USA set to invade Iran?

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by Looger

that support never arrived and iran embarked on its own enrichment program.

Russia offered numorous times to build a light-water reactor -- those used for nuclear power -- but Iran insisted it does not want one of these. LWRs are extremely difficult to produce weapons-grade plutonium. Britain, France and Germany have also offered to do the same, but the conditions where just not met by Iran. To sit here and think all the nations envolved in this are so far in the wrong, yet Iran is just the innocent victim is just ridiculous and this is what you are inferring in your posts, Looger.

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle...a912c5e7a.html
http://www.cogeneration.net/light_water_reactor.htm

A logical person would put 2 and 2 together and realize a possible dangerous outcome, those who believe in global conspiracies, other idiotic theories and believe Iran is just trying to aquire Nuclear power -- given all that has been said -- would not.

I'm not prepared to give that crazy-loon of a leader and regime the benefit of the doubt and neither should any other sane person. I can only imagine what the citizens of Israel must be thinking.

Hitler outlined in his book Mein Kampf (My Struggle) all of the things he wanted to accomplish and do, yet nobody took him seriously. It was all there in front of everyone, yet the world sat back and chose appeasement because it did not want another struggle, another conflict, but in the end the latter prevailed. Are we going to sit back and give this regime the benefit of the doubt? A regime that has denied the holocaust, refuses to recognize Israel and a regime which has insisted on a handfull of occasions that it wants to "Wipe Israel off the map" as well as pursuing the most destructive weapon known to man? Are we to do the same thing we did in the 1930s, I'm certainly not.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

To sit here and think all the nations envolved in this are so far in the wrong, yet Iran is just the innocent victim is just ridiculous and this is what you are inferring in your posts, Looger.

hmmm, i could have sworn i posted a huge list of iran's previous violations with the IAEA, but here you say i think they're an innocent victim! do you make appearances at parties, what are your rates?

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

A logical person would put 2 and 2 together and realize a possible dangerous outcome, those who believe in global conspiracies, other idiotic theories and believe Iran is just trying to aquire Nuclear power -- given all that has been said -- would not.

iran isn't any more altruistic than anyone else in the mideast. they want control of their own destiny, and they've realized that if countries keep getting invaded that a good deterrant may be the ability to strike back.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

I'm not prepared to give that crazy-loon of a leader and regime the benefit of the doubt and neither should any other sane person. I can only imagine what the citizens of Israel must be thinking.

his rhetoric is ugly, his motives are extremely questionable, the look in his eyes is crazy. how this is different than israel, is the focus of our media.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Hitler outlined in his book Mein Kampf (My Struggle) all of the things he wanted to accomplish and do, yet nobody took him seriously. It was all there in front of everyone, yet the world sat back and chose appeasement because it did not want another struggle, another conflict, but in the end the latter prevailed. Are we going to sit back and give this regime the benefit of the doubt? A regime that has denied the holocaust, refuses to recognize Israel and a regime which has insisted on a handfull of occasions that it wants to "Wipe Israel off the map" as well as pursuing the most destructive weapon known to man? I'm certainly not.

so who exactly is invading and occupying countries?

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by Looger

hmmm, i could have sworn i posted a huge list of iran's previous violations with the IAEA, but here you say i think they're an innocent victim! do you make appearances at parties, what are your rates?

Well based on your first 2 posts in this thread - which where quite long - i didn't read the rest of the thread. In those first 2 posts, you where giving quite the opposite vibe:

Originally Posted by Looger

iran has fully complied with the IAEA inspections.

Implying they have.

Originally Posted by Looger

that support never arrived and iran embarked on its own enrichment program.

Implying the west never wanted to help, when i clearly stated Russia and 3 EU countries offered to build and help fund a LWR on 2 seperate occasions -- the post you completely ignored might i add.

Originally Posted by Looger

iran isn't any more altruistic than anyone else in the mideast. they want control of their own destiny, and they've realized that if countries keep getting invaded that a good deterrant may be the ability to strike back.

Looger, would you make up your mind? Stop the contradictions:

Originally Posted by Looger

the common iranians get behind these extremists only because everything they foam at the mouth aboot, seems to be coming true. the US really does look like it'll strike. israel really does look like it'll use nuclear bunker busters to go after a nonexistant nuclear weapons program.

What is it? A nonexistant nuclear program or aquiring the bomb for deterrent? You make absolutly no sense.

Originally Posted by Looger

his rhetoric is ugly, his motives are extremely questionable, the look in his eyes is crazy. how this is different than israel, is the focus of our media.

Your comparing Israel to Iran?

I'm no fan of Israel, thats for sure. I've been in my fair share of debates supporting the palestinians 100%. Nevertheless, we are talking about 1 nuclear weapon that could whipe out 70% of Israels population in 1 go. Israel has every right to be using threats.

This regime has denied the holocaust repeatedly, refuses to recognize Israel and a regime which has insisted on a handfull of occasions that it wants to "Wipe Israel off the map" as well as pursuing the most destructive weapon known to man. After all that has been said, your prepared to give Iran the benefit of the doubt and say a bomb will simply be used as a Deterrent? That is simply ridiculous.

You are also implying the Iranian government is enjoying wide-spread support. I think your wrong here. I have several friends who have traveled back and forth to Iran, read Iranian blogs and have familes in Iran. Lots do not support the Ayatollah's or the current government. Iran is also the largest "Islamic State" that do not practice religion. Despite popular beliefe, a good chunk of Iranians aren't that religious - this hard-line religious stance has simply been foreced upon them since the 1979 relovution. During the elections, thousands of people where barred from voting as well as opposition political parties banned from campaigning.

The support for the current elite in power is not as inflated as the media likes to portray it, or how most believe. Iran is pretty modest from what i've heard, read and witnessed through my peers.

Originally Posted by Looger

iran can kill more sailors iin one day with their sunburn missiles than troops that iraqi insurgents have been able to kill in almost four years, no matter what numbers you use.

Your also giving the vibe that Iran has the ability to whipe out the US Navy in the gulf, or atleast inflict huge casualties on sailors based there - with a sunborn missile AKA Moskit?

The SS-N-22 or the SS-N-9 are outdated weapon systems built by the Soviet Union in the 1970s and can easily be handed by the numorous lines of defense the US Navy has at hand - which are much more to-date.

I can talk weapons systems with you all day, but quite frankly, i don't have the energy or desire because i know your antics. You will simply just turn logical thinking into a conspiracy debate and i don't have the time nor patients to deal with such ridiculous comments, so instead, i'll leave you with this:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ran/index.html
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ems/index.html

Do your own research and comparisons, most systems Iran has are outdated and useless in modern US-combat.

Originally Posted by Looger

is the US CENTCOM contemplating starting a conflict while thousands of its sailors / marines are in the crosshairs of these things? do they need a massive killoff of their own servicemen to justify nuking iran and maybe making their big push to seize their birthright?

Your the one clearly doing the "Fear Mongering".

[Looger]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Well based on your first 2 posts in this thread - which where quite long - i didn't read the rest of the thread. In those first 2 posts, you where giving quite the opposite vibe:

i've responded to points or questions people bring up. like right now.

you're assuming i'm some huge fan of iran, but i'm trying to bring some sanity and objectivity to people that are fed some real vicious lies and omissions aboot the whole situation.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Implying they have.

IAEA inspections are ongoing, but what i find most interesting is that iran is complying.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Implying the west never wanted to help, when i clearly stated Russia and 3 EU countries offered to build and help fund a LWR on 2 seperate occasions -- the post you completely ignored might i add.

didn't ignore it, i responded by saying that iran has aspirations of a bomb.

they're a bunch of sick religious nuts. they want what we deny them. they look east, they look west, they are scared to death of us.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Looger, would you make up your mind? Stop the contradictions:

the mideast has many contradictions, trying to look at it objectively brings up contradictions.

iran probably wants a bomb, but they don't have the ability currently. they do cooperate with inspections.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

What is it? A nonexistant nuclear program or aquiring the bomb for deterrent? You make absolutly no sense.

aspirations do not equal ability. as soon as people get airstruck because 'they hate us' then an ugly carte blanche seeps in, and the west is the biggest most powerful rogue set of nations, ever.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Your comparing Israel to Iran?

i'd like to try but until dimona submits to inspections there's not much point.

the primacy of one people over all others prevents real comparison.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

I'm no fan of Israel, thats for sure. I've been in my fair share of debates supporting the palestinians 100%. Nevertheless, we are talking about 1 nuclear weapon that could whipe out 70% of Israels population in 1 go. Israel has every right to be using threats.

yep, israel better realize that they cannot be at war forever. it's unwinnable. eventually a neighbour will become powerful.

well, unless your big brother pops in and takes them down once in awhile, and the conflict never, ever ends.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

This regime has denied the holocaust repeatedly, refuses to recognize Israel and a regime which has insisted on a handfull of occasions that it wants to "Wipe Israel off the map" as well as pursuing the most destructive weapon known to man. After all that has been said, your prepared to give Iran the benefit of the doubt and say a bomb will simply be used as a Deterrent? That is simply ridiculous.

it's interesting that the full quote of amedinajad included wiping israel off the map as the soviet union was, and where our 'translators' have put israel, he actually said 'the zionist regime'.

this holocaust denial is also an interesting accusation, i've heard interviews by people that were there (no not david duke) and it sounds like the tone of the conference wasn't as nuts as people seem to believe.

israel has total primacy because of the holocaust, which makes it an issue to the entire mideast.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

You are also implying the Iranian government is enjoying wide-spread support. I think your wrong here. I have several friends who have traveled back and forth to Iran, read Iranian blogs and have familes in Iran. Lots do not support the Ayatollah's or the current government. Iran is also the largest "Islamic State" that do not practice religion. Despite popular beliefe, a good chunk of Iranians aren't that religious - this hard-line religious stance has simply been foreced upon them since the 1979 relovution. During the elections, thousands of people where barred from voting as well as opposition political parties banned from campaigning.

iran's government i have claimed numerous times in this thread and others as being on the decline, wow.

but attacking them will not speed the eventual downfall of these idiots. atacking them will do the opposite.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

The support for the current elite in power is not as inflated as the media likes to portray it, or how most believe. Iran is pretty modest from what i've heard, read and witnessed through my peers.

jeez, did you even read the part i wrote aboot khatami and his reformist administration?

he even mused aboot recognizing israel and made several peace overtures to us.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Your also giving the vibe that Iran has the ability to whipe out the US Navy in the gulf, or atleast inflict huge casualties on sailors based there - with a sunborn missile AKA Moskit?

not with one, with dozens or hundreds. let's assume the americans are lucky and actually hit a few of the missiles incoming, or maybe a few of their inserted sappers or insurgents stop some of the truck launches. in 2005 russia sold reportedly hundreds of these things to iran.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

The SS-N-22 or the SS-N-9 are outdated weapon systems built by the Soviet Union in the 1970s and can easily be handed by the numorous lines of defense the US Navy has at hand - which are much more to-date.

yep, it's a 30 year old design. and nope, the US aegis and phalanx cannot handle it. tested in 1998. too fast for aegis, it's mach 2+ at 10 feet above the waves, and yes the phalanx hits it when it's going mach 4+ in its strike position but it doesn't happen to change a thing.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

I can talk weapons systems with you all day, but quite frankly, i don't have the energy or desire because i know your antics. You will simply just turn logical thinking into a conspiracy debate and i don't have the time nor patients to deal with such ridiculous comments, so instead, i'll leave you with this:

if you disagree you disagree but this kind of verbal diarrhea speaks for itself. well put sir.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Do your own research and comparisons, most systems Iran has are outdated and useless in modern US-combat.

yeah. how's that going again?

ask israel, they got an entire tank division wiped out in their latest invasion.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Your the one clearly doing the "Fear Mongering".

we stand at a crossroads.

more conflict or less.

attacking iran to strike their nuclear facilities will have the exact effect that the osiraq raid in iraq did: it STARTED their crash nuclear weapons program.

as long as iran feels threatened then thair aspirations are to continue to live. that means they want the ability in the future, at the very least, to produce weapons.

we have the time and the inspections to work with them and let their rotten leadership structure implode from the inside, or we can attack them and embolden what little support the people there give them.

our choice.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Looger

iran had been moving steadily away from extremism, mostly under redormer khatami, until the west invaded two of its immediate neighbours for oil interests and started supporting saddam's favourite terrorists, the MEK - still on washington's terror list by the way - inside their country, blowing crap up as we speak. seymour hirsch broke this story a long time ago.

eazyduzzit,

look here's a post of mine from the first page agreeing with you on iran and the unpopularity of the regime with the people.

i'm close to not responding to your posts, you keep throwing insults into your queries and it's quite sad.

clean up your act or i'll just ignore you.

seriously man, you're obviously a smart guy but you're got to realize that people have different points of view, and that's ok.

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by Looger

IAEA inspections are ongoing, but what i find most interesting is that iran is complying.

..

Originally Posted by Looger

hmmm, i could have sworn i posted a huge list of iran's previous violations with the IAEA...

Originally Posted by Looger

didn't ignore it, i responded by saying that iran has aspirations of a bomb.

they're a bunch of sick religious nuts. they want what we deny them. they look east, they look west, they are scared to death of us.

..

Originally Posted by Looger

israel really does look like it'll use nuclear bunker busters to go after a nonexistant nuclear weapons program.

Originally Posted by Looger

i'd like to try but until dimona submits to inspections there's not much point.

the primacy of one people over all others prevents real comparison.

But this is my point, you can't compare the two nations. You have just admitted it yourself -- "they are a bunch of sick religious nuts".

I don't know about you, but whether Israel has nuclear bombs or not is not the point, a nation of Irans record is what's really concerning. One can't really compare the likes of Britain or France having a bomb to the likes to Iran or N.Korea. There is just no accountability for the two latter states, wheres there is for the first. All i'm saying is Israel can be trusted which is far more than i can say for Iran.

Israel having the bomb does not give Iran the right, if anything, Israel has the RIGHT with all thats been said and done (Hezbollah proxy wars). If anything, the nuclear bomb is Israels deterrent, Iran has it's deterrent in population and military size. Israel would never touch Iran unless it was threatened - which could come in the next few years if Iran continues down this road.

Originally Posted by Looger

yep, israel better realize that they cannot be at war forever. it's unwinnable. eventually a neighbour will become powerful

Well i wouldn't go as far as saying that.

Muslims and Jews have never got along, ever. Since Israel was granted by the UN after WWII, it's been surrounded by people who don't want it to be there. Fact is, it's there and it's not going anywhere. Israel has a right to defend that and if that is by Nuclear means - given the shiere population of potential enemys that surrounds it - i don't think thats too much to ask.

Originally Posted by Looger

it's interesting that the full quote of amedinajad included wiping israel off the map as the soviet union was, and where our 'translators' have put israel, he actually said 'the zionist regime'.

So he used some fancy wording, we all know exacly what he means.

Originally Posted by Looger

this holocaust denial is also an interesting accusation, i've heard interviews by people that were there (no not david duke) and it sounds like the tone of the conference wasn't as nuts as people seem to believe.

I'm not really even talking about the conference, just all the sick and disgusting sentances to come out of that regime about Israel and the holocaust.

Originally Posted by Looger

but attacking them will not speed the eventual downfall of these idiots. atacking them will do the opposite.

Then what do you suggest? Your implying this is a walk in the park and not the matter of some nut jobs aquiring the most destructive weapon known to man.

I'm all for talks, negotiations and concessions but the fact is Iran is being defiant. The EU has offered numorous incentives, as have the Russians - who are supplying that country in the first place - if the Russians can't persuade the regime there i don't really think anyone can.

Time just isn't on our side and this is precisely what Iran is using. They are simply stalling all talks and trying to buy there program as much time as possible and it seems to be working quite well.

What is it going to take to wake people up? Iran has already showed it's all too keen on helping others fight Israel, it's only a matter of time before they can do it themselfs. Now nobody knows for sure what Irans asperations are, but like i have said, i'm not prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt given their record.

Originally Posted by Looger

not with one, with dozens or hundreds. let's assume the americans are lucky and actually hit a few of the missiles incoming, or maybe a few of their inserted sappers or insurgents stop some of the truck launches. in 2005 russia sold reportedly hundreds of these things to iran.

Originally Posted by Looger

yep, it's a 30 year old design. and nope, the US aegis and phalanx cannot handle it. tested in 1998. too fast for aegis, it's mach 2+ at 10 feet above the waves, and yes the phalanx hits it when it's going mach 4+ in its strike position but it doesn't happen to change a thing

Now your talking battle plans, and this is just so far out of your league, and mine.

If any of this would happen, do you not think all of this would be taken into consideration? Israel or even the United States knows of Irans capabilities more than anyone, they will more than likely know of capabilities that we don't. Fact is, any strike on Irans nuclear facilities would most definitely put all of Irans long range missile capabilities in US-Israel crosshairs. Israel and the United States have enough bombs to knock Iran back into the stone ages.

With that said, the SS-N-22 only has a range of approx 120km and thats not even the entire width of the gulf. The US could easily move there ships out of range or operate them from a different location. All missile launching capabilities would have to be on Irans coastline and that terrain is not suited for hiding weapons systems, US-Israel technology can easily pin point where these systems would be located. Missile systems located further in-land can be much more easily concealed but Iran dosen't posses the means of a knock out blow from that distance. If the sunborn is mounded on an aircraft, it's quite obvious that aircraft wouldn't be in the air too much longer after takeoff but i don't believe Iran purchased any ASMs(air-ship missiles) so there means are strictly from the ground.

The SS-N-22 also uses the "pop-up" maneauver to avoid the last-resort Phalanx guns but it's been proven this missile has a tendancy to malfunction in those final stages and the "pop-up" does not always work, allowing the Phalanx system to make contact. It also relies on radar to function and this is a very vunerable system because it can be easily taken out as radar systems tend to be relatively close to launch sites. But i'll admit, the Phalanx is hardily a threat to the sunburn if the system is executed flawlessly. Hell, the Phalanx system only has around 2-3 seconds to respond to this missile. Fact is, the missile will never get to be in the range of 2-3 seconds anyway.

The AIM-9 Sidewinder (air-toair) also has capabilities of striking the sunburn, only downside is it has to be fired from behind the target from a fighter jet. There is also a variant of this - the shipborn AIM-9.

Also the new AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles which is variant of the AIM-7 Sparrow have capabilities to destroy the SS-N-22 with it's "fire and forget" system, this missile travels at a whopping Mach 4 - far faster than the sunburn. This system also has the luxory of being able to fire multiple munitions at the target simutanously to avoid the possibility of a malfunction to increase the kill probability.

Of course as i have said, the best form of defense is offense and this is where the Sunburn is weakest, US navy ships can simply take them out before they are in range of the missile. When you look at the bigger picture, not just one US navy ship against a Sunburn but AWACS and satellites covering a fleet that has Harpoon (approx. 110-240kms) and Tomahawk missiles(1100kms), the Sunburn is still a serious threat but hardly one that will destroy the American Naval fleet in the Persian Gulf or inflict serious casualties.

Now don't get me wrong, the sunburn is definitely a threat IF USED PROPERLY but the US has systems at it's disposal or it could simply get out of the range of the missile which would render it completely ineffective. The whole idea of the sunburn being the most powerful anti-ship missile currently in service is just a myth. To think the US would put ships in range of missiles of that calibur is quite idiotic, especially when all of which can operate 100% functionally from a distance. Like I said before, with AWACS keeping an eye on an area covering 320kms around the fleet, fleet vessels and fleet aircraft armed with Harpoon missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles, these sunburn missiles may never even leave their launchers. What about US submarines? What about US air power?
Finally, take a look at a map, Iran is effectively encircled. The US has more options than simply sailing the 5th and 7th fleets up the Persian Gulf. (those currently in service in the region)

You also talk of "hundreds" or even "dozens" of SS-N-22s. Can i ask where you got this information from? To my knowloge, and according to globalsecurity Iran only posseses 16 sunburn missiles, nowhere near the "hundreds" range you claim.

Originally Posted by Looger

yeah. how's that going again?

Good and yourself?

Originally Posted by Looger

ask israel, they got an entire tank division wiped out in their latest invasion.

That was urban-ground fighting. Israel and the United States would be doing nothing of the sort.

Originally Posted by Looger

we have the time and the inspections

Time is not on our side.

Originally Posted by Looger

i'm close to not responding to your posts, you keep throwing insults into your queries and it's quite sad.

clean up your act or i'll just ignore you.

9/11 conspiracy theorists hold a special place in my heart.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

9/11 conspiracy theorists hold a special place in my heart.

you know, i was actually going to respond to your points (many of them very good) until i saw this.

good day to you sir.

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by Looger

you know, i was actually going to respond to your points (many of them very good) until i saw this.

good day to you sir.

Good, because you where wrong anyway...take the easy way out.

Western firepower > SS-N-22.

Good day.

[Looger]

...

the sunburn is unequaled by ANYTHING in the western arsenal.

it's not invincible but whenever the USN tests their defenses, they lose, and that's one missile, one target. wonder what happens if more are launched.

as to the range, well no kidding, stay out of it. problem is, the plan just may be a big killoff of US personnel to justify an escalation.

so whatever.

if you could actually get through a post without this kind of

Your implying this is a walk in the park and not the matter of some nut jobs aquiring the most destructive weapon known to man.

foaming at the mouth LYING crap, you'd maybe realize that my stance was that IF we hit their nuclear sites, THEN they will start a crash course for the weapon, exactly as iraq did.

nowhere did i say it'd be good if iran got the bomb.

i think bombing them, INCREASES the chances of them trying to get one.

[eazyduzzit]

Look Looger, i spent 6 years at CFB Cold Lake for the Canadian Forces and learned my fair share when it comes to missiles, guidance systems and the logistics around them. I also have a brother in the US:AF who served in the opening stages of the Iraqi war on the USS Harry S Truman flying the F-18 Hornet. My uncle is also a retired navy officer in the British fleet. This little debate on the inferiority of the SS-N-22 has come up numorous times but there is no doubt in my mind, those i have just mentioned or their superiors when it comes to Iran and the sunburn capabilities. The whole myth of it being un-stoppable is just ridiculous and generally tends to come from the mouths of people like you - amoung other ridiculous things.

Originally Posted by Looger

the sunburn is unequaled by ANYTHING in the western arsenal.

Look, you said this and i proved you wrong. Either reply to what i posted with facts and counter claims, or just bug off.

Originally Posted by Looger

it's not invincible but whenever the USN tests their defenses, they lose, and that's one missile, one target. wonder what happens if more are launched.

To my knowloge, it's only been tested a couple of times and all lines of defense/capabilities where not used. Not to mention, it was tested with advance US-Russian capabilities, the ones Iran lacks. There is a lot more to this missile system than simply aquiring the warhead it's self. Launchers, radar capabilities and many other aspects factor in. Iran has purchased this advance weapon, but without the advance launching means, better radar capabilities, means to protect and hide these weapons, as well as numorous other aspects when it comes to weapons systems, Iran just does not have the means to execute the same circumstances carried out in these tests. There is a big difference between executing a test under perfect conditions, as aposed to realistic ones in a battlefield.

Some of the systems i've mentioned where also not tested - for reasons unknown - but i tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the USNavy and imagine they know what they are doing -- instead of believing in bogus theories such as putting 15,000+ in lethal danger to further a "corporate war" .

The systems i have mentioned all have the capability to defend against the sunburn missiles if used correctly and in the right circumstances. Just as the SS-N-22 has the possibility to be a complete dud, if it's used wrong or malfunctions - which is it known to do as i have explained with the failure of the "pop-up" mechanism in my previous post.

Numorous systems have been tested over the years with the outcome being on the negative side, that dosen't mean the system is inferior. Look at the missile shield currently in development by the US - which comes to the top of my head without thinking -, it's had some setbacks but there is no doubt it has the ability and technological advancements to intercept missiles threatening west-coast US cities.

As i pointed out previously, you talk of "thousands" and "hundrends" of these missiles raining down on US ships, but the fact is, they have 16. 16 of which would probably not even leave their launch pads before cruise missiles disable them. Maybe it is a task for US systems to shoot down the sunburn but since you believe in the ridiculous idea that the US will simply allow Iran to strike it's ships and kill thousands of sailors, does it even matter what capabilities the US has...if it's going to let the ships get hit anyway? You are out-right ridiculous. Ab-so-lutly ridiculous.

SS-N-22's cannot function without radar and Iran does not have the means to guide these missiles any other way, nor does it have the advancements of long range radar capabilities. Meaning, all radar facilities will be close to the launch sites and the launch sites would be on the gulf coast. Hence, these missiles won't see the light of day if the radar it's self it taken out. Radars are in plain sight, it's not something you can burry under ground and expect to work.

Anyways, i'm just repeating myself here... literally.

Originally Posted by Looger

as to the range, well no kidding, stay out of it. problem is, the plan just may be a big killoff of US personnel to justify an escalation.

Originally Posted by Looger

if you could actually get through a post without this kind of

Your implying this is a walk in the park and not the matter of some nut jobs aquiring the most destructive weapon known to man.

foaming at the mouth LYING crap, you'd maybe realize that my stance was that IF we hit their nuclear sites, THEN they will start a crash course for the weapon, exactly as iraq did.

Wow, way to put things in a nutshell there buddy.

You see, i see Iran aquiring a nuclear bomb or any nuclear means as serious business and i treat it as such. While i'm talking about the "most destructive weapon known to man" which if Iran aquires, could lead to serious consequences, your boasting about global conspiracies, corporate wars and the possibility of the US Navy sacraficing the lives of thousands of sailors to further this "agenda" and all other ridiculous theories coming out of your mouth.

So really, in a nutshell, what i am saying is quite realistic and full of logic and what you are saying is what is really the " foaming at the mouth LYING crap"

Originally Posted by Looger

i think bombing them, INCREASES the chances of them trying to get one.

As for "crash course for the weapon" and the following^

News flash: they are already trying to aquire the weapon and nobody has even launched anything in Irans direction. With all the evidence reguarding Irans refusal of a LWR as well as numorous violations of the IAEA as well as restrictions placed on when and where inspections can be taken place, as well as it's refusal of several incentive packages offered by the EU - including helping Iran with Nuclear Power - which is quite clear they aren't really after - it would be quite nieve to think otherwise.

Your just that - nieve.

We're not talking about a few useless bombs, we are talking about the possible outcome of hundreds of thousands of lifes.

It's really hard to reply to your posts, because i never know what your stance is. One minute Iran is not trying to build the bomb, the next they are, then they aren't, then they will just try and aquire it when and if the US/Israel strike. Then they are complying with the IAEA, then they aren't. First it's a nuclear weapons program, next it's Israel going after a "non-existant nuclear weapons program"

Seriously,

Make up your god damn mind;

cheers.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Good debate Looger and Easy.....I enjoyed it.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

On the topic of whether the US will invade Iran, there is no way that they could commit additional resources without having North Korea 'delt' with. If they do commit to a 'boots on the ground' theatre with Iran Kimmie will probably become even more paranoid and also realize that the US is hogtied (in Iran). Hilarity ensues...

Perhaps the US could deal with Iran in a low-intensity war or by using a proxy, but I sincerely doubt it, not with the need to keep a heavy hand ready for the North Koreans and also not in the current political environment.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

On the topic of whether the US will invade Iran, there is no way that they could commit additional resources without having North Korea 'delt' with. If they do commit to a 'boots on the ground' theatre with Iran Kimmie will probably become even more paranoid and also realize that the US is hogtied (in Iran). Hilarity ensues...

Perhaps the US could deal with Iran in a low-intensity war or by using a proxy, but I sincerely doubt it, not with the need to keep a heavy hand ready for the North Koreans and also not in the current political environment.

It's not going to happen, period.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by HOZ

It's not going to happen, period.

agreed... anything else is anti-americanism and conspiracy theory.

Russia would never allow a US force in Iran. It would upset things far too much in the area surrounding Kazakhstan, uzbek etc which has historically been under Russian influence.

Not only that it really isnt possible at this time w/out major hardships suffered by the US population. Like many have pointed out before the resources just arent there. Look at the trouble in Iraq, and Iran is several times that size.

I really wish random bloggers would just give up on this point. I remember reading a story on indymedia (a site I formally respected) about how a nuclear joint invasion by Israel/US on Iran was immienent in the next month. This was about 9 months ago. http://www.indymedia.org/en/2006/03/834426.shtml

Surprise surprise it didnt happen.

When people bring up these dumb conspiracies they cant help sound like idiotic bigots. The kind of rationales are no different than those used by white supremicists, doomsday theorists, etc... and I really wish it would just stop.

[eazyduzzit]

Just to clarify:

My stance is that nobody will "invade" Iran, but if the diplomacy continues at the same pace as it is right now, somebody will strike the nuclear facilities. Whether that be a joint NATO mission, condoned by the UN, or either the United States or Israel doing it independently, it will be done, if diplomacy dosen't show some progress in the next year and a half.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Look, you said this and i proved you wrong. Either reply to what i posted with facts and counter claims, or just bug off.

it's you that keep asking me questions, and i stand by what i posted. the sunburn is unequaled by anything in the west's arsenal, none of our surface-to-surface missiles are anything even close in speed.

http://ads.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=20642

Nevertheless, defense analysts agree that the U.S. is fully a decade behind Russia in high-speed cruise missile designs. Russia currently deploys and exports the supersonic SS-N-22 Moskit cruise missile, NATO codenamed "Sunburn." The SS-N-22 is considered the most lethal anti-ship missile in the world, and flies at over 2.5 times the speed of sound only a few feet from the surface of the water.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/m...row/moskit.htm

Maximum effective range250 km

wait a minute, i thought you said it was 120 km...

you, or the federation of american scientists. hmmm...

if you take that to mean that i'm saying that they're totally invincible to our defence mechanisms then i leave you with your sea of misunderstandings and misrepreseantations, right there with your incorrect information. i don't claim to be an expert and i've doubled your range of the missiles in contention with a very reliable source.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

To my knowloge, it's only been tested a couple of times and all lines of defense/capabilities where not used. Not to mention, it was tested with advance US-Russian capabilities, the ones Iran lacks. There is a lot more to this missile system than simply aquiring the warhead it's self. Launchers, radar capabilities and many other aspects factor in. Iran has purchased this advance weapon, but without the advance launching means, better radar capabilities, means to protect and hide these weapons, as well as numorous other aspects when it comes to weapons systems, Iran just does not have the means to execute the same circumstances carried out in these tests. There is a big difference between executing a test under perfect conditions, as aposed to realistic ones in a battlefield.

Some of the systems i've mentioned where also not tested - for reasons unknown - but i tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the USNavy and imagine they know what they are doing -- instead of believing in bogus theories such as putting 15,000+ in lethal danger to further a "corporate war" .

The systems i have mentioned all have the capability to defend against the sunburn missiles if used correctly and in the right circumstances. Just as the SS-N-22 has the possibility to be a complete dud, if it's used wrong or malfunctions - which is it known to do as i have explained with the failure of the "pop-up" mechanism in my previous post.

i hope you're right but i think you're wrong.

iran has reverse engineering abilities that the chinese would probably envy, china just overtly buys what they can't develop off of israel or else in publicly scandalous backroom deals with washington politicians and the iranians are pretty much without that kind of support. they are flying F-14s with russian engines in them!

i am not so fast to say that iran's radar and electronic capabilities are not up to the task, simple as that.

look man, you're just going to have to deal with the fact that i disagree, DEAL.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Numorous systems have been tested over the years with the outcome being on the negative side, that dosen't mean the system is inferior. Look at the missile shield currently in development by the US - which comes to the top of my head without thinking -, it's had some setbacks but there is no doubt it has the ability and technological advancements to intercept missiles threatening west-coast US cities.

i hope you're right.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

As i pointed out previously, you talk of "thousands" and "hundrends"

hey look you're lying!

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

of these missiles raining down on US ships, but the fact is, they have 16. 16 of which would probably not even leave their launch pads before cruise missiles disable them. Maybe it is a task for US systems to shoot down the sunburn but since you believe in the ridiculous idea that the US will simply allow Iran to strike it's ships and kill thousands of sailors, does it even matter what capabilities the US has...if it's going to let the ships get hit anyway? You are out-right ridiculous. Ab-so-lutly ridiculous.

robert steele of open source intelligence fame, one of the top reviewers at amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile...539825-8697649

and:

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute...ople.cfm?q=105

ROBERT D. STEELE is a retired Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer. He is the founder and president of Open Source Solutions, Inc., and is an acknowledged expert on computer and information vulnerabilities. Mr. Steele holds graduate degrees in International Relations and Public Administration from Leigh University and the University of Oklahoma. He has also earned certificates in Intelligence Policy from Harvard University and in Defense Studies from the Naval War College.

http://www.oss.net

in a recent interview he echoed pretty similar misgivings aboot the USN taking it on the chin off the coast of iran in a planned escalation:

http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Tarpley/0701/...t_Tarpley2.mp3

the interview starts late in the first hour but is mostly in this link.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

SS-N-22's cannot function without radar and Iran does not have the means to guide these missiles any other way, nor does it have the advancements of long range radar capabilities. Meaning, all radar facilities will be close to the launch sites and the launch sites would be on the gulf coast. Hence, these missiles won't see the light of day if the radar it's self it taken out. Radars are in plain sight, it's not something you can burry under ground and expect to work.

if the US was serious aboot taking on iran without these missiles becoming a problem a first step would probably be securing the coast with special forces and MAKING SURE that none of these missiles, or support systems, are anywhere, as far as i understand the only US doctrine to deal with sunburns at all is to not get shot at with them.

they're a very known quantity, i guess it depends on if CENTCOM wants to win or wants to escalate.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Anyways, i'm just repeating myself here... literally.

i know the feeling.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Wow, way to put things in a nutshell there buddy.

ah.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

You see, i see Iran aquiring a nuclear bomb or any nuclear means as serious business and i treat it as such. While i'm talking about the "most destructive weapon known to man" which if Iran aquires, could lead to serious consequences, your boasting about global conspiracies, corporate wars and the possibility of the US Navy sacraficing the lives of thousands of sailors to further this "agenda" and all other ridiculous theories coming out of your mouth.

ah.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

News flash: they are already trying to aquire the weapon and nobody has even launched anything in Irans direction. With all the evidence reguarding Irans refusal of a LWR as well as numorous violations of the IAEA as well as restrictions placed on when and where inspections can be taken place, as well as it's refusal of several incentive packages offered by the EU - including helping Iran with Nuclear Power - which is quite clear they aren't really after - it would be quite nieve to think otherwise.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Your just that - nieve.

ah.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

We're not talking about a few useless bombs, we are talking about the possible outcome of hundreds of thousands of lifes.

yep.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

It's really hard to reply to your posts, because i never know what your stance is. One minute Iran is not trying to build the bomb, the next they are, then they aren't, then they will just try and aquire it when and if the US/Israel strike. Then they are complying with the IAEA, then they aren't. First it's a nuclear weapons program, next it's Israel going after a "non-existant nuclear weapons program"

as i've stated, numerous times now, i think that there is a difference between enrichment capabilities and a nuclear weapons program. that's what IAEA inspections are for, and according to the IAEA website in the links posted way up there, iran is compliant with inspections.

the UN is like any organization, the bullies can force the agenda and accuse a weaker party of mealfeasance. brazil is at a pretty similar stage of nuclear enrichment as iran, for example.

i've stated my position on this over, and over, and over, and over.

iran's crazed leadership wants the power to build weapons and i don't trust their intentions, that's what the IAEA is for.

but until someone points at a satellite photo and says "nuclear weapons program" then i feel it's best not to turn religious whackjobs on the outs with their people, into cornered supported and scared religious whackjobs.

maybe you should ask me again.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Seriously,

Make up your god damn mind;

cheers.

wow, bolded text, swearing, even the mighty eyes-rolling smiley! what's next, are you going to stomp your feet and hold your breath until i bow down and tell you how right you are?

i've stated my points, go yell at the wall.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Just to clarify:

My stance is that nobody will "invade" Iran, but if the diplomacy continues at the same pace as it is right now, somebody will strike the nuclear facilities. Whether that be a joint NATO mission, condoned by the UN, or either the United States or Israel doing it independently, it will be done, if diplomacy dosen't show some progress in the next year and a half.

i agree. neo-cons brag aboot the ethnic armies they can drum up to fight on their side, and they are already using foreign forces inside iran to 'destabilize' them and scout targets. (destabilize in neo-con parlance means embolden).

[Looger]

oops, the fas link i posted above is for the air-launched version.

http://missile.index.ne.jp/cgi/misearch.cgi

this page lists both air-to-surface and surface-to-surface as 250 km range of the sunburn.

[mykalberta]

For the sake of a $100 bet I have with my co-worker - HOPEFULLY NOT UNTIL AFTER THE NEXT PRESEDENTIAL ELECTION.

I know - WTF are you doing betting on when a war will take place.

I give it a 5% chance of them doing an Iraq (no UN support) type
I give it a 20% chance of them doing an Afghan (UN support) type

The whole Iran thing is basically to deflect from the bungling (purposeful or not of the Iraq situation). They will not be invading in Bush's presidency. Remember that the US Congress must eventually support the President and with the recent shalacking the Reps took and the upcoming election, that isnt going to happen this time (especially since the Dems control the house). Iraq was really on the backs of the 9-11 thing, where the congress would have basically agreed to attack the moon had a moon rock landed to close to DC.

Everything above is said with the *note* that Iran doesnt do anything different than what they have been doing over the previous 2 years (ie attack Isreal etc).

MYK

[Looger]

i lost a $140 bet on the iraq war, i hadn't investigated exactly who leo strauss is (founder of the neo-conservative movement) and exactly what his policies are.

EDIT: not founder, i should say he's cited as a spiritual forebearer of the movement by its main authors like wolfowitz, perle, kristol.