Countdown: Target Iran

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by B_Nick4444, Apr 26, 2008.

  1. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,002
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    When?

    What pre-conditions?

    USA alone, or with allies?

    Preventable? Should we try to prevent it?

    Is there a China factor?



    Hillary Clinton: "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."- HILLARY CLINTON, responding to a question about a possible Iranian nuclear attack on Israel

    Barack Obama: Obama's mixed record on Iran

    By SAUL SINGER , Jerusalem Post
    Second and more importantly, what matters most for Israel right now is not a candidate's stance on foreign assistance or the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, or even more controversial issues such as settlements and targeted killings of terrorists. Much more significant is the candidate's position on the wider threat of radical Islamism and its potential nuclear epicenter, Iran.
    Here Obama's record is mixed. On the one hand, he has co-sponsored a bill to impose further sanctions on Iran, and has spoken out on the seriousness of the Iranian threat. On the other, while he supported the sanctions that the Administration eventually imposed on the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, he opposed the amendment that Hillary Clinton voted for because, "it tied our presence in Iraq to an effort to counter the Iranian threat, which he felt could 1) give a green light to premature military action against Iran, and 2) provide a rationale to keep our troops in Iraq, when of course, he believes we need to end our presence there," as his staff explained to me in an email.
    In other words, Obama placed the risk of a US military response to Iran and the risk of lengthening the US stay in Iraq as higher and more important than the risk that international sanctions will be too weak to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Such logic is warped and mistaken.
    It also reveals Obama's talk about sanctions and the need to stop Iran as lip service, rather than a serious, thought-through policy designed to succeed. It is all well and good to be for sanctions, but if this position melts away in the face of extremely tenuous excuses based on extraneous issues, than the "tough" position on Iran is meaningless.


    John McCain:



    Call for International Pressure on Syria and Iran
    John McCain believes Syria and Iran have aided and abetted the violence in Iraq for too long. Syria has refused to crack down on Iraqi insurgents and foreign terrorists operating from within its territory. Iran has aided the most extreme and violent Shia militias, providing them with training, weapons, and technology that they have used to kill American troops.
    The answer is not to enter into unconditional dialogues with these two dictatorships from a position of weakness. The answer is for the international community to apply real pressure to Syria and Iran to change their behavior. The United States must also bolster its regional military posture to make clear to Iran our determination to protect our forces in Iraq and to deter Iranian intervention in that country.

    US Military:


    U.S. Steps Up Anti-Iran Rhetoric

    [FONT=Times New Roman,Times,Serif]Tehran Is Accused
    Of Increasing Aid
    To Iraq Insurgents
    [/FONT]

    [FONT=times new roman,times,serif][FONT=times new roman,times,serif]By YOCHI J. DREAZEN
    April 26, 2008; Page A3
    [/FONT]
    [/FONT]
    WASHINGTON -- The nation's top military official said Iran's support for insurgents in Iraq is steadily increasing, and he warned Tehran that the U.S. military maintains the power to strike Iran if given the order.
    Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the U.S. has no plans to attack Iran and prefers diplomacy to resolve growing tensions with Tehran. He also acknowledged that a third conflict in the broader Mideast would be "extremely stressing" to the military.

    Adm. Michael Mullen says the U.S. has the capability to attack Iran. Still, Adm. Mullen said the Navy and Air Force have enough manpower, weapons and vehicles to strike Iran if told to by President Bush.
    "I have reserve capability," he said. "It would be a mistake to think that we are out of combat capability."

    The unusually strident remarks marked the latest escalation in U.S. rhetoric about Iran, which the Bush administration blames for hundreds of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq. The U.S. also has begun describing Iran as the largest threat to Iraq's long-term stability.
    In response, Mohammad Mir Ali Mohammadi, a spokesman for the Iranian mission to the United Nations in New York, accused the Bush administration of "demonizing" Iran.

    • The News: The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Iran's support for insurgents in Iraq is increasing and warned that the U.S. military has the capability to attack Iran if given the order.
    • Word Combat: The unusually strident remarks further escalated U.S. rhetoric about Iran, which the Bush administration blames for hundreds of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq. A spokesman for the Iranian mission to the United Nations responded by accusing the administration of "demonizing" Iran.
    • What's Next: U.S. officials in Baghdad plan to release information purporting to show that Iran is continuing to ship lethal weapons into Iraq despite Tehran's vows to the contrary.


