The coming Nuclear meltdown in Iran - who "does" it?

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   
I'm not seeing an Israeli or US strike - I just don't see it. Unless Egypt and Syria become suddenly stable I think any strike would be just the excuse/motivator for a massive mess of bodies at the Israeli border. I also don't see an economic pathway becoming dire enough to make Iran reconsider - too many other players in the mess will keep the powers that be in Iran floating just fine.

I also don't think China and/or Russia are anymore interested in an nuclear Iran than Israel and the US are.

Soooo...

How do they stop the Iranian nuclear program? Managed bribery on a massive scale isn't feasible in Iran.

Nuclear meltdown at Bushehr! I don't think the IRGC could spin it well enough to satiate the regional Basij leaders and people in population centers. It might do enough to end nuclear aspirations and invigorate the Green movement again.

They already have an inbuilt cover from both German and Russian engineers. Not to mention prior alleged whistleblower leaks.

So who does it? Russia who then also plays up a recovery contract to Iran for more oil rights, offset military purchases, etc. Thoughts? -Mags

EDIT: The issue of if Iran has a nuclear program or not is irrelevant to my question - whether you think they do or not ~some~ action is happening around/in Iran. So I'm speculating and trying to gather thoughts on what lines of action people think will actually play out and by whom.
edit on 14-10-2012 by Insurrection because: Clarification w/ respect to first few responses..




posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Insurrection
 


Who has the right to nuke or not nuke



posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 02:02 AM
link   
I'm still not convinced that a conventional strike against the nuclear facilities is off the table. I don't foresee a meltdown being a very feasible solution to ending Iran's nuclear ambitions. I imagine it would not be very severe, the guilty party would be found out and it would actually bolster the Iranian people's support for their government.

I still think a traditional strike will occur after the US elections. I think we will see a lot more evidence coming out and the propaganda machine will start churning full speed. I imagine the American people supporting a strike on Iran within the next 2-6 months.



posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Insurrection
 


so you come in asking a hypothetical question about a hypothetical nuclear program?
or are you asking a loaded question with no evidence of a nuclear program besides electricity and medical grade enrichment?



posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Insurrection
 





I'm not seeing an Israeli or US strike - I just don't see it. Unless Egypt and Syria become suddenly stable I think any strike would be just the excuse/motivator for a massive mess of bodies at the Israeli border


That would be the most intelligent assessment if Iran's nuclear program didn't represent an existential threat to it's existence and a genocide on par with the Holocaust.

Your theory is predicated upon the assumption that Iran's threat is not an existential threat. If it were something that Israel felt it could hold off for years through simple diplomacy then I think Israel would do that. But Israel cannot do that, because the threat represented in Iran is too intimately connected with Iran's Shia Islamist twelvist theology, and so as long Iran remains in the hands of the Ayatollahs, Israel will always face a very real threat to its existence.

Any honest appraisal of Shia Islam, of the writings of Ayatollah Khomeini, and of the history of Iran since 1979, should unequivocally clarify the thoroughly messianic rhetoric of the Iranian revolution, from Khomeini, who may have suggested that he himself was the Imam Mahdi (he was posed the question by a reporter, in which he responded without responding, indicating a 'mystery' as to a mystical-political possibility), to Ahmadinejad, and the messianic fervor his government has built about the imminent return of the Mahdi, that if a big war does happen, it indicates that the Mahdi will come, and other such pleasantries.

In short, Iran is too extreme in its religious fanaticism to be trusted. It's dangerous.




So I'm speculating and trying to gather thoughts on what lines of action people think will actually play out and by whom.


Israel WILL attack Iran's nuclear facilities. It is going to happen. The odds are like 199/200. Everyday this issue is brought up in their media, and even today Lieberman met the Breazilian president to cajole him into supporting an attack on Iran.

My own timetable see's an attack from now, although with less probability, and some time after the US elections in later November. If not November, the odds increase as time passes by, so December, January, February. I would be amazed if nothing happened by March.

Yes, it's a highly pessimistic view of what's going on. My main concern, and the concern of the Israelis is, the real threat of a nuclear attack on Israel if Iran is allowed to become a nuclear power.

Hezbollah is intimately tied into the ICRG. If Iran has a bomb, theres not only the threat of a missile strike from Iran on Israel, but there's a very real probability that Iran would transfer a nuke into Hezbollah controlled southern Lebanon, and either attack Israel from there, or smuggle it somehow into Israel's main population center at the Tel-Aviv/Jaffa metropolitan area, killing 3.3 million Jews, and take out Israel's administrative, business and military headquarters. It would destroy Israel. There would be nothing left.

