Page 55 of 80 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765 ... LastLast
Results 541 to 550 of 796

Thread: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

  1. #541
    Professor xpiher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-23-12 @ 10:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,993

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    As far as other countries/governments in the region seeking nukes if Iran has them why hasn't any of the countries sought nukes after Israel got them?
    Hayek - too liberal for republicans

  2. #542
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Thanks but these are not determinations made by the UN.
    The ISIS report is based upon an IAEA report (from the link - my bold):
    Though several IAEA reports describe these
    violations, the November 2004 report provides an especially detailed summary of Iran’s overall
    nuclear program, including specific NPT violations.2 According to the IAEA, Iran failed to
    declare the following major activities:
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  3. #543
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    06-28-17 @ 10:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,909

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    Russia is a fair-weather friend of Iran at best. Iran has a habit of biting the hand that feeds it, and Russia knows this. Russia would oppose regime change (and thus its business dealings with Iran), but are unlikely to do anything more than complain about strikes on Iran.
    Iran is a cash cow. Some suspect the Stuxnet computer worm viruses that were unleashed in Iran which caused a nuclear plant shutdown were released by the Russians. The shut down and problems thereafter keep the money flowing. I do not beleive that Iran has many friends, but, as long as they have the cash or oil they will have allies.

    Israel can do significant damage all by itself. It doesn't need to completely destroy Iran's nuclear program. It merely needs to set the program back long enough for sanctions to have more effect. The obvious targets are anything related to uranium processing. That's the primary problem. It would be politically clever of Israel to leave the Buseshr reactor and any targets close to Tehran alone. Hit Natanz and Fordo hard. This will not eliminate Iran's uranium processing only delay the chance for refining it to weapons grade, the ultimate goal.

    Much ado is made of Iran's sites as though they are ALL buried as deeply as at Qom. They are not. Most of Iran's sites are targetable with standard munitions. Some that are buried are still reachable by penetrators already in Israeli hands.

    And Qom isn't as impervious as documented in many press releases.

    Consider that when Israel attacks, the IRIAF has no choice but to rise and meet them. Israeli F-15Is will cut them down like wheat. Within a day, Israel will have Air Superiority, Within 2 days, Israel will have Air Dominance (a separate thing, and better). This is a critical detail. With Air Dominance, Israel will have the flexibility to move where they want, when they want, unopposed. They don't have to invade Iran per se, they can simply place troops where they want them and extract them again at leisure. At this point, Israel can load up commandos in C-130s and parachute them at Qom. Security at Qom would probably be strong so this will not be a small group. The commandos can take the facility, or at least tactically important areas, set charges and leave. Doubtless, Iranian troops will move to defend Qom, but since Israeli aircraft operate unopposed they can place Iranian troops under constant fire. They'll be unable to move effectively. The commandos should be done within a few hours. Extraction would occur at nearby Manzariyeh airport.

    This is all doable but very risky and very difficult. It must happen fast or it will fail. But then Israel is very good at such things. Still, Israel would be FAR better off if they waited for the US (and allies) to work in a coordinated attack. Some expect Israel may attack between April and June. Israel should wait even longer than that. It may be that sanctions do the job and no attack at all is necessary. Israel must avoid an attack as much as the US does. Israel acting alone would draw international consternation far more than Israel acting in part with a coalition. When rockets fall in Israeli civilian centers it barely makes the news, but if an Israeli soldier spits in the dirt of the West Bank it's an international incident. Knowing this, Israel must restrain itself and avoid inevitable political fallout if at all possible.
    It is thought that an effective attack will delay Iran's nuclear program by a year or two "indicating that viable military options are far more limited than Israeli leaders have suggested." Moreover, James R. Clapper, director of National Intelligence, said the "U.S. intelligence community believes that Iran's leaders have not decided to build nuclear weapons but are pursuing technology that might allow them to do so."

    Any attack at this juncture is premature and with very little gain. Former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden told a group of foreign policy experts last month that Israel is not capable of inflicting significant damage on Iran's nuclear sites. Some are situated at the outer range of Israeli bombers, and others are underground, he said. "The Israelis aren't going to [attack Iran] they can't do it, it's beyond their capacity," Hayden said. "They only have the ability to make this worse."

    A monthlong U.S. bombing campaign would inflict far more damage, Hayden said, but it wouldn't be worth it. The George W. Bush administration studied the issue, he said."

    It would seem that Israel would need the US and is determined to draw the US into a conflict with Iran.

  4. #544
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    The ISIS report is based upon an IAEA report (from the link - my bold):
    The Rand Corp. makes reports commissioned by the Pentagon, but the Pentagon is the one that makes the decisions.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  5. #545
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    The Rand Corp. makes reports commissioned by the Pentagon, but the Pentagon is the one that makes the decisions.
    Hmm. I'm not sure how the Pentagon relates to the UN in this instance. You said, you were looking for something from the UN. The UN makes it's decisions from the IAEA findings and the report I linked is sourced from IAEA findings. Sorry if I miss the association to the Pentagon.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  6. #546
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    Hmm. I'm not sure how the Pentagon relates to the UN in this instance. You said, you were looking for something from the UN. The UN makes it's decisions from the IAEA findings and the report I linked is sourced from IAEA findings. Sorry if I miss the association to the Pentagon.

    The UN uses reports by IAEA and others to make their decision, as the Pentagon uses reports by the Rand Corp. and others to make their decisions.

    My point is that the UN has not made official a declaration of Iran being in violation of the NPT, nor have they decided NATO should take any actions in response.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  7. #547
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by Connery View Post
    Iran is a cash cow. Some suspect the Stuxnet computer worm viruses that were unleashed in Iran which caused a nuclear plant shutdown were released by the Russians. The shut down and problems thereafter keep the money flowing. I do not beleive that Iran has many friends, but, as long as they have the cash or oil they will have allies.

    It is thought that an effective attack will delay Iran's nuclear program by a year or two "indicating that viable military options are far more limited than Israeli leaders have suggested." Moreover, James R. Clapper, director of National Intelligence, said the "U.S. intelligence community believes that Iran's leaders have not decided to build nuclear weapons but are pursuing technology that might allow them to do so."

    Any attack at this juncture is premature and with very little gain. Former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden told a group of foreign policy experts last month that Israel is not capable of inflicting significant damage on Iran's nuclear sites. Some are situated at the outer range of Israeli bombers, and others are underground, he said. "The Israelis aren't going to [attack Iran] … they can't do it, it's beyond their capacity," Hayden said. "They only have the ability to make this worse."

    A monthlong U.S. bombing campaign would inflict far more damage, Hayden said, but it wouldn't be worth it. The George W. Bush administration studied the issue, he said."

    It would seem that Israel would need the US and is determined to draw the US into a conflict with Iran.
    Well, to suggest that a unilateral effort by Israel will accomplish nothing, or that strikes on Iran is beyond their capacity is, just, wrong. They could hit Iran and knockout quite a few nuclear facilities. BUT I would agree that Israel should wait for the US and allies to attack before doing anything. And, if the US decides against an attack, then Israel should just suck it up and deal with it. Israel would achieve much less without the US, so it's only practical to follow the US lead on this one.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  8. #548
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,155

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    The UN uses reports by IAEA and others to make their decision, as the Pentagon uses reports by the Rand Corp. and others to make their decisions.

    My point is that the UN has not made official a declaration of Iran being in violation of the NPT, nor have they decided NATO should take any actions in response.
    and worse yet is the likely unilateral action to be taken by israel - a non-signatory to the NPT - to take our iranian facilities without legitimate basis
    If Israel attacks Iran, it won't tell U.S. first, officials say - San Jose Mercury News
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  9. #549
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    and worse yet is the likely unilateral action to be taken by israel - a non-signatory to the NPT - to take our iranian facilities without legitimate basis
    If Israel attacks Iran, it won't tell U.S. first, officials say - San Jose Mercury News
    I'm just hoping this administration has laid out the US consequences for Israel if they strike Iran without our go ahead. We don't need another war in the middle east.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  10. #550
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    10-13-12 @ 02:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,556

    Re: PAPER: Military action against Iran 'likely'..

    Strange that there were no complaints, only compliments, after the Israeli Air Force raid in 1981 that completely destroyed the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak!


    To a certain extent it looks like Obama wants it both ways, if Israel strikes Iran and is successful then he will be happy, but if not he'll say:"See? I warned you!"

Page 55 of 80 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •