Author Topic: Iran Super Thread- Merged  (Read 589606 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 87,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,645
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #25 on: January 21, 2005, 19:36:11 »
Why not just allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons ?
What will they do with their new capability ?
How will that affect the world oil market ?
Could Iran blackmail the other oil producing countries in the region essentially controlling a big chunk of the world oil market ?
With nuclear weapons Iran would have the ability to destroy Israel - would they do it ?
With nuclear weapons would Iran give nuclear devices to terrorists to be used against the uS or other perceived enemies ?

US pre-emptive strike against Iran thus stopping/delaying its program and none of the above possibilities become reality. Given the pro's and con's I think a pre-emptive strike using air power would be the best option.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2005, 19:46:37 by tomahawk6 »

Offline Bruce Monkhouse

    is still the king of VB.OK, court jester.

  • Lab Experiment #13
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 232,240
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,586
  • WHERE IS MY BATON?
    • http://www.canadianbands.com./home.html
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #26 on: January 21, 2005, 19:42:52 »
Quote,
I do. Iran's not stupid - I don't think they'd just up and nuke Israel because they don't like them. North Korea says it's going to nuke someone every other day but there's a big difference between what countries SAY they can or want to do and what they actually do. I think Iran knows it'll get nuked by Israel and the US if they so much as fart in Israel's direction on a windy day after it gets nukes.

Sweet mother of God,.......Ape and I agree on something, any country who would use a nuclear weapon in this day and age would have to be 100% willing to be destroyed themselves.  The govt. of Iran are smarter than this, my concern would be the "passing off" of nuclear "suitcase" bombs to the people who would not care if they destroyed themselves as long as it was on American soil.
Except for that one demented guy in North Korea, I can't see anyone using a nuke anymore unless it was in a "all hope  gone scenario.
IF YOU REALLY ENJOY THIS SITE AND WISH TO CONTINUE,THEN PLEASE WIGGLE UP TO THE BAR AND BUY A SUBSCRIPTION OR SOME SWAG FROM THE MILNET.CA STORE OR IF YOU WISH TO ADVERTISE PLEASE SEND MIKE SOME DETAILS.

Everybody has a game plan until they get punched in the mouth.

Offline Cliff

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 106
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #27 on: January 21, 2005, 23:17:30 »
Well that's all the proof I need! While were at it, I have always suspected that Papua New Guinea has plans to throw spears at Australia, so let's nuke 'em. I have no proof of course, but seeing as you 'have no doubt' and don't need 'evidence' to wage war on another nation, I figure we can take care of those little buggers too.

I realize my position isn't exactly on strong moral footing, but I still think war should be waged.   At least, on a limited scale.  

Offline Carcharodon Carcharias

  • Drawing the crabs from Downunder :) WTF is TWL?
  • Banned
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 28,880
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,229
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #28 on: January 22, 2005, 00:01:02 »
What worries me is the fact that if any nuke no matter how small or crude is ever given to a third party or stolen for that matter, and falls into the hands of the extremists who are willing to use it against the west (and they want to believe me) which includes not only North America, but the UK, continental Europe and Australia, plus places in their own region. Given the chance, it can and will happen. Its just a matter of time.

I suggest a surgical airstrike on any plant capable of manufacturing such weapons in Iran. If allowed such a plant there will be a power struggle for other nations nearby to do the same, and that ole fear of 21st century technology with 13th century mentality comes up again, and thats what scares me.

Don't think Canada is immune either.

Don't give these godless hethan fundamentalists the chance to even think of having such weapons. If an airstrike happened tomorrow morning, I would feel more safe.

Cheers,

Wes
"You've never lived until you've almost died; as for our freedom, for those of us who have fought for it, life has a flavour the protected will never know." - Anonymous

Offline Cliff

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 106
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #29 on: January 22, 2005, 08:56:17 »
What worries me is the fact that if any nuke no matter how small or crude is ever given to a third party or stolen for that matter, and falls into the hands of the extremists who are willing to use it against the west (and they want to believe me) which includes not only North America, but the UK, continental Europe and Australia, plus places in their own region. Given the chance, it can and will happen. Its just a matter of time.

I suggest a surgical airstrike on any plant capable of manufacturing such weapons in Iran. If allowed such a plant there will be a power struggle for other nations nearby to do the same, and that ole fear of 21st century technology with 13th century mentality comes up again, and thats what scares me.

Don't think Canada is immune either.

Don't give these godless hethan fundamentalists the chance to even think of having such weapons. If an airstrike happened tomorrow morning, I would feel more safe.

Cheers,

Wes

I agree with you on surgical air strikes.   It's not the Iranian government that is likely to go nuclear, but rather some of the radical factions that could take control of these potential wpns. It took me awhile to accept the Bush administration's preemptive military policy, but I think it's the way to go. As far as I'm concerned, Iran is already indirectly waging war against America with terrorism. All the more reason to nip them in the bud, before it's too late..

Offline jmacleod

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 372
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #30 on: January 22, 2005, 10:01:08 »
Israel knows quite a bit about the present State of Iran. I doubt that Iran will be attacked by
any country, and the Iranian Mullahs are well aware of the lack of any real intent. Removal
of the Mullah led government is the answer, defined in some detail in recent articles in several
British periodicals and newspapers. The U.S. government is in all probability working out a
withdrawal plan for leaving Iraq at the present time - the ultimate fate of Iraq is in the hands
of Iraqi citizens in any event, and not the U.S. Army, who essentially have completed what they
set out to do and know that there is considerable political pressure in the U.S. to bring the
troops "back home". The region will be more or less unstable for some time, but forces in
Iraq, Iran and Syria will eventually dominate the future of these countries - not as democracies
perhaps, but focused on a better life for all, long overdue in the region. MacLeod

Offline Cliff

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 106
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #31 on: January 22, 2005, 10:57:17 »

The U.S. government is in all probability working out a
withdrawal plan for leaving Iraq at the present time - the ultimate fate of Iraq is in the hands of Iraqi citizens in any event, and not the U.S. Army, who essentially have completed what they set out to do and know that there is considerable political pressure in the U.S. to bring the troops "back home".

I haven't heard the Bush administration say anything about withdrawing.   What makes you think they will? If it came down to it, a tactical withdrawal to the Kurdish North might make more sence since it wouldn't require the troop density of Iraq to sustain long term mil operations.     

Online tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 87,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,645
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #32 on: January 22, 2005, 11:54:43 »
Given the poor cooperation we are getting from Turkey by moving into the Kurdish area we would find ourselves stranded. Long term there will be some form of US presence in Iraq for a long time ,it may be in the form of an air base and a forward deployed division but a presence none the less. Kuwait and the Gulf States will continue to be the logistical base for US operations in the region. Iran is surrounded by US airbases and is well within range of sea based TLAM [conventional and 200kt W-80 nuclear warhead]. Iran would be hard pressed to stop an attack by B-2 bombers. The real problem is the dispersal of the Iranian nuclear program. But for my money take out the reactor and you setback their program many years. Of course Iran would try to launch terrorist attacks which might escalate into a wider bombing campaign against key targets in Iran.

Offline Gunnerlove

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -45
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 313
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #33 on: January 22, 2005, 12:02:08 »
Quote
godless hethan fundamentalists

Last I heard they did believe in god. Only they call him by a different name.   

If the US feels they can take on the entire middle east without further destabilizing the region they are insane. Gradual change is the key to stability. When religious people are threatened they turn to their religion and become increasingly conservative (If you don't believe me look at the last US election). Increasing the number of extremely conservative fundamentalist Muslims in the world is not in any westernized nations best interest.
A rational educated population worldwide should be one of the key building blocks for international security. Instead we seem to be creating far more fanatics (on both sides of the Bible/Koran fence) who are convinced that their religion is the best and that God is on their side.      

But hey maybe I am wrong and a decade of random bombings and sanctions, followed by invasion and occupation might stabilize Iran and improve world opinion of the US.    ::)

"Someday someone may kill you with your own gun, but they should have to beat you to death with it because it is empty." Unknown

"In a gunfight four rounds in four inches in 4 seconds will always be a better grouping than two rounds through the same hole in twice the time" My father

Online tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 87,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,645
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #34 on: January 22, 2005, 13:14:01 »
Actually the regime in Tehran is increasingly isolated from its own people. The regime has blocked the moderates by preventing them from even getting on the ballot. Until the people are willing to take to the streets they will remain under the heel of the ayatollah's. Of course a precise air campaign might be able to knock out the props that hold the regime up.

Offline Bert

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 1,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 804
  • Military
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #35 on: January 22, 2005, 13:43:45 »
I don't think it is in the US's best interest to see "any regime change" occur in Iran.   The
enemy you know is better than the enemy you don't.

The theocracy in Iran is knowing of the rules of detente.   If Iran uses a nuclear response
in return they will receive one and it is definitely lop-sided in favor of the US.   Even if the
nuclear facilities in Iran are destroyed it does not necessarily mitigate further nuclear
research, development, acquisition, or manufacture.

Iran is clearly concerned about changes in Iraq's society, methods of government,
limitations to its areas of interest, having the US next door as it may put pressures on its
own internal problems. The US understands and uses it to control and influence Iran in
the region.   This is a quiet controllable simmering of conflict understood by both parties
despite the usual rhetoric.

An pre-emptive attack on Iran could put the situation out of control.   One doesn't
know what the Iranian response could be, the escalation of Iranian supported
groups around Israel, the response of countries in the region, the consequences of
world reaction.   It is in the US's best interest to manage the situation in a way
that is controllable, won't over-stretch the assets in the region given a military response
by Iran, and balance gains and cost of any pre-emptive action.

Offline Marauder

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 14,240
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 834
  • Dirty Infidel
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #36 on: January 22, 2005, 14:11:38 »
Another tack would be to locate and erase the scientists willing to work on giving any whack-job fundamentalists The Bomb. If you keep taking out the wetware, all the hardware in the world does you no good. A bullet in the head or knife in the throat in the middle of the night is far more quite and less likely to give the media a hardon than a mushroom cloud over the known location of a nuclear reactor. Eventually the mullahs will get wise, but hopefully by then any scientist with a shred of self-preservation insitinct will get a case of amnesia when it comes to reading tech diagrams (given by the French or Russians no doubt).
"Lions mustn't concern themselves with the opinions of lambs."

Offline Bert

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 1,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 804
  • Military
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #37 on: January 22, 2005, 14:24:17 »
That assumes the Iranians have everything nicely centralized, gathered intelligence is 100% correct,
and everthing works like clockwork.     The US may have assets in the region to make the attack as
you suggest but not to deal with the possible consequences.   Noticable movement of militaries
will take place. The escalation will be noticed by the Iranians and their well aware of the possibility.  
I'm sure the US and Iran have carefully considered the scenario from various angles.

Offline Cliff

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 106
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #38 on: January 22, 2005, 14:42:02 »
I don't think it is in the US's best interest to see "any regime change" occur in Iran.   The
enemy you know is better than the enemy you don't.

The theocracy in Iran is knowing of the rules of detente.   If Iran uses a nuclear response
in return they will receive one and it is definitely lop-sided in favor of the US.   Even if the
nuclear facilities in Iran are destroyed it does not necessarily mitigate further nuclear
research, development, acquisition, or manufacture.

Iran is clearly concerned about changes in Iraq's society, methods of government,
limitations to its areas of interest, having the US next door as it may put pressures on its
own internal problems. The US understands and uses it to control and influence Iran in
the region.   This is a quiet controllable simmering of conflict understood by both parties
despite the usual rhetoric.

An pre-emptive attack on Iran could put the situation out of control.   One doesn't
know what the Iranian response could be, the escalation of Iranian supported
groups around Israel, the response of countries in the region, the consequences of
world reaction.   It is in the US's best interest to manage the situation in a way
that is controllable, won't over-stretch the assets in the region given a military response
by Iran, and balance gains and cost of any pre-emptive action.

You raise some interesting points. Another interesting point is that the US preemptive policy has proved very effective in curtailing terrorism on the US home front,, while most of the world sits back and watches. I think the US needs to let it all hang out and clean out the hornet's nest once and for all. If it extends to limited warfare in Iran..so be it.   Doing nothing while Iran builds its nuclear capability doesn't seem like much of an option.

Offline Carcharodon Carcharias

  • Drawing the crabs from Downunder :) WTF is TWL?
  • Banned
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 28,880
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,229
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #39 on: January 22, 2005, 15:07:40 »
Last I heard they did believe in god. Only they call him by a different name.   



Extremists are using their religion as a front and excuse to promote terrorism and murder (look how many muslims are dying at the hands of their own kind) and are a disgrace to mainstream Islam, hence why I call these cowards godless murderers. I am in no way implying that muslims are godless, the majority like us just want the same things we do.

So, Mr Love, try seeing things outside the square.

Wes
"You've never lived until you've almost died; as for our freedom, for those of us who have fought for it, life has a flavour the protected will never know." - Anonymous

Offline Carcharodon Carcharias

  • Drawing the crabs from Downunder :) WTF is TWL?
  • Banned
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 28,880
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,229
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #40 on: January 22, 2005, 15:13:51 »
I agree with you on surgical air strikes.  

It was back in about 1981 that IDF used its aircraft to destroy a nuclear facility in a nearby 'ME' country. It makes sense to me to do it again, this time it does not have to be Israel, but I don't think they are about to sit back and do nothing.

Cheers,

Wes
"You've never lived until you've almost died; as for our freedom, for those of us who have fought for it, life has a flavour the protected will never know." - Anonymous

Offline jmacleod

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 372
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #41 on: January 22, 2005, 15:40:29 »
There are many very articulate and compelling opinons about Iran and the current state of Iran
-Iraq situations or possible situations on this site, which are appreciated. I base my opinions on
the State of Iran today on two sources; people whom I have worked with from the Northrop
Corporation, California, who had a significant presence in Iran in the days of the Shah, and my
association with Israeli industries. In particular, I read DEBKAfile on a daily basis. The best intelligence
on the Iran of January 2005 comes from Israel and France who have for different reasons, a vested
interest in knowing a great deal about the intentions of the Mullahs, who recently for instance
executed two Iranian nuclear scientists who attempted to flee Iran through Syria. Fellow readers,
take the time to read the reports in DEBKAfile and Paris Match (en francais of course). North American
news sources are biased, untruthful, and motivated by commercial interests, in particular, in Canada
the god-awful CBC. There is also, in my opinion, based on information from American friends and
associates, no doubt that the Bush government are focused on an orderly departure from Iraq - a
good source of information on this thesis can be found on the US site "Military.com" MacLeod

Offline TA

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 51
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #42 on: January 22, 2005, 15:43:46 »
You raise some interesting points. Another interesting point is that the US preemptive policy has proved very effective in curtailing terrorism on the US home front,, while most of the world sits back and watches. I think the US needs to let it all hang out and clean out the hornet's nest once and for all. If it extends to limited warfare in Iran..so be it.   Doing nothing while Iran builds its nuclear capability doesn't seem like much of an option.

I'm unsure how you can support your statement that a preemptive policy has been effective at curtailing terrorism on US soil- could you please elaborate?

In general, an operation in Iran would have to be justified with readily verifiable intelligence that the consequences of not acting far out way those of the operation- an international Defence of Necessity, per se.   What it boils down to is that one country is going to bomb another country because: it thinks it may have nuclear capabilities, those nuclear capabilities might be passed on to some terrorist organization, and that terrorist organization might attack another country.   What of Iran's response to this action?   If they did possess nuclear weapons, is it conceivable that they are all centralized in one location or in locations that the US knows of?   As such, if one facility survives, creates a nuclear weapons, and then passes it off to said terrorist groups in retaliation of an the offensive, this creates a bit of a vicious cycle.   

I don't believe Iran would ever use a nuclear weapon- directly or through a proxy.   The consequence is that the smallest shred of heretic evidence pointing the finger at them would lead to a very bad state in the world.

So, unless you can go to the world stage and say, "Hey Tehran, here's undeniable proof that your building nuclear weapons- stop it, or else", I hope this argument remains academic!

Cheers

Offline Cliff

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 106
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #43 on: January 22, 2005, 17:04:15 »
I'm unsure how you can support your statement that a preemptive policy has been effective at curtailing terrorism on US soil- could you please elaborate?

The CIA effectively taking out terrorist targets in Yemen would fit nicely into Washington's preemptive policy.   These type of actions will continue to curtail terrorism,since they won't be around to mount attacks on US soil.     

Quote
So, unless you can go to the world stage and say, "Hey Tehran, here's undeniable proof that your building nuclear weapons- stop it, or else", I hope this argument remains academic!

I hope "this argument" materializes into taking out any nuclear capability Iran has.     

Offline Cliff

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 106
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #44 on: January 22, 2005, 17:12:33 »
It was back in about 1981 that IDF used its aircraft to destroy a nuclear facility in a nearby 'ME' country. It makes sense to me to do it again, this time it does not have to be Israel, but I don't think they are about to sit back and do nothing.

Cheers,

Wes

Kudos to Israel.. They did the right thing.

Offline Freddy G

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • -135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 732
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #45 on: January 22, 2005, 21:08:17 »
Quote
Stratfor
www.stratfor.com
SITUATION REPORTS - January 22, 2005
2349 GMT - EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner says the threat of a U.S. military attack against Iran is not that great, predicting that a diplomatic solution ultimately would be found, although negotiations likely would be difficult. U.S. President George W. Bush warned Jan. 17 that the United States would launch a military strike against Iran if Tehran does not end its efforts to develop nuclear weapons.

...Someone care explain to me how the EU suddenly can decide what the US will do?

Anyways, I'm on the fence for this one.. On one hand we (the West) have to be careful of not letting a crazed state created nukes and possibly completely destabilize the whole region, and give nukes to terrorists, but on the other hand we can't go and destabilize it ourselves and created a very very bad situation.

And another trouble is finding allies who'll let "us" go into Iran using their territory:

Quote
Stratfor
www.stratfor.com
SITUATION REPORTS - January 20, 2005
1405 GMT - The Afghan Defense Ministry said it would not allow a third country to use Afghan territory against neighboring Iran, the official Iranian news agency IRNA reported Jan. 20. Afghan Defense Ministry spokesman Gen. Mohammad Zaher Azimi said that while there was a large U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, Kabul would never be convinced to allow Washington to send special forces into Iran -- a reaction to a recent report in The New Yorker magazine of a covert U.S. military reconnaissance operation under way in Iran.

Anyways, all in alll, this could turn ugly REAL fast. Let's just hope it doesn't.
My posts are my opinion alone and do not reflect any other person or group's opinion... because you can't handle the truth, and deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me to say these things.

Offline Wizard of OZ

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -15
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 375
  • Another day another 32 cents after tax
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #46 on: January 23, 2005, 18:04:22 »
Ugly it is already

Nasty is and real are what you have to hope it doesn't become.

Iran will be quite capable of giving the US more then just a bloody nose should they choose to invade.

Going after the leadership of Iran is an option but one that comes with possible unintended consiquences.  Having a harsher party rule.

Yes the air strikes may work and put back Iran's nuclear weapon program 10 yrs but what if that just pisses them off and they start to sell the stuff just to make dirty bombs to prove a point.

You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war. Albert Einstein

The Americans will always do the right thing... After they've exhausted all the alternatives.Winston Churchill

Offline Glorified Ape

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -5
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 672
  • Managing expectations is the key to success.
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #47 on: January 24, 2005, 02:21:08 »
I'm not trying to fan a fire here or anything, nor am I being sarcastic or rhetorical when asking this but can anyone tell me what right we, the US, or anyone else has to attack Iran or take any action against them (save passive actions such as economic sanction) because they're seeking nuclear weapons?





Bureaucracy is hell.

Offline Carcharodon Carcharias

  • Drawing the crabs from Downunder :) WTF is TWL?
  • Banned
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 28,880
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,229
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #48 on: January 24, 2005, 02:32:14 »
You're fan'n  ;D

Wes
"You've never lived until you've almost died; as for our freedom, for those of us who have fought for it, life has a flavour the protected will never know." - Anonymous

Offline Bruce Monkhouse

    is still the king of VB.OK, court jester.

  • Lab Experiment #13
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 232,240
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,586
  • WHERE IS MY BATON?
    • http://www.canadianbands.com./home.html
Re: Iran: We can repel U.S. attack
« Reply #49 on: January 24, 2005, 07:38:03 »
Mon, January 24, 2005

Strike at Iran possible

By Peter Worthington -- For the Toronto Sun

 
A topic of concern around Washington in these days of post-inauguration and pre-State of the Union address, is what's next?

President George W. Bush's inauguration speech left some puzzled, others encouraged, many uneasy.

He talked a lot about freedom, without getting into specifics, and didn't mention Iraq. That got people buzzing.
 

What he seemed to be doing was giving a blueprint for the future -- a future that extended beyond his term in office, deep into the unforeseeable future.

To some it was a perilous approach, to others it was inspired. Thinking big, thinking beyond. An agenda for America.

No lame duck

What Bush did convey, was that he intends his final term to be no lame duck administration.

His fixation on freedom and democracy in the world conveyed to a growing number the likelihood that the next big target for his aggressive democracy is Iran -- not a war, not ultimatums or embargoes, but direct action. Something has to be done about Iran's already considerable nuclear ambitions.

There isn't much time.

It is an issue that also worries Europe.

In 1981 Israel did the world a favour when it bombed and destroyed Saddam Hussein's Osirak reactor which was intended for nuclear weapons, with a large assist from France.

That message was absorbed by Iran, which apparently has no single Osirak-like site, but diverse sites to develop various aspects of the program, with back-ups and duplication.

Some sites are underground, some in population centres, all of them widely distributed.

So air strikes alone are unreasonable and unlikely.

What seems possible in the future -- that is, during President Bush's watch - is sabotage on the ground. Perhaps a Special Forces style attack, with limited air co-ordination -- an aggressive raid to eliminate some or all key nuclear sites. Then get out.

In Pakistan

While Western intelligence has some knowledge of where these sites are, the ones who know best are in Pakistan, which is believed to have helped Iran develop its nuclear potential in the days before Pakistan was an American ally, and when it backed the Taliban of Afghanistan and al-Qaida.

Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf changed all that when he decided President Bush was serious and not one to be toyed with, and threw his future in with America's.

Some realists speculate that there already are Special Forces inside Iraq, and that at some point an un-admitted alliance of American, Pakistani and German commandoes, with a possible inclusion of British, will be tasked with eliminating Iran's nuclear sites. Or at least some of them, before it's too late.

The one thing that seems fairly certain (one can never be absolutely sure in such things) is that Israel will not be directly involved.

Iran has few friends in the Islamic world who look forward to the ayatollahs and mullahs wielding nuclear weapons.

Since in foreign affairs as in war (and love) success is the prime virtue and failure the cardinal sin, judgment awaits the outcome of this nuclear showdown. Will, or will not, Iran become the next nuclear world influence?

Regardless of what happens in Iraq (a Shiite win in the Iraq election seems assured), it won't affect what is viewed as necessary in Iran.

As for the third member of Bush's "axis of evil" trio -- North Korea -- little action is planned. Kim Jong Il is so obviously a fruitcake with no allies except Cuba, and is in questionable health anyway, that nature will likely settle that issue.

Maybe the future will become clearer at the State of the Union address on Feb. 2 -- probably more about America's self-decreed responsibility if not to make the whole world democratic, to at least make the world safer for democracies.

Not a bad legacy


http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Toronto/Peter_Worthington/2005/01/24/908194.html
 
 
IF YOU REALLY ENJOY THIS SITE AND WISH TO CONTINUE,THEN PLEASE WIGGLE UP TO THE BAR AND BUY A SUBSCRIPTION OR SOME SWAG FROM THE MILNET.CA STORE OR IF YOU WISH TO ADVERTISE PLEASE SEND MIKE SOME DETAILS.

Everybody has a game plan until they get punched in the mouth.