dreamdancer 0 #1 March 23, 2009 wow! israel has nuclear armed submarines. why? QuoteIsrael is widely believed to be the sixth country in the world to develop nuclear weapons and to be one of four nuclear-armed countries not recognized as a Nuclear Weapons State by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the others being India, Pakistan and North Korea. International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei regards Israel as a state possessing nuclear weapons. Israel is currently believed to possess between 75 and 200 nuclear warheads with the ability to deliver them by ground, aircraft, and submarine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israelstay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #2 March 23, 2009 Quote wow! israel has nuclear armed submarines. why? For the same reason we do; Mutual Assured Destruction. It's amazingly difficult to know for certain where a nuclear armed submarine is. Since it's hard to know where it is, it's difficult to attack it first to ensure that it can't fire back at your country. Nuclear armed submarines play an important role in the nuclear stability of a country and especially when talking about a country like Israel that is surrounded by neighbors that want to destroy it.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #3 March 23, 2009 presumably these warheads are targeted at tehran, beirut, riyadh - where their 'enemies' live?stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #4 March 23, 2009 Quotepresumably these warheads are targeted at tehran, beirut, riyadh - where their 'enemies' live? I'm nearly certain they can be targeted to where ever they need to go within range of the submarine. It's not like "Missile A" only has a map of Bagdad and "Missile B" only has a map of Cairo.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #5 March 23, 2009 neither of these places has nuclear weapons - nor any other of israel's 'enemies'. this means that mad doesn't apply - if israel uses nuclear weapons it is 'first strike' by definition.stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #6 March 23, 2009 Quote Nuclear armed submarines play an important role in the nuclear stability of a country and especially when talking about a country like Israel that is surrounded by neighbors that want to destroy it. It's especially critical for a nation as small as Israel where you can't ensure a land based counterstrike would survive an attack. Personally I suspect the warhead count is well in excess of 200. (relative) Peace through Strength - Reagan's motto is proven true there. The first time they armed their warheads was the last time an Arab nation engaged in a full scale attack. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #7 March 23, 2009 How certain are you that none of Israel's enemies do not have nuclear weapons? Do you have some first hand knowledge of the nuclear capabilities of all the countries in the middle east? Pakistan absolutely has nuclear capabilities. The two cities listed above were not intended to imply that missiles were targeted specifically at them nor they they posed a specific threat. In fact, the exact opposite is true.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #8 March 23, 2009 so israel was, and presumably still is, ready to do a nuclear 'first strike'.stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #9 March 23, 2009 Quotepresumably these warheads are targeted at tehran, beirut, riyadh - where their 'enemies' live? In the 80s it was found that Israel was stealing maps from the CIA for use in targetting the USSR. I suspect that at this time, they do not have any preselected for such use. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #10 March 23, 2009 but if they armed them who were they targeted at? who were they threatening with a first strike?stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #11 March 23, 2009 you can stop feeding the trolls "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #12 March 23, 2009 Quotebut if they armed them who were they targeted at? who were they threatening with a first strike? If you load a gun and hide it somewhere for future use does that mean it's pointed at somebody now? Does it mean you intend to use it first? No. It only means you're prepared to use it, presumably on who ever attack you.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #13 March 23, 2009 but no-one who is 'attacking' israel has nuclear weapons. so there is no mad scenario - just a threatened israeli first strike.stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #14 March 23, 2009 Quoteso israel was, and presumably still is, ready to do a nuclear 'first strike'. any nuclear power can engage in a first strike, though Israel has said for decades it will not be the first to introduce nukes into conflict, however ambiguous that statement is. What you can be quite sure of is that it will not hold back on usage if it means many of its citizens will be killed. If Hussein had loaded chemical weapons onto the Scuds he launched in 1991 (as he threatened), Israel may very well have used its nukes. Calling that a first strike is a bit nebulous. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,471 #15 March 23, 2009 >but no-one who is 'attacking' israel has nuclear weapons. Iran is trying. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #16 March 23, 2009 but still won't have them for another decade and israel has been nuclear armed since 1973.stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #17 March 23, 2009 Quotebut still won't have them for another decade and israel has been nuclear armed since 1973. So, they've have them for over 35 years and haven't used them for a "first strike" yet. How does this support your point that they're on the brink of using them? You're not making much sense here.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #18 March 23, 2009 wrong about that - it was 1968 when they got their first warhead and 1973 when they got these: QuoteSeymour Hersh reports that Israel developed the ability to miniaturize warheads small enough to fit in a suitcase by the year 1973. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israelstay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,471 #19 March 23, 2009 >but still won't have them for another decade . . . Or they may have them in six months. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #20 March 23, 2009 QuoteThe first time they armed their warheads was the last time an Arab nation engaged in a full scale attack. when did this arming take place?stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tonyhays 86 #21 March 23, 2009 Quotebut still won't have them for another decade Doesn't sound that way to me...http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0302/p99s01-wome.html Quoteisrael has been nuclear armed since 1973. And your point is??? After the six day war when everyone tried to gang up on Israel, I don't blame them one bit. If I was going down I would try and take everyone else with me!“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #22 March 23, 2009 Quote >but still won't have them for another decade . . . Or they may have them in six months. but israel definitely has them (so no mad scenario yet - chemical weapons are not nuclear)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #23 March 23, 2009 Quotebut no-one who is 'attacking' israel has nuclear weapons. so there is no mad scenario - just a threatened israeli first strike. No on who is 'attacking' the US has nuclear weapons either. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #24 March 23, 2009 QuoteQuotebut still won't have them for another decade Doesn't sound that way to me...http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0302/p99s01-wome.html Quoteisrael has been nuclear armed since 1973. And your point is??? After the six day war when everyone tried to gang up on Israel, I don't blame them one bit. If I was going down I would try and take everyone else with me! so you would endorse a nuclear first strike by israel? which cities would you have targeted - occupied jerusalem?stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tonyhays 86 #25 March 23, 2009 Where did I say I would endorse a nuclear first strike? I think Israel having nukes is a good deterrent for other countries invading.“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
