View Full Version : Time to hit Iran?
arizonaranchman
08-14-10, 13:54
Interesting developments here. Now a very small window of time exists to deal with this (most likely) future nitemare. Heaven knows this administration doesn't have the ball$ to take meaningful action. In fact I suspect he supports them and will refuse to act. This leaves a difficult situation that could go sour overnight.
This is a catch-22 for Israel.
Imagine you have a neighbor living next door to you. You see him sitting in his garage loading ammo and repeatedly over time telling you to your face that he's going to kill you. Are you gonna sit on your hands and do nothing?
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/John--Bolton--Iran--Nuclear--israel/2010/08/13/id/367449?s=al&promo_code=A80B-1
rickrock305
08-14-10, 14:21
We don't really have the resources available to support an attack on Iran. Our military is pretty stretched right now.
GermanSynergy
08-14-10, 14:38
My concern would be what happens after the IDF attacks Iran. I'd wager that Iran would unleash sleeper cells / agents worldwide against Jewish targets (like Buenos Aires in 94), and things would get ugly very fast.....:mad:
And how would China, Russia and the rest of the Arab world and it's allies respond? How about the price of oil, the strength of the dollar (and euro)???
arizonaranchman
08-14-10, 15:10
And how would China, Russia and the rest of the Arab world and it's allies respond? How about the price of oil, the strength of the dollar (and euro)???
Exactly... What a mess. Extremely complicated. But for Israel the immediate and virtually certain issue is they will take a hit from Iran as soon as those whack-jobs are able to make it.
Gas/oil prices would go through the roof, stability in the middle east would go downhill overnight and the US would get dragged into it regardless.
And yes our military is pretty badly stretched now. But like WWII, they'd have to address the problem with whatever was necessary, ie: a draft, etc.
In fact this brings up something I just heard the other day - does anyone here know...? I heard that military enlistments are up so high that there's a "waiting list" up to a year after you enlist. Is this true? I'd never heard this before.
rickrock305
08-14-10, 15:14
In fact this brings up something I just heard the other day - does anyone here know...? I heard that military enlistments are up so high that there's a "waiting list" up to a year after you enlist. Is this true? I'd never heard this before.
Yes. I'm in the process of trying to enlist and its not easy. There is definitely waiting lists for pretty much any job you want to get in any of the services. Some are not available at all. Standards are very high, and the ability to get waivers has dropped significantly.
arizonaranchman
08-14-10, 15:32
Yes. I'm in the process of trying to enlist and its not easy. There is definitely waiting lists for pretty much any job you want to get in any of the services. Some are not available at all. Standards are very high, and the ability to get waivers has dropped significantly.
Wow that's just awesome to hear. I'm very impressed at this news to see so many stepping up to serve. If this Iran thing happens you and all the other applicants may get a letter within about a week to report for duty.
Sorry for thread jack here but I'm chiming in on this one. I scored a 93 on the military ASVAB test, but didn't want to go NUC field. I took the ASVAB in august 2009, I was on a list waiting for a slot to open until February 2010 when I finally got it. The Navy is pretty much the most full right now and with the biggest waiting list. When I was at MEPS trying to get a slot, for every 1 person called into the Navy liason office, there where probably 6 or 7 called into the USMC liason office.
Wow that's just awesome to hear. I'm very impressed at this news to see so many stepping up to serve. If this Iran thing happens you and all the other applicants may get a letter within about a week to report for duty.
Pakistan is a far bigger threat than Iran ever will be, Iran might dabble in arming militas with this and that, but as a country they're far more secure than Pakistan, so any use of nuclear weapons means destruction, something they don't want. It's more of a tool to thump their chest, the actual use of it isn't going to happen.
You don't see OBL strapping a bomb to his chest and running into the crowd, do you? So you sure as hell aren't going to see the clerics of Iran allowing the use of a nuclear weapon, these folks really prefer not being martyrs in this life. No matter what they say.
Pakistan on the other hand is highly unstable and has already lost a good part of its country to an insurgency, and loyalty to the government is pretty much non existence. And they already have the bomb, and more than one. But let's keep acting as if Iran is the major threat, not little old Pakistan that provides a safe haven for the insurgents in Afghanistan, and has a radical population that would love nothing more than to become martyrs.
There is a great book out by Robert Baer called The Devil we Know. I don't have time to go into detail but I will say that it was an eye opener on Iran. It is a pretty quick read, I recommend picking it up and giving it a read.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0307408647/?tag=googhydr-20&hvadid=5196759749&ref=pd_sl_62i06p9fla_e
I was going to point this thread out to Mr. Obama himself, but I did not want to interrupt his Ramadan dinner celebration at the White House. (Of course he could not invite any Christian or Jewish religious leaders to the White House on National Prayer Day because he was afraid people would think he was "favoring" one religion over another.)
Exactly... What a mess. Extremely complicated. But for Israel the immediate and virtually certain issue is they will take a hit from Iran as soon as those whack-jobs are able to make it.
Gas/oil prices would go through the roof, stability in the middle east would go downhill overnight and the US would get dragged into it regardless.
And yes our military is pretty badly stretched now. But like WWII, they'd have to address the problem with whatever was necessary, ie: a draft, etc.
In fact this brings up something I just heard the other day - does anyone here know...? I heard that military enlistments are up so high that there's a "waiting list" up to a year after you enlist. Is this true? I'd never heard this before.
None of Iran's allies would support Iran nuking Israel. Israel is essentially part of NATO now (while no MSM was reporting it) so it would be NATO vs. Shanghia Cooperation Organizaion (i.e., Russian, China perhaps India, some Caucasian states). No one wishes to have nuclear blasts on their soil and the after-effects. Iran would disappear as a nation if they launched on Israel. Just as I believe that we, too, would cease to exist as a viable nation if we were to join in a nuke attack on Iran because China is a HUGE investor (the dragon thirsts for OIL) and is allied with Russia and the US and NATO are surrounding both with bases and missiles.
NO ONE wins that conflict so let's do all we can to avoid it.
With unemployment statistics showing 22% unemployed/underemployed I can believe that the military has a glut of potential, interested personnel.
Wow that's just awesome to hear. I'm very impressed at this news to see so many stepping up to serve.
People aren't doing it to be patriotic, they are doing it because the economy sucks. It happens every recession.
People aren't doing it to be patriotic, they are doing it because the economy sucks. It happens every recession.
Sad but true. Easy way to get out of civi daily grind. If you have a high school diploma, can score a 40 or over on the ASVAB, have no obscene tattoos or in obvious places, and a pretty clean criminal record, the military is THE best job you can get for a young American. I saw a lot of guys at MEPS that were in their late 30's, some early 40's, that lost everything they had, and were joining up, some re-enlisting.
Some of the people in my Delayed Entry Program have been there for 6 months, and don't even know the first general order or their Sailors Creed. Others I'm afraid to have on the same continent as I am:sad:
variablebinary
08-15-10, 04:09
The last thing the USA needs is another front.
If Israel has a problem with their neighbors, they need to man up and deal with it.
The United States should not be the world police. This global mindset of "let the Americans deal with it" is complete B.S.
Our involvement, if we must be involved, should be clandestine in nature, playing upon the fact that Iran, at it's core, is not a happy Islamic nation. It is a mostly secular, youthful nation that can self medicate with the right motivation and support from behind the scenes.
If Israel has a problem with their neighbors, they need to man up and deal with it.
Short of using nuclear weapons what would Israel do? My understanding is many of the facilities involved are beyond the reach of conventional weapons and some of them might even be safe against nuclear attack.
variablebinary
08-15-10, 04:40
Short of using nuclear weapons what would Israel do? My understanding is many of the facilities involved are beyond the reach of conventional weapons and some of them might even be safe against nuclear attack.
What are we supposed to do exactly is a better question?
Roll an armor column from Baghdad into Tehran, occupy Iran, rebuild it like we did Iraq and Afghanistan? Not just no, but hell no.
Or how about the fantasy that we can just fly F22's in with bunker busters and destroy Iranian infrastructure, and that would solve everything. That might work great for "Meet the Press" speculation, but that isn't reality.
No, no, no. Israel better get capable if they feel that threatened, or learn to live with a nuclear Iran.
Can we learn to live with a nuclear Iran?
IDK a good course of action to take against Iran, but I am assuming that Iran with nukes would be worse for us than any terrorist attack we have suffered yet.
Can we learn to live with a nuclear Iran?
IDK a good course of action to take against Iran, but I am assuming that Iran with nukes would be worse for us than any terrorist attack we have suffered yet.
Why would Iran use nuclear weapons? Some one tell me why, instead of media hysteria.
1. It would alienate their supporters, even most fundamental Muslims are against the killing of other muslims, suicide bombers who strike crowded markets of muslims aren't the most popular folks.
2. Iran is more of a western country than Saudi Arabia (you know the one who's countryman attacked us about 10 years ago) who currently has nukes, and a growing disgruntled population and a hate for Israel.
3. Their economy would tank. No country prefers being poor, hell you think Hezbollah or any fundamental group would have any support if it was a wealthy country, and not just a plutocracy like most arab states. Very few wealthy people partake in the act of terrorism, when you have a good life it's hard to convince you that the world is evil and most be destroyed. Easier to do when you eat out of a trash can and sleep in a house made out of recycled garbage.
4. Iran's majority wouldn't stand for such an act. Right now the hardliners get the air waves simply because they're currently in power.
5. Mutual destruction is a powerful defense. Look at NK, they're so fast to pursue the bomb and show it off to deter what they feel is an impending attack by the south, if they wanted a war they would have started one a long time ago, they know they're living on borrowed time and are trying to buy more time with any means possible, bombing the south with a nuke wouldn't exactly do that, it would pretty much stop the clock. Same reason Iran wants the bomb, because they currently don't have the power to influence the region as they wish, with a nuke they would become a player in the area. Right now they see NATO building up on all sides, like it or not that's scary shit if you're Iran.
6. The last thing we need is a war with Iran, as ass backwards as they are they have a productive military industry and no matter how much the population wants a change they won't welcome a foreign military force. If we had a true dictator in office and China came and toppled that regime, we would welcome the change, but not the occupation. Nobody welcomes a stranger in their home... At least not a sane person.
Rant done, and sorry if it was disorganized and nutty, I'm tired... I'm usually tired because I post during bouts of insomnia. :P
What are we supposed to do exactly is a better question?
Stand with our ally against a common threat. Or would you suggest that Iran poses no threat to the United States, either directly or indirectly?
Some of you forget two things: Iran has pledged to wipe Israel off the map before dealing with the "great Satan" (America). Do we really want these animals in position to be the next North Korea, threatening reckless nuclear destruction every other week?
And even if they won't launch against our base Bahrain, what about them facilitating the development and delivery of a dirty bomb to be detonated here or at our bases in Saudi Arabia? If someone thinks it can't happen, can they explain why?
Stand with our ally against a common threat. Or would you suggest that Iran poses no threat to the United States, either directly or indirectly?
Some of you forget two things: Iran has pledged to wipe Israel off the map before dealing with the "great Satan" (America). Do we really want these animals in position to be the next North Korea, threatening reckless nuclear destruction every other week?
And even if they won't launch against our base Bahrain, what about them facilitating the development and delivery of a dirty bomb to be detonated here or at our bases in Saudi Arabia? If someone thinks it can't happen, can they explain why?
Why would they go through all the trouble enriching plutonium to make a dirty bomb? And why would a terrorist group use a dirty bomb? That's just more media bs, of course it's a risk, but so is getting hit by lightning? If any WMD is ever used in a terrorist take more than likely it'll be biological since it's harder to detect and easier to use unnoticed, not to mention the terror part is a bit higher, you can detect radiation and know where it's at, but a good epidemic and you'll have the entire population in a panic and even if you track down the source there's no way to truly control it's spread.
Any how Yemen, Pakistan, China, Russia are all bigger threats than Iran.
Hell Yemen and Pakistan are pretty big ones, Yemen can cause trouble for the Saudi's, being a country with nukes that could be bad, and Pakistan already has nukes and an ongoing insurgency in which certain parts of their government are involved in.
So let's keep finding an escape goat and invade other country's while ones who pose a risk and have done actual harm we ignore because their profitable and we don't want to cause a hiccup in industry, not that the financial crisis didn't already do a great job of that.
So yeah Iran is going to blow everyone to shit with their almight nukes unless we nuke them first, than we need to nuke everyone else because we'll become super unpopular with the world, Israel will still like us, but that won't matter because they'll be a lost cause after they're invaded. It's a new world, the arab nation in the 60's didn't have the same powers they do now. With their oil wealth and western hardware it would be a pretty good fight. Hell Israel can't even defeat hezbollah a rag tag group of thugs. What will they do when the Egyptians come rolling in with their shiny new m1's an the Saudis with their typhoons.
And what do we do with the middle east than? Do we support Israel and alienate our oil supply and cut off our heads, or do we play both sides? Or maybe China moves in and defuses it and builds a stronger presence like they have in Africa...
And no I'm not drunk lmao...
And why would a terrorist group use a dirty bomb?
We are headed to full ret*rd here, bowing out before my head explodes.
We are headed to full ret*rd here, bowing out before my head explodes.
Okay, so you're going to tell me it's cheap and easy to move nuclear material around? Next where going to talk about emp bombs.
Our ports are setup to detect such things, along with most entry points into this country. Hell we're using gamma rays to check trucks at the borders. So you're a terrorist who has millions to spend. You're going with the most likely thing to fail? When you could just spend a few grand get a few dipshits to jump on a plane and cause 100x the damage with out the risk of having it all go up to smoke because you're caught at customs. It's not like a dirty nuke would engulf an entire city. And it's not as if we can't decontaminate an area.
And a dirty nuke isn't that scary, hell depending on the grade of the nuclear material it might cause cancer 20 years down the road if it's fine enough to be inhaled. It's not as if people will start getting radiation burns five minutes after the explosion, and if the material isn't detonated properly it pretty much will become inert as far as your health is concerned, a few chest xrays will do as much damage.
So what's scarier, a dirty nuke or an outbreak of smallpox? I'll take the dirty nuke any day.
So again, why would a terrorist use a dirty bomb? Other than media hype because it's a what if scenario that sounds horrifing because people put it in the same light as hiroshomo, when in reality it's not that scary, when compared all the other shit that some terrorist group could do. And since the results won't be seen until years down the road (terrorism is to terrorize in the present) it's not that attractive. Probably why they hijacked 4 planes instead of smuggling in a bunch of low grade nuclear material into the country (get some nuclear treatment for cancer and you'll get similar dosages). It's not as if the world is overflowing with heu any how.
arizonaranchman
08-15-10, 13:03
The problem is we can conveniently theorize over here from 8,000 miles away, but Israel is just a stone's throw away and doesnt have that luxury to "assume" he's a nutcase and doesn't really have the balls to do it. The extremist muslims DON'T CARE if they're killed/wiped out/exterminated in the process. It will take them to heaven or whatever they believe. Iran's president is one of these extremist types from what I've heard. He WANTS TO BRING ON the end times to fulfill whatever whacky prophecy they have.
So to say they have too much to lose is dangerous and ignores the insanity of who you're talking about. These are the people who strap bombs to themselves. The last enemy we had who was that fanatical that I can recall off the top of my head was Japan and they were an incredible nightmare to defeat with conventional warfare. We had to use nukes to knock sense into them and avoid untold millions of casualties.
What do we do ref oil? WE have MORE OIL under the central western states than any of them. We need to get our heads out of our a$$es and DRILL for it. We can be completely independent if we really want to be. Yes there'd be a defiite lag time i getting this oil out of the ground but that would be the price we pay for letting these idiot environmentalists override commen sense.
Now let's HOPE you guys are right and he's just a nutjob spouting off his mouth like North Korea's president, but what if he's not? The other countries cited are definitely huge threats, but they're by and large not ruled by someone who's a fanatical whack-job who wants to bring on the end times and destroy the infidels. China appears to be the next world super power due to our idiotic liberal/progressives who've emasculated us with their foolishness. I'd say we're one generation away from being #2 sadly. A pathetic situation, but thank our liberals for that.
Remember the analogy of the neighbor next door - telling you daily he's going to kill you as he loads ammo in his garage and smirks at you. Are you going to casually assume he's just a nut? That's hard to do and a major risk. If these threats are being mailed to you from hundreds of miles away yeah you can take the attitude of being a bit more relaxed about it. But if he can throw a rock and hit you then you're in a different situation.
WE aren't going to initiate a strike, but Israel just might due to proximity and deliberate and outright threats made to them. What type of strike and to what extreme who knows. Yes we may well get dragged into it because we can't stay out of anything usually anyway, but that's not something we can help.
The nation of Israel has a warrior/kickass mindset as a general rule, unlike the US who generally has an apathetic mindset until they just can't avoid it anymore. Why haven't they been able to defeat some of their chicken-sh*% enemies in their region? Because WE keep reigning them in. So far for a long time they've taken spit in the face over and over again from the morons around them due to indebtedness and friendship with us is my guess.
Now with the Obamination in charge of things they know we absolutely cannot be depended on at all to assist them. In fact he's anti-Israel is my bet since he appears to be a closet radical muslim himself.
Let's pray this all just works out somehow, but it's def a potential problem in the making and now the time is nearly gone to take action apparently.
Interesting input from you all, thanks for the commentary!
Why haven't they been able to defeat some of their chicken-sh*% enemies in their region? Because WE keep reigning them in. So far for a long time they've taken spit in the face over and over again from the morons around them due to indebtedness and friendship with us is my guess.
For one thing we don't have a friendly relationship with Israel, we have a somewhat beneficial at times, some times ****s us over with out a thank you, they'd deal with China or Russia over us if they saw it in their favor, and have before in the past.
Israel does what they want, not what we tell them to do. The reason they still these on going problems is because a good portion of their population are die hard Zionist, while another part aren't. At some times the government supports settlements, at other times they have the military evict settlers, it depends on public opinion rather than what we tell them. Of course we might have some influence, but that's like saying UAE does what we want, sure they might listen to us if it's beneficial to them, but if it isn't they could give two shits.
Here you go Safetyhit, found a simple write up. http://www.bioterrorism.slu.edu/dirty/dirty.pdf So unless the explosive is able to turn the material into an aerosol (isn't super simple to do) and you inhale it, you're in good shape, even than you could still be fine depending on what they use.
The biggest danger would be the explosion itself... And not the radiation.
Live long enough in the south west you're probably getting cancer, hell with all these cell phones we're all probably giving ourselves good doses of radiation.
The biggest danger would be the explosion itself... And not the radiation.
When did I ever state that radiation was the primary issue? :confused:
Not to be a dick but I really don't understand where you are going with this. We have been concerned about a low level nuclear device being smuggled into this country for years now, primarily through a large shipping container.
jklaughrey
08-15-10, 14:47
Just be aware, being prepared for any type of attack is prudent. With such a wide array of weapons that can be used on us, don't you think we perhaps should entertain the idea of at least having a viable action plan in place? When you go outside and it looks like rain do you dress accordingly, or does common sense escape that "hope and dreams" mind of yours?
When did I ever state that radiation was the primary issue? :confused:
Not to be a dick but I really don't understand where you are going with this. We have been concerned about a low level nuclear device being smuggled into this country for years now, primarily through a large shipping container.
Hell I went on a rant, not even sure. But I'm just making a point it's something that's more of a danger when portrayed by the media as fear mongering as it actually is in real life. Same as the idea of Iran having heu be it for weapons or civil purposes. It's not worth a war, no matter what chest pounding they do for the media. When it comes down to it, countries that are a bigger threat to both Israel and us already have nuclear weapons and we're not advocating going to war with them.
If it was the threat portrayed we would have already bombed the shit out of Tehran a long time ago. Instead we've used it as a means to spank Iran with sanctions because we want to control their influence with the rest of the area, but saying we don't want Iran having a say in developments of neighboring shit holes isn't as popular of a reason for sanctions as saying they're building weapons and we can't tolerate it (we've tolerated it a few times before, with more at stake)
And I personally don't have a problem with us ****ing up Iran if it makes this country stronger, I live in this country so my loyalty is here and not with any other, not even jolly old Englad, as much as I love proper english :P, just as if I lived in Canada I would love Canada.
Hell the Chinese bastards are doing the same shit. So it's either us or them. If we're not benefiting they're benefiting.
Just be aware, being prepared for any type of attack is prudent. With such a wide array of weapons that can be used on us, don't you think we perhaps should entertain the idea of at least having a viable action plan in place? When you go outside and it looks like rain do you dress accordingly, or does common sense escape that "hope and dreams" mind of yours?
Not saying we shouldn't, and we already do. That's why It's highly unlikely. Terrorist like soft targets. And it's not "Hope and Dreams" just the truth. And to belive Iran actually plans to launch a nuclear weapon at Tel Aviv is to belive the DPRK is full of fat people.
jklaughrey
08-15-10, 15:03
And I personally don't have a problem with us ****ing up Iran if it makes this country stronger.
On this we seem to be in agreement!
Well looks like we should hit the gym and get toned, no need to make it easy for those ****ers to attack us!
arizonaranchman
08-15-10, 16:25
Hell I went on a rant, not even sure. But I'm just making a point it's something that's more of a danger when portrayed by the media as fear mongering as it actually is in real life. Same as the idea of Iran having heu be it for weapons or civil purposes. It's not worth a war, no matter what chest pounding they do for the media. When it comes down to it, countries that are a bigger threat to both Israel and us already have nuclear weapons and we're not advocating going to war with them.
If it was the threat portrayed we would have already bombed the shit out of Tehran a long time ago. Instead we've used it as a means to spank Iran with sanctions because we want to control their influence with the rest of the area, but saying we don't want Iran having a say in developments of neighboring shit holes isn't as popular of a reason for sanctions as saying they're building weapons and we can't tolerate it (we've tolerated it a few times before, with more at stake)
And I personally don't have a problem with us ****ing up Iran if it makes this country stronger, I live in this country so my loyalty is here and not with any other, not even jolly old Englad, as much as I love proper english :P, just as if I lived in Canada I would love Canada.
