Keep your political views out of this topic.
With NO Timeline provided, one can only assume with certainty, that in the next 500 years, the two are going to fight.
This website I visit has, check that, had a countdown to when they predict the attack.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/
Personally, I think if Israel attacks it will be something like what occurred Dec 7th, 1941. You think you engaging in a tactical victory when in reality its the start of a strategic mistake and all you are doing is motivating the population to rally behind the leadership.
The real question should be - is the situation going to be RESOLVED by war?
It is difficult to think there won’t be an exchange of weapons fire within the next three years depending on what happens in the US after the November election.
The real question should be - is the situation going to be RESOLVED by war?
That seems unlikely since the argument isn’t solely about land or resources. One side would ‘win’ but that wouldn’t be the long term end of the matter. I see the Iranians engaging in ‘ethnic cleansing’ should they win but that drags everybody in.
I’m seeing no Geneva convention applying on either side, and perhaps the release of chemical/biological weapons.
It really wouldn’t surprise me.
Would the US intervene at any point in the conflict if Israel struck first? My guess is no. But I suppose we can’t talk more about that without getting political.
Would China/Pakistan/the-Arab-Nations support Iran? Probably.
How are people really voting NO? Honestly? You don’t think the two are going to fight?
I see it as all up to Israel. Either they go ahead and attack and pretty much screw themselves over, or they move to diplomacy since the current rhetoric, funding of terrorism, and threats are merely giving Iran a specific reason to actually develop the nuclear weapons Israel is so afraid of.
There are some other major concerns here:
How would an attack be carried out? There are no easy sea routes, the countries are separated by at least 2 other nations, and flying over other countries in a military attack violates international law.
What purpose would the attack do? Start a war, that’s what, and create bigger problems.
What’s the problem with allowing Iran to possess nuclear technology (and I guess on a further note, actual nuclear weapons)? The hypocrisy and double standards are pretty stupid.
Israel needs to cool the hell down, use diplomacy instead of putting Iran on the defense, and let the younger, more liberal and more accepting of Western culture populace grow into a new breed of Iran.
Here is how Israel would do it:
Headline: How Israel might strike at Iran
Do you think Syria, in all its turmoil, will help Iran if war broke out between Iran and Israel?
I’m seeing no Geneva convention applying on either side, and perhaps the release of chemical/biological weapons.
It really wouldn’t surprise me.
I’d wager on ‘bitter’ as well. A killing prisoners and not even marginal attempts to limit collateral damage to civilians, scorched earth, Soviets-Nazis kind of ‘bitter.’
