It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does NATO has strength to resolve Iran nuclear crisis?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 01:36 AM
link   
We has known, this time, United Europe has being an ally with US to face the Iran Nuclear Crisis. US has stated that militery way is one of way to be chosen. Iran still seem to be going to develop their nuclear weapon. Although Iran govenment know they has no ability to invade America directly, but they might think Iran is two times big as Iraq, they controled almost half of production quantity of oil in this world, they has some advanced heavier weapon as F-14, MiG-29 and MRBM which even carry chymic warhead probably, then the Persian Gulf is too small to spread aircraft carrier fighting group, so US won't really attack their nuclear building. On the other hand, if Iran really has nuke in future, Europe will be threatened at first. So, Will this time US combined other members of NATO to make the action?




posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 01:55 AM
link   
I´d say that depends entirely on who takes the first step. In the unlikely case that Iran makes the first move against any NATO country or the multinational ISAF forces in Afghanistan, then yes, the whole of NATO would be obliged to react. If some other countries (Israel, Iraq etc.) are attacked most likely most of NATO would react too, but maybe not all of them.

It is not predictable now who would join the fight if the USA or Israel decided to make the first move.

Apart from that,

Originally posted by emile
...Iran [...] controled almost half of production quantity of oil in this world, ...


is not true.



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 05:58 AM
link   
i agree with lonestar. if iran attack a nato country then nato will attack iran. but if nato attack iran then i thinkthat the us and the uk will play the biggest part and that france and maybe germany will only contribute a token force.

Justin



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 09:42 AM
link   
I wouldn't be surprised if Israel resolved the whole problem by pre-emptively knocking out Iran's reactors and any possible launch sites.



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by emile
they controled almost half of production quantity of oil in this world, they has some advanced heavier weapon....


Last I checked, Iran is number 3 on ‘proved’ reserves, Canada has moved to number 2 (behind Saudi Arabia) with 174.5 billion barrels from the ‘oil sands’ and Iran ranks 4th on world production ( 4 million bbl/day against world production of 79.6 million bbl/day). Not anywhere near half.
World Oil Production Table

Given the current situation in the ME, a carrier battle group does not need to ‘float up the gulf’ (but one effectively can); Iran is surrounded by US and coalition forces and bases.

Should Iran attack a NATO nation, speculation, reprisals against Iran would come form NATO allied nations.

I agree with the above poster, Israel initiate a first strike against Iran if no resolution is made, soon.

mg



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 01:50 PM
link   
During the first Gulf War, the Iraqi army was seriously considered as a well trained and rather large force, with huge reserves, modern armor, several shiny new jets. However, virtually all its advanced weaponry was destroyed within 24 hours of the air campagin. Iran would be no different, the only major issue would be that this is a much larger country, with a much larger population. Other than that, it is nothing a rerun of the first gulf war wouldnt require to set the country back 20 years.

Assuming someone starts bombing..



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raideur
During the first Gulf War, the Iraqi army was seriously considered as a well trained and rather large force, with huge reserves, modern armor, several shiny new jets. However, virtually all its advanced weaponry was destroyed within 24 hours of the air campagin. Iran would be no different, the only major issue would be that this is a much larger country, with a much larger population. Other than that, it is nothing a rerun of the first gulf war wouldnt require to set the country back 20 years.

Assuming someone starts bombing..


thats actually untrue. ive explainned this in other threads. iraq was not considered modern in its millitry infact its equipment was way outdated even in gulf war 1 considering the technology of that decade.

the majority of its tanks where outdated and obsolete. they didnt even have night-vision.

although you are right they did have huge manpower but even they where porly motivated in the second and first gulf war even more so in the second war.

there air defence was obsolete. there radars where poor quality. there radar sam systems old soviet design of the 1960's with minimal modern upgrades. there fibre optic network was fitted too late. and they had almost a non-existant supply of infra red guided SAM's especially shoulder launched surface to air missiles.

western media likes to overhype iraqi technology as modern although it is old just like in iraq where the media has been overhyping "shaped charge" IED style weopons as revolutionary and new threat to western forces blaming it on iran for suppling iraqi guerillas while not understanding that RPG's have been used against western forces and they also contain shaped charges and this is been happing for fromt he begining of the occupation meaning that shaped charges are not revolutionary or new.

irans weopons are completly different from anything that iraq has. some technology may look like iraqi technology from the outside but internally has been significantly upgraded and modifyed by iran son't confuse it with iraqi technology. infact some of irans anti-tank and surafce to air missiles are right upto date and modern like the misaq-1/2, russian TOR-M1, BUK-1,sa-16 sam,toophan,raad-t,russian s-200,rapier and RBS-70. dont confuse iraq and iran as the same country.

please take a look at these threads :

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.network54.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 19-2-2006 by iqonx]



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Any attack on a NATO member that is unprovoked would bring all of NATO into the conflict. That is what the NATO is all about. An attack on one NATO country is an attack on all. In answer to the question - yes of course the US/UK/France/Germany thats 4 of the 26 countries could resolve it (the US could do it itself). Nato is now bigger than it was facing the soviets.

The only grey area in this scenario is what is classed as an unprovoked attack?



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by emile
We has known, this time, United Europe has being an ally with US to face the Iran Nuclear Crisis. US has stated that militery way is one of way to be chosen. Iran still seem to be going to develop their nuclear weapon. Although Iran govenment know they has no ability to invade America directly, but they might think Iran is two times big as Iraq, they controled almost half of production quantity of oil in this world, they has some advanced heavier weapon as F-14, MiG-29 and MRBM which even carry chymic warhead probably, then the Persian Gulf is too small to spread aircraft carrier fighting group, so US won't really attack their nuclear building. On the other hand, if Iran really has nuke in future, Europe will be threatened at first. So, Will this time US combined other members of NATO to make the action?


it will be highly douthfull that NATO will take action against Iran. most likely israel will start a war between west and Iran using secret operation framing iran using Black flag operations like the "Lavon Affair"

en.wikipedia.org...

israel will most likely start a war getting iran destroyed but the attack against europea/america will be huge not just some poor quality terror attack but a huge attack that will grip te headlines most likely Dirty Bomb or other WMD attack or possibly assination of an important leader in the west obviously this is just an opionion of a possible scenario/possibility not saying its going to ever happen but htis how most likely NATO will jump in if it does.

to answer the main question yes NATO has combined capability to destory the millitry of iran but it can never occupy the country succesfully becuase this occupation will be unique where the guerillas have top of the line defence technology and for the first time ever NATO will face guerillas with thousands of high quality shoulder launched SAM's and wire-guided anti-tank missiles.



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I think the world needs to grow some balls and quick or we are going to

see very soon what it would have been like if Hitler ever developed the

bomb.



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 02:09 AM
link   
OK
Then the key piont is If Iran already successfully carried on the nuclear test, whether USA still did dare with the military force to solve the Iranian nuclear problem. All Chinese military fans believe that Beijing has already successfully export some pivital technology of nuke to Iran so Iran will test nuke in two years


[edit on 21-2-2006 by emile]



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 07:06 PM
link   
then there is the question about russia supporting Iran vs nato what would happen if Putin sides with them? In what form of aid or "help" would Putin offer Iran? That would make the war much much much larger could it be like korea? Russia pulling out its secret toys as I sure nato will be doing.


THis could get a lot bigger than what it seems lets hope it dont!!



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 04:31 AM
link   
russia wouldnt dare openly side against the us. They might supply weapons and training but they wouldnt hand out any of there top secret weaponary, nor would they help fight against nato.

Justin



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 05:04 AM
link   
I am also sure Russia wouldn't dare to support Iran in any war with NATO, but my question is if Iran has already test nuke successfully, does US still dare to destroy the Iran nuclear station by militar attack? It is clearly that Iran are willing to gain time so that develop nuke in secret by China or Russia's help.



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by emile
OK
Then the key piont is If Iran already successfully carried on the nuclear test, whether USA still did dare with the military force to solve the Iranian nuclear problem. All Chinese military fans believe that Beijing has already successfully export some pivital technology of nuke to Iran so Iran will test nuke in two years

[edit on 21-2-2006 by emile]


The us will dare because if the us millitary destroy all of irans nuke buildingcapability and all of irans curent nukes then iran cant nuke america so what have they to be scared of.

Justin



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lanton
I wouldn't be surprised if Israel resolved the whole problem by pre-emptively knocking out Iran's reactors and any possible launch sites.


It won't be that easy..
I think the only sure shot way would be cruise missiles and/or stealth bombers..



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3

Originally posted by Lanton
I wouldn't be surprised if Israel resolved the whole problem by pre-emptively knocking out Iran's reactors and any possible launch sites.


It won't be that easy..
I think the only sure shot way would be cruise missiles and/or stealth bombers..

Why's that? Do you not think that the Israeli's have the people to covertly insert into Iran and knock out any given target?



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lanton
Why's that? Do you not think that the Israeli's have the people to covertly insert into Iran and knock out any given target?


Im sure that israel do but its easier to defend against a special forces team than it is to defend agaisnt bombs from a plane that you cannot see. If a special forces team go in then the explosives they plant will have to go off after the team have left the plant, which leaves time for the bombs to be disarmed. If you drop bombs from a plane then the bomb will be far bigger, do far more damage and wont give the iranians any time to disarm the bomb.

The israel's might well attack the power plants because they are crazy but the americans wont want them to.

Justin



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lanton
Why's that? Do you not think that the Israeli's have the people to covertly insert into Iran and knock out any given target?


put it this way if a target cant be destroyed by a bucker buster or air dropable munition there is abolutly no way "special" forces can destroy that target becuase humans can only carry so much explosives combined with backpacks with food/ammo/nightvsion etc... theres only so much explosives you can carry. most nucluer buildings are absolultly huge and can only be taken out with tons of explosives no "special" forces will be able to do the job. alot of time people have watched too much rambo and commando movies and think special forces are super-human there just normal people who are slightly more highly trainned in different/specilist fields of the millitry and thats it nothing more special about them.



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx

Originally posted by Lanton
Why's that? Do you not think that the Israeli's have the people to covertly insert into Iran and knock out any given target?


put it this way if a target cant be destroyed by a bucker buster or air dropable munition there is abolutly no way "special" forces can destroy that target becuase humans can only carry so much explosives combined with backpacks with food/ammo/nightvsion etc... theres only so much explosives you can carry. most nucluer buildings are absolultly huge and can only be taken out with tons of explosives no "special" forces will be able to do the job. alot of time people have watched too much rambo and commando movies and think special forces are super-human there just normal people who are slightly more highly trainned in different/specilist fields of the millitry and thats it nothing more special about them.

Who said that they'd have to blow entire infrastructure up? The weak links are the personel (the scientists and engineers) and out-of-the-way facilities holding nuclear material and ballistic missile parts (the Iranians wouldn't have put all their eggs in one basket).




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join