And So It Starts. A Lesson In Insanity

utelore

Junior Member
VIP Professional
TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's hard-line president marched in the streets of Tehran on Friday alongside tens of thousands of people supporting his call for the destruction of Israel — remarks that have been condemned around the world. The rally was one of several state-organized anti-Israel demonstrations across the country that drew more than a million Iranians.
 

utelore

Junior Member
VIP Professional
OPERATION "THEOCRATIC MELT DOWN"


In all, there are perhaps two dozen suspected nuclear facilities in Iran. The 1000-megawatt nuclear plant Bushehr would likely be the target of such strikes. According to the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, the spent fuel from this facility would be capable of producing 50 to 75 bombs. Also, the suspected nuclear facilities at Natanz and Arak will likely be targets of an air attack.

American air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osiraq nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq. Using the full force of operational B-2 stealth bombers, staging from Diego Garcia or flying direct from the United States, possibly supplemented by F-117 stealth fighters staging from al Udeid in Qatar or some other location in theater, the two-dozen suspect nuclear sites would be targeted.

Military planners could tailor their target list to reflect the preferences of the Administration by having limited air strikes that would target only the most crucial facilities in an effort to delay or obstruct the Iranian program or the United States could opt for a far more comprehensive set of strikes against a comprehensive range of WMD related targets, as well as conventional and unconventional forces that might be used to counterattack against US forces in Iraq. "this info was taken from globalsecurity and is not my writings in total."

I hope such conflict does not arise however due to the unpredictable nature of the Iranian leadership and a clear and present danger to U.S interest in the middle east I do not at this time see another choice but to curtail Irans ability to inflict harm to such interest. However I do see a serious problem that will arise in the iraqi theater of operations do to such strikes against iran.
 

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Well the question that comes to my mind is, will iran retaliate after these kind of attacks, whic are by all manners act of offensive war??

I think they migth. Then the quetion would be, Has Iran managed to made a workable method of delivering nukes?? they certainly have the capapility to deliver other WMDs via their chinese and NK desinged missiles. US military planners cannot be 100% certain, that such attack will desrtoy all Irans capapility to retaliate and at least in my mind, Iran would be a country, that migth risk all in order to regain the 'honour'. And if that kind of attack would occur, there isent much speculation, to against which it would be made...
 

utelore

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Yes I believe you are correct. Iran will lash out against Israel and most likely launch operations into Iraq. Hopefully Isael will restrain itself and U.S forces will be able to quickly defeat such iranian operations into iraq. I think you have to look at it like cancer treatment. If you do nothing you will die However if you treat it you will get sick from Kemothearpy and it will be unpleasent but you may get rid of the cancer. BUT yes you are right nothing is 100%.
 

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
And there is the political factor. Think what it would couse in the muslim world if US attack Iran?? Iran would twist the scenario into religious one imideatly to gain foreing support. Iraq operation was barely explained whit Saddams personal 'charm' if so speaking, but against Iran there wouldnt be nothing more that WMD..or suspected WMDs. The world will turn agaisnt US as it did whit Iraq

And there is Russia. Something must have remained to Russians tooth from the 99' Serbian campaing and thus Russians were unable to do anything else but complain, would it do now? Serbia aplied to Russians by beeing mere fellow slavs and from history, but Iran poses great sings of strategic ally to Russia, and sofar Moscow has taken clear stance on the matter, whic could be read also as telling the world that 'iran plays now whit us'. it would put russian pride into stance and there are ellections coming, whit putin declairing that he isent going to run for third period. Think what kind of political toyhorse possiple US attack on Iran would be on Nationalistic russians rumpling after the former glory and migth of the soviet union.

I have to say that I have doupts on whaeter US is going to attack on first place...
 

utelore

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Yes you are right there is not two ways to spin it.....it would be bad on all fronts. However which do you think would be worse. A U.S strike on Iran or a Israeli strike. I think the latter would cause much more problems in the middle east. I think you have to look also that Iran is ran by persians that are shia. Much of the rest of the middle east is Arabs who are sunni. I dont think a PGM strike against suspected WMD targets ONLY would cause that much of a stink. granted it still would cause problems.

ON the russian side of things I dont know what the russians would do. I dont think they would resort to military action. However I do believe money would change hands via the U.S and Russia to kind of smooth over things a bit.
 

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Well i think its falls to US blame if Israel does the attack. They should keep their allyes in more proper check. But i dont think that the Shia-sunni division would be proplem for the muslims. At least when the attacker is US or even Israel. And arent the Shias more of ally to US in Iraq?? Attack agaisnt Iran would couse that thin line to brake...

I dont think a PGM strike against suspected WMD targets ONLY would cause that much of a stink.

well I dont thing that Iran air defence would be so 'easy' to make it happen. At minimium it would require SEAD strikes agaisnt Iran radar sites and airbases, scrambling the interceptors. Also such strike that would leave Iran relatively unhurt, migth cost big time in Iraq if iran then chooses offically back up the insurgents and would offer some military hardfare to them.

So lets hope that nothing like this would happen and believe that Iranians are sincere whit their claims of the nature of their nuclear program:D
 

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
From tonights perspective, any near term combat would set an historical precedent - to whit, a major engagement commanded by officials serving up to 30 years in jail for perjury:roll:

But does this not drive to the heart of the US (and UK's) credibility over new WMD allegations?

Lets remind everybody what these Washington inditements are all about:

In 2002 a former US Ambassador is sent to Niger to investigate reports that Saddam Hussain is trying to buy Uranium for his WMD programmes. The Ambassador concludes that these reports are fraudulent and reports same to his Government.

Several months later "Dubya" repeats these allegations, despite it being widely known that they were false.

The Ambassador; a Gentleman of proberty, publically announces on TV about his investigation in Niger and his conclusions.

Six days later it is publically revealed by an anonomous source that the Ambassadors wife is a CIA undercover agent - a revalation that clearer endagers the life of a genuinly very brave state servant.

Suspicion falls on senior aides around "Dubya" and VP Dick Cheyne and testimony is given before the senate.

A Senior Judge then investigates the matter for 18 months before coming back and impeaching a senior aide of the VP, still investigating other Aides, and all with a probability of extending further up the Washington food chain.

If a senior Govt officials have conspired to blow the cover of a genuinely brave agent, because her husband exposed them as liars without shame, then this has been an act beneath all contempt and; frankly, a very good case for the death penalty to be used

So here we are then, a Govt of Shameless Liars, who lied deliberatly about WMD in Iraq. If they lied then, who in their right minds, is not going to believe that they are lying now about Iran!

Wake up USA:nono: and vote yourselves in a Government that is vaugely related to the Human Race!!
 

utelore

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Sanpan.....oouch....you truley boil my neocon blood :) ..but thats ok. The only aternative for a U.S government is a bleeding heart leftist socalist style of government.....no thanks. anyway the U.S did not start this with Iraq nor did we start this with the Irainians. 3,000 americans died on sep 11th and now all nations that "Hate" us are getting there due one way or another. I dont think you can call my president a lyer when most nations of the world believed that iraq possesed weapons of mass destruction. EVEN our former socialist president clinton stated that Iraq had WMD and he should be removed from power.....anyway I dont want to get to far off track here with the right and wrongs of Iraq. THIS is about Iran who is threatening to wipe a race of people off the planet because they are Jews. NO NATION WHO CALLS FOR SUCH ACTION SHOULD HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS. ITS BLACK AND WHITE RIGHT AND WRONG AND IRAN IS WRONG.......cheers ute.........PS: I know you enjoy "good drink" as do I. Have you ever had "honey wine" I just had some a few weeks ago......truly enjoyable......cheers ute.
 

Red not Dead

Junior Member
VIP Professional
utelore said:
Yes you are right there is not two ways to spin it.....it would be bad on all fronts. However which do you think would be worse. A U.S strike on Iran or a Israeli strike. I think the latter would cause much more problems in the middle east. I think you have to look also that Iran is ran by persians that are shia. Much of the rest of the middle east is Arabs who are sunni. I dont think a PGM strike against suspected WMD targets ONLY would cause that much of a stink. granted it still would cause problems.

ON the russian side of things I dont know what the russians would do. I dont think they would resort to military action. However I do believe money would change hands via the U.S and Russia to kind of smooth over things a bit.


What if this kind of rhetoric was only a payback of history? i mean what if Ahmadinejad has done that statement on purpose. Like sparkling a rethoric war with the US and It's allies. If the Us goes that way with US miliatry assets just on iran's door it would be easy for Iran to provoke the Us and to drag it on second costly war. And immagine the impact of a belliquous US in the already US-sceptic (islamic) world. That would mean a serious SC meeting a t UN and a Veto from the US to any kind of normative resolution. And it would be payback time for some unfinished business. Iraq, Kosovo, Nth Korea to stirr up.

That would really hurt the US image. Thus enabling any one to sell advanced weaponry on a low scale to Iran. Just enough to blow some limited strikes on the US armada. This is a worst case script. Now the Us has maintained an indifferent rethoric course, the best attitude to date. Nothing will happen.
 
Top