Iran making same mistake as Iraq

leekfiend · Post by **leekfiend** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:17 am 0

microwave wrote:by calling them the access of evil

HGFB · Post by **HGFB** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 6:49 am 0

http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=166&a=1478

he long awaited US military attack on Iran is now on track for the first week of April, specifically for 4 am on April 6, the Good Friday opening of Easter weekend, writes the well-known Russian journalist Andrei Uglanov in the Moscow weekly â€œArgumenty Nedeli.â€ Uglanov cites Russian military experts close to the Russian General Staff for his account.

The attack is slated to last for 12 hours, according to Uglanov, from 4 am until 4 pm local time. Friday is the sabbath in Iran. In the course of the attack, code named Operation Bite, about 20 targets are marked for bombing; the list includes uranium enrichment facilities, research centers, and laboratories.

The first reactor at the Bushehr nuclear plant, where Russian engineers are working, is supposed to be spared from destruction. The US attack plan reportedly calls for the Iranian air defense system to be degraded, for numerous Iranian warships to be sunk in the Persian Gulf, and for the most important headquarters of the Iranian armed forces to be wiped out.

manicx · Post by **manicx** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:00 am 0

The title got me confused... What was the mistake that Iraq made? Having invisible WOMD?

PFVA · Post by **PFVA** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 10:29 am 0

Having boarders with Iran.

And in relation to the Russian news: Are they divulgating the attack on the media purposely so the Russian technicians have the time to take off running and abandon the nuclear project or so Iran prepares its defenses?

foxyloxy · Post by **foxyloxy** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:54 am 0

That report was convinsing up until the nuclear weapons bit. Conventional attack? Possible (and stupidly stupid), nuclear? Not going to happen.

My best friend in first year electronic engineering was an Iranian refugee - not to put words in his mouth, but while the situation is unpleasant there, (well, terrible for anyone not in on the state faith, which is quite a bit more complex than simply being muslim), it's a phase and the society will grow out of it.

An attack, now, is just about the most stupid thing we could do.

TFO · Post by **TFO** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:59 am 0

foxyloxy wrote:An attack, now, is just about the most stupid thing we could do.

You are correct, but so? Iran has oil, and threatens American oil interests in the area.
Recent history has shown us that despite what a huge number of the population wishes, if the Bush / Blair unholy alliance wishes to wage war for reasons made up / best beknown to themselves, then they will.

Kemper_Boyd · Post by **Kemper_Boyd** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:01 pm 0

foxyloxy wrote:That report was convinsing up until the nuclear weapons bit. Conventional attack? Possible (and stupidly stupid), nuclear? Not going to happen.

I don't put any faith in the article from Tarpley, for starters the fixed date
goes against the doctrine for Global Strike, but the possibility certainly
does exist of tactical nuclear weapons forming a part of such an action.

Seymour Hersh, reported as much last year in the New Yorker. He said
that the Pentagon had concluded that to destroy some of the hardened
targets tactical nuclear weapons would be needed, fortunately Hersh also
reported that the generals persuaded the White House that that part of
the plan was unjustifiable and they'd have to accept putting targets
out of operation instead.

That's why what Iran is up to, even if the UK troops were in their waters,
is just so bloody dangerous. An attack by the US on Iran may go far
beyond any air attack the world has ever seen.

Stone · Post by **Stone** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:00 pm 0

According to the BBC just now, the ship they went to inspect is still where it was last week, still at anchor in Iraqi waters

Yeah, yeah, Western press etc...maybe they moved it

Stone

guythp · Post by **guythp** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:39 pm 0

who knows?

gravy · Post by **gravy** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 1:16 pm 0

A foreign power detaining UK citizens unlawfully and on an exceptionally flimsy pretext?

It's an outrage!

kalmar · Post by **kalmar** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 1:20 pm 0

See? Peanut butter. Evil-doers.

I catch a glimpse of Sky News at lunchtime, with the sound off. My, they are making a big deal of it, aren't they? I suspect they've got new partitions ready to wheel into the studio with WAR! emblazened on them, just like in The Day Today. For now they're making do with IRAN CRISIS on a big Iranian flag graphic.

It's amusing how the kids who got lifted are now completely off-message though, and everything they say just serves to increase Tony Blairs's blood pressure

RedOktober · Post by **RedOktober** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 1:33 pm 0

leekfiend wrote:
microwave wrote:by calling them the access of evil

He means axle of Elvis.

aureole · Post by **aureole** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 2:16 pm 0

The mistake Saddam had was not having WMD. He was trying to pretend to so that Iran didn't invade, but had binned them all in secret. Admittedly you've binned all your WMDs is a bit embarrassing for any tyrant so he was in a bit of a bind. If Iran can get some nukes then it'll be game on.

Kemper_Boyd · Post by **Kemper_Boyd** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 2:31 pm 0

gravy wrote:A foreign power detaining UK citizens unlawfully and on an exceptionally flimsy pretext?

Two wrongs don't make a right, as I'm sure your mother told you.

It's possible to think that both the US and Iran are wrong.

aureole wrote:The mistake Saddam had was not having WMD. He was trying to pretend to so that Iran didn't invade, but had binned them all in secret. Admittedly you've binned all your WMDs is a bit embarrassing for any tyrant so he was in a bit of a bind. If Iran can get some nukes then it'll be game on.

There's no prospect of Iran getting a bomb short of buying one from
someone like North Korea. The US will stop them building one no
matter the cost. If Iran is developing a bomb it's not choosing to get
a nuclear deterrent it's choosing to fight a war against the US. If Iran
won't satisfy the IAEA and international community I believe it's a
matter of when not if there will be a war.

kalmar · Post by **kalmar** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 2:45 pm 0

Kemper_Boyd wrote: The US will stop them building one no
matter the cost.

Are ya sure? Because they didn't manage to stop NK building one.

If Iran is developing a bomb it's not choosing to get
a nuclear deterrent it's choosing to fight a war against the US.

Have you considered that they may already have devices of some sort, and that this has been, and continues to be, an effective deterrant against invasion?