Pages: 1 2 3

 

2007-01-06 18:15:08
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6982

jonnykill wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

herrr_smity wrote:

if they in their wisdom decide do attack Iran then they will unleash a world of shit and it will all hit Israel.
Iran has both the will and means to hit back
Not to mention the fact that Israel is tiny and could be entirely carpet missiled in no time. The Iranians could just as well rain down 200 missiles on Dimona and destroy Israel with the resultant nuclear pollution.
Carpet Missiled !?!?!?!?!? LOL !! Carpet bombed.......... Anyhow have you heard of these things called fallout shelters? Well they are for the nukes but every single home in Israel has a bombing raid shelter under the house.
Carpet bombing isn't very successful. Any how the size of an Army dose not matter. The command dose. And I think Iran would be on the shitty end of the stick if they went to war with Israel. If things got bad for Israel take a big guess who would be backing them up? We don't don't' have THAT many troops in Iraq.
Given that Hisb'allah, a relatively ragtag bunch of guerrilla fighters, brought Israel to a standstill for 34 days and caused them untold damage in terms of lost revenues, civilian/military casualties and damage to buildings I would not feel comfortable if I were an Israeli and I provoked a highly militarised and resourceful nation twenty times my size.
The reason I said carpet missiled is because it wouldn't be feasible to carpet bomb the country - their airforce is no match for the Israeli one. They could carpet missile Dimona alone - the centre of Israeli civil and military nuclear activity and that would leave Israel relatively uninhabitable for several hundred (thousand?) years. I don't think that many people are prepared to spend that much time in an air-raid shelter.
Israel would never be able to win a protracted war against the combined forces of all of the middle east (unless it nuked every last inch of what is a rather large area) - it would be too easy to break their supply lines.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-01-06 18:17:10)

2007-01-06 18:29:22
wah1188
You orrible caaaaaaan't
+321|6887|UK
Lets kill nukes with nukes, I'll save you the cliche.
2007-01-06 18:40:08
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7101|Canberra, AUS

Kmarion wrote:

I also like that there is no evidence mentioned.
The plans, disclosed to The Sunday Times last week
Really?
Good point. Disclosed by who? Some crakpot doomsayer on the street?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2007-01-06 19:21:11
[F7F7]KiNG_KaDaFFHi
Why walk when you can dance?
+77|7014|sWEEDen
Nuke the entire middle east,including Israel and make it a big parkinglot......some here know the song I beleive...
2007-01-06 19:27:55
Capt_Flapjack
Member
+12|7181|Kansas City, MO, USA

CameronPoe wrote:

Given that Hisb'allah, a relatively ragtag bunch of guerrilla fighters, brought Israel to a standstill for 34 days and caused them untold damage in terms of lost revenues, civilian/military casualties and damage to buildings I would not feel comfortable if I were an Israeli and I provoked a highly militarised and resourceful nation twenty times my size.
The reason I said carpet missiled is because it wouldn't be feasible to carpet bomb the country - their airforce is no match for the Israeli one. They could carpet missile Dimona alone - the centre of Israeli civil and military nuclear activity and that would leave Israel relatively uninhabitable for several hundred (thousand?) years. I don't think that many people are prepared to spend that much time in an air-raid shelter.
Israel would never be able to win a protracted war against the combined forces of all of the middle east (unless it nuked every last inch of what is a rather large area) - it would be too easy to break their supply lines.
Relatively rag tag?  They have their own government, TV station, and control part of the Lebanese government.  They are not rag tag.  They are also state sponsored by Iran and Syria.  They have such a presence in Lebanon that the Lebanese army can't push them out.  Is that rag-tag?  No.  Please quit portraying false information as true.
2007-01-06 19:36:04
jonnykill
The Microwave Man
+235|7106

CameronPoe wrote:

jonnykill wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:


Not to mention the fact that Israel is tiny and could be entirely carpet missiled in no time. The Iranians could just as well rain down 200 missiles on Dimona and destroy Israel with the resultant nuclear pollution.
Carpet Missiled !?!?!?!?!? LOL !! Carpet bombed.......... Anyhow have you heard of these things called fallout shelters? Well they are for the nukes but every single home in Israel has a bombing raid shelter under the house.
Carpet bombing isn't very successful. Any how the size of an Army dose not matter. The command dose. And I think Iran would be on the shitty end of the stick if they went to war with Israel. If things got bad for Israel take a big guess who would be backing them up? We don't don't' have THAT many troops in Iraq.
Given that Hisb'allah, a relatively ragtag bunch of guerrilla fighters, brought Israel to a standstill for 34 days and caused them untold damage in terms of lost revenues, civilian/military casualties and damage to buildings I would not feel comfortable if I were an Israeli and I provoked a highly militarised and resourceful nation twenty times my size.
The reason I said carpet missiled is because it wouldn't be feasible to carpet bomb the country - their airforce is no match for the Israeli one. They could carpet missile Dimona alone - the centre of Israeli civil and military nuclear activity and that would leave Israel relatively uninhabitable for several hundred (thousand?) years. I don't think that many people are prepared to spend that much time in an air-raid shelter.
Israel would never be able to win a protracted war against the combined forces of all of the middle east (unless it nuked every last inch of what is a rather large area) - it would be too easy to break their supply lines.
Again, who do you think will give Isreal a helping hand ?
2007-01-06 19:48:55
s()mtingWong
Member
+48|7119
We all know how weapons evolved overtime and for evertime there was a dominate weapon that was made there would always be a counterpart. If you look at it there were tanks to dominate troops, jets to dominate tanks, aa to dominate jets and so on. I've always had this feeling that some nation had developed something to counter the nukes or wmd, i mean it has been over 60 years since the first one was made and launched.
2007-01-06 21:14:12
jonnykill
The Microwave Man
+235|7106
It's pretty hard to deture a nuke. To small to pick up on radar.
2007-01-06 21:15:59
blisteringsilence
I'd rather hunt with Cheney than ride with Kennedy
+83|7128|Little Rock, Arkansas
1. The article states that a bunker buster would be used to tunnel into the structure, followed by a low-yield (tactical) nuclear weapon.

2. Why is it surprising to any of you that Israel has these plans drawn up? You have to know that the US, UK, Russia, China, and every other major (nuclear) power with a stake in the struggle has drawn up similar plans. That's what operations staffs do. They plan. The simple existance of such a plan is not that surprising. I guarantee you that in a cabinet somewhere in the pentagon, there are plans for the invasion and occupation of Canada, the UK, France, Germany, and Mexico, sitting right next to the cabinet that has the plans for Iran, Iraq, and North Korea.

CameronPoe wrote:

The reason I said carpet missiled is because it wouldn't be feasible to carpet bomb the country - their airforce is no match for the Israeli one. They could carpet missile Dimona alone - the centre of Israeli civil and military nuclear activity and that would leave Israel relatively uninhabitable for several hundred (thousand?) years. I don't think that many people are prepared to spend that much time in an air-raid shelter.
Israel would never be able to win a protracted war against the combined forces of all of the middle east (unless it nuked every last inch of what is a rather large area) - it would be too easy to break their supply lines.
Dimona has the strongest AA shield the world as ever seen. Not to mention that Israel regards an attack there as fundamentally the same as nuking Jerusalem. I don't think you really understand the Israeli people. They really do see Iran in the same way Poland saw Germany in 1938. The difference is that Germany didn't want to kill every man, woman, and child in Poland. Iran does want to do that to Israel.

You said that they would never win a war with the mideast. I say they'd never engage in war against the mideast. The first capital that got nuked would be sign enough for the rest of the coalition to go home.

Let me ask you this: Do you seriously beleive that if the mideast (lets define it here as Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Yemen, and Oman) attacked Israel, they wouldn't view it as potentially the end of their very existance? Can you tell me that if they were faced with the end of their country, the end of their citizens' very presence on the Earth, that they wouldn't nuke Mecca? Tehran? Riyadh? Qu'om?

There's nothing like the sheer and total destruction of an ally's capital to make you question your involvement in a war.
2007-01-07 02:32:01
BVC
Member
+325|7122
I hope they never have to use those plans.  Realisticly, it'd start a world war and I sure as hell don't want to be drafted and sent overseas to fight in some bloody nuclear wasteland so someone can fill their car for a few dollars less.
2007-01-07 02:34:02
James-M-II
Member
+13|6795|ENGLAND

aLpHa|Mr.App|e wrote:

Its ok, Israel and USA are the only ones whos killing Terrorist's anyway
yeah because the united states is the only army in iraq isnt it. jesus christ, another ignorant yank. there is a world beyond your borders ya know, the world isnt just the usa.
2007-01-07 02:43:01
التعريفات
Squiggles
+102|6794|Cali
Iran [Carpet Missile] Israel


EDIT: if Israel attacks

Last edited by التعريفات (2007-01-07 02:43:40)

2007-01-07 02:51:19
TheDarkRaven
ATG's First Disciple
+263|7051|Birmingham, UK
1. The Independent has far superior coverage of this story.
2. This is extremely old news. Read the Independent article if you don't know already, but this has been building up over a very long time.
3. It's the old Israel vs Arab conflict. Read more into it then get back into this subject with some new, extensive knowledge.
2007-01-07 04:29:33
blisteringsilence
I'd rather hunt with Cheney than ride with Kennedy
+83|7128|Little Rock, Arkansas

James-M-II wrote:

aLpHa|Mr.App|e wrote:

Its ok, Israel and USA are the only ones whos killing Terrorist's anyway
yeah because the united states is the only army in iraq isnt it. jesus christ, another ignorant yank. there is a world beyond your borders ya know, the world isnt just the usa.
Since when are the only ignorant people Yanks? You freaking idiot. You're telling me that there aren't ignorant Frogs, ignorant Brits, ignorant Krauts? You superioristic little shit. This is the kind of thing that drives me up the freaking wall.

You know, stereotypes are bullshit. If they were true, you'd be a short fat man with good clothes and bad teeth babbling about the weather and asking for tea. Is that accurate? No? Then sod off.
2007-01-07 04:30:49
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7027|132 and Bush

Israel denies planning Iran nuke attack

LONDON - A British newspaper reported Sunday that
Israel has drafted plans to strike as many as three targets in
Iran with low-yield nuclear weapons, aiming to halt Tehran's uranium enrichment program. The Israeli Foreign Ministry denied the report.

Citing multiple unidentified Israeli military sources, The Sunday Times said the proposals involved using so-called "bunker-buster" nuclear weapons to attack nuclear facilities at three sites south of the Iranian capital.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's office said it would not respond to the claim. "We don't respond to publications in the Sunday Times," said Miri Eisin, Olmert's spokeswoman.

Israeli Minister of Strategic Threats Avigdor Lieberman also declined to comment on the report.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev denied the report and said that "the focus of the Israeli activity today is to give full support to diplomatic actions" and the implementation of a
U.N. Security Council resolution imposing sanctions on Iran for refusing to halt enrichment.

The United States and its allies accuse Tehran of secretly trying to produce atomic weapons, but Iran claims its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes, including generating electricity.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has condemned as invalid and illegal the U.N. resolution.

Though Olmert has not explicitly ruled out a military strike against Iran's nuclear program, he has repeatedly said the issue should be dealt with diplomatically.

Because an Iranian nuclear bomb would affect the entire world, Olmert has said, the problem must be solved by the international community.

The Sunday Times reported that Mossad, the Israeli spy agency, believes Iran could produce enough enriched uranium to build nuclear weapons within two years. It also reported the top three targets for the Israelis were Natanz, where thousands of centrifuges are being installed, a heavy water reactor at Arak and a uranium conversion facility near Isfahan.

Israeli pilots, the newspaper reported, have made flights to the British colony of Gibraltar to train for the 2,000-mile round trip to the Iranian targets.

The Israeli army declined to comment when asked by The Associated Press on Sunday whether the Israeli air force was training for an attack against Iranian nuclear facilities.

"I refuse to believe that anyone here would consider using nuclear weapons against Iran," Reuven Pedatzur, a prominent defense analyst and columnist for the daily Haaretz, told the AP. "It is possible that this was a leak done on purpose, as deterrence, to say 'someone better hold us back, before we do something crazy.'"

Ephraim Kam, a strategic expert at Tel Aviv University's Institute for National Strategic Studies and a former senior army intelligence officer, also dismissed the report.

"No reliable source would ever speak about this, certainly not to the Sunday Times," Kam said
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-01-07 06:07:39
jonnykill
The Microwave Man
+235|7106

Pubic wrote:

I hope they never have to use those plans.  Realisticly, it'd start a world war and I sure as hell don't want to be drafted and sent overseas to fight in some bloody nuclear wasteland so someone can fill their car for a few dollars less.
Better start hitting the Gym and joggin every morning Rambo.......
2007-01-07 06:13:29
Mogura
Member
+17|6789|EUROPE
nuking iran is very but VERY ! bad idea
2007-01-07 06:43:50
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6982

blisteringsilence wrote:

1. The article states that a bunker buster would be used to tunnel into the structure, followed by a low-yield (tactical) nuclear weapon.

2. Why is it surprising to any of you that Israel has these plans drawn up? You have to know that the US, UK, Russia, China, and every other major (nuclear) power with a stake in the struggle has drawn up similar plans. That's what operations staffs do. They plan. The simple existance of such a plan is not that surprising. I guarantee you that in a cabinet somewhere in the pentagon, there are plans for the invasion and occupation of Canada, the UK, France, Germany, and Mexico, sitting right next to the cabinet that has the plans for Iran, Iraq, and North Korea.

Dimona has the strongest AA shield the world as ever seen. Not to mention that Israel regards an attack there as fundamentally the same as nuking Jerusalem. I don't think you really understand the Israeli people. They really do see Iran in the same way Poland saw Germany in 1938. The difference is that Germany didn't want to kill every man, woman, and child in Poland. Iran does want to do that to Israel.

You said that they would never win a war with the mideast. I say they'd never engage in war against the mideast. The first capital that got nuked would be sign enough for the rest of the coalition to go home.

Let me ask you this: Do you seriously beleive that if the mideast (lets define it here as Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Yemen, and Oman) attacked Israel, they wouldn't view it as potentially the end of their very existance? Can you tell me that if they were faced with the end of their country, the end of their citizens' very presence on the Earth, that they wouldn't nuke Mecca? Tehran? Riyadh? Qu'om?

There's nothing like the sheer and total destruction of an ally's capital to make you question your involvement in a war.
I am well aware of how Israel feels about Iran given the amount of Iran-oriented spam I get sent from the Jerusalem Post and Ha'aretz newspapers. I do understand their siege mentality. I also understand that a nuclear attack is not going to scare people who find it acceptable to take their own life if they can take 30 Israelis down with them at the same time. Also, I don't see how an AA shield could possibly prevent a hit if one saturation carpet-missiled a target.

If Israel used nukes, the middle east would respond and Israel would fire more nukes and it would spiral out of control.

