Will Iran attack Israel ?

[Terrywoodenpic]

Israel usually waits for a provocation.
However it is less confident of its own abilities since the Last Lebanon war.

If it does start a fight it will be targeted at the atomic and rocket sites.

If it was sufficiently quick and clinical it would not stir the whole middle east into war.

Abberwhateverheiscalled is far from stupid and so far has known just how far he can go; he knows very well that the west is very anxious not to have another war in the middle east at this time.
So he feels quite safe to push things to the limit.

If Israel did more than a surgical strike they would not even have the backing of the USA. Certainly no more than encouragement from the side lines.

Is Iran working towards nuclear wepons? of course they are, they could have enough enriched uranium in a couple of years. Though if they wanted to use them in a surprise attack they would have to use them untested.

Any first generation bomb is bound to be very dirty and would kill almost as many friends as enemies, if fired at Israel.

More likely targets would be London or the USA. However they would then be obliterated from the face of the earth.

 

[Alceste]

I agree with most of what you've said, Terry, but why would you think Iran would directly attack London or the US? That seems extremely unlikely, IMO. That's even more unlikely than Iran attacking Israel directly, which is pretty unlikely.

No matter how crazy politicians appear to be on the podium, they rarely (if ever) wage wars when there is no geopolitical or economic advantage to be gained by it.

Bull ******** the populance from the podium gets them elected. Starting David vs. Goliath conflicts against notoriously violent enemies (i.e. us) gets them nothing.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I agree with most of what you've said, Terry, but why would you think Iran would directly attack London or the US? That seems extremely unlikely, IMO. That's even more unlikely than Iran attacking Israel directly, which is pretty unlikely.

No matter how crazy politicians appear to be on the podium, they rarely (if ever) wage wars when there is no geopolitical or economic advantage to be gained by it.

Bull ******** the populance from the podium gets them elected. Starting David vs. Goliath conflicts against notoriously violent enemies (i.e. us) gets them nothing.

You are right ...they are unlikely to use them against anyone. However it will be at least two years before they could do any thing.
In that time the world situation will likely have changed.
if the Muslim world has increased its antagonism to the west, who knows what gestures might be made. A bomb in the middle of the american nuclear testing ground would be a fairly effective statement.

 

[Reverend Rick]

It will be extraordinarily difficult for Iran to build a nuclear weapon if it's nuclear facilities are being inspected.

Phil, in light of the recent news of a second facility, I'm not sure your statement holds much water. With the agreement made this week, they should be able to have a peaceful nuclear program without running ANY FACILITIES. There should be nothing to inspect except to verify that the plants are not operational.

If Russia is going to enrich Iran's uranium for them for electrical power and medical needs, it gives me pause when I discover a second facility in operation.

Is my logic flawed here? I know you don't like where this logic takes us, but that changes very little.

 

[rojse]

I can't help but think of Doctor Strangelove as I read this thread...

General "Buck" Turgidson: Mr. President, we are rapidly approaching a moment of truth both for ourselves as human beings and for the life of our nation. Now, truth is not always a pleasant thing. But it is necessary now to make a choice, to choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless *distinguishable*, postwar environments: one where you got twenty million people killed, and the other where you got a hundred and fifty million people killed.
President Merkin Muffley: You're talking about mass murder, General, not war!
General "Buck" Turgidson: Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.

 

[Sunstone]

Phil, in light of the recent news of a second facility, I'm not sure your statement holds much water. With the agreement made this week, they should be able to have a peaceful nuclear program without running ANY FACILITIES. There should be nothing to inspect except to verify that the plants are not operational.

If Russia is going to enrich Iran's uranium for them for electrical power and medical needs, it gives me pause when I discover a second facility in operation.

Is my logic flawed here? I know you don't like where this logic takes us, but that changes very little.

