Israel nears decision on Iran attack

[Beet]

Outrageous. Easily the most unjustified Israeli act of aggression since 1967.

This will of course, put America's soldiers and diplomats around the world at heightened risk of assault, to no fault of America's own, except for our ill-considered love affair with Israel.

[Beet]

First of all, Israel does not have the capability. It could only set back Iran's progress, not stop it. Secondly, there being a chance of something is not an argument. There is a chance Pakistan could use its weapons against Israel as well. Where was the Israeli attack then? There is a chance North Korea could use it against the United States. And so on. None of this justifies military action.

[Beet]

First of all, Israel does not have the capability.

I'm guessing they'd know better than you if they do or not.

Yes, they know even better than me that they can't.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And if they leave a note saying "try it again and we'll be back"?[/quote]

Then they'll have to keep an ongoing war with Iran for the rest of their nation's history. At some point, they'd get nuked simply for the sheer hatred they would inspire.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

While obviously no friend of Israel, Pakistan is less aggressive towards them than Iran...by a lot.  And are we sure Pakistan has the delivery systems to make it to Tel Aviv?  They may, I don't know.[/quote]

Have you ever heard of a suitcase bomb?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The attack on Iran is going to be challenging, but...hopefully....doable, Pakistan is a bit further away and substantially more complex.  And again, Israel isn't the reason Pakistan got their big bombs.[/quote]

And Israel isn't the reason Iran would get their big bombs. Israel isn't the one that invaded and/or occupied countries to Iran's west, east, and north east. However, in the event of an Israeli attack, that changes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not really.  There is a chance they could use them against our allies, sure, but not against the US...you've seen their missile tests right?[/quote]

Again, have you heard of a suitcase bomb?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In your opinion, sure.  Other people have different opinions.
[/quote]

I have the most basic instinct of humanity, and possibly the animal world as well - behind me. The aggressor is the one in the wrong.

[Beet]

First of all, Israel does not have the capability. It could only set back Iran's progress, not stop it. Secondly, there being a chance of something is not an argument. There is a chance Pakistan could use its weapons against Israel as well. Where was the Israeli attack then? There is a chance North Korea could use it against the United States. And so on. None of this justifies military action.

If Iran gets the bomb then it becomes the most likely country to have a bomb and use it.  I'd rate the chance of Iran using an atomic bomb within a decade after it has a bomb and the means to deliver it as being in the 1 to 5% range.  Still not very likely, but enough to trigger the doctrine of preemptive war to prevent it.

1% to 5% is way too high. North Korea is maybe 1% to 5%. The leaders of Iran are far more sane than the leaders of North Korea. North Korea actually sank a South Korean warship - total unprovoked. Iran let the US shoot down one of its civilian airliners in the middle of the Persian Gulf and didn't retaliate. Iran would never do something so stupid as a nuclear attack on Israel. Khamenei is not "that guy." Shiite Islam is actually far more moderate than Sunni Islam.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Iran does not have any reasons for unilaterally attacking Israel. This is not 1967. Iran is far away from Israel, and if it were not for Hezbollah, would not really have anything to do with Israel. And the Hezbollah route is about to be closed anyway.

[Beet]

First of all, Israel does not have the capability.

I'm guessing they'd know better than you if they do or not.

Yes, they know even better than me that they can't.

So you think they are bluffing?  Or suicidal?  I'm confused.

Well, looking at who is in charge, they are probably acting against their better judgement.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And if they leave a note saying "try it again and we'll be back"?[/quote]
Then they'll have to keep an ongoing war with Iran for the rest of their nation's history. At some point, they'd get nuked simply for the sheer hatred they would inspire.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

While obviously no friend of Israel, Pakistan is less aggressive towards them than Iran...by a lot.  And are we sure Pakistan has the delivery systems to make it to Tel Aviv?  They may, I don't know.[/quote]
Have you ever heard of a suitcase bomb?[/quote]

(seriously?  "suit case bomb" is what you're going with here?)Of course I've heard of "suitcase bombs".  And there is no way Pakistan has the technology to make one.  Hell, the closest the US or Soviets ever got was something that could fit inside a footlocker and they are only good for blowing up an airport or something else relatively small.  Pakistan isn't going to risk the...ahem...."fallout" to blow up a couple of buildings.[/quote]

If it only blew up a couple of buildings, then the response would be simply to attack Pakistan, not to wipe Pakistan off the face of the earth. In other words, they would risk that far before they'd risk a nuclear strike. But of course they wouldn't risk either. Nether would Iran.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The attack on Iran is going to be challenging, but...hopefully....doable, Pakistan is a bit further away and substantially more complex.  And again, Israel isn't the reason Pakistan got their big bombs.[/quote]
And Israel isn't the reason Iran would get their big bombs. Israel isn't the one that invaded and/or occupied countries to Iran's west, east, and north east. However, in the event of an Israeli attack, that changes.[/quote]You think Iran is getting the bomb to protect itself against the US?  If the US wanted to invade Iran why do you think they haven't up until now?  S.Arabia would make more sense here.[/quote]

The US is currently the only country that poses an existential threat to Iran. It's the only member of the Axis of Evil still standing. Every couple of years, there are rumors the US is going to attack Iran.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not really.  There is a chance they could use them against our allies, sure, but not against the US...you've seen their missile tests right?[/quote]Again, have you heard of a suitcase bomb?[/quote]Twice?  Dude, stop watching so many movies.[/quote]

Which movie featured Korean Air Flight 858?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In your opinion, sure.  Other people have different opinions.
[/quote]

I have the most basic instinct of humanity, and possibly the animal world as well - behind me. The aggressor is the one in the wrong.[/quote]Indeed.  Tell Iran to stop trying to blow up embassies.  Tell them to stop funding terrorist organizations.  Even with our biases we still have to admit that our own side isn't perfect here.  Both sides have acted aggressively.  This whole mess isn't going to start when the first JDAM slams into concrete, it started a long ass time ago.
[/quote]

LOL. Iran hasn't blown up any embassies. And even if it did at some point years ago, it would not be justification for a new attack now.