UAL747
Topic Author
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:15 am

Seems Iran is stepping up the rhetoric, and the US is responding with sending another (3rd) aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf. President Obama said in the State of the Union address that he would not take any option, including a military option, to make sure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/...l/UPI-92161328085000/?spt=hts&or=4

Iran just bluffing and flexing muscle? It's a shame though. That country could be such a great nation.

UAL
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:27 am

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

So they say. I have my doubts.

The people who run that country aren't stupid, and they have to know that the US, but also the world in general, is just itching for a reason to remove them from power. Attacking anyone is going to be that reason. Especially if it's a NATO country. It wouldn't be like Iraq, where there was serious debate over the validity of the war, and only a few countries went in. It would be like Afghanistan, where the entire world was in support, and helped out.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
That country could be such a great nation.

It really could.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
lewis
Posts: 3564
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:31 am

Unless by US soil you mean an embassy or something, I am not sure how they would even come close to doing that before being blown back to the 10th century.
 
varigb707
Posts: 1236
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:02 am

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:35 am

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
just bluffing and flexing muscle

That's all Iran is doing it. What's his name, president or Iran? The bearded dude? He's just the "weasel" behind the bully.
Not that there's any bully on this case. But there's always a little guy, behind any bullies and those - the little guys - are always barking stuff. But never do anything.

Y'all have a great night.

Curly Howard is laughing at Mahmoud Ahmadinejad :
First, I said 'hey' and then I said 'now'. "Hey Now!" - Hank K.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:55 am

Quoting lewis (Reply 2):
Unless by US soil you mean an embassy or something, I am not sure how they would even come close to doing that before being blown back to the 10th century.

I would guess terrorism.

Come on Iran, you are only feeding into the war propaganda machine, it's really not helping your case at all
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 2509
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:25 am

Well good luck with that. That third carrier group is a go ahead, we dare you type of deal IMO. I don't think Obama is at all provoking them, but it does send a clear message. I understand they have a large military but how strong is their capability to actually hit the US mainland? I'm going to guess pretty small.
Blue
All of the opinions stated above are mine and do not represent Airliners.net or my employer unless otherwise stated.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:44 am

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 5):
I don't think Obama is at all provoking them, but it does send a clear message.

What message is that? How is it not provoking them? Why don't we quit pissing them off so we don't have to call their bluff. Sure we could wipe them off the face of the Earth, but what good would that do, and at what cost? I don't want another (preventable) 9/11

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 5):
I understand they have a large military but how strong is their capability to actually hit the US mainland? I'm going to guess pretty small.

Conventionally, basically 0. But all it took was 19 guys to kill 3000 of our civilians.

And I'm not being a biatch or anything. We as a country need to stand up for ourselves and not let others push us around. But this whole Iran thing is completely unnecessary. They don't like us, they have reason not to like us, so why do we have to "assert our power" in the region?

inb4 becuz they're gonna nuke errbody!!!1
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 3:04 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 1):
The people who run that country aren't stupid, and they have to know that the US, but also the world in general, is just itching for a reason to remove them from power. Attacking anyone is going to be that reason. Especially if it's a NATO country. It wouldn't be like Iraq, where there was serious debate over the validity of the war, and only a few countries went in. It would be like Afghanistan, where the entire world was in support, and helped out

  

I think I could name quite a few countries that would like to send Iran back to the stone age... That is one scary country run by some very scare fellows...
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
Quokkas
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:51 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 3:12 am

So for years the US and others have publicly stated that they are prepared to attack and/ or invade Iran, in addition to attempts to economically cripple the country and this is not seen as being threatening or provocative. When Iran, having seen the US and others invade other countries in the region and having been invaded by Iraq with the encouragement of the West, responds by saying that if attacked it will respond in whatever way it can, this is called a threat and a provocation?

Credible evidence? Now where have I heard that before? Oh yes, those weapons of mass destruction that were spirited out of Iraq in the back of a taxi, maybe? I well remember the footage on television after the invasion of Iraq purporting to show the discovery of a potential chemical weapons factory. The "inspector" used the very scientific method of ascertaining the precise nature of the dangerous chemical of sticking his finger into some powder and licking it! I suppose that had he dropped dead on the spot that would have been proof enough. Fortunately this particular "weapon of mass destruction" turned out to be milk powder, despite the "credible evidence" to the contrary.

Have you noticed that when someone else has or may have something it is a weapon of mass destruction, but when the "good guys" have the same thing it is a defensive shield?
“Not to laugh, not to cry, not to hate, but understand.” Spinoza
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 3:18 am

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 8):
Have you noticed that when someone else has or may have something it is a weapon of mass destruction, but when the "good guys" have the same thing it is a defensive shield?

But Iran said they want to wipe Israel off the map! (or that was incorrectly translated but none of my friends believe me   )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud...22Wiped_off_the_map.22_controversy
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 3:18 am

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Iran just bluffing and flexing muscle? It's a shame though. That country could be such a great nation.

If only they'd kowtow to the US and abase themselves before their imperial masters! Then they would be a great country.
 
Quokkas
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:51 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 3:52 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 9):
But Iran said they want to wipe Israel off the map!

Iran clearly wants the end of the Israeli state as a Zionist construct in pretty much the same way as the West wanted to see the end of the former USSR. This did not mean exterminating the entire population of the USSR but the desire to see a country that was capitalist based and democratic. In Iran's case it means the recognition of Palestine but not genocide or extermination of the Jewish population.

Iran is unusual in that it doesn't support a two-state solution but many of those who profess support take actions that make one unlikely. However, that's perhaps the theme of another thread.
“Not to laugh, not to cry, not to hate, but understand.” Spinoza
 
UAL747
Topic Author
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 3:55 am

I think by attack, they are saying some sort of state funded terrorist attack in the US against transportation, infrastructure, and buildings that hold some sort of US national sentiment or importance. I highly doubt they are going to saddle up as a country and come our direction.

However, even a state funded terrorist plot would render themselves bleeding from the inside with the response. I'm fairly certain it's rhetoric, but it seems the rhetoric is escalating more than it has before.

Of course, this is an election year too for the US, perhaps the Obama administration is flexing it's vocal muscles as well to appease the war-happy people of this country.

Personally, I don't see either side attacking each other, especially the us in anything preemptive. Iran it would equal death for their nations political system, as well as many civilians. For the US, world condemnation and reminiscence of the Bush era.

UAL
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12361
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:22 am

Of course, most of what is going on is a lot of saber rattling on both sides as well as huge questions as to the accuracy and impartiality of info on Iran's nuke program. I suspect much of it is via Israel who may be hyping up the alleged nuke bomb development in Iran to gain support for their often controversial policies.

There is 70+ years of bad history between Iran and the USA. Because of the oil there and the fears of an expanding Soviet Union in the 'cold war' era, we supported a government to be friendly to the West, mainly with the forceful placing of the Shah Pavali family that repressed the conservative Islamic Imams. That in turn caused the rise of the Islamic Republic, the chasing out of the Shah, the USA Embassy Hostage Crises from late 1979 to the day Ronald Reagan took office in 1981 and a largely hard core Islamic state. Since then, they have pushed a message of and have supported hate toward the Western governments (although not most people), especially the USA and Israel They have supported terror against Israel (via Syria and Lebanon) and given moral support to those against the USA. In recent years, there is good reason to consider they getting a nuke weapon, even a 'dirty' one to be used vs. Israel, to gain position in the Islamic world.

Of course too, you have the extreme right wing, pro-military, anti-Islamic powers in the USA who are looking for an enemy and Iran looks to be a good target for their hate.
 
einsteinboricua
Posts: 4610
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:27 am

Kinda reminds me of back in the 2004 elections where a bit before the elections Osama bin Laden published a video message. I think that may have had an impact on Bush's reelection. Maybe Iran is bluffing and if they aren't it because they are waiting for an excuse to close the Strait of Hormuz (which is even more of a reason to wean off of oil altogether: bluffs like this won't affect us).
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:29 am

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 11):
Iran clearly wants the end of the Israeli state as a Zionist construct in pretty much the same way as the West wanted to see the end of the former USSR. This did not mean exterminating the entire population of the USSR but the desire to see a country that was capitalist based and democratic. In Iran's case it means the recognition of Palestine but not genocide or extermination of the Jewish population.

Lol I know, I was trying to be sarcastic. But yeah that is a big problem, people think that the Israel government = the Israeli people. Also, the Iranian people are not like the clerics. The do not like the Israel GOVERNMENT, the way it treats Palestine, and the threats the government makes to Iran. That being said, Iran is far from perfect. But the minute both sides can see their wrongs, the sooner we might see peace

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 10):
If only they'd kowtow to the US and abase themselves before their imperial masters! Then they would be a great country.

Yeah I don't see why they don't see this either. We didn't take their oil in the 50s, we didn't overthrow their government and put in a dictator, we didn't supply Iraq with weapons, we didn't accidentally down a civilian jet, we aren't sanctioning the crap out of them, and lastly, we didn't invade the 2 countries next to it! When will those dumb Iranians learn?   (sarcasm just in case anyone didn't pick up on that)

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 8):
So for years the US and others have publicly stated that they are prepared to attack and/ or invade Iran,

Don't forget the drone of ours they shot down, and all those dead scientists (well that could have been Israel, but that is probably the same thing in their eyes)
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:20 am

Here's a good 3 minute video on all this. Makes you take a step back and ask yourself what are facts, assumptions, and outright lies... http://www.fox19.com/story/16656746/...ally-plotting-an-attack-on-us-soil
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8529
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:43 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6):
Conventionally, basically 0. But all it took was 19 guys to kill 3000 of our civilians.

all it took was 16 different US secret services who did not talk to each other, did not match their knowledge to make that happen. Instead of menacing millions of air travellers daily they should have got their act together by now, having had 10 years time to do that.

If not, you'll get the same surprises again. But compared to what 3 aircraft carriers and a number of bases in the Emirates can do, this is a mouse attacking an elephant.
powered by Eierlikör
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:57 am

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):
If not, you'll get the same surprises again. But compared to what 3 aircraft carriers and a number of bases in the Emirates can do, this is a mouse attacking an elephant.

I don't want even a mouse attacking us. I don't want our military to kill any Iranians either. I firmly believe we can get past this mess with a net loss of 0 lives. Even terrorists, it's better if there wasn't a conflict that encourages a son to strap a bomb to him and kill himself (and others.)

