Does Israel have the firepower to wipe Iran off the map?

[Option Trader]

Fred,

This is utterly amazing. You seem obsessed about the topic of Israeli aggressivenes. You have really taught me something about the significance of the role of every single Jewish person in the world, regardless of his exposure --or lack of exposure--to Torah teachings. These are the questions that brought me to this realization:

Why does the aggressiveness of war veterans throughout the world & throughout history not bother you unless he's Israeli or Jewish? Why doesn't your own aggressiveness (i.e. dark alley stuff) bother you more?

Why is it that the faults of the Palestians who brain-wash their children to be murderers doesn't bother you, while the Israeli aggressiveness (developed from self-defense) does bother you?

Why is it that you find the murdering of millions of Jews by your own people (i.e. Christians) throughout the generations as being excusable, while the Israeli w/ aggressiveness is inexcusable to you?

Why do you view the Israeli war or army veteran who never was exposed to Torah to represent the Jewish Bible and God, while you don't view Christian and Muslim war veterans as the representatives to assess their Bibles and beliefs?

The answer is either:
1) You are a simply a pitiful Jew hater (camouflaged as an Israeli hater) just like the folks in the Arab-run UN.
OR
2) You have great expectations of the Jewish people, as you understand being Jewish means you are God's servant/ representative.

Regarding the latter (#2):
Taking for granted the role of each Jew, depending upon his role will represent God in a different way. If you want to see sterling character, turn to those who devote their lives to studying (and practicing) the sacred Torah.
Some contribute by defending the country and by unveiling a soft side in them at the time of need (and in some cases leave the army almost untainted); some have the mission to grow up among "peasants" and to find their way back to palace i.e. to serve the King.

Regarding the former (#1):
All nations have their wrongdoings. So that Jews remain a pure people, God has made/ makes the Jews suffer more than any other nation for a wrondgoing; this has meant being killed, stolen from, and being hated. [No need for any volunteer*], but when you find yourself having negative feelings against Jews you should know where it comes from.

*as Divine judgment is an issue.

 

[jzlucas]

Iran conducted a test launch Tuesday night of the Shihab-3 intermediate-range ballistic missile, which is capable of reaching Israel and US targets in the region, Israel Radio reported. The test came hours before Prime Minister Ehud Olmert met with US President George W Bush in Washington to discuss the Iranian threat.

Military officials said it was not clear if this most recent test indicated an advance in the capabilities of the Shihab 3. They said the test was likely timed to coincide with the Washington summit and with comments made by Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah during celebrations in Beirut marking the 6th anniversary of Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon.


"What deters the enemy from launching an aggression is the resistance's continuous readiness to respond," Nasrallah told scores of supporters. "Northern Israel today is within the range of the resistance's rockets. The ports, bases, factories and everything is within that range."

The Shihab test was only "partly successful," according to news reports. The nature of the difficulties was not clear. The Iranians have been working to extend the Shihab 3's current maximum range of 1,300 kilometers. A year ago, they successfully tested a solid fuel motor for the missile.


The Arrow missile, he said, could intercept and destroy any Iranian missile fired at Israel, including ones carrying non-conventional warheads. Experts believe that if Iran is attacked by Israel or the US, Teheran would respond by firing long-range ballistic missiles at Israel

 

[drmarkan]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Would you please point to the minutes of a UN security council and/or general assembly meeting where the evidence of your claims was presented?

Thanks...

http://www.nysun.com/article/31196

This is not the minutes of the security council meeting, but it is an article regarding the report that Annan provided to the council. Here is the part that matters:

Hezbollah "maintains close ties, with frequent contacts and regular communication, with the Syrian Arab Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran," yesterday's report, which was prepared by Mr. Larsen, who frequently travels to the Middle East on Mr. Annan's behalf, said in a clarifying footnote.

I assume if Annan states it as fact in a UN Security Coucil meeting that you would find that as acceptable.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

So in your world, " "maintains close ties, with frequent contacts and regular communication, with the Syrian Arab Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran,"

means:

"Iran directly finances & commands Hezbollah."

