Of course this is hypothetical but highly emotional issue that I am raising in the Philosophical section. What will your reaction be of this possible scenario? How should your government react to it?

"Israel is drawing up plans to attack Iran's nuclear facilities and is prepared to launch a strike without backing from the US, it has been reported.

Officials in the Israeli Defence Ministry told the Jerusalem Post that while they prefer to act in consultation with the US, they were preparing plans that would allow them to act in isolation.

"It is always better to coordinate," a senior Defence Ministry official told the newspaper. "But we are also preparing options that do not include coordination."

However defence officials played down the reports today, telling The Times that an attack by Israeli forces alone would probably fail to take out all of Iran’s nuclear facilities, which experts say are scattered across several sites, some deep underground.



"That would leave us open to a nuclear attack from Iran’s remaining weapons stock. Israel would likely need the support, the backing, of forces from a Western ally to successfully carry out the operation,” he said.......

Some Israeli security officials fear that the Iranian retaliation for a strike on its facilities could include a large-scale missile attack on Israel from several Iranian allies, disruption of oil supplies to the West, and terror attacks against Jewish targets around the world."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle5284173.ece

I am posing this same question on an American site and others because it may be a issue we will have to get to grips with soon.

Russian president Medvedev says Israel will not attack Iran. Russia supplies Iran with surface-to-air missiles and defense systems.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090920/ap_on_...sia_iran_israel


Israel president Netanyahu held secret meeting in Russia
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3774201,00.html

Do you really believe he (Medvedev) is speaking the truth and nothing but the truth? Can he guarantee it? the only reason he could say that is if he can control the missiles from reaching Iran or he has a hold on Iran.

elle are you a little Jewy?

Why not Israel just send 100 ZOHANs to Iran diguised as hairstylists and steal all the uranium and destroy all the centrifuges that way the Iranians would not even know that it was an attack.

I would break out the champagne and celebrate. The world would be a much safer place if Iran were knocked down.

They sponsor world terror and they will strike Israel as soon as they get nukes. They believe proficy will be full filled when they do.

I WILL SPREAD ANTI WESTERN AND PRO CHINA PROPAGANDA

Why not introduce Hello Kitti in Israel and Iran it might just help it was able to convert Vader

the US would be really stupid to give it a go ahead. Already Brzenzinski is floating the idea that Israeli planes should be shot down flying over Iraq. Some military bigwigs in the US Army & navy are against this, because the effect for the US garrison in Iraq & the NATO troops in AFG would be terrible.

Israel should just openly declare its nuclear deterrent.

Riyadh 'offers airspace' for Israel attack on Iran

i have (though only a little) sympathy for Israel...OTOH if the House of Saud gets wiped out by the Iranian counterattack, at least the 9/11 victims will be partly avenged

Ofcourse Isreal has no right to attack Iran. And in an attack Iran has the right to defend itself.

I dont understand why the USA supports Isreal that much, if you know how they are treating the Palistine, time and time again builing new settlements in Palistine. That being said, the goverment of Iran is terrible in many other ways.

In the end i would support the country who came under attack. If Iran attacks Isreal, then i support Isreal and vice virsa. No country has the right to attack another country. The only exception is when there is full United Nations support.

i wouldnt give a rats dicc then proceed to doin watever tha fucc i was doin

Then what give Iran the 'right' to support Hamas?


Then you should be in full support for Israel since Iran have been financing Hamas for years. It matter little that Iran, as a country, did not attack Israel, but using agents is no less meaningful than if Iran dispatched the Iranian Navy to be off Israel's coast and start launching missiles into Tel Aviv. No country would allow that to stand.

One day in probably in the near future a Palestinian suicide bomber will go to Israel with a truck armed with a nuclear bomb and will detonate when the truck reached its target inside Israel.

Sad but thats reality.

THE $64 QUESTION. Who has the right to defend herself? Iran? Israel? the West? The Islamic nations? You have to decide who is threatening whom? Did the Chicken or the Egg come first?

It does not have to be a full nuclear device, just a simple radiological weapon, aka 'dirty bomb', will do. When, not if, that happened, many muslim countries in the region will be scrambling to remove themselves from the retaliatory equation. If it is a full nuclear device, it would narrow the source of that device considerably -- Iran. If it is a 'dirty bomb', Israel will take longer to perform the forensic analysis on the radioactive residue and will formulate the appropriate response to the country that gave the Palestinian terror group that 'dirty bomb'. In either case, the Palestinians will be the first to suffer the retaliatory response -- terribly. The Israeli/Palestinian conflict is just a tool for the mullahs in this religious war. For the sake of wiping Israel off the map, the Palestinians can be sacrificed, as long as the appropriate label -- martyrs -- are applied, some will have no problems with starting a nuclear war in the ME.

gambit, to understand the problem, you have to gain the mind set of an Islamists to appreciate why this issue is so important to Muslims. It has to do with Islam and their view point on Dar al-Islam. That is the root of the Palestinian problem.

The root cause of the Israelis/Palestinians conflict can be traced to the creation of the Jewish state, but that is a political root. The deeper root is the eminence of the Jews in a region where the muslims feel they should be overwhelmingly dominant. Jews can co-exist with the muslims but only in a subservient position. An independent Jewish state is an offense to that belief. There is a political solution to the Israelis/Palestinians conflict but the acceptance of that political solution would remove a convenient excuse to wage some kind of warfare, low or high intensity, against the Jews. Only the very few mullahs has the courage to call it exactly for the religious war it is.

I think the Israeli Palestinian conflict started a very very very long time ago when David (Jew) and Goliath (Philistine) had a confrontation which started it all. Since Islam was not yet in existence at that moment and Palestinians are Muslims today, I think that Islamic Fundamentalists are just using the Palestines as front to fight the Israelis and maybe thay will also use the Palestinians to launch a nuclear attack (Nuclear Device or Dirty Bomb) in the near future.

No, this isn't about a war between Isreal and Palastine. Besides Isreal attacked Palistine too, right?

Iran is using the Palestinians as proxy in this religious war. The political solution for the Israelis-Palestinians conflict have been there all along, just that the Arabs does not want a settlement. Whatever was done five decades ago cannot be undone, except by force and the Arabs failed to wipe Israel off the map back then.

A long long time ago in ancient history Assyria (Syria Today) wiped Israel off the map which resulted in the diaspora of the 12 lost tribes of Israel.

During the British rule, the Israelites were allowed to return to their ancient historic land Israel from countries around the world.

5 decadeds ago, Egypt, Jordan and Syria attempted to wipe Israel off the map again in the Six Day War but the Arab countries failed.

Now Iran wanted to wipe Israel off the map again with Nuclear?

The stronger a country, the more force it will require to effect a political erasure of that country.

Nation - A group of people with a common heritage

Country - A geographical locale

State - A political body composed of members of the Nation that has ministerial responsibilities of a country and is capable of defending sovereignty over that country.

For example...Europe is a 'country' that contains many 'states', or 'nation-states', or loosely use -- countries. Same for Africa or the Americas or anywhere else where there are respected borders. Before Israel proper of 1949, the Jews of the world made up the Jewish 'nation' -- individuals with a common bond. Palestine at that time was a 'country' in the broadest context of the word. To the victors the spoils of war, as they said. So the victors divided up Palestine and pretty much the rest of the ME, into many 'states'. In effect, the Arab states owe their current status to outsiders. No one complain until these outsiders decided to give the Jewish nation of the world a place they could exercise some ministerial responsibilities. Their land was largely desert with no oil to exploit. But look at the contrast between Israel and any Arab state in the region.

Now take a look at the US invasion of Iraq and post WW II Germany for examples. Prior to WW II, Germany was a political unity. At the end of WW II, what we loosely called 'Germany' was a country, no longer a 'state'. In effect, the Allies executed a political erasure, not only of Nazi Germany, a regime, but of Germany itself, and installed two distinct political entities: East Germany and West Germany. To the victors the spoils of war, remember? But with Iraq, the US did something unexpected to history, Iraq as a political entity remained intact. None dared challenged Iraq's sovereignty or even borders. Only the regime of Saddam Hussein was removed. That is like the Allies remove Nazi-ism from Germany but did not divide the country up into four administrative zones like they did. The US could have effect a political erasure of Iraq if so desired. None could have militarily challenged that action.

The military force that removed the Saddam Hussein regime from Iraq was 'near nuclear', meaning it was so powerful and overwhelming in execution that nuclear weapons were unnecessary. In the case of Israel, the Arab states alliance was unable to deliver the same level of force and execution to do to Israel what the Allies did to Nazi Germany and what the US did to Saddam Hussein Iraq. Over time, the Jewish state became more economically and militarily powerful, as well as politically influential, that the only option for any ME-astern regime to effect a political erasure of Israel is through nuclear means. The nuclear devastation cannot be isolated to Tel Aviv but to ALL major Israeli political, economic and military centers. The attacker cannot afford to spare any time like the Allies did for Nazi Germany or Saddam Hussein Iraq. Jerusalem would be spared due to its religious significance to all three major Abrahamic religions. But Tel Aviv, Haifa or others are just collections of buildings, as far as Iran is concerned.

Fat Man and Little Boy, American nuclear weapons, were used in order to accelerate the end of an on-going war that continued to get bloodier as time goes by. There is no war in the ME to that same scale. What else could it be but religion and to the muslims, an assertive Jew is an offense among muslims. Iranian nuclear weapons are not to deter the US, it is intended for the assertive Jews.

To Muslims, their ultimate aim is to create "A Land of Peace (Dar al Islam), but Israel stands in the way. How do we solve such a problem?

BLOW EVERYTHING UP!!!!

Az, do not be facetious because it might well end up that way.

They shouldn't attack Iran and foment more wars with their Muslim neighbors. This is just a meaningless war that started with Jesuit controlled free masons who are adherents to some evil people in the Catholic temporal organizations. The Jews(the real Hebrews who are brown), not the Talmudic ones, should be given their own land, and the Palestinians can go to their many Muslim countries and settle there. It's so funny, these Jesuits(formed as a Counter-Reformation) want their two enemies destroy each other without lifting a finger of their own and getting the US/England as their military for a 10th crusade against Shiite Muslims, so they can take over the Holy Lands, especially Jerusalem(since it's also a great common trade center). These guys are despicable, along with the Knights of Malta(formed from of the crusades) in their tactics and have controlled other countries' governments through their puppets throughout history so people can accept their government.

I doubt if you can substantiate your accusations? It sounds very one sided.

Which should have nothing to do with Iran...

Don't worry folks. No one is going to attack Iran, and Iran is going to attack no one, nuclear or otherwise. That's just the reality of it.

All these Muslim attacks and anti-west sentiments stem from the U.S. alliance with Israel. In addition, it causes tricky relations with Arab Countries which keeps the fuel cost high and unstable.

Why is the U.S. on the side of Israel? Nothing good has ever come out of this relationship for the U.S.; only crisis after crisis after crisis. How many lives, how much money and U.S. effort has gone into helping Israel already? If we were on the Arab side from the start, none of this animosity would exist.

I'm not anti-Jewish, but from a U.S. centric view, Israel is the worst possible partner the U.S. could ever have. The Israeli Government feels zero obligation to the U.S. yet, we support them year after year no matter what stupid thing they do. Why is there never any public criticism from the American people or Government? Makes you wonder just how much influence the TV media has.