War with Iran.

[batto 17]

In no way does that justify terrorism and murder, like 9/11

2011

believes that whole 9/11 was made only by terrorists from middle east

I seriously hope you guys don't do this.

http://911research.wtc7.net/

[PELHAM 10]

Just imagine if we were a relatively poor country, and another country, say, China, had enacted aggressive foreign policy against us for decades and was constantly interfering with our lives... and Mexico was our mortal enemy, who China supported financially and militarily, who often crossed the borders and killed us. What would you do? Would you be a fan of China? Or would you hate their guts, and maybe even try to kill them? That is essentially the situation for many in the Arab world. In no way does that justify terrorism and murder, like 9/11, but let's be reasonable. We've made the Arab world hate us because we keep screwing with them to preserve our financial interests. And we're making the problem worse and worse. Threatening war with Iran (and worse yet, actually having one) is the dumbest thing possible.

Iran supplies political support and weapons to Hamas, an organization committed to the destruction of Israel by Jihad According to Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian National Authority, "Hamas is funded by Iran. It claims it is financed by donations, but the donations are nothing like what it receives from Iran.

Iran also supplies the terrorist organization Hezbollah with substantial amounts of financial, training, weapons, explosives, political, diplomatic, and organizational aid while persuading Hezbollah to take an action against Israel. Hezbollah's 1985 manifesto listed its four main goals as "Israel's final departure from Lebanon as a prelude to its final obliteration" According to reports released in February 2010, Hezbollah received $400 million dollars from Iran.

$400 million is a lot of money. If you were to count $1 dollar a second it would take you around 12.5 years to finish!

Iran has also sponsored terrorism and destabilisation in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and Lebanon. So trying to say they are not a threat to world peace is nonsense. Many in the Arab world see Iran as the biggest threat to the region. You will notice yesterday the Arab League suspended Iran's biggest ally - Syria.

[Dwarden 1124]

just note, China seems to already adopting agressive foreign policy, especially is area around Chinese sea ...

in fact except Russia and India i would not sleep well with Chinese army rapidly modernizing ...

the problem with Iran is similar and yet different, noone really knows what will happen after they get fully working nuclear warhead

they can use it just as deterrent to keep any enemy in check

or they can start trading the secret to less safe countries and i dont want to live day when nukes are standard issue in 'insert random dictator' country

[Tonci87 163]

just note, China seems to already adopting agressive foreign policy, especially is area around Chinese sea ...

in fact except Russia and India i would not sleep well with Chinese army rapidly modernizing ...

the problem with Iran is similar and yet different, noone really knows what will happen after they get fully working nuclear warhead

they can use it just as deterrent to keep any enemy in check

or they can start trading the secret to less safe countries and i dont want to live day when nukes are standard issue in 'insert random dictator' country

^This

Its not only about Iran using the bomb, but exporting them or the tech to other more insane countrys. Like North Korea

[NoRailgunner 0]

How fast one can build a nuclear warhead and make it operational if he don't have the knowledge, staff and technology to build one? Its not something you can make (and hide) during your lunch break.

[ProfTournesol 956]

^This

Its not only about Iran using the bomb, but exporting them or the tech to other more insane countrys. Like North Korea

Iran getting some nuclear weapons is far from being positive, even more dangerous because Israel won't let it happen.

But i'm much more concerned by the fact that Pakistan already has it.

[Baff1 0]

just note, China seems to already adopting agressive foreign policy, especially is area around Chinese sea ...

in fact except Russia and India i would not sleep well with Chinese army rapidly modernizing ...

the problem with Iran is similar and yet different, noone really knows what will happen after they get fully working nuclear warhead

they can use it just as deterrent to keep any enemy in check

or they can start trading the secret to less safe countries and i dont want to live day when nukes are standard issue in 'insert random dictator' country

I noticed that the US has announced that it is pulling back to Australia in counter to the latest developments in Chinese anti-shipping missiles.

They are opening a new naval base in Darwin. Out of range.

---------- Post added at 03:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:38 PM ----------

Iran getting some nuclear weapons is far from being positive, even more dangerous because Israel won't let it happen.

But I'm much more concerned by the fact that Pakistan already has it.

As a Brit, Iran is more of a worry for me than Pakistan since Iran has the ability to disrupt our critcal trade routes/supply lines in the Gulf.

---------- Post added at 03:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:41 PM ----------

^This

Its not only about Iran using the bomb, but exporting them or the tech to other more insane countrys. Like North Korea

It's a bit too late to start worrying about NK getting the bomb.

I'd be more worried about NK exporting their tech to Iran.

[Col. 10]

Would this conflict (If it happens) result in some kind global battle? What do you think?

In some debates in Norwegian news, people discuss that this would trigger the WW3, but it seems to be a little..yeah, the word i'm looking for is... dammit.

In the news it stands that the republicans will attack Iran if they get to the power next year, and Israel will attack by christmas.

[ryfle 10]

Iran supplies political support and weapons to Hamas, an organization committed to the destruction of Israel by Jihad According to Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian National Authority, "Hamas is funded by Iran. It claims it is financed by donations, but the donations are nothing like what it receives from Iran.

Has the US and Europe never supplied weapons and political support to shady organizations, including terrorists? Installed brutal dictators in other countries because they were "US-friendly"? Are we not pouring out billions in "foreign aid" to dictatorships and repressive regimes? Yes, we've done it all and we're still doing it. Meanwhile, we're pointing the finger at everyone else and telling them what to do... :o

Iran also supplies the terrorist organization Hezbollah with substantial amounts of financial, training, weapons, explosives, political, diplomatic, and organizational aid while persuading Hezbollah to take an action against Israel. Hezbollah's 1985 manifesto listed its four main goals as "Israel's final departure from Lebanon as a prelude to its final obliteration" According to reports released in February 2010, Hezbollah received $400 million dollars from Iran.

Ok, so they want to destroy Israel. They've wanted to since day one. But they're obviously incapable of doing it. Egypt and Syria, for instance, tried and epically failed... twice... And these little rag-tag groups of Arab paramilitaries have been trying for ages, and have accomplished virtually nothing.

Why do these people hate Israel and want to destroy it? Could it be that Arabs' homelands were taken by western governments to found a new state in their front yard? Yes. And could it be that Israel is aggressive, forceful and uncompromising? Yes. And we pour billions into Israel every year, which they employ in their efforts to kill and terrorize Arabs. So I'm not surprised they've taken up arms against the Israelis (and us). In America we tend to fail at being able to put ourselves in foreign shoes and look at the world from their perspective -- we're stuck inside our ethnocentric box, and can't see the forest through the trees. How would you feel in their shoes? If your home state was seized by foreign governments and turned into a new country that was hostile toward your people, well-armed, well-financed and well-connected? Show me someone who says that wouldn't piss them off and I'll show you someone who's lying.

And then it comes down to this... why is Israel our concern? Israel can handle its own business. They've already showed us that, by not only winning wars but through their expertise for their own flavor of espionage, assassination and terrorism. The United States shouldn't be Israel's bodyguard or servant. We're not their tool. Israel needs to handle its own business. Give me one good reason why we should be up Israel's a** and constantly backing everything they do...

$400 million is a lot of money. If you were to count $1 dollar a second it would take you around 12.5 years to finish!

$400M is chump change in the context of governments. It may seem to be a lot of money for an individual who's not wealthy, but not for a state.

Iran has also sponsored terrorism and destabilisation in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and Lebanon. So trying to say they are not a threat to world peace is nonsense. Many in the Arab world see Iran as the biggest threat to the region. You will notice yesterday the Arab League suspended Iran's biggest ally - Syria.

I'm not saying Iran is a bunch of "good ol' boys" we should embrace. Just that going to war with them is stupid, as they are a minimal military threat to the US. The Iranian government is a bunch of punks with rotten attitudes, but we're not the world's police. And everything we accuse them of we've also done or are currently doing in a slightly different manner.

[PELHAM 10]

@ryfle - sure the west has handed money and guns to all sorts.

The reason I posted that was some here were saying that Iran has no argument with Israel - well if there is no argument why the guns and money? If Iran is causing trouble there needs to be some sort of resistance to that. Iran may be of minimal military threat to the US but it occupies a strategic position geographically and is a threat to world peace and the world economy. The US has signed military cooperation treaties with many neighbouring nations and has to honour them. So we are where we are - the scale of military threat is only a partial argument of a much larger problem.

@baff1

It's a well documented fact that Iran and North Korea got most of their nuclear tech from Pakistan. The man behind it all was Abdul Q Khan, employed at URENCO in the Netherlands where he worked on Uranium enrichment and acquired other knowledge and blueprints which he later distributed to many different nations.

Europe let the nuclear secrets walk out of the front door by employing a foreign national in a highly sensitive industry.

Edited November 14, 2011 by PELHAM

[NoRailgunner 0]

Imho the thread title should be changed because OP just made a mountain out of a molehill... again. :rolleyes:

Something like "What happens if Israel attacks Iran?" This is less sensational/attention seeking and more down to real question.

[Baff1 0]

Would this conflict (If it happens) result in some kind global battle? What do you think?

In some debates in Norwegian news, people discuss that this would trigger the WW3, but it seems to be a little..yeah, the word i'm looking for is... dammit.

In the news it stands that the republicans will attack Iran if they get to the power next year, and Israel will attack by christmas.

I don't think any other nation is willing to die for Iran.

I think if Obama attacked Iran and had a quick aerial victory, he would get re-elected.

