Poll: Most Jewish Israelis say Iran strike less risky than nuclear threat

Discussion in 'Israel and Palestine' started by toomuchtime_, Mar 26, 2012.

  1. toomuchtime_
    Offline

    toomuchtime_ Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,588
    Thanks Received:
    712
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,005
    Poll: Most Jewish Israelis say Iran strike less risky than nuclear threat - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

    Support for military action against Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs continues to grow in both the US and Israel.
     
  2. ima
    Offline

    ima BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2012
    Messages:
    4,650
    Thanks Received:
    209
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +209
    I don't get it. What are they going to attack or expect to accomplish? Shut down the Iranian nuclear program forever? With a few sorties? Makes no sense to me.
    You don't poke a beehive, you have to kill it completely, which is not possible with Iran.
     
  3. JStone
    Offline

    JStone BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    13,374
    Thanks Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +258
    The Arabs get it.

    Arab American Institute: Survey, Most Arabs Say Iran Playing Negative Role In Iraq and in the Region
    Arab Attitudes Toward Iran: 2011 | The Arab American Institute
     
  4. toomuchtime_
    Offline

    toomuchtime_ Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,588
    Thanks Received:
    712
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,005
    Not a few sorties. About 100 manned aircraft, 40 + Jericho III missiles, several heavy (heavily armed) UAV's and special operations forces already operating inside of Iran. This should be sufficient to do serious damage to Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs, and the sanctions will do enough damage to Iran's economy to keep them from rebuilding these programs.
     
  5. ima
    Offline

    ima BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2012
    Messages:
    4,650
    Thanks Received:
    209
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +209
    So you put their program back maybe 5 years, if it's not already underground and protected already and the buildings on the surface are just decoys.
    Shut it down for good? LOL, you're dreaming. If that was the case, they would have attacked them already.
     
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2012
  6. JStone
    Offline

    JStone BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    13,374
    Thanks Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +258
    "The United Arab Emirates ambassador to the United States said Tuesday that the benefits of bombing Iran’s nuclear program outweigh the short-term costs such an attack would impose.

    In unusually blunt remarks, Ambassador Yousef al-Otaiba publicly endorsed the use of the military option for countering Iran’s nuclear program, if sanctions fail to stop the country’s quest for nuclear weapons.

    “I think it’s a cost-benefit analysis,” Mr. al-Otaiba said. “I think despite the large amount of trade we do with Iran, which is close to $12 billion … there will be consequences, there will be a backlash and there will be problems with people protesting and rioting and very unhappy that there is an outside force attacking a Muslim country; that is going to happen no matter what.”

    “If you are asking me, ‘Am I willing to live with that versus living with a nuclear Iran?,’ my answer is still the same: ‘We cannot live with a nuclear Iran.’ I am willing to absorb what takes place at the expense of the security of the U.A.E.”

    U.A.E. diplomat mulls hit on Iran's nukes - Washington Times
     
  7. toomuchtime_
    Offline

    toomuchtime_ Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,588
    Thanks Received:
    712
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,005
    If the sanctions remain in place, Iran will not be able to afford to rebuild their program. Underground facilities are more difficult but not impossible to destroy. Natanz, Iran's main enrichment facility, is underground and in addition protected by 20 feet of reinforced concrete and steel, but the US military estimates it can be destroy by successive hits by bunker buster bombs, each bomb going deeper until the facility is destroyed. Fordow, Iran's newest enrichment facility, is built into the side of a mountain, and would be more difficult to destroy from the air, but by destroying its supporting infrastructure, water, roads electricity, it can be rendered useless.

    The combination of an effective strike against Iran's nuclear weapons and long range missile programs and economy wrecking sanctions can prevent Iran from ever rebuilding its programs. If you check you will see that none of the people who claimed Iran would be able to rebuild its programs in a few years took into account the crippling effect the new sanctions are having on Iran's economy.
     
  8. ima
    Offline

    ima BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2012
    Messages:
    4,650
    Thanks Received:
    209
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +209
    You're a dreamer, and everyone needs a dream. You actually think that the US will bunker bust with successive blasts until they hit paydirt? Hell, they might as well nuke NYC and Tel Aviv while they're at it to save some time waiting for the retaliation.
     
  9. toomuchtime_
    Offline

    toomuchtime_ Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,588
    Thanks Received:
    712
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,005
    The US has developed 30,000 lb. bunker busters especially for this purpose, and Israel has at least 60 5,000 lb. bunker busters. Iraq's Osirak reactor was reinforced to withstand attack and it was thought to be impervious to any weapons Israel had, but successive hits on the same spot eventually broke through and rendered the reactor unusable. There is no reason to think the same thing can't be done with the much better munitions Israel has today. If Israel attacks during the election campaign, with Americans strongly supporting an attack to prevent Iran from acquiring nukes, Obama will have to support the Israeli attack unless he is either hopelessly behind in the polls or too far ahead to worry, and that will certainly mean those multi million dollar bunker busters will be used if the Israelis have left any part of Iran's nuclear weapons or long range missile programs standing.
     
  10. JStone
    Offline

    JStone BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    13,374
    Thanks Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +258
    Will the troglodytes in iranistan enlist Mexicans to retaliate as they did with that botched attempted assassination of the saudi ambassador? :badgrin:

    muslimes are not the sharpest knives in the drawer
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2012

Share This Page