Interesting article, Rick:

The top ten things you didn't know about Iran | Salon

 

[Caladan]

Interesting article, Rick:

The top ten things you didn't know about Iran | Salon

Sorry Phil, its not the first time I read this, to say that some of these points are misleading would be an understatement.
so Iran has not invaded any other nation 'unlike' Israel, so?
Iran is not the only Jewish nation in the middle east which was invaded right from its independence. Iran is not the nation which has been at odds with the dictatorial regimes around it, was Israel at fault for defending itself in 1948 against 7 invading armies? was Israel at fault for the six days war, when Egypt expelled the UN peacekeepers from Sinai in preparation for attack together with Syria and Jordan and other Arab reinforcements or when it launched a blockade on Israeli ships? maybe in 73? when Egypt and Syria together with Iraqi forces attacked Israel while Jews throughout Israel were fasting on Yom Kippur? Israel has always responded to provocations, whether people consider these provocations in justification for the forceful Israeli response is a different topic.
Iran may have not invaded other countries, but I cant help but wonder why this piece ignores the fact that unlike Israel, Iran is executing its own citizens on the streets. which gay couple in Israel would be hanged from cranes? while people of the Baha'i faith are being imprisoned in Iran or even executed, in Israel they were permitted to erect one of their most prestiged centers.
I'm also amazed the writer of this piece shrugs off holocaust denying as a minor and irrelevant issue.
No, the Iranian regime is not normal. it mandates the oppression of Iranian citizens, and it promotes domestic atrocities. did the writer of this piece already forgot the images of young Iranians being shot at by the Basij on the streets of Tehran just a few weeks ago?
When did any Israeli leader proclaimed in American universities that 'there are no gays in Israel' or even worse, equated gays with criminals?

 

[Sunstone]

Sorry Phil, its not the first time I read this, to say that some of these points are misleading would be an understatement.
so Iran has not invaded any other nation 'unlike' Israel, so?
Iran is not the only Jewish nation in the middle east which was invaded right from its independence. Iran is not the nation which has been at odds with the dictatorial regimes around it, was Israel at fault for defending itself in 1948 against 7 invading armies? was Israel at fault for the six days war, when Egypt expelled the UN peacekeepers from Sinai in preparation for attack together with Syria and Jordan and other Arab reinforcements or when it launched a blockade on Israeli ships? maybe in 73? when Egypt and Syria together with Iraqi forces attacked Israel while Jews throughout Israel were fasting on Yom Kippur? Israel has always responded to provocations, whether people consider these provocations in justification for the forceful Israeli response is a different topic.
Iran may have not invaded other countries, but I cant help but wonder why this piece ignores the fact that unlike Israel, Iran is executing its own citizens on the streets. which gay couple in Israel would be hanged from cranes? while people of the Baha'i faith are being imprisoned in Iran or even executed, in Israel they were permitted to erect one of their most prestiged centers.
I'm also amazed the writer of this piece shrugs off holocaust denying as a minor and irrelevant issue.
No, the Iranian regime is not normal. it mandates the oppression of Iranian citizens, and it promotes domestic atrocities. did the writer of this piece already forgot the images of young Iranians being shot at by the Basij on the streets of Tehran just a few weeks ago?
When did any Israeli leader proclaimed in American universities that 'there are no gays in Israel' or even worse, equated gays with criminals?

Dan, your comments go very far to clarify the respective character of the Israeli and Iranian Governments. Juan Cole's main point is that Iran is not likely to launch a first strike against Israel. Do you think Iran would?

 

[Caladan]

Dan, your comments go very far to clarify the respective character of the Israeli and Iranian Governments. Juan Cole's main point is that Iran is not likely to launch a first strike against Israel. Do you think Iran would?

