- This topic has 125 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 4 months ago by
faterikcartman.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 19, 2010 at 4:29 PM #594674August 19, 2010 at 5:49 PM #593665
briansd1
Guest[quote=CDMA ENG]
Yeah? Remember this blast from the past? They attacked what was then, an ally.
[/quote]1981 was a different time.
Iran now has modern weapons.
If US intelligence truly believes that Israel will attack Iran in the next 12 months (still a long time hence), Americans can take action to prevent it (by cutting off aid and the like).
So, any attack on Iran by Israel will have tacit consent from Washington. To believe that Israel can act independently from Washington is naive, especially with such advance warning.
August 19, 2010 at 5:49 PM #593762Guest[quote=CDMA ENG]
Yeah? Remember this blast from the past? They attacked what was then, an ally.
[/quote]1981 was a different time.
Iran now has modern weapons.
If US intelligence truly believes that Israel will attack Iran in the next 12 months (still a long time hence), Americans can take action to prevent it (by cutting off aid and the like).
So, any attack on Iran by Israel will have tacit consent from Washington. To believe that Israel can act independently from Washington is naive, especially with such advance warning.
August 19, 2010 at 5:49 PM #594297Guest[quote=CDMA ENG]
Yeah? Remember this blast from the past? They attacked what was then, an ally.
[/quote]1981 was a different time.
Iran now has modern weapons.
If US intelligence truly believes that Israel will attack Iran in the next 12 months (still a long time hence), Americans can take action to prevent it (by cutting off aid and the like).
So, any attack on Iran by Israel will have tacit consent from Washington. To believe that Israel can act independently from Washington is naive, especially with such advance warning.
August 19, 2010 at 5:49 PM #594409Guest[quote=CDMA ENG]
Yeah? Remember this blast from the past? They attacked what was then, an ally.
[/quote]1981 was a different time.
Iran now has modern weapons.
If US intelligence truly believes that Israel will attack Iran in the next 12 months (still a long time hence), Americans can take action to prevent it (by cutting off aid and the like).
So, any attack on Iran by Israel will have tacit consent from Washington. To believe that Israel can act independently from Washington is naive, especially with such advance warning.
August 19, 2010 at 5:49 PM #594719Guest[quote=CDMA ENG]
Yeah? Remember this blast from the past? They attacked what was then, an ally.
[/quote]1981 was a different time.
Iran now has modern weapons.
If US intelligence truly believes that Israel will attack Iran in the next 12 months (still a long time hence), Americans can take action to prevent it (by cutting off aid and the like).
So, any attack on Iran by Israel will have tacit consent from Washington. To believe that Israel can act independently from Washington is naive, especially with such advance warning.
August 19, 2010 at 11:09 PM #593745Aecetia
Participant“It is the destiny of the world to be at war – economically, politically and ideologically – for at least the next 100 years, and it is a war the West must win.”
August 19, 2010 at 11:09 PM #593840Participant“It is the destiny of the world to be at war – economically, politically and ideologically – for at least the next 100 years, and it is a war the West must win.”
August 19, 2010 at 11:09 PM #594377Participant“It is the destiny of the world to be at war – economically, politically and ideologically – for at least the next 100 years, and it is a war the West must win.”
August 19, 2010 at 11:09 PM #594488Participant“It is the destiny of the world to be at war – economically, politically and ideologically – for at least the next 100 years, and it is a war the West must win.”
August 19, 2010 at 11:09 PM #594799Participant“It is the destiny of the world to be at war – economically, politically and ideologically – for at least the next 100 years, and it is a war the West must win.”
August 19, 2010 at 11:29 PM #593760CDMA ENG
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=CDMA ENG]
Yeah? Remember this blast from the past? They attacked what was then, an ally.
[/quote]1981 was a different time.
Iran now has modern weapons.
If US intelligence truly believes that Israel will attack Iran in the next 12 months (still a long time hence), Americans can take action to prevent it (by cutting off aid and the like).
So, any attack on Iran by Israel will have tacit consent from Washington. To believe that Israel can act independently from Washington is naive, especially with such advance warning.[/quote]
They didn’t have modern weapons in 81′?!? Research before you speak. Google aint that hard. So these non-modern weapons of 81′ would include American F4 Phantoms, F-5 Tigers, and F-14 Tom Cats. While slighty behind the US and Israel in technology these platforms were enough of threat that the IAF put a whole squardon worth of aircraft in the air to strike the reactor (this is a very large package for a strike). Eight Eagles flying BAR CAP and 8 Falcon strike packages mean that the IAF was not taking chances.
Remember the Iranians had plenty of experience as well in a fight. The had good equipment… they had too.. Iraq had been a threat for a long time and now they were fighting a war.
I would say it is easier to attack them now than it was in 81′. The techology gap is far great now.
Plus if you read the article you know that it is more likely for them to strike the reactor before the fuel is in place thus reducing chances of a meltdown or other catestrophic event.
Israel will do what it wants to. In Lebanon, Jordan, Egpyt, or anywhere else it please despite condemnation of the UN or the US.
Look at the case history.
CE
August 19, 2010 at 11:29 PM #593855Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=CDMA ENG]
Yeah? Remember this blast from the past? They attacked what was then, an ally.
[/quote]1981 was a different time.
Iran now has modern weapons.
If US intelligence truly believes that Israel will attack Iran in the next 12 months (still a long time hence), Americans can take action to prevent it (by cutting off aid and the like).
So, any attack on Iran by Israel will have tacit consent from Washington. To believe that Israel can act independently from Washington is naive, especially with such advance warning.[/quote]
They didn’t have modern weapons in 81′?!? Research before you speak. Google aint that hard. So these non-modern weapons of 81′ would include American F4 Phantoms, F-5 Tigers, and F-14 Tom Cats. While slighty behind the US and Israel in technology these platforms were enough of threat that the IAF put a whole squardon worth of aircraft in the air to strike the reactor (this is a very large package for a strike). Eight Eagles flying BAR CAP and 8 Falcon strike packages mean that the IAF was not taking chances.
Remember the Iranians had plenty of experience as well in a fight. The had good equipment… they had too.. Iraq had been a threat for a long time and now they were fighting a war.
I would say it is easier to attack them now than it was in 81′. The techology gap is far great now.
Plus if you read the article you know that it is more likely for them to strike the reactor before the fuel is in place thus reducing chances of a meltdown or other catestrophic event.
Israel will do what it wants to. In Lebanon, Jordan, Egpyt, or anywhere else it please despite condemnation of the UN or the US.
Look at the case history.
CE
August 19, 2010 at 11:29 PM #594392Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=CDMA ENG]
Yeah? Remember this blast from the past? They attacked what was then, an ally.
[/quote]1981 was a different time.
Iran now has modern weapons.
If US intelligence truly believes that Israel will attack Iran in the next 12 months (still a long time hence), Americans can take action to prevent it (by cutting off aid and the like).
So, any attack on Iran by Israel will have tacit consent from Washington. To believe that Israel can act independently from Washington is naive, especially with such advance warning.[/quote]
They didn’t have modern weapons in 81′?!? Research before you speak. Google aint that hard. So these non-modern weapons of 81′ would include American F4 Phantoms, F-5 Tigers, and F-14 Tom Cats. While slighty behind the US and Israel in technology these platforms were enough of threat that the IAF put a whole squardon worth of aircraft in the air to strike the reactor (this is a very large package for a strike). Eight Eagles flying BAR CAP and 8 Falcon strike packages mean that the IAF was not taking chances.
Remember the Iranians had plenty of experience as well in a fight. The had good equipment… they had too.. Iraq had been a threat for a long time and now they were fighting a war.
I would say it is easier to attack them now than it was in 81′. The techology gap is far great now.
Plus if you read the article you know that it is more likely for them to strike the reactor before the fuel is in place thus reducing chances of a meltdown or other catestrophic event.
Israel will do what it wants to. In Lebanon, Jordan, Egpyt, or anywhere else it please despite condemnation of the UN or the US.
Look at the case history.
CE
August 19, 2010 at 11:29 PM #594503Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=CDMA ENG]
Yeah? Remember this blast from the past? They attacked what was then, an ally.
[/quote]1981 was a different time.
Iran now has modern weapons.
If US intelligence truly believes that Israel will attack Iran in the next 12 months (still a long time hence), Americans can take action to prevent it (by cutting off aid and the like).
So, any attack on Iran by Israel will have tacit consent from Washington. To believe that Israel can act independently from Washington is naive, especially with such advance warning.[/quote]
They didn’t have modern weapons in 81′?!? Research before you speak. Google aint that hard. So these non-modern weapons of 81′ would include American F4 Phantoms, F-5 Tigers, and F-14 Tom Cats. While slighty behind the US and Israel in technology these platforms were enough of threat that the IAF put a whole squardon worth of aircraft in the air to strike the reactor (this is a very large package for a strike). Eight Eagles flying BAR CAP and 8 Falcon strike packages mean that the IAF was not taking chances.
Remember the Iranians had plenty of experience as well in a fight. The had good equipment… they had too.. Iraq had been a threat for a long time and now they were fighting a war.
I would say it is easier to attack them now than it was in 81′. The techology gap is far great now.
Plus if you read the article you know that it is more likely for them to strike the reactor before the fuel is in place thus reducing chances of a meltdown or other catestrophic event.
Israel will do what it wants to. In Lebanon, Jordan, Egpyt, or anywhere else it please despite condemnation of the UN or the US.
Look at the case history.
CE
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.