International Israel - Iran Conflict: PEACE DEAL CONFIRMED

Choose the following that best describes your position


  • Total voters
    362
  • Poll closed .

The Iron Dome is responsibly for a tiny amount of the total missiles intercepted by Israel's air defenses, and furthermore, American interceptors apparently played a much larger role in the last 48 hours in intercepting missiles. So even if this claim is true it is virtually meaningless.

I deem reports like this as spurious as the headlines you see about "anonymous US officials" saying that Israel is running low on interceptor missiles because the "US has known they were low on stock for months." First, there's no reason they would have been low, they haven't been engaged in a particularly high rate of defense, and second, it makes no sense Israel would undertake their campaign against Iran knowing their own stocks were low at the outset. They clearly prepared for years for this offensive. They would have stockpiled accordingly.

The same unnamed Israeli source of the 65% figure, asserted that, "More importantly, the Iranians do have a navigation system for the final phase of the attack that helps them to be very precise and to attack exactly the targets that they wish, like the hospital today in Beersheba.”

LOL, the Iranians can't hit anything on purpose. They're desperately trying to hit anything they can. If they come within 5km of their intended target that's good enough, we've already seen dozens of missiles land out in the ocean. I do find it ironically humorous that the Israelis are now hissing they will charge Iran for a "war crime" because of this. Uh, hello? How many times have you guys hit a Palestinian medical complex because you "missed"?

The navigation system Iran has implemented, only on its most sophisticated missiles, apparently changes the trajectory of the missile at the last second. That isn't to be more precise, the purpose is so that the missile is more likely to evade an intercepting missile.

This unnamed source is spewing propaganda aimed at Americans in the hopes to provoke more aid. It's military aid grifting.
 
Well, a change in the poll's question showed a serious shift, but it's still apparent Sherdog is deeply anti-Israeli comparative to the greater US population.

Because the WaPo has been running a poll with what would have been the original poll question, one for which Sherdog was at 13-148 (19%-81%) and the split between those for vs. those against is more favorable to Israel in the WaPo general poll (36%-64% if we eliminate the "unsure") than the modified, second question on Sherdog (32%-78% if we roll up the two pro-war options together):

Nevertheless, it's clear that Americans broadly do not support American military offensive intervention against Iran. The margin is roughly 2 to 1 against. So if Trump goes to war, it will truly be "Trump's war", because it definitely won't be the American people's.
I find Sherdog is a better barometer on reality than any polling institution. I’m being 100% serious.
 
Being proud of sending your child to go fight and die for politicians is the most cowardly disgusting thing you could do as a parent.

It's different if the enemy is on your doorstep, don't even try that argument.

You and your son will be pawns for old dirty politicians and bankers. Remember that while you're cheering on sending your kid to die for some bs
Shame on me for even mentioning my kid in here that was dumb. Really was stupid in saying something real about my kid - thats on me . Nice wording twists though. Im a ignore this thread before it ramps up another notch an i get banned.

Will just say in closing my thought here ....... you bet your ass Im proud of him. Worked his ass off to not only maintain good grades but also do ROTC for a career in Army . As a father i wish he didn't want it as a career he could be more successful as civilian. But I am VERY damn proud of him for his career choice whether his mother and I are the happiest about it or not neither one of us could be more proud.
 
Shame on me for even mentioning my kid in here that was dumb. Really was stupid in saying something real about my kid - thats on me . Nice wording twists though. Im a ignore this thread before it ramps up another notch an i get banned.

Will just say in closing my thought here ....... you bet your ass Im proud of him. Worked his ass off to not only maintain good grades but also do ROTC for a career in Army . As a father i wish he didn't want it as a career he could be more successful as civilian. But I am VERY damn proud of him for his career choice whether his mother and I are the happiest about it or not neither one of us could be more proud.

Just pray he isn't used up and spit out like the countless other vets after Bush was done with his Iraq war and the others with Afghanistan. Real heroes
 
It’s nothing like Iraq wmd. Again, here we KNOW they have near weapons grade uranium that can be converted to weapons grade in days.

IAEA is saying they “can not affirm”. They don’t have evidence. And if Iran wanted to suppress evidence, they pretty easily could and would.

But hey, give Iran the benefit of the doubt that they are producing weapons grade uranium but have only good intentions.
Really?

You cant see the parrarells in the rhetoric? Because i disagree..


'Axis of Evil' ::: Jan. 29, 2002
President Bush accuses Iraq of being part of an international "axis if evil" during his State of the Union address. Bush tells Congress:
"Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax and nerve gas and nuclear weapons for over a decade … This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world."
Material Breach' ::: Nov. 8, 2002
U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 says Iraq "remains in material breach of its obligations" under various U.N. resolutions and gives the country "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament" commitments.



The U.N. Moves Back In ::: Nov. 27, 2002
UNMOVIC and IAEA inspections begin again in Iraq, almost four years after the departure of inspectors prior to Operation Desert Fox.

No 'Smoking Guns' ::: Jan. 9, 2003
UNMOVIC's Hans Blix and the IAEA's Director General Mohamed ElBaradei report their findings to the U.N. Security Council. Blix says inspectors have not found any "smoking guns" in Iraq. ElBaradei reports that aluminum tubes suspected by the U.S. to be components for uranium enrichment are more likely to be parts for rockets, as the Iraqis claim. John Negroponte, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., says:
"There is still no evidence that Iraq has fundamentally changed its approach from one of deceit to a genuine attempt to be forthcoming in meeting the council's demand that it disarm."
Sixteen Words ::: Jan. 28, 2003
In his State of the Union address, President Bush continues to view Iraq is a WMD threat. He makes a statement that implies Iraq is trying to develop nuclear weapons. Bush says:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
It comes to light later that the president based his statement on discredited intelligence.
Powell's U.N. Appearance ::: Feb. 5, 2003
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell goes in person to the U.N. to make the case against Iraq. Citing evidence obtained by American intelligence, he tells the U.N. that Iraq has failed "to come clean and disarm." Powell adds:
"My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence."
Another disproven " fact "




The Burden is on Iraq ::: Feb. 14, 2003
The IAEA's ElBaradei and chief weapons inspector Blix report to the U.N. Security Council on Iraqi cooperation in the search for WMD. They say they have not discovered any biological, chemical or nuclear weapons activities. Proscribed missile programs are discovered and disabled. Blix does express frustration with Iraq's failure to account for its vast stores of chemical and biological agents it was known to have at one point. Blix says:
"This is perhaps the most important problem we are facing. Although I can understand that it may not be easy for Iraq in all cases to provide the evidence needed, it is not the task of the inspectors to find it."
U.S. vs. U.N. ::: March 6-7, 2003
The night before Blix and ElBaradei are to report on inspection efforts in Iraq, President Bush gives a news conference in which he again says Iraq is hiding something. Bush says:
"These are not the actions of a regime that is disarming. These are the actions of a regime engaged in a willful charade. These are the actions of a regime that systematically and deliberately is defying the world."

Blix tells the U.N. the next day:
"Intelligence authorities have claimed that weapons of mass destruction are moved around Iraq by trucks, in particular that there are mobile production units for biological weapons … [But] no evidence of proscribed activities have so far been found."
Appearing with Blix, ElBaradei tells the U.N. that the IAEA has concluded that documents appearing to show Iraq shopping for uranium in Niger are, in fact, forgeries.

Invading Iraq ::: March 20, 2003
The U.S. military and other members of an American-led coalition invade Iraq. Baghdad falls on April 9. President Bush declares an end to major combat operations on May 1. Shortly afterward, the Pentagon announces formation of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) to search for WMD.

No Weapons Found ::: Oct. 2, 2003
After three months of looking, Iraq Survey Group (ISG) inspector David Kay tells Congress in an interim report that his American team of weapons inspectors has yet to find any evidence of WMD. Kay says:
"We have not yet found stocks of weapons, but we are not yet at the point where we can say definitively either that such weapon stocks do not exist, or that they existed before the war."
 
A White House spokesman told Fox that the US Air Force has no doubts about the effectiveness of "bunker bombs" to destroy the uranium enrichment plant in Iran's Fordow, but all options (including tactical nuclear weapons) are "not off the table" for use against Tehran's nuclear facilities.

damn it, iran might have now an argument on why they must build a nuclear weapon
It'd be good to see any intelligence on what potential fallout would be from wrecking that facility. Does anyone but the Iranians even know how much radioactive material is down there? Hopefully the subterrainian aspect of it would contain much of the spread (I'm reminded of the movie Broken Arrow) it could be a big unknown what lasting impacts its destruction would yield.
 
Last edited:
Really?

You cant see the parrarells in the rhetoric? Because i disagree..


'Axis of Evil' ::: Jan. 29, 2002
President Bush accuses Iraq of being part of an international "axis if evil" during his State of the Union address. Bush tells Congress:
"Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax and nerve gas and nuclear weapons for over a decade … This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world."
Material Breach' ::: Nov. 8, 2002
U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 says Iraq "remains in material breach of its obligations" under various U.N. resolutions and gives the country "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament" commitments.



The U.N. Moves Back In ::: Nov. 27, 2002
UNMOVIC and IAEA inspections begin again in Iraq, almost four years after the departure of inspectors prior to Operation Desert Fox.

No 'Smoking Guns' ::: Jan. 9, 2003
UNMOVIC's Hans Blix and the IAEA's Director General Mohamed ElBaradei report their findings to the U.N. Security Council. Blix says inspectors have not found any "smoking guns" in Iraq. ElBaradei reports that aluminum tubes suspected by the U.S. to be components for uranium enrichment are more likely to be parts for rockets, as the Iraqis claim. John Negroponte, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., says:
"There is still no evidence that Iraq has fundamentally changed its approach from one of deceit to a genuine attempt to be forthcoming in meeting the council's demand that it disarm."
Sixteen Words ::: Jan. 28, 2003
In his State of the Union address, President Bush continues to view Iraq is a WMD threat. He makes a statement that implies Iraq is trying to develop nuclear weapons. Bush says:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
It comes to light later that the president based his statement on discredited intelligence.
Powell's U.N. Appearance ::: Feb. 5, 2003
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell goes in person to the U.N. to make the case against Iraq. Citing evidence obtained by American intelligence, he tells the U.N. that Iraq has failed "to come clean and disarm." Powell adds:
"My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence."
Another disproven " fact "




The Burden is on Iraq ::: Feb. 14, 2003
The IAEA's ElBaradei and chief weapons inspector Blix report to the U.N. Security Council on Iraqi cooperation in the search for WMD. They say they have not discovered any biological, chemical or nuclear weapons activities. Proscribed missile programs are discovered and disabled. Blix does express frustration with Iraq's failure to account for its vast stores of chemical and biological agents it was known to have at one point. Blix says:
"This is perhaps the most important problem we are facing. Although I can understand that it may not be easy for Iraq in all cases to provide the evidence needed, it is not the task of the inspectors to find it."
U.S. vs. U.N. ::: March 6-7, 2003
The night before Blix and ElBaradei are to report on inspection efforts in Iraq, President Bush gives a news conference in which he again says Iraq is hiding something. Bush says:
"These are not the actions of a regime that is disarming. These are the actions of a regime engaged in a willful charade. These are the actions of a regime that systematically and deliberately is defying the world."

Blix tells the U.N. the next day:
"Intelligence authorities have claimed that weapons of mass destruction are moved around Iraq by trucks, in particular that there are mobile production units for biological weapons … [But] no evidence of proscribed activities have so far been found."
Appearing with Blix, ElBaradei tells the U.N. that the IAEA has concluded that documents appearing to show Iraq shopping for uranium in Niger are, in fact, forgeries.

Invading Iraq ::: March 20, 2003
The U.S. military and other members of an American-led coalition invade Iraq. Baghdad falls on April 9. President Bush declares an end to major combat operations on May 1. Shortly afterward, the Pentagon announces formation of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) to search for WMD.

No Weapons Found ::: Oct. 2, 2003
After three months of looking, Iraq Survey Group (ISG) inspector David Kay tells Congress in an interim report that his American team of weapons inspectors has yet to find any evidence of WMD. Kay says:
"We have not yet found stocks of weapons, but we are not yet at the point where we can say definitively either that such weapon stocks do not exist, or that they existed before the war."
Except Iran has near weapons grade uranium. Which has 1 purpose.
 
This week alone Israel has spent 65% of all it's Arrow 2 and 3 air defense missile stockpile and 70% of all it's David Sling's stockpile. They are already mostly relying on foreign air defenses mostly brought by the americans, patriot and thaad

The Iron Dome is responsibly for a tiny amount of the total missiles intercepted by Israel's air defenses, and furthermore, American interceptors apparently played a much larger role in the last 48 hours in intercepting missiles. So even if this claim is true it is virtually meaningless.

I deem reports like this as spurious as the headlines you see about "anonymous US officials" saying that Israel is running low on interceptor missiles because the "US has known they were low on stock for months." First, there's no reason they would have been low, they haven't been engaged in a particularly high rate of defense, and second, it makes no sense Israel would undertake their campaign against Iran knowing their own stocks were low at the outset. They clearly prepared for years for this offensive. They would have stockpiled accordingly.

The same unnamed Israeli source of the 65% figure, asserted that, "More importantly, the Iranians do have a navigation system for the final phase of the attack that helps them to be very precise and to attack exactly the targets that they wish, like the hospital today in Beersheba.”

LOL, the Iranians can't hit anything on purpose. They're desperately trying to hit anything they can. If they come within 5km of their intended target that's good enough, we've already seen dozens of missiles land out in the ocean. I do find it ironically humorous that the Israelis are now hissing they will charge Iran for a "war crime" because of this. Uh, hello? How many times have you guys hit a Palestinian medical complex because you "missed"?

The navigation system Iran has implemented, only on its most sophisticated missiles, apparently changes the trajectory of the missile at the last second. That isn't to be more precise, the purpose is so that the missile is more likely to evade an intercepting missile.

This unnamed source is spewing propaganda aimed at Americans in the hopes to provoke more aid. It's military aid grifting.
What happened to the laser defense system we saw used on/after 10/7? I forget the name of it but haven't seen any videos of it in action in this latest skirmish.
 

The July 1st spike is baked-in and happens every year to us as a side effect of the cap and trade system unfortunately. California leadership claims current high prices are "because we have to refine the cleanest fuel in the country" which is BS because Arizona and Nevada also are held to the same standard, but have far lower prices concurrently.

But aside from that, yes, it would suck even harder if a worldwide Iranian shortage of supply even further increased our prices.
 
It'd be good to see any intelligence on what potential fallout would be from wrecking that facility. Does any but the Iranians even know how much radioactive material is down there? Hopefully the subterrainian aspect of it would contain much of the spread (I'm reminded of the movie Broken Arrow) it could be a big unknown what lasting impacts its destruction would yield.

So far according go IAEA radiation levels even in the bombed Natanz have remained unchanged above ground level. Mainly because Israeli jets have only targeted power stations which supplied electricity to the underground facility. According to Grossi the biggest risks so far are chemical for eventual workers going inside Natanz and they must not inhale uranium compounds and should use respiratory protection. So far strikes have been away from the places where fission is done. Only insane people would hit fission sites as they are very dangerous and pose direct crimes against humanity.
 
Back
Top