So in other words when asked to back your empty statement with facts you run and hide.
Cyber Warfare
- Thread starter AssassinsMace
- Start date
So in other words when asked to back your empty statement with facts you run and hide.
No. Its just there are masses of information on it. You may be just too lazy to do your own research and accept the 'party line'. Not everything your Gov or main stream media tells you is the truth.
Ok just for you...
^^^overthrow of the democratically elected government
Kurt
Junior Member
No, you have no MAD scenario, that's the problem. Iran stays to the letter of the non-proliferation treaty that allows for theoretical nuclear capability and the right for a second strike under nuclear attack, plus to support a nation under such an attack with her second strike. That's the dangerous part, it's not MAD, it's an enactable second strike doctrine, just like China and India declared. The second strike doctrine enables nuclear powers to wage conventional wars against each other. Just like in WWII the chemical weapons, this time the nuclear weapons can remain silent. The Cold War had tactical nukes and MAD because neither side wanted to risk a conventional war that could be won by the opponent with a reasonable homeland destruction level. And there you have the problem, will Israel conduct a nuclear first strike if they lose and conventional war?So far the answer is yes, the nuclear damocles sword is ready. Will they still commit to a first strike atrocity if their opponent is not only legitimized, but capable of launching a nuclear counterstrike afterwards? From the level of aggression and opinion manipulation Israel feels utmost threatened by that scenario because it seems to destroy their strategic nuclear advantage, limiting them to tactical nukes and defeatability from previous invulnerability of their territorial possession.
is a good starting point for research on this topic because all sides involved have a strong theocratic influence upon their acts. As it is, Iran can as much endanger Israel by obeing the non-proliferation treaty to the letter as by really creating a nuclear esplosvie device. This makes Israel very nervous because this threat requires Israel to keep her expensive and increasingly hard to afford conventional armament supremacy. Here comes the implosion of Israel by the growing numbers of into play. They have negligable economic contributions, but require an increasing share of public finance support and crave for even more influence in determining what Israel is and how it should be.
MAD only works if both sides are determined to launch the bomb in case they lose the conflict. Israel can not occupy the all Muslim countries hostile to her. The Muslim countries hostile to Israel would have little problem to occupy Israel if they weren't defeated at the borders. So these Muslim countries and factions can launch a hundred wars, lose 99 without significant negative effects on their capability to launch the next, reattack and by sheer luck win the hundreth attempt and eliminate Israel. Israel has very few pressure points other than securing the Suez Canal, Egypt's currently most important income source for armament or some fertile, adjacent land to Israel for settlements.
Last edited:
Yes you do. We know the USA is Israel's guardian. No one in the Arab states is going to attack Israel with Uncle Sam at her side with thousands of nukes and military assets.
Therefore it is Iran that feels threatened since all other states in region are pro-USA/Sunni. 2 USNCG and 1 on its way is stoking the fires. Let them have their nuke. If they use it they will be wiped off the face of the earth. The Iranian leaders are not crazy as the some of the Western Media outlets would like to portray.
