Iran Super Thread- Merged

[Infanteer]

...Unfortuantely, we tried rocking the boat before; my advice from one leader to another, don't do it, because the free-world will bring some whoop-ass on you.

Signed,
Angela

 

[paracowboy]

p.s.
I love your dresses. Where do you get them?

 

[Kirkhill]

http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20061002-102008-6971r.htm

If and when Bush 'Iraqs' Iran
By Arnaud de Borchgrave
October 3, 2006


A strategic thinker who called all the correct diplomatic and military plays preceding Operation Iraqi Freedom now sees diplomatic failure and air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities. The war on Iran, he says, started a year ago when the U.S. began conducting secret recon missions inside Iran.
    Sam Gardiner, 67, has taught strategy at the National War College, Air War College and Naval War College. The retired Air Force colonel recently published as a Century Foundation Report "The End of the 'Summer of Diplomacy': Assessing the U.S. Military Option on Iran."
    President Bush and his national security council believe seven "key truths" that eliminate all but the military option, according to Mr. Gardiner, who adds his own comments:
    (1) Iran is developing weapons of mass destruction -- "that is most likely true."
    (2) Iran is ignoring the international community -- "true."
    (3) Iran supports Hezbollah and terrorism -- "true."
    (4) Iran is increasingly inserting itself in Iraq and beginning to get involved in Afghanistan -- "true."
    (5) The people of Iran want a regime change -- "most likely an exaggeration."
    (6) Sanctions won't work -- "most likely true."
    (7) You cannot negotiate with these people -- "not proven." .....

This has the ring of a real possibility to it.

....Congressional approval? When Democratic members of Congress offered an amendment to the Defense bill in June that would have required the president to get authorization before taking military action, the amendment failed. A strike on Iran, as seen by the White House, has already been authorized. It's part of the global war on terrorism. So the strike on Iran could be ordered any time in the next two years.

G.W.'s  hands will be untied after November.  More to Follow.

As for the caveat mentioned in the article that Iran will become the permanent enemy of the US: What is it now?
And as for multiple aim points 1 B2 can simultaneously drop 80 500lb JDAMS (16 2000lb JDAMS) on multiple aim points without crossing the targets.  It doesn't take too many sorties to reach 400 aim points.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/b-2-specs.htm

 

[Kirkhill]

And in a potentially related development.....not only would Israel have to go through French "Peace Keepers" to get to Hezbollah but the US would have to go through French Nuclear Techs to get to Iran's nuke programme.

Iran pushes France nuclear deal 

Iran has suggested that France monitor its nuclear programme, by setting up a nuclear fuel consortium inside Iran.

....... The deputy director of Iran's atomic energy agency, Mohammad Saeedi, told French radio that a solution to the nuclear issue could be a consortium with France to enrich uranium in Iran.

"That way France... could control in a tangible way our enrichment activities," Mohammad Saeedi, deputy chief of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, told France-Info radio. ......

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5401828.stm

More to follow no doubt......

 

[a_majoor]

Of course, the French had technical staff at the Osirik reactor just outside Bagdad in 1981 as well. They were lucky then, apparently only one person ended up playing "catch" with an Israeli bomb.......................

 

[zipperhead_cop]

And in a potentially related development.....not only would Israel have to go through French "Peace Keepers" to get to Hezbollah but the US would have to go through French Nuclear Techs to get to Iran's nuke programme.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5401828.stm

More to follow no doubt......

Oh, well then.  The French will be trusted with the security of the middle east.  **PHEW!!** Thank god we have that problem sorted out.  : Olive vinyards and flowers in the desert to follow. 

 

[tomahawk6]

Some experts feel that Israel will strike Iran with their Jericho missiles - conventional warheads.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

Some experts feel that Israel will strike Iran with their Jericho missiles - conventional warheads.

If that happens, it's gonna get real ugly, real fast.  :-\

 

[Kirkhill]

One more sign of chipping at the foundations.

Popular Iranian cleric opposed to mixing religion and politics is detained
   


 

 



TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - A popular Shiite Muslim cleric who opposes mixing religion and politics was detained Sunday after his supporters clashed with police outside his home in the capital Tehran, news reports said.

Hossein Kazemeini Boroujerdi, a mid-ranking cleric, receives hundreds of visitors at home every day asking for his blessing but he is not favoured among Iran's hardline clerics under Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei because he does not support politicizing Islam.

About 200 demonstrators gathered beginning Saturday at Boroujerdi's home, fearing he could be arrested. The Interior Ministry said the demonstrators had blocked roads using swords and acid.

The demonstrators clashed with police and authorities fired back with tear gas to scatter the crowd, several nongovernment newspapers reported.

Later Sunday, the Interior Ministry said authorities detained several members of a "religious cult" after they attacked people with knives and acid. The ministry, in a statement posted on its Web site, did not name any of those arrested. But the semiofficial Mehr News Agency reported that one of those detained was 50-year-old Boroujerdi.

Telephone calls to Iranian authorities were not immediately returned Sunday.

In August, police failed to detain Boroujerdi when his supporters clashed with police in front of his home. He was detained twice in 1995 and 2000.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2006/10/08/1984745-ap.html

That is in addition to this:

Ayatollah's grandson calls for US overthrow of Iran

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/18/wiran18.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/06/18/ixnews.html

 

[zipperhead_cop]

That is in addition to this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/18/wiran18.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/06/18/ixnews.html

Very interesting article.  I wonder if he is paying into some other agenda, or if he really is trying to get a war going.  And why the US?  Seems they have enough on their plate.  You would think he would be calling for the world to come in, not just the Americans.  ???

 

[zipperhead_cop]

Okay, so WTF is Russia playing at?

Russia says believes Iran's nuke program peaceful
2 hours, 24 minutes ago

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia said on Tuesday it believed Iran's nuclear program was peaceful, and a political dialogue, not sanctions, must be used in talks with Tehran.

"We do not have information that would suggest that Iran is carrying out a non-peaceful (nuclear) program," Russian Security Council Secretary Igor Ivanov told a news conference in Moscow.

"We believe that the possibilities for continuing political discussion around this problem (Iran's nuclear program) have not been exhausted," he said.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in a telephone conversation on Monday that talks over Iran's nuclear dispute were being hindered because the European side did not have enough authority.

"The most important problem in continuing Iran and Europe's negotiations (over the nuclear issue) is the European side's lack of enough authority (to take decisions)," an Iranian television report quoted Ahmadinejad as telling Putin.

In a statement on Monday, the Kremlin said Putin had told the Iranian leader that Moscow favored further talks.

Iran says negotiations are the only way to resolve the dispute. But Iran's failure to meet a U.N. deadline to halt enrichment has opened up the possibility of U.N. sanctions.

European states have prepared a draft sanctions resolution but Russia has voiced misgivings.

"Sanctions should not be adopted for their own sake," Ivanov said.

European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana held months of talks with Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani. But those talks did not reach a deal and Solana said this month it was up to Iran to decide if talks should continue.

"Some Western countries create obstacles and prevent a peaceful solution to Iran's nuclear case," Ahmadinejad said.

Iran has often blamed the United States, its arch-foe, for seeking to sway others against Iran. Washington has been seeking to toughen the sanctions resolution

Are they just trying to score some cheap oil, or is there some other dynamic going on here? 

 

[McG]

Are they just trying to score some cheap oil, or is there some other dynamic going on here?

No, but it is still commercial interest.  They are making money supporting Iran's reactors and selling the technology. 

 

[a_majoor]

Russia is trying to assert regional influence in SW Asia, and by extension, limit or reduce American influence. Playing the "enemy of my enemy" card is not very smart in the mid to long term for Russia or Europe; Iran and Radical Islam is hostile to Christendom and Mother Russia, and with nuclear weaponry will be able to become even more assertive and aggressive than they are now.

Just imagine if a nuclear Iran decides it has interests in the French riots or Chechnya, and you will see what I mean.

 

[Zell_Dietrich]

People here are giving such good postings,  I almost feel bad for wanting to bring some levity to the thread.

:rofl:
http://www.cafepress.com/rightwingstuff/1359741

http://www.cafepress.com/rightwingstuff/1359561

(I put these here only out of humour,  please don't flame - I think it is funny)

 

[tomahawk6]

The issue is do we believe Tehran that their program is peaceful or do we strike Iran in an attempt to delay or curtail their program. Once Tehran has nuclear weapons then we are in a completely different game - a much more deadly one. The Iranians will figure that few countries would go nuclear on the behalf of say Israel. They probably can scare europe into compliance. The Gulf oil states will be under the nuclear protection of the US - so Tehran's approach here will be one of subversion. There are large shia minorities throughout this region that can be used to force these governments into collapse. In this way Tehran can avoid US nuclear retaliation because they know that all of these governments are built on sand. Tehran will settle for nothing less than shia domination of the region with their hand on the oil spiggot of the west.

 

[jonoxford]

Sounds like a case for Moab if Israel and the US have the guts. This war is going to be very scarey. I think it will change the world. War in the straits of Hormuz = Oil at at least 150-300 a barrel. This is all we need for a peak oil scenario.

 

[Zell_Dietrich]

This is all we need for a peak oil scenario.

Well,  an argument could be made that it wouldn't be such a bad thing. We need to get off of the oil addiction.  Besides,  I know many Albertians would become overnight trillionairs if the price doubled.  ;D  Remember Canada produces more oil than we consume.

 

[tomahawk6]

High oil prices will spur soy diesel, ethanol, tar sands and coal liquification. Short term pain but long term gain. You have to remember that Iran is as dependent on oil revenue as we are to oil. The Chinese wont be able to afford sky high oil prices and may decide they would rather side with the west.

 

[Kirkhill]

I found it interesting that Tehran was claiming during their recent missile test/show-of-strength that they had cluster munitions for their IRBMs. It seems like an awfully expensive way to terrorize a civilian population - and a particularly ineffective one.  There is a relatively small number of vehicles, which give a fair amount of advance warning of their trajectory and target.  The SRBMs and Katyushas that Hezbollah was firing had limited effect because even with their relatively short times of flight, and an effective evacuation, their ball bearings didn't do much damage although they did shut down the economy.  Militarily they seem to have been of very limited value and I would guess that an IRBM with cluster munitions would be similarly disadvantaged.

So, is Tehran telling the truth about the cluster munitions?  In which case is the entire stunt a propaganda ploy to show Israel that it can reach out and touch them?  Is that necessary because Hezbollah's abilities to hit Israel HAVE been significantly degraded?  Does it indicate that Tehran doesn't yet have anything else to put on the IRBMs?  Or, more bothersome, is it a plausible excuse for developing and deploying long range capabilities without having to announce the nature of the warhead they actually intend to use? (ie They actually have or intend to have CBRN warheads but this allows them the fiction that the IRBMS are "conventional" weapons to keep the UN/US at bay a little longer.)

PS, interesting point about China tomahawk6.  Besides, if they destroy the US economy who is going to buy all the clothes and toys they are currently selling to the US (and us) at inflated prices.  China's wealth is as dependent on the US as Ontario's.  They sell labour - not resources.  No wealthy customers - no wealthy Chinese.

 

[GAP]

High oil prices will spur soy diesel, ethanol, tar sands and coal liquification. Short term pain but long term gain. You have to remember that Iran is as dependent on oil revenue as we are to oil. The Chinese wont be able to afford sky high oil prices and may decide they would rather side with the west.

Or they just might decide to include Iran in their little retinue of countries they own.
Remember it does not have to be a Chinese face at the helm for them to be answerable to the Chinese.