Iran Warns Israel of Retaliation

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's top nuclear negotiator warned Israel on Tuesday that his country would retaliate if the Jewish state were to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.


Israel and the United States suspect Iran is secretly building nuclear weapons under cover of a nuclear energy program. In the past, Israel has said it would not allow Iran to build a nuclear bomb.

~snip~

Israel knows our hands are well equipped," Rowhani said. "If such an incident happens, it will meet a resolute response from our side."


Rowhani did not explain what he meant by saying Iran was "well equipped," but Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani said in December that Iran would strike back with long-range missiles if Israel were to attack its nuclear facilities.

~snip~

more:http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=736&e=4&u=/ap/20040511/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_israel

Iran would lay down and take it, I imagine.

that world wars are triggered.

however in this instance, Iran would back down. They know they've got the U.S. on both sides of them (Iraq & Afghanistan) and that nobody is going to come to their aid if they take on Israel.

If a world war was going to start, all other arab nations would have to join in too. And I don't see that happening because arab nations distrust eachother just slightly less than they trust us or Israel.

as the US.

That should tell you were they stand.

But consider the following examples:
- Kissinger said he misunderstood the fact that countries might start a war they couldn't win for the sake of self-respect (Yom Kipper, 1973).
- Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, even though they knew war with the U.S. was a huge gamble that they would probably lose.
- The whole complicated World War I scenario (it would take pages to go into it, as everyone knows, but the upshot is that local matters quickly escalated out of everybody's control).

Nations often do irrational things after being attacked, and that often drags other nations into doing irrational things (or rational things, if it opens up an unexpected opportunity for them).

They just would have took that...

Does anyone know if there's a single major issue that the right-wing has or had with John McCain? Thanks.

fall into line very well with the neonazicons.

Finally, as far as concerns Serbia, His Majesty, of course,
cannot interfere in the dispute now going on
between Austria-Hungary and that country, as it is a matter
not within his competence. The Emperor Francis Joseph
may, however, rest assured that His Majesty will faithfully
stand by Austria-Hungary, as is required by the obligations of
his alliance and of his ancient friendship.

BETHMANN-HOLLWEG

http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/1914/blankche.html

Washington's strategy is simple: whenever the White
House feels that developments in Iraq are not proceeding in
its favour it steps up its campaign against Tehran through
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Tehran, for
its part, has proven itself highly adept at circumventing
US pressures by capitalising on the American predicament
in Iraq.

http://palestinechronicle.com/story.php?sid=20040507114450294

Anything Israel sends to Iran must go thru US controlled
space.

The legislation, originally introduced by Rep. Tom Lantos
(D-CA) and Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Il), passed by a margin of
376-3, with 14 members voting
"present."

http://www.truthnews.net/world/2004050032.htm

Because they know they'd get stomped on if they were to retaliate against either us or Israel.

And where would the US get the troops to do anything. The US is barely holdoing its own in Iraq, and do not have control of much in Afghanistan. Of course there's always the draft, but even that would take time to implement. Taking into consideration that 9 of the US Army's 10 active divisions are spread out all over the world, with the exception of using tactical nukes, the US does not have the manpower to do much.

As for the Israelis they would have to fly over Arab airspace all the way to Iran, and have to refuel in order to make it back to Israel.

Add to that the possibility that the Iranians have been preparing for an attack on its reactors, and the rumor that they have purchased anti-air artillery from either the Russians or the Chinese.

Retaliation does not mean a direct attack against Israel, if the Iranians do have up to date defenses, they can inflict damage that
way and force the Israelis to either quit or to use their own nukes.

No matter how you look at it, whatever happens, I don't believe that the Iranians will lay down and take it this time, but we'll see.

or US monitored Saudi Arabian or Persian Gulf airspace.

To ensure that Israeli aircraft were not threatened by US air defenses - Bush would have to give the Israelis US IFF codes.

...and we would be an accomplice....

but could the israelis nuke iran and then claim that they attacked with conventional weapons and the nuclear fallout was a result of irans nucular programme.

Its a big lie but they seem to be en vogue.

or,...if you wish to call it "retaliation",...do they have? I think it very dangerous to assume how any particular person or nation or group of nations will react when there is a clear intention to use force against them and to "control" a whole region.

I don't agree that Iran would just stand down and take it - especially considering how the entire transition from national sovereignty to total chaos in Iraq BEGAN with the June '82 Israeli raid on a brand new Iraqi nuclear power plant when it was all ready to go on-line.

Iraq sorta just "took it" that time, didn't they? Not a good outcome for them!

Why is Yahoo! News (apparently) down? Haven't seen that before.
(OK - they're back)


Any other links available (PLEASE)?

If one of them was to get hurt in any Israeli strike, there is a high
probability that in a few hours russian cruise missiles would be raining down on israeli
nuclear facilities.

.
.
.

They DO have the manpower to do that.

About 5 times the manpower that the US has in Iraq right now.

And Iran isn't real "busy" with their Military right now.

Something to think about.



Those figures are from 2000, they could be considerably more by now,

And I'd bet my butt they are on a high state of readyness.

It sent prices shooting up in the 1970s; I think the Arab OPEC states would be concerned by Israel attacking other countries. It would hurt the whole world, not just Israel; but Bush would want to keep oil prices down for November, and if anyone has the ability to restrain Sharon, it's his financial backers in the Pentagon.