Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Is this man insane?

Has he not seen the results of similar actions, like the evaporation of half the entire Iranian Navy in less than a day, and only mitigated by the US Navy's calling the destruction off?

These are the people that Israel deals with daily.

How could anyone not choose sides?

  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
38 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Israel uses F-35I to shoot down cruise missile, a first for Joint Strike Fighter. 

 

“The Israel Defense Forces said that it used F-35I Adir fighter jets to shoot down a cruise missile this week, the first known cruise missile intercept by the American-made stealth fighter.”

 

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/11/israel-uses-f-35i-to-shoot-down-cruise-missile-a-first-for-joint-strike-fighter/

 

.

 

If true, this is a potentially very big deal.

It is really difficult to pack the tracking, warhead and fusing capability into something small enough to be carried on a fighter.

Without looking at the issue, I'm guessing that the F-35 would sacrifice its stealth capability to do this, but a very significant advancement in air to air missile technology if true.

Very good find.

Well done, and further evidence that the Israelis are really, really good.

 

Don't thank me B.

It's your find, and it could be extremely significant.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

 

Good find.

Notice the text that was provided by the Navy.

They said that Eisenhower was with Ford in sixth fleet. Ford needs to get home, as it is being extended, and that is a very, very big and unwanted circumstance.

In Fergy's link, it states:

     "The Ike Carrier Strike Group entered the region this week ahead of a planned transit to U.S. Central Command this weekend."

 

That is Navy speak for stating that Eisenhower is heading to the northern Arabian Sea, which means just off the coast or Iran.

While I can't understand why the Navy and DOD is publicly stating this stuff, and it makes me a little suspicious.

If believed, it is the scenario I suggested weeks ago.

 

If Eisenhower stays in sixth fleet, in the eastern Med and relieves Ford, the Iran thing is less imminent.

If Eisenhower does, as claimed, in chop to fifth fleet, and heads through the Suez to the Arabian Sea, leaving an extended Ford in the Med, that means we are serious.

 

 

 

Edited by sherpa
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

I overall support Israel for several reasons: they were there first, literally thousand of years ago, they have won every war since being recreated so has the current claim also. As for how to deal with Hamas, any country that wants to bring them to their I would tell them they have 3 months to come get them because far too many of them clearly think the eradication of Jews is ideal. The rub for Israel is they have two choices at this point: either live the permanent daily  threat that is Hamas or they take over those areas and don't allow Hamas to exist. There is no two state solution that works when one side wants the other eradicated.

  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

 

9 hours ago, Orlando Tim said:

I overall support Israel for several reasons: they were there first, literally thousand of years ago, they have won every war since being recreated so has the current claim also. As for how to deal with Hamas, any country that wants to bring them to their I would tell them they have 3 months to come get them because far too many of them clearly think the eradication of Jews is ideal. The rub for Israel is they have two choices at this point: either live the permanent daily  threat that is Hamas or they take over those areas and don't allow Hamas to exist. There is no two state solution that works when one side wants the other eradicated.

Permanent occupation of Gaza? Or just expel the Palestinians? 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

Smerconish reporting on polls re Israel and Palestine.  Huge generational divide.  younger support Palestine, older Israel.  Many don't have a basic understanding of the diff between Hamas and Palestinians.  interviewing Berkeley Jewish Law Dean, very impressive....meanwhile on Fox.

Edited by Joe Ferguson forever
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
32 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

 

I expect there is a typo in this.

I think the author may have meant 500 kilometers in the range suggestion. It is a Scud ancestor.

500 meters is useless, unless you want to blow up you neighbors house, and with the size or the warhead, you'd likely get fragged by the blast.

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

I expect there is a typo in this.

I think the author may have meant 500 kilometers in the range suggestion. It is a Scud ancestor.

500 meters is useless, unless you want to blow up you neighbors house, and with the size or the warhead, you'd likely get fragged by the blast.

 

or a hospital....

38 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Permanent occupation of Gaza? Or just expel the Palestinians? 

yes, kinda important to Arabs

Posted
6 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

 

yes, kinda important to Arabs

 

Absolutely, since they are the historically major expeller of Palestinians.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
46 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

 

Permanent occupation of Gaza? Or just expel the Palestinians? 

For those that remain it would be permanent occupation but they would have the right to leave into any country that would take them. If there was any solution of two states I would be happy with it but at this point it seems apparent that the Palestinians have no interest in allowing the Israelis to live peacefully. 

4 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

Absolutely, since they are the historically major expeller of Palestinians.

Who is the they in your statement? Every country in the Middle East has expelled them which is why they are stuck in Israel. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

For those that remain it would be permanent occupation but they would have the right to leave into any country that would take them. If there was any solution of two states I would be happy with it but at this point it seems apparent that the Palestinians have no interest in allowing the Israelis to live peacefully.

 

Who is the they in your statement? Every country in the Middle East has expelled them which is why they are stuck in Israel. 

 

Yup.  They want it all.

 

SA.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

For those that remain it would be permanent occupation but they would have the right to leave into any country that would take them. If there was any solution of two states I would be happy with it but at this point it seems apparent that the Palestinians have no interest in allowing the Israelis to live peacefully. 

and who reimburses the Palestinians for their destroyed homes and biz's?

×
×
  • Create New...