Has the Time Come to Invade Iran ?

[JimH52]

Did Dick Cheney join the board?

 

[Mustang]

It is being said that the talking with Iran has made the world LESS safe. It's being said that the meetings have produced nothing at all for all the countries threatened by Iran. Everything has been in Iran's favor, and their chief negotiator is being hailed in Iran as a hero.

What has been accomplished ? Has any centrifuges been shut down ? Any Uranium, or Plutonium been confiscated ? have the many long-range missles been destroyed ? Have all the locations of weapons development been located ? Has Iran renounced their calls (as late as 2 weeks ago) of "Death to America" ? Or to wipe Israel of the face of the earth ? Has any of Iran's military imperialism been reduced (it's been increased).

The talks are a joke. The Iranians are continuing development of their nuclear arms, and there long range missle can travel 1200 miles (Israel is 900 miles from Iran)

Is it possible that the thing to do now is invade Iran with a coalition of threatened countries ? Enter with hundreds of thousands of troops ? Fight the Iranians,and ultimately surround Tehran much like US troops did to Mexico City in 1846. Then interrogate the Iranians to get as much information as possible. Search every square yard of the country for nuclear weapon development, and destroy every bit of it.

Then it would be necessary to keep US troops there for years into the future, like troops are still in Korea Japan and Germany.

Is it possible that Obama's avoidance of war (at any cost) is just a repeat of Neville Chamberlain and Hitler in the 1930s ? Is our peaceful approach nothing but just what Iran needs to build up and become another Hitler war machine, only with a nuclear component ?

No!

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Depends on who you ask.

Republicans and Israel both say yes.

Israel wants ther US to do their fighting for them and of course, any chance to pile up dead Americans is okay with Repubs.

…and jews

I would not go so far as to say all Jews want the US to do their dirty work for them but Netanyahu certainly does.

Far better to try to diplomatic solutions. If Obama's/Kerry's hard work doesn't do it, we should go back and try again.

War and/or bombing innocent people should not be an alternative.

 

[DarkFury]

Boots on the ground is NOT what is called for. They WANT a nuke? I say send them one right over their main city. We need to kill muslims I agree but tens of thousands at ONCE.

Then and only then will we have their attention.

Sorry, but that's way over the line.

I disagree, one on them and one on Islamic State. Just flat get rid of them.

The "Islamic State" is scattered in cells from Mauritania to the Philippines.

You cannot nuke an IDEA.

Now, maybe one on the Kaaba during Ramadamadingdong might cramp their style, but, that is a whole different thing.

The main force in the middle east would do. There are 1.5 Billion muslims so coming up short 100k in radicals is really no loss to either. The loss would allow "moderates" if any to take the lead.

I fail to see how we get them all to gather under our nukes.

One mile ABOVE ground burns everything for a radius of forty miles. Everything, so right over their capital. I have been reading the fallout factors and learned a few things.
1, Ground contact...hard surface increases fallout.
2, Water contact. reduced radiation because of the "give" of water.
3, Air explosion LEAST fallout possible. Could be re-inhabited in less then a year.

Forty square miles of Tehran just gone, vaporized into nothing. NO life no plants no buildings. The living will be more then happy to talk peace with not only us but the world.

 

[deltex1]

Boots on the ground is NOT what is called for. They WANT a nuke? I say send them one right over their main city. We need to kill muslims I agree but tens of thousands at ONCE.

Then and only then will we have their attention.

Sorry, but that's way over the line.

I disagree, one on them and one on Islamic State. Just flat get rid of them.

And then there are the nutters who want to see lots of innocent children killed, or at least maimed.

What the fuck you think is happening now, GERTRUDE?

 

[Liminal]

It is being said that the talking with Iran has made the world LESS safe. It's being said that the meetings have produced nothing at all for all the countries threatened by Iran. Everything has been in Iran's favor, and their chief negotiator is being hailed in Iran as a hero.

What has been accomplished ? Has any centrifuges been shut down ? Any Uranium, or Plutonium been confiscated ? have the many long-range missles been destroyed ? Have all the locations of weapons development been located ? Has Iran renounced their calls (as late as 2 weeks ago) of "Death to America" ? Or to wipe Israel of the face of the earth ? Has any of Iran's military imperialism been reduced (it's been increased).

The talks are a joke. The Iranians are continuing development of their nuclear arms, and there long range missle can travel 1200 miles (Israel is 900 miles from Iran)

Is it possible that the thing to do now is invade Iran with a coalition of threatened countries ? Enter with hundreds of thousands of troops ? Fight the Iranians,and ultimately surround Tehran much like US troops did to Mexico City in 1846. Then interrogate the Iranians to get as much information as possible. Search every square yard of the country for nuclear weapon development, and destroy every bit of it.

Then it would be necessary to keep US troops there for years into the future, like troops are still in Korea Japan and Germany.

Is it possible that Obama's avoidance of war (at any cost) is just a repeat of Neville Chamberlain and Hitler in the 1930s ? Is our peaceful approach nothing but just what Iran needs to build up and become another Hitler war machine, only with a nuclear component ?

You lead the charge General.

 

[The VOR]

It is being said that the talking with Iran has made the world LESS safe. It's being said that the meetings have produced nothing at all for all the countries threatened by Iran. Everything has been in Iran's favor, and their chief negotiator is being hailed in Iran as a hero.

What has been accomplished ? Has any centrifuges been shut down ? Any Uranium, or Plutonium been confiscated ? have the many long-range missles been destroyed ? Have all the locations of weapons development been located ? Has Iran renounced their calls (as late as 2 weeks ago) of "Death to America" ? Or to wipe Israel of the face of the earth ? Has any of Iran's military imperialism been reduced (it's been increased).

The talks are a joke. The Iranians are continuing development of their nuclear arms, and there long range missle can travel 1200 miles (Israel is 900 miles from Iran)

Is it possible that the thing to do now is invade Iran with a coalition of threatened countries ? Enter with hundreds of thousands of troops ? Fight the Iranians,and ultimately surround Tehran much like US troops did to Mexico City in 1846. Then interrogate the Iranians to get as much information as possible. Search every square yard of the country for nuclear weapon development, and destroy every bit of it.

Then it would be necessary to keep US troops there for years into the future, like troops are still in Korea Japan and Germany.

Is it possible that Obama's avoidance of war (at any cost) is just a repeat of Neville Chamberlain and Hitler in the 1930s ? Is our peaceful approach nothing but just what Iran needs to build up and become another Hitler war machine, only with a nuclear component ?

The time has come for you to admit that you clearly don't have a clue.

 

[Liminal]

Sorry, but that's way over the line.

I disagree, one on them and one on Islamic State. Just flat get rid of them.

The "Islamic State" is scattered in cells from Mauritania to the Philippines.

You cannot nuke an IDEA.

Now, maybe one on the Kaaba during Ramadamadingdong might cramp their style, but, that is a whole different thing.

The main force in the middle east would do. There are 1.5 Billion muslims so coming up short 100k in radicals is really no loss to either. The loss would allow "moderates" if any to take the lead.

I fail to see how we get them all to gather under our nukes.

One mile ABOVE ground burns everything for a radius of forty miles. Everything, so right over their capital. I have been reading the fallout factors and learned a few things.
1, Ground contact...hard surface increases fallout.
2, Water contact. reduced radiation because of the "give" of water.
3, Air explosion LEAST fallout possible. Could be re-inhabited in less then a year.

Forty square miles of Tehran just gone, vaporized into nothing. NO life no plants no buildings. The living will be more then happy to talk peace with not only us but the world.

None of which would do anything to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

 

[DarkFury]

I disagree, one on them and one on Islamic State. Just flat get rid of them.

The "Islamic State" is scattered in cells from Mauritania to the Philippines.

You cannot nuke an IDEA.

Now, maybe one on the Kaaba during Ramadamadingdong might cramp their style, but, that is a whole different thing.

The main force in the middle east would do. There are 1.5 Billion muslims so coming up short 100k in radicals is really no loss to either. The loss would allow "moderates" if any to take the lead.

I fail to see how we get them all to gather under our nukes.

One mile ABOVE ground burns everything for a radius of forty miles. Everything, so right over their capital. I have been reading the fallout factors and learned a few things.
1, Ground contact...hard surface increases fallout.
2, Water contact. reduced radiation because of the "give" of water.
3, Air explosion LEAST fallout possible. Could be re-inhabited in less then a year.

Forty square miles of Tehran just gone, vaporized into nothing. NO life no plants no buildings. The living will be more then happy to talk peace with not only us but the world.

None of which would do anything to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

You burn down the house and mowing the lawn becomes a LOT less important.

 

[Liminal]

The "Islamic State" is scattered in cells from Mauritania to the Philippines.

You cannot nuke an IDEA.

Now, maybe one on the Kaaba during Ramadamadingdong might cramp their style, but, that is a whole different thing.

The main force in the middle east would do. There are 1.5 Billion muslims so coming up short 100k in radicals is really no loss to either. The loss would allow "moderates" if any to take the lead.

I fail to see how we get them all to gather under our nukes.

One mile ABOVE ground burns everything for a radius of forty miles. Everything, so right over their capital. I have been reading the fallout factors and learned a few things.
1, Ground contact...hard surface increases fallout.
2, Water contact. reduced radiation because of the "give" of water.
3, Air explosion LEAST fallout possible. Could be re-inhabited in less then a year.

