"Initiating a war with Iran will only bring disaster upon Israel."

[Major Shaitan Singh]

Israel's Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi has reportedly suggested that a military action against Iran's nuclear facilities would have irreparable consequences for Tel Aviv.

"A military strike is not the right way to foil it [Iran's nuclear program]," Ashkenazi said. "Initiating a war will only bring disaster upon Israel."

According to a Wednesday article in the prominent Israeli daily Ha'aretz, there are two fronts within the Tel Aviv regime over launching an offensive against Iran.

The first warmonger group includes hawkish Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak; and the second group, who is worried about the aftermath of a strike, includes Ashkenazi himself, Head of Israel's Mossad spy agency Meir Dagan, Military Intelligence Chief Amos Yadlin and Head of the Shin Bet domestic intelligence body Yuval Diskin.

Last spring, Ashkenazi was assured by Netanyahu that his views would be heard over a military confrontation, according to the article.

However, the Israeli defense minister appointed Major General Yoav Galant as Ashkenazi's successor. Ashkenazi will retire next month.

Meanwhile, Tamir Pardo, who favors a military action against Iran, was appointed as the new chief of Israeli spy agency, replacing Dagan.

Earlier on Tuesday, Netanyahu called for "a credible military option against Iran," insisting that the military effort should be taken by the 'international community' and led by the United States.

The fresh rhetoric comes a week after Tehran invited envoys representing "geographical and political groups" in the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to visit Iran's nuclear sites.

In addition to Iran's recent invitation, the IAEA continues to conduct its regular inspections and camera surveillance of Iran's nuclear facilities.

Iranian officials and lawmakers have hailed the invitation as a major step toward proving Iran's policy of "nuclear transparency" to the international community.

As an IAEA member state and a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has repeatedly refuted repeated Western accusations that it has a hidden military agenda

 

[Leviza]

Israel's Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi has reportedly suggested that a military action against Iran's nuclear facilities would have irreparable consequences for Tel Aviv.

"A military strike is not the right way to foil it [Iran's nuclear program]," Ashkenazi said. "Initiating a war will only bring disaster upon Israel."

According to a Wednesday article in the prominent Israeli daily Ha'aretz, there are two fronts within the Tel Aviv regime over launching an offensive against Iran.

The first warmonger group includes hawkish Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak; and the second group, who is worried about the aftermath of a strike, includes Ashkenazi himself, Head of Israel's Mossad spy agency Meir Dagan, Military Intelligence Chief Amos Yadlin and Head of the Shin Bet domestic intelligence body Yuval Diskin.

Last spring, Ashkenazi was assured by Netanyahu that his views would be heard over a military confrontation, according to the article.

However, the Israeli defense minister appointed Major General Yoav Galant as Ashkenazi's successor. Ashkenazi will retire next month.

Meanwhile, Tamir Pardo, who favors a military action against Iran, was appointed as the new chief of Israeli spy agency, replacing Dagan.

Earlier on Tuesday, Netanyahu called for "a credible military option against Iran," insisting that the military effort should be taken by the 'international community' and led by the United States.

The fresh rhetoric comes a week after Tehran invited envoys representing "geographical and political groups" in the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to visit Iran's nuclear sites.

In addition to Iran's recent invitation, the IAEA continues to conduct its regular inspections and camera surveillance of Iran's nuclear facilities.

Iranian officials and lawmakers have hailed the invitation as a major step toward proving Iran's policy of "nuclear transparency" to the international community.

As an IAEA member state and a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has repeatedly refuted repeated Western accusations that it has a hidden military agenda

dar gaya sala

mard ben mard....

 

[Major Shaitan Singh]

If there is a war how can Iranian Revolutioniary guard enter Isreal other than Sea....

Can anyone explain what are the chances and vise versa.

 

[Realist]

If there is a war how can Iranian Revolutioniary guard enter Isreal other than Sea....

Can anyone explain what are the chances and vise versa.

It would not need to send the army. Israel is well within the range of iranian ballistic missiles. Israels infrastructure is very compact, and Iranian missiles launched in retaliation would do a lot of damage. And hamas\hezbollah would probably launch their own offensives too. So, Israel would be wise to stop warmongering.

 

[Parashuram1]

It would not need to send the army. Israel is well within the range of iranian ballistic missiles. Israels infrastructure is very compact, and Iranian missiles launched in retaliation would do a lot of damage. And hamas\hezbollah would probably launch their own offensives too. So, Israel would be wise to stop warmongering.

Any war does not begin with ballistic missiles if you are not aware. That is a very advanced stage of a conflict meaning that When Iranian regime is in utter danger, only then it is likely to use ballistic missiles. One must consider the Israeli doctrine that the moment they feel their end has come, they will release all their nuclear missiles against the enemy country(s).

As much as it seems like a movie, it is reality, owing to the same fact of regional compactness that you mentioned about Israel.

Hence Iran's response would be militarily retaliatory rather than a strategic (involving in ballistic missiles) one. As much as Iranian regime is boastful about the sacrificing capability of Iranians, even they know that a disproportionate response to Israel would mean annihilation.

This article settles the fact that Israel shall not strike Iran.

 

[pak-marine]

if i remember it correctly in summer 2006 war , hezbo's fired thousands of rockets however their was one or two incidences when they fired guided ones at one of the cities where a few people died. Iranians very quietly gave the message to Israel that it can hit them.

Any how war will btw these 2 will result in heavy casulaties on both ends and will cause massive damage , the warmongers should stop imagining a full scale one ... it aint happening

 

[DelhiDareDevil]

1 line to summarise the thread.

We are to scared to attack Iran, please USA attack them for us.

 

[Parashuram1]

1 line to summarise the thread.

We are to scared to attack Iran, please USA attack them for us.

Oh I would not say that, knowing Israelis well. They have much more capability and will to strike hard against their threat than you Indians. Take a look at the list of missions they have embarked on against what they deem as a threat to their country. In fact, their military capabilities have baffled European and Western analysts in the past many times.

Quite contrary to what people here feel that Israel simply wants to pull the trigger on anyone it fancies, it is not the case.

 

[GareebNawaz]

Oh I would not say that, knowing Israelis well. They have much more capability and will to strike hard against their threat than you Indians. Take a look at the list of missions they have embarked on against what they deem as a threat to their country. In fact, their military capabilities have baffled European and Western analysts in the past many times.

Quite contrary to what people here feel that Israel simply wants to pull the trigger on anyone it fancies, it is not the case.

Becuase Uncle Sam will support them no matter what and Uncle Sam supports their actions. USA almost never sanctions Israel nor does EU. If India did such a thing then all hell breaks loose in the West and says India is underserving piece of crap and sanction us. We Indians need to be more self-reliant so we dont have to worry about bastard like the ones from your side of the hemisphere who rant over every damn thing going on in Asia.

 

[Parashuram1]

Becuase Uncle Sam will support them no matter what and Uncle Sam supports their actions. USA almost never sanctions Israel nor does EU. If India did such a thing then all hell breaks loose in the West and says India is underserving piece of crap and sanction us. We Indians need to be more self-reliant so we dont have to worry about bastard like the ones from your side of the hemisphere who rant over every damn thing going on in Asia.

Calm down. You are an indepedent economic power, are you not? Then why are you worried for sanctions if Americans give you so much outsourced work? Do you genuinely think they could do that against Chinese? Arms sanctions yes that they will. But they do that to almost every country who does not agree with them.

The reason why Americans do not sanctions Israelis is because they have a strategic agreement with each other. When a country decides to skew on one side, this is one of the advantages as the disadvantage would be the collapse of that power and hence being left alone.

Technically, most of West's jobs are sent to you people meaning that at present, it is not as easy for the Americans in specific to sanction you economically. Their companies are vying for your economic growth and your contracts both civil and military.

What is another factor here is that you are not seen in the same stature as your larger neighbours the Chinese who not only are considered economically stronger but also quite aggressive by Americans.

If you are truly independent, then you have to rely on yourself and decide to take the initiative. Or else you must choose a global power and listen to its dictats. So this is mostly in your hands. Israel chose the latter and hence it is able to. You want to become permanent members of United Nations Security Council, don't you? All the permanent members are decisive and firm in terms of their actions and do not worry too much unlike you.

So as I said, it is your choice.

 

[al'ain]

1 line to summarise the thread.

We are to scared to attack Iran, please USA attack them for us.

please stop being like puppet of USA, i know how Winston Churchill begged Roosevelt to help them in WWII, there is a big difference in both of your economies, USA is much more advance then UK,
USA will never attack Iran, People have to accept it, they already learnt a lesson from previous wars