• Iran ready to equip Lebanese Army
    32 replies, posted
[img]http://previous.presstv.ir/photo/20111010/soori20111010173729467.jpg[/img] [i]Iran's Ambassador in Lebanon Ghazanfar Roknabadi[/i] [release] [h2]The Iranian ambassador to Lebanon says Tehran is ready to help equip the Lebanese Army and expand bilateral defense cooperation without setting any preconditions.[/h2] Speaking in a meeting with Lebanon's Defense Minister Fayez Ghusn in Beirut on Monday, Ghazanfar Roknabadi added that developing stronger defense cooperation was necessary given the daily violations of Lebanese airspace by the Israeli fighter jets. Ghusn, for his part, praised Iran's support for Lebanon and its defense of the rights of the Arab and Muslim world and said Lebanon is proud of having Iran's support. The Lebanese minister also expressed readiness to travel to Iran in the near future. Lebanon's President Michel Suleiman recently announced the country was awaiting Iran's official response to Beirut's request for the expansion of bilateral defense cooperation. This comes as Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi had said on February 5, 2011 that Tehran was ready to start defense cooperation with Beirut upon the Lebanese side's request. "Whenever the Lebanese side is ready to start this cooperation it will submit its request," IRNA quoted him as saying. SS/AZ/HGH[/release] [URL="http://www.presstv.ir/detail/203863.html"]Source[/URL] Would be interesting to see how this evolves in the future.
And now Israel invades Lebanon. Again.
They're completely within their right to do this as sovereign nations, and so long as a defense pact doesn't translate into an antagonistic alliance it should be fine.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32723919]They're completely within their right to do this as sovereign nations, and so long as a defense pact doesn't translate into an antagonistic alliance it should be fine.[/QUOTE] well the point of a defence pact is to create a alliance to defend both countries cooperatively in the event of a invasion.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;32723918]And now Israel invades Lebanon. Again.[/QUOTE] Or in a surprising twist ending, Israel invades itself.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;32723944]well the point of a defence pact is to create a alliance to defend both countries cooperatively in the event of a invasion.[/QUOTE] And so now all it will take is Hezbollah to kidnap one more Israeli soldier and suddenly there's a war between Israel and Iran.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;32723944]well the point of a defence pact is to create a alliance to defend both countries cooperatively in the event of a invasion.[/QUOTE] Hence the word "antagonistic".
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZQdaEFa_60[/media]
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32723983]Hence the word "antagonistic".[/QUOTE] Well, Iran nor Lebanon are fond of Israel so..?
i was going to do that u fuck (@nik)
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;32724021]Well, Iran nor Lebanon are fond of Israel so..?[/QUOTE] Just because nations aren't fond of each other doesn't mean they'll just start a war. An alliance of two nations that both don't like one nation means nothing until the signs of war come about.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32724062]Just because nations aren't fond of each other doesn't mean they'll just start a war. An alliance of two nations that both don't like one nation means nothing until the signs of war come about.[/QUOTE] No shit, I was implying tensions between Israel and this "pact".
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;32724106]No shit, I was implying tensions between Israel and this "pact".[/QUOTE] Israel deserve to get ganged up on for what it's been doing. The only reason nothing has really happened yet is because of NATO backing them up.
[QUOTE=Nikota;32724148]Israel deserve to get ganged up on for what it's been doing. The only reason nothing has really happened yet is because of NATO backing them up.[/QUOTE] Israel won once before against overwhelming odds thanks to technology, they will probably do it again. But hoping for war since a country defends itself is stupid.
[QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;32724177]Israel won once before against overwhelming odds thanks to technology, they will probably do it again. But hoping for war since a country defends itself is stupid.[/QUOTE] They also won because of hydration. Something that the invading armies hadn't planned ahead towards. Along with the invading armies command fleeing and leaving their men to die without instructions. The six day war was just a mess. But you're right. Even if they do get invaded. The US army and NATO will back them up. Along with modern MBT's.
[QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;32724177]Israel won once before against overwhelming odds thanks to technology, they will probably do it again. But hoping for war since a country defends itself is stupid.[/QUOTE] ..Technology they got from their bureaucratic masters...
[QUOTE=ghosevil;32724306]..Technology they got from their bureaucratic masters...[/QUOTE] Yet it's technology nonetheless, who cares where it came from? Besides, the Israelis have done a terrific job improving on the technology they have received to suit their needs.
And water. Don't forget water. They gave everyone one liter every hour on the hour.
For some reason I read the title as "Iran ready to equip lesbian army"
[QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;32724177]Israel won once before against overwhelming odds thanks to technology, they will probably do it again. But hoping for war since a country defends itself is stupid.[/QUOTE] So then you'd agree that the "we need defensible borders" argument in regard to returning to the 1967 borders of Israel and Palestine is incorrect? Obviously if they could defend themselves when their borders were even smaller, it should be no problem.
[QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;32724177]Israel won once before against overwhelming odds thanks to technology, they will probably do it again. But hoping for war since a country defends itself is stupid.[/QUOTE] In 1967, Israeli military victory was due mainly in part of the surprise achieved by their preemptive actions and the general quality advantage of their troops, moreso than any "technological superiority".
[QUOTE=Tac Error;32725041]In 1967, Israeli military victory was due mainly in part of the surprise achieved by their preemptive actions and the general quality advantage of their troops, moreso than any "technological superiority".[/QUOTE] Didn't the Soviets cause this massive clusterfuck of confusion by giving the Egyptians false data?
Nevermind, I'm late.
[QUOTE=Tac Error;32725041]In 1967, Israeli military victory was due mainly in part of the surprise achieved by their preemptive actions and the general quality advantage of their troops, moreso than any "technological superiority".[/QUOTE] Doesn't hurt that they have both now.
[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;32723957]Or in a surprising twist ending, Israel invades itself.[/QUOTE] [img]http://chandlersfantasyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/040723_MNightShyamalan_bcol_2p.widec.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32724727]So then you'd agree that the "we need defensible borders" argument in regard to returning to the 1967 borders of Israel and Palestine is incorrect? Obviously if they could defend themselves when their borders were even smaller, it should be no problem.[/QUOTE] A smaller area is [i]easier[/i] to defend
[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;32729986]A smaller area is [i]easier[/i] to defend[/QUOTE] No, it really isn't. Jerusalem sits right on the border and at the foot of a mountain range. Currently they can't install anti air defenses to protect their capital, and the instant someone puts any kind of artillery on that mountain, the entire nation is fucked.
lol, Iran has been supplying Hezbollah for years now. Whether they supply the actual Lebanese military or not is not something Israel is going to particularly panic about.
[QUOTE=Glorbo;32730438]lol, [B]Iran[/B] has been supplying Hezbollah for years now. Whether they supply the actual Lebanese military or not is not something Israel is going to particularly panic about.[/QUOTE] You mean the Iranian government. :eng101:
[QUOTE=CommanderPT;32730478]You mean the Iranian government. :eng101:[/QUOTE] I disagree friend, the title clearly states "[i]Iran[/i] ready to equip Lebanese Army". Though I am not sure if it is the actual country itself or the 75 million citizens in it. [editline]11th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Morbo!!!;32729986]A smaller area is [i]easier[/i] to defend[/QUOTE] Yeah, before the 20th century. Aerial combat changed all of that. Besides, geometry makes a difference. Land that can be easily cut off is not easily defensible.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.