As I recall, back in the early 90s, Iraq built a “Supergun” capable of firing to a range of up to 1,000 km. A joint British-American tried to stop things, but found that Iraq was doing this legally. Crap.
Soon afterwards, Gerald Bull, the inventor was shot. To death. By a gun. Oh, the irony. :rolleyes:
Speculation abounds that the Israeli gov. sent the assassins. Personally, I think something similar will happen if Iran actually goes beyond mere boasting. Not open war, or planes. And I’ll be glad.
Yeah, but it’s a lot easier to assassinate one asshole in Belgium than it is to assassinate lots of Iranian engineers in Iran who are under the protection of the Iranian government.
And the Iranian nuclear program doesn’t depend on one mad scientist, there are lots of engineers who could help design the thing. Kill a few of the top guys and the Iranians just get more.
When I said “something similar”, I didn’t mean the Israelis are one-trick ponies. Not simply killing a scientist or two, but rather something along the lines of sabotage. Whatever they do, I am sure it would not be Carnac’s open hostility erupts predictions.
So there’s not actually any weapons Iran could use against Israel actually, you know, in existence, or being worked on, that you know of, then? Just words, and some actions that apply to virtually the entire Muslim Middle East and have for generations. Is that pretty much it?
Why your seeming eagerness to get people killed because somebody simply *said * something, Sam? Why the lack of support for your position here, d’ya suppose? Could it possibly be that starting a pre-emptive war in the *absence * of an actual, tangible, imminent threat is *against * the basic principles of civilization?
[on buying a coffin… ]
Peter Griffin: I’ll take it, but I won’t pay a cent over $60.
Coffin Salesman: Sir, that casket costs $1000.
Peter Griffin: 70 bucks.
Coffin Salesman: Huh?
Peter Griffin: 2000 bucks.
Coffin Salesman: That’s twice what it costs!
Peter Griffin: [pauses] 40 bucks.
Coffin Salesman: What?
Brian: He… he doesn’t know how to haggle.
I have no idea what you’re talking about. Of course there are lots of weapons Iran has that it can use against Israel. Hezbollah, for example. Heavily Iranian funded and supplied, Hezbollah is committed to the destruction of Israel. And they act on it. For example, by firing rockets and mortars into Israel last month.
And of course, Iran is developing missiles such as the Shahab-3 capable of hitting Israel. And nuclear weapons to put on them.
My, how you like to trivialize things. “Just some words” being statements by the leader of Iran claiming that Iran intends to ‘wipe Israel off the map’. And ‘some actions’ including smuggling weapons into Palestinian areas, funding the largest terrorist organization in the world, which has the express goal of destroying Israel, and which follows up its words with actual attacks on Israeli soil.
Nothing to see here folks. Move along.
You’re the one who wants to appease a totalitarian country that overtly plans to destroy a major ally, and that is building nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them, and I’m the one who is going to get people killed?
And once again, they aren’t just ‘saying something’. Iran is sponsoring actual attacks on Israel right now. People ARE being killed.
First of all, who said anything about a pre-emptive war? Selected strikes against Iranian military targets are a possibility. An embargo is another, as are other forms of sanctions. Some people would rather just put their heads in the sand and pretend it’s all just a big game, I suppose.
As for why I don’t have a lot of support for my position here, it could be that this board is full of people who think like you do. I’m fully aware that I’m outside of the ‘mainstream’ of the SDMB. Which only means that I’m somewhere to the right of MoveOn.org and Michael Moore.
Actually there are two and maybe 3. The Shahab-3 is almost certainly able to hit Israel today.
There are probably 1-2 functioning prototypes of the Shahab-4 and possibly a mock-up of the Shahab-5 as well. While neither have been flight tested AFAIK,it is fair to say they are “being worked on“. The 5 probably will be able to hit parts of Europe
**Exgineer:**Israel has modified many of its F-15 and F-16 with external fuel tanks – this modification was specifically made to give theme the range to reach Iran.
I agree with** Lemur’s ** larger point(s) – but I think he overstates some – the Israeli Airforce can at least somewhat effectively reach Iran
IAI/Bedek Aviation Group is a world leader in the development and implementation of air to air refueling systems.IAI/Bedek Aviation Group converts heavy cargo aircraft to air to air refueling tankers.IAI/Bedek Aviation Group has already completed tanker programs for customers such as the Israeli Air Force.
The Israelis have a history of doing this. During Iraq’s attempt to build nuclear weapons the Israelis bombed the reactors as they were being transported and attempted to assassinate several key scientists in the program according to Iraqi nuclear physicist Khidir Hamza. Eventually they just bombed the reactor (supposedly with the help of French intelligence).
It wouldn’t suprise me if Israel is already attempting to assassinate Iranian nuclear scientists.
IOW, no, not even aluminum tubes or bills of sale for yellowcake. Just words, as already noted.
“Of course”. If the threat gets to be both real and imminent, Israel can take care of it; they’ve shown it in the past. But that isn’t the topic here.
Yes, just words. And you’re happy to see people get killed over it. As long as yours isn’t one of them, of course; you’ve already established that.
You’re once again confusing words with deeds, and accepting whatever your favorite blogs breathlessly tell you is factual. Gawdamighty, man, didn’t your experience with doing exactly that in the runup to the Iraq invasion teach you anything at all about credibility of your favorite sources?
The ‘appeasement’ slander went out of style decades ago, btw - you need to update your vocabulary as well as factualize your arguments.
The subject here is if an Iranian pol’s newest rhetoric is enough to cause Israel to do more than it already is. What is the change in *the facts on the ground * that would caused a change in response?
[quote]
First of all, who said anything about a pre-emptive war?
[quote]
You did, and repeated it in your next sentence:
[quote\Selected strikes against Iranian military targets are a possibility.[/quote]
Or do your *own * words mean nothing? Or are pre-emptive military strikes *not * acts of war in Canadian English?
Not quite. Some people would rather just pretend that all the lives they’re willing to see lost, and families destroyed, and money spent for that matter, are just abstractions, like part of a video game, nothing real, nothing to worry about, doesn’t have anything to do with them, go right ahead and demand that others suffer those losses, but themselves, never.
You mentioned my “trivialization”, and in all apparent seriousness. Amazing.
But you won’t ever stop to seriously think why that is, and if the mainstream of the SDMB is really different from the mainstream of civilized society, or if you just might be wrong, will you?
I know, I know.