The Iran " Problem"

[Cachorro Louco]

Israel Tests Rocket Amid Talk of Strike on Iran

JERUSALEM - Israel on Nov. 2 successfully tested what local media called a "ballistic missile" as speculation in the Jewish state grew over the possibility of an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.

"This is an impressive technological achievement and an important step in Israel's progress in the area of missiles and space," he said in a statement before leaving on a visit to Britain.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=8126811&c=MID&s=AIR

UK military steps up plans for Iran attack amid fresh nuclear fears

Britain's armed forces are stepping up their contingency planning for potential military action against Iran amid mounting concern about Tehran's nuclear enrichment programme, the Guardian has learned.

The Ministry of Defence believes the US may decide to fast-forward plans for targeted missile strikes at some key Iranian facilities. British officials say that if Washington presses ahead it will seek, and receive, UK military help for any mission, despite some deep reservations within the coalition government.

He said Iran appeared to be "newly aggressive, and we are not quite sure why", citing three recent assassination plots on foreign soil that the intelligence agencies say were coordinated by elements in Tehran.

In addition to that, officials now believe Iran has restored all the capability it lost in a sophisticated cyber-attack last year.The Stuxnet computer worm, thought to have been engineered by the Americans and Israelis, sabotaged many of the centrifuges the Iranians were using to enrich uranium.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/02/uk-military-iran-attack-nuclear

Iran threatens to 'punish' any Israeli attack

"The United States is fully aware that a military attack by the Zionist regime on Iran will not only cause tremendous damage to that regime, but it will also inflict serious damage to the U.S.," said Gen. Hassan Firouzabadi, commander of the joint chiefs of staff, according to the semi-official Fars News Agency.

"We, as the military, take every threat, however distant and improbable, as very real, and are fully prepared to use suitable equipment to punish any kind of mistake," he added, according to a CNN translation of his remarks.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/02/world/meast/iran-israel/index.html

Is the US heading for war with Iran?

The Israeli cabinet was reported on Wednesday to be debating whether to launch air strikes on Iranian nuclear sites in the coming weeks. The prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, and the defence minister, Ehud Barak, are lobbying in favour of action, but other senior ministers are urging caution. In response, Iran has warned, as it has in the past, that any attack by Israel would result in retaliation against the US. The Iranian news agency ISNA quoted Hassan Firouzabadi, Iran's military chief, as saying: "The Zionist regime's military attack against Iran will inflict heavy damages to the US as well as the Zionist regime.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/02/us-heading-war-iran-obama

Obama Tells Allies U.S. Will Attack Iran By Fall 2012

unless Tehran halts its nuclear program, a time frame that suggests Obama is willing to use war as a re-election campaign tool to rally the population around his leadership.

A subscriber-only report by DebkaFile, the Israeli intelligence outfit which has been proven accurate in the past, reveals that shortly after the end of NATO operations in Libya at the start of this week, “President Barack Obama went on line to America’s senior allies, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Israel and Saudi Arabia, with notice of his plan to attack Iran no later than September-October 2012 – unless Tehran halted its nuclear weaponization programs.”

According to the report, the window of opportunity for an attack before Iran moves the bulk of its nuclear processing underground is quickly evaporating.

Obama’s directive contributed to the flurry of reports this week about NATO powers putting their Iran war contingency plans on standby.

“Obama’s announcement was not perceived as a general directive to US allies, but a guideline to blow the dust off the contingency plans for a strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities which stayed locked in bottom drawers for three years,” states the report, adding that “Obama’s announcement spurred Germany, France, Britain, Italy and Israel into girding their navies, air forces, ballistic units and anti-missile defense systems for the challenges ahead.”

The imminent withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq is part of a program to re-arrange the United States’ presence in the Gulf. This dovetails with numerous reports over the past few weeks that large numbers of U.S. troops are being stationed in Kuwait.

“Military sources in the Gulf report that NATO and Persian Gulf leaders are treating the prospect of a US strike against Iran with the utmost seriousness,” states the article, adding that America plans to rebuild its Gulf presence as part “of a new US focus on cutting Iran down to size.”

A d v e r t i s e m e n t

The timing of a potential fall 2012 attack would of course coincide with Obama’s attempt to secure a second term in the White House. If by that time the United States has embarked on yet another military assault in the Middle East, it would undoubtedly play to Obama’s advantage, just as George W. Bush cited U.S. involvement in Iraq as a reason for voters not to “change horse” in the middle of a race back in 2004.

As we have previously reported, influential neo-cons within the U.S. have made it clear to Obama that they will give him political cover and an opportunity to resurrect his flagging political career if he launched an attack on Iran.

In February last year, vehement Israeli-firster and signatory to the infamous PNAC document Daniel Pipes wrote a piece for the National Review Online entitled, How to Save the Obama Presidency: Bomb Iran, encouraging Obama to “salvage his tottering administration” by giving orders “for the U.S. military to destroy Iran’s nuclear-weapon capacity.”

Rumors that Israel was preparing for an attack on Iran have been rumbling all summer, but they really came to the fore in early October when US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s October 3 Tel Aviv visit was used as an opportunity by Israeli hawks to convince Panetta to green light the attack. Just ten days later, details emerged of a highly dubious assassination plot in the United States that was blamed on Iran.

This week has seen a barrage of news and leaked information which confirms that Israel, the U.S. and the United Kingdom are all on a war footing in preparation for targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Much of that information came as a result of deliberate leaks by former Israeli intelligence chiefs Meir Dagan and Yuval Diskin, who are attempting to derail the attack on Iran and remove Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from office.

DebkaFile has proven itself to be accurate in predicting the precise time frame of conflicts in the past, correctly reporting back in July that the war in Libya would come to a head in early September, which is when rebels seized Tripoli and Gaddafi went on the run.

Should Obama and the United States’ NATO allies lead the attack on Iran, Israel itself is likely to take a back seat, according to reports which suggest the Zionist state will concentrate on defending the home front against likely reprisal attacks carried out by Hizballah.

http://www.infowars.com/obama-tells-allies-u-s-will-attack-iran-by-fall-2012/

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

By the looks Israel may pull the trigger, and the USA being part of NATO, may have to enter the war to support its allie.

Personal opinion Iran has no intention in Building a Nuke, looks like Iran doesn't want to show "Trade Secrets" of the uranium enrichment, to the IAEA.

[Beetlebum]

Are you implying Israel is part of NATO? Because they are not.

No conventional attack is coming in the near future.

[Cachorro Louco]

Are you implying Israel is part of NATO? Because they are not.

No conventional attack is coming in the near future.

Yeah you are right about Israel and NATO,i dont where i got tha idea

[Mayday]

Would Iran ever attack the US?

[Devils Dose]

AP Article

President Barack Obama delivered his most explicit threat yet that the United States will attack Iran if that's what it takes to prevent it from developing a nuclear bomb."I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say," Obama told The Atlantic magazine. "I don't bluff." He firmly rejected the notion that the United States might settle for a strategy of letting the Iranians build a nuclear weapon but deterring them from using one.

At the same time, he warned Israelis they would only make a bad situation worse if they moved pre-emptively against Iranian nuclear facilities. Obama said an Israeli strike would stir sympathy for the Islamic republic in a region where it has few allies.

Israeli officials appear unmoved by the U.S. arguments, and Obama is unlikely to talk Netanyahu out of launching a strike if the Israeli leader decides not to wait. Both governments maneuvered Friday to set the terms for their discussion.

[ghdi]

Would Iran ever attack the US?

The only way they could is with a terrorist-style attack. They dont have the capabilities to hit us on the mainland conventionally.

[Copper Kettle]

The only way they could is with a terrorist-style attack. They dont have the capabilities to hit us on the mainland conventionally.

Also, no Blue Water Navy.

[lazer]

blue water navy, thats funny

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atoms_for_Peace

If at one time the United States possessed what might have been called a monopoly of atomic power, that monopoly ceased to exist several years ago.Therefore, although our earlier start has permitted us to accumulate what is today a great quantitative advantage, the atomic realities of today comprehend two facts of even greater significance. First, the knowledge now possessed by several nations will eventually be shared by others, possibly all others.

Second, even a vast superiority in numbers of weapons, and a consequent capability of devastating retaliation, is no preventive, of itself, against the fearful material damage and toll of human lives that would be inflicted by surprise aggression.

http://geoff82.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/the-china-russia-iran-connection-confirmed/

Recent developments in Iran confirm that China is providing Tehran with critical defense technologies and weapons systems, including some that violate stated Chinese policies aimed at preventing nuclear proliferation.

…

Proliferation of defense industrial know-how and brain power from Russia, Ukraine and other former Soviet republics to Iran — specifically advanced anti-ship missiles, nuclear technology and ballistic-missile designs — has been at the top of U.S. government concerns since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FH9HfEiSz_w

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then what is it?

That’s right, it’s a duck. But this duck is a nuclear duck. And it’s time the world started calling a duck a duck.

http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/03/05/full-text-of-netanyahu-speech-to-aipac-2012/

my only comments are questions;

How can we trust the pentagon after no weapons of mass destruction?

What has Israel done for the USA as an ally?

all while Israel as a nuclear armed state oppressing Palestinians

Edited March 6, 2012 by lazer

[Pepperkorn]

I have questions in response to your questions.

Since Israel has never used nuclear arms have they earned the world's trust?

Do you personally trust Iran to not use nuclear arms once they've developed them?

Do you think Palestinians fear their own demise living among the targeted Israelis?

Do you think the two could ever join forces to defend the land?

Edited March 6, 2012 by Pepperkorn

[oofrostonoo]

Iran has a large "progressive"(relativity) population. Remember their last election all the protests in the street...Hopefully those people can take care of the regime themselves.

[squishyx]

Iran has a large "progressive"(relativity) population. Remember their last election all the protests in the street...Hopefully those people can take care of the regime themselves.

They were also brutally put down for those protests. I agree though, hopefully after another generation of hatred dies off change can come to Iran, lets hope they don't take the world down before that happens.

[Daniel]

What has Israel done for the USA as an ally?

all while Israel as a nuclear armed state oppressing Palestinians

They provide critical intelligence for the US. They help develop technology with the US, both of military and laregly civilian applicability, in the public and private sector. They stood back while Iraq was lobbing missiles at them during the first Gulf War (yet folks like Pat Buchanan still say with a straight face that the conflict was of Israel's making). Destroying Saddam Hussein's nuclear program and Assad's nascient one. They were strong allies against the Soviet Union. And if they do decide to attack Iran, I'll bet you a few bucks that the Saudis are mysteriously on their lunch break when Israeli jets cross their air space.

So far as their nuclear program is concerned, I notice you don't seem to have a problem with France's, Britain's or China's. And if you lived in the vicinity of nations whose stated goal is to destroy you, I think you'd want a nuclear insurance policy also.

On the other hand, why should an American give a damn about the Palestinians. They danced in the streets on 9/11, they unrepetently murder American citizens, including tossing an old man in a wheel chair off the deck of a cruise liner, kidnap and murder Olympic athletes (to thunderous applause by their countrymen). Their stated goal is to make the area Juden-frei. They allied themselves with the Nazis in WWII, and the Soviet Union thereafter. Their only technological or scientific contribution to the world that I'm aware of is the suicide bomb belt. I would also add that the rest of the Arab countries could care less about the Palestinians except as a chip to use against Israel. Just ask the Kuwaitis or Iraqis who unceremoniously booted Palestinians out of their countries when they became a nuisance.

Don't get me wrong. The Israelis are far from perfect and they do things that are unconstructive to US interests. But then again, so do other allies. The Pakistanis were hiding Bin Laden and were directly involved in the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, yet the spigot of their foreign aid is still free flowing. Or Egypt imprisoning American "spies."

I also wish the Palestinians well, but find it hard to sympathize with them at all. They've had multiple opportunities to make peace with the Israelis. And in the past, the Israelis have made peace with Egypt and Jordan, ceding a lot of land in the process in exchange for the promise that they would respect its right to exist. A clear majority of the Israelis want to reciprocate and actually can't stand the settlers (many of whom are exempt from conscription). But so long as the Palestinians want to live out this fantasy of destroying Israel, enough Israelis will vote Likud.

Golda Meir said that Israel with have peace with the Palestinians when they love their own children more than they hate the Israelis. Nothing has proven her wrong to this point.

[Daniel]

Iran has a large "progressive"(relativity) population. Remember their last election all the protests in the street...Hopefully those people can take care of the regime themselves.

Unfortunately, highly unlikely. I believe MLK said something to the effect of, when your oppressor has a conscience follow Ghandi. When he doesn't, follow Churchill.

Short of heavy covert aid to a viable opposition that wants to overthrow the Mullahs (there are armed opposition groups, but their goals are more limited), you'll have the violent crackdowns when the situation gets hairy enough for the regime. The world can wag its finger, but ultimately the Mullahs couldn't care less.

You might also hope for a Gorbachev-like figure to pop up sometime in the future, but I highly doubt that.

ADDENDUM: I also think outside military action, from air strikes to a full blown ground invasion, would be a fool's errand, just in case some folks here (hint, hint) want to accuse me of supporting those wiley neocons who use their secret Jew beams to get their way.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Daniel

[Jerrydevil]

Bra - vo, Daniel. Great post.

[Pepperkorn]

ADDENDUM: I also think outside military action, from air strikes to a full blown ground invasion, would be a fool's errand, just in case some folks here (hint, hint) want to accuse me of supporting those wiley neocons who use their secret Jew beams to get their way.

Agreed.

[lazer]

ADDENDUM: I also think outside military action, from air strikes to a full blown ground invasion, would be a fool's errand, just in case some folks here (hint, hint) want to accuse me of supporting those wiley neocons who use their secret Jew beams to get their way.

so we do agree on something

You might also hope for a Gorbachev-like figure to pop up sometime in the future, but I highly doubt that.

"HOPE" is not a foreign policy

As outlined in the third edition of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1969–1978), the Communist Party of the Soviet Union's position during the Cold War became: "the main posits of modern Zionism are militant chauvinism, racism, anti-Communism and anti-Sovietism,... overt and covert fight against freedom movements and the USSR.

[squishyx]

"HOPE" is not a foreign policy

Damn fvcking straight it is.

North Korea had a madman in power for decades WITH nuclear weapons, and maybe, just maybe his son is a little more saner then he and we might avoid a huge catastrophe in the southeast. I am not suggesting Iran is NK, nor am I suggesting it should be handled the same way, but the idea that these things can't be solved diplomatically is outrageous.

[Daniel]

"HOPE" is not a foreign policy

If Iran is determined to get nuclear weapons it will. The only thing that might stop it would be military action which, even if it does happen, probably won't be effective. Diplomacy helps when an agreement can be reached that serves both parties interests. We have nothing to offer Iran that Iran is interested in.

The Israelis gave it a nice shot with Stuxnet, but that appears to have been a minor setback. The assassinating of Iran's nuclear scientists won't do much either.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Daniel

[lazer]

http://www.gtr5.com/

[Daniel]

http://www.gtr5.com/

Pretty lame, but not surprising. Both sides considered the incident to be accidental (yes, I realize there are some people who disagree) and Israel paid compensation. My link Some people (hint, hint) can't grasp the distinction or intentionally choose to ignore it to confirm their worldview.

[lazer]

Pretty lame, but not surprising. Both sides considered the incident to be accidental (yes, I realize there are some people who disagree) and Israel paid compensation. My link Some people (hint, hint) can't grasp the distinction or intentionally choose to ignore it to confirm their worldview.

a likely response from you, please dont pass this off as "lame" or hint hint as if this is anti-semitism, that is laughable at best. Furthermore i was posting for anyone interested, not for your hint hint, lame response.

the survivors said to a man, "not an accident"

Edited March 15, 2012 by lazer

[Pepperkorn]

I thought this was an interesting piece on the possibility of negotiating and why a Cold War isn't really an option in the Middle East as it was between US and USSR.

Diplomacy possible in Iran?

lazer -- you're jibber jabbering not solving anything. Keep on keeping on, but don't expect support when you get huffy with any of the responses you get. It seems like you're just looking for a contradiction match. It makes it look like you don't give a sh!t about the Iranian situation at all -- you just want to expound about the evil of Jews. Your response to nearly everything is "Jews! " often enough that we are all getting the idea you have nothing to say really. You never even responded to the comparison between the situation in Northern Ireland - so I'm guessing it's not the situation you have a problem with, so much as just the Jews themselves. Comparisons you draw are not about people's land being usurped, but about the inherent evil of Jews throughout history type stuff...

Come up with some relevant responses that don't just say how bad Jews are and we CAN discuss. But your response -- first off is NO response beyond "It's all the fault of the Jews" Try coming up with a solution -- please WRITE IT OUT stop with this infernal "let the video clip speak for me" crap. Say what it is you want to say.... we have only to infer you want Israel's annihilation. WRITE IT OUT THEN! Israel was a mistake and all Jews should be kicked out or left to be tortured and killed whole-sale by the Arab nations. You are not taking the next step forward in productive discussion. It's fine if you don't want to or can't but sayign the same thing over and over again isn't... well it isn't interesting.

[Pepperkorn]

Lazer, what do you want? Do you want someone to help you understand Jews? Do you want the situation explained to you? Do you want your hate alleviated?

What do you want? People to tell you you are right and that it's OK? Or people to lose reason and fight irrationally with you so you can feel better about this Jew-hating you've adopted? Does someone you care deeply for hate Jews and you need to understand and commit to it more fully? Or maybe craft an argument to get them grounded on more rational footing?

I really dont understand. It's as if you're arguing to convince yourself. OR... hockey fans are a stones throw from skin heads and you've been assigned this site for recruitment...??

It's out of place here. It's irrational. It's a very organized rational campaign don't get me wrong -- but the message itself is irrational and you do not respond to any requests for clarification. You offer no justification beyond carefully orchestrated video responses -- almost like this is something out of a manual.

Please -- don't pass this off as "lame" or me simply waggling a blustering sanctimonious finger at the anti-Semitic dude. This is odd. Unless of course you are Palestinian or Middle Eastern. I have loads of friends from Iraq, Iran - then I totally understand where you are coming from. But when there is no context it's weird and creepy!!