Iran calls for bombing Israeli cities !!

[Invisibleflash]

We won't. I'm all for getting out of the middle east... But if they attack Israel... It won't matter who's president... We'll go to war with them.

Iran has every right to attack Israel for assassinating one of its citizens inside of Iran.
No, we shouldn't get involved.
Israel made the problem. Let them deal with it. ...

Iran must have poor security. Didn't Israel assassinate other Iranians before?

I dont think Iran could fight Israel. The USA has sold or given Israel some high class weapons.

Would Russia side with Iran?

 

[Invisibleflash]

Iran Newspaper: Avenge Scientist Assassination by Striking Haifa

An opinion piece published by an Iranian newspaper called for Iran to attack the northern Israeli port city of Haifa as retaliation for...

www.breitbart.com

Israel only has 3 cities with a population over 1 million
Tel Aviv- 4 M and Jerusalem- 1M
Haifa - 1M

Huge escalation

An opinion piece in Iranian press?


If I let my jimmies get rustled every time some ignorant American said "bomb Iran," or some radical Iranian chanted "death to America," I wouldn't be sane.

USA does not ever need any fake wars in the ME, thanks to Bush
USA only has one final war and it’s not bogeymen Arabs , Russians or Chinese

That is right...the fight for Ameica's life is a fight with the filthy dems.

 

[Picaro]

What needs to happen is every time one of these vermin 'Mullahs' makes these threats, whether against Israel or anybody else, assassinate them as well, not just their employees in their terrorist cells. If that requires knocking down entire palaces to get them so be it. They're genocidal murdering rubbish and international criminals, organizing all kinds of crimes and criminal enterprises, and it's time to stop treating them with kid gloves just because they frighthen some dope addled Burb Brat halfwits hiding under their beds who would sellout the entire planet rather than give up their breakfast joints and tranny porn.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Iran calls for bombing Israeli cities !!
⁜→ Picaro, et al,

BLUF: I think Picaro's idea has some merit. I just don't think, given all the global issues that currently need attention, any nation will put it on the agenda to be considered both diplomatically and politically. (Consequences and Ramifications)(CnR)

What needs to happen is every time one of these vermin 'Mullahs' makes these threats, whether against Israel or anybody else, assassinate them as well, not just their employees in their terrorist cells.

(COMMENT)

Politically, → nations have to watch their language and use the language already on the diplomatic table. Even the protocol for a nation (a Head of State) condemns all forms of propaganda, in whatsoever country conducted, which is either designed or likely to provoke or encourage and threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression.

When an adversarial senior state officials openly endorse a calculated retaliatory strike of the magnitude as "Haifa — Israel’s third-largest city" and then make the footprint to carry-out such a credible threat at some time into the future, it threatens the peace. It becomes a regional security issue.

Just on man's opinion.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[TheParser]

The Iranian "leaders" are not very smart, are they!

The Arab nations tried several times to defeat Israel. Each time they got whipped badly. (Although in one of their early battles, they came pretty close to victory, I have read.)

This is 2020.

If Iran dared to touch an Israeli city, I would hate to see the retaliation on Iran, which would partially become a parking lot. (Oh, sure, Iran can harass American warships, for America is a very nice & patient pussycat.)

The Iranians should have learned from the Arab nations: Don't mess with Israel!

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Iran calls for bombing Israeli cities !!
⁜→ TheParser, et al,

BLUF: This is just another example of how badly our intelligence and political analysts are misreading the status and conditions in the Region. And they have been very misleading since the orginal fools court started the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) (the era of President 43 George W. Bush). He is an old dog try to peddle the leftover Cold War mentality. Before he starts using words like "reckless" and "criminal" he needs to understand the logic behind the Risk Assessment that drove a State believed to be in possession of nuclear weapons tp take such an action.

jihadwatch.org​

John Brennan blasts killing of Iranian nuclear scientist as ‘criminal’ and ‘reckless’​

"Traitor-in-Chief" John Brennan, former head of the CIA, who once defended Hizballah as having "a social and political nature to it as well” and endorsed its influence in Lebanese politics, is now blasting the killing of the Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh as "a criminal act" and “highly reckless.”​

(COMMENT)

While there are a majority of states in the world that have joined in on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and have undertaken the safeguards pertaining to the Treaty, → they also have the option of exercising its sovereign right to withdraw from the binding aspects of the NPT.

There are a few aspects that the "Risk Assessment" on extraterritorial operations must take into consideration.

America is unlikely to be successful in keeping in preventing the Islamic Republic of Iran from developing nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, should the Islamic Republic choose to do so, through American non-violent diplomacy or political means.

America is not capable of deploying to the Islamic Republic in sufficient strength conventional forces to seize or destroy the Iran's capability to craft the (but not limited to):

◈ Delivery System​

◈ Nuclear (special fissionable) material in sufficient quality (Weapons Grade)​

◈ Nuclear Triggering Device​

There is a necessary distinctive infrastructure required (physical plant manufacturing and research & development) in the critical nuclear weapons design (CNWD) process and production, for even one that is relatively crude compared to that of the nuclear weapons states that are parties to the treaty. Should the Islamic Republic choose to go beyond the need to develop, research, produce and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, there is nothing illegal to that internalized process or the collaboration with other states not party to the treaty.

The Islamic Republic is a rogue state. And it is located right in the heart of a major gas and oil production region → Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) who has a neighborhood membership (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates). This is not to mention the fact that Israel is right in the middle of the Levant gas and oil field. And a branch of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force (QF) is operating covertly, working with Hezbollah of Lebanon, Shiite militias in Iraq and Shiites in Afghanistan. The QF has an already established (but unprofected) logistic network. This represents the beginning of a manual delivery system. When we think of quality in Iran's capability, they don't need highly enriched uranium of 93%-to-95% They can make a device starting with much less. And when Iran constructs a weapon, they don't need a complicated delivery system. It can be ground towed with the element of surprise. And in the use of the weapon, they don't need to actually hit Israel. The could hit a number of other sensitive soft target and make it look like it came from Israel.

This is just food for thought. This just amplifies a few of the possible alternative dangers, consequences, and ramifications that might prompt a non-state party to the Treaty and → a State believed to be in possession of nuclear weapons → to take such an action → IF there is a chance that America will not be able to prevent an Islamic State from some clandestine action in the future. Do to Washington Leadership, America is in decline. IF allowed to proceed with the R&D today, the new technologies in five to ten years will make a basket full of scenarios possible.

Director Brennan may have been smart once, but is not now. He is, like most of Washington, is NOT looking forward from the perspective of other nations. And that is all the non-state party to the Treaty and → a State believed to be in possession of nuclear weapons → needs to act. American and most of the G-20 could absorb such a threat knowing they can recover. But there are some non-state party to the Treaty and → a State believed to be in possession of nuclear weapons → IF they are overcome just once.

Most Respectfully,
R