U.S. Chief-of-Staff tells CNN U.S. preparing for attack on Iran

reply to post by Mnemicrsl


I'll stand up when this is confirmed, and not just an internet rumor. If I freaked out every time someone on the internet predicted something bad with nothing to back it up, I'd be starting my "only one year left to live!" vigil today.

I would not advise a full front war. That's all I have to say and will be one of my last warnings.

Well there is definitely going to be another war in another Middle Eastern Country.

You know what the Americans are like they love a good war and can't live without one.

Originally posted by ATS1Calum
Well there is definitely going to be another war in another Middle Eastern Country.

and it is definitely going to rain somewhere next year.

10/10 for stating the bleedin' obvious!!

I think this is read into way more than it should be. I think its just posturing at this point.

We have been planning for war with (or in, in the event the soviets invaded) Iran since 1979.

But I want to make this clear. I am 99.99% certain this will be an air/sea campaign only.....whether it is Isreal, the US, the UK (as recently reported) or all of us. Say anywhere from a few hours to up to 12 or so days in duration. I just don't see us invading Iran...the logistics are pretty complex. An invasion WILL make Russia and China concerned enough that they might jump in against us.

I see only a few potential scenario's that lead to significant ground combat.

1) Raids/limited landings of coastal areas on the Straight of Hormuz to ensure the LOCs stay open and keep the oil flowing and trade running.

2) If Iran moves significant forces into Iraq (particularily in the Basra area) we will likely defend the Iraqi territory. Our troops are gone, but almost a division's worth is staying in Kuwait. We just spent blood and treasure building that place up, I don't see us letting it go to Iran.

3). Special Operations of course will be on the ground designating targets and prepared to rescue downed pilots. i don't consider that major ground combat, that's part of the air campaign. HOWEVER, you could see fairly large special ops missions to briefly occupy some of the nuclear sites to ensure that the nuclear capabilities and infrastructure are destroyed. These could be sizable raids, such as an entire battalion of Rangers, or a Marine Expeditionary Unit landing. Once destruction is assured, they would pull out.

That's my take on it. As of right now.

So America can do a war even in the "age of austerity" Another brazen, numb-nut military man speaks out. Thers's been enough harm done already. As for terrorism the US or any other major country is no different. So much hypocrisy, not even a noble cause, all for the greenbacks.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
EDIT : Apparently they are ``planning`` for an attack on Iran, they have not ``decided to go all in`` yet.

Well here it comes. War before the election, bet on it.

No president has EVER LOST if the election happened during a war. Obama is going all in.

He's going to blow any good will he may have gained by withdrawing troops from Iraq, just to turn around and send them to Iran?

Smooth, Barry.

If he goes to war, it's only going to push more voters to Ron Paul, imo.

Originally posted by Vitchilo

No president has EVER LOST if the election happened during a war. Obama is going all in.

The military needs to ARREST CONGRESS NOW before all hell breaks loose! The election is too far. The government won't listen to the protests... time for the army to step it up.

Surely this is contradictory! Why would the Republican congress vote for war to ensure the Democratic Obama stays in power.

Sorry this is all nonsense.

If there is a war its because both parties agree on it (rightly or wrongly). As such it has nothing to do with elections........money for the rich yes.

reply to post by jtap66


Understood! But what about the NDAA bill that's got a lot of momentum? Is that enough to make your blood boil? Totally against the constitution.

reply to post by Vitchilo


I dont think even a war will get this worthless POTUS re-elected, and watch soon he and Axelrod will start leaking the racist angle as well...

Well I did a quick search on CNN on Iran and I found several articles.

1. Official: Accused U.S.-Iranian spy must be tried in Iran updated 10 hours, 33 minutes ago
2. U.S. Joint Chiefs to Iran: Don't push it updated 1 day ago
3. Top general says Iran shouldn't 'miscalculate our resolve' updated 1 day ago

On that note I wanted to add a few points of thought.

The US Military Command (Pentagon) Has a plan for every single country in the world be it friend or foe. There is a strategy for every single possible scenario. So the fact that they are prepared for an attack on Iran is nothing more then a statement of business as usual. Just because they have have a plan does not mean they are planning to go in with guns blazing.

I don't know if you are aware of this or not but the media love to sensationalize anything and everyhting.they can for ratings, fear mongering, or generally to express there own wishes etc. Haertz is very pro-Israel and very Conservative like Fox News. They enjoy their saber rattling just as much as Fox News, The Guardian, and a few other sources. They are the same source that claimed that Israel was going to sink the Iranian ships when they went through the Suez Canal, and nothing happened then either.

I think it is clear that Israel has already started its secret war with Iran ie. unexplained explosions, and Israel is as usual rubbing there itchy trigger fingers. Any source out of Israel is going to have a pro war bias. They are just chomping at the bit to get into a war with any and everyone in the Middle East (yet the Muslim countries are always painted as the bad guys)

Personally there is nothing more here then when any media source posts a story about a common procedure. Such as Police investigate family of victim. This is something that happens in any murder investigation, but when the media posts it that way it makes you think that the family is probably guilty of something or else the police wouldn't be investigating them.

Global defence spending...


Says it all really...

Start a war to save a second term? That is crazy even for this administration, of course bush pulled the same shat. There will eventualy come a time when our government has declared war on every damn middle eastern country, and no one left to fight. Then who will be left for a failing president to wage war apon? I can already feel the cross hairs focusing on you and me.

reply to post by catwhoknowsplusone


I honestly don't think they care what awaits them in the afterlife, as the road to hell is paved with dollar signs. Lots and lots of dollar signs.One fact remains true above all the bullspit that I have read. War is very profitable.

Could make sence as to why our troops are leaving Iraq. Have them stay home for a few months then ship them off for another conflict. hmmmm

You know it is a hell of a good way to facade the movement of an army if you were to take 100k troops in hundreds of planes and quickly place them on the board again and hope your enemy dont realize there are troops at there boarders that were not there yesterday.

Misleading title. This is a non-story.

A kind of "we could attack if we wanted to" story, same one we've been hearing for years.

Click here for more information.

The savage black one when he will have tried
His bloody hand at fire, sword and drawn bows:
All of his people will be terribly frightened,
Seeing the greatest ones hung by neck and feet.
century: 4, quatrain: 47



He was age 47 when he got elected too. You know who.

Click here for more information.