The Student Room Group

Israel and Iran will go to war

Poll

Who will win this epic battle?

Israel Nuclear programme 'real danger' according to Jordan.

SHUNEH, Jordan: Israel's alleged atomic arsenal poses "the real danger" in the Middle East and not Iran's nuclear programme, Arab League chief Amr Musa said on Sunday.

"The real danger as far as nuclear military programmes are concerned is posed by Israel and not Iran," Musa said during a panel discussion on the future of Middle East peacemaking at the World Economic Forum in Jordan.

"We don't see Iran as the main issue. The vast majority of Arabs does not see Iran as the main issue. Why should we engage with Iran and with Israel?"

"However, we don't need another nuclear programme in the Middle East," the Arab League chief said.

Jordanian Prime Minister Nader Dahabi, his Palestinian counterpart Salam Fayyad, Iraqi Vice President Adel Abdel Mahdi and Russian special envoy to the Middle East Alexander Sultanov took part in the discussion on the shores of the Dead Sea.

Israel itself is widely considered to be the Middle East's sole nuclear armed power but it has never confirmed or denied having an atomic arsenal and refuses to submit to international inspections.

Iran says its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes and that it has the right to technology already in the hands of many other nations.


Israel primed for strikes on Iran nuclear sites

LONDON: Israel's military is preparing so it could launch major aerial attacks on Iranian nuclear sites if ordered to by the new government, a British newspaper said Saturday, quoting Israeli defence and intelligence sources.

"Israel wants to know that if its forces were given the green light, they could strike at Iran in a matter of days, even hours," an unnamed senior defence official told The Times.

"They are making preparations on every level for this eventuality. The message to Iran is that the threat is not just words."

Among preparatory steps being taken are the acquisition of three Airborne Warning and Control (AWAC) aircraft and regional missions to simulate the attack, the paper said.

Israel, widely considered to be the Middle East's sole nuclear armed power, suspects the Islamic Republic of using the programme to develop atomic weapons, a charge that Tehran has repeatedly denied.

The Jewish state considers Tehran to be its arch-enemy because of repeated calls by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for Israel to be wiped off the map.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who took power on April 1 at the helm of a right-wing government, has repeatedly made clear that his priority is confronting Iran.

In his inaugural address, Netanyahu said the biggest threat Israel faced was the possibility of "a radical regime armed with nuclear weapons" -- an apparent reference to Iran.

Israeli officials quoted by The Times said more than a dozen targets could be envisaged, including Tehran's main nuclear sites at Natanz, Isfahan and Arak.

"We would not make the threat without the force to back it," an official from Israel's intelligence community said.

"There has been a recent move, a number of on-the-ground preparations, that indicate Israel's willingness to act," the official said.

He added it was unlikely Israel would strike without at least tacit approval from the US.

US President Barack Obama has taken a more conciliatory tone to Iran than predecessor George W. Bush, calling on the Islamic republic to "unclench" its fist soon after taking office in January.

The New York Times reported Tuesday that the Obama administration could drop a long-held US insistence that Tehran suspend uranium enrichment in the early stages of any negotiations on the issue.

One analyst, Ephraim Kam of the Institute for National Security Studies in Israel, told The Times he thought it unlikely the US would approve an attack.


Iran test long range missile



Israel says Iran nuclear plant immune to conventional strike

Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak said on Monday that Iran's recently diclosed second uranium enrichment plant is "immune" to conventional bombing.

"The new site near Qom is meant for enrichment. What was revealed by the Iranians had been built over years and is located in bunkers that cannot be destroyed through a conventional attack," Barak told parliament's foreign affairs and defence committee.

Iran notified the UN nuclear watchdog in September that it was building a second enrichment plant near the central shrine city of Qom, after Washington accused it of covertly evading its notification responsibilities under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Confirmation of the construction work drew criticism not only from Western governments but also from the United Nations.

Enriched uranium can make the fuel for nuclear power plants but in highly extended form can also produce the fissile core of an atomic bomb.

Along with Western governments, Israel suspects Iran of seeking to develop a weapons capability under the guise of a civil nuclear programme, an accusation Tehran denies.

Along with its US ally, Israel, the region's sole if undeclared nuclear power, has refused to rule out a resort to military action to prevent Iran developing a bomb.

Barak said he feared Iran could develop a weapon by 2011.

"I believe that by early 2010 Iran will hold threshold technology (for building a bomb). That means that if it wanted, it could develop nuclear weapons within a year from obtaining threshold technology," a senior official quoted him as telling the parliamentary committee.



Israel



Iran



I sense a war coming between the two. But who will win this epic battle?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
most countries realise israel probably wont use the weapons and are much more afraid of the iranians getting their hands on nuclear weapons. if there ever was a war between the two i think and hope it would be israel who would be the winner.
Israel would demolish Iran.
Reply 3
Israel, I believe that many western countries will ultimately support them if a war breaks out in the region.
Reply 4
If Iran has nuclear weapons, I'll say Iran as both sides might exchange fire. More surface area, so more likely to survive the blasts. In a conventional war, I'd probably say... SAY.. >SAY.. sd ..yas ayas ..sd... argue that Israel would win.
I think that this would be a very interesting war. And it would certainly be more interesting than the boring and uneven wars of Britain v Argentina and USA v Iraq. It's been quite a long time since we've had one of these.
Reply 6
RamocitoMorales
boring and uneven wars of Britain v Argentina

are you talking about the falklands?
Hmm, I wonder if Al Qaeda will throw their support behind the Iranians. That would spice things up a bit.
Reply 8
The difference' in military capacity is vast. Israel receives vast military aid from the US and their fighting forces are extremely modern. The US would also immediately come to the support of the Israelis. By now it"s almost a reflex action. Iran could in no way score a true military victory over the Israelis.
tom//
are you talking about the falklands?


Yes it was quite a rubbish war if I'm honest. The shepherds of Argentina never really stood much of a chance against the British SAS. Plus the Argentinian warships could only shoot a maximum distance of 9 miles, whereas the British ones could shoot 17 miles. Too much unevenness to make an interesting war.

No disrespect meant to those who lost their lives.

StraightDrive
Hmm, I wonder if Al Qaeda will throw their support behind the Iranians. That would spice things up a bit.


Certainly. I'd expect support from Hezbollah and Hamas.

Reply 10
StraightDrive
Hmm, I wonder if Al Qaeda will throw their support behind the Iranians. That would spice things up a bit.


:confused: please explain in what world this would happen. Iran are Shia and Al Qaeda are Sunni. Don"t be so silly. Hezbollah are (possibly) fighting the sunnis in Yemen now, and Al Qaeda have a presence' there too. Quite an odd post you made.
Reply 11
If the UAE can wipe Iran's airforce, then I think Israel would win very quickly.
bj_945
:confused: please explain in what world this would happen. Iran are Shia and Al Qaeda are Sunni. Don"t be so silly.

I'm guessing they hate Jews more. And America.
Reply 13
RamocitoMorales
Yes it was quite a rubbish war if I'm honest. The shepherds of Argentina never really stood much of a chance against the British SAS. Plus the Argentinian warships could only shoot a maximum distance of 9 miles, whereas the British ones could shoot 17 miles. Too much unevenness to make an interesting war.

No disrespect meant to those who lost their lives.

lmao

well no it wasnt boring, the war was fought thousands of miles away from britain, who had to mount an invasion of these islands in autum, on limited supplies and against an enemy that was only a few hundred miles from their mainland. the weight was not in favour of the uk and even the us said it would be impossible for the uk to invade successfully. the uk had some 30 jets against 200+ argentinians, they had exocet missiles which posed a massive danger to uk warships. whilst the argentineans were mainly conscripts it doesnt make the job of the uk much easier. you dont appreciate the difficulty in mounting an invasion of a territory thousands of miles from your main base.
Reply 14
Iran should fire 100 missiles into Israel's defence to prevent them from killing Palestinians.
Israel(even without support from the West).
tom//
well no it wasnt boring, the war was fought thousands of miles away from britain, who had to mount an invasion of these islands in autum, on limited supplies and against an enemy that was only a few hundred miles from their mainland. the weight was not in favour of the uk and even the us said it would be impossible for the uk to invade successfully. the uk had some 30 jets against 200+ argentinians, they had exocet missiles which posed a massive danger to uk warships. whilst the argentineans were mainly conscripts it doesnt make the job of the uk much easier. you dont appreciate the difficulty in mounting an invasion of a territory thousands of miles from your main base.


Well I wasn't alive during the war, so I didn't really experience it on the news. But the Iraq and Afghanistan war were big disappointments. Same with the Gaza War, although I did find it slightly more interesting than the other two.
Reply 17
StraightDrive
I'm guessing they hate Jews more. And America.


I"m guessing not in a million years will that happen, and right now Hezbollah are possibly (not 100% concrete evidence supporting) fighting in Yemen. They"re fighting the Sunnis, it could be seen as a small scale proxy war between Saudi and Iran, and Al Queda are there as Sunnis.
Israel would win, due to American backing. But I'd rather Iran won
Reply 19
personally i think the leaders should talk it out over a bubblegum shisha.

i would also like to add that it is common for westerners to underestimate the military might of iran, a country far bigger and more powerful than iraq. if the usa cant win a war against iraq, how are the israelis going to win a war against what will inevitbley turn out to be the entire middle east?

Latest

Trending

Trending