Iranian missile test

[lookout123]

well this should up the pucker factor for the folks in the war games dept for the US and Israel.

Kablooie!

[Undertoad]

Kristof in NYT today (reg reqd): "An American Hiroshima"

Professor Allison offers a standing bet at 51-to-49 odds that, barring radical new antiproliferation steps, a terrorist nuclear strike will occur somewhere in the world in the next 10 years. So I took his bet. If there is no such nuclear attack by August 2014, he owes me $5.10. If there is an attack, I owe him $4.90.

I took the bet because I don't think the odds of nuclear terror are quite as great as he does. If I were guessing wildly, I would say a 20 percent risk over 10 years. In any case, if I lose the bet, then I'll probably be vaporized and won't have much use for money.

Unfortunately, plenty of smart people think I've made a bad bet. William Perry, the former secretary of defense, says there is an even chance of a nuclear terror strike within this decade - that is, in the next six years.

[lookout123]

i couldn't put odds on it but i do believe that there will be a nuclear strike in the not-too-distant future. one of the things that has discouraged nucs in the past is that most warfare was about gaining land or territory so that a nation state can have access to the materials contained within. the people who hate us (generic us) don't want our land or our wealth. we are abhorrent to them and they want our existence to end. a nuclear weapon will achieve that.

[lookout123]

why is it that before the night is over i am absolutely positive that i will read the words "no smoking gun" and "85% ... directly traceable to top management" in this thread?

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

i couldn't put odds on it but i do believe that there will be a nuclear strike in the not-too-distant future. one of the things that has discouraged nucs in the past is that most warfare was about gaining land or territory so that a nation state can have access to the materials contained within. the people who hate us (generic us) don't want our land or our wealth. we are abhorrent to them and they want our existence to end. a nuclear weapon will achieve that.

Unfortunately, too many give credence to the "hype more fear" concepts promoted by Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and cited by UT. Therefore the many see no difference between those nations who fear for their defense verse those nations who promote terrorism. People such as UT see everything in terms of an attack on Israel rather than learn the numerous perspectives that intertwine the Middle East and SW Asia. UT goes so far as to all but deny the Muslim Brotherhood.

Iran has a nuclear weapons program that could have been stopped had America not outrightly threatened Iran. Before the "promote fear to promote our agenda" Vulcans came to power, then the US and Iran were slowly moving to become good friends again. A process that would take at least 20 more years to undo the hatred. As soon as the mental midget president announced his 'axis of evil' political agenda (an agenda based only upon objectives of the Project for a New American Century), then moderate Iranians (those could have been close American friends) were completely disenfranchised. Thanks to the mental midget president and those telling him how to think, then no hope existed for any Iranian friendly to the US to remain in power. Just another example of what long time American professional diplomats publically stated - this mental midget president has undone decades of work.

With the 'Axis of Evil' speech (where the intent to attack each nation was all but stated), then any source of nuclear weapons in Iran would have been immediately promoted to a number one priority. Obviously if a nation is threatened with attack, then that nation will empower their extremists and develop the most destructive weapons possible.

Is there any hope that this Iranian weapons program will be suspended? Once that was possible. No longer possible because George Jr has declared that we must save the world from itself. We have done everything necessary to inform Iran that we will attack. We called them the axis of evil using the same facts and reasoning that claimed WMDs in Iraq. We intentionally let our number one enemy - bin Laden - go free so that we could promote the Vulcan political agenda. We now surround Iran with military forces and a chain of new military bases. What sane person could deny the US will attack Iran. Of course we will - based upon a google of facts and the stated intentions by George Jr and his Vulcans.

Did we not unilaterally execute a Pearl Harbor attack on another sovereign nation that was a threat to nobody? Of course we did. Are those same leaders - with veins hanging from their teeth - still in power in the US? Of course. Can any other power or organization stop the US from unilaterally attacking Iran? No. Not one.

America under right wing extremist domination is so intent on fixing the world that we do so to the detriment of American reputation, security, and individual security everywhere in the world.

Iran's only hope to protect itself is to build nuclear weapons and delivery systems. Only American 'fear promoters' would even think Iran is preparing to attack Israel. These 'fear promoters' have the same ethics and mind set of the dichead - which is the reason why Intafada II exists. Such individuals create war and violence as proven by history.

Iran is next on the US attack list. I state this with the same certainty that posted these previous predictions. That Iraq would invade Kuwait creating a war that would involve every nation in the world. That the US would become militarily committed in the Balkans - that was obvious and inevitable. And that there was no evidence of WMDs nor justification to invade Iraq.

In each case, the statements were made due to a prepondence of fact and often in contradiction to current popular beliefs. To be consistent: if George Jr gets reelected, then we will attack Iran during the George Jr second administration. Right wing extremists have made their objectives quite clear and obvious. They have stated and intend to impose massive and permanent change to the Middle East and SW Asia. Next in line for that political agenda is the invasion of Iran. We are already positioned with capital facilities to attack from Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, and the many former USSR 'kstans where George Jr has an ongoing massive construction of new US military bases. Why all this military base construction? One need only review the agenda of the Vulcans and the objectives defined by "Axis of Evil".

No honest person with a shred of credibility could fault Iran for building nuclear weapons and delivery systems. They are literally next in line to be invaded and occupied by the US. An invasion defined and demanded by this Vulcan political agenda - pragmatism be damned.

[lookout123]

if they were building nuclear weapons in response to our imminent invasion, wouldn't they be smarter to spend the r &d money on conventional weaponry upgrades, troop movements and a larger standing army, and then move into more effective (from a real threat standpoint) wmd like bio and chem?

[xoxoxoBruce]

I can't think of a reason why Iran would attack Israel or US Bases, except in retaliation for being attacked. They know we have the capability to decimate them. It would be like me punching "The Rock"(pro wrestler), suicide. Looks like an attempted deterent to me.

[OnyxCougar]

The commander of the elite Revolutionary Guards, Gen. Rahim Safavi, warned Iran will crush Israel if it attacks the Persian state, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported Wednesday.
"If Israel is mad enough to attack Iran's national interests, we will come down on them like a hammer and will crush their bones," IRNA quoted Safavi as saying.

And who gets to choose what Iran's national interests are?

From: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...814767&apage=1

[Undertoad]

My cite above is effing Kristof in the effing New York Times, tw, not Fox News or anything you might not watch in case you get infected with right-wing cooties.

[lookout123]

like i have said before. each nation will act in what, from their perspective, seems to be a rational manner.
Iran will build nucs as a defense measure - as in the best defense is a strong offense.
US will see that other nations ahving nucs is not particularly beneficial to them
Israel will be scared shitless and rattle the sabres and ask the sympathetic national community to demand that Iran stand down the program.
Korea will support Iran because it takes heat from them.

and everyone involved will be doing exactly what they feel is best for their own people. and it will escalate until some nut pops and starts a war or one of the weaker nations backs down.

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

My cite above is effing Kristof in the effing New York Times, tw, not Fox News or anything you might not watch in case you get infected with right-wing cooties.

ROFL

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

if they were building nuclear weapons in response to our imminent invasion, wouldn't they be smarter to spend the r &d money on conventional weaponry upgrades, troop movements and a larger standing army, and then move into more effective (from a real threat standpoint) wmd like bio and chem?

What is the one thing that America hypes fear about in every war? Nuclear and biological weapons. Conventional weapons and tactics have long ago been proven futile when the Air Force finally learned its primary mission - the support of ground troops.

I find it ironic that one would advocate conventional military weapons and tactics to defend Iran when those have repeatedly been proven ineffective against the US military - even in VietNam. What has repeatedly proven effective? Guerilla warfare. Dispersed attacks. Missile attacks on support facilities. And unsubstantiated threats. What promotes the most fear in US military doctrine? WMD and Scud missile type attacks. Why would Iran build and equip themselves with weapons and tactics long ago proven ineffective?

Lets keep this fundamental point in perspective. Iran is not building a first strike military. They are building a classic defensive structure. Those who promote fear attempt to avoid this fact. A structure designed to deter rather than repell an attack. Why? George Jr's intention to unilaterally attack Iran is all but stated. Their only hope is that centrist Americans rise up, vote, and start being informed. We have a president so irresponsible that he was warned about 11 Sept and he did nothing to defend America. No problem. Hype fear of Iran and we the people will forget his impeachable offense.

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by tw

We have a president so irresponsible that he was warned about 11 Sept and he did nothing to defend America.

from the secret files of tw.

anyway - what i stand by what i said earlier. nuclear weapons are not their most effective method right now. how many thousands of americans would be killed by a decent nuc attack? what would happen to iran if they did launch a nuc attack? they would cease to exist. do you think we just sent all of our nuclear weapons to the city dump when the cold war ended? no - the US still maintains the right to counter attack in kind. iran? now you see it, now you don't. end of story.

if they were trying to deter the US they would be touting the bio weapons programs - that is what the US military really fears. a lot of dead people is a bad thing, but a lot of sick, infected, contagious people about to be dead people? that is a terrifying thing.

in the end - we just went to war because of a belief that Iraq has WMD - do you really think the best way to avoid a war, from the iranian perspective, is to taunt the US with a REAL WMD platform?

