Planned strike on Iran's Nuclear Facilities?

aways · 12:42 PM

Anyone believe this? I hope we don't ignore the problem, or make a naive deal like the Clinton administration did with North Korea, where they sent Jimmy "see no evil" Carter to "cut a deal", and it's now too late to do anything about the problem...

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1135696369601

Joeaksa · 01-01-2006, 05:23 PM

Israel has already stated that if Iran continues with their progress on nuke weapons or powerplants, that they will take them out. Considering their past history, I believe them.

I just would like to figure out how to get them to do the same with N. Korea after they are finished in Iran...

JoeA

Aurel · Aurel's Garage

And why is it that Israel would be the only country in the area to have nukes? What makes them so superior for that? I still have problems with that do what I say, not what I do attitude. I`d rather see no one have nukes. If Iran wants nukes, it is because Israel has nukes. So why not disarm both? Enough damage can be done with conventional weapons already.

Aurel

Flatbutt1 · 01-01-2006, 05:54 PM

Disarmament is what would be best but it will never happen IMO. I fear that this will continue to escalate until someone finally pushes the button and ends everything.

aways · 01-01-2006, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aurel
And why is it that Israel would be the only country in the area to have nukes? What makes them so superior for that? I still have problems with that do what I say, not what I do attitude. I`d rather see no one have nukes. If Iran wants nukes, it is because Israel has nukes. So why not disarm both? Enough damage can be done with conventional weapons already.

Aurel

Yours is a moral equivalence argument. There is a BIG distinction between a country like Israel (or the US, France or Britain for that matter) having nukes, and a country like Iran, run by suicidal lunatics that have piblicly stated that they'd like to see Israel (and the US, if they could pull it off) "wiped off the map".

Joeaksa · 01-01-2006, 07:41 PM

Agree with Aways. Israel has had nukes for years and not used them, while they have enemies on all fronts. Iran is not stable at all and wants to take over the world and make them a moslem convert. Last person IMHO who needs a nuke, with N. Korea close behind.

Personally I would prefer to elmininate all nukes worldwide, but that aint gonna happen. The ones who have them now seem to be fairly responsible if you elmininate the resent Paki/India situation of selling anything to anyone.

Joe A

red-beard · red-beard's Garage

Isreal did not sign the NNPA while both Iran and PRNK have. By developing nuclear weapons, they are violating a treaty.

Hugh R · 01-01-2006, 09:00 PM

Red

India didn't sign either as I recall. Nor Pakistan. I guess its worth the paper its written on. Mark my words, there will be a nuclear war in the mid-east over oil one day. As I think Einstein said (I could be wrong). Semi Quote " World war three will last about 2 hours, and World War four will be fought with sticks and stones"

Ronbo · 01-01-2006, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by aways
Yours is a moral equivalence argument. There is a BIG distinction between a country like Israel (or the US, France or Britain for that matter) having nukes, and a country like Iran, run by suicidal lunatics that have piblicly stated that they'd like to see Israel (and the US, if they could pull it off) "wiped off the map".

Iran's leader went so far to state that it would be worth the total destruction of Iran to wipe Israel off the map.

aways · 01-14-2006, 05:58 PM

Do we need tactical nukes to take out the underground facilites, or would a series if bunker-busters, one on top the other, be sufficient?

sketchers356 · 01-14-2006, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hugh R
Red

India didn't sign either as I recall. Nor Pakistan. I guess its worth the paper its written on. Mark my words, there will be a nuclear war in the mid-east over oil one day. As I think Einstein said (I could be wrong). Semi Quote " World war three will last about 2 hours, and World War four will be fought with sticks and stones"

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."

speeder · 01-14-2006, 07:50 PM

Iran is going to be toast, mark my words.

fastpat · 01-14-2006, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by aways
Do we need tactical nukes to take out the underground facilites, or would a series if bunker-busters, one on top the other, be sufficient?

Just when did Iran attack America? The newspapers appear to have missed it.

fastpat · 01-14-2006, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joeaksa
Israel has already stated that if Iran continues with their progress on nuke weapons or powerplants, that they will take them out. Considering their past history, I believe them.

I just would like to figure out how to get them to do the same with N. Korea after they are finished in Iran...

JoeA

Iran wants nukes as a hedge against attacks from the US government and Israel. While I'm sure that Israel wishes to remain the only nuclear power in the middle east, just as the US government wanted no communist country to have nuclear armaments, that's not going to happen. If Israel or it's surrogate, the US government, attacks Iran you might expect China, North Korea (if they really have them), or Pakistan to give or sell several nuclear weapons to Iran for their future security.

The only way to convince the Iranians to forgo nukes is for total US government withdrawal from the region and for Israel to give up their nukes.

Under the current set of political realities, I'd say Iran will go nuke as soon as they can.

Nothing else makes sense for them.

aways · 01-14-2006, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fastpat
Just when did Iran attack America? The newspapers appear to have missed it.

No. You missed it...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5454606/site/newsweek/

fastpat · 01-14-2006, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by aways
No. You missed it...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5454606/site/newsweek/

Wow, what port in America did that attack occur in?

Again, when did Iran attack America?

Here, I'll help you, IRAN HAS NEVER ATTACKED AMERICA, IRAN, HOWEVER, HAS BEEN ATTACKED IN THE PAST BY THE US GOVERNMENT . Or didn't you know that?

aways · 01-14-2006, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fastpat
Wow, what port in America did that attack occur in?

Again, when did Iran attack America?

Here, I'll help you, IRAN HAS NEVER ATTACKED AMERICA, IRAN, HOWEVER, HAS BEEN ATTACKED IN THE PAST BY THE US GOVERNMENT . Or didn't you know that?

Dude, libertarians/isolationists don't live in the real world...

P.S. That little key on the left side of your keyboard is the
CAPS LOCK. Make sure it's "off"...

techweenie · techweenie's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by fastpat
Just when did Iran attack America? The newspapers appear to have missed it.

Most seem to have missed it when Israel attacked us.

But we have quite a double standard.

fastpat · 01-15-2006, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by techweenie
Most seem to have missed it when Israel attacked us.

But we have quite a double standard.

Yep, quite a double standard. The good thing is that there is no statute of limitations on war crimes, and the USS Liberty's surviving crew members aren't going to let Israel forget about it either.

They have my full support.

It's interesting though, that one of the roles of the Secret Service, particularly after a president is out of office, is to prevent their arrest for war crimes, or even direct warrant service.

djmcmath · 01-15-2006, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fastpat
What port in America did that attack occur in?

You seem to have missed a critical point: an attack on a sovereign entity's vessel, whether or not that vessel is currently located in it's home port, constitutes an attack on that sovereign entity. Your defense is like saying, "Yeah, I know that some schmuck murdered my wife and kids while they were driving home the other day, but it didn't happen at home, so it wasn't my family." Wasn't it Clinton who said, "Attack one American and you attack all Americans?"

RE: USS Liberty -- there are a lot of unanswered questions. How far outside of Israeli territorial waters were they, and was it close enough that the (now antiquated) navigational systems of the day could have mistaken it for being inside the line? (Note that we still have that problem today with many lesser developed nations.) Was there a warning given that simply didn't make it in time? Could the Israeli's have believed that it was an enemy ship engaged in deceptive marking practices (ie, how hard would it have been for Egypt to have procured an American flag and some white paint)? You may know enough to pass judgement on anyone involved in this event, but I certainly do not.

Dan