U.S. is preparing a war with Iran

[kallipolis]

he only problem is that Europe does not have the will power nor the manpower to do something about it

The European Union states prefer to continue with the diplomatic route.

When the matter becomes so obvious that there is no other choice, then countries such as the UK and France will act.

This issue is not one of manpower levels for invasion and/or occupation purposes, rather the use of aircraft and/or cruise missiles. The UK and France have more than sufficient such assets to act with Israel, or independently.

 

[AsianDream]

he only problem is that Europe does not have the will power nor the manpower to do something about it

The European Union states prefer to continue with the diplomatic route.

When the matter becomes so obvious that there is no other choice, then countries such as the UK and France will act.

This issue is not one of manpower levels for invasion and/or occupation purposes, rather the use of aircraft and/or cruise missiles. The UK and France have more than sufficient such assets to act with Israel, or independently.

I hope that someone does do something about Iran - but I'm not hopeful.

In this case it's not just vague rumours of WMD - Iran really does have Uranium enrichment plants running - in hardened factories 100 feet underground.

Also they've never made any secret about what they'd use Nuclear weapons for - their leadership is publicly committed to "wiping Israel off the Map". In a few years they'll be able to do this for real.

I don't think the USA will act - but Israel probably has enough sense to do something - the only problem is that they will have to use nuclear weapons to damage the Iranian facilities.

Good luck to them - but when it happens it will probably lead to $12 a gallon gas prices in the USA for a while.

 

[kallipolis]

the only problem is that they will have to use nuclear weapons to damage the Iranian facilities.

Conventional weapons, will suffice.:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1593151.stm

 

[kallipolis]

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/24/bush-budget-iran/

McInerney said the U.S. has “a new massive ordnance penetrator that’s 30,000 pounds, that really penetrates … Ahmadinejad has nothing in Iran that we can’t penetrate.”

 

[falconfan]

We have 0 justification for any attack on Iran. We don't like their leader but he was elected fairly as far as I'm aware. I mean we have no more right to invade Ira than anyone does to invade us. This madness needs to stop.

 

[kallipolis]

I mean we have no more right to invade Ira than anyone does to invade us.

Who is planning to invade Iran?

We are discussing an air/missile campaign, in order to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons industry. This does not entail a land invasion of Iran.

 

[falconfan]

I mean we have no more right to invade Ira than anyone does to invade us.

Who is planning to invade Iran?

We are discussing an air/missile campaign, in order to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons industry. This does not entail a land invasion of Iran.

It's the same difference as far as justification. We have no justification to invade them and we certainly have no justification to bomb them for no apparent reason.

 

[falconfan]

And you've been privy to all of the intelligence on the matter?

So you're saying I should support the use of military force on the theory that there may be somewhere known by someone some condition that may or may not warrant it?? Really??????? Are we really using the trust the US government card knows what it's doing and would never step out of it's bounds for personal motives or just because they're batshit crazy card?? REALLY??????????????????

 

[AsianDream]

the only problem is that they will have to use nuclear weapons to damage the Iranian facilities.

Conventional weapons, will suffice.:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1593151.stm

In fact Conventional weapons won't suffice - As the link you posted said "Bunker Busting bombs can have an effect as deep as either 6 meters of concrete or 30 meters of Earth.

The Iranian facilities have around 40 meters of earth plus also 3 meters of concrete - comfortably beyond the reach of any current conventional weapons - and of any likely to be developed.

The power of conventional high explosives has not changed much since these were first invented and are limited by the laws of chemistry.

 

[AsianDream]

We have 0 justification for any attack on Iran. We don't like their leader but he was elected fairly as far as I'm aware. I mean we have no more right to invade Ira than anyone does to invade us. This madness needs to stop.

Hitler was elected fairly and democratically - he had the overwhelming support of most of the German people when he came to power.

The regime in Iran is fundamentally opposed to what it sees as "Western decadence" and it's failure to abide by Islamic Law.

Iran is a classic case of a nation both having an aggressive intention and seeking the means to carry this out

 

[falconfan]

Hitler was elected fairly and democratically - he had the overwhelming support of most of the German people when he came to power.

The regime in Iran is fundamentally opposed to what it sees as "Western decadence" and it's failure to abide by Islamic Law.

Iran is a classic case of a nation both having an aggressive intention and seeking the means to carry this out

Yeah Hitler was also committing a holocaust. Show me a holocaust and I'll certiantly agree with immediate use of military force.

 

[kallipolis]

In fact Conventional weapons won't suffice - As the link you posted said "Bunker Busting bombs can have an effect as deep as either 6 meters of concrete or 30 meters of Earth.

Apparently you overlooked my second citation.

I shall refresh your memory:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/24/bush-budget-iran/

In other words there has been much progress in the development of this weapon, since its original usage during the 1990's.

A sample:

The B-2 bomber and MOPs are reportedly choice weapons for strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. In January, the BBC reported that the administration had drawn up plans for “long range B2 stealth bombers” to “drop ‘bunker-busting‘ bombs” in an effort to penetrate, for example, the Natanz enrichment facility in Iran.

The MOP has been in development for several years. After its completion, a U.S. military officer proudly described the destructive power of the bunker buster, specifically saying it could be used against Iran:

The U.S. has a 14-ton super bomb more destructive than the vacuum bomb just tested by Russia, a U.S. general said Wednesday.

The statement was made by retired Lt. General McInerney, chairman of the Iran Policy Committee, and former Assistant Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force.

McInerney said the U.S. has “a new massive ordnance penetrator that’s 30,000 pounds, that really penetrates … Ahmadinejad has nothing in Iran that we can’t penetrate.”

 

[AsianDream]

In fact Conventional weapons won't suffice - As the link you posted said "Bunker Busting bombs can have an effect as deep as either 6 meters of concrete or 30 meters of Earth.

Apparently you overlooked my second citation.

I shall refresh your memory:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/24/bush-budget-iran/

In other words there has been much progress in the development of this weapon, since its original usage during the 1990's.

A sample:

The B-2 bomber and MOPs are reportedly choice weapons for strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. In January, the BBC reported that the administration had drawn up plans for “long range B2 stealth bombers” to “drop ‘bunker-busting‘ bombs” in an effort to penetrate, for example, the Natanz enrichment facility in Iran.

The MOP has been in development for several years. After its completion, a U.S. military officer proudly described the destructive power of the bunker buster, specifically saying it could be used against Iran:

The U.S. has a 14-ton super bomb more destructive than the vacuum bomb just tested by Russia, a U.S. general said Wednesday.

The statement was made by retired Lt. General McInerney, chairman of the Iran Policy Committee, and former Assistant Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force.

McInerney said the U.S. has “a new massive ordnance penetrator that’s 30,000 pounds, that really penetrates … Ahmadinejad has nothing in Iran that we can’t penetrate.”

This is a technology battle - but it's one the defender will always win.

Maybe the Iranians do need to move their Uranium enrichment plants a bit deeper. It does cost a bit more to dig 1000 meters underground - rather than 30 - but not very much more - just a deeper entrance shaft - many mines are deeper than this already.

No doubt the Iranians will already have evaluated the risks to their facilities and taken appropriate measures.

One obvious fact is that you don't bury a "peaceful" nuclear power program deep underground - there's not much terrorist threat to Iran - they already finance most Islamic terrorist groups - so they're not going to "bite the hand that feeds them".

If the Iranians are spending big money on getting a nuclear weapons capability - it's probably because they think this will be useful for them.

What is a real joke is that the USA went to war in Iraq on vague hints of a WMD capability - while Iran is totally open about what it's doing - not just a "maybe" WMD capability but for real. It's hardly a "secret project" - these guys will have atomic bombs - for real - and very soon.

 

[kallipolis]

This is a technology battle - but it's one the defender will always win.

Your opinion, is noted.

What is a real joke is that the USA went to war in Iraq on vague hints of a WMD capability - while Iran is totally open about what it's doing - not just a "maybe" WMD capability but for real. It's hardly a "secret project" - these guys will have atomic bombs - for real - and very soon.

The Government of Iran has continued to inform the world that its nuclear power industry, is for the generation of energy only. The Iranian Government insists that it is not developing a nuclear weapons capability.

 

[Centexfarmer]

So what are we discussing here?

A planned tactical strike against Iran before Bush leaves office, and the funding that Congress just gave him to further "covert actions," or how we'll be greeted as liberators?

 

[kallipolis]

So what are we discussing here?

Sabre rattling. Middle Eastern peoples are only impressed (persuaded in to serious negotiation), when the odds are gigantically stacked against them.

The Israelis are becoming nervous.

Iranian "insiders" continue to keep The West informed on the progress of Iran's nuclear "power industry."

A successful strike of Iranian nuclear industry targets (situated in remote locations) could be executed by the Israeli Air Force, without the direct involvement of the United States. The United States would predictably supply satellite harnessed "intelligence." The United States might be involved in a more covert manner i.e. supplying aircraft (with Israeli colours) and/or pilots, in support of the Israeli effort.

 

[opinterph]

The Center for Strategic and International Studies published a draft report in March 2007 that may be of interest to some readers.

Israeli and US Strikes on Iran: A Speculative Analysis

(link opens in PDF format)​

 

[kallipolis]

I wonder if this report was tailor made for Iranian consumption.

Misinformation and disinformation, are valuable weapons.

 

[AsianDream]

The Center for Strategic and International Studies published a draft report in March 2007 that may be of interest to some readers.

Israeli and US Strikes on Iran: A Speculative Analysis

(link opens in PDF format)​

A very interesting report.

I think this analysis does rule out the option of a "Surgical Strike" against the Iranian nuclear facilities using conventional weapons.

The most powerful conventional "Bunker Buster" discussed has a penetration depth of around 60 meters (200 feet).

Asuming that the reports of Iranian underground facilities are correct - then the cost of tunnelling these at a depth of over 300 meters (1000 feet) is not much more that of building them at 30 meters (100 feet). The big cost is undergound tunnelling at all - so it doesn't make sense to do this at a shallow depth which would still leave you vulnerable.

 

[LaloGS]

I mean we have no more right to invade Ira than anyone does to invade us.

Who is planning to invade Iran?

We are discussing an air/missile campaign, in order to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons industry. This does not entail a land invasion of Iran.

Nit picking Kali. You know if missiles are launched there will be follow up with troops on the ground. An injured Iran is sitting on too much oil to leave it to chance. Get real about the reasons behind this concern over the middle east in general.

One word: OIL