Iran warns of 'problems' if US attacks

War with Iran is GOING to happen. Israel has vowed to launch missiles at Iran if we don't, and if that happens, we will have to back them up.

Has everyone forgot the story a few months back about Iran buying a massive missile defence system from Russia even though embargos had been placed in Iran? I think as powerful as our Air Force is, we could get our first "Bitch Slap" if we bomb Iran. We will win, but will take many casulties in the form of downed planes.

I also wish Bush would stop telling the world what our plan is... Do you not think Iran is now in the process of moving it's military into residential areas? We will still take them out, but many civilians will die and Evil America will be to blame.

[edit on 6-9-2007 by Twilly]

Originally posted by Twilly
War with Iran is GOING to happen. Israel has vowed to launch missiles at Iran if we don't, and if that happens, we will have to back them up.

You have to? Really? I mean, why do you have to?

reply to post by Beachcoma


Im not saying we have to, But we will...

reply to post by Night Watchman


Aye, well I do try.

See, I have this thing with stereotypes. I think all people are equal, but when someone decides to set themselves out as superior and starts flinging them about, I feel its only fair to redress the balance.

Having said that, it seems that rather than addressing the substance of my post, you chose to focus on the tongue in cheek bit.

C'est la vie

reply to post by Twilly


Sadly, that's probably true. Don't you feel it's unfair that your country is being used like that?

We will still take them out, but many civilians will die and Evil America will be to blame.

If we bomb a country that hasn't attacked us, damn right we will be to blame.
100%

And if people think we're evil, has it occured to you that they have pretty good reasons to?
I mean it's kinda looking like bombing swarthy foreigners is our national pastime...

[edit on 9/6/07 by xmotex]

LMAO!I might be upset if even one of your descriptives were in fact even close to describing myself.But having a college education in HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES i would'nt see the difference in your characterization.As for history without the aid of the U.S.YOU would in fact be speaking either german or russian right now so please spare us all your demented,denialistic,long winded views here.As for U.S.armory again is well known and has kept effete,ingrateful europe safe for far too long.Who in their right mind would trust a radical iran with nuclear capability is beyond me.As for your personel insults are concerned i choose to give them as much validity as your point in this thread.Useless,rude,sorrowful but in character for an effetist snob.

That will be enough with the personal jabs guys, m'kay?

Originally posted by future flow
me thinks iran isnt niave enuff to belive they would survive a full blow us air campaign....that to me worries me when they talk like this....makes me think maybe they have some backup.....maybe in the form of china and russia?but maybe thats juss crazy talk lol

china and russia are 2 of the countries that have taken strong opposition to iran and its nuke program if anything they are allies

Originally posted by EBE154
reply to post by BlackProjects

 

the only evidence you have about an iranian connection with iraqi roadside bombs are various news reports from government controlled news channels which 'claim' that the military has found actual evidence... so why don't they just show us the 'clear evidence'? strange isn't it?

They are building a large wide ranging case against iran. You don't show your cards until your ready to call. Iran's actions aren't being questioned by europe and the the USA, Iran's intentions are very clear, what is being debated is how to go about dealing with iran. Iran is making fools out of the world by using diplomacy just as a stall tactic, and are obvious about doing so. This will "force the western world into action".

[edit on 6-9-2007 by dmxny]

Originally posted by xmotex

We will still take them out, but many civilians will die and Evil America will be to blame.

If we bomb a country that hasn't attacked us, damn right we will be to blame.
100%

And if people think we're evil, has it occured to you that they have pretty good reasons to?
I mean it's kinda looking like bombing swarthy foreigners is our national pastime...

[edit on 9/6/07 by xmotex]

Iran has openly been calling for the destruction of the USA aside from israel and is now developing nuclear weapons, and using diplomacy as a stall tactic. They, iran's government, is bringing this upon themselves. Iranian soldiers have crossed the border into iraq and have attacked our soldier, that is a declaration of war on their part alone.

When taken into context with the rest of the world if you think the USA is evil then you haven't left the USA much if at all. Name one country that has not or is not guilty of anything.

France = won't let muslims integrate.

Germany = a couple of world wars.

Japan = WW2

China = Mao

Russia = enslaved eastern europe.

I could go on and on.


By the way which country donates the most money and food every year , both private and public? Oh yeah the USA cause were so darn evil... Who is the first country to arrive on scene to help other nations when disasters occur?

You know what don't secretly develop nuclear weapons while calling for the destruction of other countries and you won't have to worry about being attacked.

Originally posted by Twilly
War with Iran is GOING to happen. Israel has vowed to launch missiles at Iran if we don't, and if that happens, we will have to back them up.

Has everyone forgot the story a few months back about Iran buying a massive missile defence system from Russia even though embargos had been placed in Iran? I think as powerful as our Air Force is, we could get our first "Bitch Slap" if we bomb Iran. We will win, but will take many casulties in the form of downed planes.

I also wish Bush would stop telling the world what our plan is... Do you not think Iran is now in the process of moving it's military into residential areas? We will still take them out, but many civilians will die and Evil America will be to blame.

[edit on 6-9-2007 by Twilly]

It won't happen. They sold them air defenses which don't have the range to attack the US arsenal. Also in a simple numbers game the US could launch thousands of cruise missiles and decoys to destroy and use up the iranian defenses.

Iran can only hope that the US invades and the population decide that all of a sudden they love the Iranian hardliners in charge and wage a guerilla war. Except the US won't be invading.

If Iraq couldn't stand up to the US in the first gulf war with some of the most heavily defended air space then it is doubtful iran could either, esp with the embargo which may let some stuff slide through but not enough to repel or significantly harm.

Originally posted by BitRaiser


Read that over a few times.
Iran would never launch an attack on a foreign country.
It has no history of invasion. It's war with Iraq was primarily due to Saddam's expansionist agenda backed by US interests.

AThe Phalanx is just about useless against a ballistic missile because it will chew the missile apart, but the warhead is very likely to continue along it's ballistic trajectory and hit the target anyway. If you don't understand that, you might need to brush up on your physics.

[edit on 5-9-2007 by BitRaiser]

You just said a phalanx would chew the missile apart but the war head would keep coming.? Ok physics doesn't show that altered form equals altered trajectory, um ok. Second not all bombs are as simple as it hits the ground and explodes, triggering mechanism are required and if they are torn to shreds they won't work. Third if it tears the missile apart how is the bomb still intact?

And finally all you need are a couple of planes with aesa radar or a low powered laser and you could fry the electronics for navigation before the missile leaves iranian airspace.

reply to all people who think irans military will be wiped out:

first thats crazy no way would you wipe there army out or shatter there will to fight chances are you will make there morale high iran is not iraq alot more advanced and just look at there missiles enough to hit american targets and they will if attacked you say america will hit them first and hard the iranians no this and have measures which will ensure there ability to strike back wont be gone its right your troops are sitting ducks in iraq.

the american military will not win against iran it will be a dissaster and your forces will suffer. the blow of zufar games just showed some off there power and ability to hit back and hit american ships in the gulf hard!.

Personally If I were running Iran and had the USA posturing against them I'd take the war to their very vulnerable underbelly...the US mainland. It would be VERY, VERY easy for iraninan military SF guys to enter any major US city, lead unassuming lives as just about anything, meanwhile working is small "terrorist cells" Do what we did to the Warsaw people and plant hidden caches of weapons in our homeland. Just like what we did during the cold war with the all the warsaw folk. These caches would really be hidden small portable atomic demolition unites to medium portable atomic weapons. those things exist, are easy (relatively) to hide, and with a little phone call and maybe some evidence to back it up from Iran to the Pres. of the US stating that you attack us and we'll vaporize large chunks of either your population or major targets like dams, major highway junctions etc...

WOuld stop me in my tracks if I were the president of the US. Besides I feel it's probably alot more easy to find a nuclear weapon on the international black market than we are lead to believe. In fact I'm willing to bet that a great majority of countries and "organizations" that can fork over a small amount of money (maybe a few million not even in the 8 digit range) could get their hands on one of these "suitcase nukes"

I'm willing to bet that the eastern european mafias that really have a lot of leverage like in russia, probably sell these nukes for a lot less than we think and a lot more often than we really want to know.

This is the way I see things. We are positioning our selves for the up and truly soon coming BIG war. Probably WW3. "The Great Oil War" Iran wants and needs to become a super power as soon as possible if they want to stand a chance and seems to be playing their cards very well. They need to be dealt with as soon as possible for, our ultimate enemy is China. China's Economy is scary huge and is quickly gaining on us when it comes to oil consumption. We have already began "Peak Oil Production" worldwide. China is very aware of this as is Russia and the other powers. China is not going to allow us to just take control of all the oil. And, China has the power to stop us dead in our tracks and they will try. The scary thing is they might succeed. I wonder what they are waiting for? maybe they are waiting for us to be weakened a bit by our coming conflict with Iran.
There's a bigger picture to be looked at here. The fact is Iran wants to be a Superpower It wants free rain over its nuclear ambitions and is ultimately aiming for control of the middle eastern region. Do you think oil hungry USA is gonna allow this? Nope. Do you think oil hungry China is gonna allow the united states to take over the region and all the oil? Nope. SH%$ is about to hit the fan over there and I mean big time. N Korea is going to help China and possibly Russia will join them. But, here this: "The Great Oil War" has began and has yet to show its bloodiest side.There is a bigger plan and all we can do is take a side, take a look and watch it unfold. It seems what people are underestimating is this HUGE oil crises. We have reached "Peak Oil Production" China's thirst for oil is HUGE don't underestimate their will. As we are strategically placing our selves in the region and setting up camp. China is watching. Remember a wile back when China shot down our spy satellites? and just yesterday I learned that China hacked into The Pentagon computers...........

what i read from many posters in this thread is so way off reality i would say they are either brainwashed or just don't know what a war is all about.

our soldiers are the best, bla bla, in a head to head, bla bla...
i just can say that american troops are as good or bad as other troops that are armed..

some of you talk about atacking iran is just bombing and rocketing it. well, thats not very brave is it? but it would be necessary to weaken structures, lower the morale and so on...
but thats what is always done. BUT you can't just win a war just by bombing them.
and no, it is impossible to destroy all defences or even the industry by juust dropping bombs. you can send little demolition teams but they don't win the war.
and when troops go in, the bomb shelters and broken bunkers and so on are the best way to hide in along with russians decent AT weapons.
tanks are nothing in cities with good ATs and they got them an really sturdy bunkers.
one lesson the militair has learned while trying to kicks libanese butt was that they underestimated even the libanese defenses. and they had help from iranian bunker builders and russian anti tank rockets.
now even some atomic blasts dont damage the digged ins - they just get angrier and angrier.
and if america loves their heroes (usually they are treated as crap) the vets have to watch out they don't get sick cuase the leaders give a damn about their life.
uranium, ahhh, i love burning tanks with this 'live' ammunition. well, thats not really helathy. someone just can decide to fight some month til you start to get very nice cancer over your body..

so stop this mighty america blabla, its just showing that you don't have any idea what war is all about!
and stop saying russia is nothing compared to US...

iran is no blitz neither is it is easy to take. and really, nothing outrules soldiers in numbers.. i am not talking about C&C here where you win everything with many many tanks. you have soldiers, the city fells. iraq falls if the iranians want to.

the hardest thing would be to cross the open land.
THATS the only problem and thats the advantages the one that they who defend themselfes have.
iran is just interested in defense. and a good defense is able to withstand the amount of ten times the mass the attacker throws in..

surely now you still can say: the american soldier is so brave and so awesome equipped. a headshot is a headshot. and rambos are dead before they see the enemy..
in the 2. WW the militair hat an ethos. artillery and bombings were ok, but then there was a fight on the ground.
there is no more such a thing. its has been a cowardly bombing till everything is dead. woo, predator drones and more.. using the joystick as a real weapon. now that is glorious. i doubt someone of that kind would get the purple heart..
but the enemy has adapted... so live with the consequences and fight if you mean that this war is necessary.
stop talking about a blitz and so on. stop believing in such BS acts that have nothing to do with patriotism but just prove that you are braindead!

reply to post by dmxny


Do you understand what a Ballistic missile is?
Here's a linky:
Ballistic Missiles - Wiki

A ballistic missile is a missile that follows a sub-orbital, ballistic flightpath with the objective of delivering a warhead to a predetermined target. The missile is only guided during the relatively brief initial powered phase of flight and its course is subsequently governed by the laws of orbital mechanics and ballistics. To date, ballistic missiles have been propelled during powered flight by chemical rocket engines of various types.

This means shredding the main body of a Ballistic Missile at the range where a Phalanx can engage (only 1 to 5 miles) it will have little effect on it's flight path. This simply isn't the duty that these things were designed for. They were meant to take out smaller missiles. Originally, it was designed to counter Soviet exorcists which are tiny compared to your typical Ballistic Missile. Further, they rely on guidance until impact, so destroying the body destroys the threat.

This, incidentally, is why the Patriot missile system was woefully in-effective in the first Gulf War. The PAC-II warhead was similar to that of a sidewinder. It was in-effect a flying claymore that would get close to the target, then detonate, spraying the target with shrapnel. This had little effect on SCUDs. Thus the PAC-III missile system which impacts the target to assure a kill. The down side there is that it's MUCH harder to get a direct hit like that, especially against fast moving missiles.

As for lasers and advanced focused radar pulse systems... ah, assuming that any are ready to deploy (which they aren't according everything I've read), again, a Ballistic missile isn't guided beyond the first few moments of it's launch, so they would have no effect.

Now, if we're going to talk about cruise missiles, both the Phalanx and near-future laser/radar systems would have more effect. Cruise missiles rely on being guided until they actually hit the target. Problem here is that they are virtually undetectable until it's too late to counter them.

The Patriot has the best chance of being useful to defend against missile attacks, but then again, what do you do when Iran launches 30 to 100 of it's cheep, yet accurate (unlike the scud), ballistic missiles against your base that has one or two Patriot batteries?

You start preying is what you do.

I hate to burst your bubble, but these anti-missile systems simply aren't the wonders that they have been made out to be.

Ah well it's the same old same old Iraq story. there are WMD and Bush has this power hungry thing on the go, possibly small d*ck syndrome, who knows. Now we are all going to be affected, and not just the US, because of this one monkey that should have been taken out of office a long time ago - or just taken out. Hell if he is a shape shifting reptilian can't we just put him in a big bottle of formaldehyde and watch him fade?

I feel sorry for the American guys and gals who will have to fight this war and i guess that would eventually include the rest of the world. Hell, can't we attack Zimbabwe first and take out the biggest WMD, Weapon of Mass Delusion - Mugabe.

I am not sure what it will take to smack Bush back to a state of sanity. Perhaps losing 10 million soldiers? And then he will want to do something else again. Who knows. Hell i am no war conspiracy theorist and i do not propose to anyone that i am a knowledgeable war fanatic, but what i do know is this is all very very wrong.

I just hope, and this may sound bad but please understand where i am comming from - IF Iran is attacked, i pray the forces get such a smack from Iran that they step back and say, "ok, we are done here". But will it just be another Vietnam? US won't win again - perhaps.

I don't wish bad on the US at all but i do think the Bushes have a little too much power.

I'm sorry if this is a bit off topic, and I don't mean to distract everyone, but certainly ethics dictate the issue be addressed before I contribute to the original topic. I apologize in advance for the long post, but I'm addressing two topics at once here. Scroll down if you want to hear my opinion on the original topic.

All this talk of "I can't wait to invade Iran," and "I'm gonna go kill me some muslims," is making me sick. How old are we here? 14?

I'm specifically calling out princeofpeace, brock landers, and ketzer here. I just don't understand how you can say such things. Are you really so uptight and insecure that every time some backwater semi-dictator says something you don't like, you threaten the lives of millions of people?

This is sickening. War is hell. It is not something you do because you want to get into a d*** waving contest. Thousands of people die in wars, including those on your own side. Obviously I don't expect you to care about the lives of innocent people on the other side that are lost. No, they're just muslims to you. Obviously all that matters is your own religion. You people are no different than Bin Laden for trying to convert others under threat of death.

No, you people would rather see thousands of people die so you can show off all of the American military's fancy toys and get off to a bunch of big explosions.

It isn't your family that is getting killed. It's not your lives being taken, or the lives of those you love. These people don't matter to you because they are half way around the world, and as long as you get to watch, "Boom! Boom! Bang! Bang! Ra Ra America!" on your TV, you are happy.

In truth, your disregard for human life, and your delusion of American invincibility tell me you really have ABSOLUTELY NO grasp on reality.

Aside from this, and to return to topic.

Is it any surprise that Iran is behaving the way that they are? I don't particularly like Amhedinejad. However, war is the wrong approach. If they want to develop nuclear technology, then they should do so under the watchful eye of peaceful, more developed nations (such as the UK, France, etc...)

As a matter of fact, from what I understand, they were offered developmental help for peaceful, power generation technology from the UK and France under the condition that full access is provided to their nuclear program in order to prevent weaponization. From what I understand, the US blocked the deal, even though Iran accepted it. Weapons inspectors have also not found any evidence of a nuclear weapons program, just a power program. This would have been a peaceful outcome, but that is not what the USA wants. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the status last time I checked.

Washington wants war, and it looks like they'll get it. They don't care about nuclear technology. They just use that as a scapegoat. Look at Iraq and Afghanistan. "Lets go get Bin Laden." 1 year later, "Forget about Bin Laden, lets attack Iraq." They will stop at nothing just to show off our fancy military and make money for their corporate interests such as Halliburton.

Would we destroy Iran? Certainly, but we're not invincible. It will be significantly more difficult than destroying Iraq, and the insurgency will probably be far tougher. Our already very poor standing in the international community will suffer more. Our already stretched army will be spread thinner, and we'll escalate our debt even more. Not to even mention the reaction of China and Russia.

So in the long run, we will take a very nasty hit if we do attack.

[edit on 8-9-2007 by erkokite]

[edit on 8-9-2007 by erkokite]