Iran is threatening Greece, Turkey, and the EU

[Bernadotte 0]

2.  Last week Israel's Defence Minister said that Israel will consider “all options†to prevent Iran from producing nuclear weapons.  Iran responded saying it would "react" militarily if Israel were to launch an airstrike against any of its nuclear facilities.  The question is then, how would Israel react to Iran's reaction?

Who will run out of missiles first?

Definitely Iran.

Israel has patriot batteries plus a home grown anti-missile system. I don't think Iran has any. Also, Israel has hundreds of nukes and reliable delivery systems.

So, the question remains if Israel attacked Iran and Iran fought back with conventional missiles would Israel answer those missiles with nukes?

[theavonlady 2]

stop the nit-picking avon.

If you would read what I've written first you can clearly see that I think the US is the cause of Iran feeling threatened.

Anyway I't time for me to go to bed.

Stop blurring the facts. Start dealing with the issues and not sugar coating them over with nonsense like "Rafsanjani is human and humans would never truly ruly mean what they say when they say such things".

Quote[/b] ]I said Israel did threaten Iran.

Did you say Iran threatened Israel? No? Why not? Doesn't suit your agenda?

Quote[/b] ]I did not say Israel started the conflict with Iran or started threatening. I really don't know who did.

Don't you think it's important? I mean, here's a country with a history of declaring the desire to genocidally eliminate the State of Israel and now they're agressively moving forward to producing nuclear weapons.

Quote[/b] ]Prolly it goes deeper into the conflict between jewish people and muslim people.

It's a one way street. Israel does not desire to eliminate Iran. The reverse, however, cannot be said of Iran.

Quote[/b] ]When I mean something I tell it.

What you meant, in your own words, or specifically why you highlight Israel's responses to Iran's initial threats and not vice versa, remains unclarified.

[vektorboson 8]

So, the question remains if Israel attacked Iran and Iran fought back with conventional missiles would Israel answer those missiles with nukes?

The question is: Would the Israelis know, when Iranian missiles are launched, that they are conventional?

[turms 0]

BBC For 1 example.

BTW, this is a classic example of the BBC's dishonest reporting against Israel. The article's title is "Israel puts Iran in its sights", once again making Israel sound like the instigating aggressor, which has not been the case.

Putting something in your sights doesnt mean that they are attacking, it means that they are ready to attack/threaten to attack, like the article says. You not liking what some politic of yours said doesnt mean that the media that telss what he said is biased. Talking bout biased medias, where are your Jerusalem post stories?

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]"Israel has many, many capabilities," says Danny Yatom, a former head of Mossad, Israel's international intelligence agency.

"And in the past Israel has carried out long-range military operations, like when we bombed the nuclear facility of Iraq [in 1981]. And since then one can imagine that we've improved our capabilities."

BBC For 1 example.

Wow. You're talented.

Tell me, did Mr. Yatom call a press conference just to say this out of the blue or was a question posed to him by a reporter (possibly the BBC's own Jerusalem correspondent, James Reynolds - who wrote this article) about Iran's prior threats to offesively attack Israel?

Try contextualizing your arguments.

I'm too tired. Can anyone find the old old pic of the Iranian missiles on parade in Teheran ages ago, with Israel's name places on the missile's payload? Then you'll get a better idea of what's been going on here years back - not just this past year.

Amazing how all of a sudden, Israel pipes up in response and everyone knows how to twist the facts. Never fails.

I dont know about all that, but you asked somebody to post alink (or give information) about when has Israel threatened Iran. This is the first I found. Are you saying that Israel is not threatening Iran in that article?

No. I specifically asked:

Please give us a precise history of when and why Israel first threatened Iran, since you keep on claiming these facts out of what appears to be thin air.

Who threatened whom?

And this was after Donnervogel blatantly implied that Israel was the instigating agressor.

[Bernadotte 0]

... Iran, a nation that has openly declared its desire to destory Israel numerous times over the last several decades...

Israel has been within range of Iranian ballistic missiles for at least 5 years, no?  Then why hasn't Iran acted according to its desire to destroy Israel?

[theavonlady 2]

2.  Last week Israel's Defence Minister said that Israel will consider “all options†to prevent Iran from producing nuclear weapons.  Iran responded saying it would "react" militarily if Israel were to launch an airstrike against any of its nuclear facilities.  The question is then, how would Israel react to Iran's reaction?

Who will run out of missiles first?

Definitely Iran.

Israel has patriot batteries plus a home grown anti-missile system.  I don't think Iran has any.  Also, Israel has hundreds of nukes and reliable delivery systems.

