Warning Iran

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Feb 22, 2004
82,283
10,139
2,070
Minnesota
Petraeus warns Iran

Britain on Board for strikes against Iran

Madeleine Albright says war with Iran cannot be taken off the table

Three separate sources today.

I was watching Glenn Beck briefly, while Heroes was on commercial and they were discussing encursions into Iran against military facilities. I dont know any details about that. I could have misunderstood it. But it makes me wonder if Iran is really closer than some of us want to believe.

I must make a note here. Any "air strikes" or limited insertions into Iran, any direct attack on them will result in them attacking us directly in Iraq. IF we plan to bomb them we damn sure better be able to degrade their military to ineffective or we will be in a shooting war with their army in Iraq.
 
I must make a note here. Any "air strikes" or limited insertions into Iran, any direct attack on them will result in them attacking us directly in Iraq. IF we plan to bomb them we damn sure better be able to degrade their military to ineffective or we will be in a shooting war with their army in Iraq.

I agree. Iran is NOT Iraq. Any attack would have to effectively destroy Iran's ability to wage war. What politicians running their mouthes refuse to look at just like they didn't look at the factional outcome in Iraq is Iranians may hate their government, but they hate us MORE, and they are as nationalistic as we are.

And as deadcandance points out, any such attack WILL lead to attempted reprisal by the shia in Iraq.

If we aren't prepared to go in and beat down and subjugate Iran a la WWII, we don't need to bother with some half-assed BS that's just going to piss Iran off.
 
France and germany should take the lead on this one or, if we wait just another year or so, the Dems can deal with it. After all, they have the answer to everything.
 
France and germany should take the lead on this one or, if we wait just another year or so, the Dems can deal with it. After all, they have the answer to everything.

Iran will possess more nuke-tipped ICBM's than the former Soviet Union before France and Germany will admit there is a problem.
 
LOL...

Begs the question: How many nukes should Iran be allowed to use before any other nation is justified in retaliating?

One, only one. As it's in mid-flight and the alarms are going off everywhere they should understand that they are about to obliterated. The end of the Persian Empire.
 
One, only one. As it's in mid-flight and the alarms are going off everywhere they should understand that they are about to obliterated. The end of the Persian Empire.

I doubt it...we would be hearing from the UN, the Dems, MoveOn.org and a host of others how Iranian nukes are the only way they had to make their point and the only means they had to fight the imperialistic, satanic US. Of course, then we would have years of discussion, diplomatic efforts and a whole bunch of "blame game politics" (who knew what and when did they know it). By the time we got through all that, ground zero would be habitable once more. The Persian Empire is safe.
 
I doubt it...we would be hearing from the UN, the Dems, MoveOn.org and a host of others how Iranian nukes are the only way they had to make their point and the only means they had to fight the imperialistic, satanic US. Of course, then we would have years of discussion, diplomatic efforts and a whole bunch of "blame game politics" (who knew what and when did they know it). By the time we got through all that, ground zero would be habitable once more. The Persian Empire is safe.

Don't want to be picky but you asked how many they should be able to "use". That was where "one" came from. As far as their nuclear capability is concerned it's getting along in the UN and the IAEA, they have to sort it.
 
Don't want to be picky but you asked how many they should be able to "use". That was where "one" came from. As far as their nuclear capability is concerned it's getting along in the UN and the IAEA, they have to sort it.

Oh, I understand what you meant. I was just ranting a bit...
 
Now if AMerica is actually focusing on the military option then they better make sure they do a "clean" job of wiping out Iranian missile facilities and their airfields. Because Iran has a small scale capacity to build short missiles which can reach U.S bases in the Middle East and also Israel. Iran is no basket case. But if the U.S keeps toying with what to do with Iran then it might be too late. By next year they might have the capabilities to fit nuclear warheads in their Shahab range of missiles. They can threaten the strategic Straits Of Hormuz and disrupt oil supplies.

Plus , I dont think a U.S attack on Iran will go down very well with the Commies in Beijing. And the Russians will also start whining and "protest" in the Security Council as usual.This might seriously affect U.S-China-Russia relationships which is already very fragile.
 

Forum List

Back
Top