Report: Israel Won't Warn U.S. Before Strike On Iran

[Trajan]

That makes no sense. If you know, and as you claim Israel knows, that Israel can't effectively attack Iran's nuclear weapons program, then you've got to assume everyone knows they can't and no one will take their threats seriously and none of the things you are predicting, closing the Strait of Hormuz, etc., will take place. If you really believe Israel's threats will be taken seriously, then you must also believe that people who know far more than you do about Israel's capabilities believe an Israeli strike against Iran has at least a reasonable chance of being successful.

US aid to Israel is nominal compared to what it costs us to station troops in South Korea or Japan or Europe, and since nearly all of it is given in the form of credits to buy military hardware and ammunition from US companies, creating US jobs and local, state and federal taxes, it represents net transfers of wealth within the US economy, whereas maintaining troops abroad produces transfers of wealth out of the US economy.

Israel has been the US' most important strategic ally for decades. At a time when the West seemed to be losing the Cold War, Israel's defeats of the Soviet client states, Egypt and Syria, in 1967 and 1973 forced the USSR out of the region, and allowed the US to lock them out with the Egypt-Israel peace treaty. If Israel had lost either of those wars, what other country could have resisted the Soviet's push to the Gulf and control of much or the world's oil supply? Clearly, if not for the Israelis, the US would have had to station large numbers of troops in the ME to stop the Soviet advance, but where would we have made our stand? In Jordan? In Iraq? In Saudi Arabia? And at what cost in American blood and treasure?

Not only has Israel long been our most important strategic ally and our aid to Israel nominal in comparison to what our other important allies cost us, but Israel in the only major US ally for which American soldiers have never had to bleed and die.

It's not what everyone know, it's what everyone expects everyone else to do. Or guesses they might.

In 1914, Serbia got stupid with Austria-Hungary because they knew the Russians would back their play. And A-H got stupid because the thought the Germans would back their play. And before anyone realized it, a stupid retaliation war over an assassination became a war that brought down empires.

The Iranians would LOVE for Israel to try to attack them. It will make them the heroes of the Islamic World. But what Obama is doing is actually kind of smart. (Damn you fugnuts for making me praise Obama). Using economic pressure on Iran to bring them to the negotiating table.

Not good enough for WhataYahoo, though. Bibi would start a war for no good reason.

uhm no, they won't be the heros anymore than any hollering you hear from sunni nations will be genuine....they'll go thru the motions then sigh in relief in private.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Iran would be a sensible democracy today if we hadn't listened to the Zionists and the Oil Companies and put the Shah back into power after he was deposed.

We could take out the mullahs now and give Iran democracy.

Would we have your support?

Tell you what, Chippy, when you go out there and volunteer for the military, I'll take it seriously.

We don't need boots on the ground to take out the mullahs, Dippy.

 

[toomuchtime_]

That makes no sense. If you know, and as you claim Israel knows, that Israel can't effectively attack Iran's nuclear weapons program, then you've got to assume everyone knows they can't and no one will take their threats seriously and none of the things you are predicting, closing the Strait of Hormuz, etc., will take place. If you really believe Israel's threats will be taken seriously, then you must also believe that people who know far more than you do about Israel's capabilities believe an Israeli strike against Iran has at least a reasonable chance of being successful.

US aid to Israel is nominal compared to what it costs us to station troops in South Korea or Japan or Europe, and since nearly all of it is given in the form of credits to buy military hardware and ammunition from US companies, creating US jobs and local, state and federal taxes, it represents net transfers of wealth within the US economy, whereas maintaining troops abroad produces transfers of wealth out of the US economy.

Israel has been the US' most important strategic ally for decades. At a time when the West seemed to be losing the Cold War, Israel's defeats of the Soviet client states, Egypt and Syria, in 1967 and 1973 forced the USSR out of the region, and allowed the US to lock them out with the Egypt-Israel peace treaty. If Israel had lost either of those wars, what other country could have resisted the Soviet's push to the Gulf and control of much or the world's oil supply? Clearly, if not for the Israelis, the US would have had to station large numbers of troops in the ME to stop the Soviet advance, but where would we have made our stand? In Jordan? In Iraq? In Saudi Arabia? And at what cost in American blood and treasure?

Not only has Israel long been our most important strategic ally and our aid to Israel nominal in comparison to what our other important allies cost us, but Israel in the only major US ally for which American soldiers have never had to bleed and die.

It's not what everyone know, it's what everyone expects everyone else to do. Or guesses they might.

In 1914, Serbia got stupid with Austria-Hungary because they knew the Russians would back their play. And A-H got stupid because the thought the Germans would back their play. And before anyone realized it, a stupid retaliation war over an assassination became a war that brought down empires.

The Iranians would LOVE for Israel to try to attack them. It will make them the heroes of the Islamic World. But what Obama is doing is actually kind of smart. (Damn you fugnuts for making me praise Obama). Using economic pressure on Iran to bring them to the negotiating table.

Not good enough for WhataYahoo, though. Bibi would start a war for no good reason.

With their whacked out worship of martyrdom among the Arabs and Iranians, the Iranian regime just might like to be attacked by Israel, but who cares? The US and Israel are already well hated over there and are already the prime targets of their terrorists.

There is nothing smart about what Obama is doing. If you have been following the news, you know that Obama didn't want to apply such strong sanctions, but Congress passed legislation requiring him to unless he declared doing so would endanger national security, but Obama didn't want to appear weak on national security in an election year, so he has reluctantly begun implementing the sanctions Congress mandated.

A major problem with this administration is that no one knows what Obama's Iran policy is. Does he intend to deal with a nuclear Iran? Is he determined to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons and long range missiles that can reach the US east coast? Or is he determined to prevent Iran from acquiring the technology necessary to build nuclear weapons even if they haven't yet decided to build them? Until the administration makes it clear exactly what they are trying to do, stating that all options are on table means nothing since no one can know - especially the Iranians, the Israelis and the Gulf Arab states that are opposed to a nuclear Iran - what red lines would have to be crossed before the US would use force.

In preparation for Netanyahu's visit to Washington next week, the Israelis and the administration have been in intensive negotiations. Obama is trying to persuade the Israelis not to attack Iran's nuclear program until after the election and the Israelis are pressuring the administration to declare exactly what Obama's Iran policy is and exactly what would trigger an American attack on Iran or a green light for an Israeli attack.

Today, for the first time,Clinton suggested where the US red line might be. She declared that the US would not allow Iran to develop the technology to build nuclear weapons even if they are not trying to actually build one at this time. However this administration's credibility is so low with the Israelis, Arabs and Iranians that that the Israelis will probably insist on an explicit statement by the administration on exactly what would trigger the US to use force before agreeing to delay their attack.

 

[Lakhota]

Obama's Most Dangerous GOP Opponent: Netanyahu - The Dish | By Andrew Sullivan - The Daily Beast

 

[Lakhota]

Why Nations Start Dumb Wars: Is Israel Setting the Stage for Tragedy? | World | AlterNet

 

[FA_Q2]

]Israel is perfectly capable of doing their own "dirty work". In fact, they are also capable of doing OUR dirty work, too.

Are you aware that Israel is not the only country to whom we supply weapons, aid, assistance, bank, etc.?

Well, no, they aren't capable of doing it. They know that any unilateral military strike they take will fail pretty miserably. The Iranian facilities are too far, too well fortified and too spread out to effectively take out.

But they can threaten to instigate a war, which will result in a closing of Hormuz and oil to spike. And since no one in Europe or the US wants that to happen, we are all dancing to their tune. Which is bullshit. Bullshit of our own making, as we provided them these weapons to start with.

As for who we supply aid to, Israel is the top recipiant and everyone else are people we are bribing to play nice with them. But if the Arab Spring keeps going, that's not going to last much longer.

That makes no sense. If you know, and as you claim Israel knows, that Israel can't effectively attack Iran's nuclear weapons program, then you've got to assume everyone knows they can't and no one will take their threats seriously and none of the things you are predicting, closing the Strait of Hormuz, etc., will take place. If you really believe Israel's threats will be taken seriously, then you must also believe that people who know far more than you do about Israel's capabilities believe an Israeli strike against Iran has at least a reasonable chance of being successful.

US aid to Israel is nominal compared to what it costs us to station troops in South Korea or Japan or Europe, and since nearly all of it is given in the form of credits to buy military hardware and ammunition from US companies, creating US jobs and local, state and federal taxes, it represents net transfers of wealth within the US economy, whereas maintaining troops abroad produces transfers of wealth out of the US economy.

Israel has been the US' most important strategic ally for decades. At a time when the West seemed to be losing the Cold War, Israel's defeats of the Soviet client states, Egypt and Syria, in 1967 and 1973 forced the USSR out of the region, and allowed the US to lock them out with the Egypt-Israel peace treaty. If Israel had lost either of those wars, what other country could have resisted the Soviet's push to the Gulf and control of much or the world's oil supply? Clearly, if not for the Israelis, the US would have had to station large numbers of troops in the ME to stop the Soviet advance, but where would we have made our stand? In Jordan? In Iraq? In Saudi Arabia? And at what cost in American blood and treasure?

Not only has Israel long been our most important strategic ally and our aid to Israel nominal in comparison to what our other important allies cost us, but Israel in the only major US ally for which American soldiers have never had to bleed and die.

