If Israel tries to attack Iran.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for SauceKing
SauceKing

679

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#301 SauceKing
Member since 2011 • 679 Posts

[QUOTE="SauceKing"]

or the peace agreements with egypt and asudi arabia... negotiatiated by the US... none of this helps israel.

pie-junior

Israel is an enemy state of Saudia-arabia.

The Israeli-Egypt peace deal benefited everybody- the Egyptians included. the aid to Israel (and the one to Egypt) are the "rewards" offered to both nations in return.

how many fights has israel been in with saudi arabia?

how dumb do you have to be to not understand that its not just conicidence.

Avatar image for pie-junior
pie-junior

2866

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#302 pie-junior
Member since 2007 • 2866 Posts

whats my mistake, did we bargain peace treaties with egypt and saudi arbia? gonna throw that into the "was not a threat" category.

There never was a peace treaty between SA and Israel, that's your 1st mistake.

+I can't quite figure out how a peace-deal, ending a conflict that was much more devastating to the egyptians (in terms of casualties and economic damage), is somehow and American gift to Israel.

ITs childish to keep pretending at this point.

Iknowrite

SauceKing

Avatar image for SauceKing
SauceKing

679

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#303 SauceKing
Member since 2011 • 679 Posts

[QUOTE="SauceKing"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Iraq was not a threat to Israel. No comment on my quote above? I take you concede your mistake then.Darkman2007

whats my mistake, did we bargain peace treaties with egypt and saudi arbia? gonna throw that into the "was not a threat" category.

ITs childish to keep pretending at this point.

1 ) there is no peace treaty with Saudi Arabia, only with Egypt and Jordan. 2) how does helping to negotiate a peace treaty in 1979 and 1994 have anything to do with the war in Iraq or Afghanistan? again , youre just trying to blame Israel for everything under the sun.

alright hoss, why are we fighting those 2 wars if not to help quell the mideast?

Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#304 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts

[QUOTE="pie-junior"]

[QUOTE="SauceKing"]

or the peace agreements with egypt and asudi arabia... negotiatiated by the US... none of this helps israel.

SauceKing

Israel is an enemy state of Saudia-arabia.

The Israeli-Egypt peace deal benefited everybody- the Egyptians included. the aid to Israel (and the one to Egypt) are the "rewards" offered to both nations in return.

how many fights has israel been in with saudi arabia?

how dumb do you have to be to not understand that its not just conicidence.

actually the Saudis sent troops to help the Arab armies in both 48 and 67. and of course the Saudis are not going fight Israel alot, they don't have a border with Israel.
Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
-Sun_Tzu-

17384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#305 -Sun_Tzu-
Member since 2007 • 17384 Posts
Israel bombing Iran would be incredibly dumb.
Avatar image for pie-junior
pie-junior

2866

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#306 pie-junior
Member since 2007 • 2866 Posts

how many fights has israel been in with saudi arabia?SauceKing
three.

How many fights has Israel been with Iran?

Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#307 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="SauceKing"]

whats my mistake, did we bargain peace treaties with egypt and saudi arbia? gonna throw that into the "was not a threat" category.

ITs childish to keep pretending at this point.

SauceKing

1 ) there is no peace treaty with Saudi Arabia, only with Egypt and Jordan. 2) how does helping to negotiate a peace treaty in 1979 and 1994 have anything to do with the war in Iraq or Afghanistan? again , youre just trying to blame Israel for everything under the sun.

alright hoss, why are we fighting those 2 wars if not to help quell the mideast?

my guess? Bush's belief that western democracy is the best thing on planet earth ,, that , probably coupled with some oil interests , is what caused the Iraq war. as for Afghanistan , both the fact they were shielding Bin Laden (which from what I remember, Americans were all for killing him) and the democracy thing again. Israel on the other hand, has nothing to benefit from those wars, if anything it stood to lose from those wars (though there was vocal support since the US are allies, and thus Israel stood with them publically on that issue)
Avatar image for SauceKing
SauceKing

679

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#308 SauceKing
Member since 2011 • 679 Posts

[QUOTE="SauceKing"]

[QUOTE="pie-junior"]

Israel is an enemy state of Saudia-arabia.

