It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by centurion1211
Yo, Ahmadinejad, we just saw some really fast jets .ed in your direction. Did you want us to do anything else?
Iran also has an advanced air defense system, deployed to protect its nuclear sites; "they are dispersed and underground making potential air strikes difficult and without any guarantees of success." (Jerusalem Post, 20 April 2005). It has upgraded its Shahab-3 missile, which can reach targets in Israel. Iran's armed forces have recently conducted high-profile military exercises in anticipation of a US led attack. Iran also possesses some 12 X-55 strategic cruise missiles, produced by the Ukraine. Iran's air defense systems is said to feature Russian SA-2, SA-5, SA-6 as well as shoulder-launched SA-7 missiles
United Arab Emirates
Palestinian territories Palestinee
NAM:Member states and representatives
* Antigua and Barbuda
* Burma (Myanmar)
* Burkina Faso
* Cape Verde
* Central African Republic
* Côte d'Ivoire
* Democratic Republic of the Congo
* Dominican Republic
* Equatorial Guinea
* North Korea
* Papua New Guinea
* Saint Lucia
* Saint Kitts and Nevis
* Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
* São Tomé and Príncipe
* Saudi Arabia
* Sierra Leone
* South Africa
* Sri Lanka
* Trinidad and Tobago
* United Arab Emirates
Military action against Iran would directly involve Israel's participation, which in turn is likely to trigger a broader war throughout the Middle East, not to mention an implosion in the Palestinian occupied territories.
Israel is a nuclear power with a sophisticated nuclear arsenal. The use of nuclear weapons by Israel or the US cannot be excluded, particularly in view of the fact that tactical nuclear weapons have now been reclassified as a variant of the conventional bunker buster bombs and are authorized by the US Senate for use in conventional war theaters. ("they are harmless to civilians because the explosion is underground")
In this regard, Israel and the US rather than Iran constitute a nuclear threat.
The planned attack on Iran must be understood in relation to the existing active war theaters in the Middle East, namely Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine. The conflict could easily spread from the Middle East to the Caspian sea basin. It could also involve the participation of Azerbaijan and Georgia, where US troops are stationed.
An attack on Iran would have a direct impact on the resistance movement inside Iraq. It would also put pressure on America's overstretched military capabilities and resources in both the Iraqi and Afghan war theaters. (The 150,000 US troops in Afghanistan are already fully engaged and could not be redeployed in the case of a war with Iran.)
Moreover, US military action on Iran not only threatens Russian and Chinese interests, which have geopolitical interests in the Caspian sea basin and which have bilateral agreements with Iran. It also backlashes on European oil interests in Iran and is likely to produce major divisions between Western allies, between the US and its European partners as well as within the European Union.
Through its participation in NATO, Europe, despite its reluctance, would be brought into the Iran operation. The participation of NATO largely hinges on a military cooperation agreement reached between NATO and Israel. This agreement would bind NATO to defend Israel against Syria and Iran. NATO would therefore support a preemptive attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, and could take on a more active role if Iran were to retaliate following US-Israeli air strikes.
Needless to say, the war against Iran is part of a longer term US military agenda which seeks to militarize the entire Caspian sea basin, eventually leading to the destabilization and conquest of the Russian Federation.
The core problem is that any military action would, in practice, have to involve more than just a series of attacks on a small range of directly nuclear-related sites.Moreover, once such action started, it would be virtually impossible to maintain any relationship with Iran except one based on violence.
Apart from anything else, all the available evidence suggests that any military action would have a very powerful unifying effect within Iran, bringing a wide range of political and religious opinion behind the administration, increasing both its power base and its stability. Even the current administration could be expected to be a focus of support. Those elements of the theocracy that are at present suspicious of Mr Ahmadinejad and may still resent his unexpected electoral success, would not stand in the way of a united Iran faced with US military action.
A US military attack on Iranian nuclear infrastructure would be the start of a protracted military confrontation that would probably involve Iraq, Israel and Lebanon as well as the United States and Iran, with the possibility of west Gulf states being involved as well. An attack by Israel, although initially on a smaller scale, would almost certainly escalate to involve the United States, and would also mark the start of a protracted conflict.
Although an attack by either state could seriously damage Iran’s nuclear development potential, numerous responses would be possible making a protracted and highly unstable conflict virtually certain. Moreover, Iran would be expected to withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty and engage in a nuclear weapons programme as rapidly as possible. This would lead to further military action against Iran, establishing a highly dangerous cycle of violence.
The termination of the Saddam Hussein regime was expected to bring about a free-market client state in Iraq. Instead it has produced a deeply unstable and costly conflict with no end in sight. That may not prevent a US or an Israeli attack on Iran even though it should be expected that the consequences would be substantially greater. What this analysis does conclude is that a military response to the current crisis in relations with Iran is a particularly dangerous option and should not be considered further – alternative approaches must be sought, however difficult these may be.
Originally posted by Dark Ghost
Not a very comforting thought.
I don't think Israel will strike Iran because they are aware of the consequences that would result. I don't think Iran will strike Israel because they are aware of the consequences that would result.
I hope your predictions are wrong, but they do seem plausible.
WW3 will not be pretty for ANY of us...
[edit on 15/12/2009 by Dark Ghost]
Originally posted by December_Rain
reply to post by bodrul
Actually there are lot of sanction in place on Iran as well but their capability is much superior and more organized.It is true Iran is not Iraq or Afghanistan.
Even if Israel attacks Iran, Iran will definitely attack any US interest in Middle East along with Israel. Thus, US will have to get involved in anyway and a bigger war. It is naive to think Iran won't attack US interest in Middle East if only Israel attacks and a laughable concept.
Any attack on Iran will let Iran launch attacks within Iraq/ Afghanistan on US bases open their border with Iraq to infiltrate militias inside Iraq/ Afghanistan. Iran will attack any oil supply routes to US etc.
And don't forget what North Korea will do taking advantage of the whole situation.
so lets say its the end of Both countries as Iran would flatten Israel and Israel would unleash everything it has before hitting the dust.
What do Fadi Kabboul, Aref Richany Jimenez, Radwan Sabbagh and Tarek Zaidan El Aissami Maddah have in common? The answer is that they are, respectively, executive director for planning of Venezuelan oil company PdVSA; the president of Venezuela's military-industrial complex; the president of a major state-owned mining concern; and, finally, the minister of interior. Latin Americans of Middle Eastern descent have long played prominent roles in national politics and business. But these are all fingertip positions in what gives the Iranian-Venezuelan relationship its worrying grip.
Forty-seven years ago, Americans woke up to the fact that a distant power could threaten us much closer to home. Perhaps it's time Camelot 2.0 take note that we are now on course for a replay.
Originally posted by Raider of Truth
I wondered if Israel will do it, as they threatened to attack Iran this month back in September.. does anyone know if Israel have troops or aircraft mobilising?
If this goes down.. Israel WILL be swallowed up.. not one arab nation on this planet will defend their actions and ALL middle eastern arab nations will attack Israel, they are in a lions den surrounded by enemies..
Ironic that Israel is basically the new Nazi Germany and they treat the palestinians and other local arab nations like sub humans.. guess pay backs a bitch
they will start the process of extermination and this time i don't think there will be any survivors.. hold onto your hats boys we may have a nuclear winter.