UK and U.S. 'draw up joint plan to attack Iran': Evidence of nuclear programme raises tension in M

Holy cow,
the story

The UK and U.S. are drawing up plans to attack Iran amid growing tensions in the Middle East, it was claimed last night.
Barack Obama and David Cameron are preparing for war after reports that Iran now has enough enriched uranium for four nuclear weapons.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s hardline regime in Tehran has been linked to three assassination plots on foreign soil, according to senior officials in Whitehall.

reply to post by rom12345


Woah, this kind of got heated pretty quick. Just like 2 days ago, there were threads about Israel planning for an attack, then yesterday there were more about the UK...and now the US?

I see this in your link to...

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pushing for invasion

Plus Israel test fired missiles capable of carrying nukes that will reach Iran...

Other notable points in the OP link

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak are reportedly agitating for a pre-emptive attack against the Islamic state.

The UK would be likely to agree to any U.S. decision to invade, even though the Ministry of Defence are stretched to breaking point by swingeing budget cuts and wars in Afghanistan and Libya.

War planners will look at potential deployments of Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles and RAF fighter jets armed with precision-guided Paveway IV and Brimstone bombs and missiles, surveillance planes and air-to-air refuelling.

Western intelligence has also suggested that Iran is hiding the material for a covert nuclear weapons programme in fortified bunkers which cannot be reached by conventional missiles.

So...if what Im seeing is correct, this will be an invasion, not just a bombing campaign?

ETA - I just remembered this came out a few days ago to US to bolster Gulf military presence

The United States plans to bolster its military presence in the Persian Gulf after the withdrawal of its troops from Iraq announced by President Barack Obama.

(We are supposed to withdraw at the end of this year)

The New York Times, citing unnamed officials and diplomats, said the repositioning could include new combat forces in Kuwait able to respond to a collapse of security in Iraq or a military confrontation with Iran.

I seriously hope that Israel, the US and in this case the UK will get their Ass blown to the moon over this !!!
Dont get me wrong, but i am originated from Switzerland and we have the neutral stand in most scenarios,
but Iran has not done anything wrong !

i know it has been mentioned countless times already, but here once again : ISRAEL HAS NUKES and is not even signing that Nuclear treaty and they can go after one who is part of that treaty ????

Iran might not be honest about all their intensions, i give you that, but Israel is following NONE repeat NONE of the rules out there and can do what ever they want !!!

There4 i really hope they will be kicked left, right and center over this!!!!

there goes my neutrality !

reply to post by rom12345


I can't recall ever reading the Dailymail before, is it a reliable source of information?

Even so, I doubt the US would ever launch a war during an election year..

Wow! A secret bunker unreachable by missiles, that is scarily stupid.

I hope this is all a hoax..

I hope this is a journalist jumping to conclusions.

I very much doubt Iran would attack anyone, it would be suicide for them. So in that respect, any kind of pre-emptive military action can not be morally justified. Iran is effectively surrounded by US and UK forces. Put in that position they are bound to seek whatever deterrent necessary. Perhaps if Iran had nukes, it would stabilize the region by a stalemate.

where would you hide enriched uranium and a nuclear program. in a public nuclear facility, or 100 ft underground in a fortified bunker.

all an invasion will do is delay their program, while they fight. if all they do are airstrikes and lob missiles then it's pointless. they have to completely destroy the iranian government and occupy it like iraq, while a new government and military is rebuilt.

I feel like I have to remind people of the failed faLse flag assassination attempt on the Saudi prince.

I wad thrilled to see Obama rise to power especially in the light of Americas new dark ages in the Bush decade. But Obama only serves to prove one or two things... that America is not run by the people or their best interest but by money hungry people who want to keep the military machine running or that Obama himself is just another man of war.

I sincerely hope that any armed forces from the so-called coalition will be met with heavy resistance if they decide to attack Iran. For too long we have relied blindly on the information fed to us by governments and the media friendly to them. Information we cannot confirm and in some cases even have affirmed. This has to stop... we will never reach a point of peace if we try to get there with weaponry and ill intend.

We have to learn that it is more than ok to question those who call themselves leaders and question their decisions. They do not automatically tell the truth or give you correct information.... they lie, they plunder and they oppress. Even those closest to you...

Let's say that such military action is successful. The "coalition forces" invade iran and do away with it's "nuclear ambitions". What then ?. Does anyone think that this will ultimately stabilize the region ?

Originally posted by randomname
where would you hide enriched uranium and a nuclear program. in a public nuclear facility, or 100 ft underground in a fortified bunker.

all an invasion will do is delay their program, while they fight. if all they do are airstrikes and lob missiles then it's pointless. they have to completely destroy the iranian government and occupy it like iraq, while a new government and military is rebuilt.

edit on 3-11-2011 by randomname because: (no reason given)

This is precisely the reason why I don't see an attack happening on Iran in a conventional fashion.
If a war happens to occur, and Israel, the US and the UK do strike, I'm not expecting a conventional, drawn our war with ground troops etc. - it would be too costly, too time consuming, and far too unpopular "at home" for each of those nations.

Look instead for a series of strikes on key locations - targeted, perhaps even nuclear strikes...
and don't presume it starts and ends with Iran. Syria have been in the news a little lately over its own nuclear program - and I suspect they may be further advanced than Iran - they've just hidden it better.

Does anyone see parallels between this and their insistence about Iraq being heavily armed and ready to fire?

Firstly, I don't believe anything that comes out of Whitehall. I worked with those dorks for a decade and I can assure you, they can't find their butts with both hands. But they can conjure whatever out of whatever if they want to fry someone.

Secondly, does ANYONE believe that it was Iran behind that "assassination attempt"? Seriously. How feeble was that? The guy had better chances of slipping on a banana peel that being threatened by "the alleged".

Okay, so what we're left with is a replay of how we got started with Iraq. Does anyone else notice the similar modus operandi?

Ignore the assassination attempts for a minute, and let's say that Iran has no nuclear weapons, nor are they working toward the capability... you still have a state with religious nutjobs at the helm, who have threatened repeatedly to exterminate another sovereign state...
and are the single greatest state sponsor of terrorism on the planet.

Surely that makes them ripe for the picking?

I'm no warmonger, and I wouldn't support a war in Iran, but if those credentials don't work, what would?

Originally posted by Awen24
you still have a state with religious nutjobs at the helm, who have threatened repeatedly to exterminate another sovereign state...
and are the single greatest state sponsor of terrorism on the planet.

Yep, their flag has stars and stripes on it

reply to post by Awen24


The US had Bush for eight years. Nutjob much there? Why wasn't it okay to knock him off? Why is he still running free? Why is Cheney even on this planet anymore? Why is Rumsfeld still around? Nutjobs one and all! Bush Sr? Help!

Come on. This is a planet with all different sorts on it. I personally do not want to live in the US. I do not want to live with US values. I am an American expat who now lives in Northern Europe and has done for more than half my life. I resent it when American values are exported to my shores via the msm. I left to get away from that place. Why do you think your values are right?

Reply to post by CosmicEgg

Well this seems to mesh with the number of carriers in the Arabian sea. Seems there are four. With eight out of e eleven splayed around the Pacific rim and minimum three maybe four in the Arabian sea.

Been waiting since oh five, think this is about to pop of f.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by Awen24
you still have a state with religious nutjobs at the helm, who have threatened repeatedly to exterminate another sovereign state...
and are the single greatest state sponsor of terrorism on the planet.

Surely that makes them ripe for the picking?

I'm no warmonger, and I wouldn't support a war in Iran, but if those credentials don't work, what would?

The much quoted comment about wiping Israel from the map is said to be a wrong translation and a bit of an urban myth.
Also it's a bit ironic that while shouting the odds about terrorism and dangerous nations - it's the West which actually invades other countries and kills civilians wholesale.
Whatever - we need to get past the politics and look at what we should all be doing in this scenario. IMO it's worrying that this has gone past tabloid speculation - it's in most of the MSM media. There was even a phone in discussion on a UK radio programme last night - the popular view being that now was a likely time for military action given that the East is in such a state of turbulence. Also paradoxically war is often seen as an economic fix. We should all get ready as best as we can.

Another step towards World War If this is true, or heck, even if it's all made up will make no difference.

The USA wants to war with Iran because the people who bought them off say so. I'm sure it will have full U.N. Co-Operation as WW3 begins. I don't think people understand what's coming when Iran gets attacked.

It's the Russians and the Chinese and everyone sick of the insanity that is the US Death Machine, and it's U.N. counterparts. I can't believe it's really happening, and even the people who think they know something don't see this? How can anyone not see where this is going? There's been people saying it's coming for years, and they're not psychic.

#@&$!


That is all.

Originally posted by Awen24
... you still have a state with religious nutjobs at the helm, who have threatened repeatedly to exterminate another sovereign state...
and are the single greatest state sponsor of terrorism on the planet.

Surely that makes them ripe for the picking?

I'm no warmonger, and I wouldn't support a war in Iran, but if those credentials don't work, what would?

Your exact words can describe the US Government as well.
And Israel to boot.
The UK? Their govt are just nutjobs with no specific religious denomination.

Russia and China seem quiet???

If the US does continue the war mongering and strike Iran....
I hope like hell, China and Russia, maybe even throw Nth Korea as well, just unleash on all of them.
If not, there will be lots who will take action against the US/US/Israe, with the attack on Iran as the catalyst.
Forget holidays abroad for many nations,
and ex-pats will not be safe.

Its 2011, we need to evolve past the brute force mentality.

reply to post by buni11687


This is going to get real interesting. Especially when they invade and conquer Iran and then find out there are no nuclear missles anywhere to be found. Gonna be a whole lot of people looking like asses in the world community. I bet Iran will be filing war crimes against the nations involved that the tax payers will no doubt end up footing the bill for.