Strategists at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for devastating bombing raids backed by submarine-launched ballistic missile attacks against Iran's nuclear sites as a "last resort" to block Teheran's efforts to develop an atomic bomb.
Central Command and Strategic Command planners are identifying targets, assessing weapon-loads and working on logistics for an operation, the Sunday Telegraph has learnt.
They are reporting to the office of Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, as America updates plans for action if the diplomatic offensive fails to thwart the Islamic republic's nuclear bomb ambitions. Teheran claims that it is developing only a civilian energy programme.
"This is more than just the standard military contingency assessment," said a senior Pentagon adviser. "This has taken on much greater urgency in recent months."
Do they actually have proof of atomic bomb production?
They did the same thing in Irak. why don't they attack North Korea? I'm sure they got a few atomic bombs...
You know what, whether Iran does have the ability to make atomic bombs or not is almost irrelevant now if it looks like either way we'll be bombing them. Whether they have the intention of manufacturing nuclear weapons or not, I see it as a BAD idea to simply bomb their facilities, waking a sleeping bear, prodding a nervous scorpion with one's naked finger. I don't see the tactical sense in it, and I have little faith that the Bush administration has learned from their mistakes in Iraq (seeing how they frequently chose to ignore most sensible warnings and advice from their own intelligence network)
Devil_Dante wrote:Do they actually have proof of atomic bomb production?
They did the same thing in Irak. why don't they attack North Korea? I'm sure they got a few atomic bombs...
north korea does not have any oil.
who wants to occupy a land without any spoils?
i agree with mystic. it is irrelevant whether bush will attack iran or not.
what i am excited to see is how russia and china will react.
Devil_Dante wrote:Do they actually have proof of atomic bomb production?
They did the same thing in Irak. why don't they attack North Korea? I'm sure they got a few atomic bombs...
north korea does not have any oil.
who wants to occupy a land without any spoils?
i agree with mystic. it is irrelevant whether bush will attack iran or not.
what i am excited to see is how russia and china will react.
=)
I was trying to say that in a sarcastic way :p. Guess sarcasm doesn't work on the net.
Devil_Dante wrote:Do they actually have proof of atomic bomb production?
They did the same thing in Irak. why don't they attack North Korea? I'm sure they got a few atomic bombs...
north korea does not have any oil.
who wants to occupy a land without any spoils?
i agree with mystic. it is irrelevant whether bush will attack iran or not.
what i am excited to see is how russia and china will react.
=)
I was trying to say that in a sarcastic way :p. Guess sarcasm doesn't work on the net.
No, it doesn't translate well, you have to wrap it in [sarcasm][/sarcasm] else those will not understand it.
Yeah this isnt good. If I remember correctly one of the factors that contributed to World War I or II is that countries felt intimidated by another country developing its army and facilities and proceeded to develop their own which snowballed into a chain reaction.
But don't forget if US try to invade Iran they will got more more harder resistance from Iran people. Remember that Iran goverment was choose with democracy so they can mobilize Iran citizen easily than Sadam Husein. Don't forget Iran people most of them was Shiites, they really famous for their brave and militantcy and they can make nuke if US try to invade. If US dare to invade Iran, i'm sure the will lost more soldier and fund than in Iraq and crude oil price will increase rapidly
Iran is a country almost the size of Europe, Nuclear energy is cheap and is very environmentally friendly, a war is impossible because the entire UN could not occupy Iran, Iran is a secular society if there was any missile sent to Iran it would spark off world war 3.
Sura Iran isn't secular country but it very religious country. I think attack on Iran wouldn't create WW 3 but it worse than that. Oil price will skyrocket and world economic will collapse, all of us will face energy crisis. War with Iran will suck US budget, i'm sure that it will make social assurance program stuck while in US jobless and defisit increase. Just Israel will laugh while other country suffer with oil price since they control the black market
d-boy wrote:Sura Iran isn't secular country but it very religious country. I think attack on Iran wouldn't create WW 3 but it worse than that. Oil price will skyrocket and world economic will collapse, all of us will face energy crisis. War with Iran will suck US budget, i'm sure that it will make social assurance program stuck while in US jobless and defisit increase. Just Israel will laugh while other country suffer with oil price since they control the black market
on the contrary, i think high oil prices are helping the US economy rather than harming.
the higher the price, the more demand there will be for US$ as oil prices are denominated in US$. so the result is more US$ for the oil producing nations, more reasons for the USA to get away with high trade/budget deficits and more costs to do business for oil importers.
a WAR, on the other hand, is a totally different story.
i think the US and euro cannot afford any more wars.
I think, personally that we should stay out of Iran affair. However, this country does not have our philosophy and would use their technology to attack other countries.
"Funny", you know I wonder what would've happened had the United States not hatched a plot to overthrow a certain elected Iranian prime minister in 1953 to replace him with a dictatorially-minded shah more friendly to western oil interests, causing antiamericanism and anti-western feeling to brood in the country for over 25 years before it finally culminated with the revolution of 1979...I wonder...
And its the same country they are calling a threat now, hehe. The Iran that has never being aggressive to another country in its history, besides defending themselves against the US backed Iraq(hehe, lets not start on US involvement in Iraq, and how they shaped the country...). Not to even start on the utter hypocracy of Nuclear weapons argument, hehe. A weapon they are saying that Iran will attack the west with, while they themselves are the only country to have used it...
Until the lion learns to speak, the tales of the hunt will be(weak) told by the hunter
Color me not shocked. In any way shape or form. I saw this coming since we started getting involved with Iraq. More later after my final. Hopefully not in a drunken haze.
