Just out of interest if as a neutral which side would u fight along side if u had to? Israel ( the jews) or for Iran (The muslims)? We were debating this in the office today.
As in 'War Games' movie from long ago. 'The only way to win, is to not play.' Mathew Broderick movie. c
I was thinking of that movie just last night . The only problem with that solution is, it's false. The only way to win is for both you and your opponent not to play. If your opponent wants to play and you don't, you are still screwed and that's the problem with these fu9knuts muslims (they want to die). That creates a dilemma because: in that case a preemptive attack IS the correct course of action IMHO.
I disagree- the only way to defend is to attack- its like we beat the germans by bombing the cities- look up " Bomber Harris"- only way to win a war is to bomb the opposition into submission,keep dropping bombs until the enemy gives in- its a tactic the RAF/USAF used in WW2 to create a firestorm using incendary bombs- just release a massive amount of ordance
I'm not too worried about Iran bombing the US, or even Israel for that matter, at least not now. And, yes, both sides have to agree to stop a thermonuclear war. If we can stop ourselves and the saber rattling, perhaps they will too. Did you see the 60 minutes piece on Stoxhaus computer invading virus, if not, look it up. It shows how we 'could' stop the nuclear program there. c
yes, I agree- the problem is israel will have to rely on nukes- which cannot be used under international law- as they not on the UN security council- they havent got a veto, as only UK/usa/france/russia/china have- the 5 victors of ww2- the British have a nuchlear deterrent at sea at all time- vanguard class subs, and the the government never state , by policy, where they are positioned like the SAS