Comments by "Nigel Johnson" (@nigeljohnson9820) on "Inside Iran: the fresh missile threat causing alarm in Washington" video.

Israel has been very quiet of late. That is when they are at their most dangerous.
6
@MrJuanjon well adding Iran will not be difficult then. There seems little point bombing Syria, that's just moving the rubble about. I am not a particular supporter of Israel, I am just observing the situation. If the US fails to do anything about Iran obtaining nuclear weapons and the systems to deliver them, then I expect Israel will. They have done in the past. Israel is unique among the nuclear powers by never admitting that it has a nuclear arsenal, though few do not believe that is the case. The Iranian government has repeatedly said that it has had enough of war. But this is difficult to believe, given its actions are at odds with the sentiment..
2
@josedourado3747 in the middle East that adage does not work, all too often it has been shown that the enemy of my enemy is still my enemy. Turkey provides a recent example. Not long ago it was shooting down russian jets, now it is buying them. In the Syrian war it is difficult to decide which side it is on, other than Turkey's. The EU is trying to avoid being involved because it is militarily powerless. The EU prefers to use financial influence, but even there it's forced to do what the US wants or the risk sanctions on its companies operating in the US. EU member states may yet decide to protect their shipping in the gulf.
2
Iran has lied about the destination of its oil tanker and has broken EU sanctions on Syria. Iran is pushing the EU into the US camp. Israel would certainly like other to fight its enemies for it, but if Iran threatens Israel security, it will take independent action. Unlike the US, Israel does not advertise in advance its intentions on twitter. Israel always attacks without warning.
1
@josedourado3747 the EU like to claim the credit for keeping the peace in Europe, but in fact it has been NATO that kept the peace. The US being the major contributor. It should be said that the US had its own very selfish motives, that the current adminstration seem to have forgotten. During the cold war, the US regarded Europe as its nuclear battle field, prepared to fight a limited nuclear conflict in Europe rather than a full global nuclear war. It is questionable if this doctrine would have worked in practice, but both the Soviets and the US seemed to be willing to play this game. The idea that an EU army can match the power of NATO in the near future without US support is clearly nonsense. The problem for NATO is that the world is far more complected now with more than one potential enemy. Europe finds it difficult to sit under the us nuclear umbrella, simply because the US and EU do not necessarily share a common set of enemies. The US made a big mistake by believing the adage, mentioned above, that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It actively supported the taleban against the Russians. It armed, and continues to arm, Al-Qaeda against the Assad regime. It is friends with Saudi Arabia, despite ample evidence that the Saudis are financing militant Islamic terrorists. This at the same time as being friends with, and dominated by, Israel. The US actively trades with China despite the fact that China will soon replace the US as the world's largest super power. Given the totalitarian and environmental destructive nature of the Chinese regime, it is a prospect that should terrify the rest of the world. The world has become far more complicated and the wishy washy European liberal elite, who just want to be friends with everyone do not know where to turn. The EU behaves like a herd of sheep surrounded by a pack of wolves. They bleat loudly and inflate their egos in the hope of scaring off the predators.
1
@josedourado3747 are you really comparing the contribution of the US to that of the rest of NATO. The rest just make up the numbers and provide the US with the justification for its actions. Without NATO, lead by the US, most of Europe would be speaking russian now. NATO has very little to do with Iran and the actions of the EU is almost completely irrelevant. In matters of war, the EU will not get involved. As I pointed out, NATO was only any good when the western world was resisting a single easy to understand enemy, an expansionist USSR. It was much simpler when the world was devided between East and West. In today's world your friends can be supplying weapons to your enemies.
1
@josedourado3747 there is no doubt that NATO is a us tool, but for 70 years Europe is been using it. Saving billions on paying for its own defence. They is one of the reasons that the member states have such weak military. Maybe the only exception is the French, but they are compensating for their humiliation during WWII. Even then the French military is no match for the US. The US military some is huge and has been for a very long time, even allowing for the incredible waste associated with it, it still has 70 years of advanced R&D. If the EU dies squire its own military, it will be decades before it can match the sophistication of hat of the US. It can say goodbye to a large part of its wealth, which will need to go into weapons. Once it has a credible military force, it will be required to use it to justify the expense and to gain battle experience. At the moment the EU is not really regarded as a threat by any of the super powers, it lacks the teeth to do any real damage and lacks the nuclear weapons to act as an effective deterrent. The French nuclear arsenal will only be used to defend french, not the whole of the EU. Why would the French make their cities a target to defend other EU states? Strategically the French will only get involved if they are the lead and it is specifically in the interests of France. In the case of the us in Europe it was a case of fighting its war on European soil rather than that of the US. NATO cannot do that if the threat is coming from some other direction than Russia. If Iran launched a nuclear attack on Europe, would the US respond. A while ago this was a certainty, now need Trump, I am not so sure. It is possible that the US would reduce Iran to ash, simply because they would be concerned about being next. The only reason Iran would attack Europe and the EU in particular is because the EU had armed itself. At the moment the EU is harmless. If it forms a military, it will be mostly harmless for a long time.
1