Pentagon ‘three-day blitz’ plan for Iran

[Hoot1988 0]

Quote[/b] ]I remember a quote from a movie whose title I can't recall right now but it said: "I don't fear the man that has 10 nuclear weapons, I fear the man that has only one."

damit thats one of my favorite movies but i dont know which one it is! Sum Of All Fears maybe?

like i said before the Americans cant sustain aground campaign. and if you do attempt that your on your own, the Brits sure as hell arnt helping.

Airstrike will likely happen but only if the Iranians have/test a nuke. In the event of this i doubt the americans will go it alone, your looking at a Whole UN/NATO effort, and i cant see that happening either.

Hypothetically if Iran get/test a nuke, and IF the UN takes no military action after diplomacy failed, the UN is as redundant and useless as the League of nations was and that isnt good.

Also nuclear research isnt easy, making a bomb is not very easy. the chance of a terrorist group making one is next to impossible. Nukes need LOTS of money, facilities, people, and most importantly a delivery vehicle.

a iranian guy i know form my Uni course, was telling me that the Inteligentia of Iran want their nation to be westernized, so that they can get up to date tech and jobs. Âyatollâh Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not the major enemy most of the nations power lies with Ali Khamenei the "supreme leader" most support that terrorist groups are getting is from HIM and not the president. The Inteligentia want to remove his power. but this is not easily done as the Supreme leader can effectivly veto the powers of the president.

personally i believe Amadinejad the research is for power production not nukes. Hes trying to reform his country, not get it blasted back to the stone-age.

If the Bush Administration told you Iran had a nuke would you believe them after Iraq?

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

Quote[/b] ]I remember a quote from a movie whose title I can't recall right now but it said: "I don't fear the man that has 10 nuclear weapons, I fear the man that has only one."

damit thats one of my favorite movies but i dont know which one it is! Sum Of All Fears maybe?

The movie is "The Peacemaker", and IIRC the line is said by Nicole Kidman...

As for what you state about Iran, I sure hope you're right... Although with all the "wipe Israel off the map" talk by Ahmadinejad, I wonder how friendly he can get towards the west...

[Hoot1988 0]

funny i not seen that movie, i have a voice saying it in my head, maybe its in another film.

Ahmadinejad has said stuff about wiping Israel off the map, but hes a politician, and has people to please. Im thinking that alot of the nations foreign policy is from the Âyatollâh. you hear these comments in many Arabic nations. Its nothing new. Alot of the educational research (i mean university professors who study the middle east/terrorsim for example) suggest that it is the religious leaders that create these stances not the Administration policy. The Intelligence community would probably tell you otherwise, depending upon political requirements.

a little OT but what is Saudi Arabias/UAE/Quatar official stance on Isreal? never been able to find reliable sources to give me a answer.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Although with all the "wipe Israel off the map" talk by Ahmadinejad

Don´t want to sound picky, but he actually never said that.

The correct translation would have been:

"This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."

[Hoot1988 0]

that would make more sense if you read about the original Israel plan with the UN Jerusalem was supposed to be under UN admin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_Plan

not a big expert in that region but hopefully my middle east in 20th century module this year will increase my expertise.

[Baff1 0]

I think the time to strike is before Iran gets a bomb.

I think if Iran gets the bomb, the U.S. will do what it has done with North Korea, and be forced to make peace.

Open direct diplomatic channels, declare a non agression pact and stop prevaricating.

The bomb is freedom for Iran, like it was for the North Koreans.

I do not see the Iranians, as being non-confrontational, egged on only by U.S. aggression.

I'm sure U.S. aggression in the region does get them going, but they were already going.

The U.S. isn't a warmonger and the Iranians an otherwise peaceful nation.

They are both warmongers bent on regional domination.

Take the U.S. out of the equation and the Iranians will still make war.

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

Baff1, I suggest you reading the history of Iran and what the U.S. did to that country beguinning in the middle of last century onwards - it's not that they dislike the U.S. without a reason, you know...

[Baff1 0]

I'm fully aware. And they have my sympathy's.

That doesn't change that they aren't a peaceful and non aggressive nation with no clearly stated ambition for regional military domination.

If you remove the U.S. from the middle east, there won't suddenly be peace.

Iran won't stop trying to overthrow the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan and Lebanon and Israel.

They aren't doing that because America backed their old dictator and shot down one of their Airliners.

Iran and America have bad blood between them. Everybody knows.

(The American's don't feel very kindly about what happened to their embassy staff either.

And if you think the Iranians have suffered under the Americans, wait until you find out what my people, the British, did for them).

It's not a case of America=evil, everyone else=peaceful oppressed innocents.

Iran isn't just heroically standing up for itself in a David and Goliath style confrontation.

It is also busy pursuing it's own expansionist agenda.

Crushing it's own tinier rivals in the name of it's own greed.

[Hoot1988 0]

if you ask me if Iran gets "the bomb" and it leads to diplomatic solution then i want them to have it. and N Korea definitely do not have a free reign at the moment. If anything is lead to a better situation than there was before.

Quote[/b] ]It is also busy pursuing it's own expansionist agenda.

Crushing it's own tinier rivals in the name of it's own greed.

remind you of anyone?...

...Bush Administration maybe?

Expansionist Agenda? what you talking about?

[churnedfortaste 0]

Baff1, stop making posts as if you're guaranteed multiple famous quotes because you chat absolute bollocks.

[Hoot1988 0]

^^^^ well said

[Commando84 0]

only country us would attack right now would be iran but hey they attacked iraq , who knows what can go down.

hopefully they come to there senses and try to settle peacefully.

[Baff1 0]

if you ask me if Iran gets "the bomb" and it leads to diplomatic solution then i want them to have it. and N Korea definitely do not have a free reign at the moment. If anything is lead to a better situation than there was before.

Quote[/b] ]It is also busy pursuing it's own expansionist agenda.

Crushing it's own tinier rivals in the name of it's own greed.

remind you of anyone?...

...Bush Administration maybe?

Expansionist Agenda? what you talking about?

The freedom North Korea now have is the freedom from threat of U.S. military intervention.

America has refused to deal with them diplomatically for 55 years. Kept alive the threat of war with an invasion force on it's borders.

They do a nuclear test......and the U.S. is willing to talk.

They definitely do have free reign.

All those U.S. troops stacked up on the border, all those marine landing training operations. They are now redundant.

North Korea has nothing to fear from them any more.

Make no mistake nuclear weapons spell freedom for North Korea.

We all know the Bush administration is expansionist. There are any number of expansionist cultures on the planet.

Do you really think that mentioning it over and over again every second sentence is pointing out something new to the world?

Iran has an expansionist agenda, it's stated regional ambition is take over from America and Britain.

Al Quaeda, just wants America and Britain out of the Holy land.

Iran wants to replace them with itself.

It is actively involved in proxy wars in Afghanistan, Lebanon, Israel and Iraq and has been for decades.

I'm not trying to tell you that western involvement in the middle east is holy and righteous, I'm just pointing out that the world is rammed full of unholy and evil invaders all queuing up to replace America if they can.

Iran is one of them.

The world is not some black and white place where U.S. = evil and everyone else = good.

This is an over simplistic view of the world and deserves to be challenged.

(My apologies to bringing this up to all those who don't want to hear it. You are free to return to your comic books, if you are not ready to have your pre-conceptions challenged by public debate yet).

While I agree that Iran gaining nuclear weapons would gain them a diplomatic solution with the U.S. and the EU.

I do not agree that Iran gaining nuclear weapons would maintain their current diplomatic solution between Iran and Suadi, Iran and Kuwait, Iran and Iraq.

Quite the opposite.

The unbalancing of regional power would free them to militarily intervene with their neighbours without fear of reprisal.

There is a lot of wealth there to grab.

It's not just the U.S. that wants it and is willing to fight.

I don't want to swap U.S. agression for Iranian aggresson. Of the two I think the U.S. is by far the more humanitarian and more importantly my greater ally and financial intrest.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

And that's why every one supports Iran. They view America as their enemy.

Me, I don't.

Diplomatic Solution

I don't belive a diplomatic solution is possible.

And this is why....

If Iran does not get the bomb now, if it bows down to the E.U. and the U.S., it will never be free.

It will never be more than what it is today. It will have reached it's Zenith as a society.

Like North Korea, Iranians must be free. Free to livwe without fear of foreign military reprisal. Bombings or invasions.

Iran has one chance, and that chance is now.

If the E.U. and the U.S. ever lose domination over the gulf, they will never get it back.

If Iran gets a nuke, they cannot take it away.

E.U. and U.S. economics are dependant on gulf oil.

They cannot afford to lose it.

Their populations cannot sustain themselves without it.

Iran can't back down, and neither can the west.

Win or lose, this one must be decided militarily because any diplomatic solution always offers an unexceptable loss to one side.

Of course, the west (or the Iranians) could just give up without a fight. It could choose auto-lose.

Certainly not every western nation is dependant on Gulf oil, many of them will see no reason to fight to protect something they are not sharing in.

And many elements of their population who don;t recognise that dependancy will baulk at it also.

I fully expect the U.S. backed by Britain and France to attack Iran. I think France and U.S. have already made the deal, and Britain will be next to sign up to it. Germany, that will be in range of Iranian nuclear tipped missiles isn't going to be difficult to persuade either.

[Iron+Cross 0]

@ colossus funy loved it.

all im gonna say is, it comes down to lack of Direct Democracy.. & im not talking about IRAN.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

I just can't see a positive outcome from this. In the event we are able to cut the legs out from under Iran's military, we still lose in world opinion.

The invasion of Iraq has done more to destabilize the region then promote it. Other countries in the area such as the Saudi's are getting increasingly twitchy at the thought of Iran expanding its influence and power.

Now to fix the problem they created, the US may see the need to stomp its boots around some more. I was really hoping changes in Iran would come from within. But now the US seems to be digging deeper to try and get out of the hole it is already in.

Of course in retrospect, the billions spent in Iraq could have gone a long way in creating a sensible security apparatus, as well as restructuring America's energy policy and meeting those needs.

Then military and political influence could have been used to repress the region and facilitate their tendencies by keeping them pitted against each other.

But 'woulda' and 'coulda' are no help now. The reality of the situation remains. The US has put both feet into this pile of shit, and now has difficult decisions to make.

[swtx 42]

I'm going to post this in the Iraq thread as well. Everyone should watch this.

Watch this and comment below

It's very chilling..... But it's very true.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

I'm going to post this in the Iraq thread as well. Everyone should watch this.

Watch this and comment below

It's very chilling.....   But it's very true.

Wow.  I'm not a big Gingrich fan, but I say again...wow.  I can't remember the last time I watched a politician and did't feel like I had just listened to bland propoganda.

Most notable were his comments at the very end.  Whatever your views, if your an American, that should concern you.

Good find swtx.

[theavonlady 2]

I don't know what's so interesting about that CNN Gingrich page. Was it originally pointing to

? Newt Gingrich gets it.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

I don't know what's so interesting about that CNN Gingrich page. Was it originally pointing to

? Newt Gingrich gets it.

I think what is so interesting is how rare such plain truth is seen in the American news media.  Everything has a slant.  Everything has hidden meaning or is processed to tell us what to think rather than inform, so an opinion can be made.  When the truth comes along it slaps some sense into you.

Americans take civil liberties very seriously (well the ones whith a clue anyway).  So the parting lines in the CNN speach was a big wake up call.  Most people believe that another terrorist attack inthe US is likely.  Many see it as a matter of time.

The CNN video reminded me that the cost will not be only in lives, but may also cost us the soul of America.  If individual freedom is lost, then so is the last shred of our representative democracy.

Complacency will be our undoing.

[theavonlady 2]

I think what is so interesting

Clarification: what I meant was that the CNN link - at least for me - shows nothing but a very mellow, even bland, introductory page for Newt Gingrich. (What shows for you at CNN may be affected by whether CNN cookies are allowed or not).

That's why I posted the YouTube link, assuming that's what's being referred to above. And that video is indeed most interesting.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

I think what is so interesting

Clarification: what I meant was that the CNN link - at least for me - shows nothing but a very mellow, even bland, introductory page for Newt Gingrich. (What shows for you at CNN may be affected by whether CNN cookies are allowed or not).

That's why I posted the YouTube link, assuming that's what's being referred to above. And that video is indeed most interesting.

I get a video on that CNN link. The CNN video is very similar to your link from youtube. Almost the same speach, but with some differences, and given a few weeks later on Aug 7th. The most notable difference being his closing remark.

Quote[/b] ]I am genuinely afraind that this political system will not react until we lose a city. And nobody in this country has thought about the threat to our civil liberties, the morning after we decide its that dangerous, and how rapidly we will impose ruthlessness on ourselves in that kind of a world.

I think those of you who care about civil liberties had better be thinking through how we win this war, before the caualties get so great that the American people voluntarily give up alot of those liberties.

This speech was given to the National Press Club, so I believe those remarks were geared direcly towards them.

I couldn't find the CNN vid on youtube, but I reccomend you watch it if you can find it.

Thanks again for the link you provided.

[Baff1 0]

I enjoyed his perceptions on being in a "Phoney War", they pretty much mirror my own impressions.

I didn't find his insights into his "enemies" all that helpful.

I found the part about there being thousands of people who when they wake up are plotting the destruction of the U.S. as quite accurate, but I think he is a little too consumed by hate.

An alarmist.

Not much difference between his language and Armhadjinebab. "My grandchildren are in danger..." He's not exactly rational himself.

I don't forsee Iran nuking the U.S., or anybody else and he's got that whole "Israel" bee in his bonnet.

He is unable to to understand his enemies. He is not able to recognise any rational thought.

What should be a chess game he see's as undirected lunacy.

When he started going on about freedom of speech, I was struck by the impression, that he was a bad advert for it.

And that although he didn't realise it, the terrorists in Britain he said had freedom of speech, don't. And if he was here, neither would he.

[baddo 0]

I think the American people has already given up on a lot of things.

That's why I have on some occasions hinted that 'freedom' and 'democracy' are really not the kind of values U.S.A. is truly giving to its own citizens.

'Ostensible freedom' and 'ostensible democracy' is what is given to them more and more everyday.

The word 'terrorism' is being used by the ones in power to make them even more powerful and you even less powerful. Even attempts to improve the fight against natural disasters happening in the U.S.A. are actually turned against the citizens of the U.S.A. by giving even more power to the President and taking it away from others. Ask yourself a question, is that really going to help you if a hurricane comes and wipes your town away? Ask yourself another question, how has the President used the rights that were given to him?

U.S. Presidential elections can easily be turned into a joke, as was seen a couple of years ago. Some people called it 'illegal' and a 'coup' and I think there must be some truth in those claims.

I have to say at one point of my life I even considered getting a job from the U.S.A. and living their for some time. I have seriously started to doubt if that's a good idea at all, after seeing how the people in the U.S.A. are treated by their own government. And after seeing what kind of image the U.S.A. is building for itself globally. I'd not feel safe at all if I had a U.S. passport and had to travel around the World.

It's up to the people of the U.S. to do something about it. Big problem is as I believe, most U.S. citizens are not paying attention.

Disclaimer: My views are based on the information that has been brought to me by various medias.

[Baff1 0]

I'm the same, I no longer travel to the U.S.A. post 9/11.

I was thinking about retiring there for the tax breaks for a long time, but that little fantasy has died.

[Iron+Cross 0]

That guys a war monger's Dood, i lived on the Irish Northern Ireland border, I had 1 Protistant friend, 2 catholic friends 1 Hindu friend & 1 Muslim friend, & the Hindu & Muslim lads used to chum us to Church on Sundays, we always got on like a house on fire no trouble.

We all belived & most of us still do in the faiths & teachings we were brought up with & still get along, we just agreed we all we were m8s, we had tiff's but never about religion, religion was just there to help us run our lives & better ourselvs, for the after life.(if you belive in that sort of thing.)

We lived the way we chose to & thats that, & when we all used to go round to play the Nintendo at our muslim friends house we respected there customs & he had a sister & mother in vale, which wasent a problem, bit odd at 1st but hey if i wanted to be a tranvestite whats the problem? (not that i do or anythin)

The point is this guys just another warmonger with a spin & trying to manipulate what realy matters is, what would YOU do? & would you kill people just because they live diferently?

I mean the U.S still executes people semi-publicly... & castration is still performed.

so whats so different, whats the reason for the attacks on teh middle east & this new plan for Iran?

What is the real problem?

Is Is religious e fnatacsims confined to the Muslims??

Is Self sacrafice only used by "Evil People"

Is it ever used by the military during a LEGAL war?

Is it For Natural Resources?

Is it Political?

Is it Ethnic?

Is it Ethical?

Is it Moral?

I Dont know about you But if i was going to Risk my Hairy arse for a cause, it would HAVE to be a little more Impending,Tangable, & Clearer than the current argument.. well if there was even an argument it would be a little more democratic..

What i mean is Did u guys see the amount of Details & Data that was presented to the U.N & the Confidence that it was presented with? (Iraq WMD) & what happend? so now "They" are saying these EFP's "IED's" are coming from Iran... hmmm

Now who's track record am i going to trust more??

NATO,

OR, a country that KNOWS what death and suffering is by not starting wars & defending its own borders..

Irans History is Not of Starting Wars but suffering other peoples Wars, Is the U.S going to be another one of them to start it?

Any ways Id like to See what NATO can do against an enemy a little more defended, Not realy enough but im sure its enough to leve a decent sized pile of NATO body bag's.

Also you ought to see the amount of Kit Iran is buying, Hundreds of SU-30's (a mach for F-15's or more)

Mig 29's (blinged up)

also here is a pic of Mid range missles/Radar used by U.S & Iran compared with each other..

Also some General Info on SU-30

Iran is Also starting to make & put into service its own Fighters/Bombers/Attack chopers after years of development

Here is the Iranian made Saeghe & Saeghe 80

Iran built Fighter one of many.

also look up Azarakhsh.