BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: number 6
Date: 01 Mar 12 - 08:26 PM

Here's something of interest from the Jerusalem World News ...

Pentagon: US Air Force has plan for Iran strike

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 12 - 09:31 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-sources-israel-keep-us-loop-decides-strike-154338082.html


"Rogers told CNN television on Monday: "I got the sense that Israel is incredibly serious about a strike on their nuclear weapons program. It's their calculus that the administration ... is not serious about a real military consequence to Iran moving forward.
"They believe they're going to have to make a decision on their own, given the current posture of the United States," he added."

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Mar 12 - 08:21 AM

Try THIS BB, it may help.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 12 - 07:21 AM

As long as Greg F. is allowed to post attacks, I will continue to post the reasons I think hew is scum.

The following is from the thread where he proved just how much a scumbag he is:


"Subject: RE: BS: Wall Street Protesters...
From: Greg F. - PM
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:00 PM

BB, comparing the actions of the KKK with the actions of OWS indicates that your 'sense of proportion' seems to be a bit outta whack...

"Bit outta whack", Bobert?? Hardly. It shows that he's a complete and utter frackin' IDIOT to propound somethindg so absurd.

Beardie is also the guy that, in the thread about cash only for second-hand goods, wanted us to know that the sponsor of the bill was a Dumb Ni--er.

Gimmie a break.

....

Subject: RE: BS: Wall Street Protesters...
From: Max - PM
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:23 PM

Elves don't like to be told what to do, just an FYI, especially by folks that are not logged in. Gets them cranky.

And why would you want it removed? It so clearly shows what he is, so I feel like we should leave it as a warning for the next person that engages him. Truly, though, I would hope it would convince them NOT to engage him.

I just popped in because I its getting around that the klan was being discussed in the Wall Street thread and I just had to see how that connection was made. As a student of thread creep this one intrigued me.

I see now. You know, anything is possible when you inject some idiocy. I'm disappointed because I assumed that 2 out of 3 of you folks here were bigger and better than being drawn in like that.

Carry on, just know that these such flammable topics are aloft and to tread lightly so we don't have so much work to do back here in the shop. It's tiring to clean up all that spilled garbage, and idiots always clog our shop vac.

We have to watch this stupid thread now, thanks.

Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Subject: RE: BS: Wall Street Protesters...
From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:28 PM

Very well, Max. But Gred F has crossed the line, bigtime. This is an outright lie, as can be seen by the thead in question THAT I DID NOT POST TO until today.


If this is the kind of person who encourages supporting OWS, I fail to see why ANYONE should give them any support whatsoever.

Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Subject: RE: BS: Wall Street Protesters...
From: Greg F. - PM
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:31 PM

For Max and Beardie's benefit, from the archives:

Subject: RE: BS: Louisiana Makes It Illegal To Use Cash
From: pdq - PM
Date: 23 Oct 11 - 07:37 PM

Just for the record, the idiot behind this bill is a member of the Louisiana House of Representitives.

He is Black and a Democrat."

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 12 - 06:59 AM

When Greg F. comments on my posts, that is fine. When he attacks me. I will continue to point out what a scumbag he is, and why.

GregF,

Try NOT making attacks on people- you might find out that others can disagree with you without having to be a scumbag about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Feb 12 - 05:55 PM

Would a Mud Elf please delete BeardedBruce's several personal attacks on this thread?

Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Feb 12 - 03:43 PM

"Fact - there is a Lancaster Bomber on the moon."

Known by personal experience to be false- As Data Manager for Clementine, I saw the RAW data coming down for the complete digital map of the moon, and nothing of that size was seen.



"Fact - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle verified the fact that faries really existed"

Please provide reference information- He may have BELIEVED this, but I have not seen any proof.



"Fact - Prince Phillip orderd the assasination of Diana Spencer"

Could be- I do not know, nor do I care.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Silas
Date: 29 Feb 12 - 12:10 PM

Fact - there is a Lancaster Bomber on the moon.

Fact - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle verified the fact that faries really existed

Fact - Prince Phillip orderd the assasination of Diana Spencer

All have as much credibility as anything coming out of America

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Feb 12 - 11:53 AM

US did find Iraq WMD
By DON KAPLAN
Last Updated: 8:57 AM, October 25, 2010
Posted: 12:44 AM, October 25, 2010

There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after all.
The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war documents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion, Wired magazine reported.
The documents showed that US troops continued to find chemical weapons and labs for years after the invasion, including remnants of Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons arsenal -- most of which had been destroyed following the Gulf War.
In August 2004, American troops were able to buy containers from locals of what they thought was liquid sulfur mustard, a blister agent, the documents revealed. The chemicals were triple-sealed and taken to a secure site.
Also in 2004, troops discovered a chemical lab in a house in Fallujah during a battle with insurgents. A chemical cache was also found in the city.


Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/us_did_find_iraq_wmd_AYiLgNbw7pDf7AZ3RO9qnM#ixzz1nn4u4tWm

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Feb 12 - 11:46 AM

FACT: In June of 2006 the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, released portions of a declassified report which stated unequivocally that "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent."



FACT: Saddam was planning on restarting his program on every level (nuclear and biological), approximately one year after U.N. sanctions were lifted. This explains why he was actively approaching North Africa for the procurement of yellow cake. This also explains why 550 metric tons of the stuff was removed from Iraq in 2008 courtesy of the United States of America.



"The Iraq Survey Group, ISG, whose intelligence analysts are managed by Charles Duelfer, a former State Department official and deputy chief of the U.N.-led arms-inspection teams, has found "hundreds of cases of activities that were prohibited" under U.N. Security Council resolutions, a senior administration official tells Insight.

"There is a long list of charges made by the U.S. that have been confirmed, but none of this seems to mean anything because the weapons that were unaccounted for by the United Nations remain unaccounted for."

Both Duelfer and his predecessor, David Kay, reported to Congress that the evidence they had found on the ground in Iraq showed Saddam's regime was in "material violation" of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, the last of 17 resolutions that promised "serious consequences" if Iraq did not make a complete disclosure of its weapons programs and dismantle them in a verifiable manner.

The United States cited Iraq's refusal to comply with these demands as one justification for going to war.

Both Duelfer and Kay found Iraq had "a clandestine network of laboratories and safe houses with equipment that was suitable to continuing its prohibited chemical- and biological-weapons [BW] programs," the official said. "They found a prison laboratory where we suspect they tested biological weapons on human subjects."

They found equipment for "uranium-enrichment centrifuges" whose only plausible use was as part of a clandestine nuclear-weapons program. In all these cases, "Iraqi scientists had been told before the war not to declare their activities to the U.N. inspectors," the official said.

But while the president's critics and the media might plausibly hide behind ambiguity and a lack of sensational-looking finds for not reporting some discoveries, in the case of Saddam's ballistic-missile programs they have no excuse for their silence.

"Where were the missiles? We found them," another senior administration official told Insight.

"Saddam Hussein's prohibited missile programs are as close to a slam dunk as you will ever find for violating United Nations resolutions," the first official said. Both senior administration officials spoke to Insight on condition that neither their name nor their agency be identified, but their accounts of what the United States has found in Iraq coincided in every major area.

When former weapons inspector Kay reported to Congress in January that the United States had found "no stockpiles" of forbidden weapons in Iraq, his conclusions made front-page news. But when he detailed what the ISG had found in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence last October, few took notice.

Among Kay's revelations, which officials tell Insight have been amplified in subsequent inspections in recent weeks:

A prison laboratory complex that may have been used for human testing of BW agents and "that Iraqi officials working to prepare the U.N. inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the U.N." Why was Saddam interested in testing biological-warfare agents on humans if he didn't have a biological-weapons program?
"Reference strains" of a wide variety of biological-weapons agents were found beneath the sink in the home of a prominent Iraqi BW scientist. "We thought it was a big deal," a senior administration official said. "But it has been written off [by the press] as a sort of 'starter set.'"
New research on BW-applicable agents, brucella and Congo-Crimean hemorrhagic fever, and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin that were not declared to the United Nations.
A line of unmanned aerial vehicles, UAVs, or drones, "not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 kilometers [311 miles], 350 kilometers [217 miles] beyond the permissible limit."
"Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited Scud-variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the U.N."
"Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1,000 kilometers [621 miles] — well beyond the 150-kilometer-range limit [93 miles] imposed by the U.N. Missiles of a 1,000-kilometer range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets throughout the Middle East, including Ankara [Turkey], Cairo [Egypt] and Abu Dhabi [United Arab Emirates]."
In addition, through interviews with Iraqi scientists, seized documents and other evidence, the ISG learned the Iraqi government had made "clandestine attempts between late 1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300-kilometer-range [807 miles] ballistic missiles — probably the No Dong — 300-kilometer-range [186 miles] antiship cruise missiles and other prohibited military equipment," Kay reported.

