Who will Do Iran?

[betsy]

Iran said Israel is like a disease...and Israel answered that Iran president will go the same way as Saddam.

Things are heating up. I think war is inevitable with Iran.

[lost&outofcontrol]

You should replace preemptive with preventive war. There is a very big difference between the two.

[August1991]

Whacked? Is that the verb you chose?

Are we discussing an episode of the Sopranos?

----

No one is going to invade Iran. At most, there is a possibility that the Israelis would attack Iran's nuclear research facility. (Anyone know if it is centralized?)

I also suspect that the US will continue the "psychological" pressure on the Iranian regime. There is the possibility of an internal coup or regime change in Iran. Without getting involved, the Americans would like to encourage that.

But I don't see any whacking.

[bTW, don't we already have a thread on this topic?]

[KrustyKidd]

Iran said Israel is like a disease...and Israel answered that Iran president will go the same way as Saddam.

Things are heating up. I think war is inevitable with Iran.

War is not inevitable, in fact, it is very unlikely. The whole goat show is politics and nothing more.

Iran knows it will never acheive a nuclear weapon, hence, their attempts are all show. If Israel believes they have that capability or are close to it, they will take them out. If they do not, the US will. Simple factual givens. Everybody knows that.

So, what is the bluster about? Party politics and staying in power in an ever moderized world for the religious leadership in Iran. They use the nuclear issue to get attention and to place pressure on the US through the EU in order to have leveraged political power over events in Iraq. Reason: a democratic, sucessful Iraq is a threat to their cultural and economic power in the region and, they hope to temper that by having more influence on the political scene there through the US.

I adressed this here in part

When was the last time you saw a defeated leader allowed to speak publically on any subject and be held in esteem as a head of state? Such is the goings on in Iran as the old, more moderate leader is given podium time in order to appoligise for the new 'hothead.' It's called good cop bad cop and works very well on the untrained masses both local and international. What it does is draw attention to the problems they have and the 'squeaky wheel' but then difusses the nutbar who got the attention in the first place letting the world know that Iran can be dealt with.

The back door channels are wide open in Iran's case so, they all know where they stand in Tehran and Washington. It's just the rest of the world that only gets their news from the press that are left in the dark about what is really going on. What's going on? Easy - fear of a sucessful Iraq making them look bad and affecting the Mullahs hold on power over an ever increasing intellectual society. Simple, and realistic. The Communists in the Soviet Union did everything in their power to thwart the modern world as well. Truely, they are in a tough spot but, time is against them.

In North Korea's case it's the same - holding onto power in a modern world where they are being left behind. They want freebees galore. Do you think for a second that without nuclear brinkmanship anybody would even talk to these people? The have squat to offer and their economy is in shambles and their human rights record is terrible. Nobody wants anything they have so, you have to play the cards you're left with which is the fear of nuclear aquisition.

The US, Israel, Japan, China etc is not going to allow rougue states to have nuclear weapons so it doesn't even enter into any realistic equation as a factor. In fact, it's a given they will never attain that. It's just how far, short of attack will the world go to make sure they do not?

First there is no. Then there is an argument. Then there is 'we're going to anyhow' and then talks begin. If you talk right and threaten here and say you have this and that at strategic times, then you can play the reward part out a bit before the talks close down and a flat out punishment regime is instituted. That is the poker game in play right now. Once they cross a certain line, then they get no goodies but prior to that, their mssion is to maximize the rewards without entering the punitive zone.

As for invasion of either country - forget it. Bombing of the facilities where the stuff is being used and whatever, a given. Missile delivery systems - gone. Like, they won't even bother building anything on a scale to deliver. Sure, they will plan and make facilities to play the hand out but if the uranium comes and they have delivery systems, they'll lose both hence, they will do the show to whatever degree they need to get the responses they need.

Rhetoric and sword rattling - a given. Iran just finished 'Holy Phrophet' where they dragged out their new weapons ( a flying plane that is actually a hovercraft) to show how they are powerful but, as I stated before, Oman or any of a number of local states has them outclassed technology wise and the Fith Fleet can out gun anything the Iranians can move. So, whatever they have conventionally stays at home or is lost. So, it seems, they can rattle their swords all they want, without effect. Their concentration is in Iraq and at home.

While they may be able to influence to a small degree what happens in Iraq through various means including negotiations with the US and Iraqi government, home is where the attention lies. And, no matter how they pull out of this problem, there will always be a modern world moving in on them. Same with North korea.

Stratfor

Iranian officials are trumpeting a major advance in their country's nuclear program. Here is what it means -- and does not mean.

But ultimately the Iranian announcement is about the United States. Iran and Washington are currently -- for the first time in a generation -- engaged in direct talks, officially about all topics Iraqi. This revelation, like the U.S. leaks over the weekend that nuclear strike options against Iran had been drawn up, are all part of the ebb and flow of those negotiations.

[mcqueen625]

Whacked? Is that the verb you chose?

Are we discussing an episode of the Sopranos?

----

No one is going to invade Iran. At most, there is a possibility that the Israelis would attack Iran's nuclear research facility. (Anyone know if it is centralized?)

I also suspect that the US will continue the "psychological" pressure on the Iranian regime. There is the possibility of an internal coup or regime change in Iran. Without getting involved, the Americans would like to encourage that.

But I don't see any whacking.

[bTW, don't we already have a thread on this topic?]

As a result of the latest terrorist attack on Israel by a suicide bomber Israel has every right to respond by declaring war on both the Hamas led Palestinian peoples and Iran, who both funds and encourages such terrorism. Israel should wipe them off the face of the earth and any other who encourages these terrorism, such as Lebenon, Syria, etc.

The world must put an end to this type of activity or none of us are safe. Moussoui said it all when he inferred that Islam demands that they be the Superpower, and ALL non-muslim countries should pay tribute to Muslims. I don't think so, and it is time these nutcases were put in their place. Christians, Buddists, and all other faiths have just as much right to exist and thrive as does Muslims and if these militant Islamic clerics are going to continue teaching hate then they have to be eliminated by any means.

We cannot rely on the biased and corrupt United Nations who themselves funded a bumper-sticker campaign aimed at bolstering violence against Israeli citizens, at the same time Israel was in the process of moving out of the Gaza Strip. These bumper sticker, mugs, banners, etc were distrubuted to Palestinian youth and the slogan was very provocative and biased; TODAY-GAZA-TOMORROW-THE-WEST-BANK-AND-JERUSALEM. Nothing like inciting the masses to continue with terrorist attacks instead of attempting to live in peace. If this is what the U.N. is all about, I think it is time for our government to take a long look at the money they are sending to such a corrupt organization, led by Koffi Annan.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

No one is going to invade Iran. At most, there is a possibility that the Israelis would attack Iran's nuclear research facility. (Anyone know if it is centralized?)

A list of Iran's nuclear facilities can be seen here,

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/nuke-fac.htm

Iran is within the strike capabilities of Israel.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/iran.htm

In fact, Israel recently bought some 100 'bunker-busters' from the US with which to do the job.

[betsy]

Whacked? Is that the verb you chose?

Are we discussing an episode of the Sopranos?

----

No one is going to invade Iran. At most, there is a possibility that the Israelis would attack Iran's nuclear research facility. (Anyone know if it is centralized?)

I also suspect that the US will continue the "psychological" pressure on the Iranian regime. There is the possibility of an internal coup or regime change in Iran. Without getting involved, the Americans would like to encourage that.

But I don't see any whacking.

[bTW, don't we already have a thread on this topic?]

Well, I like the sound of "whacked."

[scribblet]

Whacked? Is that the verb you chose?

Are we discussing an episode of the Sopranos?

----

We cannot rely on the biased and corrupt United Nations who themselves funded a bumper-sticker campaign aimed at bolstering violence against Israeli citizens, at the same time Israel was in the process of moving out of the Gaza Strip. These bumper sticker, mugs, banners, etc were distrubuted to Palestinian youth and the slogan was very provocative and biased; TODAY-GAZA-TOMORROW-THE-WEST-BANK-AND-JERUSALEM. Nothing like inciting the masses to continue with terrorist attacks instead of attempting to live in peace. If this is what the U.N. is all about, I think it is time for our government to take a long look at the money they are sending to such a corrupt organization, led by Koffi Annan.

Iran stood up at the U.N. and said Israel should be destroyed...what did the U.N. do - you got it - diddley sqat. If the U.N. won't stand up to racism and anti semitism in their illustrious halls, they are not likely to sanction any action. In fact, they would probably cheer Iran on.

IMHO attacking Iran would start off a chain reaction of suicide bombings and attacks on the Israel and the west like we hoped we would never see. These people are completely irrational, if not insane, but I would prefer we all continue with the democratic method.

[Drea]

IMHO attacking Iran would start off a chain reaction of suicide bombings and attacks on the Israel and the west like we hoped we would never see. These people are completely irrational, if not insane, but I would prefer we all continue with the democratic method.

On CTV News last night - a report from Iran that men are signing up to be suicide bombers in the event that they are *attacked by the US or Isreal.

And another Palestinian suicide bomber attacked a restaurant yesterday killing more Israelis.

IMO Isreal is going to finally get fed up and nuke them, then Iran will nuke Isreal and we can all kiss our butts goodbye.

*doesn't matter if they are literally attacked, but they'll do it even if attacked figuratively for not being "allowed" to have nukes.

Now, because I have a friend in Iran, I've always given them the benefit of the doubt. No more, they are simply friggin crazy.

[GostHacked]

They are a few years away yet of actually gathering enough material for ONE single bomb, and a good chance it will be a test bomb. They are gonna have kinks. If anyone knows the kinks of nuclear testing it is the US.

We cannot rely on the biased and corrupt United Nations who themselves funded a bumper-sticker campaign aimed at bolstering violence against Israeli citizens,

And by Israeli you mean Palestinian. How many resolutions against Israel on this? How many against Palestine?

As a result of the latest terrorist attack on Israel by a suicide bomber Israel has every right to respond by declaring war on both the Hamas led Palestinian peoples and Iran, who both funds and encourages such terrorism. Israel should wipe them off the face of the earth and any other who encourages these terrorism, such as Lebenon, Syria, etc.

So for the Palestinians bombing Israel, Iran was thrown into that how? Terrorism is dealt out by Israel as well, they have very well shown that in the past with the Isreal-Arab war, the Six Day Way, ect. Israel is an aggressive state no doubts about that.

Isreal with very discrete help from the US will take out some attack on Iran.

[lost&outofcontrol]

As a result of the latest terrorist attack on Israel by a suicide bomber Israel has every right to respond by declaring war on both the Hamas led Palestinian peoples and Iran, who both funds and encourages such terrorism. Israel should wipe them off the face of the earth and any other who encourages these terrorism, such as Lebenon, Syria, etc.

The world must put an end to this type of activity or none of us are safe. Moussoui said it all when he inferred that Islam demands that they be the Superpower, and ALL non-muslim countries should pay tribute to Muslims. I don't think so, and it is time these nutcases were put in their place. Christians, Buddists, and all other faiths have just as much right to exist and thrive as does Muslims and if these militant Islamic clerics are going to continue teaching hate then they have to be eliminated by any means.

We cannot rely on the biased and corrupt United Nations who themselves funded a bumper-sticker campaign aimed at bolstering violence against Israeli citizens, at the same time Israel was in the process of moving out of the Gaza Strip. These bumper sticker, mugs, banners, etc were distrubuted to Palestinian youth and the slogan was very provocative and biased; TODAY-GAZA-TOMORROW-THE-WEST-BANK-AND-JERUSALEM. Nothing like inciting the masses to continue with terrorist attacks instead of attempting to live in peace. If this is what the U.N. is all about, I think it is time for our government to take a long look at the money they are sending to such a corrupt organization, led by Koffi Annan.

State sponsored terrorism on the part of Israel.

Palestinian children shot dead in their classroom, on their way to school or at home

In the space of a few weeks two Palestinian children were killed by the Israeli army while sitting in their classrooms and two others were shot dead on their way to school in Khan Yunis refugee camp in the Gaza Strip. On the morning of 7 September 2004, 10-year-old Raghda Adnan al-Assar was struck in the head by an Israeli bullet while sitting at her desk in UNRWA’s Elementary C Girl’s School in Khan Yunis refugee camp. The firing came from an Israeli army position in the Gush Katif Settlement block, west of Khan Yunis. Raghda never regained consciousness and died on 22 September.

They are both guilty.

[Army Guy]

Gosthacked:

Terrorism is dealt out by Israel as well, they have very well shown that in the past with the Isreal-Arab war, the Six Day Way, ect. Israel is an aggressive state no doubts about that.

Isreal with very discrete help from the US will take out some attack on Iran.

Maybe you can explain to me how the Israel-arab war or the 6 day war was an act of terrorism or an act of agression. And what did you mean that Israel is an aggressive state, are you suggesting aggressive in terms of expanding it's boaders, or aggressive in terms of defending it's nation.

And i suppose that Iran had not given any cause for Israel or the US to take some form of action.

[Leafless]

Iran deserves to be 'whacked down'.

Any country that promotes terrorist ideologies that can promote world disorder deserves to be.

It's not hard to imagine what would be left of the world to-day if was not for U.S intervention preventing catastrophical conditions both social and political.

[GostHacked]

Gosthacked:

Terrorism is dealt out by Israel as well, they have very well shown that in th

After the war Egyptian and Syrian diplomatic relations with the United States, broken since the 1967 war, were resumed, and clearance of the Suez Canal began. The 1973–74 War brought about a major shift of power in the Middle East and ultimately led to the signing of the Camp David accords.

e past with the Isreal-Arab war, the Six Day Way, ect. Israel is an aggressive state no doubts about that.

Isreal with very discrete help from the US will take out some attack on Iran.

Maybe you can explain to me how the Israel-arab war or the 6 day war was an act of terrorism or an act of agression. And what did you mean that Israel is an aggressive state, are you suggesting aggressive in terms of expanding it's boaders, or aggressive in terms of defending it's nation.

And i suppose that Iran had not given any cause for Israel or the US to take some form of action.

Yes and Yes. Israel would not be there right now if it had not got the support from the US, but this is another matter altogether.

They are aggressive in expanding their borders and making sure that they survive.

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0804479.html

War of 1956

On Oct. 29, 1956, Israeli forces, directed by Moshe Dayan, launched a combined air and ground assault into Egypt's Sinai peninsula. Early Israeli successes were reinforced by an Anglo-French invasion along the canal. Although the action against Egypt was severely condemned by the nations of the world, the cease-fire of Nov. 6, which was promoted by the United Nations with U.S. and Soviet support, came only after Israel had captured several key objectives, including the Gaza strip and Sharm el Sheikh, which commanded the approaches to the Gulf of Aqaba. Israel withdrew from these positions in 1957, turning them over to the UN emergency force after access to the Gulf of Aqaba, without which Israel was cut off from the Indian Ocean, had been guaranteed.

So the second war, Israel took a pre-emtive stance and attacked the Arab nations. I guess when you corner a wild animal it will strike out at anytime.

6 Day War

The escalation of threats and provocations continued until June 5, 1967, when Israel launched a massive air assault that crippled Arab air capability. With air superiority protecting its ground forces, Israel controlled the Sinai peninsula within three days and then concentrated on the Jordanian frontier, capturing Jerusalem's Old City (subsequently annexed), and on the Syrian border, gaining the strategic Golan Heights. The war, which ended on June 10, is known as the Six-Day War.

War of 1973-1974

In a nutshell this was the first time that the Arab nations had managed to make an assault on Israel. First time the Arabs struck FIRST.

After the war Egyptian and Syrian diplomatic relations with the United States, broken since the 1967 war, were resumed, and clearance of the Suez Canal began. The 1973–74 War brought about a major shift of power in the Middle East and ultimately led to the signing of the Camp David accords.

the 1982 war the Arabs struck again. But again pushed back.

How can one small nation the size of Israel have so much power in the region when it looks like everyone is out to kill them since the Jews havs 'settled' there? They ARE agressive, and now what they are doing is no longer protecting themselves, they are looking at border expansion and they really do not care about the road map to peace.

[Michael Hardner]

Any country that promotes terrorist ideologies that can promote world disorder deserves to be.

It's not hard to imagine what would be left of the world to-day if was not for U.S intervention preventing catastrophical conditions both social and political.

A lot of said intervention caused dischord as well, all in the shadow of the cold war. I don't agree with obsessing over past faults, but let's not exonerate anybody either.

[Army Guy]

Gosthacked:

War of 1956

I guess that depends on which history book you read, they way i read it as Egypt made the first move by blocking Israelis ships in the Suez canal and the gulf of aquaba. An act of war.

Sinai campaign

6 Day War

As for this war did they actually have a chioce you decide.

My Webpage

War of 1973-1974

In a nutshell this was the first time that the Arab nations had managed to make an assault on Israel. First time the Arabs struck FIRST.

Actually you forgot the war in 48, and we've already explained the war in 56 So that leaves the 6 day war one in which they really had no chioce ...so i'm finding it hard to swallow the fact they are aggressive in increasing thier land holdings. when to the victory go the spoils.

How can one small nation the size of Israel have so much power in the region when it looks like everyone is out to kill them since the Jews havs 'settled' there? They ARE agressive, and now what they are doing is no longer protecting themselves, they are looking at border expansion and they really do not care about the road map to peace.

Perhaps that is what it looks like to you but they are still activily fighting the palestinians and with the world sittting on thier hands Israel is just protecting it's people the only way the world will allow them...

[Black Dog]

IMHO attacking Iran would start off a chain reaction of suicide bombings and attacks on the Israel and the west like we hoped we would never see. These people are completely irrational, if not insane, but I would prefer we all continue with the democratic method.

I agree: the people clamouring for war on Iran are most definitely irrational and possibly insane. They pulled this stunt once before, y'know.

[KrustyKidd]

Iran is not going to be attacked. Why people are even considering this I have no idea. It is a given that they will never have a bomb and everybody knows that - both the west and they. So, there is no need to attack as they know there is no possibility they will have one.

It is not in Iran's interest to be attacked as they will lose more than they gain. While a controlled society they also have a modern populace and as such, cannot get away with the propaganda that other less 'intelligent' societies of the region can. Hence, a trade off for rigiousness in a Jihadistic war would not get the same milage as it would elsewhere.

It is posturing for relevence and a display of wieght in the region is all it is. With back and as of late, front door channels open to the US, nothing is being missed between the two. With the recent acknowledgement that they have the material to begin work on the reactors and such the Iranians have stepped up the chess game. If they were intent on making a bomb, why announce? Just build. The Euros have pretty much given up as they hold no sway over the events unfolding here and for good reason, it is regional power, not military but influence. The Iranians see an opportunity and a possible problem in Iraq and they need US help to work it out. hence the front door channels and the nuclear brinkmanship with nukes they will never acheive.

They need the Euro pressure placed on the US to work out a solution, they need the US in Iraq as well to ensure Sunni dominence does not occur through any political process. They need to hold back the modern world even if their polulation is modern. They are playing a fine hand from what I can tell. Whackjob nutbar phsyco president and a visual and more moderate ex leader both seem to share some sort of power at different times. Very interesting indeed. Good cop, bad cop depending on the message they wish to deliver. I mean, one day, they get atttion from the sheeple of the world by scaring them, then, to quell the warhaks, they send in the ex and he shows how they can still be dealt with. Almost think they were looking for something.

[Black Dog]

KK:

They need the Euro pressure placed on the US to work out a solution, they need the US in Iraq as well to ensure Sunni dominence does not occur through any political process

I'm sure Iran knows quite well that Sunni dominance in Iraq is an unlikely result regardless of whether the Americans stay or not. Quite simply, the Sunnis don't have the muscle and they don't have the influence to pull it off. But i wil say this much: having the Americans take their lumps to protect and nurture a nominally pro-Iranian Shiite regime is, for Iran, a positive.

[Drea]

Did anyone else see the documentary last night on CBC called "Nuclear Jihad"?

Nuclear Jihad

Pakistan has sold nuke technology to anyone and everyone.

In the second nuclear age, in the age of A.Q. Khan, there is no return address and so there is no deterrence. The bomb could come in a backpack, in a briefcase, in an oxcart. In the second nuclear age, we're seeing the privatization of the atomic bomb. The outsourcing of the bomb. It's a much more frightening world.

Scary stuff IMO.

Some crazy son of a bitch is eventually going to get ahold of a nuclear bomb and use it.

The trouble is there is nothing we can do. If we kill off all the fanatical muslims the moderate ones will just become fanatics.

The one guy says "we are not afraid to die".

He may not be afraid to die, but I rather like life on earth and would like to complete mine!

God* help us all.

*whatever God may mean to you.

[KrustyKidd]

I'm sure Iran knows quite well that Sunni dominance in Iraq is an unlikely result regardless of whether the Americans stay or not.

They hold a greater represntation than their population dictates in the government as well, if things go completely south, they would be the gravitational center for any 'Jihad' in the event of civil unrest recieving Sunni aid from Saudi Arabia and other countries. Not quite the nieghbor they wish to have.

having the Americans take their lumps to protect and nurture a nominally pro-Iranian Shiite regime is, for Iran, a positive.

On a personal scale yes, but countries have needs other than emotinal gratification. The US is their solution and why they are negotiating. Iraq is not an Iranian puppet nor will it ever be. Cooperation with Sunni elements in government is a necessity to the Iraqi Shites and, a genuine concern for the Iranians. They cannot do much other than give support to elements that will eventually be burried in the political process and then, later be looked upon as beligerent interfereers so, what they do is limited. Hence, the US is their ticket into the political side where the future lies, whether they are getting 'lumped' or lauded is well below secondary concern.

[August1991]

Who will do Iran?

IRAN'S president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, says Israel is an alien implantation whose people should return to Europe or perhaps settle in Alaska. So it is an irony that Israel's president, Moshe Katzav, is in fact a Farsi-speaker born in Iran. Ditto Israel's defence minister, Shaul Mofaz, who is doubtless preoccupied nowadays with how to destroy Iran's nuclear programme. He is advised by Dan Halutz, Israel's former air-force commander and now chief of staff. Lieut-General Halutz was born in Israel, both his parents in Iran. They seem to have taught him a sense of humour. Asked how far Israel would go to stop Iran's nuclear programme, he replied: “two thousand kilometres”.

The Economist

[KrustyKidd]

It is a certainty that Iran will never acheive nuclear capability, that's why all this talk is just mental hubris. Ignoring the actual issues that are happening. It boogles my mind to see intelligent people going on and on about things which are almost akin to Martian Space invaders or far fetched conspiracy theories.

Who will do Iran? Politics is who. That's all this whole show is about. Posturing for a post Saddam Gulf.

Now, I'm just guessing here, but, am willing to bet an internet buck that Israel has open communicatins through the back door with Iran.

[scribblet]

Did anyone else see the documentary last night on CBC called "Nuclear Jihad"?

Nuclear Jihad

Pakistan has sold nuke technology to anyone and everyone.

In the second nuclear age, in the age of A.Q. Khan, there is no return address and so there is no deterrence. The bomb could come in a backpack, in a briefcase, in an oxcart. In the second nuclear age, we're seeing the privatization of the atomic bomb. The outsourcing of the bomb. It's a much more frightening world.

Scary stuff IMO.

Some crazy son of a bitch is eventually going to get ahold of a nuclear bomb and use it.

The trouble is there is nothing we can do. If we kill off all the fanatical muslims the moderate ones will just become fanatics.

I agree, it is scary, and he is a crazy son of a b... , maybe 'someone' can take him out before he takes out all of us.

I don't have an answer, but there are more fanatical muslims then we would like to think there are, I do believe he would unlease a string of suicide attacks etc. in other words - you ain't seen nuthing yet.

Too bad we need the oil, otherwise we could isolate them, leave them alone to stew in their own juices - you stay away from me and we'll stay away from you.

[lost&outofcontrol]

I agree, it is scary, and he is a crazy son of a b... , maybe 'someone' can take him out before he takes out all of us.

I don't have an answer, but there are more fanatical muslims then we would like to think there are, I do believe he would unlease a string of suicide attacks etc. in other words - you ain't seen nuthing yet.

Too bad we need the oil, otherwise we could isolate them, leave them alone to stew in their own juices - you stay away from me and we'll stay away from you.

How do you think W. Bush sounds like to the Arab world? Pretty much the same as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is portrayed to us by the media, a crazy loon. It's a matter of perception.