Originally Posted by Topcat

If by talk you mean tell them were the bear sh*t in the buckwheat fine. Let them know that we can make their nation a smoking lifeless ruin.

Originally Posted by mlurp

And Topcat there in lies the problem.. Neither America nor Israel wants to harm Irans people.

Even if all failed and war broke out. Irans people like America for the most part.
Mostly the young ones around say 40 something and under.

Although some even older, like us. Even after we failed them twice. In the early 80's we backed the soon to be evil Iraq leader in his war against Iran.

And then again in the early to mid 2000 period when the Nations people started their riots and we failed to get involved and help them in any way.

Yet still they like the West and just want to live peacefully, earn a living (which America has seen to it most can't do) have families and live like they once did before Khomeini returnd from France and took over the power and decided to make an Islamic Nation of Iran.

Now do you see the problem?

Besides we are not a nation that wipes out all of an enemies people! We have never done this.

Or have you missed both wars in Iraq and the one we are now slowly withdrawing from in Afghanistan?

Originally Posted by Mikeyy

Topcat is a tough girl with other peoples lives. No point in having a discusion with her in an intelligent way.

Originally Posted by Mikeyy

BTW mlurp, Where do you get a comment like this? Are you on the koolaid too?

See the comment right above this.

"I know with Obama in the WH we might not back our best or once best friends in this area of the M.E."

Everyone says Obama has done more for Israels security than any POTUS to date. The Israelis say so. I get real tired of this bullshlt I really do

Here is just one example. Why don't you educate yourself rather than spew the right wing talking points? How about the "Iron Dome" for example?



The initial funding and development of the Iron Dome system was provided and undertaken by Israel. This allowed for the deployment of the first two Iron Dome systems. Subsequently, funding for an additional eight Iron Dome systems—along with funding for a supply of interception missiles—is currently being provided by the United States, with two of these additional systems having been delivered by 2012. Funding for the production and deployment of these additional Iron Dome batteries and interceptor missiles was approved by the United States Congress, after being requested by President Obama in 2010. In May 2010, the White House announced that U.S. President Barack Obama would seek $205 million from U.S. Congress in his 2011 budget, to spur the production and deployment of additional Iron Dome batteries. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor stated, "The president recognizes the threat missiles and rockets fired by Hamas and Hezbollah pose to Israelis, and has therefore decided to seek funding from Congress to support the production of Israel's short range rocket defense system called Iron Dome." This would be the first direct U.S. investment in the project. Such financial assistance could expedite the completion of the defensive system, which has long been delayed by budgetary shortfalls. A few days later, on 20 May 2010, the U.S. House of Representatives approved the funding in a 410–4 vote. The bill, the United States–Israel Missile Defense Cooperation and Support Act (H.R. 5327), was sponsored by Representative Glenn C. Nye of Virginia. This money was expected to be included in the 2011 budget. Once the money is received in 2011, it will still take a further 18 months before the additional batteries are delivered to the air force.


On 9 May 2011, Haaretz published that Defense Ministry director general Maj. Gen. (res.) Udi Shani said that Israel plans to invest nearly $1 billion in the coming years for the development and production of Iron Dome batteries. "We are no longer approaching this in terms of initial operational capabilities but are defining the final target for absorbing the systems, in terms of schedule and funds. We are talking about [having] 10–15 Iron Dome batteries. We will invest nearly $1 billion on this. This is the goal, in addition to the $205 million that the U.S. government has authorized," Shani said.


On 4 April 2012, Reuters reported that a senior Israeli official, during a briefing to a small group of journalists in condition of anonymity, predicted an increased interception range of up to 250 km, as well as more flexible aiming of Iron Dome units, thus lowering the number of batteries needed for full deployment in Israel. That would help Israel to cope with the prospect of reduced funding from the United States, while a "new round" of talks about missile-defense funding would be completed in two to three months, he anticipated. While praising American largess, the official said US planners have asked Israel to "point out honestly where the upper limit is in terms of what can be implemented" with the Iron Dome. He said the US is "deep in (fiscal) challenges itself", so it does not want to "give money for the sake of it".


In exchange for the second tranche of deployment funding, the United States is asking Israel for access to, and a stake in, elements of the system's technology.


On 17 May 2012, when Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak met with U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, the Pentagon issued a statement from the Secretary saying in part, "I was pleased to inform Minister Barak that the President supports Israel's Iron Dome system and directed me to fill the $70 million in assistance for Iron Dome that Minister Barak indicated to me Israel needs this fiscal year."



On 18 May 2012, the United States House of Representatives passed the Fiscal Year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 4310, with $680 million for Iron Dome in Section 227. The report accompanying the bill, 112-479, also calls for technology sharing as well as co-production of Iron Dome in the United States in light of the nearly $900 million invested in the system since 2011.


