72 replies to this topic

[A. J. Raffles]

Ooh, I'm going to read up on "my history" straight away, then...

Really, Stroggy, you may not realise this, but you're beginning to sound incredibly patronising.

[Stroggy]

R Havell, on Nov 1 2005, 11:43 PM, said:

the creatino of a kurdish state will result in huge amounts of the middle east being occupied by a culture which will generally be very pissed off with everybody else, and has the means (and the desire) to get their revenge.

Good, they'll fit right in!

Quote

Really, Stroggy, you may not realise this, but you're beginning to sound incredibly patronising.

But you do understand that I wasn't suggesting what you believed I was saying, right?
As for being condescending... you obviously haven't read many of my posts up till now.

[Havell]

A. J. Raffles, on Nov 1 2005, 11:44 PM, said:

Really, Stroggy, you may not realise this, but you're beginning to sound incredibly patronising.

He always talks like that, you'll get used to it in no time, that just Stroggy's way of talking to people.

[Galadrin]

Stroggy, on Nov 1 2005, 10:44 PM, said:

Good, they'll fit right in!

Hear Hear!

A. J. I have lurked for long enough to know that Stroggy is a bit of a kno... know-it-all

[Stroggy]

Galadrin, on Nov 1 2005, 11:55 PM, said:

A. J. I have lurked for long enough to know that Stroggy is a bit of a kno... know-it-all

At least I'm honest enough to openly admit it.

[Galadrin]

Hey, I know that I'm a prick from time to time.

Anyhoo, my point is that these "2'nd World" dictators are too often propped up by world powers, and that starting a war to essentially install a more favorable regime while removing an "evil dictator" that your father helped keep in power is pretty freaking lame.

[Juni Ori]

Well well well... Stroggy, I'm not quite sure wtf do you mean?

Quote

There are quite a few Israeli nuclear submarines. It is known Israel has these because it was Germany who gave it to them...

What in common is with nuclear warheads and nuclear submarines? As one of my friends commented:
- both's operation is based on nuclear fission, except another one's is based on nuclear fusion
- both are in black list of Greenpeace
- both have same first letter
Then about Germany... After WW2 they were limited to zero submarines and now they've got almost 15 years to build or buy ones, so how on earth could they have given them to Israel???

***

Then to assure you about something:

Quote

As you go on to say Iran may have SCUDs capable of striking Israel.

Both US and Russian surveillance (read spy satellites + possibly spy planes) has detected for certainty that Iran has working SCUDs. Iran also admits them and Russia has admited selling them to not only Iran, but other Middle-East countries too.

***

And finally people, don't underestimate some nations' military power. US forces have showed only their best, which, as in every military force, is only marginal. Nowadays if defender can resist long enough, best marginal doesn't anymore count. It's "second line troops" (meaning majority of first line troops) and then reserves and economy that make the decision. If defender can resist long enough. Also no one knows for certainty how major war (= two major powers really fighting a war, not some well-planned and executed occupation of much lesser power) would proceed.

China for example can easily arm millions of men (line up, give them rifles and train basics), but to maneuver and maintain them is totally different thing, not to mention their attack strength to resisting country. At the moment US forces are very likely quite stretched, mostly for their home front. Totalitarian police states can wield much more easily larger armies and Iran isn't actually very far from one, not forgetting that they have cultural and religional difference, even rivalry, compared to USA. Also USA has been quite widely considered imperialistic meddler of other sovereign states issues and thereby it would most likely receive even more liberal resistance throughout western world. But as an European citizen I don't actually mind, because Europe is finally challenging USA in economy...


PS: Stroggy, sor for sarcasm. I couldn't resist!

[Stroggy]

Juni Ori, on Nov 2 2005, 07:56 AM, said:

Well well well... Stroggy, I'm not quite sure wtf do you mean?

Quote

There are quite a few Israeli nuclear submarines. It is known Israel has these because it was Germany who gave it to them...

What in common is with nuclear warheads and nuclear submarines? As one of my friends commented:
- both's operation is based on nuclear fission, except another one's is based on nuclear fusion
- both are in black list of Greenpeace
- both have same first letter
Then about Germany... After WW2 they were limited to zero submarines and now they've got almost 15 years to build or buy ones, so how on earth could they have given them to Israel???

***

Then to assure you about something:

Quote

As you go on to say Iran may have SCUDs capable of striking Israel.

Both US and Russian surveillance (read spy satellites + possibly spy planes) has detected for certainty that Iran has working SCUDs. Iran also admits them and Russia has admited selling them to not only Iran, but other Middle-East countries too.

***

Said submarines are capable of launching nuclear weapons, and as for Germany you are correct, it was France who gave the submarines.

The fact that Iran has SCUDs does not automatically mean they are capable of reaching Israel. This is something they later stated as having developed themselves (namely the shahab-3 missiles)

By the way, why did Russian spyplanes have to confirm the existance of Iran's SCUDs  when the Russians gave said SCUDs themselves?

I do not believe Iran would want to "wipe Israel of the map," after all they'd be destroying their greatest scapegoat... of coarse mr. Ahmadinejadh does not seem to be a very stable person.

[Juni Ori]

Well, it doesn't matter where you launch your nukes from, if you have the missile technology to carry them to target. Israel apparently doesn't. Only benefit of nuclear sub over land missile silo is that they are virtually invulnerable to pre-emptive strikes when diving. So the sub thingy remains irrelevant.

You do have a strong point in:

Quote

The fact that Iran has SCUDs does not automatically mean they are capable of reaching Israel. This is something they later stated as having developed themselves (namely the shahab-3 missiles)"

But SS-1 - SCUD-B, same as Russians have sold to Iran - serie is quite easily modified and remember Iraq reached Israel. Iran has now had more time to develop their missiles. On the other hand, I don't believe it's random SCUDs Iran would strike with at the moment. More likely they try to form solid Islamic front against Israel and send forces to aid their allies. If war was to come. Which I still don't think is very likely, mostly because Middle-East is politically so spread out. Possible though.

[PrejudiceSucks]

I don't think that the reason people would attack Isreal for is religious intolerance, it's more because of the land that they were given. If they hadn't been given the only good land in that area other than the Nile Delta then people wouldn't have been so upset, I think.

Also, China already conscripts thousands and gives them training. It's the same for all neutral countries (especially Switzerland), it's what they have to do to protect themselves.

[Juni Ori]

Partially right, but there's fertile lands in Iraq and Turkey too, some areas much more fertile than average in Israel. So I'd say that's not explaining it all. Also there's very strong and long religious and cultural controversy backtracking to first millennia AD.

I'm also well aware that China already conscripts thousands of men every year, as well as in Finland we do (possibly about 30'000 per year, whichof possibly about 10% abort service). What I meant was that it has equipment and arms to form so huge army that no other nation could even dream of it. And I mean Russia and USA too. In Russia they don't have strong enough organization to get men to service at the moment and in USA they living standard would drastically decrease causing severe disturbances and possibly even collapse of economy.

And, as mentioned, I'm well aware of conscription armies and their necessity to some countries, as I've served in one myself.

[Stroggy]

Juni Ori, on Nov 3 2005, 08:11 AM, said:

More likely they try to form solid Islamic front against Israel and send forces to aid their allies. If war was to come. Which I still don't think is very likely, mostly because Middle-East is politically so spread out. Possible though.

Indeed, Ahmadinejadh does sound like a Sadat-wannabe. The formation of another Islamic coalition is a possibility, as their plan of using the Palestinians is seemingly failing. On the other hand they may still remember their previous failures of coarse we are speaking of a region that does not remember things very well, and also tends to embellish their short-term victories.
To name one: loads of plazas and bridges in Cairo reffer to the 6th of october, including one 6th of October bridge. This reffers to Egypt's crossing of the Suez into Israeli controlled Sinai. However the fact that the same Suez was crossed not much later by the israeli army (under Sharon) is quickly forgotten.

A new pan-arabic (or arabic-persian) coalition is difficult to foresee, but not impossible.

[DeathDude]

Well no conscription here, thankfully although don't get me started on our military, it's such a joke sigh our government really has made some bad decisions on our military, I mean good to be known as a peace keeping power, but still some of the decisions the gov't has made, like buying old sea king helicopters that were already in need of repairs, uh yeah.

As for an Islamic front I don't see that happening any time soon, as closely related these nations are, they have too many differences between them to really consider fighting as one united entity, even against Israel I don't see this happening any time soon.