That being said, I don't see this ending very well. What do I do this election when I want to vote for a candidate that will quit provoking Iran?
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 8:15 am

and equally, the US is no doubt willing to attack on Iranian soil... so nothing new on either side really.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8529
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:13 am

I am with you, DeltaMD90, but the problem started when you weren't even born.

If you so want, it was the French' fault , allowing Khomeini to return to THR anfd they even paid for the flight I guess, an AF 742. Not too long after, so called "students" stormed the US Embassy in THR, staying there and keeping 52 US diplomats hostage for 444 days. It was at the end of President Carters term that this was solved, the hostages freed and flown out to Frankfurt and taken from the re to Lindsay Air Station, a hospital in Wiesbaden. Reagan was already President but he allowed Carter to fly to FRA to meet the hostages here and take credit for solving the case. A noble gesture by a noble President.

Iran has ever since provoked the US, Israel and the Western Nations. IMHO, the Iranians don't deserve the political leaders they have, they are fine people, intelligent, but what can you do as a singlke person when a criminal gang takes over, regardless on what type of religion their ideology is based. The average people try to make a living and cope with the situation.

It would be great if that could be solved without violence, my usual optimism is reluctant to make me believe that. Sending aircraft carriers to the region and standing up against a regime that provokes is better than the appeasement politics in the Europe of the 1930s.

It is up to you guys to elect a responsible President.
powered by Eierlikör
 
Rara
Posts: 2296
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:41 am

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:24 pm

Iran willing to attack on US soil, US willing to attack on Iran soil - seems pretty fair to me.  

Seriously, no country in the world, democracy or not, is looking for open conflict with the United States. It's entirely in America's hands to deescalate this situation. The US acts in a way that it would never accept from any other country, and that needs to stop.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 18):
What do I do this election when I want to vote for a candidate that will quit provoking Iran?

Very good point. For fear of appearing weak, no candidate (except for Ron Paul) would dare to take a stance that a significant part of American voters would no doubt agree with, which is: stop messing with the situation.
Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:46 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 20):
Sending aircraft carriers to the region and standing up against a regime that provokes is better than the appeasement politics in the Europe of the 1930s.

Don't get me wrong, I'm on neither side. I'm for non-intervention, but if a country is blocking/threatening/provoking us when we are doing something legitimate in our interests that doesn't harm legitimate governments/populations, I say fully use our powerful military that we spend trillions on. I'd hate to see another Hitler (from any country) and hope the US, in addition to others, would prevent that. Iran is not Hitler, it's another Iraq. I wish they wouldn't get a nuke, but really, all you have to do is not blindly believe the western MSM, do a little bit of research, take off the tin foil hat, admit that some actions we have done are wrong, and bam! It doesn't look so grim anymore.

Quoting Rara (Reply 21):
Very good point. For fear of appearing weak, no candidate (except for Ron Paul) would dare to take a stance

And welcome to my dilemma! lol. I know it would be a "throw away vote" but maybe, just maybe, it'll send a message or show support for a 3rd party in the future, or something. At least I can say "I voted, and President ______ doing this to Iran is not my fault!"

(And no, I wouldn't just write in someone like Frank Lorenzo just so I can go up to people and tell them that the country is messed up and it's not my fault because my guy didn't get elected)  
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
Stabilator
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:42 am

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:05 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 18):
That being said, I don't see this ending very well. What do I do this election when I want to vote for a candidate that will quit provoking Iran?

You vote Ron Paul

It's getting to a point, for me as a conservative, where all this warmongering talk and chest-thumping is getting tiring. The Iranian clerics know if they try another 9/11, swift and relentless vengeance will be brought upon them and upon their country. Quite simply, the puppet and his string pullers will die. And there is something all humans seek: self preservation. Let's stop paying so much attention to the crying baby in the room and perhaps it'll shut up.
So we beat on against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:18 pm

Quoting Stabilator (Reply 23):
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 18):
That being said, I don't see this ending very well. What do I do this election when I want to vote for a candidate that will quit provoking Iran?

You vote Ron Paul

Plan on it  (or perhaps Gary Johnson if the Libertarian Party gains a lot of momentum)

And I agree with the rest of your post. I will point out though:

Quoting Stabilator (Reply 23):
Let's stop paying so much attention to the crying baby in the room and perhaps it'll shut up.

Some of the "crying" they do, I'll admit, is somewhat legitimate. Before I get flamed, the legitimate complaints are the same thing many Europeans say and many Americans here say, I'm not some strange jihadist anti-American hippy person
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:11 pm

Quoting Stabilator (Reply 23):
You vote Ron Paul

I can't wait for March to get here so I can vote for Ron Paul in Alabama's Republican primary.
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:21 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 24):
Plan on it (or perhaps Gary Johnson if the Libertarian Party gains a lot of momentum)

Chalk one up for me, too, regarding a third party candidate, particularly someone from the Libertarian Party. I'm not too sure about Ron Paul, tho...

If you ask me, I think that's what this country needs, a President-elect from a third party. Why should voting for a third party candidate be considered a throw away vote?
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:31 pm

Quoting steeler83 (Reply 26):
If you ask me, I think that's what this country needs, a President-elect from a third party. Why should voting for a third party candidate be considered a throw away vote?

Because they are seen as having "no chance in winning so why bother." Many people are interested in a third party, but the lack of organization scares people away from voting for them.

I believe that Gary Johnson (who is trying to get the Libertarian nomination) is opposed to attacking Iran. I'd gladly vote for Paul or Johnson. If we minded our own business, Iran would have no reason to want to attack us
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:22 pm

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 5):
Well good luck with that. That third carrier group is a go ahead, we dare you type of deal IMO. I don't think Obama is at all provoking them, but it does send a clear message. I understand they have a large military but how strong is their capability to actually hit the US mainland? I'm going to guess pretty small.

Do you know what a US carrier battle group looks like to an Iranian when it goes through the Strait? It is only 34 miles wide at its narrowest point. The BBC interviewed people in Iran a couple weeks ago and it wasn't like they didn't notice when the second group showed up, you can see the ships from shore.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 12):

Personally, I don't see either side attacking each other, especially the us in anything preemptive. Iran it would equal death for their nations political system, as well as many civilians.

Absolutely true.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 15):

Lol I know, I was trying to be sarcastic. But yeah that is a big problem, people think that the Israel government = the Israeli people. Also, the Iranian people are not like the clerics. The do not like the Israel GOVERNMENT, the way it treats Palestine, and the threats the government makes to Iran. That being said, Iran is far from perfect. But the minute both sides can see their wrongs, the sooner we might see peace

Overall, I think the Iranian people are good. During the Arab Spring they rose up against their government and were crushed by the military. But, their government isn't exactly extending an olive branch when they are determined to make nuclear weapons.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 18):

That being said, I don't see this ending very well. What do I do this election when I want to vote for a candidate that will quit provoking Iran?

I would say that Iran is doing more to provoke the international (not just the US) community then any of us are doing to them. There's a far less chance of them attacking us on US soil then their is Iran sending a nuclear warhead over to Israel. That, would be be far more destabilizing than a one time, terrorist attack on US soil.

Quoting Rara (Reply 21):
It's entirely in America's hands to deescalate this situation. The US acts in a way that it would never accept from any other country, and that needs to stop.

We're not the ones building massive underground nuclear facilities in a very unstable part of the world anymore. Unlike Iraq, there is almost international consensus that Iran is trying to make a nuclear bomb. The NY Times said,

"Knowing that their findings would be compared with the flawed Iraq intelligence that preceded the 2003 invasion — and has complicated American moves on Iran — the inspectors devoted a section of the report to “credibility of information.” The information was from more than 10 countries and from independent sources, they said; some was backed up by interviews with foreigners who had helped Iran.

The report laid out the case that Iran had moved far beyond the blackboard to create computer models of nuclear explosions in 2008 and 2009 and conducted experiments on nuclear triggers. It said the simulations focused on how shock waves from conventional explosives could compress the spherical fuel at the core of a nuclear device, which starts the chain reaction that ends in nuclear explosion. "


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/wo...r-device.html?_r=1&ref=global-home

It's no coincidence that the US has developed a 30,000 lb bunker busting bomb deliverable from a B-2 Stealth Bomber. There can only be two countries this would be used as a deterrent.
Usaf Gets New 30,000lbs Bunker Busting Bomb (by LAXintl Nov 16 2011 in Military Aviation & Space Flight)
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:42 pm

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 28):
I would say that Iran is doing more to provoke the international (not just the US) community then any of us are doing to them. There's a far less chance of them attacking us on US soil then their is Iran sending a nuclear warhead over to Israel.

But that is the issue here. I heard that and used to believe that until I looked at the arguments for that, and most don't hold water. Mr A did not say he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map" ("off the map" doesn't even exist in Persian as an idiom) but rather he wanted the Israeli regime to be removed from the pages of time. Looking at a lot of what they say, their big beef is getting the Israeli regime out or at least treating Palestinians less badly.

And look at Iran's history. Few countries would benefit more from a nuke than Iran. Why do they not say they want it for defense? I have often wondered that until I realized that if they admitted to wanting a nuke at all would almost condemn them to more sanctions and/or invasions. They say they want nuclear energy, I agree that that's BS. But again, look at their situation... I'd want a nuke if I were them too. It's the ultimate "do not get invaded card"
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 12:07 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 29):

And look at Iran's history. Few countries would benefit more from a nuke than Iran. Why do they not say they want it for defense? I have often wondered that until I realized that if they admitted to wanting a nuke at all would almost condemn them to more sanctions and/or invasions. They say they want nuclear energy, I agree that that's BS. But again, look at their situation... I'd want a nuke if I were them too. It's the ultimate "do not get invaded card"

Isn't that the same argument that North Korea uses for their nuclear program? Unlike N. Korea Iran has consistently been able to project influence in the region without nuclear weapons since the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. They provided EFPs and weapons to Shia militia and when things got too hot for Muqtadā al-Ṣadr in Sadr City he fled to Iran.

Similarly, Iran extended it's energy grid into Afghanistan to Herat (80 miles from the border) and funded highway projects in conjunction with India in Afghanistan. They hold enormous power in the region even without nuclear weapons.

If I was going to be worried about Iran, I wouldn't be worried about their influence in Iraq or Afghanistan, I'd be worried about how their currency has devalued and how that has pissed off the Iranian government. The EU is about to start a ban on crude oil imports and unemployment in the country is greater than 15%. One US Dollar in December got you 11,500 rails, now it gets you 18,800. It wasn't all that long ago that government subsidies for gas were adjusted resulting in a 300% increase in the cost of gas for everyday Iranians.

All that might sound like reasons to stop sanctions, but I think that means the sanctions are working and gives us (i.e., the world community) negotiating power. Most people in power in any government want to stay in power, Iran is no exception. Drop the nuke program and most of these problems with their citizenry go away, it also keeps Israel from killing more of their scientists.
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:08 am

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 30):
Isn't that the same argument that North Korea uses for their nuclear program? Unlike N. Korea Iran has consistently been able to project influence in the region without nuclear weapons since the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. They provided EFPs and weapons to Shia militia and when things got too hot for Muqtadā al-Ṣadr in Sadr City he fled to Iran.

Well I base it mostly off Iran's history. Also, look at what we (or the UN, I forgot) said to Libya in 2003 or 2004--do not develop nukes, we'll give you aid. He stopped, and now look at him... I am certain we wouldn't have invaded / supported the rebels if they had a nuke.

And I very highly doubt they'd provide a nuke. Tensions are bad enough with how Iran funds terrorists. If Iran got a nuke and a nuke went off in the US, Iran would become the largest mirror in the world faster than you could say "are you sure it was Iran?" Iran knows that and they know they can't hide behind a technicality in that situation.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 30):
All that might sound like reasons to stop sanctions, but I think that means the sanctions are working and gives us (i.e., the world community) negotiating power

True. The watered down sanctions were completely ineffective, but these new ones actually have a shot of working, I think. In the context of the whole situation, I'd still leave them alone, but who knows, they may drop their program (I hope they would.)

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 30):
Drop the nuke program and most of these problems with their citizenry go away,

I don't know... there is a compelling argument that the sanctions piss off the Iranian citizens more than their government does. Add in propaganda to the mix and you got some good anti-American sentiment...
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:38 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 31):
True. The watered down sanctions were completely ineffective, but these new ones actually have a shot of working, I think. In the context of the whole situation, I'd still leave them alone, but who knows, they may drop their program (I hope they would.)

We'll see China hasn't really followed the sanctions at all. They trade goods for oil and they make up around 20-30% of the Iranian oil exports. The UN inspectors are there now or will be in days, we'll see how cooperative they are.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 31):
I don't know... there is a compelling argument that the sanctions piss off the Iranian citizens more than their government does. Add in propaganda to the mix and you got some good anti-American sentiment...

I don't think you give the Iranian citizens enough credit. During the Arab Spring they did protest against the government, although those protests were brutally repressed, the youth of Iran are savvy enough to use Twitter and YouTube as seen by the numerous videos that came out during the uprising. It's not that they can't find a way to see what the rest of the world is saying or communicate outside of the regime. I think at least some of the citizens know why this is all happening.
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 13388
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 8:23 am

I obviously do not want the Iranian government to succeed in building a nuclear weapon, however it appears to me that the easiest manner to ensure the safety and stability of the region - and the U.S. strategic interests there - would be to declare the following policy, which should sound familiar:

"Effective immediately, it will be the policy of the United States government to consider any nuclear, chemical, or biological attack on the nation of Israel, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any NATO member state as an attack by the nation of Iran on the United States itself."

This way, you no longer have to step up the rhetoric of sanctions for Iran developing nuclear weapons; the U.S. government would accept it as inevitable that they will create them, but establish policy designed to ensure Iran keeps them under lock and key for fear of their own destruction.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
MadameConcorde
Posts: 9197
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:08 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 9:51 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6):
But all it took was 19 guys to kill 3000 of our civilians.

Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil?

DEBKA Psyop: There is an Iranian hiding in your closet!

DEBKAfile Special Report February 2, 2012, 3:21 PM
Iran has completed the development of a nuclear weapon and awaits nothing more than a sign from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to start assembling its first nuclear bomb, said Israeli Military Intelligence Chief Major General Aviv Kochavi on Thursday, February 2.
....
Therefore, by the end of 2012 or early 2013 Iran may have a single nuclear bomb, but by 2015 the figure would jump to four or five.

http://www.debka.com/article/21700/

"Every tenth residential house in Lebanon," he said, "harbors a missile arsenal or launching position. Their sheer volume has reached a strategic dimension with which Israel will have to deal."

Let the fear mongering begin to grow!


UN atomic team in Iran for nuclear talks
Three-day visit by UN watchdog officials aims to address concerns about Tehran's nuclear ambitions amid rising tensions.

Officials from the United Nations nuclear agency are in Tehran for talks aimed at allaying concerns that Tehran is seeking a nuclear weapon.
...
"In particular we hope that Iran will engage with us on our concerns regarding the possible military dimensions of Iran's nuclear programme," said Nackaerts, who is heading the team along with Rafael Grossi, a top adviser to IAEA director Yukiya Amano.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middle...st/2012/01/201212941556996640.html

Iran has always allowed UN inspectors visiting their nuclear facilities.
There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12361
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:56 am

What some commenters (as well as I) very much fear is Israel attempting or partially succeeding in an air or terror attack upon nuke facilities in Iran sometime in the spring into early summer. Israel did an attack on nuke facilities in Iraq many years ago so they have the mentality, motivation and ability.

An attack would murder 1000's at the site, perhaps put millions of Iranians, Iraqis, Afghans and others at risk of premature death and major illness from nuclear fallout. Such an attack would probably trigger obscene levels of terrorism backed by Iran and the 'Islamic' world leading to draconian restrictions on travel and human rights everywhere. It could cause oil prices to skyrocket leading to massive economic damage including a world-wide depression perhaps even worse than in the 1930's. Of course, some hyperchristians would want this to happen to trigger the 'end times'.

I beg the world, including Iran to end it's foolish choices, Israel to totally reject an attack and the USA to what it takes to keep it from happening.
 
luckyone
Posts: 2279
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 4:27 pm

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 13):
There is 70+ years of bad history between Iran and the USA. Because of the oil there and the fears of an expanding Soviet Union in the 'cold war' era, we supported a government to be friendly to the West, mainly with the forceful placing of the Shah Pavali family that repressed the conservative Islamic Imams.

It goes back even further than that, and it's not just the US, it's much bigger. Just before the US overthrow of the Mossadeq government the Iranians had serious row with the British and the profits they were gaining via the AIOC at Iran's expense. Before that, Iran was basically a puppet controlled half by the British, half by the Russians, under dynastic rule whose elite was educated in the West that was completely disconnected from the majority of Iranians which is what the Revolution was about at the core. The Shah's relationship with the US accelerated things and was the straw that broke the camel's back. Iranians have also been resentful of foreigners since the beginning of time it seems. It's basically in their culture, though it's also in their culture to extract as much from their invaders as they can, so it's an interesting juxtaposition of values. The US is the latest big bad wolf--for valid reasons--but Iranian foreign policy has always been full of drama and bravado. And I dare say...for the last four or five hundred years Iran's vision of itself has been significantly more grandiose and important than it has been in reality.
 
Quokkas
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:51 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 5:41 pm

I readily admit that I do not know what propaganda the regime in Iran depends upon to maintain itself today on a daily basis. In a way it is immaterial but we do know that for more than a hundred years the region between Turkey, India and Russia has been contested by a number of powers, including those of the countries I have mentioned. In the twentieth century the main rivalry was between the US and the USSR, although minor parties like the UK have played a role. None of those powers have had the best interests of the inhabitants of the region as the paramount consideration. They have always put their own interests first. That is understandable despite any pretensions to the contrary. The first consideration of any state is its own interests, not those of another power or people.

Iran has experienced differing conditions throughout its history. At times it has been an Empire that was expanding and dominating neighbouring societies. At times it was subject to the control of others. Nowhere is this more evident when a government was overthrown and an unpopular dynasty installed. It is too late to cry over spilt milk and say if the West had only supported democratic movements against the dictatorship of the Shah things may have been different.

For whatever reasons (largely access to cheap oil and geo-strategic considerations (i.e. opposition to the USSR)) it was felt better to turn a blind eye to the repressive nature of the Shah's dictatorship that saw moderate opponents imprisoned or exiled. The direct consequence of this narrow approach was that when the Shah was overthrown there was no credible democratic alternative that was sufficiently organised to present an alternative to the Mullahs.

I recall discussing these issues with Iranian exiles in London many years ago and the people that I spoke to at the time warned that the continued repression of moderate criticism of the Shah could only feed the appetite and support for more radical parties. I wish that I could point to Internet links but at the time they were rare or non-existent in the West let alone in countries like Iran. I know that is hard to believe in this always connected age but it is true. At the time almost nobody had access to the Internet, for most people it did simply not exist and the idea that you should post every debate online never occurred to anybody.

Those warnings fell on willingly deaf ears with the result that when the Shah fell there was a power vacuum. Nature abhors a vacuum and the void was filled by the only people who had the freedom to organise under the Shah - the clerics. While some choose to blame France for allowing a cleric to return to Iran, in the absence of a credible and organised alternative it is unlikely that a genuine democratic regime would have resulted.

Today it is fashionable to portray Iran as the enemy of all that is decent. That fashion may be mistaken, not because I believe that Iran is some sort of paradise when it clearly isn't, but because the people who run Iran are less concerned with what happens outside Iran and more with what happens within.

The regime in Iran may use the spectre of Israel but they do not seriously want to get rid of Israel, despite a stated support for Palestine. Just like the US constantly warned of the danger of "reds under the beds", this warning is less about opponents overseas and more about opponents at home. If you opposed the incumbent president in the states there was a good chance that you were a cryptic commie in the same way that if you oppose the regime in Tehran you must be a Zionist or US agent. Neither side really cares, or ever has, about the real conditions facing real people in any other country.
“Not to laugh, not to cry, not to hate, but understand.” Spinoza
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:03 pm

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 33):
"Effective immediately, it will be the policy of the United States government to consider any nuclear, chemical, or biological attack on the nation of Israel, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any NATO member state as an attack by the nation of Iran on the United States itself."

This way, you no longer have to step up the rhetoric of sanctions for Iran developing nuclear weapons; the U.S. government would accept it as inevitable that they will create them, but establish policy designed to ensure Iran keeps them under lock and key for fear of their own destruction.

Oh boy, well first off, that is kind of obvious--Iran knows if they screw around too much with any of our allies it's basically screwing around with us. We are at the brink of war now over basically nothing. Secondly, like North Korea, they are not kept "under lock," instead they do stupid little stunts to piss us off without going to full blown war. But last, I have a big problem with this proposed "change of foreign policy..." why not do what is in OUR best interests and pull back, saving us lives, money, and headaches... additionally as a bonus, the motivation for terrorism against us will go down significantly!
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
luckyone
Posts: 2279
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:17 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 38):

Were it not for hydrocarbons, my friend, we would have done that long ago. As it is, unfortunately, oil is the world's blood right now. Iran obviously knows this. What they don't know is how long and how tolerant the big boys on the playground will be of an annoying pest intentionally stirring up trouble trying to get attention. The Iranian economy is in the tank, and its government is realistically holding on only by a thread. Much like the Pahlavi dynasty that preceded it, the Ayatollah is propped up by an iron-fisted military. He saw first-hand how quickly that can be rendered useless. They are well aware that Iran could blow itself apart (for the umpteenth time) and are doing their best to play their hand to deflect and redirect internal frustrations with their stagflation. It remains to be seen if it actually works.

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 37):

Well said!
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:22 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 38):

Oh boy, well first off, that is kind of obvious--Iran knows if they screw around too much with any of our allies it's basically screwing around with us. We are at the brink of war now over basically nothing. Secondly, like North Korea, they are not kept "under lock," instead they do stupid little stunts to piss us off without going to full blown war.

I wouldn't say its "basically nothing". There are some similarities between NK and Iran. Both are run by people who see a neighbor country as a threat to their existence and an attack on by either country on their neighbor would destabilize an entire region.

Iran's nuclear program is likely more to use as a bargaining chip to reduce sanctions similar to what North Korea used them for, although Iran doesn't have the food shortages NK does. As I mentioned above, the Iranian people are not blind to all this they used social networking during the '09 revolt they see what's going on outside their borders. IMO the leadership is looking for a way to start shipping oil again and keep the people of Iran happy by increasing the value of their currency and lowering the price of gas. However, in order to have that power they need a nuclear weapon to bargain with, I'm not sure Israel will let that happen.
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
kaitak
Posts: 8933
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:43 pm

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 40):
Iran's nuclear program is likely more to use as a bargaining chip to reduce sanctions similar to what North Korea used them for,

And the best way to do this is not to go down this road in the first place; Iran could now be a totally different country from the pariah it has now chosen to make itself. It could have nuclear power, too, and not be a pariah, but it has had every opportunity, but has chosen to obfuscate and obstruct, lie and hide the facts at every juncture; this is what has brought them to this point. They could have saved the billions these nuclear facilities have costs, plus the billions the sanctions currently (and ultimately will) cost their economy and not go down this road.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 40):
IMO the leadership is looking for a way to start shipping oil again and keep the people of Iran happy by increasing the value of their currency and lowering the price of gas

Again, they had this chance. I just wonder what will happen when the next Iranian presidential election comes up; Ahmedinejad can't stand again, so they'll have to find a new candidate - and cheat again, but this time, given the economic woes Iran now faces, I wonder if they will be able to stave off a counter revolution.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 40):
However, in order to have that power they need a nuclear weapon to bargain with, I'm not sure Israel will let that happen.

They certainly won't allow this to happen! Especially after what Khamenei said today ...

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/ira...-against-cancer-israel-538445.html

Just to summarise the supreme leader's speech;
- Israel a cancer that must be cut
- Iran will support any organisation or country that stands against Israel
- Iran has supported and will continue to support Hezbollah and Hamas
- Any attack by the US will lower its standing in the M/E,

... but still insists that its nuclear program is for peaceful means!
 
Quokkas
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:51 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:54 pm

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 40):
Both are run by people who see a neighbor country as a threat to their existence and an attack on by either country on their neighbor would destabilize an entire region.

I am not sure how to read your comment, but be assured that I am not attacking you, merely seeking clarification.

Do you see NK attacking SK and Iran attacking ...who?, or the other way round? Either way, it would be destabilising.

At present, whatever evidence may exist that both countries may be actively seeking nuclear weapons, there is limited if any evidence that they wish to actually attack anybody. There is plenty of propaganda, but precious verifiable evidence.

The whole situation is very confusing. If we look at history, in the not too distant past, with Western blessing, Iran has been attacked by Iraq, a country subsequently invaded by those countries that encouraged the attack on Iran in the first place. The irony in this attack was that Iraq used the weapons they were supplied to attack Iran on the Kurds in Iraq instead - you remember those dreadful weapons of mass destruction that Iraq really shouldn't have despite them having been supplied by the US in the first place?

I am reminded of George Orwell's prediction (although based on experience) of how truth becomes untruth, how allies become enemies overnight, how new-speak masks realities. Orwell wanted to call his work 1948 but the publishers wouldn't allow it it so it became 1984. Reality changed by a transposition of numbers!
“Not to laugh, not to cry, not to hate, but understand.” Spinoza
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:55 pm

Quoting kaitak (Reply 41):
And the best way to do this is not to go down this road in the first place; Iran could now be a totally different country from the pariah it has now chosen to make itself. It could have nuclear power, too, and not be a pariah, but it has had every opportunity, but has chosen to obfuscate and obstruct, lie and hide the facts at every juncture; this is what has brought them to this point.

Can't disagree with anything in your post. Well said.
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
Quokkas
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:51 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:25 pm

Quoting kaitak (Reply 41):
but has chosen to obfuscate and obstruct, lie and hide the facts at every juncture;

Iran is not the first, and will not be the last country to do as you have described. Indeed, some might argue that it is par for the course. Does Israel openly admit to its possession of nuclear weapons? (Note, I do not criticise Israel for possessing them, but merely ask why are the same standards not applied?) Of course they get away with it because they were clever enough not to sign any treaties that required disclosure. If only Iran had done the same. But then again...

A number of resolutions have been drawn up at the UN and other bodies calling for the removal of various types of weapons, including land mines. A number of countries refuse to abide by these resolutions on the grounds that they violate national sovereignty because the resolutions include provisions for inspection. Care to guess which countries head the list without suggesting Iran?

The use of phosphorous is also banned as a weapon used in areas where civilians are normally to be expected, but does this prevent its use by certain countries that initially deny they use it and then claim it was used in accord with international agreements? Who has done that recently and has any country been faced with sanctions?

It seems that we are highly selective when it comes to accusations of obfuscation, hiding the facts and even more so when it comes to failing to abide with UN resolutions.

If we are going to worry about resolutions, obfuscations, lying, deceit, evasion and all the other abuses imaginable, shouldn't we apply them equally to all countries? I am naive enough to believe that we should. If I were a pragmatist I would respond, don't be daft!
“Not to laugh, not to cry, not to hate, but understand.” Spinoza
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:50 pm

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 44):
Does Israel openly admit to its possession of nuclear weapons? (Note, I do not criticise Israel for possessing them, but merely ask why are the same standards not applied?)

Israel is a country around 22,000 km(2) in area surrounded by hostile nations (or at least hostile in the past). At it's narrowest point it is just 15 km wide. I can see land from my home in WA state that's 9 miles away. Iran is 1,648,000 km(2) in area. Iran has around 75 million people living there, Israel has 8 million people. Who of those two countries seems like they would use a nuclear weapon defensively?

Iraq is no real threat to Iran, neither is Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Armenia or Azerbaijan. Israel's program is rightfully perceived as a defensive weapon. The only real threat to Iran from its neighbors is Pakistan who they have relatively good political relations with or Israel who I'd argue has a reason to keep their eyes on them because of comments from Ahmedinejad .
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
Quokkas
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:51 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 8:38 pm

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 45):

Iran does not have a direct border with Israel but which country has in the past launched air strikes against nations that it deemed hostile?

Don't get me wrong. I can see why Israel follows the policies that it does. But to date Iran has not, I repeat not attacked Israel and neither did the former US ally Iraq. The justification for the first war against Iraq was that it attacked Kuwait, not Israel. While Israel may fear an attack, it is not a forgone conclusion that Iran actually wishes to.

While you state that Iraq is no longer a threat to Iran. how much of that is due to the fact that the US and its allies have occupied Iraq? Same applies to Afghanistan. These countries are not making hostile overtures to Iran. The US on the other hand has repeatedly stated that it will not rule out an attack and even in the past few hours Israel has indicated that the time for an attack is swiftly passing. Wiki leaks showed that Saudi Arabia urged an attack on Iran.

If you were in the government of Iran, how would you see things? You are faced with a hostile world that is trying to cripple your economy and one that a daily basis will not rule out an attack. What would you do as a member of that government? Capitulate or seek to enhance the ability of the country to defend itself?

Again, I do not for a minute believe that the regime in Iran are anything less than vicious and capricious murderers: but let us be honest. That has never prevented the US and the West from supporting all sorts of corrupt, vicious and hostile opponents of democracy in the past. The US supported military dictatorship against those who wanted freedom in Bangladesh. A coup installed the Shah in Iran. Britain described the dictator Pinochet, who murdered so many opponents, as a champion of the free world (actually it was Thatcher who said it.) So what are the real reasons for opposing Iran?

I seriously doubt that they have anything to do with democracy or concern for the people of Iran. Let's face it, apart from the propaganda value to justify government actions, the condition of people in another country is hardly pressing on governments that show little concern for the condition of the poor and disenfranchised at home.
“Not to laugh, not to cry, not to hate, but understand.” Spinoza
 
luckyone
Posts: 2279
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 8:45 pm

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 46):

". A coup installed the Shah in Iran."
I just wanted to point out that Muhammed Reza was Shah before during and after Mossadeq. His power, however, was impotent from 1951 until 1953.
 
Quokkas
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:51 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 8:52 pm

Quoting luckyone (Reply 47):

Thank you for the clarification. I must be more precise in my postings.  

The salient point remains: the government was overthrown because it did not meet the needs of outside interests.
“Not to laugh, not to cry, not to hate, but understand.” Spinoza
 
luckyone
Posts: 2279
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: Iran Willing To Attack On US Soil

Fri Feb 03, 2012 8:53 pm

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 48):

Absolutely  

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DocLightning, einsteinboricua and 30 guests