End of Days for Iran

[rhodescholar]

I have reached my breaking point, no more talk, negotiations thru the pacifistic europeans, no more BS.

It is time to send in the army to remove this dreadful, awful regime of sc-mbag criminals and give democracy a chance in the middle east.

All the jihadist, brainwashed theocratic dogs that actually believe in living under this type of regime can have a small section of the country carved out where they can live like the backwards animals they are and the rest of the world can live without having to worry that iran has given an atomic bomb to hezbollah to use in a western city.

This regime is the world's NUMBER ONE problem - and it must be dealt with RIGHT NOW - before they reach "n korean nuclear status" and can no longer be threatened with a military option against them.

Bush must act now, and unlike the iraq war, which i was on the fence about, any leftwing trash that even THINKS of arguing/protesting against a war to remove the dictatorship had better HEAVILY arm themselves. Iraq was a gray area - this is not.

[defari]

The Iran youth is rebelling, they'll take care of their governemnt themselves.

[tandem]

the entire democratic world needs to empower the youth movements in iran who are sick and tired of living under a theocracy ran by a bunch of deranged islamists. the iranian regime must be toppled from within, the same way the syrians and their puppet government are being driven out by the people of lebanon.

[Sumud]

I have reached my breaking point, no more talk, negotiations thru the pacifistic europeans, no more BS.

It is time to send in the army to remove this dreadful, awful regime of sc-mbag criminals and give democracy a chance in the middle east.

But long live Saudi Arabia, the home of moderation!

[KettleWhistle]

I have faith in the Iranians for being able to sort out their political mess and to bring the democracy to fruition themselves.

As for Saudi Arabia, there is some progress. But the key difference between them and Iran would be the compliance with the UN resolutions. I don't know of any binding resolutions against the SA, while there are a number of issues IAEA has with Iran in addition their governments direct support for terrorist organizations.

[rhodescholar]

I have faith in the Iranians for being able to sort out their political mess and to bring the democracy to fruition themselves.

As for Saudi Arabia, there is some progress. But the key difference between them and Iran would be the compliance with the UN resolutions. I don't know of any binding resolutions against the SA, while there are a number of issues IAEA has with Iran in addition their governments direct support for terrorist organizations.

Unfortunately, many people when confronted with complex, difficult situations liek this just put their head in the sands and say: "lets hope for the best."

That will not work here, as the regime has thousands of imported pal arab thugs who it uses to attack democracy protestors at every demonstration. The regime is too entrenched and well-protected for internal forces to remove.

And given the time frame where iran will be nuclear-armed - preventing outside forces from removing the dictatorship - time is running out.

The US MUST attack iran NOW, and not wait like they did with n korea.

[philingraham]

... any leftwing trash that even THINKS of arguing/protesting against a war to remove the dictatorship had better HEAVILY arm themselves...Rhodes Scholar

I take it that you are referring to me, since there isn't anyone left on the IF that's willing to take you on...

[philingraham]

I have reached my breaking point...

It is time to send in the army...

Those that have reached their breaking point should go have their nervous breakdown elsewhere...

[Mediocrates]

I didn't hear anything resembling a plan. And frankly if Europe isn't worried that they will be underneath Iran's nuclear umbrella years before we will, then neither am I, too much. In just a few years - probably less than 3 Iran will have the ability to hit something from the eastern edge of Greenland to the Sea of Japan. I think the wildcard is India who already understands that it's been targeted by Russia, China and Pakistan but won't like Iran being added to that list. And I'm pretty sure that whatever Iran claims, in terms of being ready willing and able to absorb multiple strikes goes double for India.

[rhodescholar]

I have reached my breaking point...

It is time to send in the army...

Those that have reached their breaking point should go have their nervous breakdown elsewhere...

As expected, the reflexive but feeble minded leftwing makes a personal attack, devoid of substance or thought.

How about a shred of intelligence from anyone who believes a nuclear iran is not a good thing, and can actually think of a way to keep that from happening at all costs?

[MGB8]

rhodescholar, I was actually reaching a similar conclusion last week.

Only I don't think it is necessary to depose the Mullahs, and I do believe that will eventually happen on its own.

I DO, however, believe that the US, not Israel, since I don't think Israel can realistically do it, MUST DESTROY ALL OF IRAN'S NUCLEAR FACILITIES.

Right now, IMO, were are in the midst of WW4, which, sadly, has its origins in WW1/2 (Nazis) and WW3 (Communism). WW4 can be for all intents and purposes ended if none of the Jihadist powers becomes a nuclear threat before they become democracies. While we do have a problem in Pakistan, that theater seems more or less under control.

Iran is the real threat.

What is worse is a retrenchment to WW3. Putin and his KGB buddies are pretending that this is the cold war, despite the threat that Islamic terror poses to them, in large part because they think they can form an "energy axis" with Iran, Venezuela, etc., and regain much of their former Soviet glory. Alas, while the Soviet Union crumbled, it was never crushed, and like Germany seems to be making another go at it.

France is still a political whore, and Germany is confused.

In light of a political situation that is in many ways getting WORSE, not better, the US would be best nipping the "persian puzzle" in the bud, by striking only the nuclear facilities, killing as few as possible, and saying - "look, we weren't kidding when we said we weren't going to let you have the bomb. We have no problems otherwise, well, except for terrorism, etc., but no bomb for you, we will not allow you to go from nuisance to threat."

The negative consequences of such a strike, and there will be many, are far outweighed by the negative consequences of a Nuclear Iran.

I have reached my breaking point, no more talk, negotiations thru the pacifistic europeans, no more BS.

It is time to send in the army to remove this dreadful, awful regime of sc-mbag criminals and give democracy a chance in the middle east.

All the jihadist, brainwashed theocratic dogs that actually believe in living under this type of regime can have a small section of the country carved out where they can live like the backwards animals they are and the rest of the world can live without having to worry that iran has given an atomic bomb to hezbollah to use in a western city.

This regime is the world's NUMBER ONE problem - and it must be dealt with RIGHT NOW - before they reach "n korean nuclear status" and can no longer be threatened with a military option against them.

Bush must act now, and unlike the iraq war, which i was on the fence about, any leftwing trash that even THINKS of arguing/protesting against a war to remove the dictatorship had better HEAVILY arm themselves. Iraq was a gray area - this is not.

[Mira]

To follow up on MGB8's post, Russia is launching what are believed to be two spy satellites for Iran this year. At least one of them will be in space by around May.

http://www.missilethreat.com/news/200502021445.html

Iran has aligned itself with Russia, and so any attack on Iran would cause problems with Russia.

[Mediocrates]

Interesting. Plesetsk

• Has ESA (European Space Agency) permanent mission presence.
• Is designed for high azimuth polar orbital insertions (in lieu of sub orbital over the pole lobs at North America.) for scientific and spy payloads
• Has well developed support facilities
• Is scheduled to begin supporting Angara booster systems
• Has a horrendous saftey record (almost as bad as Baikonur)
• Has no practical benefit for comm sats.

Kosmos-3M has not been built since 1995 but there is believed to be 15 of these still available. It can hoist loads of 500-1500kg depending on orbit. This means that an Iranian launch would have to be part of a multipackage launch which the ESA is working hard to perfect. The booster has about a 5.2% failure rate on launch (23/444). And the location of Plesetsk 400 miles ne of St. Petersburgh in the Arkhangel Oblast means that launch failures come down on neighboring towns and villages.

[takeo]

I have reached my breaking point, no more talk, negotiations thru the pacifistic europeans, no more BS.

It is time to send in the army to remove this dreadful, awful regime of sc-mbag criminals and give democracy a chance in the middle east.

All the jihadist, brainwashed theocratic dogs that actually believe in living under this type of regime can have a small section of the country carved out where they can live like the backwards animals they are and the rest of the world can live without having to worry that iran has given an atomic bomb to hezbollah to use in a western city.

This regime is the world's NUMBER ONE problem - and it must be dealt with RIGHT NOW - before they reach "n korean nuclear status" and can no longer be threatened with a military option against them.

Bush must act now, and unlike the iraq war, which i was on the fence about, any leftwing trash that even THINKS of arguing/protesting against a war to remove the dictatorship had better HEAVILY arm themselves. Iraq was a gray area - this is not.

How are you going to achieve this? Invading Iran from Iraq? I don't think Al-sistani nor the current Iraqi leader will buy it. From the sea? it's possible of course, but who is going to help you? Blair already excluded Brittish assistance to any operation in Iran... and will Russia accept an American military operation near its borders? I think their opposition will be a lot heavier compared to Iraq, such an operation will undoubtely reinstall the cold war. France and Europe, as much as we have our differences with Iran, will not accept this invasion and Bush will be once again and more than ever isolated if he pushes trough. And will the Iranians wellcome the US-invasion? Many don't agree with the regime but very few would accept a us-military invasion, and unlike Iraq there aren't etnic or religious guerilla's to rely upon. (except the communist Hesbollah) Also Iran fought against Al-Quaida but once the Americans will create civil war and chaos nothing will prevent them from entering Iran and contributing to the resistance and it is the missing link between the insurgeancy in Afghanistan and in Iraq.
Of course Iran isn't the number one world problem, the regime is quite moderate compared to Saoudi Arabia. Yes, there is a lot of corruption and many people don't like the Ayatollah regime, especially the young, but don't underestimate Iranian nationalism, as during the war with Iraq the whole population will rally against the occupiers, there isn't etnic and religious fragmentation as in Iraq, where only the sunni's ruled the country.

And how will the Iraqi's react? the current iraqi strongmen have religious, cultural and political links to Iran and if one thing is sure in life it is that they will never accept ac US-invasion in Iran. Invading Iran means loosing the only force in Iraq which isn't fighting you.


Last question, how will the US public opinion react? Undoubtely the war will be much more costly than the war in Iraq, both in blood and in money, since Iran is a bigger and better armed country. As in Iraq you will give a free ticket to extremists who will win popularity under the barrier of fighting or opposing the occupiers, and the ayatollah themselves can save their image by presenting themselves as hero's fighting American occupation.
More than likely this war will, like Iraq, result in bloodshet and serious impoverishment. But of course no price is too high to expand your petrol-interests in the middle East...


Of course any reasonable people know that the only option for Iran is one like in Ukrain, especially since some parts of the regime are very moderate and especially since there's a strong civic society in Iran. I even think the Bush-regime has changed its strategy concerning Iran, if not they wouldn't have sought reappraochment to europe and the world, it would have been useless effort if he planned to invade Iran anyway. Bush also seems to have accepted European (including Brittish) strategy to offer to Iran economic cooperation in return for ceasing their nuclear program.


this kind of arguments give moral autorisation to Iranians who want a nuclear program, since indeed it's the only way to exclude a US-military invasion. (wow, do you consider this a breach of your rights, not being able to invade a country, life sucks, no? )

Iran so far has only obtained technology for producinf their own nuclear energy-producing installations, and according to Russia that's the only goal of their nuclear assistance.

[rhodescholar]

rhodescholar, I was actually reaching a similar conclusion last week.

Only I don't think it is necessary to depose the Mullahs, and I do believe that will eventually happen on its own.

I DO, however, believe that the US, not Israel, since I don't think Israel can realistically do it, MUST DESTROY ALL OF IRAN'S NUCLEAR FACILITIES.

I strongly disagree.

Since iran has wisely hidden many of its facilites in places the rest of the world doesnt know about - and has buried them so far underground in some cases, or placed them next to populated areas - so that military strikes alone are not an option.

Only regime change can end the nuclear threat. An iraq-style mass invasion with the goal of capturing and killing the leadership is a necessity. I dont buy the bullsh-t that the people there will rise up to defend their country from all and any invaders.

The iranians are not arabs - meaning they think before the respond with outsized emotions. The US has shown next door how they work, remove the dictatorship, let the people take over. Now that the US has proven itself under the bush administration, that it is genuinely interested in peace and spreading democracy, the people there will rally behind the US - as they have in iraq, except the media prefers to focus on the few animals making everyone else's life difficult.