Click to Translate to English Click to Translate to French  Click to Translate to Spanish  Click to Translate to German  Click to Translate to Italian  Click to Translate to Japanese  Click to Translate to Chinese Simplified  Click to Translate to Korean  Click to Translate to Arabic  Click to Translate to Russian  Click to Translate to Portuguese  Click to Translate to Myanmar (Burmese)

PANDEMIC ALERT LEVEL
123456
Forum Home Forum Home > Main Forums > General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Western Forces prepare to attack Iran
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Tracking the next pandemic: Avian Flu Talk

Western Forces prepare to attack Iran
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Western Forces prepare to attack Iran
    Posted: August 10 2008 at 4:52am
The plan to launch an attack on Iran has already been constructed and it is only a matter of time until it occurs. . Multiple options have been discussed and currently the Iran military is readying itself for a something as dismal as a nuclear strike upon its enrichment facilities. It is a rather traditional rattling of sabers when we mobilize in carrier forces, "exercises" which assemble a truly impressive Armada. The reality is that like so many moves throughout history, what would be, what will be he consequences as the last ploy of an overt effort to frighten the country of Iran into submission?

Ron Paul has stated we a poised for an imminent attack.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) has warned millions of radio listeners that the United States is heading into an illegal attack on Iran, stating his amazement at members of Congress who have openly voiced support for a criminal nuclear strike.

"If we do (attack) it is going to be a disaster," the congressman told the Alex Jones radio show. "I was astounded to see on one of the networks the other day that the debate was not are we going to attack, but are we going to attack before or after the election?" Paul continued.

Paul recently voiced concern over House Congressional Resolution 362 which he has dubbed a "virtual Iran war resolution."

"If that comes up it is demanding that the president [put in place] an absolute blockade of the entire country of Iran, and punish any country or any business group around the world if they trade with Iran," Paul told listeners.

Experts have predicted gas will rise to $6 per gallon if the resolution passes. Paul believes that may happen anyway, just by anticipation.

"The frightening thing is they say they are taking no options off the table, even nuclear first strike," Paul said. Paul believes from talking with his contacts in and around Congress that a strike on Iran has already been green-lighted.


Medclinician

comment: It should be understood by the reader that there is no statement here of opinion as to whether this attack should be carried out. The most pressing and to be considered issue is the resulting world wide consequences of such an attack. Many voices are silent, and one voice that is not silent is Iran. Without support there is little doubt that Iran could withstand such a mobilization of force alone. However, the question is what will be the reaction of the Muslim world, as we near a precipice equivalent to the Cuban missile crisis. We hovered about North Korea when they conducted their missile tests and it has been clearly stated that Iran will not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons because it would destabilize the situation in th Middle East.

The question at this point is what is it the sentiment of the American and world public. Is there general support for this or not, or is everyone afraid to speak at all.


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 5:06am
Iran says:

http://tehrantimes.com/Index_view.asp?code=174423

War threat on Iran is a propaganda campaign: UN envoy
Tehran Times Political Desk

TEHRAN, Aug. 2 (MNA) – Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations Mohammad Khazaii on Wednesday dismissed as a propaganda campaign rumors that the U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran’s nuclear installations.

“At the moment such an imprudent action has no supporter inside the United States,” Khazaii told the Mehr News Agency on the sidelines of the 15th meeting of Non-Aligned Movement foreign ministers in Tehran.

On July 19, Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili held talks in Geneva with EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana over ending Iran’s nuclear standoff with the West.

U.S. Undersecretary of State William Burns also participated in the negotiations. It was the highest level of diplomatic contact between Iran and the United States in 30 years.

Also present were representatives from the four other permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany.

Khazaii denied rumors that after the negotiations the major powers gave Iran a two-week time to answer calls to rein in its nuclear program or face “punitive measures”.

“Nuclear negotiations will continue but at the moment we cannot say whether the Security Council will hold a meeting on Iran’s nuclear issue,” he stated.

Russia, China, the United States, Britain, France, and Germany last month offered Iran an updated package of incentives in return for a halt to Tehran’s uranium enrichment program.

The package, which is a follow-up of an original proposal in 2006, offers nuclear cooperation and wider trade in aircraft, energy, high technology, and agriculture.

The Islamic Republic has also presented its own package of proposals on ways to address international challenges, including the threat of nuclear proliferation, and has said it has found common ground between the two separate packages.

Iran has repeatedly ruled out suspending uranium enrichment as a precondition for talks with the major powers and has said it will hold talks “only on common points”.

The United Nations has so far imposed three rounds of sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Khazaii accused certain Western powers of playing politics on Iran’s nuclear dossier, saying, “Some countries which have special status in the international community are making strenuous efforts to weaken the International Atomic Energy Agency in order to pursue their illegal objectives.”

He also said the implementation of UN Security Council resolutions against Iran is not “mandatory”. “The Security Council has so far issued hundreds of resolutions which different countries do not abide by.”

“Tens of resolutions have been issued against Israel but this regime has not observed any of them… Whatever the Security Council issues under political pressure should not necessarily be implemented… Iran’s constructive and powerful role in the region cannot be easily ignored and we do not accept a decision that some countries have made.”

----------Permanent seat for Islamic states

Elsewhere in his remarks, Khazaii said Iran is discussing a proposal at Organization of the Islamic Countries that the Islamic states be given a permanent seat at the UN Security Council.

“This issue should be pursued in coordination with other Islamic states at the United Nations. Islamic nations should have a loudspeaker at the international venues. Currently three Islamic countries of Indonesia, Libya, and Burkina Faso are sitting on the Security Council but Indonesia’s term will end in October.”

Iran is also seeking to gain a non-permanent seat at the Security Council as the representative of Asia in the upcoming vote at the United Nations in a bid to show to the world that the Security Council’s structure needs amendment, he stated.

UN non-permanent members are elected by the General Assembly for a two-year term starting on January 1, with five replaced each year. The members are chosen by regional groups and confirmed by the UN General Assembly.

“It is not logical that the permanent members which are five countries have the authority to take certain actions. This structure should be revised,” Khazaii commented.

BA/PA END MN


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 5:19am
This thread has been posted in the discussion session because it is completely unrelated to Avian Bird Flu. It is a world event topic of extreme interest but heavily diverts attention away from a growing spread of Avian and related flu mutations throughout the world.

With a flu season coming in which we may have no effective vaccine, and which may be considerably nasty, we move a great deal of military might to the Persian Gulf when in the event of a Pandemic it might be needed here in our own shores.

This is disturbing. I do not like to be pulled into these political and military topics. Yet we are at a flash point. in the next 48-72 hours there may be war. The question of all questions is who will support Iran on the world stage? Has it already been decided? How will the Muslims deal with a direct attack on one of their countries which is not currently attacking openly any other sovereign nation. This is a pre-emptive strike if it occurs. It places the U.S. in direct alliance with Israel against an Arab nation. Will this set off a Jihad?

The Iranians have in their possession extremely advanced technology from North Korea, China, and Russia.  There are skimmer missiles which because of speed and design pose a threat to our carriers in the area.  A war would not plunge us into a depression would it?  Almost every major American economic boom has been proceeded by a major war.

Another question the few will discuss. Are the Arab nations so satiated by the soaring prices of oil that they are willing to allow this to happen? All the talk of not wanting a foreign presence in the Middle East.  No doubt, money is being made in huge sums. Will the cartel sit in silence as the nuclear development  sites are attack and it has not been ruled out, may even be nuked,  as they rake in the greatest profits in oil in history?

I really do not feel uncomfortable in posting this thread. I think the forces that move towards Iran are sending a distinct and clear message. It is a message that we will not tolerate nuclear weapons in Iran. The question is, what will be the consequences of our actions?

MC
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 6:29am
Originally posted by medclinician medclinician wrote:

It has been something on the table since March of 2008. The plan to launch an attack on Iran. Multiple options have been discussed and currently the Iran military is readying itself for a something as dismal as a nuclear strike upon its enrichment facilities. It is a rather traditional rattling of sabers when we mobilize in carrier forces, "exercises" which assemble a truly impressive Armada. The reality is that like so many moves throughout history, what would be, what will be he consequences as the last ploy of an overt effort to frighten the country of Iran into submission?

Ron Paul has stated we a poised for an imminent attack.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) has warned millions of radio listeners that the United States is heading into an illegal attack on Iran, stating his amazement at members of Congress who have openly voiced support for a criminal nuclear strike.

"If we do (attack) it is going to be a disaster," the congressman told the Alex Jones radio show. "I was astounded to see on one of the networks the other day that the debate was not are we going to attack, but are we going to attack before or after the election?" Paul continued.

Paul recently voiced concern over House Congressional Resolution 362 which he has dubbed a "virtual Iran war resolution."

"If that comes up it is demanding that the president [put in place] an absolute blockade of the entire country of Iran, and punish any country or any business group around the world if they trade with Iran," Paul told listeners.

Experts have predicted gas will rise to $6 per gallon if the resolution passes. Paul believes that may happen anyway, just by anticipation.

"The frightening thing is they say they are taking no options off the table, even nuclear first strike," Paul said. Paul believes from talking with his contacts in and around Congress that a strike on Iran has already been green-lighted.


Medclinician

comment: It should be understood by the reader that there is no statement here of opinion as to whether this attack should be carried out. The most pressing and to be considered issue is the resulting world wide consequences of such an attack. Many voices are silent, and one voice that is not silent is Iran. Without support there is little doubt that Iran could NOT withstand such a mobilization of force alone. However, the question is what will be the reaction of the Muslim world, as we near a precipice equivalent to the Cuban missile crisis. We hovered about North Korea when they conducted their missile tests and it has been clearly stated that Iran will not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons because it would destabilize the situation in th Middle East.

The question at this point is what is it the sentiment of the American and world public. Is there general support for this or not, or is everyone afraid to speak at all.


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 7:05am
Kinda quiet in this thread - but I am finding a lot of interesting things on the net and very very few things on mainstream media. Here are a few quotes and statements - some very uncharacteristic in the Arab world concerning the Iran crisis.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/International/06-Aug-2008/Gaddafi-warns-Iran-of-military-humiliation

TUNIS (AFP) - Libyan leader Moamer Gaddafi on Tuesday warned Iran that it faces military humiliation on the scale of Iraq for its refusal to respond to western powers over a nuclear impasse.
“What Iran is doing stems simply from arrogance,” Gaddafi said during a visit to Tunisia after Tehran ignored another western deadline to accept an incentives package in exchange for full transparency on its nuclear drive.
“In the event of a decision against Iran, this country will suffer the same outcome as Iraq... Iran is not any stronger than Iraq and won’t have the means to resist (a military attack) on its own,” Gaddafi said. “The challenges are greater and exceed Iran’s ability to reply,” he added, speaking on the third day of his visit.
Like Iran and Iraq before it, Libya was for years pressured by the west over its nuclear and chemical weapons ambitions and capabilities before finding common ground in 2003.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/07/AR2008080703026.html?nav=rss_nation

courtesy of Washington Post

A military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities would probably only delay the country's progress toward nuclear-weapons capability, according to a study that concludes that such an attack could backfire by strengthening Tehran's resolve to acquire the bomb.

The analysis by the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security found that Iran's uranium facilities are too widely dispersed and protected -- and, in some cases, concealed too well -- to be effectively destroyed by warplanes. And any damage to the country's nuclear program could be quickly repaired.

"Following an attack, Iran could quickly rebuild its centrifuge program in small, easily hidden facilities focused on making weapon-grade uranium for nuclear weapons," said principal author David Albright, ISIS president and a former U.N. weapons inspector.

The study, scheduled for release today, is based in part on a comparison of Iran's known nuclear facilities with Iraq's Osirak reactor, which Israeli jets destroyed in a 1981 strike intended to curb Baghdad's nuclear ambitions. Although Israel struck a devastating blow against Iraq's program, a strike against Iran would be harder by several orders of magnitude, according to Albright and co-authors Paul Brannan and Jacqueline Shire.

The core of Iran's program is its huge uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, where thousands of machines called centrifuges create the uranium fuel used in making nuclear energy. Although Iran says its efforts are intended for peaceful energy purposes, its stocks of enriched uranium could be used to build nuclear weapons.

Last year, U.S. intelligence officials concluded that Iran had halted nuclear weapons research in 2003 but continued to expand its capabilities in ways that would allow it to develop such weapons quickly.

Despite heavy fortification, the subterranean Natanz plant could be heavily damaged in an airstrike using bunker-busting bombs or missiles. But the centrifuges could be replaced rapidly, perhaps in hidden underground facilities, the ISIS report said. Iran is known to have constructed bunkers inside mountain tunnels near Natanz and other major nuclear sites.

While Iran once relied on imported technology and parts to build its centrifuges, it is now largely self-sufficient. The manufacture of key components is dispersed among a number of government-controlled factories, while imported parts such as high-strength aluminum have been stockpiled over the past decade, the report notes.

Moreover, since 2006, when Iran began limiting access to its nuclear facilities by U.N. nuclear inspectors, Western governments can no longer say with certainty where some key facilities are located, ISIS said.

"Current knowledge of the complex is lacking," the report stated. "Without that knowledge, an attack is unlikely to significantly delay Iran's mastery of enrichment with gas centrifuges."

According to Albright, an Israeli or U.S. attack would result in broader popular support for Iran's ruling clerics and could lead Tehran to sever ties with the U.N. nuclear watchdog.

"Iran would likely launch a 'crash' program to quickly obtain nuclear weapons," Albright said in an interview. "An attack would likely leave Iran angry, more nationalistic, fed up with international inspectors and nonproliferation treaties, and more determined than ever to obtain nuclear weapons."

Medclinician



MC
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 7:31am
More data - how complex this all is... you be the judge

http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/?p=15381

ISRAEL WILL MAKE RUSSIA VULNERABLE TO AIR ATTACK IF RUSSIA SELLS ANTI-AIRCRAFT MISSILE TO IRAN

7 August 2008

missile-s-300-2.jpg

If Russia goes through with the sale of its most advanced anti-aircraft missile system to Iran, Israel will use an electronic warfare device now under development to neutralize it and as a result present Russia as vulnerable to air infiltrations, a top defense official has told The Jerusalem Post.

The Russian system, called the S-300, is one of the most advanced multi-target anti-aircraft-missile systems in the world today and has a reported ability to track up to 100 targets simultaneously while engaging up to 12 at the same time. It has a range of about 200 kilometers and can hit targets at altitudes of 27,000 meters.

While Russia has denied that it sold the system to Iran, Teheran claimed last year that Moscow was preparing to equip the Islamic Republic with S-300 systems. Iran already has TOR-M1 surface-to-air missiles from Russia.

Mixed media reports have emerged recently regarding the possible delivery of the system to Iran. Two weeks ago Reuters quoted a senior Israeli official who said the system would be delivered to Iran by the end of the year. In response, the Pentagon released a statement rejecting the assessment and saying that the US did not believe Iran would get it in 2008.

According to the Israeli defense official who spoke to the Post, “no one really knows yet if and when Iran will get the system.”

A top IAF officer also said this week that Israel needed to do “everything possible” to prevent the S-300 from reaching the region.

“Russia will have to think real hard before delivering this system to Iran, which is possibly on the brink of conflict with either Israel or the US, since if the system is delivered, an EW [electronic warfare] system will likely be developed to neutralize it, and if that happens it would be catastrophic not only for Iran but also for Russia,” the defense official said.

Neutralization of one of the main components of Russian air defense would be a blow to Russian national security as well as to defense exports. “No country will want to buy the system if it is proven to be ineffective,” the official said. “For these reasons, Russia may not deliver it in the end to Iran.”

Also on Thursday, Defense Minister Ehud Barak told an Italian paper that a nuclear Iran would be “dangerous to world order.”

Barak emphasized that all options for dealing with threat of a nuclear Teheran were “open and ready,” and stressed the importance of “strengthening and accelerating economic sanctions against Iran.”

“Either way, we need to keep every option open. If they provoke us, or they attack us, our army is prepared to attack and to succeed uncompromisingly,” he asserted in an interview with the daily Corriere della Sera . “It’s up to us to find the best way to get the best result with minimum damage,” Barak added.

“Iran confirmed its message when it stood against the whole world: to deceive and to reject. Their aim is to obtain an atomic bomb,” he continued.

The defense minister also spoke of the results of the Second Lebanon War, telling the Italian paper, “Two years ago, we saw the price that’s paid for a lack of an experienced leadership. Nevertheless, today we’re equipped with a good understanding to prevent this from happening again.”

He added that UN Security Council Resolution 1701 that brought an end to the war was inefficient since Hizbullah, Syria and Iran were doing what they wanted in Lebanon.


comment: just following the vapor trail - how real is the problem - how real is the threat?

