Looks to me like all the oil produced by the arab nations and Iraq needs access to the Straits of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf. At the narrowest point if which Iran has claimed sovereignity of three islands, one of which is reportedly weaponised.
Posted on 01/14/2006 11:41:48 AM PST by wagglebee
The big difference lies in the difference between Russians and Muslim Persians, at east the their leaderships. Russians are well known for their love for and indulgence of their children and grandchildren. Muslim fundamentalists are known for sending their children out to blow themselves up, if they can just take a few infidels with them. Deterrence may not be applicable to the Angry Ayatollahs and Mad Mullahs. Only if you can convince them that their own person can be endangered do you stand a chance of deterring them, maybe not even then.
So what are WE doing while your scenario plays out???
You said it, there is no way to 'reason' with madmen.
C'mon, get real, GWB. China is going to veto that path anyway. TIime is running out!
Charles Krauthammer believes Israel will attack just to set Iran's program back five to ten years
Yes, I agree.
President Bush should simply paraphrase President Kennedy's speech during the Cuban missile crisis. Something like the following:
"Any missile launched from Iran against Israel or any other country will be regarded as a direct attack on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response on Iran."
We can not, under any circumstances, allow the Iranian lunatics to have nuclear bombs.
MAD only works with RATIONAL opponents. The Soviets were by comparison to Islam, incredibly rational.
Even the chinese understand that we can flatten them if they get that stupid. Islam just doesn't care.
Iran appears to be saying come on guys come get me. Who is first? USA or Israel?
That would turn half the world into another Iraq. Israel is seen in most places as a US puppett, the 51st state.
I put the timetable for Israeli action closer to March. Why? From the spring foreward the U.S. will be drawing down troops in Iraq, and why should Israel act when there are fewer and fewer boots on the ground? In addition, why act at the height of an American election? When Israel acts in Iran in March or so, this strengthens mightily the entire Republican congressional delegation, and puts entirely in perspective the largely manufactured Abramoff scandal.
My point is that if Israel is going to act anyway, why do so at any time that benefits the weeny-Dems? Time everything so that it helps muscular Reps. Again, timing is the issue, given that Israel decides to act regardless. If they fail to make that decision, then everything else falls apart (and we are back to pondering what the UNSC does).
Exactly!! Iran wants Israel to attack with conventional weapons first, then guess what folks, they will have all the reason they need to let one of their subs launch a nuke. Iranians are not stupid like Saddam Insane and I think they already have a Russian nuke. Thats what this posturing is all about.
I forsee a very bright glow over Mecca!
They can be deterred. It wasn't a coincidence that they released our Americans the day that Reagan took office.
How close do you want them to get? We said the same thing about North Korea until they came out and announced it.
People around here have been making remarks like that for years regarding Afghanistan, and Iraq. "Just turn the country into a parking lot."
It ain't gonna happen. Though the USA has the capability (obviously) we don't have the stomach to get nasty with the enemy. Harry was the last Prez who had the balls. But that was 60 years ago... Today, we build nice toys, but do not seem to want to use them except at air shows. And yes, I'm addicted to watching The Military Channel.
ahmadinejad is trying to induce a strike and what we are now in isn't so much a poker game as the old persian invented game of "shah mat" also known as chess. we and/or the israelis will strike, but only when our pieces are set in place. what is necessary for us to anticipate the moves that come after we strike.
i find it amazing that for the past fifteen years, in talking about nuclear weapon development in n.korea, iraq and iran, development is *always* "two or five years out". hogwash - that is to keep the sheep from getting upset.
i am worried about a coordinated, world wide move by our enemies, particularly the moves of the less sane, like chavez in venezuela. i do not think the chinese or russians would move directly against us, and if they engineer it right they would not have to... cleaning up the mess they have planned will cost a lot of our time and effort, and with the Democratic fifth column active here in the US, we will emerge weaker and more divided, at least, that is what i think their gameplan is.
how will it play out? good question. the next six months will be very interesting indeed. i'm buying up a lot of popcorn...and batteries.
Have N. Korea and Iran tested? I'm not even 100% sure N. Korea has nukes.
We really have little knowledge of what goes on in Iran and especially N. Korea.
Looks to me like all the oil produced by the arab nations and Iraq needs access to the Straits of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf. At the narrowest point if which Iran has claimed sovereignity of three islands, one of which is reportedly weaponised.
She's not too well informed is she? Maybe she should do some research and obtain facts before making stooopid comments. I'd bet there are hundreds of FReepers who could rattle off a thousand types of ordnance, equipment, and weapons we have to get the job done.
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.