Any 'leaked' info about Israeli nuclear plans is just deliberate posturing and is simply an act of deterrency - it doesn't really indicate or imply that they will enact those plans.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-01-07 06:45:18)

2007-01-07 06:50:59
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6982

jonnykill wrote:

Again, who do you think will give Isreal a helping hand ?
USA. They have been very successful of late in places such as Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan. They will be quite an asset. It won't alter the fact that fire will rain down on Israel from above. They couldn't prevent Hisb'allah doing it so imagine what it will be like when Iran starts firing proper ballistics at them.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-01-07 06:55:33)

2007-01-07 16:10:40
Elamdri
The New Johnnie Cochran
+134|7073|Peoria

Kmarion wrote:

Israeli pilots, the newspaper reported, have made flights to the British colony of Gibraltar to train for the 2,000-mile round trip to the Iranian targets.
Urge to make a 2142 joke rising....
2007-01-07 16:36:03
Major_Spittle
Banned
+276|7081|United States of America

CameronPoe wrote:

herrr_smity wrote:

if they in their wisdom decide do attack Iran then they will unleash a world of shit and it will all hit Israel.
Iran has both the will and means to hit back
Not to mention the fact that Israel is tiny and could be entirely carpet missiled in no time. The Iranians could just as well rain down 200 missiles on Dimona and destroy Israel with the resultant nuclear pollution.
Iran already said they are going to destroy Israel.  WTF is the difference.  Might as well get in their licks now.  I fully support destroying Iran.  We need a real war in that region.  All the pussy war is doing is emboldening our enemies.

EU is a toothless dog waiting for the next socialist party to come to power and kick its ass again.
2007-01-07 16:38:04
Major_Spittle
Banned
+276|7081|United States of America

Mogura wrote:

nuking iran is very but VERY ! bad idea
Yeah, how could killing a bunch of crazy Muslims make the world a better place?
2007-01-07 16:48:20
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6982

Major_Spittle wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

herrr_smity wrote:

if they in their wisdom decide do attack Iran then they will unleash a world of shit and it will all hit Israel.
Iran has both the will and means to hit back
Not to mention the fact that Israel is tiny and could be entirely carpet missiled in no time. The Iranians could just as well rain down 200 missiles on Dimona and destroy Israel with the resultant nuclear pollution.
Iran already said they are going to destroy Israel.  WTF is the difference.  Might as well get in their licks now.  I fully support destroying Iran.  We need a real war in that region.  All the pussy war is doing is emboldening our enemies.

EU is a toothless dog waiting for the next socialist party to come to power and kick its ass again.
To be honest, if I was Israeli I would be advocating get my licks in first as well. They must realise at this point that it's inevitable that the shit is going to hit the fan at some point. When the nuclear holocaust arrives, they'll probably flee to America or Africa or some other part of the world and settle down there like they normally do.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-01-07 16:48:56)

2007-01-07 16:48:24
RoofusMcDoofus
Member
+15|7001

Vilham wrote:

For a start this is clearly misleading. What the missles most like are is tiped with radioactive material, this gives increased penitration as they are "bunker Busting" bombs, the type other countries has used thousands of times before.
Depleted Uranium tip?  I doubt it.  The reason we use DU is that it's dense shit, and hard, which means we can make projectiles that cut through armor like butter, and also because it has a secondary incendiary effect.  This is probably a ~ one ton yield bunker buster nuke that's primarily designed to destroy the target via shockwaves in the Earth.

Anyway, if Israel does it, we should nuke them off the map, just for stirring the shit.
2007-01-07 16:55:27
jonnykill
The Microwave Man
+235|7106

CameronPoe wrote:

jonnykill wrote:

Again, who do you think will give Isreal a helping hand ?
USA. They have been very successful of late in places such as Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan. They will be quite an asset. It won't alter the fact that fire will rain down on Israel from above. They couldn't prevent Hisb'allah doing it so imagine what it will be like when Iran starts firing proper ballistics at them.
Well with fire raining down on Israel as you put it I guess Israel is fecked. Damn. It's as if you can see the future. Do you have one of those crystal balls? Anyhow you need more cowbell in your delivery. You should have said " fire and brimstone will rain down on Israel from above ". Sounds more God like. And you need to follow up with an official Muwahahahahahahahahaha!

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard