• Published 00:00 18.05.07
  • Latest update 00:00 18.05.07

Poll: 71% of Israelis want U.S. to strike Iran if talks fail

Survey also reveals 65% of believe U.S. is a loyal ally, 59% still think the war in Iraq was justified.

By Aluf Benn

Fully 71 percent of Israelis believe that the United States should launch a military attack on Iran if diplomatic efforts fail to halt Tehran's nuclear program, according to a new poll.

The survey, commissioned by Bar-Ilan University's BESA Center and the Anti-Defamation League, found that 59 percent of Israelis still believe the war in Iraq was justified, while 36 percent take the opposite view.

Some 65 percent believe that the United States is a loyal ally of Israel, with only 11 percent saying the opposite. A slightly higher proportion, 73 percent, described U.S. President George W. Bush as friendly. Forty-eight percent attributed U.S. support for Israel to strategic considerations, while 30 percent credited American Jewry and 17 percent cited shared values and a shared democratic tradition.

Regarding America's importance to Israel, there was near consensus: 91 percent said that close relations with the U.S. are vital to Israel's security. Some 51 percent of respondents predicted that the U.S. will ultimately impose an agreement on Israel and the Palestinians, while 43 percent disagreed.

In addition, 52 percent of respondents described American Jewish support of Israel as "sufficient," while 33 percent did not. About half of all Israelis believe that American Jewry is in danger of disappearing due to assimilation, the poll found.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A new poll finds that 71 percent of Israelis believe that the United States should launch a military attack on Iran if diplomatic efforts fail to halt Tehran's nuclear program. (AP)

  • Print Page
  • Send to a friend
  • Share
  • Text Size +|-
 
 
TalkBacks

Why Facebook Connect?

Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.

Add a comment

Add your reply

  • 361. 0 0
    Media lying about Ahmedinedjad's statement has had its effect
    • John Smith
    • 08.10.09
    • 05:37

    Media propaganda has scared the Israelis witless. The fake untrue lie about Ahmedinejad's statement in US and UK media has had its intended CIA "blowback" effect on the Israeli public..

  • 360. 0 0
    A Shame and a Disgrace
    • Double Click
    • 01.10.07
    • 16:21

    This poll shows that Israel is no longer a peaceful country, and uses the United States to do its' dirty work. It just goes to show how far have the present day Israeli's come from the wise, honorable Hebrew culture. It is not only a shame on their ancient culture, but a disgrace for America.

  • 359. 0 0
    Israel, I apologize for Spyguy
    • Mikeinalaska
    • 11.09.07
    • 06:10

    I am sorry this fool found this article. As a resident of San Fran, Ca. he is probably a leftwing coward. The Left wing types love to hide their heads in the sand until it is too late, then cry that they are in trouble and hope someone else fights for them. The majority of the U.S. appreciates Israel and understands the terrible situation you are in being surrounded by murderous fanatics that follow a prophet (Mohammed) that never even got a prophecy correct.

  • 358. 0 0
    alan in NY thinks Persians should die for protesting?
    • lynda
    • 09.09.07
    • 08:10

    Iranian protestors have been chanting "death to America" for decades. Just because they chant something doesn't give anyone the right to bomb their whole country. Don't you people realize how much your press lies to you? How much you've been manipulated? Your israeli media has been lying to you about Iran for years now. Why do you suppose the rest of Israels allies are completely against attacking Iran? Because we haven't had the constant lies spewed to us like you have. We are beginning to though. And it will probably take another false flag attack on the US and Europe because theres no way our rotten media could convince us before Bush leaves office. So expect to see a horrendous false flag attack on a US city and blamed on Iran.

  • 357. 0 0
    israelis
    • Yagut
    • 06.09.07
    • 07:07

    Israel is a nation full of liers and theives, they entered Palestine for help from the Arab people ie the Pelstinian..and when they get help they back stabbing the Arab people..and when they get the lands from the Arab people they want more.. These are the kind of people Bush wants to help. Arabs had been fooled by these people

  • 356. 0 0
    War with Iran
    • Peter
    • 05.09.07
    • 15:24

    Bush and Cheney just cant resists all the huge war and oil profits that are going to be made out of this next war with Iran. You can bet your best silver there is going to be a war with Iran. All the talk of terrorism and rouge states with nukes is to fear the crap out of us to go along with their wars. And if they cant get terrorists to go round blowing people up to feed the lie don't be surprised to find out one day your own government was doing it. look up operation Gladio or Northwoods if you think I am paranoid.

  • 355. 0 0
    Israel wants usa to strike Iran
    • Brady
    • 05.09.07
    • 07:16

    Israel is so cowardly it can't even fight its own wars. Sure you cowards can kill the courageous Palestinians. But, as soon as someone with any type of weaponry(Lebanon)stands up to the murderous israelis you lot run away like cowards that you are. I truly hope if Iran is attacked for/by you bastards that you lot suffer tremendously Cheers Brady

  • 354. 0 0
    Israelis should fight their own damn war
    • Ariel
    • 05.09.07
    • 02:21

    Israelis should fight their own war, if they think Iran should be attacked ,let them go ahead and do it,is america suposed to jump because israelis think that?

  • 353. 0 0
    Ask first
    • Paul
    • 05.09.07
    • 01:45

    Perhaps the 71% of Israeli people would care to ask the 100% of the American people what THEY would like to do? You want Iran attacked? Do it your bloody selves you parasites.

  • 352. 0 0
    Anti Mullah Iranian
    • Reza
    • 04.09.07
    • 20:15

    Israel is a racist states who wage wars against its neighbor. Now I see from this article that Israelis are not only the enemy of Iran's regime, but the people of Iran too.In such a scenario I 100% back the Mullah's regime in the case of making nuclear bombs

  • 351. 0 0
    71%
    • Max Fortres
    • 04.09.07
    • 19:31

    72% of American taxpayers think we should invade Israel. We over whelmingly support sending the Zionists back to Slobovia and give Palestine back to the Palestinians.

  • 350. 0 0
  • 349. 0 0
    Bob Johnson
    • Bob
    • 04.09.07
    • 17:12

    "How soon we forget how Israel crippled Iraq`s Nuclear ambitions." Hey Bob, Since youv'e reminded us how Israel crippled Iraq's Nuclear ambitions, seems to me little ole Isreal should be able to handle little ole Iran all by them little ole selves. Why should our boys and girls continue to die for the wants of Israel? 71% of Israelis want U.S. to strike Iran says it all.

  • 348. 0 0
    Poll: 71% of Israelis want US to strike Iran if talks fail
    • Mr. Phillips
    • 04.09.07
    • 15:03

    I don't beleive what the author proposes that 71% of Israeli's want to strike Iran - I don't beleive it! This statement is "Manufactured or made-up". I don't beleive that the people of Israel want to attack and kill innocent babies,children,mothers,fathers and grandparents - I don't beleive it. Judaism is about love and service to mankind.

  • 347. 0 0
    Israel the nation for racist supremacists
    • z0mg
    • 04.09.07
    • 11:41

    What do you expect from a nation that was forced on the native people and is made up a group who really believe they are "chosen ones" and better than everyone else. That's supremacist racist people for you.

  • 346. 0 0
    Tough Economic sanctions on Iran
    • Michael
    • 04.09.07
    • 08:19

    [From ED] I for one, do not want it to happen and believe that it may not be required if the West is prepared to impose tough economic sanctions. --------------------------------- It would probably be kinder just to nuke them rather than impose tough economic sanctions. Or have we forgotten about the tough economic sanctions imposed on Iraq after the first Gulf War and the huge number of Iraqi civilians that perished.. some points to remember: 1959- The US gives Iran a 5-megawatt nuclear reactor which became operational in 1967 Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968 and ratified it in 1970. The Islamic Revolution in 1979 saw the overthrow of a CIA back Dictatorship-The Shah Israel, a nuclear state, has never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. By NOT declaring nuclear capabilities, Israel doesn't have to let inspectors in!

  • 345. 0 0
    ZIONIST WAR MONGERS ZOG
    • Joe Blaq
    • 04.09.07
    • 07:20

    Once again, the blood thirsty zionists want their big bro. the USA to fight ANOTHER dirty war in IRAN this time, the way the zionist occupied whitehouse fought iraq. They will get in all the TOP zionists like wolfowicz, kissinger, pearle, crystol, abrams, feith, to name but a few to bang the war drum for iran, led by evil AIPAC too! It is so sad that the UNITED STATED OF ISRAEL has a horrible foreign policy that chiefly benefits Israel first & foremost, at the expense & peril of the USA. When is our ZOG govt. going to realize that israel has the USA in a strangle hold & it is a far bigger liability than an asset. Oh, that's right, if we don't give the zionists all they want, we become anti-semite. No, I call it AMERICAN! Enough is enough. US, stop the blind support for israel. Why do you think we had 911, both saddam & ossama said it was because of our zionist occupied govt- the ZOGs!!!! Just say NO to israel for once! Peace will grow! Peace,

  • 344. 0 0
    response
    • bob johnson
    • 04.09.07
    • 06:47

    How soon we forget how Israel crippled Iraq's Nuclear ambitions. Do you think they will honestly sit back, idly wait and try to solve things diplomatically against a nation who has stated that they should be 'wiped off the face of the Earth'? I don' think so either. See ya around Iran!

  • 343. 0 0
    No war on Iran.
    • Michael
    • 04.09.07
    • 06:45

    We don't give a damn about what 71% of Israeli's want. The citizens of the United States should only fight wars when our national security is at stake. Iran is not a threat to the USA, even if they have nuclear power and Nuclear weapons. In this case, Iran does not have nuclear weapons. Iran has signed an NPT agreement with safeguards. It is obvious that Israel wants Iran attacked but not because they feel that Iran is a threat. Israel is more a threat to the USA than Iran. This is totally about fearmongering and Israeli hegemony in the middle east. For lack of a better term.. This is about white supremacy!! Crazy white people wanting to take over the entire world. Any country that has oil, that isn't a slave to the white elite in the united states and Israel are considered part of the Axis of Evil. The corporate elite would like to control the tap for oil and natural gas profits and that is what this plannned war is about.

  • 342. 0 0
    Zionists: Leave Palestine & Go Home
    • Janet
    • 04.09.07
    • 06:07

    #329 "Real" Jews are Semitic and truly Middle Eastern -- not Caucasian! But, more that 80% of those who are living in Israel today are Europeans (of Eastern or Western stock). And most of them are atheists! So I wonder, on what grounds are they claiming to be Jews? Therefore when the Israel Zionists' experiment fails, where else do you expect them to run to, other than Europe or North America? The Zionists planned the destruction of Iraq and they are now planning for the destruction of Iran. But what they don't seem to understand is that YAHWEH is no longer on their side. How can G_D be on the side of atheists? Let them or the US attack Iran and ADONAI will seal their doom in Palestine.

  • 341. 0 0
    71% of Iranians want Russia to attack Israel if talks fail
    • Dave Libori
    • 04.09.07
    • 04:53

    What a stupid poll! Naturally it s always easy to advocate that others fight for your cause. That is why governor Bush of Israel's North American Colonies will sacrifice the goyim (American and Iranian) for the greater good of the chosen people. Neither he nor any of his family will be at risk (or for that matter any member of the chosen tribe). It really makes you hope for intervention by Comrade Putin.

  • 340. 0 0
    Whose Next?
    • Tim
    • 04.09.07
    • 04:51

    Who do the Israelis want the U.S. to attack after Iran?

  • 339. 0 0
  • 338. 0 0
  • 337. 0 0
    71% of Israelis want U.S. to strike Iran if talks fail
    • Bruce Richer
    • 04.09.07
    • 03:38

    And about 60 % OF AMERICANS BELIEVE THAT SUCH A BATTLE MUST TAKE PLACE EVENTUALLY BECAUSE Iran will attack Israel when it gets the nukes. Soldiers now back from Iraq are stating that Iraqi's want democracy while Iran keeps feeding the insurgency as well as Syria. Keep in mind that most Iranians also want freedom but are affraid to speak out as is the case in Iraq. It is only the leaders in these regions who are struggling to hang onto religious power who are fighting the west and Israel. Once those leaders have been removed, the way of freedom and democracy will be clearer.

  • 336. 0 0
    Israeli's want U.S. to do their job
    • Dr. Watson
    • 04.09.07
    • 02:49

    30% in the poll got it right that the U.S. supports Israel due to Jewish political contributions. 87% of the Jews vote Democratic Party and about 60% of the political contributions to both parties comes from Jews. Is this wrong to give money to support one's interest or is it wrong for the Gentiles to sell themselves?

  • 335. 0 0
    THE US doesn't need a 51st state
    • Haley
    • 04.09.07
    • 02:16

    The US has enough problems... Nearly 50 million American citizens without Health insurance.. A crumbling infrastructure, One of the worst Education systems in the Developed World. One of the Largest Prison populations. We are sick of paying for YOUR crimes. What have you done for US? After Hurricane Katrina.. The poorest nations in the world were offering Aid or Assistance and Israel.. Our supposed "Best Friend" not only did not give us help.. Instead they were asking the US Taxpayers to pay them 2 billion dollars to Evacuate THEIR ILLEGAL SETTLERS from Gaza who shouldn't have been there in the first place. We're onto you and we will not do it anymore. If the US attacks Iran I am sure there will be a serious backlash against Israel.. from all over the world.. Including America. It's time Israel put its blood and treasure where it's mouth is and leave us the hell alone!!!

  • 334. 0 0
    This whole thread
    • Tyler Phaboonheuang
    • 04.09.07
    • 02:00

    First off, everyone in this debate missed the main thing. This "poll" should not even be taken seriously, if you go back and read who conducted it ,( Bar-Ilan University's BESA Center and the Anti-Defamation League) this should tell you only people pro-zionism were mostly likely polled anyway.Every # here should be scrutinized, now the other issues, first im Canadian so we dont have that much snow and no we dont travel by horse and carriage still you idiots.Second, Israel and the US can definately strike Iran.No doubt about it, they can inflict heavy damage at will from the air. no prob.However, Iran can as well inflict serious damage on them.Do not underestimate your enemy is the first rule of war.Israel should know this i think they underestimated some one last year who was it oh yeah Hezbollah!Next Iran has made it clear they do not seek to develop nukes, however considering the threats form the west, they would be wise to reconsider

  • 333. 0 0
    While you sell out your own country ... to Jihadis.
    • Cope
    • 04.09.07
    • 01:56

    You Jews really amaze me. Here you are, your own government selling out and giving away piece by piece your land and you want the US to bomb Iran and possibly have Americans die in the process. Why bother? I'd rather just sit back and watch you Jews give away everything while your glorious Herod temple police and army beat up, kill and arrest their own people until Israel exists no more. Why? Because you loons don't even know how to defend yourselves anymore. You are not the same people I respected in the 60's and early 70's. Very few of you fought to protect yourselves from Hitlers machine. Then one day, you said no more. Didn't last long ... did it? Go invade Iran yourselves cowards. Then maybe I'll respect you peoples again. http://causapatet.blogspot.com/

  • 332. 0 0
    71%
    • remy rascasse
    • 04.09.07
    • 01:41

    spyguy - correction: Israel has less than zero friends in the world and the US has only 4 tepid ones at most. There will be few tears shed here in the EU, for example, when the Israeli experiment is cancelled and the airlifts start. Tip - don't bother heading due north.

  • 331. 0 0
    71% want war
    • Roberto
    • 04.09.07
    • 01:28

    To Alan in N.Y. You have it all wrong my friend. . The 20th century produced three tyranical totalitarian political systems, i.e. 1/naziism/facism. 2/ communism, and 3/ zionism. Zionism is nothing more than Jewish nationalism and it no more represents the tenets of the jewish faith than facism represent the tenets of christianity or communism represents those of atheism. All three of these brutal political systems has lead to the deaths of millions of people and the destruction of whole societies. Only when the jewish people reject zionism as a political philosophy and return to the roots of their religion will we have any peace in this world in Iraq, Iran or anywhere else. Wake up!! We are all brothers and all people- including arsba deserve our respect as fellow human beings We must share this p[lanet as equals. None of us will survive if we don't War is hell!!

  • 330. 0 0
    Engineering Prophecy
    • Concerned Citizen
    • 03.09.07
    • 23:19

    As an Amerikan Jew, I am truly ashamed of Israel and the Zionist push towards the "SCRIPTED" version of biblical prophecy. It's easy to engineer prophecy, especially when u have a script to follow. Religious fanaticism of ANY KIND, is THE BIGGEST THREAT to the world we have ever known. More blood has been spilled in the name of religion than the oceans can hold.

  • 329. 0 0
    Jew's prayer to mommy
    • Saba
    • 03.09.07
    • 21:53

    Surprise, surprise. Let mommy attack Iran as collectively the Sunni/Shite nations will not declare war on the US but will certainly declare war on Israel perhaps not now but certainly after the Bush builds up their war machines. What goes around comes around. Israeli Jews had better start thinking of peacefull solutions to the problems they has created for themselves by 60 years of war with their neighbours over their desire for liebensraum.

  • 328. 0 0
    71% of the Jews in Israel want US to bomb Iran
    • TheAZCowBoy
    • 03.09.07
    • 20:25

    87% of American's believe that Israel has no business with nuclear arms and 96% of them believe that 'Those that live by the sword - Die by the sword." 98% of American's believe that Israel's genocide and mass murder in Gaza and Lebanon constitute war crimes and that the apartheid state needs to do some more bleeding of its own - (especially among its women and children, which is where the IDF excells in their murderous modus operandi against Gazan and Lebanese civilians)- Much as the cowardly IDF thugs and murderers experienced in Lebanon summer of 2006 in the hands of the Hezbollah warriors. 1% of American's believe that there are decent Jews in Israel but their 'silence' disqualifies them as 'truly decent Jrews.' 89% of American's believe that 'by hook and by crook' the Arabs will get a nuclear device over the skies of Israel and 100% of them beiieve that the stratosphere over Dimona, Tel Aviv & Haifa will one day be filled with radioactive kosher confetti. Amen,

  • 327. 0 0
    US soldiers must die for Israel
    • Shawn
    • 03.09.07
    • 19:57

    It does appear that it is the God given right for every US soldier to die for Israel.

  • 326. 0 0
  • 325. 0 0
    living in Iran
    • AnAmericaninTehran
    • 03.09.07
    • 17:06

    I'm an American documentary filmmaker -- been living in Iran for three months. And I can make the following observations: - Even if Iran had a bomb, they wouldn't use it on Israel, since that would be suicide and the Iranians are not stupid or suicidal as a nation. Also, there is no evidence that Iran is making a bomb rather than engaging in a civilian nuclear power program, as they claim. - Though most Iranians are not keen on Israel, most are also not anti-Semitic. Iran has the largest Jewish population the Middle East outside Israel, and most Iranian Jews who leave for Israel do so for economic reasons. - The average Iranian likes the United States, if not the Bush Administration. I have felt very welcome here as an American, and travel around the country with zero fear. If the US attacks Iran, however, that positive attitude toward the US would change in an instant, and the US would lose the last bastion of pro-American sentiment in the Middle East.

  • 324. 0 0
    Before Israel...
    • John Sheehan
    • 03.09.07
    • 15:49

    "Whenever someone says that Israel is our Only friend in the Middle East, I can't help thinking that BEFORE Israel we had No Enemies in the Middle East." --Jesuit Father John Sheehan

  • 323. 0 0
    Who are these 71%
    • confused
    • 03.09.07
    • 13:31

    I'd like to know who they polled. I imagine that the 7/10 people who want to bring Armageddon to the Middle East (including Israel) are very sad people indeed. I guess the gene pool is diminishing intelligence everywhere in the world as the geneticists predicted. The sad truth is that the wisdom of the world?s founding fathers has been replaced by the emotive and short sighted folly of youth. Very sad indeed.

  • 322. 0 0
    Why isn't Wolfie going to Jail?
    • John McQuade
    • 26.05.07
    • 14:41

    Why isn't Wolfowitz headed to jail? That's what happens to non-Neo-Con Jews when they are caught in big crimes.

  • 321. 0 0
    nukes
    • eyes wide open
    • 25.05.07
    • 18:41

    to those who want to use nukes on Iran, think about what your saying, and then you wonder why they are trying to get thier hands on nukes? If someone is being threatened by someone with a gun, wouldnt they try and arm themselves aswell with the same kind of weapon? But I guess in your little minds that wouldnt make sense. maybe if Israel wasnt into stealing land from the Arabs, things would be different. Remember this, every time you hear about another american soldier killed in Iraq, Did he die protecting the USA? Or did he die so Israel could continue on with its agenda?

  • 320. 0 0
    #10
    • eyes wide open
    • 25.05.07
    • 16:46

    first off, its spelt nukes, short for nuclear weapons. Not nucs, and second, USA is getting a huge lesson in Iraq, but you americans dont seem to learn, same thing was said about Iraq, if we dont attack them, they will attack us(Bush on WMDs), which was proven untrue. warmongering americans just dont learn, do they, nor does history(Veitnam, korea, and bay of pigs, Cuba, lebanon) or the present(Iraq) teach them anything, so you idiots will continue screaming war until one day you find it on your front door step, and then you`ll be hiding behind your sofa, trying to turn it off, with your tv remote

  • 319. 0 0
    83% of Americans Agree
    • NJCommand
    • 21.05.07
    • 16:44

    When informed that '71% of Israelis want U.S. to strike Iran if talks fail', 83% of U.S. citizens responded: 'Who cares?'

  • 318. 0 0
    Gods LOVE For ISRAEL !!
    • James
    • 21.05.07
    • 13:21

    People such myself and Terry #64 read ad believe in, and read the one book which has been proving itself for over 2500 years. If people such as yourself, Clickfool?, would take the time to read the Bible, then you would know and I hope understand that Gods interest in Israel is a fact. It is true that God all people equally, but he hates the sin of mankind equally. Israel is being punished for the sins, as is every country in this world, who choose to turn their backs on the God of Israel, and follow the god of this current evil world which is satan. I will leave you Clickfool, and all others who think as you do without knowledge and understanding of prophecy which is being fulfilled every day, this prophecy from the bible, Jude:17,18, But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;* 18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.*

  • 317. 0 0
    Go for it
    • Ron
    • 21.05.07
    • 08:00

    In my eyes I fell the world poll should 71%. The sooner the bombs drop the better but not conventional go nuclear and save the mess Iraq is in do a real good job of it and fast. They will stop at nothing talking will do nothing proper action will. Arrest them in other countrys sleeper cells and all the rest of them.

  • 316. 0 0
    If the Israelis think....
    • Mikesailor-
    • 21.05.07
    • 07:33

    at all that the US public will incur casualties and pay more billions of dollars merely to protect "Israel", you will create a backlash in America that will truly be remarkable. I wouldn't shed one drop of American blood, or Iranian for that matter, merely because 71% of Israelis think that would be a good idea,

  • 315. 0 0
    59% feel the war was justified
    • joe dickson
    • 21.05.07
    • 00:56

    The war to remove Saddam was more then justified. I mean he did violate and ignor 17 U.N resolutions, kicked weapons inspectors out of his country, gave the family's of hamas suicide bombers $25,000 dollars each,used chemical and biological weapons against his own people and the kurds, gave medical attention to top al-queda officals, russian intelligence intercepted reports in 2002 saying Saddam was planning 9/11 type terrosists attacks agains the U.S. I mean the list goes on. I know all you libs love this brutal dictator who supported terrorists and slaughtered thousands of his own people.But George W Bush was right to remove him from power and the 41% of israel's population that dont agree with the war are just as stupid of the 60% of Americans who have turned against the war.

  • 314. 0 0
    #157 Hey Neutral Observer
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 12:18

    Cheney has less credibility than Dubya. He still says Iraq was involved in 9/11, had WMD and that the US is winning. I thought AIPAC was smarter than to listen to that idiot for any assurances. Was he the one that said Iraqis would give us flowers? Yeah, right, don't count on that idiot who shot his friend in the face and failed to even tell the president for more than a day. He nearly killed his 'friend'. Regards.

  • 313. 0 0
    #83 Say Jeff in Toronto
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 12:06

    Your musings from the safety of Canada sound like what americans were told about Iraq; to whit, "we will be greeted as liberators"; "the oil will pay for the war"; "the people will give us flowers"; "we will be in and out in a hurry". Yeah, right, Canada didn't believe it then and americans won't believe it now. Is Canada being threatened up there? I think not. You must be watching the Fox channel, Dubya's station. Regards.

  • 312. 0 0
    #261 Ed
    • Scott
    • 20.05.07
    • 11:38

    Tell it to the History Channel and to my friends parents in LA that watched the ships get hit and burn in the Gulf. Tell it to the divers that dive down to explore the German uboats off the US coast. Tell it to the archivists and to the footage seized from Germany of the film they shot while cruising up the Chesapeake Bay and took footage of Baltimore at night. It is so well documented, it is not worth agruing anymore. True, at the outset of the war, the Germans only had about 70 some U-Boats on active service. The "Good Times" as they were called by Adm. Doernitz lasted only about a year after Pearl Harbor, when the US had perfected detecting and destroying the UBoats. Even at its peak of 300 UBoats, the Kreigsmarine was doing less damage then they had pre Pearl Harbor and the early part of the Battle of the Atlantic. The US was able to extend their Air umbrella and would constantly pick them when they surfaced, hence, yes, by 1943, there were no more incursions along the US coast.

  • 311. 0 0
    #69 Uh oh, Bernie; read your proposed
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 11:27

    solution to an apparently intractable problem. I enjoyed your thought provoking views. Regards. Ballistic.

  • 310. 0 0
    #31 Say Eli, Iran dangerous??
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 11:16

    You must be listening to Dubya and Cheney's news channel, Fox. What you post is the same BS americans were told about Iraq. It was all a lie then and those telling the lie knew it to be such. Iran, unlike Israel, has not attacked any of its neighbors and, unlike Israel, does not occupy the land of another. Shake your head a couple times and join sane folks in reality. Stop watching Fox news. US blew it with americans in lying about Iraq. It's all BS to get to Iran's oil. Don't forget US history there in assassinating a democratically elected president a while back. It will be hard to sell the same lie again to americans, which is the penalty for lying in the first place. Geez.

  • 309. 0 0
    #37 Say Astasheiks
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 11:10

    Er, well, about that "biggest show of force", well, we had that in Iraq too. Remember shock and awe? Well now the US is in shock and awe. Iraq and Lebanon was an appetizer. Try and keep current with prevailing views now evident with the arse whupping the US is taking in Iraq. Did your mom ever tell you "the bigger they are, the harder they fall". US says the USSR has been shipping Iran weapons. Judging by what Iran sent Hez, I shudder to think what they might be. All for what, oil??? Geez.

  • 308. 0 0
    #18; say Spyguy; you need to post
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 11:00

    that in all capital letters for the hard of hearing and seeing. Not only does Pakistan have nukes, but they have prevented anybody talking to AQ Khan about his spiegel catalog of weapons he ran for years. Who knows what and who he sold to and Musharaf says no jail cause he is a national hero. Yessiree, according to the US gov't, he sold nuclear stuff far and wide, yup, that is what they say. Enjoyed your post. Regards.

  • 307. 0 0
    #15 Say Alan in NY
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 10:56

    Coalition to strike Iran??!!! Say, they could not get a coalition to impose meaningful sanctions. The only folks jumping up and down and spreading the usual paranoia are the US and Israel, along with poodle UK. Get a life. US/Israel have cried wolf too often. This preemptive nonsense is long past the trash bin. Hope you are signed up for duty as Dubya is taking any and everyone. Folks with your view should be right up front and personal to the results of the madness you espouse. Right now our coalition in Iraq is the US and none other. Even UK is pulling out and the rest have 2 here, 15 here. Yeah, right, one coalition coming right up. Regards.

  • 306. 0 0
    #11 Say Ed from Canada; why don't
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 10:49

    you lobby the Canadian gov't to whack Iran. The mistake you in your thinking is the same that Dubya made in Iraq. Going in is one thing; dealing with the aftermath, which Dubya did not plan for, is quite another. USSR has been sending Iran weapons. Everybody was surprised at Lebanon and Iraq. There may be a larger surprise with Iran. We in America are tired of war and voted out the warmongering liars, all that we could, and americans want our troops home. Perhaps Canada could do your bidding to whack another country who has not attacked anybody. Fools rush in, wise men never do. Thanks, but no thanks. Regards.

  • 305. 0 0
    One of the reasons used for Israels creation
    • Guy From NYC
    • 20.05.07
    • 10:33

    One of the reasons the Zionists first used with the British was that the creation Israel could act as a bridge between the West and the Middle East. Israel has been everything but... I say send those 71% of Israelis to Iran and let them attack. My childrens blood will not spill for the sake of a warmongering bunch of nuclear armed Israeli's. Im awaiting the results.

  • 304. 0 0
    #302 Say Philo;
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 10:30

    Sounds like your crazy plan will cause Israel to be history. If she ever formed a thought to whip out a nuke over there, she would be history, no questions need be asked. Anybody who has the cajones to whip out a nuke behind BS deserves what she gets, whoever it is. Take a Prozac. Regards.

  • 303. 0 0
    Maria#276 '" Israel will win"' ... (with a team effort)
    • Highlander
    • 20.05.07
    • 10:25

    Maria, your post begs a number of interconnected questions, namely: 1. Israel will win what? 2. Against whom will Israel win? 3. What does 'Israel mean'? 4. In what prophecy is it mentioned? 5. Who issued the 'prophecy'? 6. Was the holocaust also in prophecy? 7. If not in prophecy why not? 8. Is 'prophecy' the same as 'destiny' 9. Does 'prophecy' require effort by the beneficiaries of the prophecy to aid the prophecy? 10. When does a prophecy cease being a prophecy? 11. When a 'prophecy' fails to emerge as a real happening, how should we term it? mistaken belief? ...dream? 8. Was the emergence of your main sponsor & handler also prophesied? Without the USA, you would still surely be only a twinkle in the eye of Herzl & Co. Such was their own belief in 'prophecy' that Herzl and other early Zionists, they had originally planned to have their 'promised land' somewhere in South America... Either they were realists of their political times or else they possessed no inherent feelings for the 'Land that is Palestine'... ... any place will do... something along those lines.

  • 302. 0 0
    HERE IS WHY USA UNABLE TO STRIKE IRAN:
    • PhiloEvraios
    • 20.05.07
    • 09:22

    With his stupidity, incompetence, and probably serious mental illness, George W. Bush has committed political suicide, taking down to Hell with him the Republican Party, the Conservative Cause, and the USA itself. The Democratic Party contains all the left wing (i.e. Marxist) traitors to America, practically all of the Bad Jews of America (the good ones are not participating in politics), and nearly all of the low class yahoos of small town America who can't find on the map of the world even the USA itself. As a result of all this, who the hell is going to have the ability and the guts to push the button to crush the Persians ? It is quite frightening, but Israel will have to confront Iran all by itself. Only, please do not bother to drop dumb iron bombs, or even little smart ones. Make use of the "good stuff" Dimona has been cranking out all these decades.

  • 301. 0 0
    #291 LisaV
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 09:06

    What Spyguy has laid out in his post is a likely scenario and several particulars of his post have been alluded to by our Congress. What do you think Americans won't support in what he said? Americans want out of Iraq yesterday and everything else follows. Many generals, respected ones, indicate there is a no win there. Regards.

  • 300. 0 0
    #231 Say Spyguy; read your post!
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 09:04

    Golly day do I agree with the depressing scenario you laid out. Why are people denying the reasonable scenario? I guess they think the US will save em and it is clear the US can no longer save itself and will withdraw from Iraq the same as the USSR hauled arse from Afghanistan. I fear lotsa folks are going to be disappointed, and that is the best scenario, disappointment. If Dubya stays in much longer, we may be headed for catastrophe. However, messing with Iran will be a terrible mistake for those in the area, including our troops and Muslims will shut off that oil spigot quick, like they did in the 70's. I think the Saudi King has threatened that so that Cheney has been running back and forth to him like a servant. Golly day, bad days ahead. Enjoyed your post. Keep blogging. High regards. Ballistic.

  • 299. 0 0
    #294 Peter SM
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 08:56

    Say Peter, you say for americans' generosity and devotion to fighting on behalf of Muslims, they have given us home grown terrorists. Well, the first terrorist I knew about that was home grown was Tim McVeigh, hardly a Muslim. What I haven't seen or read about is MUSLIMS spying on the US. Have you? There is an AIPAC trial coming up and that's the thanks america gets for her help in that regard. America should pull in and care for her own problems and let all those thankless folks float their own boat, be they Muslim or not. PS. Aid to Arabs guarantees oil. What does aid to Israel guarantee? Regards.

  • 298. 0 0
    #264 Hey Dutch
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 08:45

    The post showed up. It was on the Talkback blog. I have never had any problems with a post not showing up that I recall. The one with the cites that I complained about showed up late; folks must have been on break. With respect to the rest of your comments, it is all true and very sad. However, I am a believer in justice winning out in the end. The naysayers talk about the Arabs as though nobody from the West has messed with them and their people. Feigned ignorance is what I call it and when they finally react they are barbarians. US will be leaving Iraq, and soon. It is my hope that the loss there will temper Dubya's oil empire dream, but who knows. I enjoy your posts and defenders of the Pals are increasing. Keep up the good work. You have more stamina than I do. I have a group of thugs who routinely gnaw on me, however, it is no matter. High regards. Ballistic.

  • 297. 0 0
    #293 Say Maria; read your post.
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 08:39

    However, you didn't answer my question. What would be your reaction if they don't win? Regards.

  • 296. 0 0
    #292 Say Paul; what's new pussycat?
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 08:38

    What's new is that moving day will soon be upon you! Are you ready with that trailer hitch? When it is all said and done you will be glad to haul arse back into the 67 borders, wait and see. Have coffee. Regards.

  • 295. 0 0
    IF WE DONT CALM DOWN THEN GOD IS GONNA STRIKE US ALL
    • HUMAN
    • 20.05.07
    • 07:47

    YOU ALL ARE SELF CENTERED LOST SOULS THAT ROAM THE EARTH THIRSTY FOR BLOOD AND VENGEANCE, ISN'T THAT WHAT SATAN IS ALL ABOUT. YOU ALL NEED TO RELAX BEFORE GOD DECIDES THAT WE HAVE STEPPED OUT OF OUR BOUNDARIES TO THE POINT OF NO RETURN ,THEN HE WILL FINISH US ALL,AT THAT POINT REPENTANCE ISN'T AN OPTION ANYMORE. GO HUG YOUR KIDS AND EXTEND YOUR HAND OUT TO YOUR NEIGHBORS INSTEAD OF TRYING TO BLOW THEM UP TO PIECES AND GLOAT ABOUT IT ,GOD IS WATCHING YOU AND THIS TIME ITS THE LAND AND NOT THE SEA THAT MAY PART AND SWALLOW YOU WHOLE, ENOUGH ALREADY CEASE YOUR GREED AND LOOK FOR YOUR FUTURE ON EQUAL PAR INSTEAD OF TRYING TO FORCE YOUR DOMINATION THAT MAY ONLY BRING UPON YOUR DEMISE , WAKE UP PEOPLE BEFORE ITS TOO LATE.

  • 294. 0 0
    BALLISTIC.every country looks at the Presidential election from -
    • PETER. S.M
    • 20.05.07
    • 06:58

    from their own point of view and how it effects their country. You are right the USA has a foreign policy of its own as shown by the JERUSALEM celebration so what is the point of your repeating what I said?or is it that the US mammaries provide many times more aid to the Arabs than Israel or is it to obfuscate that US Soldiers have fought and died for Moslems and Americas reward is home grown Moslem terrorists and soldiers who kill their own officers.? / /

  • 293. 0 0
    ballistic.......God's Word never fails...
    • maria
    • 20.05.07
    • 06:36

    according to His Word,israel would become a nation.israel was reborn on may 14,1948.it's in the prophecy also that God will regather His people in end times whether they like it or not.who motivated them to go back to their ancestral home?...you see,the jews lived a comfortable life in pre-nazi germany/europe...who wanted to go back to swampy,uncultivated,malaria infected land like "palestine".most jews were anti-zionist-not wishing to support a return to the Holy Land,or not wishing to "force God's hand" by trying to create a Jewish state in the Holy Land......pogroms and holocaust motivated them to go back to their ancestral homeland.

  • 292. 0 0
    #273 knicker E AND THE PARIAH NATION
    • paul harris
    • 20.05.07
    • 06:30

    WHEN YOU GET YOUR NEW BRAIN FITTED NOTE THE FOLLOWING ISRAEL WAS A PARIAH NATION IN EGYPT A PARIAH NATION WHEN EXPELLED IN 70 CE BY THE ROMANS AND HAS BEEN TREATED AS APARIAH NATION FOR 1800 YEARS ! BY CHRISTIANS AND MUSLIMS ALIKE THIS IS THE REASON THAT ISRAEL EXISTS !! SO WHATS NEW PUSSYCAT ???

  • 291. 0 0
    what spyguy said
    • LisaV
    • 20.05.07
    • 06:11

    in your dreams is the US public going to support this

  • 290. 0 0
    idiot
    • joe
    • 20.05.07
    • 05:10

    your kind of an idiot arnt you

  • 289. 0 0
    # 278 For Wiskeypapa on whom to trust
    • Ed
    • 20.05.07
    • 04:27

    From your rhetorical question I deducted that you would trust Iran over Israel. Israel is not a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and never joined or signed it. Because of this, what Israel developed or not is entirely up to Israel and not for any other country to dictate. Israel never threatened Iran or any other country and is a democracy. Iran, on the other hand, is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. When Iran jointed the treaty, it undertook upon itself to …not to receive, manufacture or acquire nuclear weapons or to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons… (from Wikipedia encyclopedia). Iran, on many occasions, threatened Israel, engaged in state-sponsored terrorism against Israel and the West and has been implicated in numerous lies about its nuclear program. Iran has an oppressive regime that does not tolerate decent and treats women as second-class citizens. A couple of years ago Iran seized Zahra Kazemi, a Canadian citizen and a journalist and tortured her to death. This spring, Iran seized another Canadian woman of Iranian decent who was in Iran visiting her aging mother and she has been in prison for 6 weeks now. Possibly you are too busy enjoying being a papa to your whiskey and may have overlooked these things.

  • 288. 0 0
    # 230 Star of David
    • Clickfan
    • 20.05.07
    • 03:59

    You wrote: "Gaza is not occupied by Israel" Really? 1) Who controls the skies of Gaza? 2) Who controls the shores of Gaza? 3) Who controls water flow into Gaza? 4) Who controls the electricity into Gaza? 5) Who controls food coming into Gaza? 6) Who controls the medicine coming into Gaza? should I go on? The settlers left Gaza, but the occupation IS ALIVE AND UGLY AS EVER!

  • 287. 0 0
    Iran
    • Ed
    • 20.05.07
    • 03:55

    So, now the U.S. will be officially called Israel's poodle. Hey, why don't ya run a poll here in the U.S. and ask how Americans feel about bombing Iran on behalf of the Israelis?

  • 286. 0 0
    Cluck Fool: rise and shine
    • Star of David
    • 20.05.07
    • 03:43

    Good morning , mate. Not long to go now before u get the government you deserve... :) Anyway. i was SO disappointed not to have a reply from u re my earlier post and your rendering of the Greater Israel project. Was it just a good idea at the time? No matter, citizen zero on this post has also made a fool out of your position. No reply? Anyhow, regards from my Mum :)

  • 285. 0 0
    Paul #280
    • Robert
    • 20.05.07
    • 03:27

    Isn't that what I said? My point was that Iranians and Jews had a good history in ancient times.

  • 284. 0 0
    To Tom re 275 - Jews Driving American Foreign Policy
    • Lee
    • 20.05.07
    • 03:10

    "Unfortunately, we have in the U.S. a large force of pro-Israeli Quislings that drives U.S. policy in the Middle East." Oh, and I guess the Saudis, Kuwait, the Gulf States, big oil and the millions of Americans who were galled by 9/11 have nothing to do with driving US policy in the Middle East? It's all our fault, huh?

  • 283. 0 0
  • 282. 0 0
    To Tom re 275
    • Lee
    • 20.05.07
    • 02:58

    And if itwas up to you, they would put all of us in detention camps, as well.

  • 281. 0 0
    neither usa or israel has got the balls
    • paul
    • 20.05.07
    • 02:55

    i dont think they got the balls to attack iran,isreal should first take care of the qassam's and the usa should first take care of the side route boms.the persian will teach you baby's what war means.

  • 280. 0 0
    to robert,#272#
    • paul
    • 20.05.07
    • 02:45

    i suggest you to read the history one more time before you talk bullshit,it were the persians who saved the jews from kilings by the own king. maby is good for you to read the history of prophet daniel.we saved them many times.

  • 279. 0 0
    Astashieks - #37
    • Mimi
    • 20.05.07
    • 02:12

    The U.S. does have the biggest show of force in the Gulf waters since the start of the Iraq War, and - there has also been a NATO expansion into the Persian Gulf. You might be interested in reading the following article: The Globalization of Military Power: NATO Expansion NATO and the broader network of US sponsored military alliances by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya 2007-05-18 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20070517&articleId=5677

  • 278. 0 0
    atack on Iran
    • whiskeypapa
    • 20.05.07
    • 02:06

    Iran is developing it's nuclear technology honestly and openly under the terms of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, unlike Israel who developed it's nuclear WEAPONS on the sly. Who is to be trusted, someone who is honest or open, or a sneak?

  • 277. 0 0
    Maria
    • ballistic
    • 20.05.07
    • 01:41

    Say Maria; what if they fail to win? Regards.

  • 276. 0 0
    israel will win......
    • maria
    • 20.05.07
    • 01:17

    it's in the prophecy...

  • 275. 0 0
    pro-israeli quislings
    • tom
    • 20.05.07
    • 00:14

    The zeal to commit aggression would be understandable, not acceptable, if it were limited to Israelis. Unfortunately, we have in the U.S. a large force of pro-Israeli Quislings that drives U.S. policy in the Middle East. What makes the Israel firsters so galling is that more than 100,000 Japanese-Americans spent World War II in concentration camps, people who were infinitely more loyal to the U.S. than the Israeli Quislings.

  • 274. 0 0
    #260 Say Jean Pierre; no warmongers
    • ballistic
    • 19.05.07
    • 23:02

    won't recognize the implications of your well reasoned post. Sometimes a hard head brings on a soft arse!! Great post. Keep blogging. Regards.

  • 273. 0 0
    #261 Say Paul; your problem is that you
    • ballistic
    • 19.05.07
    • 23:00

    and yours don't recognize the time and that gigs don't last forever. What do you make of the polls done by Dubya's Fox News and the BBC poll that you are living in a pariah nation, in a hands down vote. No, you fail to recognize yourself in the world's mirror image and, if God himself showed up and told you to knock it off, you would tell him he doesn't speak for the world. Well, read the news, the "world" has spoken and are dealing with the Pals, wars and all, and you, my friend, will be left at the peace train depot, scratching your head and your arse wondering what just happened. Why not get out your umbrella and your passport and keep them dusted, bets are you will need em!! Until then, have coffee. Regards.

  • 272. 0 0
    In ancient times...what happened?
    • Robert
    • 19.05.07
    • 22:43

    In ancient times, Persia invaded Israel and carried the Jews away. Later, such was the goodwill between them that Persia returned them to Israel and gave them gold to re-build the Temple. What happened?

  • 271. 0 0
    School Children & Babies - Criminally Insane
    • Rob
    • 19.05.07
    • 22:35

    Anyone calling for an attack against IRAN is Criminally Insane. Have a look at the towns and villages close to the nuclear facilities to be attacked. Then Think of slaughtering Children Going to School, Babies being Born in Hospital. Families having Breakfast together, praying, going to church (Mosque).. Anyone planning to attack Iran's Nuclear sites is Planning to Mass Murder and Maim thousands and thousands of INNOCENT People; Babies, Toddlers, Boys, Girls, Teenagers, Mums, Dads, Grandparents.

  • 270. 0 0
    #48 - "A muslim middle eastern nation with nuclear weapons."
    • Robert
    • 19.05.07
    • 22:26

    What a great idea! The middle east as radioactive crater. That would seem to preclude a political solution.

  • 269. 0 0
    We are not a bunch of Dumyas, you know.
    • Hardy
    • 19.05.07
    • 22:23

    "Look at the mess you've left me in in Iraq Ollie"

  • 268. 0 0
    #257.Duane, Newport.
    • Chuck
    • 19.05.07
    • 22:17

    these(71%)should arm themselves to the teeth and INVADE IRAN THEMSELVES rather than counting on Americans to do their dirty war.And you Duane, should lead them, as you are so sure they(Iranians ) will be defeated. Good Luck . So please,let's start THINKING a little more NOW.

  • 267. 0 0
    #259 Say Dutch; I don't have a comlaint anymore
    • ballistic
    • 19.05.07
    • 21:59

    Haaretz posted the cites on the Talkback thread. Thanks for the post. I enjoy reading your posts very much. Keep blogging. Ballistic.

  • 266. 0 0
    #254 knicker elastic AND THE WHOLE WORLD
    • paul harris
    • 19.05.07
    • 21:56

    THE FIRST AND GRAVEST DELUSION IS THAT YOU SPEAK FOR ANYONE BUT YOURSELF . SINCE YOU ARE INACAPABLE OF ANY FORM OF BALANCED ARGUMENT YOU COME OUT WITH YOUR TIPSY MEANDERINGS !! SEE IF YOU CAN FIND A SPARE BRAIN WHERE YOU WORK AND GET IT FITTED !!

  • 265. 0 0
    These 71% should instead push their GOVT.
    • Jean Pierre G.
    • 19.05.07
    • 21:51

    to find a way for Peace rather than instigating WARS. Everybody knows the Consequences of an attack on IRAN, Israel I'm afraid will be the biggest looser. Is Israel better off with the departure of Saddam Hussein from the scene, and replaced by a pro Iran regime???

  • 264. 0 0
    #259 Hello Ballistic --My Response
    • Dutch
    • 19.05.07
    • 21:47

    Ballistic, I find Haaretz's editors very fair and If they rejected something I have submitted I often just rewrite it or omit the troublesome message. After all, it is their prerogative and I respect that. Why don't you try one quote first and if that's rejected try the other and if both quotes are rejected --move on a nd find less troubling ones. Thanks again, Dutch P.S. I agree attacking Iraq is political suicide for either the Bush Camp (and the Republicans) and for Israel. P.S. But the real hypocrisy here is Israel almost wiped the Pale- stinian people and Palestine off the map when Zionists gangs uprooted hundreds of thousands innocent people from some 400--500 villages in 1948 and now they are beating the drums when Iran threatens to attack them. What double standards. I recall Iran doing the same to the US during the hostage crisis in the 80's and no one got bent out of shape about it and things settled down. Hence the worse they can do is respond. Dutch

  • 263. 0 0
    213 and 256 Ali and Iran Born
    • Bernie
    • 19.05.07
    • 21:43

    Israel is not going to be wiped off the map. And the Jews living in Isreal are not going to be incinerated in some Armaggedon like reckoning. That would be evil. What the goal is, and what must happen, is that Israel must cease to be a 'Jewish State'. The 'Jewish State' must be destroyed. I live in America, and I am happy that it is not a 'Christian Country', even though some politicians would like to make it so. To destroy the Evangelical movement in America is not an attack against Christians or Americans. To destroy the Fanatical Judeo movement in Israel is not an attack against Jews or Israelis. It is simply a civilized response resulting from a maturing world which will no longer allow the existence of States based on theocracy. Many Jews go to synogogue, and that is to be commended. This movement to make the Temple include the air above Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, the West Bank, Haifa and Gaza ... is what must be opposed, and destroyed.

  • 262. 0 0
    Once bitten !! NOT EVER AGAIN
    • Fred
    • 19.05.07
    • 21:38

    From now on us Americans will mind our own business, and take care of OUR OWN INTERESTS, not others. We've learnt our lesson in IRAQ, just find some other GUYS, sure NOT us again.

  • 261. 0 0
    # 251 Scott: your turn to check your facts
    • Ed
    • 19.05.07
    • 21:29

    For your information, there were virtually no histilities in the Gulf of Mexico or the East Coast of the US diring 1940-1943 that involved Germany and the US. The total number of US ships sunk during this time was 33, all lost to mines, most of them laid to protect the US ships from Germany or Japan. About half of the total of lost ships were lost in Carribean, Mediterranian etc. For further reference, see http://www.usmm.org/mineships.html It is true that there are hundreds of ship wrecks in the Gulf and the East Coast from earlier periods. Cheers

  • 260. 0 0
    Citizen Zero? Nukes for Defence
    • Bernie
    • 19.05.07
    • 21:13

    Nukes are not for defence. You don't shoot down a plane with a nuke. They are to insure that no offensive measures are taken. If Lebanon had a nuke, 1100 Lebanese civilians would not have died last summer. 350 Lebanese children, aged 15 and under would not have died, if Lebanon had a nuke. If Lebanon had a nuke, 1.4 million cluster bombs would not be spread over Southern Lebanon. Israel does not take care to spare civilians. We hear of the 39 Israeli civilians that died in the past conflict, as if that was a tragedy. When Iran, or Lebanon, or Egypt, or Iran, have a nuke ... Israel will make peace and innocent people will stop dying. It is that simple. Eliminating Israel's nukes, or giving one to another Middle Eastern nation, will save lives. When Iran has a nuke, the Jewish State will cease to exist, and a secular Israel will consist of Jews, Muslims and Christians that are all treated as equal citizens. We all must strive to achieve that goal.

  • 259. 0 0
    #256 Hey there Dutch; I have my first complaint
    • ballistic
    • 19.05.07
    • 21:00

    about a post not showing up, and it is very odd because they were cites from respected Jewish newspapers outlining Jewish influence on our gov't from way back until now and I sent two cites to Lee in response to his post that my view that Zionists have undue influence on our gov't. All the post contained were the 2 cites and a short one liner saying the cites where inconsistent with his complaints. What do you make of that? Well, this hysteria that Zionists are whipping up against Iran is rather odd, since the only one to use nukes is the US and Zionists keep attacking their neighbors. Well, times have changed since the Iraq and Lebanon fiascos. Woe to any idiot attacking Iran, as USSR has sent 'care packages' of weapons. Judging from Zionists defeat in Lebanon by the rag tag Hez, hitting Iran is suicide. Regards.

  • 258. 0 0
    #249 Ballistic, Well Said! Thank You
    • Dutch
    • 19.05.07
    • 20:32

    Ballistic, Well said! Americans aren't fighting any more dirty wars for their government's agenda or Israel's. As I mentioned above Bush and Israel will get the fastest boot in the West if they touch Iran. What a war mongering people we are supporting in Israel. They don't share American valvues with their racist democracy for Jews only and they certainly don't share the American con- cept of liberty with their cruell and illegal occupation in the territories. That's the message Americans need to be voicing in the Halls of Congress, Town Halls, street corners and in the media. This equation needs to change here and I thank you for doing your part in helping it along. Israeli tyranny and war mongering must end and they drug supply of power must be shut off. It may even help to save them from themselves in the end. Dutch

  • 257. 0 0
    71% of the people in Israel are sane
    • Duane
    • 19.05.07
    • 19:37

    This is common sense that most Californians lack. Israel was attacked and almost destroyed twice that I can remember by Islamists countries. Now Iranian president Ahmadinejad threatens Israel with building nuc's and chanting death to Israel. hmmmm... No wonder why most Israelis want to attack Iran... So the Israelis are so dumb because they want stop Iran from making a bomb and actually using it against them! Why do Californians lack so much common sense. I'm sick and tired of these people... honestly where do they come from? And many of you think that there's going to be serious consequences for Israel and the U.S. if there were to invade Iran. Well I got news for you, where was the consequences for the Islamist nations invading Israel?? It's no wonder why 71% of the Israelis think they should stop Iran because they have seen this before from other Islamists nation's and don't want a repeat or worse (a nuc!). So please, extreme liberals, let's start thinking a little more next time.

  • 256. 0 0
    213 Ali, there are two sides
    • Iran-born
    • 19.05.07
    • 19:29

    I, like you, think Israelis deserve peace and security, but so do the Palestinians! In your zeal to badmouth the mollahs who rule Iran - I abhor tham as much as you do - you are ignoring the fact that the groups who rule Israel are no better. In order for the people of the ME, of any religion to live in peace and have security, both Zionism and Islamism MUST be eradicated. These two religion-based terroristic movements are two sides of the same coin. So if Ahmadinejad utters some nonesense which because the talk of the day and allows Iran's enenmies to have a field day in attacking the Iranian people, you should know the Zionists' main belief that "Palestinains do not exist" let alone deserving a county. You need to educate yourself a lot more about the realiy of made-in-the-West Zionism and the terror tactics they have been deploying against the people of Palestine and all Middle Easterns. I know, and you may know too, that Iran does not have the means nor the will to "destroy Israel"

  • 255. 0 0
    TOTAL PREEMPTIVE STRIKE
    • GOLDA
    • 19.05.07
    • 18:50

    IT IS OBVIOUS THAT BUSH IS STUPID ENOUGH TO BOMB IRAN AND PUT ISRAEL IN JEPARDY. IF IT COMES TO THAT (AND I HOPE NOT !) WE HAD BETTER BE PREPARED TO RESPOND QUICKLY AND DECISIVELY.WHILE I HAVE TROUBLE SLEEPING OVER THIS POTENTIAL HORROR, THERE IS NO DOUBT, AFTER SEEING WHAT IS GOING ON, THAT WE WILL HAVE TO, UNFORTUNATELY, TAKE THIS ACTION IN ORDER TO SURVIVE. ANYTHING ELSE WOULD BE NAIVE AND LEAVE ISRAEL OPEN TO TOTAL DESTRUCTION. BY THE WAY, HOW DO WE PROTECT OUR TWO NUCLEAR SITES ?

  • 254. 0 0
    #239 Hey Paul, er
    • ballistic
    • 19.05.07
    • 18:22

    and what do you think civilized nations of the world would be doing while zionists were carrying out your dream of an ultimate tantrum? What about Pakistan and the USSR? You'd be gone before your planes could take off. Better think up something else cause most people don't want WWIII because you want to keep stolen land. So, how about it? I can't believe you posted '10 sorties' blah, blah. Say what is in your coffee today? In case you haven't noticed, most of the world views you and yours as a pariah state causing problems amongst Arabs; this the prevalent view even in Europe from whence you came. Shake your head a few times and join us in reality. Regards.

  • 253. 0 0
    #138 Say Paul; no need to enumerate ALL
    • ballistic
    • 19.05.07
    • 18:17

    the blunders. We can start with the initial blunder which is Europeans plopping down in Pal land and trying to convince them and the world that you and yours from Europe have a land claim dating back thousands of years. From this blunder, all others can be reached by extrapolation. Regards. Get your umbrella and grab coffee and get moving!

  • 252. 0 0
    clickfool disproves his own arguments!
    • citizen zero
    • 19.05.07
    • 18:15

    Clickfool asserts that nukes will "certainly not be used by Israel". He knows - as do the rest of the arabs and oyther jew-hating Israel bashers - that Israel always does whatever it can to spare innocent lives. Therefore his constant arguing that Iran needs nukes to defend themselves from Israeli aggression is proven to be completely disingenuous, as if we didn't already all know that!

  • 251. 0 0
    Ed #197
    • Scott
    • 19.05.07
    • 18:14

    Get your facts straight. The Gulf of Mexico and the Atlanctic Coast of the US are littered with hundreds of ships that the Germans sunk before Pearl Harbor and Germany's Declaration of War. You can argue if it were justified or not (we were supplying their enemy...Britain), but the hostile activities by Germany against the US were frequent, and vice versus with many of our mercenary pilots flying for the RAF. Just want to set the record straight.

  • 250. 0 0
    #172 Say Anon
    • ballistic
    • 19.05.07
    • 18:11

    You say Israel must strike first if she wants to exist, however, the prevailing view is that Israel will cease to exist if she strikes first. You fail to take into account Pakistan, and the USSR who has told the US not to mess with Iran. Despite the tenor of your post, Israel is not amongst the big boys. Did you watch Lebanon? Are you watching Iraq and Afghanistan? Ah, thought not. Regards.

  • 249. 0 0
    #224 Say Paul Harris; Americans have read Dubya's
    • ballistic
    • 19.05.07
    • 18:07

    lips and heard his musings about Iran; however, neither our Congress nor the voters agree with his delusions! Sorry, US is all done with trying to whack each and every neighbor on your behalf with the hope of getting to that PEARL of the ME and its oil. Forget it. And if zionists decide in their 'wisdom' to whack Iran, well, better get our your umbrella or head to a shelter. Why don't you hook up your trailer and pull it to the '67 lines, why don't you? Ah, I know, that would be too much like right. Have coffee. Regards.

  • 248. 0 0
    #234 Say Peter SM
    • ballistic
    • 19.05.07
    • 18:01

    The US boycotted the 'celebration' because the US knows zionists won't get all of Jerusalem, and therefore there was not point in celebrating a delusion. As for the rest of your post, it is so far away from the true reality that it does not deserve comment. Golly day, the Israeli gov't worries which US presidential candidate will be better for Israel; no point in sitting by idly and letting the US taxpayer mammary gland dry up. Regards.

  • 247. 0 0
    #225 Say Efox; I guess you missed
    • ballistic
    • 19.05.07
    • 17:57

    the surprise goings on in Lebanon and Iraq!

  • 246. 0 0
    to Pablo B
    • Scott
    • 19.05.07
    • 17:40

    wow...you are quite the world traveler. However.....I cannot think of the irony of the last several years of elections Pro Busshys were evicted in Spain and Italy, Anti Bushies were evicted in France and Germany..... Just like in the US....many in the Western World are middle ground, but it is always a leftist or a rightest that wins because they can manipulate some small incident into their side......we all have gotten so cozy and just want Centrists, but they are few and far between, because they speak common sense, they do not yell and scream right/left rheoteric. It appears the shrillest voices are generaly heard.

  • 245. 0 0
    spyguy
    • Tribulation
    • 19.05.07
    • 17:24

    Obviously you Mr. wise spyguy you have never read and or dont belive in the bible,your day is comming too,and to all people who do not accept and belive in john 3-16.I love too see all of this unfolding,I can almost here the trumpets now.....then I will have the best seat in the house to watch,all the evil nations and people tremble.

  • 244. 0 0
    Clickfool #115 Part 2
    • Scott
    • 19.05.07
    • 17:13

    On top of that, you are showing your ignorance in that the US does have proven oil reserves and emergency stockpile for just such an occasion. Accessing the reserves are just a little pricey, but they are their. Once oil got to $100/barrel, it becomes economically feasible to go after them. OOOoohhhhh.....I dare say we may complain it costs us more for our commute, but it won't have that much of an impact, so quit your dreaming. in case u have not paid attention, gas prices went up some 60% here in the last year and a half, and it has not slowed us down one bit. While I agree with alot of your positions, you really came across as ignorant in that post.

  • 243. 0 0
    Clickfool #115 Part 1
    • Scott
    • 19.05.07
    • 17:08

    While I have generally agreed with your position, you have shown ignorance in that post. The US gets less oil from the Middle East today, as a percentage, than it did in 1970. In fact, back then, Opec accounted for some 70% of worldwide oil sales, now they account for about 35%. Now...if Russia decides to start an embargo, as well as the former USSR countries, that would be a problem, but not those in the Middle East. Reread my threads. A regional war will lead to a pouring out of oil hand over fist as the Sunnis will try to drive oil through the floor. Its Iran's only source of income. And true, and all out war may lead to a sinking of an American ship, quite plausible, but the first objective of any US military action will be to obliterate any and all Iranian missle batteries along the straights of hormuz and about 100 miles inland with the 500 or so fighter bombers we have currently in the region.

  • 242. 0 0
    And if US takes down Iran nukes , do these 71% of Israelis
    • Joseph E .
    • 19.05.07
    • 17:07

    think its for free , Do these 71% of Israelis think that US takin' down the existential threat of Iran nukes against Israel , will be for free , do 71% of Israelis think US is the Santa Clauss messiah , US is interested in the success of its 2003 US Road Map Monumental Deceit , Thus in spite of 2005 Gaza Disengagement blunders and actual Gaza mess , are Israelis willin' to pay the price of Iran nukes versus 2 States hangman solution , keep in mind IDF object US Benchmarks , and IDF has the capacity to take down Iran nukes , and if so then how come IDF deals poorly against a simple quassam , or does the answer lies in Israel leaders policies that refuse to eliminate South Gaza faucet used for smugglin', and if these 71% of Israelis get not the thread of this reasonement , then they should expect that should these Israel leaders stick to these fabricated policies accomodatin' US policies wich US has no problem at flatterin' Israel by callin it "Model" State , then US protectorat over Israel begun has , and if so doesn't it sound deja vu , will 71% of Israelis care to revise the politics blunders leadin' to 2000 years old exile , that started due to internal Israelis discord forcin' Hashmonayim blunders under Yehuda Hamaccabee to seek power recognition thru alliance with Rome wich alliance turned into a Rome protectorat lookin' nice some years later under Herod and the rest of History is registered and recorded , leadin' 2000 years later to Israel National Hatikva Anthem .wich must not be just words for a song , But that 71% of today Israelis care not to learn history for they're too busy , too focused in the world of Wall Street and investment, cattle and livestock. , We Israelis once used to have political Leaders and IDF Leaders capable of liftin' up Iraq-Osirak style operation , But Today Israelis poltical Leaders and IDF Leaders rather check their Wall Street index before Leb War 2 , to the point that 71% are led to think that it would be best should the US and Not IDF takes Iran nukes down , wouldn't it be best for Israel to have IDF takes down Iran nukes and get after the world barkin' thru invalid condemnations ,or would Israel prefer to be called 'Model" State as a novice gamblin' with the long term strategy (inexistant) of the Survival of Israel the State as a national home for the Jews ,after 2000 long years of exile with persecutions unparallel in world history till today , "persecutions till today" , same as Iran Nukes and Iran verbal threats , please tell me not that you call peace the existential threat taken against Israel thru this diplomatic process called 2002 Saudia initiative , 2003 US Road Map, for if you think its peace then 71% of Israelis are dead walkin' novices in dire need for actions for resurection of the deads , So much for a Wall Street World in need of ladders connectin' heavens and earth ,

  • 241. 0 0
    Arik #108
    • Scott
    • 19.05.07
    • 16:49

    Ummm, dont know where you are reading but try NK having maybe...12 nukes...tops. And they have not proven they work, as shown by their meager tests last year.

  • 240. 0 0
    Spyguy
    • tadchase
    • 19.05.07
    • 16:48

    US/Iran reminds me of Falklands war. UK was nuclear power, competent profesional army/navy. Argentina incompetently led, concript army but armed with modern "fire and forget" weapons. Outcome was inevitable but costly. The US would defeat the Iranian military but thats not the issue. The issue is what comes after. US does not have the manpower to mount an invasion. Cant stop the nuke program without invasion only delay it. Would an attack on Iran unite the country in its hatred of the west or encourage Amahdinejads opposition? Is Iran more or less likely to get nukes if we attack? I agree with you that the law of unintended consequences is applicable - nobody knows what will happen, which is what makes an attack so dangerous.

  • 239. 0 0
    #222 the sword from greecePAINTS AGLOOMY PICTURE
    • paul harris
    • 19.05.07
    • 16:32

    YOUR SURVEY OF EVENTS IS INTERESTING !! LET US SUPPOSE YOUR PREDICTIONS COME TRUE THEN THE GLOVES WOULD COME OFF AND THE RESTRAINT SHOWN BY ISRAEL IN THE LAST 25 YEARS WOULD DISAPPEAR ! WITH 400 WARPLANES ALONE FLYING 10 SORTIES ADAY JUST WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN TO ITS NEIGHBOURS ?? WEAPONS UNDREAMT OF SO FAR WOULD BE USED . THE USA NO DOUBT WOULD ARM THEIR 1200 MULTI HEADED ROCKETS AND FIRE THEM TOO !! DOOMSDAY WOULD APPEAR IN THE MID EAST !!

  • 238. 0 0
    response to Clickfan
    • Scott
    • 19.05.07
    • 16:18

    Iraq became a mess because of incompetence. I still advocate and defend it was the right thing to do, and for many reasons most opponents never think of because they get caught up in the "No blood for oil" chants. I fully believe their is much more that led up to and was found during the invasion of Iraq that we dont, and should not, know. Has anyone ever wondered why the French, Germans and Russians have been more at the forefront of negotiating with Iran over the nuclear programs, when before, they were patting Saddam on the back assuring him we would not attack? Consider Saddam had invaded two countries, slaughtered his own people, killed hundreds of thousands of Iranians. Iran has not invaded anyone, but the these 3 countries are more aligned with the US now than they were before Iraq. My conclusion, we have dirt on them from the thousands of boxes of records we seized in the war. And to me, there are still too many unanswered questions about Iraq.

  • 237. 0 0
    In contrast......
    • tadchase
    • 19.05.07
    • 16:10

    ......71% of Americans want to drop Bush on Iran. Note to Ed #11: you are the first person to use the words "Berkeley" and "reality" in the same sentence.

  • 236. 0 0
    Response to Dror
    • Scott
    • 19.05.07
    • 16:04

    Sorry for the delay, I had to go to work and all. I do not think my hopes are that terribly high with Iran. Think about it, what Middle Eastern nation had the populace rise up and overthrow their Autocratic leader?.....Iran. They have done it once before, and have had some of the largest protests allowed in any Middle Eastern country save Isreal. And as I said and you somewhat agreed with a Westernized country is more likely to cave, the youth of Iran is highly Westernized in their own right, more than any Arab country. But the Mullahs are shrewd....more than people give them credit for. They stay in power because they throw the populace small bones to keep them happy, while at the same time keeping their grip on power. Until Amedinjahd (sp?) Satelitte Dishes were tolerated, women were pracically allowed to show themselves through see-through veils. Like I said before, a tough nut to crack.

  • 235. 0 0
    Neutered Observer
    • Nephtaly
    • 19.05.07
    • 15:50

    You could not have said it clearer. "Most people dont think Israel (Jacob) is part of the civilized world any more, sorry." Peoples true colors always come out. I dont worry to much though. We have survived, and we will continue to survive. Remember, it was the rest of the "civilized world" that hunted the Jews since the time Pharoahs. The game never changes though. Wonder if you have picked up a joystick against us.

  • 234. 0 0
    KEVIN.Israel hasNEVERrequested American soldiers fight for Israel
    • Peter SM
    • 19.05.07
    • 15:18

    American soldiers have ONLY fought for Moslems and Arabs. You do have a say despite what you are trying to imply. The USA boycotted the Jerusalem celebrations just last week. Did you write anywhere in caps when the American soldiers went into action in Kuwait Bosnia or Somalia?

  • 233. 0 0
    Bobby # 166
    • female
    • 19.05.07
    • 14:36

    According to an article that I read a while back the jews of iran will support iran. SUPPORTING their HOST country!!!!

  • 232. 0 0
    FOR NEPHTALY 209
    • Neutered Obserber
    • 19.05.07
    • 14:29

    Most people dont think Israel is part of the civilized world any more, sorry.

  • 231. 0 0
    225 the delusional optimist
    • spyguy
    • 19.05.07
    • 13:04

    Israel does NOT realistically have the resources to take on the whole Muslim world - It does not have the money, it does not have the manpower, it does not have the weapons. With the world economy crashing around it and no oil available to Israel, its planes and tanks will be great paperweights - can't use high tech weapons if they can't get to the fight. If the fight come down to man-to-man, then Israel is vastly out manned. Man-to-man, the Muslims can more than match Israeli soldiers for killing passion. As for weapons, the world has caught up with (and in many cases exceed) Israel's weapons. The world is awash in effective weapons. The bottom line is an attack on Iran basically ends Israel's future. If Israel isn't bombed off the earth, the remaining people will be suffering a lot and will be scorned by the whole world. As for nuclear war, the most likely country to start throwing nukes around is Israel followed by the US. Iran is way down the list even if they get nukes.

  • 230. 0 0
    Click Fool
    • Star of David
    • 19.05.07
    • 12:32

    Your comments are beginning to reek of early onset senility. There is no greater israel project. Gaza is not occupied by israel. most istraelis would like to have shot of the west bank. if u continue with your senile mouthing about non-issues, then u must simply be an attention seeker, with not a lot to do. i don't blame you. The warm beer must be revolting.

  • 229. 0 0
    YOU ALL FORGET THE PAST DON'T YOU ?
    • VIPER
    • 19.05.07
    • 12:22

    india and pakistan were feuding, they both wanted the nuclear bomb, the american government said they would use it, the russians got it and the u.s was scared and threatened again, and the list goes on, but hey, which country was actually the only one to use it? america, iran can back out of the npt and build one without problems, but no, here they are letting inspections happen by the world body and trying to do the right thing, but wait, america thinks otherwise, who died and made the american government god ( excluding the ordinary citizen ), let iran be, israel has them and denies the inspectors and is not doing it the right way so why should iran which is doing it the correct way be punished ?pleeeeeeeeeeasse.

  • 228. 0 0
    you ass
    • me
    • 19.05.07
    • 12:21

    you are an ass. you should really look up thing and not say foolish things, iran is a military powerhouse of the region, whether you want to accept it or not... go ahead, google them up...

  • 227. 0 0
    For Ali Moghzadeh # 213
    • Clickfool
    • 19.05.07
    • 10:07

    "But I do have to defend myself if I say what I really believe Israel deserves: Peace and security" So do I, Ali, but to get these things Israel has to abandon the course it has been on for the past 59 years of its existence. The Greater Israel project must end and the Palestinian people must be given a viable, contiguous state of their own.

  • 226. 0 0
    For Ibrahim Shvonce # 185
    • Clickfool
    • 19.05.07
    • 10:03

    "Do you have any idea of the logistical problems that the war of 1948 posed for Israel? Do you have any idea of the logistical problems that the war of 1967 posed for Israel? Do you have any idea of the logistical problems that the war of 1973 posed for Israel?" You harrumphing about past glories, Ibrahim, doesn't solve the problem of the missing transponder codes, which will be required before Israel's warplanes can overfly Iraq. Nor does it solve the problem that Israel alone is unable to deliver the bombloads that would be required to make a significant difference to Iran's nuclear programme. Nor does it ease the catastrophic consequences for Israel and the West that will follow such an attack.

  • 225. 0 0
    Someone will destroy Iran
    • Efox
    • 19.05.07
    • 09:59

    If not America, it will be Israel. It has to be done, because waiting means Nuclear War becomes inevitable. Either country could do it, though America can do it more gently, and no one in the world could prevent it. If necessery, Israel can take on all Billion and a Half of the world's Moslems and survive it. They rant and rave and beat their hands bloody, they love to lynch and torture people, but if Israel actually "fights" a war, Israel wins.

  • 224. 0 0
    #194 JOLSON SINGS IRVING BERLIN AND
    • paul harris
    • 19.05.07
    • 09:39

    GETS THE WORDS MIXED UP! A POLL IS JUST APOLL !!! READ YOUR PRESIDENTS LIPS AL , HE WANTS IRAN OUT !!

  • 223. 0 0
    israelis are arrogant
    • fred
    • 19.05.07
    • 08:18

    and by this arrogance we gain in strength , smile.

  • 222. 0 0
    I HAVE A SOLUTION
    • XCALLIBAR
    • 19.05.07
    • 08:10

    IF ISRAEL ATTACKS IRAN IT WOULD FACE FOUR FRONTS; HAMAS WITH A MUCH MORE POWERFUL STRATEGY TO DELIVER HAVOC WITHIN ISRAEL , THIS TIME ITS DO OR DIE. HIZBOULLAH ; THE FINAL BATTLE, NO NEED TO SAY MORE . SYRIA AND ITS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF MISSILES POINTED AT ISRAELI CITIES, ENOUGH SAID THERE. NOW IRAN ...WHO KNOWS WHAT THE HECK THEY HAVE IN THEIR ARSENAL!!! THEIR CHILD SHOOK ISRAEL SO IMAGINE WHAT DADDY MAY HAVE IN STORE. CAN THE ISRAELIS AFFORD TO FIGHT SUCH A WAR !!! I DOUBT IT, EVEN IF ISRAEL WAS ABLE TO FEND OFF ALL THESE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES/GROUPS BY THE TIME ITS SAID AND DONE ISRAEL WILL BE LEFT AS A WEAK TORN APART STATE,THE THE DANGER BEGINS,THE ARAB STREET WOULD REVOLT AT THE SMELL OF BLOOD ,THEN YOU MIGHT JUST MIGHT HAVE TO BATTLE EGYPT, JORDAN AND WHO KNOWS WHAT ELSE HELL BRINGS YOUR WAY, SO MY SOLUTION IS GET RID OF OLMERT ,MAKE PEACE, ISN'T THAT BETTER THEN PLAYING RUSSIAN ROLLET WITH A MILLION MISSILES POINTED AT YOUR HEADS..YAAAY .

  • 221. 0 0
    # 146, JIM
    • indrajaya
    • 19.05.07
    • 08:01

    "...The lack of a clearly defined goal is what makes for prolonged, pointless conflict..." What amazed me so much about Americans is they don't believe whether a war is justified or not based on CLEARLY DEFINED GOAL, but by whether the WAR has been won or lost. Based on POLLS every years since the WAR began, less and less Americans believe that the WAR in IRAQ was LEGAL and JUSTIFIED. Do you know why? Because they knew that they already LOST the war and because the FACE of WAR that they are watching in CNN (or FOX or whatever) are so horrible and the number of American got killed are much more than they expected. WIN=LEGAL, LOST=ILLEGAL.

  • 220. 0 0
    UMMM WHAT ABOUT US AMERICANS
    • KEVIN
    • 19.05.07
    • 07:56

    WHAT ABOUT US AMERICANS!! DON'T WE HAVE A SAY SO ON WHO OUR KIDS SHOULD BE FIGHTING!!!! SHALL WE ASK THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT ON WHATS THE NEXT HELL THEY ARE ABOUT TO SEND OUR CHILDREN TO SO WE END UP FIGHTING FOR ISRAEL!!!! GO FIGHT YOUR OWN WARS CAUSE WITH EVERY DAY PASSING BY IT SEEMS TO US THAT THE IRAQ WAR BLUEPRINTS WERE DRAWN UP BEHIND CLOSED DOORS IN TEL-AVIV..NOT THIS TIME GRINGOS

  • 219. 0 0
    winning over Iran chances
    • Simon
    • 19.05.07
    • 07:35

    simple question: if you couldn't win over a tiny organization like hizbullah then how will we make it against iran?

  • 218. 0 0
    200 Ddddd - An Alias for Donald Rumsfeld?
    • Mark of Lewiston
    • 19.05.07
    • 07:28

    Your post shows all the brilliant predictive power of Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowicz, combined. The US was greeted in Iraq with flowers and candy? Right. The occupation of Iraq was self-financing out of oil revenues. Right? Are you volunteering your live and your fortune?

  • 217. 0 0
    #209 Nephtaly. "The rest of the civilized world."
    • Maureen Ann
    • 19.05.07
    • 06:44

    And who might that be Nephtaly? Civilized people have the ability to talk - that leaves Bush and Olmert out!

  • 216. 0 0
    To Goldie (87)
    • Fortuna Benmayor
    • 19.05.07
    • 06:00

    Majorities don't have it necessarily right. In this case, you gleefully see yourself mirrored in this 85 % you describe. But the toaster doesn't remain burning just one side of the turnover forever. Sooner than later the masses will see Arab and Muslim propaganda for what it is.

  • 215. 0 0
    Nobody promised to bomb Iran at AIPAC (157)
    • Fortuna Benmayor
    • 19.05.07
    • 05:55

    Neutered Observer (157) says Darth Vaders "promised" in a speech to AIPAC that the US would bomb Iran. That's absolutely false. Nobody gave any hint such a thing was being considered. People's ovation was for the lucid clarity with which Darth Vaders described the threat posed by a nuclear Iran.

  • 214. 0 0
    38 Eli - Right You Are
    • Mark of Lewiston
    • 19.05.07
    • 05:54

    Your guess is right, an American poll would have vastly different results, especially if you added "while Bush is still in office." Also, if you asked our military branches if they wanted a third ME war to go with the two we have going, perhaps only the Airforce would claim any capability. The rest of the services have their hands full in Iraq and Afghanistan. Who needs another threat axis?

  • 213. 0 0
    To Clickfool
    • Ali Moghzadeh
    • 19.05.07
    • 05:48

    Nobody will bomb Iran, not Israel, not the US not Saudi Arabia. But you are dead wrong about Iran and Israel. This regime of the I.R of Iran absolutely intends to erase Israel off the face of the earth and really believes it can, and really strives towards it with every means. I have no problem saying it here. But I do have to defend myself if I say what I really believe Israel deserves: Peace and security. But I say it for fairness and for the historical record, so that people like you don't think we Iranians hate Israel just because you and our regime do.

  • 212. 0 0
    It's my wet dream too, and I am not Israeli.
    • Fortuna Benmayor
    • 19.05.07
    • 05:37

    But it won't happen. The biggest mistake the US did in Iraq was not Abu Ghraib, debaathification, or not sealing Iraq's borders with Iran and Syria. The biggest mistake is that it came before -ergo instead- of a military campaign against Khamenei's regime Iran, which would have truly ended with a meaningful, poisonous enemy of humankind.

  • 211. 0 0
    # 14 Leslie Duffy
    • Ed
    • 19.05.07
    • 05:24

    Good Shabbat to you if case you are Jewish and a very relaxing and a happy Friday night in case you are not. I wanted to respond to you since you did not call me names but expressed a respected opinion. So, I want to acknowledge your remark, thank you for engaging in a discussion and give you my perspective on the issue of Iraq, Iran etc. It may have appeared to you that I sounded like a far right but I assure you it is not so. I am a student of history and take cues from what I read and study without prejudice. One must be very careful not fall into a trap of a popular or expected opinion (based on one’s upbringing or associations). Regarding the weapons of MD in Iraq and consequently, the war with in Iraq, I believe that Iraq was engaged in something very bad and the US Bush administration had all the reasons to be suspicious of Iraq’s activity. Up to now, no weapons were found in Iraq likely because they were packed up and sent to Syria prior to the invasion. Think of it this way. Libya recently shocked the world’s of Intelligence by disclosing its nuclear program and how advanced it was - well beyond anyone’s expectations. Do you really believe that Iraq, and now Iran, would somehow be excluded by whoever had an interest in developing an Islamic bomb, (likely Pakistan) ? Iraq had the money, motivation and the sources available to develop the nuclear program. Why would you ever, ever give the benefit of the doubt to Saddam and his regime over your own President, that Iraq, and now Iran, not being involved ? Regardless of your agreeing with me or not, the history has its ways of deciding on the right and wrong. If you had lived at the time of occupation of Japan. you, without any doubt, would argue that it was the wrong move. It took 10 years but look at Japan now and judge whether or not it was the right move. The same goes for Iraq. The world will be far better off in 10 years from now because of what had been done in Iraq.

  • 210. 0 0
    Equest
    • Nephtaly
    • 19.05.07
    • 04:50

    For supporting Israel and also for supporting democracy. I dont understand why people are so moved by this article. Im sure that 100% of Americans wants the Mossads help in finding Bin Laden Regardless of the matter, the WORLD would be better off going after Irans Regime and finding Bin Laden

  • 209. 0 0
    PUSH THE BUTTON
    • Nephtaly
    • 19.05.07
    • 04:45

    Someone, anyone be it the US, Israel, Iceland or even Belize and Panama better start dropping some bombs on Iran before its to late for the civilized world.

  • 208. 0 0
    well of course
    • Omar
    • 19.05.07
    • 04:17

    If you can get some1 else to fite your battles than why not???

  • 207. 0 0
    re 206
    • Bill
    • 19.05.07
    • 03:52

    anyone who believes that missiles landing on Dimona (or any other nuclear reactor) would cause it to explode, is completely ignorant of how reactors work. Israel also has missile defense systems. And I question whether the Syrians would stick their necks out for the Iranians in the event of a war.

  • 206. 0 0
    #200 Ddddd ignorant of Syria/Iran mutual defense pact
    • Pablo B
    • 19.05.07
    • 02:56

    Ddddd said "Syria would invade? Are they suicidal all of a sudden?" Syria and Iran signed a mutual defense pact. So Syria will come to Iran's aid the same way the US would come to the aid of any NATO country that might get attacked. You appear to be "clueless" of this pact (by a "factor of ten" using your own words). You should read up on North Korea's relations with Iran too. Especially since PRK is a nuclear power and has already supplied Iran with NoDongs and/or NoDong technology. Yep. NoDongs. Makes ya giggle just saying it, but they aren't so funny landing on Dimona making Israel the site of a nuclear explosion, or in Tel Aviv.

  • 205. 0 0
    Attack Iran?
    • Equest
    • 19.05.07
    • 02:33

    Fortunatelly 71% of Americans do not feel that way, if the Israeli feel that strongly about attacking Iran they should do it and let the chips fall where they may, America has paid and still paying a heavy price for supporting Israel how much more does Israel want from America?

  • 204. 0 0
    #200 Ddddd announces plan for US withdraw from mideast
    • Pablo B
    • 19.05.07
    • 02:32

    Ddddd announced "if we attacked Iran, we wouldn`t try to occupy it, or change the regime, we wouldn`t stay around" So the US "wouldn't stay around" for the Iranian military response? We would have to leave Iraq, Kuwait, the Gulf, the whole Middle East! Anything less and the US would be drug into escalating conflict. We would hit their nuke sites, then leave the country. They would hit our soldiers in Iraq, sink a few oil tankers, and launch silkworms on some of our smaller boats without sophisticated defenses. Then the US would be forced back into Iran to "Defend" itself. If they try to leave again, they will have to keep going back in again until the US finds itself occupying both Iraq and Iran. Talking about Iraq, that front would explode into violence as the Maliki Gov't would fall as collaborators. All this would happen unless the US retreated from the region and left Israel alone as the only target left for Muslim rage. Is that what you want?

  • 203. 0 0
    Iran's President
    • Bill
    • 19.05.07
    • 02:15

    Amadnutjob needs to see his dream of a nuclear armed Iran vanish in wave after wave of bunker busters and tomahawk cruise missiles. Hopefully President Bush has the common sense to ignore the appeasement brigade in the West and crush Iran's not-so-covert nuclear weapons program before it is too late. From a domestic US public opinion standpoint, though, it would be better if the Israelis touched it off. The Iranians would then retaliate against the US (seeing Israel and the US as one and the same), and Bush could then finish off Iran's nuke program, and be seen as coming to the defense of Israel, which would resonate with most members of both major US political parties.

  • 202. 0 0
    100%
    • melchizedek
    • 19.05.07
    • 02:03

    A quick survey shows that 100% responded that they'd like someone else to pay their bills and go to work for them. M.

  • 201. 0 0
    fight your own fight
    • sabbatai
    • 19.05.07
    • 02:01

    why should the US fight for Israel ? Cant see Iran having missiles capable of reaching the US in the future can you ? why should the US risk the price of oil going over $100 a barrel ? S.

  • 200. 0 0
    spyguy is laughable
    • Ddddd
    • 19.05.07
    • 01:36

    You are the most clueless person posting here, by a factor of ten. Israel would get "bombed?" DO you mean by airplanes? ROFL That is hilarious. Syria would invade? Are they suicidal all of a sudden? The fact is, if we attacked Iran, we wouldn't try to occupy it, or change the regime, we wouldn't stay around. The number of ground troops needed to achieve the goal of setting their nuclear program back to square one, would be minimal (compared to Iraq). Of course you ignore all of this. The idea that Iran would use nukes for defense is completely belied by the fact that it is their stated goal to annihilate Israel. While I am not convinced that Iran will nuke Israel to start a war, I am sure they would like to remove Israel's option of using nukes as a last ditch effort to save itself, should Iran and its neighbors decide to sacrifice a couple million soldiers in a conventional attack on Israel. You are quite the appeaser, aren't you?

  • 199. 0 0
    ODP
    • Ibrahim
    • 19.05.07
    • 01:10

    "Nobody will expect Israel to go into Syria or Egypt without an excuse of being attacked in some format." I disagree. Israel saber rattles against Syria all the time and many people wouldn't be surprised at all if some excuse was manufactured to invade Syria. I doubt it will happen...but it wouldn't surprise. Syria, frankly hasn't started any offensive military action against Israel since 1973. So they support some of Israel's enemies...one could argue they do so for good reason. At any rate, I believe Israel has a lot of potential to be a force for goodness in the world, but first, she must give up on the idea of controlling another people for the sake of real estate. Please don't deny they are doing this...study a map of the West Bank and explain how anything good can come out of this arrangement that Israel's concocted over the last 40 years.

  • 198. 0 0
    To Fred # 182
    • Clickfan
    • 19.05.07
    • 00:59

    well said!

  • 197. 0 0
    # 24 Spyguy: I am as much of a geneal as you.
    • Ed
    • 19.05.07
    • 00:54

    It is funny that you should bring Stalingrad into this discussion. By the time Hitler got there, there was no choice but to fight that batlle. Please note that by you own logic, American involvement in a war with Germany and Italy would never be justified because neither attacked the US. Another argument you use for maintaining the status quo is that it is going to be painful and thus, it should not be tried at all. I wander where you learned your history. Sorry to break news to you but the world since its inception has been following a violent path until now. I do not see it changing any time soon. When nations feel threatened, they often react in pre-emptive and selfish ways much like individuals do. I do not like it but this is how it is. If Israel or USA decide to attach Iran it would be out of a percieved unacceptable future cost of not taking such an action.

  • 196. 0 0
    71%
    • P. J. Casey
    • 19.05.07
    • 00:12

    I am amazed that in a society where most men serve in the army, that 71% of the people think Israel would not experience a second strike from Iran if it is attacked by Israel or the U.S. You are a fairly small country and enough missiles with conventional warheads could destroy you. There are times where the use of force is madness.

  • 195. 0 0
    spyguy #1
    • tom
    • 19.05.07
    • 00:04

    Thank you for sparing me a long response. Israel needs to shed its well-cultivated, and phony, sense of victimhood and become a part of the real world.

  • 194. 0 0
    Let Israelis Spill Teir Blood
    • J Olson
    • 18.05.07
    • 23:35

    If Israel wants miltary action taken against Iran, then let Israel step up to the plate and do it themselves. Why should Americans bear the cost both militarily and financially? The results of this poll certainly make the arguement that Israelis always want somebody else to pick up the tab for them. Israel and her supporters love to proclaim how formidable their army is, Well here's the chance. To paraphrase Clint Eastwood, the only question Israelis have to answer is do they feel lucky? Well do you, punk?

  • 193. 0 0
    #25 "show of force"
    • ballistic
    • 18.05.07
    • 23:11

    "US has a show of force" in the Gulf. The operative words in your post is "show of force". Bush isn't gonna attack Iran or his arse will really be in a sling along with his cajones. Hope you are suited up for an "army of one" since Dubya is taking any and everybody. Somebody with your views should be up front and personal. Americans don't want any more war behind lies and BS, and whacking Iran is simply more of the same. Regards.

  • 192. 0 0
    #29 Say Jake in Canada
    • ballistic
    • 18.05.07
    • 23:08

    Well, Iran doesn't have this, that and she is this and that. Where do you get all your information from in Canada? Well, fools can rush in and catastrophe most likely will ensue. As the old folks used to say, "don't let a fart fool ya", get the drift? Regards.

  • 191. 0 0
    71% of Israelis want U.S. to strike Iran
    • Bilbo Baggins
    • 18.05.07
    • 23:08

    71% of my constituents want the US to attack Israel.

  • 190. 0 0
    Not =Another= War for Israel
    • Lee Kaplan
    • 18.05.07
    • 23:05

    Isn't it bad enough that the USA is bogged down in Israel's war in Iraq? My prediction: Olmert will attack Iran and Bush will feel =obligated= to "assist" good friend Israel. Then the gates of hell will open in the Middle East.

  • 189. 0 0
    It Would Be Simpler to Attack Israel's Existing WMD's
    • Fred Farkelsteinman
    • 18.05.07
    • 23:02

    The US would save itself much grief by just flatening Israel's nuclear weapons and facilities and making peace with the Arabs. Ever since the US started supporting the Israeli regime, we have harmed its own national interests in order to aid Israel's illegal occupations and ethnic cleansing of Paletsinian lands. The US must distance itself from Israel, not draw closer.

  • 188. 0 0
    and 98% of Americans want ...
    • margaret
    • 18.05.07
    • 23:00

    And 98% of Americans want Israel to stop telling us what to do. MInd your own business.

  • 187. 0 0
    alan in ny ny
    • JoeD
    • 18.05.07
    • 22:57

    "The issue is that Iran is chanting and calling openely for the genocide of entire nations: "death to america, death to israel etc..." " And what you are doing is different how?

  • 186. 0 0
    How many Israelis vote to whack Iran if Israel does it?
    • ballistic
    • 18.05.07
    • 22:54

    I bet it would not be any where near 71%. I do think that those who want somebody whacked should do their own whacking and not sacrifice any more of our men and women on behalf of anybody else. So, how many Israelis vote to have their IAF/IDF go on over and whack Iran, and then wait for the justified response for your usual aggressive state? Golly day, Zionists have whacked everybody in the neighborhood and then whine, whine, whine that they are not wanted. What a surprise!

  • 185. 0 0
    Clickfool: Resident philosopher and horoscope reader
    • Ibrahim Shvonce
    • 18.05.07
    • 22:54

    Do you have any idea of the logistical problems a raid on Iran would pose for Israel?" Do you have any idea of the logistical problems that the war of 1948 posed for Israel? Do you have any idea of the logistical problems that the war of 1967 posed for Israel? Do you have any idea of the logistical problems that the war of 1973 posed for Israel? You do not, don't you? For one thing, be absolutely sure, that Israel was not created by "D-student" Busch and bunch of his retards. Israel will prevail. Sit tight in your armchair.

  • 184. 0 0
    Fight your own wars
    • BushLaden
    • 18.05.07
    • 22:27

    Isn't it about time that you guys fought your own wars? I mean we the USA already provide you with tons of OUR money. We constantly provide you with cluster bombs to drop on civilians but yet you are such wimps you cant fight your own war? I guess you are scared because Iran could fight back against you unlike the poor Palestinians you kill and maim every day. In fact Iran is no threat to the USA so why should our troops die for you? What have you ever done for our country other than play the victim and take our money and scream anti-semitics if you don't get your own way. Pathetic is what I say - time 4 u to fight your own wars for a change and leave us alone!!!!

  • 183. 0 0
    Better solution: Nuke-free Middle East
    • Jeff
    • 18.05.07
    • 22:16

    It's been hard enough for all these years for the Arab world to live in fear of nuclear Israel. A nuclear Iran would spur the whole region into an arms race. There can only be one solution: make Israel and Iran renounce their nuclear weapons programs and have all countries in the Middle East sign a no-nuclear weapon pact. This is the ONLY solution.

  • 182. 0 0
    Ibrahim
    • Pro-Israel
    • 18.05.07
    • 22:09

    Read ME papers and you will probably see AHMADI-NEJAD at some Anti-Israel Protest. He has stated many times that Israel has no right to exist and also stated the Holocaust was a hoax. On top of that he believes it to be his duty to bring about Armaeggedon and the coming of the 12th Iman.

  • 181. 0 0
    Paul Freedman - part II
    • Pssd Off American
    • 18.05.07
    • 22:07

    Also, the accuracy of "precision" guidance systems seems to fall well short of DoD claims and is not sufficient to prevent collateral damage. The 2006 Lancet study of civilian mortality in Iraq attributes 13% of civilian deaths to airstrikes - i.e., out of 600,000 estimated deaths from violent causes, nearly 80,000 Iraqis had been killed by US bombs as of June, 2006. The military likes precision guided munitions because they make missions safer for aircraft, but they do little to protect noncombatants. Even the most recent technology (JDAM, I think) was used with cloud cover in the initial bombing run on one of Saddam's palaces, and none of the bombs hit their targets, destroying residential areas instead. Granted, it is possible that the targets you are contemplating are not heavily populated. I don't know. But I find your "zero blowback" scenario to be pretty naive. By the way, I see you are in Falls Church. Do you work for DoD?

  • 180. 0 0
    #138 KNICKER ELASTIC KNOWS SOMETHING
    • paul harris
    • 18.05.07
    • 22:00

    WE ALL DONT KNOW !! PLEASE ELABORATE ON THE BLUNDERS WITH AN IN DEPTH ANALYSIS ???? RANGE OVER ATEN YEAR PERIOD FROM 2007 ONWARDS !!

  • 179. 0 0
    To Spyguy and Everyone Else Against Israel
    • Pro-Israel Christian
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:58

    Spyguy stop blabbering nonsense. No one in the ME can stand up to the US/Israel/Saudi alliance, and to say Iran would sink our ships.. LOL thats just plain funny. Its easy for us to judge Israel safe and sound in the U.S. We have two oceans protecting us.. They don't have that luxury. When the Iranian President is talkin about the will of allah to destroy all jews, the holocaust was a hoax, and its his duty to bring about the 12th Iman I think its safe to say I'd want to take him out as quickly as possible if I were Israel. The guy is a nut. Israel has the right to that land and the protection of God. To go against Israel is suicide as the Six Day War showed in 1967.

  • 178. 0 0
    Paul Freedman - zero blowback?
    • Pssd Off American
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:56

    Any decision to use nuclear weapons, even "tactical" ones, will have massive diplomatic reprecussions and completely derail our uneasy relationship with North Korea. It gives every country on the planet incentive to either develop nuclear weapons or increase their existing stockpiles. Your rosy outlook also presumes that we have sufficiently detailed knowledge of the location of Iranian facilities and the surrounding geology to be even moderately successful. How would we verify the effectiveness of such a strike without Iranian cooperation? The existing inspection regime would be completely withdrawn and would never get back in. That is precisely what happened when Clinton resumed bombing in Iraq, which later aided the Bush administration in its paranoia peddling.

  • 177. 0 0
    OPD
    • Ibrahim
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:56

    You act like a girl.

  • 176. 0 0
    325 the extraordinary natallie WHERE DOES SHE GET IT FROM ?
    • paul harris
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:54

    TRY STUDYING HISTORY AND THE USAS RECORD !!

  • 175. 0 0
    #158: neocon illusion
    • Paul Freedman
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:50

    American neoconservatives are not FYI endorsing a preemptive US attack on Iran which will, if one comes, come from Israel that is the party directly threatened. Such stalwart "neoconservatives" as Elliot Abrahms have very publicly derided the notion of an attack to prevent Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons as fundamentally misguided. Most of what is written about "neoconservatives" ends up redlining into the fantasy zone.

  • 174. 0 0
    #166: no, Iran has more to lose
    • Paul Freedman
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:48

    Bobby, Israel has robust strategic deterrence. Although that might fail if Iran succeeds in getting a nuclear device, *before then* (which is the timeframe of the speculative preemption). If Iran is foolish enough to threaten genocide on its dwindled Jewish population Israel will ignore that paper threat. Israel will indirectly let it be known that if Iran should be foolish enough to even take baby steps to carry out that threat, a threat, again of genocide that you endorse, then Iran, not yourself, the friend worse than an enemy, but large portions of Iranian real-estate, facilities, and leadership, will be very negatively and critically impacted.

  • 173. 0 0
    #167 Pablo B it's not Iran
    • abd
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:42

    You're right that it is not Iran, who wants war...but confrontation is inevitable because the US wants to settle old scores. The humiliation of 1979, and ascension of Khomeni on an anti-American platform is driving American foreign policy towards Iran. The time to take Iran down has never been any better. BTW it has nothing to do with the mullahs of Iran since the US is happy in its alliance with fundamentalist Saudis. The mullah's only fault was that it dared to defy the US.

  • 172. 0 0
    what will happen
    • anon
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:38

    Iran will get nuke weapons if they want them. no one will stand up to them to stop them. An invasion would be impossible to achieve. An air strike/tomahawk strike can slow them down, but they will rebuild. America won't do anything until America is hit again and/or again & again. Bin Laden was right to say we don't have the stomach. Iraq is a perfect example. I think that the worst will come, but I think in 30 - 50 years America will prevail. Israel must strike first if they wish to exist.

  • 171. 0 0
    Find a Gut, Sammy #163
    • Solon
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:37

    Actually, Sammy, all that Israel 'lost' last summer was a bit of prestige owing to its restraint. That mistake won't be repeated. The trouble with half-measures in dealing with fascist scum is that the latter never interpret half-measures as anything but weakness. They cannot interpret such measures as forbearance or moderation or mercy, because such qualities are not in the fascists' cognitive vocabularies. Rest assured that next time, there will not be a single theocrat -- Iranian, Hiz-Ebolan, Humourous Mousian, or otherwise -- who continues breathing. Their corpses will be feasted upon by dogs.

  • 170. 0 0
    Thanks for the sage advice, Click # 148, but I shall be fighting.
    • Solon
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:32

    Actually, Click, my intention is to head for Israel to serve as a civilian volunteer. I shall help provide medical care to innocent Israeli citizens, who will doubtless be bombed by the benighted Iranian theocrats irrespective of who bombs Iran. And I shall do so not as a Jew, since a Jew I am not, but rather in a spirit akin to that of those who volunteered in Spain in the mid-1930s, to assist the progressive Republic in its struggle with Nazi-backed theocrat Franconian fascists.

  • 169. 0 0
    To Alex # 136
    • Solon
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:25

    Israel is no theocracy. Israel is a Jewish homeland only in an ethnic sense, just as France is the French homeland in an ethnic sense. No one *ever* has been persecuted, prosecuted, or otherwise molested in Israel for a religious practice or belief or nonbelief. Research day-to-day life in Iran and learn what theocracy really is. (Scores of women were executed -- hang from the neck off of cranes -- only yesterday for failing to wear blankets over their heads.)

  • 168. 0 0
    Poll: 71% of Israelis want U.S. to strike Iran if talks fail
    • mike h
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:20

    It has been said that "the fastest way to cure a dog who chases cars is to let him catch one!"

  • 167. 0 0
    #120 Sittizen - World survived Soviet Union
    • Pablo B
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:09

    Joe, enough of the fear mongering already. "Will the World survive a nuclear Iran?...this is a regime that supports the notion of suicide to reach heaven, whose leader has said he wants to wipe Israel off the map." Yea, and the Soviets (who actually HAD nukes) pounded their shoe at the UN and threatened to bury the United States. Please. Name a major nation in the world, and 9 out of 10 times I'll name another nation who has a nice selection of nukes ready and waiting to drop on them. Get over yourself. Iran, who as far as I know didn't join in any of the original wars to wipe Israel off the face of the earth (1940's to 1980's), isn't going to launch an attack on Israel now. There isn't a single Israeli or US military official who will say a bombing attack will do anything more than DELAY Iran by a few years at most. If the US turned every Iranian city into a smoldering heap, Iran would just dig their weapons program deeper underground and redouble there work.

  • 166. 0 0
    Iran's Jews have the most to lose
    • Bobby
    • 18.05.07
    • 21:08

    Iran should make it clear to Israel that if it is attacked by the "Jewish state", then the 30,000 Jews currently living in Iran will pay a price.

  • 165. 0 0
    Ibrahim
    • ODP
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:51

    "The Bin Laden people almost never mention Israel. Which Muslims are you referring to?" The ones in the region, that might actually go to war. I'm talking about a conflict that's created by either Hezbollah/Islamic Jihad that spreads to Syria, Lebanon(whoops redundant), Jordan and Egypt. I agree that the Bin Laden people rarely mention Israel, although Israel is one of their major problems even if not the biggest. Obviously, Israel hasn't treated the Palestinians or Hezbollah very nicely over the past fourty years. But then again, the Pals/Hezbollah and indeed the Arab world haven't treated Israelis well for the last seventy(I'll reluctantly leave Jews out as a lot of people were willing to leave Arab lands). Nobody will expect Israel to go into Syria or Egypt without an excuse of being attacked in some format. People wouldn't be surprised if Syria or Egypt attacked Israel without an excuse. Hence, making Israel a threat to world peace. But is it in a bad way?

  • 164. 0 0
    Iran
    • Joanna
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:51

    Iran is threatening Israel, not the USA. Why can't you take care of this problem yourselves? Don't you think we have our hands full in Iraq and Afghanistan? Personally I think you should bomb their nuke facilities. But stop expecting the USA to defend you.

  • 163. 0 0
    HEZBOLLAH WILL STRIKE!
    • Samy
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:49

    Israel LOST a war to Iran's proxy, Hezbollah, how the hell do 71% of Israelis think life is going to be like when Iran rains down thousands of rockets on their heads? And then Hezbollah guerillas will fire Katushas and then Hamas will also attack.. how the hell can Israel survive that war? Frankly, 71% of Israelis are either plain STUPID or plain arrogant or both. It shows the influence of the right on ordinary Israelis. If that is how most of the public thinks, then God helps us all because WWIII is not far off... Armageddon will be at hand soon!

  • 162. 0 0
    #130 Pilly - You need to get out a bit more often
    • Pablo B
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:47

    Pilly said "As for the US having few "friends" in the world, give me some examples of countries with many "friends" and how they benefit as a nation from being so well liked.." You need to get outside the US and find out exactly how badly Bush has damaged US relations with the rest of the world. Everywhere I've gone recently I get grilled on why do the US people put up with Bush, and why haven't we stopped him. This is in pro-US nations like Australia, Germany, England, Japan, and Canada. It is even worse in nations that are Allies of Convenience like Spain, France, and Turkey. I can only imagine how bad it is in the Mideast, Africa, Latin America, Asia, and the FSU. Who is left besides Israel? Palu? Marshall Islands? We're losing the battle for "hearts and minds" almost EVERYWHERE. An attack on Iran without UNSC authorization would sink us in the battle for "hearts and minds" globally. And there is NO way the US will get UNSC approval.

  • 161. 0 0
    sorry
    • michael
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:47

    Sorry, but I'm just one American who will ask his elected Representative to reject any intervention in the Iran situation. Anything short of a Iranian flagged warship attacking the Mainland USA, would have me calling for the impeachment of said Representative. You make the world you live in.

  • 160. 0 0
    If things worked as they should . . .
    • B
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:46

    What 71% of people in Israel wanted the US to do WOULD NOT MATTER! If the legislative and executive branches of this country's government still listened to the American people, what Israel wants WOULD NOT MATTER! But since every politician who refuses to be bought off by the pro-Israeli lobby has their career quickly destroyed - those who actually make it into public office are all on the payroll. So, what 71% of Israelis want is more important than what Americans want!

  • 159. 0 0
    A loyal ally - more like a puppet!
    • Johnny Mango
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:30

    Oh lemme guess - America has a biblical mandate to blow up the world for Israel. For the price America has paid to protect Israel - we should have fed you to the wolves along time ago. Ingrates!

  • 158. 0 0
    US WILL NOT STRIKE IRAN. THE IDEA IS LUDICROUS.
    • Eric
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:25

    Why are 71% of Israeli's interested in the destruction of Israel? A strike on Iran would bring catastrophic revenge attacks and probably mark the end of Israel. All of you have been allowing the neo-conservative train wreck to brainwash your thinking. The right-wing extremists on the Israeli and US side are doing more damage to Israel than any terrorist could. WAKE UP.

  • 157. 0 0
    Cheney's promise to AIPAC
    • Neutered Observer
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:23

    Anybody who is sure that the USA will not now attack Iran should go back and listen to Darth Vaders speech to AIPAC a couple of months ago at their annual jamboree in Washington. He all but promised it to them, and the applause went on for ages.

  • 156. 0 0
    OPD
    • Ibrahim
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:21

    "The major reason why Israel is a threat to world peace is because some Muslims won`t stop going to war until Israel is destroyed." The Bin Laden people almost never mention Israel. Which Muslims are you referring to? The Palestinians? Well, be both agree Israel hasn't treated them very nice for the last 40 years...Hezbellah? Well, Israel does fly over Lebanese Airspace in a provacative manner since they were booted out... I would refrain from generalizations that attempt to paint Muslims as irrational Israel-Haters.

  • 155. 0 0
    Iran
    • Chris
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:12

    I agree we have to take care of Iran ASAP. Chris

  • 154. 0 0
    Poll this!
    • MindzEye
    • 18.05.07
    • 20:00

    If the american public would open up thier eyes and see the corrupt and unjust government that clearly is seated today this poll would not have any relevence. This administration is a merely a puppet to the financial bankers that really control this U.S Corp., I say that because it is very true. We are no longer a country just a corporation and we are it's employees. The sooner we take back this country and re-establish the old republic the better we can make this world better for all and not just to achieve power.

  • 153. 0 0
    # 21 Rebuttal for HK re: facts of Iran
    • Ed
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:54

    1. “Iran is 15% desert in the southern region” -- Desert … is uninhabited (!) or not fit for crops (Merriam-Webster). Take a look at the Iranian landscape via Google Earth and see for yourself. The fact is that is probably over 95% of Iranian territory is not inhabited and population lives in and near relatively few cities. This is a huge disadvantage for Iran in case of hostilities involving a modern military power. 2. “The war with Iraq was from 1980-1988, it was the longest modern war in the twentieth century, yes even longer than WWII for USA, Iran lost 500K people” -- It cost Iran an estimated 1 million casualties, and $350 billion.— (reference on Iran-Iraq War from the Wikipedia encyclopaedia). The length of the conflict hardly matters. Comparing this war to WWII on the same level is ridiculous. Iran-Iraq war was a regional conflict involving local powers and 2-d class armies and caused ~ 1.5 mln. casualties. WWII involved the most developed and technologically advanced nations of the World and involved more than 40 mln. casualties. 3. Iran was able to fight to a standstill buy laying down countless lives and boys as young as 13-15 who were ordered to run across minefields and using suicide squads. This is no modern army that knows how to fight a war. 4. I am not advocating an invasion of Iran. Contrary, I believe an air strike is highly undesirable but may become necessary. I hope it never happens. But if it comes to blows, Iranian Forces, although definitely not a push over, do not have a chance against a modern air force. Finally, before you call others ignorant and refer to comments of others as un-researched, you should take a good look in the mirror and check and see if your fool’s ears have grown a bit longer.

  • 152. 0 0
    #87 Goldie
    • Jim
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:42

    But not much longer, I hope!

  • 151. 0 0
    Natallie #25
    • Neal
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:42

    They already are killing our troops and smuggling weapons (penatrators) into Iraq. We should hit them now for that. If we cut and run in Iraq, stand by over here. I disagree with you Natallie. Consequences should be thought about. If Iran gets the bomb they will use it and it will be teotwawki. We, the Arabs and the Jews will suffer.

  • 150. 0 0
    # 85 female
    • Jim
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:38

    The question: shall we attack Iran? Congress: 50%-50% The people: Yea 0%, Nay 100% But no chicken newspaper in the USA would dare to conduct such a poll.

  • 149. 0 0
    zeev schiff and hizballah
    • abuaghelia
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:38

    i despair of zeev schiff sometimes.he tells us today that hizb would not go to war because of iran.implying they are raring to go.that analysis is so faulty i have no idea what the mean is doing as a militray correspondent. hizballah was decimated in the war.they lost the whole of the dahiya neighbourhood of southern beirut.it was flattened.the shia of lebanon are not willing to fight again.they are rebuilding bint jubeil and have no interest in fighting the jewish state.all their rhetoric is just show.zeev schiff what are you thinking?

  • 148. 0 0
    For Solon # 134
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:35

    "Good News. Now Let Us Plan the Attack" What I would do, Solon, is think instead about getting some beers and some pretzels in so that you can watch those entertaining fireworks on CNN every day when you come home from work. The summer television schedule gets SO dull....

  • 147. 0 0
    The Fastest boot in the West....
    • Dutch
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:34

    Let the Iranians blow the Israelis up this time. If Bush touches Iran he will immediately get the fastest boot in the West from the American people and Israel will get the other. Dutch

  • 146. 0 0
    # 74 Indrajaya
    • Jim
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:29

    I can't answer your question off the top of my head. But consider that GWB senior was allowed to initiate the first war on Iraq only because he clearly defined the end point, the condition under which the western forces would withdraw: namely when Iraq was driven out of Kuwait and Kuwait was once again free. The lack of a clearly defined goal is what makes for prolonged, pointless conflict. Apply that to the present circumstances and you will see why the idiots can't figure out how to exit a stupid war. No end condition set in advance means eternal argument and no end to the fighting. But it also means $$$ in business' pocketbook.

  • 145. 0 0
    For MindDoc # 122
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:29

    "He is now Clickfool and Clickfan. Well, at least he loves himself HAHAHHAHAHA" Glad you like your own jokes, MindDoc. What do you think of that one, Clickfan? Really? I agree... rubbish.....

  • 144. 0 0
    Clickfool # 116 - There Is Some Evidence
    • Eli
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:25

    That Israel actually did not destroy Osirik from the air. The explosives were in place and blew up as the air force roared over the plant. Which is very plausible. Iran is even more vulnerable for the same type of sabotage from the ground. Also, don't forget, quite a few Iranian nuclear scientists have already died from a "variety of illnesses". Maybe that is all that it will take to stop their program.

  • 143. 0 0
    Why should the US do it ?
    • Stefan
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:21

    71% of the israeli people want US to strike Iran. Interesting. But why should the US do this? Am I to understand this poll in such a way, that israeli people prefer their own jobs to be done by others?

  • 142. 0 0
    # 72 Bernie
    • Jim
    • 18.05.07
    • 19:10

    You are on the right track, Bernie. It is the concept, still prevalent in the ME, that religion and government mix that is the problem. It encourages religious fanatics to seize the power of government in order to further their own narrow minded aims, and fulfill their dreams of authoritarian dominance. When religious leaders yearn after power, it means trouble for everyone. From exposure to the west they are now beginning to learn that religion and government foment trouble instead of mixing well. But this is a cultural characteristic of the ME and cultural changes take a long, long time to evolve. Fortunately, we are now seeing the beginning of the end of this concept in the ME. Several generations hence, our children will soberly laugh at the foolishness of their ancestors. Regards

  • 141. 0 0
    Ibrahim
    • ODP
    • 18.05.07
    • 18:57

    The major reason why Israel is a threat to world peace is because some Muslims won't stop going to war until Israel is destroyed. In that light, it makes perfect sense to call Israel a threat to world peace, but maybe this shows there are worse things.

  • 140. 0 0
    to Joe # 120
    • Clickfan
    • 18.05.07
    • 18:42

    fearmongerer! The Iranians justifiably hate Israel, but they are no dummies. In fact, I can see they have out-smarted the US&Israel on the nuclear issue. They need the nukes to protect themselves from bullies trying to bring down their regime and control their neighborhood and resources. I am sure they know the consequences of a nuclear strike on Israel.

  • 139. 0 0
    #101 Hey Viper
    • ballistic
    • 18.05.07
    • 18:32

    It sure is amazing isn't it? Golly day, here these idiots are advocating an attempt to whack Iran after Lebanon and Iraq. The warmongers are delusional. However, they may get a very large surprise this time around when their latest tantrum is in full bloom. Iran has not attacked anyone, so if a preemptive attack behind BS is undertaken, well, we will see what happens, however, I don't think it will be pretty. As far as the US, she doesn't have enough soldiers to occupy Baltimore, let alone Iran or Iraq. Lunatics abound everywhere. Enjoy your posts. Keep blogging. Regards. Ballistic.

  • 138. 0 0
    Attack Iran?! Say, what else is new?
    • ballistic
    • 18.05.07
    • 18:27

    Iraq, Lebanon, now Iran? Another blunder from idiots--may be their last blunder under Dubya!!!

  • 137. 0 0
    Most interesting number...
    • W
    • 18.05.07
    • 18:22

    ...is that 51% of Israelis expect the US to impose a solution. I think they misread US politics. The Israel Lobby is simply too strong to allow that. The End Timer "Christians" in particular would rebel. And they and the rest of the "Christian" right are too strong here to allow that. Maybe the 51% number really reflects an unspoken wish that the US act because Israelis think their own gov't is a basket case and utterly incapable of doing anything other than drop bombs.

  • 136. 0 0
    To Solon
    • Alex
    • 18.05.07
    • 18:16

    What theocratic regime? Israel has a religious symbol on its flag and is a "Jew Homeland." They are every bit as theocratic as Iran.

  • 135. 0 0
    Good news
    • Tosefta
    • 18.05.07
    • 18:08

    Over 95% of Israelis supported the recent war in Lebanon (at least in the initial stage). I am glad we don't have a similar number of Israelis supporting ISRAEL attacking Iran. This was the Israeli government's talk until a few months ago. And if less than 95% support the US attacking Iran, it is also an improvement. Perhaps the sad results of the Lebanon war got Israelis to think more before the military option is used. It seems even AIPAC learned something from the Iraq experience and is careful about pushing for a US attack on Iran. They are now pushing for tougher sanctions. P.S. If sanctions don't work, I assume Bush will attack the nuclear installations of Iran by air. I haven't decided myself on the wisdom of such an attack. The question is how responsible the Iranians really are. They may be more rational than they are made out to be.

  • 134. 0 0
    Good News. Now Let Us Plan the Attack
    • Solon
    • 18.05.07
    • 17:58

    This is very good news. And let there be no mistake: Even Democrats in the US overwhelmingly agree that the cretinous theocratic regime in Iran must be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons. What we must also realise, however, is that nuclear weapons are but part of the problem. The fuller problem is the possession of *any* military infrastructure by these backward savages (the theocrats). We should *already* be destroying *all* of their military capacity. NOW.

  • 133. 0 0
    Gaza Diversion Per Iran Enrichment A 2 Way Street.
    • Ambrose
    • 18.05.07
    • 17:41

    Clearly, Islamists use Pals as a buffer for their internal hostilities, with very little concern for the outcome for Pals. With Iran it's intended to deflect attention away from enrichment. What Iran's moves in Gaza will do: It will further strain their existing shortfall of cash, which is bound to get far worse by much stronger sanctions. Put a stop to the tired rhetoric about Iran's "peaceful" intentions. Will forge West clarity, and a unified action against them quickly if and when they cross their enrichment line of demarcation.

  • 132. 0 0
    #1 spyguy
    • abd
    • 18.05.07
    • 17:38

    I think you are dead wrong in your analysis. The US stands in the ME on two legs - one planted in Israel, the other in Saudi Arabia. Both Israel and Saudi although they smear each other for public consumption, share a great rapport politically. One is a Jewish state, the other an Islamic state allied to the US. And both are against a nuclear Iran. There you have it...Egypt has been nutralized, Iraq decimated, Syria is being cajoled - there is no government with an army in the ME who will stand up to the US/Israel/Saudi bombing or invasion of Iran. Iran is surrounded in all sides - Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, Iraq, Ajerbeijan. There will be international pressure to back off from Iran, but by that time, Iran can be toast. Your one billion Muslim theory is a hoax.

  • 131. 0 0
    THE MAD DOG
    • Friend of Israel
    • 18.05.07
    • 17:32

    I JOIN THE 71% OF ISRAELI PEOPLE . THE MAD DOG NEED A BIG STRIKE .

  • 130. 0 0
    Spyguy's defeatism
    • Pilly
    • 18.05.07
    • 17:19

    If you lived within easy range of a nuclear armed nation led by a lunatic, you might think differently. As for the US having few "friends" in the world, give me some examples of countries with many "friends" and how they benefit as a nation from being so well liked...

  • 129. 0 0
    #93 An attack on Iran is avoidable.
    • Jim
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:51

    Aren't you forgetting the people of Iran? One revolution invites another. The Ayatollah is on his last legs, and the fanatic, tin-horn politician Ahmadinejad is on his way out. Iran will solve its own problems without the US initiating Vietnam III. Of course US business won't like that. Tough.

  • 128. 0 0
    Thanks for the heads-up!
    • janet
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:44

    Hopefully 100% of Americans hear about this poll and and say FU Israel!

  • 127. 0 0
    terry and the "blessings".
    • Chaval
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:41

    "as long as we help/bless you(israel) we`ll be blessed,but when the gog-magog war comes who knows if we`ll even still physically exist. G-d will save israel" -terry According to your beliefs ONLY 144,00 Jews will be saved. The rest will be whacked in your Armageddon fantasy. Oh! and about them "blessings" thanks but NO THANKS!

  • 126. 0 0
    Israel's culture of violence and war...
    • Ibrahim
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:40

    Another "pre-emptive" war....advocated by the Israeli state that will certainly play no role or pay no price for the war... Another example of why the Europeans find Israel one of the biggest threats to world peace.

  • 125. 0 0
    71% of Israelis are delusional
    • Morris Goldfarb
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:40

    The US and Iran are closer to normalizing relations - the mutual saber rattling notwithstanding, done purely for internal consumption purposes - than they have ever been in twenty-seven years. Israelis should focus on improving their dismal world image and butt out of everyone else's business.

  • 124. 0 0
    spyguy says iran wont attack Israel..
    • Nick Lang
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:39

    He is absolutely right. Iran is far too cowardly to attack their enemy openly. They will rather arm hezbollah to the teeth in Lebanon and tell their vicious little attack beast to "sic-em".

  • 123. 0 0
    Clickfool #59 Re Bush
    • Eli
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:21

    I said Morons predicted the outcome in Iraq, not the deranged people we have at the White House. There is a big difference between the two. All you had to do is look back to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 to have predicted Iraq. First the flowers and the dancing that greeted the Israelis followed very quickly by ass kicking. Mine is still hurting.

  • 122. 0 0
    It was bound to happen, Click has schizophrenia
    • MindDoc
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:20

    He is now Clickfool and Clickfan. Well, at least he loves himself HAHAHHAHAHA

  • 121. 0 0
    Messianic mission
    • John
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:16

    I do not think that King Bush would leave office before fulfilling his messianic mission of eradicating ?evil? in the whole world, I hope he would succeed before being hanged on the Cross.

  • 120. 0 0
    Can the world survive a nuclear Iran?
    • Joe Sittizen
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:12

    Most people are not willing to take the chance that Iran would not use its nuclear bombs. Spyguy and Clickfool et al seem to forget that this is a regime that supports the notion of suicide to reach heaven, whose leader has said he wants to wipe Israel off the map. It's not just Israel, but the Arabs as well are worried that the Iranians would nuke them too. A radioactive Tel Aviv may be the hope of many Muslims, but many others are also concerned about Cairo and Riyadh. San Francisco and Sussex would also be justified targets for the Iranians.

  • 119. 0 0
    #90 Viper
    • Jim
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:12

    Yeah, Viper! And when the USA finally decides that Iraq is another Vietnam and pulls its forces out, Israel will no longer need the ID codes to fly their planes over Iraq. Then they can do their own dirty work - and suffer the consequences.

  • 118. 0 0
    # 13 Joseph E
    • Mary
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:12

    100% of Moslims: I have no idea where you got these figures from. What I read in the newspapers; when Israel attacked Hezbollah in south Lebanon, the majority of the sunnis in the Middleeast supported Hezbollah, even though Hezbollah is shiit. The leaders of the Arab countries you have mentioned in your post were worried about their seats because of the growing support for Hezbollah. What I think, lots of Moslim sunnis most likely converted to Shiits at the time.

  • 117. 0 0
    and 29% want Iran to strike Israel?
    • AlexK
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:07

    Does this surver include Arabs? Otherwise, I do not understand what the rest of Israelis think. Do they believe that suicidal mullahs strike peace with Jews instead of nukes?

  • 116. 0 0
    The sheer impossibility of a solo Israeli attack # 92
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 16:02

    "The fact is only Israel has the experience and capability to execute such delicate operation that requires high precision and brilliance." Israel can't stage this attack without US clearance of the skies over Iraq, and the transponder codes, quite simply, will not be given to the IAF. Israel, by itself, cannot in any case deliver the bombloads that would make any real difference to the Iranian nuclear programme. This isn't Osirak.

  • 115. 0 0
    For Scott # 84
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:58

    "A naval blockade of refined gasoline coming in would cripple them even more." Not as fast as the closure of the Gulf to oil traffic would cripple America. The price of oil would rise rapidly to $200-$300, Dow would drop like a stone, the dollar would plummet, US interest rates would rise dramatically, the US housing bubble would finally and unequivocally burst, consumer confidence would be destroyed and the real economy would nosedive. And when Iran sinks the first major US capital ship, this meltdown would grow even worse.

  • 114. 0 0
    Diplomatic efforts have no chance. Military force unavoidable
    • Chaim
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:54

    Making nuclear bombs is a huge winner for the President of Iran. His stature in the Moslem world has skyrocketed as a result. European leaders are paying him lots of attention and respect. That's pretty heady for the leader of a banana republic with oil! Why would he stop such a winner? Words will never stop him. Diplomacy has no chance. Military force is unavoidable to stop the Mad Mullahs from using nuclear bombs on Israel and other western nations. Risky? Sure, but the risks of the Mad Mullahs with nukes are infinitely greater.

  • 113. 0 0
    ed
    • mike
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:40

    Go back to canada

  • 112. 0 0
    #16 Ralph
    • Double Click
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:40

    Ralph questions, "What kind of a country would expect the US to attack another country for their benefit?" He then further says, "If they want Iran hit, they should have the guts to do it themselves." Coming from Oklahoma, Ralph simply reflects his Midwestern naiveté. This Israeli government reflects the absolutely worst of Jewish archetype behavior. Hopefully, the next time Israelis have a chance to vote, they will elect candidates with their forefathers values.

  • 111. 0 0
    Let's see if I got this right
    • Goldie
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:37

    For the past 50+ yrs, US taxpayers have been gifting Israelis with hundreds of billions in aid and military equipment to defend itself against its enemies. And once again, rather than defend itself, Israelis overwhelmingly expect the US to do its dirty work. It's time to take them off the taxpayers' tit and DEMAND they do what they have been paid so handsomely for.

  • 110. 0 0
    an attack on Iran is unavoidable
    • Joe
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:34

    Weather it's the US or Israel. One of the 2 if not both will have to deal with Iran sooner or later. Hold Ahmadinejad for his words. He swore he will not fold in front of sanctions. The only way to make Iran stop is by force.

  • 109. 0 0
    Operation requiring Precision
    • Brod
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:31

    Israel has been threatened with annihilation by Iran repeatedly. Israel has all the rights in the world to defend itself against such threats and aggressions. Like all the Islamist-Jihadist countries in the past who had threatened to annihilate Israel and had their armies vanquished by Israel, Iran is making the same stupid mistake of picking a formidable foe. The end result will be the same. The fact is only Israel has the experience and capability to execute such delicate operation that requires high precision and brilliance.

  • 108. 0 0
    #1 spyguy A Flagrant Sign of Insanity
    • Arik
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:25

    You're comletely right. Isreal will never survive a U.S. attack on Iran. Iran got an offer to become a member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). The CSTO's intention is to have a common air-defense system and creating a large military contingent. The CSTO's current members are Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Russia and Uzbekistan. (And Iran has also observer status in "SCO energy club" and got an offer to be a member. The SCO's members are China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.) And last but not least, Iran?s friend of the "Axis of Evil", North Korea, has, certainly, shared her nukes (about 360 war heads!) with Iran. After an attack Israel would be wiped out of the map...

  • 107. 0 0
    #1: not if it was a tactical nuclear strike
    • Paul Freedman
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:23

    spyguy: Jews, in Israel or in the Diaspora have difficulties outside of America (and as Henry Ford demonstrated, even inside America) given the fundamental dislocations within the process of internalizing Judaism in the non-Jewish psyche. That's irrelevant, however, to the main fact that a tactical nuclear strike might be so successful and decisive as to leave zero "blowback"--the Iranian's could do whatever they wanted to do with their hands--talk, gesticulate, open cans of tuna--their facilities would be gone and there would be nothing they could do about it.

  • 106. 0 0
    #69 Bernie: Sheep in wolves' clothing
    • Jim
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:20

    "The highjacking of Israel by fanatic Jews is the greatest threat to Middle East peace." Religious fanatics get into politics for one reason. They are scatter -brained like sheep, lack the cunning and strength of wolves, labor under the delusion that God loves them and hates the rest of humanity, are overcome by fear and uncertainty, and can't control their own adrenalin. That is what Christians, Jews, and Muslims have in common: fanaticism It all boils down to one un-God-like but very human attitude: I'm right; you're wrong; and God will rejoice when I kill you all to prove it! Authoritarians all; but too frightened to do anything on their own authority. Sick

  • 105. 0 0
    thank you
    • Richard
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:12

    Dear US citizens. In your opinion, why does the US support Israel without reserve? Israel is a democracy and has a free media. These are positives. The situation in Gaza and the West bank, vis a vis the separation wall and the checkpoints, intimidation and the regular 'incursions' by air and tanks are indisciminate and should not be considered acceptable by the West. Just think about this wall that is being erected around the West Bank.It's hundreds of miles long! Is this the behaviour of an enlightened and fair nation? Or the manner in which the residents of Gaza are kept in what is effectively an open prison. Is that acceptable?

  • 104. 0 0
    to Scott # 83
    • Clickfan
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:08

    At least you are advocating a non-miltary way to deal with the Iranian nuclear issue. That is good and it shows you have learned something from the Iraq mess that you supported. Also, Iranian agents (and there 10s of thousands of them) will overtly send the gulf oil facilities up in flames if Iran is cornered. I am sure you will feel the effect back in MD just like ordinary Iranians will.

  • 103. 0 0
    War is not a game
    • SwedMan
    • 18.05.07
    • 15:08

    War is not a game if israel think so, people die this is not counterstrike, like the small children the IDF killed in lebanon and they didnt care becouse its not jewish blood that is spilled! Do you think USA can destroy Iran? Its not a simple task Iran is not a small and dumb country. why dont israel return what belongs to the arabs and make peace instead.

  • 102. 0 0
    Not a wise thing
    • Raffaele Ladu
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:57

    It is not a wise thing for the residents of a state to suggest that another state should go to war - even though I agree with them that Ahmadinedjad is quite a dangerous guy. Take care.

  • 101. 0 0
    DO THE DIRTY WORK YOURSELF ISRAEL
    • VIPER
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:33

    GEES, all these war mongerers in israel want the u.s to hit iran, HEY, you want them out, you do the job yourselves ,but then you KNOW whats gonna happen to you if you do, don't you ?

  • 100. 0 0
    Are we Israel's thug?
    • Mark Lincoln
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:25

    The US is currently losing two wars, one in Afghanistan and another in Iraq. We really don't need to be losing a third. Sorry Israel, we are too busy to be your thug. I would suggest you do it yourself if you think it is so important.

  • 99. 0 0
    #34, SCOTT HUNTER, i agree fully and stated the same
    • VIPER
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:22

    as i have stated numerous times, jews were once in this position, now they are handing out, jews always say " never again " and the time ( which is borrowed ) will come when arabs will say the same, sad, very sad, and history always repeats itself.

  • 98. 0 0
    Response to Scott
    • Dror
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:15

    You have a convincing and interesting argument, but you forget that it is middle easterners you are talking about here, and not russians that were taught to be atheists. Western culture is more likely to implode before the middle east becomes atheistic or fully westernized, you build your hopes too high Scott. Iran with nukes poses a reality check for the western powers and for greedy corporations bent on manipulating world markets to their advantage. Israel's existence will be more seriously threatened, but maybe, just maybe, a nuclear Iran will begin to put a stop to western arrogance and domination, renewable energies and alternatives will be accelerated like never before. The interest groups will finally be silenced and the dumb, deaf, and blind masses will sit up and finally take interest in matters that they are usually indifferent towards.

  • 97. 0 0
    Response to Scott
    • Dror
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:15

    You have a convincing and interesting argument, but you forget that it is middle easterners you are talking about here, and not russians that were taught to be atheists. Western culture is more likely to implode before the middle east becomes atheistic or fully westernized, you build your hopes too high Scott. Iran with nukes poses a reality check for the western powers and for greedy corporations bent on manipulating world markets to their advantage. Israel's existence will be more seriously threatened, but maybe, just maybe, a nuclear Iran will begin to put a stop to western arrogance and domination, renewable energies and alternatives will be accelerated like never before. The interest groups will finally be silenced and the dumb, deaf, and blind masses will sit up and finally take interest in matters that they are usually indifferent towards.

  • 96. 0 0
    #6 - - - Thank You
    • PR
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:11

    It's time our tax dollars remains at home to fix our problems. My one response is "fight yr own wars"

  • 95. 0 0
    How I read these polls
    • Mary
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:08

    65% believe that the US is an ally. As an American, I would say to the other 35% send us our $3 Billion a year back. If it wasn't for America, there would be no Israel.

  • 94. 0 0
    Iran 2 con't
    • Scott
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:06

    Far fetched? just check out why the Saudis are trying to buy coastal ship from the US, as was reported by Haartz a few months ago. Blockades and to escort their own ships. It would be ugly. However, the Iranian on the street would question why they are funding so many Shia abroad while their lives get more miserable (they were doing just that last summer during the 2nd Leb War, when their earthquake survivors are still living in squalor). You just might tip a revolution in such a scenario. What you get as a result would be the question.

  • 93. 0 0
    #Clickfool. Some just follow a war god.
    • Maureen Ann
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:05

    By the way Wolfowitz resigned today! Strange isn't it, how a WORLD bank has it's president 'put in place' by the U.S President?

  • 92. 0 0
    Iran 2
    • Scott
    • 18.05.07
    • 14:01

    If you really want to cripple Iran, and I say this as an ardent supporter of the invasion of Iraq and still trying to stabilize a democracy, the best thing to due is to take a page book from the Nixon doctrine, and withdraw all foreign forces. Let the civil war ensue. Why? It will pit the Arab Sunnis against the Shiite Persians and Arabs. Iran has been living off oil for so long, and the high oil prices sustain them. However, their output continues to decline day by day for lack of parts and investment from US sanctions. They do not have the capacity, with all of their reserves, to produce enough gasoline for their own country, so they must import. A civil war in Iraq would result in the Saudis opening up every last spigot they have to drive the price of oil through the floor, thus cutting off Iran's main national source of income. A naval blockade of refined gasoline coming in would cripple them even more.

  • 91. 0 0
    71% of Israelis......
    • Elias
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:55

    Haven't the Israelis public learnt any lessons from their support for American attacks on Iraq and the mess it created. Your friend the American will leave sooner or later but the mess will remain right at your door steps. Attacking Iran will only make things worss. You guys are looking for short term gain and a long term pain.

  • 90. 0 0
    Retaliation
    • Goldie
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:51

    Whether Iran can respond militarily to a US/Israeli attack is moot. The response will be swift and global - oil will be taken off the Dollar Standard. OPEC and China, simply refusing to back the Dollar, will result in an immediate and devastating economic crisis in the US. And then we'll see how fast the rest of the world comes to the rescue of Israel and the US. My bet is - more than 71% of the world will call it "just desserts".

  • 89. 0 0
    Iran
    • Scott
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:50

    Iran will be a tougher nut to crack than most realize. The comparison that the invasion of Iraq did not produce any attacks outside of Iraq ignores the situation. Iraq did not have proxy groups in the Pal territories or in Lebanon. Nor did they have cells organized for years in the US or have hteir proxies building a training base in South America. Iran does have all of these, and it is quite documented. Hezbollah is in South America and the US already. Im a conservative, but have no reason to doubt the Wash Post when they interview one of the Hez commanders at the training base in SA. The FBI admits they are tracking Hez cells in the US, and they have sent some to jail already. Isreal failed to rout them out last summer in Lebanon. An attack on Iran will have consequences. We are in a game of Chicken with Iran right now, the question is, who will blink, and who is ready to suffer the resulting consequences of their actions.

  • 88. 0 0
    it is still good that 29% thinck better
    • iranian guy
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:49

    in such country as isreal i am surprised that there also some 29% of the poeple is wise.

  • 87. 0 0
    world opinion
    • Goldie
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:45

    Recent polls show the world believes Israel to be the greatest danger and threat to peace. World opinion shows over 85% disapprove of US war in Iraq. That proves that the world gets it while Israel and Bush are in total delusion and denial.

  • 86. 0 0
    POLL USA CITIZENS
    • female
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:38

    Now why not poll the people of the USA and see how they feel about attacking Iran JUST because 71% israeli's WANTS us to?????

  • 85. 0 0
    POLL USA CITIZENS
    • female
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:38

    Now why not poll the people of the USA and see how they feel about attacking Iran JUST because 71% israeli's WANTS us to?????

  • 84. 0 0
    Attacking Iran
    • Scott
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:32

    It is foolish for Isreal or the US to attack Iran unless they openly trot out a nuclear missle, which is what Saddam practically did before the first Gulf war (the triggers I believe it was). Not because it can't be done (I am a firm believer that was the real intent of invading Iraq, to surround Iran). The better tact is that Irans population is young (what is it now, like 60% under the age of 25?) and very Western oriented. If contained, Iran will bear out much as did the Soviet Union when this generation of Mullahs who lived through the Revolution die and the younger generation comes to power. You are more likely to see internal strife in Iran then an attack on Isreal if left unprovoked.

  • 83. 0 0
    strike Iran
    • Jeff
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:27

    U.S. will strike Iranian nuclear facilities not Iran as a whole. This might not make much difference to a lot of people. The U.S. will do it not for Israel or anyone else except for their own. 1) Destroy Iranian capability to aquire nukes and become a world power 2) Stop Iranian support for Iraqi insurgency. Iran will not retaliate knowing that without nukes it can't take on the U.S. without being turned into charcoal. There will propably be a revolt against the ayatollahs. Iran will stop all nucklear research,knowing that if they play with nuke research they will be attacked again.

  • 82. 0 0
    Spyguy #24
    • Scott
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:26

    While I agree with your assertions on Iran, I do have a question for you that I ask everyone who has since the first Gulf War maintained the US was supplying Iraq with weapons. What US weapons? Iraq was always a client state of the USSR. The last time I saw any and every clip of Iraqs 3 conflicts, Iran, UN, US, they were using Soviet T tanks, flying MIGs and Mirages, shooting AK-47's, firing SCUD and Exocet missles. These are all Soviet/Russo and French weapons the last time I checked. Exactly what weapons were we supplying them?

  • 81. 0 0
    For Maureen Ann # 68
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:23

    "how many of the 71% believed the U.S. should have launched an attack on Iraq before America invaded Iraq?" You're right, Maureen Ann. They didn't see that an even bigger bunch of villains were waiting to fill the vacuum in the Middle East. And now, in clamouring for an attack on Iran, they don't see the catastophic consequences. If you were to ask them the following question, would they still be beating the drums for war? "If an attack on Iran's suspected nuclear facilities would lead to the destruction of Dimona, with the possibility of severe radiocative fallout over Israeli cities, the destruction of Israel's only oil refineries, Hezbollah attacks in Northern Israel, a collapse in worldwide financial markets and a worlwide economic slump, the like of which the world hasn't seen for 80 years, and with no guarantee of totally wiping out Iran's nuclear programme, would you still want that attack?"

  • 80. 0 0
    Folks
    • Clickfan
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:22

    An attack on Iran, if it ever happens, will not prevent them from going nuclear. In fact it may accelerate that effort. Iran will suffer economically much more than Israel or the US will from a counter attack. They may lose 1600 centrifuges (if Israel is lucky). However, the regime will survive, pull out of the NPT, and seek a nuclear device with vigor. With IEAE out of the country, they will get their 1st nuke device in less than a year. So to those 71% in Israel, please think carefully about the consequences what you are asking for.

  • 79. 0 0
    For Star of David # 65
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:15

    ""I do believe that the Bush administration thought that the Iraqi people would welcome the conquerors of Saddam Hussein with flowers, and all would then be well in the Middle East forever and ever." Overwhelming hubris, again. The true mark of the english education system. Well done, cobber. Shall we together churn out a verse or two of "Drule Brittania" in clebration? :)" The remarkable thing about your posts, Star of David, is how empty of meaning they all are. You are a wit only in your own mind. As you know, I blame your mother for telling you what a clever boy you were.

  • 78. 0 0
    For Terry # 64
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 13:12

    "G-d will save israel" I am always - truly - amazed that people such as yourself should imagine that God would have the smallest interest in a nation like Israel, which has spent the 59 years of its barbaric existence oppressing the weak, stealing from them and butchering them. God has no sepcial favourites. He loves all mankind equally. There is no reason for you to think otherwise. Israel will be lucky not to have the Sodom and Gomorrah treatment dished out to it.

  • 77. 0 0
  • 76. 0 0
    Typical Haaretz sensationalism and provocation
    • Dror
    • 18.05.07
    • 12:41

    The snakes running america and britain know why the iranians are developing nukes. They know just how much of a grudge the iranians have against them. Iranians like Ahmedinijad want revenge for what was done to them by the americans' cia, britain, and sadly our prostitute mossad that did the bidding of the overlords to protect their oil interests in the middle east. America and britain will confront Iran sooner or later. IN THIS DAY AND AGE USING ISRAEL AS A CONVENIENT COVER AND SCAPEGOAT IS BECOMING HARDER AND HARDER TO DO. Both the Iranians and the West find it very useful to put Israel in the middle in order to conceal their true interests and true intentions. I am relying on human nature to resolve the problem with Iran. Self-preservation is in the interest of the western countries. Israel will not do your bidding and deal with Iran for you. We all know that the Iranians hate the americans and british a HELL of allot more than they hate Israel. It is the world's problem.

  • 75. 0 0
    why doesn't Israel attack Iran
    • Bob
    • 18.05.07
    • 12:31

    Can someone tell me why Israel expects the USA to do it's dirty work? Why doesn't she attack Iran herself? Stop being a coward, Israel the parasite. Soon we will stop giving aid, you're nothing but a liability, who squashes free speech in the USA

  • 74. 0 0
    WHAT ABOUT THE NUMBER AT 2003
    • indrajaya
    • 18.05.07
    • 12:26

    ...59 percent of Israelis still believe the war in Iraq was justified, while 36 percent take the opposite... Can somebody tell me what the number in about April and May 2003, just after US invaded Iraq when Bush declared that Mission Accomplished. It means alot to me.

  • 73. 0 0
    Sheath the sword of Gideon - it's embarrassing
    • Tom S
    • 18.05.07
    • 12:06

    I like to see that those getting a boner for the "sword of Gideon" and imploring the anxious to "stop being so liberal" are living in Rio de Janeiro (shmuelshachor) and LA (saba) respectively. Back in the Middle East, where the consequences would actually be felt, Yentel says: "too bad we don't have a pulse beam weapon". Too bad indeed. Israel risks being dragged into a new 'Great Game' which is all about natural resources and who commands them. iran has a lot of gas/oil and no longer needs to sell to the US. The US is not happy with the idea of a dilution of its power and would love to slap Iran. Israeli panic over the Iranian bomb is the kicker and as such 71% of Israelis are being used for something that will not be about their security.

  • 72. 0 0
    I can't believe that civilized people ...
    • Bernie
    • 18.05.07
    • 11:57

    Are suggesting that countries with nuclear weapons, like Israel or the USA, should drop nuclear bombs on Iran, so they do not become a 'rogue' state in possession of a nuke. 1. Saddam Hussein had chemical, biological and nuclear material in 1990. He did not use them. 2. He went along with the 'civilized' world and dismantled his entire nonconventional military. 3. He was rewarded for that by being executed. No country or leader, postIraq, having seen the consequences of not building a nuke, will ever accept the arguments and trust of the West. To disarm Iran and North Korea, we needed to stay out of Iraq, and reward Saddam Hussein. We chose to kill him instead, so other countries will choose Nukes. There is nothing to be done about it now. Israel must immediately make peace with its neighbours, before its neighbours are so strong that they don't want to talk peace anymore.

  • 71. 0 0
    59% of Israelis think Iraq was Justified
    • Bernie
    • 18.05.07
    • 11:48

    Even Ariel Sharon supposedly warned George Bush to be careful of deposing Saddam Hussein. He even recognized that eliminating Saddam Hussein would create a dangerous Middle East. He recognized that Saddam Hussein was a source of stability in the Middle East. So my confusion is this? What possible justification can there possibly be to destroy a nation and all its peoples, and create a dangerous Middle East that is more threatening to Israel. What are 59% of Israelis thinking? Saddam Hussein was a defensive buffer for Israel. If this is how the majority of Isreals feel towards their 'protectors', no wonder they become so despised by their enemies. I feel very bad for the other 41%. It is terrible that a majority of idiots lumps them in among its citizenry. I wish 59% of Israelis would just pick up their weapons and go to Iraq. Then the ones that remain can definitely negotiate peace.

  • 70. 0 0
    Mark, You make Some Valid Points
    • Bernie
    • 18.05.07
    • 11:38

    But we must all be clear about what the threats are: Jews are not a target. This is not Germany 1939. Iranian Jews live in Iran, and they are not villified or threatened. In Lebanon, very liberal Christians, with the same beliefs as many Jews live side by Side with Hezbollah, the Party of God, and they are not villified or threatened. It is not Israel that will be targetted. It is not Jews that will be targetted. The Jewish State will be destroyed. That is all, very simple, a semantics thing. All the Jews can continue living in Israel, but peace will be made when Israel is a place where Jews are free to live, rather than a place where Jews are concentrated and NonJews are not allowed to immigrate to. The existence of theocracies in the Middle East is a cancer. The Muslim State of Saudi Arabia and the Jewish State of Israel must be destroyed.

  • 69. 0 0
    The Existential Threat to the Jewish State
    • Bernie
    • 18.05.07
    • 11:32

    Having a rogue theocratic nation with nuclear weapons at their disposable is a threat which must not be accepted. No, I am not speaking of Iran. It is Israel that I speak of. 36% of Israelis must be commended for recognizing that Iraq was a foolish and useless war that accomplished nothing. The rest must stop demanding a Jewish State (and countries like Saudi Arabia must stop being Muslim States), and join the civilized world and become more secular. No more Stars of David on the National Flag. No more words like 'I am proud to be Jew' in the national anthem. The Middle East is too dangerous a place for religious zealots to possess nuclear weapons. The Jewish State must be destroyed. A NonNuclear Secular Israel must be a home for all religions. The highjacking of Israel by fanatic Jews is the greatest threat to Middle East peace.

  • 68. 0 0
    71% believe America should launch a military attack on Iran...
    • Maureen Ann
    • 18.05.07
    • 11:28

    how many of the 71% believed the U.S. should have launched an attack on Iraq before America invaded Iraq? And do the 71% of Israelis realize Iran has bigger rockets than Hamas!

  • 67. 0 0
    Eli
    • Moury
    • 18.05.07
    • 11:21

    I think you would be surprised how much the Iraq war has disallusioned Congress and the people of America. The Iraq War's approval ratings are at an all time low. America is kinda sick of war at this point. I doubt we would want to jump head first into another war.

  • 66. 0 0
    Iran
    • Tamar Ferguson
    • 18.05.07
    • 11:13

    After the debacle in Lebanon, what makes Israel think that they would win a war with Iran?

  • 65. 0 0
    Cluck Fool
    • Star of David
    • 18.05.07
    • 11:03

    "I do believe that the Bush administration thought that the Iraqi people would welcome the conquerors of Saddam Hussein with flowers, and all would then be well in the Middle East forever and ever." Overwhelming hubris, again. The true mark of the english education system. Well done, cobber. Shall we together churn out a verse or two of "Drule Brittania" in clebration? :)

  • 64. 0 0
    as a judeo-christian nation,the us should
    • terry
    • 18.05.07
    • 11:03

    do whatever to help,but we know that except as individuals we too are amoungst the nations, so we will be judged. as long as we help/bless you(israel) we'll be blessed,but when the gog-magog war comes who knows if we'll even still physically exist. G-d will save israel. in the meantime maybe you should start vetting christian-zionists to help militarily.

  • 63. 0 0
    This is going to go down well in Washington
    • Johnboy
    • 18.05.07
    • 10:47

    Yep, go down a treat, I suspect. Flunky: "Sir! The Israeli public is begging us to nuke Iran" GWB: "Well! That is a mandate for action if ever I heard one. Get on the scrambler, Capt. Flunky, and launch the Beasts of War now". Flunky: "Yessir! And, Sir, may I say that I am in awe of your decisiveness!" GWB [laughing]: "No, Capt. Flunky. Credit where credit is due - it's all down to Israeli Chutzpah!" [Everyone in the Oval Office]: "And so say we all!" Yes, this trumpet-blast from Israel is going to go down a Real Big Treat with the USA. You just wait and see.....

  • 62. 0 0
    71% of Israelis want U.S. to strike Iran if talks fail
    • Richard
    • 18.05.07
    • 10:43

    Israel and the US seem to love fighting whilst all the time talking peace. Israel has only the courage to attack defenceless people and call them 'terrorist' whilst doing so. Hamas and Hizbollah aren't beaten despite the billions in aid to Israel and the vast difference in technology available to each side. In Iraq (take aside all the Bush hyperbole - remember that victory 'parade' on the aircraft carrier anyone?)the US has clearly failed and the US army is being outwitted and ground-down by men equppped with side arms. So now Israel wants to attack Iran. Why? What will it acheive? And why not go it alone? Stand up for yourselves for once. The Bush era is over. Rumsfeld is discredited, Wolfowitz has lost his job at the World Bank, Congress is Democrat. It's over. Thank God.

  • 61. 0 0
    49 Click - Israelis may still get their wish
    • spyguy
    • 18.05.07
    • 10:35

    As much as most of my fellow Americans and I think starting another war is a terrible idea, we do have a problem in the Whitehouse. Both Bush and Cheney have no problem doing whatever they want regardless what the American people want and there are enough military leaders with no morals that just may follow any orders Bush sends down no matter how bad it would be for their country ("following orders" still exists even after all the evidence that it can sometimes be a bad idea). As the ongoing hearings in the congress have shown, Bush holds anyone that tries to limit his power in total contempt. So the possibility that Bush will attack Iran are still 50/50, no matter how many people think it is insane. Sure he will be removed from office very soon after attacking Iran and the consequences sink in to the American public, but the damage will be done and it may take a long time to recover.

  • 60. 0 0
    what % of the Ummah will celebrate next time Europe is attacked?
    • Jan
    • 18.05.07
    • 10:30

    At least the Israelis are honest. They don't have a death wish, they simply understand that they're on the frontlines of what their neighbors habitually proclaim as war -- and not just any war, but a possible war of annihilation -- against them. So, they fantasize about part of their problem going away (i.e., an Iranian nuclear arsenal; and a dim-witted Iranian president, who denies historical reality, and who wants to kill all "Zionists"), as if by laser-guided magic. But can you really blame the Jews of Israel for this? Is this not a problem worthy of a little fantasizing when taking a B.S. public opinion survey? Please remember, when polls like this are allowed in Israel's neighbors -- which isn't often -- the results are similar. Spiteful and cavalier about using violence as a political tool. To outsiders, this often looks "crazy"... but that's just the neighborhood, and don't anyone doubt it.

  • 59. 0 0
    For Eli in Berkeley # 39
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 10:20

    "Every Moron Predicted The Outcome in Iraq" I do believe that the Bush administration thought that the Iraqi people would welcome the conquerors of Saddam Hussein with flowers, and all would then be well in the Middle East forever and ever.

  • 58. 0 0
    If you read history...
    • H50
    • 18.05.07
    • 10:19

    If you read history you will occasionally come across countries who appear to be genuinely bloodthirsty, almost to a man. Countries which start war after war with their neighbours, and who appear to be completely foreign to humanity and morality. Israel is one such place, and I feel privileged being able to watch from a safe distance. Not many people consistently and constantly bray for more bloodshed, not many never get tired of war and murder. A whole nation thinking that a failed war that has caused a near genocide was an excellent idea, who want another war at the same time, is another truly historic entity.

  • 57. 0 0
    Pure wishful thinking from Lightkeeper # 46
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 10:13

    "their air force will make the first move. They`ve been practicing for it and the US has given them a corridor over Iraq." You haven't got the smallest scrap of evidence that this is the case, Lightkeeper. If America gives Israel the transponder codes to overfly Iraq, and helps with the complicated refuelling, it might as well do the job itself, for it would then become a clear and obvious accessory to the aggression. The Gulf would be closed to Western oil traffic within hours. I hope you've got a bicycle to get around, over there in Cave Junction, Lightkeeper.

  • 56. 0 0
    33 Eli - so you are assuming that after a few
    • spyguy
    • 18.05.07
    • 10:07

    bombs, Iran will quietly submit themselves to the will of the US and Israel? Every thing I read from around the world says attacking Iran would be terrible for Israel. Israel's population centers would be heavily bombed, its oil infrastructure destroyed, its nuclear centers destroyed, It would be attacked by Hez and Syria. Life in Israel would become very dangerous. For the US, its army in Iraq would be killed, its ships in the gulf sunk, its oil stopped. As a result, the US economy dives toward zero since the US economy can NOT function without cheap oil. Without cheap oil, people in the US start to starve because food can not move. Basically, it is far better for Iran to have nukes than for US/Israel to attack. BTW - this is assuming that Russia, China and EU don't punish US/Israel for starting the war and bringing on Peak Oil. Also remember all three have nukes. So the reality is, just like the 71%, you totally ignore the consequences of war. You aren't going to like it.

  • 55. 0 0
    #1: spyguy, Freud, and Israelis' "death wish"
    • Thomas Jackson
    • 18.05.07
    • 10:04

    "Talk about delusional with a death wish - that sure describes 71% of the people of Israel." "spyguy" has expressed a thought that has bothered me for decades concerning Israel's apparent "death wish". Since 1967, in particular, it seems that the Israeli body politic has been embarked on a journey toward self-destruction. Why? Is it because political principles that have taken hold since the capture and occupation of Arab lands in the Six-Day War have been inimitable to deepset concepts of morality which are central to Jewish identity? Many (certainly not all) Israelis have adopted positions reflecting racism (or, if you like, "ethnicitism"), religious intolerance, hatred of "the other", and a peculiar indifference to extreme human suffering in their own back yard. Does gross violation of one's own most basic moral ideals lead to indifference about one's own integrity and survival? I would especially appreciate some thoughtful responses about this from Israeli Jews.

  • 54. 0 0
    Israel - Brat Nation
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 09:43

    Israel behaves like a spoilt brat of a child, trying the bend the world to its will.

  • 53. 0 0
    For Shmuelshachor, again # 3
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 09:37

    "Israel w`ll have to give iran a repetition of Osiraq" Do you have any idea of the logistical problems a raid on Iran would pose for Israel? Israel's warplanes would have to overfly Iraq. This would only be possible if the USA gave Israel the transponder codes, otherwise they would be turned back by US jets, which control the skies over Iraq. It's a long journey that would require frequent refuelling, which would necessitate co-operation withe the Americans, which would not be forthcoming. Finally, the payload of those Israeli warplanes that managed to get through would not be heavy enough to do serious damage to all the dispersed and deeply buried Iranian sites. Add in the certainty that the Dimona reactor would rapidly be coverted into a radioactive ruin by an Iranian counterstrike with Shahab-4 long-range missiles. If I were the planners for the Iranians I would also try to destroy Israel's only two oil refinery complexes at Ashdod and Haifa, crippling the Israeli economy.

  • 52. 0 0
    To Jospeh Where did you get this insane
    • Suleiman
    • 18.05.07
    • 09:32

    info ...100% of dictators the normal citizen will be against it ,and may be go to the rescue of iran that is your problem you always guess nothing is sure shia or sunni we have common enemy and beleive me the defference won't make a slightese change

  • 51. 0 0
    American blood
    • Attoo
    • 18.05.07
    • 09:29

    It is strange. American blood, American money and American resources while the main culprit Israel thinks it can enjoy the fight watching from the sidelines. The US managed to enter Iraq only after Iraq was destroyed by the whole world and then starved to death for 13 years. Did the US win after all these? No. No. No. As for Israel, Lebanon's few thousand Gorilla fighters were enough to defeat it. Israel killed innocnet Lebanese civilians and destroyed houses but it lost the war. Attacking Iran is like calling for an end to the human suffering in Palestine. It does not matter who attacks Iran. My prediction is that Iran will concentrate all its power on Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities. I think Hizbollah, Syria, Egypt and all the gulf states will eventually be dragged in to this war. It will be the end of Zionism as we know it because Americans will incur heavy casualties to the point where the American people will hold all Zionists responsible for the war.

  • 50. 0 0
    Another rabid "Shouter Not A Shooter for Israel" # 5
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 09:28

    "a dozen of nukes,and the iranian problem is settled !" There he is, ole Shmuelshachor, tucked away in Rio, far away from all the death and radioactive fallout, drooling for nuclear action. It won't happen, Shmuelshachor. Nuclear weapons will never be used, and certainly not in this context, and certainly not by Israel. Can you imagine the precedent this would set? Have you any idea of the likely consequences for Israel and Jews in the diaspora?

  • 49. 0 0
    71% of Israelis are going to be sadly disappointed
    • Clickfool
    • 18.05.07
    • 09:21

    November 7th 2006 was a momentous day in the history of the Middle East. That was the day George W.Bush had his mandates shot off by the American people.

  • 48. 0 0
    I hope the attack on Iran goes better than Iraq
    • mark Kienan
    • 18.05.07
    • 09:11

    Get real! Look at what is happening in Iraq! The US attacks Iran and we have world war 3. Nothing will militarize and destabilze pakistan, saudi arabia, egypt, jordan like an attack on Iran. Oil will stop. The world economy will be severely disrupted. Israel is certain to be targeted. A better solution is accepting the reality of a muslim middle eastern nation with nuclear weapons and find a political solution. Despite all of Israe'ls nuclear weapons and their readiness to use them in self defense, they are still a very small nation which makes a very easy target to destroy. There is only a political solution to this problem.

  • 47. 0 0
    Wow, 71%!
    • Esther
    • 18.05.07
    • 09:05

    It's really sad that 71% of Israelis can be idiotic. And only 29% choose to be sagatious.

  • 46. 0 0
    Attacking Iran
    • Lightkeeper
    • 18.05.07
    • 09:02

    When it comes to attacking Iran, it will happen. However, because of Israeli track record, their air force will make the first move. They've been practicing for it and the US has given them a corridor over Iraq. Iran's response will probably be to send chemical and biologicals into Israel. Then is when the two US carrier battlefleets that are in the Persian Gulf will respond. And go figure where Israel's four submarines are hanging out right now.

  • 45. 0 0
    Israel's Bitch?
    • Harlan
    • 18.05.07
    • 09:01

    Let Israel fight it's own war! What is the U.S. supposed to do - anything & everything that Israel wants? As disastrous as the Iraq war is, a war w/ Iran would be INFINITELY worse. The Israeli's need to focus on bringing Peace to the Middle East, not constant war. And the U.S. needs to work within its' own borders, fighting crime, drugs, illegal immigration, rampant immorality & focusing on EDUCATION ! WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.

  • 44. 0 0
    And I want Iran + Pakistan+Indonisia+Syria to AirStrike Israel
    • Imad
    • 18.05.07
    • 08:56

    ...To finish with this sh...

  • 43. 0 0
    And I want Iran + Pakistan+Indonisia+Syria to AirStrike Israel
    • Imad
    • 18.05.07
    • 08:56

    ...To finish with this sh...

  • 42. 0 0
    Do 71 % of Americans want to attack Iran because Israelis want
    • Petteri
    • 18.05.07
    • 08:53

    American taxpayers are certainly happy to read news as this. They like to pay Israel's wars.

  • 41. 0 0
    woah wait a min... do it yourself
    • David G
    • 18.05.07
    • 08:24

    As an American and a Jew I will say stright out. If Israel wants to strike Iran then it can do it themselves. The United States will strike if it feels it is in its best intests to do so.

  • 40. 0 0
    Parviz #7
    • Rowan Berkeley
    • 18.05.07
    • 08:00

    Interesting that someone or something pays farsi speakers to sow racial hatred (not even religiously expressed, but quite blatantly racial) in the blogosphere.

  • 39. 0 0
    Spyguy # 19 - Every Moron Predicted The Outcome in Iraq
    • Eli
    • 18.05.07
    • 07:38

    An attack on Iran if carried out sensibly (attack, not occupation) may actually work or at least set back Iran's nuclear program by a few years. Wars are always dangerous and the outcome is never predictable unless there is a decisive defeat. In the case of Iran, the country is so dangerous that it is well worth taking that gamble.

  • 38. 0 0
    If a Poll was Taken In America About whether Or Not
    • Eli
    • 18.05.07
    • 07:31

    Israel should attack Iran, I wonder what percentage would respond "yes". Just a guess, but I would think as much as the Israeli percentage.

  • 37. 0 0
    RE #25. Natalie Durson...No Chance America will attack iran
    • Astasheiks
    • 18.05.07
    • 07:28

    If you think that is the case then I sure like get some of whatever your drinking or smoking...The US has the biggest show of force in the Gulf waters since the start of the Iraq war and you say no chance of an attack. One good slip up of Iran...Think Again!

  • 36. 0 0
    #31 Christian
    • Another Christian
    • 18.05.07
    • 07:26

    That's the will of God. That's right,in the end God will destroy Israel's enemies in Armaggedon.

  • 35. 0 0
    Iraq
    • H M
    • 18.05.07
    • 07:23

    living in Israel during the Golf War, I can 100% understand the Israeli position and somewhat agree with it. Iraq attacked Israel for NO reason, in the long run, the removal of Saddam will stabalize the region (even you left-wing "sissys" can agree with that...). I remember the numerous times I had to go and change my gas mask since that nutjob (saddam HAD chem weapons [used them on the Curds..]) For Israel, the removal of the extremist dictatorship in Iraq was good for overall security, thus it is easy to see why the polls are the way they are. There is no protection against nuclear strikes, Israel, being in numerous wars in the past 50 years (unlike other nations) is scared of nut cases acquiring nuclear weapons . What makes it more scary is that they are not secularized, if a 'scholar' can find it in a holy document that destroying Israel will get you into paradise, chances are they will follow this destructive ideology.

  • 34. 0 0
    I think it should read "Israeli Jews"
    • Scott Hunter
    • 18.05.07
    • 07:06

    How else could you explain "59%"? I mean how many Iraqis were involved in the 9/11 attack? We all know that Chalabi's assessments were Iranian lies, so how come it was "justified"...Iraqis are Arabs??? Is that enough these days, to kill, maim, destroy and occupy innocent people? Does ANYBODY remember when JEWS were on the reciving end of THAT thinking? I mean Anybody??!?

  • 33. 0 0
    Parviz
    • Leslie Duffey
    • 18.05.07
    • 07:04

    Parviz, I assume by your language, that you are speaking on behalf of the Iranian people. So, I have a question for you, Who excactly are the Arab invaders of the middle east you are referring to? and who are the Arab chickens? and who are the liars and thieves now living in the U.S.A.?(Paul wolfowitz)?(george bush and dick cheney were born here).and who do you think you are? speaking on behalf of the Iranian peoples? better luck next time traitor.

  • 32. 0 0
    #26 Clickfan
    • Clickfoe
    • 18.05.07
    • 07:01

    Don't be too sure of Iran going nuclear.You might be disappointed!!!!

  • 31. 0 0
    Isral
    • christian
    • 18.05.07
    • 06:58

    The one thing people forget..Isreals fate is laid out in th bible...if you study prophecy from the begining till now you will see what must happen , and we are on the brink of the Gog magog war...end result Israel wins.

  • 30. 0 0
    Spyguy's calculation
    • Infidel
    • 18.05.07
    • 06:57

    "Iran has 80 million people and there are a over a billion Muslims in the world, what do these Israelis think these people will do after the bombs fall?" Spyguy, I am not too good in calculation.Maybe you will enlighten me. How many infidels are there in this world as compare to muslims? 4 or 5 billions!!!Do not fan the fire or it may get out of hand and remember no one race or religion will be able to rule this world. Let's come together and work towards peace.Live and let live!!!!!

  • 29. 0 0
    Iran is not stable, it can be taken out
    • Jake
    • 18.05.07
    • 06:48

    Iran is no where near as strong as people here make it out to be. Its military is backward. It is ethnically divided (only 45% are ethnic persians). It has a semi dictatorship since most Iranians do not support the current government. It has virtually no airforce, ect... The Iranians are scared of fighting, but then again so is the US, Israel, and the West, since no one knows the consquences. The issue comes down to whether or not to allow Iran to go Nuculear. If pushed hard enough the will not, if not they will. After they are nuculear their influence will increase. Are other powers willing to accept that?

  • 28. 0 0
    71% of Israelis want Us to strike Iran
    • Yentel
    • 18.05.07
    • 06:35

    The Iranian people are not our enemy it is their government that is,I hope that the sanctions will hurt their economy so bad that the people will finally have enough of this regime and they will rise up and throw them out. If this does not happen and we (the west cannot help them to overthrow their regime then something must be done to stop them(the religious fanitoc there from getting nukes. Too bad we don't have a pulse beam weapon that could stop all their electric power immediately that way they couldn't push any buttons to send their weapons of destruction this way and to their arab enemies in the middle east as well,if Iran is struck there will be alot of damage done to other countries in the middle east besides Israel,I just hope and pray we can survive that senerio especially with the leaders that we have in office here!

  • 27. 0 0
    Ahmadinejad Hasn't Budged One Inch
    • Yosemite
    • 18.05.07
    • 06:26

    So if it's a go, it's a go. Just take my advice, if it's war then blow that photo of Ahmadinejad shaking hands with David Duke really big. Then, on the other side show Duke in his KKK uniform. That'll show the world what kind of guy Ahmadinejad is. The kind of guy that shakes hands with White Supremists. Play the race card boys. It'll work 100% guaranteed!

  • 26. 0 0
    Iran Will Go Nuclear
    • Clickfan
    • 18.05.07
    • 06:24

    Nothing will stop Iran from going nuclear. They have pretty much mastered the technology while the US is distracted in a war that Israel and its cronies pushed us into. If faced with technical glitches, the iranians can count on sympathetic Pakistani brothers for help. Attacking Iran now will cause them to withdraw from NPT. They can now produce and assemble 164 centrifuges per week (~9000/yr). They can hide them at different sites (3000/site) and produce HEU for 5-6 bombs per year. Without inspections, it is hard to discover all such sites. The US and West better focus on dialogue and impleneting effective monitoring of Iran's nuclear sites. Israel should rely on their nuclear deterrent, but should also stop occupying and humiliatiin the Palestinians to reduce hatred and anomisity for generations to come. Start serious negotiations with the Arabs based on the Saudi plan. They days of bullying others are pretty much over!!!!

  • 25. 0 0
    No Chance America will attack iran
    • Natallie Durson
    • 18.05.07
    • 06:21

    Americas Iraq war was a mistake without justification. No WMD were ever found. Bush is mired in a war that the American people want no part of and mighty efforts are being made to end American involvement regardless of the consequences. There is no chance at all that America will make any attack upon Iran unless Iran actually attacks America first.

  • 24. 0 0
    11 Ed - Another armchair general that vastly
    • spyguy
    • 18.05.07
    • 06:05

    underestimates Iran and vastly over estimates the might of the US and Israel. This is the same hubris that has gotten the US into the quicksand of Iraq and Vietnam, got Hitler defeated at Stalingrad and so on throughout history. Iran fought Iraq to a standstill even though Iraq had the might of the US military behind it, including prohibited weapons Iraq got from the US. As a result of that war, Iraq has built up its own weapons industry and sells many of its product on the open market. There are many reliable sources that disagree with your view of Iran military capability, among them, the US CIA. Iran will NOT be a pushover and will have a very deadly response to any attack. US generals have already expressed deep reservations about any attack on Iran. you might want to wonder why they don't share your rosy viewpoint.

  • 23. 0 0
    10 Saba - Starting a war because you think
    • spyguy
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:56

    someone else might, is a sure way to end up with some very negative consequences. You have no way to know what Iran might do in the future, but it is highly probable that Iran will NOT attack Israel. As for what will happen after the bombs fall on Iran, I can guarantee they are NOT going to be submissive. They are going to want all the Israeli and US blood they can get. Are you prepared to die for Israel? As rabid a defender of Israel as you are, bombed Iranians are going to be even more rabid. If you think your passion and weapons are a match for their passion and weapons, go for it - I will watch to see how long before Israel dies, which it surely will. Sun Tzu pointer out several thousand years ago, never pick a fight when compromise will work better.

  • 22. 0 0
    How many thinks that Israel should attack
    • Scott Hunter
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:51

    Iran if negotiations fail? That is a question that is obviously to sensitive to publish. 5% 10%...40% it's bound to be less than that 71% who thinks that the US should do Israels dirty work.

  • 21. 0 0
    #8 Ed
    • HK
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:51

    Ed you are as ignorant as they get, Iran is 15% desert in the southern region. The war with Iraq was from 1980-1988, it was the longest modern war in the twentieth century, yes even longer than WWII for USA, Iran lost 500K people Iraq lost about another 400K, Iraq used chemical weapons provided by Europe and Rumsfeld. Obviously you cannot get to school with all that snow blocking your carriages for schoolbuses in Canada (sarcasm). Go worship your queen in England, and please quit embarrasing your fellow citizens. Its cool you don't like the Iranians, but do not use ignorant unresearched comments, its make it easier to shoot you down like it will be Israeli F-16's.

  • 20. 0 0
    Dumb poll
    • Jon
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:50

    Why is this a headline? Of course Israelis want the US to strike Iran, Iran is an existential threat to Israel. What's next, 71% don't like paying taxes? 71% expect to die at some point? This is shlock journalism. It also happens to make Israel look bad to Americans who don't understand and think it's the Jews trying to drag them into another war.

  • 19. 0 0
    #8 ADK - It appears that you have not kept up
    • spyguy
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:47

    on the news. Virtually every negative thing that was predicted to happen to the US after it invaded Iraq has happened and worse. The US has severely crippled its own military (even the USAF and Navy because they have been "lending" people to the Army and the Marines to fill in for nonexistent people). Attacking Iran will be 100 times worse for the US than Iraq.

  • 18. 0 0
    FYI - Pakistan ALREADY has nukes
    • spyguy
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:41

    No one has been able to explain to me why Israel is so concerned about Iran having nukes when Pakistan already has nukes and a very vulnerable government. Not only that but the boogie man Al Qaeda is freely operating in Pakistan. Sounds to me like Pakistan is a bigger threat to Israel than Iran. The bottom line is the consequences of an attack on Iran are so much more negative than Iran having nukes (which they will get whether they are attacked or not), it is time to Israel and the US to just learn to live with reality. BTW - Iran is not going to attack Israel unless Israel attacks Iran first. So all you folks advocating an attack on Iran really need to get over your mental illness and live in the real world.

  • 17. 0 0
    to iranian
    • doesnt matter
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:40

    its diferent to catch a harmless kassam with 20 sec flight time, than a long range, we have the capability and we have the nukes, its a reason iran have not try it.

  • 16. 0 0
    71% of Israelis want US to nuke Iran
    • Ralph
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:39

    If Israel thinks that Iran should be attacked, I say: "Go Israel!". What kind of a country would expect the US to attack another country for their benefit? Israel has nukes and the delivery systems. If they want Iran hit, they should have the guts to do it themselves. After 60 years, it is time that Israel solo and get out of the nest and join the club of nations.

  • 15. 0 0
    to the SF guy who thinks he's a spy
    • alan
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:25

    It is absolutely true to say that there will be serious consequences. But your point would be valid if the numbers make a difference. The issue is that Iran is chanting and calling openely for the genocide of entire nations: "death to america, death to israel etc..." Do you really think the world is going to let Iran be as vicious and perverse as they are any longer? It is not the world's fault if some islamo-fascists organizations ruling, for instance, the great nation of persia while threatening anyhting that is not islamist. However it is the world's responsibility to ensure that Iran never get what is needs to threaten other nations with other beliefs than Allah. We, members of the free world, and contrary to what ou think, will have a very strong and powerful international coalition to strike Iran.

  • 14. 0 0
    Ed in Canada
    • Leslie Duffey
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:24

    Ed, wow, you sound just like the Bush admin. right before the ill fated "shock and awe" campaign in Iraq. I suppose you still believe Iraq is still holding weapons of mass destruction.

  • 13. 0 0
    100% of muslims Sunnis want U.S. and Israel to strike Iran if tal
    • Joseph E .
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:20

    ks fail , Israel should Strike Iran if talks fail, US cannot strike Iran if talks fail, US won't , US has to many problems of its own , Muslims Sunnis can cooperate with Israel if talks fail , Talk will fail , Saudia, Egypt and Gulf States really don't want Iran to have nukes ,

  • 12. 0 0
    A Prediction
    • Jon Lenz
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:16

    Now that Wolfowitz has imploded at the World Bank, the neoncons and the infamous Jewish Lobby are going to offload him as the key emissary for 'taking out Iran'. Prediction: he's either going to end up at AIPAC, at the Saban Center, the ADL, the WJC, or some other similar offshoot...

  • 11. 0 0
    Spyguy: how was Iraq's might different from
    • Ed
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:13

    that of Iran ? Since you have such an insight, let me clue you in. The last time Iran was at war they lost a million people. They have not had any war experience for 30 years, use antiquated equipment and have idiots for leaders. On top of that, the entire country is a desert safe for 10-15 cities housing most of the population. The whole country of Iran can be collapsed with the a couple of weeks, that is, if it becomes necessary. I for one, do not want it to happen and believe that it may not be required if the West is prepared to impose tough economic sanctions. However, if you believe that a nuclear Iran is OK you should stop spying in San Francisco and take a Reality Check Course 101 at Burkley.

  • 10. 0 0
    Stop being so liberal
    • Saba
    • 18.05.07
    • 05:06

    After the bombs fall they will finally realize that talks are over! What do you think the consequences of Iran with the nucs will be? Trust me if we do not start first THEY will

  • 9. 0 0
    if 71% of Iranians think ..
    • Iranian
    • 18.05.07
    • 04:59

    God forbid the day when %71 of Iranians demand their government to act militarily against Israel. Total destruction will be upon Israel. You people be realistic. Iran absorbed millions of bombs during the 8-year war, with cities after cities falatten out by massive bombardment and direct artillary fire and yet Iranian fought without a second thought. Don't you put yourself into something you can not handle. Iran will crush Israel in pieces in a matter of days. There are people here in Iran who are craving for an attack to have a reason to destroy Israel, don't make their number reach even beyond %50. I wish you were more sane. First see if you could take care of Qassams raining down on Sedort.

  • 8. 0 0
    # 1 Spyguy
    • Adrian de Klerk
    • 18.05.07
    • 04:57

    People were saying that when the US invaded Iraq. But nothing happened. Also there are a lot of nations that do not like Iran eg Iraq, the Saudi's are very suspicious towards Iran as is Lebanon

  • 7. 0 0
    To spyguy the Hezbollahi farsi speaking arab
    • Parviz
    • 18.05.07
    • 04:41

    There will be no response from Iranian nation toward Israel. The only response will be the Destruction of your Hezbolahi noniranian invaders by the Iranian nation. The history has proven that you arab invaders of Middle East can only harm the honest and the weak. You are a bunch of liers and thives you are now living in USA and already planning the invasion of USA the way you have occupied Iran. Jamesh kon joojeh arab (rap it up arab chicken). Doorood bar Iran Lanat bar hezbollah. Parviz / Iran

  • 6. 0 0
    Sorry, this won't happen
    • bb
    • 18.05.07
    • 04:16

    The US is up to its neck in Iraq, the war is a disaster, and the American public is against it. Do you think they would sanction opening up a new war against Iran? I don't think so.

  • 5. 0 0
    to "spyguy" on #1
    • Shmuelshachor
    • 18.05.07
    • 04:16

    Israel can't afford iran to have nuclear capability.So can't the saudis,kuwaitis and the other Gulf States...It depends on what kind of war heads we deliver to them...This requires something much heavier than conventional...a dozen of nukes,and the iranian problem is settled !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • 4. 0 0
    surprising or not?
    • Wes
    • 18.05.07
    • 04:13

    The results of the poll concerning Iraq and Iran just show how Israeli's think differently than the majority of the rest of the world. They still think eveything they wish for can be achieved by force.

  • 3. 0 0
    71% want
    • Shmuelshachor
    • 18.05.07
    • 04:06

    Israel w'll have to give iran a repetition of Osiraq...The USA have their hands full with iraq,and the Gov w'll not take risks during the election campaign...It'll have to be the sword of Gideon,and it's pretty feasable!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • 2. 0 0
    Neat
    • JJ
    • 18.05.07
    • 04:05

    Most Israelis still believe Iraq war was justified | Most Israelis want US to strike Iran (if talks fail) | Most Israelis find Bush 'friendly'... I think that most Israelis don't live on the same planet as the rest of humanity. JJ

  • 1. 0 0
    71% of the people in Israel are insane
    • spyguy
    • 18.05.07
    • 03:23

    Do these people realize that every action has consequences, both intended and UNINTENDED? Do they have a clue about what the likely consequences of an attack on Iran would be? Do they think that after the first bomb falls the Iranians will hold up their hands and yell "we didn't mean to make you mad?" Do they realize that attacking Iran is choosing certain death for their neighbors and maybe them? Israel and the US are not the all-powerful warriors they think they are. Israel has ZERO friends in the world and the US has only a few more. The blow-back from a US/Israel attack on Iran would be swift and very deadly for Israel and to a slightly lesser extent the US. Iran has 80 million people and there are a over a billion Muslims in the world, what do these Israelis think these people will do after the bombs fall? Talk about delusional with a death wish - that sure describes 71% of the people of Israel.