@Kurt You raise many valid points. Touching on some of the highlights
_Regarding the nuclear ambitions of Iran may I point out the historical, bilateral, cultural and international relations shared by Iran and Pakistan. You mentioned this fact in your post. I firmly believe that those two Islamic states will draw closer together in the future. They share much history. What would be the shape of a future alliance between those two states is anybodies guess. But an alliance would create an Islamic nuclear armed bloc that would have to be reckoned with. Iran and Pakistan were once a part of what was considered Greater Iran. Them linking up again should not be discounted. There are signs that a strengthening of ties are already underway
_Regarding the Iranian missile threat to Europe, I still stand by my historical thinking on Iran regarding Europe (NATO) as a new version of the Crusades. The wild card is what influence western thinking will have on the Iranian young people, If they adopt a more liberal view of Islam then things might cool down a bit. However if Iran for whatever reason takes a hard turn towards Islamic fundamentalism then all bets are off on where things will land. This chart below shows the current missile protection setup as established to protect Europe from a current and future missile threat
_Regarding the nuclear ambitions of Iran may I point out the historical, bilateral, cultural and international relations shared by Iran and Pakistan. You mentioned this fact in your post. I firmly believe that those two Islamic states will draw closer together in the future. They share much history. What would be the shape of a future alliance between those two states is anybodies guess. But an alliance would create an Islamic nuclear armed bloc that would have to be reckoned with. Iran and Pakistan were once a part of what was considered Greater Iran. Them linking up again should not be discounted. There are signs that a strengthening of ties are already underway
_Regarding the Iranian missile threat to Europe, I still stand by my historical thinking on Iran regarding Europe (NATO) as a new version of the Crusades. The wild card is what influence western thinking will have on the Iranian young people, If they adopt a more liberal view of Islam then things might cool down a bit. However if Iran for whatever reason takes a hard turn towards Islamic fundamentalism then all bets are off on where things will land. This chart below shows the current missile protection setup as established to protect Europe from a current and future missile threat
Answer: Any attack on Europe would have to be viewed through the prism of Islam. And I cannot understand Islam and its goals of converting non-believers to Islam via the sword. But Islam drives all decisions for Iran and cannot be understood by a non-Islamic person.
Are the Iranians pragmatic? I cannot say.
OT
Kurt wrote in #38:
AD 66-70, well-known (?).
AD 115-118 ( not in the later Palestine, because of the presence of two Roman legions, but in Cyrenaica, in Alexandria ( at the time a half Jewish city - most of the Jews spoke Greek and the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament was made about a century and a half before the birth of Christ for those Greek speaking Jews ) and on Cyprus where the Jews tried to murder all non-Jews. Also in what is now southern Iraq and was then part of Persia.
AD 132-135, the Bar Kochba war. It was after this war that the Roman authorities expelled the Jews from Jerusalaim, gave the city a new Roman name and renamed the country Palestine. The Jews were not then expelled from Palestine. It were the Crusaders, those heroes of George W. Bush, for whom many Jews fled or who murdered them. See
The Qur'an is opposed to forced conversion and at the time of the first crusade the majority of the people in the Middle East were Christians and there many Jews.
Addition: I first got interested in this matter by reading Volume "History before 1880" from the series Israel Pocket Library published by Keter in Jerusalem in the 1970's. Later reading largely confirmed what I read there.
Kurt wrote in #38:
Just a bit of history. Judaism developed from the earlier Israelite polytheism during the Babylonian exile of the elites of eleven of the twelve Israelite tribes. Jews have been living in the diaspora ever since. The Persians, who probably taught them monotheism allowed the return of some/any (?) to the old Judea and Samaria ( The Samaritans were the tribe that kept its elite, Samaritans have been discriminated against in Israel until a few years ago ). Jump to the Roman period. There where three Jewish insurrections in the first and second century:
AD 66-70, well-known (?).
AD 115-118 ( not in the later Palestine, because of the presence of two Roman legions, but in Cyrenaica, in Alexandria ( at the time a half Jewish city - most of the Jews spoke Greek and the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament was made about a century and a half before the birth of Christ for those Greek speaking Jews ) and on Cyprus where the Jews tried to murder all non-Jews. Also in what is now southern Iraq and was then part of Persia.
AD 132-135, the Bar Kochba war. It was after this war that the Roman authorities expelled the Jews from Jerusalaim, gave the city a new Roman name and renamed the country Palestine. The Jews were not then expelled from Palestine. It were the Crusaders, those heroes of George W. Bush, for whom many Jews fled or who murdered them. See
The Qur'an is opposed to forced conversion and at the time of the first crusade the majority of the people in the Middle East were Christians and there many Jews.
Addition: I first got interested in this matter by reading Volume "History before 1880" from the series Israel Pocket Library published by Keter in Jerusalem in the 1970's. Later reading largely confirmed what I read there.
Last edited: