4 ms·

You forgot to mention Israel's aggression on adjacent countries Lebanon and Palestine. Would Israel's constant belligerence start a war?

azernik 8y ago
I think Israel (and, unlike GP, also Iran) are too small-time to start real global war. They're more the potential Bosnias or Serbias - small, belligerent countries that could drag their patrons into conflict.
- nerpderp83 8y ago
  Israel has "the bomb", they definitely could start a global war.
  - raprp 8y ago
    According to Colin Powell they have 200 of them. More than enough to bring the Fallout series to life.
  - foobarian 8y ago
    What series of bombings might start a global war? I doubt bombing Iran would be enough.
    - caf 8y ago
      The nuclear bombing of Iran by a state would almost certainly be enough to precipitate the complete collapse of the NPT, which is already wobbly (the latest Review Conference ended in acrimony). Subsequent nuclear weapons projects in erstwhile NPT NNWS could easily trigger a few regional wars, and from there the escalation to a global conflict is certainly possible.
  - brandonmenc 8y ago
    Or, Israel having nukes has made their neighbors wary of another attempt at annihilating them, which could trigger a large war.
- ImprovedSilence 8y ago
  yeah.... but isn't that how big wars get started... coughBosniacoughwar that ended 100ys ago almost to the day...
mjevans 8y ago
Probably because, like myself, the OP isn't informed enough to make a judgement on that case. There are aggressive factors on all sides of that conflict and there's no clear-cut good or bad guy; only unfortunate things happening to real people who'd all be better off if religion stayed inside the walls of one's dwelling and temple of worship. Also if in cases of contested buildings listed above, everyone had equal access to the area administered by a neutral outside party.
tomohawk 8y ago
I'm not aware of Israel making it a matter of national policy to annihilate Iran or any other country. However, that is Iran's stated policy, and what they've said they'll do when they get nukes. https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2018/04/21/Iranian-general-threatens-to-annihilate-Israel/8071524333946/ https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2018/04/21/Iranian-g... Iran is training proxies in Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine to attack Israel. And that's what they're doing. They just launched a missile barrage, the largest ever, at Israel. It seems that Israel is just defending its existence.
- colordrops 8y ago
  > I'm not aware of Israel making it a matter of national policy to annihilate Iran You jest. That's the centerpiece of their foreign policy.
  - GauntletWizard 8y ago
    Asking the world to dethrone and delegitimize a country - even without the context of Iran's posture towards them - is different from genocide, which is Iran's posture, yes.
    - colordrops 8y ago
      That is not Iran's posture.
    - baursak 8y ago
      That is nowhere near Iran's posture or policy.
- raprp 8y ago
  Hamas is bombing Israel, not the Syrian Army. Hamas chose Saudi Arabia's and Qatar's side on the Syrian conflict and that lead to Assad breaking relations with them. Syria took it as a betrayal so I doubt they would do anything to help Hamas. Israel is not bombing Syria to defend itself. Syria never had and nor will have the capability to do anything to Israel. The reason Israel have been bombing Syria is the same reason Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, USA, UK, France, Australia and the rest of the coalition are doing it too: regime change. They want to replace Assad with a puppet, like Hariri in Lebanon, so they can all push their own agendas in the region. And on the other side Russia, Iran and Hezbollah jumped in Assad's rescue to counter that move. They are ALL pushing their own interests at the expense of Syrian lives so please drop this outrageous "defending itself" narrative and admit all actors of both sides are war criminals with blood on their hands.
jcranmer 8y ago
No, it wouldn't start anything more than a regional conflict à la the Seven Days' War or any of the other several Arab-Israeli conflicts of the past 70 years. World War I did not start because Austria had a legitimate grievance against Serbia that it was determined to settle with military force. It started because France, Germany, and Russia were all willing, maybe even eager, to go to war and the putative Third Balkan War in as many years was an opportunity to do so. When the leaders of Germany and Russia started getting cold feet and asked about partial mobilization as an alternative option, the military commands were shocked and worked assiduously to convince them that there was no alternative to complete war. In stark contrast stands the Cuban Missile Crisis, where Kennedy and Khrushchev both ignored their military commands' pleas for war and sought to find alternatives to war. The ingredients for global war are international disputes irreconcilable except for war; a conflict that can serve as a flashpoint to rapidly bring in these wide international disputes; and you need leaders who can continue to escalate the war, knowing all the consequences it might entail. The Middle East simply lacks strategic importance to make two major power blocs go to global war in support of their local allies in a localized conflict.

azernik 8y ago

I think Israel (and, unlike GP, also Iran) are too small-time to start real global war. They're more the potential Bosnias or Serbias - small, belligerent countries that could drag their patrons into conflict.

nerpderp83 8y ago
Israel has "the bomb", they definitely could start a global war.
- raprp 8y ago
  According to Colin Powell they have 200 of them. More than enough to bring the Fallout series to life.
- foobarian 8y ago
  What series of bombings might start a global war? I doubt bombing Iran would be enough.
  - caf 8y ago
    The nuclear bombing of Iran by a state would almost certainly be enough to precipitate the complete collapse of the NPT, which is already wobbly (the latest Review Conference ended in acrimony). Subsequent nuclear weapons projects in erstwhile NPT NNWS could easily trigger a few regional wars, and from there the escalation to a global conflict is certainly possible.
- brandonmenc 8y ago
  Or, Israel having nukes has made their neighbors wary of another attempt at annihilating them, which could trigger a large war.
ImprovedSilence 8y ago
yeah.... but isn't that how big wars get started... coughBosniacoughwar that ended 100ys ago almost to the day...

mjevans 8y ago

Probably because, like myself, the OP isn't informed enough to make a judgement on that case. There are aggressive factors on all sides of that conflict and there's no clear-cut good or bad guy; only unfortunate things happening to real people who'd all be better off if religion stayed inside the walls of one's dwelling and temple of worship. Also if in cases of contested buildings listed above, everyone had equal access to the area administered by a neutral outside party.

tomohawk 8y ago

I'm not aware of Israel making it a matter of national policy to annihilate Iran or any other country. However, that is Iran's stated policy, and what they've said they'll do when they get nukes. https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2018/04/21/Iranian-general-threatens-to-annihilate-Israel/8071524333946/ https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2018/04/21/Iranian-g... Iran is training proxies in Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine to attack Israel. And that's what they're doing. They just launched a missile barrage, the largest ever, at Israel. It seems that Israel is just defending its existence.

colordrops 8y ago
> I'm not aware of Israel making it a matter of national policy to annihilate Iran You jest. That's the centerpiece of their foreign policy.
- GauntletWizard 8y ago
  Asking the world to dethrone and delegitimize a country - even without the context of Iran's posture towards them - is different from genocide, which is Iran's posture, yes.
  - colordrops 8y ago
    That is not Iran's posture.
  - baursak 8y ago
    That is nowhere near Iran's posture or policy.
raprp 8y ago
Hamas is bombing Israel, not the Syrian Army. Hamas chose Saudi Arabia's and Qatar's side on the Syrian conflict and that lead to Assad breaking relations with them. Syria took it as a betrayal so I doubt they would do anything to help Hamas. Israel is not bombing Syria to defend itself. Syria never had and nor will have the capability to do anything to Israel. The reason Israel have been bombing Syria is the same reason Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, USA, UK, France, Australia and the rest of the coalition are doing it too: regime change. They want to replace Assad with a puppet, like Hariri in Lebanon, so they can all push their own agendas in the region. And on the other side Russia, Iran and Hezbollah jumped in Assad's rescue to counter that move. They are ALL pushing their own interests at the expense of Syrian lives so please drop this outrageous "defending itself" narrative and admit all actors of both sides are war criminals with blood on their hands.

jcranmer 8y ago

No, it wouldn't start anything more than a regional conflict à la the Seven Days' War or any of the other several Arab-Israeli conflicts of the past 70 years. World War I did not start because Austria had a legitimate grievance against Serbia that it was determined to settle with military force. It started because France, Germany, and Russia were all willing, maybe even eager, to go to war and the putative Third Balkan War in as many years was an opportunity to do so. When the leaders of Germany and Russia started getting cold feet and asked about partial mobilization as an alternative option, the military commands were shocked and worked assiduously to convince them that there was no alternative to complete war. In stark contrast stands the Cuban Missile Crisis, where Kennedy and Khrushchev both ignored their military commands' pleas for war and sought to find alternatives to war. The ingredients for global war are international disputes irreconcilable except for war; a conflict that can serve as a flashpoint to rapidly bring in these wide international disputes; and you need leaders who can continue to escalate the war, knowing all the consequences it might entail. The Middle East simply lacks strategic importance to make two major power blocs go to global war in support of their local allies in a localized conflict.