Quoted: Bush is an idiot, he should appease and try to understand why Iran feels the way they do.  He should just let the UN take care of everything because they have such a great track record at preventing mass murders and genocides.  Besides the UN holds Israel in such high regard that they would never let anything bad happen to them.  Bush should follow the Neville Chamberlain model making concessions and agreeing to submit to the Iranians wishes because we all know appeasement always has great success, history bears this out.

LOL Alvin

We will not use NUKES and will not use them first at all.

My fear is we will do a Half Ass job like we have been doing due to political pressure.

Let the Military give an assessment for total destruction with conventional means and then let them do it...Screw the protest screw the liberals...

I am getting tired of hearing we are going to do the job and then watch the number of Americans die every day because we didn't....Support the troops and let them do the job.

Iran might have a MTV culture the problem is Iran does not need them to fight. There are enough fanatics to help out.

Quoted: Fuck Israel.

Why?

Quoted: Quoted: There is no such thing as a conventional SLBM, mainly because there is no need for it. It makes perfect sense that SLBM's would be the choice if nukes were desired, simply because they offer the smallest chance of a malfunction causing a small sun to appear in the wrong place. No my former SWO friend that is not the case.  While what you said may indeed be true, all that one has to do is look at a globe to see why ICBMs are not a good choice here.  Launching Minuteman missiles over Russia enroute to Iran is not a good way to ensure the security of the USA.

Well, a SBLM doesn't have to fly over Russia like a Minuteman would.   One could launch one from the Indian Ocean below the equator on such a path that it's trajectory would never make Russian territory.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There is no such thing as a conventional SLBM, mainly because there is no need for it. It makes perfect sense that SLBM's would be the choice if nukes were desired, simply because they offer the smallest chance of a malfunction causing a small sun to appear in the wrong place. No my former SWO friend that is not the case.  While what you said may indeed be true, all that one has to do is look at a globe to see why ICBMs are not a good choice here.  Launching Minuteman missiles over Russia enroute to Iran is not a good way to ensure the security of the USA. Well, a SBLM doesn't have to fly over Russia like a Minuteman would.   One could launch one from the Indian Ocean below the equator on such a path that it's trajectory would never make Russian territory.

ICBMs don't have to fly over the pole either--that was simply the shortest route in the "old days."

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There is no such thing as a conventional SLBM, mainly because there is no need for it. It makes perfect sense that SLBM's would be the choice if nukes were desired, simply because they offer the smallest chance of a malfunction causing a small sun to appear in the wrong place. No my former SWO friend that is not the case.  While what you said may indeed be true, all that one has to do is look at a globe to see why ICBMs are not a good choice here.  Launching Minuteman missiles over Russia enroute to Iran is not a good way to ensure the security of the USA. Well, a SBLM doesn't have to fly over Russia like a Minuteman would.   One could launch one from the Indian Ocean below the equator on such a path that it's trajectory would never make Russian territory.

That was the point of my post.

Quoted: Let the Military give an assessment for total destruction with conventional means and then let them do it...Screw the protest screw the liberals...

+1

Civilian commanders, i.e. the POTUS, should have one command to give to their military commanders when entering a war or major battle, and that command is "WIN".  Then stand back and let them do their jobs.

Quoted: Fuck Israel.

Figures.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There is no such thing as a conventional SLBM, mainly because there is no need for it. It makes perfect sense that SLBM's would be the choice if nukes were desired, simply because they offer the smallest chance of a malfunction causing a small sun to appear in the wrong place. No my former SWO friend that is not the case.  While what you said may indeed be true, all that one has to do is look at a globe to see why ICBMs are not a good choice here.  Launching Minuteman missiles over Russia enroute to Iran is not a good way to ensure the security of the USA. Well, a SBLM doesn't have to fly over Russia like a Minuteman would.   One could launch one from the Indian Ocean below the equator on such a path that it's trajectory would never make Russian territory. That was the point of my post.

Sorry, misread your post.

Quoted: Fuck Israel.

Well now, I would expect nothing less from Arfcom's very own Haji sympathizer. Some day this troll will learn not to fuck with Uncle Sugar and his minions. Troll on Haji lover, all the way to hell!!!....

Quoted: Fuck Israel.

I hope Israel F*@KS YOU!

Perhaps you would like to see a picture of your prophet with a bomb in his head-wrap.

Quoted: Fuck Israel.

