PDA

View Full Version : Let's Have Surgical Airstrikes On Iran's Bomb Program


35Pete
May 11th, 2007, 8:08:18 AM
Or..Maybe we shouldn't?

"NEWSWEEK has learned that the CIA and DIA have war-gamed the likely consequences of a U.S. pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. No one liked the outcome. As an Air Force source tells it, "The war games were unsuccessful at preventing the conflict from escalating.""

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6039135/site/newsweek/

Woody
May 11th, 2007, 8:12:21 AM
Iran is not to be screwed with. :niterider

35Pete
May 11th, 2007, 8:21:18 AM
Let me propose another scenario that doesn't involve another false flag. The BA knows that we'll question this immediately. Being evil doesn't automatically make you stupid.

Bombing the nuclear facilities in Iran would cause escalation and the BA KNOWS THIS.

Iran would retaliate with attacks in the US with possibly hundreds if not thousands of pre-placed agents. These attacks would be numerous and serious and would provide proof that we are in emminent danger in the "homeland" (Doesn't Homeland Security sound almost Orwellian?).

The loyal SA neocon voters and tricked conservatives as well as many independants will demand security and protection.

Patriot Act provisions and Military Commision provisions kick in full force. Because of the seriousness of the homeland attacks (that word "homeland" gives me the creeps) no politician or judge dare question them in such a time of crisis.

The US decides that they have to "liberate Iran" to stop the attacks. We are stretched thin and Iran is much more formidable than Iraq. Plus the ME will explode. We don't have the forces to accomplish this. The BA orders a draft. The domestic front explodes. Here's where the Orwellian three-headed monster of Patriot Act, Military Commission Act, and Homeland Security kick in. Anti-war agitators and key civilian opposition leaders are spied on, harassed and if necessary detained. The clamps are put down on opposition. We have to preseve the petrodollar status to keep our economy afloat. OPEC must not be allowed to convert to selling oil in euros. If the Iranian Bourse is allowed to exist then US hegemony in international affairs comes to a grinding halt.

Woody
May 11th, 2007, 9:16:33 AM
Iran is not to be screwed with. :niterider

deconstruction
May 11th, 2007, 9:57:46 AM
I'm glad they spent money predicting what anyone with half a brain knows, that this thing with Iran can't end up well for us.

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 11:36:24 AM
Iran's gonna happen when and how are all that's left.
An American administration will eventually deal with this.
It might not be the BA but it's coming.
Just don't lie to yourselves about it.

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 12:17:31 PM
Iran's gonna happen when and how are all that's left.
An American administration will eventually deal with this.
It might not be the BA but it's coming.
Just don't lie to yourselves about it.

What's wrong fellas crickets is that all you got.:rockon:

mark3274
May 11th, 2007, 12:18:09 PM
Iran's gonna happen when and how are all that's left.
An American administration will eventually deal with this.
It might not be the BA but it's coming.
Just don't lie to yourselves about it.

NO it's not lol.

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 12:28:19 PM
NO it's not lol.

Thanks I didn't believe anybody cared anymore.:rockon::D

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 7:18:52 PM
Iran's gonna happen when and how are all that's left.
An American administration will eventually deal with this.
It might not be the BA but it's coming.
Just don't lie to yourselves about it.

bump

Green Lantern
May 11th, 2007, 7:51:10 PM
Did you ever think that Iran will eventually get a bomb and all this uproar will be laughed at like by the future when they read about it?

Gibby
May 11th, 2007, 8:21:13 PM
Lets let Israel take care of it and then publicly come out against Israel and then give them a secret pat on the back.

35Pete
May 11th, 2007, 8:24:11 PM
Bad Gibby. Bad.

Not good at all.

Green Lantern
May 11th, 2007, 8:27:10 PM
I think Israel could not hold it's own anymore. Not against the whole region.

Gibby
May 11th, 2007, 8:34:59 PM
I think Israel could not hold it's own anymore. Not against the whole region.

I agree and yes Pete, but I am saying if we are ****ing stupid enough to try to start yet another disastrous war in the region then let Israel take care of it. Personally I am against any military action at all, and nothing but firm handed diplomacy.

Gilly
May 11th, 2007, 8:37:40 PM
if there ever is a nuclear war thats where it'll begin. when iran gets the bomb someone (Isreal or iran) will get the itchy trigger and the whole area will go up

Gibby
May 11th, 2007, 8:40:03 PM
if there ever is a nuclear war thats where it'll begin. when iran gets the bomb someone (Isreal or iran) will get the itchy trigger and the whole area will go up

Really? Pakistan and India both have the bomb and they hate each others guts yet they haven't pressed the button. North Korea has the Bomb and you know we do and yet Kim has never fired them. Nukes, if anything, are WMDS. Weapons of Mass Deterence.

Gilly
May 11th, 2007, 8:41:00 PM
I agree and yes Pete, but I am saying if we are ****ing stupid enough to try to start yet another disastrous war in the region then let Israel take care of it. Personally I am against any military action at all, and nothing but firm handed diplomacy.


if we scold them real good and threaten to use our firm handed diplomacy... im sure they will act real nice and become our friends. you agree?

Gibby
May 11th, 2007, 8:46:25 PM
if we scold them real good and threaten to use our firm handed diplomacy... im sure they will act real nice and become our friends. you agree?

Yes, if we tell them that if they fire a nuke at Israel we will say that because Israel is an ally of ours that a nuclear attack on Israel is the same as a nuclear attack on us and that while they might drop one or two warheads on Israel we will drop enough nuclear and conventional ordinance to greatly increase the area of the Caspian Sea to the south.

As for your sarcasm, I want to address it. The Iranian people, from what I understand (this comes from knowing a few Iranians) want a democracy but they don't want us to come in and interfere with their nation. They want to their nation to be left alone and they want to naturally build a democracy from the grass roots level. War with their country would actually destroy the democratic sentiments of the Iranian people and would be at best counterproductive.

Gilly
May 11th, 2007, 8:59:17 PM
i dont want war there either, its a matter of time once iran gets a nuke. its just too much hate there for "talking" to be effective.

Gibby
May 11th, 2007, 9:04:32 PM
i dont want war there either, its a matter of time once iran gets a nuke. its just too much hate there for "talking" to be effective.

you obviously have forgotten just how much antipathy and bitterness there was between us and the Soviet Union. Remember Ronnie wanted to turn great parts of the Evil Empire into a pile of irradiated ashes. The Soviets were always plotting for ways to get a first strike against us, see the Krasnayorsk radar and SDI complex -one of the reasons for glasnost (to make communism safe for geeks to talk together) . Yeah we almost had nuclear war with the Soviets 3 times that I know of, but talking and diplomacy always got both sides to back down. Watch in the near future (Gibby means tomorrow about 10:00 AM CST) for a thread about the history of nuclear diplomacy between the USA and USSR you will be amazed.

35Pete
May 11th, 2007, 9:12:20 PM
you obviously have forgotten just how much antipathy and bitterness there was between us and the Soviet Union. Remember Ronnie wanted to turn great parts of the Evil Empire into a pile of irradiated ashes. The Soviets were always plotting for ways to get a first strike against us, see the Krasnayorsk radar and SDI complex -one of the reasons for glasnost (to make communism safe for geeks to talk together) . Yeah we almost had nuclear war with the Soviets 3 times that I know of, but talking and diplomacy always got both sides to back down. Watch in the near future (Gibby means tomorrow about 10:00 AM CST) for a thread about the history of nuclear diplomacy between the USA and USSR you will be amazed.

Please lose your boner for the Russians Gibby. :D

The soviets were scum.

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 9:19:38 PM
Please lose your boner for the Russians Gibby. :D

The soviets were scum.

Correction are!:D :rockon:

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 9:20:50 PM
Did you ever think that Iran will eventually get a bomb and all this uproar will be laughed at like by the future when they read about it?

NO DO YOU?:rockon:

Gibby
May 11th, 2007, 9:21:06 PM
Please lose your boner for the Russians Gibby. :D

The soviets were scum.

Never said the Bolshevik regime was not scum. I have praised the russian fighting man, usually Io (pronounced similar to Joe) Averageski and most Soviet Generals of WWII but I will bash the Bolshevik- Especially Stalin's- regime for harming the fighting capability of the Red Army. While the Bolsheviks fascinate me, I think they were at worst a force of sheer evil and at best an extreme perversion of Marxist and socialist theory.

So while I agree that they were scum, its hard, pun maybe intended, to not be fascinated by something that I have spent a great deal of my academic career studying. Just wait until my book on Stalin's Secret Plan of 1941 hits the shelf.

Green Lantern
May 11th, 2007, 9:54:45 PM
NO DO YOU?:rockon:

It is possible.

If you look at Iran's posturing in the context of it being for domestic consumption to keep the current government in power, it does not look that threatening to us. It looks like rabble-rousing.

Not to say these sorts of things don't get out of control.

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 10:02:50 PM
It is possible.

If you look at Iran's posturing in the context of it being for domestic consumption to keep the current government in power, it does not look that threatening to us. It looks like rabble-rousing.

Not to say these sorts of things don't get out of control.

Do we trust or verify?

Green Lantern
May 11th, 2007, 10:07:03 PM
Do we trust or verify?

We watch very closely, get our ducks in a row, and wait for them to actually violate some agreement they've signed...

Turning centrifuges on is not illegal and does not violate any agreement anywhere in the world.

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 10:20:09 PM
We watch very closely, get our ducks in a row, and wait for them to actually violate some agreement they've signed...

Turning centrifuges on is not illegal and does not violate any agreement anywhere in the world.

What approach did the previous administration take? (Clinton)

Green Lantern
May 11th, 2007, 10:25:24 PM
What approach did the previous administration take? (Clinton)

I don't remember the issue ever taking center-stage.

We were not occupying their neighbors to the east and west back then.

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 10:27:33 PM
I don't remember the issue ever taking center-stage.

We were not occupying their neighbors to the east and west back then.

Did they ignore a potential problem?
Seems like it would be a very important thing to pay careful attention to.

Green Lantern
May 11th, 2007, 10:41:36 PM
Did they ignore a potential problem?
Seems like it would be a very important thing to pay careful attention to.


Your sentiment seems too open-ended to be of concern.

There are a very many things that become important through hind-sight.

We embargoed Japan during their war with China and they grumbled and grumbled until Pearl Harbor. Al Qaeda asked us to get our troops out of the holy land from Gulf I until 9/11 and we did not listen.

And then, Pakistan and India got nukes, many predicted apocalypse and nothing happened.

By asking did "they" ignore a potential problem, are you saying you agree with President's Wilson and Bush that we need to go out and find future threats and "deal" with them before they do anything wrong? Should we punish people for thinking about doing harm?

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 10:49:17 PM
Your sentiment seems too open-ended to be of concern.

There are a very many things that become important through hind-sight.

We embargoed Japan during their war with China and they grumbled and grumbled until Pearl Harbor. Al Qaeda asked us to get our troops out of the holy land from Gulf I until 9/11 and we did not listen.

And then, Pakistan and India got nukes, many predicted apocalypse and nothing happened.

By asking did "they" ignore a potential problem, are you saying you agree with President's Wilson and Bush that we need to go out and find future threats and "deal" with them before they do anything wrong? Should we punish people for thinking about doing harm?

No just asking your opinion.
Not agreeing or disagreeing with anything.
Interested in your take on the question.

Green Lantern
May 11th, 2007, 10:57:26 PM
My take is that American citizens are being told that Iran is a bigger problem than they are.

The world is full of potential problems. Looking at them will not help prevent the.

We need to accept the fact that other countries want to be the leaders in their area of the world. China does not want to fight the US, it only wants to be the big boy on their block. They want to be the area's hegemon. Iran probably wants the same. They can see that we can't fight our way out of a paper bag given the restraints put on our troops by the public and the congress and they know that they can gain influence in Iraq because it is a Shia country, which gives them disproportionate influence to their numbers in the middle east.

Maybe we should consider choosing the main powers in other areas of the world and working with them in cooperation instead of trying to defeat them so we can be the big boy of the whole planet. What we are trying is not working and we are getting more and more tired of the efforts.

JLB
May 11th, 2007, 11:01:27 PM
My take is that American citizens are being told that Iran is a bigger problem than they are.

The world is full of potential problems. Looking at them will not help prevent the.

We need to accept the fact that other countries want to be the leaders in their area of the world. China does not want to fight the US, it only wants to be the big boy on their block. They want to be the area's hegemon. Iran probably wants the same. They can see that we can't fight our way out of a paper bag given the restraints put on our troops by the public and the congress and they know that they can gain influence in Iraq because it is a Shia country, which gives them disproportionate influence to their numbers in the middle east.

Maybe we should consider choosing the main powers in other areas of the world and working with them in cooperation instead of trying to defeat them so we can be the big boy of the whole planet. What we are trying is not working and we are getting more and more tired of the efforts.

Good job live and let live but keep your eyes wide open.

mark3274
May 11th, 2007, 11:44:55 PM
there will be no attack on iran by The USA or Israel. If Isreal was going to attack they would have by now ... This nuke they supposedly have or are trying to have is a big a threat as ohh say Saudi Arabia our pals... lmao maybe we can nuke the saudi royal palace ? all in the name of security mind you.. and the war on terror.........