• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Who Would Iran Pay to Confront Israel?

JEDIYoda

Lifer
More sabre rattling....or truth?
It looks like this guy is probably legit Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei .
He has been described as one of only three people having "important influence" on the Islamic Republic of Iran (the other two being the founder of the republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, and the president of Iran for much of the 1990s, Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani).[11] So far, the biggest challenge to his leadership has been the mass protests following the June 2009 presidential elections.[12] Khamenei, however, continued to strongly support Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's policies and re-election.--wiki pedia

His name is not -- Mahmūd Ahmadinezhād oops Ahmadinejad!
Iran knows that Israel does have the capabilities to pull of such a raid successfully!!
Rumor also has it that Iran is presently not taking lightly Israel`s willingness to launch a pre-emptive attack on Irans Nuclear facilities!


http://news.yahoo.com/iran-pay-conf...BzdGNhdAN1cwRwdANzdG9yeXBhZ2UEdGVzdAM-;_ylv=3

Today, Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei pledged to support any group that confronts the "cancer" Israel, in an address broadcast on state TV. "From now on, in any place, if any nation or any group confronts the Zionist regime, we will endorse and we will help," he said. "We have no fear expressing this." The speech comes following news that Defense Secretary Leon Pannetta believes Israel could strike Iran in the next few months. So what sort of groups might be on Ali Khamenei's rolodex to "confront" Israel? To get a sense, we pinged a handful of foreign policy think-tanks here in Washington. Here's what they said:


Al Qaeda The idea of the embattled terrorist network teaming up with Iran is a hot topic in foreign policy circles these days, especially following the publication of Seth Jones's article on the subject in Foreign Affairs last week. Iran recently gave new freedoms to a handful of top Al Qaeda operatives who were detained in 2003, according to U.S. officials. Both the Brookings Institution's Kenneth Pollack and CATO's Justin Logan mentioned the group in phone calls with The Atlantic Wire today. While Logan said other groups outside of Al Qaeda constituted a more significant threat, he did fear a "near-term shooting war" with Israel. Pollack said "I think this is mostly rhetoric—they already are helping every group that hates Israel." According to reports, the new freedoms were given to "Al Qaeda's so-called management council, a group that includes members of the inner circle that advised Osama bin Laden and an explosives expert widely considered a candidate for a top post in the organization."





Palestinian Islamic Jihad This small Palestinian militant group was cited as a potential recipient of Iranian funds. It's been labeled a terrorist group by the U.S., European Union, Israel, and a range of other countries, and it supports the destruction of the Jewish state. In the picture to the right, Islamic Jihad militants are taking part in a funeral for fallen comrades in southern Gaza Strip. The group has claimed responsibility for a range of suicide bombings and killings, which have been catalogued here.


Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine General Command More than 30 countries consider this Palestinian nationalist organization a terrorist organization, which is backed by Syria and Iran, and is lead by Ahmed Jibril, pictured to the right. The group has been accused of involvement in the 1988 Lockerbie bombing of Pan Am flight 103, in which 270 were killed. Jibril has denied his group was linked to the bombing.


Hamas The Islamic political party that governs the Gaza strip is a commonly-cited recipient of Iranian support. The U.S. and a number of other Western countries consider it a terrorist group while countries such as Russia and Turkey do not. In the picture to the right taken in December, "members of Hamas' security forces march in formation during a graduation ceremony for new recruits in Gaza."



Hezbollah The Shia Muslim militant and political group based in Lebanon often gets backing from both Iran and Syria. To varying degrees, Western nations such as the U.S., the U.K. and Canada classify it as a terrorist organization. It's led by Hassan Nasrallah, pictured to the right. Though it began as a small militia movement, it expanded into a political force that holds seats in the Lebanese government.
 
Last edited:
How about this: we let these bastards kill as many of one another as they can, and after they kill off 90% of their population and burn off 95% of their land, we DON'T send any aid over there.
 
It's less risky to support proxy terrorists. Arm and train then deny.

Its even less risky to stoke the fires of extreme ideologies without providing material/financial/logistical support, only to have them attack by proxy anyway. There's no shortage of people desperate enough to fall for it these days.
 
How about this: we let these bastards kill as many of one another as they can, and after they kill off 90% of their population and burn off 95% of their land, we DON'T send any aid over there.

Nothing you said has anything to do with the article or the premise of the article.
 
I think its hand down and on the record, that Israel is far guilty than Iran in making threats at each other. Its even hard to make a case that Iran is arming Hamas, Fatah, or Hezbollah. Hezzbollah may have gotten arms from Syria, Fatah is not using violence as a tactic, and Hamas had only rocks and bottles during cast lead. And if Hamas has any decent arms now, they are coming in through Egypt.

At the same time, Israel is sponsoring anti Iranian terrorists, probably murdering Iranian scientists, ad screaming for ever tougher sanctions against Iran. And also threatening to bomb Iran at any time which is a highly specific threat. But by in large Iran just wants to be left alone as it lifts itself up by its own bootstraps.

When Iran makes vague threats against Israel, Israel rises up in dubious self righteous indignation.

Just more Israeli hypocrisy IMHO.
 
Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei pledged to support any group that confronts the "cancer" Israel
Fricking genius! At the time a far more superior country is publicly entertaining the idea of bumrushing your nuclear program you come out with gems like this!
 
Fricking genius! At the time a far more superior country is publicly entertaining the idea of bumrushing your nuclear program you come out with gems like this!

well you know what he said is not to far off the stuff people who support him on these forums also say!

What Khameni says smacks of being influenced my shrooms!!
 
I think its hand down and on the record, that Israel is far guilty than Iran in making threats at each other. Its even hard to make a case that Iran is arming Hamas, Fatah, or Hezbollah. Hezzbollah may have gotten arms from Syria, Fatah is not using violence as a tactic, and Hamas had only rocks and bottles during cast lead. And if Hamas has any decent arms now, they are coming in through Egypt.

At the same time, Israel is sponsoring anti Iranian terrorists, probably murdering Iranian scientists, ad screaming for ever tougher sanctions against Iran. And also threatening to bomb Iran at any time which is a highly specific threat. But by in large Iran just wants to be left alone as it lifts itself up by its own bootstraps.

When Iran makes vague threats against Israel, Israel rises up in dubious self righteous indignation.

Just more Israeli hypocrisy IMHO.

Israel didn't make this an accusation. These are words spoken by an influential Iranian leader and that is the issue. Diversions really won't work.
 
Israel didn't make this an accusation. These are words spoken by an influential Iranian leader and that is the issue. Diversions really won't work.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But is Haybasusa right or just blowing smoke? Israel makes it threats without preconditions, while Achmadinejhad, the supreme Ayatollah, and a few other Iranian motor mouths, threats are highly conditional. They threaten retaliation ONLY AFTER Israel and other Countries attack them first.

And since Iran has not used it advanced weapons to attack any other nations, Israel and other countries may not know how effective a defense Iran can mount.

It is remotely possible, that the first sortie of incoming Israeli planes will cross the Iranian border and all get shot down far short of their targets. After all, Iran is not without technology, Iran just put their third satellite into orbit yesterday. And if Turkish Jets help defend Iranian soil, Israeli jets won't stand a chance. After all they will have to sacrifice bomb load for fuel, can't carry many many air to air missiles, and can't go onto afterburners. Hell even large numbers of Iranian piper cubs with air to air missiles would have a field day.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But is Haybasusa right or just blowing smoke? Israel makes it threats without preconditions, while Achmadinejhad, the supreme Ayatollah, and a few other Iranian motor mouths, threats are highly conditional. They threaten retaliation ONLY AFTER Israel and other Countries attack them first.

And since Iran has not used it advanced weapons to attack any other nations, Israel and other countries may not know how effective a defense Iran can mount.

It is remotely possible, that the first sortie of incoming Israeli planes will cross the Iranian border and all get shot down far short of their targets. After all, Iran is not without technology, Iran just put their third satellite into orbit yesterday. And if Turkish Jets help defend Iranian soil, Israeli jets won't stand a chance. After all they will have to sacrifice bomb load for fuel, can't carry many many air to air missiles, and can't go onto afterburners. Hell even large numbers of Iranian piper cubs with air to air missiles would have a field day.

You didn`t read the article.......its really obvious......
The article has nothing to do with if and when Israel stages a pre-emptive attack on Iran.....
The articles says Iran has stated that they will support any group that confronts the "cancer" Israel, in an address broadcast on state TV. "From now on, in any place, if any nation or any group confronts the Zionist regime, we will endorse and we will help," -- that is not conditional on if Israel attacks!
You cannot rewrite the article to suit your pro Islamic leaning!
 
Last edited:
LL
This wasn't "some guy", it was one of the three people of highest standing. In any case if Iran and Israel were to become involved in real war it wouldn't be pretty, but Iran isn't going to be laughing. Your understanding of military matters is not one of your strengths.
 
LL
This wasn't "some guy", it was one of the three people of highest standing. In any case if Iran and Israel were to become involved in real war it wouldn't be pretty, but Iran isn't going to be laughing. Your understanding of military matters is not one of your strengths.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hayabusa, I would really question whose understanding of military reality is better. As we may recall, the Donald Dumsfeld strategy in both Iraq and Afghanistan was based on shock and awe. It didn't even work for long in a technology challenged Afghanistan, it did not work in Iraq despite the fact Saddam Hussein's military was a paper tiger after gulf war one, and now you somehow dismiss the possibility that Iran with far more advanced technology will have no means to fight back or have more staying power than Afganistan and Iraq have already exhibited.

Hayba, gotta love your sun glasses on a camel avitar, but I suggest they are really rose colored and not grey. A wounded Iran is far more dangerous than almost anything I can conceive of. Except maybe a delusional Israel who is seeing their entire world credibility unraveling at an ever increasing rate.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hayabusa, I would really question whose understanding of military reality is better. As we may recall, the Donald Dumsfeld strategy in both Iraq and Afghanistan was based on shock and awe. It didn't even work for long in a technology challenged Afghanistan, it did not work in Iraq despite the fact Saddam Hussein's military was a paper tiger after gulf war one, and now you somehow dismiss the possibility that Iran with far more advanced technology will have no means to fight back or have more staying power than Afganistan and Iraq have already exhibited.

Hayba, gotta love your sun glasses on a camel avitar, but I suggest they are really rose colored and not grey. A wounded Iran is far more dangerous than almost anything I can conceive of. Except maybe a delusional Israel who is seeing their entire world credibility unraveling at an ever increasing rate.

Israel won't be nation building and Rumsfeld isn't invited.
 
Israel won't be nation building and Rumsfeld isn't invited.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you really think Iran will not counter attack if Israel attacks Iran on a preemptive basis.
Do you really think a larger world will allow Israel to use nukes against Iran which is what it would take to take the Iranian people out of action. Haybasusa, do you really think the US position in Afghanistan or Iraq will remain tenable for very long as both places would go ballistic if Israel attacks Iran.

Methinks I am right about your camel sunglasses, they are far rosier than I thought possible. I may be in a minority on this forum, but Hayba, you are seeming a totally delusional Israeli fan clubber and 95% of the larger world would be totally against what you advocate. You remind me of the good people of Washington DC,who made it a picnic lunch affair to watch the entire civil war get fought and decided at the first battle of bull run.
 
Last edited:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you really think Iran will not counter attack if Israel attacks Iran on a preemptive basis.
Do you really think a larger world will allow Israel to use nukes against Iran which is what it would take to take the Iranian people out of action. Haybasusa, do you really think the US position in Afghanistan or Iraq will remain tenable for very long as both places would go ballistic if Israel attacks Iran.

Methinks I am right about your camel sunglasses, they are far rosier than I thought possible. I may be in a minority on this forum, but Hayba, you are seeming a totally delusional Israeli fan clubber and 95% of the larger world would be totally against what you advocate. You remind me of the good people of Washington DC,who made it a picnic lunch affair to watch the entire civil war get fought and decided at the first battle of bull run.

The camel can read. This thread is about a powerful Iranian leader and his statement. If Israel is attacked then Iran will have it's military ass kicked.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hayabusa, I would really question whose understanding of military reality is better. As we may recall, the Donald Dumsfeld strategy in both Iraq and Afghanistan was based on shock and awe. It didn't even work for long in a technology challenged Afghanistan, it did not work in Iraq despite the fact Saddam Hussein's military was a paper tiger after gulf war one, and now you somehow dismiss the possibility that Iran with far more advanced technology will have no means to fight back or have more staying power than Afganistan and Iraq have already exhibited.

Hayba, gotta love your sun glasses on a camel avitar, but I suggest they are really rose colored and not grey. A wounded Iran is far more dangerous than almost anything I can conceive of. Except maybe a delusional Israel who is seeing their entire world credibility unraveling at an ever increasing rate.

Just about anyone on this forum has a better understanding of military reality than you, LL. If it comes to a war, Israel will defeat Iran. If nuclear weapons are brought into play by both sides, the whole world loses.
 
Just about anyone on this forum has a better understanding of military reality than you, LL. If it comes to a war, Israel will defeat Iran. If nuclear weapons are brought into play by both sides, the whole world loses.

He appears to be looking at things as he would like them to be rather than as they are. The fact is (and I challenge him to refute this) that Iran has an aging air force consisting of MIG-29's, F-14s etc, are in a sad state of repair and have a critical shortage of spare parts for them. The only real threat is the Russian s-300 missile system, but the Greeks use that as well have have given the Israelis full access to develop countermeasures. The technical abilities of Israel aren't in serious question and they have UAV capability to reach Iran.

Besides, Iran doesn't share a border and neither Turkey nor Iraq are going to let Iran lead a ground force across their territory.

I suppose the greatest threat are those 150,000 missiles aimed at Israel. We know it's true because Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi said it and we can always believe Iran.
 
The camel can read. This thread is about a powerful Iranian leader and his statement. If Israel is attacked then Iran will have it's military ass kicked.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the USA kicked the North Vietnamese army too, the USA kicked the North Korean military too, the USA kicked Saddam's military too in Gulf war 2, the Russians kicked the Afghan military too, and so did the US military in 2002.

In the fullness of time Hayba, can we say any of it resulted in a win? But in some ways the instances I have cited are shock and awe wars in areas that were not central to world commerce, but Iran is center stage to the most important oil route the the entire world, namely the Persian Gulf.

War always look easy on paper, but it seldom works out that way.

As a US citizen, I pee my pants the Israel might try to attack Iran for no reason, but if Israel does, I certainly hope the USA stays the hell out of it.
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the USA kicked the North Vietnamese army too, the USA kicked the North Korean military too, the USA kicked Saddam's military too in Gulf war 2, the Russians kicked the Afghan military too, and so did the US military in 2002.

In the fullness of time Hayba, can we say any of it resulted in a win? But in some ways the instances I have cited are shock and awe wars in areas that were not central to world commerce, but Iran is center stage to the most important oil route the the entire world, namely the Persian Gulf.

War always look easy on paper, but it seldom works out that way.

As a US citizen, I pee my pants the Israel might try to attack Iran for no reason, but if Israel does, I certainly hope the USA stays the hell out of it.

If it's real war you fear you can relax for any foreseeable future. If however the good cleric makes good his statement and recruits others to attack I have no doubt that there will be a limited conflict. Neither side will gain direct access to the other because of the nations between. We're not going to see armies marching. Chances are we're going to see little of consequence unless of course it turns out that Iran starts building weapons. Then Iran will have more than Israel to worry about.
 
If it's real war you fear you can relax for any foreseeable future. If however the good cleric makes good his statement and recruits others to attack I have no doubt that there will be a limited conflict. Neither side will gain direct access to the other because of the nations between. We're not going to see armies marching. Chances are we're going to see little of consequence unless of course it turns out that Iran starts building weapons. Then Iran will have more than Israel to worry about.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Haybasusa, your main point keeps changing, but your main point now, revolves on the condition of " unless of course it turns out that Iran starts building weapons."

Leaving you at least 25 years out of date. The First Iranian Ayatollah who replaced the Shah was dumber and more naive than a box of rocks. Iran may have inherited a descent military from from the Shah, but Ayatollah let in rot and rust into ruin. As the USA and the Western world went to Saddam Hussein, in the person of Donald Rumsfeld, who whispered sweet nothings into Saddam Hussein ears saying that they would back him to the hilt if Iraq built up their military and beat the dog shit out of Iran. Never mind the fact that ole Saddam then committed the unpardonable sin in double dealing with the Russians too, after all in US eyes, there is nothing worse than a tin pot dictator that won't say bought as Noreiga found out first. But still the die was already cast as Iraq invaded Iran that was three times larger than Iraq. And Iran found itself with nothing defend itself with, as Iran lost the better part of two generations of its men using human waves against Iraqi tanks and Machine guns. Meanwhile Iran found itself unable to buy weapons to defend itself with. Except a little aid in a US scandal called Iran contra. But still in the end, Iran somehow prevailed, and for at least 25 leaned their lessons. As Iran learned to depend on itself and has developed its own homegrown armament industry. And has also bought weapons on the international weapons markets.

Now here we are 25 years later Haybasusa, and Iran has the technology to put satellites in orbit, so rumor has large stockpiles of Chemical weapons, and in the 25 years since has never used them in combat against anyone. What Iran has in terms of advanced land to air missiles, or land to ship missiles may be largely unknown. But they are widely dispersed and there are in place Iranian plans to makes sure they fall into guerrilla army hands.

Israel may feel they are now immune to Iranian counter attacks now they have an Iron dome system, but an Iron dome system may be able to shoot down cruse type missiles that fly low and slow, but a semi intercontinental ballistic missile with a good guidance system that comes in high and fast could easily take down the dismonia reactor and countless targets in Israel using only conventional explosives. After all, Iran would be fully justified in doing so if Israel attacks first. And if Israel uses nukes, Iran would be justified in using chemical, biological. radiological weapons against Israel.

Its the Israeli problem, its a postage stamp sized country, Iran is much much bigger and harder to kill. Meanwhile Iran would have plenty more effective weapons to make sure the Persian gulf stays shut down for mounts at a time. Maybe the straights could be protected
but oil tankers would face a 500 mile gauntlet if their docking facilities were not already wrecked.

Still feel as froggie and over confident Haybasusa?
 
Back
Top