo Chavez, who continues to exist only at the pleasure of the White House.

Despite gnashing of leftist upper and lower dentures, time for the USA to take serious the doctrines of the U.S. Grant, William T. Sherman and George S. Patton schools of war- unconditional surrender or total annihilation.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jeffrey
Senior Carp
Rick - Previously, you denied that Iran had the intention to destroy Israel. Do you know admit that this is true? If you do not admit this, is there any fact at all that could possibly get you to admit this, or is the claim that Iran does not intend to nuke Israel in a first strike have for you the status of an unverifiable first premise, which you will not abandon no matter what the evidence???

As to why they are rattling sabres? Answer: it helps them. The world will wag their fingers, but do nothing. Yak, yak, yak, but do nothing. And Iran knows it. The Iranian regime can't deliver to their people in terms of living standards or well-being, but they can direct their anger outwards. The are threatening Israel for the same reason the Taliban destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas. Totalitarian religious regimes must keep their populations in a state of nationalist rage, in order to cover over their basic failures as a government. The government of Iran is preparing its people for a nuclear strike against Israel, just as Hitler prepared the German people for the Holocaust. The political logic of the Iranian regime's position is, in fact, genocide. They have no other option for legitimation, or justification for their existence. The cost to Iran of threatening Israel is zero, since no one will actually do anything about it but wag fingers, at best.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Amanda
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
Jeffrey
Oct 29 2005, 12:39 AM
The cost to Iran of threatening Israel is zero, since no one will actually do anything about it but wag fingers, at best.

Hardly, since Israel will stike preemptively one way or the other - or both.

And thanks to Iran's million-wide rally and the new president's big mouth, no one will blame her.

So then the question comes, what IS the ulterior motive? You think it's just a distraction? Israel won't take that chance.
[size=5]
We should tolerate eccentricity in others, almost to the point of lunacy, provided no one else is harmed.
[/size]

"Daily Telegraph", London July 27 2005
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Jeffrey
Oct 28 2005, 09:39 PM
Rick - Previously, you denied that Iran had the intention to destroy Israel.  Do you know admit that this is true? 

As to why they are rattling sabres?  Answer: it helps them.  The world will wag their fingers, but do nothing.   Yak, yak, yak, but do nothing.  And Iran knows it.   The Iranian regime can't deliver to their people in terms of living standards or well-being, but they can direct their anger outwards.  The are threatening Israel for the same reason the Taliban destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas.  Totalitarian religious regimes must keep their populations in a state of nationalist rage, in order to cover over their basic failures as a government.  The government of Iran is preparing its people for a nuclear strike against Israel, just as Hitler prepared the German people for the Holocaust.  The political logic of the Iranian regime's position is, in fact, genocide.  They have no other option for legitimation, or justification for their existence.  The cost to Iran of threatening Israel is zero, since no one will actually do anything about it but wag fingers, at best.

I do not see this as the policy of a nation, but the policy of the current government.

In the same way, I do not see the current Iraq debacle as the policy of the United States as a nation (indeed, it is clear most American disagree with it), but as the policy of the current government.

As I said, his comments need to be taken seriously, but as jbryan said --- consider this a chess game.

Your comments that he can say this with impunity because no one will do anything is not quite true. Indeed, he has stirred up quite the hornets' nest and has lost much credibility in the world, especially in Europe. This is not good for Iran.

However, the implication in your comments is that you want something more done because of this guy's belligerence. What specifically would you suggest be done about it?
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
Rick Zimmer
Oct 28 2005, 08:49 PM
I do not see this as the policy of a nation, but the policy of the current government....As I said, his comments need to be taken seriously, but as jbryan said --- consider this a chess game.


Unfortunately, now after close to thirty years after the revolution, we ought to see this statement as the policy of the nation. It is a game for very high stakes they are playing. Time is coming that they will be in check mate if they continue the game they are playing..
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jon-nyc
Member Avatar
Cheers
Unfortunately his statements do not represent a policy change - this has been a stated foreign policy goal of Iran since the revolution.

I do wonder why he made the statement now, though. I can't see how it is in their interest to do so.
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jeffrey
Senior Carp
jon - I stated what the goal is: to psychologically prepare the unemployed and disgruntled population of Iran for a nuclear first strike against Israel. Such actions take time to prepare, as Hitler did for decades in Germany, and as the Hutu did in Rwanda. They know they will not be harmed in any way by such comments, since China wants their oil, and Europe has ruled out military action of any sort as a big bother. China and Russia will say such comments are not good (since they draw too much attention to the issue) and then buy their oil from Iran and sell them nuclear technology and veto any real action in the UN.

Rick - Your post is still full of denial. You state that it's statement are not good for Iran. This is false. They will suffer nothing real for their comments, and they know it. Europe has ruled out military action no matter what the consequences of inaction. China and Russia support Iran as a counterweight against the US, and neither regards relations with Israel as vital. Again, this is a government that cannot meet the basic economic needs of it citizenry. It must claim legitimacy in some other way. A classic way is scapegoating. The Iranian government also published a detailed analysis of how it could withstand a nuclear counter-strike by Israel, since it is so much bigger (details at www.memri.org). They mean what they say absolutely literally. Only deluded liberals think otherwise.


What should be done? Well if the world were a rational and decent place, and liberals did not delude themselves about the clearly stated intentions of fascist regimes, Iran would be subject to UN sanctions, an economic blockade, China would not buy their oil and Russia would not sell them nuclear technology. We could also consider military action. This will not happen, because the world is not a rational and decent place, and people primarily look out for themselves.


Israel is in a bad situation, and in the end will have to rely on itself. It cannot do more than a quick strike against Iran: Israel's army cannot occupy a country. Iran has hidden its weapons facilities in cities with large civilian populations, using its own population as hostages. Since Israel is disliked around the world, the political consequences of causing massive civilian casualties (in the 10's of thousands) in Iran, even to save itself from a clear and overwhelming existential threat, are dire. It therefore has no good options, since it faces a genocidal regime that doesn't care about its own citizens. Remember, Israel was roundly criticized for taking out Saddam's nuclear facilities years ago. Imagine how it will be condemned if it conducts systematic bombing raids in Iran, causing extensive city damage and 10's of thousands of civilian deaths, because that is how the government of Iran has set it up?? Also, given the way the Iranian weapons facilities are hidden, and dispersed, it is not clear that a mere air raid will, in fact, disable Iran's nuclear weapon capacity for more than a short time.

Israel will seek the support of the world community to stop the current government of Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It will not work, but it is worth a try. When it does not work, they will be put in a no win situation: allow themselves to be killed, or kill many thousands of innocent hostages on the other side, along with making themselves outcasts in the world community for several generations if not longer while liberals wag their fingers at them. It is better to be hated and alive than loved and dead, so I assume Israel will seriously consider the latter course, and whether they will choose it will depend on details of military intelligence that I do not posess. However, it is not clear to me that taking such action, even if desirable in theory, will work, given the dispersion and location of the Iranian assets.

I think that a possible better solution would be for Israel to dramatically and publically increase the lethality and dispersion of its own nuclear and biological weapons, such that even if attacked first, it would retain sufficient counter-attack ability, and publish such ability widely and with details. Israel may also wish to publish details of the effect of multiple hydrogen bombs dropped on Iran in a counter-attack on the world eco-system. I suspect it would alter life as we know it, not only for Iran. Israel should make clear that it will not go quietly, but has the capacity and will to counterattack with catastrophic force. Hopefully, nearby Russia does not need a nuclear cloud spreading from Iran, and would counsel Iran accordingly. Iran I regard as immune to self-interest arguments, since it is a crazed theocracy, but Russia is a mafia-led kingdom, and does have a vulgar conception of self-interest, and does not wish to be harmed by a nuclear cloud from Iran. Again, not a perfect solution, but I doubt the capacity of an Israeli bombing raid to set back Iranian nuclear capability for more than a few years.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jon-nyc
Member Avatar
Cheers
good analysis, Jeffrey. that pretty much sums it up.

(except perhaps the very first bit - i don't think the population would need much prep, or much more prep perhaps i should say)
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
Agreed, Jon.. the only RATIONAL reason I could see for doing so is as a starting position in negotiations.. a red herring if you will.

One time-honored tactic in contract negotiation is to throw in something you know the other party will find unacceptable, and you really don't want to begin with. Then you allow them to take that term off the table while retaining what it was you really wanted to begin with. You in essence create bargaining chips for yourself.

For instance, threatening the devastation of Israel, with the implication of nuclear weapons as the means. This would in turn mean Iran's annihilation.

Is the current regime in Iran willing to commit suicide? I doubt it, but I also don't think we can allow them to profit from that statement, if that is indeed what they are doing in their typically heavy-handed fashion.

I'll reiterate my comment from Bach's original thread on this subject. It would be madness to ignore this belligerent statement, madder still to allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bachophile
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
i think jeffs scenarios with thousands incinerated is not likely.

i think whatver action done will be covert and no one will even know it happened.

one day all their computers will go offline, or their material or centrifuges, will be defective, or something like that.

and iran will never admit it publicly.

but then, there is much that goes on that the public never knows...
"I don't know much about classical music. For years I thought the Goldberg Variations were something Mr. and Mrs. Goldberg did on their wedding night." Woody Allen
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jeffrey
Senior Carp
Bach - I respect your belief in Israel's capacity to defend itself by purely technological means (secret microwave counterstrike, for example). But technology is not unlimited, nor is Israel's military capability. I believe the world community will take a threat to nuke Israel seriously, only if they feel their own safety would be harmed as a result (say, from a worldwide nuclear winter from the Israeli counter-strike). People in large numbers rarely do things out of altruism or because others are threatened. (It's not impossible, just rare and rarely sustained over long periods of time.) The world will only restrain Iran, if the world thinks their own safetly will be (indirectly) compromised if they do not. The simple desire to save Israeli citizens from genocide is not a sufficiently large motivation. Such is the way of the world.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
apple
one of the angels
Jeffrey
Oct 29 2005, 08:42 AM
People in large numbers rarely do things out of altruism or because others are threatened. (It's not impossible, just rare and rarely sustained over long periods of time.) The world will only restrain Iran, if the world thinks their own safetly will be (indirectly) compromised if they do not. The simple desire to save Israeli citizens from genocide is not a sufficiently large motivation. Such is the way of the world.

i hope we disagree on this.. i hope
it behooves me to behold
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DivaDeb
HOLY CARP!!!
Jeffrey,

It's taken me a while to read through the thread. I agree with every word of your post (the long one, I didn't quote it because of the length, but the last one).

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
Jeffrey,

Do you think that Iran would nuke Israel and that would be the end of it? We'd all just sit back and say 'Gee.. that's too bad. Glad it wasn't me.'

The response from this country alone would be devastation for Iran. They know that.
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jon-nyc
Member Avatar
Cheers
Jeffrey
Oct 29 2005, 09:42 AM
Bach - I respect your belief in Israel's capacity to defend itself by purely technological means (secret microwave counterstrike, for example). But technology is not unlimited, nor is Israel's military capability. I believe the world community will take a threat to nuke Israel seriously, only if they feel their own safety would be harmed as a result (say, from a worldwide nuclear winter from the Israeli counter-strike). People in large numbers rarely do things out of altruism or because others are threatened. (It's not impossible, just rare and rarely sustained over long periods of time.) The world will only restrain Iran, if the world thinks their own safetly will be (indirectly) compromised if they do not. The simple desire to save Israeli citizens from genocide is not a sufficiently large motivation. Such is the way of the world.

THats a bit far out now... a nuclear deterrent is one thing (say, a submarine-based weapon that would survive Israel being nuked). But to blackmail the world into solving its security problems by threatening a nuclear winter? THats a bit over the top. I have trouble imagining it.

In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jeffrey
Senior Carp
jon - "its security problems"

Your wording is quite revealing and correct, and it is how the world will view the situation and why they will do nothing. Yes, precisely. So long as Iran going nuclear is regarded merely as Israel's security problem, it will not be taken seriously, and nothing real will be done to stop it. Such is the way of the world. Iran has stated many times that it believes it's size makes it able to survive a counter strike by Israel. They are deadly serious.

I was not talking about blackmail or any such thing. A nuclear strike big enough to wipe out Iran, would all by itself alter the world ecosystem. That's what nuclear exchanges can do. Israel must make sure that it will not just have one or two bombs left, but enough to make it worth something. Hydrogen, not merely atomic. And it needs to make sure the world knows it will not go quietly. Then and only then will the world regard a nuclear Iran as the world's security problem, not just Israel's. Maybe.

I'd be happy to be proven wrong on this, but I don't see any real effort to stop Iran.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 4