Israel Bombing Syria, who's next?

Question

If Israel is allowed to attack any country they want, without provocation or justification, and the U.S. supports their actions, is any Arab or Islamic nation safe from their aggression? Why are they scared to take on Iran?

Answer 1

israel does as it pleases, a god on earth

Answer 2

first of all, Israel will by no skill attack a one in all those important Islamic holy internet site intentionally. Such an attack might have not have been given any militia fee. the main's such an attack might in all risk carry each and every Muslim united states of america to conflict with it. it might additionally open civilian objectives in Israel open to attack. Israel and Syria, regardless of being at formal conflict considering that 1948, have saved removed from attacking each and each others civilian populations for the main section. 2nd, Israel might basically attack Syria if there become evidence (which there now's) that Syria has been arming Hezbollah with rockets and missile, and if those have been used against Israel. . Estimates are that Hezbollah has 40 8,000 rockets, or 10 cases as many as that they had interior the final conflict. those rockets are turning out to be bigger; some may well be waiting to hit Haifa and different Northern cities. Hezbollah can even have some scuds and different missiles that ought to hit Tel Aviv. If any of this have been to ensue, and if Israeli inhabitants centers are hit. Israel might strike decrease back at Syria in a brilliant way -- yet might in all risk take our skill turbines, factories, and air bases -- yet no longer Mosques. might Syria retaliate by way of hitting Israel with its Scuds? It basically would. If Israel have been to attack Iran's nuclear websites, or if Iran sought a diversion for one in all its movements, it ought to set their Shiite Hezbollah puppets loose, that ought to reason a important conflict.

Answer 3

Israel hasn't commented on the incident, and all real information is coming from second hand sources. Let's take a roundup of who said what:
Israel- mum's the word.
Syria- Israeli planes flew over, were fired upon and then dropped munitions and fuel-tanks to flee faster
America- Israel bombed a shipment of Iranian arms headed to Hizbullah through Syria, and in the attack also included ground troops. America supports this mission.
Obviously, Syria and America have differing accounts of what happened. If what America says is true, then did Israel really do anything wrong? Syria has said that they aren't actively aiding Hizbullah or the transfer of arms to them. And yet, here we have what is apparently a large shipment of arms traveling THROUGH Syria to Hizbullah. If Syria was in the know, than the real aggressor is Syria for arming terrorists who attack Israel, and thus Israel's action is justified. If Syria was not in the know, than it was an attack on smuggler's and not Syria itself, and the attack is still justified because Syria is obviously incapable of stopping the smuggling itself.
In Syria's version, it was more a foray into Syrian airspace then an attack. This may be a breach of international relations, but certainly not an overtly aggressive act.
Neither of those two countries have presented evidence for their version of events other than unmarked fuel tanks, so it's really just a matter of who you believe.

Answer 4

The Israelis committed an act of aggression against Syria and Turkey - for no reason.
Any retaliation for the attack by either state is justifiable.
That neither Turkey nor Syria has responded in kind indicates their restraint and respectability - and the fallacy of America's arguments against Syria.

Answer 5

Without provocation? If you ignore the fact that Syria has surrogate troops attacking Israel from Gaza/Lebanon, I suppose you're right. Israel's not afraid they can't beat Iran, but they are probably concerned about the fallout in the reason if they have to do so. But if Iran keeps up with the nukes, Israel may decide that's a risk they'll have to take.

This just in about the "unprovoked" attack, I'm sure Syria had no interest in seeing the weapons in question used against Israel:

Israel's alleged incursion into Syrian skies last week included a strike on what was likely to have been Iranian arms transferred to the country, CNN reported on Tuesday afternoon. According to the news network, a ground operation was also part of the overall foray.

CNN claimed that the operation was largely aerial but also had comprised of ground components, left "a great hole in the desert." Although CNN did not cite a specific source, the network gave credence to "US government officials." The report said the IAF targets were likely to be weaponry delivered by Syria which was intended for the use of Hizbullah.

Answer 6

Firstly it's only a matter of time the Iranians will destroy themselves. Secondly what do you mean " Take on Iran" the Israeli's have already taken them on . Patients my dear friend. The Israeli's do things differently to other countries. Read between the lines it's happening..............

Answer 7

The new reports on the incident give a different story than what you are saying (see: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070911/wl_mideast_afp/mideastconflictsyria_070911184454 ). It seems Israel has both provocation and justification for their actions. I would say the real issue here is any non-Islamic nation safe from Muslim terrorism?

Good Luck!!!

Answer 8

Your premise is false (not surprisingly).

Israel certainly has justification. Under the terms of the cease-fire and UN resolution pursuant to last year's war, there were to be no arms transferred across the border. Hezbollah was not to be rearmed.

Syria and Lebanon have violated the terms of that ceasefire repeatedly. Israel has complained to the UN, and as usual, the UN is completely indifferent to violations that harm Israel. UNIFIL is impotent, and has done nothing to prevent Hezbollah from rearming. Thus, after a year of reporting violations, Israel has finally decided to take action against the rearming of Hezbollah (if media reports are correct).

Too little, too late, in my opinion.

And the answer to your question is that Israel has not, and does not, attack Arab (or Muslim) nations without provocation. There have been, and continue to be abundant provocations from Iran: support for terrorist organizations in Gaza and Lebanon, not to mention threats of annihilation and the development of means to do it.

If/when Israel decides to take action against Iran it will be, as they say, "at a time and place of their choosing." Israel's decision whether or not to attack Iran is based on multiple complex political and military factors. I could explain them, but you're obviously more interested in spewing hate and propaganda than learning, so I won't waste my time.

Answer 9

first of all when you say that israel is allowed to attack any sountry and so on... what about the hamas that attacks us every single day?????? but you don't care because you hate us so it's ok!
what about our 2 soldiers in lebanon??? and one in gaza but still you don't care because it's OUR soldiers and you're pro terrorists!!!
we don't attack innocent people!!!!! I believe we had a reason and a GOOD one!!!!! I glad we did it!!!
and by the way Irans time will come

Answer 10

They are not scared, they will work their way through to Iran eventually, however, they might be a bit worried because of the nuclear threat!! But basically Israel has been doing what ever it's wanted ever since it was founded!

Answer 11

The Syrian statement said Israelis "dropped munitions" that did no damage. A Western diplomat in Damascus offered what many found a plausible version of events -- that a reconnaissance mission found itself targeted by Syrian radar, or actual fire, and jettisoned its load as part of an evasive maneuver.