Israel (now broader Mid East discussion) (4 Viewers)

[BigFrosty]

 

[baarbogast]

This is a great view of Lebanon. We must not repeat the mistakes of the past.

 

[baarbogast]

 

[baarbogast]

 

[baarbogast]

 

[baarbogast]

 

[Arathrael]

While you may say its glib and one-sided, there is a lot more truth in her statement than there are omissions and falsehoods. Lebanon was a vibrant, multicultural society with a great economy until the PLO started to use Southern Lebanon as a staging ground for attacks on Israel. Any differences between the Maronite Christian population and moderate Islamic parties could have been settled peacefully without Arafat et. al. fanning the flames of hatred against Israel (and by association, the Christian population).

"Lebanon had an open border policy, we wanted to share our knowledge with our Muslim neighbors. But then they became the majority, they started slaughtering the Christians who welcomed them," is one-sided and dangerously misleading, and on reflection, that's putting it mildly. Even just contrasted with your own summary above (which is also grossly over-simplified, because you can't summarise the history, tensions, and other dimensions necessary to understanding the conflict in a couple of sentences, which is why I linked to the detailed wikipedia article as a starting point instead of trying to summarise it myself).

 

[Merl]

We don't need their bases. We would still have airfields in Saudi Arabia, Diego Garcia, and 2 carriers in the area that are capable of hitting anywhere in Iran.

 

[Arathrael]

We don't need their bases. We would still have airfields in Saudi Arabia, Diego Garcia, and 2 carriers in the area that are capable of hitting anywhere in Iran.

Did you mean Saudi Arabia there? That was the first one on the quoted list of countries that wouldn't allow the use of their airbases against Iran.

 

[Merl]

Did you mean Saudi Arabia there? That was the first one on the quoted list of countries that wouldn't allow the use of their airbases against Iran.

Somehow missed them but we still don't need them.

 

[DaveXA]

Somehow missed them but we still don't need them.

While we don't "need" them, having access does make a huge difference in terms of logistics and being able to hit Iran if it comes to that.

That said, unless Iran starts launching nukes, or lobbing more of those ballistic missiles into Israeli cities, I don't see us taking direct militaey action on Iran.

Certainly sanctions and other diplomatic avenues are on the table before we engage in a shooting war with Iran proper.

Edit: And it's a lot more than just hitting Iran.

 

[efil4stnias]

We don't need their bases. We would still have airfields in Saudi Arabia, Diego Garcia, and 2 carriers in the area that are capable of hitting anywhere in Iran.

this isnt just about "using bases". I hope you understand this.

 

[DaveXA]

this isnt just about "using bases". I hope you understand this.

Yep, we still have those bases. Imo, this is more a posturing declaration than anything else. We'll keep the bases and adjust logistics if/when necessary.

 

[baarbogast]

 

[baarbogast]