Iran: let's cover all of the angles to figure out when we are going in

[RX Bandit]

I've come across some interesting points in discussions and reading certain documents. The point of this thread is to build a forecast model based upon declassified intel, media reports, common sense and anything else you want to bring to the table.

Points to think about that aren't hashed out ten times on the forum already:
- Tony Blair leaves office in April, right?
- John C Stennis carrier is arriving in the Persian Gulf within days. That makes two carriers and there haven't been two since the invasion of Iraq in 2003
- The Euro is forecasted to benefit at the peril of Turkey's economy and the US dollar
- Hizbullah capability forecasts are all over the charts. I've read some reports that they are at 80% strength of what they were before last summer; others say 50%. They would be better off toppling Lebanon before they start shooting at Israel...
- Certain sectors are rapidly arming Fatah...common sense is to force a conflict to finally eradicate Hamas. The Saudis are helping too much so they need diversion
- Israel is not bound by the prospect of mutually assured destruction...this is not the cold war. Israel will shoot first should the US fail to act, I bet my family's life on it (well I do anyway since they'd be getting hit with anything sent back over from Tehran)

I know we are going in. I really don't think there will be a draft, but let's not discuss that.

I kinda have a vested interest in this because a) I will be in Israel over the summer b) this is what I study c) I'm a dirty neocon/illuminati/mason/whatever else is ridiculous conspiracy theory worthy

I'd like to get as many viewpoints in on this as I can - I know we have some current/former army field officers on the forum. I think there is another International Relations grad student on here if I remember correctly. Let's see what you guys canc ome up with.

[6SpeedTA95]

I do not think invasion is inevitible.

I think that we have our work cut out for us but I do not think that we're going into Iran. At worst I see targeted airstrikes, more than likely there will be some sort of peaceful resolution to the ordeal. I really think invasion would be a bad move. Many of the iranian people like the US and do not like their own government, giving them reason to rally around their government would not be a smart move and is somethign I do not think we'd do unless it were absolutely necessary.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I do not think invasion is inevitible.

If we're going to stop them from getting nukes it is.

[Pro Street]

According to Bill O'Rielly's latest newspaper editorial, we have an "ongoing diplomatic relationship with Iran"

I don't want war with Iran, I want to watch as the younger generation matures and forces a coup over the radical government. To me, forcing the matter will leave things much worse.

However, with the current Lame Duck president we have and the familiar "intel reports" that bush has talked about, I really think there's a good chance of it happening.

[Scrum]

As I have said before, this may be a good track and we have a fine horse, but we have the wrong jockey holding the reins to risk paying the entry fee.

Let's get someone in there who will at least acknowledge that there is such a thing as diplomacy without the use of cruise missles.

[Pro Street]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

If we're going to stop them from getting nukes it is.

An invasion might stop them from developing nukes, but it won't do much else. The costs of a war with Iran might do more damage than the potential for developing them.


But who knows, I know RX said not to talk about a draft, but maybe if here is I can get into the Navy. I've only been trying for 4 years

[Scrum]

And I also think that if Israel wants a war with Iran so bad, they should go ahead and do it.

I don't see why we should have to get in the middle of things.

[Pro Street]

we're treaty bound to fight along Israel...although only in defense.

[RX Bandit]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

And I also think that if Israel wants a war with Iran so bad, they should go ahead and do it.

I don't see why we should have to get in the middle of things.

Israel doesn't want war. Going into something knowing you are going to lose Jewish lives is never a good thing.

But if the US fails to act (I started outlining some of the lesser known reasons of why the US seems to be on track to attack) Israel will defend its right to exist.

Some of my other posts also talk about the horrible timing of this all considering Olmert the Coward just replaced Halutz with a complete idiot (Ashkenazi) as chief of staff IDF who is the puppet of Olmert and Peretz, the most incompetent Israeli official ever.

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by RX Bandit

Israel doesn't want war. Going into something knowing you are going to lose Jewish lives is never a good thing.

But if the US fails to act (I started outlining some of the lesser known reasons of why the US seems to be on track to attack) Israel will defend its right to exist.

Some of my other posts also talk about the horrible timing of this all considering Olmert the Coward just replaced Halutz with a complete idiot (Ashkenazi) as chief of staff IDF who is the puppet of Olmert and Peretz, the most incompetent Israeli official ever.

Let them defend themselves then. We should have no part in it. Hire some other mercenaries.

[kinggovernor]

I really don't see us fighting Iran in the near future we have several other options before it comes to that

[avsp]

What form of military action could either the US or Isreal take that would guarantee the destruction of nuke weapon production facilities?

Which would cause greater damage to US public support for Isreal, the Isrealis attacking Iran or for the US to do it? Especially if the attacks themselves were with nuclear weapons.

Is there any milage in considering other options that instead seek to adapt to a world with numerous minor nuke players?
Such as getting the big 5 nuke nations to abbounce publically & forcefully that they'll nuke any nuke using nation flat? This would probably encourage moves for a terrorist habd0off to allow 'plausibele debibility' but any such question would be fairly easily solved IIUC

I'd favour the big 5 saying 'disobey the IAEA & you get flattened' but such an approach isnt going to fly now that the Coaltion has 'jumped the gun'

All these problem has been massively exacerbated by the use of destabilisation as a policy tool IMO.

BTW nuke blast != 'batman sounds'

[RX Bandit]

Originally Posted by avsp

What form of military action could either the US or Isreal take that would guarantee the destruction of nuke weapon production facilities?

Which would cause greater damage to US public support for Isreal, the Isrealis attacking Iran or for the US to do it? Especially if the attacks themselves were with nuclear weapons.

Is there any milage in considering other options that instead seek to adapt to a world with numerous minor nuke players?
Such as getting the big 5 nuke nations to abbounce publically & forcefully that they'll nuke any nuke using nation flat? This would probably encourage moves for a terrorist habd0off to allow 'plausibele debibility' but any such question would be fairly easily solved IIUC

I'd favour the big 5 saying 'disobey the IAEA & you get flattened' but such an approach isnt going to fly now that the Coaltion has 'jumped the gun'

All these problem has been massively exacerbated by the use of destabilisation as a policy tool IMO.

BTW nuke blast != 'batman sounds'

I personally refuse to allow lesser nations. I wasn't old enough at the time but looking back on the documents and history I think it was a good move for Israel to help white South Africa develop a nuclear program. White South Africa fit the bill for a superior nation (at the time) which could be a responsible steward of technology.

Iran, anything in the middle east other than Israel, anything in eastern Europe, anything in Latin America, anything in the Pacific etc is not stable, with a responsible scientific community and any of the other factors that would lend itself to becoming one of the nuclear nations.

I would rather tactically nuke Natanz and send in ground troops to wipe out any remnants of industry that could be converted into the nuclear program than allow them the chance to use a weapon.

I have to believe most people would rather war than allow Iran to use a nuclear device.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by RX Bandit

I'm a dirty neocon/illuminati/mason/whatever else is ridiculous conspiracy theory worthy

Have you heard of the "project for the new american century"?

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by RX Bandit

I personally refuse to allow lesser nations. I wasn't old enough at the time but looking back on the documents and history I think it was a good move for Israel to help white South Africa develop a nuclear program. White South Africa fit the bill for a superior nation (at the time) which could be a responsible steward of technology.

Iran, anything in the middle east other than Israel, anything in eastern Europe, anything in Latin America, anything in the Pacific etc is not stable, with a responsible scientific community and any of the other factors that would lend itself to becoming one of the nuclear nations.

I would rather tactically nuke Natanz and send in ground troops to wipe out any remnants of industry that could be converted into the nuclear program than allow them the chance to use a weapon.

I have to believe most people would rather war than allow Iran to use a nuclear device.

Lesser nations? Israel is a lesser nation as far as we're concerned so I guess they shouldn't have nukes either. Correct?

[RX Bandit]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Have you heard of the "project for the new american century"?

I've posted about it a fair bit - I received invaluable assistance on a paper from over there. I was a huge fan before but after being able to ask a few questions to this day I am still impressed and think well of them.

PNAC (close past) and CSP (noticeably further left and IMO less coherent overall) is the closest thing to accurate these days in my opinion.

[RX Bandit]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Lesser nations? Israel is a lesser nation as far as we're concerned so I guess they shouldn't have nukes either. Correct?

I can see how fluid and complete democracy (and widespread suffrage to Arabs, women etc) without interruption since the independence of the state would confuse you -- also the world's most responsible stewards of technology that have had a hand in nearly everything you use on the internet and any time you need advanced diagnostic medical procedures done.

Show me one time when Israel's scientific community has failed to act in a responsible fashion. Show me a country in the middle east with as widespread suffrage with unfaltering democracy from the beginning. Show me one time when Israel has failed to act in any manner whatsoever as a "lesser nation" like Iran -- you want to know who the biggest outcry came from over Sabra/Shatila massacre? Israelis. For a minor lapse in judgment in a war zone meant everything if the highest ideals of Israel were set aside even for a minute, even in a war zone.

You troll about Israel very hard without ever having a convincing argument or facts to refute anything I say. You always go for emotion comrade and it never looks well upon your case.

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by RX Bandit

I can see how fluid and complete democracy (and widespread suffrage to Arabs, women etc) without interruption since the independence of the state would confuse you -- also the world's most responsible stewards of technology that have had a hand in nearly everything you use on the internet and any time you need advanced diagnostic medical procedures done.

Show me one time when Israel's scientific community has failed to act in a responsible fashion. Show me a country in the middle east with as widespread suffrage with unfaltering democracy from the beginning. Show me one time when Israel has failed to act in any manner whatsoever as a "lesser nation" like Iran -- you want to know who the biggest outcry came from over Sabra/Shatila massacre? Israelis. For a minor lapse in judgment in a war zone meant everything if the highest ideals of Israel were set aside even for a minute, even in a war zone.

You troll about Israel very hard without ever having a convincing argument or facts to refute anything I say. You always go for emotion comrade and it never looks well upon your case.

And all I have to do is look at your AV for your unbiased unemotional opinions. Please. Stop.

[RX Bandit]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

And all I have to do is look at your AV for your unbiased unemotional opinions. Please. Stop.

Once again I make clear argument and you respond with bullshit.

How have you stayed on this forum for so long - are you THAT anti-Semitic and brainwashed by Marx, or do you respond in this way to all members of LL?