This is what a US strike on Iran would look like.....

page: 3
37
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by votan
 

reply to post by Iwinder
 


One is called Iran and the other Iraq.

Two entirely different countries and two entirely different set of circumstances....

Just pointing out the obvious.




posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by SheopleNation
 

reply to post by DirtyLiberalHippie
 




I lived through the latter part of the Cold War with WW-III just around the corner. I also saw it come to an end. Back then there were many more on the opposing side than just Russia, and China.


The Soviets and Red China were almost in lockstep.




This "Scare" is nothing new.

I think many here need to rethink this supposed threat.

{No offense}

edit on 27-10-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 10:48 PM
link   
And this is probably what a US or Israeli strike on Iran would lead to...



----

I realise this thread is just entertaining the idea of how a strike on Iran might go down, but still, it is bordering on dangerous territory as it legitimises military action in a situation that I and many others believe does not warrant it.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


Very dramatic.
edit on 27-10-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
I realise this thread is just entertaining the idea of how a strike on Iran might go down, but still, it is bordering on dangerous territory as it legitimises military action in a situation that I and many others believe does not warrant it.


I double quoted you...
That's a matter of opinion.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 11:05 PM
link   
Personally, I don't think this kind of strike will take place at all. I know it wouldn't if I were the US Secretary of Defense and I wouldn't recommend this sort of thing if I were at the top of the CIA or if I were Secretary of State.

At one time Iran and its mullahs were totally against the acquisition of nuclear weapons. Indeed there was a fatwa against the acquisition of nuclear weapons, since rescinded. However that may have been, if I were Iranian, and rational, as CIA and Defense Department studies maintain Iranians are, I would certainly be trying to beg, borrow, steal or manufacture nuclear weapons now in the wake of developments in the region.

Nuclear weapons have done wonders for a crackpot regime like North Korea. Nobody bothers a crackpot regime that has nuclear weapons.

Iran may be Islamic to the eyeballs but it is not a crackpot regime.

American officials are not known for subtlety, so some kind of OK Corral style shootout may indeed take place. Other posters have pointed out that despite an American victory in the shootout, serious difficulties could develop in the aftermath.

(Irony Alert) Students of history will know that the British collapsed as soon as the Germans started the blitz. Germany threw in the towel when its major cities were leveled. Vietnam knuckled under when the US dropped more bombs on it than were dropped in all of WW2.

Naturally, the Iranians and other Islamic countries will follow suit. America's popularity will increase even higher than the record levels it is at now and last but not least, Israeli security problems will be solved. (End of Irony.)

I think the United States should have a different policy in the region. I think it should take care of its economic concerns using traditional business practices. (Please don't throw "freedom" and "values" back at me.)

If you can't haggle in the Middle East . . . well, let's just say The Lost Art of Haggling should be back on the Harvard MBA course list.

Having said all that, if America decides to intervene on Iranian territory in the interests of fomenting regime change, with a view to getting someone in power in Iran who will cooperate in dismantling the covert aspects of Iranian nuclear ambitions, she should go about it in an altogether different manner.

I've posted on this before, and I don't have time to go over details but I think the way to destabilize and topple the mullah-ocracy in Iran is to start trouble on Iran's western borders with Turkey and Iraq. This trouble will involve the Kurds, who are Christian and seeking their own independent, oil rich state.

There will undoubtedly be difficulty over this with the Iraqis and the Turks. Kurdish "territory" overlaps all three countries in question. This region is a geopolitical swiss army knife of multiple uses. There is a lot of scope for measured, cadenced creativity in strategic initiatives in the region. Its a veritable cornucopia of chaos waiting to happen.

It definitely has problems, the chief of which is that the region is completely landlocked, but let's get real. We're talking about oil not nuclear weapons. This is a long term proposition. My two cents worth.

The most tantalizing and attractive thing about the creation, by hook or by crook, of Kurdistan is that it will be, right down to the last mortar round, America's one true friend in the region.

Edit: Just talked to a Muslim friend who told me that most Kurds are Sunni Muslim. I stand corrected but I don't think it really alters too much the thrust of my argument. It does make some difference though, for sure. Iraq and Iran have Shia majorities which might work in America's favor in dealing with the Sunni Kurds.
edit on 27-10-2012 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
A half-arsed war would be a 'solution' that leads us nowhere because we would require a negotiated settlement with Iran in order to end it properly; the same sort of agreement that we're looking for now. A long list of 'what ifs' raises the distinct possibility of a conflict progressing into a less-than-limited war with Iran. The sort of thing that we would not want.

For us the status quo is adequately sustainable. It is less so for them. Personally I wouldn't want to piss Iranians off just as they were beginning to become suitably pissed off with their own government.




posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Soshh
 

You are correct. Iran is on the verge of replacing their Old Guard Religious Government. The stupidest thing we could do right now is to give the Old Guard an excuse to KILL the Pro-Democracy Leadership.
Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Soshh
 

It's crazy isn't it? The point you make right there is one I've thought myself as well. Since we are long past the days of 'Total War' where 'Total Victory' was the only outcome, what exactly IS the point of war right now?

The leaders we go after ..may or may not still be there afterward. Saddam survived the first shot and even the Taliban were offered a way to stay. Oh..Bush would have had a problem if they'd publicly and completely called his bluff and met his terms for that promise. lol...

Point being though, doesn't ALL war eventually end in settlement and negotiated peace these days? If not, it ends by both nations staring nasty looks at each other over the UN General Hall and elsewhere. So why kill 10's of thousands of people (or millions in this case) when, as you so rightly point out, unless we kill 70 MILLION Iranians...we'll be making peace with them at some point. It'd be SO much better before we make a party out of slaughter first. No doubt.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by SheopleNation
 

reply to post by DirtyLiberalHippie
 




I lived through the latter part of the Cold War with WW-III just around the corner. I also saw it come to an end. Back then there were many more on the opposing side than just Russia, and China.


The Soviets and Red China were almost in lockstep.




This "Scare" is nothing new.

I think many here need to rethink this supposed threat.

{No offense}

edit on 27-10-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)


As usual, SnF

I do believe that China doesn't care we if obliterate their mainland (fewer mouths too feed). China has set up ghost towns all over the world to repopulate their culture when TSHTF.
What they have turned a blind eye to is the U.S. knows where these empty cities are located.
www.bbc.co.uk...
www.time.com...
www.businessinsider.com...



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 12:08 AM
link   
No it's not what an attack would 'look like'

It's what the description of it would convey.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by FraternitasSaturni
 

The U.S. could .. do it alone but why .. when the current Iranian Regime is at odds with it's own Military? The REAL Iranian Military Leadership is PISSED OFF that the Iranian Regimes MOUTH PIECE is spouting off ... They believe they have been placed in a SUICIDAL POSITION of being asked to fight a WAR against the U.S. Military which can easily destroy the entire Iranian Navy in short time.

The Iranian Military is secretly talking with the U.S. Military to find a way to Stand Down as apposed to being OBLITERATED.


If true, working these assets would, by far, be the best option for all - hopefully to prevent conflict, not just clean up afterward. And/but if the Iranian Military stood down, we'd be looking at another changing of the guard. That is another matter altogether, to be considered carefully.
edit on 28-10-2012 by AtlasShrugging because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 12:42 AM
link   
Here's how it boils down too soo...

Suck it!


Ideas?

How cowboy'ish does that sound?

"The I'm the #"

Curious
edit on 28-10-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Yeah, somebody toss out a frag!




posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 12:52 AM
link   
I would also point out that we dont know the capabilities of a true US first strike should
they use some of the more advanced weapons many of us believe they have access
to, a hypersonic bunker buster for instance might be able to answer a bunker built so
deep in the ground, i have no real clue and im speculating here but i know they have
been working on one at the very least.

the idea behind it is obvious, instead of explosives you use a heavy metal, kinetic
kill rods, accelerate them up to a speed that is just plain ridiculous and bam you
have a kill that doesn't rely on explosives but on sheer momentum. they should
also have the range we would need to meet to make it to all of the targets.

As to the question if we should attack or not, so far im not convinced iran is a real
threat, some elements within iran may well be a threat but that could be said about
almost any nation, look at our own sordid affairs, those of our allies etc. etc. etc.
its a tough call to be sure, innocent lives will be lost no matter the choices most
likely.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by AtlasShrugging
 

The realities of the Iran situation are that the U.S. has FORBIDDEN Israel to Bomb Iranian Nuclear Sites as this would shoot Radioactive Material into the Atmosphere and poison the whole Middle East including Israel. There is only one viable solution to the issue and that is the careful dismantling of Iranian Nuclear Sites.

Israel is pushing hard with an unrealistic threat it knows it cannot carry out if it wants to keep getting Billions in U.S. AID.

Iran's Military Leadership is on the verge of Mutiny as it knows it will be the ones dying if it attempted the closing of the Strait of Hormuz. It is talking in secret to the U.S. Military and a way out would be the take over of the Iranian Regime by Pro-Democracy Forces that are backed by the Iranian Military.

The Iranian Military WANT''S NO PART OF A WAR WITH THE U.S. MILITARY. This is for certain. If the Iranian Military were to Stand Down with promises by the U.S. that they would not attack the Iranian Military...it is possible for a Regime Change.

Another issue is at play also...the U.S. has already decided that a Nuclear Seeking Iran cannot be left in power to threaten closure of the Worlds Oil Blood Line.

The U.S. must have patience and allow the developing Regime Change to take place. At that point the U.S. can exchange AID for the dismantling of the Iranian Nuclear Program. Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Does slayer69 need some sleep


I just noticed you are replying to a reply of yourself


Personally I do not want us to strike anybody for a while

We need some peace time.

I would like to see some roadwork done and infrastructure work done with the war funds.

But we know that isn't going to happen.

I say if we/they/someone does it, then it needs to be done as effective as can be. Political correctness needs to take a backseat to win a war.

Just my opinion.

edit on 28-10-2012 by liejunkie01 because: phone spelling



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 01:26 AM
link   
I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but here goes...

The estimates are based on commonly known US military tech. I'm not trying to make this a "MERIKA'S THE BIGGEST AND BADDEST" post, but anyone on here with friends or family in the military who have told you about things they've seen that are a little "need to know", you realize that the US could go it alone if needed. It's actually quite frightening if you think about it.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by CuriousR
 


Go it alone for sure, no probs, blimey the US is designed to take on Russia and China at the same time, the operation against Iran will be easier. Obamas done a deal with Putin over Ukraine in exchange for limited action only against Iran, when Yanukovich gets elected back into office that's the green light for air strikes against Iran nuke and military industrial sites, put them back a generation, Russia with back room control over Ukraine is a superpower again like USSR and gets to reap reward of massive spike in oil prices for its military modernisation. So Putin allows only boots on the ground for op at nuke sites, bombers and cruise do the rest.
edit on 28-10-2012 by ufoorbhunter because: Missed w off when



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 01:52 AM
link   
This is propaganda and disinfo. Israel has no military ability to do this and the USA would have to use a full scale thermonuclear attack to do it.






top topics



 
37
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join