Cable Forum
Page 1 of 3 1 23
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Israel v Iran conflict (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33713368)

Chris 13-06-2025 16:02
Israel v Iran conflict
 
Israel has decided now is the time to act to prevent a country committed to its destruction from acquiring a nuclear bomb. Thus far they seem to have had a good day out, taking out a lot of very senior scientists and ideologues.

What got my attention this afternoon is how Trump, like the pathetic bully he is, is now threatening Iran to make a deal lest things get worse, as if this is somehow anything to do with him.

He’s not even the bully … he’s the weedy boy who stands behind the bully making threats and shouting insults. Pathetic little man.

I wonder what next for Iran though. The regime has been made to look vulnerable, and there are those within the country who would like to see it gone.

pip08456 13-06-2025 16:24
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Not unexpected, Isreal allegedly had the green light from the US for the attack.

Chris 13-06-2025 16:30
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
I’ve no doubt Trump will frame it that way post hoc, but I’m equally certain Israel was going to do this anyway. Trump’s in a bit of a bind now. He needs to look like the tough broker but there is a section of MAGA that really thought he was going to end all wars on day one, and this does not look like that.

papa smurf 13-06-2025 16:37
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
i wonder how close Iran is in reality from having a nuclear bomb

Chris 13-06-2025 16:43
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36198008)
i wonder how close Iran is in reality from having a nuclear bomb
Quote:
I essentially see two paths ahead:

1. Israel completes its objective by dismantling Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and conducts follow-on strikes as needed to prevent reconstruction.

2. Iran rushes the bomb

As of May 2025, Iran had a declared stockpile of 408.6 kg of 60% enriched uranium.

Keep in mind that enriching uranium from natural levels to 60% accounts for roughly 90% of the total energy required to reach weapons-grade.

So if anything substantial survives, or if infrastructure can be relocated, Iran could reach weapons-grade enrichment levels relatively quickly.
https://x.com/frhoffmann1/status/193...56-Kgau3lzowJw

That’s Dr Fabian Hoffman, defence, missile and nuclear strategy specialist at Oslo University.

Take from it what you will but I have seen plenty of people with the expertise to know what they’re on about, saying similar things.

The timing of Israel’s attack adds some credence to it all. Iran has motive and intent and seems to have been close to securing the means. Hoffman’s analysis would also be predictive of Israel not letting up quite yet.

TheDaddy 13-06-2025 16:45
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36198005)
Israel has decided now is the time to act to prevent a country committed to its destruction from acquiring a nuclear bomb. Thus far they seem to have had a good day out, taking out a lot of very senior scientists and ideologues.

What got my attention this afternoon is how Trump, like the pathetic bully he is, is now threatening Iran to make a deal lest things get worse, as if this is somehow anything to do with him.

He’s not even the bully … he’s the weedy boy who stands behind the bully making threats and shouting insults. Pathetic little man.

I wonder what next for Iran though. The regime has been made to look vulnerable, and there are those within the country who would like to see it gone.
That'll be donnie who ripped up the last deal that was widely praised by senior US military Generals and admirals and replaced it with nothing at all.

Iran has been one step away from.acquiring a nuclear bomb since 1948, seriously I saw a headline say that earlier and even if that was bogus and it's just since the 80's progress has been awful slow.

Yes you could say that Israel had used that rationale and it'd be entirely plausible if a charmer like Ali Sumkhani hadn't been amongst the victims, who was the lead negotiator with Trump's team and said last month he'd sign a deal there and then if some sanction relief was included in it, now it'll just look like to many people that Netanyahu is sabotaging negotiations to avoid jail, again.

papa smurf 13-06-2025 16:48
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36198009)
https://x.com/frhoffmann1/status/193...56-Kgau3lzowJw

That’s Dr Fabian Hoffman, defence, missile and nuclear strategy specialist at Oslo University.

Take from it what you will but I have seen plenty of people with the expertise to know what they’re on about, saying similar things.

The timing of Israel’s attack adds some credence to it all. Iran has motive and intent and seems to have been close to securing the means. Hoffman’s analysis would also be predictive of Israel not letting up quite yet.
i guess we'll find out when the mushroom clouds start rising

Sephiroth 14-06-2025 19:10
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36198008)
i wonder how close Iran is in reality from having a nuclear bomb
I don't. Look at the language psychologically. Something like:

UN: Iran has violated its nuclear proliferation obligations and must cease & desist.

IRAN: Just for that, we're gonna double production of enriched Uranium. (Just the excuse Iran wanted).

ISRAEL: Right, sod you. Bang - before you can wipe us out.

As already indicated, this miliary action was always gonna happen. Rather now than when Iran has nuclear weapons.



---------- Post added at 19:10 ---------- Previous post was at 19:05 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 36198010)
That'll be donnie who ripped up the last deal that was widely praised by senior US military Generals and admirals and replaced it with nothing at all.

Iran has been one step away from.acquiring a nuclear bomb since 1948, seriously I saw a headline say that earlier and even if that was bogus and it's just since the 80's progress has been awful slow.

Yes you could say that Israel had used that rationale and it'd be entirely plausible if a charmer like Ali Sumkhani hadn't been amongst the victims, who was the lead negotiator with Trump's team and said last month he'd sign a deal there and then if some sanction relief was included in it, now it'll just look like to many people that Netanyahu is sabotaging negotiations to avoid jail, again.
Was the above code for "Israel shouldn't be trying to smash Iran's nuclear threat right now"?

Chris 14-06-2025 21:11
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198042)
I don't. Look at the language psychologically. Something like:

UN: Iran has violated its nuclear proliferation obligations and must cease & desist.

IRAN: Just for that, we're gonna double production of enriched Uranium. (Just the excuse Iran wanted).

ISRAEL: Right, sod you. Bang - before you can wipe us out.

As already indicated, this miliary action was always gonna happen. Rather now than when Iran has nuclear weapons.


---------- Post added at 19:10 ---------- Previous post was at 19:05 ----------


Was the above code for "Israel shouldn't be trying to smash Iran's nuclear threat right now"?
You missed the part where Trump pulled the USA out of JCPOA, giving Iran cover to continue working towards high enrichment and a possible bomb.

Not that that was what Trump intended to achieve; Trump is far too stupid to think strategically. Trump’s sole intention was to trash Obama’s legacy in any way possible, without any consideration of consequences.

These are the consequences.

Pierre 14-06-2025 22:37
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Israel is defending itself.

thenry 15-06-2025 00:29
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
I don't understand this war. Everyday in Mecca, Saudi Arabia they recite the Quran as does the rest of the Muslim world. In those verses are Israel. Whatever your stand point Israel is reality. By wiping out Israel through war means the holy book doesn't hold credibility. It's a story ffs. There is no Quran without Israel. I don't get it.

Sephiroth 15-06-2025 06:32
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenry (Post 36198053)
I don't understand this war. Everyday in Mecca, Saudi Arabia they recite the Quran as does the rest of the Muslim world. In those verses are Israel. Whatever your stand point Israel is reality. By wiping out Israel through war means the holy book doesn't hold credibility. It's a story ffs. There is no Quran without Israel. I don't get it.
Surely you do get it. There's Israel full of Jews and Israel, the Muslim concept (political version). It's all political generated as a consequence of cultural differences between the two religions.

Incidentally, there's Muslim (as in Sunni) and Muslim as in Shia. The Quran is separately interpreted by these sects, so far as I can tell. Thus the enemy of my enemy (Saudi vs Iran) is my friend (says Israel) sort of thing.

And that's ignoring the amount of Quran being recited in the UK (and on the boats crossing the channel).

RichardCoulter 15-06-2025 13:36
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198056)
Surely you do get it. There's Israel full of Jews and Israel, the Muslim concept (political version). It's all political generated as a consequence of cultural differences between the two religions.

Incidentally, there's Muslim (as in Sunni) and Muslim as in Shia. The Quran is separately interpreted by these sects, so far as I can tell. Thus the enemy of my enemy (Saudi vs Iran) is my friend (says Israel) sort of thing.

And that's ignoring the amount of Quran being recited in the UK (and on the boats crossing the channel).
Let's hope that the different factions don't start attacking each other on British soil.

noel43 15-06-2025 16:34
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36198050)
Israel is defending itself.
No isreal is attacking who it wants because usa backs it.

Sephiroth 15-06-2025 17:24
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by noel43 (Post 36198064)
No israel is attacking who it wants because usa backs it.
Here we go. Israel are the baddies along with the USA.

Surely the fact that Iran has hundreds of ballistic missiles ready to use tells you that they are the baddies, determined to destroy Israel.

And that on top of the UN report that Iran has broken its agreement not to produce weapons grade Uranium - Iran lying through its teeth that it'snot true. That would be the Iran that's vowed to destroy Israel.

And don't forget October 7th 2024.

downquark1 15-06-2025 17:51
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenry (Post 36198053)
I don't understand this war. Everyday in Mecca, Saudi Arabia they recite the Quran as does the rest of the Muslim world. In those verses are Israel. Whatever your stand point Israel is reality. By wiping out Israel through war means the holy book doesn't hold credibility. It's a story ffs. There is no Quran without Israel. I don't get it.
They are talking about the land, not the state.

Dude111 16-06-2025 00:43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
What got my attention this afternoon is how Trump, like the pathetic bully he is, is now threatening Iran to make a deal lest things get worse, as if this is somehow anything to do with him.
Yes he is making this country look worse....... I think he should back off Chris before something bad happens!!

Sephiroth 16-06-2025 10:06
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
To get back to the matter in hand:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn840275p5yo

Quote:
Last week, the IAEA said in its latest quarterly report that Iran had amassed enough uranium enriched up to 60% purity - a short, technical step away from weapons grade, or 90% - to potentially make nine nuclear bombs. That was "a matter of serious concern", given the proliferation risks, it added.
This is the nub of the matter. You all know as well as I what Iran would do with a nuclear bomb, assuming that it could deliver it onto Israel. That's been Iran's goal since 1979.

downquark1 16-06-2025 10:18
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
They can deliver bombs to Israel, they just demonstrated this.

Sephiroth 16-06-2025 10:21
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198078)
They can deliver bombs to Israel, they just demonstrated this.
... nuclear? Just what's your point?

Hugh 16-06-2025 10:43
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198077)
To get back to the matter in hand:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn840275p5yo



This is the nub of the matter. You all know as well as I what Iran would do with a nuclear bomb, assuming that it could deliver it onto Israel. That's been Iran's goal since 1979.
Except when it wasn’t…

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33521655

downquark1 16-06-2025 10:53
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198079)
... nuclear? Just what's your point?
If they intended to nuke Israel and could convince Russia to lend them a nuke, it would have already happened.

While it is true they would rather Israel not exist, I think the idea they would nuke it asap is far fetched.

Sephiroth 16-06-2025 10:58
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36198081)
What's your point?
It's clear to everyone what the IAEA was saying: Iran has enough U235 to build a few nuclear bombs.

Put that together with Iran's publicly declared dedication to the destruction of the State of Israel, then the handshaking and smiles from 2015 (your evidence) can be taken with a pinch of salt.


---------- Post added at 10:58 ---------- Previous post was at 10:55 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198082)
If they intended to nuke Israel and could convince Russia to lend them a nuke, it would have already happened.

While it is true they would rather Israel not exist, I think the idea they would nuke it asap is far fetched.
Is this naievity on your part? What's with this "if" stuff? Iran was refining Uranium for its own nukes. That must be obvious to you - and if not why not?

As to your "far fetched" assertion, it must be at least a 50/50 chance that they they would nuke Israel; they are religious zealots who welcome martyrdom.

downquark1 16-06-2025 11:04
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198083)
Is this naievity on your part? What's with this "if" stuff? Iran was refining Uranium for its own nukes. That must be obvious to you - and if not why not?

As to your "far fetched" assertion, it must be at least a 50/50 chance that they they would nuke Israel; they are religious zealots who welcome martyrdom.
No, you're confusing sunni and shia, and Arabs and Persians.

The Iranians are different to Bin Laden. They are a theocratic regime don't want their country burnt to the ground for martyrdom, they are more subtle than that.

Sephiroth 16-06-2025 11:19
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198085)
No, you're confusing sunni and shia, and Arabs and Persians.

The Iranians are different to Bin Laden. They are a theocratic regime don't want their country burnt to the ground for martyrdom, they are more subtle than that.
Apologies for my rudeness - but ?????

In this part of the conversation, Shia/Sunni doesn't come into it (except perhaps that the Sunni Arabs are rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of their Shia enemy, Iran, being taken down by Israel).

My entire point is about Iran's nuclear development and its intentions toward Israel.

Why have you pivoted away from that?

What have you got against Israel, frankly?


---------- Post added at 11:19 ---------- Previous post was at 11:14 ----------


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E...rael_relations

Quote:
Iran and Israel do not maintain diplomatic relations and relations are hostile. The Iran–Israel relationship was cordial for most of the Cold War, but worsened following the Iranian revolution in 1979 and has been openly hostile since the end of the Gulf War in 1991. Iran's current government does not recognize Israel's legitimacy as a state and has called for its destruction; it views Palestine as the sole legitimate government of the historic Palestinian territories. Israel considers Iran a threat to the Middle East's stability and has targeted Iranian assets in assassinations and airstrikes
Clear enough?

Hugh 16-06-2025 11:22
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198083)
What's your point?
It's clear to everyone what the IAEA was saying: Iran has enough U235 to build a few nuclear bombs.

Put that together with Iran's publicly declared dedication to the destruction of the State of Israel, then the handshaking and smiles from 2015 (your evidence) can be taken with a pinch of salt.


---------- Post added at 10:58 ---------- Previous post was at 10:55 ----------



Is this naievity on your part? What's with this "if" stuff? Iran was refining Uranium for its own nukes. That must be obvious to you - and if not why not?

As to your "far fetched" assertion, it must be at least a 50/50 chance that they they would nuke Israel; they are religious zealots who welcome martyrdom.
The point is that under the JCPOA Iran couldn’t build a nuclear weapon, so that ipso facto negates your proposition about their "goal"…
Quote:
You all know as well as I what Iran would do with a nuclear bomb, assuming that it could deliver it onto Israel. That's been Iran's goal since 1979.

downquark1 16-06-2025 11:26
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198086)
Apologies for my rudeness - but ?????

In this part of the conversation, Shia/Sunni doesn't come into it (except perhaps that the Sunni Arabs are rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of their Shia enemy, Iran, being taken down by Israel).

My entire point is about Iran's nuclear development and its intentions toward Israel.

Why have you pivoted away from that?

What have you got against Israel, frankly?


---------- Post added at 11:19 ---------- Previous post was at 11:14 ----------


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E...rael_relations



Clear enough?
I haven't pivoted away. The martyrdom doctrine is a religious thing and that requires a religious discussion. Their intention towards nuking Israel requires a discussion on their attitude towards martyrdom -- if they did nuke Israel, America would seek revenge and at that point Russia may not defend them.

Sephiroth 16-06-2025 11:33
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36198088)
The point is that under the JCPOA Iran couldn’t build a nuclear weapon, so that ipso facto negates your proposition about their "goal"…
You too? What do you think Iran was doing? Why was/is it enriching Uranium to weapons grade?


---------- Post added at 11:33 ---------- Previous post was at 11:31 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198089)
I haven't pivoted away. The martyrdom doctrine is a religious thing and that requires a religious discussion. Their intention towards nuking Israel requires a discussion on their attitude towards martyrdom -- if they did nuke Israel, America would seek revenge and at that point Russia may not defend them.
The martyrdom doctrine leads to the death of people with whom the martyrs disagree. I'm worried for you.

Hugh 16-06-2025 11:51
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198090)
You too? What do you think Iran was doing? Why was/is it enriching Uranium to weapons grade?


---------- Post added at 11:33 ---------- Previous post was at 11:31 ----------



The martyrdom doctrine leads to the death of people with whom the martyrs disagree. I'm worried for you.
From the previously linked article

Quote:
Low-enriched uranium, which typically has a 3-5% concentration of U-235, can be used to produce fuel for commercial nuclear power plants. Highly enriched uranium has a purity of 20% or more and is used in research reactors. Weapons-grade uranium is 90% enriched or more...

…. Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was also reduced by 98% to 300kg (660lbs), a figure that must not be exceeded until 2031. It must also keep the stockpile's level of enrichment at 3.67%…

… Under the JCPOA, Iran said it would redesign the reactor so it could not produce any weapons-grade plutonium, and that all spent fuel would be sent out of the country as long as the modified reactor existed.

Iran must also not build additional heavy-water reactors or accumulate any excess heavy water until 2031.
So, under the terms of the JCPOA, Iran would not have the capability to build a nuclear weapon, so could not fulfil "their goal since 1979"…

papa smurf 16-06-2025 12:01
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
If Iran can't be allowed to have a nuclear bomb should any country in the region be allowed them?

Chris 16-06-2025 12:08
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
The point is, once a country has a nuclear weapon it’s basically too late to do anything about it. Iran 1. Does not have one yet and 2. Has made existential threats about what it wants to do with a neighbour who is within missile range.

papa smurf 16-06-2025 12:25
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36198095)
The point is, once a country has a nuclear weapon it’s basically too late to do anything about it. Iran 1. Does not have one yet and 2. Has made existential threats about what it wants to do with a neighbour who is within missile range.
nicely avoiding the question, If Iran can't be allowed to have a nuclear bomb should any country in the region be allowed them?

Paul 16-06-2025 13:22
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Are these other countries (in the region) threatening to use them against their neighbours ?

I dont happen to believe Iran would be daft enough do it anyway, as they know the result would be their own destruction.

Pierre 16-06-2025 13:31
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36198093)
So, under the terms of the JCPOA, Iran would not have the capability to build a nuclear weapon, so could not fulfil "their goal since 1979"…
You really could start an argument in an empty room.

Pedantry, unless you're suggesting that Iran is happy for the state of Israel to exist and wouldn't be keen to facilitate its destruction in any way possible.

---------- Post added at 13:31 ---------- Previous post was at 13:27 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36198099)
Are these other countries (in the region) threatening to use them against their neighbours ?

I dont happen to believe Iran would be daft enough do it anyway, as they know the result would be their own destruction.
Islamic fundamentalists are happy to be martyrs.

Chris 16-06-2025 13:39
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36198096)
nicely avoiding the question, If Iran can't be allowed to have a nuclear bomb should any country in the region be allowed them?
That’s not avoiding the question, that’s rejecting your framing of the issue. Quite a different thing.

papa smurf 16-06-2025 13:45
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36198102)
That’s not avoiding the question, that’s rejecting your framing of the issue. Quite a different thing.
interesting spin, but still no answer to the question which was If Iran can't be allowed to have a nuclear bomb should any country in the region be allowed them?

yes or no will do

Damien 16-06-2025 13:47
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
You can't allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. If we were continuously being threatened with destruction from an enemy state, we would also stop them from developing nuclear weapons.

But it's a spectacular failure of international diplomacy that it got this far. Obama's deal was working; the UN nuclear watchdog verified this many times. Iran had halted its development of a weapon. Their uranium stocks were depleting. It wasn't perfect, Iran could eventually have broken the agreement and continued, but it was working.

Trump came in and ripped it up because it was an Obama deal and therefore bad. He didn't replace it. His 'talks', as Iran has got closer to a nuclear weapon, were going to be a weakened version of Obama's deal. Now we're just risking further escalation and an Iranian regime that is now unlikely to enter such an agreement again.

This idiot's ego has real life ramifications.

Chris 16-06-2025 13:52
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36198103)
interesting spin, but still no answer to the question which was If Iran can't be allowed to have a nuclear bomb should any country in the region be allowed them?

yes or no will do
Sorry, I tend to assume you understand the concept of framing and use it as a debating tactic. Duly noted - you don’t understand, and require a fuller explanation.

The issue is not whether or not one or more nation gets to decide who is ‘allowed’ to have a nuclear bomb. The issue is whether one nation is allowed, under international law, to pre-emptively strike another in its own national defence. Israel has stated its reasons. The only relevant question is whether those reasons are credible. Badly framed questions, which misunderstand Israel’s actions as some sort of regional policing operation, miss the point and are more than a little tedious.

You’re never going to get a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer to a question where both the question, and the answer you want, are intended to score points rather than clarify issues. It’s sort of disappointing you’ve been engaged in discussions on this forum for so many years yet you’re still stuck trying to use tactics like the new boy at your school debating society.

Sephiroth 16-06-2025 14:26
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36198093)
From the previously linked article



So, under the terms of the JCPOA, Iran would not have the capability to build a nuclear weapon, so could not fulfil "their goal since 1979"…
Except that Iran has not stuck to its obligations. Are you blind to the obvious? Or just anti-Israel?

---------- Post added at 14:26 ---------- Previous post was at 14:24 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36198103)
interesting spin, but still no answer to the question which was If Iran can't be allowed to have a nuclear bomb should any country in the region be allowed them?

yes or no will do
Who's doing the allowing? Who's enforcing the not allowing? Facts are facts and Iran has enough enriched Uranium to make a nuke.

mrmistoffelees 16-06-2025 15:11
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
The Iranians are a massive bunch of tools , they are however honest with their intentions.

Also, why isn’t the point that the US blocked Israel’s plans to assassinate the chief Iranian tool being discussed ?

I’m not sure Israel’s objectives are just about stopping Iran from a functioning nuclear weapon, that might be the implied objective sure, but if they could implement regime change as well? They wouldn’t say no would they

papa smurf 16-06-2025 15:17
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36198108)
The Iranians are a massive bunch of tools , they are however honest with their intentions.

Also, why isn’t the point that the US blocked Israel’s plans to assassinate the chief Iranian tool being discussed ?

I’m not sure Israel’s objectives are just about stopping Iran from a functioning nuclear weapon, that might be the implied objective sure, but if they could implement regime change as well? They wouldn’t say no would they
The chief American tool is probably worried that he could be next, but the chief Israeli tool is trying his best to bring the USA into his war, meanwhile our chief tool is moving war planes into the region

Hugh 16-06-2025 16:33
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198106)
Except that Iran has not stuck to its obligations.Are you blind to the obvious? Or just anti-Israel?

---------- Post added at 14:26 ---------- Previous post was at 14:24 ----------



Who's doing the allowing? Who's enforcing the not allowing? Facts are facts and Iran has enough enriched Uranium to make a nuke.
They kept to the terms of the JPCOA until Trump ripped it up - there are no "obligations" to keep to...

See you are doing the old Netanyahu ploy of conflating "Israel" with "Israeli Government actions" - nice try...

noel43 16-06-2025 16:50
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198077)
To get back to the matter in hand:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn840275p5yo



This is the nub of the matter. You all know as well as I what Iran would do with a nuclear bomb, assuming that it could deliver it onto Israel. That's been Iran's goal since 1979.
That is assuming not fact.

Sephiroth 16-06-2025 16:55
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36198110)
They kept to the terms of the JPCOA until Trump ripped it up - there are no "obligations" to keep to...

See you are doing the old Netanyahu ploy of conflating "Israel" with "Israeli Government actions" - nice try...
The usual fugg and haze from you.

Iran was trying to make nukes. If you dispute that, then you're not thinking straight.

Iran wants Israel destroyed - not just the Israeli government. The IAEA notes 400kg of highly enriched Uranium. What does Iran want that for?

noel43 16-06-2025 16:56
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36198050)
Israel is defending itself.
As usual isreal can do what it wants and nobody is bothered because the usa backs it.It is now a rogue state and should be treated as one. It is attacking any nation it wants to.

Chris 16-06-2025 17:00
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by noel43 (Post 36198113)
As usual isreal can do what it wants and nobody is bothered because the usa backs it.It is now a rogue state and should be treated as one. It is attacking any nation it wants to.
Don’t be absurd.

Israel has launched a pre-emptive strike on the country that has repeatedly called for its destruction and has taken steps towards that goal.

This is the least rogue thing Israel has done in years.

Pierre 16-06-2025 17:01
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by noel43 (Post 36198113)
As usual isreal can do what it wants and nobody is bothered because the usa backs it.It is now a rogue state and should be treated as one. It is attacking any nation it wants to.
I refer you to my previous statement.

Paul 16-06-2025 17:12
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by noel43 (Post 36198113)
As usual isreal can do what it wants and nobody is bothered because the usa backs it.
So you said yesterday, no need to keep repeating.

noel43 16-06-2025 20:20
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36198114)
Don’t be absurd.

Israel has launched a pre-emptive strike on the country that has repeatedly called for its destruction and has taken steps towards that goal.

This is the least rogue thing Israel has done in years.
Thats what a rogue nation does

Sephiroth 16-06-2025 21:17
Re: Israel blitz on Iran’s nuclear programme
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by noel43 (Post 36198118)
Thats what a rogue nation does
Who is the rogue?
Iran, who doesn't allow political opposition; oppresses its people, supplies arms to terrorist organisations (Houthis, Hamas, Hezbollah); declares its intent to wipe Israel off the map; building nukes with which to destroy Israel?

Israel, a fully democratic country (admittedly with some bad eggs in power); fighting for its existence; fighting terrorism (see Oct-7th-2024 for details); threatened with destruction by Iran?

Do you seriously side with Iran (one has to wonder)?

Mr K 16-06-2025 21:31
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
There's some very nasty people on either side of this conflict. If we were even handed in in condemning both, we could hold our heads slightly high. One country has a 'get out of jail free card', to do whatever it wants, including genocide.

1andrew1 16-06-2025 23:43
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36198108)
The Iranians are a massive bunch of tools , they are however honest with their intentions.

Also, why isn’t the point that the US blocked Israel’s plans to assassinate the chief Iranian tool being discussed ?

I’m not sure Israel’s objectives are just about stopping Iran from a functioning nuclear weapon, that might be the implied objective sure, but if they could implement regime change as well? They wouldn’t say no would they
Countries in the Middle East and elsewhere are filling the vacuum created by the US and finding their own solutions to problems, as Israel has done here. It also has the beneficial effect of changing the focus from Gaza.

If the regime changed in Iran, it's the army who have the power so don't expect a pro-Western government to fill the void.

Pierre 17-06-2025 12:45
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36198121)
One country has a 'get out of jail free card', to do whatever it wants
Like fund terrorism on an industrial scale?

Hamas
Palestinian Islamic Jihad
Houthis
Hezbollah
and
Several Iraqi militias

Hugh 17-06-2025 17:28
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
1 Attachment(s)
https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1750177585

So long, and thanks for all the fish…

Paul 17-06-2025 17:58
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
"We" ?

I though he said the USA was not involved ...

Hugh 17-06-2025 18:06
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
1 Attachment(s)
https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...2&d=1750179944

OpSec, anyone?

Damien 17-06-2025 18:08
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
This is moving quite fast now. Trump is 'considering' joining the war against Iran. US equipment is moving towards the region.

---------- Post added at 18:08 ---------- Previous post was at 18:07 ----------

https://bsky.app/profile/axios.com/post/3lrsxdtutt22l

Quote:
NEW: Trump is seriously considering joining the war on Iran and launching a strike against its nuclear facilities, U.S. officials tell Axios.

Hugh 17-06-2025 18:12
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Trump just re-posted this from Mike Huckabee, the US Ambassador to Israel

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2025/06/1.jpg

fyi, Mike Huckabee is an Evangelical who believes that Israel is central to triggering the rise of the Antichrist, the rapture, the return of Christ, the battle of Armageddon - on a side note, Truman in 1945 authorised the dropping of Atomic bombs on Japan...

Sephiroth 17-06-2025 18:25
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Huckabee's tripe is reminiscent of George Galloway's cringe toward Saddam Hussein.

papa smurf 17-06-2025 18:38
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Netanyahu's nuclear time table for Iran started in 1992

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskMiddleEa...line/#lightbox

noel43 17-06-2025 20:56
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36198145)
"We" ?

I though he said the USA was not involved ...
Then he can say I was on the winning side

Pierre 17-06-2025 21:30
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36198149)
Trump just re-posted this from Mike Huckabee, the US Ambassador to Israel

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2025/06/1.jpg

fyi, Mike Huckabee is an Evangelical who believes that Israel is central to triggering the rise of the Antichrist, the rapture, the return of Christ, the battle of Armageddon - on a side note, Truman in 1945 authorised the dropping of Atomic bombs on Japan...
Huckabee is an exGovernor, presidential candidate and has been a republican political figure for many years. I presume you have quotes from him where he says that he believes that Israel is central to triggering the rise of the Antichrist, the rapture, the return of Christ, the battle of Armageddon.

I would like to see them.

Chris 17-06-2025 22:03
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by noel43 (Post 36198153)
Then he can say I was on the winning side
Might as well agree with you while I can …

Trump didn’t want this; a great chunk of his MAGA base supports him because he promised to disentangle America from overseas wars. But something he hates even more is someone else looking like a winner, because in his tiny little zero-sum brain that makes him the loser. So if there’s a sniff of the great geopolitical threat of the age being brought to its knees, it has to look like it was Trump wot did it.

Hugh 17-06-2025 22:55
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36198154)
Huckabee is an exGovernor, presidential candidate and has been a republican political figure for many years. I presume you have quotes from him where he says that he believes that Israel is central to triggering the rise of the Antichrist, the rapture, the return of Christ, the battle of Armageddon.

