Posted on 07/15/2009 7:18:13 PM PDT by metmom
Two Israeli missile class warships have sailed through the Suez Canal ten days after a submarine capable of launching a nuclear missile strike, in preparation for a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
The deployment into the Red Sea, confirmed by Israeli officials, was a clear signal that Israel was able to put its strike force within range of Iran at short notice. It came before long-range exercises by the Israeli air force in America later this month and the test of a missile defence shield at a US missile range in the Pacific Ocean.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Thank you Germany.
I think you’re correct.
In case you didn’t see this (”OBAMA VS. BIBI: SHOWDOWN”):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2270358/posts?page=1
Can is relative.
China and israel HAVE them. Obviously they CAN have them, because they have for decades. Are YOU going to take them away? No one else is either.
Iran probably does not, beyond a couple ssr nukes maybe.
Of all the above countries, Iran is the one rational observers least want to want nukes. China (hopefully), like the USSR, understands MAD. Israel has had nukes 3 decades and hadn’t nuked anyone yet. Iran openly advocates wiping one country off the map totally. I am not sure what orbit a person has to be operating in to not make any sort of rational distinction here, though there are a lot of folks in the west unable to, apparently.
This isn’t a thing about nations being treated as people and therefore ‘rights’ and even ‘feelings’ being relevant. Countries will do what is best for them, to the limit of what they perceive of being able to get away with as possible. By the reasoning (?) of your post, Lebanon could be argued as a viable nuclear state. Zimbabwe could too. Can you argue against either or both of them as viable ICBM-owning countries? Zimbabwe has a long history of political stability under Mugabe, longer than Iran’s, I think.
A more practical way of looking at is would be to ask yourself if whether Iran having nukes is good, bad, indifferent, or unknown for you, whether than whether there is any thing right or wrong about who owns or doesn’t own nukes. That is all that matters in the end, and collectively your interests in this will in outcome if not opinion mirror most if not all other americans.
(I have the sneaking feeling I am feeding a troll)
I hope you’re right Squantos.
Contingency plans are in order.
“You’ll find that supporting Iran and opposing Israel don’t go over very well here. It’s a conservative site, you know. “
A rational person would find to many reasons to oppose Israel on a number of issues (the Pollard case being one, Patriot tech transfers to china being another, and why bother to bring up the Liberty), and it is silly to act like that country is our new best friend (nations HAVE no friends, not even enduring alliances, only enduring interests), but personally I cannot see how a nuclear Iran is good for almost anyone in the West, period. In this case, it might be in the US’s interests (not the manchurian candidate’s) to let israel do the heavy lifting, because it is certain the political will does not and will not exist in washington.
“Now we have an honest appraisal of the reality and I totally agree. Given that premise, and the new “doctrine of preemption” so strongly advocated by some here, even after Iraq, in goading Israel to use our nukes on Iran,then conversely, if China nuked us out of the blue using that same doctrine, it would be acceptable?”
Philisophical navel-gazing. It would be World War III.
:“Iran gives state-sponsored aid to train suicide bombers.” Did you know that “Shiites” do not do suicide bombing? Only Sunnis. There are no Sunnis in Iran. Please go Google “ Shiite suicide bomb” and read til you learn that reality. One of our problems as conservatives is that to maintain credibility we must deal is truth and fact or no one will listen.”
I call BS here. Everything you have put on this thread smells of Trolling. What does state-sponsored aid have to do with the sect of islam practiced in Iran?
The North Koreans have their hand in everything and in every terrorist or rogue nation. You ought to know that.
They must wipe this menace off the face of the map. If it includes using nuclear weapons so be it.
However, I would like to give you another option. Israel use of nuclear armed Jericho missiles on Iran. These are very accurate.
“Can you tell me how many iranians at any point in history were ever rounded up by another country or culture, tatooed against their will, put in shackles on box cars because of who they were or where they were from and exterminated (by lethal injection, bullets to the head, poisonous gas, creamatoriums, and much worse) for just being alive?”
While this rhetorical question explains why Israel would WANT nukes, it doesn’t say anything about whether that is a good idea or not for the western world.
“The us took care of the world’s evil at the time, and will need to do so again based on current circumstances. Please read up on history to answer your own question. “
Another great evil, the USSR, did a great deal in the second world war, and profited from it immensely.
But you are correct it was not in the question. My fault
Two Israeli missile class warships have sailed through the Suez Canal ten days after a submarine capable of launching a nuclear missile strike, in preparation for a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
____________________________________________
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSS
F-15I Ra'am 
F-16I Sufa
I agree. The Iranians have them all over the place
You mean supply the freedom fighters with airlifts?
Thank you so much for the information and also for the link.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.