NUCLEAR IRAN [They Have called For The Destruction Of Israel And The United States ALERT]

Neal Boortz ^ | Dec. 5, 2005 | Neal Boortz

[Big Red Clay]

Excellent post, John. I think your analysis is right on the money. Israel will not act without either the explicit or complicit approval of the U.S. Unfortunately, the President is hamstrung by the current political situation and cannot act or approve action by others unless the Iranians act first. The Iranians will not act first because waiting to be hit pre-emptively by either the U.S. or Israel will give them the excuse to "wipe Israel off the map". The situation is complicated by the fact that those underground facilities will not be neutralized by anything short of nukes (unless we have something super duper secret that could do the job).
I cannot for the life of me see any way that this situation can be resolved in even a somewhat positive manner. The Iranians seem to be holding a hand that can only be beaten if the U.S. or Israel go "nuculur" first. If that happens, the nation that drops the big one will be portrayed as a pariah even if they are responding to a clear and present danger to their national survival. If the U.S. or Israel fail to act, (and I agree with you that neither will do a damn thing besides posture) then the west will be held up to nuclear blackmail at the hands of an Islamofascist regime that is controlled by insane barbarians.
This is a nightmare situation. The next year should be very interesting to say the least.

[going hot]

A tactical or suitcase nuke lit up near their facility would prolly work for the desired effect, and have the cover of "it was their booboo" to the "civilized" world.

[familyop]

"The poor Israelis will be called on to do this, and the world will condemn them while privately breathing a sigh of relief. It really is PATHETIC!"

U.S. Army report: Israel can't stop Iran nukes
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1534403/posts

Israel has an anti-ballistic missile defense up and successfully tested and has a really mean nuclear offense. Another friendly country is building ABM defense.

Iran bellows about Israel. But I think Iran is looking more seriously at countries in western Europe, where some real gain in power is possible. IMO, Russia and China will threaten in really nasty ways when an action is taken against materiel in Iran.

[RightWhale]

Israel cannot do this without the cooperation of the US since Israel has no direct connection to Iran without going through US territory. Guaranteed Bush will not be re-elected if he moves on Iran, but it doesn't matter and won't change anything since the entire planet already assumes the US will take out the nuke facilities. The only question is when, and that seems to be coming into focus: March '06.

[familyop]

On perceived radical Islamist thought, consider this. Ahmadinejad threatened to nuke Israel, even though the Dome of the Rock is there and Iran would be annihilated in reply.

Radical Islamist students in the USA have said that they wouldn't join our military, because they "couldn't kill another Arab." They did not say that they couldn't kill Muslims.

It's more about ethnicity and power, IMO. And any attempt by terrorist Islamist leaders to get more power can be promoted their people as a benefit to the religion.

[sheik yerbouty]

It's more like the Arab gutter..