or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › War with Iran inevitable: do you support Iran's right to self-defence?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

War with Iran inevitable: do you support Iran's right to self-defence?

post #1 of 309
Thread Starter 
I have no doubt that the attack on Iran is now inevitable, planned and decided upon. We will have to wait for a month or two of sheep-prepping but I firmly believe it is now inevitable.

And so do many in the Intelligence Community.

Quote:
Senior American intelligence and defence officials believe that President George W Bush and his inner circle are taking steps to place America on the path to war with Iran, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt.

Pentagon planners have developed a list of up to 2,000 bombing targets in Iran, amid growing fears among serving officers that diplomatic efforts to slow Iran's nuclear weapons programme are doomed to fail.

Pentagon and CIA officers say they believe that the White House has begun a carefully calibrated programme of escalation that could lead to a military showdown with Iran.

Now it has emerged that Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, who has been pushing for a diplomatic solution, is prepared to settle her differences with Vice-President Dick Cheney and sanction military action.

In a chilling scenario of how war might come, a senior intelligence officer warned that public denunciation of Iranian meddling in Iraq - arming and training militants - would lead to cross border raids on Iranian training camps and bomb factories.

A prime target would be the Fajr base run by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds Force in southern Iran, where Western intelligence agencies say armour-piercing projectiles used against British and US troops are manufactured.

Under the theory - which is gaining credence in Washington security circles - US action would provoke a major Iranian response, perhaps in the form of moves to cut off Gulf oil supplies, providing a trigger for air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities and even its armed forces.

Senior officials believe Mr Bush's inner circle has decided he does not want to leave office without first ensuring that Iran is not capable of developing a nuclear weapon.

The intelligence source said: "No one outside that tight circle knows what is going to happen." But he said that within the CIA "many if not most officials believe that diplomacy is failing" and that "top Pentagon brass believes the same".

He said: "A strike will probably follow a gradual escalation. Over the next few weeks and months the US will build tensions and evidence around Iranian activities in Iraq."

The vice president is said to advocate the use of bunker-busting tactical nuclear weapons against Iran's nuclear sites. His allies dispute this, but Mr Cheney is understood to be lobbying for air strikes if sites can be identified where Revolutionary Guard units are training Shia militias.

Given that an insane and blood-crazed bunch of maniacs are planning yet again to conduct an unprovoked attack - this time using nuclear weapons - on a sovereign state, I was wondering what the Americans on the board actually feel would be an appropriate stance for themselves and for Iran to react with?

I am not interested in hearing from the Stepford-drones who have been panting for this ever since the orgasm of Iraq wore off (you know who you are), I am just wondering what the general opinion would be now it appears to becoming a reality.

In a connected note, I think the French will be in for a shock. They opposed Iraq - and rightly so - and at least had some integrity. with the advent of Sarkozy it seems that they too have been co-opted into the New Order.

France is now being used as the UK was as a mouthpiece (useful idiot?) in the drumbeat lead-up to the slaughter: France warning of war with Iran.

Of course part of that deal would be to put troops on the ground - the US will need some cannon fodder - so I wonder how chirpy they'll be when they start dying over there?

As for me, I think we should get on with it. The Bush cabals are sick psychopaths and unless they are stopped they will only cause more death and destruction. I honestly now view it the same as stopping Hitler; a cause worth dying for to make a safer world.

If it has to be Iran that does this then so be it - I think it will be ugly though because the bullies don't like a straight fair fight. Thoughts?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #2 of 309
I don't see how this would be possible without the draft being reintroduced.

A limited air campaign? No ground invasion?

Not that I support such actions, but without a proper air force, Iran doesn't stand a chance against non-ground incursions. That being said, this sort of action would likely bring Russia into the mix and that is something I don't think Cheney and gang are actually willing to do...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #3 of 309
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

I don't see how this would be possible without the draft being reintroduced.

A limited air campaign? No ground invasion?

Not that I support such actions, but without a proper air force, Iran doesn't stand a chance against non-ground incursions. That being said, this sort of action would likely bring Russia into the mix and that is something I don't think Cheney and gang are actually willing to do...

As I understand it, the plan is to launch air attacks on what they will claim are 'nuclear facilities' - in reality though, the operation would be to cripple the majority of military infrastructure.

Perhaps that is as far as the plan goes and no invasion is planned - I can quite imagine that Bush and Co might believe that this will 'show Iran who is boss' and that will be the end of it.

But I do not think they remotely understand the Iranian (or Iraqi or Afghani) mindset. That's normal, why should they? The problem is that with this admin they are so arrogant they actually think they don't need to.

It will escalate - either by intention or mistake - and then the US will have to respond.

I have no doubt now whatsoever that they will kick this off - probably in January or shortly thereafter.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #4 of 309
must be the reason 'whathisname?' was predicting a rise in Bush's popularity come the end of the year.
post #5 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

I don't see how this would be possible without the draft being reintroduced.

A limited air campaign? No ground invasion?

Not that I support such actions, but without a proper air force, Iran doesn't stand a chance against non-ground incursions. That being said, this sort of action would likely bring Russia into the mix and that is something I don't think Cheney and gang are actually willing to do...

From one Washington Post war nerd..

Quote:
The next war would begin with an intense air and naval campaign. Let's say you're planning the conflict as part of the staff of the Joint Chiefs. Your list of targets isn't that long -- only a few dozen nuclear sites -- but you can't risk retaliation from Tehran. So you allow 21 days for the bombardment, to be safe; you'd aim to strike every command-and-control facility, radar site, missile site, storage site, airfield, ship and base in Iran. To prevent world oil prices from soaring, you'd have to try to protect every oil and gas rig, and the big ports and load points. You'd need to use B-2s and lots of missiles up front, plus many small amphibious task forces to take out particularly tough targets along the coast, with manned and unmanned air reconnaissance. And don't forget the Special Forces, to penetrate deep inside Iran, call in airstrikes and drag the evidence of Tehran's nuclear ambitions out into the open for a world that's understandably skeptical of U.S. assertions that yet another Gulf rogue is on the brink of getting the bomb.

This is all talk. There will have to be a "Gulf of Tonkin" or "9-11" event for this to happen. Or a complete surprise attack on their northern operating reactors.
post #6 of 309
if you were Iran under threat of attack, wouldn't you just rig all the oil fields with explosives and detonate them when the attack comes. That would surely doubly cripple the west.

One, oil prices will skyrocket because of market nervousness of an attack on Iran, Two, blowing the oil fields will put upwards pressure on the oil price even more.

Bush could actually be the catalyst that brings about the fall of western civilization.
post #7 of 309
Non-western civilization would crumble as well -- this would be the end to all modern civilizations...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #8 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Non-western civilization would crumble as well -- this would be the end to all modern civilizations...

Ain't this just what the Jack Van Impe's of the world have been "prophe-sighing" about for quit some time? Ain't this just 'according to the book'?

Paz
What we obtain too cheap, we esteem to lightly...it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Thomas Paine
Reply
What we obtain too cheap, we esteem to lightly...it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Thomas Paine
Reply
post #9 of 309
I don't see it. The US has not the will to do the damage required to win such a war.

Of course there are plans. The military leadership would be derelict not to have plans. There are several other plans. Pick a country. There is a plan.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #10 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by rufusswan View Post

Ain't this just what the Jack Van Impe's of the world have been "prophe-sighing" about for quit some time? Ain't this just 'according to the book'?

Paz

cant wait! I'll be rotting in hell with fellows, dmz, cuilla and the like, but I really hope im a fly on the wall when they're told to depart from me, i never knew you. That would bring me endless joy - but that is why i'll be with them.

It wont be the end of civilization at all, the meek inherit the earth remember. These are the people who have nothing today. There are alot of these people out there, we just dont notice them really. You cannot take anything away from people who already have nothing.

