Iranian President planning apoclaypse on August 22nd?

[stormtruth]

Iran doesn't have Nukes yet so the op-ed mentioned above is probably yet another baseless rumor. It was probably written to stir up enough fear so that we will attack or invade another country that starts with an I. Iran's nuclear program should be pretty obvious and visible from space. One building from the U.S. Manhattan Project was dozens of football fields long. It should be pretty difficult for Iran to hide these facilities and therefore easy to bomb Iran's facilities if it comes down to it. Unless you take enormous pleasure in killing human beings there would be no need to carpet bomb everything in Iran as Derek suggested. I also think it would be unfair for us to order our pilots to do something so inhumane.

Iran could do something crazy like bomb oil rigs in the area but that seems unlikely since it would be like shooting themselves in the face. What are the odds that the theory in this op-ed becomes reality? There is no chance whatsoever in my opinion that this happens like the author of the op-ed suggests. And if the author is wrong, which he likely is, future articles from this author should definitely not be taken seriously or deemed credible.

[Brent]

Mike Wallace retired from CBS has an exclusive interview with Iran's President this Sunday on 60 Minutes!!!

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/me ... 1002984736

Take that Katie Couric.

[JTD]

Mike Wallace retired from CBS has an exclusive interview with Iran's President this Sunday on 60 Minutes!!!

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/me ... 1002984736

Take that Katie Couric.

But is this solution based news??

[stormtruth]

Mike Wallace retired from CBS has an exclusive interview with Iran's President this Sunday on 60 Minutes!!!

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/me ... 1002984736

Take that Katie Couric.

LOL. He's Hot

"He's actually, in a strange way, he's a rather attractive man, very smart, savvy, self-assured, good looking in a strange way," Wallace said. "He's very, very short but he's comfortable in his own skin."

[CentralFlGal]

Iran doesn't have Nukes yet so the op-ed mentioned above is probably yet another baseless rumor.

Bushehr NPP model of nuclear work with Iran - Russian FM Lavrov
14:38 | 13/ 07/ 2006

MOSCOW, July 13 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's foreign minister said Thursday that the joint construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran is a perfect model of cooperation in the nuclear sector.

"The Bushehr NPP and the whole construction project, including the return of spent nuclear fuel to Russia, is seen as a model for the development of cooperation in this sphere with Iran," Sergei Lavrov said.

"The Bushehr NPP is not considered by anyone as a threat," Lavrov said referring to possible economic sanctions against Iran.

Russia is helping to build an $800-million plant in Bushehr, 400 kilometers (250 miles) southwest of Tehran, which had been previously scheduled to be operational by the end of 2006.
http://en.rian.ru/world/20060713/51302236.html

It was probably written to stir up enough fear so that we will attack or invade another country that starts with an I.

Yep, that's all the west focuses on. Countries starting with the letter "I". Iceland, Ireland and Italy better take note...

Iran's nuclear program should be pretty obvious and visible from space.

Ask and ye shall receive. :: checks watch ::

What are the odds that the theory in this op-ed becomes reality? There is no chance whatsoever in my opinion that this happens like the author of the op-ed suggests. And if the author is wrong, which he likely is, future articles from this author should definitely not be taken seriously or deemed credible.

See the article I included above from Russian sources. Or just do a web search of keywords military, russia and iran. But bear in mind that by the time any news of military nature makes it to the press, it's already outdated and the intel sector has moved on to the next issue.

Bringing this down to more simpler terms, it's either western countries in the Middle East or former KGB Putin. The cold war never ended; and as I've stated in the thread about Fidel Castro, Putin is kicking anthills all over the globe to draw us into conflict again.

[The Sandcrab]

A nuclear power plant isn't a nuclear weapon or a nuclear weapons program. Accounting for every nanogram of spent fuel is the issue. And since the Russians have problems accounting for and maintaining their own "loose nukes", problems they've acknowledged and asked for our help with (we've declined, bad choice IMO), we need to be involved.

Dealing with Iran by not dealing with Iran is an atrocious policy and leaves us no leverage and few options in a world where there aren't many to begin with.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0809/p09s02-coop.htm

[BUD]

Helloooooooooo!!!!PEOPLE.The Russians probably sold Iran a few nudes.How many nuclear weapons are missing from Russia????I bet that number is greater than 10!!!Its like this do you think any Iranian would care if a nuclear bomb gos off in the US,no probably not.If anything dancing in the street.

[Audrey2Katrina]

The Russians probably sold Iran a few nudes.

I heard the Russian Mafia was getting into stuff!...

Sorry... I just couldn't resist!

A2K

[nholley]

can we just carpet bomb Tehran and every other major Iranian city and take care of this nutcase regime? Don't worry about world opinion, as world opinion has been dead flat wrong so many times in the past... and almost certainly is now.

Well done. You just justified everything they want to do to Israel and the US. YOU think he is a nutcase and want to carpet bomb them, THEY think the US are nutcases and want to carpet bomb you. In both your eyes both your views are correct. So if the US can do it to them, why is it so wrong for them to want to do it to you?

[Stephanie]

The Russians probably sold Iran a few nudes.

I heard the Russian Mafia was getting into stuff!...

Sorry... I just couldn't resist!

A2K

- Thanks for the lighter moment!!

[Skywatch_NC]

The Russians probably sold Iran a few nudes.

I heard the Russian Mafia was getting into stuff!...

Sorry... I just couldn't resist!

A2K

- Thanks for the lighter moment!!

[Derek Ortt]

since when has the United States threatened aggression against Iran?

Iran has on many times threatened our great nation; thus, we should take all necessary steps to defend ourselves, public opinion regardless. We should not have a policy of national security by polls, but by what is needed to protect our nation

[coriolis]

I thought that Iran has a newer generation of more worldly and pragmatic young citizens who don't necessarily follow the hard line - at least in private.

If this is true, and if the US could discipline itself to look to the long term, there could be dividends by being patient.

That's one thing that the former Soviet Union could do well. In their real-life game of Risk, they could be patient and wait for the right moment to act. Americans tend to be impatient and think that all problems can be solved within the limits of a 60 minute drama on TV.

[Regit]

I thought that Iran has a newer generation of more worldly and pragmatic young citizens who don't necessarily follow the hard line - at least in private.

If this is true, and if the US could discipline itself to look to the long term, there could be dividends by being patient.

That's one thing that the former Soviet Union could do well. In their real-life game of Risk, they could be patient and wait for the right moment to act. Americans tend to be impatient and think that all problems can be solved within the limits of a 60 minute drama on TV.

I agree with you completely. People aren't satisfied unless they get action now. This was plainly seen after North Korea fired its test missles. Message boards on the internet lit up with demands that we attack RIGHT NOW.

You're seeing the same thing now with Iran. People think world leaders who use diplomacy are weenies and act like our President should shoot now and ask questions later.

It's a good thing these people have no power.

[x-y-no]

since when has the United States threatened aggression against Iran?

You're kidding, right?

There have been open discussions of the possibility of military strikes against alleged nuclear facilites in Iran by many US officials for quite some time now.

EDIT: Before anyone jumps on me for the use of the word "alleged" - I'm just trying to be precise. Personally, I have no doubts that Iran is engaged in efforts to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran has on many times threatened our great nation; ...

In generalized terms, yes. There was the "harm and pain" business with regard to a response to any sanctions. But that's pretty vague. It could just as well have meant economic "harm and pain." In any case, that was a matter of a proposed response to sanctions imposed on them, not some unilateral theat.

Offhand I'm not recalling a specific threat by Iran against the US (unless you count statements that they would defend themselves, but that's hardly fair).

Mind you I'm hardly defending the virtue of the Iranian government. If I've just missed or forgotten about such a threat in the fog of all that's going on there, please remind me of it.

... thus, we should take all necessary steps to defend ourselves, public opinion regardless. We should not have a policy of national security by polls, but by what is needed to protect our nation

The problem lies in the cognitive (and moral) leap you take in equating those neccesary steps with carpet bombing Iranian cities.


I have a neighbor who is something of a belligerent drunk. On a few occasions, he's been quite threatening to me and others when in that condition. Now I own several guns, and lets say I have reason to think my neighbor is thinking of getting one (in real life he already has one - but we're building an analogy here). Thus there is a distict possibility that sometime soon he might come after me with gun blazing.

As I understand it, you would argue that I am justified in killing not only him, but his wife, kids and possibly pets right now in order to prevent that possibilty. Am I right?

If not, how is this different from "carpet bomb[ing] Tehran and every other major Iranian city [to] take care of this nutcase regime?"

[artist]

Iran's presidents design is not to hit our nuclear facilities, but to wipe us & Israel out, period. A little bit different from our wanting to wipe out their nuclear threat to us.

Derek Ortt wrote:
since when has the United States threatened aggression against Iran?


You're kidding, right?

There have been open discussions of the possibility of military strikes against alleged nuclear facilites in Iran by many US officials for quite some time now.

EDIT: Before anyone jumps on me for the use of the word "alleged" - I'm just trying to be precise. Personally, I have no doubts that Iran is engaged in efforts to develop nuclear weapons.

Quote:
Iran has on many times threatened our great nation; ...

[kevin]

I claim to have insights into the ways in which politics among nations work, through examination of the historical record and by considering what International Relations and particularly the Realist School have to offer. For instance, there are plenty of instances where nations pursued a policy of brinksmanship and said things which they did not genuinely intend. Why do we underestimate the Iranian President's ability to figure out his own best interests?

The Russians said things of similar provocation before, and we were in more of an adversial situation with them, yet peace was obtained (or rather lack of war) through a shared interest in not undergoing mutual destruction.

So how do you know that the Iranian President wants to or would have the political control/physical means to launch nuclear missiles against Israel or the United States? In case people haven't been informed of this, the Iranian President does not run Iran.

[Cookiely]

I can't remember the movie but in it someone says its not the thousand nukes he's afraid of but the one nuke that terrifies him. I think that says it all. Frankly if any of the terrorist groups get the nuke they will use it against us. My question is what will be our response when not if this happens?

[x-y-no]

Iran's presidents design is not to hit our nuclear facilities, but to wipe us & Israel out, period. A little bit different from our wanting to wipe out their nuclear threat to us.

Really? What's the evidence of that? Some blowhard speeches? Some blustery 30 year old quotes from Ayatollah Khomeni?

Let's have some specifics of how he's going to do this before we contemplate the mass murder of millions of innocents (remember - I'm addressing the "why can't we carpet bomb Tehran and other Iranian cities" proposal) to prevent it.

What I really think everyone ought to do is dial the rhetoric down. If a situation is already tense and the level of information and communication already low, it isn't helpful to immediately jump to the worst conclusion and immediately seize upon the most extreme response.

[kevin]

I can't remember the movie but in it someone says its not the thousand nukes he's afraid of but the one nuke that terrifies him. I think that says it all. Frankly if any of the terrorist groups get the nuke they will use it against us. My question is what will be our response when not if this happens?

The one nuclear weapon which isn't guarded or gets sold to terrorists is what scares me also. And you'll find that the stockpiles in Russia aren't as closely guarded as they should be, and that Pakistan the birthplace of the Taliban has nuclear weapons and one can never be sure of their intelligence agencies and some of their military.

One would think that a country like Russia with thousands of warheads has a much greater chance of letting one slip (intentionally or otherwise) than a nation like Iran, which will have at the most once they develop nuclear weapons, a few of them. Also, it is very important strategically to the Iranians that they not let their only bargaining chip go over to Sunni terrorists who will use it for the aggrandizement of Wahhabism.

Iran - if one examines in strategic terms - is developing nuclear capabilities in response to the sense that it is their only way to avoid American influence if not invasion. Iran and Iraq fought a war to stalemate for years. America took over Iraq as fast as her supply line would allow. It is in Iranian strategic interests (if war or sanctions can be avoided somehow) to get a nuclear weapon.

It is in American interests to not allow Iran to gain power with which they will be able to ignore our policies to a larger extent than they already do. I do not believe that the strategic policy makers in Washington believe the Iranians with nuclear weapons = use of nuclear weapons. Rather they understand that there is an implicit danger in allowing Iran to become a regional power.

I hope that's evenhanded enough to be informative but not 'know-it-allish' because I'm clearly not an expert in the region.