[ProfTournesol 956]

I don't think any other nation is willing to die for Iran.

I think if Obama attacked Iran and had a quick aerial victory, he would get re-elected.

Thanks god Obama isn't Bush and he's got a slightly better knowledge of what is happening outside Texas.

[Baff1 0]

I'm not saying Iran is a bunch of "good ol' boys" we should embrace. Just that going to war with them is stupid, as they are a minimal military threat to the US. The Iranian government is a bunch of punks with rotten attitudes, but we're not the world's police. And everything we accuse them of we've also done or are currently doing in a slightly different manner.

You have the only police force in the world willing to defend your own world intrests.

You have bigger global intrests than anybody else, so you do more world policing than anyone else.

If you choose not to, many other countries such as Iran are all queuing up to take them over from you.

What happens to your economy right now if oil prices quadruple?

Can you afford a military even?

Our countries are very close to going the way of the Soviet Union currently.

It won't take much.

So what we have to weigh up is whether we will be more hurt by going to war with them than if we allow them to take more control over our vital trade routes.

---------- Post added at 05:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:54 PM ----------

Thanks god Obama isn't Bush and he's got a slightly better knowledge of what is happening outside Texas.

He attacked Libya.

What difference he and Bush?

[ProfTournesol 956]

He attacked Libya.

What difference he and Bush?

UN resolution ?

[Baff1 0]

Both Obama and Bush were quite happy that a UN resolution entitled them to bomb people.

[PELHAM 10]

He attacked Libya.

What difference he and Bush?

All that was debated before on the Libya Head Cam thread - look it up - you might enjoy my analysis and learn enough to get your facts straight.

Edited November 14, 2011 by PELHAM

[batto 17]

What difference he and Bush?

Bush and his fellows were very happy when they somehow achieved abolishment of Geneva conventions for "terrorists" (read "those who are suspected of being terrorists or their friends" eg. 99.9% of them aren't terrorists). G. W. Bush deserves life in prison.

[PELHAM 10]

Bush and his fellows were very happy when they somehow achieved abolishment of Geneva conventions for "terrorists" (read "those who are suspected of being terrorists or their friends" eg. 99.9% of them aren't terrorists). G. W. Bush deserves life in prison.

Despite making positive sounding noises to the international community and at his Nobel Prize speech (what did he do for that again? :D) Obama hasn't actually changed anything RE the application of the Geneva Convention and Al Queda / Taliban 'enemy combatants'. They are still not given the legal status of POW. The Conventions, and even the Additional Protocols, do not provide clear guidance for countries engaged in conflicts with terrorist groups.

The legal arguments on that one continue. If you read the Geneva conventions it continually defines that for it to apply you must 'carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.' As Terrorists generally don't do that, they place themselves outside the conditions required for the Conventions to apply.

What is odd is they are not then given the status of a civilian criminal. As the terrorists themselves do not apply any international standards of human rights to their prisoners or victims, well, I don't personally care what happens to them. It's the people caught in the middle that we should worry about - e.g. suspects with no evidence against them who may have not done anything wrong at all.

[eble 3]

I don't think Russia or China would back a UN security council resolution to attack Iran, I bet they would actually veto it.

It looks like Iran exports 17% of it annual oil production to China, any attack that disrupted that could be seen as a national defence priority for China.

The chinese could just ship cloned s300 missile defence systems to Iran negating a standard Air Force attack, that would leave missile options but the iranians also have those in great numbers.

My bet is sanctions will be increased, though in all honesty i've no idea what else could be done, seems the rest of Europe/Russia and more recently China just ignore those now anyway.

Any attack on Iran would effectively close the Gulf to Oil transport, your talking 40% of the world Oil production stopped, that would send oil prices through the roof and actually bankrupt all of the western world in pretty no time at all.

[mrcash2009 0]

I don't think Russia or China would back a UN security council resolution to attack Iran, I bet they would actually veto it.

Sky rocket oil/fuel prices, crash of economy (blamed on middle east) western disruption and rioting, military draft brought back for all the teenagers and folk out of work (money generation) to fight ww3 with a large dash of propaganda to get everyone on side and cause middle east vs west tensions on the ground which have been helped with flooding countries with said people with less border controls, oddly enough in the UK this summer.

Fun times ahead.

[walker 0]

Hi all

Thought it was worth reminding the more Chicken Hawk contributers to this thread what the stakes are in their little suggestions, so from earlier in the thread here are some worst case scenarios:

...Assuming Israel attacks Iran on its own

A) Assuming Iran has no nukes or perhaps even no intention of creating them and is just as it says pursuing a civilian nuclear power and research.

The attack on exiting reactors, remember all previous attacks on nuclear reactors have been on ones that were not fueled up, causes massive fallout similar or worse than Chernobyl as Chernobyl was largely contained. Remember nuclear reactors contain far nastier and much larger quantities of polluting elements than a nuclear weapon; unless the nuke is designed to be dirty. Tehran, where some of the reactors are, becomes as unlivable, prevailing winds carry the fallout in to Pakistan, Afghanistan, India and China.

Thousands die from radiation sickness all played out in the glare of the media.

1) The world turns against Israel on mass including Europe and America. Embargo and blockade with constant threat of nuclear annihilation from Russia China and India until it gives up all its nukes and cedes everything to pre 67 borders. Jerusalem becomes the capitol of a recognised Palestinian state.

US Foreign policy is down the toilet, possibly never to recover.

2) Tehran gives various terrorist groups very dirty substances: strontium, cesium and the like and Israel suffers a worse fate than Iran.

3) Pakistan tips and Al Qaeda get control of Pakistan's Nukes (Al Qaeda's long term plan), political via a revolution or coup or individual because Johny, with his hand on the red button, who's family are dieing of radiation poisoning, gets pissed off. Nukes Israel. Or gives the Nukes to terrorists to drive there slow style.

4) Bad enough radiation and China gets pissed off, China has a very short fuse on such things, and nukes Israel to smoking ash.

B) Iran already has one or two nukes

5) Iran embarks on a crash program to get them to Israel and Nukes Haifa and Tel Aviv. Israel responds and nukes Tehran (already evacuated as it is already Irradiated like Chernobyl), Isfahan, Tabriz and other major Iranian cities.

Cases 3 and 4 are both the likely results of 5 as well.

Assuming the west is complicit in an attack on Iran

1) The world turns against Israel and the West on mass including most of Europe. America is riven with dissension. A new Eastern block forms including all South America China Russia and the bulk of Europe.

US, UK, Canada Australia and a few small states are all that remain of the west massive Oil embargoes cripple their economies.

2) Iran Irradiates US Bases in Afghanistan, Iraq and the oil fields of Saudi Arabia, using dirty bombs. Mines and Irradiates the Gulf Straights. Sends terrorists with dirty bombs to London, New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Houston, Las Vegas, Miami, Sydney etc.

Heck it don't even have to do that, Iran can just sneak terrorists into the oil fields of Saudi Arabia and pump radioactive substances down the Saudi wells. Then every oil tanker from Saudi Arabia becomes the transport for a dirty bomb poking out of the tail pipe of every car in the world.

3) A destabilized Pakistan fires Nukes at US and NATO bases in Afghanistan and the US Fleets in the Indian Ocean, and Persian Gulf as well as Israel. Israel retaliates. Case 1 and 2 results but with Pakistan being the main cause.

4) China gets pissed off, China has a very short fuse on such things, WWIII results though China might be happy with nuking Israel to radio active dust and in all honesty in such circumstances the west and US would probably consider that as ok, as it would mitigate against case 1.

B) Assuming Iran already has one or two nukes

5) Iran Nukes the US Fleet in the Persian Gulf and embarks on a crash program to get a Nuke to Haifa or Tel Aviv. Israel responds or pre-empts because it thinks it might be the case and nukes Tehran (already evacuated as it is already Irradiated) Isfahan, Tabriz and other major Iranian cities.

Cases 1, 2, 3 and 4 are all the likely results of 5 as well.

Now those are worse case scenarios ;)

And of course all of these can result in WWIII.

And they are only ones I came up with in 15 minutes. When you come up with worse case scenarios, you need imagination.

Professional assessment

For a professional assessment see the Paper “Military Action Against Iran: Impact and Effects†by Professor Paul Rogers he also wrote the paper “Iraq: Consequences of a War†which predicted and described in 2003, what would happen in Iraq as a consequence of the war:

http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/publications/briefing_papers/military_action_against_iran_impact_and_effects...

Of course we have Fukushima as an example of what can happen. A deliberately destroyed reactor containment would set a terrible precedent and open Israel and any other country seen to be involved to a tit for tat attack.

People need to consider the consequences carefully before setting a match to this particular tinder box.

Kind Regards walker

Edited November 15, 2011 by walker

[mrcash2009 0]

People need to consider the consequences carefully before setting a match to this particular tinder box.

We are not the people with the match box.

If at this time you can only speak of diplomacy and not speak of end results then its a bit la la land, becuase you only have to look at the jigsaw puzzle unfolding currently. Nothing is pretty whichever way you want to paint it. Elephant in the room and all that.

[Tonci87 163]

Conclusion: We are all f***ed

Maybe the mayans were right and apokalypse is just a year away (I think a year is enough to start WW3)

:butbut:

[Baff1 0]

All that was debated before on the Libya Head Cam thread - look it up - you might enjoy my analysis and learn enough to get your facts straight.

Obama attacked Libya.

That's factual enough for me.