Peak_Oil
Member
Joined :: May 2004
Post Number :: 2103

CA, USA

FUCKTARD

Quoted: Quoted: Fuck Israel. Peak_Oil Member Joined :: May 2004 Post Number :: 2103 CA, USA FUCKTARD

Fuck Israel.  Why should I care about Israel?  You got a couple spare billion dollars to keep Israel afloat?  Oh, maybe you want to tax me to pay for their security?

Fuck Israel.

Gimme two good reasons to care what happens to Israel.  And they better be at least as good as why I should care about the Congo.

Israel should go shake a cup in front of the UN for money.  I'd rather put my kids through a decent school with my money.

How are you goping to get DU to agree with using them?    What?  OHHH not Democratic Underground, depleted Uranium, never mind.

I doubt we would ever use nukes, all they would do is earn us the eternal enmity of all the countries downwind of the fallout clouds.  Unfortunately, the crazy ass Mullah in charge dowan't care about fallout.

We better have those re-entry vehicles already loaded and ready to go, it's a little late to spin up the R&D and manufacturing processes.  

If I was to bet I'ld say they would launch from either the South Atlantic or South Pacific, to minimize flight paths that would unduly alarm either the Russians or Chinese.  The IO is likely too close.

Quoted: How are you goping to get DU to agree with using them?    What?  OHHH not Democratic Underground, depleted Uranium, never mind. I doubt we would ever use nukes, all they would do is earn us the eternal enmity of all the countries downwind of the fallout clouds.  Unfortunately, the crazy ass Mullah in charge dowan't care about fallout. We better have those re-entry vehicles already loaded and ready to go, it's a little late to spin up the R&D and manufacturing processes.   If I was to bet I'ld say they would launch from either the South Atlantic or South Pacific, to minimize flight paths that would unduly alarm either the Russians or Chinese.  The IO is likely too close.

Uh, you do understand how large Iran is and how small our nuclear warheads are right?

It would be very hard for mesurable radation to get much more than a few tens of miles downwind.

Our bombs have, since way back in the sixties, had this nice feature called DIAL A YEALD, and can be set anywhere from  few hundred TONS  to a couple hundrid kilotons.

Remember we also set off 300 bombs on the continental US and we are all still here.

Saturday, February 11, 2006
Manos arriba!

Occasionally the truth is spoken before dissimulation can prevent it. That must have been the case when Polly Toynbee at the Guardian set out her thoughts on the Iran crisis. (Hat tip: Scott Burgess)

If Iran is determined, no one can stop it becoming a nuclear power, alongside Israel, Pakistan and India. The crazed dictator of North Korea shows the way: nuclear weapons make nations unassailable. Why on earth would Iran not want them too? ... Fantasy diplomacy is ready to fight all the way to stop the mullahs getting the bomb. Reality suggests there is a difficult choice: if you cannot win, give up at once to minimise the damage. Get off the high horse and start to negotiate terms on which Iran can be allowed to enrich uranium. It amounts to turning a blind eye to their weapons potential while striking a deal that saves their face, affords them some dignity and entices them economically into becoming a more stable force.

Commentary

Your hear it all the time: let's stop fighting; let's negotiate. Of course, the key problem being why anyone should be willing to negotiate with a party which is willing to surrender at the drop of a hat. As every MBA (but presumably not Polly Toynbee) knows, the unspoken alternative to negotiation is the Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement or BATNA.

BATNA is a term coined by Roger Fisher and William Ury in their 1981 bestseller, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Without Giving In. ... In the simplest terms, if the proposed agreement is better than your BATNA, then you should accept it. If the agreement is not better than your BATNA, then you should reopen negotiations. If you cannot improve the agreement, then you should at least consider withdrawing from the negotiations and pursuing your alternative (though the costs of doing that must be considered as well).

My teachers put it this way: BATNA is the penalty you pay when you walk away from the negotiating table. Since Polly Toynbee argues that Teheran should face no penalty for walking away from the negotiating table then there is no reason it cannot continue to do whatever it wants. Indeed the question is why it should negotiate at all since nothing is to be gained by negotiations. Iran is free to advance in whatever direction it wishes without opposition. Of what use are negotiations? To provide a forum to make further concessions of course. What else should the West concede? Oh wait, I had forgotten that it is not only important to surrender, but to surrender cravenly. During the Clinton Administration, it was sophisticated policy to pre-emptively hand over the keys to the fortress even before you were asked to. In that distant era the European Union was viewed as as inevitable Wave of the Future, the successor Superpower. Not, as it turned out, the footman in chief to the imams.

...  Kupchan, who was Director of European Affairs on the staff of the National Security Council in the first Clinton Administration, the United States will soon be on the way down as a world power while Europe is on the way up, to be followed closely by Asia. "America's unipolar moment and the global stability that comes with it will not last," he contends. ... Kupchan's prescription is to retreat: "The United States cannot and should not resist the end of the American era. To do so would only risk alienating and provoking conflict with a rising Europe and an ascendant Asia."

While the prediction didn't quite work out for the European Union there's no reason why an updated version of this impeccable logic shouldn't work for Iran or any variable you may wish to substitute in it's place. The key idea is the same: dishonor before death, with the one used to gain a reprieve before the other. 'The United States cannot and should not resist the end of the American era. To do so would only risk alienating and provoking conflict with a rising X and an ascendant Y.' Thanks to the Internet Time Machine we can savor the full flavor of the Imperative to Decline. To Kupchan it wasn't happening fast enough, even under Clinton.

Salon: Still, you're basing a lot of your argument on what you've seen in the last year, aren't you? The idea that American intervention and multilateralism is on the wane ... that has a lot to do with what happened in the last year. And that's just one year. Kupchan: Interestingly enough, I wrote the first draft of the book before Bush was elected. The core themes were all there. What I'm quite shocked by is the speed with which all of this has happened. I thought that my general analysis would take a good decade to play out. Once Bush came to office it seemed like someone stepped on the gas. I had to rewrite the book and I put much more emphasis on America's turning inward and its ambivalence about running the world. After Sept. 11, the unilateralists' angry lashing-out side came back. The emphasis in the book on that was written after Bush came to office, and after Sept. 11. Salon: So you think this trend might slow down with Democrats -- if they're ever in power again -- but not halt. Kupchan:Yes, and that's partly because when I was in the Clinton administration in the early 1990s -- only a few years after the end of the Cold War -- I already saw trends that were seeds for the book. Congress was beginning to check out. The media was stopping its coverage of foreign affairs. Even Clinton, who was a liberal internationalist by inclination, wasn't so wild about the Kyoto Protocol, the International Criminal Court and all this other stuff that the Bush people said no to. When it all comes down to it, I see the arrows all pointing in one direction, but the emphasis and the speed changes from party to party.

History is cruel in that way. We can read Kupchan's remarks today not as serious scholarship but as dated comedy. The European what? The Kyoto whosis? Small things loom large in tiny minds. But the impulse is still there. Just ask Polly Toynbee: "if you cannot win, give up at once to minimise the damage.". Wrong premise, wrong conclusion.


posted by wretchard at 3:39 AM | 132 comments

Why are there so many israel lovers on here? What have they ever done for us? Those fuckers are nothing more than arabs who are actually good at telling lies. Yeah arabs are semites too you know.

These two common phrases didn't come from nowhere

"Cheating arab"
"Lying jew"

<Ethnic slur removed.  --tbk1>

Quoted: Why are there so many israel lovers on here? What have they ever done for us? Those fuckers are nothing more than arabs who are actually good at telling lies. Yeah arabs are semites too you know. These two common phrases didn't come from nowhere "Cheating arab" "Lying jew" I say let all those swarthy little towell-heads & skullcap-heads stew in their own shit-gumbo.

1.) Posting derogatory comments of a racial, religious, or sexual nature. This includes your username, signature line, and title. Site Staff and Moderators reserve the right to edit these items and to remove your ability to modify them in the future.

Cmon how many times have I seen raghead, towelhead, camel jockey etc etc and no-one gives a shit?

Quoted: There is no such thing as a conventional SLBM, mainly because there is no need for it.

Read the article...it appears that they are talking about retrofitting conventional munitions on Tridents.

That seems like a stupid and expensive method of delivery. Why put a big bomb on a platform that offers 150m CEP when you can put a bunch of smaller bombs on target with a >5m CEP?


eta: Duh, read the thread: Rods from God.

Quoted: Quoted: There is no such thing as a conventional SLBM, mainly because there is no need for it. Read the article...it appears that they are talking about retrofitting conventional munitions on Tridents. That seems like a stupid and expensive method of delivery. Why put a big bomb on a platform that offers 150m CEP when you can put a bunch of smaller bombs on target with a >5m CEP?