I would like to see them.
As to whether or not Huckabee believes in the End Times (which encompass all of your points above), enjoy one of his shows where he says he thinks we may just be living in them…

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1wr0StT-_eQ

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...3&d=1750196877

Dude111 18-06-2025 08:38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul
"We" ?

I though he said the USA was not involved ...
This country thinks they own the world Paul. They think they can treat anyoje like crap and nothing can be done.......

Truly disgusting.........

Sephiroth 18-06-2025 09:02
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dude111 (Post 36198161)
This country thinks they own the world Paul. They think they can treat anyoje like crap and nothing can be done.......

Truly disgusting.........
Meanwhile, Israel is defending itself against Iran's nuclear ambitions as identified by the IAEA.

But, addressing Dude's point directly: I suppose you could regard Trump and Netanyahu as being in the same mould. Also, their respective electorates are sharply divided down the middle. But that should not detract from Israel's need to defend itself from Iran, which is committed to Israel's destruction.

Pierre 18-06-2025 09:44
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36198156)
As to whether or not Huckabee believes in the End Times (which encompass all of your points above)
So you have no quotes to back up your statement about him.

granted he is a Christian, I'm sure many Christians on this site believe in the end times

I was more focused on this:

Quote:
who believes that Israel is central to triggering the rise of the Antichrist
I'd be grateful if you could expand on that.


Quote:
enjoy one of his shows where he says he thinks we may just be living in them…


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1wr0StT-_eQ

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...3&d=1750196877
Did you watch it?

He doesn't really say anything, the pastor and author of a book about the end times does.

Chris 18-06-2025 09:59
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
American Christian fundamentalism has been obsessed with Millinarianism in one way or another since the latter half of the 19th century. It has given rise to some of the most well known sects that have survived to this day (Mormons, JWs, Adventists) as well as many more that didn’t, but it also has a home in mainstream (i.e. creedally orthodox) charismatic Christianity.

Interest in the end times was turbo-charged in the mid 20th century with the world seeming to be on a nuclear knife-edge. A 1960s book called The Late Great Planet Earth set out the modern form of the end times beliefs Huckabee seems to be espousing here. The same basic set of predictions about the end times are also contained in a novel series called Left Behind (the first of which was badly adapted into an airport disaster movie starring Nicholas Cage some years ago).

This is by no means the only way of understanding the Bible’s Book of Revelation, and it was not the way the church understood it at all until it took root in the USA, which has used its cultural reach to spread it far and wide. But it is now widespread and so while it may sound a bit batty to unchurched ears, especially on the lips of someone so close to the president, it really is not all that surprising when understood in context.

Hugh 18-06-2025 10:03
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Yes, I watched it…

Huckabee says "some of us think we may just be living in them (End Times)" - that’s saying something…

Re your other point, Huckabee is a Evangelical Christian Zionist (as is Hesgeth), out of the Southern Baptist Church - all big fans of dispensational premillennialism…

What do you think Huckabee meant when he referenced Truman and 1945?

Sephiroth 18-06-2025 11:17
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Huckabee and his ilk have more than one screw loose. Carrying out foreign policy with that crap in mind is dangerous isn't much distant from the more extreme Islamists. IMO.

Pierre 18-06-2025 13:19
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36198165)
Huckabee says "some of us think we may just be living in them (End Times)" - that’s saying something…
I just saw that as an intro for the author to talk about his book


Quote:
What do you think Huckabee meant when he referenced Truman and 1945?
I take your point, but I don't see the US nuking anyone, I don't see the US getting too involved. Trump is not a war president. Best thing they can do is continue to supply Israel.

downquark1 18-06-2025 13:23
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Trump is very close with Israel and is currently bickering with his anti-war base so it looks like a betrayal may be on the cards.

Hugh 18-06-2025 16:52
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36198170)
I just saw that as an intro for the author to talk about his book




I take your point, but I don't see the US nuking anyone, I don't see the US getting too involved. Trump is not a war president. Best thing they can do is continue to supply Israel.
I can understand why you could interpret it that way, but if that is what Huckabee meant, one would have thought he would say "some think we may just be living in them" rather than the inclusive "some of us".

downquark1 18-06-2025 18:23
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
It looks like the exiled son of the last Shah (King/Tzar/Ceasar) is supporting the US and Israel. This is interesting because the US dropped support to his father partly because he started complaining about Israel.

A 50 year drama is playing out.

Sephiroth 18-06-2025 19:46
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
There's a rather interesting description of the Israel/Iran relationship at:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/mg1143osd.7?seq=6

A selected quote:

Quote:
Iran’s cooperation with Israel was not based on common fears
alone. The Shah had a rather exaggerated notion of Israeli influence in
Washington and believed that Israel could help him win the favor of
the Kennedy administration, which had been critical of his rule. 8 Iran’s
expectation of drawing itself closer to the United States through Israel
had an important role in its decision to expand ties with Israel. 9 By the
mid-1960s, the Shah had permitted a permanent Israeli delegation to
Iran that constituted a de facto embassy in Tehran. However, he did
not grant Israel more than de facto recognition, 10 and his public statements on Israel only grew more critical after the 1967 war.11 Though
Iranian popular disapproval of Israel surged, the Shah continued to
deepen relations with the Jewish state after he witnessed Israel’s victory
over the Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian armies. He believed that Isra-
el’s rising status would strengthen Iran’s position as a major regional
power as well.
... and ...

Quote:
Israeli-Iranian Cooperation After the 1979 Revolution
Iran’s post-revolution foreign policy was at first overzealous and ideo-
logical. The revolutionaries saw the Shah’s overthrow not as a final goal
in itself but as a first step toward “liberating” the wider Middle East
from U.S. domination. The Persian Gulf’s Arab regimes, backed by
the United States, were the next stop for the Islamic revolution. The Islamic Republic focused its efforts on stirring up Shi’a populations
in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq. However, Iran’s efforts to over-
throw the old order were largely ineffective and in many ways counter-
productive. Faced with the threat of a revolutionary Iran, the Persian
Gulf states formed the Gulf Cooperation Council in 1981 and aided
Saddam Hussein’s military conflict with Iran.
However, much like the Shah, the Islamic Republic realized the
value of an Israeli counterweight to its Arab neighbors, particularly
Iraq. Saddam’s war against Iran became a major incentive for Iranian-
Israeli cooperation. A low-level relationship between Iran and Israel
helped the regime avoid total isolation while it benefitted from desper-
ately needed Israeli (and U.S.) weapons. Israel itself had a vested inter-
est in Iraq’s defeat, as it viewed Saddam Hussein as a central threat to
its security.

peanut 18-06-2025 20:05
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
So let me get this straight....

This morning, Trump says unconditional surrender or else. Then Russia steps in and tells the US to back off or else. Trump then says er maybe, maybe not get involved...

Like he thought he's master of the universe and whatever he says goes. Basically like playing poker, but as soon as he get called. He folds...

That or he's complying with his leader....

Sephiroth 18-06-2025 20:22
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut (Post 36198182)
So let me get this straight....

This morning, Trump says unconditional surrender or else. Then Russia steps in and tells the US to back off or else. Trump then says er maybe, maybe not get involved...

Like he thought he's master of the universe and whatever he says goes. Basically like playing poker, but as soon as he get called. He folds...

That or he's complying with his leader....

That would be:

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle...an-2025-06-18/

Quote:
ST PETERSBURG, June 18 (Reuters) - Russia is telling the United States not to strike Iran because it would radically destabilise the Middle East, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said on Wednesday, and Moscow said Israeli strikes risked triggering a nuclear catastrophe.

Itshim 18-06-2025 20:23
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut (Post 36198182)
So let me get this straight....

This morning, Trump says unconditional surrender or else. Then Russia steps in and tells the US to back off or else. Trump then says er maybe, maybe not get involved...

Like he thought he's master of the universe and whatever he says goes. Basically like playing poker, but as soon as he get called. He folds...

That or he's complying with his leader....
Trump is bully fight. back and he tends to cave in, Starmer is his whipping boy. The man should have never entered politics, so easy to push around.

papa smurf 18-06-2025 20:26
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut (Post 36198182)
So let me get this straight....

This morning, Trump says unconditional surrender or else. Then Russia steps in and tells the US to back off or else. Trump then says er maybe, maybe not get involved...

Like he thought he's master of the universe and whatever he says goes. Basically like playing poker, but as soon as he get called. He folds...

That or he's complying with his leader....
When i watch Trump give one of his rambling speeches i feel like I'm having a stroke because nothing he says makes any sense and it all sounds like gibberish

Damien 18-06-2025 20:57
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
I honestly do not think Trump knows what he'll do next. He is riding the wave of interest and getting off on the idea that he is a strongman. It's a question of whether his ego is better served by going to war with Iran, getting 'a deal' or just backing off altogether if he thinks the blowback will be too much.

Pierre 18-06-2025 21:01
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36198177)
I can understand why you could interpret it that way, but if that is what Huckabee meant, one would have thought he would say "some think we may just be living in them" rather than the inclusive "some of us".
Fair enough, I again, take your point.

downquark1 18-06-2025 22:08
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Trump is dancing around shouting "I'm being unpredictable". I just don't know if he is trying to buy time or is genuinely indecisive.

Chris 18-06-2025 22:14
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198189)
Trump is dancing around shouting "I'm being unpredictable". I just don't know if he is trying to buy time or is genuinely indecisive.
He’s in a genuine bind. Israel’s decisive action is making him look weak. On the other hand, his handlers in Moscow are telling him not to do it, and the MAGA ultras are reminding him he promised not to do it. I almost feel sorry for him.


Snigger.

downquark1 18-06-2025 22:44
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Well Israel is unlikely to win a sustained military exchange with Iran without western involvement, so if he doesn't back then up Israel will have to back down.

*This does not account for espionage.

Sephiroth 18-06-2025 22:58
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198191)
Well Israel is unlikely to win a sustained military exchange with Iran without western involvement, so if he doesn't back then up Israel will have to back down.

*This does not account for espionage.
Is that right?

downquark1 18-06-2025 23:03
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198192)
Is that right?
Iran has 10x the population of Israel and is hard to invade because of mountains.

Either there is revolution in Iran or tel Aviv will get chipped away.

Sephiroth 18-06-2025 23:46
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198193)
Iran has 10x the population of Israel and is hard to invade because of mountains.

Either there is revolution in Iran or tel Aviv will get chipped away.
Chipped away with what? Israel isn't gonna invade Iran. Just bomb their military and nuclear to shreds. Or do you see otherwise?

Chris 18-06-2025 23:47
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198193)
Iran has 10x the population of Israel and is hard to invade because of mountains.

Either there is revolution in Iran or tel Aviv will get chipped away.
You’re comparing apples and pears.

Population is not relevant when the exchange that has been taking place is missiles. The relevant metrics are technology, industrial capacity and capable allies willing to sell you what you can’t produce domestically. Exactly how do you envisage Iran ‘chipping away’ at Israel? Iran itself had hoped to do so via Hamas and Hezbollah, not via some long march through northern Iraq and Syria. Did you notice that wasn’t quite working out for them?

downquark1 19-06-2025 05:21
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
I envision this https://youtu.be/p4Me9G3hPTE?

Population density is very relevant. But I'm not going to get into a long debate. We will see soon enough.

Chris 19-06-2025 07:50
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198198)
I envision this https://youtu.be/p4Me9G3hPTE?

Population density is very relevant. But I'm not going to get into a long debate. We will see soon enough.
Now you’re shifting the goalposts.

Population size (which you clearly meant in your earlier post) is not the same thing as population density. And in any case, the entire population of Israel would have to be at ground zero for one of those missiles to wipe them out.

