Monday May 28, 2012

JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

Israeli prime minister said to favor Iran attack

World Nov. 03, 2011 - 06:42AM JST ( 13 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

13 Comments

0

Elbuda MexicanoNov. 03, 2011 - 10:04AM JST

Iran needs to stand up for its own rights, and not let the west push around! Venezuela and IRAN and Cuba are the only true democracies right China??
1

Elbuda MexicanoNov. 03, 2011 - 11:03AM JST

Sorry, I got a bit excited, we in the West must look at this problem not only through our brainwashed propaganda that Rick Perry and the other Christian Evangelicals want us to believe, that every Christian on the face of god's earth must give his life for Israel and all that other crap, imagine Iran telling the world that their god says, defend Iran and screw the rest of the non Iranian world etc..would that make us happy??
-3

JapanGalNov. 03, 2011 - 12:12PM JST

The Mossad needs to go in and do a bunch of assassinations on key nuclear scientists.
1

ubikwitNov. 03, 2011 - 04:02PM JST

Until the USA stops supporting a neo-theocratic regime in the "Jewish State", then there will be no solution in Palestine, which is the core of the problem. Settler incursions into Palestinian territory on the basis of a "Promised Land" doctrine are in blatant violation of international law, yet that movement receives a huge amount of money and other forms of support from the Israeli government, which means indirectly through the US taxpayer.

Theocracy is anachronistic.

Give it up, Freemasons.
0

MadvertsNov. 03, 2011 - 04:43PM JST

"which is the core of the problem."

Nah, crazy Islamic dudes in Iran trying their damndest to become a nuclear power is the core of the problem.
1

Spidapig24Nov. 03, 2011 - 05:21PM JST

Zichi,

Israel has two German built disel subs armed with 5 atomic missiles i each sub.

Yes the Israeli's have subs (3 currently with another to be delivered this year and another next year), that are armed with nuclear cruise missiles. These cruise missiles have an estimated range of 300 km so to strike anywhere worth while they would have to be on the coast of Iran to launch. And while it is reported that the Israeli's are going to station a sub in the Persian gulf there are a few issues with this. The subs are diesels and only have a range of 12,000 km surfaced and with a distance to the Iranian coast of around 6000km (approx) then it will be a stretch further more the subs only have a 30 day endurance. Its unlikely that any arab nations in the gulf will let them dock and refuel and refuelling at sea in the gulf would at best be risky.

In Iraq a convoy of US mine resistant tanks are being moved to the Iran border.

The picture of "tanks" you refer to are infact wheeled armoured personal carriers (Cougars if lm not mistaken) not tanks. They are at best armed with a machine gun not a cannon and would not be used to lead an invasion of Iran. Furthermore the caption actually says "A convoy of mine-resistant U.S. tanks, pictured in Iraq, could now be deployed to Iran" These vehicles are used after the fighting to patrol areas not as an attack weapon as they are to vulnerable.

The US and UK will not invade Iran for one major reason, they do not have the forces to successfully take and hold the country. The US is stretched thin as it is, its forces are exhausted from Iraq and Afghanistan, the UK is in a similar boat and is struggling to maintain its forces in Afghanistan on top of that the UK is slashing its military budget, the UK no longer has an aircraft carrier and is shutting bases and disbanding squadrons.

So while they talk about preparing for strikes any strike is likely to be limited airstrikes against set targets but the risks that entails is massive as Iran's military would be a lot stiffer than Libya's and any strike by Israel will instantly stop any support from other mid east countries.

Personally l would be very surprised if the UK and US do indeed strike Iran as the risks outway the rewards while Israel may do so l think it would be the end of Israel.
-1

zichiNov. 03, 2011 - 05:42PM JST

Spidapig24,

The Israeli subs are stationed off the coast of Iran. They are using the British Island in the Indian Ocean as a base and for refueling.

We don't need anymore wars, that much is for sure.
0

Spidapig24Nov. 03, 2011 - 05:54PM JST

zichi

The Israeli subs are stationed off the coast of Iran. They are using the British Island in the Indian Ocean as a base and for refueling.

Even if they are using Diego Garcia as a refuelling point that is still in excess of 4000 km away (one way). So even at top speed on the surface the subs would take 10 days to get to the gulf and back to the refuelling point and given there are only 3 of them its dubious to say the least that they can permanently station one off the coast of Iran.

We don't need anymore wars, that much is for sure.

Totally agree however some nations (US) just never seem to be content to butt out and learn from their mistakes. A war or even a strike on Iran is a very bad idea indeed and will lead to nothing good.

By the way why was your origional comment removed?
1

SuperLibNov. 03, 2011 - 06:36PM JST

From what I've heard a military strike just wouldn't be effective in terms of ending the nuclear program. Something tells me Israel is up to something else.
-1

ubikwitNov. 03, 2011 - 09:03PM JST

From what I've heard a military strike just wouldn't be effective in terms of ending the nuclear program. Something tells me Israel is up to something else.

I'd say that there is definitely more to this display of bluster than the content would indicate. One thing it does is to attempt to divert attention from the Palestinian issue(s) by attempting to overblow the nature of the threat from Iran.
0

SerranoNov. 04, 2011 - 12:12AM JST

When are the Iranians going to get themselves a decent government? It sure is taking a long time.
0

WilliBNov. 05, 2011 - 09:22PM JST

ubitkwit:

" Until the USA stops supporting a neo-theocratic regime in the "Jewish State", then there will be no solution in Palestine, "

The jewish state is the only democratic modern state in the region. Or can you name another one? Of course you can´t. Now happened to all the enthusiasm for democracy? Why is that suspended for Israel?

" Settler incursions into Palestinian territory on the basis of a "Promised Land" doctrine are in blatant violation of international law, yet that movement receives a huge amount of money and other forms of support from the Israeli government, which means indirectly through the US taxpayer. " Nonsense. Nobody has ever clarified what "Palestinian territory" is. In the 7-day way, Israel conquered territories from Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. Lebanon got the South back for a "peace", but Hizbollah still attacks Israel. Egypt got the Sinai back for a "peace" treaty, which the coming islamist government is going to shred. Jordan actually does not want Transjordan back. The so-called "Palestinians" i.e. muslim Arabs do not want a state next to Israel, they want Israel proper. US sends as much money to Egypt as to Israel. Try to read more than the typical propaganda websites.

" Theocracy is anachronistic. "

Absolutely! So you want to replace the only modern democracy in the Middle East with another backward theocracy where Sharia rules??

Go figure.
0

WilliBNov. 05, 2011 - 09:35PM JST

The article is hot air. Israel simply does not have the ability to take out the Iranian nuke plants.

All the anti-israeli propaganda in the media makes people think that Israel is some kind of military superpower. When in fact it is a tiny country of 7 million people squeezed on 10,000 skm, surrounded by several dozen countries on millions of sqk with a total population of 700 million, all hostile to Israel.

Talk about equal terms...

Even if Israel lobbed some missiles into Iran, they could not possibly take out all the fortified Iraninan installations. And the moment they did, they´d be faced with massive rocket attacks from Hizbollah at home. To stop they, the´d have to get embroiled in a war, in which Syria and (the now hostile, under Erdogan) Turkey would also chime in.

Good luck with that. Ain´t gonna happen.