Report: US discussing strikes on Iran

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Link

By DOUGLAS DAVIS

LONDON ? Pentagon officials are said to be discussing possible military action to neutralize Iran's nuclear weapons threat, according to a report in London's Observer. US administration sources are quoted as saying that air strikes ? "either by the US or Israel" ? to wipe out Iran's fledgling nuclear program would be difficult because of a lack of clear intelligence about where key components are located.

Instead, sources quoted by the paper said the Pentagon is considering strikes in support of regime change, including attacks on the leadership, as well as on political and security targets
.
The new "modeling" at the Pentagon, with its shift in emphasis from suspected nuclear sites to political target lists, is said to be causing deep anxiety among officials in Britain, France, and Germany, who last week appeared to have negotiated a deal with Teheran to cease work that could contribute to a nuclear weapons program. But Washington is said to be skeptical about the deal.


So, if we give the Iranian Ruling Mullahs 48 Hours to get out of Dodge, Do you think they will go? :p
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Good news :thumbsup:
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good news :thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Let's pursue permanent regime change all around the world.

The New World Order in the New American Century. The apotheosis of Bush.

And I love all the tough guy he-man cowboy talk too.

Get out of Dodge!

Smoke 'em out!

Dead or alive!

Bring 'em on!

 

Stunt

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,717
2
0
Maybe they will attack Israel while it all goes down. Bombing Iran will do nothing but escalate the problem.
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good news :thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Let's pursue permanent regime change all around the world.

The New World Order in the New American Century. The apotheosis of Bush.

And I love all the tough guy he-man cowboy talk too.

Get out of Dodge!

Smoke 'em out!

Dead or alive!

Bring 'em on!
:roll: :roll:

Words without action is the Liberal way of doing things.

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...

 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Originally posted by: Stunt
Maybe they will attack Israel while it all goes down. Bombing Iran will do nothing but escalate the problem.

Hopefully they will. Nothing like getting rid of two pests with one stroke. :D
 

Stunt

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,717
2
0
Or...Bomb Israel, then Iran may not feel the need to get nukes as there would no longer be a nuclear power in the ME :p
 

Kibbo

Platinum Member
Jul 13, 2004
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned


Words without action is the Liberal way of doing things.

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...

Umm. . .weren't most of the terrorists Saudis? Didn't most of Bin Laden's come from the US, through Saudi Arabia? Did Iran have anything to do with the 9/11 attacks?

Yes, the potential for Iran to gain nuclear is concerning, but let's see what happens with the Euroopean deal.
 

Tylanner

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2004
5,481
2
81
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good news :thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Let's pursue permanent regime change all around the world.

The New World Order in the New American Century. The apotheosis of Bush.

And I love all the tough guy he-man cowboy talk too.

Get out of Dodge!

Smoke 'em out!

Dead or alive!

Bring 'em on!

Maybe a policy of nonparticipation looks good in theory, but in the real world, it is clear that even before Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr, Isolationism will not work.

 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good news :thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Let's pursue permanent regime change all around the world.

The New World Order in the New American Century. The apotheosis of Bush.

And I love all the tough guy he-man cowboy talk too.

Get out of Dodge!

Smoke 'em out!

Dead or alive!

Bring 'em on!
:roll: :roll:

Words without action is the Liberal way of doing things.

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...
Sorry, but the bank's all out of money. Bush bankrupted it in the unjust war on Iraq. Why didn't he go after Iran which actually had ties to terrorist attacks against the U.S.?
 

ReiAyanami

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2002
4,466
0
0
to ensure that insurgents are kept under control, they will put Saddam in charge of Iran post-war
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
64
91
This won't help anything. Iran's a very large country, with lots of space (and mountains) to put VIP's and Nuclear facilities. It would take ground troops, a U.S. draft, and a shift from consumer to a war economy to prevent their development (when european sanctions would do the job easilty). These strikes will just entrench the power of the Muhllahs and prevent any actual reform in the country. If Iran can play the wounded party to Europe to prevent sanctions, they can continue on as before, with less democratic reform.

Woohoo! Let's make more Terrorists by killing random Muslims! Go America!
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: Kibbo
Originally posted by: Ozoned


Words without action is the Liberal way of doing things.

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...

Umm. . .weren't most of the terrorists Saudis? Didn't most of Bin Laden's come from the US, through Saudi Arabia? Did Iran have anything to do with the 9/11 attacks?

