I think to be honest though it is definitely alone in a military sense - who could, or would try, take on Israel with American military support?

But the article does effectively discuss how the proposed Western sanctions may not be too painful anyway. Only military action will 'stop' Iran from developing nuclear tech (if they don't already have it), but decades of Western interference coupled with a rising level of nationalistic jingoism will make kowtowing to the Western line very, very difficult to stomach, if at all.

With friends like these...

Quote: "Obama puts forth what is purported to be a major "diplomatic" solution to have Iran ship its nuclear fuel to Brazil and Turkey for processing. This was, of course, a hollow gesture, meant to show how intransigent and untrustworthy Iran really is; the nuke-hungry mullahs would naturally reject the deal. But when Iran made an agreement with Brazil to do exactly what Obama requested, this was immediately denounced -- by Obama -- as .... a demonstration of how intransigent and untrustworthy Iran really is. Meet a benchmark, and the masters simply change the rules. That's how it works until they get what they want: regime change in strategic lands laden with natural resources... ...Second -- and I think much more relevant to this case -- there is the hope that ever-tightening sanctions will provoke a violent response from the victim, thereby "justifying" a war of "self-defense" against the "unprovoked" attack. The series of escalating provocations being carried out by Washington and its allies, chiefly Israel -- including an increasingly open program of assassinations -- is clearly designed to goad the Iranians into a casus belli retaliation. So far, the Iranians have resisted -- a forbearance that has driven the Western warmongers into ludicrous attempts to manufacture casus belli incidents. such as the recent "Gleiwitz gambit": the story that the super-duper Iranian spymasters tried to hire a goofball car dealer to kill a Saudi diplomat on the streets of Washington. But the matches our masters keep throwing at this bone-dry pile of tinder are getting closer and closer to sparking the desired conflagration. The Iranians have already threatened to close the Straits of Hormuz if the EU goes through with its embargo. This, of course, would likely be the "Pearl Harbor" moment the war-whoopers are waiting for: an "unprovoked" attack aimed at -- what else? -- "targeting the economic lifeline" of the West. (Targeting economic lifelines is a tactic reserved solely for God's good eggs, you understand; it's an unmitigated evil when those heathen devils try it.)

http://www.chris-floyd.com/componen...-with-iran.html

Interesting article and quite funny. They are attacking our economy, a complete evil.
But hang on, what are they doing to Iran?

Iran claims advances made in the nuclear program. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/new...jectid=10785877

Suggestions of a covert War.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/new...jectid=10785760

Interesting times ahead.

Incase you missed it:

While Iran will get bitchslapped if it starts, the damage they could possibly do to US Navy units could really hurt American military thinking, as well as be a major loss of face.

The outcome will be bleak for everyone. I just hope that it changes the yankee foreign policy and stops them policing the world.

Now would be a good time to brush up on your self-sustainable living skills

RedNZ wrote: The outcome will be bleak for everyone. I just hope that it changes the yankee foreign policy and stops them policing the world. Now would be a good time to brush up on your self-sustainable living skills

2012 presidential elections around corner. I only see this Iran situation exploding into something a lot more serious.

Quote: Iran has halted oil shipments to Britain and France, the Oil Ministry has said, in an apparent pre-emptive blow against the European Union after the bloc imposed sanctions on Iran's crucial fuel exports.

Iran flexing some muscle. This may very well be the start. Does anyone know where the US gets most of its Oil from?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/middle...-Britain-France

MXRecord wrote: Does anyone know where the US gets most of its Oil from?

According to US Census Bureau import statistics, in 2010, the top crude oil exporters to the United States were Canada, Mexico, Nigeria, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia (in order from most exports to least). (from wiki)

mafro wrote: 2012 presidential elections around corner. I only see this Iran situation exploding into something a lot more serious.

Obama's popularity would take a big hit if he started another war during election season. Not saying that Democrats would vote Republican, but I think many wouldn't vote at all, or vote third party/independent or something.

Invade Canada!

gneiss wrote: According to US Census Bureau import statistics, in 2010, the top crude oil exporters to the United States were Canada, Mexico, Nigeria, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia (in order from most exports to least). (from wiki)

Thank you, so the US are unlikely to care very much. All I can imagine that this will do is get more countries onside with the US.

Reagrding War. I don't think we will see the US leading a war, will most likely see this fought through Israel.

RedNZ wrote: Invade Canada!

For their delicious bacon and maple syrup deposits.

MXRecord wrote: Does anyone know where the US gets most of its Oil from? http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/middle...-Britain-France

Not Iran. The US has had a trade embargo against Iran since 1987.

Iran is also going to stop trading in the US dollar from March 20th.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...lar-attack.html

victorious wrote: Obama's popularity would take a big hit if he started another war during election season.

True but his popularity might also take a big hit if he didn't come to the aid of Israel if Israel starts a war which they can't finish. which is the most likely scenario

RedNZ wrote: Invade Canada!

Tensions are rising between the two, with Canada's liberal view on drugs and all.

Thunderstorm wrote: True but his popularity might also take a big hit if he didn't come to the aid of Israel if Israel starts a war which they can't finish. which is the most likely scenario

So Israel starting the War would be win, win for the US . . . .
Anyone willing to gamble on when this will start?

MXRecord wrote: So Israel starting the War would be win, win for the US . . . . Anyone willing to gamble on when this will start?

This will almost certainly be the justification, "defending" an ally against Iran. AND THEY HAVE* NUKES.

*may or may not

Soon after elections, it will happen.

All the top brass have probably already been briefed on the war plan

Can someone tell me exactly when the last time the United States actually faced a halfway decent nation-state?

I'm thinking Korea? There's simply no way the US populace are going to stand for that sort of body count. And let's be realistic, carpet bombing the place isn't going to meet their objectives, is it?

Normally I'd suggest that the west drop with the anti-Iranian rhetoric for 5 minutes and ask them - honestly - what it would take to bring them back to dropping their nuclear programme. Trouble is, there's just too many other parties stoking the fire now =/

The policy makers in Washington must know this. The world does not need any more wars.

Wally Simmonds wrote: Can someone tell me exactly when the last time the United States actually faced a halfway decent nation-state?

According to this Vietnam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...sualties_of_war

RedNZ wrote: Soon after elections, it will happen.

I'm not so sure on that.

A) If they leave it until November or December it might be to late.

B) If Obama gets Re-elected I can't see the US initiating a war with Iran under the Obama administration

C) Nov-Dec is winter time which complicates a military operation due to thick clouds over Iranian skies, well so I have read.

I could be wrong tho, but my guess is Israel will start it before hand and they will drag the US into it and Obama will be forced to help.