War with Iran?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Will there be a war with Iran?

Likely
14
41%
Not likely
20
59%
 
Total votes : 34

Election saber-rattling.

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:57 pm

Both the US and Israel are about to install new 'leaders' and saber-rattling serves to firm up nationalist-militarist cohesion while this process is carried out.

Flyboy McCain will be first a War Candidate and then installed as the next War President.
CIA runs mainstream media since WWII:
news rooms, movies/TV, publishing
...
Disney is CIA for kidz!
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby unaltered » Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:59 pm

The US is in no shape to start a THIRD front war. So stop being absurd.
unaltered
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:55 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby kissing blarney » Sat Jun 21, 2008 4:52 pm

l don't know.

Bomb Iran? What's to Stop Us?
By Ray McGovern

http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e20140.htm
User avatar
kissing blarney
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 1:05 pm
Location: colorado
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby ninakat » Sat Jun 21, 2008 6:03 pm

kissing blarney wrote:l don't know.

Bomb Iran? What's to Stop Us?
By Ray McGovern

http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e20140.htm


Thanks for posting that, kissing blarney. It was one of the articles that prompted me to start this thread. And, I don't know what to expect either, and hope the poll results (so far) are an accurate prediction.
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Seamus OBlimey » Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:44 pm

War with Iran?

Not before years of sanctions, deprivations, starvation and humiliation, sorties, naughties and dirty tricks, they wouldn't dare.

Sepka will have to wait.
User avatar
Seamus OBlimey
 
Posts: 3154
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:14 pm
Location: Gods own country
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby ninakat » Sun Jun 22, 2008 1:41 pm

I'd be interested in hearing interpretations of this. How they can even speak openly about Bush launching a war totally for political purposes just shows how far we've gone down.

Kristol: Bush might attack Iran if he thinks Obama will win
By Andrew McLemore | Uncategorized | Sunday, 22 June 2008

President Bush is more likely to attack Iran if he thinks Senator Barack Obama may be elected, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol told FOX News Sunday morning.

Kristol added that if Senator John McCain was going to win the presidency, Bush would “think it more appropriate” to let him deal with the issue.

Senators McCain and Obama have often sparred about whether military force or diplomacy should be the primary way of dealing with Iran, according to an article by the Los Angeles Times.

McCain has criticized Obama for his willingness to meet with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but a Gallup poll shows 59 percent of Americans support a meeting with the leader, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Bush said that McCain is “not going to change when it comes to taking on the enemy” when he declared his support for the candidate at a White House press conference in March.

WALLACE: So, you’re suggesting that he might in fact, if Obama’s going to win the election, either before or after the election, launch a military strike?

KRISTOL: I don’t know. I mean, I think he would worry about it. On the other hand, you can’t — it’s hard to make foreign policy based on guesses of election results. I think Israel is worried though. I mean, what is, what signal goes to Ahmadinejad if Obama wins on a platform of unconditional negotiations and with an obvious reluctance to even talk about using military force.

This video is from Fox’s Fox News Sunday, broadcast June 22, 2008.
(see link above for video)
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby MacCruiskeen » Sun Jun 22, 2008 3:20 pm

I'd be interested in hearing interpretations of this. How they can even speak openly about Bush launching a war totally for political purposes just shows how far we've gone down.


I agree, ninakat. But we're Masters of our Domain. We can discuss and interpret it to our hearts' content.

ON EDIT: Sorry, I really didn't mean to abort the discussion, which is all we have right now.
"Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen, wie ich kotzen möchte." - Max Liebermann,, Berlin, 1933

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." - Richard Feynman, NYC, 1966

TESTDEMIC ➝ "CASE"DEMIC
User avatar
MacCruiskeen
 
Posts: 10558
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:47 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby vanlose kid » Sun Jun 22, 2008 6:07 pm

deleted
Last edited by vanlose kid on Mon Nov 23, 2009 1:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Teach them to think. Work against the government." – Wittgenstein.
User avatar
vanlose kid
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby ninakat » Tue Jun 24, 2008 2:38 pm

The Coming Catastrophe?
The finishing touches on several contingency plans for attacking Iran
by David DeBatto

Global Research, June 23, 2008

Global Research Editor's note
We bring to the attention of our readers David DeBatto's scenario as to what might occur if one of the several contingency plans to attack Iran, with the participation of Israel and NATO, were to be carried out. While one may disagree with certain elements of detail of the author's text, the thrust of this analysis must be taken seriously.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Israel has said a strike on Iran will be "unavoidable" if the Islamic regime continues to press ahead with alleged plans for building an atom-bomb." (London Daily Telegraph, 6/11/2008)

    "Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany joined President Bush on Wednesday in calling for further sanctions against Iran if it does not suspend its uranium enrichment program." Mr. Bush stressed again that "all options are on the table," which would include military force. (New York Times, 6/11/2008)
We are fast approaching the final six months of the Bush administration. The quagmire in Iraq is in its sixth painful year with no real end in sight and the forgotten war in Afghanistan is well into its seventh year. The "dead enders" and other armed factions are still alive and well in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan again controls most of that country. Gas prices have now reached an average of $4.00 a gallon nationally and several analysts predict the price will rise to $5.00-$6.00 dollars per gallon at the pump by Labor Day. This, despite assurances by some major supporters of the decision to invade Iraq that the Iraq war "will pay for itself" (Paul Wolfowitz) or that we will see "$20.00 per barrel" oil prices if we invade Iraq (Rupert Murdoch).

One thing the Pentagon routinely does (and does very well) is conduct war games. Top brass there are constantly developing strategies for conducting any number of theoretical missions based on real or perceived threats to our national security or vital interests. This was also done prior to the invasion of Iraq, but the Bush administration chose not to listen to the dire warnings about that mission given to him by Pentagon leaders, or for that matter, by his own senior intelligence officials. Nevertheless, war gaming is in full swing again right now with the bullseye just to the right of our current mess – Iran.

It’s no secret that the U.S. is currently putting the finishing touches on several contingency plans for attacking Iranian nuclear and military facilities. With our ground forces stretched to the breaking point in Iraq and Afghanistan, none of the most likely scenarios involve a ground invasion. Not that this administration wouldn’t prefer to march into the seat of Shiite Islam behind a solid, moving line of M1 Abrams tanks and proclaim the country for democracy. The fact is that even the President knows we can’t pull that off any more so he and the neo-cons will have to settle for Shock and Awe Lite.

If we invade Iran this year it will be done using hundreds of sorties by carrier based aircraft already stationed in the Persian Gulf and from land based aircraft located in Iraq and Qatar. They will strike the known nuclear facilities located in and around Tehran and the rest of the country as well as bases containing major units of the Iranian military, anti-aircraft installations and units of the Revolutionary Guard (a separate and potent Iranian para-military organization).

Will this military action stop Iran’s efforts to develop nuclear weapons? Probably not. It will probably not even destroy all of their nuclear research facilities, the most sensitive of which are known to be underground, protected by tons of earth and reinforced concrete and steel designed to survive almost all attacks using conventional munitions. The Iranian military and Revolutionary Guard will most likely survive as well, although they will suffer significant casualties and major bases and command centers will undoubtedly be destroyed. However, since Iran has both a functioning Air Force, Navy (including submarines) and modern anti-aircraft capabilities, U.S. fighter-bombers will suffer casualties as well. This will not be a "Cake Walk" as with the U.S. led invasion of Iraq in 2003 when the Iraqi Army simply melted away and the Iraqi Air Force never even launched a single aircraft.

Not even close.

If the United States attacks Iran either this summer or this fall, the American people had better be prepared for a shock that may perhaps be even greater to the national psyche (and economy) than 9/11. First of all, there will be significant U.S. casualties in the initial invasion. American jets will be shot down and the American pilots who are not killed will be taken prisoner - including female pilots. Iranian Yakhonts 26, Sunburn 22 and Exocet missiles will seek out and strike U.S. naval battle groups bottled up in the narrow waters of the Persian Gulf with very deadly results. American sailors will be killed and U.S. ships will be badly damaged and perhaps sunk. We may even witness the first attack on an American Aircraft carrier since World War II.

That’s just the opening act.

Israel (who had thus far stayed out of the fray by letting the U.S. military do the heavy lifting) is attacked by Hezbollah in a coordinated and large scale effort. Widespread and grisly casualties effectively paralyze the nation, a notion once thought impossible. Iran’s newest ally in the region, Syria, then unleashes a barrage of over 200 Scud B, C and D missiles at Israel, each armed with VX gas. Since all of Israel is within range of these Russian built weapons, Haifa, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and virtually all major civilian centers and several military bases are struck, often with a result of massive casualties.

The Israeli Air Force orders all three squadrons of their F-16I Sufa fighter/bombers into the air with orders to bomb Tehran and as many military and nuclear bases as they can before they are either shot down or run out of fuel. It is a one way trip for some of these pilots. Their ancient homeland lies in ruins. Many have family that is already dead or dying. They do not wait for permission from Washington, DC or U.S. regional military commanders. The Israeli aircraft are carrying the majority of their country’s nuclear arsenal under their wings.

Just after the first waves of U.S. bombers cross into Iranian airspace, the Iranian Navy, using shore based missiles and small, fast attack craft sinks several oil tankers in the Straits of Hormuz, sealing off the Persian Gulf and all its oil from the rest of the world. They then mine the area, making it difficult and even deadly for American minesweepers to clear the straits. Whatever is left of the Iranian Navy and Air Force harasses our Navy as it attempts minesweeping operations. More U.S casualties.

The day after the invasion Wall Street (and to a lesser extent, Tokyo, London and Frankfurt) acts as it always does in an international crisis – irrational speculative and spot buying reaches fever pitch and sends the cost of oil skyrocketing. In the immediate aftermath of the U.S. invasion of Iran, the price of oil goes to $200.00 - $300.00 dollars a barrel on the open market. If the war is not resolved in a few weeks, that price could rise even higher. This will send the price of gasoline at the pump in this country to $8.00-$10.00 per gallon immediately and subsequently to even higher unthinkable levels.

If that happens, this country shuts down. Most Americans are not be able to afford gas to go to work. Truckers pull their big rigs to the side of the road and simply walk away. Food, medicine and other critical products are not be brought to stores. Gas and electricity (what is left of the short supply) are too expensive for most people to afford. Children, the sick and elderly die from lack of air-conditioned homes and hospitals in the summer. Children, the sick and elderly die in the winter for lack of heat. There are food riots across the country. A barter system takes the place of currency and credit as the economy dissolves and banks close or limit withdrawals. Civil unrest builds.

The police are unable to contain the violence and are themselves victims of the same crisis as the rest of the population. Civilian rule dissolves and Martial Law is declared under provisions approved under the Patriot Act. Regular U.S. Army and Marine troops patrol the streets. The federal government apparatus is moved to an unknown but secure location. The United States descends into chaos and becomes a third world country. Its time as the lone superpower is over.

It doesn’t get any worse than this.

Then the first Israeli bomber drops its nuclear payload on Tehran.

David DeBatto is a former U.S. Army Counterintelligence Special Agent, Iraqi war veteran and co-author the "CI" series from Warner Books and the upcoming "Counter to Intelligence" from Praeger Security International.
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby nathan28 » Tue Jun 24, 2008 2:52 pm



I saw that story. I started to read it but then I looked at the syntax in the headline: "X Might Happen If Y Also Happens!!!" Global Research is also not the most reliable of sources, full of all sorts of wanton speculation.

Having gotten burnt in a speculative play on all the Iran-wardrumming almost exactly two years to this date, I know better.

The Iran wardrums beat every summer for the past four or five years. I doubt the likilihood of this happening so long as the "bomb Iran" "meme" is contained by the buzz-o-sphere and thinly-veiled CNN pieces. When the Administration actually starts getting on TV, then look out--we're not the Israelis, we always have to stage-manage a reason for any military action. Look for Colin Powell on TV with a photograph of a guy with a beard in a trailer with a couple glowsticks or something like that. But now it serves there purpose to just buzz, buzz, buzz.
User avatar
nathan28
 
Posts: 2957
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby ninakat » Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:36 pm

nathan28 wrote:


I saw that story. I started to read it but then I looked at the syntax in the headline: "X Might Happen If Y Also Happens!!!" Global Research is also not the most reliable of sources, full of all sorts of wanton speculation.

Having gotten burnt in a speculative play on all the Iran-wardrumming almost exactly two years to this date, I know better.

The Iran wardrums beat every summer for the past four or five years. I doubt the likilihood of this happening so long as the "bomb Iran" "meme" is contained by the buzz-o-sphere and thinly-veiled CNN pieces. When the Administration actually starts getting on TV, then look out--we're not the Israelis, we always have to stage-manage a reason for any military action. Look for Colin Powell on TV with a photograph of a guy with a beard in a trailer with a couple glowsticks or something like that. But now it serves there purpose to just buzz, buzz, buzz.


nathan28, I agree about the Kristol story -- the whole "might" and "if" thing seemed to get blown out of propotion to what he actually said.... although, anything that comes out of that asshole's mouth must mean something

And I also agree about globalresearch.ca -- they've been moving in a direction that I find less credible as time goes on. Still, as with the Kristol article, there might be something there.... at least, to leave to our interpretation.

And I hope you're right about this essentially being all just sabre rattling. Those scenarios in the globalresearch article were way out in nightmareland... and, if BushCo was stupid enough to start a bombing campaign, I do think these are quite terrifyingly plausible outcomes. Those nightmare scenarios do need to be kept up front, in my opinion.
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Sweejak » Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:34 pm

I should probably read the thread first, but no time today.

I thought we were at war.

The March 20, 2008 US Declaration of War on Iran

Over at the US Congress, no war resolution was passed, no debate transpired, no last-minute hearing on the Iran "threat" was held. The Pentagon did not put its forces on red alert and cancel all leave. The top story on the Pentagon's website (on March 20) was: "Bush Lauds Military's Performance in Terror War," a feel-good piece about the president's appearance on the US military's TV channel to praise "the performance and courage of U.S. troops engaged in the global war on terrorism." Bush discussed Iraq, Afghanistan and Africa but not Iran.

But make no mistake. As of Thursday, March 20 the US is at war with Iran.

So who made it official?

A unit within the US Treasury Department, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), which issued a March 20 advisory to the world's financial institutions under the title: "Guidance to Financial Institutions on the Continuing Money Laundering Threat Involving Illicit Iranian Activity."

FinCEN, though part of the chain of command, is better known to bankers and lawyers than to students of US foreign policy. Nevertheless, when the history of this newly declared war is someday written (assuming the war is allowed to proceed) FinCEN's role will be as important as that played by US Central Command (Centcom) in directing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8429

Bush Authorizes New Covert Action Against Iran
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/200 ... rizes.html

If they did this to us we would call it war.
User avatar
Sweejak
 
Posts: 3250
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 7:40 pm
Location: Border Region 5
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: War with Iran?

Postby stefano » Fri Dec 02, 2016 6:19 am

Eight years after the OP... is it happening now?

I still very much doubt it. Trump's war's going to be a job like Reagan attacking Grenada, maybe in Eritrea.

But this James Matthis is a fucking loon.
User avatar
stefano
 
Posts: 2672
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests