Anonymous plans to attack Iran

[Chris]

(CNN) -- The Internet hackers group Anonymous plans to hack Iran on Sunday, according to a press release published on their website. The group wants to use International Workers' Day, which commemorates the first national general strike in the United States, as an opportunity to reignite last year's protests in Iran.

Exactly how they intend to "attack" Iran remains to be seen. The sophistication of their previous attacks ranges from the denial-of-service overloading of web servers (this simply knocks a website out) to the exploitation of code and accessing of private data (more like the hacking seen in the movies).

The attacks are scheduled to start at 5 a.m. GMT (1 a.m. ET) on Sunday.

Hackers group says it will target Iran on Sunday - CNN.com

 

[Mr. H.]

"Porn. Lots porn."

 

[Antiderivative]

last time I checked, we haven't stopped attacking Iran since 1953 with the ousting of Mossadegh.

 

[thinsey]

That's awesome. Maybe we'll screw with more of their nuke sights. >

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right Haberdasherjob `bout to get his sassy mouth smacked...

Iran says Israeli jets preparing to strike
May 2, 2011 -- Israeli fighter jets are conducting drills at a military base in Iraq in preparation for a strike on Iran, the Islamic Republic's Press TV reported.

The report said the Israeli planes participating in the drills include F-15, F-16, F-18 and F-22 fighter jets. It said they have conducted weeklong exercises,flying mainly at night. Press TV said its report was based on information received from a source close to Moqtada al-Sadr's group in Iraq. Sadr is considered to be one of the most influential religious political figures in Iraq but holds no official title. He has repeatedly called for the immediate withdrawal of U.S.-led coalition troops and U.N. forces deployed in Iraq.

The air drills are being conducted in collaboration with the U.S. military, the report said. It said Iraq was not informed of the exercises. The U.S. maintains a number of military bases in Iraq and the government in Baghdad is not involved in any military activities occurring there, the report said. There was no official comment on the report by Israeli government or military officials. Last month, Brig. Gen Mohammed Ali Safari, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards, declared Israeli and American military bases in the Middle East are within range of Iran's missiles.

"Although we are capable of increasing the range of our missiles, we don't think it would be necessary because today our extra-regional enemy -- the Zionist regime of [Israel] -- is within the range of our missiles," he told the Fars news agency. "As for the American forces -- if they were to back Israeli threats -- they would be closer to us than them [Israel] and they would be within the range of our firepower as well," he said.

Read more: Iran says Israeli jets preparing to strike - UPI.com

 

[P F Tinmore]

JERUSALEM – Israel's defense minister says even if Iran develops nuclear arms, it is unlikely to bomb Israel.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak's comments appear to be an attempt to prepare a jittery Israel for the possibility of Tehran getting a nuclear weapon. The remarks were published Thursday in the Haaretz newspaper.

Haaretz asked whether Barak thought Iran would drop a nuclear bomb on Israel. The minister responded: "Not on us and not on any other neighbor."

Israel defense minister: Iran won't bomb us - Yahoo! News

 

[Dr.Drock]

Yeah even with how war-hungry the US and Israel are I'm doubting we attack Iran, still plenty of afghanis and libyans we "need" to blow up.

 

[Avatar4321]

Yeah even with how war-hungry the US and Israel are I'm doubting we attack Iran, still plenty of afghanis and libyans we "need" to blow up.

can you name one?

 

[blastoff]

Name? Christ, they all look alike!

 

[Dr.Drock]

Yeah even with how war-hungry the US and Israel are I'm doubting we attack Iran, still plenty of afghanis and libyans we "need" to blow up.

can you name one?

Can I name one we need to blow up? Absolutely not


That's the opinion of our beloved bureacrats, not of me.

 

[waltky]

Granny says, Dat's right - let the Frenchies do it...

France Won't Rule Out Military Strike on Iran
9/28/2011, France may consider a pre-emptive military strike on Iran to stop its march towards obtaining a nuclear weapon of mass destruction.

France warned late Tuesday it may consider a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to stop the Islamic Republic from creating a nuclear weapon of mass destruction. French Ambassador Gerard Araud said in a panel discussion in New York, “If we don't succeed today to reach a negotiation with the Iranians, there is a strong risk of military action.” He did not specify who would carry out the strike. “It would be a very complicated operation,” Araud went on,” according to a report by the AFP news agency. “It would have disastrous consequences in the region,” he warned. “All the Arab countries are extremely worried about what is happening,” in the Iranian nuclear development program, Araud said.

He added that it has become increasingly clear that the Islamic Republic has no intention of negotiating a resolution to the impasse over its uranium enrichment program. Iran has insisted that its nuclear development technology is geared to peaceful domestic use only. However, it has severely restricted the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency from access to its facilities. European negotiators have concluded that Iran does not wish to negotiate with the international community, said Araud, and is “moving forward” with its nuclear development program despite. Several rounds of sanctions against the Islamic Republic by the U.N. Security Council, aimed at persuading its government to end its uranium enrichment program, have failed to budge Iran from continuing its production.

“We have tried everything. Not a stone has been left unturned,” Araud said. Ahmadinejad has claimed the country needs 20 percent enriched uranium for a medical reactor to produce isotopes for cancer treatment. However, Western intelligence agents have said the country already has enough uranium for that purpose, and that any additional uranium would be used to produce weapons, according to AFP. The Iranian president claimed in an interview last week with the New York Times that Iran would halt production of low-enriched uranium if the international community were willing instead to provide it to Tehran. However, Iran recently moved its uranium enrichment facilities to underground bunkers, setting off alarm bells in both Europe and the United States.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, and former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert before him, each have repeatedly warned the international community of the dangers posed by allowing Iran to continue its nuclear development programs unchecked. Each round of sanctions against the Islamic Republic, however, took months to pass, due to opposition from Russia and China, both of whom are permanent members of the Council.

France Won't Rule Out Strike on Iran - Global Agenda - News - Israel National News

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Yeah even with how war-hungry the US and Israel are I'm doubting we attack Iran, still plenty of afghanis and libyans we "need" to blow up.

.....Besides.....​

"We're lucky that, for the time being anyway, we're fighting Iraq and not Iran because Iran is four times as big as Iraq and we're having enough trouble with the little country."

Geography; For Teabaggers​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

*

[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=djs5Ux0Sk0s[/ame]


We NEED to mind-our-OWN-fuckin'-business!​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

last time I checked, we haven't stopped attacking Iran since 1953 with the ousting of Mossadegh.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy3KDYE5KQE]History of Iran- (a must see for any Ron Paul Supporter) WW3 Russia - YouTube[/ame]

Bu$ine$$ A$ U$ual

 

[mskafka]

Iran and North Korea. Wow, which is more frightening? These are two countries my gut tells me that we really shouldn't mess with; unless there is absolutely NO other alternative. These people don't screw around.

 

[Photonic]

Iran and North Korea. Wow, which is more frightening? These are two countries my gut tells me that we really shouldn't mess with; unless there is absolutely NO other alternative. These people don't screw around.

Besides the fact that the military in North Korea is starving more and more each day (and so are the people) because of widespread famine and inability to provide for his people. His troops are emaciated and about as war ready as a pack of playing cards. Why do you think they have returned to talks with the US? Not because they want too, surely. North Korea has realized that they cannot stand against a world that hates them, by returning to talks they can start to have their people fed again.

Iran doesn't have the economy to handle a full military strike from NATO and the US (both of which would be involved).

Because this would be war against a single, specific target. A uniformed and organized military of a country, they would be battered into oblivion in a matter of days with little actual troops on the ground. They know they can't match the US Military and have said so a few times. They rely on propaganda and they garner support from countries that are far more powerful than they are, while their people continue to broil just beneath the surface of their society waiting for the smallest chance to take out their much hated government.

Against an organized target the US military would simply stomp on them. Iran fights a proxy war against the US by arming terrorists to kill our civilians and soldiers. That venue is slowly deteriorating due to our superior Air Power and our capabilities in using it.

If you want to see people that don't screw around, join the Service and find out why we are the best.

 

[mskafka]

I tried to join the navy. I am "permanently disqualified" for service because of frequent premature ventricular contractions. Trust me...it's not from lack of trying, or bravery.

I don't worry about their military. There's no question that the US would pound them into oblivion, if it is military against military. Terrorists are my concern.

 

[Photonic]

I tried to join the navy. I am "permanently disqualified" for service because of frequent premature ventricular contractions. Trust me...it's not from lack of trying, or bravery.

I don't worry about their military. There's no question that the US would pound them into oblivion, if it is military against military. Terrorists are my concern.

Well, as far as that is concerned, because of the 10 years we have spend combating terrorism directly, we have gained enough experience to fight against it like no other country. We've realized that smaller groups of better armed special operations units are better for clearing out terrorists coupled with a much more bolstered intelligence community.

Sorry I doubted your bravery, I'm very sorry to hear you could not join.

 

[techieny]

Granny says, Dat's right - let the Frenchies do it...

France Won't Rule Out Military Strike on Iran
9/28/2011, France may consider a pre-emptive military strike on Iran to stop its march towards obtaining a nuclear weapon of mass destruction.

France warned late Tuesday it may consider a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to stop the Islamic Republic from creating a nuclear weapon of mass destruction. French Ambassador Gerard Araud said in a panel discussion in New York, “If we don't succeed today to reach a negotiation with the Iranians, there is a strong risk of military action.” He did not specify who would carry out the strike. “It would be a very complicated operation,” Araud went on,” according to a report by the AFP news agency. “It would have disastrous consequences in the region,” he warned. “All the Arab countries are extremely worried about what is happening,” in the Iranian nuclear development program, Araud said.

He added that it has become increasingly clear that the Islamic Republic has no intention of negotiating a resolution to the impasse over its uranium enrichment program. Iran has insisted that its nuclear development technology is geared to peaceful domestic use only. However, it has severely restricted the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency from access to its facilities. European negotiators have concluded that Iran does not wish to negotiate with the international community, said Araud, and is “moving forward” with its nuclear development program despite. Several rounds of sanctions against the Islamic Republic by the U.N. Security Council, aimed at persuading its government to end its uranium enrichment program, have failed to budge Iran from continuing its production.

“We have tried everything. Not a stone has been left unturned,” Araud said. Ahmadinejad has claimed the country needs 20 percent enriched uranium for a medical reactor to produce isotopes for cancer treatment. However, Western intelligence agents have said the country already has enough uranium for that purpose, and that any additional uranium would be used to produce weapons, according to AFP. The Iranian president claimed in an interview last week with the New York Times that Iran would halt production of low-enriched uranium if the international community were willing instead to provide it to Tehran. However, Iran recently moved its uranium enrichment facilities to underground bunkers, setting off alarm bells in both Europe and the United States.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, and former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert before him, each have repeatedly warned the international community of the dangers posed by allowing Iran to continue its nuclear development programs unchecked. Each round of sanctions against the Islamic Republic, however, took months to pass, due to opposition from Russia and China, both of whom are permanent members of the Council.

France Won't Rule Out Strike on Iran - Global Agenda - News - Israel National News

Laisse le font

 

[Mr. Shaman]

If Iran WAS to develop nukes....

....SO WHAT??????



....Besides....if you asked Iranians WHY they needed nukes.....all they'd have-to-do is point to Iraq.​