Iran War. How do you think it will lead to that and the possible outcome.

Originally posted by theubermensch
reply to post by spy66

 

Yeah,I think they are just being smart ass's. They do seem cocky though.

And I think they are saying that they arent stupid. They know they can hurt America. They know they are not Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya. They still seem far too cocky to not be confident of the backing of Russia and maybe China in some form or another.

edit on 31-1-2012 by theubermensch because: (no reason given)

Iran is all alone and isolated, it dosent matter how Iran plays their cards politically. It doesn't matter if they play the nice guy or the bad guy. Iran wont submit to the US, the EU or Israel. Neither should they have to.

Iran is targeted for a specific purpose regardless of what they do. That is why they are being cocky. They can say what they like it wont change the outcome unless they submit themselves unconditionally to the western authorities.

We dont want to be over ruled by our government. Why should Iran be any different?

Iran is not being cocky in the sense we think they are, they are being cocky because we are threatening their sovereign rights. The media is not writing about all that is going on. They are just snapping up what is good news if you know what i mean. And turning this into a circus where Iran is the clown.

Why do we think the media is oh so right about this, But when it comes to how the media treats us here at home its suddenly the other way around?

Glad to read this, especially the contribution of SplitInfinity.
Finally a thread with real info we can think about, not just the ideological huffing and puffing of last weeks.

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
reply to post by Chance321

 

How do you think we get agents in country?

I don't think we will. Remember the drone that obama gave the iranians? All iran has to do is with the doubt thats already in the water from my earlier post, is stage a few showy explosions in country and show some wreckage from the mock drones they made of the one they've had months to measure, ect. china/russia'll come to the aid of iran attacking our troops and we'll have no choice but defend our selves.

reply to post by sonnny1

2. No one KNOWS what the US has,but I will say this much,You can bet the World hasn't seen 1/10 of the advancements.........You dont spend like a drunken sailor,not to have an advantage.

I think we can safely assume that the US does have great tech, but, it doesn't have near anything in the movies. Otherwise, Afghanistan wouldn't have taken as long and homemade bombs wouldn't be killing US soldiers.

Iran has NO allies. None that are willing to go against the US,or its Allies. Not unless they want full scale WW3.

Yes they do. I don't believe they will support Iran if Iran attacks first, but, I believe they will if the US/Israel invades Iran, which may explain why nothing has been done with all the accusations.

Originally posted by superman2012


Yes they do. I don't believe they will support Iran if Iran attacks first, but, I believe they will if the US/Israel invades Iran, which may explain why nothing has been done with all the accusations.

Can you name me the countries that will go to war, side by side with them?

Not terrorist organizations,or ones willing to risk WW3........

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by superman2012


Yes they do. I don't believe they will support Iran if Iran attacks first, but, I believe they will if the US/Israel invades Iran, which may explain why nothing has been done with all the accusations.

Can you name me the countries that will go to war, side by side with them?

Not terrorist organizations,or ones willing to risk WW3........

Nobody is going to risk WW3, that is why Iran hasn't attacked the US yet, and the US hasn't attacked Iran yet. Don't be silly. If you are going to preclude me from listing any country, don't ask for one. I believe China will support them, possibly Russia, India, hell, their ally list is on the net, check it out. North Korea is one as well.

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by superman2012


Yes they do. I don't believe they will support Iran if Iran attacks first, but, I believe they will if the US/Israel invades Iran, which may explain why nothing has been done with all the accusations.

Can you name me the countries that will go to war, side by side with them?

Not terrorist organizations,or ones willing to risk WW3........

Nobody is going to risk WW3, that is why Iran hasn't attacked the US yet, and the US hasn't attacked Iran yet. Don't be silly. If you are going to preclude me from listing any country, don't ask for one. I believe China will support them, possibly Russia, India, hell, their ally list is on the net, check it out. North Korea is one as well.

Thats what I mean.They have NO Allies willing to go to war with them.Support is one thing,Actively going to War? Not so much.BTW,Iran has attacked the US......Beirut,1983,Using a terrorist arm of their Country.

reply to post by superman2012

Nobody is going to risk WW3, that is why Iran hasn't attacked the US yet, and the US hasn't attacked Iran yet. Don't be silly. If you are going to preclude me from listing any country, don't ask for one. I believe China will support them, possibly Russia, India, hell, their ally list is on the net, check it out. North Korea is one as well.

People seem to have a rather narrow definition of "war" and a very broad definition of "ally." The United States and Iran have been at war from the moment the Iranians stormed the American embassy. Iran escalated the conflict by having its agents firebomb bookstores, on US soil and elsewhere. They have also waged a proxy war by forming and supporting paramilitary groups that attack American allies like Israel. The United States has retaliated by embargoes and seizing Iranian funds. That is war. There are a number of countries that continue to trade with Iran for the purposes of their own national interests. This does not make them allies; in fact, Iran can be described as their "client state." They will do nothing to defend Iran if they feel that it will be easier to deal with a post-conflict government. It will, they won't.

reply to post by sonnny1

Thats what I mean.They have NO Allies willing to go to war with them.Support is one thing,Actively going to War? Not so much.BTW,Iran has attacked the US......Beirut,1983,Using a terrorist arm of their Country.

Yes, but they would have allies that would support them in the event of an invasion. Then it wouldn't be the "bad guys" that started it, it would be the US invasion that started it.

Iran attacked the US, in Beirut in 1983...wonder why? Anything to do with Reagan getting chummy with their enemy, taking them off the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, and this:

Starting in 1982 with Iranian success on the battlefield, the United States made its backing of Iraq more pronounced, normalizing relations with the government, supplying it with economic aid, counter-insurgency training, operational intelligence on the battlefield, and weapons.

Wouldn't you be pissed if that happened to you? I think it is just sour grapes on Iran's part, it seems like they feel they should have been chosen.

reply to post by DJW001


Wasn't the same said of China and North Korea a while back? Whatever happened to NK? No plans there. China will not let the US invade Iran. They want the oil/gas. India has now said they will not support the sanctions. If I got all my food at a specific store and someone wanted to destroy the store, I wouldn't let that happen. If I am so wrong, why hasn't the US invaded or bombed them yet? They had much less proof in Iraq and that didn't stop them. The biggest terrorists are afraid of terror? Funny.

Originally posted by superman2012


Yes, but they would have allies that would support them in the event of an invasion. Then it wouldn't be the "bad guys" that started it, it would be the US invasion that started it.

What US invasion are we speaking of?

Originally posted by superman2012
Iran attacked the US, in Beirut in 1983...wonder why? Anything to do with Reagan getting chummy with their enemy, taking them off the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, and this:

Starting in 1982 with Iranian success on the battlefield, the United States made its backing of Iraq more pronounced, normalizing relations with the government, supplying it with economic aid, counter-insurgency training, operational intelligence on the battlefield, and weapons.

Wouldn't you be pissed if that happened to you? I think it is just sour grapes on Iran's part, it seems like they feel they should have been chosen.

They actively made aggressions against the US. Iran had Americans killed. From the Embassy takeover,to Beirut. I would say Iran had the first move.

Edit to add:

Unless we take the regime change years.........

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by superman2012


Yes they do. I don't believe they will support Iran if Iran attacks first, but, I believe they will if the US/Israel invades Iran, which may explain why nothing has been done with all the accusations.

Can you name me the countries that will go to war, side by side with them?

Not terrorist organizations,or ones willing to risk WW3........

There are other ways to appose the US besides supporting Iran in this confrontation.

The US is a great war machine, but it doesn't matter how great it is, if the US cant afford to use it or sustain it in the future.
In the future the US will know who their real friends are. Iran is just a small game not worth blowing your cover for. That is why there is no one willingly to sacrifice themselves at this stage.

reply to post by superman2012


somehow a bomb goes off in the Americanaz or a Americanaz relation Israel or other??

Iran is blamed somehow

Iran repeates it wasnt us

test say bomb materials came from Iran even if materials stolen and set for blame

Iran then is urged to further step back into a deep corner

Iran is not believed and is given a timer

Timer set in days for something to be done by Iran

Iran passes timer

Iran realizes this may be it and sickness bombs manifested human -animal -insect -microb delievered?

Iran tries to withstand release of sickness but knows it may be over for them so sickness carriers released

Iran attacked by????????!!!!!! please no!

Sickness bombs humans are already implanted globally begin to take sickness device injections

humans in Iran nuked Israel nuked Europe/Asia sick

Americanaz sick

Global pandemic spreads everywhere in days

ELE
ELE
ELE
ELE
ELE

NATAS smiles at its newcomers HUMANS LOST during FAIL. FAIL sequence begins due to massive soul transfer and flesh destruction.

NATAS feels happy for split second and then realizes no more humans to TEST then no more need for it (natas).

WAR WAR WAR with dark and LIGHT many from 3rd dimension are on sides of LIGHT or DARK

NAMASTE*******


[COLOR=RED]
it wants humans to destroy themselves SO IT CAN HAVE YOU CLOSER IN ITS DIMENSION and humans---SMH!!! [/COLOR]

Originally posted by superman2012
Wasn't the same said of China and North Korea a while back? Whatever happened to NK? No plans there. China will not let the US invade Iran. They want the oil/gas. India has now said they will not support the sanctions. If I got all my food at a specific store and someone wanted to destroy the store, I wouldn't let that happen. If I am so wrong, why hasn't the US invaded or bombed them yet? They had much less proof in Iraq and that didn't stop them. The biggest terrorists are afraid of terror? Funny.

I have a few questions regarding this last reply.

First off Oil is a commodity. Available from a myriad of sources. Right now Iran is in a pinch economically and is offering their oil at rock bottom prices to gain customers. Countries will purchase oil where it's the cheapest [For the time Being] when the price or situation changes so do loyalties.

AGAIN, I'm not advocating an attack on Iran but since you've written a "What If" thread.

1. What makes you so sure that Russia and/or China will risk the lives of millions of their people over Iran?
2. Just how exactly will they defend Iran?
3. Will Russia or China drive their forces across sovereign countries to get there?
4. Will they use their navies?

Let's try to stick to real world logistics in this "What If"

reply to post by sonnny1


You should read up on your history if you think Iran drew first blood.

CIA and MI6 hand their dirty fingers all over Iran long before the embassy scandal.

Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by sonnny1

 

You should read up on your history if you think Iran drew first blood.

CIA and MI6 hand their dirty fingers all over Iran long before the embassy scandal.

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

Maybe you should reread my post..........

I added covert regime change................

reply to post by sonnny1


Well you cant disregard something that has a direct connection to the Embassy incident. It was from the US embassy that the US NATO general instigated everything. And than use it as a legitimate argument for Iran being aggressive.

That is corrupt.

reply to post by superman2012

If I am so wrong, why hasn't the US invaded or bombed them yet?

Because that does not serve American interests. America's strategy is simply to keep Iran from dominating the Muslim world. It does this by preventing them from projecting political and military influence in their own backyard. So long as Iran cannot claim to be the guardians of Mecca, they are just a bunch of loud mouthed heretics.

I can confidently state that the United States will never attempt to invade and occupy Iran. A measured look at a topographical map will quickly explain why. A very quick airborne or missile attack against military targets is a possibility, but there will be no attempt to "reconstruct" the government in its wake. If these purely military strikes result in the collapse of the government, it would be in the United States' best interest to allow China to take the lead in the reconstruction. They know how to deal with recalcitrant religious groups, and would continue to rely on US naval power to safeguard the vital shipping lanes. This would also block Russia from extending its power across its near abroad. If a destabilized Iran leads to conflict between major powers, the war will be between China and Russia.

People keep accusing the US of being devious, but they fail to appreciate just how devious the US can be.

Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by sonnny1

 

Well you cant disregard something that has a direct connection to the Embassy incident. It was from the US embassy that the US NATO general instigated everything. And than use it as a legitimate argument for Iran being aggressive.

That is corrupt.

Sigh.....

Again reread my post.

Iran is aggressive. They are attempting to build Nuclear bombs,under the guise that North Korea used,as "peaceful purposes". Iran had Americans killed. Did the US storm the Iranian Embassy? The US has many times "helped" with regime change in other parts of the world,and I am not saying without consequences. The aggression of Iran is clear,unless you want to define it another way.....

Originally posted by superman2012

Starting in 1982 with Iranian success on the battlefield, the United States made its backing of Iraq more pronounced, normalizing relations with the government, supplying it with economic aid, counter-insurgency training, operational intelligence on the battlefield, and weapons.

Wouldn't you be pissed if that happened to you? I think it is just sour grapes on Iran's part, it seems like they feel they should have been chosen.

Meanwhile back at the Ranch.

Iraq was just loaded to the gills with Russian made tanks, trucks, BMPs, fighter jets, support aircraft and transports, helicopters. RPGs, AK-47s, Scud missiles and launchers not counting Russian made boots, belt buckles, helmets and socks etc etc etc....

But all that has been ignored.

So, who was really supplying and profiting from the Iraqi war machine?