Because the MaRV's that were banned (in their nuclear version) by the START accords with Russia would have been around 15m CEP

And that was back in the 1980's, when GPS had not been completed.

What they are talking about are MaRVs with solid TUNGSTIN slugs for "warheads" that would hit their targets at around 17,000 mph, with a energy far greater than any air dropped bomb.

Quoted: Quoted: Why put a big bomb on a platform that offers 150m CEP when you can put a bunch of smaller bombs on target with a >5m CEP?

Penetration maybe?

Quoted: Quoted: There is no such thing as a conventional SLBM, mainly because there is no need for it. Read the article...it appears that they are talking about retrofitting conventional munitions on Tridents. That seems like a stupid and expensive method of delivery. Why put a big bomb on a platform that offers 150m CEP when you can put a bunch of smaller bombs on target with a >5m CEP? eta: Duh, read the thread: Rods from God.

Two reasons--first, current technology on RVs is better than 150 meters.  Trust me.  Minuteman does better than that, and Peacekeeper regularly did MUCH better than that.

Secondly, you can get an ICBM on target in 30 minutes after launch, anywhere in the world, and an SLBM a little later than that but not much (the subs take longer to get into launch position and configuration).  It takes much longer--possibly days--to get an F-18 off a carrier or a B2 out of Whiteman over the target.  

What if we got intell that said that Bin Ladin, Al Zaqari, and the rest of the top leadership of Al Qaeda was having a meeting in a small village in Turgidstan in two hours, meeting would last an hour?  There's no way we could get a bomber there in time, but a conventional  ICBM launched out of Vandenberg could take the shot--and make it.  

Quoted: Dear Lord, this is going to get ugly, isn't it? I just hope the free world has the balls to strike them before they CAN strike back.

Unfortunately, you're right, and it IS just that simple.  There are three phases: the one we are in now, in which Iran can't do much except some disruptions; the next, to which you allude, in which they can strike back in a serious way, limited possibly by their delivery system, which limits options to deal with them, no matter how insane they may get; and the worst, the one in which they are capable of initiative, and will act against whomever they wish, impervious to any attempt to stop or control them because they can put half the world in flames.

The only justification for attacking them - and, I tend to be very conservative in these things - is an honest estimation of how mad their leadership is and will become (that is, the obvious or visible succession).  If it becomes very likely that phase three will be reached and,  that they will indeed take initiatives by nuclear threat, whcih by defintion we won't be able to counter without a worse situation, then it indeed is a legitimate and prudent attack.  And, none of this "balance of force" nonsense:  no "warnings."  Keep trying diplomatically, and then just blow up as many of their facilities as possible, including the universities in which the research is being conducted (assuming it is).  No "buildup"  or announcement that this is commencing.  Make it happen, and let it be on CNN.

Of course the Europeans will scream.  It is unfortunate that we just have to let them and take it.  I would as soon the nutsos in the Middle East attack Europe and we just sit back and do nothing, saying, "see?"  But,  by then the Iranians will be in phase 3 and we won't be able to control them.  MAD doesn't work with those nuts like it did with the Soviets.  Even Kruschev knew better, though I suspect he, with a farmer background was just being practical (I also suspect he didn't believe in the virgins, etc.).  

Quoted: [ Fuck Israel.  Why should I care about Israel?  You got a couple spare billion dollars to keep Israel afloat?  Oh, maybe you want to tax me to pay for their security? Fuck Israel. Gimme two good reasons to care what happens to Israel.  And they better be at least as good as why I should care about the Congo. Israel should go shake a cup in front of the UN for money.  I'd rather put my kids through a decent school with my money.

Reason 1. Our government could not care less what you have to say or think about Israel. Israel enjoys overwhelming support in the House and Senate for good reason. Rant all you want, no one is listening.

Reason 2. This is just my opinion but I think Israel could easily exceed the stipend we give them by selling weapons and technology to people you would prefer not to have such things.

We give money to Egypt, Africa and Colombia and are spending LIVES as well as billions in Iraq and Afghanistan not to mention giving money to the Palestinians and all you can complain about is Israel?

Quoted: What they are talking about are MaRVs with solid TUNGSTIN slugs for "warheads" that would hit their targets at around 17,000 mph, with a energy far greater than any air dropped bomb.

Good point. I was assuming explosive warheads, not Ke weapons. That brings up an interesting question: what is the destructive force of a Ke weapon of this type? Is it possible that these types of Ke weapons are the "new" nukes? Put twenty DU or Tungstin rods atop a Minuteman and allow them to pepper a target. Would this not cause a similar level of damage to a nuke without the associated radiological after effects?

My guess is, the U.S. government is going to turn it's head and let up on Israel's leash for two seconds, and Iran will have it's sh*t pushed in.  All of their military/nuclear sites will be smoking and Iran will have to spend ten years rebuilding.  Perhaps Syria would be on the receiving end of that backhand as well.  We will condemn Israel publicly for the strikes, while secretly patting them on the backside.  After all, the majority of Iran's anger and promises for destruction have been directed at Israel, and Israelis have layed a smackdown on Palestine for less.

Quoted: Strategists at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for devastating bombing raids backed by submarine-launched ballistic missile attacks against Iran's nuclear sites as a "last resort" to block Teheran's efforts to develop an atomic bomb. We're gonna nuke the nuclear sites?

There are US NAvy Submarines armed with non-nuclear, cruise missiles.

ROW
The support we give to the has you say skull cap heads or lying Jews goes to a good cause..After all do you see them shooting at our guys or flying jets into American Buildings or blowing up subways in Spain or buildings in Africa and the list goes on.

On the other hand the Cheating Arab or little towel-heads take the assistance we give to do those things and keep their people oppressed and uneducated. We don't just give aid to the Jews if you look around American blood is being spilt in the sands of Afghan and Iraq. We tried to help the Palestine Nation but they refuse to live in Peace with anyone.

I suggest you take your good will thoughts and go live in Palestine. Become a Suicide Bomber and blow yourself apart. For the good of the children and for yourself.

Quoted: The majority of Iran is not like their crazy prez. However, then have no power and no say over the crazy clerics that run the place. I say fuck 'em. Bomb the shit out of them and let the crazy fucks in the streets riot about that instead of some silly cartoons. Then bomb them too. The object of a war is to win not try to make friends with those who want to kill you. hr

+1000 everything has been a huge shitball since the "hearts and minds
" idea came into play. we need to go roman on their asses and just get this shit done. Granted war sucks but dragging shit out for decades sucks more. Let the armed forces be just that ,the armed forces. When we make the decision make it and get it over with.

Quoted: Quoted: What they are talking about are MaRVs with solid TUNGSTIN slugs for "warheads" that would hit their targets at around 17,000 mph, with a energy far greater than any air dropped bomb. Good point. I was assuming explosive warheads, not Ke weapons. That brings up an interesting question: what is the destructive force of a Ke weapon of this type? Is it possible that these types of Ke weapons are the "new" nukes? Put twenty DU or Tungstin rods atop a Minuteman and allow them to pepper a target. Would this not cause a similar level of damage to a nuke without the associated radiological after effects?

I cant do the math,  but I have seen pics of the house sized craters concrete filled Minuteman dummy RVs make on Kawajalin.  And they shatter easily.

Quoted: Fuck Israel.

Dude methinks the discussion was on Irans nuclear arms program,the Aryan Brotherhood forum is that way--------------------------------------------->

Quoted: My guess is, the U.S. government is going to turn it's head and let up on Israel's leash for two seconds, and Iran will have it's sh*t pushed in.  All of their military/nuclear sites will be smoking and Iran will have to spend ten years rebuilding.  Perhaps Syria would be on the receiving end of that backhand as well.  We will condemn Israel publicly for the strikes, while secretly patting them on the backside.  After all, the majority of Iran's anger and promises for destruction have been directed at Israel, and Israelis have layed a smackdown on Palestine for less.

Maybe I am wrong, but I do not think that this is a mission that Israel can complete without help. The Israelis are bad asses, but I don't think that they have ability to take out all of the nuke sites on their on. You are talking about almost 50 facilities that need to be hit, if I understand correctly. As people have said over and over, Iran is not Iraq. They have modern Soviet aircraft and weaponry. Israel may play a part in the attack, but I just don't see them doing it alone.

tag for later reading

I give the Iranians about 4 more months if they continue on their current path.

JOB SECURITY for me

tag

Heheh,

Now they're feeling the drums of War, and understand what that means.

We'll play nice, says Iran

TEHRAN, Iran — Iran reaffirmed its commitment to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty on Sunday, a day after its hard-line president implied Tehran was considering withdrawing from the pact after being reported to the U.N. Security Council.

Quoted: I give the Iranians about 4 more months if they continue on their current path.

I'm thinking less than 3...

HH

Ya'll are slipping.  No one has suggested just sending Chuck Norris into Iran to clear things out??  Maybe give him that rocket-armed, flying motorcycle from "Megaforce" for good measure too...

Seriously though...  do I understand correctly, that most of the Iranian population are actually "Persians" which are different from the "Arabs" and that they actually despise the Arabs?

And regarding these convetionally armed ICBM/SLBMs...  I'd imagine that we'd have to notify a lot of countries (UK, France, Russia, India, Pakistan, Israel, Japan, China, just to start) before we popped one off so that they don't all panic when they see an unscheduled launch?

Interesting Perspective...

Will Israel Strike Iran?

The X Factor: Israel's military planners say they know how to forestall Tehran's nuclear schemes. The options—and their cost.

By Kevin Peraino and John Barry

02/06/06 "Newsweek" -- -- Feb. 13, 2006 issue - As scary as the idea may sound, the Israelis may not be bluffing. Their defense experts display no doubt whatsoever that Israel's Air Force can cripple Iran's nuclear program if necessary. The trick, they say, is to go after the system's weak spots. "You need to identify the bottlenecks," says a senior Israeli military source, asking not to be named for security reasons. "There are not very many. If you take them out, then you really undermine the project." Shlomo Brom, a former Israeli armed forces chief of strategic planning, says the destruction of two or three key facilities would probably suffice. He singles out the Natanz uranium-enrichment complex and the conversion plant at Esfahan as critical.

It wouldn't be as easy as it sounds. Tehran, taking obvious lessons from Israel's successful 1981 bombing of Saddam Hussein's reactor at Osirak, has done its best to shield potential targets like Natanz. "They are dispersed, underground, hardened," says the senior Israeli military source. U.S. analysts say each facility would require multiple hits before serious damage was done. Still, the Israelis—who have an undeclared nuclear arsenal of their own, and refuse international inspections or oversight—insist they have all the firepower they need: more than 100 U.S.-made BLU-109 "bunker buster" earth-penetrating bombs. "I think they could do the job," says the senior Israeli source.

Logistics is a bigger hurdle. Each separate target would require a small fleet of aircraft. Israel's F-15s and F-16s would need advance escorts of "electronic countermeasures" aircraft to jam Iran's air-defense radars, and every one of those planes would need an entourage of fighter aircraft. At short range, Tehran's newly upgraded MiG-29 interceptors are a match for just about anything in the air. "To get there and bomb the facilities, that's the easy part," says Brom. "The difficult part is how to get back. We're not making kamikaze runs."

To hit Osirak in 1981, Israel's bombers flew in low over Saudi Arabia. In a study published late last year by the U.S. Army War College, Brom suggests that a strike against Iran's facilities could arrive by way of the Indian Ocean—roughly twice the operational radius of Israel's newest strike aircraft under optimal flying conditions. But Israel's fleet of specialized planes for in-flight refueling—five aging KC-130H tankers—doesn't have the capacity to get all those aircraft there and back again. The only way to manage it would be with a covert stopover midway—it's anybody's guess where.

The Israelis admit they can only disable the Iranian program, not destroy it. "The real question is what you achieve if the best you can do is to delay the project for a few years," says a senior U.S. administration official, speaking anonymously because it's a sensitive topic. The cost to the region's stability could be devastating. Meanwhile, Israel continues to upgrade its own arsenal, acquiring two new German subs that could launch nuclear-armed cruise missiles for a "second-strike" deterrent. Perhaps the threats are only a way of pushing the West to get tough with Tehran before the arms race gets even more heated. But if so, it's one hell of an act.

Quoted: Heheh, Now they're feeling the drums of War, and understand what that means. We'll play nice, says Iran TEHRAN, Iran — Iran reaffirmed its commitment to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty on Sunday, a day after its hard-line president implied Tehran was considering withdrawing from the pact after being reported to the U.N. Security Council.

I would not be so quick to call off the 'dogs of war' just yet, afterall Iraq pulled this same scam with IAEA for years before Saddam got his ass handed to him. Think about it, it's obvious they are just stalling for time just like Iraq did.

They have no intention of using nuclear energy for PEACEFUL[\b] purposes, they are just trying to gain the time they need to build their bomb. Once they have it they will tell the IAEA and the UN and everybody else to fuck off!!!........(Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it) and all that......

Quoted: Quoted: I give the Iranians about 4 more months if they continue on their current path. I'm thinking less than 3... HH

Six weeks, tops. Too many good reasons why if conflict must come, it should come by the end of March.

There's a piece of the puzzle missing from at least the declassified discussion of the Iran situation IMO. Something doesn't add up. Iran seems to be doing everything in their power to provoke an attack. I don't think this is simple insanity on their part, for some reason they feel they have an advantage.

Letting Isreal deal with the situation isn't a good option IMO, nothing else would so inflame the region as a preemptive strike from Isreal. They don't have the conventional capability to destroy Irans capability to make war, they'd have to go nuclear, and that's a road I don't think we want to go down.

We have much the same problem, although we do have the conventional capability the costs would be enormous, men, equipment, money, time.

The nuclear option is going to be awfully tempting, especially considering the political problems we're going to have with a prolonged costly campaign.

Seems the clash of civilizations is about to go hot.

Clash of civilizations about to go hot?


Does that mean I should move away from the DC suburbs?

Quoted: Six weeks, tops. Too many good reasons why if conflict must come, it should come by the end of March. There's a piece of the puzzle missing from at least the declassified discussion of the Iran situation IMO. Something doesn't add up. Iran seems to be doing everything in their power to provoke an attack. I don't think this is simple insanity on their part, for some reason they feel they have an advantage.

Ahmadinejad is an follower of the apocalyptic wing of radical Islam. Either he thinks that an attack will start a worldwide holy war on the West or Iran has a functional nuclear arsenal via a third party and wished to "help" the 12th Imam return more quickly.

Is it wishful thinking to hope that he is a CIA plant?

Why the holdup?

They are waiting for Shaun Penn to go back there.

Then we attack!

Quoted: JOB SECURITY for me

I am with you on that.  I am already in a convienient location to help.

Quoted: Quoted: Six weeks, tops. Too many good reasons why if conflict must come, it should come by the end of March. There's a piece of the puzzle missing from at least the declassified discussion of the Iran situation IMO. Something doesn't add up. Iran seems to be doing everything in their power to provoke an attack. I don't think this is simple insanity on their part, for some reason they feel they have an advantage. Ahmadinejad is an follower of the apocalyptic wing of radical Islam. Either he thinks that an attack will start a worldwide holy war on the West or Iran has a functional nuclear arsenal via a third party and wished to "help" the 12th Imam return more quickly. Is it wishful thinking to hope that he is a CIA plant?

The earlier article stated that he believes that he'll be the leader that takes Iran into Armageddon.  If that is true, then there will be no other recourse than to flatten their sites.  His delusions of grandeur are interesting-to say the least.  This could end up being one of the most interesting years in history with regards to world events.

HH

Quoted: Quoted: Six weeks, tops. Too many good reasons why if conflict must come, it should come by the end of March. There's a piece of the puzzle missing from at least the declassified discussion of the Iran situation IMO. Something doesn't add up. Iran seems to be doing everything in their power to provoke an attack. I don't think this is simple insanity on their part, for some reason they feel they have an advantage. Ahmadinejad is an follower of the apocalyptic wing of radical Islam. Either he thinks that an attack will start a worldwide holy war on the West or Iran has a functional nuclear arsenal via a third party and wished to "help" the 12th Imam return more quickly. Is it wishful thinking to hope that he is a CIA plant?

An interesting perspective which roughly parallels my own thinking on the subject...

http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/analysis.htm

Quoted: An interesting perspective which roughly parallels my own thinking on the subject... http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/analysis.htm

Here is my problem with this whole debacle. The US _knows_ that Iran itself will not have a weapon of its own design for quite a while (years), yet we continue the belacose talk. The Iranian oil borse opens in late March to a world hungry for a new reserve currency. Given this, I can understand the US motivation to protect the US economy.

If that article is correct and the WoT is yet another proxy conflict of the not-quite-dead ColdWar, I am trying to grok the motivation of the Russians to allow any disruption to the Iranian oil borse. If they truly wish to harm the US, wouldn't the cheapest way be to protect Iran, allow the oil borse to open, and to watch as the US economy collapses under the weight of our, now, unsupported fiat currency?