Not one drop of American blood should be spilled if Iran attacks Israel

[bluestateguy]

I hope Israel kicks Iran's ass if Iran is foolish enough to do it, but no American blood should be shed or risked in such a scenario. The Israelis are big boys and girls, with a powerful military machine (especially the Air Force), and I'm confident that they could handle it.

We need to stop poking our nose into other people's business around the world.

[Cant trust em]

1. Israel has the best military in the region as well as some nuclear capability

They can do just fine on their own.

Thanks for bringing this up as something to talk about.

[Elspeth]

27. Bullshit. The Israelis would need a much larger military partner to deal with Iran

unless they planned on a nuclear war, and that would be just as much a disaster for them as Iran.

Israel cannot deal with this kind of attack on its own. Why do you think AIPAC is here? They need the US military (or someone else's) to avoid annihilation.

My question for the OP is WHY would Iran attack Israel, especially unilaterally?

[Rabrrrrrr]

2. You're right - no American blood should be spilled. Unfortunately, the truth is,

a LOT of American blood will be spilled, because of the Christian Zionists who run this country and who believe that without Israel existing as a state, the eschaton will never occur.

[Hardrada]

4. I don't understand how their sucky theology got so much traction.

It boggles the mind.

[Rabrrrrrr]

7. Reagan gave it traction.

Reagan was friends with Tim Lehaye, and Tim Lehaye is the one who told Falwell to start the Moral Majority.

[Hardrada]

13. I knew it! I KNEW it!

(Sounds of hitting forehead with palm of hand!) Is there nothing beastly that did not begin with his hell-spawn misadministration?

[Elspeth]

28. The fundie movement was funded by William F. Buckley's YAF

Formerly the "Young Americans for Freedom" then the "Young America's Foundation." It provides major funding to campus fundamentalist ministries and has been a major source of right wing funds at colleges and universities. I remember reading that it is THE largest off-campus source of funding for student events, massively dwarfing everything else.

The evangelical movement started in the late 70's (before Reagan) on college campuses and in high schools. (Just after the Moonies). The neocons were very active in the 70's, even if it wasn't in evidence until the Reagan era.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

3. Or if Israel attacks Iran

which is far more likely.

[guyanakoolaid]

5. Get your facts straight.

Iran does not have nukes, no capability to make nukes, and has not shown interest in acquiring nukes. This comes from the UN inspectors, whose word seems to matter less to the M$M than military-briefs news-plants. There is a country in the Middle East who DOES illegally possess nuclear weapons, and has shown more than hostile aggression in its official military policies. That country is Israel. But keep watching the talking heads on your television, and just keep nodding when they pull out surveillance photos.

[izzie]

16. When has Iran gone to war with others?

Didn't Saddam go after them? I can think of other countries that have gone to war in the Middle East but do not recall Iran being that country. I got the feeling that we are mad because they got rid of our guy who we put in as King.

[guyanakoolaid]

33. Oh, yeah - Iran and Iraq were at war for most of the 80's

Iraq unilaterally invaded, like they did to Kuwait. Only they didn't realize we didn't give a shit about them destroying Iran, but did about Kuwait.

And "we" are currently "mad" at Iran because "we" want their oil, and they say bad things about Israel. I mean, nuclear weapons are a logical retaliation for verbal insults, right? right?!? :eyes:

[gateley]

6. We're all going off like

Iran HAS nuclear capability -- they DON'T.

Are we falling for that crap? Let's take a look at that recent NIE. Let's ask those who understand what's really going on.

During the debates, Biden was talking about what Iran has/is capable of getting which he believes is negligible.

Let's not buy into this shit yet just because some people are all of a sudden ratcheting up the rhetoric.

[UndertheOcean]

8. Israel is the rouge Aparthied state with "secret" Nuclear Weapons

Its not much better than Iran.


Let them fuck themselves up , maybe it will teach both societies to grow up.

[EFerrari]

11. Iran's humanitarian record is better than Israel's lately and

another journalist was just killed by the IDF:

Israel to Probe Killing of Reuters Journalist

Meanwhile, the Israeli military has announced it will investigate the death of a Reuters cameraman who was killed last week by an Israel tank. Human Rights Watch has said the journalist, Fadel Shana, may have been deliberately targeted by an Israeli tank crew. Shana was traveling in a vehicle clearly marked as belonging to media workers when he came under attack. Human Rights Watch’s Middle East director Joe Stork said, “Israeli soldiers did not make sure they were aiming at a military target before firing, and there is evidence suggesting they actually targeted the journalists.” Shana’s final piece of footage showed an Israeli tank firing a shell just before the camera went black. Other journalists who arrived at the scene shortly after the shelling also said they came under tank fire.

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/4/21/headlines#6

[EFerrari]

9. WTF? Iran has NO REASON to attack Israel. That's just a neocon excuse

for funding their cronies arms deals. Please.

[snot]

10. HUH?

What are YOU trying to start?

[still_one]

12. Iran is not going to attack Israel, it isn't worth the risk /nt

[JohnyCanuck]

17. Seeing as how Chimpy has promised that the US will defend Israel

if it comes under attack by Iran, it would seem rather suicidal for Iran to attack Israel. Frankly, I am more concerned that Israel would initiate a "preemptive" attack on Iran, or even stage a false flag type attack on Israel to be pinned on Iran (Israeli intelligence has used a false flag operation at least once before, i.e. the Lavon Affair). Once Israel is under attack, whether in retaliation for an initial Israeli attack on Iran or not, the US military could very well will step in on their side.

[Captain Sensible]

23. So has Hillary. nt

[still_one]

29. I don't by that either. However, I do not put it past mccain to do a

pre-emptive attack of Iran

The only way Israel would attack Iran is if Iran attacked them. That is not going to happen

What we should be concerned about is a republican president attacking Iran pre-emptively

[Demeter]

14. It's Far More Likely That Israel Attacks Iran as a US Proxy

and the same strictures should apply--no US blood in the Middle East.

[KSinTX]

15. K & R

Israel is the ME's superpower. I also don't see why we would get involved absent some compelling case. I also don't see attempting a "nuclear umbrella" in that region either. Ignoring NIEs is what got us in the mess we're in right now. Forget talk of the future!

[KharmaTrain]

18. The US Has Never Fought For Israel...And Israel Wouldn't Want It

As others have mentioned above, Israel has one of the finest military establishments in the world...one that's grown through over 60 years of non-stop warfare. The one thing the country has prided itself is to be able to fight its own battles...to be self-reliant for its defense, the goal of modern Judiasm following the wake of the Nazi. Never Again not only means not a repeat of the Holocoust but also about Jews and Israel never again being defenseless or relying on others to fight their battles.

Israel is very capable of defending its homeland from an Iranian attack...and any attack would be foolish for the Iranians for numerous reasons. Israel remains a good stalking horse in the Arab world...better to unite and fight them than to fight among themselves.

[riverdeep]

20. Sure it's capable, with our funding.

Israel constitutes the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid, at 30%, when it has 0.001% percent of the world's population. They have sweetheart deals with our defense department. No other nation receives this kind of favoritism. In truth, I believe there are factions inside the defense departments that use Israel as much as Israel uses the U.S., primarily to test out equipment on the Palestinians and keep the flow of arms churning out.

[KharmaTrain]

21. Funding Is Not Sending Troops

Yes, I agree, there's a special relationship between the US and Israeli militaries...a close relationship based on money and self interests. Israel has taken American military technology and both "battle tested" it and perfected the systems. They've also provided a lot of intel over the years on former Soviet systems that they captured or stole plans to. But there's a difference between sending money and aid and basing troops on Israeli soil...that's what the OP was discussing.

[depakid]

19. Sounds a lot like an isolationist take from the late 30's and early 40's

http://www.pbs.org/perilousfight/home_front/isolationism/

[RB TexLa]

22. You find a lot of isolationism here

[Zodiak]

24. It is a false premise

Iran hasn't invaded another country for 200 years and they do not have nuclear capability (and are not actively seeking it now).

Apparently no one wants to discuss this scenario as being unlikely inside the MSM. It is all fear, all of the time.

[mnmoderatedem]

25. and yet Hilary says it should

or so she said at the most recent debate.

But flag pins on lapels and such were far bigger issues.

[theboss]

26. I don't think the guys pushing the buttons at NORAD would bleed much

If Iran attacked Israeal with nuclear weapons, Iran would cease to exist.

[NoPasaran]

30. You're right, let all the blood be Iranian

Don't be stingy with the megatons, boys!

[Xolodno]

31. Lets just assume....

Iran is trying to get nuclear weapons....even if they did, it won't be anywhere near as advanced as Israels (I wouldn't be surprised if Israel has had some coaching from the US on racheting up precision, capability, etc.).

And lets be brutally honest, Israel would launch air-strikes against any facility in Iran that proved to be a bit too close for comfort.

I'm also of the opinion of why the Iraq mess hasn't been cleaned up and there always seems to be stalling on "training thier troops"....Israel can't fly over Iraq's airspace if Saudi and other Sunni allies are occupying the country if Iraq is unable to get its act together. Hence keep US troops in, allow Israel to pre-emptive strike Iran and Iran has a choice of retaliating against US troops (and triggering an invasion and ending thier regime) or just yell up a ton of rhetoric and do what they normally do.

If the US withdraws from Iraq and let them stand on thier own two feet, there is a chance Iraq won't allow the fly over. If Iraq can't stand on its feet, then Saudia Arabia will occupy it and they won't allow the fly over either.

[Marie26]

32. Why would they?

I can't see how it'd be in Iran's best interests.