Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

iran war

Discussion in 'Legal' started by carlrodd, Jan 12, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. carlrodd

    carlrodd Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    849
    Location:
    Delaware
  2. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    I don't think it will happen unless the rest of the world also wants it. I don't think we can afford another invasion without more allies.

    So tell me, are France and Germany selling "machine parts" to Iran to help build their toys? If so, guess what they will say to an invasion......
     
  3. Joejojoba111

    Joejojoba111 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,056
    It's a scary issue. When Iran was simply being an international dick I supported the notion of sovereignty and the right to be a dick, as well I figured that it would be hypocritical to allow Pakistan and India to have nuclear weapons, and Iraq to have chemical ones, but deny Iran.

    Now, though, 2 possibilities haunt me. #1)Iran already has something, and are itching to use it in a situation which could be construed as self-defence or something complicated like that, and not result in world-wide support for massive retaliation. #2)Iran is bluffing, hoping people think #1 and thus they have time to actually make a weapon.

    What Iran doesn't seem to realize is that a lot of the world is generally dumber than they were 20 or 30 years ago, and while average Joes may have understood basic concepts like MAD before, even basic game theory is lots on most now. The result is that the option #3) 'Make things go boom for me to watch on TV while I eat a microwave burrito.' is gaining widespread support.


    At least I don't see other explanations for the actions of Iran's leaders. Heck even a lot of the leaders are quieter, and ALL the Islamic countries are uncomfortable with Mahmoud's rhetoric. Maybe Mahmoud really IS crazy, and really DOES want to bring about some prophesized apocalypse or something.

    Right now I'm betting on #1. If I had to pick even longer odds I'd suggest that Iran has had Soviet scientists working on their nuclear program since the late 1970's, when the USSR shipped a thousand or so en masse as part of an agreement. But I'd suspect that Iran doesn't have their own weapons built YET, though they might have old or re-conditioned Soviet warheads they aquired.
     
  4. carlrodd

    carlrodd Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    849
    Location:
    Delaware
    mahmoud seems to be a bit of a throwback. he's no saddam, he's no saudi royal or jordanian prince, and certainly no silk robe, sunglasses wearing kadafi. i've read and heard that he is well educated in the conservative muslim tradition, and lives a VERY simple life in accordance with the original principals of iran's revolution. he is also obviously, VERY well respected by the conservative, radical cleric element in iran. when he threatens israel, i truly believe he seeks to do whatever he can during his tenure to bring about some sort of major conflict in the middle east. didn't we used to "cause accidents" for uppity, contentious third world leaders. i know he's rather high profile, but sheesh, iran can be a very dangerous place. maybe that could be an option for israel.
     
  5. Lupinus

    Lupinus Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,502
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    Im not sure of an outright war. I would say air strikes would be possible, but now that we are in a neighboring country they coul counter attack and force us into a land war. One thing is certian though. Isreal will never, ever, allow Iran to own a nuclear weapon. NEVER. They will tell the world to pound salt and send a few F-15's to send a missle up allah's rear end. And to be honest I wouldn't blame them.
     
  6. Biker

    Biker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    6,105
    Location:
    Idaho
  7. carlrodd

    carlrodd Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    849
    Location:
    Delaware
    wow. sounds very plausible. iran just isn't iraq is it?....to say the least.
     
  8. Lupinus

    Lupinus Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,502
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    Very good story.

    A bit more dramatic I think then the real thing would be, but still good story. The things he leaves out- Stealth and cruise missles, if it wasn't just Isreal and was a joint strike by Isreal and the US stealth and cruise missles would be the first in and would obliterate their air defense network and a good bit of their fighters. Iraq preGW1 had a very good air defense system and our planes didn't fall from the sky by any means. Also as far as the green zone attack part they leave out anti-missle defense systems like PATRIOT that have come a way since GW1 when they missles still hit Isreal and when Saddam launched a few missles before the start of this war they did a very good job. And for the ships you'd have to get a lot of missles off to get past their measures, and you'd be picked up on radar a long time before you were in fireing range of anti-ship missles and I doubt Iran would send it's planes on suicide runs or agianst US ships, they would be to busy trying to defend their airspace. But the Iraqi military was still fairly neutured still from the first Gulf war, it simply never recovered. Iran's military isn't neutured at the moment and would be admitidly harder, but the article is way mroe dramatic then the real thing would be.
     
  9. Biker

    Biker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    6,105
    Location:
    Idaho
    Yup. I don't see any easy answers to this problem.
    Biker
     
  10. Lupinus

    Lupinus Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,502
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    Easy answers no, but answers none the less.

    Of course just like two times now we would tell Isreal thanks but no thanks.
     
  11. Biker

    Biker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    6,105
    Location:
    Idaho
    Lupinus...

    I don't have any proof handy (I'll dig around a bit later), but there is supposably no real defense against the Sunburn missile.
    This could complicate things for us...
    Biker
     
  12. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth

    Raytheon claims to have it covered.....

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/966345/posts
     
  13. GoRon

    GoRon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,495
    Location:
    west burbs of Chicago
    Other than allowing Iran to control our foreign policy toward Israel and the ME there is little the US can do to avoid an eventual showdown.

    If a showdown occures it will be because they want it to happen.

    We can let it perculate until they are ready or we can force the issue. Neither alternative is very appealing.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2006
  14. Wllm. Legrand

    Wllm. Legrand member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2005
    Messages:
    219
    Interesting story by someone who evidently predicted the present "Charlie Foxtrot" in Iraq.

    Not to worry...the present administration will guide us to another crackerjack victory of the Project for the New American Century.

    They don't even KNOW the meaning of the word "hubris". It's all Greek to them....
     
  15. Waitone

    Waitone Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,406
    Location:
    The Land of Broccoli and Fingernails
    Tough situation but there had better be a resolution to the problem because the very last thing anyone wants is a radical Islamic government, with access to a high percentage of the world's oil supply, implementing a nuclear umbrella under which Islamic jihadists can conduct their violent actions. Bad, bad situation that will not go away. I hope for the best but I am more pessamistic about the Iran situation than I am about what's happening in Iraq.
     
  16. Manedwolf

    Manedwolf member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,693
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    Raytheon also made the Patriots that didn't have the overall best record of knocking down clunky, old-tech Scuds.

    Never trust a salesperson about a gun (or a missile), read the reports of the soldiers in the field who use them.
     
  17. Manedwolf

    Manedwolf member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,693
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    The Russians also had developed a supercavitating torpedo that we have absolutely no defense against. It's well-believed that a number were sold to China, and who knows, could be to Iran as well.

    Look up the Shkval torpedo, which travels at over 200mph underwater by creating a shielding low-friction wall of bubbles around itself. Scary stuff for Navy guys.

    It seems we spent too much money and time trying to become all geared for four-day wars, essentially becoming a specialist predator. But in nature, it's the adaptable generalist predators who do the best...the specialists often are the ones on the endangered lists.
     
  18. taliv

    taliv Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Messages:
    22,280
    i don't think that scenario is at all realistic. stuff like iran using GPS-guided bombs??? :scrutiny: and our awacs flying above iran before the attack??

    if we throw down, and especially if we initiate it, air superiority won't be in question.
     
  19. Biker

    Biker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    6,105
    Location:
    Idaho
  20. Waitone

    Waitone Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,406
    Location:
    The Land of Broccoli and Fingernails
    While the Russkies develop supercaviating torpedoes we develop supercavitating ground penetrators. If the physics is similar which do you think would be easier to engineer?
     
  21. Biker

    Biker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    6,105
    Location:
    Idaho
    Couldn't tell ya. I thought a 'physic' was something that helped you go 'number two'.
    :)
    Biker
     
  22. johnster999

    johnster999 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2004
    Messages:
    207
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Like many hardline Islamists, the Iranian Pres is a total goofball full of bluster and made things much simpler for everyone.

    Just a little promise here and a lie there would have placated Europe. Europe had resigned itself to a nuclear Iran. All they wanted was a comforting promise (nonproliferation) from Iran to take home to the folks. Iran could have then proceeded to research and build nukes secretly despite the promise (see US/North Korea fiasco).

    What Europe got instead was, "The holocaust was a myth and we wanna blow Israel off the map and we're breaking these seals and moving ahead with enrichment right now, so there."

    999
     
  23. R.H. Lee

    R.H. Lee Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,377
    Location:
    CA
    I don't understand why a military solution is always the first, or preferred option. I would rather see the U.S. withdraw militarily from the rest of the world, and use economic coercion instead as standard policy. We have enough oil reserves in the continental U.S. and Alaska to make us independent of reliance on foreign oil. That's the first step. The second step is to trade only with countries whose governments meet certain minimum standards for not only human rights but also international aggression. This is the carrot.

    Then and only then, any country that poses a security threat to us or our trading partners will be dealt with militarily, after diplomatic efforts have been exhausted. That military consequence will be devastating and delivered solely by air power; no 'occupying' forces. That is the stick.

    Once this pattern has been established, everyone will know what to expect. You want to run your country with a murderous dictatorship? Fine-we don't do business with you. Keep your aggression confined to your own country. If you attack one of our trading partners to exploit their wealth you will be bombed back into the stone age.
     
  24. Waitone

    Waitone Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,406
    Location:
    The Land of Broccoli and Fingernails
    A really interesting evaluation of Iran and US from a monetary perspective, written mid-2005. http://www.energybulletin.net/7707.html

    <snip>
    <snip>
    The article is chocked full of stuff not aired in mass and alternative media.
     
  25. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth

    So you'll believe Russias' claim that the Sunburn is unbeatable, but not another groups' claim that it can be defeated....... OK.......:scrutiny:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page