Hell the Chinese bastards are doing the same shit. So it's either us or them. If we're not benefiting they're benefiting.
My thoughts ref this...
Ref the points above that I highlighted. Yes there are much bigger countries with nukes who are a potentially much bigger threat so us. But the difference here is they're not actively making threats to us - they just exist and yes they're menacing, but not actively issuing threats to exterminate us.
In the case of Iran they are openly/boldly making threats to annihilate Israel. With that situation how can Israel just sit there and hope for the best. No-one else gives a damn about their problem but them, including us with Obama in office. Yes we can hope he is chest-beating (in that region quite common) but from what I've heard the difference with him is he's one of those extremist radicals who actually wants to bring on the end times, not just take land or beat someone's ass he doesn't like.
Now as far as the USA... WE haven't taken any significant action against Iran because they haven't issued these threats at us in particular, it's been at Israel. As thinly as we're spread right now we can't really open up that can of worms due to lack of ability to deal with a 3rd theater of war and one that would probably ignite into a huge mess - far bigger problem than Iraq or Afghanistan.
Don't forget, we've fought Chinese in the past in places such as Vietnam, and Korea. But we didn't bomb the shit out of bejing (spelling lol). We didn't even bomb them when they where working on the bomb :eek: And they could afford to lose a billion or so ;)
Don't forget, we've fought Chinese in the past in places such as Vietnam, and Korea. But we didn't bomb the shit out of bejing (spelling lol). We didn't even bomb them when they where working on the bomb :eek: And they could afford to lose a billion or so ;)
The difference is that while totalitarian, the Chinese were rational (as was the USSR). They did not want to burn and incinerate any more than we did/do and did not want that for their country either.
The islamic nutcases are not rational.
variablebinary
08-15-10, 18:43
Stand with our ally against a common threat. Or would you suggest that Iran poses no threat to the United States, either directly or indirectly?
Some of you forget two things: Iran has pledged to wipe Israel off the map before dealing with the "great Satan" (America). Do we really want these animals in position to be the next North Korea, threatening reckless nuclear destruction every other week?
And even if they won't launch against our base Bahrain, what about them facilitating the development and delivery of a dirty bomb to be detonated here or at our bases in Saudi Arabia? If someone thinks it can't happen, can they explain why?
This is rhetoric, not an answer to what we are supposed to do, or what we can do in the real world.
There are a ton of what ifs that can be applied to nations with nuclear capability or the potential for going nuclear. Translating those what ifs into a justification for preemption is a very different story
We already support Israel through numerous aid programs. We should not be fighting their wars too.
Why would Iran use nuclear weapons?
They keep saying they will.
No one listened to Hitler. He said what he was going to do but western governments thought it was just bluster.
This is rhetoric, not an answer to what we are supposed to do, or what we can do in the real world.
So if I want to voice my support for military action in the face of an overt Iranian threat, this as opposed to supporting inaction, I must also assume the role of the operation's strategist? Does this mean that every American that supports general military operations anywhere overseas must have a plan of specific action in order to do so?
Ok, well here's my best shot. Israel and Saudi Arabia just formed a pact against Iran, this including Saudi Arabia granting air space to Israeli jets should they attack them. We, by amazing coincidence, just sold a bunch of F-15's to Saudi Arabia.
How about a joint Christian, Muslin and Jew military operation against them? I think it is a very real possibility sometime soon, but who knows.
For one thing we don't have a friendly relationship with Israel, we have a somewhat beneficial at times, some times ****s us over with out a thank you, they'd deal with China or Russia over us if they saw it in their favor, and have before in the past.
Lots of folks don't get this. Americans are damagingly preconditioned to think in terms of friendship, and get all butt-hurt when other cultures with a functioning sense of history don't act they way they think they should. Gets us in more trouble these days....
Israel's small, surrounded, and nobody loves them. Good! A certain level of ruthlessness makes perfect sense. They have smart leaders who, out of a simple need for survival, have made the best deals they can with the strongest players they can, based on mutual self-interest instead of intangibles like "frienedship."
Friends are what people are with each other, not nations. They're worried about getting pushed into the sea, not if somebody's gonna come over and play XBox with them.
Lots of folks don't get this. Americans are damagingly preconditioned to think in terms of friendship, and get all butt-hurt when other cultures with a functioning sense of history don't act they way they think they should. Gets us in more trouble these days....
I'm a nationalist in the belief that I hold my homeland above all others, it's my home after all.
And as far as even allies go Israel has been a real shitty one more often than not. How many times have they been caught with their hand in the cookie jar trying to steal shit from us? Curious how often we've caught British spies in this country in the last 100 years?
I have no love for the government of Israel, or it's more radical population. Just want to make that part clear, don't care much for Palestinian either ;)
Hope the best for the rest of the 70% of Israel and that they live long lives, same as I wish for any Palestinian who isn't a terrorist asshole.
Matthew 7:12, if a heathen like me can appreciate such a simple rule for a functional society, than any one can.
So if I want to voice my support for military action in the face of an overt Iranian threat, this as opposed to supporting inaction, I must also assume the role of the operation's strategist? Does this mean that every American that supports general military operations anywhere overseas must have a plan of specific action in order to do so?
Ok, well here's my best shot. Israel and Saudi Arabia just formed a pact against Iran, this including Saudi Arabia granting air space to Israeli jets should they attack them. We, by amazing coincidence, just sold a bunch of F-15's to Saudi Arabia.
How about a joint Christian, Muslin and Jew military operation against them? I think it is a very real possibility sometime soon, but who knows.
We've been selling planes, vehicles and arms to Saudi Arabia for years to keep the royal family in power which keeps the oil flowing our way.
Saudi war planes striking targets in Iran....not gonna happen.
If we hit Iran, I think the Yurpeens would walk away from us. The Chinese would no longer buy our debt, and the Russians would do something antagonistic, although I am not sure what. Without European support, we would be seriously over-stretched. Also, without Chinese financing, we would need to cut non-military spending by half or more, and the current administration wants to go the opposite direction. Also, if China quit buying our debt we may put up trade barriers for Chinese products, would could result in 100 million or more unemployed Chinese workers. That could lead to social unrest in China, which China would counter with a scapegoat: Taiwan. So we would have to decide if we can support defense of Taiwan and an Iranian meltdown on our own without European help, without Chinese financing, and with massive federal spending cuts.
Hmmm...
Lots of folks don't get this. Americans are damagingly preconditioned to think in terms of friendship, and get all butt-hurt when other cultures with a functioning sense of history don't act they way they think they should. Gets us in more trouble these days....
Israel's small, surrounded, and nobody loves them. Good! A certain level of ruthlessness makes perfect sense. They have smart leaders who, out of a simple need for survival, have made the best deals they can with the strongest players they can, based on mutual self-interest instead of intangibles like "frienedship."
Friends are what people are with each other, not nations. They're worried about getting pushed into the sea, not if somebody's gonna come over and play XBox with them.
You have such a way with words. You should write philosophy books and teach at Columbia, they would love you there.;)
jklaughrey
08-16-10, 21:52
LOL hell know we need more of a voice of reason at my Alma Mater...Stanford!
We've been selling planes, vehicles and arms to Saudi Arabia for years to keep the royal family in power which keeps the oil flowing our way.
Yes, we have. And since I mentioned our Mid-East ops command center in Saudi Arabia, the implication would be that I know of the alliance.
Saudi war planes striking targets in Iran....not gonna happen.
Maybe, maybe not.
We won't do it, nor Saudi.
If it goes, Israel will be the ones that end up generating the actionable info with US help, put together the sortie package, launch and create smoking holes. They have the means, and the will and ability to make decisions without hand-wringing over what the world will say about them on Twitter. They'll do the lion's share of the work slotting bad guys and take the lion's share of the shitstorm from the global community.
The US will publicly tsk-tsk Israel while being privately relieved we weren't forced to try and ask for our balls back from Hillary and not having had to sign the butcher's bill. The usual flock of mall-goers won't even look up from their seat in the food court where they're eating their 12th sandwich of the day, or from watching the Real Sand-Encrusted Vaginkys of New Jersey on their couch, to follow the editorializing I'm sorry I mean news of the event.
The Saudis will be publicly outraged at the "unprovoked attack" on their Shi'ite brethren while privately being delighted at the prospect of a competitive Iran taking a smackdown and nudging the US with their elbow and saying "Yo, Israel got us nervous with all dis plane-launching and shit, you gotta sell us some more Eagles, brah durka durka."
Textbook.
montanadave
08-17-10, 08:17
A timely article in The Atlantic on this very topic:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/09/the-point-of-no-return/8186/
Before I get flamed for what may (or may not) be the author's POV, let me say I have not read the article in it's entirety. I did hear a short interview with the author on one of the cable news shows this AM and thought it might be of interest to those following this thread.
**************
Now having read the article, I can say it provided me with a clearer understanding of the Israeli position vis-a-vis a nuclear Iran and the mindset of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. It is certainly worth reading for those interested in this topic.
FlyAndFight
08-17-10, 10:49
A timely article in The Atlantic on this very topic:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/09/the-point-of-no-return/8186/
Now having read the article, I can say it provided me with a clearer understanding of the Israeli position vis-a-vis a nuclear Iran and the mindset of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. It is certainly worth reading for those interested in this topic.
Agreed. A facinating article, indeed. I will say that it also provided some insight into the Obama administration's mindset as well.
In the meantime, I highly suggest we all prepare for additional economic hard times in the near future, particularly astronomically high fuel prices and the subsequent affect on all other aspects of modern day civilization.
I'd suggest reading this article by STRATFOR. It talks about the US withdrawal from Iraq and how Iranian influence will make it difficult.....as well as the ramifications of a strike.
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100816_us_withdrawal_and_limited_options_iraq?utm_source=GWeekly&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=100817&utm_content=readmore
GermanSynergy
08-17-10, 22:33
This is most prescient and accurate analysis I've ever seen on the subject. :cool:
We won't do it, nor Saudi.
If it goes, Israel will be the ones that end up generating the actionable info with US help, put together the sortie package, launch and create smoking holes. They have the means, and the will and ability to make decisions without hand-wringing over what the world will say about them on Twitter. They'll do the lion's share of the work slotting bad guys and take the lion's share of the shitstorm from the global community.
The US will publicly tsk-tsk Israel while being privately relieved we weren't forced to try and ask for our balls back from Hillary and not having had to sign the butcher's bill. The usual flock of mall-goers won't even look up from their seat in the food court where they're eating their 12th sandwich of the day, or from watching the Real Sand-Encrusted Vaginkys of New Jersey on their couch, to follow the editorializing I'm sorry I mean news of the event.
The Saudis will be publicly outraged at the "unprovoked attack" on their Shi'ite brethren while privately being delighted at the prospect of a competitive Iran taking a smackdown and nudging the US with their elbow and saying "Yo, Israel got us nervous with all dis plane-launching and shit, you gotta sell us some more Eagles, brah durka durka."
Textbook.
We won't do it, nor Saudi.
If it goes, Israel will be the ones that end up generating the actionable info with US help, put together the sortie package, launch and create smoking holes. They have the means, and the will and ability to make decisions without hand-wringing over what the world will say about them on Twitter. They'll do the lion's share of the work slotting bad guys and take the lion's share of the shitstorm from the global community.
The US will publicly tsk-tsk Israel while being privately relieved we weren't forced to try and ask for our balls back from Hillary and not having had to sign the butcher's bill. The usual flock of mall-goers won't even look up from their seat in the food court where they're eating their 12th sandwich of the day, or from watching the Real Sand-Encrusted Vaginkys of New Jersey on their couch, to follow the editorializing I'm sorry I mean news of the event.
The Saudis will be publicly outraged at the "unprovoked attack" on their Shi'ite brethren while privately being delighted at the prospect of a competitive Iran taking a smackdown and nudging the US with their elbow and saying "Yo, Israel got us nervous with all dis plane-launching and shit, you gotta sell us some more Eagles, brah durka durka."
Textbook.
Outstanding summary! Do you have a second job we don't know about..........National Security Adviser?
If they could have destroyed their nuclear capability through conventional means, they would have done so already. They have to hit the nuclear sites with nuclear penetrators and blow the shit out of the infrastructure either conventionally (like we did with Iraq) or unconventionally. If they assume the complete loss of world support and even the US refusing to sell them weapons in the future, they'll go fully nuclear. Why waste planes, pilots and ordinance that you can't replace?
Outstanding summary! Do you have a second job we don't know about..........National Security Adviser?
"This episode of '24' has been brought to you by..."
*scroll credits*
Executive Producer - JSantoro
The Saudis will be publicly outraged at the "unprovoked attack" on their Shi'ite brethren while privately being delighted at the prospect of a competitive Iran taking a smackdown and nudging the US with their elbow and saying "Yo, Israel got us nervous with all dis plane-launching and shit, you gotta sell us some more Eagles, brah durka durka."
Textbook.
I agree with the others that most of your summary is correct, but I have to disagree with this part.
You seem to forget that most Saudis are Arabs while the Iranians are mostly Persian. They are long time adversaries, so a conflict amongst them would not really be so surprising to many. But there are other factors, I know.
And what about the fact that Saudi Arabia just granted air clearance to Israel should they decide to attack Iran about a month or so ago? That's a pretty strong adversarial statement, is it not?
All you're disagreeing with is the fact that I didn't go chapter-and-verse on the phrase "competitive Irantaking a smackdown" in a speculative, tongue-in-cheek statement that's positively riddled with gross oversimplifications.
So, you're assertion is that a epochal adversarial relationship doesn't count as "competitive."
Bully for you, Professor Nitpick.
All you're disagreeing with is the fact that I didn't go chapter-and-verse on the phrase "competitive Irantaking a smackdown" in a speculative, tongue-in-cheek statement that's positively riddled with gross oversimplifications.
So, you're assertion is that a epochal adversarial relationship doesn't count as "competitive."
Bully for you, Professor Nitpick.
I am not trying to nitpick you buddy, just pointing out some relevant details that you omitted. Thought maybe you didn't understand the nature of the relationship between Persians and Arabs, but maybe you do and just gave absolutely no indication whatsoever by design.
;)
My conclusion of the Iran debacle is this:
http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/6954/achmedblowjob.jpg
Holy old thread bump, Batman!
But seriously, who do you think is behind the computer attack on the facility?
The Stuxnet cyber virus (allegedly - and most probably - deployed by intelligence from both the USA and Israel) temporarily halted the run up to war based upon the "nuclear missile" threat campaign.
It also could be the precursor to a strike which would prove the current campaign being a false hypothesis hiding (effectively) alterior motives.
Google "Stuxnet, Iran, Bushewehr". Reportedly it's effecting China, too. Haven't found much info on that yet. (Though I haven't looked).
Google "Stuxnet, Iran, Bushewehr". Reportedly it's effecting China, too. Haven't found much info on that yet. (Though I haven't looked).
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100921/ts_csm/327178
Cyber security experts say they have identified the world's first known cyber super weapon designed specifically to destroy a real-world target – a factory, a refinery, or just maybe a nuclear power plant.
The cyber worm, called Stuxnet, has been the object of intense study since its detection in June. As more has become known about it, alarm about its capabilities and purpose have grown. Some top cyber security experts now say Stuxnet's arrival heralds something blindingly new: a cyber weapon created to cross from the digital realm to the physical world – to destroy something.
"Stuxnet is a 100-percent-directed cyber attack aimed at destroying an industrial process in the physical world," says Langner, who last week became the first to publicly detail Stuxnet's destructive purpose and its authors' malicious intent. "This is not about espionage, as some have said. This is a 100 percent sabotage attack."
Both really badass and kind of crazy. Skynet has arrived . . .
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100921/ts_csm/327178
Both really badass and kind of crazy. Skynet has arrived . . .
No, it's more than likely already existed. Now WE know it exists. Not quite the same thing.
Scary.
Crazy shit. It seems the stuff of scienc fiction is becoming non-fictional quite rapidly these days...
Crazy shit. It seems the stuff of scienc fiction is becoming non-fictional quite rapidly these days...
Glad to read this, really. Now I know I wasn't crazy when I was convinced my computer was shooting lasers at me and whispering Chinese backwards.
No, it's more than likely already existed. Now WE know it exists. Not quite the same thing.
Scary.
True, but this story is a little off, many viruses in the past have caused physical damage. Some caused hard drives to spin till they either burned up, or genereated enough heat to actually start small fires. While this is on a whole other level (a nuclear power plant doesn't take to burning), the basics have been around for a while.
I wonder if they will ever find the tainted flash drive.
Glad to read this, really. Now I know I wasn't crazy when I was convinced my computer was shooting lasers at me and whispering Chinese backwards.
:confused:
:confused:
Was just kidding, bro.
We won't do it, nor Saudi.
If it goes, Israel will be the ones that end up generating the actionable info with US help, put together the sortie package, launch and create smoking holes. They have the means, and the will and ability to make decisions without hand-wringing over what the world will say about them on Twitter. They'll do the lion's share of the work slotting bad guys and take the lion's share of the shitstorm from the global community.
The US will publicly tsk-tsk Israel while being privately relieved we weren't forced to try and ask for our balls back from Hillary and not having had to sign the butcher's bill. The usual flock of mall-goers won't even look up from their seat in the food court where they're eating their 12th sandwich of the day, or from watching the Real Sand-Encrusted Vaginkys of New Jersey on their couch, to follow the editorializing I'm sorry I mean news of the event.
The Saudis will be publicly outraged at the "unprovoked attack" on their Shi'ite brethren while privately being delighted at the prospect of a competitive Iran taking a smackdown and nudging the US with their elbow and saying "Yo, Israel got us nervous with all dis plane-launching and shit, you gotta sell us some more Eagles, brah durka durka."
Textbook.
Israel will do it w/o a care about the forthcoming angry letter from the UN
Israel will do it w/o a care about the forthcoming angry letter from the UN
As long as they have our dollars, hardware, US money, troops and gear in reserve along with our gov't's tacit support, true.
TEHRAN, Iran – Iran's nuclear chief says that a "small leak" and not a computer worm is the cause of a delay in starting up of the country's first nuclear power plant.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/10/04/iran-leak-worm-plant-delay/
I wonder how long they'll be able to claim that it's a leak, if infact it was the virus?
Or are they suffering from poor build quality?
arizonaranchman
10-04-10, 10:15
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100921/ts_csm/327178
Both really badass and kind of crazy. Skynet has arrived . . .
Very interesting! I like the idea of the cyber attack. A new chapter in the art of warfare... Nasty indeed.
Ill be on the look out for time traveling genocidal robots and a guy named John Conner....
Iran seems to "admit" to nuclear ambitions
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/iran-nuclear-weapons-israel/2010/10/05/id/372644?s=al&promo_code=AEB4-1
So they just want nuclear for the energy, but suddenly "Nuclear Response" starts popping up in their war simulations?
Hmmmmmm . . . . . I'm not sure anyone saw this coming!
Iraq Ninja
10-06-10, 13:20
FYI, Iran appears to be stepping up the exportation of EFPs to Iraq. The stuff being shipped over is better than anything before, and in greater numbers.
The technology used to target the vehicles is greatly improved. Luckily, it seems the high tech components are getting removed by the Iraqis the further the stuff gets from the border. It might be that it is a bit too complex for the Iraqis...
GermanSynergy
10-06-10, 13:23
Iraq Ninja,
Do you think it's possible for us to see another Iraq/Iran conflict, seeing that Iran is still trying to usurp the govt in Baghdad?
Stay safe over there.
FYI, Iran appears to be stepping up the exportation of EFPs to Iraq. The stuff being shipped over is better than anything before, and in greater numbers.
The technology used to target the vehicles is greatly improved. Luckily, it seems the high tech components are getting removed by the Iraqis the further the stuff gets from the border. It might be that it is a bit too complex for the Iraqis...
Iraq Ninja
10-09-10, 09:09
Iraq Ninja,
Do you think it's possible for us to see another Iraq/Iran conflict, seeing that Iran is still trying to usurp the govt in Baghdad?
My gut feeling is no. I suspect Iran will continue to try to influence Iraq politically through the various Shia factions and continue to provide military aid and training to the "Special Groups" that continue to harass the Iraqi government troops, US forces, and people like me.
We see Iranians here in the South all the time. Normally, they are tourists on their way to Karbala or other Shia holy sites.
Most of the Iraqis I deal with dislike the Iranians because of the war, and because they are Persians. But, the Badr brigade is still strong and well funded.
I suspect the Iranians are making a strong effort to kill more Americans now that September 1st has passed. Many of the EFPs appear to be made to take out the MRAPs.
You have to also understand that both the US and Iran have been involved in cross border activities for a while now and the Iranians don't seem to be too bothered to hide their aspect of it.
The Iraqi military is not strong enough to deal with outside threats, let alone internal problems, but they are getting better.
My gut feeling is no. I suspect Iran will continue to try to influence Iraq politically through the various Shia factions and continue to provide military aid and training to the "Special Groups" that continue to harass the Iraqi government troops, US forces, and people like me.
We see Iranians here in the South all the time. Normally, they are tourists on their way to Karbala or other Shia holy sites.
Most of the Iraqis I deal with dislike the Iranians because of the war, and because they are Persians. But, the Badr brigade is still strong and well funded.
I suspect the Iranians are making a strong effort to kill more Americans now that September 1st has passed. Many of the EFPs appear to be made to take out the MRAPs.
You have to also understand that both the US and Iran have been involved in cross border activities for a while now and the Iranians don't seem to be too bothered to hide their aspect of it.
The Iraqi military is not strong enough to deal with outside threats, let alone internal problems, but they are getting better.
Interesting.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.