0 Hour has arrived with Iran

[geauxtohell]

Because fucking moron we are pledged to protect the GCC states, SA, Israel and our allies in general.

None of which mandate a first strike or military action to pre-empt a nuclear Iran.

Unlike flavor-of the nanosecond fucktards like you, embracing ron paul's latest ramblings about not getting involved in foreign entanglements, sensible, rational americans know how important it is to defend our allies, and to maintain world order from crumbling into chaos.

1.) I don't support Ron Paul.
2.) "Not getting involved in foreign entanglements" is hardly "flavor of the nanosecond".

Israel is picking a fight? You mean they are guilty of iran surrounding it with terrorist groups firing rockets into their cities? Gosh you are fucking stupid.

If Israel attacks Iran, they are picking a fight.

Serves you right, but at least he has a sense of american agreements and responsibilities, more so than much of the dung passing for leftists and ron paul/lyndon larouche acolytes today.

No, I am just sick of Americans sacrificing their lives and limbs to secure someone security for someone else. I am also sick of us bankrolling wars when we already can't pay our own debts.

If Israel is attacked, I am in favor of supporting our allies. I fail to see how Iran going nuclear equates to an "attack" on Israel.

Which is why I've called for regime change there for oh, 15 years...

Good for you. So what? You are just another asshole on a message board. You don't make policy in this country.

Correct me if I am wrong, but you've never carried a rifle for this country have you?

I find it ironic (but not surprising) that so many of the hawks in this country couldn't be troubled to actually put their own asses on the line to back up their tough talk.

And you know this how? Are you in khameini's inner circle? You don't know a fucking thing.

No. I know Iran is pragmatic enough to know that attacking Israel will ensure their destruction.

In a two outcome world, we either start war to prevent war or threaten destruction to prevent destruction.

Which one seems like a more practical foreign policy?

At any rate, Israel has their own arsenal of nukes. They don't need out nukes to obliterate Iran. However, they are also pragmatic enough to know that any nation that employs a first strike nuclear attack will be viewed as a villain by the world and will lose any support and risk their own demise.

So all of your insults aside, you have yet to make a convincing point for why we need to throw our men and women into another meat grinder for another decade.

 

[pgm]

Hint: It was NEVER about electricity. Their goal all along has been warheads.

Wake up.

Iran does have a legitimate interest in enriching uranium for medical use (20% enrichment). Of course, once it gets past 20%, there are no more civilian uses. It's a lot easier to go from 20% to 95% than it is to go from 0-20%, so that's why people have always suspected it was a ploy. Now, evidence is much stronger that it is so.

 

[Katzndogz]

Iran has a leader who believes he has a mandate from allah to start nuclear war. That's all he cares about. He doesn't care how many people die, or how many Iranian children die, they are going to paradise anyway.

 

[Navy1960]

Lady, I mean this with the utmost respect, If these are your feelings, would you be willing in a War with Iran to go to the Recruiters and sign up?, If not would you be willing to do the same with your son or daughter, or perhaps advocate for a draft?,

More ron paul-deflective nonsense BS. So does a person need to be willing to be a plumber, or they are not allowed to fucking have their sink fixed? WTF kind of an argument is that? I'm unwilling to climb a tree, so I guess I'm not allowed to call the local FD to get a fucking cat down...where the fuck do these morons come from?

The armed forced are volunteer, if they didn't feel they'd be willing to fight a war - then they should not have fucking joined in the first place.

And BTW dipshit - I did fucking serve a long, long time - and I'd re-enlist if it meant I could dish out to the iranian regime the shit they've been for the last 30 years.

You missed the entire point of that post, perhaps this will help, the point is that it's very easy for those who have nothing to lose to commit the US Military to battle and if it is that easy then you put this nation in a state of perpetual war, why? because for the most part no one in the nation except the war fighter has to suffer for it. In the past when this nation went to war, the people had a part in it, and in so doing knew that there was a SACRIFICE to be made. That sacrifice was made , by taxes, the draft, rationing, shortages, and yes the biggest one's the sacrifice of its sons and daughters. Those that say, hey we have a volunteer force are correct, but if they wish to commit these young men and women to battle on their behalf no matter where that is, then they should be willing to make the sacrifice here to pay for it. If you did serve in the Military you would know what I am talking about and btw, there are many many volunteer groups that could use your help if you can't re-enlist.

 

[Navy1960]

The Navy’s fleet ballistic missile submarines, often referred to as “Boomers,” serve as an undetectable launch platform for intercontinental missiles. They are designed specifically for stealth and the precision delivery of nuclear warheads.

Ohio class SSBNs cam carry up to 24 submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) with multiple independently-targeted warheads. The SSBN’s strategic weapon os tje Trident II D5 missile, which provides inceased range and accuracy over the now out-of-service Trident I C4 missile.

The US Navy -- Fact File: Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarines - SSBN

We have 14 of these that carry about 50% of our strike capability, so when you talk about Iran and it's building a nuclear warhead keep in mind, that we are not exactly toothless here. I am very sure that the Iranian regime all bluster aside is very well aware of this.

 

[geauxtohell]

Iran has a leader who believes he has a mandate from allah to start nuclear war. That's all he cares about. He doesn't care how many people die, or how many Iranian children die, they are going to paradise anyway.

If you buy that crap, I have a bridge to sell you in Arizona.

"Mandate from Allah" my ass. Just like OBL "welcomed death", which explains why he hid out in a compound in Pakistan for 10 years (and would have done so indefinitely had we not found him).

"Matyr-dom" is for the suckers who are too stupid to figure out the racket. The big wigs, like big wigs anywhere, very much want to remain alive and in power.

 

[daveman]

Hint: It was NEVER about electricity. Their goal all along has been warheads.

Wake up.

Iran does have a legitimate interest in enriching uranium for medical use (20% enrichment). Of course, once it gets past 20%, there are no more civilian uses. It's a lot easier to go from 20% to 95% than it is to go from 0-20%, so that's why people have always suspected it was a ploy. Now, evidence is much stronger that it is so.

If Iran vaporizes Tel Aviv, morons like franco will insist Israel did it herself to justify an attack in Iran.

Guaranteed.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Does McCain still want to bomb, bomb, bomb Iran?

Who knows, I damn sure wish we had a President with the Balls to do it. We invade Afghanistan to get Terrorist who kill 3000 Americans, We invade Iraq to Topple a Man that really posed little threat to us, or his Neighbors, we attack Libya to Remove a man that Posed 0 Threat to the US.

But were not going to Bomb a few Key Sites in Iran to avoid the Unthinkable from a clearly Hostile, and Radical Country?

I swear to god if we really sit by and allow Iran to get Nukes after spending Blood and Treasure on Wars that involved far less risk to us, then we deserve every damn thing we get.

It's Idiotic.

I said before we ever Invaded Iraq that I didn't understand why we were invading Iraq, Iran was the Real Threat, And still is.

Obama just aided in handing over an oil rich country to the Jihadi's (Libya), and just completely insulted Israel's leader, on top of stabbing Israel in the back since he took the Presidency.....Does anyone actually think he gives a shit about Israel, and will have the balls to do something about this growing problem?

As long as that inept MOFO is occupying the oval office, Israel will be left to their own devices.

 

[Navy1960]

In general, the Israeli Arrow is a more advanced weapon than the Patriot and possesses far more range, undertaking high altitude interceptions and covering a wide area (est. 90km/ 54 mile range, maximum altitude 30 miles/ 50 km for Arrow 2) as a Theater Missile Defense (TMD) system. Unlike the USA’s THAAD, PAC-3, or SM-3 which all use “hit to kill” technology, Israel’s Arrow relies on a directed fragmentation warhead to destroy enemy missiles. It can work in conjunction with a number of systems, but its main Israeli partner is the Green Pine long-range, ground-based fire control radar. The system and its engagements are controlled by the mobile Citron Tree battle management center. Since the launchers are also mobile, and the radars are semi-mobile, the system is resistant to pre-emptive strikes if good discipline is maintained.
Israel’s Arrow Theater Missile Defense

Israel is hardly defenseless,

The air force has approved a set of upgrades for its Patriot missile defense system that will boost its interception capabilities, IAF sources say.

The upgrades will include the installation of new software as well as hardware changes to the radar system that accompanies the system, which Israel first received from the United States ahead of the First Gulf War in 1991.

The upgrades will enable the IAF to one day receive PAC-3 missiles, a more advanced version of the interceptor currently used by Israel that is already in service in the United States.
Israel upgrading Patriot missile defense system

The U.S. is still very involved in the defense of Israel and Israel has a highly developed internal defense industry as well. It would be very unwise for Iran or any of the Middle East States to attack Israel with Nuclear or Bio-Chem weapons, as it would be met with a massive response. Israel has more of these type's of weapons than all of the Middle East states put together as well as a highly developed defense system. While it's easy for Iran's leaders to pop off and bluster to stir up the faithful when it comes to Israel and shoot rockets across the border, they are very well aware of the fact that any such moves would be met in kind. Nations like Iran who are on the path to develop Nuclear weapons are doing so in order to use it as a hedge to prevent interference in their antics or make other nations take pause.

By the late 1990s the U.S. Intelligence Community estimated that Israel possessed between 75-130 weapons, based on production estimates. The stockpile would certainly include warheads for mobile Jericho-1 and Jericho-2 missiles, as well as bombs for Israeli aircraft, and may include other tactical nuclear weapons of various types. Some published estimates even claimed that Israel might have as many as 400 nuclear weapons by the late 1990s. We believe these numbers are exaggerated, and that Israel's nuclear weapons inventory may include less than 100 nuclear weapons. Stockpiled plutonium could be used to build additional weapons if so decided.
Nuclear Weapons - Israel

In conclusion, Israel is not a nation to be taken lightly and am quite sure that even though Iran's leaders have a long history of bluster and back door funding of terrorist groups they would be very unwise to push contact directly with Israel regardless of US intervention. However, we have and still do support Israel.

 

[geauxtohell]

Hint: It was NEVER about electricity. Their goal all along has been warheads.

Wake up.

Iran does have a legitimate interest in enriching uranium for medical use (20% enrichment). Of course, once it gets past 20%, there are no more civilian uses. It's a lot easier to go from 20% to 95% than it is to go from 0-20%, so that's why people have always suspected it was a ploy. Now, evidence is much stronger that it is so.

If Iran vaporizes Tel Aviv, morons like franco will insist Israel did it herself to justify an attack in Iran.

Guaranteed.

I will personally be insisting that we turn Iran into a glass factory. Iran is not going to vaporize Tel Aviv. This whole notion that we have to start war to prevent nuclear war is idiotic. Nuclear weapons are and have always been a deterrence unto themselves. That is why Iran wants them. They know that nuclear weapons make them invasion proof. I would chalk that up to paranoia, but considering our recent foreys in the region, they probably have a little bit of justification to their paranoia.

The nuclear weapon issue in Iran isn't important because Iran might use them (they won't), it's important because it will change the politics of the region.

 

[daveman]

Iran does have a legitimate interest in enriching uranium for medical use (20% enrichment). Of course, once it gets past 20%, there are no more civilian uses. It's a lot easier to go from 20% to 95% than it is to go from 0-20%, so that's why people have always suspected it was a ploy. Now, evidence is much stronger that it is so.

If Iran vaporizes Tel Aviv, morons like franco will insist Israel did it herself to justify an attack in Iran.

Guaranteed.

I will personally be insisting that we turn Iran into a glass factory. Iran is not going to vaporize Tel Aviv. This whole notion that we have to start war to prevent nuclear war is idiotic. Nuclear weapons are and have always been a deterrence unto themselves. That is why Iran wants them. They know that nuclear weapons make them invasion proof. I would chalk that up to paranoia, but considering our recent foreys in the region, they probably have a little bit of justification to their paranoia.

The nuclear weapon issue in Iran isn't important because Iran might use them (they won't), it's important because it will change the politics of the region.

You're speaking as if the leadership in Iran is sane.

There is no evidence that's the case.

Funny how people will trust religious fanatics in other nations but insist American conservative Christians are terrorists bent on establishing a theocracy.

 

[pgm]

Actually, I believe the Iranian regime is cold, calculating and ruthless, but I hardly think that's in its defense. Most of Iran's actions can easily be reduced to realpolitik calculations.

 

[rhodescholar]

Review & Outlook: If Iran Gets the Bomb - WSJ.com

NOVEMBER 11, 2011
If Iran Gets the Bomb
The world immediately becomes a far more dangerous place

"This is a regime that took 52 American diplomats hostage and dared the Carter Administration to do something about it. It used its surrogates in Beirut to kill 258 American diplomats and Marines in 1983. The FBI believes it was behind the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 U.S. airmen. It supplied IEDs to anti-American militias in Iraq, killing hundreds of U.S. soldiers. And only last month, the Obama Administration accused Iran of seeking to blow up the Saudi ambassador in a Washington, D.C., restaurant.

These acts were perpetrated by Tehran without a nuclear umbrella. What would Iran's behavior look like if it had one?"

=====================================

This sums it all up...

 

[geauxtohell]

You're speaking as if the leadership in Iran is sane.

I refuse to double down on this silly notion that the regime in Iran is inherently insane and therefore we have to go to war to prevent them. That line of logic is, unto itself, insane.

A cop doesn't fire at will on an insane patient by virtue of them being insane. That is not seen justification for lethal force unto itself.

The leadership in Iran is indeed sane and wants to do what any government wants to do: ensure it's continued survival.

We are extremely efficient at removing civilian governments and infrastructure. We are not good at the long fight (which would come after "regime change").

The Mullahcracy and their puppet knows it. They can threaten and saber rattle all they want, at the end of the day the knowledge that they will be destroyed (and downward pressure from China and Russia) will keep them in line.

People have long argued that the leadership in North Korea is "insane" too. Yet, no nukes have been tossed by them either.

As I said, nuclear weapons unto themselves are a deterrence and Israel has 200 of them.

There is no evidence that's the case.

Funny how people will trust religious fanatics in other nations but insist American conservative Christians are terrorists bent on establishing a theocracy.

Funny how this has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

 

[pgm]

These acts were perpetrated by Tehran without a nuclear umbrella. What would Iran's behavior look like if it had one?"

That's my concern too.

 

[geauxtohell]

Review & Outlook: If Iran Gets the Bomb - WSJ.com

NOVEMBER 11, 2011
If Iran Gets the Bomb
The world immediately becomes a far more dangerous place

"This is a regime that took 52 American diplomats hostage and dared the Carter Administration to do something about it. It used its surrogates in Beirut to kill 258 American diplomats and Marines in 1983. The FBI believes it was behind the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 U.S. airmen. It supplied IEDs to anti-American militias in Iraq, killing hundreds of U.S. soldiers. And only last month, the Obama Administration accused Iran of seeking to blow up the Saudi ambassador in a Washington, D.C., restaurant.

These acts were perpetrated by Tehran without a nuclear umbrella. What would Iran's behavior look like if it had one?"

=====================================

This sums it all up...

So now the argument has shifted from a mushroom cloud to an emboldened Iran?

I suppose the issue has lost a degree of urgency then. Here's a novel thought, continue to lean on Iran and support the people who are fighting for democracy over there. If recent history has taught us anything, it's that regime change only works when it comes from within.

 

[pgm]

So now the argument has shifted from a mushroom cloud to an emboldened Iran?

It depends on who you were talking about. My concern has always been about an embolden Iran and a regional arms race. I don't fear the rationality of Iran any more than I do North Korea and Pakistan. But those who fear the mushroom cloud are still talking about the mushroom cloud.

I suppose the issue has lost a degree of urgency then. Here's a novel thought, continue to lean on Iran and support the people who are fighting for democracy over there. If recent history has taught us anything, it's that regime change only works when it comes from within.

Well, I agree with that. But you have to bet on the right horses and give them the proper degree of support. You don't want to encourage the Green Movement to rise up only to have it brutally crushed (a la Iraq's Shi'as post Gulf War). You also don't want to publicly back the Green Movement too strong and have it stick of imperialism (the death nail in Iranian politics). You also don't want to back strange, terrorist cults like the MEK.

All the short-term trends favor the regime heavily, but the long-term trends are working against it. Iran may have gotten its population growth under control, but there are still tons of young people who are less religious and have less faith in the regime. You have more people who favor reaching out to the West. And, for the first time ever, you have public disagreements among conservatives. That's a recipe for change.

 

[geauxtohell]

So now the argument has shifted from a mushroom cloud to an emboldened Iran?

It depends on who you were talking about. My concern has always been about an embolden Iran and a regional arms race. I don't fear the rationality of Iran any more than I do North Korea and Pakistan. But those who fear the mushroom cloud are still talking about the mushroom cloud.

I suppose the issue has lost a degree of urgency then. Here's a novel thought, continue to lean on Iran and support the people who are fighting for democracy over there. If recent history has taught us anything, it's that regime change only works when it comes from within.

Well, I agree with that. But you have to bet on the right horses and give them the proper degree of support. You don't want to encourage the Green Movement to rise up only to have it brutally crushed (a la Iraq's Shi'as post Gulf War). You also don't want to publicly back the Green Movement too strong and have it stick of imperialism (the death nail in Iranian politics). You also don't want to back strange, terrorist cults like the MEK.

All the short-term trends favor the regime heavily, but the long-term trends are working against it. Iran may have gotten its population growth under control, but there are still tons of young people who are less religious and have less faith in the regime. You have more people who favor reaching out to the West. And, for the first time ever, you have public disagreements among conservatives. That's a recipe for change.

I agree with all that. I think we can subtly affect change over there and I don't want to see Iran get the bomb.

However, an airstrike is an act of war. If Israel does it, then it will almost certainly prompt a regional war that could end up being atrocious and we would likely be drug into it. The end result would likely be a "Holy War". I guess that would be one way to solve the Isreali/Palastinian issue.

If we do it, it will make Iran a victim and we will lose face. There is also the possibility that Iran will retaliate and we will be drug into a ground war there.

The people who think that we have some sort of magical surgical air strike at our disposal that will quickly solve this problem are engaged in tactical wishful thinking.

We tend to have too much faith in the power of our Air Force. Nothing really happens until you control the ground.

Just ask Donald Rumsfeld who thought we would win Iraq in 6 months due to our technological superiority.

 

[Si modo]

I supported Irans nuclear program for power, then they found those enrichment facilities and all my sympathy went out the window.

How naive are you leftists? Honest to God.. This deranged megalomaniac (AchmadinJIHAD) has stated UNEQUIVOCALLY on numerous occasions, "Bringing about nuclear holocaust will usher in the coming messiah." That religious wackjob made certain to broadcast his intentions to the world over and over.. To nuke Israel off the fucking map, with the US being next. WTF?? How can anyone support a MASS MURDERER developing nuclear capability?! Wow, just wow.

Hey, fuck face.

All countries deserve alternative power sources.

This isn't about nuclear power. It's about nuclear weapons.

And, the treaty.

 

[daveman]

You're speaking as if the leadership in Iran is sane.

I refuse to double down on this silly notion that the regime in Iran is inherently insane and therefore we have to go to war to prevent them. That line of logic is, unto itself, insane.

A cop doesn't fire at will on an insane patient by virtue of them being insane. That is not seen justification for lethal force unto itself.

The leadership in Iran is indeed sane and wants to do what any government wants to do: ensure it's continued survival.

We are extremely efficient at removing civilian governments and infrastructure. We are not good at the long fight (which would come after "regime change").

The Mullahcracy and their puppet knows it. They can threaten and saber rattle all they want, at the end of the day the knowledge that they will be destroyed (and downward pressure from China and Russia) will keep them in line.

People have long argued that the leadership in North Korea is "insane" too. Yet, no nukes have been tossed by them either.

As I said, nuclear weapons unto themselves are a deterrence and Israel has 200 of them.

There is no evidence that's the case.

Funny how people will trust religious fanatics in other nations but insist American conservative Christians are terrorists bent on establishing a theocracy.

Funny how this has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Actually -- it does. Did you believe Iran when they said their weapons program was just for electricity? A lot of people did. And the people that did are afraid of American conservative Christians.