Quote from drmarkan:

http://www.nysun.com/article/31196

This is not the minutes of the security council meeting, but it is an article regarding the report that Annan provided to the council. Here is the part that matters:

Hezbollah "maintains close ties, with frequent contacts and regular communication, with the Syrian Arab Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran," yesterday's report, which was prepared by Mr. Larsen, who frequently travels to the Middle East on Mr. Annan's behalf, said in a clarifying footnote.

I assume if Annan states it as fact in a UN Security Coucil meeting that you would find that as acceptable.

 

[shohami]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

So in your world, " "maintains close ties, with frequent contacts and regular communication, with the Syrian Arab Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran,"

means:

"Iran directly finances & commands Hezbollah."

It's very clear that is the case. Israeli Intelligence agencies know for certain that Iran is financing Islamic Jihad groups that send suicide bombers to Israel, and Hezbollah, that keeps on buying more rockets and SAM's.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

If they have proof of the claim posted previously in this thread, that "Iran directly finances & commands Hezbollah" then present it to the UN security council.

Then post a link to those minutes, thanks.

Quote from shohami:

It's very clear that is the case. Israeli Intelligence agencies know for certain that Iran is financing Islamic Jihad groups that send suicide bombers to Israel, and Hezbollah, that keeps on buying more rockets and SAM's.

 

[shohami]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

If they have proof of the claim posted previously in this thread, that "Iran directly finances & commands Hezbollah" then present it to the UN security council.

Then post a link to those minutes, thanks.

The UN chief dude already stated that.
The US already declared Iran and Syria as terrorist-helping countries. What more do you need ?!

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Declarations without evidence are not proof.

If they were, then what Iran declares wihtout evidence is also proof.

I am still waiting for direct evidence and proof that "Iran directly finances & commands Hezbollah."

Quote from shohami:

The UN chief dude already stated that.
The US already declared Iran and Syria as terrorist-helping countries. What more do you need ?!

 

[fhl]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Declarations without evidence are not proof.

If they were, then what Iran declares wihtout evidence is also proof.

I am still waiting for direct evidence and proof that "Iran directly finances & commands Hezbollah."

Iran may present greater threat than Iraq

By Amitai Etzioni

USA Today, Posted 12/9/2002

Much attention has been paid to the dangers posed by North Korea and Iraq, which this past weekend turned over a 1,200-page report to the United Nations that declared it had no weapons of mass destruction. But there's another time bomb ticking: It's in Lebanon, and Iran holds the fuse.

The terrorist group Hezbollah has moved some 8,000 Katyusha rockets into southern Lebanon in recent months. Intelligence analysts fear that on a cue from Iran's capital, Tehran, these may be unleashed on Israel. The hope is that Israel's resulting response will strain the American alliance just as it readies to strike Iraq.

There has been evidence in the past of Iran's role in actions against the United States and its allies. On the night of June 25, 1996, terrorists drove a truck loaded with plastic explosives up to the Khobar Towers, where U.S. military personnel were housed near Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, and detonated it. Nineteen U.S. soldiers were killed, and more than 300 Americans and Saudis were wounded.

Former FBI director Louis Freeh recently told a congressional committee about direct evidence that strongly indicates the 1996 bombing was "sanctioned, funded and directed by senior officials of the government of Iran." He also reminded the members of Congress that the National Commission on Terrorism concluded in 2000 that "Iran remains the most active state supporter of terrorism."

At a time when President Bush is making his case for action against Iraq, Freeh's testimony provided a vivid reminder that Iran is another terrorist threat to U.S. security – a threat that is being overlooked.

Indeed a strong case can be made that Iran is even more troublesome than Iraq. Take the connection to terrorists. Bush and his administration repeatedly have tried to connect the dots between Iraq and al-Qaeda, citing the belief that 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague, Czech Republic, well before those attacks. Yet U.S. intelligence agencies themselves have discounted that such a meeting took place. The administration's many attempts to link Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda also have often led nowhere.

In contrast, the evidence against Iran is far clearer, and the dangers of ignoring that country carry serious implications:

* Iran has given arms and finances to the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah and sent a ship full of armaments to the Palestinian Authority.

On a recent 60 Minutes episode, Lesley Stahl cited evidence that numerous heavy weapons seized from a cargo ship earlier this year "may have been paid for by Iraqi oil money, but they came from Iran." U.S. intelligence agencies report that Iran has harbored fleeing al-Qaeda fighters and served as a transit point for al-Qaeda and Taliban officers to ship gold out of Pakistan into Sudan.

* If Saddam's weapons of mass destruction greatly concern the United States, then Iran's program should really give it pause.

Israeli intelligence presented the White House wit data showing that Iran's development of weapons of mass destruction is more advanced than Iraq's. In recent months, Iran successfully fired a new long-range missile that could travel some 800 miles and is believed capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.

* The potential for establishing democracy in Iran is much higher than it is in Iraq, where there is a danger that the current tyrant will merely be replaced by another.

I was the guest of Iranian reformers in April and May. They are the unquestioned majority of the country. Although elections are rigged (some of their candidates have been disqualified and jailed by the dominating mullahs), the reformers have repeatedly earned 70% of the vote.

In recent days, there have been several sizable demonstrations of students – the typical leaders of change – in Iran. They have been protesting the death sentence given to a reformist lecturer, Hashem Aghajari. But they also say their protests go beyond Aghajari. The No. 1 priority for reformers is an open society where people can freely abide by the rules of a more liberal Islam.

Iran has by far the greatest chance of becoming the Middle East's most liberal society. But we cannot wait for the reformers to win their way in an election. The mullahs, who control the military and the secret police, also are rushing ahead with the development of missiles and nuclear weapons at a rate that outpaces reforms. So we must break the hold of the mullahs and destroy their weapons facilities – a much smaller task than conquering Iraq.

It is unclear just what the majority of the Iraqi people favor. In Iran, however, there's little doubt that a regime change would be widely considered an act of liberation. It should be noted, however, that the reformers are patriotic citizens. They would much rather have regime change come from the inside than be triggered by the United States.

But neither the hardliners nor the reformers are keen to go to battle. In Iran, every small town and village has a shrine for those killed in the 1980-88 war against Iraq. Local leaders are quick to tell you how grateful they were when the war finally ended and the nation began using its resources to build roads, water mains and other essential parts of the economic infrastructure. There is very little taste there for war.

Although there may be some quiet cooperation between the U.S. and Iran during a war against Iraq, the Bush administration properly includes Iran on its short list of "axis of evil" members. The USA has warned Iran to end its support of terrorists and stop its development of nuclear weapons, both good steps, but it continues to emphasize Iraq over Iran.

Perhaps it is just a question of time. Once the first member of the axis of evil is defanged, the United States can take on the second one with our troops already assembled in the region – unless, that is, Iran sees what happens in Iraq and immediately mends its ways.

Amitai Etzioni is a member of the USA TODAY contributor's board and author of The New Golden Rule.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Again, where is the proof of this statement:

"Iran directly finances & commands Hezbollah."

Seriously, please read the article. I see no direct evidence offered that removes all possible doubt, and/or establishes as fact uncontrovertable that Iran is commanding Hezbollah.

Quote from fhl:

Iran may present greater threat than Iraq

By Amitai Etzioni

USA Today, Posted 12/9/2002

Much attention has been paid to the dangers posed by North Korea and Iraq, which this past weekend turned over a 1,200-page report to the United Nations that declared it had no weapons of mass destruction. But there's another time bomb ticking: It's in Lebanon, and Iran holds the fuse.

The terrorist group Hezbollah has moved some 8,000 Katyusha rockets into southern Lebanon in recent months. Intelligence analysts fear that on a cue from Iran's capital, Tehran, these may be unleashed on Israel. The hope is that Israel's resulting response will strain the American alliance just as it readies to strike Iraq.

There has been evidence in the past of Iran's role in actions against the United States and its allies. On the night of June 25, 1996, terrorists drove a truck loaded with plastic explosives up to the Khobar Towers, where U.S. military personnel were housed near Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, and detonated it. Nineteen U.S. soldiers were killed, and more than 300 Americans and Saudis were wounded.

Former FBI director Louis Freeh recently told a congressional committee about direct evidence that strongly indicates the 1996 bombing was "sanctioned, funded and directed by senior officials of the government of Iran." He also reminded the members of Congress that the National Commission on Terrorism concluded in 2000 that "Iran remains the most active state supporter of terrorism."

At a time when President Bush is making his case for action against Iraq, Freeh's testimony provided a vivid reminder that Iran is another terrorist threat to U.S. security – a threat that is being overlooked.

Indeed a strong case can be made that Iran is even more troublesome than Iraq. Take the connection to terrorists. Bush and his administration repeatedly have tried to connect the dots between Iraq and al-Qaeda, citing the belief that 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague, Czech Republic, well before those attacks. Yet U.S. intelligence agencies themselves have discounted that such a meeting took place. The administration's many attempts to link Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda also have often led nowhere.

In contrast, the evidence against Iran is far clearer, and the dangers of ignoring that country carry serious implications:

* Iran has given arms and finances to the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah and sent a ship full of armaments to the Palestinian Authority.

On a recent 60 Minutes episode, Lesley Stahl cited evidence that numerous heavy weapons seized from a cargo ship earlier this year "may have been paid for by Iraqi oil money, but they came from Iran." U.S. intelligence agencies report that Iran has harbored fleeing al-Qaeda fighters and served as a transit point for al-Qaeda and Taliban officers to ship gold out of Pakistan into Sudan.

* If Saddam's weapons of mass destruction greatly concern the United States, then Iran's program should really give it pause.

Israeli intelligence presented the White House wit data showing that Iran's development of weapons of mass destruction is more advanced than Iraq's. In recent months, Iran successfully fired a new long-range missile that could travel some 800 miles and is believed capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.

* The potential for establishing democracy in Iran is much higher than it is in Iraq, where there is a danger that the current tyrant will merely be replaced by another.

I was the guest of Iranian reformers in April and May. They are the unquestioned majority of the country. Although elections are rigged (some of their candidates have been disqualified and jailed by the dominating mullahs), the reformers have repeatedly earned 70% of the vote.

In recent days, there have been several sizable demonstrations of students – the typical leaders of change – in Iran. They have been protesting the death sentence given to a reformist lecturer, Hashem Aghajari. But they also say their protests go beyond Aghajari. The No. 1 priority for reformers is an open society where people can freely abide by the rules of a more liberal Islam.

Iran has by far the greatest chance of becoming the Middle East's most liberal society. But we cannot wait for the reformers to win their way in an election. The mullahs, who control the military and the secret police, also are rushing ahead with the development of missiles and nuclear weapons at a rate that outpaces reforms. So we must break the hold of the mullahs and destroy their weapons facilities – a much smaller task than conquering Iraq.

It is unclear just what the majority of the Iraqi people favor. In Iran, however, there's little doubt that a regime change would be widely considered an act of liberation. It should be noted, however, that the reformers are patriotic citizens. They would much rather have regime change come from the inside than be triggered by the United States.

But neither the hardliners nor the reformers are keen to go to battle. In Iran, every small town and village has a shrine for those killed in the 1980-88 war against Iraq. Local leaders are quick to tell you how grateful they were when the war finally ended and the nation began using its resources to build roads, water mains and other essential parts of the economic infrastructure. There is very little taste there for war.

Although there may be some quiet cooperation between the U.S. and Iran during a war against Iraq, the Bush administration properly includes Iran on its short list of "axis of evil" members. The USA has warned Iran to end its support of terrorists and stop its development of nuclear weapons, both good steps, but it continues to emphasize Iraq over Iran.

Perhaps it is just a question of time. Once the first member of the axis of evil is defanged, the United States can take on the second one with our troops already assembled in the region – unless, that is, Iran sees what happens in Iraq and immediately mends its ways.

Amitai Etzioni is a member of the USA TODAY contributor's board and author of The New Golden Rule.