That’s nothing thorgalaeg, Israel also has a secret space laser that actually destroyed the World Trade Center on 9/11. It’s classic stuff really! They’re probably already smacking asteroids into alien planets we don’t even know about. Who cares about some lousy missiles?
Iran, the Red Sea, and the West (tm).
- Thread starter Estebonrober
- Start date
Thorgalaeg
Deity
Well, Israel has its own ICBM which is pretty capable (talking about outer space, they even base their space program launcher on it), and a multi-layered AD nobody else in the world have, much less Russia. That is the reality. You can make your meaningless jokes to confront such reality as you apparently find it unbearable, Inno has built his own foolish fantastic little world... At least your way is less laborious. 
Last edited:
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,087
Lol^2
You are really hopeless, so this is the last time I spend a single minute illustrating you. Israel has nuclear capable ballistic missiles since the 60s. Current version has enough range to hit practically any target in the world.
You are welcome.Jericho (missile) - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
About the rest of your post, I don't know what kind of cave have you been living for the last couple of years practicing your political onanism, in any case it must be really deep and dark, because claiming Russian AD is anything comparable to Israel's one, when Ukrainian ultralight aircraft flying at 80 km/h can hit critical targets in Moscow while Israel can intercept 100+ ballistic missiles simultaneously without much issue is worth looking for professional help.
Israel does not have "nuclear capable" ballistic missiles. It allegedly may have some ballisic missiles, which it never tested. The testing serving always as demonstration to other countries. "believed to" in wikipedia is meaningless. It demonstrated some capabilities with low-orbit lauches and that's it. If Israel has any missles capable of carrying a nuclear warhead they would likely be air-launched, to compensate for the very short range of both missiles and planes. Israel did demonstrate some lauches of air-surface missiles that might carry a warhead. Such missiles necessarly (mass) are always short-range, less than a couple thousand kilometers.
If they had any ballistic missiles at all, they just missed the opportunity to demonstrate they had, in the exchange with Iran. Fear of a larger conter-attack by Iran? Or simple lack of capability, of missiles?
Either way, Israel is weaker than it had been depicting itself. That propaganda of strenght was a great asset, one that it lost in this war.
I usually try to avoid descending to your level. But I'll say this: your problem is that you wish to live in a fantasy world of being an obedient client of what you think is the world empire, and also fail to see that this empire never was as strong as it depicted itself and is not failing in several fronts. But keep believing yourself a servant of the masters of the world. Your ego might be greatly hurt if your masters were not so masterful as you wish to believe.
Thorgalaeg
Deity
? Totally invented, baseless paragraph, you don't imagine how silly you sound. Better create your own Wikipedia and call it the Cluelesspedia or something.
Israel ICBM development has a long history which implied France and South Africa, most nuclear powers before and after Israel has "some capabilities in low orbit launches" derivated precisely from ICBM development. You don't get such thing from nothingness. Israel regularly launch 400 kg payloads to LEO using Shavit rockets which is basically a modified Jericho ICBM (in your world it had been developed from ether though). Which is pretty nice, and in fact it could carry more but Israel is the only space capable country which must launch westward, over the Mediterranean, (retrograde), way more difficult than normal prograde launches and launch payload is greatly reduced.
So having the money, the technology and the capability Israel misteriously decided to have a defective nuclear capability and become the only nuclear power without nuclear capable ballistic missiles, even being the most threatened country in the world, even being one of the countries that takes defense more seriously by obvious reasons. I wonder why you keep insisting on such imbecile idea which is not only against all evidence but against all logic. There are things worse than losing an argument, like being a bad loser for instance.
Demonstrate what to who? To you? LoL. Everybody knows Israel has ICBM missiles. But it doesn't need and has never needed ballistic missiles to attack his neighbors Iran included, using drones, cruise missiles and fighters are more than enough to overwhelm enemy AD capabilities, which are Russian made after all, and we see in a regular basis how effective they are against Ukrainian drones and Storm Shadow that repeatly hit Russian most valuable installations in Crimea with total impunity. Israel otoh is an extremely hard egg to crack AD wise, drones and cruise missiles have not a chance, only chance is to launch a large barrage of ballistic missiles hoping for some to pass the Arrow based ABM system, which btw seems pretty effective. There are numerous footage of extra atmospheric interceptions in last Iran attack something never seen before. Too much for "some surface to air launches"
LoL, nice harangue, you think you are very clever uh? To me however you sound like some ignorant spoiled brat lucky enough to have been born in a western democratic country which allows you to spit your vitriol against the very democracy that warrant you the freedom to do so, who thinks society owned him something, embracing every single authoritarian regime that you wrongly perceive as opposed to 'the system' you blame your failures on. I bet I am not very wrong.
Last edited:
r16
not deity
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 11,232
as the "riots in universities" start to resemble the hated hippy days and presumed result of losing the war in Vietnam which otherwise was going perfectly well , it is an unavoidable observation that the "ruling elite" would have taken notice . The spoiled brats of the West daring to talk in this dark hour of Israel seeming impotent or whatever and which horribly makes losers think that there is something wrong with the West , pay attention to what you post so that your rebuttal will not become part of the consent manufacturing . It costs nothing for others to imagine that you are doing it on purpose anyhow .
Estebonrober
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2017
- Messages
- 5,898
? Totally invented, baseless paragraph, you don't imagine how silly you sound. Better create your own Wikipedia and call it the Cluelesspedia or something.
Israel ICBM development has a long history which implied France and South Africa, most nuclear powers before and after Israel has "some capabilities in low orbit launches" derivated precisely from ICBM development. You don't get such thing from nothingness. Israel regularly launch 400 kg payloads to LEO using Shavit rockets which is basically a modified Jericho ICBM (in your world it had been developed from ether though). Which is pretty nice, and in fact it could carry more but Israel is the only space capable country which must launch westward, over the Mediterranean, (retrograde), way more difficult than normal prograde launches and launch payload is greatly reduced.
So having the money, the technology and the capability Israel misteriously decided to have a defective nuclear capability and become the only nuclear power without nuclear capable ballistic missiles, even being the most threatened country in the world, even being one of the countries that takes defense more seriously by obvious reasons. I wonder why you keep insisting on such imbecile idea which is not only against all evidence but against all logic. There are things worse than losing an argument, like being a bad loser for instance.
Demonstrate what to who? To you? LoL. Everybody knows Israel has ICBM missiles. But it doesn't need and has never needed ballistic missiles to attack his neighbors Iran included, using drones, cruise missiles and fighters are more than enough to overwhelm enemy AD capabilities, which are Russian made after all, and we see in a regular basis how effective they are against Ukrainian drones and Storm Shadow that repeatly hit Russian most valuable installations in Crimea with total impunity. Israel otoh is an extremely hard egg to crack AD wise, drones and cruise missiles have not a chance, only chance is to launch a large barrage of ballistic missiles hoping for some to pass the Arrow based ABM system, which btw seems pretty effective. There are numerous footage of extra atmospheric interceptions in last Iran attack something never seen before. Too much for "some surface to air launches"
LoL, nice harangue, you think you are very clever uh? To me however you sound like some ignorant spoiled brat lucky enough to have been born in a western democratic country which allows you to spit your vitriol against the very democracy that warrant you the freedom to do so, who thinks society owned him something, embracing every single authoritarian regime that you wrongly perceive as opposed to 'the system' you blame your failures on. I bet I am not very wrong.
Israel the most threatened nation on Earth? From whose might does this little Israel suffer night terrors from? Which nation is posed to obliterate their people off the face of the Earth? This is overblown nonsense... Ask Taiwan. I agree Israel is likely capable of nuking Moscow, but that was always a dumb point just like the idea of Russia attacking Israel was.... can we drop this already?
Look I get you are spirited in your beliefs, I am as well, but this tone in your response is not productive, and your blind belief in Western Supremacy is misplaced. I disagree with @innonimatu often about the decline of the West and various other things and I think his tone was bordering the line with the fantasy world and ego talk, but your response is mainly ad hominem. Try to just post the facts in a situation like this...
r16
not deity
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 11,232
israel has nuclear capable nuclear missiles , last known threat to be used against this country just after the 99 earthquake when these so called friends of Israel tried to channel the rescue efforts for better PR and merely ended up bolstering the Islamist effort , which in turn led to New Turkey and the ouster of the so called friends of Israel in due course . Israel was indeed nuclear armed to be a French proxy before being hi-jacked by Pentagon and stuff ; because the French lacked both bases and aircraft range , though Ankara should have been rather easier than Moscow .
Estebonrober
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2017
- Messages
- 5,898
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,087
There are many ways to defeat a polity, even a nuclear-armed one. The apartheid regime had nukes and still fell, and still lost its wars in Angola and Namibia. The USSR had nukes and got disbanded from the inside.
I fully expect the zionist regime to collapse in Israel. Thet collected too many enemies both outside and within. It has been their own doing. The open question is whether the country continues to exist under a different political organization (like South Africa) ir breaks apart (like the USSR). Israel now only continues to exist on inertia, but the war itself disrupts that. Ironically it was a war of choice by the regime, not one it had been forced into.
Israel does not have ICBM. They have missiles but there is no evidence of ICBM capability. Such a capability requires testing. In fact the much talked about couple hundred of nuclear bombs may be more propaganda that reality. Israel has some nukes, because the simpler ones are not that hard to make. Of unnanounced and never tested types. Don't bother mentioning the indian ocean incident, a proper nuclear is meant to collect data (not doable stealthly in the middle of the ocean) and demonstrate capability, that test (if it happened) achieved neither. It could just provide a went boom/didn't go boom binary result.
It would be foolish to ignore the nukes that Israel must have. Because of that they are a deterrent on attacks against Israel. But they are of little military value in any big war that does start. In the event of a war between nuclear-armed Israel and non-nuclear armed Iran, Iran would eventually wipe out Israel and still continue to exist despite the damage suffered. The use of nukes by Israel would make sure that everyone else in the region would pile on them and make sure to finish off the threat. In short: nukes are the weapon Israel can't use to win any war. They would only be a sore loser's vengeance because by being used they would be sealing the destruction of the state using them. Whatever is said of Israel's government and internal politics, I think they know this and are not suicidal.
That is why I discount the possibility of a big war. None of the countries, including Israel, wants to go down that path. Israel will be worn down instead. As a far-away colonial outpost it gets abandoned when the empire is shrinking. And shrinking it is. Israel's options are to either cease being a colonial outpost (which requires a political reorganization), of disappear with its empire-linked population fleeing and the rest collapsing into tiny warring fiefdoms. With nukes. Not a good prospect, this last one. This collapse does not require any big regional war, just Israel carrying on as it is now. It's firmly on the path to collapse.
amadeus
Serenity now
To be fair, the South African bombs were too heavy to fit on any of the rockets so I guess they’d have to put them on a truck or something, and I’m betting the border guards would just deny them entry so really the whole thing would have just been a colossal waste of time.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,087
Their nukes were a product of paranoia, produced without a strartegic plan. Because they really were convinced that communists everywhere were conspiring against South Africa and the USSR might attack them. The reality was that the political system could no longer keep the black population repressed and afford the conventional wars up north. Nukes had zero use to counter those points of erosion.
There are parallels to Israel. Have been for a long, long time.
Right now Israel's air bases, radar and AA missile emplacements are in the process of being demolished by Hezbollah. Nukes don't stop that. Even ignoring the very real political consequences of using any, if Israel had tactical nukes (a but if, I don't believe they do)should one be used Israel would ne nuking itself, so close is the adversary. Neither that Arrow system (likely much depleted by now) our spaniard is so impressed about, not the iron dome system Israel had been peddling around the world, is stopping any of the missiles raining on Meron. Their military position grows more unsustainable by the day. Israel cannot win a war of attrition and will be abandoned by its sponsors because their own available stocks are limited, their industry incapable of ramping up production fast enough.
I'm betting on it going the SA way.
There are parallels to Israel. Have been for a long, long time.
Right now Israel's air bases, radar and AA missile emplacements are in the process of being demolished by Hezbollah. Nukes don't stop that. Even ignoring the very real political consequences of using any, if Israel had tactical nukes (a but if, I don't believe they do)should one be used Israel would ne nuking itself, so close is the adversary. Neither that Arrow system (likely much depleted by now) our spaniard is so impressed about, not the iron dome system Israel had been peddling around the world, is stopping any of the missiles raining on Meron. Their military position grows more unsustainable by the day. Israel cannot win a war of attrition and will be abandoned by its sponsors because their own available stocks are limited, their industry incapable of ramping up production fast enough.
I'm betting on it going the SA way.
Last edited:
Senethro
Overlord
Has anyone noticed that Inno thinks all his enemies are corrupt, feckless, dissolute, degenerate and just plain stupid to the point where they will inevitably defeat themselves in a very short time frame?
Is this a realistic view or a self-serving one?
Is this a realistic view or a self-serving one?
Snowygerry
Deity
It is consistent at least, in my time here he has predicted the collapse of Belgium, the Eu, the Euro, NATO, and UEFA, now it's Israel
also predicted the corona virus would kill us all,
it's nothing short of a miracle we are still posting
also predicted the corona virus would kill us all,
it's nothing short of a miracle we are still posting
Last edited:
r16
not deity
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 11,232
yes , it is exactly the sort of repeated series of failed predictions and whatnot that power the delusions that afflict the CFC . It has blinded the non-contributors and stuff to tradition and history of bloody things . That will end up with the defeat of the West in a way not even moderators would be able to hide .
when translated this says South Africa's show of nuclear weapon ownership went for believability . Some Hiroshima type weapon which was still rounded down into a 750 kg package that would have reached many places in Africa in the bombbay of a Buccaneer . Which was like basically unstoppable in that particular context . And the weapons themselves as a bait for some random Cuban commando raid and stuff , so that they would be unable to steal one or explode one in place as an "accident" . You can sense the true South African nuclear bombs were British , American or Israeli warheads in their respective armouries .
when translated this says South Africa's show of nuclear weapon ownership went for believability . Some Hiroshima type weapon which was still rounded down into a 750 kg package that would have reached many places in Africa in the bombbay of a Buccaneer . Which was like basically unstoppable in that particular context . And the weapons themselves as a bait for some random Cuban commando raid and stuff , so that they would be unable to steal one or explode one in place as an "accident" . You can sense the true South African nuclear bombs were British , American or Israeli warheads in their respective armouries .
Narz
keeping it real
Wait what, proper response to terrorism is police huh
Narz
keeping it real
How does this sentence work even?
Death to Israel is just the name of their band?
Saying something doesn't make it real, or even a possibility. To begin to justify punishment, especially pre-emptive punishment, the threat must be real, and not simply "hey man they said the thing".
Otherwise, why not look at all the things another countrie have said? What pre-emptive punishment should be meted out in country X, given the things politicians in X have said they want to do?
(substitute "X" for whatever country you want, really)
Similar threads