Forty square miles of Tehran just gone, vaporized into nothing. NO life no plants no buildings. The living will be more then happy to talk peace with not only us but the world.

None of which would do anything to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

You burn down the house and mowing the lawn becomes a LOT less important.

Fortune cookie wisdom won't deter Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

 

[Kondor3]

If we launch on Iran we'd better get (1) their Leadership, (2) their nuke-labs, (3) their nuke-fuel stockpiles and (4) their ICBM silos. Their conventional stuff we can handle.

I just don't see us as having reached that point yet.

 

[Liminal]

If we launch on Iran we'd better get (1) their Leadership, (2) their nuke-labs, (3) their nuke-fuel stockpiles and (4) their ICBM silos. Their conventional stuff we can handle.

I just don't see us as having reached that point yet.

No guarantees of getting any of that stuff. It's either invade or make a deal, nothing short of that could be effective.

 

[deltex1]

The main force in the middle east would do. There are 1.5 Billion muslims so coming up short 100k in radicals is really no loss to either. The loss would allow "moderates" if any to take the lead.

I fail to see how we get them all to gather under our nukes.

One mile ABOVE ground burns everything for a radius of forty miles. Everything, so right over their capital. I have been reading the fallout factors and learned a few things.
1, Ground contact...hard surface increases fallout.
2, Water contact. reduced radiation because of the "give" of water.
3, Air explosion LEAST fallout possible. Could be re-inhabited in less then a year.

Forty square miles of Tehran just gone, vaporized into nothing. NO life no plants no buildings. The living will be more then happy to talk peace with not only us but the world.

None of which would do anything to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

You burn down the house and mowing the lawn becomes a LOT less important.

Fortune cookie wisdom won't deter Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Nor will negotiations...so what is left?

 

[DarkFury]

If we launch on Iran we'd better get (1) their Leadership, (2) their nuke-labs, (3) their nuke-fuel stockpiles and (4) their ICBM silos. Their conventional stuff we can handle.

I just don't see us as having reached that point yet.

No guarantees of getting any of that stuff. It's either invade or make a deal, nothing short of that could be effective.

You take out the chain of comand first then you take the spoils.

 

[deltex1]

Obama and his administration is clearly floundering. The ME is chaotic. My surmise is that our military is humoring the President...nodding their head as he makes his indecisive decisions. And the military is also watching as Sunnis kill Shiia and vice versa...and as sunni nations get more involved. At some point all hell will break loose and let's hope our military has a plan to foment chaos in iran and bring that regime down.

 

[eagle1462010]

PEACE THRU STRENGTH..............

When you negotiate with a country like Iran........you do it with the tip of the spear at their throats and say..............OR ELSE...............

Under this negotiation you must be able to back it up..................Invasion isn't necessary................All sites targetted including defensive positions like the Silk Worm sites..............and command and control sites...............

Their is no guarantee that the program will be totally destroyed.................There are no guarantees in War period......................

Gun Boat Diplomacy does work................the new paper deal will be as useless as the Clinton's with North Korea.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Obama and his administration is clearly floundering. The ME is chaotic. My surmise is that our military is humoring the President...nodding their head as he makes his indecisive decisions. And the military is also watching as Sunnis kill Shiia and vice versa...and as sunni nations get more involved. At some point all hell will break loose and let's hope our military has a plan to foment chaos in iran and bring that regime down.

It's not just the ME, now the Ukraine is in play. Floundering is a mild way of putting the ineptness of this administration

 

[Kondor3]

If we launch on Iran we'd better get (1) their Leadership, (2) their nuke-labs, (3) their nuke-fuel stockpiles and (4) their ICBM silos. Their conventional stuff we can handle.

I just don't see us as having reached that point yet.

No guarantees of getting any of that stuff. It's either invade or make a deal, nothing short of that could be effective.

If it comes to war, do we drop bunker-busters (conventional and/or nuke-tipped) to get the labs?

 

[Liminal]

If we launch on Iran we'd better get (1) their Leadership, (2) their nuke-labs, (3) their nuke-fuel stockpiles and (4) their ICBM silos. Their conventional stuff we can handle.

I just don't see us as having reached that point yet.

No guarantees of getting any of that stuff. It's either invade or make a deal, nothing short of that could be effective.

If it comes to war, do we drop bunker-busters (conventional and/or nuke-tipped) to get the labs?

Either way there's no guarantee we know where all the underground sites are.

 

[Liminal]

If we launch on Iran we'd better get (1) their Leadership, (2) their nuke-labs, (3) their nuke-fuel stockpiles and (4) their ICBM silos. Their conventional stuff we can handle.

I just don't see us as having reached that point yet.

No guarantees of getting any of that stuff. It's either invade or make a deal, nothing short of that could be effective.

You take out the chain of comand first then you take the spoils.

Uh huh, very sophisticated strategy General.