Iran Nuclear Standoff

Chat about anything and everything... (well almost anything) Whether it be the front porch or the pot belly stove or news of interest or a topic of your liking, this is the place to post it.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Message
Author
User avatar
HURAKAN
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 46086
Age: 38
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 4:34 pm
Location: Key West, FL
Contact:

Re: Re:

#721 Postby HURAKAN » Sun May 18, 2008 11:42 am

Derek Ortt wrote:
HURAKAN wrote:If Iran wants to have a nuclear weapon, they will probably build it if nothing forceful is done. They have already demonstrated again and again that they don't care about sanctions, they laugh at them. Nonetheless, America cannot be involved in another war, especially of this dimension.


yes we can and we can win it in less than 2 weeks without even using our WMDs. You are severely underestimating our capabilities. We can just line up our B-52s if necessary and level each and every Iranian city, kill millions, and make it impossible for them to continue for lack of an idustry after the bombing. Iran almost certainly would surrender quickly, as did Serbia (and we killed far far less then, we only killed thousands of Serbian civilians and they still quickly waived the white flag).

That is unless we repeat the mistakes of Iraq and try and fight a bloodless war


You know that I'm not talking about the kind of war you're proposing. Of course the US has the military power to level Iran, but what you are proposing is a carnage. I know there are a lot of people in Iran that have nothing to do with the government actions, and killing them shouldn't be an option. This is between the US and the Iranian government, not its people.
0 likes   

User avatar
x-y-no
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 8359
Age: 65
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:14 pm
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL

#722 Postby x-y-no » Sun May 18, 2008 11:46 am

Yes, we could do that Derek - but what would be the consequences to our forces in Iraq, and what would be the long-term consequences in the region?

Personally, I can't think of a better way to make the terrorism problem far worse for decades to come.
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

Re:

#723 Postby Derek Ortt » Sun May 18, 2008 11:53 am

x-y-no wrote:Yes, we could do that Derek - but what would be the consequences to our forces in Iraq, and what would be the long-term consequences in the region?

Personally, I can't think of a better way to make the terrorism problem far worse for decades to come.


and what would be the consequences of a limited war that fails? Possibly far worse as that would show weakness on our part, emboldening our enemy to strike again.

Remember, Bid Laden felt he could strike on 9/11 due to our weak response to the embassy bombings. It is possible that a forceful response would give others pause before instigating a conflict with us in the future (more pain now for a longer term peace)
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

#724 Postby Derek Ortt » Sun May 18, 2008 11:56 am

You know that I'm not talking about the kind of war you're proposing. Of course the US has the military power to level Iran, but what you are proposing is a carnage. I know there are a lot of people in Iran that have nothing to do with the government actions, and killing them shouldn't be an option. This is between the US and the Iranian government, not its people.

While this is quite true, history has shown that it is hard to win a limited war. If we do not go after civilian targets, Iran continues to retain the means of waging war. Until that is terminated, our forces will be in harms way and we would suffer casualties that could have been prevented
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

#725 Postby Derek Ortt » Sun May 18, 2008 11:57 am

basically what I am saying is if we do have to fight, we must fight to win and do everything necessary to ensure victory. Or else, do not even bother showing up on the battlefield
0 likes   

User avatar
cycloneye
Admin
Admin
Posts: 145322
Age: 68
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico

Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff

#726 Postby cycloneye » Tue May 20, 2008 9:03 am

U.S to Attack Iran soon?

:uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow:

Its possible that something occurs before 2008 is out,but at what cost for the U.S is the question.
0 likes   

Cryomaniac
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:26 pm
Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire, UK
Contact:

Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff

#727 Postby Cryomaniac » Tue May 20, 2008 10:12 am

cycloneye wrote:U.S to Attack Iran soon?

:uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow:

Its possible that something occurs before 2008 is out,but at what cost for the U.S is the question.


I agree.

A few of the more out of here conspiracy theorists are saying that a war with Iran would result in the US election being called off.
0 likes   

User avatar
cycloneye
Admin
Admin
Posts: 145322
Age: 68
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico

Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff

#728 Postby cycloneye » Fri Jun 06, 2008 7:52 am

An Israeli deputy prime minister on Friday warned that Iran would face attack if it pursues what he said was its nuclear weapons programme.
"If Iran continues its nuclear weapons programme, we will attack it," said Shaul Mofaz, who is also transportation minister.

"Other options are disappearing. The sanctions are not effective. There will be no alternative but to attack Iran in order to stop the Iranian nuclear programme," Mofaz told the Yediot Aharonot daily.

He stressed such an operation could only be conducted with US support.

A former defence minister and armed forces chief of staff, Mofaz hopes to replace embattled Ehud Olmert as prime minister and at the helm of the Kadima party.




Israel May not wait too long to Attack Iran

:uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow:

Oh,oh,Israel is getting very serious now.
0 likes   

flwxwatcher
Category 4
Category 4
Posts: 926
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 3:35 pm
Location: Central Florida

Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff

#729 Postby flwxwatcher » Fri Jun 06, 2008 9:39 am

cycloneye wrote:An Israeli deputy prime minister on Friday warned that Iran would face attack if it pursues what he said was its nuclear weapons programme.
"If Iran continues its nuclear weapons programme, we will attack it," said Shaul Mofaz, who is also transportation minister.

"Other options are disappearing. The sanctions are not effective. There will be no alternative but to attack Iran in order to stop the Iranian nuclear programme," Mofaz told the Yediot Aharonot daily.

He stressed such an operation could only be conducted with US support.

A former defence minister and armed forces chief of staff, Mofaz hopes to replace embattled Ehud Olmert as prime minister and at the helm of the Kadima party.






Israel May not wait too long to Attack Iran

:uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow:

Oh,oh,Israel is getting very serious now.


Yep, I have no doubt that Israel, with the blessings of the U.S. will attack Iran before the summer is over.
0 likes   

Cryomaniac
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:26 pm
Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire, UK
Contact:

#730 Postby Cryomaniac » Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:13 am

Me too, I think they'll be an attack before the US election.
0 likes   

User avatar
feederband
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 3423
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 6:21 pm
Location: Lakeland Fl

#731 Postby feederband » Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:39 am

Wow...
0 likes   

User avatar
cycloneye
Admin
Admin
Posts: 145322
Age: 68
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico

Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff

#732 Postby cycloneye » Fri Jun 06, 2008 8:39 pm

The question is if a Israel Attack to Irans Nuclear plants will be a joint operation with the U.S.

Independent analysts have questioned, however, whether Israel’s armed forces can take on Iran alone, as its nuclear sites are numerous, distant and well-fortified.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24998146/

Image
0 likes   

User avatar
Chacor
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 10229
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Singapore

#733 Postby Chacor » Fri Jun 06, 2008 8:47 pm

The UN will obviously try to intervene but of course the U.S. would then exercise its veto.
0 likes   

User avatar
HURAKAN
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 46086
Age: 38
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 4:34 pm
Location: Key West, FL
Contact:

#734 Postby HURAKAN » Fri Jun 06, 2008 9:09 pm

When things are bad, they can always get worse.
0 likes   

User avatar
feederband
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 3423
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 6:21 pm
Location: Lakeland Fl

Re:

#735 Postby feederband » Fri Jun 06, 2008 9:28 pm

HURAKAN wrote:When things are bad, they can always get worse.


It is inevitable..... They can't sit there and wait to get wiped out....
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

#736 Postby Derek Ortt » Sat Jun 07, 2008 12:44 am

not going to do that much good

NORTH KOREA is behind everything. Remember, when Israel attacked the reactor in Syria late last year or early this year, it was NORTH KOREA who was caught there, aiding the Syrians.

If you want to stop a pathetic puppet show, why would you wipe out the puppets? The puppets can merely be replaced. The puppet master, however, is the one to take out, and that cannot be replaced
0 likes   

Matt-hurricanewatcher

Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff

#737 Postby Matt-hurricanewatcher » Sat Jun 07, 2008 11:24 pm

Ahmadinejad Invites Japan to Prepare for a World Without the US
By Patrick Goodenough
CNSNews.com International Editor
June 05, 2008

(CNSNews.com) - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been making headlines during his first visit to Western Europe as Iran's president by attacking the United States and Israel, but he also is trying to use the opportunity to show that he's not as isolated as his opponents would wish.

Ahmadinejad failed to secure meetings with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and the Pope while in Rome for a U.N. food conference that ends Thursday, but he did meet with the prime minister of Japan for half an hour.

Japan and Iran last held a leaders' summit eight years ago, when President Mohammed Khatami, generally regarded as a moderate, was in office.

Since Ahmadinejad was elected in 2005, Tehran's lengthy dispute with the international community over its nuclear program has deepened, while the controversial president has caused outrage with comments calling for Israel's demise and questioning the Holocaust.

Given the U.S.-led efforts to isolate Tehran over the nuclear issue, Ahmadinejad will likely view his meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda as a diplomatic coup. Japan is a close U.S. ally, which next month hosts the annual Group of Eight leaders' summit.

Fukuda's spokesman, Kasuo Kodama, said the prime minister had urged Ahmadinejad to comply with U.N. Security Council resolutions on halting uranium enrichment.

The official Iranian news agency, Irna, had a different take on the encounter, saying Ahmadinejad had told Fukuda that U.S. domination was in decline. "Iran and Japan as two civilized and influential nations should get ready for a world minus the U.S.," he said.

Ahmadinejad said "enemies" did not want Iran and Japan to work together, but it was time for the two countries to plan for long-term cooperation.

He invited Fukuda to join Iran in developing "peaceful" nuclear energy programs, and said Tehran-Tokyo cooperation could expand in other fields too.

Iran is an important oil supplier for energy-hungry Japan, the world's second-largest economy, but attempts to deepen energy cooperation have run into strong U.S. opposition.

A Japanese company had planned to help develop Iran's Azadegan oilfields, one of the world's largest untapped oil reserves, but in 2006 Iran cut its share in the $2 billion venture from 75 percent to 10 percent, complaining that Japan was delaying the project, reportedly because of U.S. objections.

Earlier that year, the then-U.S. ambassador to the U.N., John Bolton, told Japan's Kyodo news agency that Tokyo should rethink the Azadegan investment because it could help Iran avert sanctions related to its nuclear activities. Since then, the Security Council has imposed three rounds of sanctions on Tehran for its refusal to halt uranium enrichment.

Ahmadinejad's meeting with Fukuda came on the sidelines of the conference on the global food crisis, held at the Rome headquarters of the U.N.'s Food and Agriculture Organization.

He used the visit to the Italian capital to lash out at his usual targets, calling Israel an "artificial regime" that is "doomed" and declaring that the "myth of [American] invincibility is being shattered."

The visit has been controversial, drawing protests from Italian politicians, members of the Jewish community and Iranian exiles.

Ahmadinejad was not invited to a state dinner hosted by Berlusconi and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday

Late last week, Iranian media reported that the president had requested a meeting with Pope Benedict XVI while in Rome. Amid press speculation that an audience had been refused, the Vatican issued a statement saying the pontiff was unable to respond positively to requests for audiences with any of the visiting leaders.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBurea ... 0605c.html

WOW is all I got to say.
0 likes   

User avatar
cycloneye
Admin
Admin
Posts: 145322
Age: 68
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico

Re: Iran Nuclear Standoff

#738 Postby cycloneye » Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:31 am

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's defense minister was quoted on Tuesday as warning Israel of a "very painful" response if it launched a military strike over the Islamic Republic's disputed nuclear program.

On Friday, Israeli Transport Minister Shaul Mofaz told an Israeli newspaper an attack on Iran looked "unavoidable" given the apparent failure of United Nations sanctions to deny Tehran technology with bomb-making potential.

"Our armed forces are at the height of their readiness and if anyone should want to undertake such a foolish job the response would be very painful," the state Iran daily quoted Iranian Defence Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar as saying.


Iran Warns of Painful Response if Israel Attacks

:uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow: :uarrow:

More tough talk this time comming from Iran.
0 likes   

Cryomaniac
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:26 pm
Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire, UK
Contact:

#739 Postby Cryomaniac » Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:15 am

And the tension increases another notch.

I think it's less of a question of "if" but "when" Israel attacks Iran, or vice versa.

As I have said before, I'm not prepared to post what my opinions are as to what each side should do on a public forum, but I will say that I don't think a surgical strike on Iran's nuclear facilities will work.

Also, I doubt that this will help the oil price.
0 likes   

User avatar
cycloneye
Admin
Admin
Posts: 145322
Age: 68
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico

Re:

#740 Postby cycloneye » Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:22 am

Cryomaniac wrote:And the tension increases another notch.

I think it's less of a question of "if" but "when" Israel attacks Iran, or vice versa.

As I have said before, I'm not prepared to post what my opinions are as to what each side should do on a public forum, but I will say that I don't think a surgical strike on Iran's nuclear facilities will work.

Also, I doubt that this will help the oil price.


Do you think that if Israel launches a Military strike inside Iran,it has to get help from the U.S. or it can do it alone?
0 likes   


Return to “Off Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests