Israel may well attack Iran soon

Discussion in 'Politics' started by blackchip, Jun 7, 2008.

  1. Given Roubini is an alarmist.

    Here is an interesting analysis from the former German foreign minister - Fischer and Roubini's comments.

  3. I don't think they are going to do it, but if they do I'm afriad they might do it the wrong way, there is no reason to keep repeating that they will attack iran and when they will attack, like yesterday;'s-nuclear-plans.html

    it's actually giving them enough time to come up with crazy plans, the best way is to attack without any prior warning, and to bomb the country suddenly and to the point of extinction
  4. Everyone thought we would attack Iran. Why should we when Israel can do it for us. Iran will welcome democracy.
  5. ssierra


    Do you mean as Irak??
  6. piezoe


    It should be obvious to everyone why (from the point of view of an Iranian) Iran desperately needs nuclear retaliatory capability.

    Though Iran's interference in Iraq is annoying and dangerous and so is Ahmadinejad's threatening rhetoric, the way to address these transgressions is via diplomacy, not bombers. If Iran gets nuclear strike capability, let's hope they don't but they well could, the most likely outcome is not the destruction of Isreal, which already has nuclear weapons, but rather an uneasy coexistence of the two countries in which despite nasty rhetoric they leave each other alone. That would not be such a bad thing and preferable to the present situation where Isreal is unconstrained.

    Isreal's consistent belligerence and hard line have failed for 60 years to achieve security and freedom from terrorist attacks. They are less secure, not more, because of their policies. Isreal is its own worst enemy. The murder of Yitzhak Rabin in 1994 by an Israeli citizen on the eve of their best chance in many years to achieve a lasting peace underscored how hopeless the Isreali situation is.

    I do not think that Isreal's bombing of Iran on the eve of the American Election would necessarily guarantee a McCain victory. American's have had it up to here with Mideast entanglement and endless wars. I believe such a move by Isreal, particularly if it was with American support and encouragement, would produce an even bigger backlash against the foreign policies of the present Bush administration than already exists. Such a move might very well have exactly the opposite effect hoped for by Israel, the American Zionist coalition and the present American President, and in fact, sweep Obama into the White House on the heels of an overwhelming victory.
  7. 377OHMS


    Iran and much of the world actually think that the hamas and hezbolla surrounding Israel represent a real military threat. What a joke.

    If Israel attacked the Iranian nuke facilities Iran would unleash the rocket launching terrorists that surround Israel.

    Israel would simply treat these attacks from gaza and southern lebanon as though they were attacking a real army and destroy the entire place. Southern lebanon will, this time, be cleared and become a buffer zone which Israel will not give back, sort of like the golan heights taken from Syria. It won't be given back. Thats what I call a real-estate deal. :D

    Its high time really. Israel is actually anxious to get it all over with at this point. If Iran flips out in response and starts harrassing the USN in the Gulf the U.S. will likely take Kargh Island in response. So much for Iranian oil exports by sea. The oil will be appropriated by the U.S. and Iran will get U.N. oil-for-food etc. U.N. oil-for-food officials will drive up Manhattan real-estate prices with their oil/cash kickbacks.

    Haliburton will be offerring condos on Kargh Island. Give Dubai some competition lol.
  8. Syprik


    If you are actually serious with this post, I apologize in advance for being a bit offensive, but you are in far left field.

    1st, no sane leader in Israel would announce intent to strike Iran in public. This is saber-rattling 101.

    2nd, have you at all calculated the potential consequence a strike on Iran would have for our interests/forces in fragile Iraq (a majority Shite population)?

    3rd, ever contemplate the resulting side-effects when truly angering the world's fourth largest oil producer in today's oil climate? It is China's top supplier. Syria, Gaza, WB, Lebanon, Hezbollah and Iraq... all minuscule in significance compared to Iran's potential economic(oil) leverage.

    This strikes me as just another potential self-centered and short-sighted approach by Israel.
  9. Couple of points -

    The Olmert gov't in Israel is about to crumble due to corruption charges involving an American "businessman".

    If Iran chooses it can wreck the world economy in the near term as retaliation -

    Israel would immediately be attacked from the north and south. But that's just a side show.

    A few of Iran's supersonic missiles sink a super tanker in the strait of hormuz and oil goes easily over $200 as millions of bbd are removed from the world markets.

    The US Navy has no defense against these missiles and Iran could even attack a carrier group in the Gulf while moving the missile sites around the low hills of the coastline.

    The US cannot invade Iran like it did Iraq. Iran is mountain fighting like the former Yugoslavia. Likely, no other country would help and China and Russia would side with and supply Iran.

    Iran is currently cooperating to maintain relative stability in Afghanistan. If Iran is attacked, the US would probably lose Afghanistan to extremists and Pakistan is possible. The taliban are back now (you won't hear it from the US media). Of course Pakistan already has nukes.

    Iraq would destabilize (more). Saudi could easily destabilize.

    Effectively, Iran has a knife on the throat of the industrialized countries.

    This kind of move by Bush would be an "all in" bet depending on Iran's reaction.
  10. 377OHMS


    Oh, really? :D
    #10     Jun 7, 2008