Hmmmmmm
 

Mind Prep

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


What war with Iran would look like

POSTED: 10:46 a.m. EDT, September 17, 2006

(Time.comhttp://i.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1....on.offsite.gif) -- The first message was routine enough: a "Prepare to Deploy Order" sent through Naval communications channels to a submarine, an Aegis-class cruiser, two minesweepers and two minehunters.
The orders didn't actually command the ships out of port; they just said be ready to move by October 1.
A deployment of minesweepers to the east coast of Iran would seem to suggest that a much discussed, but until now largely theoretical, prospect has become real: that the U.S. may be preparing for war with Iran.
The Bush team, led by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, has done more diplomatic spadework on Iran than on any other project in its 5 1/2 years in office.
For more than 18 months, Rice has kept the administration's hard-line faction at bay while leading a coalition, which includes four other members of the U.N. Security Council, that is trying to force Tehran to halt its nuclear ambitions.
But superpowers don't always get to choose their enemies or the timing of their confrontations. The fact that all sides would risk losing so much in armed conflict doesn't mean they won't stumble into one anyway.
So what would it look like? Interviews with dozens of experts and government officials in Washington, Tehran and elsewhere in the Middle East paint a sobering picture: Military action against Iran's nuclear facilities would have a decent chance of succeeding, but at a staggering cost.
And therein lies the excruciating calculus facing the U.S. and its allies: Is the cost of confronting Iran greater than the dangers of living with a nuclear Iran? And can anything short of war persuade Tehran's fundamentalist regime to give up its dangerous game?
No one is talking about a ground invasion of Iran. Too many U.S. troops are tied down elsewhere to make it possible, and besides, it isn't necessary. If the U.S. goal is simply to stunt Iran's nuclear program, it can be done better and more safely by air.
An attack limited to Iran's nuclear facilities would nonetheless require a massive campaign. Experts say that Iran has between 18 and 30 nuclear-related facilities. The sites are dispersed around the country -- some in the open, some cloaked in the guise of conventional factories, some buried deep underground.
A U.S. strike would have a lasting impression on Iran's rulers. U.S. officials believe that a campaign of several days could set back Iran's nuclear program by two to three years. Hit hard enough, some believe, Iranians might develop second thoughts about their government's designs as a regional nuclear power.
Some U.S. foes of Iran's regime believe that the crisis of legitimacy that the ruling clerics would face in the wake of a U.S. attack could trigger their downfall, though others are convinced it would unite the population with the government in anti-American rage.
Given the chaos that a war might unleash, what options does the world have to avoid it? One approach would be for the U.S. to accept Iran as a nuclear power and learn to live with an Iranian bomb, focusing its efforts on deterrence rather than pre-emption.
The risk is that a nuclear-armed Iran would use its regional primacy to become the dominant foreign power in Iraq, threaten Israel and make it harder for Washington to exert its will in the region. And it could provoke Sunni countries in the region, like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, to start nuclear programs of their own to contain rising Shiite power.
Those equally unappetizing prospects -- war or a new arms race in the Middle East -- explain why the White House is kicking up its efforts to resolve the Iran problem before it gets that far. Washington is doing everything it can to make Iran think twice about its ongoing game of stonewall. Everyone has been careful -- for now -- to stick to Rice's diplomatic emphasis.
"Nobody is considering a military option at this point," says an administration official. "We're trying to prevent a situation in which the president finds himself having to decide between a nuclear-armed Iran or going to war. The best hope of avoiding that dilemma is hard-nosed diplomacy, one that has serious consequences."

the world can't let iran become a nuclear power....period. they would get weapons into terrorists hands and there two targets that come to mind- israel and the usa. irans nuclear program WILL be neutralized, not by diplomacy, but by the sword.

Yes indeed, the world cannot permit Iran to gain nuclear power. It's a disaster waiting to happpen. Nukes in terrosists hands is not going to be pretty, and we thought 9/11 was shocking?? Just imagine what they would do with nukes :(

I will support ANY action taken to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear power.

You guys ever stop and think a lot of this simply has to do with maintaining the below market price of oil for US consumption?

If Iran is nuclear we will loose much of our ability to influnce the region as we have done for the past century.

I think the notion that Iran will give terrorists a nuke is primarily a scare tactic. Don't think for a second that MAD isn't still alive and kicking.

The real danger would be a localized Sunni/Shia war that could cripple global energy.

-spence

i'm a bottom line thinker- radical islams- like those running iran have an agenda that has nothing to do with global economy. their bottom line is the destruction of israel and the usa, and the spreading of fundimental islam thru the sword- as is stated in their holy book. these people have no fear of consequenses- death? = 72 virgins in paradise. no need to overthink the situation. over and out.

next in line
 

the squeeze play on the persion gulf....to not let any oil out.

chavez is backing their play so our 14% of imported oil from
venezula will be systematically shut off too for any military actions
against Iran.

Iran's agenda has everything to do with the global economy. They are waging a political war of rhetoric to manipulate energy markets and reap the short term benefits. Long term they are establishing even deeper economic ties with Russia and China to provide protection in the UN from US led actions.

Only about 20% of Iranians are really considered fundamentalists. Hell, I'd wager that Terahan has better cell coverage than Tiverton!

This is about global politics and the good old grab for economic power and leadership, and we are being outplayed.

-spence

spence- what do you think their bottom line is?

:

:kewl:


Spot on.

Iranians are terrorists? Because they're Muslims we label them terrorists? Because they want to have nuclear weapons like India, and Isreal, that makes them terrorists... Iran doesn't produce many bad folks... Andre Agassi is of Iranian decent, and I bet you thought he was Greek eh? There's quite a lot of Iranians playing Professional poker so when we see them on TV do we call them terrorists?

Personally, I think American views of what and who terrorism/terrorist are is getting a bit radical. The wake of 9/11~~~~

Surprisingly she didn't blow up the Space shuttle... :conf: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wir...C-RSSFeeds0312

Maybe because Iran is a HUGE supporter of Terrosist groups, and the Iranian president has vowed to wipe Isreal off the map.

Yet you see no reason why Iran should'nt have some nukes? :err:

H'mm last time I looked oil was traded on many markets, none of which are government controlled.

Wait a minute. I thought you guys said George Bush and the GOP manipulated energy markets?

Now that is just plumb crazy!

Wait a minute... Do you have information to back up your comment there Skippy? My point is that, if your rivaling neighbors have big guns, then what are you to do? So do you blame Iran for wanting those guns? Isreal can blow up any 1 country in the middle east if it chooses to. And if that happens what defense would its neighboring countries have? (Other than Pakistan) So Iran's developement of its nuclear program is a way to even the score. Iran, remember hates Iraq... I'm sure they somewhat support the "Falling of Saddam" movement. So you can't measure the plan we have for Iran with what we're doing in Iraq.

Just ignore Stormfish, he thinks Bush carried out 9/11 also. He's just a nut.

Plumb crazy... But point is that American Society cannot handle trauma well. When Pearl Harbor got bombed, it was a war against Iraq but a war against Asians. Hence, the deportation of Chinese citizens at that time. After the Vietnam war, the same applies... Every Asian citizen was seen as Vietnamese and the enemy. But was it a way against Vietnam or a war against Communism? Today, is it a war against Muslim Arabs or a war against Radical Islam/Terrorism/Jihad/Koran. The reason for what we are fighting for seems to have diluted.
Bottomline, American Society cannot handle traumatic events impose upon itself. I bet Europeans view 'US' as being cry babies.

The info that Iran supports Terroism, and has stated it wants to wipe Israel off the map is old news. Feel free to educate yourself and look into it, you'll see that its a known fact, and nothing new. You really didnt know this about Iran? Pick up a newspaper and watch the news once in awhile! Iran is bad news my friend. And want them to get nukes!? :conf:

Too much name calling going on here

See above. Knock off the name calling.

Wonderful, friekin wonderful...........

Name calling quote deleted.

You respond because you're always trying to prove that you are somewhat intelligent. I don't bash America... I don't agree with how the Bush Administration is handling the situation. Think Skippy... Why do you think there are terrorism? Do these Muslims just one day hate America and decides to kill people? And are what we are doing going to end or esculate things?

uhhhh.... they're KNOWN supporters or terrorist organizatioons! they openly call for the destruction of israel. you ever listen to their president? yeeeeoowwww- whatcha smokin' and with whom?

But the US has used heavy influence to help keep prices below what the market will bear because our GDP has depended on it.

Now that our manufacturing oil consumption has shifted to China somewhat, you can see why they are building all those aircraft carriers :)

-spence

They feel they're positioned to counter historical Western influence and are exploiting our situation in an effort to bolster their regional position.

I think the accusation of Iran as a sponsor needs to be put in context. Certainly they support Hezbollah, but this is a group that's not even on the EU list of terror organizations.

But beyond that what do we really know?

It's stated as fact that they have a military nuke program (and I'd wager they do) but we really don't have any real evidence that proves this.

You do know that in Afghanistan, pre "Axis of Evil" Iran was actually helping the United States.

The same people who are beating the drum of war with Iran are those that got everything wrong in Iraq. Think about that...

Now I'm not saying Iran isn't a threat, and a nuclear armed Iran wouldn't shift the balance of power in the region. The only thing in all our interests is non-proliferation.

But your "bottom line" statement above just doesn't make any sense to me. It's just a jumble of rhetorical snippits in a broad sweeping generalization. It's precisely this kind of thinking that paints issues as black or white and dwells only on worst case scenarios.

And as such there can be no political reasoning, just bluster and militant positioning, which is exactly what we are doing. Iran knows we have no military solution short of all out war. They are throwing Bush's "cowboy" rhetoric right back in his face to great affect.

-spence

hezbolla IS a terrorist organization. they sucide bomb civilian populace, so no matter what the eu says- that's terrorism in action. bottom lines are what makes the world go round- not puesdo intellectual notions. not promoting war, just a little pre- emptive activity to prevent those clowns from dragging the world deeper into their visions and goals.

No military solution short of all out war? What about thirty days of around the clock bombing?

thats right
 

but give her time.....she probably brought mentho's
and will drink a mountain dew shook up
and then blast a cosmonauts eye out
there by grabbing the space station for islam.:hf1:

Look at all you Radical S-Bers` :jester: Crazy as bed bugs :cheers: