-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Iran: Real Threat?
- Thread starter Darkdale
- Start date
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
I don't think that Iran is a threat to anyone.
But I do think that they could offer up a good fight should anyone attack them.
But I do think that they could offer up a good fight should anyone attack them.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
I don't think that losing a war has ever brought a country out of recession.
Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
Shermana
Heretic
Maybe the US soldiers who were in Northern Iraq getting shot by the Insurgents they armed and trained to start with? Maybe the Israelis who were bombarded with Hezbollah (Iran sponsored) rockets? I guess Iran was of no threat to them. Even if Iran doesn't use its nukes when it builds them, what is to stop them from giving a nuclear gift to Hezbollah? Iran has proxies, lots and lots of proxies. Supposedly they have 40,000 suicide bombers on call.
I actually don't think Iran will put up as good of a fight as everyone fears, they have no air force, and the Kurds can rip apart their air defenses if need be. The worst thing they have is their arsenal of chemical missiles, of which would give total justification for tactical nukes if they used them.
Last edited:
Bismillah
Submit
We all know that between Israel and Iran which of the two has conducted direct military action against the other.
A nuclear weapon functions on the policy of deterrence. If Iran were to obtain a nuclear weapon it would equalize the region and form an effective counter to any aggressive action by Israel, something it hasn't hesitated to do in the past.
The only reason Israelis shout the loudest at the idea of a nuclear Iran is that it will nullify their entire military advantage, it would forcefully end all any and all aggressive actions against the country.
A nuclear weapon functions on the policy of deterrence. If Iran were to obtain a nuclear weapon it would equalize the region and form an effective counter to any aggressive action by Israel, something it hasn't hesitated to do in the past.
Yeah gee I wonder if Lebanon would launch a nuke at Israel, they still are reeling from the occupation of their country a couple years back.
The only reason Israelis shout the loudest at the idea of a nuclear Iran is that it will nullify their entire military advantage, it would forcefully end all any and all aggressive actions against the country.
So if Iran were to use the last resource available to it fighting a defensive war you would approve the use of nuclear weapons? Repulsive.
That's exactly what Saddam and his American allies said.
Shermana
Heretic
What's repulsive is that you think Chemical weapons don't justify the use of equal counter measures. Are you saying they should be allowed to use Chemical weapons freely? If so, that says a lot. Should Israel be allowed to counter with chemical weapons instead of tactical nukes? Or is it only allowed when non-Jews use it?
It's not really a "Defensive" war when it financed proxy groups to attack Israel first.
It appears you think Hezbollah and Lebanon are one and the same, which may be partially correct, but Hezbollah acts on its own. They can launch from Syria if they wanted. They can launch from Gaza if they really wanted to. They also don't even need to launch from a missile. A suitcase will do. Which is probably what their plan is.
It's not really a "Defensive" war when it financed proxy groups to attack Israel first.
It appears you think Hezbollah and Lebanon are one and the same, which may be partially correct, but Hezbollah acts on its own. They can launch from Syria if they wanted. They can launch from Gaza if they really wanted to. They also don't even need to launch from a missile. A suitcase will do. Which is probably what their plan is.
Last edited:
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Iran simply doesn't have the resources to be a serious threat.
Shermana
Heretic
But would the invading troops not be allowed to use Chemical weapons if they were invading due to being attacked first by Proxy groups?
Why are tactical (short-impact) nukes any worse than chemical weapons? I'd probably rather be vaporized than choke to death on Sarin.
Bismillah
Submit
There has been longstanding reasons just why Hezbollah has been attacking Israel, it is not unprovoked aggression. Furthermore there is an inherent difference between a country being occupied by troops to overthrow the government and the launching of largely ineffective missiles.
The scale of the former is larger than the latter, by far.
Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
Last time I checked, Lebanon and Hezbollah were not synonymous.
sadiq
Spain, Morocco, Jerusalem
Sorry man a Pro-Zionist is not an Israeli or a representative of Israel or its people,Paul Wolfowitz is an American born and raised.
And you should know that Sharon advised against an american invasion in his tenure.
If he was a Pro chinese activist as well would you say "We're tired of fighting for China" i think not.
people like to scapegoat Israel nowdays.
Alceste
Vagabond
Except to an invading army.
So the solution to Iran's "threat" is simple: don't attack Iran.
murtaad
Member
Chicago Cubs don't want to wipe a country off a map and don't have nuclear ambitions.
jarofthoughts
Empirical Curmudgeon
I'm not terribly worried about Iran getting their hands on nukes.
Seriously, they would never use them against another nation, including Israel.
They have no interest in turning their country into a glass bowl, which would be the result.
Again, for all the fearmongers, there is no Muslim country or coalition of Muslim countries that are even close to being a serious threat to neither the US nor Europe.
While certain extreme individuals might be suicidal, the countries and the general population, is not.
Seriously, they would never use them against another nation, including Israel.
They have no interest in turning their country into a glass bowl, which would be the result.
Again, for all the fearmongers, there is no Muslim country or coalition of Muslim countries that are even close to being a serious threat to neither the US nor Europe.
While certain extreme individuals might be suicidal, the countries and the general population, is not.