marine1
Honorary Master
I think Killa is going to be dismissed from their group !! 
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: How do you normally pay for purchases in stores?
Israel Considers Pre-Emptive Attack On Iran
- Thread starter griffinbradley
- Start date
The_Assimilator
Executive Member
Minnow?
Do you know iran is one of the most oil rich countries in the world bud. They are far from minnows. Iran has something like 160 years worth of oil, more than the saudi's and second only to canada
You really are incapable of seeing past oil aren't you? Here's a hint: Israel doesn't give a rat's ass about Iran's oil reserves or lack thereof, and neither do I. Iran is a minnow because they're a small country with the delusion that they can play with big boys like the USA.
If the nukes hadn't been dropped, WW2 would have dragged on for months or years longer than it did, with millions of dead Americans and Japanese by the time it ended. Little Boy and Fat Man were a brutal way to end the war, but they saved far more lives than they took.
But they wouldn't have been snuffed out in an instant by a nuclear explosion with the dramatic mushroom cloud, the act recorded in all it's gruesome detail . Much easier on the consciences if a million people were wiped out in conventional warfare.
Out of sight and out mind.
news24
Expert Member
Someone please make this clear for me. Israel wants to attack a country which has never taken any military attack on another sovereign nation?
Again, they want to attack a country whose president is a loud mouth, but not commander-in-chief? Come on, someone wipe of the bloody big bully off the map.
Again, they want to attack a country whose president is a loud mouth, but not commander-in-chief? Come on, someone wipe of the bloody big bully off the map.
killadoob
Honorary Master
They are the 17th biggest country in the world, far from small.
So if israel was nuked by iran would you also think that saved more lives than it took or does it only apply to the western countries saving lives? I am just wondering if anyone can nuke to save lives or certain countries only.
Assas(no offense meant by shorting your name) tell me what iran has done to deserve the west and israel wanting to attack? 3 hours ago
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-attack-nuclear-plants.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
Now ASSAS tell me if israel hit iran and then iran nukes israel would you consider that a good end and a life saving end to a war?
Last edited:
I want a GTI
Senior Member
Their day will come. Make no mistake about it, when the States falls as a superpower(and that is soon), Israel will feel quite lonely. That's when they should try something against Iran, then watch Russia and China strike Israel...and again for good measure.
Jest* A Russian strike on Israel will be important to save lives, in the same way the two nukes saved many lives during WWII. Jest*
What would be even nicer, is NATO intervening in Syria
Their day will come. Make no mistake about it, when the States falls as a superpower(and that is soon), Israel will feel quite lonely. That's when they should try something against Iran, then watch Russia and China strike Israel...and again for good measure.
Jest* A Russian strike on Israel will be important to save lives, in the same way the two nukes saved many lives during WWII. Jest*
What would be even nicer, is NATO intervening in Syria
you shouldn't post before you take your meds, you just come across as crazy.
I don't think anyone would come out in support of Israel if they initiated a premptive nuclear strike on Iran, the WW2 situation can hardly be compared...
Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
About 95% of those deaths were probably before the end of the war seeing as the dropping of the bombs ended the war, while I am not trying to justify or debate the ethical question of dropping the bombs, I am just pointing out that at that time the thinking in the world was very different and as a testament to that no country has ever used nuclear weapons since. I doubt today any country would back another that used nuclear weapons except perhaps as an absolute last resort.
killadoob
Honorary Master
Well i keep hearing that nuking 200000 people is acceptable as it saves lives, so why not just nuke israel if they attack and stop a middle east war?
End it chop chop, people seem to be ok with it and they think it saves lives. So do it, a long drawn out war is no good. US should have nuked iraq and vietnam to save lives.
Somehow i doubt people would be so relaxed if israel was on the receiving end of a nuke to end a war, they would be crying about jew hatred and all that nonsense. Let's say that nuke killed 200000 israeli's and not japenese i doubt it would be as acceptable but if israel nukes iran everyone will be jumping for joy
.
Last edited:
Because that is taking the argument to far and I was not arguing that it was O.K only that at the time the thinking in the world was different the United States lost over 100000 milatary personnel during the pacific war and based on that and the general sense of despair most of the world must have felt after 6 years of world war, not to mention this was after all the atrocities Hitler had commited had been uncovered by the Allies I can understand how the americans may have felt that anyone allied with Hitler merited no mercy and that things were desperate enough to use the atomic bombs.
Luckily saner minds have prevailed since then and nuclear weapons havn't been used since then otherwise as you say America could easily have ended the Korean and Vietnam war with a couple of nukes.
killadoob
Honorary Master
Saner minds have prevailed, you mean those who feel a nuke is a good way to end a war? If you choose to fight a war then do so, there is no need for nukes. All nukes are doing is driving us closer the next war and it won't be a pretty war, these sane people you speak of will use nukes if they are pushed into a corner and that scares me and with the masses supporting the nuking of countries like iran it could very well happen.
As i said people are happy to say nuke iran but if i say nuke israel they will say i hate jews.
Let me them attack iran and get the nuke party started. It would be awesome to a nuclear stand off, then tension must be intense.
As i said people are happy to say nuke iran but if i say nuke israel they will say i hate jews.
Let me them attack iran and get the nuke party started
. It would be awesome to a nuclear stand off, then tension must be intense.
Last edited:
I want a GTI
Senior Member
You guys have no problems with hundreds of thousands of unarmed Japanese civilians being killed to "end the war and save many lives".
I think, once the States falls as a superpower, Israel needs to take heavy losses, in order to save many lives, Arabs and Jews alike.
Just applying the same principal. Without the States to back them, a heavy defeat for the occupiers will do great things for world peace.
I think, once the States falls as a superpower, Israel needs to take heavy losses, in order to save many lives, Arabs and Jews alike.
Just applying the same principal. Without the States to back them, a heavy defeat for the occupiers will do great things for world peace.
Last edited:
I want a GTI
Senior Member
Inspired by the "religion of peace" ?
Saner minds have prevailed, you mean those who feel a nuke is a good way to end a war? If you choose to fight a war then do so, there is no need for nukes. All nukes are doing is driving us closer the next war and it won't be a pretty war, these sane people you speak of will use nukes if they are pushed into a corner and that scares me and with the masses supporting the nuking of countries like iran it could very well happen.
As i said people are happy to say nuke iran but if i say nuke israel they will say i hate jews.
Let me them attack iran and get the nuke party started
please provide links where anyone has said they would be happy to nuke iran
Saner minds have prevailed, you mean those who feel a nuke is a good way to end a war? If you choose to fight a war then do so, there is no need for nukes. All nukes are doing is driving us closer the next war and it won't be a pretty war, these sane people you speak of will use nukes if they are pushed into a corner and that scares me and with the masses supporting the nuking of countries like iran it could very well happen.
As i said people are happy to say nuke iran but if i say nuke israel they will say i hate jews.
Let me them attack iran and get the nuke party started
I don't think anyone is supporting the use of nuclear weapons against Iran {or at least that I know} except maybe some of the more fanatical posters on this forum. I will only believe Israel intends a nuclear strike against Iran when their is definitive proof otherwise it's all here say and rumor. I do agree any country using a nuclear weapon today will likely plunge the world into chaos forcing the Russian, Chinnese and American superpowers to take sides, I can't imagine Israel being stupid enough to consider nuclear weapons an option except as a last resort, if Israel ever did use nukes first I imagine even the Americans would turn against them so it wouldn't be a particularly smart move.
You should read the thread as has been said that was a different time and the world was in a very very different mindset after 6 years of world war. Nuclear weapons have not been used since perhaps as a testament to the progress humanity has made by not needing such barbarous methods of warfare. Also don't know where you getting the idea of America falling as a superpower hav'nt really seen anything to support this.
there has never been the question of an israeli nuclear strike against iran. the strike if happens would be conventional warfare against irans nuclear facilities. i doubt they would also resort to that. the world has more to fear from a nuclear iran than israel has.