Define "shortage".
As @PhilC said, Islam didn't exist during biblical times. The first infighting between the Abrahamic religions were the Jewish leaders persecuting Christians from the first century AD. This lasted up until the Judeo-Roman war of 67-70 AD that saw the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. After that point, the remaining Jews who hadn't converted to Christianity had bigger issues to worry about - namely the very survival of their religion, since the line of Aaron had just been wiped out.
People of the Book definitely includes Jews. It was a distinction between monotheists and pagans/polytheists.
As @Bravo52 said, those who know aren’t saying and those who say don’t know. According to Wikipedia, it looks like their original partner was the French, but see the previous statement.
I mean last I checked the US was number two and I can’t imagine that they ALL got disposed of.
Hmm following the source leads me to a book published in the 90s and that is the only source I’ve seen to say that then again it’s the only source to suggest who it was so I guess it’s the best we’ve got. I really hope that they don’t have full on nuclear weapons though, if they have the largest estimate of 80 then they could make the entire area a waste land. If they have fission ones then they can only damage most of the cities.
I would not bet against Israel having nuclear weapons, from fusion bombs to artillery shells.
See also: MAD.
That's interesting. I didn't know that Charlemagne did any fighting against Muslims.
If you look at the history of weapons, the first bombs used were fission weapons and of rudimentary design. Modern fission weapons are not rudimentary. Even the Ivy King (early 1950s) weapons (Mk-18s) were roughly 500-600 Kt and by Hiroshima and Nagasaki standards were approx 40 times more powerful. I wouldn't think Israel would be rock'n just a few "Fat Mans" and "Little Boys".
Prior to the Crusades Europe was fairly chaotic in the 'dark ages' following the collapse of Rome. Bands of Saxons, Franks and Danes migrated generally westwards and founded their own states. Stability started to emerge when the Normans established stable kingdoms in northern Europe and the Mediterranean, leading to increased pilgimages and other contact.
He was also known as “the Hammer” because he fought with a big hammer.
Interesting I was not aware that there was work done on fission after the fusion program started (besides reactors).
I’m usually pretty confident in that but this time there’s complications, mostly the fact that both parties are entertaining a hot war with hard liners on both sides, all it might take is one’s army getting to close for comfort and then making the call of a scorched earth becomes a lot more appealing (if I can’t then no one can)
I think you underestimate Iran's ability to defend itself against external attack. The Iron Dome proved very effecting in defending Israel from this barrage; don't confuse that with the idea that Israel can hit targets in Iran with impunity.
"Possible"? I consider it a virtual certainty that Israel has covert assets in Iran. And so do we. And so does every other country with significant covert intelligence capability. And they all have assets here, and in all those other places. Everybody watches everybody, everybody knows it, and even knows who a few of those assets are.
Martel means hammer in old French, so Charles Martel is more or less Charles the Hammer.
I may be a minority on this here, but I see the Iranians as a fundamentally rational regime cloaked in religious fundamentalism. At this point, they're more interested in regional power and self-preservation than the fundamentalism. Pursuing nuclear weapons is a self-preservation move vs. the US (the US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, who don't have nukes, but have not invaded North Korea, who does). Keeping Israel and others occupied with insurgents is a self-preservation move too. The IRGC is on a financial gravy train, since there's a lot of Guard-owned businesses. Like in Cuba, the opposition to the US and Israel is a way to justify a poorer economic climate partly caused by the IRGC skimming a lot off the top. I don't agree with their choices, but I see them as fundamentally rational. And MAD works on rational people.
Nah, Kim is perfectly aware that his military and government will be obliterated by the west and their allies if he tries anything stupid. His chief interest is in maintaining the status quo with himself on top of North Korea.
This, I have think that dictators are always intelligent people after all it takes some smarts to run a country.
Well I don’t speak French and I saw I pic of him holding a big hammer so I assumed that was why he was called the hammer.
I don’t know, the US for a long time really intended to hit the button if the USSR did anything funny, but then we both started doing something funny and bing bang boom Cuba has nuclear weapons and the US is about to do it, I think this can play out the same way.
Iran surely has an ability, but not "the" ability. They should assume Israel can hit strategic targets at a much higher capacity than they can defend. If you look at the overall "big board" you will see the systems Iran possesses are not as capable as the systems the Israelies possess. The majority of the systems in Iran are copies of other systems that are 60-70s era systems. Copies. The bigger threat is the S-300, which they have trouble maintaining so they copied it. However, that's not the biggest issue. While those systems have some capability, the command and control is the bigger void they have issues overcoming. Considering the "similar" systems in Syria, they have done nothing to stop Israel.
You may or may not know this, but in the middle ages most surnames were descriptive. Charles the Hammer got the name because he used a hammer in battle. Charlemagne is literally Charles the Great. John Farmer and Joseph Miller got their names from their jobs (which were likely handed down parent to child so they approximated family names, at least for eldest sons). George Brown and Erik the Red... well, you get the idea.
I sort of did, I meant I knew that Farmers where farmers and smiths were smiths I just didn’t realize at the time.
As stated above, Israel acquired nuclear technology in the mid 1950s from Charles DeGaulle. In the 1973 war, when the initial tide of war was against Israel, Moshe Dayan (defense chief) requested that several nuclear bombs be assembled in their nuclear labs in Dimona. Israel has been reported to have over 200 nuclear devices in their stock pile. They have both the aircraft and missiles readily available to deliver these devices. It was reported (~ 2 years ago) that several Israeli F-35s flew over Terhan and were undetected. One of several distinctions is that Israel has had nuclear weapons for over 70 years and not used them and only would if needed in a last ditch measure to sustain their existence. In contrast, once Iran has operational nuclear bombs, they will use them for nuclear blackmail and at any opportunity possible. Thankfully, 99% of the drones/ ballistic missiles were intercepted. However , if the few missiles that got through the defense network were nuclear "tipped," it would have been devastating. IMHO Israel needs to hit Iranian military sites and their developing nuclear sites as soon as possible
Nah, for the same reason Kim won't use his nukes. If Iran does that, anything sketchy that Israel has done will be instantly forgotten as the full wrath of the West is turned on Iran.
North Korea takes its marching orders from China only, they have functional delivery systems and nuclear weapons. In contrast, we believe Iran does not yet have a functional bomb or effective delivery system; thus the comparison may not hold. Furthermore, If Iran one day does hit Israel with a nuclear bomb, it would be too late for the West to effectively act. Israel does not want to be in a position to "depend" on anyone to defend them or control their response to a potential existential attack. If the UK told the US to not retaliate for the attack on 911, you know what our response would have been.
A great book to read that uses this descriptor is Ken Follett's "Pillars of the Earth". That said, I'm pretty sure there is a "little john" in my surname. If I look at my DNA, there are only two places I could be from...here and there. One on this side of the pond and one on the other.
what could we do that was worse than using nuclear weapons that Israel has already used in this situation? Bio weapons to finish the last off?
For starters, Israel probably wouldn't use all of their nukes. They would likely want to save some for another adversary. Next up, if some of the nukes are not in a form that can reach Iran. For example, srtillery shells and a modern equivalent of the Honest John don't have the range. Finally, you would expect that they would use redundant targeting of high value targets either to make sure that at least one bomb gets through or to try to get a blast deeper underground (one nuke digs a hole, the next digs it deeper, etc.). So I could imagine a scenario where 5-20 targets got hammered, and the rest of the country was relatively unscathed except for fallout.
Good point we could make the entire country resemble the fallout games,
