Pentagon 3-day Blitz Plan for Iran

jeag ..if it is true that the iranians have no hope of produceing nuke weapons from what they are now doing then i agree ,, why worry at all ..im not an expert but clearly there are those in the know who are quite concerned about the the abilities of the iranians to build weapons ..islamic zealots are quite happy to blow themselves to bits just to kill a few jews on a bus , do you not agree that such persons in possesion of nukes is a frightful thing? mutual assured destruction kept the usa and the kremlin from doing anything stupid for 50 years ...all bets are off when it comes to those who embrace a martyrs death in holy war .

 

I totaly agree with you jaeguer but the last part is a bit tricky.

With the record current US administration has. In Iraq case they proved that they don't know a thing about accepting consequences and that they are quite capabe to make profoundly moronic decisions. And yes anyone who follows the situation in mid - east and central Asia get's a cold sweat and nightmares from what Bush&co can do.

Woody what you write is a two way street. On one side you have a country that attacked another country on what is now known to be falsified evidence ( think in terms of Poland in 1939) and proven that they don't give rat's arse about international law. What would you do in their shoes? I know i'd be buying everything i could lay my hands on and prepare for war. I would also arm anyone who is willing to help me in case of war.

 

.

The dirty little secret is that atomic weapons are not very useful for aggressive purpose , but they are fantastic as a life insurance .
If someone wanted to do some serious damage some vial of selected bugs could really get things cooking ( by the way , what happened to the great anthrax investigation , it seems to have ....faded away ..)
the intentions of the iranian republic is open to supposition , they have no stated incentive to develop nukes now , in a few years they would have the people and the knowledge to reassess their options .
what is certain is that if they had nukes , they would certainly not give them to anyone , least of all to loose cannons militants , some shouder fired missiles or a brace of scuds ,ok , doomsday ....no way
The Iranians have not been particularly aggressive , they support hamas and hezbollah but those movement are deeply focused on the Palestine issue , Iran is getting a lot of browny point from it around the Muslim world
nothing like the unlimited cultural war against the west in the style of the Saudis and Pakistanis double-faced " allied "

.

 

tiso, did you see the post about the former iraqi af general who claims tons of sadams wmds were airlifted to syria prior to us invasion ..we know sadam had wmds and we know he even used them ..if sadam had proved the destruction of said weapons as per his obligation he would still be happily brakeing shin bones in iraq today ..911 coupled with sadams little shell games reaped the whirlwind .i agree the war in iraq is a fiasco ,we are not going to win the hearts and minds there or in any other muslim country but allowing a mulim theocracy to build nuclear weapons would be more moronic than anthing gw bush ever did ,would it not?

 

Let's face it we are talking about former Saddam's chief of Air force. He now works for and is paid by Americans. Not a credible source realy. If you were working in Bagdad and had family there, you would damn well write and say anything US want's you to. All US has to say please pay the rent or move out of the green zone.

Now guess who was the only country in security counsel of UN who vetoed the condemnation of said use of WMD's against the Kurds? Do you think Kurds forgot that little episode?

He didn't had the chance to prove it. And guess who is braking shinbones in Iraq now?

Well you are too late. Pakistan is the main supporter of Sunni extremism right behind Saudi arabia. Pakistan who put traliban into the power and supplied them with wapons and military advisors is obviously not problematic owner of the A bomb. Or is it?

 

yes tiso , paki and even indian weapons are quite scairy enough but if musharif falls and power passes to sunni hotheads the pakistani A bomb could be very much a problem to india , to israel ,to me and even to you ...btw , was not slovenia at one time occupied by muslim armys ?

 

No we just fought the Ottomans (and their vasal) armies for few centuries and finaly broken their backbone in battle of Sisak ( Styrian armoured infantry and arquebusieres, as usual we were saving the day after Croats messed up).
BTW
You didn't answer my questions.

 

...so tiso ,your slovenian ancestors were butchered raped and sold into slavery for a few hundred years under jihadists but finally the slovines were able to rid themselves of their turk masters and now muslims are not a threat because modern muslims do not regard slovenia as part of the former ottoman caliphate .....but gw bush is a threat to slovenians because he is fighting muslim jihadists who wish to kill yankees ,brits and slovines ...sure ,that makes perfect sense ,,,,and the former iraqi af chief is being bribed to make up lies about the wmds by the us govt , and you know this because ? ....sry tiso ,what question did i not answer ?

