Israel's New Strategic Position

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

You keep talking about suicide as if the West would go in and end Iran. I think that's wishful thinking.

Israel has fusion bombs a 1000 fold more powerful than any fission weapon Iran would be able to field including in missiles in submarines.. Iran would be ended even if a strike on Israel was successful.

Thinking they would not retaliate is wishful thinking.

[mota bhai 2,675]

Israel has fusion bombs a 1000 fold more powerful than any fission weapon Iran would be able to field including in missiles in submarines.. Iran would be ended even if a strike on Israel was successful.

Thinking they would not retaliate is wishful thinking.

Iran is huge. Iran would not end.

[GandD 5,966]

"End any country"? That's naive. The West would do no such thing.

The US just deposed the Iraq government with little international or domestic support and with little or no cause. Removing the Iranian leadership and government post Nuclear attack would be internationally and domestically supported and frankly, fairly easy. Now would the long haul prove successful? Prob as successful as Iraq or Afghanistan. But, they wouldn't have an Army worth a sh!t or nuclear bombs after.

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

Iran is huge. Iran would not end.

Uh-huh.....

It has been reported that Israel has several other nuclear weapons capabilities:

• Suitcase bomb: Seymour Hersh reports that Israel developed the ability to miniaturize warheads small enough to fit in a suitcase by the year 1973.^[161]
• Tactical nuclear weapon: Israel may also have 175 mm and 203 mm self-propelled artillery pieces, capable of firing nuclear shells. There are three battalions of the 175mm artillery (36 tubes), reportedly with 108 nuclear shells and more for the 203mm tubes. If true, these low yield, tactical nuclear artillery rounds could reach at least 25 miles (40 km), while by some sources it is possible that the range was extended to 45 miles (72 km) during the 1990s.^[25]
• EMP strike capabilities: Israel allegedly possesses several 1 megaton bombs,^[162][163] which give it a very large EMP attack abilities.^[164]For example, if a megaton class weapon were to be detonated 400 kilometers above Omaha, NE, USA, nearly the entire continental United States would be affected with potentially damaging EMP experience from Boston to Los Angeles and from Chicago to New Orleans.^[165] A similar high altitude airburst above Iran could cause serious damage to all of the electrical systems in the Middle East, and much of Europe.^[166]
• Enhanced Radiation Weapon (ERW): Israel also is reported to have an unknown number of neutron bombs.^[25]
• Nuclear land mine: Israel supposedly has deployed multiple defensive nuclear land mines in the Golan Heights.^[167][168]

^{This was what was listed under "Other" .. Not even their larger nukes....}

Edited December 3, 2013 by OnMyWayID

[mota bhai 2,675]

The US just deposed the Iraq government with little international or domestic support and with little or no cause. Removing the Iranian leadership and government post Nuclear attack would be internationally and domestically supported and frankly, fairly easy. Now would the long haul prove successful? Prob as successful as Iraq or Afghanistan. But, they wouldn't have an Army worth a sh!t or nuclear bombs after.

Regime change is not an existential threat. It doesn't "end Iran".

Edited December 3, 2013 by mota bhai

[Hotter Otter 1,211]

If you are a small or densely populated country you need a nuclear deterrent based on submarines like the UK's Vanguard class or someone with lots of nuclear weapons (like USSR in Cold War) will just blast your entire nation knowing they will destroy any ability to retaliate. Can't imagine Iran will be producing lots but certainly enough to wipe out most of Israel. I doubt they'd be stupid enough to nuke Jerusalem though, or they'd p**s of Christians and Muslims so bad that they'd make Saddam look popular in comparison.

Edited December 3, 2013 by Hotter Otter

[GandD 5,966]

Regime change is not an existential threat. It doesn't "end Iran".

Sorry, that's what I mean. I'm not one of the brutes suggesting we "turn the whole middle east into glass"

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

What Israel has lost is twofold. First, it has lost control of America's regional strategy. Second, it has lost control of America's political process.

There it is, right out in the open.

[luckytxn 2,265]

That's the war that has been ongoing about a thousand years now right?

There is a cold Sunni-Shia war going on right now in the Muslim world and rapprochement with Iran strikes me as a good way to fan those flames, drive them further apart.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Israel could pretty much end Iran with the nukes they can employ by just hitting the population centers

The problem is if Israel is hit first they will be nuking the capitals of each of their enemies. They will not stop at Iran at that point.

I actually don't have a problem at all with Iran getting nukes. They are a nation and their enemy has nukes. They should be allowed to counter potential threats. If Obama had the balls to pull the U.S. out of the middle east I would vote for him in the next election. One day we may get a man running this country again. It is not our problems there. Let Europe and Russia and China settle this. Bring our troops home.

Iran is huge. Iran would not end.