Initially I was in the opinion that the Iranian nuclear program may not be the end of the world. I still largely believe that despite its disturbing domestic policies the Iranian regime will act reasonably to maintain itself and will not launch any suicidal acts of lunacy. however, the Iranian regime is also responsible for mass indoctrination and for proxy wars against Israel, we would be complete fools to ignore the Iranian rhetorics and the great effort they place on building their capabilities at the same time. usually when me or my friends meet with people who left Iran, or who's family left Iran they tell us something to the effect of 'back in Iran we were bred to hate you and to kill you'. I think that regimes like that of Iran are an enigma to people like you and me Phil, because our dismay for some of the policies of our own governments are still not on the level of experiencing a physical 1984 scenario as Iranian citizens do.
Im inclined to think Iran would not attack Israel directly, but because Iran IS provoking Israel with proxies, and Israeli citizens did and still do need to use their shelters, its a no-brainer to let the Iranian regime raise the threat level and dictate the security measures of the region or on the global scale.
at the end of the day, if Iranian lives are so cheap back in Iran, what is the worth of Israeli lives to the Ayatollahs?
One thing to consider is, that perhaps they are not stupid to attack Israel NOW, but once they will have heavy weight capabilities, western decision making and politics are going to be very complicated, and the realpolitik of the middle east will try to seek balance in unexpected ways. remember many Sunnis are threatened by the rise of the Shiite crescent.

 

[rojse]

Interesting article, Rick:

The top ten things you didn't know about Iran | Salon

The last comment in the article was quite interesting:

Moreover, Israel, Pakistan and India are all much worse citizens of the globe than Iran, since they refused to sign the NPT and then went for broke to get a bomb; and nothing at all has been done to any of them by the UNSC.

 

[Caladan]

The last comment in the article was quite interesting:

and the NPT means what exactly?
North Korea signed the nuclear treaty and resumed to treat it as nonexistent and eventually withdrew from it in 2003.
is Iran following in North Korea's footsteps? just a few days ago the IAEA chief said that Iran's second nuclear facility is in violation of the transparency law, beyond these recent news through out the 2000's the IAEA has blamed Iran repeatedly of not meeting the standards of the NPT.
while Israel is not signed on the NPT it has kept its policy of not being the first to introduce nukes into the region, Israel has developed its nuclear capacity but has kept its strict 'no first use' agenda for decades, and it has been tested in the most difficult times and has been kept, as history shows us in the 1973 Arab-Israeli war when Egypt and Syria together with Iraqi forces launched a surprise attack against Israel on the most holiest day in Judaism.
Some also claim that the US has violated the NPT with is nuclear weapons sharing, when it deployed nukes in other NATO states.
nations like Iraq, Libya and Romania have all been accused of violating the NPT.

 

[rojse]

and the NPT means what exactly?

Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.

North Korea signed the nuclear treaty and resumed to treat it as nonexistent and eventually withdrew from it in 2003.
is Iran following in North Korea's footsteps? just a few days ago the IAEA chief said that Iran's second nuclear facility is in violation of the transparency law, beyond these recent news through out the 2000's the IAEA has blamed Iran repeatedly of not meeting the standards of the NPT.
while Israel is not signed on the NPT it has kept its policy of not being the first to introduce nukes into the region, Israel has developed its nuclear capacity but has kept its strict 'no first use' agenda for decades, and it has been tested in the most difficult times and has been kept, as history shows us in the 1973 Arab-Israeli war when Egypt and Syria together with Iraqi forces launched a surprise attack against Israel on the most holiest day in Judaism.
Some also claim that the US has violated the NPT with is nuclear weapons sharing, when it deployed nukes in other NATO states.
nations like Iraq, Libya and Romania have all been accused of violating the NPT.

India flagrantly disregarded the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, and we now treat them as allies.

I suppose that is what happens when you have launch-capable nuclear missiles.

 

[Caladan]

Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.

Are you kidding me? Im not asking what does 'NPT' means, I'm asking has it kept a nuclear safety? it certainly didn't keep many nations which signed it to render it useless on many occasions.

 

[rojse]

Are you kidding me? Im not asking what does 'NPT' means, I'm asking has it kept a nuclear safety? it certainly didn't keep many nations which signed it to render it useless on many occasions.

Your words were

"and the NPT means what exactly?"

I believe I answered the question as asked.