 

First it was not kapiphate but Empire. Secondly they were not Juhadists but mostly vasal nations ( read Bosnians, Serbs, Bulgarians...) fighting for their overlords under their command. You also forgot that Ottomans were one of the more religiously tolerant at the time. They did inpale or behead you if you rebelled (common practice in Europe at the time as well) and non-muslims did have to pay blood tax but were not summarily burned at the stake as it was done in "civilised" Europe. WE WERE NEVER UNDER TURKISH EMPIRE! Hungarians were we were not. We were one of the last lines of defense of Holly Roman Empire (read Hapsburgh monarchy) in the south and we gave as good as we got.

He is an not to smart of the person with nuclear weapons and no regard for international law.

Prove him right and don't just repeat what he wrote in his book.

Those sentances with question mark at the end two posts back.

 

...ah , ok ...my answer is three posts back ...and to amplifie it ANY wmd weapons in the hands of any muslim govt is a BIG problem because even a secular muslim govt could fall into the hands of the devout ( ie iran ) and really devout muslims , as they like to point out , are not afraid of death ,,,so the concept of mutual assured destruction might not faze them in the least ...if blowing yourself up with 5 jews at a bus stop is a good thing why not blow yourself up with 500,000 jews or two million ....after all, there is no god but god ...and allah will surly make you profit....

 

WMD's in the hands of any idiot (that also includes certain western countries) is a scary thought indeed.
IRRC certain US politicians were talking about using Nuclear weapons and even on this forum someone was mumbling something about nuclear tipped bombs. Scary thought indeed.

BTW Woody you didn't answer the following questions:

1. Now guess who was the only country in security counsel of UN who vetoed the condemnation of said use of WMD's against the Kurds?
2. Do you think Kurds forgot that little episode?
3. And guess who is braking shinbones in Iraq now?

 

The Kurdish region of Iraq is THE biggest success story of the entire campaign.

Whilst the Sunni and Shiites are working overtime killing themselves and denying any stabilization, the Kurds are back in school--boys AND girls--and are busy rebuilding their lives. They are quite proud of their relationship with the US, and are our biggest supporters. They still wave the US flag up 'ere...

What troubles me is the animosity between the Kurds and the Turkish government. Much talk of possible invasion of the Kurdish region by neighboring Turkish military forces. If you recall, Turkey would not allow US to stage troops out of Turkish-bases prior to the invasion of Iraq.

In response, the US sent elite teams into that region to link-up with Kurdish warlords and they were able to bring "Shock and Awe" to Iraqi strong-points that had been static defenses for years. They accomplished some incredible feats with state of the art communications, close air-support and painted their targets with laser-designators. The Kurds were impressed and elated... the Iraqi defenders were devastated.

Tim

 

Yep Kurds are a succes story for now. They also are a bit cross with US about US meddling into their relations with Iran.

 

..very true tiso ,a vast munber of shinbones are still being broken in iraq in spite of the absense of sadam ,shias and sunnis are breaking each others bones by the tens of thousands and with great glee and enthusiasim despite our best efforts ,alas, as they both like to say ,it is merely gods will ...i guess gods will can be a real bitch sometimes ...

 

the usa has attempted many times since the fall of the us embasy to normalize relations with iran , it is they who have rebuffed our efforts and in the meantime supported many terrible terrorist attacks thruout the world .kohmani said that the revolution in iran in 79 was just the beginning .the mullas are not intrested in relations with the west ,they openly have declared they want the entire world to be just like iran .i realize that this worldwide caliphate is not within their power ,but it dosent change their intentions .and even all the arab gulf states do not want a nuclear armed tehran .wether it will take them 2 years or 10 years to produce ,it is something that cannot be allowed to happin ,imo

 

Get real. When did US acctualy try to normalise relations with Iran?
Was it with shooting down Iranian airliner ( IA655 incident)? Or perhaps attacking and destroying significant portion of Iranian navy before Iraqi coastal offensive? Or was it with economical sanctions they slapped on them? Or pehaps with vetoing security council resolution which condemmed Iraqi use of chemical weapons against Iranians (yes those Iraqi WMD's)? Or perhaps with US attacking and destroying iranian offshore oil rigs?

Iranians did try to normalise relations and lend a significant help to the US in Afaganistan with their mullahs blessing. What did they get in return? Their proposal dissapeared in Chaney's office and they got a new round of sanctions, threats of invasion and US support for Al qaida connected terrorist organisation Mujahedeen Al Khalk.

BTW
World caliphate is a Saudi ( Al Qaida) project not shia Iran's. Khomeini is dead for some time now unless he was resurected recently. Regarding support to terrorist organisations/regimes and attacks they are mere begginers comparing to US.
And Irangate was simply money deal for getting funds for illegal meddling in Nicaraguan internal affairs and their support of terrorists and their terror activities there.