The Israeli-Egypt peace deal benefited everybody- the Egyptians included. the aid to Israel (and the one to Egypt) are the "rewards" offered to both nations in return.

Darkman2007

how many fights has israel been in with saudi arabia?

how dumb do you have to be to not understand that its not just conicidence.

actually the Saudis sent troops to help the Arab armies in both 48 and 67. and of course the Saudis are not going fight Israel alot, they don't have a border with Israel.

so thats the reason? Not because of world politics or influence... just "ide kill them, but they are a little too far away" why are people being stupid on purpose in this thread?

Avatar image for m25105
m25105

3135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#309 m25105
Member since 2010 • 3135 Posts

If Israel attacked Iran, they would be doing so alone. The USA has been working all of its politics to keep Israel from doing such a thing. We wouldn't intervene nor help them in any way. If their attack results in them getting their asses beat, so be it.

Wasdie
Wow.. I actually agree with you.
Avatar image for SauceKing
SauceKing

679

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#310 SauceKing
Member since 2011 • 679 Posts

[QUOTE="SauceKing"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] 1 ) there is no peace treaty with Saudi Arabia, only with Egypt and Jordan. 2) how does helping to negotiate a peace treaty in 1979 and 1994 have anything to do with the war in Iraq or Afghanistan? again , youre just trying to blame Israel for everything under the sun.Darkman2007

alright hoss, why are we fighting those 2 wars if not to help quell the mideast?

my guess? Bush's belief that western democracy is the best thing on planet earth ,, that , probably coupled with some oil interests , is what caused the Iraq war. as for Afghanistan , both the fact they were shielding Bin Laden (which from what I remember, Americans were all for killing him) and the democracy thing again. Israel on the other hand, has nothing to benefit from those wars, if anything it stood to lose from those wars (though there was vocal support since the US are allies, and thus Israel stood with them publically on that issue)

the oil interests that totally lowered oil prices? oh thats right, conflict in the middle east RAISES global oil prices.

So bush went to war in order to raise oil prices, this all makes sense.

Avatar image for Barbariser
Barbariser

6785

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#311 Barbariser
Member since 2009 • 6785 Posts

I sincerely doubt that such an attack would provoke a 3rd World War. In any case, Iranians are far more military capable and competent than Iraqis, so they'll probably be able to cause quite a bit of damage without American intervention.

Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#312 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="SauceKing"]

how many fights has israel been in with saudi arabia?

how dumb do you have to be to not understand that its not just conicidence.

SauceKing

actually the Saudis sent troops to help the Arab armies in both 48 and 67. and of course the Saudis are not going fight Israel alot, they don't have a border with Israel.

so thats the reason? Not because of world politics or influence... just "ide kill them, but they are a little too far away" why are people being stupid on purpose in this thread?

yes, along with the fact the Saudis never had the most capable military around (its changing recently). so it would be pretty damn pointless for them to attack anyways.
Avatar image for pie-junior
pie-junior

2866

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#313 pie-junior
Member since 2007 • 2866 Posts

so thats the reason? Not because of world politics or influence... just "ide kill them, but they are a little too far away" why are people being stupid on purpose in this thread?

SauceKing

Saudi soldiers have fought with Israeli soldiers on at least 3 wars.

So far all I have done ITT is correct your blatant factual mistakes, w/o taking sides on my own- yet somehow you're accusing me of being stupid, and not the other way around.

Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#314 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="SauceKing"]

alright hoss, why are we fighting those 2 wars if not to help quell the mideast?

SauceKing

my guess? Bush's belief that western democracy is the best thing on planet earth ,, that , probably coupled with some oil interests , is what caused the Iraq war. as for Afghanistan , both the fact they were shielding Bin Laden (which from what I remember, Americans were all for killing him) and the democracy thing again. Israel on the other hand, has nothing to benefit from those wars, if anything it stood to lose from those wars (though there was vocal support since the US are allies, and thus Israel stood with them publically on that issue)

the oil interests that totally lowered oil prices? oh thats right, conflict in the middle east RAISES global oil prices.

