Looks like Iran might finally be in the crosshairs. - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Looks like Iran might finally be in the crosshairs. (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 8/13/2005 12:29:21 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Iran didn't bury them deep for no reason, they expect us to bomb them.

Every super-deep bunker has a door or elevator shaft - sealing them shut is as good as destroying the bunker itself, in terms of halting their program and pushing the pro-democracy revolution in Iran to break out.

Then just lob some cluster bombs at the excavation crews at irregular intervals.

Posted: 8/13/2005 12:33:59 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Iran didn't bury them deep for no reason, they expect us to bomb them.

Yep.

Yep +2.

As much as I would like to see an attack on Iran, I just don't believe it would do much good.

And the Iranians have a few cards to deal, too.

- Hezbollah

- Shore based anti-ship missiles. Those oil tankers would be a big, fat target. You think oil prices are high now?

- Medium range ballistic missiles. Israel and targets in Iraq would be in range. And they have much better accuracy than the older Scuds that Saddam had.

So's the f'n PAC 3 Patriot system, Mr Glass is half empty. We escorted tankers throughout the persian gulf in teh mid-/late/80s, repeatedly kicking Iran's ass when they got uppity. We can do the same quite readily.

Posted: 8/13/2005 12:54:14 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Iran didn't bury them deep for no reason, they expect us to bomb them.

Yep.

Yep +2.

As much as I would like to see an attack on Iran, I just don't believe it would do much good.

And the Iranians have a few cards to deal, too.

- Hezbollah

- Shore based anti-ship missiles. Those oil tankers would be a big, fat target. You think oil prices are high now?

- Medium range ballistic missiles. Israel and targets in Iraq would be in range. And they have much better accuracy than the older Scuds that Saddam had.

So's the f'n PAC 3 Patriot system, Mr Glass is half empty. We escorted tankers throughout the persian gulf in teh mid-/late/80s, repeatedly kicking Iran's ass when they got uppity. We can do the same quite readily.

Yeah really! How many days, oh I am sorry I mean how many hours do you think their airforce would last?After we mop the desert with their airforce we just bomb them at will.

Sounds like a good start anyway.And it would be a real show of force to the real trouble makers on the block,North Korea!

Posted: 8/13/2005 12:56:43 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:

So's the f'n PAC 3 Patriot system, Mr Glass is half empty. We escorted tankers throughout the persian gulf in teh mid-/late/80s, repeatedly kicking Iran's ass when they got uppity. We can do the same quite readily.

Edit.
Nevermind.

Posted: 8/13/2005 1:05:38 PM EDT

[#5]

I think a slight bitch slapping might be in order(JDAMS on nuke sites).

Then we sit and wait to see if they are ready to fight or comply.

No need to send the boys accross the border......not yet anyway.

FREE

Posted: 8/13/2005 1:06:57 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In all seriousness, whatever transpires, President Bush has taken a solemn vow to protect and preserve the Constitution. He has proven he is a man of his word. He takes his job seriously and will take WHATEVER measures necessary to carry out his duties.

We all know that if the Islamofacists in Iran who now are represented in the ongoing quasi-surregate war with the United States by such .orgs as Hezbollah, ever get their hands on a nuke they will use it here or in Israel. Bush and his staff are well aware of the threat. They will not let that happen.

Whatever it takes...including nuclear pre-emptive strikes if necessary. Our future must and will be preserved.

Your dreaming, the only way we'd use nukes was is nukes were used on us, period (Hell, even then it would be iffy).

WADR, you are mistaken.

Sorry friend but this country lacks the balls it had durring WWII, that's just a fact.

The only person who needs enough sack to go nuclear is President Bush, and I'm pretty sure he has plenty of sack to do what needs to be done.

As Commander-In-Chief he is not obligated to seek permission from, or give notification of pending nuclear weapons use, to anyone.

Had to run up to the commisary to replenish stores. You guys have made my argument for me!

Most Americans don't really understand (Nor should they be required to for that matter...

), but IF the Constitution were REALLY at risk, and a [pre-emptive] nuclear strike were called for, it would happen. This country will NOT sit by and permit any foreign state, terror organization, or any other crazy fucker to attack us with a WMD. And yes...President Bush and the NCA have complete and utter power to conduct such a strike WITHOUT the concurrence or permission of any other branch of government or individual person therein. All it takes is the reason and concurrence of other persons within the PRP and on the permission list of those persons with nuclear release order authority.

From that point on...it's canned sunshine baby!

Posted: 8/13/2005 1:13:41 PM EDT

[#7]

I dont see us using nukes in the M.E.............not yet anyways.

A good ol' conventional weapons strike and scramble things up a little.Who gives a squat if its deep underground? Theres enough above it thats vulnerible to our 'stuff' that will render it 'unuseable for awhile' and send a clear message that we aint just screwing around with idle threats.

Nukes should ALWAYS be our last option.

Posted: 8/13/2005 1:23:09 PM EDT

[#8]

For the really deep and difficult targets, we could use a B61 Mod 11 deep penetration thermoculear weapon or its replacment.

B61:

B61 Mod 11 penetrator after test in Alaska:

New design nuclear penetrator:

Posted: 8/13/2005 1:26:50 PM EDT

[#9]

Why couldn't we have done the same thing with Iraq? Bomb, bomb, bomb until Saddam and his cronies comply?

Posted: 8/13/2005 1:28:11 PM EDT

[#10]

Bush definitely has a big set of clankers, that's for sure.

I think he means it, as he always does. The Iranians should be paying close attention.

CJ

Posted: 8/13/2005 1:34:50 PM EDT

[#11]

You guys keep saying that we don't have the manpower for a world war. Granted, RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT we don't. In 6 months we could.

IIRC the population of the U.S. during WWII was about 180 million. It is almost 300 million now. We COULD (if we had to) field a MUCH larger army than we did in WWII.

Key question: would we do it?

Posted: 8/13/2005 1:39:14 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
You guys keep saying that we don't have the manpower for a world war. Granted, RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT we don't. In 6 months we could.

IIRC the population of the U.S. during WWII was about 180 million. It is almost 300 million now. We COULD (if we had to) field a MUCH larger army than we did in WWII.

Key question: would we do it?

I think the answer would be no. Not enough Americans view the war(s) in the Middle East as legitimate enough to be drafted.

Posted: 8/13/2005 1:52:59 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
You right we don't have the man power for a world war ,but a military strike against their nuclear sites would not start one .It not even a option to think about them buliding a bomb,we have to stop it if they continue.

+1 For the North Koreans as sell!

Lt. General Thomas G. McInerney says it can be done!

You know..we didn't have the Manpower, the Money nor the equipment when we got involved in WWII.

It is really a matter of resolve.

Posted: 8/13/2005 1:58:55 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Had to run up to the commisary to replenish stores.

Should have sent out a logreq with lat/lon for RAS, shipmate. The you wouldn't have missed a second.

Posted: 8/13/2005 2:02:53 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Quoted:
You right we don't have the man power for a world war ,but a military strike against their nuclear sites would not start one .It not even a option to think about them buliding a bomb,we have to stop it if they continue.

+1 For the North Koreans as sell!

Lt. General Thomas G. McInerney says it can be done!

You know..we didn't have the Manpower, the Money nor the equipment when we got involved in WWII.

It is really a matter of resolve.

WWII was a different story.

Posted: 8/13/2005 2:03:34 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Does anyone here think Iran was a bigger threat than Iraq from the beginning? Shouldn't Iran have been the first target in the war on terror?

Personally, caught me by surprise because I haven't kept up with the event concern Iran until much later. Now the Iranians are starting to show their true colors. Jimmy Carter was such a wuss, IF he had did his job, the USA and the world wouldn't be in this pickle. History is going to judge the Peanut Farmer very harshly, he may have been the genesis to WWIII for not taking out the Iranians.

Posted: 8/13/2005 2:05:19 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You right we don't have the man power for a world war ,but a military strike against their nuclear sites would not start one .It not even a option to think about them buliding a bomb,we have to stop it if they continue.

+1 For the North Koreans as sell!

Lt. General Thomas G. McInerney says it can be done!

You know..we didn't have the Manpower, the Money nor the equipment when we got involved in WWII.

It is really a matter of resolve.

WWII was a different story.

Won't need as many men as in WWII because of modern electronics. Those SOBs are just 3rd world country, the USA should just squash like the roach that they are(but in reality that is not politically possible.)

Posted: 8/13/2005 2:30:05 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The krauts are at it again.
BBC:Germany attacks US on Iran threat
Germany's chancellor warns the US to withdraw the threat of force against Iran over its nuclear programme.

Or what? We kicked those bastards asses twice in a row in the last 100 years. Do they want more of the same?

They are a bunch of impotent little pricks, anyway.

LMAO! The only reason we beat the Germans was because the Russians took the brunt of the German force. Had Germany not attacked the Soviet Union and the Soviet Unon had stayed neutral not only would Britan have been conquered America would have never set foot in Europe.

Posted: 8/13/2005 2:45:28 PM EDT

[#19]

As much as I hate to see us get involved in yet another conflict, I realize that Iran cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. With their loony Islamic leadership and intentions toward the US, only a fool would allow them to gain nukes.

Once they get nukes, they will be very difficult to deal with in the future. Not only could they give materials to terrorists, but they could also hold the entire region hostage. And guess what? At that point, ground troops and navy assets in the Gulf are not going to be an option. Neither will US bases in the Middle East. Therefore the only response that would be left is nuclear annihilation of Iran.

I hope diplomacy works and we must try that first. But if the option of military force is the only option remaining after diplomatic efforts are exhausted, then I would be in favor of hitting Iran's sites and stopping them from gaining nukes.

We don't have to occupy the nation like we did Iraq. We just gotta knock out their production facilities. Israel did this with Iraq in the 1980s and their nuclear program never recovered. And even if they tried to rebuild it, we could always hit it again in the future. Then we'd just need to be prepared to defend against Iranian counteracts, which we could do, with disasterous results on any Iranians stupid enough to attempt it.

Posted: 8/13/2005 2:46:59 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Who's he gonna send???? The Boy Scouts???

He can't......the Boy Scouts are guarding the southern border of fortress America!

Besides, from what I've heard......his "intelligence services" ( you remember them, the "intelligence guys" who told him that Saddam Hussein was up to his eyeballs in WMD's) say that Iran has no bad weapons.........

Posted: 8/13/2005 2:56:52 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The krauts are at it again.
BBC:Germany attacks US on Iran threat
Germany's chancellor warns the US to withdraw the threat of force against Iran over its nuclear programme.

Or what? We kicked those bastards asses twice in a row in the last 100 years. Do they want more of the same?

They are a bunch of impotent little pricks, anyway.

LMAO! The only reason we beat the Germans was because the Russians took the brunt of the German force. Had Germany not attacked the Soviet Union and the Soviet Unon had stayed neutral not only would Britan have been conquered America would have never set foot in Europe.

Certainly things would have played out differently. But to say that Germany would have sat unchallenged in Europe after we nuked Japan is a mistake. We would have gone toe to toe with them, and the Russians would have joined the party against the krauts anyway.

Remember, Stalin trusted Hitler about as much as he trusted anyone.

Posted: 8/13/2005 3:08:20 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Remember, Stalin trusted Hitler about as much as he trusted anyone.

Agreed, but I wonder if he would have actually taken the initiative to declare war without being provoked?

Posted: 8/13/2005 6:14:42 PM EDT

[#23]

Paging GlockGuy40!!!!

Posted: 8/13/2005 6:23:01 PM EDT

[#24]

Maybe we can dig up Atomic Annie and park it on the border of Iran.

Posted: 8/13/2005 6:28:57 PM EDT

[#25]

Fence sitting young Iranian population see us smoke their nuke plant. They will see the clerics rhetoric about us wanting to keep them repressed as valid. They do not see that it is the clerics who are repressing them. This situation is very precarious because most middle eastern muslims are easily swayed by rhetoric and are quite ignorant of most things.

This could open a can of worms we havent seen yet.

I say let Israel deal with it.

Posted: 8/13/2005 6:31:46 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Israel would have to launch every single jet they had, at once to take out the entire Iranian nuclear facilities and associated areas of interest. I am thinking that Iran wants to be hit, especially by Israel, in order to rally their own people in an anti-American/ Israel mother-of-all-jihads. We need to support more of the pro-democracy struggles inside of Iran, and quick.

I agree a thousand fold. If we strike in haste any pro democracy movement we may be able to use will dissolve instantly and they will go back to their barbaric ways influenced by the mullahs.

Posted: 8/13/2005 6:39:09 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Does anyone here think Iran was a bigger threat than Iraq from the beginning? Shouldn't Iran have been the first target in the war on terror?

Afghan first then Saudi.

Posted: 8/13/2005 8:09:20 PM EDT

[#28]

Looks like there's a lot of places to hit in Iran where they're developing nuke material, not just the reactor at Bushehr.

There's shit at Lavizan, Arak, Natanz, and a bunch of other places. Gotta get it all at once if you really wanna set them back. They're FULLY ENGAGED in building nukes.

www.iranwatch.org

Posted: 8/13/2005 8:16:30 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Does anyone here think Iran was a bigger threat than Iraq from the beginning? Shouldn't Iran have been the first target in the war on terror?

Afghan first then Saudi.

So why are we attacking Iraq?!

Posted: 8/13/2005 8:27:42 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Does anyone here think Iran was a bigger threat than Iraq from the beginning? Shouldn't Iran have been the first target in the war on terror?

Afghan first then Saudi.

So why are we attacking Iraq?!

Who the hell knows..

WildBoar got it right.

Posted: 8/13/2005 8:37:26 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Fence sitting young Iranian population see us smoke their nuke plant. They will see the clerics rhetoric about us wanting to keep them repressed as valid. They do not see that it is the clerics who are repressing them. This situation is very precarious because most middle eastern muslims are easily swayed by rhetoric and are quite ignorant of most things.

This could open a can of worms we havent seen yet.

I say let Israel deal with it.

I think your wrong on that one. I want every rogue nation to know if they attempet to begin buliding weapons of mass destruction that we will bomb them and take out those facilitys. We need our president and congress to be stronger then almost any time in our history. The middle east will not hate us anymore or any less if we do this .They would like to see us destroyed now.So that is not an issue.I want us to be feared by these rogue states. All of them

Posted: 8/13/2005 8:40:12 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Israel would have to launch every single jet they had, at once to take out the entire Iranian nuclear facilities and associated areas of interest. I am thinking that Iran wants to be hit, especially by Israel, in order to rally their own people in an anti-American/ Israel mother-of-all-jihads. We need to support more of the pro-democracy struggles inside of Iran, and quick.

major +1

Posted: 8/13/2005 8:52:00 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
In all seriousness, whatever transpires, President Bush has taken a solemn vow to protect and preserve the Constitution. He has proven he is a man of his word.

Dude... I need some of what you're smoking!
While Bush may not be attacking the second amendment as hard as some others would the last hundred years or so have been a steady decline in our constitutional rights, with a sharp drop in the last few years. The fourth and fifth amendments have been nearly gutted, and they're really trying to gut the first. If you think any modern politican is a protector of the constitution you need to pay a bit more attention.

Posted: 8/13/2005 8:52:20 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Who's he gonna send???? The Boy Scouts???

The Israelis are foaming at the mouth... all we have to do is let slip the dogs of war. BTW, we just sold them new production bunker busting MOAB style bombs about 2 years ago. And they just modified their F-16s for long range flights.

Exactly right.

All we have to do is release the leash and the Isralis would take care of 90%+ of our problems in the Middle East.

Posted: 8/13/2005 8:56:49 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
Who's he gonna send???? The Boy Scouts???

Why? You wanna know in advance so you can root for the enemy?

Posted: 8/13/2005 9:06:36 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The krauts are at it again.
BBC:Germany attacks US on Iran threat
Germany's chancellor warns the US to withdraw the threat of force against Iran over its nuclear programme.

Or what? We kicked those bastards asses twice in a row in the last 100 years. Do they want more of the same?

They are a bunch of impotent little pricks, anyway.

LMAO! The only reason we beat the Germans was because the Russians took the brunt of the German force. Had Germany not attacked the Soviet Union and the Soviet Unon had stayed neutral not only would Britan have been conquered America would have never set foot in Europe.

It would not have been as early, but we would have triumphed over them, just as we did Japan.

Posted: 8/13/2005 9:34:15 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Once they get nukes, they will be very difficult to deal with in the future. Not only could they give materials to terrorists, but they could also hold the entire region hostage. And guess what? At that point, ground troops and navy assets in the Gulf are not going to be an option. Neither will US bases in the Middle East. Therefore the only response that would be left is nuclear annihilation of Iran.

There it is. Be it us, the Israelis, or Gawd Hisself who prevents it, in this game the Iranians simply cannot be allowed to possess the nuclear trump card.

Posted: 8/13/2005 9:59:12 PM EDT

[#38]

i think the world needs to rid itself of all weapons-except for edged ones...then the best sword fighter wins. fuck nukes.

Posted: 8/14/2005 4:27:03 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
i think the world needs to rid itself of all weapons-except for edged ones...then the best sword fighter wins. fuck nukes.

Posted: 8/14/2005 4:44:16 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
GlockGuy40 will be along shortly to tell us why this cannot work.

ANdy

I'm touched

In this instance though... I think I'll back out and let the mental masterbation continue

Posted: 8/14/2005 4:58:24 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The krauts are at it again.
BBC:Germany attacks US on Iran threat
Germany's chancellor warns the US to withdraw the threat of force against Iran over its nuclear programme.

Or what? We kicked those bastards asses twice in a row in the last 100 years. Do they want more of the same?

They are a bunch of impotent little pricks, anyway.

+1

Anybody that doesn't think GWB will use nukes in a preemptive manner to prevent a nuclear strike of any kind on one of our cities is dreaming.

Posted: 8/14/2005 5:35:39 AM EDT

[#42]

If it were possible to launch a pre-emptive strike that would set them back 10 years or more in their nuke program (like the Israeli attack in 1981 against Iraq did), I say go for it.

But don't bother with a year-long telegraphed punch involving the UN, Russia, China, French, etc, since the program would have been so dispersed by then- it wouldn't be effective anyway.

they are openly defying us and the rest of the world right now, knowing full well our Iraqi problem would mean zero global support for an attack that would kill 'civilians'

Irans actions right now represent a worst case scenario

Imagine of Saddam had been so bold as to re-start an enrichment program in say 2003?

Posted: 8/14/2005 9:54:40 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Who's he gonna send???? The Boy Scouts???

Why? You wanna know in advance so you can root for the enemy?

Ah no, rikky.

One way to "root for the enemy", is to put our troops where the enemy wants them!!

In Shitholes..........Doing "Nation-building"..

You, Bush, and the modern day "Whiz Kids", are doing just fine at fulfilling the predictions and wish's of the enemy, all the while you are TRAINING them FAR better than they ever got before...

Meanwhile, the real bad guys skate.

Just like I predicted rikky, while YOU were saying he, (Saddam), had WMD!!!

Why don't YOU pick the last American to die in Iraq???

Posted: 8/14/2005 9:58:25 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who's he gonna send???? The Boy Scouts???

Why? You wanna know in advance so you can root for the enemy?

Ah no, rikky.

One way to "root for the enemy", is to put our troops where the enemy wants them!!

Yes, just like we put our troops where the enemy wanted them in the Pacific in the 40s.

Why don't YOU pick the last American to die in Iraq???

If only I could...

Posted: 8/14/2005 12:04:58 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who's he gonna send???? The Boy Scouts???

Why? You wanna know in advance so you can root for the enemy?

Ah no, rikky.

One way to "root for the enemy", is to put our troops where the enemy wants them!!

In Shitholes..........Doing "Nation-building"..

You, Bush, and the modern day "Whiz Kids", are doing just fine at fulfilling the predictions and wish's of the enemy, all the while you are TRAINING them FAR better than they ever got before...

Meanwhile, the real bad guys skate.

Just like I predicted rikky, while YOU were saying he, (Saddam), had WMD!!!

Why don't YOU pick the last American to die in Iraq???

Excuse me liberty but just in case you haven't noticed we have not been attacked here since we took it to them over there.
Coincidence?
I think no.

In one major respect you have something in common with liberals.

You want to cut and run?
You want America weakened by the liberal scum bags in this country?
You should change you name to something more in line with the sympathizer you're acting like.

Posted: 8/14/2005 12:10:13 PM EDT

[#46]

By the way liberty86 there are couple of low lifes at DU using that same quote in your sig line.
Coincidence?

"And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon." Re 13:11

Who is the beast supposed to be liberty?
I wonder if you aren't referring to GWB?

Posted: 8/14/2005 12:22:34 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who's he gonna send???? The Boy Scouts???

Why? You wanna know in advance so you can root for the enemy?

Ah no, rikky.

One way to "root for the enemy", is to put our troops where the enemy wants them!!

In Shitholes..........Doing "Nation-building"..

You, Bush, and the modern day "Whiz Kids", are doing just fine at fulfilling the predictions and wish's of the enemy, all the while you are TRAINING them FAR better than they ever got before...

Meanwhile, the real bad guys skate.

Just like I predicted rikky, while YOU were saying he, (Saddam), had WMD!!!

Why don't YOU pick the last American to die in Iraq???

Excuse me liberty but just in case you haven't noticed we have not been attacked here since we took it to them over there.
Coincidence?
I think no.

C'mon jrzy, now you know as well as anyone else that they wait a while between each attack. One WILL happen here, it's not if but when and how bad it will be.

Posted: 8/14/2005 1:09:21 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
C'mon jrzy, now you know as well as anyone else that they wait a while between each attack. One WILL happen here, it's not if but when and how bad it will be.

We don't know anything of the sort. The fact is, if they could have executed a massive strike like 9-11 against the US in the 4 years since, they would have.

Posted: 8/14/2005 1:11:19 PM EDT

[#49]

Shouldn't we be spending tens of billions on alternative energy so we never have to deal with the Middle East again?

Posted: 8/14/2005 1:21:31 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Shouldn't we be spending tens of billions on alternative energy so we never have to deal with the Middle East again?

Or hell, why won' the Senate let us drill right here at home in AK?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Looks like Iran might finally be in the crosshairs. (Page 2 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us