Rogue State of Israel Threatens Tactical Nuke Strikes on Iran

Another Zionist Jew trying to smoke screen the war for Israel agenda as
he doesn't care how many Americans die/get horribly wounded for Israel
in the Middle East like we have already experienced with the Iraq
quagmire with Iran to come soon for Israel as well:

Reality Check about Israeli 'denials':

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewt...=320113#320113



Additional at the following URLs:

Rogue State of Israel Threatens Tactical Nuke Strikes on Iran

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=65753

Charlie Reese: Israel's Bad Influence

http://www.antiwar.com/reese/?articleid=10276

Israel Divulges Plan to Nuke Iran

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=711

PS: US airpower could conduct the attacks on Iran or Israel could
initiate the attack knowing that the US would come to Israel's
'defense' as Dick Cheney and President Bush have already assured... The
AIPAC hacked Congress would support the attack all the way as well...


Israel's influence of US policy & the Israeli lobby:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O125hGt9qt4&NR

AIPAC and NeoCon Policy
on bombing Iran for Israel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Rf16XjbOUs


AIPAC Trying to Get US to Attack Iran for Israel


http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=49800




Bombing Iran for Israel:

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=65628

Matt Wiser wrote:
wrote:

Why don't you change your handle to "Chicken Little?" You've been shreiking about someone
(whether it's the U.S. or Israel) launching nukes on Iran for what, two years now? And if by
some reason either party decides to nuke Iran, they sure won't announce it ahead of time
to a newspaper that's anxious to boost its circulation. The correspondents in Baghdad will
be able to see the instant sunshine off to the east and know what just went down (or up)....
Neither the U.S. or Israel will pop nukes without a very good reason. But with a nut like
Ahmendijad running around, who knows? You really need a stay in a rubber room and to get
back on your meds.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

wrote:
Another Zionist Jew trying to smoke screen the war for Israel agenda as
he doesn't care how many Americans die/get horribly wounded for Israel
in the Middle East like we have already experienced with the Iraq
quagmire with Iran to come soon for Israel as well:

If we use nukes, I doubt there'll be a quagmire.


Reality Check about Israeli 'denials':

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewt...=320113#320113



Additional at the following URLs:

Rogue State of Israel Threatens Tactical Nuke Strikes on Iran

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=65753

Charlie Reese: Israel's Bad Influence

http://www.antiwar.com/reese/?articleid=10276

Israel Divulges Plan to Nuke Iran

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=711

PS: US airpower could conduct the attacks on Iran or Israel could
initiate the attack knowing that the US would come to Israel's
'defense' as Dick Cheney and President Bush have already assured... The
AIPAC hacked Congress would support the attack all the way as well...


Israel's influence of US policy & the Israeli lobby:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O125hGt9qt4&NR

AIPAC and NeoCon Policy
on bombing Iran for Israel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Rf16XjbOUs


AIPAC Trying to Get US to Attack Iran for Israel


http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=49800




Bombing Iran for Israel:

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=65628

Matt Wiser wrote:
wrote:

Why don't you change your handle to "Chicken Little?" You've been shreiking about someone
(whether it's the U.S. or Israel) launching nukes on Iran for what, two years now? And if by
some reason either party decides to nuke Iran, they sure won't announce it ahead of time
to a newspaper that's anxious to boost its circulation. The correspondents in Baghdad will
be able to see the instant sunshine off to the east and know what just went down (or up)....
Neither the U.S. or Israel will pop nukes without a very good reason. But with a nut like
Ahmendijad running around, who knows? You really need a stay in a rubber room and to get
back on your meds.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

wrote:
wrote:
Another Zionist Jew trying to smoke screen the war for Israel agenda as
he doesn't care how many Americans die/get horribly wounded for Israel
in the Middle East like we have already experienced with the Iraq
quagmire with Iran to come soon for Israel as well:

If we use nukes, I doubt there'll be a quagmire.

All US supplies come inland from Kuwait via the only two major roads. The south
is controlled by the Shia. Iran is Shi'ite.

Get Iran ****ed and they shut off the supplies to US troops and they starve.
Cut off supplies and move into Iraq and kill them quickly.

Respond to an Iranian land war and face a well equipped army several times
larger than the Iraqi army and discover there are not enough US troops in the
world to fight them. Then there is a draft which takes months to deliver the
first troops to the battlefield presuming presuming by some miracle US troops
have managed to hold out that long.

--
Tony Blair says the war on the Taliban will take decades. That is the same
as saying the war on Southern Baptists will take decades. Or perhaps in the
British sense, the war on Roman Catholics will take decades.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3728
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Iraqi democracy http://www.giwersworld.org/911/armless.phtml a3

Matt Giwer wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Another Zionist Jew trying to smoke screen the war for Israel agenda as
he doesn't care how many Americans die/get horribly wounded for Israel
in the Middle East like we have already experienced with the Iraq
quagmire with Iran to come soon for Israel as well:

If we use nukes, I doubt there'll be a quagmire.

All US supplies come inland from Kuwait via the only two major roads. The south
is controlled by the Shia. Iran is Shi'ite.

Get Iran ****ed and they shut off the supplies to US troops and they starve.
Cut off supplies and move into Iraq and kill them quickly.

Respond to an Iranian land war and face a well equipped army several times
larger than the Iraqi army and discover there are not enough US troops in the
world to fight them. Then there is a draft which takes months to deliver the
first troops to the battlefield presuming presuming by some miracle US troops
have managed to hold out that long.

Which doesn't change my point...if we use nukes, I doubt there'll
be a quagmire. What will be left of Iran or the Iranian Army?


--
Tony Blair says the war on the Taliban will take decades. That is the same
as saying the war on Southern Baptists will take decades. Or perhaps in the
British sense, the war on Roman Catholics will take decades.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3728
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Iraqi democracy http://www.giwersworld.org/911/armless.phtml a3

wrote:
Matt Giwer wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Another Zionist Jew trying to smoke screen the war for Israel agenda as
he doesn't care how many Americans die/get horribly wounded for Israel
in the Middle East like we have already experienced with the Iraq
quagmire with Iran to come soon for Israel as well:
If we use nukes, I doubt there'll be a quagmire.
All US supplies come inland from Kuwait via the only two major roads. The south
is controlled by the Shia. Iran is Shi'ite.
Get Iran ****ed and they shut off the supplies to US troops and they starve.
Cut off supplies and move into Iraq and kill them quickly.
Respond to an Iranian land war and face a well equipped army several times
larger than the Iraqi army and discover there are not enough US troops in the
world to fight them. Then there is a draft which takes months to deliver the
first troops to the battlefield presuming presuming by some miracle US troops
have managed to hold out that long.

Which doesn't change my point...if we use nukes, I doubt there'll
be a quagmire. What will be left of Iran or the Iranian Army?

How does one nuke an army? Dozens of nukes? Kill off hundreds of thousands of
civilians and thousands your own troops immediately and even more slowly
downwind with fallout? After homes and family are destroyed what interest does
the Iranian army have in peace? What other than slaughter prisoners?

Nukes were to be used in the Fulda Gap because it was narrow and the only tank
entry point into western Europe and it would have been against a background of a
total nuclear exchange.

--
If Americans knew about Israel's treatment of non-Jews they would turn
against Israel as fast as they did against apartheid South Africa.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3737
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Old Testament http://www.giwersworld.org/bible/ot.phtml a6

Matt Giwer wrote:
wrote:
Matt Giwer wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Another Zionist Jew trying to smoke screen the war for Israel agenda as
he doesn't care how many Americans die/get horribly wounded for Israel
in the Middle East like we have already experienced with the Iraq
quagmire with Iran to come soon for Israel as well:
If we use nukes, I doubt there'll be a quagmire.
All US supplies come inland from Kuwait via the only two major roads. The south
is controlled by the Shia. Iran is Shi'ite.
Get Iran ****ed and they shut off the supplies to US troops and they starve.
Cut off supplies and move into Iraq and kill them quickly.
Respond to an Iranian land war and face a well equipped army several times
larger than the Iraqi army and discover there are not enough US troops in the
world to fight them. Then there is a draft which takes months to deliver the
first troops to the battlefield presuming presuming by some miracle US troops
have managed to hold out that long.

