Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iranian Alert - February 9, 2005 - "Tehran warns facilities indestructible"
Regime Change Iran ^ | 2/08/05 | freedom44

Posted on 02/08/2005 7:24:22 PM PST by freedom44


Top News Story


Iran warned the United States Tuesday that its nuclear sites cannot be destroyed by air or missile strikes, as Britain entered the fray by declaring that Tehran is a state sponsor of terrorism.

Top national security official Hassan Rowhani said on state television that a military strike would only push Iran's nuclear activities underground, and told Washington that the stand-off should be settled by dialogue.

"Our nuclear centers cannot be destroyed. Our nuclear technology comes from our scientists (and) we can transfer our nuclear workshops under mountains and carry out enrichment where no bomb or missile can be effective," said the cleric, adding he did not consider an attack as a "serious threat."

Rowhani, the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, insisted that Iran was "not looking for increased tensions with any country, even with the Americans."


A Daily Briefing of Major News Stories on Iran:


Iran: Political Prisoners Held with Violent Criminals

Rice: Iran Cannot Set Its Own Nuclear Terms

Iran's educated sleeping on the streets

Blair moves towards Bush's hard line on Iran

'Iran policy unchanged with new government'

Iran's dissident cleric, Eshkevari frees

'Attack on Iran would be human rights disaster'

German scholar: Americans lack Iran policy


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alqaedaandiran; alsadr; anniversary; armyofmahdi; axisofevil; axisofweasels; ayatollah; azadi; binladen; china; cleric; democracy; doyoufeelluckypunk; elbaradei; eu; freedom; freedomdeficit; germany; humanrights; iaea; insurgency; iran; iranianalert; iraq; irgc; iri; islam; islamicrepublic; japan; journalist; kazemi; khamenei; khatami; moqtadaalsadr; mullahs; muslims; persecution; persia; persian; politicalprisoners; protests; rafsanjani; regimechangeiran; revolutionaryguard; rumsfeld; russia; satellitetelephones; shiite; southasia; southwestasia; studentmovement; studentprotest; terrorism; terrorists; us; vevak; wot; zawahiri
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-82 next last

1 posted on 02/08/2005 7:24:22 PM PST by freedom44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: freedom44


They must have a Bagdad Bob... maybe Tehran Teddy?


2 posted on 02/08/2005 7:25:13 PM PST by Barney59 (Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Starting to sound a lot like their old neighbors.


3 posted on 02/08/2005 7:27:42 PM PST by cripplecreek (they call me tater.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44
"Top national security official Hassan Rowhani said on state television that a military strike would only push Iran's nuclear activities underground, and told Washington that the stand-off should be settled by dialogue."

Sounds like someone needs a change of underwear.

4 posted on 02/08/2005 7:28:49 PM PST by yooper (If you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Make the whole area radioactive and it won't matter if they are "underground". May the peace of the grave be upon them.


5 posted on 02/08/2005 7:30:01 PM PST by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44
Tehran warns facilities indestructible

Not what I'd call a safe bet.

6 posted on 02/08/2005 7:33:03 PM PST by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Me thinks the Iranians are going to be in for a nasty surprise very soon, courtesy of the IDF.


7 posted on 02/08/2005 7:34:44 PM PST by rdl6989
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44
Our nuclear centers cannot be destroyed. Our nuclear technology comes from our scientists (and) we can transfer our nuclear workshops under mountains and carry out enrichment where no bomb or missile can be effective

Against US forces, a bunker is the ABSOLUTE WORST PLACE TO BE.

8 posted on 02/08/2005 7:36:02 PM PST by Paul_Denton (The UN is UN-American! Get the UN out of the US and US out of the UN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek



Just for the sake of argument, let's say Iran's nuke sites are invulnerable to conventional weapons or clandestine attacks. What are our options? With Russia rearing its head again in the Middle East, does the President still have any military options he can risk without the conflict becoming global.


9 posted on 02/08/2005 7:36:11 PM PST by buckalfa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: buckalfa

It might be our only option to take that risk. We can risk the CHANCE of Russia entering the fray or allow the suicidal fanatics who rule Iran to get nukes and USE THEM.


10 posted on 02/08/2005 7:43:48 PM PST by Paul_Denton (The UN is UN-American! Get the UN out of the US and US out of the UN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paul_Denton

Well said !


11 posted on 02/08/2005 7:46:30 PM PST by buckalfa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: freedom44
Tehran warns facilities indestructible

...and what about Tehran itself?

12 posted on 02/08/2005 7:57:16 PM PST by TXnMA (Attention, ACLU: There is no constitutionally protected right to NOT be offended -- Shove It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Shiite head says..."Our nuclear centers cannot be destroyed. Our nuclear technology comes from our scientists (and) we can transfer our nuclear workshops under mountains and carry out enrichment where no bomb or missile can be effective,"

Hey mon...no problemo...we just fly the smart laser guided bunker buster bombs right in the front door.

If we cant get it...it means they cant get out.


13 posted on 02/08/2005 8:01:48 PM PST by Dat Mon (will work for clever tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Wan't it John Kerry who warned that we were developing bunker busting nukes? Hmmm.


14 posted on 02/08/2005 8:02:34 PM PST by Antoninus (In hoc sign, vinces )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Barney59

Scientists can tell a mullah anything and he'll believe it. This article proves that.


15 posted on 02/08/2005 8:04:40 PM PST by JustaCowgirl (You have seen that life is fragile, and evil is real, and courage triumphs -- George W Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; Ed_NYC; MonroeDNA; widgysoft; Springman; Timesink; dubyaismypresident; Grani; coug97; ...
"Indestructable?"

I don't think so...

Just damn.

If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...

16 posted on 02/08/2005 8:08:23 PM PST by mhking (Do not mess with dragons, for thou art crunchy & good with ketchup...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Israelis will take care of it.


17 posted on 02/08/2005 8:10:43 PM PST by Jedidah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44
Hmmm.... said the cleric, adding he did not consider an attack as a "serious threat." Maybe this cleric ought to talk to Saddam- he didn't think we were a threat either.
18 posted on 02/08/2005 8:24:45 PM PST by joedelta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

General Patton: If oceans and mountains can be overcome, anything built by man can be overcome.


19 posted on 02/08/2005 8:25:33 PM PST by embedded_rebel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999; nuconvert; sionnsar; AdmSmith; parisa; onyx; Pro-Bush; Valin; Pan_Yans Wife; seamole; ..

PING


20 posted on 02/08/2005 8:25:34 PM PST by F14 Pilot (Democracy is a process not a product)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dighton

Our nuclear centers cannot be destroyed.

Just wait till I send my kids over there.
Jack


21 posted on 02/08/2005 8:28:31 PM PST by btcusn (Giving up the right to arms is a mistake a free people get to make only once.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

RE: "Tehran warns facilities indestructible"

Let's find out.


22 posted on 02/08/2005 8:31:52 PM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44
Yeah, and the Titanic was unsinkable.
23 posted on 02/08/2005 8:37:45 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Barney59

Hootinany Hillary?


24 posted on 02/08/2005 8:40:49 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LachlanMinnesota


Fatima Hillary...

I can see how a burka would be nice...


25 posted on 02/08/2005 8:43:35 PM PST by Barney59 (Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mhking

Cver ops team to steal all spark plug wires thus disabling their delivery systems?


26 posted on 02/08/2005 8:53:00 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: LachlanMinnesota

"Cvert" = "Covert"


27 posted on 02/08/2005 8:53:54 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: buckalfa
does the President still have any military options he can risk without the conflict becoming global.

We can fight a proxy war. We've done it before in Nicaragua and Afghanistan.

28 posted on 02/08/2005 8:58:01 PM PST by Publius Scipio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Publius Scipio

Who wold be our proxies?


29 posted on 02/08/2005 8:59:10 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Indestructible?

So was the titanic.


30 posted on 02/08/2005 9:08:33 PM PST by Rca2000 (Helping to swing the swing state of Ohio to "W")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LachlanMinnesota

The Kurds come to mind.


31 posted on 02/08/2005 9:08:37 PM PST by Publius Scipio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Publius Scipio

Possibly, but they are busy frying other fish right now, what with the Turks uncomfortable with the Kurds (now that Saddam has stopped killing them).

What tribes exist in Iran? Any that would be helpful?


32 posted on 02/08/2005 9:14:43 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

LOL! And the Titanic was unsinkable. Have the Iranians not heard of our new bomb called, "Ice Berg" ????


33 posted on 02/08/2005 9:19:32 PM PST by F.J. Mitchell ( Dems! Show us your exit plans for Germany,Japan, Bosnia ,S. Korea and we'll show you ours for Iraq.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Bush Seeks Regime Change in Iran, But How?

By Christophe de Roquefeuil, Agence France-Presse

Feb. 9, 2005

WASHINGTON: US President George W. Bush has been actively behind “regime change” for Iran, but the route to that end has yet to be defined and the perils are great, US experts said.

Bush and his top aides have turned up the volume in their verbal attacks on the Islamic republic, calling it an “outpost of tyranny” and one of the principal backers of international terror, on its way to developing a nuclear weapon.

It was three years ago that Bush plotted Iran on an “axis of evil,” alongside North Korea and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

US officials shy away from pronouncing “regime change,” a controversial phrase on the international scene, but their intentions are clear, analysts said.

“I have no doubt the president and his closest advisers believe that the way both to solve the nuclear problem but also to deal with terrorism and improve the lives of the Iranian people is regime change,” said George Perkovich, an Iran specialist at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a Washington think tank.

“The question is how this regime change happens, and that’s the issue.

“It’s very important to distinguish between the idea of regime change and the means. And on the means I think there is a division in the administration, but that [Secretary of State Condoleezza] Rice made very clear that the means that they will pursue would be noncoer­cive and more political.”

Bush clearly encouraged opponents to the regime last week, during his annual State of the Union address before Congress: “To the Iranian people, I say tonight: As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you.”

Bush also said Iran “remains the world’s primary state sponsor of terror—pursuing nuclear weapons while depriving its people of the freedom they seek and deserve.”

Administration “hawks” have been promoting the idea that the regime is teetering and easy to topple.

“I think it’s much easier than in most of the other cases, because we know from the public opinion polls conducted by the mullahs themselves that more than 70 percent of people hate this regime and want it changed, they want to be free,” said Michael Ledeen, of the American Enterprise Institute, a neoconservative think tank.

How to get there is the subject of much Washington speculation.

Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have not ruled out the use of force, not only to potentially destroy Iran’s nuclear sites, but also to weaken the regime.

But they have also said they would give a chance for mediation by Britain, France and Germany to wean Iran away from its nuclear ambitions, while being skeptical about chances for a diplomatic success.

A group of legislators has introduced in the US House of Representatives a draft bill, the Iran Freedom Support Act, which would provide further political and financial support for so-called prodemocracy elements, especially opposition television and radio.

The Committee on the Present Danger, a group of Washington heavyweights, including former Republican secretary of state George Shultz and former Democratic presidential hopeful Joseph Lieber­man, have released a document saying, “We recommend a peaceful but forceful strategy to engage the Iranian people to remove the threat and establish a strong relationship, which is in both nations’ and the region’s interests.”

http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2005/feb/09/yehey/opinion/20050209opi7.html


34 posted on 02/08/2005 9:20:39 PM PST by nuconvert (No More Axis of Evil by Christmas ! TLR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LachlanMinnesota
The Kurds make them all uncomfortable. Turks, Syrians, and Iranians.

I don't know anything about their tribal relations, but there are certainly anti-Iranian Kurdish factions and anti-Syrian Kurdish factions etc.

35 posted on 02/08/2005 9:25:51 PM PST by Publius Scipio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Paul_Denton
"...we can transfer our nuclear workshops under mountains"
And what would happen to a mountain of, say, 5 cubic miles size on 25+MT detonation, either on the mountain surface or slightly under it?
36 posted on 02/08/2005 9:25:52 PM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill
Yeah, and the Titanic was unsinkable.

No no no, It's in the Titanic.

37 posted on 02/08/2005 9:26:16 PM PST by MaxMax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: rdl6989
Me thinks the Iranians are going to be in for a nasty surprise very soon, courtesy of the IDF.

I have a "relative" involved in US weaponry. He claims we know very little about the might of our current arms. He adds, "We can kill them 100 different ways."

38 posted on 02/08/2005 9:32:15 PM PST by ExtremeUnction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LachlanMinnesota
"Who wold be our proxies?"

Mujahedeen-e-Khalq

Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) is the largest and most militant group opposed to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Also known as the People’s Mujahedeen Organization of Iran, MEK is led by husband and wife Massoud and Maryam Rajavi. MEK was added to the U.S. State Department’s list of foreign terrorist groups in 1997 and to the European Union’s terrorist list in 2002 because its attacks have often killed civilians. Despite MEK’s violent tactics, the group’s strong stand against Iran—part of President Bush’s “axis of evil”—and pro-democratic image have won it support among some U.S. and European lawmakers.

Council on Foreign Relations

39 posted on 02/08/2005 9:32:58 PM PST by Daaave ( I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: buckalfa
It's not like there's only one site or that we even know where all the sites are. Iranians are strategic and paranoid. A terrible combination. It seems to me that behind the door stuff might be a better solution -- that and praying a stable democracy in Iraq tips the population... In other words, I have no clue, lots of fear, and some hope. We'll have to trust Bush -- he'll know the path.

Just for the sake of argument, let's say Iran's nuke sites are invulnerable to conventional weapons or clandestine attacks. What are our options? With Russia rearing its head again in the Middle East, does the President still have any military options he can risk without the conflict becoming global.

40 posted on 02/08/2005 9:33:26 PM PST by GOPJ (Jacksonville and the NFL did us proud. Thanks for a great show.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Daaave

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.


41 posted on 02/08/2005 9:35:35 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot

It's not like there's only one site or that we even know where all the sites are. Iranians are strategic and paranoid. A terrible combination in a war situation. It seems to me that behind the door stuff might be a better solution -- that and praying a stable democracy in Iraq tips the population... In other words, I have no clue, lots of fear, and some hope. We'll trust Bush -- he'll know the path.


42 posted on 02/08/2005 9:37:53 PM PST by GOPJ (Jacksonville and the NFL did us proud. Thanks for a great show.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Daaave

Would they permit elections if the Mullahs saunter off?


43 posted on 02/08/2005 9:39:10 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Daaave; LachlanMinnesota; nuconvert; AdmSmith; Reza2004

What if your friend is a Marxist-Islamist terrorist who has no popularity among Iranians?

Will you invest on such a friend?

They are a crazy, dangerous and insane stalinist group. That is the mistake the US is making to work with them, let alone empower them...

NO TO TERRORISM IN ITS ALL SHAPES & FACES


44 posted on 02/08/2005 9:48:23 PM PST by F14 Pilot (Democracy is a process not a product)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: LachlanMinnesota
I personally, don't like leftists. But, aide could be given to MEK if it were decided that certain Iranian sites should be destroyed by someone other than the U.S. and Israel.

I don't believe I would support MEK to overthrow the present Iranian regime. I would not trust leftists to hold elections. But they might hold them. Didn't the Sandanistas hold promised elections? And lost?

I would better trust MEK with sat photos and explosives.


45 posted on 02/08/2005 10:05:21 PM PST by Daaave ( I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: GSlob

Well Mt. St. Helens was equivilant to a 5 Megaton detonation 1100 feet below the surface.


46 posted on 02/08/2005 10:09:05 PM PST by Paul_Denton (The UN is UN-American! Get the UN out of the US and US out of the UN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
Please calm down. I was just answering a couple of questions. I was not advising the President to change his foreign policy.

It is not President Bush's policy to aide the MEK. In fact, it is just the opposite.

"During the 2003 Iraq war, U.S. forces cracked down on MEK’s bases in Iraq."

"During the Iraq war, U.S. troops disarmed MEK and posted guards at its bases

47 posted on 02/08/2005 10:24:10 PM PST by Daaave ( I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Daaave

I am fine, buddie! But it is just terrible to think of the US government being involved in cooperation with bunch of a$$ hole terrorists who are known as criminals worldwide.


48 posted on 02/08/2005 10:32:33 PM PST by F14 Pilot (Democracy is a process not a product)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Daaave

MEK has no such power to take out the Iraian nuke facilities.


49 posted on 02/08/2005 10:33:40 PM PST by F14 Pilot (Democracy is a process not a product)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: freedom44
Nothing in Iran is "indestructable."


50 posted on 02/08/2005 10:35:46 PM PST by familyop ("If you disrespect women you are not allowed to wear a mohawk" (Feminist Creed).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-82 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson