Lets say Israel decides to do some espionage inside Iran and Iran finds the soldiers and captures them....Iran captures them treats them like how P.O.Ws should treat them in the Geneva convention..and do not issue any retalitory acts...would Israel be just to attack Iran like they did Iran?....I say no.....cuz the soldiers were in Iranian soil not vice versa and although Iran vocally threatend Israels security Israel actually threatend it with military action
2006-07-31 11:23:04 · 13 answers · asked by Darkness 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I meant to say "Attack Iran like they attacked Lebanon"
2006-07-31 11:23:38 · update #1
No they would have no right to attack Iran simply because they where trespassing on the Iranian soil, but in saying that the Israeli's have become so stupid lately they will attack anyone they looks at them funny, personally i think that the UN should move into southern Lebanon to protect the people living there, then lets see if Israel has the balls to kill UN peace keepers , I'm sure if the US and UN stood up to these wankers the war will stop, bye the way I'm not backing anyone side I'm neutral, but i can see mass murder when it happens!!!!
2006-07-31 11:42:33 · answer #1 · answered by diablo0470 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
first off, i highly doubt that iran would follow the neveva conventions on treatment of POWs, although they should b/c they are an actual military and not an insurgency. but no i don't think israel has the right to attack iran for capturing israeli soldiers on iranian soil. thats what you do when foreign soldiers are cought in your country up to no good. i think israel would lose alot of its support if they did any such thing. iran would actually be justified for attacking israel if such an even occured. i doubt iran would though.
2006-07-31 18:32:54 · answer #2 · answered by doc 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Retaliation is like other forms of punishment - it is most effective when it fits the crime. Hezbollah sends rockets into Israel. Israel is justified in doing what's necessary to stop it. Kidnapping soldiers was just the trigger that both sides participated in pulling.
If there was a way to attack Iran that would stop Hezbollah, and not do Israel more harm than good, they would attack Iran. But not to rescue any spies otherwise.
2006-07-31 18:31:45 · answer #3 · answered by Grist 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the Israeli soldiers were captured on Iranian soil, and were treated in accord with the rules governing treatment of prisoners, then Israel would have no grounds to retaliate. I mean, if Mexican soldiers were captures on US soil, would Mexico have the right to retaliate?
2006-07-31 18:54:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Y'know, Israel has existed at the mercy of its neighbors for over 50 years. All of this time, everyone has humored them with their macho bravado, their strutting around and tendency to lash out with violence at the least provocation. I know no group of neighboring states that has tolerated so much for so long.
Maybe it's time to call their bluff. What if . . what if ALL the countries in the middle east did something to eat Israel's shorts on the SAME DAY? Israel at least has spies in all those countries--let each one capture the Israelis in their midst and dare Israel to retaliate ALL AT ONCE to EVERYONE at the SAME TIME!
Then maybe, just maybe, Israel would look back to the 'good old days' when everyone tolerated their presence and treated them with goodwill . . .
2006-07-31 18:30:58 · answer #5 · answered by nora22000 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they dont belong there in the first place....i think they should apologize then steer clear of Iran. Iran has full choice for retailitory action, Isreilies (howsever you spell that) tried to act militarily against them. Id say Iran has full reason to attack Israel. but thats just me.
2006-07-31 18:37:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I could've sworn the Hezbollah went into Israeli territory to kidnap the Israeli soldiers. At least that is what has been said on the news. Not that the Israeli soldiers were kidnapped while they were in Lebanon. So I'm not sure what sort of comparison you're trying to make.
2006-07-31 18:28:29 · answer #7 · answered by Bad Kitty! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good question...!
"Hezbollah" is a Lebanese armed movement and political party, with a military arm and a civilian arm. It was founded in 1982 with the declared aim to fight the Israeli occupation of Southern Lebanon that lasted until 2000.
"Hezbollah" has some members in Lebanon parliament. Also, their military branch was founded by Lebanese militias for defense their country against Israel.
This is their right to defense their country against Israel barbarism.
The most of parties in Lebanon including, Lebanon government are supporting "Hezbollah" as well.
In the other side, Israel is a hostile country in middle east. Since it was founded till now, they are killing innocents, running out Palestinian of their country, invading other countries and occupy some other countries such as "Palestine", "Lebanon", "Syria", "Egypt" and threating the whole of the region.
US is supporting Israel regime for a long time including, giving them WMDs, political supports, etc. So, US is Israel accomplice.
Some people are so stupid while they think if "Hamas" and "Hezbollah" didn't exist Israel didn't invade and slaughter Palestinian and Lebanese.
"US prime minister said they want to change the middle east map."
It means all of these troubles and killing innocents are made as a plan. Actually, invading Lebanon is an excuse to continue this plan after US invaded to Afghanistan and Iraq.
On (Monday, July 31, 2006) "Olmert" in Israel parliament (Knesset) said to Lebanese with a laugh, nobody don't want to help you.
What does it mean in your opinion?
Isn't it a permission from some countries to Israel for killing Palestinian and Lebanese civilians?
WAKE UP PEOPLE...! They are killing civilians and ruin countries with aids of US, UK and even United Nation can't do any useful activity.
United Nation is a toy in powerful countries hands...!
US is vetoing all of UN resolutions for aid to Israel and doesn't let nobody help civilians. US prime minister several times said, we don't want this war be finish now.
What does it mean in your opinion?
Isn't it Holocaust in Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, etc.?
Who are terrorists in your opinion?
People who fighting for their country or those countries that invade, occupy countries and slaughtering civilians for the name of peace?
Remember while "Hitler" wanted to invade and occupy other countries, he found some excuses.
2006-07-31 20:43:29 · answer #8 · answered by ±50% 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, the Israelis would NOT dare to do that to Iran. Viva Ahmadi Negad.
2006-07-31 18:27:09 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
israel doesent dare to attack iran . iran is an strong and vast country!
2006-07-31 18:33:24 · answer #10 · answered by shaka 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