How would the world respond...

[Semper Fi]

...(hypothetically) if Iran nuked Israel?

 

[Hobbit]

...(hypothetically) if Iran nuked Israel?

The U.S. has at all times enough nukes ready to go to completely eradicate every country in the world that has nukes 5+ times over. If Iran launches a single nuke, their country will cease to exist.

 

[Annie]

The U.S. has at all times enough nukes ready to go to completely eradicate every country in the world that has nukes 5+ times over. If Iran launches a single nuke, their country will cease to exist.

Do you really think the US would do so, if Israel was irradicated?

 

[jAZ]

Do you really think the US would do so, if Israel was irradicated?

Yes, I think we would nuke Iran. I don't think anyone else would go to bat for Iran either. I think it would be like a scene out of the Breakfast Club... "Two hits: I hit you; you hit the floor."

 

[Hobbit]

Do you really think the US would do so, if Israel was irradicated?

Could we afford not to? If one country, unprovoked (and don't even try to tell me that it would be provoked), nukes another country, we have to remind all the other trigger happy madmen out there that just living in the same country as one of these clowns will get you killed.

 

[insein]

Could we afford not to? If one country, unprovoked (and don't even try to tell me that it would be provoked), nukes another country, we have to remind all the other trigger happy madmen out there that just living in the same country as one of these clowns will get you killed.

Absolutely. Unfortunately youll get the UN mucking everything up. Theyll want to bring IRan in and make them a part of the Security Council to discuss this tragic undertaking. Hell all Sudan had to do to gain access to the Humans Rights committee was commit a genocide. So Iran nuking another country surely will gain them favor with the UN for a Security Council vote.

 

[Semper Fi]

An alternative to strictly nuclear weapons (on our side) would be mass quantities of conventional cruise missiles. Think shock and awe times about 1,000, no joke, on Tehran and all the other towel-headed camelmen. Without using nukes, the UN couldnt have a tear-fest on such a macro scale.

 

[insein]

An alternative to strictly nuclear weapons (on our side) would be mass quantities of conventional cruise missiles. Think shock and awe times about 1,000, no joke, on Tehran and all the other towel-headed camelmen. Without using nukes, the UN couldnt have a tear-fest on such a macro scale.

Sure they could. Any Retaliation by Israel or the US is seen as "Unilateral Aggression" in the eyes of the UN. So Cruise Missiles may be kind and gentle compared to nukes, but i think a nuke sends a message to not on the Middle East but Russia and China not to Fuck with America or America's Friends.

 

[Semper Fi]

Good point, I suppose a message to China and Russia and NK would be far more effective and worthwhile than worrying about hurting the UN's feelings. If they condemn the US and Israel for responding to a unprovoked (or even provoked, for that matter) nuclear strike with a retaliatory nuclear strike, then I say we abandon the UN at once, and cut off all funding to the nations apart of it. We could use the money saved to restock our nucelar stockpiles.

 

[insein]

Good point, I suppose a message to China and Russia and NK would be far more effective and worthwhile than worrying about hurting the UN's feelings. If they condemn the US and Israel for responding to a unprovoked (or even provoked, for that matter) nuclear strike with a retaliatory nuclear strike, then I say we abandon the UN at once, and cut off all funding to the nations apart of it. We could use the money saved to restock our nucelar stockpiles.

Why not just abandon the UN now. They are pretty useless as it stands the way things are. All they do is create more problems in areas where problems exist already. Oil for Food. Former Yugoslavia. All of Africa. the UN is completely useless and in most cases, the biggest criminal organization on the planet.

 

[Semper Fi]

Why not just abandon the UN now. They are pretty useless as it stands the way things are. All they do is create more problems in areas where problems exist already. Oil for Food. Former Yugoslavia. All of Africa. the UN is completely useless and in most cases, the biggest criminal organization on the planet.

In the eyes of our allies, there is not necessarily a clear reason for abandoning the UN, though I'm all for it. It was helpful during the ascend of the cold war, but now, your right pretty useless. Perhaps after another scandal, and there probably will be one, then we could count it as the last straw and walk out. Then kick back and watch all the little Eurostates vie for control and collapse. Sounds like a good show to me.

 

[Gunny]

In the eyes of our allies, there is not necessarily a clear reason for abandoning the UN, though I'm all for it. It was helpful during the ascend of the cold war, but now, your right pretty useless. Perhaps after another scandal, and there probably will be one, then we could count it as the last straw and walk out. Then kick back and watch all the little Eurostates vie for control and collapse. Sounds like a good show to me.

In the eyes of our socialist, "one world order" alleged allied, not to mention those in our own Nation of the same mindset, the US and all other Nations should be subservient to the Useless N.

A "clear," no mistaking it for anything else reason exists -- Palestine, Iran, Sudan, al Qaeda, N Korea ..... need more?

You really need to ask just ONE question ... WHAT does the UN do for the US?

 

[Semper Fi]

You really need to ask just ONE question ... WHAT does the UN do for the US?

Nothing

What does the US do for the UN? Well, i think if we left the UN, the UN would fall.

 

[USViking]

...(hypothetically) if Iran nuked Israel?

Israel is probably 30-40 years ahead of Iran,
and has its own nuclear deterrnet.

 

[liberalogic]

I'd just like to reverse the question for a second:

What do you think Israel would do if Iran nuked us?

I would be a bit hesitant to say that they would nuke Iran. Over the last few years there have been so many suicide attacks from the Palestinians and Israel has retaliated very little. While I think the Palestinians have a right to some of that land, their methods of attack have been inhumane...why hasn't Israel just nuked them already? So who is to say that they would nuke Iran for our sake?

 

[insein]

I'd just like to reverse the question for a second:

What do you think Israel would do if Iran nuked us?

I would be a bit hesitant to say that they would nuke Iran. Over the last few years there have been so many suicide attacks from the Palestinians and Israel has retaliated very little. While I think the Palestinians have a right to some of that land, their methods of attack have been inhumane...why hasn't Israel just nuked them already? So who is to say that they would nuke Iran for our sake?

I think the Jewish mindset would be to do get their way with as little criticism as possible. I know they want to nuke Iran as it is or at least bobm their Nuclear plants to prevent themselves from being attacked. So if the opportunity arose to attack Iran with little political repurcussions, Israel would be all over it.

 

[manu1959]

I'd just like to reverse the question for a second:

What do you think Israel would do if Iran nuked us?

I would be a bit hesitant to say that they would nuke Iran. Over the last few years there have been so many suicide attacks from the Palestinians and Israel has retaliated very little. While I think the Palestinians have a right to some of that land, their methods of attack have been inhumane...why hasn't Israel just nuked them already? So who is to say that they would nuke Iran for our sake?

they would not need to do anything.....nor do i care if they did

palestine has a right to israel's land? why is that?

 

[liberalogic]

they would not need to do anything.....nor do i care if they did

palestine has a right to israel's land? why is that?

Because it was promised to them by the British empire before it was given to the Jews.

 

[Annie]

Because it was promised to them by the British empire before it was given to the Jews.

huh? Never mind their refusal, you are claiming Israel for the Palis, via Balfour?

 

[liberalogic]

huh? Never mind their refusal, you are claiming Israel for the Palis, via Balfour?

The Arabs who were living in Palestine under Ottoman rule became infuriated when the Zionists began to emigrate to the area around 1882 in order to escape persecution in Eastern Europe and Russia. When the Balfour Declaration was issued during WWI, the Arabs saw that as a threat to their right of self-determination. The British, before the Balfour, had led them on to believe that Palestine would become part of a larger, independent Arab country, but the pressure on the British increased because of the growing number of Jews who continued to enter Palestine and who desired an independent Jewish state. After the Holocaust, everyone saw the atrocities committed towards the Jews and began to support an independent Jewish state on that land. But the Arabs still made up over 70% of the population. After Britain couldn't resolve it, they left and turned it over to the UN who divided the land.