Fortress Iran is Virtually Impregnable to a Successful Invasion

Originally posted by kindred

bruxfain
Hey, when you say learn it the hard way do you mean learn it the way Europeans did?

I saw some photos of London from just 60 years ago. It was bombed into a heap. Learn like the Germans did? Like the French or the Russians or the Italians?

I see, Europeans of today want what happened to them to happen to America. Not only can't any European nation claim recent victory in War, they got #ed big time. It can be pointed out what they did to there own home and it never happened in America anywhere near that scale and I am happy to say, it never will. The Persian and Arabs want to happen in this land what has happened to them, but it won't and that's why everyone's seems so pissed off these days. You were counting on Bush, but he failed to get America destroyed.

YAWN!, keep peddling your ignorance. It's times like this that I sincerely wish I could teach my arse to speak. At least then I would be on a level playing field, and I might actually be able to relate to what you're saying.

It's people like you who seem to think you have the god given right, to sow death and destruction on anyone you please. Most of the time you don't even need a reason or an excuse which just about sums up your mentality. You also tend to gloat about how easily you can kill and destroy entire nations and then you have the audacity and nerve to call yourselves civilized. Most of the sane people on this thread, probably don't know whether to laugh or cry. What you do affects everyone on this planet, therefore we have every god damn right to be concerned and p***** at the same time.

One of the reasons Europeans are reluctant to wage war and instead favour diplomacy is because we have seen first hand the horrors of war, or have been told tales of these horrors by our grandparents. Being on the receiving end has taught us a valuable lesson in morality, something some of you Americans just don't get. Probably because your homeland has never been subjected to the ravages and horrors of war as our countries have. Unfortunately if you don't change your attitudes sometime soon, there's a strong chance that will change and I sincerely hope it doesn't.

What you said in regards to Bush just proves how paranoid and fearful you truly are. You'll probably find that most Europeans don't wish for the destruction of America. Quite the opposite, as I certainly don't and we just wish you would come to your senses. Hatred, begets hatred, just as war begets war and frankly we Europeans have truly grown sick and tired of those who peddle hatred, ignorance, death and destruction.

Peace!!!

Shazam The Unbowed
Yep. The only reason we got so many itanians rattling sabres here is ause they are scared #less were gonna do to them what we did to iraq.

Geez another tough guy who brags about bringing death and destruction to others, but who'll nodobt be cowering under his computer desk if and when war does break out.

Some of you yanks crack me up.

TXMACHINEGUNDLR
Yeah the terrorists are doing well. We have killed between 1 and 3 million Arabs and they have killed what 4000 American troops. Keep dreaming.

Another American who places immeasurable value on the life of a human being. Can't you just feel the love.

Only 4000 Americans. To anyone whose sane, that's 4000 too many and I also bet their families don't see it that way. Only, pffftt.



[edit on 27-7-2008 by kindred]

Really great post,star for you,encompassed my thoughts on reading some of the things that people think on this thread and others,put it more eloquently than i could

reply to post by SystemiK


You do know we have Bombers and Fighters that can strike from 40,000 feet, right? And that we have bunker busting bombs that can penetrate up to 500 feet before exploding? And that our sensors can find nuclear facilities even shield in lead from 40,000 feet?

Taking out the facilities is not the problem. It's how do we prevent it from HAVING to happen, and if it does, make sure we can handle any reprecusions.

Personally, I think it's a fait-a-compli that Israel will do so before the next President, whoever it is, is elected. AND, we should help and support them when they do.

reply to post by Nunny

Personally, I think it's a fait-a-compli that Israel will do so before the next President, whoever it is, is elected. AND, we should help and support them when they do.

Interesting... when did Israel become the 51st State? Maybe I missed that.

Israel is sucking the US into a blackhole slowly but surely and the American government are too blind to see their being dragged down by their so-called "friends" because of the Jewish Lobby in the US Congress.

American interests and Israeli interests conflict on so many levels, why should America sacrifice it's own national security to help Israel?

So because Israel stepped into a pile of sh*t by threatening Nuclear action on Iran, America must now reel the Israelis out, and at the same time put it's own National Security and stability on the line?

By supporting Israel, it gives more and more justification to all those Islamic Fundamentalists to attack the US. That's why US troops are dying everyday.

America didn't create Israel, it didn't bring it on to it's feet, it's not Americas responsibility.

The only reason the US bows down to it's parasitic friend is because of the immense pressure from the Jewish Lobby in Congress and the growing number of Jewish members of Bush Administration who don't know where their loyalties lie:
www.tbrnews.org...

reply to post by Nunny


The Israelis know that even the most successful airstrike they could possibly pull off would probably not do more than delay Iran's program for 1-2 years.

It's all posturing at this point IMO, no military action short of invasion, occupation and regime change is going to stop an Iran that's determined to build a bomb. Period.

And the US just isn't up to the task. We lack the forces to occupy a country the size of Iran, and there is almost no political support within the US for such a plan, and quite a bit of opposition.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if these right-wing fanatics drag us into a war with Iran, it's time to stop talking to them and start shooting them. It would be time for civil war.

[edit on 7/27/08 by xmotex]

Maybe it's due to the worth of life?

Are American lives are worth little when compared to 'Gods chosen people'...?

So by getting the Yanks to act as dispensible bodyguards and defenders, the Israeli's will have little or nothing to fear knowing that president of the united states will happily send his own men to the slaughter as long as the Israeli interests are protected.

I wonder what would happen if the Americans needed Israels help? Would Israel be so quick to dispense equipment and weapons and human life?

Some how i doubt it?

But hey, why argue, when we can see the evidence...

Maybe the Yanks should start thinking for themselves?

reply to post by mr-lizard


Whatever it is, they certainly do have a superiority complex.

Israel reminds of the "little brother of the big, bad kid on the block".
He loves to stir up the sh*tstorm and cause mischief but when its time for him to taste his own medicine he runs home to big bro and hides.

So by getting the Yanks to act as dispensible bodyguards and defenders, the Israeli's will have little or nothing to fear knowing that president of the united states will happily send his own men to the slaughter as long as the Israeli interests are protected.

Exactly my point above.

America is SACRIFICING it's own National Security for another nation's.

And this has become standard Foreign Policy for god knows how long, and nobody in Congress has the presence of mind to get up and say: "Hang on, why the hell are we helping these people?"

I wonder what would happen if the Americans needed Israels help? Would Israel be so quick to dispense equipment and weapons and human life?

Are you kidding?

I would love to see Israel try to give America $3 billion dollars in aid every single year: www.forbes.com...

Really I would love to see them repay one iota of all the weapons and "aid" America has given them in the past 40 years.

Instead look at what they have to offer to their Host, oops I mean Ally.

- Felafel
- Hummus
- Residency for American Jews
- Deteriorating relations with every Muslim country in the Mid-East
- A big bullseye on their asses for every Islamic Fundamentalist group in the world, because now they have one more reason to attack America
- And of course 35 dead US servicemen: The USS Liberty

Seems the love is a little one-sided to me, but hey that's the price to pay for friendship sometimes....

[edit on 27/7/08 by The Godfather of Conspira]

reply to post by ZindoDoone


Sorry Zindo, don't know what closet you live in, but unlike Iraq, the Iranian people are fierce nationalists. They may not be at all satisfied with the regime currently calling the shots in Tehran, but if anyone were to attack the country, the people (and the government) will respond with brutal force (which is exactly what mullahs want).

Originally posted by Impreza
In Iran, the US will have the mujahideens, the peshmargas, most of the kurdish people, and a few other resistance groups that have taken refuge in northern Iraq. These guys know the Iranian mountains and valleys like the back of their hands.

Which mujahideens? The ones in Afganistan killing our troops
The Kurds? Maybe maybe not, few have forgotten what happend the last tiem the US asked them to help.

The demonstrators? This displays a total lack of understanding about Iran and her people. You do not have the same level of opression and disatisfaction you had under the Shah or in Iraq. The US by and large will be seen as the Invader / occupier and not a liberator. In that context, the Mountain people will make little difference.

What so Militias need fuel do they? Insurgents need to drink 5 cups of oil everyday to survive?
Guerrilla fighters don't run on fuel.


Guerllial fighters rely on the society they come from to recruit. If that society is starving no-one fights.

Lol... laughable logic at best. We're talking about asymmetrical warfare here.

That they may cripple Iran's tanks and planes, but their huge militias and the other resistance movements that would arise wouldn't give a damn if you cut off the flow of oil.

Electricity, heating oil, cooling systems etc. All require oil. I agree though, your "logic" is laughable.

As for the "Paper Tiger" remark that's funny, the world's second largest army, one of the most sophisticated, disciplined forces and they still cannot overcome an Insurgency that numbers in the ten's of thousands at the most.

We did overcome them. Even the AP recognises we have won in Iraq. All that "assymetrical warfare" didnt amount to jack.

The US has put one foot into quicksand here and nobody's throwing any life lines.

You're talking points are a year old. You might want to update them.

Putting the second foot in via Iran, is such a horrible move strategically, politically, globally; it just beggars belief anyone here could actually support it.

Who says we land a single troop. Our airforce alone could reduce every building in the country over a single story to rubble in 36 hours.

Right we're against war, therefore we're the enemy.
The old Republican mindset.

Being against war is very trendy. Sadly its also like being against gravity. You can be against gravity all you want, you're still gonna fall.




Wow those must be some pretty sharp sticks those Insurgents in Iraq are wielding if they've managed to kill 4,000 servicemen.


Even a dog gets lucky every now and again.

Lol.. "Backward culture"?
This may burst your bubble here, but modern Science, medicine, physics and astronomy all started in the Middle East.
Muslims pioneered those fields while Europe was in the Dark Ages:

The concepts of the number Zero, Botany, quarantine, Neurosurgery, Anthropology, Kinetics, decimals, the Arabic numeral system, heliocentric calenders, Dissection, Autopsy, Orbits, metabolism, pulsation, anatomy, the circulatory system, were all invented by Muslims.

No. Nice try though.

On Zero

History of zero
The concept of zero as a number, and not merely a symbol for separation is attributed to India.[10] In India, practical calculations were carried out using zero, which was treated like any other number by the 9th century CE, even in case of division.[10][11]

History of Botany

Ancient India

Early examples of plant taxonomy occur in the Rigveda, that divides plants into Vrska (tree), Osadhi (herbs useful to humans) and Virudha (creepers). which are further subdivided. The Atharvaveda divides plants into eight classes, Visakha (spreading branches), Manjari (leaves with long clusters), Sthambini (bushy plants), Prastanavati (which expands); Ekasrnga (those with monopodial growth), Pratanavati (creeping plants), Amsumati (with many stalks), and Kandini (plants with knotty joints). The Taittiriya Samhita and classifies the plant kingdom into vrksa, vana and druma (trees), visakha (shrubs with spreading branches), sasa (herbs), amsumali (a spreading or deliquescent plant), vratati (climber), stambini (bushy plant), pratanavati (creeper), and alasala (those spreading on the ground).

Manusmriti proposed a classification of plants in eight major categories. Charaka Samhitā and Sushruta Samhita and the Vaisesikas also present an elaborate taxonomy.

Parashara, the author of Vrksayurveda (the science of life of trees), classifies plants into Dvimatrka (Dicotyledons) and Ekamatrka (Monocotyledons). These are further classified into Samiganiya (Fabaceae), Puplikagalniya (Rutaceae), Svastikaganiya (Cruciferae), Tripuspaganiya (Cucurbitaceae), Mallikaganiya (Apocynaceae), and Kurcapuspaganiya (Asteraceae).[3]

Important medieval Indian works of plant physiology include the Prthviniraparyam of Udayana, Nyayavindutika of Dharmottara, Saddarsana-samuccaya of Gunaratna, and Upaskara of Sankaramisra.[3]

Ancient China

In ancient China, the recorded listing of different plants and herb concoctions for pharmaceutical purposes spans back to at least the Warring States (481 BC-221 BC). Many Chinese writers over the centuries contributed to the written knowledge of herbal pharmaceutics. There was the Han Dynasty (202 BC-220 AD) written work of the Huangdi Neijing and the famous pharmacologist Zhang Zhongjing of the 2nd century. There was also the 11th century scientists and statesmen Su Song and Shen Kuo, who compiled treatises on herbal medicine and included the use of mineralogy.

Greco-Roman world

Among the earliest of botanical works in Europe, written around 300 B.C., are two large treatises by Theophrastus: On the History of Plants (Historia Plantarum) and On the Causes of Plants. Together these books constitute the most important contribution to botanical science during antiquity and on into the Middle Ages. The Roman medical writer Dioscorides provides important evidence on Greek and Roman knowledge of medicinal plants.

And the other "achievements" you listed, are just as full of BS.

So much for "anti-science" ey?

So much for "denying ignorance eh?






[edit on 7/27/2008 by Shazam The Unbowed]

Actually you did. Let me refresh your stale memory:

* August 20, 1984. 96 TOW anti-tank missiles
* September 14, 1984. 408 more TOWs
* November 24, 1984. 18 Hawk anti-aircraft missiles
* February 17, 1986. 500 TOWs
* February 27, 1986. 500 TOWs
* May 24, 1986. 508 TOWs, 240 Hawk spare parts
* August 4, 1986. More Hawk spares
* October 28, 1986. 500 TOWs

query.nytimes.com...

You sold to the Iranians even when they were your enemies in the 1980's.

We sold to them when they were the enemy of our enemy. Again, whos going to sell them advanced weapons now?

And it wasn't just a few thousand rocket launchers either.
How the hell do you think the Iranian Airforce got its hands on F-14's?
Or Cobra Gunships?
Or Hueys?
Or F-4's?

Yes, because those will perform awesomely against modern f-16's, F-22's etc.

You guys threw weapons and cash at them like there was no tomorrow.

Besides, it's not like they need much American help, the Russians & Chinese have got that covered:

Hah.
Russian and Chiense weapons?
Theyd be better off stickinh with the rocks and sticks.

Originally posted by Nunny
You do know we have Bombers and Fighters that can strike from 40,000 feet, right? And that we have bunker busting bombs that can penetrate up to 500 feet before exploding? And that our sensors can find nuclear facilities even shield in lead from 40,000 feet?

Recent articles in AWST show that Iranians have hardened thier bunkers using alternating patterns of 10" reinforced concrete and 10 feet of packer earth some as deep as 200 feet of this type of layer.

Short of using nuclear weapons,

The bomb underwent critical testing in Nevada at the Tonopah Test Range, a major test facility for United States Department of Energy funded weapon programs. It proved capable of penetrating over 30 metres (100 feet) of earth or 6 metres (20 feet) of solid concrete.[3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-28

We are talking anywhere from 70-100 feet of concrete and 70-100 feet of packed earth.

Personally, I think it's a fait-a-compli that Israel will do so before the next President, whoever it is, is elected. AND, we should help and support them when they do.

Support for what? An act of total agression?

All this is no doubt true, but really, there is no need to *invade* Iran. It is a threat only because of its missiles and potential nuclear capabilities. Remove that capability and you've ended the potential threat.

A sufficiently powerful and sufficiently motivated government (e.g., the U.S.) could destroy Iran's military and technical infrastructure without much effort. It might require the use of nuclear weapons, which would be abhorrent to the world, but so far that consideration hasn't had much weight with the current administration.

If Iran appears to be a credible nuclear threat to the U.S., we'll likely shoot first.

Originally posted by FredT


Support for what? An act of total agression?

What like taking dozens of diplomats hostage? Or funding and supporting attacks on theUS and Isreal?
Like that kind of agression?

Once again I find it totally discusting the attitude of some people on this thread and we all know who they are and where they come from

qoute " we have killed 1-3 million arabs for the loss of 4k troops"

Its quite obvious that some members think that the mass killing of people is fun and there should be more of it. These people need rounding up for re education becuse they need it big time. The attitude of those backward Arab Nations etc, where do these people come from do they grow idiots in greenhouses or what.

Long before America ever existed and Europeans were living primitive lives the people of the ME were highly advanced in many areas such as math and Science etc. so where has this oh they are all inbred savages attiude and the like come from.

And why have the American people allowed to have their country high jacked by zionists to fight Isreal's wars for it and the next one Iran will probally result in attacks on the US mainland will these ignorant war mongers be cheering then when their cities are lying in ruins.

The fact that American can do alot of damage to Iran is a know fact but do the war mongers think that the 70 million Iranians will just sit back and take it, no I dont think so. And those who think they should KILL more Arabs makes you no better than what the Nazis, Stalin, Lennin, Pol Pot and all the other murderous regimes.

I would bet anything that this same person was one of those that predicted that the USA would have tens of thousands of dead if they invaded Iraq.

Besides, who wants to invade Iran? A few dozen nukes, and they are pretty much taken care of. No real problem at all.

And if they keep it up, that's exactly what will happen to them. Their "leader" is just like Saddam, bluffing like crazy. He has nothing that any modern country would be afraid of.

Even if they were invaded, their weaponry is 2nd class at best, they couldn't do anything against the Iraqui army at its best (and look what the Americans did to THEM), and their armed forces would just be destroyed in place.

Of course, you can always find some General that will bleat in fear. usually one that has never seen real combat in his life, or only a very limited form of it.

Yes indeed, the people of the middle east were once heads and shoulders above the west in math, science and medicine.

Then, they stagnated and went backward. They became primitive, and went back to a tribal way of life. They abhorred education, science, the arts, and any form of human advancement.

But their arrogance did NOT die back. They still believed that they were head and shoulders above everyone else in the world. They want to impose their beliefs on everyone, and they will not compromise.

Now, the idea of killing tens of thousands of them is NOT a wonderful thing. But, if they threaten me and mine, then I say, kill them off if that is what it takes.

Kill the leadership that keeps them in a medieval form of government. Kill the leadership that keep them vassals of a religion that is violent, anti-female and that relishes the killing of anyone that is not of their particular belief (including other Muslims).

If it takes a few nuclear bombs to make the western world safe from their threats, then that is what they brought down upon themselves.

And no, dying by an atomic bomb is no more evil than being struck down by a bullet, or by a disease.

reply to post by magicmushroom


Now that is one of the most sensible responses i've seen in this thread so far. Pity it's followed by Old Medic's armchair general style rubbish (the post below yours), but nonetheless at least somebody on here has got a soul.

Interesting how so many of these right-wing fanatics are rooting for a war, yet they're the very first to start crying when some form of retaliation hits them. Like spoiled children really.

Life for these people is little more than a video game, some of the responses i've seen on here verge on the insane, with blind ignorance, idiocy and a distinct lack of imagination.

It does make me happy though that the likes of 'what theory, shazam the unbowed and Dan Tanna' aren't working in politics or any form or military strategy, otherwise America would be in worse trouble than it is now.

At least your post makes me realise this forum isn't full of idiots.

Originally posted by OldMedic
Yes indeed, the people of the middle east were once heads and shoulders above the west in math, science and medicine.

Then, they stagnated and went backward. They became primitive, and went back to a tribal way of life. They abhorred education, science, the arts, and any form of human advancement.

If it takes a few nuclear bombs to make the western world safe from their threats, then that is what they brought down upon themselves.

Wow... You genius!

So by nuking the middle east, it would make the survivors and any observers realise that the western world is far more evolved than them?

I cannot even begin to state where your logic fails, but instead i'll just take great pride in the fact that you are nothing more than an armchair general and god forbid you take any responsibility for anything more taxing than typing words onto a screen.

If you a representation of the good of the westerners, then I'll pack my bags and start hitchiking to mars.

Originally posted by Shazam The Unbowed

Originally posted by mr-lizard

Ahh yes, because pussified pacsifists who are unable to recognise or respond to a threat is exactly what America needs.

I'd much rather be a 'pussified pacifist' than a slave to Israel, but i'm neither so you're totally wrong on both accounts.

I just abhor idiots and uneccesary violence.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by mr-lizard]