So, the question remains if Israel attacked Iran and Iran fought back with conventional missiles would Israel answer those missiles with nukes?

I would think the answer would be - it depends.

A 1000 conventianal missiles lobbed against Israel's population centers? Or one or two, with minimal damage - ala Saddam's scuds, circa 1991?

But Vektor's question is a good point, too, though I would think it would take long to find out just what kind of warheads they're carrying.

[Bernadotte 0]

So, the question remains if Israel attacked Iran and Iran fought back with conventional missiles would Israel answer those missiles with nukes?

The question is: Would the Israelis know, when Iranian missiles are launched, that they are conventional?

Yes.  By conventional I mean non-nuclear.

[Bordoy 0]

... Iran, a nation that has openly declared its desire to destory Israel numerous times over the last several decades...

Israel has been within range of Iranian ballistic missiles for at least 5 years, no?  Then why hasn't Iran acted according to its desire to destroy Israel?

Iran may be co-ordinating with the palistinians. its only a may so no evidence availiable.

[theavonlady 2]

... Iran, a nation that has openly declared its desire to destory Israel numerous times over the last several decades...

Israel has been within range of Iranian ballistic missiles for at least 5 years, no?  Then why hasn't Iran acted according to its desire to destroy Israel?

Because of the threat of nuclear retaliation or simply their patience in waiting for "better times".

[BoweryBaker 0]

With Avon Lady being in Israel, If Iran does strike she will be decimated first, before Iran gets decimated, so she figures either way if they have nukes she'll lose.  We as other countries are more relaxed in thinking and are like, "Let Iran strike first" but for people like Avon Lady, that first strike will be the end of it all.  Being able to think the clearest and most calmest since I am most out of harms way, I believe that Iran won't do it out of Israels religious value to the islamic world and that we must have faith in that Iran is only talking big, and truly does have no bad intentions for the land of Israel.  In the bible it says he who controls Israel controls the world.  That's God.  Even God knows the value of Israel.  Iranians, though not christian or jewish do believe in God just the same, and the Palestinians want Israel to live in.  I think everyone needs to cool down, and look at Israels value as a bargaining chip.  That ought to keep things cool on both sides, and under the table you can do anything you want.  Now lets all think here. If I were your president, I'd send over the new laser beam 747 and any necessary defence shields to detect and disable a nuke over to Israel, though with NORAD its already in place, and while thats happening go into diplomatic talks to quell iran. They haven't necessarily declared war, and a nuclear attack would be an act of war. It's funny though, nations like that don't even do like America and give them a warning that they're coming. Those jerks. I'm sure that through talks and communication taps there would be some clear way to tell something is close to happening.

[Bernadotte 0]

... Iran, a nation that has openly declared its desire to destory Israel numerous times over the last several decades...

Israel has been within range of Iranian ballistic missiles for at least 5 years, no?  Then why hasn't Iran acted according to its desire to destroy Israel?

Because of the threat of nuclear retaliation or simply their patience in waiting for "better times".

Better times? Do you mean political improvements?

Certainly the threat of nuclear retaliation is here to stay.

[Bordoy 0]

With Avon Lady being in Israel, If Iran does strike she will be decimated first, before Iran gets decimated, so she figures either way if they have nukes she'll lose.  We as other countries are more relaxed in thinking and are like, "Let Iran strike first" but for people like Avon Lady, that first strike will be the end of it all.  Being able to think the clearest and most calmest since I am most out of harms way, I believe that Iran won't do it out of Israels religious value to the islamic world and that we must have faith in that Iran is only talking big, and truly does have no bad intentions for the land of Israel.  In the bible it says he who controls Israel controls the world.  That's God.  Even God knows the value of Israel.  Iranians, though not christian or jewish do believe in God just the same, and the Palestinians want Israel to live in.  I think everyone needs to cool down, and look at Israels value as a bargaining chip.  That ought to keep things cool on both sides, and under the table you can do anything you want.

People have to see it from the Israeli point of view as well. Say if Europe was in total carnage and no allies, then the french or whoever got some technology to blow my house up I'll would be scared and wanting to strike first before they strike.

[theavonlady 2]

... Iran, a nation that has openly declared its desire to destory Israel numerous times over the last several decades...

Israel has been within range of Iranian ballistic missiles for at least 5 years, no?  Then why hasn't Iran acted according to its desire to destroy Israel?

Iran may be co-ordinating with the palistinians. its only a may so no evidence availiable.

