Iran to Stun the West on the 11th

John- how do you go about your day while constantly terrorized?

in any case, israel is the size of a cupcake; any nuclear threat is a big, big deal.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]Ratchet wrote:

[quote]spyoptic wrote:
whats our contingency plan if Iran gets nukes?[/quote]

send obama, with his nobel piece prize in hand he can totally take out 2 - 3 of them before they realize its really a weapon…

Besides that I suppose its that only Russia and us can pretty much put the entire planet into a 2nd ice age and kill anything living with a nuclear winter. not that they would care, but hay, least we get the last laugh…[/quote]

I’ve been saying this for years on this board: BURN THE NEST!

You don’t get rid of hornets by hoping they go away. Once in a while they sting. The only solution is to destroy the nest.

It would be wonderful if we could fly drones over Iran and peacefully lobotomize the people. But we can’t.

The nest…the nest…
[/quote]

Yes, unlike Iraq, Iran is a country of 75 million people ruled by a ruthless, shady clique of theocratic fanatics and Revolutionary Guard officers.

However, they are not dumb and know how to play their strengths, which they showed by royally kicking Israel’s ass in Lebanon using their Hezbollah proxy.

This is probably just posturing in order to draw attention away from the rising wave of internal dissent. Nothing unusual there.

Rapid right-wing babbling about “bombing Iran” is not feasible, and the Iranians know it, regardless of the US administration. The same way US of A policy options are very limited when it comes to Kim Jong-Il and North Korea.

Iraq still requires active support from the US to uphold its government. Without it (and I’ll say the surge helped) it would not function as a viable nation. In addition Iran isn’t scared of Iraq like it was in the years during and after the Iran-Iraq war. Iran knows it’s weak. It’s the only big kid on the block in the Middle East. This is its way of saying it

[quote]loppar wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]Ratchet wrote:

[quote]spyoptic wrote:
whats our contingency plan if Iran gets nukes?[/quote]

send obama, with his nobel piece prize in hand he can totally take out 2 - 3 of them before they realize its really a weapon…

Besides that I suppose its that only Russia and us can pretty much put the entire planet into a 2nd ice age and kill anything living with a nuclear winter. not that they would care, but hay, least we get the last laugh…[/quote]

I’ve been saying this for years on this board: BURN THE NEST!

You don’t get rid of hornets by hoping they go away. Once in a while they sting. The only solution is to destroy the nest.

It would be wonderful if we could fly drones over Iran and peacefully lobotomize the people. But we can’t.

The nest…the nest…
[/quote]

Yes, unlike Iraq, Iran is a country of 75 million people ruled by a ruthless, shady clique of theocratic fanatics and Revolutionary Guard officers.

However, they are not dumb and know how to play their strengths, which they showed by royally kicking Israel’s ass in Lebanon using their Hezbollah proxy.

This is probably just posturing in order to draw attention away from the rising wave of internal dissent. Nothing unusual there.

Rapid right-wing babbling about “bombing Iran” is not feasible, and the Iranians know it, regardless of the US administration. The same way US of A policy options are very limited when it comes to Kim Jong-Il and North Korea.
[/quote]

Why is it not feasible? They hate us and want to destroy us. Whoever hits first in a fight usually wins.

[quote]Bambi wrote:
Iraq still requires active support from the US to uphold its government. Without it (and I’ll say the surge helped) it would not function as a viable nation. In addition Iran isn’t scared of Iraq like it was in the years during and after the Iran-Iraq war. Iran knows it’s weak. It’s the only big kid on the block in the Middle East. This is its way of saying it[/quote]

Tried trolling you and it didn’t work. Welcome to PWI, and kudos!! :wink:

[quote]Bambi wrote:
Iraq still requires active support from the US to uphold its government. Without it (and I’ll say the surge helped) it would not function as a viable nation. In addition Iran isn’t scared of Iraq like it was in the years during and after the Iran-Iraq war. Iran knows it’s weak. It’s the only big kid on the block in the Middle East. This is its way of saying it[/quote]

No it doesn’t.

You are all foolish if you believe that he will launch a nuclear weapon under the flag of Iran.

This is the same fucking thing I said about Saddam, and about Kim Jong Il- they like being in power. In fact, they love it. They’re not going to give that up for ANYTHING in this world, and they’re not going to risk total annihilation by trying to nuke anyone, regardless of what they say.

For such America-centric assholes, you people sure forget quickly who is the unequivocal top dog in the world. We are a pittbull looking down at a yipping runt of a dog in Iran- he can say all he wants, but in the end it takes one big bite to end him. And don’t think he doesn’t know that.

You people amaze me.

We’ll see if they are full of shit tomorrow. Let’s see if they actually do anything or if they are just talk.

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Dustin wrote:

[quote]spyoptic wrote:
whats our contingency plan if Iran gets nukes?[/quote]

Bomb the shit out of Iran while also claiming to be spreading freedom and democracy.

[/quote]

Yeah, just like we did in Iraq![/quote]

Exactly!

Pretty awesome, wasn’t it!?!oneone!?

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Why is it not feasible? They hate us and want to destroy us. Whoever hits first in a fight usually wins.
[/quote]

Actually, the guys running Iran are not hating the US. I believe they we’re delighted with Dubya, for example.

He plunged into chaos their main regional rival and gave them enough fodder for that idiotic anti-Americanism that kept the Iranian masses happy and distracted them from corruption, high unemployment and other economic woes.

All educated, pro-western Iranians are much more pissed about the 1953 coup:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d’%C3%A9tat

Like I said, despite pointless macho posturing and “cowardly democrats” talk by the right, no US administration would risk a conventional showdown with Iran. Basij militiamen are on a completely different level of crazy compared to inept Baathists in Iraq.

As far as I recall, several Pentagon wargames proved that point.

As far as the nuclear (nukyular for those Bush lovers) option is concerned, good luck explaining “they hate us and want us dead” as a reason for dropping the bomb both externally and internally.

North Koreans are doing much worse stuff on the peninsula - navy skirmishes, long range missiles etc. but I don’t see anyone queuing to bomb them. Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations were (are) sucking up to Kim Jong-Il.

[quote]loppar wrote:

North Koreans are doing much worse stuff on the peninsula - navy skirmishes, long range missiles etc. but I don’t see anyone queuing to bomb them. Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations were (are) sucking up to Kim Jong-Il.

[/quote]

Mmhhj, I wonder why Iran could possibly want nukes…

[quote]pat wrote:
We’ll see if they are full of shit tomorrow. Let’s see if they actually do anything or if they are just talk.[/quote]

Fuckin’ A, now I have something to look forward to.

[quote]loppar wrote:

no US administration would risk a conventional showdown with Iran. Basij militiamen are on a completely different level of crazy compared to inept Baathists in Iraq.

[/quote]

If you’re talking politically, then I agree with you. If you’re talking militarily, then you have got to be kidding. We could, and would, absolutely crush their forces in a conventional showdown. That is why all of our enemies since Vietnam have opted for some variation of asymmetrical warfare–there’s simply no way for a small, ill-equipped country like Iran to stop us in a conventional war, no matter how crazy their militiamen are.

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
If you’re talking politically, then I agree with you. If you’re talking militarily, then you have got to be kidding. We could, and would, absolutely crush their forces in a conventional showdown. That is why all of our enemies since Vietnam have opted for some variation of asymmetrical warfare–there’s simply no way for a small, ill-equipped country like Iran to stop us in a conventional war, no matter how crazy their militiamen are.[/quote]

Also, Iran would see a lot of this before a “conventional showdown.”

[quote]loppar wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Why is it not feasible? They hate us and want to destroy us. Whoever hits first in a fight usually wins.
[/quote]

Actually, the guys running Iran are not hating the US. I believe they we’re delighted with Dubya, for example.

He plunged into chaos their main regional rival and gave them enough fodder for that idiotic anti-Americanism that kept the Iranian masses happy and distracted them from corruption, high unemployment and other economic woes.

All educated, pro-western Iranians are much more pissed about the 1953 coup:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d’%C3%A9tat

Like I said, despite pointless macho posturing and “cowardly democrats” talk by the right, no US administration would risk a conventional showdown with Iran. Basij militiamen are on a completely different level of crazy compared to inept Baathists in Iraq.

As far as I recall, several Pentagon wargames proved that point.

As far as the nuclear (nukyular for those Bush lovers) option is concerned, good luck explaining “they hate us and want us dead” as a reason for dropping the bomb both externally and internally.

North Koreans are doing much worse stuff on the peninsula - navy skirmishes, long range missiles etc. but I don’t see anyone queuing to bomb them. Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations were (are) sucking up to Kim Jong-Il.

[/quote]

I guess it’ll take them putting a nuke on Haifa before we wake up.

Look, these people don’t think logically. The process you describe above is not how fanatics think (I oughta know! :wink:

Its like the Chi-comms: People argue that China would lose trillions if they destroyed our dollar by dumping their trillions on the market. But…they don’t care about that at all. They’re commies! They hate capitalists and that’s all that matters.

Same with the Iranians. They put 100,000 teens in rolled up carpets soaked in gas, lit 'em, and rolled 'em towards the Iraqi soldiers in the Iran-Iraq war. They’re NUTZ!!!

The nest…the nest…

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

If you’re talking politically, then I agree with you. If you’re talking militarily, then you have got to be kidding. We could, and would, absolutely crush their forces in a conventional showdown. That is why all of our enemies since Vietnam have opted for some variation of asymmetrical warfare–there’s simply no way for a small, ill-equipped country like Iran to stop us in a conventional war, no matter how crazy their militiamen are.[/quote]

Asymmetrical warfare is the order of the day. Especially if you play by different rules than your opponent - where you don’t care about casualties or lost war materiel (see Iraq - Iran war).

Let’s look at Vietnam. The Tet offensive was, in purely military terms, a complete disaster for the Vietcong where most of their forces were wiped out in ill-fated attacks - the fighting from then on was conducted by the NVA. From a wider political perspective, with the profound psychological shock caused by the totally irrelevant attack on the US embassy in Saigon, it was a brilliant success.

The same thing happened 2006 in Lebanon when the IDF forgot that they weren’t fighting a Syrian or a Egyptian Russian-equipped force with a shitload of tanks and planes to destroy.

So when you’re thinking about Iran, you shouldn’t think about those Shah-era F-14 that can barely fly, but about a young radicalized population that would make any occupying force in the country virtually untenable, especially with the current Western sensitivity to casualties.

I mean, if a flat, secular Islamic country not known for it’s military prowess can cause so much problems, what would happen with a theocracy almost 10 times in population?

And by the way, why were the Israelis so quick to destroy Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor 1981, yet haven’t done anything now?

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]loppar wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]Ratchet wrote:

[quote]spyoptic wrote:
whats our contingency plan if Iran gets nukes?[/quote]

send obama, with his nobel piece prize in hand he can totally take out 2 - 3 of them before they realize its really a weapon…

Besides that I suppose its that only Russia and us can pretty much put the entire planet into a 2nd ice age and kill anything living with a nuclear winter. not that they would care, but hay, least we get the last laugh…[/quote]

I’ve been saying this for years on this board: BURN THE NEST!

You don’t get rid of hornets by hoping they go away. Once in a while they sting. The only solution is to destroy the nest.

It would be wonderful if we could fly drones over Iran and peacefully lobotomize the people. But we can’t.

The nest…the nest…
[/quote]

Yes, unlike Iraq, Iran is a country of 75 million people ruled by a ruthless, shady clique of theocratic fanatics and Revolutionary Guard officers.

However, they are not dumb and know how to play their strengths, which they showed by royally kicking Israel’s ass in Lebanon using their Hezbollah proxy.

This is probably just posturing in order to draw attention away from the rising wave of internal dissent. Nothing unusual there.

Rapid right-wing babbling about “bombing Iran” is not feasible, and the Iranians know it, regardless of the US administration. The same way US of A policy options are very limited when it comes to Kim Jong-Il and North Korea.
[/quote]

Why is it not feasible? They hate us and want to destroy us. Whoever hits first in a fight usually wins.
[/quote]

not with second-strike nuclear weapons

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]loppar wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Why is it not feasible? They hate us and want to destroy us. Whoever hits first in a fight usually wins.
[/quote]

Actually, the guys running Iran are not hating the US. I believe they we’re delighted with Dubya, for example.

He plunged into chaos their main regional rival and gave them enough fodder for that idiotic anti-Americanism that kept the Iranian masses happy and distracted them from corruption, high unemployment and other economic woes.

All educated, pro-western Iranians are much more pissed about the 1953 coup:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d’%C3%A9tat

Like I said, despite pointless macho posturing and “cowardly democrats” talk by the right, no US administration would risk a conventional showdown with Iran. Basij militiamen are on a completely different level of crazy compared to inept Baathists in Iraq.

As far as I recall, several Pentagon wargames proved that point.

As far as the nuclear (nukyular for those Bush lovers) option is concerned, good luck explaining “they hate us and want us dead” as a reason for dropping the bomb both externally and internally.

North Koreans are doing much worse stuff on the peninsula - navy skirmishes, long range missiles etc. but I don’t see anyone queuing to bomb them. Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations were (are) sucking up to Kim Jong-Il.

[/quote]

I guess it’ll take them putting a nuke on Haifa before we wake up.

Look, these people don’t think logically. The process you describe above is not how fanatics think (I oughta know! :wink:

Its like the Chi-comms: People argue that China would lose trillions if they destroyed our dollar by dumping their trillions on the market. But…they don’t care about that at all. They’re commies! They hate capitalists and that’s all that matters.

Same with the Iranians. They put 100,000 teens in rolled up carpets soaked in gas, lit 'em, and rolled 'em towards the Iraqi soldiers in the Iran-Iraq war. They’re NUTZ!!!

The nest…the nest…
[/quote]

From an economic standpoint I think China would suffer greatly if the American economy collapsed…

and so what if they’re nuts? thats to our troop’s advantages on the ground - that’s why it sucks to get deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan now - all the stupid ones have been killed and only the smart insurgents are left.

Iran does not behave rationally. That is what makes them dangerous and unpredictable.

Today they announced they are a “nuclear nation”. At this point the US will do nothing imo. Obama does not have the spine to stand up to Iran and he will continue his “smart diplomacy” tactic that will yield no benefit for the US and allow Iran to continue to develop a workable and deliverable nuke. The Iranian leaders have correctly sized up Obama, judged him to be weak, and will continue to challenge and roll over him.

At this point Iran might as well put a bullseye on their nuke plants. That will make it easier for the IDF to hit them and cause less collateral damage. If Israel even gets an inkling that they are close to a bomb I think they will go nuclear and strike Iran first. Based on the public statements Iran has made they have no other choice.