US planning air strikes on Iran

[CptStern]

In the latest edition of The New Yorker magazine, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh reports that the Bush administration is accelerating plans for military strikes against Iran to squash its nuclear program ambitions and that it is considering using nuclear weapons to take out the country's nuclear facilities."

"White House Counselor Dan Bartlett called Hersh's report ill-informed and told The Associated Press that the president's priority was "to find a diplomatic solution to a problem the entire world recognizes.

like they did in iraq?

Hersh said that the military had given the White House six plans to choose from, one being the nuclear bunker buster option. Later, he said, some military officials had second thoughts on the idea, but the White House refused to let go of the nuclear option — and that has made some officials nervous.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1825359&page=1

U.S. intelligence and terrorism experts say this might be Iran's response:

As tensions increase between the United States and Iran, U.S. intelligence and terrorism experts say they believe Iran would respond to U.S. military strikes on its nuclear sites by deploying its intelligence operatives and Hezbollah teams to carry out terrorist attacks worldwide.

Iran would mount attacks against U.S. targets inside Iraq, where Iranian intelligence agents are already plentiful, predicted these experts. There is also a growing consensus that Iran's agents would target civilians in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, they said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/01/AR2006040100981.html



surely americans after being lied to about saddam's nuke capabilities/vast stores of wmb, wouldnt support another illegal invasion. Cooler heads will prevail ...right?

 

[Bob_Marley]

surely americans after being lied to about saddam's nuke capabilities/vast stores of wmb, wouldnt support another illegal invasion. Cooler heads will prevail ...right?

You'd think that, wouldnt you. Or at least they'd sort out Iraq before invading somewhere else.

Any military strike against Iran would probubly spell doom for hopes of a coalition pullout from Iraq in the next 10 years. Hell, there are enough Iranian weapons and insergernt groups backed by them there already that any excuse would probubly warrent some kind of large scale reprisal.

And any use of Nuclear weapons (including the US's Bunkerbusters, AKA the "fun sized thermo nuke", which was developed after the US signed the non-proliferation treaty) would be a really bad idea...

 

[CptStern]

ya even without an invasion of iran the coalition is there to stay

here's a video by concerned scientists:
http://www.fas.org/main/content.jsp?formAction=297&contentId=403

the US has stepped up nuke bunker busting testing:

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_3678364


here's a handy map that shows the effects of nuclear weapons (car bomb) detonated in american cities so that americans can plan accordingly should bush invade iran

http://www.fas.org/main/content.jsp?formAction=297&contentId=367

 

[Mutley]

If there arn't nuclear weapons or a threat from Iran (like it was with Iraq, US presence only made it more unstable) then what is the Americans motive?

 

[CptStern]

regime change

 

[Gray Fox]

The US isn't planning to invade Iran, just destory the nuclear facilities, and I would do the same.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Single-handed?

 

[Mr-Fusion]

If there arn't nuclear weapons or a threat from Iran (like it was with Iraq, US presence only made it more unstable) then what is the Americans motive?

There'll be an entire list of things that can be used to manipulate public opinion, just like Iraq.

In order of effectively brainwashing the populace.

1. They have nuclear weapons pointed at us and will destroy our freedom and democracy
2. The country is run by an evil regime that doesn't believe in freedom or democracy, they must be removed.
3. Freedom and democracy are under threat!
..
..
..
153. We need the oil.

Either way, Bush and his pals know that using those two bolded words together is very persuasive to the average dolt. Freedom and democracy!! Invade? It makes sense to me!

not.

 

[CptStern]

The US isn't planning to invade Iran, just destory the nuclear facilities, and I would do the same.

with nukes? that's ok by you? did you read the links posted? did you watch the video? nuke bunker busting is ineffective and dangerous ...not too mention that even if Iran continues t work towards nuclear warheads it's at least a decade away from when they would produce their first nuke capable warhead ...funny how short people's memories are ..this is exactly the justification the US used with Iraq ..and we all know how badly that turned out

 

[Mutley]

Didn't Iran help USA to invade Iraq at the beginning? Sort of backstabbing, getting support then going against it.

 

[CptStern]

no, the US hasnt been friendly with iran since 1979

 

[Nat Turner]

Bush will stage another terrorist act first to get enough popular support... then we'll attack Iran. Maybe a couple patriot acts will be passed also for good effect.

 

[gick]

nuke bunker busting is ineffective and dangerous

Well duh....

I seriously doubt that even Dubyah would be thick enough to start flinging nukes around. If he does, it'll make today's situation in Iraq look like a minor scuffle.

 

[Razor]

Well duh....

I seriously doubt that even Dubyah would be thick enough to start flinging nukes around. If he does, it'll make today's situation in Iraq look like a minor scuffle.

If only that were true, if Bush had brains he wouldn't have Senator Palpatine as his Vice President.

 

[CptStern]

Well duh....

I seriously doubt that even Dubyah would be thick enough to start flinging nukes around. If he does, it'll make today's situation in Iraq look like a minor scuffle.

they've been using depleted uranium bombs for decades, I dont see why they would stop at using bunker buster nukes ...they're for underground detonation not above ground. The bush admin has been pushing for nuke bunker busters to be used since 2001

 

[gick]

Still, in the mind of Joe Public nuclear weapons = mushroom clouds and radiation. Even if the Bush admin used very low yield tactical nukes I think that there would be a huge domestic backlash.

DU is a different kettle of fish entirely.

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

I still think we should let them build their plants. It' not fair for us to be keeping lesser countries in the iron age.

 

[CptStern]

Still, in the mind of Joe Public nuclear weapons = mushroom clouds and radiation. Even if the Bush admin used very low yield tactical nukes I think that there would be a huge domestic backlash.

DU is a different kettle of fish entirely.

yes but the point is that the US has been using radioactive carrying weapons for decades ..so it isnt that much of stretch to see them use bunker buster nukes .......oh and Joe Public ate up the WMD lie bush spoonfed everyone, I dont see why they couldnt put a positive spin on things ...if the war on terror/iraq has taught us anything it's that the american public isnt all that concerned with facts

 

[kirovman]

The President of Iran was democratically elected...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/03/iran_power/html/default.stm

 

[A True Canadian]

It's rather silly to use nuclear weapons in order to make a statement about not using nuclear weapons. :rolling:

The President of Iran was democratically elected...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/h...ml/default.stm

Neat. I didn't know that.

 

[DeusExMachina]

I don't believe Bush will strike Iran. He's already got too much on his plate.
Ugh, two more years of this...

 

[CptStern]

the US helped overthrow another democratically elected leader of iran ..democratically left-leaning Mohammad Mossadeq in 1953

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/

 

[kirovman]

Ugh, two more years of this...

Then Jeb Bush? D:

 

[jverne]

Then Jeb Bush? D:

or Arnie!

 

[K e r b e r o s]

here's a handy map that shows the effects of nuclear weapons (car bomb) detonated in american cities so that americans can plan accordingly should bush invade iran

Seems like this has been preplanned ... Whats to say this won't happen anyway without an invasion of Iran?

Plus, I just don't agree with Islamic Fundie countries with Nukes, because if that happens, then you can just shake hands with the new Jewish Holocaust.

 

[CptStern]

Seems like this has been preplanned ... Whats to say this won't happen anyway without an invasion of Iran?

kerberos, try reading the information provided instead of just glancing at it ..that map isnt iranian ..or did you just miss the title in large bold type: FAS: Federation of AMERICAN scientists

Plus, I just don't agree with Islamic Fundie countries with Nukes, because if that happens, then you can just shake hands with the new Jewish Holocaust.

yes because that's the smart thing to do ..develop a nuke then immediately use it on your neighbour ...at least Iran signed a non proliferation treaty ..where's Israel's signature on that treaty?

 

[Maxi]

Actually, I doubt iran would use a nuke if they developed it. Unless the US attacked them. And they don't really have ICBMS either. I'm more afraid of the us using WMDs than any other country atm.

 

[Fishlore]

I didn't know the president collected intelligence information. All this time I thought the intelligence agencies did that. Of course, this from the same person that thought the UK collected their own intelligence, but apparently Bush does that too. He must be a busy person; single handedly collecting US, UK, French, German and Russian intelligence just to name a few. I suppose Saddam's boasting about having WMD and the fact that all of his top government people thought they had WMD is meaningless though.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

yes because that's the smart thing to do ..develop a nuke then immediately use it on your neighbour ...at least Iran signed a non proliferation treaty ..where's Israel's signature on that treaty?

First, Israel's no neighbor to Iran.
Second, I can't believe you support a second holocaust.
Third, Nuclear Holocaust is not going to help anyone.
Fourth, have a source that shows 'Israel's Signature' is not on that treaty?

And they don't really have ICBMS either. I'm more afraid of the us using WMDs than any other country atm.

You don't need an intercontinenal ballistic missle system to reach Tel-Aviv or Jerusalem for that matter.

Plus, they have this, they're own version of an ICBM.

Fajr-3, and the Shehab-3 (The Shehab can reach targets in Europe)

TEHRAN, Iran — Iran successfully test-fired a missile that can avoid radar and hit several targets simultaneously using multiple warheads, the military said Friday.

Gen. Hossein Salami, the air force chief of the elite Revolutionary Guards, did not specify the missile's range, saying it depends on the weight of its warheads.

But state-run television described the weapon as "ballistic" — suggesting it's of comparable range to Iran's existing ballistic rocket, which can travel 1,250 miles and reach arch-foe Israel and U.S. bases in the Middle East.

"Today, a remarkable goal of the Islamic Republic of Iran's defense forces was realized with the successful test-firing of a new missile with greater technical and tactical capabilities than those previously produced," Salami said on state-run television.

It showed a clip of the launch of what it called the Fajr-3, with "fajr" meaning "victory" in Farsi.

"It can avoid anti-missile missiles and strike the target," Salami said.

He said the missile would carry a multiple warhead, and each warhead would be capable of hitting its target precisely.

From my own states News and Observer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/31/AR2006033100308.html

described the weapon as "ballistic" _ suggesting it is of comparable range to Iran's existing ballistic rocket, which can travel about 1,200 miles and reach arch-foe Israel and U.S. bases in Iraq and the Persian Gulf region.

"Today, a remarkable goal of the Islamic Republic of Iran's defense forces was realized with the successful test-firing of a new missile with greater technical and tactical capabilities than those previously produced," Salami said on television, which showed a brief clip of the missile's launch.

"It can avoid anti-missile missiles and strike the target," the general said.

He said the missile would carry a multiple warhead, and each warhead would be capable of hitting its target precisely.

http://www.meib.org/articles/0211_l2.htm

TEHRAN, April 2 — Iran said Sunday that it had test-fired what it described as a sonar-evading underwater missile just two days after it announced that it had fired a new missile that could carry multiple warheads and evade radar systems.

The new missile is among the world's fastest and can outpace an enemy warship, Gen. Ali Fadavi of the country's elite Revolutionary Guards told state television.

General Fadavi said only one other country, Russia, had a missile that moved underwater as fast as the Iranian one, which he said had a speed of about 225 miles per hour. State television showed what it described as the missile being fired.

"The missile carries a very powerful warhead that enables it to operate against groups of warships and big submarines," he said.

http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Iran/Missile/3367_3395.html <- About Irans Missle and Nuclear Capability

Missile Capabilities

Shahab-3 (Nodong)
Other Names: Shehab-3

Iran has been an active participant in the DPRK's Nodong program from its inception in the late 1980s. This would lead to the establishment of the Shahab-3 ("meteor" or "shooting star") program and has allowed both technology and components from the DPRK's programs to continue to flow into Iran's missile programs. Exactly when the Iranians established the Shahab-3 program is presently unclear. Preliminary evidence suggests that both the Nodong and Shahab-3 programs were established concurrently in 1988, although the Shahab-3 program may have had a different name at the time. It appears that a key element of the program was not to purchase and deploy a fleet of Nodong missiles—which it could have done; instead it was to develop the technology and industrial infrastructure to the point where it could produce the system indigenously. The Shahab-3 is of strategic importance for two primary reasons. First, its 1,300km+ range allows it to strike every important U.S. ally in the region (i.e., Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey), southern Russia, and most of Afghanistan. Second, it was designed as a delivery system for WMD warheads.

Irans nuclear programme for electricity? My. Ass.

 

[CptStern]

I didn't know the president collected intelligence information. All this time I thought the intelligence agencies did that. Of course, this from the same person that thought the UK collected their own intelligence, but apparently Bush does that too. He must be a busy person; single handedly collecting US, UK, French, German and Russian intelligence just to name a few. I suppose Saddam's boasting about having WMD and the fact that all of his top government people thought they had WMD is meaningless though.

yes the do collect information ...or rather SHAPE it:

"[Richard] Clarke says that as early as the day after the attacks, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was pushing for retaliatory strikes on Iraq, even though al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan.

"The president dragged me into a room with a couple of other people, shut the door, and said, 'I want you to find whether Iraq did this.' Now he never said, 'Make it up.' But the entire conversation left me in absolutely no doubt that George Bush wanted me to come back with a report that said Iraq did this.

"I said, 'Mr. President. We've done this before. We have been looking at this. We looked at it with an open mind. There's no connection.'

"He came back at me and said, "Iraq! Saddam! Find out if there's a connection.' And in a very intimidating way. I mean that we should come back with that answer. We wrote a report."

Clarke continued, "It was a serious look. We got together all the FBI experts, all the CIA experts. We wrote the report. We sent the report out to CIA and found FBI and said, 'Will you sign this report?' They all cleared the report. And we sent it up to the president and it got bounced by the National Security Advisor or Deputy. It got bounced and sent back saying, 'Wrong answer. ... Do it again.'


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/19/60minutes/main607356.shtml

 

[CptStern]

First, Israel's no neighbor to Iran.
Second, I can't believe you support a second holocaust.

where the hell do I say that ..seriously stfu kerberos you're just foaming at the mouth, spewing nonsense for the sake of it. Your immature attempts to label me anti-semetic are laughably stupid

Third, Nuclear Holocaust is not going to help anyone.
Fourth, have a source that shows 'Israel's Signature' is not on that treaty?

would it have killed you to look it up? officially Israel doesnt have nukes ...so why would they sign the nonproliferation treaty?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_nuclear_weapons

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-proliferation_treaty#India.2C_Pakistan.2C_Israel

 

[K e r b e r o s]

where the hell do I say that

Here:

Originally Posted by K e r b e r o s
Plus, I just don't agree with Islamic Fundie countries with Nukes, because if that happens, then you can just shake hands with the new Jewish Holocaust.

Originally Posted by CptStern
yes because that's the smart thing to do ..develop a nuke then immediately use it on your neighbour ...at least Iran signed a non proliferation treaty ..where's Israel's signature on that treaty?

Ever tried scrolling up in a thread, CptStern?

You've also not commented on the Shehab program run by Iran, and I think your dodging it. For whatever reason, your trying to get this forum to ignore Iran's own aggressive measures. Have you forgotten they're Interior Ministries comments?

"In 1996 . . . with Katyushas alone, the resistance was able to displace two million people and [the Israeli government] had to look for places in central Israel to settle them," he declared last month. "[If] Hezbollah's missiles can now reach all population centers in Israel, then where can they flee?"6 (6 Al-Manar Television (Beirut), 22 October 2002.)

http://www.meib.org/articles/0211_l2.htm

 

[Fishlore]

Yes, I'm sure that everything that Clarke thought was implied to him in those converstations is exactly what the intended message was. So how did the president cook the books of the other nations? How did he get Saddam to boast about his stockpiles, how did he convince Saddam's generals that these stockpiles would be used upon invasion?

 

[CptStern]

holy shit kerberos you're on to me ..that passage clearly says I believe jews should be led to the gas chambers ..you're grasping at straws like a drowning man kerberos

Ever tried scrolling up in a thread, CptStern?

you cant even use sarcasm effectively ..oh noes I loose to kerberos

 

[CptStern]

Yes, I'm sure that everything that Clarke thought was implied to him in those converstations is exactly what the intended message was.

what exactly was implied here ..please point it out, because you seem to be so sure of yourself it should be easy right?

""[Richard] Clarke says that as early as the day after the attacks, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was pushing for retaliatory strikes on Iraq, even though al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan.

"The president dragged me into a room with a couple of other people, shut the door, and said, 'I want you to find whether Iraq did this.' Now he never said, 'Make it up.' But the entire conversation left me in absolutely no doubt that George Bush wanted me to come back with a report that said Iraq did this.

"I said, 'Mr. President. We've done this before. We have been looking at this. We looked at it with an open mind. There's no connection.'

"He came back at me and said, "Iraq! Saddam! Find out if there's a connection.' And in a very intimidating way. I mean that we should come back with that answer. We wrote a report."

Clarke continued, "It was a serious look. We got together all the FBI experts, all the CIA experts. We wrote the report. We sent the report out to CIA and found FBI and said, 'Will you sign this report?' They all cleared the report. And we sent it up to the president and it got bounced by the National Security Advisor or Deputy. It got bounced and sent back saying, 'Wrong answer. ... Do it again.' "

So how did the president cook the books of the other nations? How did he get Saddam to boast about his stockpiles, how did he convince Saddam's generals that these stockpiles would be used upon invasion?

bullshit, that was a complete lie, saddam never authorised jack shit, it was bush who made that statement NOT saddam:

"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have." - George Bush February 8, 2003

how do you go from this:

a few months before 9/11

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6456.htm

to this:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/04/september11/main520830.shtml

in just a few short months


oh and the cia gave other nations bogus intelligence


here read this

http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/memos.html#originalmemo

 

[K e r b e r o s]

you cant even use sarcasm effectively ..oh noes I loose to kerberos

CptStern, your flamming me, and its getting annoying. Either put up (actually comment on the Shehab Missle Program, and the Fajr Tests), or stay silent on this matter.

Hell, anyone else willing to comment on the Shehab Missle Program?

 

[B_MAN]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...6apr06,0,5989419.story?coll=la-home-headlines

the US frightens me much more than Iran

 

[K e r b e r o s]

the US frightens me much more than Iran

The Date on that Article is well after the US/Iran relations went down the toilet. I see no difference in this response, or Irans.

Its scaring me both.

 

[CptStern]

CptStern, your flamming me, and its getting annoying. Either put up (actually comment on the Shehab Missle Program, and the Fajr Tests), or stay silent on this matter.

Hell, anyone else willing to comment on the Shehab Missle Program?

so in other words you want me to address something that has little to do with this topic because you always address every point I make right? who the **** cares about your stupid missle program how does that in any way:

a. justify a US strike on iran
b. have anything to do with this topic

my flamming is getting annoying? why dont you backtrack here and tell like it really is ..it was YOU who started flamming ..it's you every single time

 

[K e r b e r o s]

so in other words you want me to address something that has little to do with this topic

No, the Shehab 3 and Fajr 3 have everything to do with this thread. Why is the United States planning airstrikes against Irans Nuclear Capabilities?

Its because of those missle programs.