Israel conducts military exercise directed at Iran

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Aimster

Lifer
Jan 5, 2003
16,129
2
0
& how does the U.S plan on removing the Islamic Regime of Iran?

The U.S and Israel blabber the same non-sense. Does this mean U.S and Israel are going to nuke Iran? No.

Iran is not going to wake up one morning and decide "let's kill everyone and nuke Israel". That is paranoid thinking. Even the psycho North Korean dictator doesn't mess with anyone. It is good to be King. Why give it up?
 

KurskKnyaz

Senior member
Dec 1, 2003
880
1
81
Originally posted by: palehorse
I sure hope you kids are ready to participate in The Draft.

I pray every day that we all avoid war with Iran. But, if Israel hits them, that entire part of the world is going to explode like a supernova, and we're going to get sucked into like a blackhole.

WWIII FTL.

I'm serious. This isn't a fucking joke at all. Those of you treating it as such are in for a very rude awakening...

I doubt it. Iran doesn't have the capability to invade Israel or attack the U.S. In a worst case scenario, Iran will double funding for Hezbollah and Israel will be condemned by the U.N. for doing what the U.N. would have ended up doing anyway.
 

KurskKnyaz

Senior member
Dec 1, 2003
880
1
81
Originally posted by: Drift3r
Originally posted by: palehorse
I sure hope you kids are ready to participate in The Draft.

I pray every day that we all avoid war with Iran. But, if Israel hits them, that entire part of the world is going to explode like a supernova, and we're going to get sucked into like a blackhole.

WWIII FTL.

I'm serious. This isn't a fucking joke at all. Those of you treating it as such are in for a very rude awakening...

Ah....no one cares. Just keep those freedom fries coming. I have a feeling though that Iran ( if they are smart ) have stuff buried so deep within it's mountain ranges that no bombs of any type could reach it. Israel will get the stuff that is out in the open but the real goods will be safely stored away underneath tons of mountain rock. At the most they probably have to dig out the entrances to their secret stashes.

I have a feeling Israel will use small tactical nukes and then blame the fallout on the actual nuclear plant.
 

KurskKnyaz

Senior member
Dec 1, 2003
880
1
81
Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
Even the Europeans realized there's no good in letting Iran arm itself with missiles capable of hitting central Europe, complete with nuclear warheads. It's a shame that Israel is left alone against Iran at such times.

Craig234, what do you think Israel has an army for? To retaliate AFTER a nuclear attack? It's not the US, it doesn't have the endurance to withstand a nuclear attack. It just can't take chances.

Whatever is the justification, I don't think an Israeli attack on Iran is feasible. Israel isn't the US, it can't launch bombing raids on Iran effectively. Without resorting to something nasty like nuking their nuclear facilities, I don't see how anything could be done without some assistance.

Iran is run by a religious sect that has biblical doomsday scenario beliefs. Its not like the atheist Russians with nukes. This is far worse. Israel would never accept a nuclear Iran.
 

KurskKnyaz

Senior member
Dec 1, 2003
880
1
81
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
With Iran capable of reaching American bases in Iraq and Afghanistan we might have a full scale war if Israel does anything stupid. You just can't go bombing places for no reason at all. And I sincerely do hope the rest of the world does something instead of watching US/Israeli imperialism taking over the world. In fact an attack of this sort would give me all the reason to compare Nazi ambitions with Israeli ones. And the relatively friendly people of muslim countries will now turn totally anti-American. The Iraqis; the afghans; the Pakistanis; and because a common enemy and common threat will get the people together - the Sunni Arabs. Will Russia and China let trillions of dollars worth of oil and trade be stolen by America? I doubt it. If Russia and China were to ever go with war with America it would be best to do so when America was in a black hole.

And some people talk of a nuclear strike. That would be so hypocritical it makes me want to puke!

Iran can't do shit to America. We dominate the air. That means if they attack a base the U.S. will bomb their military out of existence.

 

KurskKnyaz

Senior member
Dec 1, 2003
880
1
81
Originally posted by: mizzou
This is every bit as impressive and convincing to me as North Korea's excercises.

I am honestly a bit embarrased that this actually had a significant effect on the market.

Military excercises are acts of diplomacy, not aggression.

The exercise can also be a way of telling the UN to "hurry the fuck up" with an embargo.
 

KurskKnyaz

Senior member
Dec 1, 2003
880
1
81
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: tvarad

And Israel should ignore the daily rants from the Iranian mullahs about how it's going to be wiped off the map?

My gosh, can you get one word correct?

What "daily" rants, I'm aware of a one-time comment. It wasn't from the Mullahs, it was from the less-powerful president. And he clarified that he was not speaking of violence, he was saying that he would like to see the political state of Israel removed. And it was a desire that it happen, not something he was 'going to do' like announcing a war plan.

Israel not only wanted to see Hezbollah 'wiped off the map', they not only wanted to do the wiping with violence, they actually did a major military attack to try to largely do that.

Time to stop the mis-characterizing of the facts. There's plenty to be concerned about with Iran without inventing things.
eh, what? How exactly do you wipe Israel off the map "politically". Apparently Israel has a good reason to want the Hezbollah wiped off the map and so do many Lebanese.
 

KurskKnyaz

Senior member
Dec 1, 2003
880
1
81
Originally posted by: Aimster
Russia has said there is no need to use force on Iran because there is zero evidence they are trying to build a bomb.

....except for the fact that they don't have a single civilian nuclear plant and are trying to enrich material.
 

KurskKnyaz

Senior member
Dec 1, 2003
880
1
81
Originally posted by: Drift3r
Originally posted by: bsobel
Ah....no one cares. Just keep those freedom fries coming. I have a feeling though that Iran ( if they are smart ) have stuff buried so deep within it's mountain ranges that no bombs of any type could reach it. Israel will get the stuff that is out in the open but the real goods will be safely stored away underneath tons of mountain rock. At the most they probably have to dig out the entrances to their secret stashes.

Israel got a large cache of bunker busters from us about 2 years ago and they always have the nuclear option (and if they really think their existance is threatened, I have no doubt that would use it).

1.) Bunker busters are not all they are cracked up to be. While they are good for traditional bunkers and the badly dug out Taliban caves that serve as hold outs they cannot reach a facility that has been dug extremely deep into a mountain.

2.) Nukes are just plain stupid. If Israel were to use them preemptively they'd lose pretty much all their support and legitimacy around the world. Not to mention that even nukes just like bunker busters are not able to reach a facility that has been designed to be buried deeply into a mountain. Hence why even our own military has it's key control centers in the event of a invasion or nuclear war in this nation buried deeply inside mountains.

Actually, small tactical nukes exploding underground will collapse any facility. Ofcourse this has lots of political consequences.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
349
126
Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: tvarad

And Israel should ignore the daily rants from the Iranian mullahs about how it's going to be wiped off the map?

My gosh, can you get one word correct?

What "daily" rants, I'm aware of a one-time comment. It wasn't from the Mullahs, it was from the less-powerful president. And he clarified that he was not speaking of violence, he was saying that he would like to see the political state of Israel removed. And it was a desire that it happen, not something he was 'going to do' like announcing a war plan.

Israel not only wanted to see Hezbollah 'wiped off the map', they not only wanted to do the wiping with violence, they actually did a major military attack to try to largely do that.

Time to stop the mis-characterizing of the facts. There's plenty to be concerned about with Iran without inventing things.
eh, what? How exactly do you wipe Israel off the map "politically". Apparently Israel has a good reason to want the Hezbollah wiped off the map and so do many Lebanese.

1. See my later post for the Iranian president's own statement that he meant 'wiped off the map' politically like the USSR regime was. Note no war, no genocide there.

2. See my later post for the point that 'wiped off the map' was a mistranslation.

3. One group's 'good reason' is another's not so good reason. What's your point? Mine was that Israel is using force more than the others lately with the invasion of Lebanon (again).

Do you care about the facts, or just want an excuse to kill who you want?
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: tvarad

And Israel should ignore the daily rants from the Iranian mullahs about how it's going to be wiped off the map?

My gosh, can you get one word correct?

What "daily" rants, I'm aware of a one-time comment. It wasn't from the Mullahs, it was from the less-powerful president. And he clarified that he was not speaking of violence, he was saying that he would like to see the political state of Israel removed. And it was a desire that it happen, not something he was 'going to do' like announcing a war plan.

Israel not only wanted to see Hezbollah 'wiped off the map', they not only wanted to do the wiping with violence, they actually did a major military attack to try to largely do that.

Time to stop the mis-characterizing of the facts. There's plenty to be concerned about with Iran without inventing things.
eh, what? How exactly do you wipe Israel off the map "politically". Apparently Israel has a good reason to want the Hezbollah wiped off the map and so do many Lebanese.

If Hezbollah is a militant force inside Lebanon then the Israeli military is a militant force inside Palestine.

 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz
Originally posted by: Aimster
Russia has said there is no need to use force on Iran because there is zero evidence they are trying to build a bomb.

....except for the fact that they don't have a single civilian nuclear plant and are trying to enrich material.

They also don't have enough electricity to run their economy anymore. They are considering load shedding.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
The Shah had already sold off much of Iran's oil to the West for a pittance. Iran's great remaining natural resource is in natural gas which Iran has in great abundance. Producing electricity with nuclear energy means it can use its natural gas as an export commodity. But Iran needs pipelines to get it to market. And face the facts, Iran looks east to markets in Pakistan and India. And therefore (1) Needs a stable Afghanistan even more than Pakistan does. (2) And Iran's future does not lie in the mid-east to the West where selling energy is like selling ice boxes to eskimo's.

As for Achmadinejad, he is a motor mouth with little real power, he is an unpopular Iranian national embarrassment, and will be out of office come 8/2009. But make no mistake, Iran as a nation is committed to developing nuclear energy for electrical power generation. The road only forks some five years from now, when Iran can decide if they want or need nuclear weapons also.

It never seems to occur to some of the Iran haters, that what the rest of the world does CAN HAVE A HUGE EFFECT on that future Iranian decision on nuclear weapons or not.
If Uncle Sam keeps using the policy of always poking Iran with sharp sticks for no reason and keeps trying to over throw their government, then yes, Iran will be very likely to opt for nuclear weapons, even though it could never overtake even Israel in nuclear weapons capacity.

But if the world allows Iran to develop its natural resources, then Iran is far less likely to feel it needs Nukes to defend itself. And we may be pleasantly surprised to find US and Iranian interests dovetail quite nicely.
 

Aimster

Lifer
Jan 5, 2003
16,129
2
0
Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz
Originally posted by: Aimster
Russia has said there is no need to use force on Iran because there is zero evidence they are trying to build a bomb.

....except for the fact that they don't have a single civilian nuclear plant and are trying to enrich material.

Iran has a nuclear plant
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,134
38
91
Israel never makes anything public until after the fact. All this means is that nothing is going to happen.
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
Just an exercise to expend some old munitions.

This way they can get more from the US taxpayer.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz
Originally posted by: Aimster
Russia has said there is no need to use force on Iran because there is zero evidence they are trying to build a bomb.

....except for the fact that they don't have a single civilian nuclear plant and are trying to enrich material.

They also don't have enough electricity to run their economy anymore. They are considering load shedding.

That has not stopped militaristic regimes from pursuing their goals, however orthogonal their interests are to those of the population at large.

The generals ran Pakistan into the ground but got their bomb. Comrade Kim-il-Sung and his son have turned North Korea into a basket-case but done the same. The thugs running Burma couldn't even be bothered about organizing relief for their cyclone hit population. The thug running Zimbabwe has destroyed his country but the end of his rule is nowhere in sight.

Iran falls into the same category. A 100,000 people die in an regular earthquakes and, instead of working on technology which exists to drastically cut such casualties, they are hell-bent on pursuing aims which put their country in harm's way. Go figure.
 

Aimster

Lifer
Jan 5, 2003
16,129
2
0
Originally posted by: tvarad
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz
Originally posted by: Aimster
Russia has said there is no need to use force on Iran because there is zero evidence they are trying to build a bomb.

....except for the fact that they don't have a single civilian nuclear plant and are trying to enrich material.

They also don't have enough electricity to run their economy anymore. They are considering load shedding.

That has not stopped militaristic regimes from pursuing their goals, however orthogonal their interests are to those of the population at large.

The generals ran Pakistan into the ground but got their bomb. Comrade Kim-il-Sung and his son have turned North Korea into a basket-case but done the same. The thugs running Burma couldn't even be bothered about organizing relief for their cyclone hit population. The thug running Zimbabwe has destroyed his country but the end of his rule is nowhere in sight.

Iran falls into the same category. A 100,000 people die in an regular earthquakes and, instead of working on technology which exists to drastically cut such casualties, they are hell-bent on pursuing aims which put their country in harm's way. Go figure.

If an earthquake happens in Jerusalem hundreds of thousands of people will die.

How in the world do you expect Iran to develop technology when the buildings in the city are older than your grandmother?
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Originally posted by: Aimster
Originally posted by: tvarad
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz
Originally posted by: Aimster
Russia has said there is no need to use force on Iran because there is zero evidence they are trying to build a bomb.

....except for the fact that they don't have a single civilian nuclear plant and are trying to enrich material.

They also don't have enough electricity to run their economy anymore. They are considering load shedding.

That has not stopped militaristic regimes from pursuing their goals, however orthogonal their interests are to those of the population at large.

The generals ran Pakistan into the ground but got their bomb. Comrade Kim-il-Sung and his son have turned North Korea into a basket-case but done the same. The thugs running Burma couldn't even be bothered about organizing relief for their cyclone hit population. The thug running Zimbabwe has destroyed his country but the end of his rule is nowhere in sight.

Iran falls into the same category. A 100,000 people die in an regular earthquakes and, instead of working on technology which exists to drastically cut such casualties, they are hell-bent on pursuing aims which put their country in harm's way. Go figure.

If an earthquake happens in Jerusalem hundreds of thousands of people will die.

How in the world do you expect Iran to develop technology when the buildings in the city are older than your grandmother?

This reply shows the type of moron you are. You're exhibiting a typical third-world mindset. The beauty of the human mind is it's ability to solve problems, not wring your hands about how intractable they are. Why do densely populated areas on the U.S. West Coast or Japan have so few earthquake casualties? Why didn't sixty story buildings collapse in San Francisco during the '89 Loma Prieta earthquake (which I lived through and only a hundred people died then out of millions).

The effers are awash in oil money. Why the fvck don't they seek readily available technology to reinforce their centuries old buildings to withstand earthquakes (or re-build them to earthquake codes) instead of squandering it on nukes which they don't need? I tell you, the survivors of the earthquakes should corner the mullahs and set their beards on fire. That will focus their energies on solving the real problems of the people.
 

Aimster

Lifer
Jan 5, 2003
16,129
2
0
Originally posted by: tvarad
Originally posted by: Aimster
Originally posted by: tvarad
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz
Originally posted by: Aimster
Russia has said there is no need to use force on Iran because there is zero evidence they are trying to build a bomb.

....except for the fact that they don't have a single civilian nuclear plant and are trying to enrich material.

They also don't have enough electricity to run their economy anymore. They are considering load shedding.

That has not stopped militaristic regimes from pursuing their goals, however orthogonal their interests are to those of the population at large.

The generals ran Pakistan into the ground but got their bomb. Comrade Kim-il-Sung and his son have turned North Korea into a basket-case but done the same. The thugs running Burma couldn't even be bothered about organizing relief for their cyclone hit population. The thug running Zimbabwe has destroyed his country but the end of his rule is nowhere in sight.

Iran falls into the same category. A 100,000 people die in an regular earthquakes and, instead of working on technology which exists to drastically cut such casualties, they are hell-bent on pursuing aims which put their country in harm's way. Go figure.

If an earthquake happens in Jerusalem hundreds of thousands of people will die.

How in the world do you expect Iran to develop technology when the buildings in the city are older than your grandmother?

This reply shows the type of moron you are. You're exhibiting a typical third-world mindset. The beauty of the human mind is it's ability to solve problems, not wring your hands about how intractable they are. Why do densely populated areas on the U.S. West Coast or Japan have so few earthquake casualties? Why didn't sixty story buildings collapse in San Francisco during the '89 Loma Prieta earthquake (which I lived through and only a hundred people died then out of millions).

The effers are awash in oil money. Why the fvck don't they seek readily available technology to reinforce their centuries old buildings to withstand earthquakes (or re-build them to earthquake codes) instead of squandering it on nukes which they don't need? I tell you, the survivors of the earthquakes should corner the mullahs and set their beards on fire. That will focus their energies on solving the real problems of the people.


Cities such as Tehran are built to withstand earthquakes.

Rebuild them? LoL. Why don't you go destroy all the buildings in Jerusalem and rebuild them just "in case" an earthquake happens. Those buildings are old and if an earthquake happens good-bye. I guess it's because Israel has a nuclear plant and that is making them unable to destroy the city and build new buildings.

You have just proven how stupid you are and you should stop posting on P&N.

Who the hell goes and suggests for a nation to destroy their ancient city and build new buildings? You even linked their inability to do so with their nuclear program. Are you kidding? Iran is not spending all their money on their nuclear program.

San Francisco is a city made to withstand earthquakes, just like Tehran is a city made to withstand earthquakes

& Iran has a need for nuclear energy. Anyone who knows how to read and is informed can tell you Iran has an energy problem inside Iran.

& anyone who knows about architecture or has common sense will tell you that is is beyond stupid to destroy an entire city and build from scratch just because an earthquake might destroy it. Buildings have lasted for 3,000 but just in case let's destroy them if an earthquake happens.

My house is a brick house. When does the demolition begin? I expect the govt. to rebuild my house to withstand an earthquake
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Aimster,
The fundamental problem faced by people of third-world countries is how they're ruled. The real danger is the ruler and not the things the rulers say threaten their countries. The gist of your replies are a repudiation of this fact.

Enough said.
 

Aimster

Lifer
Jan 5, 2003
16,129
2
0
Originally posted by: tvarad
Aimster,
The fundamental problem faced by people of third-world countries is how they're ruled. The real danger is the ruler and not the things the rulers say threaten their countries. The gist of your replies are a repudiation of this fact.

Enough said.

The fact is you are an idiot.

You are blaming Iran for an earthquake on an ancient city and you say it is all Iran's fault.

Fact:
Earthquake in Jerusalem with a magnitude of 6.5 would destroy most of the buildings
Thousands of people would die

Now according to you:
It would be Israel's fault

Go wash your brain with soap. It's not thinking today

Don't call me stupid again if the crap you type in the same post is clearly retarded
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
The squander public monies cuts more to Israel and the USA than to Iran. If the USA quit subsidizing the Israeli military, the Israeli economy would collapse from the weight of military spending. As it is, the USA economy is in deep do do with the policies of GWB. Iran does not invest a huge part of its GDP into nuclear programs, and as they get electricity out of the investment, it will pay for itself.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Aimster,
Read this and weep. The misogynistic mullahs have all the time in the world to organize squads to check on how much skin women on the streets are showing but the pr*cks don't have the wherewithal to solve one of Iran's most endemic problems.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...04/12/041219182609.htm

Contractor Ignorance Kills Earthquake Victims In Sesmic Zones, Says U. Of Colorado Professor

ScienceDaily (Dec. 28, 2004) ? Hundreds of thousands of earthquake fatalities could be averted if building contractors and homeowners were alerted to elementary construction principles, especially in the world's six deadliest earthquake countries led by Iran, according to a University of Colorado at Boulder seismologist.

Roger Bilham said Iran, Turkey, China and the Caucasus states run the highest risk among developing nations, while Japan and Italy are the most hazardous industrialized nations in terms of earthquakes.

"Each of these countries are multiple offenders in terms of killing their people with 30,000-plus-fatality earthquakes," Bilham said. "While the industrial nations have acted to include earthquake resistance, the poorest countries in the world are constructing more dwellings now than at any time in Earth's history. It's imperative that contractors in the developing nations are educated in the perils of taking short-cuts in construction."

Iran is the worst offender, according to Bilham. One in 3,000 Iranians dies in an earthquake, he said, a statistic that has remained unchanged since 1900.

"Most of Iran needs rebuilding," Bilham said. "If the population of Iran had a choice between spending oil revenues on munitions or houses that won't kill them, I suspect they would choose a safe home. It's all a matter of earthquake education."


Though earthquake resistant construction methods have been implemented in Iran, they've had little effect because few of the newer, more resistant structures have been hit by an earthquake, according to Bilham. "Teheran now hosts 12 million Iranians, many living in perilous structures," he said.

"The world's vast urban population has doubled and re-doubled in a short amount of time compared to the historical recurrence interval of damaging earthquakes," Bilham said.

"The world's exploding mega-cities have yet to experience a major earthquake, but it's only a matter of time before one or more occurs. Unprecedented numbers of fatalities are likely unless earthquake resistance construction codes are applied seriously," he said.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Originally posted by: Lemon law
The squander public monies cuts more to Israel and the USA than to Iran. If the USA quit subsidizing the Israeli military, the Israeli economy would collapse from the weight of military spending. As it is, the USA economy is in deep do do with the policies of GWB. Iran does not invest a huge part of its GDP into nuclear programs, and as they get electricity out of the investment, it will pay for itself.

Right. I'm sure if Israel disappears, the houris will descend from the heavens and start hanging out with you on earth itself.