Yes, the potential for Iran to gain nuclear is concerning, but let's see what happens with the Euroopean deal.


1.) Yes

2.) Yes

3.) An Interesting question.

That being said, Iran is on Us List of state sponsers of terrorism. Bush ran on an Agenda. I voted for Bush, not Europe.

Get my drift?
 

ReiAyanami

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2002
4,466
0
0
BTW, when this does happen, watch oil skyrocket to $75/barrel or even $100, and gold $500/ounce

halliburton already has dibs on reconstruction

bush's oil buddies will be bankin' it rich. iran is the 3rd largest reserves with 120 billion barrels of the texas tea

hey, why are we invading all the countries that have lots of oil... hmmm.....(ignores Sudan)
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: Ozoned

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...


Two words....

Saudi Arabia
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good news :thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Let's pursue permanent regime change all around the world.

The New World Order in the New American Century. The apotheosis of Bush.

And I love all the tough guy he-man cowboy talk too.

Get out of Dodge!

Smoke 'em out!

Dead or alive!

Bring 'em on!
:roll: :roll:

Words without action is the Liberal way of doing things.

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...
Sorry, but the bank's all out of money. Bush bankrupted it in the unjust war on Iraq. Why didn't he go after Iran which actually had ties to terrorist attacks against the U.S.?
I don't know. I don't ever recall Bush making this kind of reasoning public. Why don't you enlighten me as to Bush's reason for not going after Iran.

 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Ozoned

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...


Two words....

Saudi Arabia
Baby steps. You got to think baby steps...
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good news :thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Let's pursue permanent regime change all around the world.

The New World Order in the New American Century. The apotheosis of Bush.

And I love all the tough guy he-man cowboy talk too.

Get out of Dodge!

Smoke 'em out!

Dead or alive!

Bring 'em on!
:roll: :roll:

Words without action is the Liberal way of doing things.

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...
Sorry, but the bank's all out of money. Bush bankrupted it in the unjust war on Iraq. Why didn't he go after Iran which actually had ties to terrorist attacks against the U.S.?
I don't know. I don't ever recall Bush making this kind of reasoning public. Why don't you enlighten me as to Bush's reason for not going after Iran.
Uh...that's what I'd like to know. Perhaps you should re-read my post.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Ozoned

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...


Two words....

Saudi Arabia
Baby steps. You got to think baby steps...


A few more "baby steps" like Iraq and we won't be able to walk...much less run.
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good news :thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Let's pursue permanent regime change all around the world.

The New World Order in the New American Century. The apotheosis of Bush.

And I love all the tough guy he-man cowboy talk too.

Get out of Dodge!

Smoke 'em out!

Dead or alive!

Bring 'em on!
:roll: :roll:

Words without action is the Liberal way of doing things.

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...

Yeah, Osama is banking on that.

 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good news :thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Let's pursue permanent regime change all around the world.

The New World Order in the New American Century. The apotheosis of Bush.

And I love all the tough guy he-man cowboy talk too.

Get out of Dodge!

Smoke 'em out!

Dead or alive!

Bring 'em on!
:roll: :roll:

Words without action is the Liberal way of doing things.

"The U.S. government will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed the acts and those who harbor them."


Those are words you can take to the bank...
Sorry, but the bank's all out of money. Bush bankrupted it in the unjust war on Iraq. Why didn't he go after Iran which actually had ties to terrorist attacks against the U.S.?
I don't know. I don't ever recall Bush making this kind of reasoning public. Why don't you enlighten me as to Bush's reason for not going after Iran.
Uh...that's what I'd like to know. Perhaps you should re-read my post.

Uh...I read your post. Uh.. I said "I don't know".

Then you said "Uh...that's what I'd like to know. Perhaps you should re-read my post."

Sorry dude. Circular isn't my thing....



 

OneOfTheseDays

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2000
7,052
0
0
Ozone you confuse reckless aggression with "taking action". There's a right way to do it, and a wrong way to do it, and Bush has been all wrong thus far.
 

Stunt

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,717
2
0
Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Ozone you confuse reckless aggression with "taking action". There's a right way to do it, and a wrong way to do it, and Bush has been all wrong thus far.

Quoting Kerry isn't going to win you any points with an administation wh0re like Ozoned.