• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

So you want to sit around and do nothing while the Iranian Army makes plans to attack America?
Get them before they get us, it's that type of paranoia and absence of logic that got us into Iraq.
 
While Congress is saying, paraphrased, "Now that we know our sanctions are having an effect, it's time to pile them on," I wonder.

Higher fuel prices...military action in Iran...both of these things could impact Obama's chances for re-election. Maybe I'm just too suspicious, but something about this whole scenerio doesn't make sense.


It is believed that the effects of the sanctions ultimately will result in a change of regime or having Israel forgo any military action against Iran.
 
It is believed that the effects of the sanctions ultimately will result in a change of regime or having Israel forgo any military action against Iran.

Well, that makes some sense. I hope they're right. And I hope we like the next regime. ;)
 
Thank you. I think Connery wished to give me the clap.

It's all good.

My "thang" don't "swang" that way, but, I thank you ever so much for the invitation...:tongue4:
 
It is believed that the effects of the sanctions ultimately will result in a change of regime or having Israel forgo any military action against Iran.


Wouldn't that be nice huh? that the sanctions force the Iranian Regime to open up ALL their nuclear facilities to the world and give up their nuclear dreams..... wouldn't that be just dandy!


I for one, am not holding my breath! :shrug:
 
Wouldn't that be nice huh? that the sanctions force the Iranian Regime to open up ALL their nuclear facilities to the world and give up their nuclear dreams..... wouldn't that be just dandy!

I for one, am not holding my breath! :shrug:

Why should they have to give up their nuclear dreams??
 
Like I said, respond to my position or not as you may wish. Again, the US issued Economic sanctions Iran responded with declaring they have "the capabilities to carry out military strikes on US interests around the globe"

That makes their actions our business.

My stubborn Irish friend, what you are looking for is an excuse not definable position. Iran has no nuclear capability at present and has no real delivery system. Yes, perhaps if Iran does develop a nuke and uses a ship to launch the nuke from international waters it could strike one US city. What would be the point? Their country would not exist shortly after that. They know that. What would they gain?

No matter, they have no nuclear option. So then you fear that if we don't attack them now they will attack us around the globe? If if we do attack them now they won't? How does that work?

No, I'm sorry my friend what you are looking for is an excuse to attack Iran. Iran does not need an excuse to attack us as we have been screwing them constantly for a very long time. Nothing we do now can change the past. But perhaps by changing the present we can change the future.
 
Why should they have to give up their nuclear dreams??


oops!

you are totally right there.... I meant nuclear nightmare! ;)
 
oops!

you are totally right there.... I meant nuclear nightmare! ;)

I was going for a serious discussion. You were going for the laugh. Didn't work for either of us.
 
I was going for a serious discussion. You were going for the laugh. Didn't work for either of us.


I'm sorry I didn't mean to upset you ..... I was only trying to lighten up the conversation a little....

I and others with my point of view, have explain ad nauseam in other words extensively, our positions about this Iran issue ..... it seems like we are going over and over the same things like squirrels in a cage.
 
While Congress is saying, paraphrased, "Now that we know our sanctions are having an effect, it's time to pile them on," I wonder.

Higher fuel prices...military action in Iran...both of these things could impact Obama's chances for re-election. Maybe I'm just too suspicious, but something about this whole scenerio doesn't make sense.

Indeed, fair lady. I am cautious and concerned that what we might be seeing is a whole lot of plausible deniability being establish prior to the fact. Long, long ago I stopped taking what my government, any government, said at face value.
 
So you want to sit around and do nothing while the Iranian Army makes plans to attack America?

Johnny, put that quart of Old Times down and step slowly away from the bottle. The U.S. is not going to be invaded by the Iranian army. We are no more in danger of any attack now than we were a year ago, perhaps less so. There's nothing like telegraphing a punch. Well, maybe emailing one would be worse.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, fair lady. I am cautious and concerned that what we might be seeing is a whole lot of plausible deniability being establish prior to the fact. Long, long ago I stopped taking what my government, any government, said at face value.

I would be quite concerned if we had a Republican president. With Obama in the WH ... not so much.
 
My stubborn Irish friend, what you are looking for is an excuse not definable position. Iran has no nuclear capability at present and has no real delivery system. Yes, perhaps if Iran does develop a nuke and uses a ship to launch the nuke from international waters it could strike one US city. What would be the point? Their country would not exist shortly after that. They know that. What would they gain?

No matter, they have no nuclear option. So then you fear that if we don't attack them now they will attack us around the globe? If if we do attack them now they won't? How does that work?