SECTION 227, IRON DOME SHORT-RANGE ROCKET DEFENSE PROGRAM, would authorize $680.0 million for the Iron Dome system in fiscal years 2012–15 in PE 63913C for procurement of additional batteries and interceptors, and for operations and sustainment expenses. This section would also require the Director, Missile Defense Agency to establish within MDA a program office for cooperative missile defense efforts on the Iron Dome system to ensure long-term cooperation on this program. The committee is aware that National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383) included $205.0 million for the Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system for the State of Israel. The committee notes that the Iron Dome system has proven very effective at defeating threat rockets launched at protected targets. The committee also notes that if the full $680.0 million is used on the program, the total U.S. taxpayer investment in this system will amount to nearly $900.0 million since fiscal year 2011, yet the United States has no rights to the technology involved. The committee believes the Director should ensure, prior to disbursing the authorized $680 million for Iron Dome, that the United States has appropriate rights to this technology for United States defense purposes, subject to an agreement with the Israeli Missile Defense Organization, and in a manner consistent with prior U.S.–Israeli missile defense cooperation on the Arrow and David's Sling suite of systems. The committee also believes that the Director should explore any opportunity to enter into co-production of the Iron Dome system with Israel, in light of the significant U.S. investment in this system.

On 4 June 2012, the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee included $210 million for Iron Dome, in its version of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2013, S.3254. The bill has been reported out of committee and is waiting to be assigned a date for consideration by the full Senate.

SEC. 237, AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR IRON DOME SHORT-RANGE ROCKET DEFENSE PROGRAM, said that of the amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2013 by section 201 for research, development, test, and evaluation, defense-wide, and available for the Missile Defense Agency, $210,000,000 may be provided to the Government of Israel for the Iron Dome short-range rocket defense program as specified in the funding table in section 4201.

[edit] Co-production with the United States

With the United States on track to greatly increase funding for Iron Dome, there have been calls for technology transfer and co-production of Iron Dome in the United States. Just as the US and Israel share co-production of the Arrow III missile system, with Boeing manufacturing 40–50 percent of the production content, there has been support in the U.S. Congress, media and think tanks in favor of co-production.[40] The U.S. House of Representatives included report language in its FY-2013 Defense Authorization Act supporting Iron Dome with $680 million but also instructing that the Director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, Lt. Gen. Patrick O'Reilly, "should explore any opportunity to enter into co-production of the Iron Dome system with Israel, in light of the significant U.S. investment in this system."[41] There are media reports that the Pentagon is requesting similar language in the Senate Defense Authorization Act as well as the respective House and Senate defense appropriations bills for 2013.[42] Adding Iron Dome to the list of high-tech military programs built jointly by both nations would help further strengthen ties between Israel and America.[43]

[edit] Development

[edit] Design

In 2005, Brig. Gen. Danny Gold, then head of Maf'at, decided to start the program that would include the system's research and a demonstration of the intercepting system.[13][14] In 2007, Israel commissioned the development of Iron Dome, choosing Israeli contractor Rafael over the American giant Lockheed Martin. Israeli company mPrest Systems was put in charge of programming the core of Iron Dome's battle management system. Iron Dome went from the drawing board to combat readiness within less than four years, a remarkably short period of time for a weapons system designed from scratch, according to military experts.[44]


There was no system like this, anywhere in the world, in terms of capabilities, speed, accuracy. We felt like a start-up

—Eyal Ron, a manager at mPrest[44]

[edit] Testing

Iron Dome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by Mikeyy

I have heard some who are vehemently opposed to any direct talks with Iran. I can never understand this position. Talking to our enemy doesn't concede anything and is preferable to seeing our men and woman killed or thousands of Iranians killed.

We have seen polling that shows that the Iranian public likes Americans. When you act belligerent and do nothing but threaten you stir nationalistic patriotism in the people of Iran and the positive feeling toward America begins to shift.

Don't misunderstand me. I think the regime is a sponsor of terrorism. I think they are already responsible for the deaths of Americans and our allies. I'm no Pollyanna when it comes to that government. But eventually that regime will fall. When it does who will take over? People who hate America or those who look to the U.S. as a model to emulate? It's called deplomacy and long term thinking.

It would help on two fronts. It would empower those in Iran who want a more western style democracy and establish to our allies that we have made every effort if we need to form a military coalition.

It could even have the effect of working out an agreement. I doubt it but it could happen. I just think it doesn't hurt to talk to your enemies up to the point you have to kick their asses.

What is gained by not talking?

Originally Posted by mlurp

I think each person has a right to voice their opinions.



for the links Mikeyy but my mind was thinking of his last election, where he made the premier wait in his office.

And note I didn't do any attacks I just gave my own thoughts. So now Obama has made a change.

GREAT I can respect that to. Yet you need not go off on a triad to just tell me he has changed when it come to Israel.

Heck Mikeyy, I quit watching him do speechs, because they all seem like he is still campaigning & attacking the GOP.

Which to bring you upto date on my position, which is I don't care for either parties & to hell with most politics...

Yet I have a right to say my opinions.

So stop taking all I say {which is not the news I posted but my opinion at that time} and making it the important part of what I posted.