Iran could destroy Israel with 2 Nukes

Middle East Newsline ^ | 7/7/05 | Middle East Newsline

[servantboy777]

With all due respect, your analysis is flawed. One does not have to destroy all targets to bring about the collapse of a society. You are also incorrect in the assumption that Israel does not have enough nuclear weapons. Do your homework, Israel's warhead count is in the hundreds, not one-sy, two-sy.

Hitting major targets such as infrastructure and government would be the goal, however the radiological fallout would cause food/water sources and geographical areas to become contaminated.

Hell the lucky ones would be in the mountains, but how lucky can ya be when there is nowhere to return to. As far as autonomous since Cyrus the great, let them ingest water and food contaminated with uranium or plutonium.

Radiation poisoning, lack of food and water, lack of governmental control of the masses would create chaos on a biblical scale. You would witness Iranian turning on Iranian as survival mode kicks in. Their society would cease to function. Trust me on that one.

[muawiyah]

The subject wasn't taking out Iran's nuclear capabilities, but rather a nuclear counterattack against Iran AFTER an Iranian atomic attack on Israel.

[RinaseaofDs]

Destroy in two, but it they will only launch one. As long as the Islamofascists revere Jerusalem as holy, they'll only wipe out Tel Aviv.

Israel is a one-nuke state.

[CyberAnt]

How condescending of you .. I know what the subject is .. I also know Iran will NOT use nuclear again Israel.

[muawiyah]

Wasn't being condescending at all. It thought you had simply gotten disconnected from the topic.

[dervish]

Maybe we could include Pakistan and get rid of the Islamic bomb altogether.

The two words - Islam and Nukes - should never co-exist.

[null and void]

"Israel obviously needs more land area. Something, say, about the size of Syria Saudi Arabia.

There. Much better...

[dervish]

Iranian Nukes have popular support.

How is taking out the Mullahs going to stop that? Or are you saying that if the Mullahs are gone it won't matter if Iran has nukes?

I don't trust Iran with nukes no matter who is in power.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"Let's see ~ a handful of nukes would take out Iran yet leave the oilfields available for future use."

Unless they hit on the brilliant idea of basing some of their missiles in hardened silos upwind of the oil fields...

[JeffersonRepublic.com]

"Iran could destroy Israel with 2 Nukes"

It only took one twisted religion to destroy Iran.

Holtz
JeffersonRepublic.com

[Mad Mammoth]

Some observations:

1.) Iran will never launch a nuke strike on Israel, because Joe Farah over at WorldNetDaily.Com INSISTS that Iran is going to explode a nuke in the atmosphere over AMERICA, to create an EMP-disaster for our electronic infrastructure. Hey, Joe publishes a (laugh-snicker-snort) "Intel Newsletter" that proves this very thing. And all you have to do is subscribe to it and send Joe your money. (HAR-HAR)

OK, getting serious now.

2.) It is entirely possible that Iran would use a nuke or nukes on Israel as soon as they were operational, because the mullahs do not have any sense whatsoever, they would not care if Iran were destroyed if the benefit (to them) was the destruction of their hated enemy Israel. In their deluded minds, such a "selfless" act of national suicide would catapult them to Numero Uno status at that big Muslim banquet table in the hereafter, and not 72, not 720, but probably 7200 choice tasty Islamic virgins for each and every one of 'em. Their minds are that deranged, believe that.

3.) The Shah of Iran (and his family), for all of their faults, would have been responsible and sane if they had been in power and obtained a nuclear capability. Compared to the carnage, torture, sponsorships of terrorism that the mullahs unleashed on the civilized world, the Shah was a peacemaker and human rights advocate. And let us never forget that the reason Iran is ruled by an Islamic tyranny is due to the treason and incompetence of that chiklet-grinning idiot from Plains Georgia, the closest America ever came to picking a name out of a phone book and making him President, the one, the only, the accursed Jimmy Carter. Each and every person that has been murdered due to the actions of Iran's Islamofascists can point to Carter as the truly responsible party, because HE is the one who put those killers into power by his betrayal of the Shah, who was a loyal and reliable U.S. ally, the blood of untold hundreds of thousands of people are on Carter's hands.

4.) If Israel is serious about her national security and actual survival, she better decide whether to fish or cut bait, because the time is damn near upon them to do so.

5.) Iran wants a nuke so damn bad? Give 'em one. A 10MT airburst over Tabriz (the Ayatollah's home town) would send a most appropriate message.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Iranian Nukes have popular support.

Don't confuse a MSM press blackout with 'popular support', the Mulahs are hated by the rest of the Iranians.

[CyberAnt]

"simply gotten disconnected from the subject"


I've been connected to the subject since 1985. Isaiah 17:1 says, "The burden of Damascus, it has been taken away from being a city, it has become a ruinous heap."

[M. Espinola]

"Iran could destroy Israel with 2 Nukes"

Then logic demands a first strike prior to the mullahs gaining dozens of nukes (with Moscow's assistance of course).

[muawiyah]

It'd already done that several times. You know, Nagasaki and Hiroshima prove that being hit with a nuke is not the end of things.

[bert]

Point of order......

Please define devastate. I doubt your assertion. When I look at Iran, I see lots of square miles.

[CyberAnt]

Well .. you better check your stats. The bombs built today are totally different than the bombs used in the 40's.

[bert]

.....one of the pillars of Islam ....

Actually if the Kaaba was obliterated and the surrounding shrines and mosques obliterated and radio actively poisoned, two pillars would be rendered impossible.

The reason for making the Hajj pilgrimage would be gone and although the faithful could pray 5 times a day, they would fall prostrate facing a hole in the ground.

Then there is the Zakat or giving to charity, a third pillar. It would soak up all the Zakat for a very long time to cleanse and rebuild the shrines. Although The king of Saudi Arabia has as his primary duty the keeping of the two Holy Mosques, I'm certain he would spread the cost around. The other is in Medina and should also be obliterated for good measure.

Lastly and most profoundly, Since there is no God But Allah and since such action would certainly be his will it can be reasoned that Allah willed the end of Islam.

By the-way, there are many who rant about the jihad against the current crusade. The actions outlined above will be known for the rest of world history as the final crusade.

[muawiyah]

Our bombs, and those of the Russians, and the Chinese, are different.

The Iranian bombs aren't built yet, but you'd better believe they are not going to be up to snuff.

[Bon mots]

Let's see ~ a handful of nukes would take out Iran yet leave the oilfields available for future use.

Actually, even if it were much more than a handful of nukes, and we unleashed hundreds of thermonuclear weapons turning the entire country of Iran into a crackling, smoking mass of fused green glass - all the oil underneath would still be perfectly usable!