I just want to say... "Screw you Iran"... and yes WE SHOULD HAVE turned that ship around when they were shaking their fists at our carrier as they were leaving.
Now that two carrier groups have gone back in, what happened to all the bluster, saber rattling and screaming?
I TOLD YOU SO.
They have neither attacked our forces nor have they blockaded the straits.
Select fighters being described as 'Soldiers of Imam Mahdi'
By Reza Kahlili
Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has held several secret meetings with his economic and military advisers in recent days to prepare for the possibility of war with the United States.
Sources report the preparations are to include the execution of those Iranians who oppose the regime. Khamenei has been heard to say that the coming of the last Islamic Messiah, the Shiites’ 12th Imam Mahdi, is near and that specific actions need to be taken to protect the Islamic regime for upcoming events.
Mahdi, according to Shiite belief, will reappear at the time of Armageddon.
Selected forces within the Revolutionary Guards and Basij reportedly have been trained under a task force called “Soldiers of Imam Mahdi” and they will bear the responsibility of security and protecting the regime against uprisings. Many in the Guards and Basij have been told that the 12th Imam is on earth, facilitated the victory of Hezbollah over Israel in the 2006 war and soon will announce publicly his presence after the needed environment is created.
According to SepahOnline, sources within the Vali’eh Amr, the revolutionary forces in charge of the supreme leader’s protection, report that Khamenei held several meetings in recent days at which the leader instructed his advisers to tighten the grip on anyone who opposes or might oppose the regime in case of war.
These actions include investigations of every person or group that was pro-regime but now hold opinions contrary to regime policies. Also being created is a list, to be presented to Khamenei, to decide the fate of any opponents.
It also was decided that those political prisoners who will not repent will be executed, the sources said.
This action also was taken by the founder of the Islamic regime in 1988, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
In the book, “A Time to Betray,” it is documented when Khomeini announced the campaign, he said, “If the person at any stage or at any time maintains his (or her) support for the opposing groups, the sentence is execution. Annihilate the enemies of Islam immediately.”
The fatwa led to the execution of thousands of innocent men and women of all ages in a very short period.
The list of actions by Khamenei includes investigation of private business owners. If records show that at any time in the past they have not supported the Islamic regime, their businesses and belongings could be confiscated.
Journalists, writers and publishers who are deemed to be against the regime would be arrested and punished. Even high religious authorities who do not fully support Khamenei will be put under surveillance and dealt with if they become outspoken about the direction of the country.
Several journalists already have been arrested in the past week. In a recent speech, Khamenei hinted of a warlike environment and warned those clerics who might doubt his direction of the country that their survival is tied to the survival of the Islamic regime. Many Iranians who resent the regime resent the religion it promotes, so even opposition clerics might not fare well should the regime fall.
The plan by the leader calls for total control of Tehran, the capital where the presence of the Basij and Hezbollah militias would be quite visible so that no one would dare to challenge the regime.
This news comes in light of the formation of the “Removal Committee,” which secretly would eliminate all deemed as opponents, even within the military and the government.
Khamenei’s extraordinary measures are based either on an understanding that war could be imminent or that the regime has decided to announce it has nuclear capability and is getting ready for a possible reaction from Israel or America.
Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, an influential cleric and a radical Twelver, previously had stated that Khamenei ascends to the sky every year to take direction from Imam Mahdi, and sources close to the cleric have disclosed that Khamenei has been ordered by Imam Mahdi to continue with the nuclear program despite worldwide objection as it will facilitate his coming.
Last March, a Iranian secret documentary, “The Coming Is Upon Us,” was revealed to depict Khamenei as the mythical figure who creates the environment for the reappearance of Mahdi by leading Iran to destroy Israel.
January 25th, 2012, 23:50
American Patriot
Re: Prepare Now for the Coming Middle East War
This friends is what happens when people believe in religious prophecy and "expect" even WANT it to come true.
January 25th, 2012, 23:53
American Patriot
Re: Prepare Now for the Coming Middle East War
When I was in Egypt... for several months, I heard the call to prayers every day.
Today, when I hear it, the sounds grate on my nerves and just make me want to grab a weapon and defend myself - against those making the damned screaming noises.
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/27/2012 11:54 -0500
In what is likely a long overdue move, Iran has finally decided to give Europe a harsh lesson in game theory. Instead of letting Euro-area politicians score brownie points at its expense by threatening to halt imports and cut off the Iranian economy, the Iranian government will instead propose a bill calling for an immediate halt to oil deliveries to Europe. The move, with most reports citing the Iranian news agency Mehr, has come about in response to the EU agreement to impose sanctions against Iran, which were announced earlier this week. And why not? After all if Europe is indeed serious, sooner or later Iran will be cut off but in the meantime experience significant policy uncertainty, which is precisely what the flipflops on the ground need. The one thing that Europe, however is forgetting, is that all that whopping 0.8 Mb/d in imports will simply find a new buyer.Quickly.
So with China, India and Russia already having bilateral agreements with Iran in place, we are confident that said buyer will have a contract signed, sealed and delivered within an hour of the proposed bill's passage.
Furthermore, as SocGen speculated, the fact that Europe will be even more bottlenecked in its crude supplies (good luck Saudi Arabia with that imaginary excess capacity), and which just may force the IEA to release some more of that strategic petroleum reserve (and thus give JPM some more free money on the replenishment arbitrage) will send Brent to $125-150 - something which Iran will be delighted by. That is of course unless some "experts" discover that Iran may or may not have a complete arsenal of shark with fricking nuclear warheads attached to their heads (despite what Paneta has already said) which gives the US the green light for a full blown incursion, which in turn will send oil over $200, and the world economy into a global coordinated re-depression.
"If this bill is passed, the government will be forced to stop selling oil to Europe before the actual implementation of their sanctions," said Emad Hosseini, spokesman for the Iranian parliament's energy commission, reportedly said. The bill is set to become law on Sunday.
The EU sanctions allow for oil deliveries from Iran until July 1. Any pre-empting of this timescale by Tehran could prove problematic for countries like Italy, Greece and Spain, who would need to urgently find new suppliers.
China, meanwhile, a major importer of Iranian oil, has also criticized the EU sanctions. The Xinhua news agency quoted the Chinese Foreign Ministry on Thursday as saying: "To blindly pressure and impose sanctions on Iran are not constructive approaches."
Many members of the EU are now heavily dependent on Iranian oil. Some 500,000 barrels arrive in Europe every day from Iran, with southern European countries consuming most of it. Greece is the most exposed, receiving a third of all its oil imports from Iran, but Italy too depends on Iran for 13 percent of its oil needs. If this source were to dry up abruptly, the economic conditions in the two struggling countries could become even worse.
Already on Wednesday, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned of the economic consequences of the EU's planned embargo. Stopping deliveries from the world's fifth largest producer could drive up the price of oil by 20 to 30 percent.
Perhaps instead of doing its best at crippling the world energy markets, and crushing the global economy, Europe should stick to bailing itself out, and other activities in which it has extensive experience.
Iran could halt its oil exports to Europe as early as next week.
A senior Iranian lawmaker says Majlis (parliament) will discuss a bill in the coming week which seeks to cut off Iran's oil exports to Europe.
Deputy head of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee Hossein Ebrahimi said on Friday that Iranian lawmakers would debate a “double-urgency” bill on Sunday which calls for the ban of oil exports to Europe as early as next week.
The move comes after EU foreign ministers reached an agreement in Brussels on Monday to impose sanctions on oil imports from Iran as of July 1. The sanctions involve an immediate ban on all new oil contracts with the Islamic Republic and freezing the assets of the Central Bank of Iran (CBI) within the EU.
The Majlis motion would deny Europe the six-month phase-in period that the bloc has considered to adjust and find alternative sources to Iran's crude.
The recent EU sanctions on Iranian oil are merely a “psychological warfare,” as the 27-member bloc is delaying the implementation of the embargoes under various pretexts, Ebrahimi added.
“Europe is uncertain about enforcing these sanctions and seeks to project [its own woes] and manipulate public opinion,” the lawmaker said.
The EU accounted for 18 percent of Iranian crude oil sales in the first half of 2011, according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), making it Iran's second biggest customer after China.
The EU sanctions came after US President Barack Obama signed into law fresh unilateral economic embargoes against the Central Bank of Iran on New Year's Eve in an apparent bid to punish foreign companies and banks that do business with the Iranian financial institution. The bill ultimately takes aim at Iran's oil revenue.
The United States, Israel and some of their allies accuse Tehran of pursuing military objectives in its nuclear program and have used this pretext to push for the imposition of four rounds of UN sanctions and a series of unilateral embargoes against the Islamic Republic.
Iran has refuted the allegations, arguing that as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, it is entitled to use nuclear technology for peaceful use.
January 27th, 2012, 17:50
American Patriot
Re: Prepare Now for the Coming Middle East War
Well, they didn't stop traffic in Hormuz, did they?
/chuckles
Now what? Europe won't do anything.
January 27th, 2012, 18:16
American Patriot
Re: Prepare Now for the Coming Middle East War
In signal to Israel and Iran, Obama delays war exercise
By Gareth Porter | Last updated: Jan 27, 2012 - 9:16:16 AM WASHINGTON (IPS/GIN) - The postponement of a massive joint U.S.-Israeli military exercise appears to be the culmination of a series of events that has impelled the Barack Obama administration to put more distance between the United States and aggressive Israeli policies toward Iran.
The exercise, called “Austere Challenge ‘12” and originally scheduled for April, was to have been a simulation of a joint U.S.-Israeli effort to identify, track and intercept incoming missiles by integrating sophisticated U.S. radar systems with the Israeli Arrow, Patriot and Iron Dome anti-missile defense systems.
U.S. participation in such an exercise, obviously geared to a scenario involving an Iranian retaliation against an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities, would have made the United States out to be a partner of Israel in any war that would follow an Israeli attack on Iran.
President Obama and U.S. military leaders apparently decided that the United States could not participate in such an exercise so long as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refused to give the administration any assurance that he will not attack Iran without prior approval from Washington.
The official explanation from both Israeli and U.S. officials about the delay was that both sides agreed on it. Both Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and Mark Regev, spokesman for Netanyahu, suggested that it was delayed to avoid further exacerbation of tensions in the Gulf.
The spokesman for the U.S. European Command, Capt. John Ross, and Pentagon spokesman John Kirby told Laura Rozen of Yahoo News Jan. 15 that the two sides had decided on the postponement to the second half of 2012 without offering any specific reason for it.
However, Ms. Rozen reported Jan. 16 that “several current and former American officials” had told her the previous day that the delay had been requested last month by Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak. One official suggested privately that there is concern that the alleged Barak request could be aimed at keeping Israel’s options open for a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the spring.
But it would make little sense for leaders Netanyahu and Barak to commit Israel to war with Iran before the shape of the U.S. presidential election campaign had become clear. And Mr. Barak would want to have knowledge gained from the joint exercise in tracking and intercepting Iranian missiles with the U.S. military before planning such a strike.
Moreover, the Israeli Air Force was still touting the planned maneuvers as recently as Jan. 12 and, according to Israeli media, was taken by surprise by the announcement.
The idea that the Israelis wanted the postponement appears to be a cover story to mask the political blow it represents to the Netanyahu government and to shield President Obama from Republican charges that he is not sufficiently supportive of Israel. Nevertheless, the signal sent by the delay to political leaders Netanyahu and Barak, reportedly the most aggressive advocates of a strike against Iran in Israel’s right-wing government, could hardly be lost on the two leaders.
President Obama may have conveyed the decision to Mr. Netanyahu during what is said to have been a lengthy telephone discussion between the two leaders the night of Jan. 12. Iran policy was one of the subjects Mr. Obama discussed with him, according to the White House press release on the conversation.
The decision to postpone the exercise may have been timed to provide a strong signal to Mr. Netanyahu in advance of a visit to Israel by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey. Gen. Dempsey reportedly expressed grave concern at a meeting with Mr. Obama last fall about the possibility that Israel intended to carry out a unilateral Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities without consulting with Washington in advance.
Mr. Obama has been quoted as responding that he had “no say” in Israel’s policy, much to Gen. Dempsey’s dismay.
The coincidence of the announced delay with Mr. Dempsey’s mission thus suggests that the new military chief may inform his Israeli counterpart that any U.S. participation in a joint exercise like “Austere Challenge ‘12” is contingent on Israel ending its implicit threat to launch an attack on Iran at a time of its own choosing.
This apparent rift between the two countries comes in the wake of a series of moves by Israel and its supporters here that appeared aimed at ratcheting up tensions between the U.S. and Iran.
In November and December, U.S. neoconservatives aligned with Mr. Netanyahu’s Likud Party and what is sometimes called the Israel lobby engineered legislation that forced on the Obama administration a unilateral sanctions law aimed at dramatically reducing Iranian crude oil exports and “collapsing” its economy.
The administration’s reluctant embrace of sanctions against the oil sector and Iran’s Central Bank led in turn to an Iranian threat to retaliate by closing off the Strait of Hormuz. The risk of a naval incident suddenly exploding into actual military conflict suddenly loomed large.
Amid tensions already reaching dangerous heights, Iranian nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan was assassinated in Tehran in a bombing Jan. 11. Both Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and NSC spokesman Tommy Vietor immediately condemned the assassination and vehemently denied any U.S. involvement in that or any other violence inside Iran.
It was the first time the U.S. government had chosen to distance itself so dramatically from actions that mainstream media has generally treated as part of a joint U.S.-Israeli policy.
U.S. officials told Associated Press Jan 14 that Israel was considered responsible for the killing, and the London Times published a detailed account of what it said was an Israeli Mossad operation.
Mossad is believed to have assassinated at most a handful of Iranian nuclear scientists—not enough to slow down the Iranian program. And the timing of those operations has strongly suggested that the main aim has been to increase tensions with the United States and sabotage any possibility for agreement between Iran and the West on Iran’s nuclear program, if not actually provoke retaliation by Iran that could spark a wider conflict.
MUMBAI, India – India has joined China in saying it will not cut back on oil imports from Iran, despite stiff new U.S. and European sanctions designed to pressure Tehran over its nuclear program.
"It is not possible for India to take any decision to reduce the import from Iran drastically because, after all, the countries which can provide the requirement of the emerging economy, Iran is an important country amongst them," India's finance minister Pranab Mukherjee told reporters Sunday in Chicago.
India and China together accounted for 34 percent of Iran's oil exports from January to September of 2011 -- slightly more than Europe, according to International Energy Agency data.
The move is likely to be seen as a political victory in Iran, but it's unclear how Chinese and Indian companies will actually be able to pay for Iranian oil without running afoul of the sanctions, analysts said.
"It's a blow," said David Hartwell, senior Middle East analyst at IHS Jane's, adding that Iran may have discounted prices to keep the Chinese and Indians on their side. "If you have two major countries like India and China saying they will not abide by the sanctions, that's going to keep a vital line open for the Iranians to continue to sidestep the sanctions and get foreign capital."
He said India and China could just be trying to buy time to diversify their oil supplies and may steer away from Iran, especially if Saudi Arabia -- India's largest source of oil imports -- were to ramp up production and offer an attractively priced alternative.
The European Union last week imposed an oil embargo against Iran and froze the assets of its central bank. In December, the U.S. said it would bar financial institutions from the U.S. market if they do business with Iran's central bank.
India and China are ravenous energy consumers and rely heavily on imported oil. Iranian oil accounts for 9 percent of India's oil consumption and 6 percent of China's, according to the latest data from the IEA.
Iran exports 2.5 million barrels of oil per day, about 3 percent of world supplies. About 500,000 barrels go to Europe and most of the rest goes to China, India, Japan and South Korea.
China has called for negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. South Korea has been non-committal about the sanctions, and Japan is seeking an exemption, saying its Iranian oil imports have steadily declined and probably will continue to do so.
Kyodo News agency reported that senior Japanese and U.S. officials on Thursday will hold their second meeting on the sanctions this month.
"I believe it may not be easy to come to a conclusion on this matter in the upcoming discussions," Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba said.
Western sanctions could make it harder for India to pay for the oil it gets from Iran. Past sanctions have already delayed payments by Indian oil importers, who have had to scramble to find banks willing to handle transactions with Iran.
India's central bank governor D. Subbarao said last week that the current payment mechanism was "working fine," though India was also "exploring other options," which he declined to discuss.
Indian companies now reportedly route payments through Turkey's Turkiye Halk Bankasi AS, after EU pressure forced German-based Europaisch-Iranische Handelsbank AG to stop handling the payments last year.
IHS Jane's energy analyst said Turkey is unlikely to shut down that route immediately, noting that Turkish oil refiner Tupras also uses this payment mechanism.
"But this route remains susceptible to external pressure," she added by email. "India is now discussing rupee based payments and direct trade -- however that has a number of drawbacks for Iran given the trade imbalance and restrictions on use. China isn't publicly discussing options but I imagine other currency payments are also on the cards there."
The U.S. and its allies believe Iran is using oil revenues to develop nuclear weapons, but Tehran insists its nuclear program is purely for peaceful purposes.
In less than sixty minutes, the tiny nation of Iran could easily defeat two of the mightiest military powers in the world if they are allowed to engage in a first strike opportunity against both of those nations. This is not some far-fetched idea as U.S. and Israeli military planners are keenly aware of the implications of an Iranian attack which catches both nations off guard. The problem is not one of strategy or ability by either nation. The military units of both nations could easily defeat the Iranians in a nuclear or conventional war. However, Iran is not a conventional nation-state nor is the modern concept applicable to the confrontation which is coming.
IF Iran were to attack, it would be the ultimate one shot “use it or lose it” approach to all strategic, conventional, and non-conventional forces. Syria would not have any notification of the coming attack and the countries which were to be exposed to collateral damage, Iraq and Jordan, would receive only the warning provided by U.S. military forward air controllers with little choice but to stand down or engage a fellow Islamic nation in combat.
Iran’s first strike against Israel would be a combined effort designed to overwhelm the air defense systems of the IAF and create mass confusion. Odds are they would use every available missile launcher, and being conservative, we’ll say that’s 500 inside of Iran with an additional 1,100 plus inside of Lebanon, to fire an overwhelming volley at Israel. In addition, every available fighter aircraft capable of supersonic flight would be launched on a suicide mission trailing the initial missile attack. This initial volley would set the IAF and IDF on their heels along with creating massive panic in the United States defense establishment knowing the retaliatory strike package the tiny nation would launch. The defense systems might intercept 60% of all of the incoming if they were precise and of course, lucky as hell. The impacting conventional and non-conventional warheads would trigger a devastating response which would obliterate the entire nation of Iran however. That strike might be construed as a defeat for the “nation” of Iran but the attack would not end with just the Israel versus Iran aspect of the conflict.
Since the early 1980′s the Islamic Republic of Iran has been infiltrating the United States using a series of faux defectors, college students obtaining access through third party nations, and as highlighted by Fox News own Geraldo Rivera in July of 2002, via Mexico using the coyote network of smugglers. These infiltrators did not come to the United States to learn the historical aspects of American constitutional law nor our theories of engineering, although some did engage in education programs about nuclear physics, civil engineering, and advanced electronic technologies. This group of long time “students” and infiltrators are not here to assist or help our nation.
At the moment the Iranian attack is announced in the West, these sleeper cells will activate with a series of per-determined targets. Imagine the following happening while news reports of Israeli cities being hit:
- An eighty year old woman at a bus stop being beheaded with a machete by a crazy man screaming “God is Great” in Farsi then attacking dozens of other people standing by the area with his blade and a handgun.
- A six year old little girl is standing in front of a store in a shopping mall and is suddenly shot in the back of the head by a man who then shoots dozens of others after the horror of the initial shock wears off and action is taken by authorities against him.
- A man screaming “God is Great” in Farsi uses his car to run a bus load of children off of a large hill causing it to roll over and burst into flames.
- A suicide bomber wearing an explosive vest kills the driver and hijacks a gasoline tanker which he drives into a crowded grocery store and detonates.
Crazy talk? No, not really, this is the worst case scenario for U.S. security apparatus. I submit to my readers to consider the following idea. The U.S. has designed a patchwork security system which could handle one, two, maybe even a dozen attacks simultaneously. But if over one thousand were to occur, the best that could be expected before serious casualties and damage were inflicted is at best a forty to fifty percent interception rate. Thus if the Israelis were overwhelmed, the U.S. would be also. That sets the stage for the defeat of both nations, and sadly a period of darkness that will take the world decades to recover from.
Militarily, the nation of Iran would cease to exist. The Iranian people would suffer, at a minimum, a 70% loss rate. The impact would be equally as devastating for the nation of Lebanon which effectively be eradicated from existence along with many cities inside of Syria and much of the Arab world becoming uninhabitable should the Samson Option be triggered, which in this scenario it would. The United States would become a militarized state overnight. Europe would become a basket case. And the Arab street would galvanize behind the eradication of the Israeli state, the removal of the “great Satan” and the largest victory of Islam over the West since the last of the Crusaders. The Islamic world would sing the praise of the sacrifice of the Persian people plus those ancillary nations impacted by the Jewish retaliatory attack.
Meanwhile, there are those who would invoke the Biblical implications of such a conflict.
The United States would immediately be seen as a slumbering, bumbling, club footed nation unable to respond against an unseen enemy other than engaging in Wilsonian tactics of isolating Muslims in prison and at the same time destroying the Constitutional rights of American citizens who had nothing to do with the initial wave of attacks or fears of a secondary action. There are many who call this a delusional nightmare, but there is some historical logic behind this horrific scenario.
First, the Russians and Chinese would see an immediate strategic shift in power placing their nations in total control of the world from a strategic perspective. The Russians would instantly replace OPEC and the Middle Eastern oil cartel as the safest and most secure provider of crude oil in the world which would exceed two hundred dollars per barrel at that point in time. China would seize full control of Far Eastern affairs as the United States would be forced to contract its sphere of influence to the Western Hemisphere and no further at that point in time. The nations of South America would disengage in any meaningful strategic relationships with the U.S. thus driving them to Africa, Asia, and the newly Russian dominated European Union nations.
Second, and more importantly, the re-establishment of the greater Islamic caliphate would be completed almost immediately. The Persians would have zero influence over the creation or rule of the new Pan-Islamic territorial region. However, the consequences of this new geopolitical grouping will not be recognized by the world for at least a year. The now extinct nation of Iran would be honored and recognized for their act of martyrdom in the Islamic world thus giving the Shiites and the radical Islamic movement great credibility in the world, especially in fringe Islamic nations like Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and throughout Central Africa. Saudi Arabia and the associated Gulf states would immediately become subservient to the radicals as there would be no common enemy, aka, Israel, to unify their citizens against. Hence a demand for recognition of the re-established Caliphate would become the demand of the street.
Lastly, the destruction of freedom and economic disruption in the United States guarantees a period of renewed U.S. isolationism versus the globalist policies of the post World War II period. While that might well be viewed as a positive by many inside the American sphere and externally, the resulting darkness that would descend on the nations of the world will be a resumption of the Dark Ages of humanity instead of a new world order as designed by the bankers and politicians who envisioned “their” era of of domination after the establishment of the League of Nations. The nation-state of Iran will be defeated immediately, however the memory of the Islamic martyrs of Persia will be viewed as a victory in the centuries old war of Islam versus the West.
February 7th, 2012, 14:31
American Patriot
Re: Prepare Now for the Coming Middle East War
Nonsense, the Muslims are our friends, they deserve to practice their religion as they wish. We are bringing this on ourselves.
(God, that just sounds fucking stupid, HOW can people like Ron Paul or Bill Clinton actually AGREE on this and say shit like this?)
February 10th, 2012, 15:16
American Patriot
Re: Prepare Now for the Coming Middle East War
Quote:
Originally Posted by michael2
I'm with Ron Paul in that if we go to war we should do it CONSTITUTIONALLY, no more Goddamned Executive Orders, 'Police Actions', and United Nations Resolutions, etc....Iran isn't the threat to US that Imperial Japan or Nazi Germany was, and our President then-by no means a stickler for Constitutionalism-had enough respect to ask for a declaration of war after Pearl Harbor. He knew the reasons for war would bear scrutiny...Maybe that's the reason why it hasn't been done since?
Constitutionally, huh? We went to war "Constitutionally" with Iraq and Afghanistan. Somehow or another everyone seems to believe that it wasn't done "legally". Hate to say it Michael, but you're listening to the Left too much again.
IF (should be WHEN) we "go to war" with Iran it will be an air campaign.
They have a very large population - 75 million or so, and 20% of them are in the military.
They have mountains to the north protecting them, and a land invasion as proved by the Soviets is a BAD idea.
They have US and Russian aircraft, old, but useful - and roughly 75% of their air force is quite capable. However, WE (the USA) can mitigate those forces in no time flat and we should.
Look, Iran is a lying society. They ARE making a nuke, they ARE going to use it on Israel and sell them or give them to terrorists.
If we DO NOT do something about this, it will be the stupidest thing America ever did... sit on our asses and do NOTHING.
February 13th, 2012, 20:21
American Patriot
Re: Prepare Now for the Coming Middle East War
Quote:
Originally Posted by michael2
The stupidest thing we ever did was get involved in the first place. I don't care about other people's wars, or having American soldiers risking their lives to fight in other people's conflicts. If there is a clear national security threat TO US, NOT ISRAEL OR SAUDI ARABIA, then the President should do his job and ask Congress for a declaration of war against Iran, and make the case for war.
Otherwise, let these assholes fight it out amongst themselves...Sure they'd love to have us get involved and do the fighting and the dying, as long as they don't have to.
Michael,
what part of "Afghanistan" aren't you getting here? We "GOT INVOLVED" because the fuckers were training terrorists there, and they are the ones who trained the terrorists who took out the World Trade Center, attacked the Pentagon and were stopped by Americans on Flight 93.
It was NEVER about Israel, it was about the United States.
Iraq... Gulf War 1, under G. H. W. Bush.... 1991 wasn't about Israel, it was about Kuwait, NATO and a UN-Authorized invasion with a COALITION - NOT the USA alone.
The actual invasion began in 1990, around August (I remember because that's my birthday month) and it was by IRAQ into KUWAIT to take over the country. Saddam was at fault.
Israel wasn't involved in even a cursory manner in either of those two places.
Gulf War Two.... Weapons of Mass Destruction. Let's not forget that regardless of what the fucking Liberals (and Libertarians) say, there WERE WMD there, and that information IS documented ON THIS SITE as well as other places.
The Left can LIE all it likes and say Bush Lied etc, but the facts are the WMD were there, and MOST of them were moved out before, during and even AFTER the War.
That's a fact.
So, Afghanistan was a CLEAR threat to our safety here (WTC). Saddam was a CLEAR threat to Kuwait who ASKED for assistance from us, NATO, the UK, and the UN.
February 13th, 2012, 20:29
American Patriot
Re: Prepare Now for the Coming Middle East War
By the way, this thread isn't for debating whether we should or shouldn't "be involved" in something.
The very FACT that these fucks are working on nukes, they LIE (according to their OWN religion) to hide what they are doing, they are buying time, and IF they get a nuke, TERRORISTS will have them, again this has NOTHING to do with Israel.
If we do NOTHING we are culpable as the Iranians when a terrorist sets off a nuke in NYC.
U.S. Navy: Iran prepares suicide bomb boats in Gulf
By Warda Al-Jawahiry
MANAMA | Sun Feb 12, 2012 4:42pm EST
(Reuters) - Iran has built up its naval forces in the Gulf and prepared boats that could be used in suicide attacks, but the U.S. Navy can prevent it from blocking the Strait of Hormuz, the commander of U.S. naval forces in the region said on Sunday.
Iran has made a series of threats in recent weeks to disrupt shipping in the Gulf or strike U.S. forces in retaliation if its oil trade is shut down by sanctions, or if its disputed nuclear program comes under attack.
"They have increased the number of submarines ... they increased the number of fast attack craft," Vice Admiral Mark Fox told reporters. "Some of the small boats have been outfitted with a large warhead that could be used as a suicide explosive device. The Iranians have a large mine inventory."
"We have watched with interest their development of long range rockets and short, medium and long range ballistic missiles and of course ... the development of their nuclear program," Fox, who heads the U.S. Fifth Fleet, said at a briefing on the fleet's base in the Gulf state of Bahrain.
Iran now has 10 small submarines, he said.
Military experts say the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet patrolling the Gulf - which always has at least one giant supercarrier accompanied by scores of jets and a fleet of frigates and destroyers - is overwhelmingly more powerful than Iran's navy.
But ever since al Qaeda suicide bombers in a small boat killed 17 sailors on board the destroyer U.S.S. Cole in a port in Yemen in 1996, Washington has been wary of the vulnerability of its huge battleships to bomb attacks by small enemy craft.
Asked whether the U.S. Navy was prepared for an attack or other trouble in the Gulf, Fox said: "We are very vigilant, we have built a wide range of options to give the president and we are ready... What if it happened tonight? We are ready today."
Iranian officials have threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, the outlet to the Gulf through which nearly all of the Middle East's oil sails.
Asked if he took Iran's threats seriously, Fox Said: "Could they make like extremely difficult for us? Yes they could. If we did nothing and they were able to operate without being inhibited, yeah they could close it, but I can't see that we would ever be in that position."
He added that diplomacy should be given priority in resolving the tension.
"So when you hear discussion about all this overheated rhetoric from Iran we really believe that the best way to handle this is with diplomacy... I am absolutely convinced that is the way to go. It is our job to be prepared. We are vigilant."
Contacts between the U.S. Navy and Iranian craft in the Gulf region were routine, Fox said, referring to cases where his sailors helped Iranian ships that were in distress or threatened by pirates.
In addition to commanding the Fifth Fleet, Fox is also the commander of a multinational naval task force charged with ensuring Gulf shipping routes stay open. Although most of its firepower is American, the task force also includes other Western countries and the Gulf Arab states.
The European Union slapped an embargo on Iranian oil last month, which is due to kick in completely by July 1. The United States and EU have both imposed new sanctions on Iran's central bank which make it difficult for countries to pay Tehran for oil and for Iran to pay for the goods it imports.