Hizbalah is mainly funded and supported by Iran. Hizaballah, in turn, is a major contributor of training and supllying Palestinian terrorists.

And let's not forget who funded the Karin-A arms ship.

Who are you all fooling?!

[Bernadotte 0]

With Avon Lady being in Israel, If Iran does strike she will be decimated first...

If Jerusalem (where Avon lives) would be "decimated" then so would several hundred thousand Muslims and Islam's 2nd holiest site.

[theavonlady 2]

BBC For 1 example.

BTW, this is a classic example of the BBC's dishonest reporting against Israel. The article's title is "Israel puts Iran in its sights", once again making Israel sound like the instigating aggressor, which has not been the case.

Putting something in your sights doesnt mean that they are attacking, it means that they are ready to attack/threaten to attack, like the article says. You not liking what some politic of yours said doesnt mean that the media that telss what he said is biased. Talking bout biased medias, where are your Jerusalem post stories?

Please show me what biased JPost news items you're referring to. I've pointed out the BBC's based on your supplied link.

If I need to post a link to a JPost article, I'll proudly do so. If you find bias in it, go ahead and point it out.

[BoweryBaker 0]

They would lose a sh*tload of money and economic value to blast Israel. I see it that, they want more to take Israel over than lose all that cash and power.

[Bordoy 0]

I doubt they would blow Jerusalem up due the religous aspect of the site.

[Bordoy 0]

... Iran, a nation that has openly declared its desire to destory Israel numerous times over the last several decades...

Israel has been within range of Iranian ballistic missiles for at least 5 years, no?  Then why hasn't Iran acted according to its desire to destroy Israel?

Iran may be co-ordinating with the palistinians. its only a may so no evidence availiable.

Hizbalah is mainly funded and supported by Iran. Hizaballah, in turn, is a major contributor of training and supllying Palestinian terrorists.

And let's not forget who funded the Karin-A arms ship.

Who are you all fooling?!

Didn't know that but now i do.

In-direct use of force by Iran.

[Bernadotte 0]

Iran may be co-ordinating with the palistinians. its only a may so no evidence availiable.

Not just Iran, but Syria and Lebanon too.

Egypt and Jordan to a lesser extent.

Even Iraq will likely do so again if their elected government will be truly responsive to the Iraqi people.

Oh, and let's not forget Cat Stevens...

[theavonlady 2]

With Avon Lady being in Israel, If Iran does strike she will be decimated first...

If Jerusalem (where Avon lives) would be "decimated" then so would several hundred thousand Muslims and Islam's 2nd holiest site.

1) I've already pointed out Iran's Rafsanjani's own words, stating that it's not the end if the Islamic world if 100,000 or even a million or 2 Muslims die for the cause.

2) Jerusalem is Islam's 3rd holiest site, after Mecca and Medina. And for Shi'ites, Najaf's Shrine of Imam Ali is the 3rd holiest.

[theavonlady 2]

I doubt they would blow Jerusalem up due the religous aspect of the site.

Just so you should maybe get an inkling of the kind of ilk you are dealing with: Contemporary Islamist Ideology Authorizing Genocidal Murder.

Will the penny ever drop?

[Colossus 2]

This has accually nothing to do with Iran or there missiles,

but are Israel really allowed to do this?

[Bernadotte 0]

Jerusalem is Islam's 3rd holiest site, after Mecca and Medina.

Doh!!    /Bernadotte slaps forhead.

Pardon me.

Now, what did you mean before by "better times?"

[theavonlady 2]

Oh, and let's not forget Cat Stevens...

Good idea:

Quote[/b] ]Now I've been happy lately, thinking about the good things to come

And I believe it could be, something good has begun

Oh I've been smiling lately, dreaming about the world as one

And I believe it could be, some day it's going to come

Cause out on the edge of darkness, there rides a peace train

Oh peace train take this country, come take me home again

Now I've been smiling lately, thinking about the good things to come

And I believe it could be, something good has begun

Oh peace train sounding louder

Glide on the peace train

Come on now peace train

Yes, peace train holy roller

Everyone jump upon the peace train

Come on now peace train

Get your bags together, go bring your good friends too

Cause it's getting nearer, it soon will be with you

Now come and join the living, it's not so far from you

And it's getting nearer, soon it will all be true

Now I've been crying lately, thinking about the world as it is

Why must we go on hating, why can't we live in bliss

Cause out on the edge of darkness, there rides a peace train

Oh peace train take this country, come take me home again

Holy roller extraordinairre!