Thunderstorm wrote: yea like the IAEA being denied access to Parchin. If they have nothing to hide then why deny access? The attack would have to happen this year otherwise Iran gets nukes. We are soon in for a bumpy ride.

It sounds like its already being prepared for. "Israel says will not warn US before attack", after the attack "US must help Israel". Hmmm.

Its all staged and planned

MXRecord wrote: "Israel says will not warn US before attack", after the attack "US must help Israel". Hmmm.

Watch out for when the US has 1 or 2 extra carriers in the region at a time when 1 carrier relieves another.

Thunderstorm wrote: Watch out for when the US has 1 or 2 extra carriers in the region at a time when 1 carrier relieves another.

I was under the impression there are currently two carrier groups in the Gulf at this point.

If any republican candidate wins the presidential election, you can almost guarantee an invasion of Iran. I'm mostly concerned about the fact that Rick Santorum is so popular.

Israel may strike, but I honestly can't see the yanks doing it. Will they risk an armed confrontation with Russia over this? I doubt it.

And even if Israel bomb the crap out of Iranian nuclear facilities, they've already stated that it will only delay the program, and probably isolate them even more in the ME.

I can't see any of this ending well for the west in general. Perhaps the US, the UK, France and Germany are more worried about all these rising powers who might start asking questions about who's been eating all the pies for the last 100 years.

Obama not Bluffing. Interesting article here

Quote: Obama will argue that under his leadership, the United States "has Israel's back," and that he will order the U.S. military to destroy Iran's nuclear program if economic sanctions fail to compel Tehran to shelve its nuclear ambitions

http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...t-bluff/253875/

The question is how long would the US wait? because Iran one day will announce that they now have a nuclear weapon if you attack us we will use it.

Shit is going to get real in the next year or so.. Maybe sooner?

Can one really blame Iran for wanting nuclear weapons? The US has military bases completely surrounding Iranian territory. They have stirred huge uprest in the Middle East.
Sure Iran has some nutters in power but until Iran actually does -something-, how can anyone say that they are the "bad guys". And if you're going to say they sponsor terrorism, while that may be true or false, one could easily site numerous occasions where the US has supplied arms to "terrorist" factions.

Map of US military bases:


The US/Israel are bullies with large sticks, and Iran is close to picking up an equally-sized stick.

Yer shits getting real alright. If you saw them on the news they really look declivity uncomfortable with each other.

(another link to Thunderstorms)

Obama warns Iran and Israel: 'I don't bluff'

OBAMA wrote: "You're talking about the most volatile region in the world," he said. "It will not be tolerable to a number of states in that region for Iran to have a nuclear weapon and them not to have a nuclear weapon. Iran is known to sponsor terrorist organisations, so the threat of proliferation becomes that much more severe. "

OBAMA wrote: the threat of proliferation becomes that much more severe.

I think this is a key point. Not so much about Iran getting nukes, but about who's getting one next, and next, and next.
By having a nuke, you become a world power instantly.

Spotted this on a News story last night.



The Last Day in 2013.

haha, trying to drum up lots of fear int he general population i see. do the US/Israel media ever mention the 200 to 300 nukes Israel has sitting on missiles?

But Israel is a nation of level headedness.

I can see why the Israelis are freaked out though. They're a very small nation.

Going back in time say 2-3 years ago apart from myself how many of you here knew that things were gonna heated up like this? I originally thought that Iran would be bombed during the second term of the bush administration, I guess I was just way off on the timing of things.

Still so many people adamant that Iran is going to get bombed. There main plant is deep in the side of a mountain, it is not something easy to just go in there and destroy. None of the western world is in a position economically to fight such a hard advisory.

This is a much tougher army and extremely well equipped, it would be a brutal war not some silly air campign, and would only serve to stoke the fire for further hate towards the west and especially Israel.

If there is a war, it aint going to happen till at least after the US presidental election. When Obama knows he has one last term to play with and nothing to lose.

Furyan wrote: But Israel is a nation of level headedness.

Lol. Nice.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/20/w...eral&src=mv

referring to the above map its really simple. Its just power politics playing out under the realist view. I mean them getting a nuke is just to ensure security against the surrounding enemies, balance of power, self-help blah blah blah but. it could esculate into the so called 'security dilema' very easily.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articl..._staging_ground

Quote: U.S. officials believe that the Israelis have gained access to airbases in Azerbaijan.

Hmmm ... an interesting development

KiwiTT wrote: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articl..._staging_ground Hmmm ... an interesting development

Saw an issue of FP in America, it's just sensationalist drivel.

Well Iran does have 3,000 female ninja's for defence

You know the funny thing about this situation is Bush's policies were really the catalyst towards Iran getting nukes. After he came into power and started promoting his nutty democratic domination theory, the Iranian hardliners rose to power in the face of western threats. Iraq, under Saddam, has kept Iran in cheque very well, obvious foes shown by the Iraq-Iran war, but what does Bush do? He invades Iraq and gets rid of Saddam, getting rid of an obstacle and threat for Iran. Ultimately giving them more freedom to pursue nukes. Not only this, but the current Iraqi government has good relations, far better than Saddam, with Iran, so America essentially eliminated a key regional figure who could cheque Iranian power. Now the Iranian hardliners are in power and pursuing/ probably already have, enriched uranium.
Ironic don't you think?

Well, if your agenda is ongoing weapons sales, and ensuring the high price of energy, not really.

<yawn> Are we there yet?