So bush went to war in order to raise oil prices, this all makes sense.

maybe so , but still, that has nothing to do with Israel , since israel doesn't produce oil, it imports it (mainly from Russia and others since the Saudis obviously won't sell any), so a low oil price is in Israel's interest. the only reason Israel is pushing for sanctions on Iranian oil is because it considers the Iranian threat as worse than any rise in the price of oil
Avatar image for SauceKing
SauceKing

679

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#315 SauceKing
Member since 2011 • 679 Posts

[QUOTE="SauceKing"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] actually the Saudis sent troops to help the Arab armies in both 48 and 67. and of course the Saudis are not going fight Israel alot, they don't have a border with Israel.Darkman2007

so thats the reason? Not because of world politics or influence... just "ide kill them, but they are a little too far away" why are people being stupid on purpose in this thread?

yes, along with the fact the Saudis never had the most capable military around (its changing recently). so it would be pretty damn pointless for them to attack anyways.

dude we sell the saudis military tech.... just as we sell it to israelies...

im still unsure what you think you know....

Avatar image for pie-junior
pie-junior

2866

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#316 pie-junior
Member since 2007 • 2866 Posts
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] yes, along with the fact the Saudis never had the most capable military around (its changing recently). so it would be pretty damn pointless for them to attack anyways.

How do you explain them doing it, then? I'm not even going to explain what kind of a military powerhouse SA is in comparison to some of its neighbours.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#317 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="SauceKing"]

so thats the reason? Not because of world politics or influence... just "ide kill them, but they are a little too far away" why are people being stupid on purpose in this thread?

SauceKing

yes, along with the fact the Saudis never had the most capable military around (its changing recently). so it would be pretty damn pointless for them to attack anyways.

dude we sell the saudis military tech.... just as we sell it to israelies...

im still unsure what you think you know....

I said recently, although the Saudis wouldn't attack Israel now for the same reason any other country close to it won't with conventional means , Israel is a regional military and frankly, economic power, the Saudis wouldn't just attack for ideology. they also leave Israel alone because it fights Hezbollah (which the Saudis dislike as a proxy of Iran) , and the major rival to Iran in the region (yet another country the Saudis dislike)
Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
-Sun_Tzu-

17384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#318 -Sun_Tzu-
Member since 2007 • 17384 Posts

Israel on the other hand, has nothing to benefit from those wars, if anything it stood to lose from those wars (though there was vocal support since the US are allies, and thus Israel stood with them publically on that issue)Darkman2007

I wouldn't say that. The brokered stability between Israel and Arab dictators was and is not sustainable. A completely democratic middle east is something that should benefit all parties in the region in the long term.

Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#319 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts
[QUOTE="pie-junior"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] yes, along with the fact the Saudis never had the most capable military around (its changing recently). so it would be pretty damn pointless for them to attack anyways.

How do you explain them doing it, then? I'm not even going to explain what kind of a military powerhouse SA is in comparison to some of its neighbours.

the reasons for 48 and 67 you mean? because it was a collaborative Arab effort where for a while it really seemed like the Arabs had a shot at destroying Israel.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#320 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]Israel on the other hand, has nothing to benefit from those wars, if anything it stood to lose from those wars (though there was vocal support since the US are allies, and thus Israel stood with them publically on that issue)-Sun_Tzu-

I wouldn't say that. The brokered stability between Israel and Arab dictators was and is not sustainable. A completely democratic middle east is something that should benefit all parties in the region in the long term.

not really, most chances it will just bring a whole bunch of Muslim brotherhood like parties into power, just like it did in Egypt, Tunisia, and from what it seems , probably Libya too. not that Israel was any great friend of Mubarak either, Mubarak worked with Israel in regards to Gaza because it suited his interests vis-a-vis the Muslim Brotherhood
Avatar image for pie-junior
pie-junior

2866

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#321 pie-junior
Member since 2007 • 2866 Posts

A completely democratic middle east is something that should benefit all parties in the region in the long term.

-Sun_Tzu-

I disagree.

Considering the utter popular hatred for Israel, and the support for maintaining military or other conflict with it, in the mid-east I would doubt that. It would harm Israeli PR, as well- Being the "only true democracy in the mid-east" is a powerful piece of propaganda.

Avatar image for SauceKing
SauceKing

679

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#322 SauceKing
Member since 2011 • 679 Posts

[QUOTE="SauceKing"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] yes, along with the fact the Saudis never had the most capable military around (its changing recently). so it would be pretty damn pointless for them to attack anyways.Darkman2007

dude we sell the saudis military tech.... just as we sell it to israelies...

im still unsure what you think you know....

I said recently, although the Saudis wouldn't attack Israel now for the same reason any other country close to it won't with conventional means , Israel is a regional military and frankly, economic power, the Saudis wouldn't just attack for ideology. they also leave Israel alone because it fights Hezbollah (which the Saudis dislike as a proxy of Iran) , and the major rival to Iran in the region (yet another country the Saudis dislike)

saudis wont attack because we put conditions on the weapons we sell them..... just as we do with israel.

Avatar image for pie-junior
pie-junior

2866

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#323 pie-junior
Member since 2007 • 2866 Posts
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="pie-junior"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] yes, along with the fact the Saudis never had the most capable military around (its changing recently). so it would be pretty damn pointless for them to attack anyways.

How do you explain them doing it, then? I'm not even going to explain what kind of a military powerhouse SA is in comparison to some of its neighbours.

the reasons for 48 and 67 you mean?

and 73. where they weren't under the impression of having the ability to destry Israel.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#324 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="SauceKing"]

dude we sell the saudis military tech.... just as we sell it to israelies...

im still unsure what you think you know....

SauceKing

I said recently, although the Saudis wouldn't attack Israel now for the same reason any other country close to it won't with conventional means , Israel is a regional military and frankly, economic power, the Saudis wouldn't just attack for ideology. they also leave Israel alone because it fights Hezbollah (which the Saudis dislike as a proxy of Iran) , and the major rival to Iran in the region (yet another country the Saudis dislike)

saudis wont attack because we put conditions on the weapons we sell them..... just as we do with israel.

yes and no , Im sure the Saudis realise that if they try and attack Israel , then they won't be able to buy US weapons. but frankly, even if they didn't buy those weapons, they still wouldn't attack , it simply makes very little sense for them, other than send some token troops to some collaborative Arab effort.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#325 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts
[QUOTE="pie-junior"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="pie-junior"] How do you explain them doing it, then? I'm not even going to explain what kind of a military powerhouse SA is in comparison to some of its neighbours.

the reasons for 48 and 67 you mean?

and 73. where they weren't under the impression of having the ability to destry Israel.

again , a collaborative Arab effort, I would guess the Saudis didn't want to look as though it was only Egypt and Syria fighitng Israel (which would make them look good in the region), hence why they sent a faily token number of troops.
Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
-Sun_Tzu-

17384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#326 -Sun_Tzu-
Member since 2007 • 17384 Posts

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]Israel on the other hand, has nothing to benefit from those wars, if anything it stood to lose from those wars (though there was vocal support since the US are allies, and thus Israel stood with them publically on that issue)Darkman2007

I wouldn't say that. The brokered stability between Israel and Arab dictators was and is not sustainable. A completely democratic middle east is something that should benefit all parties in the region in the long term.

not really, most chances it will just bring a whole bunch of Muslim brotherhood like parties into power, just like it did in Egypt, Tunisia, and from what it seems , probably Libya too. not that Israel was any great friend of Mubarak either, Mubarak worked with Israel in regards to Gaza because it suited his interests vis-a-vis the Muslim Brotherhood

The reason why groups like the Muslim brotherhood have so much sway in the Arab world isn't because they are overwhelming popular among the general public, but because they are the only opposition groups that have been able to survive under these dictatorships, because while these regimes have done a very good job of crippling liberal, secularist, socialist, ect. opposition groups, they never went after the mosques, and so groups like the Muslim brotherhood have an extraordinary advantage over other opposition groups by default, because they are already well organized. It's specifically because of the dictators that Israel has brokered deals with to ensure stability that the Muslim brotherhood is able to enjoy the influence that it does.

And while maybe in the short term Israel is better off with these dictators in place, it is not a sustainable policy nor is it in any way moral to keep these oppressive regimes in power.

Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#327 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

I wouldn't say that. The brokered stability between Israel and Arab dictators was and is not sustainable. A completely democratic middle east is something that should benefit all parties in the region in the long term.

-Sun_Tzu-

not really, most chances it will just bring a whole bunch of Muslim brotherhood like parties into power, just like it did in Egypt, Tunisia, and from what it seems , probably Libya too. not that Israel was any great friend of Mubarak either, Mubarak worked with Israel in regards to Gaza because it suited his interests vis-a-vis the Muslim Brotherhood

The reason why groups like the Muslim brotherhood have so much sway in the Arab world isn't because they are overwhelming popular among the general public, but because they are the only opposition groups that have been able to survive under these dictatorships, because while these regimes have done a very good job of crippling liberal, secularist, socialist, ect. opposition groups, they never went after the mosques, and so groups like the Muslim brotherhood have an extraordinary advantage over other opposition groups by default, because they are already well organized. It's specifically because of the dictators that Israel has brokered deals with to ensure stability that the Muslim brotherhood is able to enjoy the influence that it does.

And while maybe in the short term Israel is better off with these dictators in place, it is not a sustainable policy nor is it in any way moral to keep these oppressive regimes in power.

that depends if they want peace with Israel , if they want peace, they will get peace at the moment though , the Muslim brotherhood movements are not just anti Israel , they are anti "Israel should exist". the question is, will being in power change them in some way.
Avatar image for xscrapzx
xscrapzx

6636

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#328 xscrapzx
Member since 2007 • 6636 Posts
And yet it's funny how the US and Britain can keep nuclear weapons, damn hypocrites.H_M_1
We won world war 2. Too bad deal with it. The other thing is we don't threaten to use them on other nations.
Avatar image for wis3boi
wis3boi

32507

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#329 wis3boi
Member since 2005 • 32507 Posts

Man, this thread went to sh!t real fast. I can't believe I just read it all, I have a headache now....

Avatar image for pie-junior
pie-junior

2866

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#330 pie-junior
Member since 2007 • 2866 Posts

Man, this thread went to sh!t real fast. I can't believe I just read it all, I have a headache now....

wis3boi
lol wat a stupid thing to do.
Avatar image for percech
percech

5237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#331 percech
Member since 2011 • 5237 Posts

[QUOTE="LastRambo341"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] total nonsense, especially the rape and poison gas, rape even more so as culturally its literally considered shameful in Israeli society to have contacts with Arabs which are beyond business contacts (and the same goes for the Arabs' attitudes towards Jews) John_Coffey

I've seen videos and pictures, I don't make it up.

And, pray tell, what exactly are your sources?

Lol, have you morons NOT seen the BBC documentary?
Avatar image for percech
percech

5237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#332 percech
Member since 2011 • 5237 Posts
[QUOTE="H_M_1"]And yet it's funny how the US and Britain can keep nuclear weapons, damn hypocrites.xscrapzx
We won world war 2. Too bad deal with it. The other thing is we don't threaten to use them on other nations.

Russia won WW2, deal with it. I guess that means they can do whatever **** they want too.
Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#333 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

Obama won't do anything, Israel is vital to American foreign policy and Obama has been preaisng Israel alot orecently. He has also been trying to appeal to jewish voters recently as well, Obama is probably one of the most pro Hebrew/Jewish politicians there is.

And Israel won't attack Iran, in order to do so they would have to fly over other arab countries (all of whom hate Israelis) without getting shot down, then stop and refuel along the way (again not going to happen as they would be killed), and fly over several no fly-zones. It's not going to happen, so don't worry.

I do hope the Isralis kick the crap out of the Iraninas though. I know they will too if Iran pushes them. The Jews are the victims here once again, not the aggressors.

Avatar image for coolbeans90
coolbeans90

21305

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#334 coolbeans90
Member since 2009 • 21305 Posts

I do not think the U.S. would shoot down Israeli aircraft if they were to strike Iran. Perhaps a few years ago, when we had a vulnerable military presence in Iraq in between Israel and Iran, the U.S. would shoot them down, but I think that time has past. That said, it would be kinda dumb of them to do so.

Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
-Sun_Tzu-

17384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#335 -Sun_Tzu-
Member since 2007 • 17384 Posts

Obama won't do anything, Israel is vital to American foreign policy and Obama has been preaisng Israel alot orecently. He has also been trying to appeal to jewish voters recently as well, Obama is probably one of the most pro Hebrew/Jewish politicians there is.