Life will go on - and the cycle will begin again.
post #11 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by rufusswan View Post

Ain't this just what the Jack Van Impe's of the world have been "prophe-sighing" about for quit some time? Ain't this just 'according to the book'?

Paz

well, the book interpreted in such a way is crap. if it appears to be identical, it is only self-fulfilling prophesy of the worst order.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #12 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

well, the book interpreted in such a way is crap. if it appears to be identical, it is only self-fulfilling prophesy of the worst order.

even if it did become self-fullfilling prophecy of the worst order - it would still happen, so the prophecy would become true! - isn't that neat that something written years ago could come to pass, simply because it was written?
post #13 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

even if it did become self-fullfilling prophecy of the worst order - it would still happen, so the prophecy would become true! - isn't that neat that something written years ago could come to pass, simply because it was written?


neat? no.

a sad statement on the self-destructive drives of humanity? certainly.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #14 of 309
There are approximately ~200K US military forces in the ME, ~170K in (and supporting) the Iraq effort, see Multinational force in Iraq.

Quote:
As of September 2007, there were around 168,000 Army, Navy, Coast Guard, Air Force, and Marine Corps personnel deployed to the western, northern and central regions of Iraq.

Quote:
An additional 30,000 troops are deployed in the Gulf region.

Quote:
In addition to regular troops there are 35,000-120,000 private military contractors in Iraq.

So basically, the US has the ground forces and land based airfields to allow the Air Force and Army/Marines to go into western Iran, secure the eastern Iraq border, and take out Iranian forces in that region.

Also don't forget the US Navy, expect several of the carrier battle groups to be stationed offshore to launch attacks and secure oil production facilities in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

Also, expect US ground forces to secure the western border of Iraq/Syria.

Out of necessity Turkey, Kuwait, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia will also secure their borders.

Also add Israel to the mix for some additional punch.

Expect massive, and I do mean massive (much bigger than GW's I and II) air strikes from land and sea bases.

Expect Bunker busters, and if necessary, Nuclear bunker busters and small yield tactical nukes.

Some other salient facts are in order;

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 pretty much gives the POTUS free reign to attack anywhere for up to 90 days.

See, for example, the Invasion of Grenada in 1983, the United States invasion of Panama in 1989, and Operation Restore Hope in Somalia in 1992.

Signed,
Dr. Strangelove
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #15 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

neat? no.

a sad statement on the self-destructive drives of humanity? certainly.

yes, but sooner or later, you have to be honest and admit that is who and what we are. After all, were all just animals. Nature keeps animals in check because they have limited intelligence to be able to destroy things - they still do, but not with any fundamental intelligence or meaning.

our problem is that we have cheated the simplistic equilibrium rules of nature by having larger brains. If you like, our particular thread of evolution gave us a temporary advantage for survival and reproduction, but ultimately we cannot adapt quickly enough to the environment (of there being an enormous population explosion and limited resources) and so we will die off.
post #16 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

must be the reason 'whathisname?' was predicting a rise in Bush's popularity come the end of the year.

Yeah, because an attack on Iran would be sucked up by the American people right now...

Even the American sheeple would crucify Bush if he tried it before he started the "WMD" style targeted lying. Believe me, that'll be the next step. If not some "real" terrorist attack that they blame on Iran sometime in the next few months. Dirty bomb anyone?
post #17 of 309
Do you believe in Israel's right to self defence as well?

Thought so. \
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #18 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

if you were Iran under threat of attack, wouldn't you just rig all the oil fields with explosives and detonate them when the attack comes. That would surely doubly cripple the west.

One, oil prices will skyrocket because of market nervousness of an attack on Iran, Two, blowing the oil fields will put upwards pressure on the oil price even more.

Bush could actually be the catalyst that brings about the fall of western civilization.

Um NO! They are actually more dependent on oil than we are. If you had one main source of income would you blow it up? No you wouldn't.
post #19 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

There are approximately ~200K US military forces in the ME, ~170K in (and supporting) the Iraq effort, see Multinational force in Iraq.
Signed,
Dr. Strangelove

And their opponent:

Military branches: Islamic Republic of Iran regular forces (includes Ground Forces, Navy, Air and Air Defense Forces), Revolutionary Guards (includes Ground, Air, Navy, Qods, and Basij-mobilization-forces), Law Enforcement Forces

Military manpower - military age: 21 years of age

Military manpower - availability: males age 15-49: 17,762,030 (2000 est.)

Military manpower - fit for military service: males age 15-49: 10,545,869 (2000 est.)

Military manpower - reaching military age annually: males: 801,260 (2000 est.)

Military expenditures - dollar figure: $5.787 billion (FY98/99)

Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 2.9% (FY98/99)

This I believe includes the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution

and the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force

Taking on Iran's air force

Quote:
The stand-off with Iran over its nuclear ambitions was just beginning while I was embedded with Marine All-Weather Fighter Attack Squadron 332 at Al Asad air base in Iraq. More than once the fliers lamented that they'd probably be back in the States by the time the "inevitable" bombing of Iran got underway. One conversation went something like this:

Me: Oh God. We can't afford a war with Iran

Aviator #1: Whatever. We'd kick their asses.

Aviator #2: No, they've got F-14s!

Aviator #3: Yeah, my wife [deployed to northern Iraq] saw one!

Aviator #1: We'd still kick their asses.

Me: Oh God.

If, God help us, the stand-off does turn violent, U.S. air power will play a critical role. For months pundits have predicted a massive bombing campaign to target Iran's nuclear facilities, and perhaps even to attempt regime change.

But don't expect Iran's air force to roll over like Iraq's did in 1991 and again in 2003. Unlike the Iraqi air force, the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) appears to be well-armed, well-trained and eager for a fight.

Wouldn't say "superior" but wouldn't say "puny" either. Expect a military that will fight and fight to the last man.
post #20 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

And their opponent:

Military branches: Islamic Republic of Iran regular forces (includes Ground Forces, Navy, Air and Air Defense Forces), Revolutionary Guards (includes Ground, Air, Navy, Qods, and Basij-mobilization-forces), Law Enforcement Forces

Military manpower - military age: 21 years of age

Military manpower - availability: males age 15-49: 17,762,030 (2000 est.)

Military manpower - fit for military service: males age 15-49: 10,545,869 (2000 est.)

Military manpower - reaching military age annually: males: 801,260 (2000 est.)

Military expenditures - dollar figure: $5.787 billion (FY98/99)

Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 2.9% (FY98/99)

This I believe includes the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution

and the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force

Taking on Iran's air force



Wouldn't say "superior" but wouldn't say "puny" either. Expect a military that will fight and fight to the last man.

You really do need to stop watching Top Gun, that's so 60's, technologically speaking!

It's like comparing a 1G iPod to today's iPods!

Consider;

F-22 Raptor

F/A-18 Hornet

F-16 Fighting Falcon

F-15 Eagle

F-117 Nighthawk

B-2 Spirit

B-1 Lancer

and even the venerable B-52 Stratofortress, OMFG a 50 year old plane still seeing service!

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the F-14 Tomcat is;

Quote:
It was retired from the U.S. Navy fleet on 22 September 2006, having been replaced by the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. As of 2007, it remains in service only with the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force.

Quote:
The first F-14 arrived in January 1976, modified only by the removal of classified avionics components, but fitted with the TF-30-414 engines.

see Iran F-14's for more enlightenment.

Quote:
The remaining intact US Navy F-14 aircraft have been stored at the "Boneyard" of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona. These F-14s are currently being disabled by being shredded to prevent parts from being acquired by hostile states.

Quote:
In January 2007, it was announced by the US Department of Defense that sales of spare parts for F-14s would be suspended, due to concerns that they could end up in Iran. It announced that the decision was taken "given the current situation in Iran". On 2 July 2007, the remaining American F-14s were being shredded to ensure that F-14 spare parts would not be acquired by governments considered hostile to the US.

[CENTER]

[/CENTER]
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #21 of 309
Thread Starter 
One more word: Shahab 3
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #22 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

You really do need to stop watching Top Gun, that's so 60's, technologically speaking!

Yeah, yeah yeah... I'm not saying we couldn't wipe them off the face of the Earth. There will be a cost greater than Iraq to accomplish it though. Don't forget the Soviet Union's "successful" campaign against the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan.

Also, the F-14s will be replaced with 250 advanced long-range Sukhoi-30 fighter jets from (wait for it) Russia.
post #23 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Yeah, yeah yeah... I'm not saying we couldn't wipe them off the face of the Earth. There will be a cost greater than Iraq to accomplish it though. Don't forget the Soviet Union's "successful" campaign against the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan.

Also, the F-14s will be replaced with 250 advanced long-range Sukhoi-30 fighter jets from (wait for it) Russia.

I've never spoken of this as being an extended GROUND campaign.

Basically, secure the air space (that's an easy one), secure the sea lanes (again very easy), secure the ME oil (ditto, other than Iran), and secure the Iraqi borders on the west (Iran) and east (Syria). That's it, other then bomb Iran back to the stone age, that is!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #24 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yeah, because an attack on Iran would be sucked up by the American people right now...

Even the American sheeple would crucify Bush if he tried it before he started the "WMD" style targeted lying. Believe me, that'll be the next step. If not some "real" terrorist attack that they blame on Iran sometime in the next few months. Dirty bomb anyone?


Now here's a reasonable look at things.

Also even events like you suggest to set this in motion would be highly suspect at this time. So I don't think the american people would just openly buy it.

So if he tries this it could be the straw that breaks the camel's back. I mean they already really don't trust him.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #25 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

I've never spoken of this as being an extended GROUND campaign.

Basically, secure the air space (that's an easy one), secure the sea lanes (again very easy), secure the ME oil (ditto, other than Iran), and secure the Iraqi borders on the west (Iran) and east (Syria). That's it, other then bomb Iran back to the stone age, that is!

But Russia won't take this sitting on their pudgy hands. Expect some serious repercussions from Russia and China. This administration was saying Iraq was going to go "swimmingly". Look where that got us...
post #26 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

But Russia won't take this sitting on their pudgy hands. Expect some serious repercussions from Russia and China. This administration was saying Iraq was going to go "swimmingly". Look where that got us...

I'm just playing devil's advocate. I'm just trying to think like those loopy noecon artists, no telling what they all will be up to before "Chimpy has left the building!"
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #27 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

I'm just playing devil's advocate. I'm just trying to think like those loopy noecon artists, no telling what they all will be up to before "Chimpy has left the building!"

I don't know, now that Blackwater has "left the building" they'll probably be sent to Iran now.
post #28 of 309
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

I'm just playing devil's advocate. I'm just trying to think like those loopy noecon artists, no telling what they all will be up to before "Chimpy has left the building!"

Chimpy might not be leaving the monkey-house just yet...didn't he pass some law that he can continue if something 'really bad' happens?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #29 of 309
Iran has only ONE gasoline refinery. A blockade and destruction of the ONE refinery will bring Iran to a complete shutdown in two weeks.
post #30 of 309
When the mainstream media start to feature the upcoming war against Iran as if it's an inevitability, what position will they take? Will they once again exhibit their usual standards of cowardly administration lapdoggishness, and feature an endless procession of retired generals, White House personnel, military analysts, neoconservative commentators/Islamophobes, Pentagon officials, as if the notion of going to war against Iran is a patriotic, pro-American stance (I know it's ridiculous, but that's how they see it)..... or.... will the MSM, just for once, give equal billing to both sides of the argument?

My guess is no, unfortunately. We will see a media "Iraq" deja vu, with respect to Iran, with the predictable string of pro-administration shills and weasels being softsoaped by the likes of "Wolf" Blitzer. The opposing side will get get a token airing, <1% of the airtime of the pro-war crew, and will feature, for example, a longhaired hippy, on stilts, singing a John Lennon tune, wearing a tied dyed tshirt, or a bunch of FBI-paid stooges disguised as Black Block anti-war activists, lobbing rocks through McDonalds windows on cue for primetime television.

Just wait and see.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #31 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Chimpy might not be leaving the monkey-house just yet...didn't he pass some law that he can continue if something 'really bad' happens?

Noooo...... is that true? \
post #32 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

When the mainstream media start to feature the upcoming war against Iran as if it's an inevitability, what position will they take?
Just wait and see.

BBC news...


"to prepare for the worst... and the worst means war"


So, is France taking over where Britain, er Blair left off?



Telegraph.co.uk...


Bush setting America up for war with Iran


Quote:
Senior American intelligence and defence officials believe that President George W Bush and his inner circle are taking steps to place America on the path to war with Iran, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt.
\t
Pentagon planners have developed a list of up to 2,000 bombing targets in Iran, amid growing fears among serving officers that diplomatic efforts to slow Iran's nuclear weapons programme are doomed to fail.

Pentagon and CIA officers say they believe that the White House has begun a carefully calibrated programme of escalation that could lead to a military showdown with Iran.

Now it has emerged that Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, who has been pushing for a diplomatic solution, is prepared to settle her differences with Vice-President Dick Cheney and sanction military action.

Well Britain's sending the message out...
post #33 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akumulator View Post

Noooo...... is that true? \

Maybe.

New presidential directive gives Bush dictatorial power

Quote:
The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, signed on May 9, 2007 declares that in the event of a catastrophic event, George W. Bush can become what is best described as "a dictator":

"The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government."

This directive, completely unnoticed by the media, and given no scrutiny by Congress, literally gives the White House unprecedented dictatorial power over the government and the country, bypassing the US Congress and obliterating the separation of powers. The directive also placed the Secretary of Homeland Security in charge of domestic security.
post #34 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by mydo View Post

Um NO! They are actually more dependent on oil than we are. If you had one main source of income would you blow it up? No you wouldn't.

um no, if you're about to be annihilated, you do whatever is necessary to defend yourself, you cause economic catastrophe in your attacker that makes the attack pointless. You take a small term hit on your own economy.

Afterall, the oil is still going to be there under Iranian soil when the hostilities cease. You make sure you are still in control of your country.
post #35 of 309
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystic View Post

Iran has only ONE gasoline refinery. A blockade and destruction of the ONE refinery will bring Iran to a complete shutdown in two weeks.

So that would be an argument for why they legitimately need nuclear power then.....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #36 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

So that would be an argument for why they legitimately need nuclear power then.....

No, it isn't. Iranian power plants run off their incredible excess natural gas capacity.

One gasoline refinery has nothing to do with their need for nuclear power - it just has to do with their low gasoline usage, I suppose.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #37 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK View Post

Afterall, the oil is still going to be there under Iranian soil when the hostilities cease. You make sure you are still in control of your country.

Yeah, you'll need a diamond drill though to bore through the GLASS PARKING LOT.

post #38 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

So that would be an argument for why they legitimately need nuclear power then.....

Yep, fur shure.

As everyone knows, the major byproduct of nuclear fission is 87 octane petrol.

Paz
What we obtain too cheap, we esteem to lightly...it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Thomas Paine
Reply
What we obtain too cheap, we esteem to lightly...it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Thomas Paine
Reply
post #39 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akumulator View Post

Noooo...... is that true? \

I don't see that as a relevant question on your part. You need to make pompous overblown accusations in this forum, not seek answers.
post #40 of 309
my point:
-war is bad
-but, i don't like the thought of iran having a nuke (and a trigger-happy ahmadinejad at the button)



peve

and by the way...
no. english is not my native language.
Reply
peve

and by the way...
no. english is not my native language.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › War with Iran inevitable: do you support Iran's right to self-defence?