US refuses to commit to avoid attacking Iran

Jerusalem Post ^ | 12/13/5 | JPOST.COM STAFF

[SmithL]

The United States on Tuesday International Atomic Energy Agency head Mohamed ElBaradei's call to state explicitly that it has no plans to launch a military strike against Iran.

The spokesman for the State Department in Washington asserted that at this point the burden of proof lies with the Iranians, and they must follow through with their commitments to the international community.

ElBaradei claimed that an announcement in which the US insists it would not attack, might encourage Iran to cease its nuclear development plans, according to Israel Radio.

Robert Joseph, the US Secretary of State's aide said last week that he believed Iran would not back down from its nuclear ambitions and would even risk UN sanctions.

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

although they do have a good Navy with warships,

What warships? What class of ships? What tonnage? What size guns? Or, what type of missiles and quantities?

Not to confuse the type with coastal defense ships, but tell us all what type of "warships" does Israel have that can be used for force projection 1000 miles away + near Iran?

a deployable force of 15,000 <.i>

What is your source? When did Israel acquire a division sized unit of Marines? Where are they based? Are they at sea now? How do they sustain themselves at sea for so long?

even a Navy Base at the Red Sea, it was about getting to Iran contrary to your notion that Israel can't get there. How wide is the Gulf of Aqaba? How deep is the Straight of Tiran. What Chanel would be used to get from Eilat (naval base) to the Red Sea?

TRUE or FALSE: the most feasible channel to get to the Red Sea from the Straight of Tiran is only one mile (1 mile) from Egyptian land (and shore batteries).

TRUE or FALSE: It is quite easy to mine a body of water that is only one mile wide.

Due to the depth of the channel and the coral reefs in the area, what limitation does this place on a "fleet of warships" in terms of navigating to avoid running aground?

As I asked earlier, how would this "fleet" protect itself from Saudi, Egyptian, Jordanian naval and air assets? Would Yemen cooperate with Arab nations and Iran in a war, being that Aden sits at the strategic choke pint near the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea?

How many days sailing time to get to Iran from Eilat (assuming the avoid all the narrow channels, the Egyptian shore defenses, mines, subs, PT boats, anti-ship missiles, tactical fighters, etc.

Do you know exactly how narrow the Straight of Tiran is? DO you know exactly how narrow the opening at the Gulf of Aden is? Do you know how much depth a destroyer needs to navigate this area? Do you know how much depth a ship the size needed to carry a brigade would need to navigate safely?

Are you goin gto tell us that a large fleet with 15,000 men onbaord can sail down the very, very narrow straight of Tiran undetected? Do you know how many miles it is from Eilat to Aden? Do you know that Egypt, Saudi Arabia and others all have a crack at sinking this fleet all during that long trip?

Even if by the greatest miracle that ever happened Israel was able to float a fleet along with a division from Eilat to Aden, how in the world would Israel sustain this fleet and force? How woudl they be resupplied? How would reinforcements arrive? How would they oeprate without aircover--remember, contrary to what you claimed, Israel does NOT have aircraft carriers.

You are making wild claims about Israel's force projection capabilities. You are not using sources. You are not quoting facts. We have a good forum here at Free Republic. When it comes to serious issues, all we ask is that statements be able to be backed up with factual information. The only way to have a reasonable discussion and debate at Free Republic is to be able to have claims made on each side be factual. When one side makes wild claims and false statements, and the other side is trying to debate the issue using facts, it makes for an unbalanced situation and a lousy debate.

Your pal claimed that Israel attacked Iran's nuclear reactor (it was Iraq, not Iran), and you claimed Israel had multiple aircraft carriers (Where did you get that? From D.U.?) These types of wild, false claims are not what this forum is all about. You need to know the facts if you get into a discussion about factual information.

It is OK to say Hillary Clinton is fat and ugly and she is a opportunist, and stuff like that because that is opinion. Some threads are abou topinion. But to claim Israel has aircraft carriers, a large (offensive) fleet and a division sized Marine unit capable of reaching Iran (and being sustained and reinforceed--that has to be a given in military terms) is so wild and crazy that it is unbecoming of our fine forum here. If you make statements that sound factual, please be ready to prove they are based on fact.

[Heyworth]

Step #1, Israel invades Syria..

Then what's Step #2? Israel invades Iraq, or Israel invades Saudi Arabia?

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

And of course you've never misspoke. Because your perfect! (right?)

To misspeak: To speak mistakenly, inappropriately, or rashly.

To "misspeak" is to say something that you know but you say it incorrectly. You did not "misspeak", since you never corrected you error. You truly believed that Israel's destruction of Iraq's Osirak Nuclear in 1981 was actually carried out at a nuclear reactor in Iran. Until you were corrected by "Dave Elias", you flat out did not know that it was Iraq, not Iran.

So the truth is you do NOT misspeak--the truth is you did not know your facts of history.

[tobyhill]

"We have a good forum here at Free Republic. When it comes to serious issues, all we ask is that statements be able to be backed up with factual information."

If you consider accusing me of being on drugs or having a mental problem a "good forum" then you are a POS and prior to your insertion on my posting, without it being addressed to you, it was pretty much all nonfactual shop talk so who made you the "Free Republic All Serious Only Factual Proved Police"?
FYI, my reasons for thinking Israel had Aircraft Carriers was not based on fact checking but thinking I read something a while back that they had purchased them from another country and that POed some Middle-Eastern Countries but as it turns out my recollection was wrong not that I really have to explain anything to a POS.

[Dave Elias]

It sounds like they've being playing Age of Empires or something and think that Israel could effect some kind of Rush on Tehran. Perhaps there is a flag in that you capture to win.

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

LOL!

Hey, I have played Age of Empires, but at least it has not warped my history education or ability to do reasearch.

[ArrogantBustard]

Tell me... Who was it that took out the reactor in Iran the last time, since Israel "has never attacked Iran"?

Uhhh ... why don't you tell us who took out a reactor in Iran, where that reactor was located (name of nearest city will do), and when this "take-out" occurred?

Thanks in advance.

Well? Got an answer?

[LjubivojeRadosavljevic]

["Hillary Clinton is...(an) opportunist"]

Yes, this is very true. What a brilliant deduction.

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

You obviously have no clue as to what "context" means. The post was NOT about that POS. Read the post again, and then ask yourself why you wold make such a stupid post. I pointed out to this other member the difference between FACT and OPINION. I could have just as easily said "you like that painting" or "you do not like that painting" as an example of opinion, but I chose to take a crack at Hillary. Do you make a habit out of making stupid posts?

[LjubivojeRadosavljevic]

["It is OK to say Hillary Clinton is fat and ugly..."]

a previous post

and then

["You obviously have no clue as to what "context" means."]

Yes, I do. In short, you're not the editor of this forum.
Now do you get it?

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

My post had 749 words in it.

I used one sentence as an ILLUSTRATION for that other member as an example of "opinion". That sentence took up 24 words out of a total of 749 words in the post. That one sentence had nothing to do with the theme of my post. It was not meant as a "Breaking News" revelation--it was supposed to be an obvious remark. Repeat--it was supposed to be an obvious remark, If you read the entire post, you would have known that, assuming you have some rudimentary ability in reading comprehension.


Now, you take that one sentence (24 words)--which was not even part of the theme of the post (a total of 749 words)--and make a childish comment. Do you always avoid the core of a discussion in order to find some insignificant, irrelevant piece of minutia to crab about? Are you that void of capability of adding some value to the discussion?

Since I was using an example of opinion instead of fact, I could have said "you like pizza" or "you hate TV". Instead, since I had to use one sentence, I decided to take a swipe at Hillary Clinton, a bitch that I hate. Given an opportunity to trash Clinton, I will do it.

You are some DU troll, right? You are some RAT lover, correct? Is that your problem? Since you took 24 words out of a 749 word post, and took one sentence that purposefully had nothing to do with the theme of the post, but was done to use as an example for that other member, you seem to be some Democratic hack that avoids the serious parts of a thread/post and finds minutia to make some stupid remark. Get a life. Then get serious when you post here at FR and stop wasting posts on your meaningless minutia.

[LjubivojeRadosavljevic]

["get serious when you post here at FR..."]

Well, I usually do get serious when I post.

By the way, I like Hillary about as much as you do.

[Tommyjo]

Israel does not have any warships or even carriers on deployment in the Arabian Sea. Israel does not have any aircraft carriers. Israel does not possess any such amphibious capability to put troops ashore in force and sustain them. It's whole nature for its land army is defence. It has no power projection in strategic airlift or amphibious capability. I think that your initial 'Air Craft Carriers' statement sums up your limited knowledge in this topic.