Which doesn't change my point...if we use nukes, I doubt there'll
be a quagmire. What will be left of Iran or the Iranian Army?

How does one nuke an army? Dozens of nukes? Kill off hundreds of thousands of
civilians and thousands your own troops immediately and even more slowly
downwind with fallout? After homes and family are destroyed what interest does
the Iranian army have in peace? What other than slaughter prisoners?

Nuke Tehran and Qom. The Iranian Army will lose interest in the
fight. Also, tactical nukes against troop concentrations as they move
forward.


Nukes were to be used in the Fulda Gap because it was narrow and the only tank
entry point into western Europe and it would have been against a background of a
total nuclear exchange.

I'm not saying nukes are a good option. My initial post was in reply
to the claim that the US would be in a quagmire in Iran. My point is
that nukes would alter this situation....since nukes are mentioned in
the initial post.
Your point that US supply lines would be easy to cut is also weak. A
US movement toward Kuwait would reopen those supply lines before the
troops starved.....fuel would be a bigger problem. If the Iranians
moved to cut the supply lines, there would be a boatload of dead
Iranians.....even using conventional weapons. Now conquering Iran, much
less holding the nation, is a whole different argument.



--
If Americans knew about Israel's treatment of non-Jews they would turn
against Israel as fast as they did against apartheid South Africa.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3737
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Old Testament http://www.giwersworld.org/bible/ot.phtml a6

Matt Giwer wrote:


How does one nuke an army? Dozens of nukes? Kill off hundreds of
thousands of civilians and thousands your own troops immediately and
even more slowly downwind with fallout? After homes and family are
destroyed what interest does the Iranian army have in peace? What other
than slaughter prisoners?

Once the civillian infrastructure is destroyed the army cannot be
resupplied. This was General Sherman's great discovery. If you want to
defeat the army, defeat the civillians.

Bob Kolker

wrote:

Matt Giwer wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

Another Zionist Jew trying to smoke screen the war for Israel agenda as
he doesn't care how many Americans die/get horribly wounded for Israel
in the Middle East like we have already experienced with the Iraq
quagmire with Iran to come soon for Israel as well:

If we use nukes, I doubt there'll be a quagmire.

All US supplies come inland from Kuwait via the only two major roads. The south
is controlled by the Shia. Iran is Shi'ite.

Get Iran ****ed and they shut off the supplies to US troops and they starve.
Cut off supplies and move into Iraq and kill them quickly.

Respond to an Iranian land war and face a well equipped army several times
larger than the Iraqi army and discover there are not enough US troops in the
world to fight them. Then there is a draft which takes months to deliver the
first troops to the battlefield presuming presuming by some miracle US troops
have managed to hold out that long.


Which doesn't change my point...if we use nukes, I doubt there'll
be a quagmire. What will be left of Iran or the Iranian Army?

This guy also seems to ignore the US's truly prodigious capability to
move people and goods by air...which the Iranians would have virtually
no ability to block...also the US's ability to rain destruction onto
Iran from above...even without going nuclear...which, if "properly"
implemented (don't hit civilian targets at all and stay away from
military targets that have a higher probability of collateral damage)
against the Iranian military only...would tend to destabilize the
mullahs and either destroy Iran's ability to make war OR bottle the
Iranian armed forces up in their cities...
If the mullahs could be shown to be ineffective against the US while at
the same time being hammered relentlessly militarily and causing "a
little" discomfort to the Iranian people only, the mullahs will lose
credibility with their own people and would likely be overthrown...from
within.
Remember, the only place in the Muslim world where there were
spontaneous demonstrations of SORROW and SADNESS and in SUPPORT of the
US after 9/11 was in IRANIAN cities...for God sake, built of that, don't
squander it like Bush senior and Bush junior did in Iraq...

