Another War!

[Gipper]

Many have speculated that Israel will launch an attack on Iran soon. According to the Times editorial today, the attack likely leads to a larger war involving much of the Middle East.

Now how will BO handle this situation? In my humble opinion, I don't think he has a clue.

Imagine what the radical left will do if we get involved, which I don't think can be avoided. No doubt some modern day Rosenberg will commit traitorous actions leading to many American deaths.

But time is running out. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave the Obama White House a year to make progress with Iran, and instead, the situation has grown worse. Israel repeatedly has stated that it will not tolerate a nuclear Iran, and the Jewish state is receiving significant behind-the-scenes encouragement from Sunni Arab states wary of the possibility of Iranian regional hegemony.

Preparation for possible conflict is ongoing. This week, a biological-warfare-preparedness exercise is being held in Tel Aviv and other cities. Starting late next month, gas masks will begin to be distributed to every Israeli citizen; similar measures were undertaken before the first and second Gulf wars.

On Sunday, Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), said in a clear signal to Tehran that it would be "irresponsible if CENTCOM were not to have been thinking about the various 'what ifs' and to make plans for a whole variety of different contingencies" with respect to Iran. The next day, it was reported that America was doubling the value of emergency military equipment stockpiled in Israel, which would be available for Israeli use in the event of an emergency. Perhaps this is a signal to Iran as well.

The coming conflict will not be an overnight air strike followed by bellicose language, like the Israeli attack on the Syrian nuclear site in September 2007. Disrupting Iran's nuclear program will require Israel to undertake a sustained campaign. Iran will launch reprisal attacks through its proxies in Gaza and Lebanon, encourage Syria to respond, foment chaos in Iraq and Afghanistan and potentially order terror attacks on Western targets.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ewsletter_must-read-stories-today_top_stories

 

[BigRob]

Many have speculated that Israel will launch an attack on Iran soon. According to the Times editorial today, the attack likely leads to a larger war involving much of the Middle East.

Now how will BO handle this situation? In my humble opinion, I don't think he has a clue.

Imagine what the radical left will do if we get involved, which I don't think can be avoided. No doubt some modern day Rosenberg will commit traitorous actions leading to many American deaths.

Frankly, and I am hardly on the Left, an invasion of Iran is the last thing we need to get involved in right now.

 

[Gipper]

Frankly, and I am hardly on the Left, an invasion of Iran is the last thing we need to get involved in right now.

Who said anything about invading Iran other than you?

 

[BigRob]

Who said anything about invading Iran other than you?

From your story...

"The coming conflict will not be an overnight air strike followed by bellicose language, like the Israeli attack on the Syrian nuclear site in September 2007. Disrupting Iran's nuclear program will require Israel to undertake a sustained campaign. Iran will launch reprisal attacks through its proxies in Gaza and Lebanon, encourage Syria to respond, foment chaos in Iraq and Afghanistan and potentially order terror attacks on Western targets. "

If you think a "sustained campaign" and proxy wars all over the Middle East, including against the US in Iraq and Afghanistan, is going to result in something outside of an invasion to bring back stability, then your imagination is better than mine.

 

[The Scotsman]

Here's something to chew over chaps.......

The U.S. Army will double the value of emergency military equipment it stockpiles on Israeli soil, and Israel will be allowed to use the U.S. ordnance in the event of a military emergency, according to a report in Monday’s issue of the U.S. weekly Defense News.

The report, written by Barbara Opall-Rome, the magazine’s Israel correspondent, said that an agreement reached between Washington and Jerusalem last month will bring the value of the military gear to $800 million.

This is the final phase of a process that began over a year ago to determine the type and amount of U.S. weapons and ammunition to be stored in Israel, part of an overarching American effort to stockpile weapons in areas in which its army may need to operate while allowing American allies to make use of the ordnance in emergencies.

The agreement was signed by Brig. Gen. Ofer Wolf, who heads the Israel Defense Forces’ technology and logistics branch, and Rear Adm. Andy Brown, the logistics director of U.S. Army European Command.

Stockpiled weapons are avialble to the IDF...

 

[Gipper]

From your story...

"The coming conflict will not be an overnight air strike followed by bellicose language, like the Israeli attack on the Syrian nuclear site in September 2007. Disrupting Iran's nuclear program will require Israel to undertake a sustained campaign. Iran will launch reprisal attacks through its proxies in Gaza and Lebanon, encourage Syria to respond, foment chaos in Iraq and Afghanistan and potentially order terror attacks on Western targets. "

If you think a "sustained campaign" and proxy wars all over the Middle East, including against the US in Iraq and Afghanistan, is going to result in something outside of an invasion to bring back stability, then your imagination is better than mine.

You may be right. But, the article did not claim the US would invade Iran nor did I.

If the region explodes in a broader war, what do we do? You seem to think we will have to invade Iran to control them. I don't think so.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Frankly, and I am hardly on the Left, an invasion of Iran is the last thing we need to get involved in right now.

thats because your a bleeding heart Hippie, you white flag waving surrender monkey. Why do you hate America?

Iran would be the Death of the US for some time in terms of our military power, and our Economy. Also be a Green light for Korea to do as it wanted...They are no so dumb as to think we would pull for 4 wars at once. They could basically attack the south and we would most likely have to pull out. The other choice would be leave some troops to fight and die, but have no real option to win.

Of course a war with Iran also means Iran attacks Iraq as well where our troops are...then its a nice fun Sunni Shia war, with US in the middle.

We can't deal with more right now...unless it was something like little man Reagan....I mean we could try to feel more manly and invade Grenada again for practice and act like we have a a big .....

 

[pocketfullofshells]

You may be right. But, the article did not claim the US would invade Iran nor did I.

If the region explodes in a broader war, what do we do? You seem to think we will have to invade Iran to control them. I don't think so.

what makes you possibly think that a attack by Israel on Iran...does not lead to a bigger war? You think Iran will say, hey that was not nice, time out?

 

[Gipper]

Never said it wouldn't lead to a bigger war. Please keep up will you.

In fact, my dear progressive friend I believe it will lead to a broader war as the editorial stated and why I posted it.

But, that does not necessarily mean WE will HAVE to invade Iran which is what BigRob is asserting.

When Israel hits Iran, do we have to start a war with Iran? I think not, but avoiding it could be difficult.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Never said it wouldn't lead to a bigger war. Please keep up will you.

In fact, my dear progressive friend I believe it will lead to a broader war as the editorial stated and why I posted it.

But, that does not necessarily mean WE will HAVE to invade Iran which is what BigRob is asserting.

When Israel hits Iran, do we have to start a war with Iran? I think not, but avoiding it could be difficult.

no you just attacked what the left may do ,if we did.,,,but why would that make anyone think that means for some reason you would say we should?

Maybe you hate Israel and will watch them fight alone becuse you hate Jews....right? Since that will be the rights attack on the left

 

[Gipper]

no you just attacked what the left may do ,if we did.,,,but why would that make anyone think that means for some reason you would say we should?

Maybe you hate Israel and will watch them fight alone becuse you hate Jews....right? Since that will be the rights attack on the left

Well dear pockets you finally got something right. The radical left does hate Israel. I hope you are not an anti-Semite too.

I am all for helping Israel, but I think they can defend themselves just fine. They have proved that several times now.

 

[groupthink]

deleting posts?

As and when required yes! its called Moderation!

THE SCOTSMAN

 

[BigRob]

You may be right. But, the article did not claim the US would invade Iran nor did I.

I just do not see how we can truly prevent an Iranian nuclear program short of full invasion.

You have to ask yourself too, if Iran gets a bomb, would they test it? I tend to think they would not. Given that our intel is so shoddy coming out of Iran, I really think we have no idea when they will be capable of producing a weapon.

If the region explodes in a broader war, what do we do? You seem to think we will have to invade Iran to control them. I don't think so.

Well, I suppose it really would depend on who was involved in the war, but we would have some other options outside of a full invasion.

However, I think any Israeli action is going to be viewed through the lens of "it had American approval" and we therefore will be blamed and retaliated against. If Iranian proxies, or the Iranian military itself, starts killing Americans, I think all bets are off.

 

[groupthink]

iran cannot have nuke energy?

or they wanna make nuke bombs and kill everyone??

did we save the incubator babies yet?
did we find the WMD's?

 

[BigRob]

iran cannot have nuke energy?

Iran has the right to a peaceful nuclear energy program under the NPT. However, multiple facilities that have come to light recently have no purpose outside of a military program, which would be banned under the NPT, and other UNSC Resolutions.

Additionally, there are numerous UNSC Resolutions that express call for the halt of uranium enrichment, so even enrichment for a peaceful program would be in violation of international law at this point.

or they wanna make nuke bombs and kill everyone??

did we save the incubator babies yet?
did we find the WMD's?

One bomb will of course hardly "kill everyone."

However, a nuclear Iran will set off a wave of proliferation throughout the Middle East, resulting in much more fissile material in the region that some rouge group might get their hands on. Additionally, to be frank, I would be more concerned about a Saudi nuclear weapon than an Iranian nuclear weapon, and rest assured, once Iran goes nuclear, Saudi Arabia will not be far behind.