The NPT makes obtaining materials and the know-how to develop nuclear weapons more difficult, but the larger countries that have the resources to develop such arms have already done so. The countries that wanted nuclear weapons have now got them, and there are no forceful ways in place to prevent countries that are developing nuclear weapons from obtaining them. Look at North Korea, for example.

 

[.lava]

May you elaborate, sister?!

it is said Ahmedinejad is a Jew. He is going to play the second Hitler of 3rd WW. Iran is takin technology to build nuclear weapons from Israel. There are some European scientists who fly to Iran and Western governments know they are working for Iran but they would not do anything about it. Cos they all know those nukes are not built for Israel. they know Iranian government is playing double and they would not hit Israel. that's not the purpose, never was. Ahmedinejad's purpose is to eliminate Islam.





.

 

[Sajdah]

it is said Ahmedinejad is a Jew. He is going to play the second Hitler of 3rd WW. Iran is takin technology to build nuclear weapons from Israel. There are some European scientists who fly to Iran and Western governments know they are working for Iran but they would not do anything about it. Cos they all know those nukes are not built for Israel. they know Iranian government is playing double and they would not hit Israel. that's not the purpose, never was. Ahmedinejad's purpose is to eliminate Islam.





.

A Jew!! if that thing was true then, in your opinion why Iran is supporting Islamic resistance in palestine?!

 

[DavyCrocket2003]

Self defense implies that someone has been attacked, and I think you don't even have an argument, so I'm one step ahead of you with my "poor" one.

So what needs to happen for you to feel that Israel has been attacked? Does someone need to nuke them?

 

[JMorris]

decades of military aggression against small, mostly defenseless nations (and the Iraq invasion in particular) has taught the world that the only way to avoid American military intervention (whither it be assassinations, support of insurgency/terrorist groups, or out right invasion) is to either to do as your told, or develop nuclear weapons.

while im not defending the government of Iran, given the situation, can you blame them for wanting nuclear weapons? their surrounded by american bases, and recently had 2 neighboring countries invaded. if the american government was truly worried about proliferation, then not invading Iraq would of been a good idea.

but to answer the op, i find it far more likely that Israel would attack Iran than the contrary.

U.S. experts: Suspected Syrian nuclear site far from operational - Haaretz - Israel News

 

[Reverend Rick]

decades of military aggression against small, mostly defenseless nations (and the Iraq invasion in particular) has taught the world that the only way to avoid American military intervention (whither it be assassinations, support of insurgency/terrorist groups, or out right invasion) is to either to do as your told, or develop nuclear weapons.

while im not defending the government of Iran, given the situation, can you blame them for wanting nuclear weapons? their surrounded by american bases, and recently had 2 neighboring countries invaded. if the american government was truly worried about proliferation, then not invading Iraq would of been a good idea.

but to answer the op, i find it far more likely that Israel would attack Iran than the contrary.

U.S. experts: Suspected Syrian nuclear site far from operational - Haaretz - Israel News

This attitude of, if we only become a kinder gentler nation, all the rogue nations will quit hating us is naive at best.

 

[JMorris]

This attitude of, if we only become a kinder gentler nation, all the rogue nations will quit hating us is naive at best.

how so? what is your definition of a rogue nation? and what does it matter if they love us or hate us? its US who are invading THEM, isnt it? if we didnt do that, in what way would we come into military conflict? would they come invade us? shoot their ICBM's at us? come shell us with their navies? bomb us with their air forces? what is your point? that we should attack every country that gives us a bad look?

of course you dont address the fact that our invasion of Iraq (and other military operations in the region, including past interventions in Iran itself) was a good motivator for Iran to seek nuclear weapons. i am well aware that Iran's government isnt anything nice, but reality is reality. if a much more powerful country is constantly threatening your country, and there is a historic precedent that the only way to deter that country from attacking in one fashion or another is to develop nuclear weapons, then what are you going to do?

so, again, whats your point? what have we accomplished with our aggression?