Israel Could Strike Iran In Spring

Yet you just wash your magic wand over the assassination of scientists in a nation that has not only done nothing to your country but has been subjected to the will of the rest of the world because they don't want their own assets (read: oil) value/worth dictated by the west.

I never meant to convey complete innocence but he stating something as fact. I have a feeling that this "fact" is based more on opinion or belief than it is hard numbers. Then I wonder to myself if everyone thinks that the U.S. is the only one doing any of this. Do people think that?

Sua Sponte.

No need to topic ban, I'm out.

no I was stating that a government worker who makes things that kill people isn't an innocent civilian, nothing more, nothing less, they knew the risks.

Reading comprehension, it does wonders.

I wish I had a magic wand... anyways... I didn't even condone the action... You never showed any proof that it was America that did it or even had a hand in it. Assuming... now you know what that does. Is it possible we were involved? Anythings possible. I thought it was innocent until proven guilty? You have no evidence but only conjecture and accustations.

This is not about the price of oil.

Um...wrong.

And this whole issue started in 2000 when Ali Khamenei told the world that Israel is a "cancerous tumor" ... [that] "must be uprooted from the region."

Considering that the Supreme Ruler of Iran holds more power than Ahmadinejad, this alone is a threat for war.

Ahmadinejad didn't exactly say Israel should be wiped of the map. His exact quote was that it should "vanish from the arena of time." Which is actually an INCORRECT quote from, once again, Ali Khamenei. The wrote should have read something like "book of time," I don't remember exactly.

But either way, despite "wiped of the map" being a media exaggeration, I see three direct threats, from the two most powerful ruling forces in Iran aimed at Israel. And considering the recent, increasing tension in the area, the promised attack seems closer now than ever.

Oh...and good morning everyone :)

that accusation is pretty funny considering OPEC controls the world's oil prices based on speculation, and these countries are profiting greatly from it.

If I had it my way we'd bring back imperialism and just take over and take the oil, no ***.

oh...

So wait, a country tries to make nuclear energy so they don't have to rely on oil and the scientists are bad because corrupt people could use that knowledge to kill people?

Not the guys that will kill people, but the guys trying to provide stable energy are the bad guys?

I did not say that...

Rear states that you're ignoring the assassination of scientists.

You say that the scientists aren't innocent civilians because they were working on nuclear energy, which can be used to engineer weapons that kill people, ergo they knew the risks and it's okay they died.

It sounds an awful lot like you're saying "They were making a technology that could be altered to make a weapon, so they were not and were working on something just to kill people, and therefore it's okay they died."

I firmly agree about what George Washington said in his Farewell Address. He warned about a lot of things but he also said that America should stay out of European (which was the world back then) affairs. We didn't get concerned with other countries affairs until WWI and look where it has led us.

Again, I will say that Iran should not be allowed to get weapons, but the US doesn't really have to put their hand in everything that goes on in the world.

PS: Good Morning!

again, I did NOT say that...

did not say that at all

edit: and even your first sentence is off, go backread sir.

From a governmental / military point of view, its not about who is the good or bad guy, but about crippling your enemies ability to reach a goal.

Having a few scientists who's knowledge is key to achieving their goal is a very good weak point to exploit. A small car bomb is also much cheaper than using lots of large explosives to blow up any number of facilities.

The morality of it is irrelevant to the Gov.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/03/world/meast/iran-warning/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Khamenei is another psychopath. Calling Israel a cancer is wrong and shouldn't ever be said. He is another very dangerous person who has to go.

So you support George Washington's address of non-intervention and then go on to support intervention in Iran?

You think we should have stayed out of WWII?

If America had stayed out of WWII, Germany would have eventually overrun Britain and with no threat from the West would have turned on Russia and no doubt beaten them as well thus conquering Europe, with that power behind them and their Japanese allies, America would have been next to fall.

Ooh that was fun to write.

I don't think the general public realizes how close that really was

I suppose my post was taken a little out of context and I will elaborate on it:

The US NEEDS to intervene when it has to. Even in the days of the founding fathers, we did what we had to do. Should we have intervened in WWII? Absolutely. I have a degree in World History emphasizing Nazi Germany so I do know how close it was and I do know how important the entrance of the US was to the cause.

The point I was trying to make is that the US has seen fit to stick their nose in everything that goes on in the world. Whether its bad or whether its good, its a simple fact that GW was trying to avoid and in some scenarios, I agree with it.

Do I agree with it for Iran and Israel? It is a loaded question. Does Iran need to be calmed the *** down and their psycho leaders to be forcefully evicted? Of course they do. But does Israel need to quit being the aggressor in every conflict they have been in? They need to stop the rhetoric as well.

He specifically stated that a government employed scientist working to creat nuclear weapons. Not nuclear energy.

Hrrrmmm...Germany was losing resources by the time the US stepped in, if I remember correctly. I doubt Japan could have maintained it's control over continental Asia too. Not enough resources. It would have all ended one way or another.

If America completely 100% stayed out that would also mean not sending resources to the allies, the Battle of Britain would have happened far sooner than 1942 and Britain would have probably fallen.

I Often wonder what the world would look like if the U.S. Had sided with Nazi germany.

And Israel isnt making such statements?


"General Moshe Dayan: 'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under."

The real questions really should lie with what Germany, France and Japan would do were Israel and America went to war with Russia and China.

Germany and France have tended not to side with the states and they are both still powerhouses when put next to Russia and China. Russia knows that they could not withstand both of those countries and China would be looking over their shoulder at their old enemy Japan.

The states have what could be argued as the best airforce and navy but, and i may be taking some liberty here but much of Europe views their ground forces with some contempt. Germany and France both have well trained and equiped land forces and the back up support in place to deliver them easily into Russia and China.

Americas involvment is a non issue really, the old European powers still hold all the cards in Europe.

On the western front I believe they were doing just fine. The eastern front was a different story. Japan was stomping around China without much hinderance.

just weapons really

Only because Germany foolishly tried to fight a war on two fronts.

If I remember correctly we would have had to invade Japan, hence why we dropped the bomb, they were settled in for the long haul.