 

khomeini is dead but his ideals live on . ok , one more time , the koran is the DIRECT word of god and god clearly wants infidels gone from trhe planet .

"slay the unbelivers where ever you find them "the fact that some muslims are less ambitious in this regard than others does not change the directive .although it is true the usa was complicit in installing the shah ,every us administration since ike attempted to get him to lighten up with the secret police , for his own good and our own cold war intrests .his repression of his own growing middle class made them allie themselves with a new dictator in black robes who made the shah look like walt disney by comparisin .

it is pretty obvious that a large percentage of iranians would welcome the 82nd airborn into the streets of tehran if it would rid them of nazis who now controll their wretched country . to my knowlege , iran is the only muslim country where the was a spontanious display of public empathy for the 911 attacks . i should point out that i know of this event thanks to some members of this forum .


carter tried to open dialog with the revolutionarys even before they sacked the embassy in tehran .
reagan sent a cake in the shape of a key and a signed bible ,as in the key to open the door to dialog .
bush one and clinton also made overtures in spite of iranian sponsered terror attacks worldwide ,and although many the ordinary people of iran would prefer to normalize relations they are repressed by a very harsh theocratic dictatorship , with its own savak gestapo .

 

Really? They are more nationalistic than you think. Do you think they forgot the 80's and US support of Saddam's agression and his use of chemical weapons? Don't kid yourself about that. Iran is not splintered internaly as was/is Iraq. They do have internal political issues but if attacked by external enemy they will ressist. Any greeting the 82nd would get in the streets of Teheran from huge percentage of Iranians would be in form of 7,62mm bullet.
As all good nationalists (and they are just that) they are immensly proud of their heretige and the fact that they already had civilisation when most of the world was living in mud huts. They are also immensly proud that despite US imposed sanctions they are a modern society in stark contrast to most US supported middle east countries and that they are in pace regarding modern technologies.
They have a good and modern army recently updated with new Russian AA systems ( Thor-M, Tunguska and possibly S-300) and anti-ship missiles from Russia and China ( that are covering the most of the Persian gulf) and are now in process of updating their air force as well ( they oredered new J-10 fighetrs from China).

Really? You should read a book or two on the subject. Iranian take on Carter ( as well as Soviet - according to ambs. Anatoly Dobrynin) was that anybody will be better than him as he was impossible to talk to a compromise any issue.

Reagan should realy fire his advisors over that unless it was intended as provocation. BTW It is also speculated that timing of the Embassy incident was covertly coordinated with certan individuals in the US. BTW Reagan did try to talk to Iranians by sinking half of their fleet ( ust before a huge Iraqi coastal offensive), destroying their off shore oil rigs, destroying the IA-655 civilian airliner, impsing economical sanctions on them and supporting Iraq in the war ( politicaly and militarily). If this is your idea of dialogue....

,

Since when are sanctions overtures to negotiations. Sad truth is that nobody seriously wanted to talk and negotiate with them as it would be a recognition of regime in Iran ( same as Cuba since Castro came to power and Nicaragua in the 80's). That didn't really bothered the cloak and dagger poeple in delaings with them when it suited them or when they needed money for shady dealings elsewhere (US and Israelis selling them eqipment in the 80's), but politialy no serious talks were prepared and Iranian proposal to relove issues between US and Iran was sqashed in Chaney's office despite their help in Afganistan fighting Taliban and Al Qaida (locating targets, bringing splinterd northern alliance to the compromise...). About terrorism charges take a good look at US involvement all over the world before you accuse somebody else of it.

Just like US Republican party and Homeland secutiry?

 

BTW Intersting reading
Shahs of old:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/shahnama.txtof Ferdowsi, translated by Helen Zimmern [1883]
The national epic of Persia (Iran).

 

the shah in his 30 year reign is said to have executed a total of some 2000 to 3000 people with the aid of his infamous secret police .most of these were communist agents or terrorists working under the direction of the kgb .

since the islamic revolution of 79 , some 250000 iranians are known to have been executed for such crimes as adultry ,homosexual behaviour ,civil disobidience ,chargeing intrest or listening to western radio broadcasts .ethnic and religious repression is widespread and very harsh .being dressed in the wrong kind of clothing or talking to western journalists can result in severe beatings ,imprisonment or worse .

tiso , im not sure how many people have been executed by the republicans and homeland security in the usa , perhaps you have some figures ?