The incentive is there. They could destroy Israel in one shot, while leaving the holy places of concern, such as Jerusalem, out of the proximity of the blast.

edit on 14-10-2012 by dontreally because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by dontreally
Your theory is predicated upon the assumption that Iran's threat is not an existential threat.


No - my theory hinges on the idea that eliminated Iran as a threat no longer removes the existential threat from Israel. I really believe that the instability that the current US Administration seems "proud" of creates another series of storms around Israel that any action against Iran would congeal into other action against Israel. A lose-lost situation. And, again, I think POTUS is perfectly happy with that (and that's another issue).

However, I also think other major Tier 1 Actors wouldn't be happy with that and have the option of stepping in discretely to create an environment to dissuade action by anyone. That's what I'm hoping this thread will speculate on..

If Israeli strikes are a lose-lose and the US won't act in time or with conviction - who else can "salvage" this mess around Iran?

So you may still disagree it's a lose-lose but I want to be clear I actually do believe Iran is a serious threat to Israel. -Mags



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Insurrection
So who does it? Russia who then also plays up a recovery contract to Iran for more oil rights, offset military purchases, etc. Thoughts?


I think people need to realize Russia already has huge oil reserves. I've always thought that Russia doesn't want the sanctions coming off Iran to avoid yet another competitor for fuel sales to the EU and others. So, they play their part in keeping this shell game going. But in the end it's going to cost lives.

Lots of lives.


EDIT: The issue of if Iran has a nuclear program or not is irrelevant to my question - whether you think they do or not ~some~ action is happening around/in Iran. So I'm speculating and trying to gather thoughts on what lines of action people think will actually play out and by whom.


First off, that's nearly an impossible question to ask for some members here. They'll simply regurgitate the Evil Israelis Zionists killed off the Dinosaurs, started Global warming and canceled the X-Files line of rhetoric. Secondly, Anything posted based on fact will be disregarded as nothing more than propaganda by both sides if it exposes their paradigm as being a fallacy.

Fact is, Iran has a Nuclear program. Whether or not they are working on a bomb is the question. Some here are totally convinced they are while others simply refuse to acknowledge that possibility and are in complete denial over it.

Ask yourselves this.

Do you honestly think all those Iranian Nuclear scientists are all huddled deep down in those secret bunkers playing Worlds of Warcraft?



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Insurrection
 





my theory hinges on the idea that eliminated Iran as a threat no longer removes the existential threat from Israel


True, I agree, but that doesn't change the fact that there exists an immediate threat in Iran which poses a greater problem to Israel's safety than the other threats in the region.

True, once Israel strikes Iran, I have little doubt - and most analysts in Israel are expecting - that Egypt will find reason to fault Israel for attacking Iran, and so increase tensions against Israel.

There is no doubt at all that the Obama clan aren't aware of this. Their demonization of Mubarak - puppet or not, he was good for US and western interests - speaking at Al Azhar, essentially giving moral legitimacy to the brotherhood, and then labeling the revolution in Egypt as a 'victory for democracy' when it is nothing of the kind - unless democracy is understood in the most narrow sense of 'majority' rule, without all the civil liberties, freedoms etc, that are implied to go along with democracy - gave the Brotherhood the international clout to eventually come to power.

It looks to me as the Obama administration has been paving the way for a very serious future confrontation, not only with Israel, but more globally, a future conflict between Islamist states - Egypt, Syria (if the rebels succeed), Libya (which are still vying) and still others, and the west.

And why wouldn't a radical, who himself followed the philosophy of Saul Alinsky, author of 'rules for radicals' decide to make use of Islamism as the tool for change in our own societies.

The transition from liberal democracy to socialist state will happen in the next 4 years, I am sure of it.



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Insurrection
 





If Israeli strikes are a lose-lose and the US won't act in time or with conviction - who else can "salvage" this mess around Iran?


I don't see how the US wouldn't act 'without conviction'.

They're already engaging in military exercises with other nations in the region. The concern being, obviously, the strait of Hormuz.

The US will interfere because it is in it's national interest to interfere.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   
I love this kind of thinking...you may have just thwarted some black opps.
If we seen it coming they can't use it right?
Seems like the best way to make sure an event doesn't happen is to predict it will !
Excellent





new topics
top topics
 
3

log in

join