Joined: May 27, 2007 Posts: 1203 Location: The Post Peak Oil Historian
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 12:59 pm Post subject: Re: British fear US is beating the drum for Iran strikes
Exclusive: Iran, Syria, Lebanon on military alert over US Gulf movements and Israel’s home defense drill
April 6, 2008, 5:36 PM (GMT+02:00)
In the last two weeks, Russian military and intelligence officials have been leaking claims of intensified American military movements around Iranian shores.
Saturday, US defense secretary Robert Gates turned up in Oman, the site of big American air bases, for talks with Sultan Qaboos. He then flew straight back to Washington. While Gates insisted to correspondents aboard his plane that the US is committed to a diplomatic solution for Iran’s covert nuclear program, the surpise visit struck sparks in the already fraught regional atmosphere, particularly as it followed on the heels of US Vice President Dick Cheney’s talks in Oman two weeks ago.
1. US is preparing to attack the Iranian military installations linked to subversion in Iraq. The operation will widen out into strikes on the Islamic Republic’s suspect nuclear sites.
2. Israel will use the chance for a concurrent attack on Syria.
3. Israel will attack Hizballah’s strongholds in Lebanon.
4. A broad, coordinated US-Israeli offensive will be mounted against Iran, Syria and Hizballah.
Iran and Syria view Israel’s four-day home defense exercise against missile attack, conventional or non-conventional, beginning Sunday, as setting the stage for these attacks.
Both believe Washington and Jerusalem are in close military step. Neither is reassured by soothing statements from prime minister Ehud Olmert and defense minister Barak that Israel does not seek violent confrontation - especially when the US administration is withholding all comment. Hence the high state of preparedness ordered by the jittery governments in Tehran, Damascus and Beirut.
link _________________ In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
- George Orwell
Joined: Sep 24, 2007 Posts: 2584 Location: third from the sun
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 9:11 pm Post subject: Re: British fear US is beating the drum for Iran strikes
Cid_Yama wrote:
In the last two weeks, Russian military and intelligence officials have been leaking claims of intensified American military movements around Iranian shores.
Now that's a reliable source of information. _________________ only the paranoid survive
Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 2:17 am Post subject: Re: British fear US is beating the drum for Iran strikes
steam_cannon wrote:
Windmills wrote:
steam_cannon wrote:
Quote:
General David Petraeus
"The idea that America can't fight a war on two fronts is wrong,
there can be airstrikes and other moves," he said.
Technically I would say it's a battle on three fronts, since we are still in Afghanistan.
Uh huh. Perhaps Gen. Betrayus should march an army into Russia in the middle of winter, too.
???
General Betray Us? Invading Russia? Is this a Bush/Nazi joke or camouflaged sarcasm?
Uhh...
If you remember World War II or Napoleon's ill fated winter campaign, then you would realize how stupid it is to attempt to invade Russia in winter (aka "land war in Asia"). I believe that Windmills is attempting to draw parallel with that idiotic move.
Invading Iran right now, with its mountainous terrain, higher population, and a (somewhat) better military than Iraq...while already stretched to the limit in Iraq and Afghanistan...is stupid. Logically unsound. Like invading Russia in winter.
Oh, and Betray Us is a pun of Petraeus. Is English not your first language? Because Windmills intent seemed quite obvious to me.
Joined: May 27, 2007 Posts: 1203 Location: The Post Peak Oil Historian
Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 4:30 pm Post subject: Re: British fear US is beating the drum for Iran strikes
Paul Craig Roberts is an economist who served as an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration earning fame as the "Father of Reaganomics".
Just as the world could not believe Hitler's next horror and thus was always unprepared, the Iranians despite all the evidence cannot believe that even the Great Satan would gratuitously attack Iran based on nothing but lies about non-existent nuclear weapons.
Iran's only chance would be to strike before the US delivers the first blow. Instead of using its missiles to take out the Saudi oil fields and to sink the US aircraft carriers, instead of closing the Strait of Hormuz, instead of arming the Iraqi Shi'ites and moving them to insurgency, Iran is perched like a sitting duck in denial even as the US and its Iraqi puppet Maliki move to eliminate Al Sadr's Iraqi Shi'ite militia in order to avoid supply disruptions and a Shi'ite rebellion in Iraq when the US attack on Iran comes.
When even Reagan Republicans start sounding a warning, you know there's a problem. _________________ In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
- George Orwell
Joined: Oct 15, 2004 Posts: 2089 Location: Arkansas
Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 4:46 pm Post subject: Re: British fear US is beating the drum for Iran strikes
This is from the old Iran thread:
seahorse wrote:
We haven't assessed the likelihood of an Iranian "pre-emptive" strike in the Persian Gulf. Its not that unplausible to me.
First, all nations, not Just "Bush Doctrine" would recognize the inherent right to strike pre-emptively if there was an imminent threat of attack. So, its not so implausible to consider an Iranian first strike when, the Israelis and US are clearly contemplating a first strike against them. Rommel wrote a book "Attack" assessing lessons learned from his experiences in the First World War, and that was, always attack first, regardless if you are outnumbered. This is in fact the motto of the British SAS "He who dares, wins." Napoleon even said, when surrounded, attack. Attacking when outnumbered and outgunned follows the military principle of doing the unexpected. By attacking first, even if outnumbered and outgunned, you may create an unforeseen advantage.
In the Iranian case, if they determine that attack by the Americans and or Israelis is imminent, it would be foolish not to attack. The US and Israel are considering a preemptive attack (to include possible use of nukes) against Iran to prevent Iran from attaining a nuclear weapon. So, if the US and Israel are contemplating a first strike, possibly with nukes, why wouldn't the Iranians consider the same? It is widely reported that the US is contemplating 1000+ targets within the first 48 hours, and viewing Statcom's webpage, and those who have written about Stratcom, its purpose is to eliminate an enemy's military and economic infrastructure. Thus, if the Iranians hope to have any chance to respond militarily, they would have to fire everything they have first, otherwise, the odds of anything surviving to shoot back after the first 24-48 hours is not good.
The Iranians could seriously consider a "Persian Gulf IED", a floating "trojan horse" to take out a carrier (remember the US sub that just got rammed by a Japanese tanker?).
Whether a first strike would do any damage militarily, who knows. However, they can't afford to give the US/Israel the first strike, bc the odds of being able to retaliate militarily go down significantly.
Looking at the current situation from the Iranian perspective, it would be the same as Iranians having troops deployed in both Canada and Mexico, with an armada of ships, including carriers, subs etc sailing in the GOM and off the coast of D.C. and New York, publicly stating a military strike against the US was on the table and that it would include over a 1000 targets hit in the US in the first 48 hours. If we believed that such an Iranian strike was imminent, it would be foolish not to do whatever could be done militarily to strike first to avoid some of the damage and possibly create an advantage - however, if an attack is imminent, one has no choice. A sunburn launched has more chance to hit than a sunburn destroyed by Specops or a first strike by your opponent.
The Iranian plan would ultimately have to try to achieve two strategic goals, (1) increasing the price of oil for the west and ruining their economies by causing oil prices to rise - thus a phyrric victor for Stratcom; (2) possibly stopping or hampering resupply of the US forces in Iraq by blocking the Persian Gulf shipping channel, and thus, causing that army to succumb like the German army at Stalingrad or Napoleon's army in Egypt. They would probably consider blowing some NG lines to Western Europe.
If nothing else, if you are going to hit me, I'm going to hit you first, just to get a hit in.
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