    "Instead of scapegoating Iran for U.S.'s policy failures in Iraq, the U.S. government should address its wrong policies...and desist from deceiving its own public opinion," he said in a written statement.
    The exchanges came as U.S. officials in Baghdad prepared to release information purporting to show that Tehran is continuing to ship lethal weapons into Iraq despite Tehran's vows to the contrary.
    U.S. military officials had said privately in recent days that they had found caches of Iranian-made mortars, rockets and explosives bearing date stamps indicating the weapons had been made within the past two months, long after Tehran had promised to curb the flow of Iranian weaponry into Iraq.
    Adm. Mullen said the weapons were "recently not just found, but recently manufactured."
    He added that Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, would hold a briefing about the weapons caches within the next two weeks. A trio of senior military officials said the presentation could come as early as Monday.
    Mr. Mohammadi denied the new U.S. claims. "To suggest that Iran puts its labels and dates on weapons and then smuggles them to Iraq is ridiculously false," he said.
    In his public comments Friday, Adm. Mullen said Iran is steadily increasing its support for Shiite insurgents from across Iraq, bringing them into Iran for training and then funneling weapons, explosives and rockets to them in Iraq.
    He also accused Iran of providing the Taliban in Afghanistan with technology for both roadside bombs and explosively formed penetrators, which are capable of punching through virtually all U.S. armor.
    Similar assertions have been widely questioned by outside analysts who say they are skeptical that a Shiite country like Iran would ally itself with a Sunni terrorist group like the Taliban.
    Adm. Mullen said Iran is acting out of a desire to become a regional power. He argued that Tehran preferred to see a weak Iraq that could be "significantly influenced" by the decisions and activities of the Iranian government.
    The admiral said it is unclear what levels of the Iranian government knew about or were directing the flow of armaments into Iraq, though he said that he was "very hard-pressed to believe" that the leadership of Iran's Quds Force, an elite unit of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, was unaware of the shipments.
    "That said, I have no smoking gun which could prove that the highest leadership is involved in this," he said.
     
  2. Industrialsize

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    24,307
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,175
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United States
    never please( only as an absolute total LAST resort if Iran threatened the USA strategically at home)(BTW Israel has its OWN nukes and can take care of themselves)also btw from the Obama website on Iran and nukes:

    And while other candidates have insisted that we should threaten to drop nuclear bombs on terrorist training camps, Obama believes that we must talk openly about nuclear weapons – because the best way to keep America safe is not to threaten terrorists with nuclear weapons, it's to keep nuclear weapons away from terrorists.
     
  3. unabear09

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    7,083
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    24
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    well if we make it through the end of the bush regime, and mccain is elected president....well i'd say within the first 2 years of his presidency, we'll be at war with either syria or iran......mccain scares me....worse that bush, cheney, or carl rove ever did
     
  4. tripod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Messages:
    5,250
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Statesville N.C.
    It would be opening up the gates of hell.
     
  5. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    881
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

    Iran is actually the ONLY middle east state that is anywhere near having a democratic political system. And the Iranian youth toady are actually PRO-USA.
    We should be sitting down with them and discussing closer ties... not trying to alienate them to the point of having no options.



    The US needs to stop trying to bully its way thru the world and start doing what we did in China... make them so economically intertwined with the west that they simply can not afford to consider war.


    The same kind of affluence that has resulted in the apathy of the US electorate will result in apathy in the islamic states, too.


    THe US could have won the Vietnam war in two years if we had spent the same amount dropping appliances on North Vietnam, rather than bombs.
     
  6. vince

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Messages:
    14,785
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    540
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Asia
    I don't think the U.S. is going to be getting any allies to follow it down the garden path again anytime soon.

    Adm. Michael Mullen's preference for diplomacy with Iran is the wisest course.
     
  7. No_Strings

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2007
    Messages:
    4,100
    Likes Received:
    6
    If I ever have control over a nuclear arsenal, the one time that I'm most likely to use it, above all others, is when the most powerful nation on the planet invades my country.
     
  8. Lex

    Lex
    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    9,536
    Likes Received:
    16
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
    Exactly.
     
  9. vince

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Messages:
    14,785
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    540
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Asia
    You are right, but let's not underestimate the stupidity of our so-called leaders.

    The current sanctions are driving the Iranians into the economic orbit of the Chinese and the Russians. They are finding out that they don't actually need the US/European market to survive.

    The Vietnam war would have never even happened if the U.S. hadn't turned it's back on it's WW2 ally, Ho Chi Ming. Instead the state department stepped back and let the French try to re-colonized Indochina.
     
  10. visualalert

    visualalert New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Messages:
    304
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NC, USA
    I'd say let's get arms and training to the students rebelling against the theocrats. And if that doesn't work in, oh, say, 3 months, NUKE 'EM. MAKE TOAST. Turn the whole fucking country into a sheet of glass. Preferably when Jimmuh Carter is visiting.

    And some people say I'm not nuanced. Hmmph.
     
  11. D_Pubert Stabbingpain

    D_Pubert Stabbingpain Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    8
    That sounds like a vote for staying the course! The US has an extremely long history of arming our enemies to fight bigger enemies and then having our own arms used against our own soldiers. Then we have to go in and bomb the shit out of them due to we fucked everything up so bad. And the beat goes on. :mad:

    Oh, and I almost forgot, it is all in the name of spreading Democracy into countries that don't want it! :confused:
     
  12. faceking

    faceking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Messages:
    7,535
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    110
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mavs, NOR * CAL
    Talllllllllllllllllllllllllk about it with them.... like the hack Jimmy Carter. Obama is clearly as "roll over" non-alpha dog as it gets...

    This will be made clear during the summer...
     
  13. faceking

    faceking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Messages:
    7,535
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    110
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mavs, NOR * CAL
    for what it's worth, the ENTIRE WORLD has been taaaaaaaaaaaaaalking with Iran about weapons.... yet the contrary rhetoric and actions continue.

    we need to, as a nation just move forward with nuclear energy here in the US, by the way... then taaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalk to the hypocritical bed-wetting enviro-greenos about not doing the program....
     
  14. D_Pubert Stabbingpain

    D_Pubert Stabbingpain Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    8
    I agree with other posters that say Israel can defend itself. Any political candidate that defends Israel against any other country is simply courting the Jewish vote and HillBilly or Billary or whatever you want to call her will play all the political games at her and her husband's disposal to get any and all votes. The Clintons love politics more than life itself and their political machine is known far and wide.

    At least Carter is trying to sit down with people in Israel and Palestine and talk instead of making idle threats.

    These Iranian "high seas" incidents over the past month, (whether actually Iranian or covert activities intended to look Iranian), together with the incresing rhetoric all serve the ultimate purpose of caving into the Saudi's interests. As long as we continue to sleep with them we will be mired down in the Middle East for generations. :frown1: McCain was telling the truth about being there for 100 years. That is Bush's legacy.

    Even if we did not depend upon foreign oil at all, the Fat Cats who run this country would still be sleeping with the Saudi's because they are some of the most powerful people in the world. And if you don't think so, pay attention to how they are buying controlling interests in American companies. Gee, aren't they trustees of the Clinton library or something too? :eek:
     
  15. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    881
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego

    We can all see how effective aaaaaaaaaaaaction has been when you have an "alpha dog" with the functional brain capacity of a gerbil in command.


    Human beings are not dogs... some of us are actually smarter than dogs.

    We have other weapons than missiles and guns...

    I am not advocating Talk.... I am advocating engagement... just not military engagement.

    We are successfully changing China into a capitalist democracy... without Killing anyone.
    And if China tried anything we really didn't want to stand for... A one month embargo of Chinese made CRAP, would devastate their economy far worse than any war.


    We have far more influence over China's actions, thru economic engagement, then we have over Iraq, despite having our troops and tanks all over it.

    And, unlike Iraq and the rhetoric over Iran, our financial engagement with China does not make us look like jackasses.

    It makes us look like good guys.


    Smart good guys.


    I am tired of alpha dog barking and yelping.

    Time to shoot this dog dead and start THINKING and PLANNING
     
  16. D_Fiona_Farvel

    D_Fiona_Farvel Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,790
    Likes Received:
    17
    Beginning as soon as someone makes acting against Iran a combination of national protection and a show of patriotism. Labeling dissenters pussys, draft dodgers, or unpatriotic will help as well.

    Nothing valid. Domestically? It must be seemingly complex, too complex for the average person to understand with a lot of information gaps. Opposing views not covered in the media. Probably beginning during some sort of domestic issue - say, an economic collapse.

    USA largely alone. Maybe Saudis.

    Absolutely preventable. Yes, we should.
    However, that may be impossible when some of our people who help make military decisions operate from "they hate us", "they want to destroy our way of life", "we have to act before they act", while not sending their loved ones or self to fight in a pointless war.


    Idk, about China.
    The last few years, I have felt Russia becoming a stronger presence in these "rogue states". I actually think we are on the brink, or early stages of another cold war. :shrug:
     
  17. D_Fiona_Farvel

    D_Fiona_Farvel Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,790
    Likes Received:
    17
    What in this "contrary rhetoric and actions" warrant military aggression against Iran? Are we only discussing Ahmadinejad's rhetoric? Because he has very limited powers, his lip flapping means nothing in the long run.


    I agree, too many minority shi'a in every country of the Middle East. They are also a group that is used to being oppressed, yet have found ways to fight back and thrive in majority Sunni nations - some using Hussein as an exemplar because of his martyrdom and warrior spirit. Why work to engage them in one single unifying cause?
     
  18. B_Trues

    B_Trues New Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
  19. B_Trues

    B_Trues New Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: china, china also has a good history of standing up to Islamics, but i don't think they care about anything much outside their border, esp. not Israel
     
  20. B_Trues

    B_Trues New Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    if the iranians are crazy enough to attack israel, will the usa persue a iraq style, long expensive war, or a chucknorris nukeem, they pose a threat and arent-our-responsibilities style war?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted