1 2 4 Next
Topic: What Are Iran's Intentions?
AdventureBegins's photo
Thu 03/08/12 07:49 PM

Seriously if Iran realy wanted to make trouble why would they smuggle garage door openers? A few stingers would send our choppers down as we did to the soviets eh?

Stingers are highly controlled and watched (not to mention expensive).

'Garage door openers' are not...

However garage door openers make a nice remote trigger.

C'mon man...

Pointing out the other side of the truth is one thing.

Deflecting the full truth smacks of desperation.

If a thing is true.

The facts speak for themselves.

In truth from this side of your eyes both Iran and the US have engaged in a Dance to War...

and BOTH of them need to knock it off.

Before Israel becomes frightened by the chest thumping and ends it for both of them.

s1owhand's photo
Thu 03/08/12 07:58 PM
Edited by s1owhand on Thu 03/08/12 08:00 PM
Tracking Iran's mass destruction weapon capabilities

Iran Watch is a comprehensive web site published by the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control that monitors Iran's ability to construct weapons of mass destruction. Iran Watch describes suspect Iranian organizations and sites and lists their foreign suppliers. It also analyzes Iran's weapon-related activities and provides a range of documents produced by international organizations, national governments and private sources.

http://www.iranwatch.org/

The Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control is a non-profit, non-partisan organization established to curb the proliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) through research and advocacy.[1] Led by Emeritus Professor Gary Milhollin, the group aims to stem weapons proliferation at the source through its emphasis on the monitoring and control of export and other trade transactions.[1] Established in 1986 in cooperation with the University of Wisconsin–Madison, the Wisconsin Project is located in Washington, DC.[1]

Key initiatives of the organization include the Risk Report database and the Iran Watch and Iraq Watch websites.[1]

(from the Wiki)

Sin_and_Sorrow's photo
Thu 03/08/12 07:58 PM
Way I see it..

Israel will make the first move. With a nudging from some higher up political powers here.

This action will tick someone off and they'll threaten Israel to back off.

In turn, US, their ally, will make a counter threat...

Then it'll either turn into WWIII.

OR

They'll let Israel do what they will..

OR

Everyone will back off...

OR

Every country will find their people rioting on their "white house" lawns.

AdventureBegins's photo
Thu 03/08/12 08:04 PM
I get that also.

It would seem that many worldwide are tired of the back and forth.

s1owhand's photo
Fri 03/09/12 02:41 AM
1. Iran folds and dismantles centrifuges, agrees to destroy the
underground fortified bunkers, and accepts foreign assistance with
uranium and reprocessing and permanent verifiable IAEA inspections.
Not bloody likely.

or,

2. Israel with widespread international acquiesence and direct support bombs their weapons development effort into the 5th century
and everyone heaves a huge sigh of relief. There is a bunch of
gaseous noise like there was with the Syrian reactor site and Iraqi
reactor site demolitions but just as in those cases it all blows
over relatively quickly.

In either case I don't see it developing into even a minor
conflagration.

=-=-=-=

Operation Orchard[2][3] was an Israeli airstrike on a nuclear reactor[4] in the Deir ez-Zor region[5] of Syria carried out just after midnight (local time) on September 6, 2007. The White House and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) later confirmed that American intelligence had also indicated the site was a nuclear facility with a military purpose, though Syria denies this.[6][7] An International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) investigation reported evidence of uranium and graphite and concluded that the site bore features resembling an undeclared nuclear reactor. IAEA was initially unable to confirm or deny the nature of the site because, according to IAEA, Syria failed to provide necessary cooperation with the IAEA investigation[8][9] Syria has disputed these claims.[10] In April 2011, the IAEA officially confirmed that the site was a nuclear reactor.[4]

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/02/11/080211fa_fact_hersh

1 2 4 Next