MC
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 8:05am
Okay Albert _ I am pushing the bar on this one... I picked this up from Mexico and it is pretty out there. I think there may be some moderately solid data on activity in the gulf but if you feel we are getting too deep in this or any of this data might be compromising to U.S. interests in the Gulf - please pull it and the thread and I will not be feel slighted.

I am trying to follow this and as usual, I am starting to get in dataminer areas that are not on mainstream and quite honestly I feel like just before we hit Iraq - we may be poised for a strike and as such - silence may be more appropriate. We are not going to let Iran proceed. The real sticky point is how deeply Russia has its fingers in the pie. How much weapons and technology are locked in huge money deals and whatever - Russia is at war with one of "its" former provinces Georgia - there was a massive strike in Pakistan this morning by forces, and things are getting really much too busy. This will be my final post on this thread unless there are comments. My suggestion is people just lurk and read and decide what is what and the intent of posting this thread is to keep the blogger readers and those wanting data outside the mainstream media possible information.

This last post is VERY hard to pin down. It is put up by people who are not exactly pro-U.S. and therefore it is only the data on the movement of military towards the gulf possibly signally and imminent strike. The inferences of co-Israeli involvement in this is very volatile. Libya bit the bullet and stopped nuclear development and are no worse for the wear. With tensions running red hot in the Middle East we don't need any nuclear surprises or wars. However, just as Russia, just invaded Georgia and is in active war - It would not be at all a big surprise if having exhausted all peaceful moves, we imposed a blockade, Iran, infinitely unwise started a fight, and we had to finish it.

Last post for now.. let's watch and wait and see what happens -

translated from Mexico...

Reports from the Middle East are stating today that Kuwait has activated its “Emergency War Plan” after being notified that 2 additional United States Navy Aircraft Carrier Groups are headed to the Gulf and Red Sea.   

The Arabic news agency Moheet is reported that “an unnamed American destroyer, accompanied by two Israeli naval vessels, traveled through the Suez Canal from the Mediterranean to join a US nuclear submarine accompanied by a destroyer and a supply ship that have also moved into the Mediterranean.”

The Jerusalem Post is also reporting that “there are two US naval battle groups operating in the Gulf: one is an aircraft carrier group, led by the USS Abraham Lincoln, which carries some 65 fighter aircraft. The other group is headed by the USS Peleliu which maintains a variety of planes and strike helicopters.”

Russian Military Analysts report that with the addition of these new US Naval Battle Groups the American Forces now have arrayed against the Iranian Nation one of the largest naval armadas assembled by the West since World War II.

The Associated Press News Service is reporting, too, that Israel is building up its strike capabilities against Iran and is ‘confident’ of dealing a ‘crippling attack’ against Iran’s nuclear programme as it becomes more concerned that the Western Nations will back off from their planned attack against the Iranians.

The United States, at least for the moment, appears to be attempting to thwart another major war by threatening Iran with more sanctions, and as we can read as reported by the Associated Press News Service:

“US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice threatened Iran with more sanctions Thursday after it failed to give an adequate response to the latest bid by Western powers to induce it to freeze uranium enrichment.

"Iran has a way out if they ever wish, but we will seriously pursue sanctions if they don't," Rice told Yahoo! News and the magazine Politico.

"You have to hope that there are reasonable people in Iran who see this as not the way to run a country."

Tehran's latest response to a demand for the enrichment freeze in exchange for trade and technology incentives "is not a really serious answer," she said in her first comments since six world powers discussed the matter in a Wednesday conference call.”

The ‘wild card’ in these latest moves by the United States, its Western Allies and Israel, say Russian Military Reports, remains the ‘hidden’ Israeli threats against the US should it not attack Iran, and which many in the Russian Intelligence Community take to mean another September 11th type assault upon the American Nation itself.

[Note: Following the attacks upon the US on September 11, 2001, American Intelligence services conducted one of their largest counter terror sweeps in their history which netted not Arab Terrorists, but one of the largest Israeli spy networks ever discovered. Fox News was the only US propaganda media outlet to report on this but after its first airing was ‘immediately pulled’ from the American airwaves.]

The United States has further moved to counter Russian Military responses to an attack upon Iran’s nuclear facilities, and which have been built and financed by Russia, by igniting the flames of Total War on Russia’s very doorstep in the Caucuses by turning their loose their puppet ally Georgia to begin attacks upon South Ossetia.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry issued a warning today that Georgia is preparing for war, and as South Ossetia’s capitol has come under fire, and with Russia reporting that Georgian tanks are headed for the border, Russia has warned the West that it ‘will not stand by’ if the situation erupts into a full scale conflict.  

What remains unknown at this time is how far the United States, and the West, is prepared to push our World towards Total War in its game of brinkmanship in the Middle East. 

What is known, however, is that should the Americans push our World into the abyss of war, both Russia and China will retaliate as they are both determined not to ever again allow the Western Nations to have control over the World’s supply of oil.

[Ed. Note:   No interviews are granted and very little personal information is given about our contributors, or their sources, to protect their safety.]

Translation to Spanish by: Sister Maru Barraza, Mazatlán, Mexico

MC
Back to Top
sjf53 View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: April 06 2008
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 400 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote sjf53 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 10:54am
Hi Med,
 
 I had a creepy feeling watching the Olympic Ceremonies Friday Night. 
I felt like I was watching the "Godfather".  Remember how before a big hit there is always
a Big event.  Wedding, Christening......etc, using the event as a distraction.  Wasn't Putin acting as if nothing is going on all the while he knew the Georgia invasion was taking place.  All the Heads of State at the "table or Ceremonies" pretending like there is nothing else going on.  The tension had to be immense.  US, Russia, Israel, Iran and the World.  But the chess game goes on.  You can be sure there are alot of back room politcs going while "The One World Dream"  goes on.
Back to Top
Levygoddess View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: November 22 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 381 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Levygoddess Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 12:25pm
This is getting really worrisome. The war between Georgia and Russia is just the appetizer. I really feel we are fixin to be in a bad time. You know there is more behind this Georgia thing. 
God put us here for a reason
Back to Top
LaRo View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: March 14 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 350 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LaRo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 12:51pm
Just think this could all have been avoided if we would have switched to solar power years ago and we'd all be driving electric cars.  It's not to late to pull the plug on oil and make the change.   Where is Ron Paul when we need his leadership?
r we there yet?
Back to Top
H2HPrep View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: March 14 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 325 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote H2HPrep Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 1:10pm
How is Georgian forces launching a surprise attack and sending a large force into the capital Tskhinvali related to solar power, electric cars and Ron Paul?
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 10 2008 at 5:48pm
FYI and retrospect - Medclinician 8-10-08  8:48 EST


Published on Tuesday, May 27, 2008 by Asia Times

Bush ‘Plans Iran Air Strike by August’

by Muhammad Cohen

NEW YORK - The George W Bush administration plans to launc0527%2006h an air strike against Iran within the next two months, an informed source tells Asia Times Online, echoing other reports that have surfaced in the media in the United States recently.

Two key US senators briefed on the attack planned to go public with their opposition to the move, according to the source, but their projected New York Times op-ed piece has yet to appear.

The source, a retired US career diplomat and former assistant secretary of state still active in the foreign affairs community, speaking anonymously, said last week that that the US plans an air strike against the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). The air strike would target the headquarters of the IRGC’s elite Quds force. With an estimated strength of up to 90,000 fighters, the Quds’ stated mission is to spread Iran’s revolution of 1979 throughout the region.

Targets could include IRGC garrisons in southern and southwestern Iran, near the border with Iraq. US officials have repeatedly claimed Iran is aiding Iraqi insurgents. In January 2007, US forces raided the Iranian consulate general in Erbil, Iraq, arresting five staff members, including two Iranian diplomats it held until November. Last September, the US Senate approved a resolution by a vote of 76-22 urging President George W Bush to declare the IRGC a terrorist organization. Following this non-binding “sense of the senate” resolution, the White House declared sanctions against the Quds Force as a terrorist group in October. The Bush administration has also accused Iran of pursuing a nuclear weapons program, though most intelligence analysts say the program has been abandoned.

An attack on Iraq would fit the Bush administration’s declared policy on Iraq. Administration officials questioned directly about military action against Iran routinely assert that “all options remain on the table”.

Rockin’ and a-reelin’
Senators and the Bush administration denied the resolution and terrorist declaration were preludes to an attack on Iran. However, attacking Iran rarely seems far from some American leaders’ minds. Arizona senator and presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain recast the classic Beach Boys tune Barbara Ann as “Bomb Iran”. Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton promised “total obliteration” for Iran if it attacked Israel.