Iran’s missiles don’t have anccurate targeting capabilities. They are little more than terror weapons. They cause spectacular but highly localised destruction of whatever they happen to land on. Of the 400 or so launched, about 10-15% have got through, and killed a couple of dozen people. The 1967 ‘six day war’ killed 776 soldiers and civilians.

downquark1 19-06-2025 08:58
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
I'm am not shifting the goal posts. Iran wins on both population and population density, so you don't have an argument, I just didn't want to insult your intelligence by pointing out that Iran is significantly larger.

You don't need super accurate missiles, you just aim into Tev Aviv.

Iranians are the intellectuals of the Muslim world, they have no shortage of engineers. If they do engage in a long term conflicts (although it looks like they don't want to) they keep rebuilding.

They have already used hypersonic missiles which are considered high tech delivery systems.

---------- Post added at 08:58 ---------- Previous post was at 08:27 ----------

OK I will lay it out:

US doesn't give any support:
Revolution in Iran - Israel wins
Iran unifies into long term war - Iran wins

US commits massive forces:
Russia and China don't support Iran, Iran surrenders/regime change - Israel wins
Russia and China do support Iran - Long term conflict, hard to say (maybe WWIII)

Pierre 19-06-2025 09:40
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198193)
Either there is revolution in Iran or tel Aviv will get chipped away.
I think that's the plan, bomb them into revolution. Can't see it happening though.

Chris 19-06-2025 11:31
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198202)
I'm am not shifting the goal posts. Iran wins on both population and population density, so you don't have an argument, I just didn't want to insult your intelligence by pointing out that Iran is significantly larger.

You don't need super accurate missiles, you just aim into Tev Aviv.

Iranians are the intellectuals of the Muslim world, they have no shortage of engineers. If they do engage in a long term conflicts (although it looks like they don't want to) they keep rebuilding.

They have already used hypersonic missiles which are considered high tech delivery systems.

---------- Post added at 08:58 ---------- Previous post was at 08:27 ----------

OK I will lay it out:

US doesn't give any support:
Revolution in Iran - Israel wins
Iran unifies into long term war - Iran wins

US commits massive forces:
Russia and China don't support Iran, Iran surrenders/regime change - Israel wins
Russia and China do support Iran - Long term conflict, hard to say (maybe WWIII)
There’s no path to anything anyone but an Iranian regime Mullah would call ‘victory’ here.

Sure, Israel probably wants regime change. Lack of regime change however is not an Iranian win. Iran has already lost its proxies on Israel’s borders, and it has now lost swathes of war-making capacity on its home territory.

Lack of regime change certainly doesn’t open the way to Tel Aviv getting ‘chipped away’. Iran doesn’t have the capacity to produce enough damaging munitions, rapidly enough, to achieve that, and neither Russia nor China is in a position to help.

Sephiroth 19-06-2025 11:45
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
One of the things sort of bothering me is there is no condemnation of Iran from Downquark. Especially because of their terrorist proxies - Hamas and Hezbollah.

He seems to be in "just saying" mode by inventing Iranian superiority at the end game.

What I'd really like to know is whether or not Downquark would prefer Iran to be the winning side. I'll be surprised if I get a proper answer.

downquark1 19-06-2025 12:04
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
There’s no path to anything anyone but an Iranian regime Mullah would call ‘victory’ here.
Now you are moving goal posts. Survival is victory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198206)
One of the things sort of bothering me is there is no condemnation of Iran from Downquark. Especially because of their terrorist proxies - Hamas and Hezbollah.

He seems to be in "just saying" mode by inventing Iranian superiority at the end game.

What I'd really like to know is whether or not Downquark would prefer Iran to be the winning side. I'll be surprised if I get a proper answer.
Most of my scenarios I suggest involve Israel winning and that is definitely a strong possibility.

In this particular military spat, Israel opened aggression and is risking World war 3. Iran has been funding Hamas and Hesbola etc. which I do utterly condemn and if they do lose it would not be undeserved. But I am still tepid about the whole risking world war III thing.

Sephiroth 19-06-2025 12:19
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198207)
Now you are moving goal posts. Survival is victory.



Most of my scenarios I suggest involve Israel winning and that is definitely a strong possibility.

In this particular military spat, Israel opened aggression and is risking World war 3. Iran has been funding Hamas and Hesbola etc. which I do utterly condemn and if they do lose it would not be undeserved. But I am still tepid about the whole risking world war III thing.
Thanks - I did receive a proper answer.

About this WWIII thing: The corollary to your tepidity is that Israel, having noted the IAEA report, should not, on balance, have attacked Iran - leaving Israel open to eventual extinction by reason of Iran's eventual nuke. Then what for WWIII?

This was a long time coming and the IAEA report was the trigger. Note that the surrounding Arab countries have not mobilised against Israel nor made any such noises. On the contrary, I believe them to be sort of rooting for Israel.

downquark1 19-06-2025 12:29
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
The countries allied with the US are rooting for Israel (sort of). The countries allied with BRICs is rooting for Iran (also sort of).

The nuke thing is a red herring. It's just Saddams WMD over again.

Russia and China don't want US influence in Iran as that messes with their geopolitical chess game.

Sephiroth 19-06-2025 12:48
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36198209)
The countries allied with the US are rooting for Israel (sort of). The countries allied with BRICs is rooting for Iran (also sort of).

The nuke thing is a red herring. It's just Saddams WMD over again.

Russia and China don't want US influence in Iran as that messes with their geopolitical chess game.
The "nuke thing" is a matter of record: The IAEA's report.

And yes, imo, to your chess game assertion. Nevertheless, Isreal, acting on the IAEA report, is in self defence mode.

Hugh 19-06-2025 13:28
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36198210)
The "nuke thing" is a matter of record: The IAEA's report.

And yes, imo, to your chess game assertion. Nevertheless, Isreal, acting on the IAEA report, is in self defence mode.
Analysis of the IAEA report here.

https://isis-online.org/isis-reports...port-may-2025/

Maggy 19-06-2025 13:49
Re: Israel v Iran conflict
 
There’s another option. It all plays out online via social media.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 18:46.
Page 1 of 3 1 23
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum