Would Israel have been as aggressive if the US wasn't in the region?
2006-09-11 08:13:01
·
answer #1
·
answered by martin h 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
it truly is not any longer actual. by reality of this I in spite of the reality that want that Rahm Emmanuel change into in spite of the reality that Obama's chief of crew. He would not in any respect allow Obama, make a reality like that. Obama may be more desirable specialist-Israel. Israel is the surely democracy interior the area, and persons might want to take care of it. Iran is a actual chance, it really is were the Obama admin are patently incorrect. as a lot as I hate Mitt Romney he's smart sufficient to maintain in mind that Iran is an severe chance.
2016-11-26 01:31:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by cassone 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think Iran had already responded to Isreal by supplying arms to Hizbollah because the US is in the region, otherwise there wouldn't be any reason to.
2006-09-11 08:22:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'm guessing it worked to their advantage as it was. They just supply the arms, Israel gets pounded, while Lebanon and Hezbollah take the heat.
2006-09-11 08:14:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by Rockvillerich 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Iran would have responded to Israeli aggression against Syria.
=)
2006-09-11 08:12:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Iran's army are whimps, they couldn't fight they're way out of a wet paper bag
2006-09-11 08:30:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
last time israel was attacked directly by a muslim nation it really didnt go to well for the muslims...so they are very hesitant to do it again.
2006-09-11 08:12:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mark D 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not Sure
Don't Know.
2006-09-11 08:12:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by Spaghetti MY 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
you bet your *** they would!
2006-09-11 08:12:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by Mr.happy 4
·
0⤊
1⤋