Iran

[ThePest179]

Iran is an anti Israeli totalitarian regime trying to make nuclear weapons. How does the US respond to this? the same way with North Korea? Will there be a nuclear showdown or a repeat of Iraq?

Edited August 24, 2013 by Guest (see edit history)

[BTGBullseye]

Iran having nukes means Israel is going to either be attacked, or Iran is going to have an 'accident' in their nuclear storage facility.

[ThePest179]

Iran having nukes means Israel is going to either be attacked, or Iran is going to have an 'accident' in their nuclear storage facility.

 

Why hasn't this kind of "accident" happened in North Korea? just as unstable, just as willing to hand their nukes over to terrorists. Why is Iran different? Isreal? If Iran was to destroy Isreal, the Isrealies would nuke them back (so says old Cold War doctrine).

[BTGBullseye]

The reason it hasn't happened to NK is because NK isn't within striking distance of Israel, nor would they be attacked directly by NK if they were within range. (and because NK just wants to show that it's a 'powerful nation' by having nukes)

 

The reason Iran would have an 'accident' is because the top spot on their top 10 list of 'countries to nuke' is Israel, and second is the USA. Israel would really only take 1 good hit to completely destroy their military strength, and allow the Muslims to 'reclaim' the territory.

[ThePest179]

The reason it hasn't happened to NK is because NK isn't within striking distance of Israel, nor would they be attacked directly by NK if they were within range. (and because NK just wants to show that it's a 'powerful nation' by having nukes)

 

The reason Iran would have an 'accident' is because the top spot on their top 10 list of 'countries to nuke' is Israel, and second is the USA. Israel would really only take 1 good hit to completely destroy their military strength, and allow the Muslims to 'reclaim' the territory.

 

The Isrealies could nuke back. They could use a large amount of nukes in retaliation if they had to.

[BTGBullseye]

How? If 99% of their military is gone, who would be left to fly the planes with nukes on them past the extremely heavy SAM net that surrounds Israel? (they don't have nuke-proof silos like we do in the US, Russia, China, etc.)

[ThePest179]

How? If 99% of their military is gone, who would be left to fly the planes with nukes on them past the extremely heavy SAM net that surrounds Israel? (they don't have nuke-proof silos like we do in the US, Russia, China, etc.)

 

Nuclear submarines? Missle launches? If Isreal is supposed to cotain the holy land, nuking it would irradiate the area for decades, making it unlivable. The muslims would inherit radioactive ash heaps. If the US is another target, then, again, terrorists could have stolen them from North Korea or Pakistan.

[BTGBullseye]

Israel doesn't have subs or nuke-proof missiles.

 

What makes you think that an extremist willing to suicide just to kill a child from another country has enough sense to not nuke another country because of radiation?

 

The chance that the US will be attacked first is 1:10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 against.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Guest (see edit history)

[ThePest179]

How? If 99% of their military is gone, who would be left to fly the planes with nukes on them past the extremely heavy SAM net that surrounds Israel? (they don't have nuke-proof silos like we do in the US, Russia, China, etc.)

 

Nuclear submarines? Missle launches? If Isreal is supposed to cotain the holy land, nuking it would irradiate the area for decades, making it unlivable. The muslims would inherit radioactive ash heaps. If the US is another target, then, again, terrorists could have stolen them from North Korea or Pakistan.

Israel doesn't have subs or nuke-proof missiles.

 

What makes you think that an extremist willing to suicide just to kill a child from another country has enough sense to not nuke another country because of radiation?

 

The chance that the US will be attacked first is 1:1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 against.

 

Their holy land will be destroyed and unliveable. Why don't you get that?

Edited March 19, 2013 by Guest (see edit history)

[BTGBullseye]

I get it, but that level of extremism doesn't give a shit as long as nobody else is there to defile it.

[ThePest179]

I get it, but that level of extremism doesn't give a shit as long as nobody else is there to defile it.

 

"If I can't have it, noone can." I'm not too sure if they would be willing to go to those heights, especially if this was a direct attack by Iran. I guess we'll just have to find out in the near future. I'm more concerened with US policy with Iran. If the US goes to war, what will happen? This will be no repeat of the invasion of Iraq, not with what the Iranians have in their arsenal, whether it be conventional or unconvetional. If Iran aquires nuclear capability, I would side with those wanting containment, rather than war. Better yet, just keep track of every Iranian nuclear weapon. That way, there is less threat of nuclear terrorism. To protect Isreal, install Cold War modeled bunkers and missle defence programs. Easy solution. But of course our politicans make things complicated.

[BTGBullseye]

About making those bunkers, have you ever seen the pricetag for one? How about the pricetag for digging one out when part of it is on holy ground?

 

Price for just a regular bunker that can take 1 direct hit from a nuke: over $20 million USD

Price for a high-end nuclear fallout shelter for about 5 direct hits: over $1 billion USD

Price for digging out just 1 cubic foot of sacred soil: more money than the universe could possibly contain

 

Not likely to get bunkers beyond the few non-fallout ones they already have, even with the threat of nuclear warfare.

 

 

As for the missile defense programs, the best ever made is in use by the US government, and it has at best a 20% chance of doing sufficient damage to a missile to make it not hit it's intended target. (that doesn't make the slightest difference to a nuke though, just so long as it's within a kilometer of the target)

 

**I'm going to edit my previous post to far fewer 0's so that it doesn't stretch the screen, but you'll need to edit your quotes too.

[ThePest179]

About making those bunkers, have you ever seen the pricetag for one? How about the pricetag for digging one out when part of it is on holy ground?

 

Price for just a regular bunker that can take 1 direct hit from a nuke: over $20 million USD

Price for a high-end nuclear fallout shelter for about 5 direct hits: over $1 billion USD

Price for digging out just 1 cubic foot of sacred soil: more money than the universe could possibly contain

 

Not likely to get bunkers beyond the few non-fallout ones they already have, even with the threat of nuclear warfare.

 

 

As for the missile defense programs, the best ever made is in use by the US government, and it has at best a 20% chance of doing sufficient damage to a missile to make it not hit it's intended target. (that doesn't make the slightest difference to a nuke though, just so long as it's within a kilometer of the target)

 

**I'm going to edit my previous post to far fewer 0's so that it doesn't stretch the screen, but you'll need to edit your quotes too.

 

Just because Isreal needs bunkers doesn't mean that they need to build them right next to Jersalum. The only reason that Isreal doesn't have the kind of US Cold War defence tactics (nuclear missle silos that can launch after the first strike, nuclear submarines, nuclear shelters, etc.) is because Isreal never had to deal with that kind of threat. They better get to building it though, regardless of finacial cost. NATO doesn't look poised to deal with Iran.

[BTGBullseye]

The cost is too high when you can't possibly make them large enough to house enough stuff to do effective retaliations... Right now their only hope is preemptive strikes.

[Vapymid]

**I'm going to edit my previous post to far fewer 0's so that it doesn't stretch the screen...

 

You can always use scientific notation to illustrate your point without breaking the screen

 

that level of extremism doesn't give a shit as long as nobody else is there to defile it.

 

If you dehumanise your opponent in your mind to such an extent you are guaranteed to always make mistakes in dealing with him.

 

You can't gain anything if you start with an assumption that people whom you don't like are non-human aliens from another planet who will act in irrational way. Your seemingly rational action to preempt an imaginary imminent irrational move by your enemy will itself become totally irrational when your opponent will instead behave in a rational way, contrary to your expectations and putting you on back foot.

 

Regards

[ThePest179]

The cost is too high when you can't possibly make them large enough to house enough stuff to do effective retaliations... Right now their only hope is preemptive strikes.

 

Too high? Nothing is too high in cost when it comes to nuclear warfare (says Cold War experience). And to speak of Iran and not Isreal's nuclear capabillity, I'm more concerned Iran will be attacked by the US and start a war that could have and should have not started. I am afraid it will be simillar to Iraq, but it will be as terrible as Vapymid seems to think Iraq is/was. To quote you directly, "They never intended to win, it was pure politics"

[BTGBullseye]

You can't gain anything if you start with an assumption that people whom you don't like are non-human aliens from another planet who will act in irrational way. Your seemingly rational action to preempt an imaginary imminent irrational move by your enemy will itself become totally irrational when your opponent will instead behave in a rational way, contrary to your expectations and putting you on back foot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_attacks

Might want to read that before assuming I'm portraying these people as something they're not. Those are solely Palestinian suicide attacks, and Iran hates Israel more.

 

Too high? Nothing is too high in cost when it comes to nuclear warfare (says Cold War experience).

Ok, so you think that they can afford to pay money they don't have, can't get loans of, and build things that they can't get the materials to build for the aforementioned reasons?

 

And to speak of Iran and not Isreal's nuclear capabillity, I'm more concerned Iran will be attacked by the US and start a war that could have and should have not started. I am afraid it will be simillar to Iraq, but it will be as terrible as Vapymid seems to think Iraq is/was. To quote you directly, "They never intended to win, it was pure politics"

Why would the US attack Iran now? There's no threat to US holdings, (Iraq was attacking Kuwait, an ally of the US, and Kuwait has about 10% of the world's oil [the 4th largest amount in the world]) and until there is, I doubt the US will care. They'll back Israel covertly, but that's probly the extent of it.

[Vapymid]

Might want to read that before assuming I'm portraying these people as something they're not. Those are solely Palestinian suicide attacks, and Iran hates Israel more.

 

But there is a big difference between sending people to blow themselves up to aid your political ends and sacrificing the whole country itself (and your own political ends with it) for some obscure ideological reason.

 

So far, the latter has never been attempted in the world's history (or so I think).

 

I would really like to convince you to start thinking that regimes like Iran, North Korea etc are acting in what they believe is pragmatic way. I grew up behind the "Iron Curtain" and I can tell you that the Western notions about the way how Soviet people lived and thought and what motivated them were very, very far away from reality.

 

Regards

[BTGBullseye]

This isn't anything like the cold war. (and implying it is just shows your ignorance of the thousands of years of racial hatred involved) Look at history... Israel has never been able to have peace with any of the Muslims. Constant non-stop warfare. It's not like the opinions of Iran/etc. have suddenly changed because they're working towards nukes.

[Vapymid]

This isn't anything like the cold war.

 

Why not?

 

(and implying it is just shows your ignorance of the thousands of years of racial hatred involved) Look at history... Israel has never been able to have peace with any of the Muslims. Constant non-stop warfare. It's not like the opinions of Iran/etc. have suddenly changed because they're working towards nukes.

 

I also heard Jewish people were not on good terms with Romans either. And with Egypt... Oh, and with Germans not so long ago too.

 

And Iranians are not the only Muslims around. Pakistan is also a Muslim country and they have nukes. They also have missiles to deliver them too. So, if existence of Israel depends on Muslims not having nukes, the horse has already bolted. Mind you, there are Muslims in the US too. Oh, dear!

 

Regards