I know that everyone in the US is focused on the presidential elections and the hurricane, but there is a storm brewing in the Middle East that could potentially effect every nation on the planet. Wherever you live, what do people in your country say about the possibility of an Israeli or Israeli/US or US strike on Iranian nuclear facilities? (I just wrote a hub on this from the conversations near my Wadi.)
I believe if they feel they are threatened enough they will strike the nuclear facilities. They would be happier about it if the US supported them but this administration will back away if they see Israel taking action.
Do you think, then, that the US will not join Israel in an attack? One matter of concern is that US air forces are stationed next door in Iraq, making access much easier for the US. Israel, on the other hand, would have to send pilots over dangerous airspace at a long distance to reach Iran. I agree that Israel has to act, but why wouldn't the US give assistance?
I think they might do something but regardless of rhetoric you see recently our current Commander-in Chief is no friend of Israel. It won't be what it could be.
Well, Israel would strike Iranian nuclear facilities only if they feel the pros outweigh the cons, and I think there are a lot of cons that they have to think quite hard about before concluding that it is worth striking at Iranian nuclear facilities. For one, Iran isn't a primitive military power and has missiles capable of reaching Israel. Any strike, therefore, would prove to be a messy affair for Israel.
There is also the question of efficacy of any such strikes. Would they really meet the objectives and eliminate Iranian nuclear ambitions or capabilities? It may delay it, but it may perhaps be a matter of years before the threat of a nuclear Iran presents itself once again. Again, accurate intelligence would be a key deciding factor. One certainly wouldn't want the kind of intelligence that we had in Iraq.
Secondly, I don't foresee Israel attacking Iran unilaterally. They would do so only, in my view, with the active or tacit support of the United States. There are people in Israel who think that Israel shouldn't lead such an operation - that the US should be persuaded and made to lead an attack on Iran and that Israel should be a supportive ally, rather than the lead actor.
Either way, a counter strike by Iran using missiles would probably lead to casualties numbering the hundreds in Israel, so if they do attack, it would be a move considered well worth those kind of casualty numbers. I suspect it won't be a pretty picture!!
Thank you for the lengthy and thoughtful response. From my wadi and with my big ears, I hear that Israel doesn't want to strike without US assistance, but time is running out and there are no other options. Yes, there will be Israeli casualties. The Israeli government has stated that it is expecting 500 casualties from retaliatory missiles launched by Iranian forces in, at least, Lebanon and Syria. But, a nuclear bomb dropped on Israel could mean the death of 6 million. If you read the Hub I posted, Israel and Iran, you will see a map of the destruction projected from just one nuclear bomb dropped on Israel.
Like you say, it is not a pretty picture.
People sure do love a good holocaust. Must be in their religious genes.
"Translation: The 16 U.S. intelligence agencies believe that Iran's covert nuclear weapons work remains suspended for now, but could be restarted if the Iranian regime decides to do so. And if it does proceed, the United States may not know it."
The UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) just released its quarterly report which states that Iran has increased its uranium enrichment abilities by at least 30% in this last quarter. The report also stated that the number of enrichment centrifuges at Iran's Fordo site (buried inside a mountain near Qom) has increased from 1,064 to 2,140 in the last 4 months
In what way the UN is an independent source? Everybody knows that behind the UN hides the US! Didn't the US assert us of the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq few years ago? It's becoming old!
Really, well the reports we've been receiving in the UK suggest that Iran has enriched uranium to 20%. Still, should they so desire, they can always pull out of the IAEA and enrich whatever they want, FOR, whatever they want without oversight. Just like Israel.
"VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran has doubled the number of uranium enrichment centrifuges it has in an underground bunker, a U.N. report said on Thursday, showing Tehran has continued to expand its nuclear program despite Western pressure and the threat of an Israeli attack."
Don't think one is ever going find anything in this report that Iran has started work on a nuclear bomb. Sure will find a lot of innuendo in these press reports reminding one of those mobile biological weapons labs in the run-up to the Iraq war. OOOOh its a trailer and its mobile.
by Ralph Deeds5 years ago
How serious and immediate is a nuclear threat from Iran? What should we do about it? Some of the same hawks who helped talk us into invading Iraq are coming out of the woodwork and saying that a nuclear Iran is...
by readytoescape6 years ago
With only days left before Iran’s first nuclear reactor is loaded with fuel rods and begins start up procedures on August 21st, will the Israeli’s take out the reactor complex and other support facilities?Should...
by Ralph Deeds5 years ago
The Sunday NY Times Magazine cover story this week reports on the current state of the standoff between Iran, Israel, the US and other countries over Iran's nuclear facilities and intentions. It's a very frightening...
by AngelTrader5 years ago
It is all falling neatly into place for the US to attack Iran on behalf of Saudi Arabia. The US views the plot as state-sponsored terrorism. Secretary of state Hillary Clinton described it as a "violation of...
by mhope3245 years ago
Many news outlets, like CNN, have posted that Leon Panetta is now suggesting Isreal will attack Iran in the spring. Is this a good idea? Should America get involved?
by Longhunter5 years ago
Iran says it's a 'lie'. Hillary calls it a 'dangerous escalation'. Saudis say Iran 'must pay the price.'What's your opinion? What, if anything, should the U.S. do? Since it was the Saudi Ambassador that was targeted,...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.