The US and Iran have a long and troubled history, even without the proposed air strike. US and British intelligence were behind attempts to unseat prime minister Mohammed Mossadeq, who nationalized Britain’s Anglo-Iranian Petroleum Company, and returned Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to power in 1953. President Jimmy Carter’s pressure on the Shah to improve his dismal human-rights record and loosen political control helped the 1979 Islamic revolution unseat the Shah.

But the new government under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini condemned the US as “the Great Satan” for its decades of support for the Shah and its reluctant admission into the US of the fallen monarch for cancer treatment. Students occupied the US Embassy in Teheran, holding 52 diplomats hostage for 444 days. Eight American commandos died in a failed rescue mission in 1980. The US broke diplomatic relations with Iran during the hostage holding and has yet to restore them. Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad’s rhetoric often sounds lifted from the Khomeini era.

The source said the White House views the proposed air strike as a limited action to punish Iran for its involvement in Iraq. The source, an ambassador during the administration of president H W Bush, did not provide details on the types of weapons to be used in the attack, nor on the precise stage of planning at this time. It is not known whether the White House has already consulted with allies about the air strike, or if it plans to do so.

Sense in the senate
Details provided by the administration raised alarm bells on Capitol Hill, the source said. After receiving secret briefings on the planned air strike, Senator Diane Feinstein, Democrat of California, and Senator Richard Lugar, Republican of Indiana, said they would write a New York Times op-ed piece “within days”, the source said last week, to express their opposition. Feinstein is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and Lugar is the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee.

Senate offices were closed for the US Memorial Day holiday, so Feinstein and Lugar were not available for comment.

Given their obligations to uphold the secrecy of classified information, it is unlikely the senators would reveal the Bush administration’s plan or their knowledge of it. However, going public on the issue, even without specifics, would likely create a public groundswell of criticism that could induce the Bush administration reconsider its plan.

The proposed air strike on Iran would have huge implications for geopolitics and for the ongoing US presidential campaign. The biggest question, of course, is how would Iran respond?

Iran’s options
Iran could flex its muscles in any number of ways. It could step up support for insurgents in Iraq and for its allies throughout the Middle East. Iran aids both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Israel’s Occupied Territories. It is also widely suspected of assisting Taliban rebels in Afghanistan.

Iran could also choose direct confrontation with the US in Iraq and/or Afghanistan, with which Iran shares a long, porous border. Iran has a fighting force of more than 500,000. Iran is also believed to have missiles capable of reaching US allies in the Gulf region.

Iran could also declare a complete or selective oil embargo on US allies. Iran is the second-largest oil exporter in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and fourth-largest overall. About 70% of its oil exports go to Asia. The US has barred oil imports from Iran since 1995 and restricts US companies from investing there.

China is Iran’s biggest customer for oil, and Iran buys weapons from China. Trade between the two countries hit US$20 billion last year and continues to expand. China’s reaction to an attack on Iran is also a troubling unknown for the US.

Three for the money
The Islamic world could also react strongly against a US attack against a third predominantly Muslim nation. Pakistan, which also shares a border with Iran, could face additional pressure from Islamic parties to end its cooperation with the US to fight al-Qaeda and hunt for Osama bin Laden. Turkey, another key ally, could be pushed further off its secular base. American companies, diplomatic installations and other US interests could face retaliation from governments or mobs in Muslim-majority states from Indonesia to Morocco.

A US air strike on Iran would have seismic impact on the presidential race at home, but it’s difficult to determine where the pieces would fall.

At first glance, a military attack against Iran would seem to favor McCain. The Arizona senator says the US is locked in battle across the globe with radical Islamic extremists, and he believes Iran is one of biggest instigators and supporters of the extremist tide. A strike on Iran could rally American voters to back the war effort and vote for McCain.

On the other hand, an air strike on Iran could heighten public disenchantment with Bush administration policy in the Middle East, leading to support for the Democratic candidate, whoever it is.

But an air strike will provoke reactions far beyond US voting booths. That would explain why two veteran senators, one Republican and one Democrat, were reportedly so horrified at the prospect.

Former broadcast news producer Muhammad Cohen told America’s story to the world as a US diplomat and is author of Hong Kong On Air (www.hongkongonair.com).
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2008 at 4:00am
"But we can be tranquil and thankful and proud, for man's been endowed with a mushroom-shaped cloud.
And we know for certain that some lovely day, someone will set the spark off... and we will all be blown away.
Their rioting in Africa, there's strife in Iran. What nature doesn't do to us, will be done by our fellow man."

The Kingston Trio.

M.C.
Back to Top
LaRo View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: March 14 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 350 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LaRo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2008 at 6:55am
My thoughts:  Solar power would have kept the US out of the gulf area because we wouldn't be fighting for the oil.   I assume we are there for that reason and no other because there isn't anything else worth fighting for over there.  Georgia has a pipeline and who controls Georgia also controls the oil pipeline.  A war is usually only creating jobs to create more war material.  If it isn't used up, these industries go out of business, so it's in their interest to keep the world fighting.  I don't believe Ron Paul is in this group.  He is not owned by this group.
r we there yet?
Back to Top
waterboy View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: January 21 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 8170 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote waterboy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2008 at 8:01am
Attack on Iran is getting closer.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 11 2008 at 6:31pm
I am tempted, very tempted to comment much more as I post data. I will keep my comments to a minimum. Please do read this carefully.  M.C.

Two additional United States naval < name="IL_MARKER" ="">aircraft carriers are heading to the Gulf and the Red Sea, according to the Kuwaiti newspaper Kuwait Times.

Kuwait began finalizing its "emergency war plan" on being told the vessels were bound for the region.

The US Navy would neither confirm nor deny that carriers were en route. US Fifth Fleet Combined Maritime Command located in Bahrain said it could not comment due to what a spokesman termed "force-protection policy."

While the Kuwaiti daily did not name the ships it believed were heading for the Middle East, The Media Line's defense analyst said they could be the USS Theodore Roosevelt and the USS Ronald Reagan.

 

Within the last month, the Roosevelt completed an exercise along the US east coast focusing on communication among navies of different countries. It has since been declared ready for operational duties. The Reagan, currently with the Seventh Fleet, had just set sail from Japan.

The Seventh Fleet area of operation stretches from the East Coast of Africa to the International Date Line.

Meanwhile, the Arabic news agency Moheet reported at the end of July that an unnamed American destroyer, accompanied by two Israeli naval vessels traveled through the Suez Canal from the Mediterranean. A week earlier, a US nuclear submarine accompanied by a destroyer and a supply ship moved into the Mediterranean, according to Moheet.

Currently there are two US naval battle groups operating in the Gulf: one is an aircraft carrier group, led by the USS Abraham Lincoln, which carries some 65 fighter < name="IL_MARKER" ="">aircraft. The other group is headed by the USS Peleliu which maintains a variety of planes and strike helicopters.

The ship movements coincide with the latest downturn in relations between Washington and Teheran. The US and Iran are at odds over Iran's nuclear program, which the Bush administration claims is aimed at producing material for nuclear weapons; however, Teheran argues it is only for power generation.

Kuwait, like other Arab countries in the Gulf, fears it will be caught in the middle should the US decide to launch an air strike against Iran if negotiations fail. The Kuwaitis are finalizing details of their security, humanitarian and vital services, the newspaper reported.

The six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) - Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman - lie just across the Gulf from Iran. Generals in the Iranian military have repeatedly warned that American interests in the region would be targeted if Iran is subjected to any military strike by the US or its Western allies.

Bahrain hosts the US Fifth Fleet, while there is a sizeable American base in Qatar. It is assumed the US also has military personnel in the other Gulf states, The Media Line's defense analyst said.

Iran is thought to have intelligence operatives working in the GCC states, according to Dubai-based military analysts.  (There is no doubt we have a sizable intelligence presence and a substantial ground spotter presence in Iran itself which has been there for quite some time. Any more information on that would jeopardize operatives- We have an extremely efficient monitoring of all Iranian military activities, sizes and locations of current forces, and especially key target locations for missile hits to be also directed by direct ground line of site personnel.) The Iran military forces and leaders should be aware of this in their consideration of alternative paths of action and negotiation. 

The standoff between the US and Iran has left the Arab nations' political leaders in something of a bind, as they were being used as pawns by Washington and Teheran, according to The Media Line analyst.

Iran has offered them economic and industrial sweeteners, while the US is boosting their defense capabilities. US President George W. Bush and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have paid visits to the GCC states in a bid to win their support.

If the forces are given no alternative of first enforcing the blockade and any military or terrorist strikes are made against them for doing so, this will create a flash point and immediate retaliatory action.  Tactical nuclear deployment has not been ruled out.

(more to follow 8/11/08) Medclinician
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 12 2008 at 7:01pm
Keep the reports coming MC, PLUS keep your comments to a MAXIMUM. I read the forums for the comments and opinions and thoughts of others. I value your comments and several others. Thank you Annie
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 13 2008 at 8:43am


أخبار من العراق المحتل

Update on the rumored armada sailing to Iran

upper text in Arabic does not display correctly

August 13, 2008
Official sources state, the U.S. carrier fleet was in one of its most relaxed postures, with a single carrier - the Lincoln - in 5th Fleet, and a single carrier - the Reagan - in 7th Fleet near Japan. The rest of the "armada" was operating fairly close to the U.S. East or West Coast.

According to the U.S. Navy, on Aug. 12 the only carriers currently under way are the Lincoln and the Reagan.

The Lincoln began its current deployment on March 13, and the Reagan may replace it in the 5th Fleet (the Reagan began its deployment on May 19). It is not uncommon for these carriers to train together during a handover, but Washington has not chosen to maintain two carriers in the region since 2007.

… In sum, a surge of three carriers to the 5th Fleet would indeed be a noteworthy event, but there is not yet credible reason for concern based on the information available about the disposition of the U.S. Fleet. However, should we see the Reagan transit the Strait of Malacca and another carrier transit the Strait of Gibraltar, we will certainly have more to say at that point.

The USS Theodore Roosevelt {is} currently in its home port of Norfolk.

While the Kuwaiti daily did not name the ships it believes are heading for the Middle East, in "Two U.S. Aircraft Carriers Head for Gulf Region", the Media Line’s defense analyst said "they could be the USS Theodore Roosevelt and the USS Ronald Reagan."  This was reiterated even more strongly (but citing no evidence other than his "sources") by Timothy Alexander in "MassivNote:  after a brief search, I cannot find the Navy’s denial e US Naval Armada Heads For Iran".  {that Stratfor mentions, nor stories confirming that the Roosevelt is in Norfolk.}

Now Debkafile adds to the fog:  Three major US naval strike forces due this week in Persian Gulf", 12 August 2008 — Excerpt:

DEBKAfile’s military sources note that the arrival of the three new American flotillas will raise to five the number of US strike forces in Middle East waters - an unprecedented build-up since the crisis erupted over Iran’s nuclear program.

This vast naval and air strength consists of more than 40 carriers, warships and submarines, some of the last nuclear-armed, opposite the Islamic Republic, a concentration last seen just before the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

… DEBKAfile’s military sources name the three US strike forces en route to the Gulf as the USS Theodore Roosevelt , the USS Ronald Reagan and the USS Iwo Jima . Already in place are the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea opposite Iranian shores and the USS Peleliu which is cruising in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden


need to check out DEBKA credibitility: MC


Medclinician
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 13 2008 at 9:32am
.I can't hand type this and I can't copy it and I cannot verify its credibility. Use your own judgment. However the listing of ships, destinations, and over all content appear in multiple locations on the net. This is much too much for me to break through in embedded encoding which makes it nearly impossible to paste this.

I found it interesting. Many more "grounded blogs" have a lot of the same info, it is just gathered here much more clearly and easier to read.

I can make no statement of credibility of this, but it certainly is interesting.

Medclinician

http://europebusines.blogspot.com/2008/08/massive-us-naval-armada-heads-for-iran.html
Back to Top
DANNYKELLEY View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: May 01 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2785 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DANNYKELLEY Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 13 2008 at 4:31pm
Interesting is one way of putting it ,nice read Medclinician,Thank!!!
WHAT TO DO????
Back to Top
coyote View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: April 25 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8395 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote coyote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 14 2008 at 6:27am
Med, Thanks for your Posts!
Long time lurker since day one to Member.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 14 2008 at 10:36am
Ships readying for war.Ships guarding our front and back doors.If we attack Iran I expect the draft to quickly follow along with our Prez declaring martial law.
Look to those you know in the armed forces for real information as the news only gives half truths and misinformation.
Back to Top
H2HPrep View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: March 14 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 325 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote H2HPrep Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 14 2008 at 3:29pm
Loose lips sink ships
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2008 at 8:08am
http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-17/0808123643161157.htm

Tehran - August 12

Iran-Georgia-Qashqavi
Iran calls for an end to conflict in the Caucasus, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hassan Qashqavi said on Tuesday.

"Iran has called for ceasefire between Russia and Georgia in South Ossetia and seeks peaceful end to Caucasus conflict." Speaking to domestic and foreign reporters in weekly press briefing, he said "We are following up current developments in Caucasus and urge the belligerent parties to help resolve their disputes through peaceful means."
Continued conflict will harm the civilians in the sensitive region of Caucasus, he said.

"We hope talks between warring parties will lead to a cease-fire and restoration of security in that region."

comment:  Why do they care whether Russian and Georgia are at war?

Note: August 15, 2008


Germany-Georgia-Shevardnadze
Former Georgian president Eduard Shevardnadze warned of a new Cold War between the US and Russia, the Munich-based Sueddeutsche Zeitung newspaper reported Friday.

Shevardnadze said the "material basis for a new Cold War" had been created such as the stationing of 10 US missile interceptors in Poland and a reader track system in the Czech Republic.

"Of course, all of this angers Russia. That's why the danger for the beginning of a new Cold War is realistic. We have to be very vigilant," the ex-Soviet Union foreign minister added.

Shevardnadze lambasted the decision of Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili to go to war with Russia over the breakaway province of South Ossetia.

"Today one has to label it a mistake which has severely damaged Georgia and the Georgian population, and not only them. Many Ossetians and Russians have also lost their lives. That was unnecessary." Shevardnadze was president of Georgia from 1992 until 2003 when he was toppled by his successor Saakashvili on among other things corruption changes.




Medclinician
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2008 at 8:42am
Background Information : Behind the mask of peaceful nuclear energy research in Iran - The Problem.

comment: once again.. just data.. and little comment. 

Iran Develops Nuclear Technologies in Secret for 18 Years
A report issued by the International Atomic Energy Agency describes technological advances and a policy of concealment.

On November 10, 2003, the International Atomic Energy Agency issued a 30-page confidential report on Iran's nuclear activities. The report, which the agency sent to its board of governors and to 20 governments, reveals that for the past 18 years Iran has secretly developed technologies for producing weapon-usable highly enriched uranium and plutonium. During that time, the report says, Iran violated its Nonproliferation Treaty obligations and falsified declarations to the agency regarding safeguards required under the treaty.


11 August 2008 | Communication from Iran. The IAEA circulated a communication from the the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran (issued as INFCIRC/733), that forwarded the text of the "Statement on the Islamic Republic of Iran´s Nuclear Issue" adopted by the XV Ministerial Conference of the Non-Aligned Movement.

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/IaeaIran/
International Atomic Energy Agency

Despite these findings, the report goes on to say that no evidence exists of a current weapons project in Iran, a conclusion that NRDC's nuclear experts dispute. "It's dumbfounding that the IAEA, after saying that Iran for 18 years had a secret effort to enrich uranium and separate plutonium, would turn around and say there was no evidence of a nuclear weapons program," said NRDC nuclear program director Tom Cochran in an interview with The New York Times. "If that's not evidence, I don't know what is."

Is it a valid statement that Iran really needs to develop nuclear energy power plants to supply energy for its country?

From an energy perspective, the United States has cast aspersions on Iran's commitment to a legitimate nuclear energy program, given Iran's preponderant oil and natural gas reserves. Iran is endowed with 92.86 billion of proven crude oil reserves (circa 1994), equivalent to 9.3% of the world's total reserves. It is estimated that Iran's oil reserves have a natural life of 72 years, according to 1993 production statistics. Iran also possesses 73 billion cubic feet of natural gas, which is second only to Russia in the ownership of gas reserves. Since natural gas is much easier and cheaper to develop for energy purposes than nuclear energy, U.S. analysts doubt whether Iran needs its nuclear reactors from Russia.

Medclinician
Back to Top
endman View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar

Joined: February 16 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1232 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote endman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 15 2008 at 10:41am
The War in achieved a couple of objectives that were beneficial for the current US foreign policies
  
   1 Russia is back to be a Bad Guy
   2 Poland got scared and signed the missile deal
   3 Ukraine is now looking more and more towards NATO
   4 The two breakaway Georgian republics will be patrolled by the international peace keepers
   5 US did not get involved militarily because they have a bigger fish to fry Iran
  
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2008 at 8:44am
Originally posted by endman endman wrote:

The War in achieved a couple of objectives that were beneficial for the current US foreign policies
  
   1 Russia is back to be a Bad Guy
   2 Poland got scared and signed the missile deal
   3 Ukraine is now looking more and more towards NATO
   4 The two breakaway Georgian republics will be patrolled by the international peace keepers
   5 US did not get involved militarily because they have a bigger fish to fry Iran
  


Well said.  Medclinician
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2008 at 9:32am
Hi,
 just found this.
 
Another False Iran Alarm
Jeff Huber | June 03, 2008
Excerpts-
 
"...So this guy with an odd name writes an article in the Asia Times that says Bush plans to run an air strike on Iran by August. Do we ignore it or do we start squirreling away canned pears in the family fallout shelter?
 
 
 
..."I hope his goofiness helps him sell a lot of books, but I sure wish he hadn't written his stupid article on Iran for Asia Times, and I wish his editor buddy at Asia Times had said, "Interesting, but we can't use this just now. I'm sure you can find other ways to promote your novel."
 
source
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2008 at 1:00pm
Originally posted by Mary08 Mary08 wrote:

Hi,
Another False Iran Alarm
Jeff Huber | June 03, 2008
Excerpts-
 
"...So this guy with an odd name writes an article in the Asia Times that says Bush plans to run an air strike on Iran by August. Do we ignore it or do we start squirreling away canned pears in the family fallout shelter?
 
..."I hope his goofiness helps him sell a lot of books, but I sure wish he hadn't written his stupid article on Iran for Asia Times, and I wish his editor buddy at Asia Times had said, "Interesting, but we can't use this just now. I'm sure you can find other ways to promote your novel."
 
source


_____________________________________________

Of course this type of data release had to occur. It is a typical slam dunk which is very well thought out effort to destroy the credibility of hundreds of pages of research and solid information.

1) Destroy the credibility of the source
2) Allude to the fact that the information is intensionally misleading for monetary gain.
3) Ignore the solid base of credible authorities in world politics and rather indisputable facts that in  fact,  nuclear weapons technology has been developed for the past  18 years while elusively avoiding  international inspection teams from raising a red flag. The current inspection system is not an effective deterrent or preventive measure to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons to unstable countries or terrorists groups.

You do not use centrifuges to develop weapons grade plutonium for peaceful atomic energy use. You do not have any "secret" sites which cannot be inspected if  what you are doing is simply creating nuclear reactors for energy.

The slam dunk is based on the final effect on the reader. That is despite all that has been read it is the last sentence or statement that will stick with the average reader. Like the hook in a song or last oration to a jury before a verdict.

Facts are:

Whatever was posted under whatever name, the United States has avoided a military involvement in a Russian armed invasion in Georgia.

The hard core situation of the impending invasion of Iran has existed since plans were made in March of 2008 by Israel that Iran could not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon that could be fired at Israel. This is widely documented in fiery rhetoric which can be easily researched on the net. If some action were not taken to stop Iran's nuclear program, a blockade would ensue. The specter loomed of a possible Russian escort of oil laden Iranian ships. Russia and China are involved with Iran for huge amounts of money and far reaching nuclear development contracts as well as oil lines running from Iran to Russia. The scenario of American, British, and French vessels attempting to enforce a UN mandated blockade (even though it would not pass due to Russian veto power) would present the world with a very dangerous situation. And there is no way possible the American military and other Western allies would not keep or maintain a carrier and nuclear submarine presence in the Gulf.

I consider the readers of this site to be intelligent, adult, and persons capable of separating truth from speculation.

In this case it is impossible to single out a single source or post to invalidate, because basically there is a general consensus among the government, military, and also the U.N. there is a problem and a stalling Iran which must face a physical ultimatum  having exhausted all other negotiation attempts. Thus proposing an embargo  to persuade Iran to cease its pursuit of a nuclear weapon, cease actions focused on manufacturing weapons grade plutonium, and submit to inspections which could verify without asking it to stop its peaceful nuclear energy development.

The greatest amount of money that will be and has been  made by the current Gulf War situation, is the sale of high technology weapons and over a billion dollars worth of items from Russia and China to Iran. That tends to influence one's perspective in terms of loyalties and who will protect who if there is an actual confrontation.

The topic and question still remains the same. Either Western forces attack if negotiations fail, or Israeli forces will. If the Israeli forces attack, this will very likely set up a fierce Islamic backlash which could destabilize the entire region.  There are already active plans for a limited and surgical strike by several country on Iran's nuclear development facilities. If Iran does not cease development, it is highly likely one will occur. Two facilities, one which is frequently referenced which would be the target of the target.

As far as squirreling away pears in shelters, since this is an Avian Flu Talk site, I think that many people already have been storing food, water, and other supplies in the event of a Pandemic.

Looking at the state of the world, the economy, the natural and unnatural disaster we have had and those which could occur, this is common sense for the survival and practical planning for oneself and ones family.

If there is no situation and it is not a threat - there will be no more data to post of a situation growing worse. So much the better.

note: link formerly given appears too dated to be relevant. Although content supports the post - and is mainstream - we need a more current link.

Medclinician
Back to Top
RICHARD-FL View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: May 13 2008
Location: N.E. Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 98 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RICHARD-FL Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2008 at 3:52pm
I did not read everything on gthis subject, but there was an error on the first page  The article having two carrier groups in the IO. 
 
The USS Peleliu (LHA-5) is a Tarawa-class amphibious assault ship of the United States Navy.  It is part of what is called the "Gator Navy"  IT has a most of a battalion of Marines on board with a composite squadron of aircraft which include about 16 aircraft, Ah-1T, UH-1N, CV-22, CH-53E Helicopters, and AV-8B Harrier II Jump Jets. It serves with four to eight other ships to make up an amphibious task force.  IT IS NOT A CARRIER.
 
I served on board carriers 4 years and LPH/LHA amphibious assault ships an additional 2 years. There is no way to launch or recover jets other then the AV-8B.  It is a helicopter platform. 
 
OK  those are facts.
"...No man is an island on to himself..." Words to remember

RICHARD-FL
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2008 at 5:27pm
First, do understand the posting of this data on this thread is to encourage discussion, verification, and input from readers. Now that the dust is settling as this has hit the net, the impact is being felt.

This is an article today from a mainstream media source - UPI

It is from a UPI contributing editor, and the next phase of this presentation of some rather intense data is discuss and verify it. Starting here:

http://www.metimes.com/Security/2008/08/11/analysis_is_war_in_the_gulf_air/ca8a/

everything posted on this thread is open for verification and discussion. Since the weakest link of course is the post with very specific information on who was at Operation Brimstone, a Naval maneuver which was thought to possibly signal an impending blockage of Iran which would trigger either a further attack or response from Russia - first the data must extend beyond this publication which is the most vulnerable to attack.  Anyone posting alone this type of data is going to get hit. So let's move to something a little more solid.

WASHINGTON, Aug. 11 (UPI) -- No sooner had Operation Brimstone ended -- a mega joint U.S., British and French naval exercise held in the Atlantic Ocean where the allies practiced enforcing an eventual blockade on Iran -- when, according to numerous reports, the armada set sail for the Gulf waters -- and a potential showdown with Iran.

The move comes shortly after the European Union issued a decree Friday authorizing the imposition of stronger sanctions against Iran, on top of existing U.N. Security Council sanctions, over its refusal to back down from its controversial nuclear program.

Leading the joint naval task force is the nuclear-powered carrier the USS Theodore Roosevelt and its Carrier Strike Group Two; besides its 80-plus combat planes the Roosevelt normally transports, it is carrying an additional load of French Naval Rafale fighter jets from the French carrier Charles de Gaulle, currently in dry dock.

Also reported heading toward Iran is another nuclear-powered carrier, the USS Ronald Reagan and its Carrier Strike Group Seven; the USS Iwo Jima, the Royal Navy aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and a number of French warships, including the nuclear hunter-killer submarine Amethyste.

Once on site, the joint naval force in the Persian Gulf region will be joining two other U.S. naval battle groups already in position: the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS Peleliu; the Lincoln with its carrier strike group and the latter with an expeditionary strike group.

Meanwhile, Tehran seems undeterred, saying it will not back down on its nuclear stance, regardless of the threat of stricter sanctions, an Iranian government spokesman said Sunday.

And a European diplomat was quoted as saying that Britain, the United States and France could impose sanctions that go beyond what is called for by the United Nations, in essence giving weight to the formidable armada currently heading toward Iran.

"It is important that our country is ready to insist on its rights under any conditions," Iranian spokesman Gholam-Hossein Elham was quoted by the Iranian Students' News Agency. "Our stance would not change with sanctions or the threat of sanctions," added the spokesman.

Led by the United States and leading EU members Britain, France and Germany and supported by China and Russia, all have tried to persuade Iran to freeze its uranium enrichment program.

Expecting a formal reply from Iran, the six nations leading the charge against Iran's nuclear ambitions were disappointed when the much awaited reply was a non-committal one-page letter, despite a promise from Iran that it would provide a "clear response."

The deployment of the multinational naval task force is the largest show of military power from the United States and allied countries to assemble around the strategic waters of the Persian Gulf since the First and Second Gulf wars.

The object of the naval deployment would be to enforce an eventual blockade on Iran, if, as expected by many observers, current negotiations with the Islamic republic over its insistence to pursue enrichment of uranium yield no results.

For Iran, however, a naval blockade preventing it from importing refined oil would have devastating effects on its economy, virtually crippling the Islamic republic's infrastructure. Although Iran is a major oil producer and exporter, the country lacks refining facilities, having to re-import its own oil once refined.

Iran's oil -- both the exported crude as well as the returning refined product -- passes through the strategic Strait of Hormuz, controlled by Iran on one side and the Sultanate of Oman -- a U.S. ally -- on the other. The strait is about 30 miles wide at its narrowest point, making it easy to control, but at the same time placing Western naval vessels within easy reach of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' fast-moving light craft which could be used by Iranian suicide bombers.

Iranian Parliamentary Deputy Alaeddin Boroujerdi said imposing new EU sanctions against the Islamic Republic will "damage" the West, Iran's Press TV reported. "Any measure by the European Union ahead of the end of talks between Iran and the five Security Council veto holders plus Germany will be unacceptable," Boroujerdi, the head of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, told the Islamic Republic News Agency. The Iranian MP said Iran and the EU enjoy a high level of trade and economic cooperation and added sanctions would have adverse consequences on their positive mutual ties.

Boroujerdi asked Javier Solana, the EU foreign policy chief, to hold a second round of talks with Iran.

Iran is now playing for time, hoping to ride out the remaining 160-plus days of the George W. Bush presidency. The question now is whether the Western powers will blink or call Iran's bluff.

--

(Claude Salhani is editor of the Middle East Times.)

This is not the article mentioned at all and appears to be from UPI.

reference - military unclassified - Operation Brimstone

http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showphoto.php/photo/33186

Congress Blog

http://www.congresscheck.com/2008/07/22/operation-brimstone-preparing-for-wwiii/

In order to enforce the seriousness of the U.S.-EU position against Iran with the threat of serious sanctions Debka reports a dozen warships from the U.S.-UK-France and a Brazilian frigate began ten days of maneuvers Monday in the Atlantic off the U.S. coast to practice the blockading of Iran’s coast in the Strait of Hormuz.

The exercises have been called "Operation Brimstone" and are lead by the USS Theodore Rooselvelt Carrier Strike group and the USS Iwo Jima Expedtionary Strike Group which carries ground forces trained in operating in shallow coastal-littoral waters and the seizure of islands like the ones in the Strait of Hormuz, Qeshm for example. The narrow island is about fifty miles long and just a few miles off Bandar Abbas believed to be the headquarters of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and the small islands in the strait are manned by Revolutionary Guard Marines. [DEBKA]

Knesset -The IRGC will no doubt have Iranian air and naval support as the combined U.S.-EU forces attempt to enforce a blockade intended to target shipments of benzene and other refined oil products as they head for Iranian ports. Iran does not have much oil refining capacity and therefore has to import 40% of its benzene.

France24 recorded British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s speech in front of Israel’s Knesset in Jerusalem in which he reinforced the two week sanctions ultimatum by EU foreign policy representative Javier Solana and U.S. Secretary of State Dr. Condoleezza Rice, "Iran now has a clear choice to make: suspend its nuclear programme and accept our offer of negotiations or face growing isolation and the collective response not of just one nation but of all nations round the world. Just as we heave led the work of three mandatory sanctions resolutions of the UN, the UK will continue to lead-with the United States and our European Union partners-in our determination to prevent an Iranian nuclear weapons programme

More data to follow.

Medclinician
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2008 at 5:47pm
hi Med...
 
This article was on Debkafile - Iran was given a two week ultimatum, Iran buried the ball...and it was decided to set up a blokade. and they held exercises off our east coast in prep of the blockade.  They are not going to let in certain cargo .
.........................
July 28, 2008
 

The penalty of withholding refined oil products from Iran would be exercised by means of a partial international naval blockade of its Gulf ports.

Taking part in the 10-day exercise in the Atlantic Ocean are more than a dozen ships, including the US carrier strike group Theodore Roosevelt and expeditionary strike group Iwo Jima; the French submarine Amethyste, and the British HMS Illustrious Carrier Strike Group, as well as a Brazilian frigate.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2008 at 6:15pm
So far it seems apparent, and more links could be provided there was an Operation Brimstone which was participated in by multiple countries and possibly this was a dress rehearsal of a possible blockade option if after what limit of reasonable negotiations had been exhausted measures were to be taken. Of course, there would be sanctions. But sanctions without some sort of enforcement would be weak.

Our next question is this. Did this happen?

Participating in the Operation Brimstone maneuvers is the British HMS Illustrious Carrier Strike Group and the French submarine Amethyste. There are also French Rafale fighter jets on board the Theodore Roosevelt alongside U.S. aircraft. In addition to preventing benzene from arriving Operation Brimstone is also intended to prevent Iran’s attacks on oil shipping leaving the Persian Gulf for world ports.

After a briefing by Under Secretary of State William Burns, who took part in the Geneva negotiations, Secretary of State Rice met in Abu Dhabi the representatives of the six Gulf Cooperation Council states and officials from Egypt-Jordan-Iraq.

Pentagon - GoNavy.jp not only mentions these maneuvers but seems to indicate the carrier USS Abraham Lincoln is still on station in the North Arabian Sea and if so could be used in support of the blockade. These maneuvers are due to end July 31 just two days before the end of the ultimatum delivered by the U.S.-EU. [GONAVY]


http://www.gonavy.jp/CVLocation.html

This is an unclassified on the net webpage. Before posting it was checked to be sure that no current (today) locations of any of the vessels were listed. Does this concur?  Check the data.

If this site link is a problem or is listing data which should not be on the net - then it is suggested the link be deleted from this post and appropriate authorities remove the site or request it be removed from the country hosting it.  If it cannot be removed, then delete the link here.

IMPORTANT NOTE:

Following the initial reports and data - officials have stated this information was mistaken and incorrect. In the interest of accuracy this link leads to the " amended" locations as well as extensive comments.

Shortly after this article was released on August 13, US military
sources as well as Stratfor ( a Strategic Studies Think Tank) stated
that the various press reports (UPI, Middle East Times, Kuwait Times,
Debka) regarding the naval deployment to the Middle East were incorrect.

According to the press reports (see UPI, August 11, 2008), the war ships
involved in the "Operation Brimstone" war games off the US North
Atlantic coast, had set sail for the Middle East. This information is
apparently incorrect, according to the US Navy and Stratfor.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/southnews/message/6921

Since this data and these comments are likely to be posted anyway- this will make it easier to note the changes. Why was incorrect data sent to UPI, Middle East Times, Kuwait Times, and Debka?

Was this for security reasons? With our current level of satellite surveillance  and those of other nations it would seem logical that the movements of large extremely visiable above water carriers could easily be monitored by satellite.

Thus, though we have posted data which is supported by four mainstream news sources, not simple one rogue data poster, the initial accuracy in terms of what was on the net can be verified.

It would be a breach of security for a military individual to state the location of his force or vessel, and therefore it really would not be inappropriate but a breach for any member of the military to state "it could not be there because I was on it and it was there."

Only the general and published what appears to be a fact item that there was an Operation Brimstone and it was run to simulate a blockade by multiple nations had been stated by 4 major news sources, so was certain public domain and open and unclassified knowledge.

Ironically, the flashpoint did not happen in this case in the Gulf. Instead, and for reasons perhaps one should not analyze to openly here, Russia decided to send tanks into Georgia and the U.S. decided to not become militarily involved. It has been stated earlier in this thread that several military objectives and other plusses have been the result of this series of scenarios and conflicts.

If and when a blockade (if ever) is set up around Iran it will be mainstream news very quickly. The pre-emptive shuffling of ships in anticipation of armed conflict, whether or not a an  attack is in progress, and the announcement to mainstream media, makes it a topic of open discussion on the Internet.

Medclinician
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2008 at 6:19pm
Originally posted by Mary08 Mary08 wrote:

hi Med...
 
This article was on Debkafile - Iran was given a two week ultimatum, Iran buried the ball...and it was decided to set up a blokade. and they held exercises off our east coast in prep of the blockade.  They are not going to let in certain cargo .
.........................
July 28, 2008
 

The penalty of withholding refined oil products from Iran would be exercised by means of a partial international naval blockade of its Gulf ports.

Taking part in the 10-day exercise in the Atlantic Ocean are more than a dozen ships, including the US carrier strike group Theodore Roosevelt and expeditionary strike group Iwo Jima; the French submarine Amethyste, and the British HMS Illustrious Carrier Strike Group, as well as a Brazilian frigate.



Thanks Mary. I am feeling a lot like its time to go back to posting about sick birds than scary things in the Persian Gulf.

MC
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2008 at 7:01pm
me too :)  
 
So I'm wondering when this blockade will happen and how close will we get and what will the reaction of the Iranians be?  Isn't this how Russia drove Georgia nuts?
They kept up the in your face stuff for a long time until Georgia attacked, then they were at the ready right there waiting to rush over into Georgia just as Pres. Saakashvili related.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 16 2008 at 11:54pm
Ok so let us look at this Russia is going to be bad again, we have Arab terrorists who would like to see us all be Muslim, we have always had to save Europe from itself, and we depend on 70% of our oil from somewhere else.

We have a lot to think about...the world is not going to be peacful in the 21st. century. It all is about Three Things...Money, Power and Religion.

Think about it!
Back to Top
Turboguy View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: October 27 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 6079 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Turboguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 17 2008 at 6:02am
Originally posted by TheWalkinDude TheWalkinDude wrote:

Ships readying for war.Ships guarding our front and back doors.If we attack Iran I expect the draft to quickly follow along with our Prez declaring martial law.
Look to those you know in the armed forces for real information as the news only gives half truths and misinformation.
 
There's never going to be a draft again, don't be rediculous.
 
I'm in the military and I don't ever want to have to rely on people that might not want to be there. There's a reason that we've got the best, most professional, smartest military the world has ever known: We don't have any dumbass conscripts to screw it all up! The military even is totally against conscription as it's not like we're getting the best and brightest through these programs. The US military can stand toe to toe with any other country's military and come out on top. I like that situation, and you should too.
 
When you start conscripting people, especially nowadays, you forment a situation where you have a near revolt. It would be an absolute political nightmare. Think George W. took a licking over the Iraq war? Let a sitting president start talking about drafting people for anything less than a war against another superpower or the US is getting invaded. He'd be instantly impeached, quite possibly be executed, and his party would never hold political power again.
 
Martial law? ROFL! Why? If the Muslim cowards started killing civilians in the US they'd be met with levels of persecution unknown since WWII.
 
I'm getting sent to Iraq in September, they didn't give me a specific date until four days ago. They don't tell me anything more than what you could figure out from looking at the internet or watching television.
Back to Top
SouthTexas View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar

Joined: April 29 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 61 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SouthTexas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 17 2008 at 6:23am
T.,
 
Thank you for your service --- and your posts.
 
ST
The Lord be magnified.
Back to Top
Lone Wolf View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: October 28 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 253 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lone Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 17 2008 at 6:43pm
http://www.debka.com/index1.php
 
%20 %20 %20

Iran now says "dummy satellite" into orbit. Israel concerned by missile capability

DEBKAfile Special Report

August 17, 2008, 9:48 PM (GMT+02:00)

Iran%20puts%20satellite%20carrier%20in%20space

Iran puts satellite carrier in space

The head of Iran’s aerospace program qualified Tehran’s earlier announcement that its first home-made communications was launched Sunday, Aug. 17. Reza Taghizadeh said: “The Safir satellite carrier was launched today and for the first time we successfully launched a dummy satellite into orbit.”

Earlier, the Iranian news network IRNN showed footage of what it called a domestically-manufactured communications satellite named Safir-e Omid being launched.

DEBKAfile's military sources stress that confirmation of Iran’s successful launch would represent a strategic breakthrough for Tehran’s long-range missile delivery capability, possibly armed with nuclear warheads

The head of Iran’s aerospace program qualified Tehran’s earlier announcement that its first home-made communications was launched Sunday, Aug. 17. Reza Taghizadeh said: “The Safir satellite carrier was launched today and for the first time we successfully launched a dummy satellite into orbit.”

Earlier, the Iranian news network IRNN showed footage of what it called a domestically-manufactured communications satellite named Safir-e Omid being launched in darkness, accompanied by patriotic hymns.

DEBKAfile reports form one Iranian source that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad personally recited the countdown.

Our military sources stress that confirmation of Iran’s successful launch would represent a strategic breakthrough, testifying to Tehran’s long-range missile delivery capability, possibly armed with nuclear warheads, to distances of thousands of kilometers, against Israel and beyond; Europe and parts of Asia would also be in range. The missile program has been advancing in parallel to Iran’s drive for a nuclear weapon.

Iran would also have paved the way for spy satellites. If verified, Iran’s space achievement would offset one of Israel’s prime military assets, its superiority in space technology.

According to our sources, Tehran caught Israel, the United States and both their undercover agencies by surprise. They knew Iran was working on a space program but not how close the Iranians were to placing a satellite in orbit.

Our sources believe that the capsule was boosted by the Shehab-5 missile, whose range the Iranians boast is up to 5,000 km and, according to some military experts, reaches 7,000 km.

The Islamic Republic’s reported feat comes at a bad time for Moscow internationally. The Russians emphatically dismiss America’s argument for installing missile interceptors in Poland as a shield against Iranian ballistic missile attack, claiming they were aimed at Russia. The Kremlin accuses the Bush administration using this false claim as a pretext, because Iran had not so far developed a ballistic threat. Now, that proof may have been provided Sunday, Moscow will have to reconsider its position.

 

 
Back to Top
endman View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar

Joined: February 16 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1232 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote endman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 18 2008 at 12:02pm
http://www.allthingsbeautiful.com/photos/uncategorized/the_iran_oil_corridor.gif
 

Just look at all this oil in Iran its looks like its more that Saudi Arabia has

And Russians are only few hundreds of miles from major oil fields in Azerbaijan
What I think Russians are telling US that if we going to go after Iranian oil they will try to grab republics of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan

Back to Top
Tadeo View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: October 23 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 193 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tadeo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 18 2008 at 10:37pm

Hey Turboguy, if you need someone to babysit your guns while you're in Iraq just ship them over.Thumbs%20Up

p.s.  If you happen to see any Kalashnikov's lying around that nobody wants well......you know.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure." -Thomas Jefferson.
Back to Top
gypsy View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: June 16 2008
Location: Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 35 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gypsy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 19 2008 at 12:10am

Turbo..........saying "There is never going to be a draft again".......................Never say never!! In a National crises .............The U.S. would use the draft again!
Back to Top
Pookey View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: July 20 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 79 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pookey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 19 2008 at 6:45am
Turbo,  take care over there, Godspeed  and check in with us from time to time.  And we thank you for your service to us and our country.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 19 2008 at 7:48am
Originally posted by Mary08 Mary08 wrote:

me too :)  
 
So I'm wondering when this blockade will happen and how close will we get and what will the reaction of the Iranians be?  Isn't this how Russia drove Georgia nuts?
They kept up the in your face stuff for a long time until Georgia attacked, then they were at the ready right there waiting to rush over into Georgia just as Pres. Saakashvili related.


see next post
Medclinicain
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 19 2008 at 7:53am
Originally posted by medclinician medclinician wrote:

Originally posted by Mary08 Mary08 wrote:

me too :)  
 
So I'm wondering when this blockade will happen and how close will we get and what will the reaction of the Iranians be?  Isn't this how Russia drove Georgia nuts?
They kept up the in your face stuff for a long time until Georgia attacked, then they were at the ready right there waiting to rush over into Georgia just as Pres. Saakashvili related.


You might notice a resounding snip in what little media attention this stirred and then silence. The invasion of Russia in Georgia had a huge effect in terms of taking attention off the Iran developing nuke crisis.

---- for those of you who caught a brief glimpse - that was "too hot to put up". Sorry. It basically goes into the extremely complex situation in Iran.

Medclinician
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down