>>>>>i don't think that russia will want to commit forces and neither would china, and the us and uk are too over stretched with iraq to invade so it would have to be a bombing run by someone, possibly israel again. only problem is if you don't get them all and they do have nukes... as tom says large hole where israel is but then israel would counter with the nukes that they (don't) have and so the entire region is gone. now i don't know if that is THE solution to the problems there but it is A solution. i think that the only thing that will work is UN monitors and lots of them and also sanctions for looking in the wrong direction.
>>>>
>>>>But you don't think The US and UK have enough bombers, missiles, whatever to send in a short sharp shock?
>>>>
>>>>How about Ireland? You guys haven't come up with much! :-)
>>>
>>>How about Canada? We could send both our soldiers if somebody can lend us some sort of transport. It doesn't have to be anything fancy.
>>
>>No, I was thinking of a more militarily mighty country :-)
>>
>>Anyway, I thought you didn't have soldiers per se - or 3 branches of the military - just security personnel who may travel by land, sea or air.
>>
>>Seems daft. I can just imagine it: "Right Smith, put down that spanner and come ashore with me. Get into your flight suit - there's a wee mission I've got lined up for you. ... No, not the helicopter, get into the Fairy Swordfish." :-)
>
>Yeah, right (snicker). As if we have a helicopter.

I meant one of those perpex bubble things that used to be in the TV series "Whirlybirds!.