"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin
Posted on 01/07/2006 9:41:37 AM PST by DoctorZIn
"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin
Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!
"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”
If Iran attacks Basra he will have the UK to contend with. I don't think they will do that.
I wonder if even a nuke going off over U.S. troops, on U.S.or Israeli soil would be get the libs to support a real war on all terrorists....
Iranian reinforcements opposite Basra would not be used to attack Basra, but to reinforce Iraqi Shia if they rise up in support of Iran in a future confrontation between Iran and Israel/USA.
It may not get support from Libs, but it will sure get suport from Americans.
And This American, for sure.
Note to the Bush Admin:
Go get Dingy Harry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Murtha, Sheehan, Durbin, et al and take them to Gitmo where they will be held as hostile..for the duration. After the dust settles, then we can straighten all this out....we don't need enemies within helping the terrorists.
Sorry, but IMHO this report brings up nothing but questions:
IF Iran has in fact had ex-SovBloc nukes (plus, one must assume, replacements/service/training as a paying customer) since 1991, why devote all the treasure and effort in establishment of their own weapons program with all of the burdens of publicity, outrage and potential adverse action that program has brought to their door?
Why not take all that cash and spend it on delivery systems, keep your mouth firmly shut until you simply announce a competence rather than indulge in strident threats that accomplish nothing but alert even the most catatonic of your adversaries?
Why, for that matter, spend anything at all since you have but to provide a few of those nukes to your terrorist clients and allow THEM to be your delivery system?
Between all the restructure and consolidation of power under the secular side of Iran's government and this apparent parallel movement among religious leadership, I think that all the statements about nukes, Isreal, the US and Europe are no more than a fandance to cover the power grab AND the last dash to get enough functional nukes to support the whole facade.
If somebody has a stick in their hand, they do not need to hold a press conference before they use it to hit you in the head.
I'm sorry to say that it seems that "Alan Peters" is spinning more than usual. Maybe the rpm is higher than is advisable by the Surgeon General.
LMAO!
"Alan Peter's" arguments about 1991 nukes in Iranian hands doesn't make sense, for reasons noted by others. But what remains a fact on the ground is Ahmadinejad's escalation of rhetoric, very public rhetoric. There is no leader of any country that draws such attention to himself without a reason. And the part of Peter's report that is most compelling, if true, is that which deals with recent Iranian troop movements. Add to that all the contingencies surrounding Sharon's problems, and Condi canceling her long-scheduled trip to Asia, and I would say - Something is in the air that wasn't there 3 months or so ago, and that something sounds more and more ominous.
BTTT!
You're making an important point. Ahmadinejad is indeed simply mouthing the sentiment all around him, and that he has been believing for decades. But now he is a leader of a major Middle Eastern country, and this changes everything. Now this ugly sentiment is playing out, and being repeated over and over, on a world stage. So the world - beginning with Israel - cannot simply avert its eyes in disgust, including the Europeans. When Europeans take notice, their knee-jerk appeasement notwithstanding, then you know a loudspeaker has entered the calculation. The phrase "Never Again" means something, and the Israeli leadership knows exactly what it means. Ahmadinejad is purposefully pulling that chain, and he also knows the consequences - and yet he is doing it anyway, and no one is stopping him from doing it. This is new.
I wonder if even a nuke going off over U.S. troops, on U.S.or Israeli soil would be get the libs to support a real war on all terrorists....
_________________________
Certainly not!!! After all, it is perfectly clear that all of this is BUSH'S FAULT!
I predict that the use of atomic weapon by terrorist forces will result in the immediate demand by the Democrats for impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney. The response by the Republicans will be to censor the Democratic leadership.
This is going to get very, very ugly. The Democrats have sealed their fate. They are no longer capable of representing any responsible segment of the American public.
Not very prophetic, Amos. Any severe attack on the U.S. will initiate a huge backlash against the Dems, and even the MSM will finally abandon them. Bushies have little to fear in the future: With no attacks, they look better and better; with an attack, all the vicious-stupid Dem banter will look not impeachable but, worse, treasonous. The only wild card I see is if the attack is found conclusively to have originated from a border-crossing to our South. Then I think the public will demand a sea-change of both Reps and Dems - and the winner will be Giuliani.
You can say that the Islamic regime has been like this since 1979 but his rhetoric has been a bit unusual
Re: Iranian Alert - January 7, 2005 - Special Must Read Report - Why Is Iran Seeking A Crisis Now?
From FARS | 01/07/2006 1:31:17 PM PST replied
You do have a tendency to laugh from the wrong end of your body. And from your posts, claim a knowledge and expertise of matters you don't actually have. Or try to do a survey of whether the USA will attack Iran? Who asked you to do that? Get real.
For those who question the credibility of Alan Peters report, I think you might find it interesting to note that I have received nothing but praise from the leading experts on Iran for having posted his article earlier on my website.
These same experts have confirmed many of the essential elements of the report and therefor your "personal attacks" on Mr. Peters are to me a sign of a lack of an ability to argue the facts of the case.
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.