....Ken

Ken Chaddock wrote:
....
This guy also seems to ignore

As preamble I have a practical understanding of it and its limitations.

the US's truly prodigious capability to move people and goods by air...

And if you look it you will discover it is all shock force troops to hold an
area until the bulk of the troops arrive by conventional means. You will also
learn it is a fair weather capability and anyone can download satellite images
and predict the weather.

which the Iranians would have
virtually no ability to block...also the US's ability to rain
destruction onto Iran from above...even without going nuclear...which,
if "properly" implemented (don't hit civilian targets at all and stay
away from military targets that have a higher probability of collateral
damage) against the Iranian military only...would tend to destabilize
the mullahs and either destroy Iran's ability to make war OR bottle the
Iranian armed forces up in their cities...

The destruction from above would play well at home and it might even be true
that no civilians were harmed. But in the middle east it will be portrayed as
targeting civilians and everyone there will believe it. Look at what Americans
still believe about WWII if you don't think that will happen.

As for aerial bombing I repeat, it failed in Germany during WWII. It increased
not decreased the will to resist. It has increased the will to resist every time
it has been tried. Both Vietnams, Cambodia, Afghanistan, Serbia you name it. It
has always been troops on the ground that have been the deciding factor. For the
US in Afghanistan it was the alliance with the drug lords and their mercenaries
that provided the troops.

Why in the world would you talk about bottling up Iranian troops in the cities
as troops are not stationed in cities in the first place? In any confrontation
they would be augmenting the Shia in the south and east of Iraq cutting off the
land resupply from Kuwait. There is no way the US has the ability to air supply
what is brought in from Kuwait. And if that is tried ****loads of shoulder fired
AA rockets are going to find their way into Iraq to bring them down.

Am I pessimistic? The last I heard planes landing at Baghdad airport still
spiral in to avoid fire from the ground. Last I heard which was only six months
ago the FIVE MILES of city street from the airport to the Green Zone still is
NOT secured.

Please tell me how all this is suddenly going to turn around.

If the mullahs could be shown to be ineffective against the US while
at the same time being hammered relentlessly militarily and causing "a
little" discomfort to the Iranian people only, the mullahs will lose
credibility with their own people and would likely be overthrown...from
within.

And that is on the assumption that Iranians are really Americans trying to get
out from under the religious leadership. If they are overthrown they will be
replaced by some group that is more effective against the American attacks. That
is exactly what Americans would do if this country were under attack and losing
because of incompetent leadership. Why do you assume Iranians would do
differently from Americans?

Remember, the only place in the Muslim world where there were
spontaneous demonstrations of SORROW and SADNESS and in SUPPORT of the
US after 9/11 was in IRANIAN cities...for God sake, built of that, don't
squander it like Bush senior and Bush junior did in Iraq...

It was squandered on Iran when the US attacked Afghanistan three months after
9/11 without justification and based upon a war announced in MARCH 2001.

It was not the only place. Despite the Zionists lies the Palestinians also
expressed sympathy while Netanyahu said 9/11 was a good thing for Israel.

--
Before the Iraq war Brad Pitt was ridiculed for filming kite flying in
Baghdad. Looks like he was right.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3730
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Lawful to bomb Israelis http://www.giwersworld.org/israel/bombings.phtml a11

Ken Chaddock wrote:

When considering US superior technology here is a question that a far from a
trick question.

The US constantly boasts of its night vision technology as a decisive
superiority capability.

What is the cheapest and easiest method to nullify that advantage that requires
no extra effort or expenditure?

I have had lots of guesses on that from bonfires to flares but none have gotten
it right the first time. Care to make a guess?

--
The WWII holocaust is the only one which the victims do not want
investigated. It is also the only one where reparations are being paid. That
is an odd combination.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3736
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
antisemitism http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/ a1