If Israel nuked Iran without ample provocation would we go to war with Israel?

[gunner]

That's MY Point.
What is "ample provocation" either in fact or in the OP's opinion?
HE based his whole attack scenario on that phrase.
I'm pointing t is is subjective and HE has the burden to clarify before asking.
If Israel attacked Canada now, THAT would be "without ample provocation" by any measure.
I'm pointing it that in the case of Iran, there MAY already be "ample provocation and HE must clarify beore BASING his scenario on it.
Some US or Israel leaders already believe there is "ample provocation".
It's the OP's burden.

The above would be a true representation but you added,

Or would "ample provocaton" only be seeing missiles headed for Tel Aviv on Radar?

From which we can infer in your opinion a strike may be necessary much sooner.

Edited to add, can you stop/continually edit after my post!

Paul

 

[Mycroft]

I have to side with mbig in this discussion.

Without a specific definition to "ample provocation", this poll is impossible to answer.

 

[shiang]

Your hypothetical question relies on an ignorant assumption that Israel will use nukes on Iran.

Seriously, Israel won't even "go to war" with Iran, have you ever looked at the map of the world? do you know where Israel is and where Iran is ? The most Israel can do is launch a surgical strike on Iran's nuclear facilities just as Israel did in the 80s with Iraq and a few years ago with Syria. The only problem is that such a strike will be more complicated due to the distance from Israel and the fact that there are multiple facilities.

Where the hell is this Israel will launch nukes on Iran idiotic idea even coming from?

Honestly comments like that are just insulting. A lot of people automatically assume every one else is retarded. I can point to half the countries in the world. I'm not sure if you've looked at the world map Israel is fairly close to Iran. We can attack Iraq and Afghanistan which, btw is a lot further if you have no idea what the world map looks like. You don't have to border a country to attack them it's the 21st century.

Also if you can read more than 2 lines. You would've seen that I said I find Israel attacking Iran or vice versa to be highly unlikely.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/CIA_WorldFactBook-Political_world.pdf

Israel is by the east bank of the Mediterranean sea. Only 3 countries are between it and Iran. US is on the other hand half way across the world.

...I said all this in vain of course as you can only read the first two lines.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

If Israel nuked Iran that would quite possibly be the most stupid thing ever right now.

 

[4Horsemen]

If Israel nuked Iran that would quite possibly be the most stupid thing ever right now.

It would trigger Armageddon.

why?

Russia is Irans' ace, no bad blood

Russia hates America so they are just itching to see us jump in.

Israeli-land hates the world if it ain't Israeli-land, so they have no friends.

America has monetary interests in Iran and Israeli-land.

China is also a friend of Iran.


So who makes the first move? Better not be America.

Let Israeli-land fight their owne war. they seem to be well-equipped to handle their own mess. they did well in 1948, why not in 2012 when the weapons are more advanced? America sold them to em, so they should still be good and work proper.

I honestly see this as a trick by Israeli-land to force America's hand and jump into the fray, effectively sealing our doom.

Beware of that Hexagram.

 

[shiang]

The Glaring deficiency of your query is WHAT is "ample provocation."
Iran threatening Israel?
Iran enriching beyond power needs?
Iran developing/acquiring more accurate and longer range missiles?

Or would "ample provocaton" only be seeing missiles headed for Tel Aviv on Radar?

To the least I would say arming aircraft and missiles with nuclear weapons. Nuclear technology isn't used only for weapons you know? I may go further and say the following actions would constitute "ample provocation"

1.Iran sending soldiers into Israel
2.Iran launching air strikes or missiles (note arming missiles can be considered "defense" which Israel does as well)
3.Iran declaring war on Israel
4.Iran arming air craft, submarines, or missiles with massive amounts of nuclear weapon sufficient to over come Israel's missile defense system and level the nation.
5.Iran arms more nuclear weapons than Israel
6.Robust intelligence that could be confirmed with proof that Iran intends to carry out any of the above.

...unless if Israel agrees to disarm all nuclear weapons. Then Iran arming any nuclear weapons would also be considered "ample provocation". They can't have nuclear weapons themselves and tell their neighbors they're the only one's that can have it.

So here's a good idea. Tell Israel to disarm it's nuclear weapons so we CAN attack Iran with just cause if they do develop nuclear weapons. Of all the current nuclear countries in the world I trust Israel the least, even then it's highly unlikely.

If you find these terms to be extreme then it's time to reflect on how bias we as a nation have been towards Israel, and wonder why the middle east is upset with our unconditional support for Israel. Yet the Israeli government keeps whining that we'r not doing enough to support them.

 

[shiang]

It would trigger Armageddon.

why?

Russia is Irans' ace, no bad blood

Russia hates America so they are just itching to see us jump in.

Israeli-land hates the world if it ain't Israeli-land, so they have no friends.

America has monetary interests in Iran and Israeli-land.

China is also a friend of Iran.


So who makes the first move? Better not be America.

Let Israeli-land fight their owne war. they seem to be well-equipped to handle their own mess. they did well in 1948, why not in 2012 when the weapons are more advanced? America sold them to em, so they should still be good and work proper.

I honestly see this as a trick by Israeli-land to force America's hand and jump into the fray, effectively sealing our doom.

Beware of that Hexagram.

Oh if Iran actually attacked Israel with a real military China, Russia, Germany, France, India, you name it would certainly not stand in our way if we leveled Iran's military and toppled Terran. If anything they'd support us with their own military. Believe it or not Iranians are not stupid they know this full well.

They did not support us when we attacked Iraq because we attacked on the basis that Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction (nuclear weapons)" and didn't have any proof and look at what happened, they're right. Even when we attacked without just cause no one really stood in our way.

They did support us when we attacked Afghanistan because of 911 and believed Bin Laden was in Afghanistan.

 

[jamesrage]

We all know that if Iran attacked Israel, especially with nuclear weapons we'd declare war. But...

If Israel nuked Iran without ample provocation would we go to war with Israel? ...or just slap them on the wrist.

I doubt neither Israel nor Iran would do such a stupid thing.

*change first option to "we would and we should"

Regardless of who bombs who we shouldn't get involved over Israel or Iran and I doubt we would go to war of Israel nuking Iran.

 

[4Horsemen]

Oh if Iran actually attacked Israel with a real military China, Russia, Germany, France, India, you name it would certainly not stand in our way if we leveled Iran's military and toppled Terran. If anything they'd support is with their own military. Believe it or not Iranians are not stupid they know this full well.

are you serious?Iran's military ain't no punk.

 

[shiang]

What do you mean? Our military is plenty to deliver Iran a beating, even if they're much stronger than Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran is also developing mid range missiles clearly to confront Israel with no insertions of harming us or any attempts to retaliate if we attack.

 

[NolaMan]

We all know that if Iran attacked Israel, especially with nuclear weapons we'd declare war. But...

No -- we in fact do not "know" this -- and we probably would not automatically be at war -- so the rest of the hypotheticals are pointless.

 

[NolaMan]

What do you mean? Our military is plenty to deliver Iran a beating, even if they're much stronger than Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran is also developing mid range missiles clearly to confront Israel with no insertions of harming us or any attempts to retaliate if we attack.

Iran being a destabilizing force in the region "harms" us -- they don't have to do military harm to negatively impact our interests in the region.

 

[Mycroft]

To the least I would say arming aircraft and missiles with nuclear weapons. Nuclear technology isn't used only for weapons you know? I may go further and say the following actions would constitute "ample provocation"

1.Iran sending soldiers into Israel
2.Iran launching air strikes or missiles (note arming missiles can be considered "defense" which Israel does as well)
3.Iran declaring war on Israel
4.Iran arming air craft, submarines, or missiles with massive amounts of nuclear weapon sufficient to over come Israel's missile defense system and level the nation.
5.Iran arms more nuclear weapons than Israel
6.Robust intelligence that could be confirmed with proof that Iran intends to carry out any of the above.

...unless if Israel agrees to disarm all nuclear weapons. Then Iran arming any nuclear weapons would also be considered "ample provocation". They can't have nuclear weapons themselves and tell their neighbors they're the only one's that can have it.

So here's a good idea. Tell Israel to disarm it's nuclear weapons so we CAN attack Iran with just cause if they do develop nuclear weapons. Of all the current nuclear countries in the world I trust Israel the least, even then it's highly unlikely.

If you find these terms to be extreme then it's time to reflect on how bias we as a nation have been towards Israel, and wonder why the middle east is upset with our unconditional support for Israel. Yet the Israeli government keeps whining that we'r not doing enough to support them.

The problem with your conditions is:

A. Iran, being a destabilizing force in the region, with nuclear weapons could be considered enough of a provocation.
B. Iran has already expressed it's desire to rid the region of Israel.
C. What would induce Iran to actually disarm if they do get nuclear weapons?
D. Once Iran does all the arming you mention...it's too late.

 

[mbig]

To the least I would say arming aircraft and missiles with nuclear weapons. Nuclear technology isn't used only for weapons you know? I may go further and say the following actions would constitute "ample provocation"

Iran is well Past what is needed for legitimate peaceful power needs.
It refuses full inspection and Turned Down the EU offer of Free Offsite Enrichment.
They've turned down all negotiation/everything that would stop them from Diverting fissionable material to a Bomb program.

Iran is Drowning in Oil and Gas. They are a poster child for NOT needing Nukes.
They have occasionally Gasoline shortages because they have a shortage or Refineries and the must import it.
Instead (!) they spend Billions on deep underground secret Nuclear installations and get cost additional billions in sanctions.

1.Iran sending soldiers into Israel
2.Iran launching air strikes or missiles (note arming missiles can be considered "defense" which Israel does as well)
3.Iran declaring war on Israel
4.Iran arming air craft, submarines, or missiles with massive amounts of nuclear weapon sufficient to over come Israel's missile defense system and level the nation.
5.Iran arms more nuclear weapons than Israel
6.Robust intelligence that could be confirmed with proof that Iran intends to carry out any of the above.

These Jokes are just short of my pointing out it would be too late.
But one point is Salient.
Iran hasn't officially declared war on Israel, but Many times, it's leaders have called for Israels END and do so Regularly.
Instead of me "telling" Israel, why don't You tell Iran.

...unless if Israel agrees to disarm all nuclear weapons. Then Iran arming any nuclear weapons would also be considered "ample provocation". They can't have nuclear weapons themselves and tell their neighbors they're the only one's that can have it.

So here's a good idea. Tell Israel to disarm it's nuclear weapons so we CAN attack Iran with just cause if they do develop nuclear weapons. Of all the current nuclear countries in the world I trust Israel the least, even then it's highly unlikely.

If you find these terms to be extreme then it's time to reflect on how bias we as a nation have been towards Israel, and wonder why the middle east is upset with our unconditional support for Israel. Yet the Israeli government keeps whining that we'r not doing enough to support them.

Huh?
Israel has had Nukes for 40 years and is a threat only to attackers.
Israel ergo, never signed the NPT.
Iran not only signed the NPT, they re-affirmed it under the post-1979 regime and must abide by it's terms.

Israel, as I said in another string just a day or two ago, is in a completely DIFFERENT geo-strategic situation.
Israel, 5 million surrounded by 300,000,000 on 500x the land mass, is the poster child, perhaps only one, for Needing Nukes.

Iran is a New Radical Islamist/Fascist state who threatens Israel regularly and is Actively NOW/Already Waging Proxy WAR with Hamas and Hezbollah.
These posts which say "if they have then everyone can" are Simplistic Nonsense.

How anyone voted in this poll without clarifying what "without amply provocation" meant is beyond me.

 

[Sherman123]

This is the kind of question that can only be answered if the scenario has been extremely planned and detailed. What did they strike, how many warheads, what is the background, what is the geopolitical climate, what is the global political climate, etc, etc, etc.

 

[ido_]

Honestly comments like that are just insulting. A lot of people automatically assume every one else is retarded. I can point to half the countries in the world. I'm not sure if you've looked at the world map Israel is fairly close to Iran. We can attack Iraq and Afghanistan which, btw is a lot further if you have no idea what the world map looks like. You don't have to border a country to attack them it's the 21st century.

Also if you can read more than 2 lines. You would've seen that I said I find Israel attacking Iran or vice versa to be highly unlikely.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/CIA_WorldFactBook-Political_world.pdf

Israel is by the east bank of the Mediterranean sea. Only 3 countries are between it and Iran. US is on the other hand half way across the world.

...I said all this in vain of course as you can only read the first two lines.

I had no intention to insult you personally. Nevertheless the idea is stupid, it is sci-fi and just diverts the discussion from the real issues with the Iranian nuclear program.

Iran is not fairly close to Israel, Tehran is about 1000 miles from Israel, there are Jordan, Iraq, Syria and Turkey buffering between the two countries, non of them are particularly friendly towards Israel. Israel is not the US, we don't have a massive navy that can strike anywhere in the world, we do not have the resources nor the manpower to haul over 100 thousands of soldiers 1000 miles away. For a country like Israel a border is a obligatory in order to go on an all out war, even in the 21st century.

 

[shiang]

Chill out Iran won't nuke "you" unless they are willing to get nuked by the world.

 

[ido_]

Chill out Iran won't nuke "you" unless they are willing to get nuked by the world.

I'm not sure I follow what you are saying here? You support Iran's ambition to develop nuclear weapons while giving the finger to the rest of the world?

 

[X Factor]

Chill out Iran won't nuke "you" unless they are willing to get nuked by the world.

I'm sorry, I just don't understand why so many people seem to trust Iran, whose leaders have pretty much vowed destruction for Israel, to behave rationally. In my opinion, Iran has already come very close to providing sufficient justification for an Israeli attack and I'd expect the US to back Israel to whatever extent necessary.

 

[Higgins86]

I'm sorry, I just don't understand why so many people seem to trust Iran, whose leaders have pretty much vowed destruction for Israel, to behave rationally. In my opinion, Iran has already come very close to providing sufficient justification for an Israeli attack and I'd expect the US to back Israel to whatever extent necessary.

they have been playing the same old broken record for the last 20 years and have yet dont nothing, I think most people think they are full of hot air and im sure if Israel got a whiff that Iran were close to attacking them they would engage them.

 

[X Factor]

they have been playing the same old broken record for the last 20 years and have yet dont nothing, I think most people think they are full of hot air and im sure if Israel got a whiff that Iran were close to attacking them they would engage them.

And there'd still be people who'd blame and castigate Isreal for doing so. Why is it, if an Israeli leader expresses concern for it's security, especially in light of Iran (which has pretty much pledged the destruction of Israel) being so close to obtaining WMD, they're being unreasonable warmongering hawks but Iranian leaders can comment on how Isreal is a tumor and a cancer to be eliminated, it's "awwww, they don't really mean it"?

 

[Higgins86]

And there'd still be people who'd blame and castigate Isreal for doing so. Why is it, if an Israeli leader expresses concern for it's security, especially in light of Iran (which has pretty much pledged the destruction of Israel) being so close to obtaining WMD, they're being unreasonable warmongering hawks but Iranian leaders can comment on how Isreal is a tumor and a cancer to be eliminated, it's "awwww, they don't really mean it"?

well I dont think its like " awwww, they dont really mean it". I think its more like " they are full of ****".

I guess my point is I dont understand why a lot of posters are almost egging on Israel to pick a fight with Iran. If Israel took these comments seriously they would of done something by now so their in action tells me that they do not believe Iran pose a threat as of yet. When it comes a time when Iran to pose a credible threat im sure Israel will call on us to aid them on an attack vs Iran, however until that time I dont think its wise for the media to keep pushing this subject. End of the day its easy for us to sit here and say " we need a preemptive strike on Iran" because its not our familes that will be in strking distance it will be the people of Israel.

 

[X Factor]

well I dont think its like " awwww, they dont really mean it". I think its more like " they are full of ****".

Aren't both things essentially saying the same thing?

I guess my point is I dont understand why a lot of posters are almost egging on Israel to pick a fight with Iran. If Israel took these comments seriously they would of done something by now so their in action tells me that they do not believe Iran pose a threat as of yet. When it comes a time when Iran to pose a credible threat im sure Israel will call on us to aid them on an attack vs Iran, however until that time I dont think its wise for the media to keep pushing this subject. End of the day its easy for us to sit here and say " we need a preemptive strike on Iran" because its not our familes that will be in strking distance it will be the people of Israel.

I ask this in all sincerity, do you think the UK would aid Israel if a conflict of that nature broke out? I admit to pure ignorance on the relationship between Israel and the UK.

 

[Higgins86]

Aren't both things essentially saying the same thing?



I ask this in all sincerity, do you think the UK would aid Israel if a conflict of that nature broke out? I admit to pure ignorance on the relationship between Israel and the UK.

Good question and to be honest I could not give you a sure answer. However I do know given the UK's work over the last 20 years with the US that if Israel were attacked and the US called on allies we would be there. Also worth pointing out we dont exactly see eye to eye with Iran given our shared history, empire days, embassy siege in London during the 80s and of course the attack on our embassy in Iran this year, so I think we def wouldnt shy away from a fight with Iran

 

[shiang]

I'm sorry, I just don't understand why so many people seem to trust Iran, whose leaders have pretty much vowed destruction for Israel, to behave rationally. In my opinion, Iran has already come very close to providing sufficient justification for an Israeli attack and I'd expect the US to back Israel to whatever extent necessary.

In my world people don't always do what they say. I tend to trust what people do more than what people say. If Iran attacked Israel it'll literally be suicide.