Iran Super Thread- Merged

[SeaKingTacco]

Saint-

I am in no way advocating an attack on Iran (I don't think it is going to be necessary- in my experience, the whole country is a house of cards, waiting to collapse), but many of your "negative consequences" are not well thought out.

-  enflames Middle East (and the World) with anti-US sentiment

There is absolutely no love lost from Israel to Saudi Arabia to Oman for the Iranian Govt.  In fact, If  (a big if) the Israelis ever decide to take direct action against the Iranians, count on the entire Royal Saudi Air Force having that day off. 

-  Israel (who had thus far stayed out of the fray by letting the U.S. military do the heavy lifting) is attacked by Hezbollah in a coordinated  and large scale effort (maybe even chemical or biological attack).

Maybe.  Tehran would then disappear.  Hezbollah's money would be gone.  The end.

- Many US and Israeli planes will be shot down as Iran has much better air defense than Iraq and has been acquiring modern anti-air capability.

Yes, the very same "capability" that the Syrians had last winter when the Israelis blew up their nuclear facilities- with no losses.  Don't overcredit the Iranians.

the Iranian Navy seals off the Persian Gulf and all its oil from the rest of the world. They then mine the area.

Don't over credit the Iranian Navy.  While I found them to be a generally professional bunch, they are pretty poorly equipped and could only keep the Straits closed for a limited period against the combined weight of every Western Navy who depends on Arabian Gulf Oil and all of the Gulf State Navies who want to sell that oil. 

cost of oil....300-400$ a barrel (maybe more who knows)

Maybe briefly.  Maybe not.

thousands of rockets hit Tel Aviv and Jerusalem fired by Hezbollah and Iran with casualties in the thousands

Thousands of rockets?  Hundreds, maybe.  Of those, how many are guided?  Or intercepted by the Israeli missile defence system?  All the while, Iran gets hit from all sides...

Possibly the first sinking of a US Navy ship in a loooong time with major casualties.

That is always a risk for any Naval Vessel of any country...it is not a reason not to act, if the price is right.  It is kind of why you have a military in the first place.

becomes a never ending war as Iran has three times the population of Iraq and terrain is perfect for guerrilla efforts

Where have you read any credible evidence suggesting that the US intends on invading and occupying Iran?  Sure- I have heard Presidential candidates musing about attacks...but that is a long way from an occupation.  And let's be blunt- the US has absolutely no capacity to occupy Iran, so why are we discussing mythical guerrilla wars?

possibility of another Sept. 11th as Iran has already said in the event of such an attack it will find means to attack the US Homeland
- sleeper cells already in strategic locations in US attack
- large Iranian population in Canada is upset and worried for relatives in their country
- Iran has had years to prepare, therefore, there will be consequences that can't be imagined

And Tehran disappears.  Forever.  The US is not in a very forgiving mood.

* due to inflation OUR way of life comes to an end

Ok- that is just silly.

Again, I in no way advocate an attack on Iran, nor do I think it necessary- I think the place will collapse under it's own shambolic weight.  Soon.

 

[George Wallace]

Methinks I have seen this line of posting before...

Further, methinks you had underscores at he beginning and end of your name before...

As well, the two accounts seem to post from the same place...

Spidey senses tingling.

Care to set my mind at ease?

OK!

Enough is enough!

The Saint

Time to answer the above questions poised to you.

Your understanding of World and Military Affairs seems to be completely lacking, so we would like to have you clarify exactly who you are, and what your agenda may be.  Your "Post 'N Run" style is also in question.


Thanks.

George
Milnet.ca Staff

 

[TheSaint]

OK!

Enough is enough!

The Saint

Time to answer the above questions poised to you.

Your understanding of World and Military Affairs seems to be completely lacking, so we would like to have you clarify exactly who you are, and what your agenda may be.  Your "Post 'N Run" style is also in question.


Thanks.

George
Milnet.ca Staff

Eh? What I do? What question? No I don't have underscores?

 

[TheSaint]

Where have you read any credible evidence suggesting that the US intends on invading and occupying Iran?  Sure- I have heard Presidential candidates musing about attacks...but that is a long way from an occupation.  And let's be blunt- the US has absolutely no capacity to occupy Iran, so why are we discussing mythical guerrilla wars?

I've heard it suggested that to completely eliminate the possibility of secret nuclear facilities in Iran, some form of occupation would be necessary. There are apparently underground labs that even US mini-nukes can't touch. In any case, without sending in ground forces the results I mentioned will still occur to some unknown degree. And when your answer to what will happen if another 911 occurs is the end of Tehran....or that if Hezbollah attacks Israel it's the end of Tehran you forget that that city is filled with innocents. 11 000 000 people to be exact. That's a holocost if it's bombed.

The best plan is no war whatsoever.

 

[muskrat89]

"suggested"
"apparently"
"unknown"



Riveting

 

[TheSaint]

Again, I in no way advocate an attack on Iran, nor do I think it necessary- I think the place will collapse under it's own shambolic weight.  Soon.

Well then we agree.
I also think that if left their own devices the people of Iran will take care of the situation. There's an election in 2009.  All this talk of attacking Iran is accomplishing is to anger the public of that country into supporting Ahmadinejad (and maybe making some money for big oil and defense contractors). The US and Israel are the best friends the Pres of Iran could have wished for. If the planners of those countries were smart they'd use covert ops and psychological warefare instead by funding and supporting opposition groups. Maybe play one off against the other.

 

[TheSaint]

"suggested"
"apparently"
"unknown"



Riveting

Well nothing has happened yet. Of course everything's speculation. Can you see the future?

 

[a_majoor]

It is rather odd that you seem to have none of the same compassion for the 732,100 people of Jerusalem; 3,040,400 of Tel Aviv, 858,000 people of Haifa....do I really need to go on?

I am also concerned about the safety of the 1,130,761 people of Ottawa; 5,113,149 people of Toronto...................

Magic does not seem to be in the cards, so I will remain vigilant and trust that the adults have various contingency plans (with branches and sequels) to deal with the situation. The fact that there will be consequences to taking action is no reason not to do so, especially when we reach the point that inaction will have more severe consequences.

 

[TheSaint]

It is rather odd that you seem to have none of the same compassion for the 732,100 people of Jerusalem; 3,040,400 of Tel Aviv, 858,000 people of Haifa....do I really need to go on?

I am also concerned about the safety of the 1,130,761 people of Ottawa; 5,113,149 people of Toronto...................

Magic does not seem to be in the cards, so I will remain vigilant and trust that the adults have various contingency plans (with branches and sequels) to deal with the situation. The fact that there will be consequences to taking action is no reason not to do so, especially when we reach the point that inaction will have more severe consequences.

"the fact that there will be consequences to taking action is no reason not to do so"

Isn't that how making a plan works? You consider consequences? Remember your "adults" in charge of the Iraq affair. Hmm....let's fire the Iraqi Republican Guard and see what a bunch of armed and well trained people with no jobs will do. Oh wait now we have an "insurgency" to deal with. I fear you must be a poor planner if you don't consider consequences.

I have loads of compassion for the regular people in the cities you named, hence, I hope that there isn't a war between Israel and Iran, or between the US, Israel and Iran. And what do Ottawa and Toronto have to do with anything? No one has threatened them and last time I checked they're not in the Middle East. I think that without a war there is no harm to them, but with a war a lot of people here will lose jobs due to the massive worldwide recession that will occur. Also, a lot of people on both sides will die- which is bad. 

 

[TheSaint]

especially when we reach the point that inaction will have more severe consequences.

When is that point, btw?

I don't see any reason to do anything with Iran unless they threaten to attack, or actually attack Israel with nuclear weapons. Until that point you're being guided by the "Bush Doctrine' of pre-emptive war; something that is totally illegal and typically done by rogue and non-law abiding States. (Please don't bring up Hitler and Poland and appeasement Iran has not attacked anyone yet). I'm just hoping that the US Pres and Israel keep their panties on before the election in November so that Obama can turn the ship around. 

What these groups are attempting to do is like that movie Minority Report where you try to predict what crimes people will commit in the future and arrest them today. Kind of backwards don't you think?

 

[tomahawk6]

Armageddon the final battle between good and evil. Saint you know where that will take place ? We may be on the road to Armageddon whether we like it or not.

 

[George Wallace]

Armageddon the final battle between good and evil. Saint you know where that will take place ? We may be on the road to Armageddon whether we like it or not.

What was that old Debra Harry song?

"Go now
pray later
it's a lay-away plan
free vacation in Iran
stop and see the middle east
miles and miles of lovely beach
get that coppertone tan on radioactive sand"

[Militry Rap]

 

[Edward Campbell]

When is that point, btw?

I don't see any reason to do anything with Iran unless they threaten to attack, or actually attack Israel with nuclear weapons. Until that point you're being guided by the "Bush Doctrine' of pre-emptive war; something that is totally illegal and typically done by rogue and non-law abiding States. (Please don't bring up Hitler and Poland and appeasement Iran has not attacked anyone yet). I'm just hoping that the US Pres and Israel keep their panties on before the election in November so that Obama can turn the ship around. 

What these groups are attempting to do is like that movie Minority Report where you try to predict what crimes people will commit in the future and arrest them today. Kind of backwards don't you think?

Why would Israel wait for Obama?

Israel has demonstrated, again and again, that it is not a client of the USA. It does receive huge levels of US financial and military support but Israel thumbs its nose at American policy and politicians whenever its (Israel's) vital interests are not consistent with those of the USA.

IF (maybe when) Israel determines, for itself and by itself, that Iran poses a grave threat to Israel’s security and survival then I have no doubt that it will, as it should, take whatever action it feels necessary – up to and including pre-emptive nuclear attacks on Iran (and maybe some of Iran’s friends, too).

Barack Obama is irrelevant to Israel’s security and survival appreciation – as is George W Bush.

 

[aesop081]

Eh? What I do? What question? No I don't have underscores?

These questions :

Methinks I have seen this line of posting before...

Further, methinks you had underscores at he beginning and end of your name before...

As well, the two accounts seem to post from the same place...

Spidey senses tingling.

Care to set my mind at ease?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Echos of Venezuela?

People are always being led by US propaganda in regards to Venezuela. I suggest watching a documentary called  "The War on Democracy" by Pilager to get a different perspective on what's happening in South America. The only thing that Chavez has done "wrong" in the eyes of the US is cut down on large multi-national corporations basically raping his people of their own wealth and exporting it for their own well being. The rich in Venezuela are the only ones that have anything to lose by having him in power (and most of them are now living in Florida). All this garbage about human rights violations etcetera is trumped up propaganda to try and oust Chavez and install a corporate friendly regime. The US sponsored  a FAILED coup in 2002....where Chavez's own people rose up and re-installed him because they know he is on their side. As we all know the US has intervened on numerous occasions to oust Democratic leadership as well as dictatorships in South America- basically ousting whomever is not friendly to foreign corporate interests. There's a list of such countries if you care to look it up.

Have you ever been there? I have prior to his takeover and know people that live under his rule, the country was run by 5 families and corruption was rampant, Chavez tossed those families and appointed his own cronies. Although things were bad in the 90's, it's far worse there, as competent people are booted to make way for the politically correct, right now the country is surviving on oil monies, but they are being poorly spent, Chavez has been blocked from total power so far, but he is dealing with people who oppose him one by one, soon there will be no way to stop him and you will end up with another president for life and perpetual revolution run on the backs of the people, thankfully he is not as organized or quite so brutal as Mao.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Preparing the Battlefield
The Bush Administration steps up its secret moves against Iran.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh
by Seymour M. Hersh July 7, 2008

Operations outside the knowledge and control of commanders have eroded “the coherence of military strategy,” one general says.

L ate last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country’s religious leadership. The covert activities involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations. They also include gathering intelligence about Iran’s suspected nuclear-weapons program.

Clandestine operations against Iran are not new. United States Special Operations Forces have been conducting cross-border operations from southern Iraq, with Presidential authorization, since last year. These have included seizing members of Al Quds, the commando arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and taking them to Iraq for interrogation, and the pursuit of “high-value targets” in the President’s war on terror, who may be captured or killed. But the scale and the scope of the operations in Iran, which involve the Central Intelligence Agency and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), have now been significantly expanded, according to the current and former officials. Many of these activities are not specified in the new Finding, and some congressional leaders have had serious questions about their nature.

Under federal law, a Presidential Finding, which is highly classified, must be issued when a covert intelligence operation gets under way and, at a minimum, must be made known to Democratic and Republican leaders in the House and the Senate and to the ranking members of their respective intelligence committees—the so-called Gang of Eight. Money for the operation can then be reprogrammed from previous appropriations, as needed, by the relevant congressional committees, which also can be briefed.

“The Finding was focussed on undermining Iran’s nuclear ambitions and trying to undermine the government through regime change,” a person familiar with its contents said, and involved “working with opposition groups and passing money.” The Finding provided for a whole new range of activities in southern Iran and in the areas, in the east, where Baluchi political opposition is strong, he said.

Although some legislators were troubled by aspects of the Finding, and “there was a significant amount of high-level discussion” about it, according to the source familiar with it, the funding for the escalation was approved. In other words, some members of the Democratic leadership—Congress has been under Democratic control since the 2006 elections—were willing, in secret, to go along with the Administration in expanding covert activities directed at Iran, while the Party’s presumptive candidate for President, Barack Obama, has said that he favors direct talks and diplomacy.

The request for funding came in the same period in which the Administration was coming to terms with a National Intelligence Estimate, released in December, that concluded that Iran had halted its work on nuclear weapons in 2003. The Administration downplayed the significance of the N.I.E., and, while saying that it was committed to diplomacy, continued to emphasize that urgent action was essential to counter the Iranian nuclear threat. President Bush questioned the N.I.E.’s conclusions, and senior national-security officials, including Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, made similar statements. (So did Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee.) Meanwhile, the Administration also revived charges that the Iranian leadership has been involved in the killing of American soldiers in Iraq: both directly, by dispatching commando units into Iraq, and indirectly, by supplying materials used for roadside bombs and other lethal goods. (There have been questions about the accuracy of the claims; the Times, among others, has reported that “significant uncertainties remain about the extent of that involvement.”)

 

[tech2002]

This is nothing new from Bush, this man has agenda, and it is pushing a bit too far, I think.

 

[George Wallace]

This is nothing new from Bush, this man has agenda, and it is pushing a bit too far, I think.

An agenda to retire in six months.

 

[MedTechStudent]

An agenda to retire in six months.

Amen

 

[Mike Baker]

The Bush Administration steps up its secret moves against Iran.

Well their not secret anymore apparently... :



-Dead