And Israel won't attack Iran, in order to do so they would have to fly over other arab countries (all of whom hate Israelis) without getting shot down, then stop and refuel along the way (again not going to happen as they would be killed), and fly over several no fly-zones. It's not going to happen, so don't worry.

I do hope the Isralis kick the crap out of the Iraninas though. I know they will too if Iran pushes them. The Jews are the victims here once again, not the aggressors.

ShadowMoses900
I think it's pretty obvious that the Iranian people (not the mullahs) are the victims, not Israel.
Avatar image for lordreaven
lordreaven

7239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#336 lordreaven
Member since 2005 • 7239 Posts

Wait, how would attacking Iran start a World War? it's barely a regional power (which is it's goal, no doubt) but as of right now, it's only real allies is Russia and China, whom both are not willing to jump in so quickyl to defend Iran (even though they invested in it) as it will ruin any other investments. Iran is alone, except for maybe Syria (except maybe shelling some Israeli towns, Syria will fall like a house of cards ina hurricane, and it's in no shape to do anything right now with rebels running around).

So yeah, the question I'm asking is what will happen AFTER the war. The war will happen, once this US election is through, the US will be ready to rofl stopm Iran (Unless Obama gambles and does the war before the election to garner extra support, which I doubt). Will the Iranian government be changed, will the Shah be put back into power, will Zoroastrians return to Iran, will Iran be renamed Persia?

Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
-Sun_Tzu-

17384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#337 -Sun_Tzu-
Member since 2007 • 17384 Posts

Wait, how would attacking Iran start a World War? it's barely a regional power (which is it's goal, no doubt) but as of right now, it's only real allies is Russia and China, whom both are not willing to jump in so quickyl to defend Iran (even though they invested in it) as it will ruin any other investments. Iran is alone, except for maybe Syria (except maybe shelling some Israeli towns, Syria will fall like a house of cards ina hurricane, and it's in no shape to do anything right now with rebels running around).

So yeah, the question I'm asking is what will happen AFTER the war. The war will happen, once this US election is through, the US will be ready to rofl stopm Iran (Unless Obama gambles and does the war before the election to garner extra support, which I doubt). Will the Iranian government be changed, will the Shah be put back into power, will Zoroastrians return to Iran, will Iran be renamed Persia?

lordreaven
What would probably happen is that Iran would look a lot like Iraq after Saddam was ousted.
Avatar image for themajormayor
themajormayor

25729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#338 themajormayor
Member since 2011 • 25729 Posts
[QUOTE="lordreaven"]

Wait, how would attacking Iran start a World War? it's barely a regional power (which is it's goal, no doubt) but as of right now, it's only real allies is Russia and China, whom both are not willing to jump in so quickyl to defend Iran (even though they invested in it) as it will ruin any other investments. Iran is alone, except for maybe Syria (except maybe shelling some Israeli towns, Syria will fall like a house of cards ina hurricane, and it's in no shape to do anything right now with rebels running around).

So yeah, the question I'm asking is what will happen AFTER the war. The war will happen, once this US election is through, the US will be ready to rofl stopm Iran (Unless Obama gambles and does the war before the election to garner extra support, which I doubt). Will the Iranian government be changed, will the Shah be put back into power, will Zoroastrians return to Iran, will Iran be renamed Persia?

-Sun_Tzu-
What would probably happen is that Iran would look a lot like Iraq after Saddam was ousted.

Not if attacked by Israel only
Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
-Sun_Tzu-

17384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#339 -Sun_Tzu-
Member since 2007 • 17384 Posts
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="lordreaven"]

Wait, how would attacking Iran start a World War? it's barely a regional power (which is it's goal, no doubt) but as of right now, it's only real allies is Russia and China, whom both are not willing to jump in so quickyl to defend Iran (even though they invested in it) as it will ruin any other investments. Iran is alone, except for maybe Syria (except maybe shelling some Israeli towns, Syria will fall like a house of cards ina hurricane, and it's in no shape to do anything right now with rebels running around).

So yeah, the question I'm asking is what will happen AFTER the war. The war will happen, once this US election is through, the US will be ready to rofl stopm Iran (Unless Obama gambles and does the war before the election to garner extra support, which I doubt). Will the Iranian government be changed, will the Shah be put back into power, will Zoroastrians return to Iran, will Iran be renamed Persia?

themajormayor
What would probably happen is that Iran would look a lot like Iraq after Saddam was ousted.

Not if attacked by Israel only

And then what?
Avatar image for Apathetic_Prick
Apathetic_Prick

4789

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#340 Apathetic_Prick
Member since 2003 • 4789 Posts

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="lordreaven"]

Wait, how would attacking Iran start a World War? it's barely a regional power (which is it's goal, no doubt) but as of right now, it's only real allies is Russia and China, whom both are not willing to jump in so quickyl to defend Iran (even though they invested in it) as it will ruin any other investments. Iran is alone, except for maybe Syria (except maybe shelling some Israeli towns, Syria will fall like a house of cards ina hurricane, and it's in no shape to do anything right now with rebels running around).

So yeah, the question I'm asking is what will happen AFTER the war. The war will happen, once this US election is through, the US will be ready to rofl stopm Iran (Unless Obama gambles and does the war before the election to garner extra support, which I doubt). Will the Iranian government be changed, will the Shah be put back into power, will Zoroastrians return to Iran, will Iran be renamed Persia?

themajormayor

What would probably happen is that Iran would look a lot like Iraq after Saddam was ousted.

Not if attacked by Israel only

DEpends on how Israel attacks. If it's just a few airplanes, Iran will look like current Iran, Now With 5000%More Craters!

Avatar image for themajormayor
themajormayor

25729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#341 themajormayor
Member since 2011 • 25729 Posts
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="themajormayor"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] What would probably happen is that Iran would look a lot like Iraq after Saddam was ousted.

Not if attacked by Israel only

And then what?

Well judging by Osirak and Syria (which strategically is a very different situation I know) pretty much nothing.
Avatar image for coolbeans90
coolbeans90

21305

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#342 coolbeans90
Member since 2009 • 21305 Posts

IIRC, the U.S. developed new bombs in order to penetrate new Iranian bomb shelters, which were (apparently) robust enough to withstand any bombs the U.S. was armed with to date. Moreover, if the Iranians are using these to further their nuclear program, what exactly does Israel plan to do w/o these bombs?(which we won't give them b/c we no want them to attack Iran) It's not like they can stop Iran from developing nukes on their own.

Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#343 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="themajormayor"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] What would probably happen is that Iran would look a lot like Iraq after Saddam was ousted.

Not if attacked by Israel only

And then what?

then its a decision of wheter Iran responds and how, they could use Hamas and Hezbollah , although both have to think 100 times before trying to fight Israel , for Hamas especially it could be the end of them. if in Israel there is the decision to simply wipe Hamas out (which has been suggested by a few people in the military)
Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#344 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts

IIRC, the U.S. developed new bombs in order to penetrate new Iranian bomb shelters, which were (apparently) robust enough to withstand any bombs the U.S. was armed with to date. Moreover, if the Iranians are using these to further their nuclear program, what exactly does Israel plan to do w/o these bombs?(which we won't give them b/c we no want them to attack Iran) It's not like they can stop Iran from developing nukes on their own.

coolbeans90
Israel has its own very competent defence industry, who knows what kind of stuff none of us are getting told regarding what weapons are being developed.
Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
-Sun_Tzu-

17384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#345 -Sun_Tzu-
Member since 2007 • 17384 Posts
[QUOTE="themajormayor"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="themajormayor"] Not if attacked by Israel only

And then what?

Well judging by Osirak and Syria (which strategically is a very different situation I know) pretty much nothing.

Except for the mullahs having new found popularity thanks to the foreign attack, which would severely stifle any hopes for democratic reforms in the country. Not only that but a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities is not a permanent solution - it would only delay their nuclear program. And then a few years down the road we'll all find ourselves in the same exact situation, except then there probably would be much less domestic opposition to the Iranian regime (which really is the only viable long term solution to the Iranian problem).
Avatar image for Darkman2007
Darkman2007

17926

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#346 Darkman2007
Member since 2007 • 17926 Posts
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="themajormayor"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] And then what?

Well judging by Osirak and Syria (which strategically is a very different situation I know) pretty much nothing.

Except for the mullahs having new found popularity thanks to the foreign attack, which would severely stifle any hopes for democratic reforms in the country. Not only that but a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities is not a permanent solution - it would only delay their nuclear program. And then a few years down the road we'll all find ourselves in the same exact situation, except then there probably would be much less domestic opposition to the Iranian regime (which really is the only viable long term solution to the Iranian problem).

what makes you think its going to be all that different , Israel destroyed Syria's reactor, and its not as though Assad is popular these days.
Avatar image for themajormayor
themajormayor

25729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#347 themajormayor
Member since 2011 • 25729 Posts
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="themajormayor"] Well judging by Osirak and Syria (which strategically is a very different situation I know) pretty much nothing.

Except for the mullahs having new found popularity thanks to the foreign attack, which would severely stifle any hopes for democratic reforms in the country. Not only that but a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities is not a permanent solution - it would only delay their nuclear program. And then a few years down the road we'll all find ourselves in the same exact situation, except then there probably would be much less domestic opposition to the Iranian regime (which really is the only viable long term solution to the Iranian problem).

what makes you think its going to be all that different , Israel destroyed Syria's reactor, and its not as though Assad is popular these days.

And in both cases it did turn out to be more than a short term solution.
Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
-Sun_Tzu-

17384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#348 -Sun_Tzu-
Member since 2007 • 17384 Posts

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="themajormayor"] Well judging by Osirak and Syria (which strategically is a very different situation I know) pretty much nothing. Darkman2007
Except for the mullahs having new found popularity thanks to the foreign attack, which would severely stifle any hopes for democratic reforms in the country. Not only that but a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities is not a permanent solution - it would only delay their nuclear program. And then a few years down the road we'll all find ourselves in the same exact situation, except then there probably would be much less domestic opposition to the Iranian regime (which really is the only viable long term solution to the Iranian problem).

what makes you think its going to be all that different , Israel destroyed Syria's reactor, and its not as though Assad is popular these days.

The politics of Syria are very different than that of Iran. Assad is a shiite in a predominantly sunni country. Where as Iran is a overwhelmingly Shiite country that is ruled by a Shiite clerical regime. When a country gets attacked by a foreign state, the government of that country more often than not gets a huge boost in popularity. Look at FDR after Pearl Harbor, George Bush after 9/11, and even Iran in 1979. When Khomeini first got into power he was not the most popular guy in the world. He had just finished hijacking what was a secular revolution and stifled the original democratic goals of said revolution. But then Saddam attacked and that proved to solidify Khomeini as the leader of Iran, precisely because of the Iraqi invasion.

Avatar image for ShadowMoses900
ShadowMoses900

17081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 48

User Lists: 0

#349 ShadowMoses900
Member since 2010 • 17081 Posts

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Obama won't do anything, Israel is vital to American foreign policy and Obama has been preaisng Israel alot orecently. He has also been trying to appeal to jewish voters recently as well, Obama is probably one of the most pro Hebrew/Jewish politicians there is.

And Israel won't attack Iran, in order to do so they would have to fly over other arab countries (all of whom hate Israelis) without getting shot down, then stop and refuel along the way (again not going to happen as they would be killed), and fly over several no fly-zones. It's not going to happen, so don't worry.

I do hope the Isralis kick the crap out of the Iraninas though. I know they will too if Iran pushes them. The Jews are the victims here once again, not the aggressors.

-Sun_Tzu-

I think it's pretty obvious that the Iranian people (not the mullahs) are the victims, not Israel.

Israel doesn't want to go to war with Iran, Iran wants to go to war with Israel. Israel just wants to be left alone, but Iran is a bully and doesn't want that to happen. It would be a mistake too, Israel would kick their asses so hard they would never try anything again. You don't mess with the chosen people b!tches!

So yes, obviously Israel are the victims. They have less people and a really small country. Plus the Hebrews have been pushed around forever, now they are tired of it and standing up for themselves. And they kick ass when they do. Go IDF!

Avatar image for Riverwolf007
Riverwolf007

26023

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#350 Riverwolf007
Member since 2005 • 26023 Posts

arabs to each other, "hey! lets all gang up on israel again so they can kick our asses yet again and end up with more territory than they started with for like the 3rd time!"

seriously arabs give it a break already they have the freaking ark of the covenant or something and are just going to break it out and stomp your asses for the umpteenth time.