Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by R£SP£CT)
    Israel possesses, perhaps, more than 200 nuclear warheads. They even refuse to sign the treaties that prevent nuclear weapons being used. They have threatened Iran's facilities countless times. I think the real threat is Israel.
    You had to say 'perhaps' because that number was completely arbitrary - just some more Bullsh*t made up by you guys.

    The key point in your second statement is 'Iran's facilities,' what facilities? That is right, it is Iran's nuclear facilities. Has Israel threatened to Nuke those facilities?? No, why has Israel threatened those facilities? Because time after time Iran's president has made speeches that prove Iran to be an existential threat to Israel's very existence.

    You think incorrectly about the 'real threat.'

    P.S If you are going to neg rep me at least put your F*CKING name on it.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)
    You had to say 'perhaps' because that number was completely arbitrary - just some more Bullsh*t made up by you guys.
    I dont know the exact number, but given that their military capabilities are one of the most advanced on the planet, I would say in that region of 100-200 Nuclear warheads.

    The key point in your second statement is 'Iran's facilities,' what facilities? That is right, it is Iran's nuclear facilities. Has Israel threatened to Nuke those facilities?? No
    ,

    Did I say Israel was to nuke the facilities?. Endeavour to read my posts properly, before making any criticisms. :rolleyes:


    why has Israel threatened those facilities? Because time after time Iran's president has made speeches that prove Iran to be an existential threat to Israel's very existence.
    They're empty threats. What can Iran do with a couple of rockets?. It would take several years for Iran to develop a nuclear warhead. And if you open your eyes widely and step out of the zionist circle of arrogance, you'l realise that Israel's military strength is stratospherically higher than Irans. And as a bonus of having the most powerful nation by your side, Israel clearly outclasses Iran. Iran isnt backed by anyone. Iran isn't daft enough to fire one warhead at Israel and then expect around 100 times that number fired back at them. Rather idiotic wouldn't you agree?.

    You think incorrectly about the 'real threat.'
    You're certainly naive, but its not surprising.

    P.S If you are going to neg rep me at least put your F*CKING name on it.
    Even though your post was illogical and poorly structured Im not going to neg rep you. In fact I couldnt care less what rep you had. I'm not really bothered about rep. If your going to quote me in the future, please use manners and have atleast an ounce of deceny in them.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    After Obama's visit to Moscow, I can't really foresee, Russia stepping in, to rescue Iran if they actually "strike" Israel(let's imagine it happens), because 1) there's absolutely no way they could fund their campaign and 2) they wouldn't be daft enough to intervene.

    So theoretically Iran would be alone, unless other Arab states helped Iran and invaded Israel(which is debatable as they all hate Israel, however they hate Iran because of their religion). By that time, the US, the UK+Australia+Canada and India would immediately come to Israel's aid(economically and militarily speaking).

    The US would help for obvious reasons which I won't bother mentioning.
    The UK+Aus+Canada because they have that unbreakable relationship with the US.
    and India because Israel have armed most of their army along with Russia. They also enjoy strong economic ties.

    I honestly don't see it happening, even Iran isn't stupid enough to attack Israel, what I am worried about, is that Iran acquire a nuclear bomb and let some terrorist organisation use it for them(in the name of Allah). However it would be pretty blatant, and I'm sure Israel would nuke Iran without hesitation.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by R£SP£CT)
    I dont know the exact number, but given that their military capabilities are one of the most advanced on the planet, I would say in that region of 100-200 Nuclear warheads.

    ,

    Did I say Israel was to nuke the facilities?. Endeavour to read my posts properly, before making any criticisms. :rolleyes:




    They're empty threats. What can Iran do with a couple of rockets?. It would take several years for Iran to develop a nuclear warhead. And if you open your eyes widely and step out of the zionist circle of arrogance, you'l realise that Israel's military strength is stratospherically higher than Irans. And as a bonus of having the most powerful nation by your side, Israel clearly outclasses Iran. Iran isnt backed by anyone. Iran isn't daft enough to fire one warhead at Israel and then expect around 100 times that number fired back at them. Rather idiotic wouldn't you agree?.



    You're certainly naive, but its not surprising.



    Even though your post was illogical and poorly structured Im not going to neg rep you. In fact I couldnt care less what rep you had. I'm not really bothered about rep. If your going to quote me in the future, please use manners and have atleast an ounce of deceny in them.
    a) Israel has no more than 20 nuclear warheads, max. Having a 100 - 200 would be more than Britain and China, people put Israel's nuclear capabilities at a maximum of 80 warheads.

    b) Well what 'facilities' would Israel bother to attack?? The local f*cking gymnasium? How about a public swimming pool? Of course when anyone says facilities in this context it means nuclear.

    c) One nuclear weapon can destroy Israel, 'empty' threats are still threats, and what do you want to do, wait until Iran has nukes so that their threats are no longer empty? That would be very stupid.

    d) Rofl

    e) Rofl :top:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by R£SP£CT)


    Even though your post was illogical and poorly structured Im not going to neg rep you. In fact I couldnt care less what rep you had. I'm not really bothered about rep. If your going to quote me in the future, please use manners and have atleast an ounce of deceny in them.

    Sorry that last one was not aimed at you, i know you didn't neg rep me that is why I tried to separate it with the 'PS' but sorry if you did think i accused you.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)
    a) Israel has no more than 20 nuclear warheads, max. Having a 100 - 200 would be more than Britain and China, people put Israel's nuclear capabilities at a maximum of 80 warheads.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear...rael#Stockpile

    General consensus is between 100-400, with the figure more likely at about 200.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sakujo)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear...rael#Stockpile

    General consensus is between 100-400, with the figure more likely at about 200.
    'lower limit of 70 -100 weapons' and does any one outside of the IDF actually know how many?? No, so lets just say that Israel has enough.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    When does the article say Iran is ready to strike Israel? He said if Israel attacks first, Iran is ready to attack back.

    Iran is capable of attacking Israel's nuclear facility.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ScotlandStandUp)
    After Obama's visit to Moscow, I can't really foresee, Russia stepping in, to rescue Iran if they actually "strike" Israel(let's imagine it happens), because 1) there's absolutely no way they could fund their campaign and 2) they wouldn't be daft enough to intervene.

    So theoretically Iran would be alone, unless other Arab states helped Iran and invaded Israel(which is debatable as they all hate Israel, however they hate Iran because of their religion). By that time, the US, the UK+Australia+Canada and India would immediately come to Israel's aid(economically and militarily speaking).

    The US would help for obvious reasons which I won't bother mentioning.
    The UK+Aus+Canada because they have that unbreakable relationship with the US.
    and India because Israel have armed most of their army along with Russia. They also enjoy strong economic ties.

    I honestly don't see it happening, even Iran isn't stupid enough to attack Israel, what I am worried about, is that Iran acquire a nuclear bomb and let some terrorist organisation use it for them(in the name of Allah). However it would be pretty blatant, and I'm sure Israel would nuke Iran without hesitation.

    IThia ian't going to be a war fought with soldiers, look at a map. Iran will launch missiles from Iran, Lebonan and Syria.

    BTW i suggest you look at a country called China who doesn't want a western dominated ME. Nor do they or America for that matter want The strait of hournouz blocked.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Israel will not attack Iran. They can't and it will be counter productive.

    For starters, there is a high chance that they will fail. (if you disagree, consult a map).

    If they do attack, it will accelerate our nuclear project. We will just start building under mountains.

    We will not differentiate between America or Israel. All American bases in the ME will be bombed. We will arm the Taliban and the Mahdi Army. We will get Hezbollah to attack Israel (they have about 40,000 missiles). We will shut the strait of hormouz where 40% of the worlds oil passes. We will also bomb Israel's nuclear facility.

    Non of the above is far fetched. An attack on about 80 known nuclear sites (non of which were not even known until recently, meaning that there can be many many more) from over 1000km away is far fetched.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bateman)
    Israel will not attack Iran. They can't and it will be counter productive.

    For starters, there is a high chance that they will fail. (if you disagree, consult a map).

    If they do attack, it will accelerate our nuclear project. We will just start building under mountains.

    We will not differentiate between America or Israel. All American bases in the ME will be bombed. We will arm the Taliban and the Mahdi Army. We will get Hezbollah to attack Israel (they have about 40,000 missiles). We will shut the strait of hormouz where 40% of the worlds oil passes. We will also bomb Israel's nuclear facility.

    Non of the above is far fetched. An attack on about 80 known nuclear sites (non of which were not even known until recently, meaning that there can be many many more) from over 1000km away is far fetched.
    I think you're in dream land, son.

    I can clearly see that you've done your homework, but if war broke out in the ME it wouldn't be surprising if the US launched a full blown attack on Iran and decimated it's entire army, navy and airforce like it did to Iraq and after 2-3 weeks of fighting they had already "won". I think you underestimate Israel a lot, the IDF are one of the best armed forces in the world.

    Available for military service
    1,499,186 males, age 17–49 (2000 est.),
    1,462,063 females, age 17–49 (2000 est.)

    Fit for military service
    1,226,903 males, age 17–49 (2000 est.),
    1,192,319 females, age 17–49 (2000 est.)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces

    I know this is quite mediocre to Iran's 17 million odd, however the IDF forces are all extremely well armed and trained, unlike the Iranian army who, with respect to them, honestly wouldn't put up much of a fight. Then there's the allies, with the UK, Canada, Australia, NZ possibly even South Africa, France, Germany, Spain, Denmark and without a doubt the vast majority of the EU countries, if not all, all coming to Israel's aid, I'd suspect a swift victory and a puppet being put in place to govern Iran for the better of the US and the EU.

    China aren't daft enough to intervene in this, they can cripple the US in many other ways, notably with the amount of US factories and business' in China, also with China and Japan having heavily funded the US' war on terror they're in a good position, why waste it by going to war? They know they wouldn't win, I sincerely doubt they could even deploy their army in the ME.

    As for the Strait of Hormuz, the UAE just signed an agreement with France, giving France a base in the UAE and giving UAE a few of France's rafale fighter jets. I can't remember how many exactly, anyway we patrol the Strait as it is and have enough firepower to keep it on lock. But do you honestly think that the US and it's allies would let Iran do as they please?

    You underestimate the US and it's allies a lot, which is not a good thing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Last time Iran tried the Hormuz stunt, it got badly owned.

    I do not recommend to try that again.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by borismor)
    Last time Iran tried the Hormuz stunt, it got badly owned.

    I do not recommend to try that again.
    There's no way they could pull it off, the US patrol that and the Persian Gulf, with numerous nuclear submarines, not mention quite a few big ships.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by borismor)
    Last time Iran tried the Hormuz stunt, it got badly owned.

    I do not recommend to try that again.

    This last time was 30 years ago.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ScotlandStandUp)
    There's no way they could pull it off, the US patrol that and the Persian Gulf, with numerous nuclear submarines, not mention quite a few big ships.
    LOL, that is the biggest bs i have heard. The strait is narrow and very shallow. No nuclear submarines go there. BTW do you know what nuclear submarines are for? They would have no use there.

    There is about 4km space where these "big ships" can pass through.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ScotlandStandUp)
    I think you're in dream land, son.

    I can clearly see that you've done your homework, but if war broke out in the ME it wouldn't be surprising if the US launched a full blown attack on Iran and decimated it's entire army, navy and airforce like it did to Iraq and after 2-3 weeks of fighting they had already "won". I think you underestimate Israel a lot, the IDF are one of the best armed forces in the world.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces

    I know this is quite mediocre to Iran's 17 million odd, however the IDF forces are all extremely well armed and trained, unlike the Iranian army who, with respect to them, honestly wouldn't put up much of a fight. Then there's the allies, with the UK, Canada, Australia, NZ possibly even South Africa, France, Germany, Spain, Denmark and without a doubt the vast majority of the EU countries, if not all, all coming to Israel's aid, I'd suspect a swift victory and a puppet being put in place to govern Iran for the better of the US and the EU.

    China aren't daft enough to intervene in this, they can cripple the US in many other ways, notably with the amount of US factories and business' in China, also with China and Japan having heavily funded the US' war on terror they're in a good position, why waste it by going to war? They know they wouldn't win, I sincerely doubt they could even deploy their army in the ME.

    As for the Strait of Hormuz, the UAE just signed an agreement with France, giving France a base in the UAE and giving UAE a few of France's rafale fighter jets. I can't remember how many exactly, anyway we patrol the Strait as it is and have enough firepower to keep it on lock. But do you honestly think that the US and it's allies would let Iran do as they please?

    You underestimate the US and it's allies a lot, which is not a good thing.
    America would not get involved. Look at 74 when the arabs stopped giving oil to America.

    America won't let Israel attack Iran.

    China needs cheap oil as would America, there are other things china can do, they don't need to deploy even one soldier. Iran definitely has enough, in fact Iran has the largest combination of reserves+troops+paramilatry forces in the world.

    BTW you seriously need to look at a map. Stop talking about the IDF soldiers. They will be of no use. The only thing israel can do is attack via air, this would mean they'd have to go through Syria and Iraq lmao, they'd also need to refuel on the way there and on the way back.

    I think you're in a dream land too son. Iraq had no navy or air force and the Iraqis welcomed America with open arms. The soldiers all deserted.
    Not that it is of any relevance. America would not get involved and if it does, it will not be an invasion.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bateman)
    LOL, that is the biggest bs i have heard. The strait is narrow and very shallow. No nuclear submarines go there. BTW do you know what nuclear submarines are for? They would have no use there.

    There is about 4km space where these "big ships" can pass through.
    The USS Hartford and USS New Orleans collided there.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ScotlandStandUp)
    The USS Hartford and USS New Orleans collided there.

    So? My point is that it is a very narrow space and Iran could destroy any ship that enters or leaves. Nuclear submarines can go in very limited areas and they are of no use.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bateman)
    America would not get involved. Look at 74 when the arabs stopped giving oil to America.

    America won't let Israel attack Iran.

    China needs cheap oil as would America, there are other things china can do, they don't need to deploy even one soldier. Iran definitely has enough, in fact Iran has the largest combination of reserves+troops+paramilatry forces in the world.

    BTW you seriously need to look at a map. Stop talking about the IDF soldiers. They will be of no use. The only thing israel can do is attack via air, this would mean they'd have to go through Syria and Iraq lmao, they'd also need to refuel on the way there and on the way back.
    The US has many bases in Iraq and they could easily refuel there.

    Iran may have the largest reservers etc but they aren't trained or anything and would be sitting ducks if land warfare came about.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bateman)
    LOL, that is the biggest bs i have heard.

    You obviously haven't heard yourself speak before
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,544

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.