News Will Israel back us if we attack Iran?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nothing000
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Israel
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around whether Israel would support the U.S. in a potential military action against Iran, with many participants noting that Iran poses a significant threat to Israel. Some argue that Israel has its own issues to manage and may not engage in a conflict, recalling how the U.S. previously worked to keep Israel out of the Gulf Wars. Others highlight the complexities of military action, including the potential backlash and the lack of solid evidence regarding Iran's nuclear capabilities. The conversation also touches on the historical context of Iraq's missile attacks on Israel during the Gulf War and the implications of Iran's nuclear ambitions. Ultimately, the consensus leans towards skepticism about immediate military action against Iran without clear justification.
Nothing000
Messages
403
Reaction score
0
Do you guys think that Israel would assist us if America and our allies attack Iran? Because as I look at it, Iran, not Palestine, is Israels greatest threat.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Everyone that's not Israel is a threat to Isreal in that region. They would jump at the chance of war with Iran.
 
cyrusabdollahi said:
They would jump at the chance of war with Iran.

They sure don't seem to be jumping at it yet.
 
This is very hypothetical of course, but we went to great lengths to keep Israel out of the last two gulf wars. I don't think a war with Iran would be any different.
 
How did we go to great lengths to keep Israel out of Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom?
 
How did we go to great lengths to keep Israel out of Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom?

Did u miss the news? Iraq was firing skud missels at Israel and they didnt retaliate! Isreal wouldn't join any war, they have enough of there own problems, plus they arent stupid enough to do that IMHO.
 
Anttech said:
Did u miss the news? Iraq was firing skud missels at Israel and they didnt retaliate! Isreal wouldn't join any war, they have enough of there own problems, plus they arent stupid enough to do that IMHO.


Are you implying that the US is :wink:
 
Anttech said:
Iraq was firing skud missels at Israel...

When did that happen?
 
Schrodinger's Dog said:
Are you implying that the US is :wink:

Are you trying to make fun of the United States? Don't forget your country is in this as much as we are.
 
  • #10
Are you implying that the US is

Perhaps but don't take that the wrong way, Israels and US's cirumstances are totally different, so you can't compare...
 
  • #12
I was pretty young, but this is still something I should have known. Very interesting. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
 
  • #13
What the hell did they do that for?
 
  • #14
Another thing I did not know about until a few hours ago, was the scale of the Iraq-Iran war. I had no idea that this war was the longest war in the 20th century. And I didn't know that the Iraqi millitary used chemical weapons; and killed so many people! I just read that the chemical attacks on Iran killed more people by a WMD than any other attack in history, next to the nuclear attacks on Japan.
 
  • #15
Nothing000 said:
Are you trying to make fun of the United States? Don't forget your country is in this as much as we are.

Since when am I responsible for my governments actions? I never quite got why people never make the distinction between a citizen and it's government :smile:

Discalimer: just to be clear I have no direct control over the actions of my governement whatsoever, their political decisions both misguided and adroit are none of my doing.

And yes I supose I am being a little sarcastic but I do think any sort of military action against Iran when it is already involved in a costly war with Iraq, is somewhat unwise to say the least. I'm hoping all this is is posturing and who's got the biggest **** type stuff. But with old GW you never can tell what he's going to do.

Hasn't the IAEA already stated that Iran is at least 5 years from obtaining the technology to make nuclear weapons? Would it not then make sense to threaten rather than invade? Or even bomb? Would the US want to be shown to be making war if there is no WMD again after the last embarassement? Is there more to this than just WMD, as there was in Iraq?
 
  • #16
I really think that Isreal should take them out. Iran is a crazy theocracy, and they obviously are a big threat to Israel. I trully do think that the US should stay out of it. But who else is going to step up.
You don't really think that Iran should be able to have a nuclear arseneal, do you?
Because if not, someone has to stop them.

Did you vote for Tony Blair?
 
  • #17
Schrodinger's Dog said:
And yes I supose I am being a little sarcastic but I do think any sort of military action against Iran when it is already involved in a costly war with Iraq, is somewhat unwise to say the least. I'm hoping all this is is posturing and who's got the biggest **** type stuff. But with old GW you never can tell what he's going to do.

Hasn't the IAEA already stated that Iran is at least 5 years from obtaining the technology to make nuclear weapons? Would it not then make sense to threaten rather than invade? Or even bomb? Would the US want to be shown to be making war if there is no WMD again after the last embarassement? Is there more to this than just WMD, as there was in Iraq?
Bush won't be President in five years. If he's going to make his mark on history, he has to do it within the next two years. :rolleyes:

If he does attack Iran, I doubt he'll go to Congress about it first. You don't do that unless you're sure they'll back you. Even if Bush could eke out a majority for support, the scene in Congress would be positively ugly.
 
  • #18
what are you talking about? If we just immediately invaded Iran without getting some serious support it would be a very difficult battle. I seriously doubt that we would even be able to invade Iran alone. Our millitary is too thinly spread right now.
 
  • #19
Nothing000 said:
What the hell did they do that for?
Do WHAT for? Please quote statements you are responding to.

During the first gulf war, after Iraq had invaded Kuwait, and the United States was bombing Iraq, Iraq did, in fact, start firing missiles at Israel who, to that point, had had nothing to do with the war. Iraq's whole point was to get Israel to retaliate- then most of the middle east, moslem, nations would stop fighting Iraq and turn against Israel.
 
  • #20
How very interesting.

I am referring to the statement made by the Member of Physics Forums named HallsofIvy on Tuesday, Aprill 11, 2006 at 10:04am Central Standard Time, in which this member said:
HallsofIvy said:
During the first gulf war, after Iraq had invaded Kuwait, and the United States was bombing Iraq, Iraq did, in fact, start firing missiles at Israel who, to that point, had had nothing to do with the war. Iraq's whole point was to get Israel to retaliate- then most of the middle east, moslem, nations would stop fighting Iraq and turn against Israel.
:biggrin: :biggrin:
 
  • #21
That school you work at look very cool HallsofIvy. If you don't mind me asking, are you deaf too?
 
  • #22
BobG said:
Bush won't be President in five years. If he's going to make his mark on history, he has to do it within the next two years. :rolleyes:

If he does attack Iran, I doubt he'll go to Congress about it first. You don't do that unless you're sure they'll back you. Even if Bush could eke out a majority for support, the scene in Congress would be positively ugly.

But at the moment there is no excuse for an attack other than some completely unsubstantiated claims that Iraq is trying to develop nuclear weapons. Which I think personally they may not of been doing, but you can be damn well sure they are now, since the US has made it some sort of matter of pride.

There is no way Bush could garner suport for invasion at the moment, no one in their right mind thinks it's a good idea. How many countries supported the invasion of Iraq? Something like 46 out of 192 wasn't it. How many do you think would support an invasion of Iran 5/6? tops, aiming to ignore the UN again?

Nah to me this is little more than threats and bluster atm, should Iran be revealed directly to be moving towards making nukes, or should it be shown they have acquired the technology to do so then I'll worry, 'til then this is all just hot air.

If I was cynical I'd say that Bush has an eye for the gas fields of Iran, no coincidence that it is the most gas rich country in the Middle East, but that's just silly surely, who'd attack a country for Fossil fuels and then pass it off as concern for non existent WMD and terrorism?:wink:
 
Last edited:
  • #23
[already answered by others, but...]
Nothing000 said:
When did that happen?
In the first Gulf War. We stationed Patriot Missiles in Israel and all but begged them to stay out of the conflict. Saddam was trying to pull them in precisely because it would break-up the international coalition against him. We had been invited (begged?) in by the Saudis, Kuwaities, and other oil states (thinking they were next in line), but they are all Muslim and they would never would have accepted being on the same side of a war as Israel.

For the second Gulf War, Israel never was challenged directly, so it was not difficult to keep them out.
I really think that Isreal should take them out.
They might. More history for you: Do you know about Israel taking out Iraq's Osirak nuclear plant/facility in 1981?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/7/newsid_3014000/3014623.stm

This would be a tougher strike, but it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility, and I think it is more likely than a US strike (but only by a little).
 
Last edited:
  • #24
Show me direct evidence that Iran is enriching uranium?Not speculation not circumstantial gossip, not suggestion, actual proof, No? Or that Iran has an eye to make WMD? That's because there is none?

I reserve judgement until I see facts, I am suspicous of Iran but not certain enough that I'd risk the lives of thousands of people, stir up a hornets nest of terrorism and make even more political enemies whilst simultaneously alienating the UN.

We've seen where all these plans charts and bits of hearsay lead before, did you learn nothing from Iraq, it seemed then at least at face value that they had WMD, but when you dug deeper, it was all a house of cards.

Pardon me for being cynical of the US propoganda machine, once bitten.

[insult response deleted by Russ]

EDITED: OK I actually meant to say enriching uranium for nukes, I am well aware Iran has enrichment facilities, but enrichment does not mean nukes absolutley, there are peacefull motives for doing so.
 
Last edited:
  • #25
russ_watters said:
This would be a tougher strike, but it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility, and I think it is more likely than a US strike (but only by a little).

Do you mean that you think it is more likely that Israel will attack Iran before the US does? Because I absolutely agree with you. And I think that Israel will kick there ass. I think Israel has every right to.

Man, I just wish everyone would get along. I am not trying to make a hateful comment, and I have nothing against the religion of islam, but as I see it muslims are really the only ones that have problems with the rest of the world AND it is because of their religion. (I emphasised the word AND, because many other countries dislike other countries, but I know of none that hate other countries just due to religious differences).

I really think that Muslims need to incorporate some type of tollerance into their relligion. Everyone is always saying how america is intollerant; well I think that the relligion of Islam is much more intollerant.
 
  • #26
Oil is one of many reasons, economics are a major consideration in a capatalist country; are you so naive that you believe it was solely to depose Sadaam?

I think personally that the US is behaving politicaly ineptly as seems usual under Bush, and stomping around like a 7 year old with a bee in it's bonnet.
 
Last edited:
  • #27
Schrodinger's Dog said:
...show me direct evidence that Iran is enriching uranium?

Dude, Ahamadinejad straight up says that they are pursuing uranium enrichment. He just claims it is for nuclear power. Do you dispute he said that? I don't really think this requires providing a source, because this is what the whole conflict is about. Ahamadinejad says they want to start a nuclear program, but for energy. The US says that they are doing it for other reasons.
 
Last edited:
  • #28
Schrodinger's Dog said:
...you believe it was solely to depose Sadaam?

Yes, but I don't think it was soley for the reasons that we are told. I think that after 9/11 we had no one to fight. I mean it was a completely new type of attack. No single country hit us, so who the hell do we fight. Of course America has extreme pride, so if we get hit we have to hit someone back. So I think that once we could not find Osama, I think we looked for the easiest target that is also viewed by Americans as evil...Saddam. Unfortunately we are still running into this new "invisible enemy" type of gurilla warefare in Iraq (people dressed in everyday clothes attacking us). So I think it is turning out to be harder than we thought.
 
  • #29
Schrodinger's Dog said:
Show me direct evidence that Iran is enriching uranium?Not speculation not circumstantial gossip, not suggestion, actual proof, No? Or that Iran has an eye to make WMD? That's because there is none?
SD, it has been all over the news. It's the very reason we are having this conversation - why the governments are having the rhetoric-war.
The International Atomic Energy Agency announced today that Iran had begun removing seals at several nuclear facilities in the area of Natanz under the observation of the IAEA's nuclear safeguards inspectors.

ABC News reported yesterday that Iran intended to begin enriching uranium — the critical step in making material for nuclear weapons — a move European diplomats and officials at the International Atomic Energy Agency have tried to prevent over the last three years.

Sources with knowledge of Iran's nuclear program told ABC News that a senior Iranian official notified the IAEA verbally over the weekend of the country's intention to introduce uranium hexafluoride gas, or UF6, into centrifuges at a facility in Natanz, 150 miles south of Tehran.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=1488020
 
  • #30
Awesome. Thanks for providing a source russ.
 
  • #31
This just out on cnn
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/04/11/iran.nuclear.ap/index.html
 
Last edited:
  • #32
I guess that Schrodinger did not know what the situation was really even about! Or maybee he thinks that Ahamadinejad saying that he wants to a nuclear program is just propaganda made up by the American media.:biggrin:
 
Last edited:
  • #33
WHOA! Thanks for the news greg. Man that is crazy.
 
  • #34
[take it easy, Nothing000. -Russ]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35
I guess the conversation is over?
 
  • #36
Nothing000 said:
I guess that Schrodinger did not know what the situation was really even about! Or maybee he thinks that Ahamadinejad saying that he wants to a nuclear program is just propaganda made up by the American media.:biggrin:

Schrodinger is correct, you are the one making a "leap of faith" If Iran is MAKING nuclear weapons then we have a problem, surely you don't oppose Iran using Nuclear technology for energy purposes?
 
  • #37
Anttech said:
Schrodinger is correct, you are the one making a "leap of faith" If Iran is MAKING nuclear weapons then we have a problem, surely you don't oppose Iran using Nuclear technology for energy purposes?

But the Iranian leaders simply can not be trusted. The break promises like there no tommorow.
 
  • #38
They just can't be trusted.
 
Last edited:
  • #39
But the Iranian leaders simply can not be trusted. The break promises like there no tommorow.
:smile: :smile: :smile: :smile:

Are you serious? What about Bush Blair etc... You should put your hatered for the unknown aside and try and understand the ramifications of your proposal! A war with Iran will undobtly cascade into something very very much bigger. Anyway Even if Iran does develop Nuclear bombs, I can't see anyway they could deliever them to the US. So you would be safe, why don't we let the ME sort there own problems out. It is completely obvious that any interaction from the "west" just makes things worse. If I were you I would be much more scared of N.Korea than Iran...
 
  • #40
If we did go to war with them then this thing would defenintely cascade into something very very much bigger. That is why I think Israel should whipe them out.
 
  • #41
Whipe them out?:confused:
You've seen to many action movies...:rolleyes:
 
  • #42
Nothing000 said:
If we did go to war with them then this thing would defenintely cascade into something very very much bigger. That is why I think Israel should whipe them out.

Israel couldn't "whipe" them out anyway, unless they admit to having Nukes then they too would be taken to the security council!

Anyway if Israel attacked Iran, they would be attacked on all sides. Then everyone else would be pulled in, as I said before it would cascade.

So you think from where you are sitting, the population of Iran should be wiped out? Is this what you are saying? There is a word for that, its called genocide!
 
  • #43
EL said:
Whipe them out?:confused:
You've seen to many action movies...:rolleyes:

I mean stop their nuclear program with force. Not just whipe out the whole country.
 
  • #44
Anttech said:
Israel couldn't "whipe" them out anyway, unless they admit to having Nukes then they too would be taken to the security council!

Uhh... Israel does have nukes.
 
  • #45
Nothing000, what do you think would happen to Israel if they attacked Iran?
 
  • #46
Dude, Israel is not only powerful, but all the western countries have their back.
 
  • #47
What is it with you Europeans? Why do you sympathize for these terrorists? They hate you guys as much as they hate america. They hate anyone that is not Muslim. That is why I say they are the most intolerant people of the world.
 
  • #48
What is it with you Europeans? Why do you sympathize for these terrorists?

Which terrorists? Are you trying to say that the Iranian nation is full of terrorists?
 
  • #49
Nothing000 said:
Uhh... Israel does have nukes.

Do they? So why doesn't there government admit to it?
 
  • #50
Nothing000 said:
What is it with you Europeans? Why do you sympathize for these terrorists? They hate you guys as much as they hate america. They hate anyone that is not Muslim. That is why I say they are the most intolerant people of the world.

That's a post completely filled with nonsense.
First of all, what do you mean by "you Europeans". We're not a single mind you know.
Second, in general, "we" do not at all sympathize with terrorists. (And btw, what specific terrorists are you talking about?)
Thirdly, who are you saying hate us? The people of Iran?

Are you takling about "terrorists", or muslims in general?
 

Similar threads

News Is the US Prepared to Militarily Engage Iran?
3
Replies
127
Views
16K
News Biden: New Israel would be 'ill-advised' to attack Iran
3
Replies
132
Views
14K
News Case Scenario: Iran's Nuclear Program & Oil Prices
2
Replies
75
Views
11K
News Why is the security of Israel so important to the United States
Replies
43
Views
38K
News Has Iran replaced Al-Qaeda as the greatest terror threat?
2
Replies
67
Views
10K
  • Poll Poll
News Speculation mounting of an attack on Iran
3
Replies
124
Views
16K
News Should the US veto a UN resolution granting Palestine statehood?
3
Replies
124
Views
10K
News Iran calls for Israel's destruction
2
Replies
61
Views
7K
News Why Does Russia Support a Nuclear-Armed Iran?
2
Replies
52
Views
9K
News Is Romney's War Threat Against Iran Just a Political Move?
2
Replies
52
Views
11K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top