Exactly. I always hear whining about our aid to Israel but no one seems to want to admit the simple fact that we want Israel there as our dog because we can't do what they do or afford the troops/capability that they bring to the table in one of the most heated areas on the planet at this time. Whether you like Israel or not, they are an attack dog and they are the only people in that part of the world who are our attack dogs.

 

[JoeB131]

The Iranians would LOVE for Israel to try to attack them. It will make them the heroes of the Islamic World. But what Obama is doing is actually kind of smart. (Damn you fugnuts for making me praise Obama). Using economic pressure on Iran to bring them to the negotiating table.

Not good enough for WhataYahoo, though. Bibi would start a war for no good reason.

uhm no, they won't be the heros anymore than any hollering you hear from sunni nations will be genuine....they'll go thru the motions then sigh in relief in private.

Your Premise is that the leaders really are in control of their own countries... They'll "go through the motions" because they know the people on the street hate Israel with a passion.

Egypt, TUnsinia, Yemen, Libya have all toppled their leaders in favor of populist Islamist movements. Only a matter of time before others fall.

 

[JoeB131]

Iran would be a sensible democracy today if we hadn't listened to the Zionists and the Oil Companies and put the Shah back into power after he was deposed.

We could take out the mullahs now and give Iran democracy.

Would we have your support?

Tell you what, Chippy, when you go out there and volunteer for the military, I'll take it seriously.

We don't need boots on the ground to take out the mullahs, Dippy.

YOu work on the assumption the Mullahs are the problem. The reality is the Mullahs represent teh popular will.

Ugly truth. Iran is a Democracy. The have elections. They are subject to internal politics.

In fact, we almost had a deal with Mahmoud on the Uranium, until Mosavi (the oppossition leader) cried that Iran shouldn't give up her nuclear assets.

 

[JoeB131]

Not only has Israel long been our most important strategic ally and our aid to Israel nominal in comparison to what our other important allies cost us, but Israel in the only major US ally for which American soldiers have never had to bleed and die.

Exactly. I always hear whining about our aid to Israel but no one seems to want to admit the simple fact that we want Israel there as our dog because we can't do what they do or afford the troops/capability that they bring to the table in one of the most heated areas on the planet at this time. Whether you like Israel or not, they are an attack dog and they are the only people in that part of the world who are our attack dogs.

The premise is that "our dog" is the one that is mauling the neighborhood children and shitting on everyone's lawn and doing more damage than good.

Israel is actually useless as an ally. They were no help in the Iraq War, they were no help in the Gulf war. Because we might get into a fight between Iraqis and Iranians, or Iraqis and Kuwaitis, but they all hate Israel more.

 

[FA_Q2]

Not only has Israel long been our most important strategic ally and our aid to Israel nominal in comparison to what our other important allies cost us, but Israel in the only major US ally for which American soldiers have never had to bleed and die.

Exactly. I always hear whining about our aid to Israel but no one seems to want to admit the simple fact that we want Israel there as our dog because we can't do what they do or afford the troops/capability that they bring to the table in one of the most heated areas on the planet at this time. Whether you like Israel or not, they are an attack dog and they are the only people in that part of the world who are our attack dogs.

The premise is that "our dog" is the one that is mauling the neighborhood children and shitting on everyone's lawn and doing more damage than good.

Israel is actually useless as an ally. They were no help in the Iraq War, they were no help in the Gulf war. Because we might get into a fight between Iraqis and Iranians, or Iraqis and Kuwaitis, but they all hate Israel more.

Then you don't understand the dynamic there. Not only that, but do you really think that those regimes would start signing peace and love if Israel vanished? The sad truth is no. They are going to hate and target the US. It is better if they target the Israelites rather than us directly and we know it.

 

[JoeB131]

Exactly. I always hear whining about our aid to Israel but no one seems to want to admit the simple fact that we want Israel there as our dog because we can't do what they do or afford the troops/capability that they bring to the table in one of the most heated areas on the planet at this time. Whether you like Israel or not, they are an attack dog and they are the only people in that part of the world who are our attack dogs.

The premise is that "our dog" is the one that is mauling the neighborhood children and shitting on everyone's lawn and doing more damage than good.

Israel is actually useless as an ally. They were no help in the Iraq War, they were no help in the Gulf war. Because we might get into a fight between Iraqis and Iranians, or Iraqis and Kuwaitis, but they all hate Israel more.

Then you don't understand the dynamic there. Not only that, but do you really think that those regimes would start signing peace and love if Israel vanished? The sad truth is no. They are going to hate and target the US. It is better if they target the Israelites rather than us directly and we know it.

They only hate us because we support Zionism.

Do I think they'll sing Kubmaya when Israel gets pushed into the sea? Nope.

They'll go back to what they were before Israel was established, a bunch of squabbling tribes with different banners.

Of course, it would be helpful if we broke our addiction to petroleum as well.

 

[Ropey]

Yes, well, I guess I'm on someone's enemy list, then.

Get real. The Arabs are going to do that, eventually. Maybe 30 years ago, they could have co-existed, but the Palestinians have been so radicalized by Zionist policies, not now.

No hit list. You just provided enough proof on this thread to show that your agenda is to happily see the end of Israel and all Jews pushed into the sea.

Your words.

Indeed he did - eliminate Israel is his goal, thus his support of Iran.

(These types often out themselves on their own.)

Waiting for the happy day the Arabs Push Israel into the ocean...

This one sure did.

 

[Jos]

At a news conference in Switzerland, on the occasion of the building an Israeli railway there, the German newspaper Die Zeit interviewed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

"Congratulations Mr. Netanyahu, my first question is that does the beginning of the large train line's construction confirm the announcement of the dissident Syrian Intelligence Office that you will strike Lebanon?"

In reply, Netanyahu stated:

"Yes, and it is not a secret that it will happen with U.S.-Gulf support and that is why they have been warned, but before you ask, you have a look at the new map of the world and see that there is no nation with this name."

Netanyahu: No Lebanon will be on the map - English pravda.ru

 

[Ropey]

At a news conference in Switzerland, on the occasion of the building an Israeli railway there, the German newspaper Die Zeit interviewed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

"Congratulations Mr. Netanyahu, my first question is that does the beginning of the large train line's construction confirm the announcement of the dissident Syrian Intelligence Office that you will strike Lebanon?"

In reply, Netanyahu stated:

"Yes, and it is not a secret that it will happen with U.S.-Gulf support and that is why they have been warned, but before you ask, you have a look at the new map of the world and see that there is no nation with this name."

Netanyahu: No Lebanon will be on the map - English pravda.ru

"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."

The Regime = Zionism

Zionism = The State of Israel

Zionism, the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims.

Thus, he calls for The State of Israel to vanish from the page of time. The page of time is history.

I draw my own conclusions from this historical Iranian statement.

 

[Jos]

For years, the paranoid Israelis have been screaming bloody murder that the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said that "Israel should be wiped from the map." Of course, the man said no such thing, it was a deliberate mis-translation meant to serve their purposes: to demonize Ahmadinejad and Iran and to justify an unprovoked attack against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in Farsi:

"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

The full quote translated directly to English:

"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."

Word by word translation:

Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).

So that should settle the disinformation campaign being waged in order to set the stage for an aggressive attack against Iran and their paranoid delusions that Iran is building a nuclear weapon in order to "wipe them off the map."

If they are nothing, they are constantly hysterical, while collecting billions annually in American taxpayer money to feed the hysteria and the lust for war and to take out those governments they don't like, preferably by proxy in the form of NATO or the US Armed Forces.

But it's ironic. There was no fuss or screaming when Netanyahu actually told an interviewer that when Israel is done with them, there will be NO Lebanon on the new world map.

From the op link

 

[patrickcaturday]

It's not what everyone know, it's what everyone expects everyone else to do. Or guesses they might.

In 1914, Serbia got stupid with Austria-Hungary because they knew the Russians would back their play. And A-H got stupid because the thought the Germans would back their play. And before anyone realized it, a stupid retaliation war over an assassination became a war that brought down empires.

The Iranians would LOVE for Israel to try to attack them. It will make them the heroes of the Islamic World. But what Obama is doing is actually kind of smart. (Damn you fugnuts for making me praise Obama). Using economic pressure on Iran to bring them to the negotiating table.

Not good enough for WhataYahoo, though. Bibi would start a war for no good reason.[/QUOTE]

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

This is probably the most intelligent reply yet to this most complex issue. The problem is that everyone thinks that they have the answeres and yet they fail to realize that most of their answers are not guided by historical reasoning but instead they are guided by ideology. If Israel attacks it will not so much be a military decision as a political one in which they will judge that the U.S. will back them, This is what is decribed above in the WWI senario.
Before we start to cheer for one side over the other we should first look at this as a chess game and attempt to see where each of the moves will lead. If we are not carefull mistakes in judgement could lead us into a regional war and then into WWIII. We really must ask ourselves the simple question WHO IS THE MOST DANGEROUS NATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST. Before you answer please look up and study OPERATION SAMSON.

 

[Jos]

Zionism, the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims.

I do wish you would post a link to quotes

 

[toomuchtime_]

Zionism, the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims.

I do wish you would post a link to quotes

Don't know how to use google?

Google

 

[Jos]

I do wish you would post a link to quotes

Don't know how to use google?

Google

I also know this sites rules on linking to quotes

On edit I followed your Google link this one came up first http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t781995/
was that the one you meant?

 

[Ropey]

I do wish you would post a link to quotes

Don't know how to use google?

Google

I also know this sites rules on linking to quotes

Then you know I'm following the rules.