Iranian President planning apoclaypse on August 22nd?

[BEER980]

Perhaps if this had been posted in the Iran nuke thread you might have read my post touching on this very subject. Only I read it from a different source and posted it on July 30, a full 9 days ago without much fanfare. My article was written by Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu who is billed as: "Conservative Speaker Gordon Cucullu - former Army Green Beret lieutenant colonel, author, commentator and speaker - military affairs, current events, cultural dynamics, politics & International Business Issues." Google "The Missiles of 27 Rajab" for the whole story.

[Cookiely]

I, for one, am thrilled it's not your decision to make, Derek.

Can you name another major Iranian city?

I seem to remember something about a smoking gun and a mushroom cloud . . . oh yeah, the "Bush Doctrine" of preemptive war, which has been thoroughly discredited in Iraq. World opinion seems to have been dead flat right.

Who all is on this list of nations we carpet bomb on behalf of? Just Israel, the 51st state? Carpet bombing worked like a charm in Vietnam, didn't it?

Cookiely, you tend to agree with Derek on levelling a nation of 70 million, many of whom do not support Ahmadinejad, but you have a soft and compassionate spot in your heart?

There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons LOL, the difference is Iran doesn't have 'em, yet

And sadly, there's not a helluva lot we can do to keep them from getting them. They can't get 'em here, they don't have ICBMs. Nor can their rockets deliver a heavy enough payload to get 'em from Lebanon or Iran to Israel even if they were ret to go. (I'm not getting into the logistics of a SADM-type deployment)

As far as eliminating their program, forget it. We can't farm it out to the Israelis, they don't have heavy bombers. The Iranian sites are hardened, deep underground, in urban areas, and duplicated, so we'd have to take out several crowded inner city neighborhoods with lots of civilian deaths (doesn't seem to bother folks here), but if we missed even one, it would be for nothing.

Ahmadinejad may be a "nutcase" (wrong), but he's not completely stupid. He IS a politician playing to a certain element, just like they do here. And he is well aware of the retribution we could rain down on him should he go too far. This MAD ain't exactly mutual.

Any proponents of the "Destroy Iran" plan thought for 2 milliseconds about the consequences for the 135K Americans in the 'hood, even if the others nationalities are less than worth the trouble? Aware the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (Shia, fwiw), now the leading party, has had ties to Iran since the 80s Iran-Iraq war? When laying blame for Iran's new emboldened strutting in the region, make sure to look in a star-spangled mirror, because we made it possible.

Are you saying with 100% certainty that they don't have one (just one) bomb capable of bombing Israel? Are you saying that they don't have an airforce capable of delivering the bomb? I fully admit my ignorance in military matters. You don't know me so you can't know the state of my heart and compassion for people. I am a healer not someone filled with hatred or warmonger, but I truly am afraid for the people of Israel. For me to say what I did shows the depth of my fear.

[Derek Ortt]

so its better that we are "morally" right rather than do everything we can to protect ourselves in the long run?

May I ask some if the bombing of the Reich was also a war crime? What I am advocating is no different than tested WW2 tactics

[vbhoutex]

so its better that we are "morally" right rather than do everything we can to protect ourselves in the long run?

May I ask some if the bombing of the Reich was also a war crime? What I am advocating is no different than tested WW2 tactics

Things have changed since WWII and so must our thinking. Unfortunately things are not as black and white as they used to be when it comes to war. I am not sure what the answer is and in fact Derek could turn out to be right in the end, but it is not something I, at least at this time with the current situation, can advocate.

[The Sandcrab]

It's estimated they are a few years away from having a bomb. They have no bombers, just a degraded fighter fleet. And getting their hands on nukes is not about the certain suicide that would come with using them, but about the "prestige" of having them, not to mention the deterrent effect. Notice we don't attack nuclear powers, no matter what kind of SOB they have at the helm, e.g. North Korea.

Iranians aren't unanimous in their desire for nuclear weapons. Plenty wish Ahmadinejad would shut up about it so they could continue to develop their nuclear power program and worry about their economy. But actions that radicalize their moderates don't help.

Turning Iran into yet another recruiting program for assorted terrorist orgs does nothing to make us safer. It's more than morality, it's strategy. Surely we have established that airstrikes alone don't win wars, but they do piss people off. Check out a topographical map of Iran. I won't review the many indicators of how thinly stretched the Army is. Who would sign up for this? What you are advocating, Derek, is a helluva lot different than WWII, Obvious Reason #1: we're not at war w/Iran.

And before somebody asks me this dumbass question, no, I do not want Iran to join "the club." I'm just realistic about what control we have over it.

[SouthFloridawx]

Currently in the world we live in right now the past few years has caused this sense of things to have to be either, "Black or White". I'm not talking about skin color either. Many people are quick to just push the button and kill however many people to eliminate a "problem".

I'm not advocating terrorism or terrorist but, as long as we are over there we are even more open to such attacks and we should be aware that by now.

By eliminating several tens of millions of people might seem like the only answer in the end... is it really an answer.

If you drop some bombs to kill millions to rout out a small percentage of the people you are trying to get rid of well then.... IMO you are no different that the side that we are fighting against.

We are supposed to be different than that. Well then if we are using violence to fight violence, Does it end? How does it end?

How are we different from them? We're both killing each other.

[Rainband]

With all due respect. Most of you people and your views scare me. I am so glad your not in charge of anything remotely important. I am amazed how you can condone the genocide of millions for the actions of a few. Guess thats the easy way huh.

[Audrey2Katrina]

I do understand the concerns of many with regard to "genocide"; equally I have a very real concern that it will be but a matter of time when a genuine "genocide" takes place, and that its victim will be Israel.

I make no claims to any solution, beyond the hope that better minds and stronger wills prevail. But if history is any indicator--nations like Iran have no compunctions whatsoever about selling/dealing weaponry to terrorist organizations, and once nukes are developed, it will be but a matter of time before terror groups start to employ them. Yes, I agree that some leaders are more bluff than bluster--right now; but there is a growing radicalism that just might let the genie out of the bottle and it won't be too easy to get it back inside.

It is indeed a very complex quagmire--but like so many other scenarios discussed on these and other forums--not so much a matter of if, as a matter of when.

A2K

[x-y-no]

so its better that we are "morally" right rather than do everything we can to protect ourselves in the long run?

How far does one carry this pre-emptive defensiveness? Should I shoot all my neighbors, given the marginal possibility that one of them will one day shoot me? The possibility that they will is undeniably non-zero. I know for a fact that several of them own guns. Furthermore, a couple of them are sometimes unreasonably belligerent when drunk.

May I ask some if the bombing of the Reich was also a war crime? What I am advocating is no different than tested WW2 tactics

Some of the things done in the course of bombing the Reich - for example the firebombing of Dresden - were indeed war crimes. And if you'd read the transcripts of the discussions leading to the post-war definitions of war crimes you'd find many of the participants in those decisions agreeing with that assesment.

There's such a thing as progress, Derek. There's such a thing as spiritual growth.

I don't know your ethnic background, but being of Viking descent I'm willing to bet I have a greater preponderance of murderers, plunderers and even cannibals in my recent ancestry than you do. Yet that does not doom me to the behavior of those ancestors.

[Aquawind]

I am amazed how you can condone the genocide of millions for the actions of a few. Guess thats the easy way huh.

I think that is an important point reguarding simply bombing them now. I do think Americans are tired of this talk and generally ignorant of the details and history related to this issue. Throw in the radicals who actually do advocate wiping Israel of the planet and supossed martyrs who think killing anyone works and we are having a hard time dealing with it all. Thus you get some of the same responses as Americans are having a very hard time understanding this whole issue and simply want it to go away. I think were a little spoiled and lazy thinking we can just make it go away.. THEY need to resolve the issues and find common ground. We can help but only in limited fashion. Going in there as outsiders and pushing people around just isn't going to help for lasting peace.

[x-y-no]

All aside from the fact that Iran is years away from acquiring a nuclear weapon, I don't buy the argument that they're so insane as to use it offensively if they manage to do so.

Sure, Ahmadinejad is given to some extreme comments, but nothing more extreme than Derek has said in this thread (carpet bombing all the major Iranian cities amounts to the deliberate murder of millions of innocent civilians who have never done anything to us nor have ever threatened to do anything to us). Do we think Derek is insane? I don't. I just think he's being intemperate in his comments. Ahmadinejad is playing to his political base. I don't like what he's doing, and I sure as heck don't trust him, but I don't think he's stupid and I don't think he's insane.


Israel is the world's fifth largest nuclear power. They have hundreds of nuclear warheads in a second-strike capability with a several thousand mile range. It's unknown but suspected that this capability includes thermonuclear weapons.

It would take an extraordinary level of insanity for any nation to escalate to a nuclear exchange with them.

[Aquawind]

I don't think he's stupid and I don't think he's insane.

keyword.. think.

Granted Jan you are a good thinker.

Nobody really knows and yet everyone has a breaking point. At that point it will be to late for many humans. I do think the more power they get the more of a threat to those they oppose on the planet. They have started a ground war already. Israel won't blow itself up or anyone in close proximity. The Martyr thing is really freaking people out as there is no rational. Nations as Martyrs would be really scary..let's hope they don't exist and get Nukes..

[Rainband]

Good post Paul and Jan

[The Sandcrab]

"I have a very real concern that it will be but a matter of time when a genuine "genocide" takes place" - One is taking place right now, in the Sudan, and more, several times more, have died there than in all the attacks on Israel since it was founded in '48, so where is the outrage? Where is the international community? Where are the Americans demanding that we level the place to save it and ourselves? Talk about the next Afghanistan, Somalia doesn't even have a government, it is Camp Kill 'Em All <crickets>

Hezbolla's death toll is about 900, Hamas another 500. 4 million are dead from war in Africa since '96. Can anyone afraid for the imminent demise of Israel name those African countries or their leaders?

Is our compassion reserved for a select few? Looks that way, somebody want to explain why it isn't?

"Never again" has never ended. Read Samantha Power's "A Problem from Hell."

"nations like Iran have no compunctions whatsoever about selling/dealing weaponry to terrorist organizations" - I guess that would make the US a "nation like Iran". Highlights from our arms sales history include, ironically, Iran/Contra and arming Saddam with, among other things, the precursor chemicals for chem weapons.

Do I want Iran, Pakistan, NK, etc selling weapons to "subnational actors"? Of course not. Does the US, the biggest arms proliferator in the world, have ANY moral authority in this department? NONE. And, LOL, just because our own citizens are unaware of our recent history doesn't mean others are. Makes trying to convince people we're only on the side of "good" a damn sight harder.

[Audrey2Katrina]

"I have a very real concern that it will be but a matter of time when a genuine "genocide" takes place" - One is taking place right now, in the Sudan, and more, several times more, have died there than in all the attacks on Israel since it was founded in '48, so where is the outrage?

In the first place, more, "several times more", than the population of Israel live in the area(s) to which you refer, so apples-to-oranges comparisons won't do. While I fully empathize with the situation in the Sudan, and the almost universal neglect of the horrible state of affairs in many African nations, (just look at how badly Rwanda was ignored and that was most definitely genocide) it's not the topic of the thread which is the suggested Iranian apocalyptic plan; Israel, being their primary target of hate, on the other hand is. And while I appreciate the fact that your comment wasn't aimed at any particular person, it was my quote you cited and asked for expressions of outrage and demands to "level the place"... A quick review of my entire post clearly showed neither "outrage" (which I certainly detect in yours)... nor were there any demands that we "level the place" anywhere to be found.

Hezbolla's death toll is about 900, Hamas another 500. 4 million are dead from war in Africa since '96. Can anyone afraid for the imminent demise of Israel name those African countries or their leaders?

You really seem to have an issue about the US and its alliance with Israel. As far as the geography lesson, it would be pointless to name them as anyone that worried about passing your rhetorical quizzes could easily enough google for the answers before posting them. Again, this thread isn't about the situation in the Sudan, or Somalia, or the AIDs stricken areas all over the continent, the civil wars and strife from Gabon, to the Congo.. all very significant, and if they are matters you wish to discuss, by all means open a topic on them. This thread, however isn't about the plight of Africa--it's about the imminent danger of a potential nuclear holocaust going off consequent to the developments in the Middle East--particularly this loud mouth in Iran.

Is our compassion reserved for a select few? Looks that way, somebody want to explain why it isn't?

The reservation of our compassion is not at issue here, and nobody needs to explain it to anyone. Of course that was doubtless another rhetorical query; as we have seen that going off into other subject areas on a specified thread can quickly bring on rebuke.

Do I want Iran, Pakistan, NK, etc selling weapons to "subnational actors"? Of course not. Does the US, the biggest arms proliferator in the world, have ANY moral authority in this department? NONE. And, LOL, just because our own citizens are unaware of our recent history doesn't mean others are. Makes trying to convince people we're only on the side of "good" a damn sight harder.

And just because some claim they are, doesn't mean they are. Just a word of advice that you can take, or choose to ignore: statements such as that in bold, suggest potential political firestorms, and would best be eschewed. If some of us could show less of a soap-box mentality and try not to sound so self-righteous about things in preaching to everyone else (and I include myself in that number) perhaps better communications would be achieved.

A2K

[The Sandcrab]

If this thread is about the imminent danger of a nuclear holocaust in the ME perpetrated by Iran, it's gonna be short, because Iran doesn't have nukes.

Several people posted about compassion or lack thereof in response to the "carpet bombing" suggestion. I'm the only one off topic?

Several people in these current events/Middle East threads, yourself included, have raised comparisons to WWII, Dresden, etc to make a point. I bring up Africa to do the same, and I'm off topic?

I see how this works. The "off topic/politics" label is reserved for opinions/posters you don't like, topic be damned.

Who's "The Decider" here, anyway?

[LSU2001]

I think everyone needs to remember that if we are attacked with ANY non-conventional weapon (chemical, nuclear, or biological) our established political doctrine is to respond in kind. However, our response will be nuclear and will not take into consideration that the leaders are not representative of the people. Iran in my opinion is the greatest threat to world security since the fall of the Soviet Union.
Just My 2 cents,
Tim

[Audrey2Katrina]

If this thread is about the imminent danger of a nuclear holocaust in the ME perpetrated by Iran, it's gonna be short, because Iran doesn't have nukes.

The title of the thread clearly suggests what it is--how imminent it may be is arguable. They were in N. Korea when that renegade government decided to attempt their own missile launch, admittedly a dismal failure. But I don't think you'll find too many that would argue the possibility, if not the probability that the N. Koreans at least possess some nukes however crude. The idea that Iran could have them one day--and it appears they are headed very much in that direction, is frightening--or should be. Not because of any direct action they'd take; because I actually agree with you that they (meaning the political leadership) aren't as suicidal as they sound. This does not preclude a government that is essentially theocratic in nature, engaging in clandestine traffic with terrorists who could very much bring that danger into other areas.

Your point about them wanting the prestige of being members of the "club" is also well taken; inasmuch as two nations (Pakistan and India) possess the technology and thankfully, so far, neither has employed them. This doesn't however lessen the concern as more and more nations attain "membership". My only point was that sooner or later, one of those members, are going to share this with people who could very much bring it to our own back yards. I did say it is an extremely complex issue.

Several people posted about compassion or lack thereof in response to the "carpet bombing" suggestion. I'm the only one off topic?

The "carpet bombing" THEY suggested was in direct response to dangers posed by Iran which is decidedly more on topic than discussing the plight of the Sudanese, Somalians, et. al. Personally, I wasn't trying to suggest you (or anyone else, for that matter) were the "only" one off topic; but simply suggesting that the African situation was considerably moreso.

Several people in these current events/Middle East threads, yourself included, have raised comparisons to WWII, Dresden, etc to make a point. I bring up Africa to do the same, and I'm off topic?

You're sounding very defensive here, Sandcrab, and it's really unnecessary. And once again you're bringing us into uncharted water that would better be left unexplored. This should cease to be a back-and-forth between two parties, and resume to that of being a discussion on the title of the thread--or perhaps begin a thread of greater interest to you. In reference to the comparisons of WWII etc, to make a point--yes, they were but contextually the relationship to the topic being discussed was far greater. When people call any bombing that involved civilian victims a "war crime", the discussion of the WWII carpet-bombing was germaine and not really off-topic. I can't speak for anyone else; but I certainly will for myself, and in referencing WWII, I was doing just that--making a point--and NOT standing on a soap-box diverting the discussion and demanding further explanations. You did more than just bring up Africa--you were bringing in a contemporaneous issue that has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic at hand. It was a valid question, but totally diversionary as it even requested an "explanation" about the new course you were headed on.

I see how this works. The "off topic/politics" label is reserved for opinions/posters you don't like, topic be damned.

Since you chose to bring in the folks I "don't like", which is a straw man if ever there was one, I will only reply with the stated opinion is one to which you are entitled--however wrong it may be.

Who's "The Decider" here, anyway?

In the final analysis--neither you nor I. The Mods and Admin do--all our contentions notwithstanding, theirs is the last say.

A2K

[Stephanie]

If this thread is about the imminent danger of a nuclear holocaust in the ME perpetrated by Iran, it's gonna be short, because Iran doesn't have nukes.

Several people posted about compassion or lack thereof in response to the "carpet bombing" suggestion. I'm the only one off topic?

Several people in these current events/Middle East threads, yourself included, have raised comparisons to WWII, Dresden, etc to make a point. I bring up Africa to do the same, and I'm off topic?

I see how this works. The "off topic/politics" label is reserved for opinions/posters you don't like, topic be damned.

Who's "The Decider" here, anyway?

The Mods and Admins, that's who. We've also taken steps, BEHIND THE SCENES to address people going way off topic. That is none of your concern. You need to be concerned with what YOU are doing.

This has gotten WAY off topic. You post a good question Sandcrab but now pulled in NK, Sudan, etc. which in turn, generated replies.

The topic at hand is about Iran. If you have a problem with the way the forums work then perhaps this isn't the place for you.

Okay, now back to a CIVIL discussion on this issue or it will be locked.

[Lindaloo]

Well said Steph. I agree 100%.