edit:

I find it ironic that one would advocate conventional military weapons and tactics to defend Iran when those have repeatedly been proven ineffective against the US military - even in VietNam.

if the US truly feels threatened there is no strategy that will prove effective. if the US gets off its ass and decides that a war is just and necessary and can get the schmucks in DC to unite behind it - there is nothing that can stop the US military when it is not tethered by the leash of public opinion. let's face it - that is what has stood in the way of US military success since Korea - the polls. public opinion and political gamesmanship. if the gov't were to actually realize there was a REAL threat and they pulled it together, the US military has the ability to devastate all comers.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by lookout123

if they were building nuclear weapons in response to our imminent invasion, wouldn't they be smarter to spend the r &d money on conventional weaponry upgrades, troop movements and a larger standing army, and then move into more effective (from a real threat standpoint) wmd like bio and chem?

Because nuclear weapons are the great equalizer. Given their GDP, there is no way they can match US armor and tactics. Granted they make up some in fanaticism, but strapping explosives on young teenagers will not stop heavy armor.

Anyone who watched us roll over Iraq and stop at North Korea gets the message. After being placed on the Axis of Evil list, it would probably be irresponsible of them not to develop a deterrent. Right now the US is extended as far as we can sustain without a draft. We could field another 50K or more for a very short while, but would not have replacements anytime soon. It is in Iran's interests to develop a deterrent before the bulk of the troops come back and are sent out the door to Iran.

Considering the tinderbox the Middle East has become, I doubt that Israel can get away with a pre-emptive strike like they took against Iraq in 1981.

Of course, this might be premature since the reactor in Iran is supposedly not the best type for weapons grade development.

Still, it's nice to see a demonstration of the safer world Wolfowitz, Cheney, and friends have led us to. I hope they get locked out of the shelter if the day ever comes.

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

from the secret files of tw.
if the US gets off its ass and decides that a war is just and necessary and can get the schmucks in DC to unite behind it - there is nothing that can stop the US military when it is not tethered by the leash of public opinion. let's face it - that is what has stood in the way of US military success since Korea - the polls. public opinion and political gamesmanship. if the gov't were to actually realize there was a REAL threat and they pulled it together, the US military has the ability to devastate all comers.

I guess this silly little fact called Chinese has no place in your memory of Korea. And you are going to tell us that the public is the reason we lost in Vietnam? You did first learn basic geo-military-political history?

Tell me how many schmucks in DC stopped the US military from liberating Kuwait. In fact much of the resistance to that liberation was, instead, from the military itself - because those schmucks who were itching for war refused (out of misunderstanding) to do their job - provide a workable strategic objective. To blame the public for a military loss is to not have learned basic history - or to spend too much time with Rush Limbaugh half truths.

When a nation does not have public support for its war, then the war is wrong. So and again we return to a fundamentally simple concept - the smoking gun. Right wing extremists - enemies of the military - would advocate that the public is an impediment to the military. "Soldiers dealing with the trauma of killing " in the Current Events forum touches upon what happens when the military goes to war without public support. It is the little people who then and again suffer because the military is wrong. Too many still refuse to learn the lessons of Vietnam. Those are an enemy of the military.

And yes, the president did know (or at least was informed of by his PDB) that hijackings and attack by Al Qaeda were imminent. The 9/11 Commission says so. Furthermore, this president and his people did everything possible to cover up that fact. When Condi Rice read the title of that PDB, then the entire hearing room gasp. That is what the president want you to not know - that he was informed of the attack we now call 9/11. It is bluntly obvious to anyone with reading skills. The president was warned of the attack. Warned bluntly from numerous quarters. He and his principles instead quashed all attempts to uncover or subvert that attack. These are historical facts even provided by the 9/11 Commission report.

Nuclear weapons are a far more effective impediment than bio weapons. Basic military knowledge (rather than just hype opinions from Fox News) makes that obvious. Bio weaspons are trivial localized devices that are much too overhyped by naive news reporters. To even suspect that bio weapons can defer an attack is to be naive. Nuclear weapons can take out entire divisions and naval task forces including the aircraft carrier. The latter causes fear in generals, admirals, and presidents. Bio attacks only get the press upset and create cannon fodder. Bio weapons do not threaten top leadership and capital weapons. Bio weapons are described by the leadership as "militarily insignificant". No better weapon than nuclear to deter an invasion. Bio weapons will not deter an invasion. Simple background in military tactics make that obvious.

Iran must build nuclear weapons because George Jr has all but declared his intentions to attack Iran. Iran is next as soon as George Jr and his people can invent an excuse.