In testimony before Congress on March 30, Duelfer, revealed the ISG had found evidence of a "crash program" to construct new plants capable of making chemical- and biological-warfare agents.

The ISG also found a previously undeclared program to build a "high-speed rail gun," a device apparently designed for testing nuclear-weapons materials. That came in addition to 500 tons of natural uranium stockpiled at Iraq's main declared nuclear site south of Baghdad, which International Atomic Energy Agency spokesman Mark Gwozdecky acknowledged to Insight had been intended for "a clandestine nuclear-weapons program."

In taking apart Iraq's clandestine procurement network, Duelfer said his investigators had discovered that "the primary source of illicit financing for this system was oil smuggling conducted through government-to-government protocols negotiated with neighboring countries [and] from kickback payments made on contracts set up through the U.N. oil-for-food program."

What the president's critics and the media widely have portrayed as the most dramatic failure of the U.S. case against Saddam has been the claimed failure to find "stockpiles" of chemical and biological weapons. But in a June 2003 Washington Post op-ed, former chief U.N. weapons inspector Rolf Ekeus called such criticism "a distortion and a trivialization of a major threat to international peace and security."

The October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction concluded that Saddam "probably has stocked at least 100 metric tons [MT] and possibly as much as 500 MT of CW [chemical warfare] agents — much of it added in the last year."

That assessment was based, in part, on conclusions contained in the final report from U.N. weapons inspectors in 1999, which highlighted discrepancies in what the Iraqis reported to the United Nations and the amount of precursor chemicals U.N. arms inspectors could document Iraq had imported but for which it no longer could account."

http://www.wnd.com/2004/04/24352/


I am awaiting that racist scumbag Greg F.'s FACTUAL evidence to support his claims.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Feb 12 - 10:22 AM

Greg F,

You want to discuss my posts, have some facts, and discuss the POST.

When YOU attack me, I will post your racist bigotry until you are know as not fit for conversation.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Feb 12 - 10:18 AM

Keep chasing me, Greg F....


You deny that you made a racist lie about me, stating that I had called someone a "Stupid N**ger" and based it on someone else saying that the person who had proposed a bill being discussed was "Black, and a Democrat"?

I know that YOU read "Black and a Democrat" as "Stupid n***ger", but the rest of us do not, nor do we try to use such racist attacks to get away from arguements we have lost, nor do we make up lies about people.


YOU are scum.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Feb 12 - 10:13 AM

BB: I still have reason to doubt the veracity of your statement.

Bruce doubts for the same reason Iona doubts evolution; because he is a true believer and no amount of factual information will change his mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Feb 12 - 02:35 PM

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762462.html



http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat


http://www.timeforchange.org/nuclear-energy-and-nuclear-weapons-per-country


Country        # of nuclear weapons

USA               10'300
Russia        16'000
China        410
France      350
UK            200
Israel       100
India         90
Pakistan           85

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Feb 12 - 02:25 PM

String,


"We need to put the old hoary bromide about Hussein having nukes to rest. It's false."

The FACTS presented were that Iraq HAD a PROGRAM of WMD and prohibited rocket DEVELOPMENT. THAT is true, NOT the claims pushed by the liberal media that he had nuclear weapons.

To set up a lie as a strawman, and then prove your lie false does NOT give weight to your premise.




"America is the only country outside of Israel and India which possess the most nuclear weapons and if they are there, they will probably be used at some time or other."

Other than Britain, France, Russia, China, Pakistan, and North Korea.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 28 Feb 12 - 02:19 PM

there are already Israeli commando raids in Iran attacking nuke facilities.

We need to put the old hoary bromide about Hussein having nukes to rest. It's false.

America is the only country outside of Israel and India which possess the most nuclear weapons and if they are there, they will probably be used at some time or other.

The paranoia that guides Netanyahu policies is growing out of control daily.
There are dissident voices in Israel that see this sickness for what it is but they
are often jailed.

Check out Uri Avnery for example.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Silas
Date: 28 Feb 12 - 03:16 AM

Well there you go, it obviously works this US propaganda machine.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 28 Feb 12 - 12:40 AM

"The facts were that he didn't have have a development programme and if hanz Blick had been allowed to complete his investigation this would been obvious ."

Wrong. Saddam Hussein and his regime had made it certain that UNMOVIC could never do their job.

In 1991 Iraq was to have halted its WMD development - Yet they started a VX development programme while UNSCOM were still in the country - you cannot dis-invent science, the people were in place as was all the equipment they needed, Blix was not allowed to interview the scientists, there were no U2 surveillance flights as required by UNSCR 1441.

Iraq was developing proscribed weapons systems (rockets/missiles) and Saddam had smuggled 384 rocket engines into the country.

When Blix wrote his book "Disarming Iraq" in 2004 he fully believed that Iraq still possessed WMD.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 05:56 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Silas
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 01:04 PM

I have found that the US will use the UN when it suits them and ignor it when it dosent. Iraq being a case in point.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 12:46 PM

And I have found that those who state that there was no evidence have never bothered to look at what was found, or read the actual UN Reports.

I still have reason to doubt the veracity of your statement.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Silas
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 12:41 PM

Because after the bullshit spoken before the invasion by the american propagnda movement, I would be wary of believing any 'evidence' that was produced by the good old US of A

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 12:33 PM

"The facts were that he didn't have have a development programme and if hanz Blick had been allowed to complete his investigation this would been obvious ."

There is evidence to the contrary in both the documents recovered after the invasion and the reports of truck caravans taking material into Syria on the eve of the invasion. This has been discussed repeatedly. Why do you believe that your statement is true?

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Silas
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 12:27 PM

"The facts indicated that Saddam had a DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR WMD"

no, not the facts - it was the speculation. The facts were that he didn't have have a development programme and if hanz Blick had been allowed to complete his investigation this would been obvious .

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 12:20 PM

T,

In 1914, the nations acting did not think that the other nations would react as they did- ditto Germany in 1938-9. I believe that the Iranians will BELIEVE that they will not be obliterated, because that is what they wish to believe.

I agree with your assessments, but reality does not matter when it comes to the decisions of an absolute (religious) dictatorship. What is significant is what the nations involved THINK will happen. As long as the Left insists Obama will never attack Iran, the Iranians will act as if they can get away with an attack on Israel. Thus, comments like Bobert's are more likely to lead us into World War III (or IV, perhaps) than all the saber-rattling by Israel.

Remember what Hitler said about the Armenians, as he started to round up the Jews, Gypsies, et al.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: bobad
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 12:06 PM

"Is that a typo? Did you mean an attack on Iran?"

That's reproduced from the document - from the context I believe it's a mis-type and indeed should be Iran.

Document

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 11:52 AM

"Iran is way behind in developing a deliverable nuke." - Bobert

Deliverable? Many ways of delivering a nuclear device. Had the nuclear weapons programmes of Iran, Syria and Libya remained secret as they were supposed to, the means of delivery would have been component by component smuggled in with the device (small low yield tactical nuke) being assembled on site. My guess is that there would have been between four and six of them.

In 2003 GWB invaded Iraq and deposed Saddam Hussein just to ensure that that sort of scenario could not be played out against the USA, or any of her allies. Libya blinked, Iran crash stopped its programme and then went into overdrive developing missiles with the aid of the North Koreans (they now have ballistic missiles that can hit Moscow and anywhere in Europe), Syrian nuclear ambitions were discovered and the Israeli Air Force with the assistance of the Turks wiped their nuclear facility out. The uncertainty at the moment is whether or not Iran has restarted her nuclear weapons programme.

Under the original plan if small low yield nukes had gone off in Israel the only suspect would have been Iran, who along with the IAEA would be able to prove conclusively that ever atom of fissile material received from Russia for its nuclear programme was accounted for - After all the IAEA and the rest of the world would have not known of the existence of the secret uranium enrichment plants in Natanz or Qom.

"the promoter of a massive Israeli attack on Syria is..." -bobad

Is that a typo? Did you mean an attack on Iran?

beardedbruce

I fail to see any parallel or similarity between Europe between 1912 and 1914, or Europe in 1939.

The First World War was completely ridiculous, the Kaiser had been pushing for it for years and would have gone to war on any pretext. The supposed cause involved the Austro-Hungarian Empire (One dead Archduke), the Serbs (nationalism) and Tsarist Russia (meddling). Left to those actors there may well have been a war but it would have been minor and over in months. It was the Kaiser's Germany butting in from the sidelines that widened and escalated the problem. Today with the situation regarding Iran there is no such party pushing from the sidelines, in fact quite the reverse.

Europe in the 1930's had seen Germany elect a nationalist government to power, which then broke the Versailles Treaty, re-armed, re-occupied the Rhineland, annexed Austria, took over the Sudetenland then negotiated to leave the rest of Czechoslovakia alone - a promise that they promptly ignored. With a string of broken promises a line was drawn relating to Poland. Alliances were formed to assure the Poles. When Germany (viewed as the aggressor), the Soviet Union (seen to be acting in her own self interest to create a buffer-zone) and Hungary (pure Jackal opportunism) attacked Poland, the British and the French honoured their promises and declared war on Germany. Today with the situation regarding Iran the Iranians have just reached the first stage where the International Community suspect that they have "broken" the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Iranians may have trading partners but she has no allies save Syria and Venezuela. Russia is in no fit state to fight a war and neither is China, both know it and so does the USA.

The middle-east would have been far, far better off had the US backed the British and the French in 1956 (Even Eisenhower admitted his handling of Suez was the greatest mistake he ever made in his time in Office as President - he stopped the British and the French invasion of the canal zone in 1956 only to find HE had to invade the Lebanon himself in 1958).

Had the US backed the UK and France, Nasser's pan-Arabist Egypt would have been isolated from Israel by a corridor held by two permanent members of the UN Security council, there would have been no Fedayeen attacks from the Sinai between 1956 and 1967, there would have been no way for an Egyptian Army to assemble on Israel's borders, there would have been no closure of the Suez Canal or the Straits of Tiran (the thing that prompted Israel to act in 1967). Eisenhower's actions handed most Arab states in the middle-east and the North coast of Africa over to the Soviets causing the US to have to deploy a Fleet in the Mediterranean full time.

The British left the area in 1948 when the mandate expired. In 1937 the Peel Commission recommended a two-state solution, this was also adopted by the UN who proposed that to both sides in 1947 - The Jews of Palestine accepted it and the Arabs of Palestine rejected it and elected to fight.

In the break-up of the Ottoman Empire the League of Nations sought to create two secular havens of tolerance in the middle-east one was the Lebanon and the second was post-1923 Palestine. Lebanon was destroyed by Syrian interference and you can see how tolerant an Arab Palestine would work out by looking at Gaza.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 08:56 AM

GregF,

The facts indicated that Saddam had a DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR WMD- as was stated at the time. And it turns out he did.

And the point of my post was that Bobert is now using the same sources that Bush used to justify Bobert's call to inaction. So, what YOU are stating is in support of NOT trusting those agencies for the information to make life-or-death decisions that Bobert is claiming we should depend on them for.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 08:32 AM

"The Facts Indicate"..... just like the "facts" indicated that Saddam had WMD's & all ythe rest.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 08:28 AM

Teribus,


"World War III is not going to start over Iran. Neither Russia or China are going to risk a war with the USA, simply because they have too much to lose."

I have to disagree. Look at Europe in 1912-1914, or Poland in 1939.

Nor is Bobert correct in his comments:

"First, Iran is way behind in developing a deliverable nuke... That was reported to Congress last week by the US intelligence people..."

These are the same people that he criticised for thinking that the Iraqis had a nuclear program, and the Iraqi people would rise up to support invasion...The facts indicate that they are less than 6 months from a warhead, and they already have demonstrated IRBMs capable of reacing Europe, Israel, and , if place on container ships off the coast in international waters,, anywhere in the US.



"Second, Iran may be irritating but these people ain't stupid... Any nuclear attack against Israel would be suicidal... They would cease to exist in a matter of hours..."

Only if they believe that that other countries, and people like Bobert, will not demand that the US NOT attack them if they attack Israel. Since they believe what they WANT TO BELIEVE, I doubt if they think that they will suffer any more than when they had civilians march into minefields, to clear the way for tanks and troops




"Third, the US/UK has created so much instability in the Middle East that if Iran isn't trying to get a nuke, it should be..."

The UK may be credited with a major part, for it's actions as the Mandate Power in Palestine, but I think there would be a greater degree of instability if there were not US efforts in the region, based on historical records.
"

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: bobad
Date: 27 Feb 12 - 08:08 AM

Interesting info from Wikileaks "The Global Intelligence Files":

Despite the reports in the media and against any public
knowledge, the promoter of a massive Israeli attack on Syria is
the axis India-Russia-Turkey-Saudi Arabia. The axis
US-Germany-France-China is against such an attack from obvious
reasons. Not many people know that Russia is one of Israel's
largest military partners and India is Israel's largest client.

If a direct conflict between Iran and Israel erupts, Russia and
Saudi Arabia will gain the advantages on oil increasing prices.
On the other hand, China and Europe are expected to loose from
an oil crisis as a result of a conflict. Based on Israeli plans,
the attack on Iran will last only 48 hours but will be so
destructive that Iran will be unable to retaliate or recover and
the government will fall. It is hard to believe that Hamas or
Hezbollah will try to get involved in this conflict.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Feb 12 - 08:04 PM

First, Iran is way behind in developing a deliverable nuke... That was reported to Congress last week by the US intelligence people...

Second, Iran may be irritating but these people ain't stupid... Any nuclear attack against Israel would be suicidal... They would cease to exist in a matter of hours...

Third, the US/UK has created so much instability in the Middle East that if Iran isn't trying to get a nuke, it should be...

Forth, even though the majority of Americans think that bombing Iran is peachy by them, Obama knows that after Iraq-mire and Afghanistan-mire that the American people will be quick to develop a severe case of buyer's remorse with yet another war...

Fifth, history is littered with wars that were bumbled into so it would behoove the Republican presidential candidates to shut down their woof-woof rhetoric... The rest of the world doesn't get the American political sytem and the Republican candidates don't get much of anything...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Ed T
Date: 26 Feb 12 - 07:23 PM

Israel inks $1.6 billion arms deal with Azerbaijan

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 26 Feb 12 - 05:41 PM

Rest assured of one thing Stringsinger - World War III is not going to start over Iran. Neither Russia or China are going to risk a war with the USA, simply because they have too much to lose.

Iran would be making the greatest mistake of all if it attempted to close the Straits of Hormuz to international shipping - just working on precedent the UN view such an act as an act of war. That is a war they would lose and not one single US Marine would have to set foot on Iranian soil.

In 2004 Iran was caught out, they will develop their nuclear weapons programme to the point just short of having a weapon, because now the weapons they were originally hoping to build in secret in collusion with Dr A.Q.Khan, North Korea, Syria and Libya can no longer be used, and the Iranians found themselves having to rapidly develop a conventional means of delivery for their own defence.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 26 Feb 12 - 02:15 PM

I am not in favor of any expansion of nukes for peacetime or war. Witness Fukushima.


The US and Israel have more war nukes than Iran or any other Mid-East country. The argument for bombing Iran is specious and harmful propaganda.

Gush Shalom and Uri Avnery (can be searched out by search engines) are proponents of peace and are active in Israeli politics today. They are admirable in my opinion.
There are many in Israel today who would oppose the bombing of Iran as there are
in the U.S.

When the US invokes the mantle of international opinion, it refers to those countries whose heads of state who agree and cooperate with the US. This is phony. The US is not international opinion. This is hegemony.

If the Straits of Hormuz are closed, Wall Street bank speculators will use this as an excuse to raise the price of gas at the pump even more. They (Koch Brothers among them) are the culprits.

If a war is started with Iran, the only beneficiaries will be those bank speculators who have bought out oil reserves and the military industrial complex who manufacture weapons as well as power in the Pentagon.

if Israel or the US dare to bomb Iran's nuke facilities, they well might trigger a world war.

We've seen this movie before entitled "Iraq" and "smoking guns and mushroom clouds".

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: bobad
Date: 26 Feb 12 - 01:08 PM

Is an Israeli attack inevitable?

A close look at the debate inside Israel reveals deep divisions on the issue of striking Iran, writes Peter Jones

Read more:

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 01:06 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/iran-wants-more-un-nuclear-talks-tehran-stalemate-095121644.html


"VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran has sharply stepped up its controversial uranium enrichment drive, a United Nations watchdog report showed on Friday, a defiant move certain to further fuel Western alarm about the Islamic Republic's atomic aims.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in a confidential document, also reported its failed mission to Tehran this week to try and get Iran to respond to allegations of research relevant for the development of nuclear weapons.
The setback increased worries about a downward spiral towards conflict between Iran and the West, and sent oil prices higher.
"The Agency continues to have serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear program," the Vienna-based U.N. body said in its latest quarterly report about Iran's atomic activities.
The IAEA report to member states showed Iran had carried out a significant expansion of activities at its main enrichment plant near the central city of Natanz, and also increased work at the Fordow underground facility."

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 07:49 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/thedc-jamie-weinstein-more-proof-israel-cannot-tolerate-043058332.html

""Mostafa's ultimate goal was the annihilation of Israel," Fatemeh Bolouri Kashani told the Fars News Agency this week.
She was referring to the wishes of her late husband, Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan Behdast, an Iranian nuclear scientist assassinated on the streets of Tehran in January.
It is unclear who exactly murdered her husband and other scientists involved in the Iranian nuclear program over the last two years — no one has claimed responsibility — but their elimination was likely directed by Israel, the United States or one of the various Arab countries that quite understandably fear a nuclear Iran (or perhaps a combination thereof). What Kashani's comment highlights, however, is why Israel cannot live with a nuclear Iran and why Israel's leaders have been forced to seriously weigh authorizing a difficult and dangerous mission to set the Iranian nuclear program back militarily.
Many foreign policy elites, perhaps epitomized by CNN host Fareed Zakaria, confidently assert that the Israel specifically and the West generally can live with a nuclear Iran. The Iranian leadership isn't suicidal, they tell us. Ignore Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's repeated calls for Israel to be wiped off the map, or Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei's statement that Israel is a "cancerous tumor of a state" that "should be removed from the region," or supposed moderate former Iranian President Akbar Rafsanjani's casual remark that the "application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world.""

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Ed T
Date: 21 Feb 12 - 07:41 AM

Oops

Iran-Military exercises

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Ed T
Date: 21 Feb 12 - 07:39 AM

http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Iran+stages+exercises+warning+against+Israeli+strike/6182439/story.html

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Feb 12 - 11:19 PM

A "sane secular society" whose whole existence is entirely based on the "reclaiming" of a biblical homeland which was abandoned nearly 2000 years ago?

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 18 Feb 12 - 05:40 PM

Iran's leaders are nutters of the religious variety. They don't care if the whle feckin world dies, as long as they can maintain their pretence.

Israel on the other hand is a sane secular society run on democratic principles in which all citizens are equal, irrespective of faith, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation.

But if Israel attacks Iran, the nutters will have an excuse to attack Israel. And if Israel has been duped into attacking the decoy plant, that could be nuclear.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 18 Feb 12 - 05:24 PM

The government of Israel has made themselves hateful. Being wiped off the map is a propaganda tool used by those who claim that anyone actually has said this.

Netanyahu has to be replaced by a more sensible leader who is not a saber rattler
and has a more charitable attitude to the Palestinian state.

There are Jews in Israel today who do not approve of what their government is doing
and are activists, some jailed.

Will Obama widen his wars to include Iran? If Israel attacks the Iranian nuclear
facility, Iran will respond in kind. Then the U.S. is in an untenable situation
where it feels it has to defend Israel which then will trigger another world war.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Ed T
Date: 18 Feb 12 - 04:06 PM

""More history's made by secret handshakes than by battles, bills, and proclamations"". John Barth, The Sot-Weed Factor

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Ed T
Date: 18 Feb 12 - 03:01 PM

south-caucasus-nations-fear-iran-israel-war

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Ed T
Date: 18 Feb 12 - 02:45 PM

Iran warships enter Mediterranean -tensions with Israel grow

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: bobad
Date: 16 Feb 12 - 11:00 AM

Netanyahu blasts Iran over nuclear program

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Ed T
Date: 15 Feb 12 - 12:48 PM

Now that they have the three of them, will they spill the beans on who put them up to it?

Iranians

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Feb 12 - 09:14 PM

Damn, did it again. That post was me.

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Feb 12 - 08:35 PM

Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: bobad
Date: 12 Feb 12 - 04:15 PM

Iran and Iraq are different countries.

#############################

Subject: RE: BS: Will Israel Attack Iran?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 12 Feb 12 - 04:38 PM

Oy! A yank with geography!

##############################

Bobad is a Canadian.