"US warns Iran on missile threat"

S

Sotiris

Guest
Here we go lads:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7499198.stm

I don't quite get what's happening. Why Is Iran deliberately provoking the coalition which is already at its doorstep? Not to mention the fact that it's condemned it's natural resource industry. Do they know something we don't?

They are throwing down the gauntlet it seems :bud:!
 

Seedytucker

Venerated Contributor
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Posts
1,119
Reaction score
1
not sure, the PM of Iran was quoted on BBC world news as saying it was all propaganda it could just be another iraq/WMD situation, or Iran might be aware that whilst Iraq and ghan are trouble spots Iran is relatively safe to arm up
 

Priar

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Posts
225
Reaction score
0
I personally think it's highly unlikely that America will initiate a first strike against Iran. Americas military is already overstretched with its global commitments and initiating another war could damage the republican chances of getting John McCain in the white house.
If the Democrats start to win, then Bush may be more willing to try and attack Iran prior to being pushed out of the white house.
America is also not particularly popular as it is throughout the world and invading another Muslim country isn't going to do it any favours.

However Israel is another story, they're a bunch of psychos who really don't react well to intimidation. If anyone will be attacking Iran it will be them.
What is then likely to ensue is a retaliation attack on Israel which in tern will result in the Americans jumping in and saying "We didn't start this, but we're not going to let you bully our Jewish buddies!".

Regardless of all of this, I doubt us Brits will be getting involved early on.
- British forces are currently massively overstretched and under funded.
- Gorden Brown is screwed as it is, the last thing he needs is to land himself in more *text deleted**text deleted* by helping America attack another country.

On a plus note, if Iran was invaded, at least we'd have a convenient corridor between Afghanistan and Iraq. And think of all that lovely oil and Gas we would be able to get our hands on. Although in saying that, Qatar has been nicking all of Irans gas for ages now. :smile:

Just my thoughts anyway.
 

AdmiralAwesome

Active Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Posts
3,116
Reaction score
19
The Israelis will never allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons. They'd be crazy to let it happen. The message the Iranians gave out was clear - we have missiles that can hit Israel, and if we develop nuclear weapons, we'll put warheads on them. Israel doesen't need anyones help to take on Iran. The Iranians would be crazy to respond in anything more than a token way. The Israelis will knock out their reactor, the Iranians will fire a few missiles that likely won't hit much. The Israelis will respond by attacking the missile bases, and then it will all fizzle out.
 

Priar

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Posts
225
Reaction score
0
You have to remember that Israel is a very small nation which has only existed for 50/60 years. All Israel's arab neighbours hate them, and would love to get revenge for 1967. If Israel were to come under serious attack, I'm sure their neighbours would be quick to hand out some revenge.
Again, America probably wouldn't let this happen...

Also Iran aren't as dumb as we would like to believe. The Uranium enrichment facilities are not just buildings above ground, they are deep deep underground and have been designed to cope with being attacked by standard bunker busting missiles.

This article is a bit old, but it gives a general idea of what sort of attack would be required and the repercussions of such an attack. I don't like all this talk about mini nuclear warheads though.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article1290331.ece
 

Seedytucker

Venerated Contributor
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Posts
1,119
Reaction score
1
see that's the worrying thing, people talk of rogue states but i genuinely believe Israel wd't think twice about using nukes they've threatened it before
 

AdmiralAwesome

Active Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Posts
3,116
Reaction score
19
It's a bit of a lose lose situation, isn't it?

I don't like the sound of the bunker busting nukes the Israeli's would have to use, but it's better than a nuclear armed Iran. That said, the Israeli Government has said that diplomacy is the preffered option. If that fails, then it'll have to be an Israeli strike. There is no way they can afford to let the Iranians get nukes.

Israel is accustomed to fighting on numerous fronts... They've done it before (Six Day War, Yom Kippur). Besides, as you've said, there is no way the Americans will let Israel fight alone this time. I believe the Iranian's will just posture and pose for a bit if Israel attacks, launch a few missiles and the whole thing will fizzle out.

Better to act now, than act in 10 years when the Iranian's have got nukes.

Addition:
Seedy, if we were in the position of being invaded, don't you think we'd threaten to use, and use nukes? As I recall, NATO doctrine during the Cold War was that if the Soviet tanks started rolling, we'd have dropped tactical nukes on a lot of Germany to slow them down untill the entire American Army could be shipped across the Atlantic.
 

Seedytucker

Venerated Contributor
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Posts
1,119
Reaction score
1
sure, but that was a defensive war. NATO's doctrine throughout was that any land based war would be fought in a defensive role. Israel seems like a pitbull raring to play with it's toys sometimes, look at the disproportionate responses to hezzbollah. They even, a few years back shelled a known UN bunker even after they'd been informed it was a UN bunker (the arti position that is not HQ). why? because the bunker over looked an Israeli position (which was the whole point of the bunker) though apparently it was a equipment malfunction- how does a howitzer fire 12 rounds (each manually reloaded) due to a malfunction?, and what of the american ship attacked in the late 60s? My point is that personally i think Israel is far too aggressive to be trusted with nukes i would rather neither nations had nukes as i personally think they are both equally incapable of moderation. the only difference is that Israel is on our side
 

GreyWing

Nobody
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Posts
5,427
Reaction score
3,798
Israel will hit them this year in my opinion before GW Bush leaves office. Then if things get bad it wouldn't surprise me if tactical nukes are used.

As I said before the Saudi's and other's may make a bit of noise but behind the scenes they will be backing Israel. Trouble is will Nuclear *text deleted**text deleted*stan get involved to save Iran?

Looks like things are warming up though
 

Priar

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Posts
225
Reaction score
0
Your probably right GreyWing, although I fail to see the link between *text deleted**text deleted*stan and Iran other than the obvious Muslim connection.
 

AdmiralAwesome

Active Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Posts
3,116
Reaction score
19
As I understand it, Iran and *text deleted**text deleted*stan are always at logger-heads?

Didn't *text deleted**text deleted*stan support the Taliban, and Iran the Northern Alliance? (Funny how it's completely reversed now - or supposed to be.)
 

GreyWing

Nobody
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Posts
5,427
Reaction score
3,798
*text deleted**text deleted*stan is completly bonkers, God only know who is in charge of that country. Depends, if the current regime stay in power then their will be no problems. If Iran is invaded the crazy Mullahs in *text deleted**text deleted*stan may make a brake for power and if they get hold of the nukes then all hell is going to break loose.

Just heard of the code name given to the Iranian sabre rattling going off today, "Operation Great Prophet 3" Sounds like an X Box game. Good effort on the name front though, beats "Op Telic" hands down.
 

Danny Lake

Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Posts
27
Reaction score
0
Ooooh interesting discussion here. I have mentioned before in other threads that as far as I am concerned a war with Iran is not only a possibility, but a very real probability; and as far as I am concerned this just backs up my previous statements. OK, one person on here is saying that the republicans won’t risk jumping into Iran before an election, but Barack Obama is also talking tough on Iran as well; threatening to do all in his power to prevent Iran gaining nuclear capabilities. The point here is that whether the republicans avoid going into Iran just to keep votes or not, the Democrats are just as likely to walk in when (not if…just my opinion :smile:) they win the election.

Not only that, let’s be honest. If Israel was to be fired upon by the Iranians, then US public opinion would be in favour of a war anyway. Especially given the number of American Jews and pro Israeli end timers. Not only that, it would make it very difficult for the international community to oppose a strike on Iran, especially when Iran are likely to be made to look like the bad guys of the story.

As for Israel’s involvement, I must say that this is a very interesting addition to the events surrounding Iran and its aggressive nature. And as a few have said, I suppose it is quite possible that Israel could be the ones to launch a first strike. In the event that this does happen, then I must say I completely fall into line with the argument that states the US will back it’s Israeli buddies, particularly given their speed in responding to the missile threats and old Condy’s warning that “We (the US) take very strongly our obligation to defend our allies and we intend to do that”

Over the past few years things have been kicking off every now and then between Iran and the west, and it seems to me that the issue of weapons tests could be the catalyst that sparks the reaction.
 

Seedytucker

Venerated Contributor
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Posts
1,119
Reaction score
1
i was watching panorama today about china backing sudan and possibly breaking the arms trade embargo along with russia even going so far as to supply them with fast attack jets, training pilots and service personel, personally i think that's more of a worry than iran getting a bit bulshy with israel (which, let's be honest is what these missiles are about)
 

Beats

New Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Posts
3
Reaction score
0
Yeah, I wouldn’t be worried about Iran I highly doubt we will be involved. This will be between Israel and Iran and if the Israel’s get even a niff that they are close to developing nuclear weapons (will give them Hell) *text deleted* anyhow not all their missile’s managed get airborne, the added ones were put in to cover up the failed launch! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwOTIN_CuwI
 
Top