JP: General commander of the Iranian army: It will take us 11 days "to wipe Israel ou

[HA1LV1CT0RY]

Actually I don't think either party has the ability to significantly threaten the other conventionally. The Israeli IDF is top notch, but they are a defense force not built to project power 1000 miles distant from their boarders.

Iran's got the largest military in the world with 12 million men under arms. They also have shown to be very industrious and implement well thought out strategies against US style tactics as employed by Israel. ( See Hezbollah in the winter war, or Hamas in Gaza ). But Iran's forces are not very sophisticated and don't possess the means to really threaten Israel conventionally either.

Also Nobody in the region ( Saudi, Jordan, Iraq or even Syria ) will allow either of them fly over permission to get at the other.

You bring up some good points. I just figured Isreal could wipe them out using their superior air power vs Iran's outdated military. Like they did to Egypt, Jordan, and Syria during the 1967 Arab-Isreali war.

[PokerPacker]

someone just wants attention.

[Prosperity]

Israeli and Iranian foreign press releases are just one big circle jerk after another

[btfoom]

A lot of Israeli citizens would be happy to be left alone. Some political leaders, not so much. I think the conservative side is still trying to expand Israel through settlements and other expansionary tactics. Israel needs to recognize that it would be better off if the Palestinians had an economically and politically viable state. I may seem to be picking on the Israeli's here but they are the ones in a position to change that situation.

You certainly like to change every topic to Israel/Palestine. The issue on this thread has to do specifically with Israel/Iran. Nothing to do with Palestine or the Palestinians. I'd be happy to discuss this issue in another thread, but it does not belong here. It just muddies the waters

I entirely agree on the Arab leaders scapegoating Israel to control their own populations. It is a problem but I think the bigger problem our involvement in the region through client states. We allow people like Mubarak to oppress the Egyptian population and the Egyptian political system with our aid and our policy towards Egypt. I think that is more enabling for these leaders then the Israeli scapegoat. But both need to be addressed.

Again, this thread isn't about Arab leaders, it is specifically about Iran's leaders. The biggest problem in the region right now is that Iran sees a power vaccuum and is trying their best to fill it. The focus on Israel right now because they know it is an easy target. Eventually, they will look at the rest of their 'neighbors' and try to expand (see Iran/Iraq wars). The situation in Egypt has nothing to do with this threat (though again, their government uses the US and Israel as scapegoats for their own failings).

Iran certainly wants to be a hegemon in the region but I do not think they would use a nuclear weapon offensively. I think they would use it as a way to deter some Israeli or Arab actions and to basically level the military playing field between them and Israel. The regime in Tehran is not suicidal, however, a nuclear Iran is not in the United States best interest because we would lose some significant leverage in the region and it also might start an arms race in the Arab countries which would not be good at all.

Actually, the leader of Iran right now sees his 'quest' as one of hightly religious significance and regularly espouses that the demolition of Israel is something that their religion demands. He has regularly said that he wants to "Remove Israel from the Map", hardly the words of a man in full control of his senes. You seem to apply your beliefs to his words and deeds. He doesn't feel that being suicidal is all that bad as his 'reward' is in the next life. Listen to his words, hear what he says, and evaluate what you think of Iran from that standpoint.

[btfoom]

Not to downplay it, but Iran has been making rumblings about defeating this or that country since the Islamic Republic came to power. Israel is just the power most often mentioned. They actually declared war on the U.S. in 1986 or there abouts.

Except this time, they either have or are on the brink of having nukes.

This reality makes their 'rumblings' a little more realistic.

[oisn1]

This is just sabre-rattling, but I love how people will take words out of context just prove their points. This is no difference than an Israeli minister claiming they will destroy Iran if attacked.

Take, for example, this article.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j659KQWTRiLRyWq4QWMJe-bS2u8w

Here's another where a minister claims to want to create an even bigger Holocaust on the Palestinians.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/01/israelandthepalestinians1

If you're going to criticize Iran, then criticize Israel for their remarks. Or better yet, let these insignificant children yell back and forth, ignore them and try to create some peaceful solutions.

[December90]

Can I get a source on this or is it some joke? I am confused.

Assuming that there were no Palestinians in that territory in ancient times should we give back the entire United States to the Native Americans? After all they were here before us.

A joke to test the sensitivity of all posting the solution to world peace here.

[btfoom]

This is just sabre-rattling, but I love how people will take words out of context just prove their points. This is no difference than an Israeli minister claiming they will destroy Iran if attacked.

Take, for example, this article.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j659KQWTRiLRyWq4QWMJe-bS2u8w

Here's another where a minister claims to want to create an even bigger Holocaust on the Palestinians.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/01/israelandthepalestinians1

The difference is shown in the bolded, underlined two words above: "if attacked." Noone in the Israeli government has threatend to wipe Iran off the map or declared a holy war should be waged against them. The political leader of Iran has said both things and more. It is very different to threaten to kill someone because you dislike them vs threatening to kill them IF they try to kill you first.

If you're going to criticize Iran, then criticize Israel for their remarks. Or better yet, let these insignificant children yell back and forth, ignore them and try to create some peaceful solutions.

Well, I'm just some poster here on ES, I doubt very much that the leaders of those countries care at all about my ideas regarding peaceful solutions.

Also, if someone is in charge of nuclear weapons, you ignore them at your own peril. Iran has shown before (again, see Iran/Iraq war) that it will be aggressive in trying to reach their goals.

[jpyaks3]

You certainly like to change every topic to Israel/Palestine. The issue on this thread has to do specifically with Israel/Iran. Nothing to do with Palestine or the Palestinians. I'd be happy to discuss this issue in another thread, but it does not belong here. It just muddies the waters

I was responding to your assertion that Israel would be happy if left alone. And this has been proven to be untrue as they have worked to expand their territory through settlements even in times of peace. I was refuting your point about Israel just wanting peace. Some elements including the current government want expansionism.

Again, this thread isn't about Arab leaders, it is specifically about Iran's leaders. The biggest problem in the region right now is that Iran sees a power vaccuum and is trying their best to fill it. The focus on Israel right now because they know it is an easy target. Eventually, they will look at the rest of their 'neighbors' and try to expand (see Iran/Iraq wars). The situation in Egypt has nothing to do with this threat (though again, their government uses the US and Israel as scapegoats for their own failings).

You brought up Arab leaders I simply responded to it.

Actually, the leader of Iran right now sees his 'quest' as one of hightly religious significance and regularly espouses that the demolition of Israel is something that their religion demands. He has regularly said that he wants to "Remove Israel from the Map", hardly the words of a man in full control of his senes. You seem to apply your beliefs to his words and deeds. He doesn't feel that being suicidal is all that bad as his 'reward' is in the next life. Listen to his words, hear what he says, and evaluate what you think of Iran from that standpoint.

Can you show me one thing that the Iranian regime has DONE that is irrational? They obviously want to expand power but so does every other state ever. Ignore the rhetoric and make look at what the Iranians have been doing. They have been slowly trying to move into a hegemon role but they have never acted in a suicidal or even irrational way. After 9/11 they worked with us in Afghanistan because it was in both our best interests and their best interests. In 2003-2007 they worked to influence Iraq in a manner that worked against us, but they worked to put forth a system where they could exert control over parts of Iraq and that is perfectly rational to want to have control over a neighboring country that you has attacked you in the past in the bloodiest war since WW2. Every action the Iranian leadership has taken has been rational, however people want to focus on rhetoric which doesn't usually show the actors real motivations. If we were to listen simply to what the Iranian leadership was saying and take it as a fact for their intentions then we would be forced to believe they are peacefully working towards nuclear power with no intention for obtaining nuclear weapons.

[jpyaks3]

The difference is shown in the bolded, underlined two words above: "if attacked." Noone in the Israeli government has threatend to wipe Iran off the map or declared a holy war should be waged against them. The political leader of Iran has said both things and more. It is very different to threaten to kill someone because you dislike them vs threatening to kill them IF they try to kill you first.

The Iranian response in this article states explicitly if attacked this is their response.

Well, I'm just some poster here on ES, I doubt very much that the leaders of those countries care at all about my ideas regarding peaceful solutions.

Also, if someone is in charge of nuclear weapons, you ignore them at your own peril. Iran has shown before (again, see Iran/Iraq war) that it will be aggressive in trying to reach their goals.

Uh the Iran/Iraq war was started by Saddam Hussein. Iran was attacked. So I don't think thats a very good example.

[JMS]

You bring up some good points. I just figured Isreal could wipe them out using their superior air power vs Iran's outdated military. Like they did to Egypt, Jordan, and Syria during the 1967 Arab-Isreali war.

The air wing of the Israeli IDF is truely top notch. But they don't have the air refueling capacity, or the air cooridor for a prolonged attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. We had about 15 times the air assets Israel has when we started degrading Iraq. We also had entire catagories of air systems like strategic bombers, and air to ground specialized planes like the wart hog which Israel doesn't possess.

It took us months of continous sorties to degrade Iraq in the first gulf war, and Iran is much larger and their nuclear program better dispersed and camaflaged than Saddam's industrial complex. We estimated that if we started an air campaign against Iran it would take several months and even then had a small chance of setting back their nuclear program significantly. Israel has an even smaller chance because their weapons are smaller, and their ability to bring those weapons to bare is even smaller.

Now Israel has a nuclear capability, if they employed that, then it's a different story.

[JMS]

I was responding to your assertion that Israel would be happy if left alone. And this has been proven to be untrue as they have worked to expand their territory through settlements even in times of peace. I was refuting your point about Israel just wanting peace. Some elements including the current government want expansionism..

Just to expand on you point a bit. Another significant impediment to peace is Israel has refused to define her boarders. They aren't exactly trying to go along to get along when they refuse to say what they consider is or isn't part of Israel.

For about half of Israel's modern existance, she was willing to discuss peace and had no Arab partner. Since the early 80's the Arabs have been there and their terms for peace have been well defined. The impediment today is terms of that peace. Typcially the Arabs seek, what Israel was offering a decade or more earlier.

[WARLORD1863]

11 days to wipe out Israel? Didn't Iraq have a similar style of boasting prior to the Persian Gulf War? I believe it was something about the ELITE Republican Guard could meet and defeat any foe with ease.

We all know how that turned out.

More propaganda for the poor people of Iran to gobble down.

[Predicto]

You certainly like to change every topic to Israel/Palestine. The issue on this thread has to do specifically with Israel/Iran. Nothing to do with Palestine or the Palestinians. I'd be happy to discuss this issue in another thread, but it does not belong here. It just muddies the waters

Mr. Netanyahu does not appear to agree. After all, he is the one who refuses to change Israeli policies with regard to the Palestinians using the justification that the Palestinian problem is somehow inextricably tied in with the threat from Iran.

:whoknows: