acting as Israel's enforcer.

There would be no Israel without American tax dollars. Not only are we their enforcer, we're their benefactor, their main source of income. Netanyahu is an arrogant ungrateful bastard.

I really wonder why we keep giving Israel the money that we do...

I know this post will get me flamed by someone...

"Allies" didn't pick fights, so that you'd have to weigh in...
"Allies" didn't act like bullies, lording it over poor and weak people...
"Allies" didn't look through your private stuff...

I may not know a lot about the nuances of our relationship with them, and how the leaders interact. but here's my 2 cents...

Israel is like a passive-agressive victim, they use their horrific history to make everyone feel guilty and help them, then turn around and act like a impetulant child, and believe everyone 'should' back them up. How many US weapons do they have in their possession? How many weapons do they have that we DON'T know about? and also, why isn't russia or other nearby countries trying to calm this down...if limited nuculear warfare started in that region, all those areas would be fucked/contaminated...

It just feels like Israel's leader is a hawk and is trying to stir up shit before our elections...

FirstLight,

You got it right. The time has come for ALL of US to recognize this historically persecuted minority has become led by a right-wing, neoconservative group that illegally influences United States elections. Not only are these people hard-liners, they possess nuclear weapons and have a proclivity to use them. They will use the Holocaust and other examples to back their need to cause more human suffering.

The American and Israeli People should stand up to this dangerous cabal that will only foment fear, terrorism and war around the world. If they attack Iran drawing the US into another war, be advised of MF $@!t-storm that will be directed at Israel.

seems to be running the world these days

picking Presidents, choosing wars, all so that the fat pig can get billions in tax breaks from his puppet Rmoney

If bibi wants to start a war - he's on his own - good luck with that you asshole

Need I go on?....

We need to stay out of this fight. Regardless of the hype, Iran can't hurt us and probably wouldn't try. We have nothing to gain and a lot to lose.

that they aren't going to do exactly what they say they will? They will hit U.S. Warships in the Gulf, they will close the Gulf, they'll hit U.S. bases and interests in the ME. Why wouldn't they do exactly what they say they will do? They would have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

scraping for a fight than starting one which then sucks in other nations really isn't the brightest of ideas, no?

They will attack, they've said so, even if only Israel strikes, they have said they make not distinction between Israel and the U.S..
Make no mistake, Iran will hit U.S. interests, military and civilian, and once that happens, Pres. Obama will have no chioce but to hit Iran, the american people will demand it, especially once the video of a damaged or destroyed U.S. Warship and dead and wounded Americans are broadcast. And make no mistake, Pres. Obama will hit back and hit back with everything we've got which is substantial, 2 Carrier Air Wings alone will destroy Iran's military and civilian infrastructure.
I truly hope this doesn't come to pass, but I fear the worse. I guess I'm a pessimist at heart.

and I don't think we destroyed most of that. And Iran has a much stronger military now, than during the Iran-Iraq war. This would be much worse than either of the wars we are in now--for everybody involved.

my point is that if Israel attacks Iran, Iran will hit U.S. interests, military and civilian, in the Gulf, at that point, Pres. Obama will have absolutely no choice but to hit Iran and hit them hard, Iran does have a stronger military than back during the Iran-Iraq war, but they are still no match for the U.S. military combined with the Israeli military.

Now, do I think it could trigger a regional war, hell yes.

count Hezbollah and Hamas, so I don't think this could trigger a truly regional conflict--though there would be some scattered violence. The Arab Gulf countries, at least the Saudis, would covertly support such an attack because most of the Arabs leaders resent the de facto Iranian hegemony that resulted from the Iraq war.

Of course, if became a full-scale war with a land invasion, all bets are off. But I think this is quite unlikely. And I think the Iranians, despite their bluster, are not so stupid as to do something that would require such a response.

I think you're correct about the the other Arab nations giving tacit support for a strike. They don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon anymore than us or Israel does.

This is a long-standing feud.

However, the Saudis must be careful because the Saudi citizens around the main Saudi oil fields are Shia. That means that the main Saudi efforts will go to keeping the oil field Shia pacified.

Perhaps the Saudis will offer some of their air force, which is supposed to be the best of their military. Their ground troops are supposed to be useless and their navy is puny.

If the Iranians do hit us after the Israelis start the thing, I think that we will do the least possible, including secure our embassies and consulates and concentrate on opening the Straits of Hormuz.

We should bill the Israelis for our trouble, too, since we will have not started the mess.

D****d Netanya-coo-coo and his whole Likud outfit.

You make the odd point again, "They will attack, they've said so, even if only Israel strikes" Ergo, if you leave them alone they won't attack.

So why scrap for an attack? If Iran attacks as you say, "even if only Israel strikes" what's the point of attacking Iran in the first place?

You seemed to have completely misunderstood or misread my question the first time.

that if Israel attacks Iran, even w/o our help, Iran has made it clear that they will attack our interests in the Gulf.

and reply with something that has zero to do with my question.

So again, If Israel doesn't attack Iran, Iran will do nothing, correct?

no, I don't believe that Iran will do anything if left alone.

If a bluff, he'll say it again in the future.

If it's real, it's a question of when the Israeli military would strike: before or after the election in November.

Another unanswered question is at what point would this country be compelled to assist the Israeli military if they couldn't finish a job they started? What is the duty of an ally when the ally has assumed the risk of danger against the advice and support of this country?

They let their smaller ally, the Austro-Hungarian empire force their hand, which resulted in WW One.

Unfortunately for them, they do not share airspace with Iran.

They will be forced to intrude on someone's airspace, such as Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and maybe Kuwait.

None of these entities will give them advance permission. They'll just have to scoot and hope for the best. Probably the Saudis will be having problems with their equipment.

The Israelis also will need refueling to get home, and will have to recross other countries for that, too.

I'm not sure if the Israelis have the flying tankers that we do. If they don't they'd have to "borrow" ours. The Israelis also don't have friendly nations to the east of Iran where they could put down in an emergency. They also don't have carrier ready aircraft like we do, with a reinforced frame that won't fall apart on the carrier catapult.

I really don't know how the Israelis would carry out a bombing mission against the Iranians. If anyone here has a better idea, I sure would like to hear it.

If the Israelis don't have a workable, all of this may just be bluster.

and weapons?

with that man." meaning Netanyahu.
I am sure Obama has gotten the word and so has Secretary Clinton.
I am hopeful stringent steps will be taken against Israel for their reckless policy.
This is a case of America First.

on this announcement. Y'know what with all the agent provocateur actions...er...attacks on embassies.

Adelson said he's spend at least 100 million on this election. Angry mobs and RPGs are chicken feed. Follow the money. Again.

the timing of all of this is suspect, and gas prices seemed to spike before it started. The fact that al CIAda is behind much of the protest action is also suspect.

and Africa. I know you don't give a shit about that, but I know the the US government is monitoring Iran and will protect you. Just stop that fucking whining.

When he was referring to Netanyahu. I'm sorry.

U.S. embassies are burning -- hey, why not attack Iran right about now?

If Iran gets the A-Bomb, does that mean that Israel will suddenly be nuked off the face of the planet? I don't think so.

Obviously Iran without nuclear weapons is preferable. But if Iran does get the nuclear missile I don't think it will go beyond sabre rattling - pretty much as they do today. Iran knows full well that if they USE the nuclear missile, they would be nuked into oblivion and probably not just by the United States. It will make other nations more wary of going in and attacking Iran though.

We now know North Korea has nuclear weapons. They haven't used them yet. AFAIK, Israel may have nuclear weapons but I don't really know for sure.

Taking out Iran's nuclear facilities before they have the bomb does sound enticing but I fear that if this is done by Israel acting unilaterally then this would IMO make it more likely that Israel would be attacked. It would be like kicking the hornet's nest.

I would think with the USA standing by its allies and with the clear understanding that if their allies get attacked with nuclear missiles that the allies will respond in kind is good enough.

So what would be the point?

day to day diplomacy and military conflicts. They are a potent deterrent against "total war," because most leaders do not want to have their countries wiped out. During the Cold War, I think that the threat of nukes was the source of a lot of US power. Certainly, as Vietnam showed, we did not have the conventional power to forcibly dominate the world militarily. We probably have no idea how many times nukes were used in diplomacy, but there were rumors that such a threat was behind the Soviet withdrawal from Azerbaijan (Iran) in 1946. I think such threats-real or implied--were an important tool in our foreign pollicy arsenal. In a similar vein, the threat of invasion, overthrow, or "shock and awe" attacks constitute a a big stick in US foreign policy. It only needs to be used occasionally to remind the uppity nations of the world that they could be next.

Did you seriously just write that? Not to be rude but rhetoric like that honestly sounds like something that the Klan would use when describing minorities.

Since you bring up the cold war, do you know that we were almost wiped out by a Soviet satellite glitch? Were it not for a junior officer, who was later dismissed from service, we would have been. It reported a missile launch on three separate occasions in the course of a few hours. It was actually IR from the sun.

Thinking that a nuclear bomb is a viable deterrent is at best delusional, and at worst completely insane. Take a look at Chernobyl. Twenty plus years on and it is still not habitable. The amount of fallout that would travel around the globe from ONE multi-megaton bomb could poison food production across entire regions.

It's easy to be an armchair general when talking about something like this, but the reality is that an above ground nuclear detonation ANYWHERE on the globe would cause serious issues for more than just the intended target.

I am not an advocate of nuclear weapons. I was just saying that part of the appeal comes from the power acquired without having to actually use them. That, after all, is the reason Sadam Hussein wanted people to think he had weapons of mass destruction. The diplomatic power of A bombs has lessened with the international consensus among most actors that using them would be unthinkable, if only because the retaliation. But Bush seems to have been trying to bring them back into category of weapons that might actually be used with his "bunker busting" nuke rhetoric.

The perception of the rest of the world sees us as bullies. We need to change that and it would be to our benefit to do so.

F him.

but I don't think they are picking a fight for the pure heck of it, They feel like a Iran with a nuke isn't a neat idea since they will be the ones to receive it. Now I don't know if they are making one or not but I would think they would have more info then most on a discussion board would or could have.


I am not for going to war unless its absolutely necessary.

and vice versa.

This has Sheldon Adelson's handprint all over it. He is trying to jump start the flagging Romney campaign, hoping that the US will start bombing Iran. Deja vu all over again, reminiscent of the WTC "bombing" that started the fake war with Iraq.

We must understand there is a lot of disagreement in Israel. Israelis are not monolithic thinkers. The peace groups tend to get ignored by the Israeli corporate media just like those groups are ignored here.

I'm so sick of US politicians kissing Likudnik ass.

These fuckers are taking us down a path to never ending war.

Sheldon Adelson has had entirely too much power and influence over the debate this election cycle.

As if the US is supposed to?

On the other hand, I still think there there may be more reasons than Libya that we have 5 war ships in the Mediterranean. Maybe for shooting down incoming to Israel...

What do I know? Nothing. But 5 warships?

It's not HIS kid that will pay the price.... it will not be his buddy Romney's 5 kids who will pay the price.... it will be MINE.

Please Israeli Citizens... get out in the streets and stop this insane man before it is to late!