No, I'm sorry my friend what you are looking for is an excuse to attack Iran. Iran does not need an excuse to attack us as we have been screwing them constantly for a very long time. Nothing we do now can change the past. But perhaps by changing the present we can change the future.

Holy Cripes... I do not beleive this!!!! I did not say this.....the Iranian ambassador to Moscow, Seyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi said, "Iran has the capabilities to carry out military strikes on US interests around the globe."

Again my post was a very simple answer to MagieD's question....
 
Holy Cripes... I do not beleive this!!!! I did not say this.....the Iranian ambassador to Moscow, Seyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi said, "Iran has the capabilities to carry out military strikes on US interests around the globe."
Again my post was a very simple answer to MagieD's question....

He means the Saudi oilfields.
 
I would be quite concerned if we had a Republican president. With Obama in the WH ... not so much.

I want to believe you are correct, Adam. I know if it were Bush or Romney or Gingrich or Insanitorium we'd already be waiting for retaliatory strikes from nations allied with Iran. Obama doesn't have a lot to work with as the Congress is hostile and the world is already on the skids.
 
Holy Cripes... I do not beleive this!!!! I did not say this.....the Iranian ambassador to Moscow, Seyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi said, "Iran has the capabilities to carry out military strikes on US interests around the globe."

Again my post was a very simple answer to MagieD's question....

It's OK, take a couple of deep breaths. If you smoke, a cigarette and an adult beverage might be good right about now. In fact, I'm having a gin (Hendrick) and tonic while smoking BBQ dry rubbed chicken and sopping with Alabama Great White Sauce. I'd invite you over, but you being Irish and all, I probably don't have enough booze.

But to the point, I did not say that you said that, "...the Iranian ambassador to Moscow, Seyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi said, 'Iran has the capabilities to carry out military strikes on US interests around the globe.'"
 
When Israel knocked out Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in June 1981, it was essentially one ground-level building, yet the mission required 14 Israeli aircraft — F-16 fighter-bombers with some of their fuel tanks removed to carry heavy bombs, and F-15 fighters to handle any Iraqi planes that came up to meet them. Israel’s other success, hitting a partially constructed Syrian facility in September 2007, again targeted a single, ground-level building.

Now look at the potential targets in today’s Iran.

There is the fuel-enrichment plant at Natanz, a collection of below-ground facilities used to produce enriched uranium. There is the newer Fordow fuel-enrichment plant near Qom, built into the side of a mountain and heavily fortified. This is where Iran has already moved 3.5 percent enriched uranium from Natanz and where most analysts believe it will be enriched to weapons grade, if Tehran decides to take that step.

Of course there would be other targets if a strike is to do more than set back Iran by one to three years. At Parchin, one of the nation’s leading munitions centers, Iran is suspected of testing high explosives for use in nuclear weapons, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s November report. There is a uranium conversion plant at Isfahan, a heavy-water facility being constructed at Arak and centrifuge factories outside Tehran.

No telling how many aircraft the Israelis would need to carry out a meaningful mission. The Robb-Wald report says Israel has enough GBU-28s to “severely damage, though likely not completely destroy, Iran’s known underground nuclear sites in a single well-executed operation.”

American Intelligence -> PLANS TO BOMB IRAN
 
It's OK, take a couple of deep breaths. If you smoke, a cigarette and an adult beverage might be good right about now.

I am cooking right now.


In fact, I'm having a gin (Hendrick) and tonic while smoking BBQ dry rubbed chicken and sopping with Alabama Great White Sauce. I'd invite you over, but you being Irish and all, I probably don't have enough booze.


You are and that explains this very humorous portion of the thread. I would join you if I could.
But to the point, I did not say that you said that, "...the Iranian ambassador to Moscow, Seyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi said, 'Iran has the capabilities to carry out military strikes on US interests around the globe.'"

Ok, I am not looking to bomb attack blow up anybody. I like the sanctions and hope they achieve their intended purpose..
 
And what are we getting from our relationship with Israel? Tell me why it is worth the billions we have spent and the likelihood that Israel will draw us into what will probably be a very nasty war with Iran and beyond.

Israel is one of our longest standing and most reliable allies, certainly in the middle east at least. It also lies in a very hostile region of the world with vital US interests (terrorism, oil, etc) which makes it of even more of a strategic ally.
 
Last edited:
Well Hot Damn, about F*ing time.

Guess Iran sending a war ship into the mediterranean toward Isreal was finally enough for even a few the commie loveing, tofu munching, kumbaya singing cowards currently running Washington to wake and see a truth that some have known for decades.

So, to those zealous morons in Teheran, Good bye, good riddence and don't let the door hit where the good lord split you on the way out.
 
Back
Top Bottom