Just out of curiosity...?

Show all answers

shameless2youbaby

well im not Israeli
but one thing i know for sure
Iran doesnt mean a danger for the world
this is just an excuse for USA to start a war.
USA talked about a danger when they went to war with Iraq

Â¡É™Êžá´‰

I think any sovereign country
should have the right to bear arms.

Including Iran

Crystal (PSM)

1. They will use American F16s and Apache, so yes US aid is necessary for their sustenance.

2. No, it's a very bad idea. The Iranian counter-strike will be painful. Iran is no Iraq.

3. While I am not for war or killing of the Jews, but anything that will weaken the Jews and help reduce the Palestinian sufferings is supported by me.

[ ImpaKt ]

Israel Zionist very existence are because of US.

Israel is nothing without US,
monthly billions of $$$ among other aids!

Besides, Iran is no joke.
Israel with or without US wouldn't dare to attack.

Iran has a strong/huge army capable of sinking ships.
It's a huge land also in allies with Russia and China.

Also, there're many other factors that dismisses the attack to Iran.

In the mean time, read this:
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/israel.htm

John E

Do you honestly believe that Iran (Persia) with a culture and a history of thousands of years, (almost as the Greeks) would ever "attack" another country?
Do you honestly believe all that your Jewish controlled Press and Media tells you to believe?
And finally,
Do you honestly believe that the Jews with George Bush leaving Office would do anything to provoke the Iranians?

So let me answer your excellent question:
1. Israel is a country on crutches. American made crutches.
Do you know that each American citizen pays each year the sum of $146.80 to Israel so their Prime Ministers and Army Generals can enjoy free trips to Jamaica and other luxuries unheard of to the Average American person?

So, No. I don't think there will be Israel without the US funding whatsoever.
But the rest of the world would have a unique chance to enjoy a trouble free Middle East.
You agree with me on that, yes?

2. No I don't agree to any strike to no country,simply because I am a civilized person and I hate "strikes" no matter how you call them.

3. I do not support any kind of war because I am a Christian person in faith and I hate violence and destruction.

Until recently I believed that the Jews were smart.
Excuse me but I don't think so anymore. Au contraire I should say.
So I urge you my friend and open up your eyes and you'll see how wrong they've handled the creation of their country until now.
I do believe the British are a whole lot smarter than the Jews, so the least they could do is follow their example. Instead of 60 years (and counting) full of blood, destruction and tears the Brits would have that resolved within 3 months. Tops!
So, I think that with the terrible Jewish diplomacy Israel is doomed no matter how hard some people are trying to persuade you for the opposite.
Greetings my friend.

(Most) Israelis are warmongers, so of course they support war against Iran. I hope that Iran blows up their nuclear power plant(s) if it's attacked.

easyman52

iran can only send missles to counter attack..they cannot send a land force because of u.s. troops in iraq and other arab countries that oppose iran. if a strike is done, the leaders would be sure beforehand that israel can sustain itself.
is it a good idea? does a nucleur iran sound like a better idea?
when someone says theyare going to obliviate you off the face of the map, then i support defending myself against him

1. No
2. No
3. No
War should always be the last resort.
Iran hasn't done anything to bring on war and they won't. They work and achieve through surrogates.
A war with Iran would not accomplish anything as long as Syria remains.
Iran would be hurt more by wiping out Hexbo and Hamas.

allen

1: no, i think they will need US aid

2: not sure

3: i do support, because i think iran is going to attack israel very soon and its better if israel attacks first with US aid.

dmaud56

1) no

2) No.

3) Only with the backing of India and China so that they quit without even a fight, but, that's not gonna happen.

Getting in someone's face to intimidate them, is bullying. On the world stage, using a big country to intimidate a smaller country to prevent war is not intimidation, but humaneness, as it saves lives. With the backing of the military colossus that is China, Iran would not even DREAM of going to war. Problem is, most of their nuclear stuff is Chinese.

One T

1. Israel has done it before and it will do it again, no, we don't need U.S support or permission, we just need a few jets and a few bombs.

2. Yes, because this isn't a game.

3. Yes, the one who rises to kill you, rise to kill him first.

History has proven that when someone says he wants to kill you...believe him!

Abiyah TORAH FTW

Have you ever heard of " YHWH of Hosts" = YHWH Sabbaoth, He is also "YHWH-Tsidkenu & ha'el haggadol
wehannora" as well as 'el 'elohe yisra'el. EL the Eloah of
ISRA'EL.
WHY would you think they need any other aid?

Shay p

1 AND 2
Because an air attack on Iranian nuclear facilities will roil world financial markets and thus provide Obama with even more of an edge over the Republican party, Israel may be less inclined to attack Iran before the election. On the other hand, after the inauguration, Israel will be in the hands of a new American president who will show it much less sympathy than Bush. That's why someone might bet on the period between the election and the inauguration -- say December -- as the perfect time for an Israeli attack.

Israel recently held massive air exercises hundreds of miles off its coast in the eastern Mediterranean, both honing and displaying to the outside world the complex aerial sortie and air-to-air refueling skills that would be specifically required in an attack on Iran. The exercise was not just a message directed at Iran itself, but at the Europeans - to get serious in helping the United States to force Iran to stop enrichment, or face a military cataclysm that could immediately send the price of oil past $200 a barrel, with collateral effects on world stock markets.

3.
A war against Iran might not be a conventional one, in my humble opinion Iran should be and will be taken care of.

The experts found that Iran's scientists were operating 1,312 centrifuges, the machines used to enrich uranium. If Iran can install 3,000, it will need about one year to produce enough weapons grade uranium for one nuclear bomb.

Experts had judged that Iran would need perhaps two years to master the technical feat of enriching uranium using centrifuges - and then another two years to produce enough material to build a weapon.

But the IAEA found that Iran has already managed to enrich uranium to the four per cent purity needed for power stations. Weapons-grade uranium must reach a threshold of 84 per cent purity.

Mohammed ElBaradei, the IAEA's head, said the West's goal of halting the enrichment programme had been "overtaken by events". Iran had probably mastered this process and "the focus now should be to stop them from going to industrial scale production".

Dylan

Israel is the one providing military technology to the United States! Of course they could sustain.

Yes it is a good Idea. you cannot allow a man who has a hatred for you like no other obtain a nuclear bomb.

Not a war, Just a strike.

Pazit.

1. Yes, there are more weapons in Israel than there are people - but could the US sustain its weapons industry without giving the money in military aid to Israel and having Israel buy American-made weapons? Probably not.

2. I don't entertain the possibility of that happening, because the US can't go without Iranian oil, and Iran can't go without selling oil to the US. (That's why the 1973 embargo was so short.)

3. If Iran shows a true and genuine desire to attack Israel, I have no doubt that this will happen.

Israel lasted 30 years (late 1940s to late 1970s) with no US aid, but the US has a history of putting its money where its "mouth" is and helping its allies.

Michael J

1. Israel will have the means to sustain without U.S. aid for a certain period of time. Of course they would find other means as history will show you about the Hebrew people. Also why would the U.S. ever discontinue aid?

2. A pre-emptive on strike on Iran would nto be good for Iran. It would be good for the rest of the world if a country as unstable as Iran obtains the means for a W.M.D

3. I think most of the civilized world would offer support to go to war with Iran if it meant safety and security. Nobody wants to see a rogue leader with the means to do damage to a population because of his religous agenda.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: