Israel threaten pre-emptive strike on Iran

An attack on Israel is very very unlikely. The Israelis know this. However the worry of a nuclear Iran is not that it would attack Israel but the other consequences and destabilisation that would come with a nuclear armed Iran.

As for attacking nations does that really matter when they have constantly been supporting terrorist groups throughout the middle east as well as supporting dictatorship in Syria?

Did he say that wasn't terrorism?

So because America supports all those dictatorships lets let Iran support terrorist groups that like to put bombs in school buses. The truth is the US does all of that to maintain its hegemony which is disgusting frankly because of the sheer hypocrisy. But what you have to realise is that Iran has had no role at all in the Israel-Arab conflict until the mullahs decided to poke their noses in on purely ideological grounds which, quite frankly has been a burden on the Iranian people themselves and the threats made make them susceptible to invasion when they're gonna be the ones getting bombed if Israel decides to invade. Aj isn't justifying America's actions, you're justifying Iran's actions because of America's actions.

I think you overlook the fact that the Iranian regime shoots people when they come out to protest and is helping Syria to do just that; BUT WAIT! That doesn't matter as long as they hate Israel and America.

Is Iran not part of "Arabia"?

Erm NO!

My bad.

He implied that Iran is the terrorist whilst America/Israel are the good guys. Further to his examples, I merely added some more relevant ones that puts things into perspective.

Is Iran not part of "Arabia"? Does it not feel threatened by all those American bases on it's borders as well as it's Sunni neighbors who would love to exterminate the shia's. Look at the picture below and tell me which country is the one under threat.

At least the Iranians OWN up to it although that makes not one jot of a difference.

The Americans are still supplying the Saudi's and Bahrani's with tanks, planes and weapons to crush the "rebel protesters" whilst on the diplomatic front are advocating military force in Syria and Iran. That is the REAL HYPOCRITICAL objective here.

Your map doesn't say that much to be honest.

Iran has gained immensely beyond their wildest dreams from the removal of their old enemy Saddam and the installation of a Shia government that is very much influenced by Iran in Iraq. In Afghanistan, Iranian special forces fought alongside the Americans to capture Herat in the early stages of the war and the Taliban were long a foe of the Iranian regime, they were close to invading all the way through the 1990s. Of all the countries in the region, Iran has gained the most by American interventions. It is the Saudis who lost out because they lost their buffer with Iran in Iraq.

It shows the American bases primed to attack Iran. Regardless of collaboration between Iranian and Americans, the situation has now changed, for the worse.

Well in my opinion they're both the terrorists in more ways than one. Regardless you can't defend Iran for the fact that it hasn't invaded another country in a couple centuries seeing as using proxies is technically the same.

I don't understand what you mean, Iran is not part of Arabia, Arabia is just the Arabian peninsula, I'm confused I have no idea what you're on about and Iran is no more an Arab country than the UK is one. Iran wouldn't be under threat if it didn't have such a hostile approach towards Israel and the US. It's feeding them and giving them more reasons to beat the war-drums and making itself more prone to invasion. The US bases around Iran would pose no threat to it if it's fanatical leaders didn't keep baiting Israel.

...and the Iranian regime are supplying Hamas, Hezbollah to do their dirty work for them and keep poking Israel. Funding Assad to shoot his own people so it can have a like-minded dictatorial neighbour so they can happily defeat the Great Satan that is America with complete indifference to the position of its own people. I'm sure I don't need to tell you that two wrongs don't make a right.

You do realise that these mullahs want to be bombed. They will use it as an excuse to abuse the Iranian people even more.

An attack on Israel is very very unlikely. The Israelis know this. However the worry of a nuclear Iran is not that it would attack Israel but the other consequences and destabilisation that would come with a nuclear armed Iran.

As for attacking nations does that really matter when they have constantly been supporting terrorist groups throughout the middle east as well as supporting dictatorship in Syria?

Wouldn't a pre-emptitve strike that be illegal under international law or something?

Oh wait! I forget. Israel has never been good in following laws. Such a shame that they then turn around and claim another country (Iran) should not do what is essentially allowed of them under the law. i.e - possess nuclear technology.

I'm not saying that Iran is the "good angel" in all this but just suggesting that people should put things into perspective. Like:

(1) No evidence has been found of Nuclear weapons.

(2) Iran has complied LEGALLY with every IAEA request.

(3) Whilst all the fuss has been made that Iran supports "terrorist" groups, no one has made a pipsqueak that America continues to support the Bahrani and Saudi regime who are crushing down on their own protesters with weapons supplied by America itself.

Maybe if the US stopped backing and cosying up to the Saudi's, maybe we'll get a more positive reaction from Russia and China who have been vetoing military action.

Or and let's again puts things into perspective:

Rockets vs Tanks - Which one is worse?
Planes vs Mortars - Which one is worse?

And you seem to be under the misapprehension that Hizbullah instigates wars when they are the self-defending party which couldn't be said the same for the Saudi's.

basically same as what i think. I dont condone the political situation in Iran nor their stance on nuclear weapons but it is legal for them to have nuclear power. They have said they dont want a bomb.

obama's only saying that to keep the jewish voters. i highly doubt that it is going to happen.

First of all to put it into context Israel didn't threaten Iran.

It's been the warmongering on the mullahs' part after they decided they wanted Israel destroyed for some obscure reason because their ideology advocated it.

Iran is not an Arab country, the Israel-Arab conflict has absolutely nothing to do with Iran.

The mullahs have no right funding proxies there because they are getting involved in something that has nothing to do with them.

A very optimistic view. China and Russia don't want the US to throw its weight around so they're using their veto as a feeble show of strength. By vetoing the criticism of Assad's actions they want to show that they will not just follow America's lead on this one.

Hezbollah was created by Iran

As I said before the mullahs have no right to poke their nose into the Arab-Israel conflict so whether Hezbollah attacked first or otherwise, it doesn't justify their actions.

It's so they can throw their weight around without fear of reprisal from America or Israel, not for use.

If you think there'd be no chance of reprisal, you're living in cloud cuckoo land.

While neither is really that much of a threat to the other, there's more grounds for saying Israel is a threat to Iran than vice versa.

That 'obscure reason' is most likely to distract the Iranian populations from their low living standards and authoritarian regime, by blaming it on Israel. It's nothing new in history. It's all talk.



First part true, second part I'd dispute. They're not directly involved, but it's had a lot of knock on effects on Iran.

Whereas when the West do it, it's all OK?

I'd advise you to take a look at the number of US vetoes compared to Russian and Chinese ones in recent decades (the USSR vetoed a lot in the first few years of the UN, but that really skews Russia's stats).

No, Hezbollah was created due to the radicalisation of communalist groups such as Amal thanks to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

So when Israel supports its favoured factions in Lebanon, that's OK, but when Iran does it it's bad? And that's without even starting on the US.....

For example? The Shah seemed pretty content with staying out of it.

basically same as what i think. I dont condone the political situation in Iran nor their stance on nuclear weapons but it is legal for them to have nuclear power. They have said they dont want a bomb.