Bombing Iran?

[P F Tinmore]

Iran has no intention of attacking anyone.

 

[Connery]

Iran has no intention of attacking anyone.

Have you been in on meeting with the Iranian decision makers? If not how can you say for sure.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Desperado]

"The Iranian ambassador to Russia reportedly said Wednesday that his country has the means to attack U.S. interests "anywhere in the world. Ambassador Seyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi told reporters in Moscow that it would only exercise such capability if attacked by the United States, according to the Reuters news agency."

if attacked by the United States is the line that everyone seems to ignore when they claim Iran threatened us.

 

[Connery]

"The Iranian ambassador to Russia reportedly said Wednesday that his country has the means to attack U.S. interests "anywhere in the world. Ambassador Seyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi told reporters in Moscow that it would only exercise such capability if attacked by the United States, according to the Reuters news agency."

Which has been the case in every one of their so called threats.

Are we to play Russian Roulette and not take any of this seriously?

 

[Desperado]

"The Iranian ambassador to Russia reportedly said Wednesday that his country has the means to attack U.S. interests "anywhere in the world. Ambassador Seyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi told reporters in Moscow that it would only exercise such capability if attacked by the United States, according to the Reuters news agency."

Which has been the case in every one of their so called threats.

Are we to play Russian Roulette and not take any of this seriously?

Where did I say that?
From the beginning of this thread, I have only been arguing that we should not pre-emptiviely attack Iran.
Which is totally different than ignoring them.

 

[Connery]

Which has been the case in every one of their so called threats.

Are we to play Russian Roulette and not take any of this seriously?

Where did I say that?
From the beginning of this thread, I have only been arguing that we should not pre-emptiviely attack Iran.
Which is totally different than ignoring them.

Yep you said it. Does not really matter. There must be safeguards and defensive measures in place for every threat real or not.

 

[Desperado]

Are we to play Russian Roulette and not take any of this seriously?

Where did I say that?
From the beginning of this thread, I have only been arguing that we should not pre-emptiviely attack Iran.
Which is totally different than ignoring them.

Yep you said it. Does not really matter. There must be safeguards and defensive measures in place for every threat real or not.

Really, not pre-emptiviely attacking Iran is playing Russian Roulette?
Your paranoia is beyond compare.

 

[Katzndogz]

The United States isn't going to attack Iran, or anyone else. No matter what happens. Iran has an open invitation to do anything it wishes without fear of retaliation by the US.

 

[Connery]

Where did I say that?
From the beginning of this thread, I have only been arguing that we should not pre-emptiviely attack Iran.
Which is totally different than ignoring them.

Yep you said it. Does not really matter. There must be safeguards and defensive measures in place for every threat real or not.

Really, not pre-emptiviely attacking Iran is playing Russian Roulette?
Your paranoia is beyond compare.

I said defense and safeguards.

 

[georgephillip]

The United States isn't going to attack Iran, or anyone else. No matter what happens. Iran has an open invitation to do anything it wishes without fear of retaliation by the US.

Do tell:

"The Iraq War[nb 1] was an armed conflict in Iraq that consisted of two phases.[39] The first was an invasion of Ba'athist Iraq starting on 20 March 2003 by an invasion force led by the United States.[40][41][42][43]

"It was followed by a longer phase of fighting, in which an insurgency emerged to oppose Coalition forces and the newly formed Iraqi government.[39] The U.S. completed its withdrawal of military personnel in December 2011.[44][45] However, the Iraqi insurgency continues and has caused thousands of fatalities."

Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The greatest purveyor of violence on this planet will "retaliate" against any country it perceives as a threat or an investment opportunity.

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip; Katzndogz; et al,

I think you are both wrong, but at opposite ends of the spectrum; one far left and one far right.

The United States isn't going to attack Iran, or anyone else. No matter what happens. Iran has an open invitation to do anything it wishes without fear of retaliation by the US.

Do tell:

"The Iraq War[nb 1] was an armed conflict in Iraq that consisted of two phases.[39] The first was an invasion of Ba'athist Iraq starting on 20 March 2003 by an invasion force led by the United States.[40][41][42][43]

"It was followed by a longer phase of fighting, in which an insurgency emerged to oppose Coalition forces and the newly formed Iraqi government.[39] The U.S. completed its withdrawal of military personnel in December 2011.[44][45] However, the Iraqi insurgency continues and has caused thousands of fatalities."

The greatest purveyor of violence on this planet will "retaliate" against any country it perceives as a threat or an investment opportunity.

(COMMENT)

It is all about the "why" the US did what it did and the prevailing wisdom. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[georgephillip]

Rocco...in his book [ame="http://www.amazon.com/The-Fire-This-Time-Crimes/dp/1560250712"]The Fire This Time[/ame] Ramsey Clark alleges the Pentagon conceived a plan to invade Iraq through Turkey in the mid- 1950s. Apparently the plan was to liberate the northern oil fields. Do you find that allegation credible?

 

[ima]

So what would we accomplish by bombing Iran? Anything? Just make them more pissed at us instead of Israel?

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

The Pentagon (the Joint Planning Activities) are always developing alternatives approaches to various hypothetical scenarios. This is not unusual.

Rocco...in his book The Fire This Time Ramsey Clark alleges the Pentagon conceived a plan to invade Iraq through Turkey in the mid- 1950s. Apparently the plan was to liberate the northern oil fields. Do you find that allegation credible?

(COMMENT)

It is possible as an alternative.

Remember, in the 1950's the bulk of the US forces were in the Mediterranean and Western Europe (3 Army Corps, Naval Support and Tactical Air along with all the pre-stocked supply points). The massive US supply point on the British Holding of Diego Garcia (Camp Justice) (7º20'S by 72º25'E) had not been established yet. Camp Justice is used to provide immediate direct support for operation in the Indian Ocean, Arabian Sea, Persian Gulf and the Middle East (from the south).

In the 1950's, the political-military relationship between Turkey and the Allied Command was much different and amiable.

Today, the political-military relationship between Turkey and the Allied Command is much different. And independent operations necessitated the establishment Pre-positioned Supply Points nearby, outside the political interference of the Islamic World. The importance of Diego Garcia has proven itself over and over again. In the Iraq Invasion (Mar/APR 2003), the equipment of the 4th Mechanized Infantry Division was delayed several weeks after Government of Turkey (in a passive show of support for Saddam Hussein) refused to allow passage of US Forces (30 ships of supplied). Turkey may not be a hostile opponent, but it is not a military ally, not withstanding its envelopment in NATO.

Similarly, Iraq is not expected to cooperate, without serious bribery, in any Middle East - Persian Gulf operations. It is a political-military ally to Iran. The same can be said for Lebanon.

Most Respectfully,
R