Is-real V Iran (& thus WW3)

[Mega]

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article37585.html

Lets cut to the chase, Is-real knows that if they want "Greater Israel" then its now or never. The US is now on a downward path wealth/miltaly power wise. They want to take more of Syria & about 60% of the Leb-or-on, they tried this in the 80's but US/USSR power forced their hand.

Please understand that i am not pro or against this plan........i don't have an agenda other than reporting the facts as i see it. I rather like Jewish people, even slept with one.....but i feel "un-easy" that they are leading us down the road to WW3!.........
Mike

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Is-real V Iran (& thus WW3)

Meh......

It's probably worth having a read of history.

Until the late 1960's France was probably Israel's single biggest military supplier...everything from Mirage jets to dodgy nuclear development.

It wasn't until the late 60's that the baton was passed from France to the US and remains to this day.

Is anyone surprised about Israel's growing relationships with:

China......the US has admonished harshly Israel for it's deals with China that involve co-developed and funded military technology

India....(future UN Security Council Member)not only is the US fast warming up to India in terms of foreign military sales, but so is Israel in terms of advanced radar and missile defense systems

Brazil....(another future UN Security Council Member) with Brazil looking to produce Israeli military technology under license agreement.

What I see is Israel hedging it's long-term bets with both current and future regional and global powers......the same as they have ALWAYS done.

[Mega]

Re: Is-real V Iran (& thus WW3)

How many Jewish-chinesse are there?
How many aircraft carries does Brazil have?

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Is-real V Iran (& thus WW3)

How many Jewish-chinesse are there?
How many aircraft carries does Brazil have?

There are lots of Jews in the world...some are Jewish, some are called Hazara, some are called Matabele, some are called Kurd, etc, etc.. Jews aren't the only "Jews".

Brazil has one more aircraft carrier than the UK....further supporting my point of the tectonic shift in geopolitical power and how 2nd tier powers such as Israel attempt to maneuver through the changes.

[Mega]

Re: Is-real V Iran (& thus WW3)

I hope this guy is right:-

War Games If these "war games" were realistic, they would go something like this: 1) Israel tries for decades to get the US to bomb Iran, and fails. It can't even get permission to fly over Iraqi airspace to carry out a mock attack, let alone a real one. It thus conducts practice raids over the Mediterranean to show what it would do if it were allowed to enter American-controlled Iraqi Airspace. The Yanks aren't fooled -- they know that Israel would start the fight and step aside, leaving the US and Nato to finish it. They're happy enough to put a fleet in the Persian Gulf and make loud noises as a diversion from unfortunate economic events at home, to keep a troublesome "ally" of their back and to keep the campaign funds flowing. They aren't interested in taking on a project of this size -- It's just too big a war to start without a really good reason. 2) Israel attacks South Lebanon to try its luck against a small, Iranian-armed assymetrical force. It loses 60 tanks to peasants armed with soulder-fired anti-tank weapons, and runs home to conduct an enquiry into why the battle was lost. The defense chief is sacked and no more expansionist adventures in South Lebanon are conducted. 3) Netanyahu puffs his chest out and pretends that if the US wasn't holding him back, he would teach Iran a thing or two about what a few F16's and some refueling tankers can do to a country the size of Western Europe with the terrain of Afghanistan, that has been preparing militarily and culturally for an American invasion for thirty years. The reality is that they will have to run back and forth thousands of miles, over other peoples' uncooperative countries, to rearm their fighter jets. They have no strategic bomber fleet, or aircraft carrier groups -- just light jets operating from fields inside Israel. Neither Turkey nor Iraq will allow them to use their airspace, let alone their airfields for such an operation. The US has already refused to allow them to use Iraqi airspace for this operation. In any event, the damage that their light aircraft can cause is not adequate to bring about any sort of a surrender. In short it's all bullshit. Driving through Jordan or Syria, and Iraq to get to Iran with their tanks and trucks doesn't need comment. The only thing they have that could cause any real damage (besides possibly getting the US to do their dirty work) is their nuclear arsenal. They will certainly not pre-emptively nuke Iran -- That would, of course, be silly. This is all just posturing as a cover for the expansionism that is occuring in the name of national security in the West Bank. Nothing more and nothing less. If Israel were to start a war by, for example, a repeat of the 9/11 tragedy or something similar, the results would not turn out as described in this article. Iran's biggest fear is to get over-run by the US, get broken up, disarmed, and suffer centuries of backwardness, ignorance and poverty. You have to remember that they have been around for thousands and thousands of years and have seen many ups and downs and suffered this exact fate several times during this long history. They are fully aware of the possibility of this occurence and have no interest in allowing it to happen to them again. They have repeatedly said that their best chance of avoiding this fate would be to immediately drag the US into the deep end of the fight. Their military leaders have very clearly stated that this would be their immediate action. To accomplish this, they have clearly stated that they would shut the Straits of Hormoz, hit the oil infrastructure and attack the US Fifth Fleet in the Gulf. These actions would be sufficient to drag the US into the fight. They would then have to go to ground and wait out the inevitable aerial bombing campaign, re-emerging when the bombs stop falling. The US and it's allies would eventually have to put boots on the ground for many, many, years, and this is when their losses would mount up and the game would turn in Iran's favour. The very same shoulder-fired rocketry that showed the tank to be obsolete in South Lebanon would make this a costly and unwinnable war. The US is struggling in similar terrain in Afghanistan against a poorly armed militia with access to nothing more than home-made roadside bombs, rifles and suicide vests. It would have a harder time against an organised nation with thirty years of arms stockpiles and an active military force. If these same weapons were supplied by Iran to anyone else in the region who is up for a fight, the results would be a widespread conflict that would be very challenging to win on the ground -- Anything that can knock out a tank from a great distance can do the same to a fuel truck or whatever other assets are used to win and hold territory. In short, the US would quickly win the air war, but probably lose the ground war. The US would quite possibly have to retreat from the entire region and conduct Dresden-style bombing raids and a massive drone campaign over a very large part of the map of the world. This would be hugely unpopular, lengthy, costly, and uncertain. The final outcome is not something to gamble on "because we like Israel". Many American (and Israeli) military experts have urged restraint for this very reason. The UK would probably have to go along for the ride, again, but any government that bled the treasury dry on a war of this scale would struggle to justify its actions -- particularly after Iraq and Afghanistan. Support for Israel would eventually dry up, leaving them friendless in a tough neighborhood. Meanwhile China and Russia would keep their eye on the ball and continue to develop economically and industrially, surpassing the US. They would probably supply just enough help to Iran to keep the distraction and cost going for as long as possible, smiling as the West wastes its resources and piles on the debt.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Is-real V Iran (& thus WW3)

Absolute rubbish.

What air defense capability does Iraq possess?

In terms of anti aircraft defense it's 70's and 80's era AAA equipment is obsolete and almost entirely non operational.

In terms of air defense interceptors Iraq will not possess a basic capability again for another 2-3 years

The US has no tactical combat aircraft stationed in Iraq.

Iraqi airspace is currently, and largely, undefended.

This junk isn't worthy of this forum.

[Mega]

Re: Is-real V Iran (& thus WW3)

Hmmmm..............i see your point, but its a LONG way to Iran............Yes Is-real could fly over Iraq, but thousands of miles to drop a few bombs on factory built UNDER a montain.......hmmmm