Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: ghi on August 20, 2006, 05:01:04 PM
-
Iran will not suspend atomic work, says official (http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-08-20T074002Z_01_BLA026520_RTRUKOC_0_UK-NUCLEAR-IRAN.xml)
imop,the sanctions are not going to work., United States and Israel have no choices, but to strike the Iranian nuclear facilities , in next 2-3 months
Does anyone agree ?
-
The United States has plenty of choice. Just like Iraq. We had a choice then also.
-
B2's droping multiple MOABs :) or the 5k bunker busters
-
Originally posted by whels
B2's droping multiple MOABs :) or the 5k bunker busters
Will sertainly solve that problem, but how many new will be created in the process? Just wondering.
-
It doesn't solve anything. It simply delays the problem and hardens the resolve of the Iranians.
-
I suppose we could send Sandman over to negotiate instead.
-
Originally posted by Rino
I suppose we could send Sandman over to negotiate instead.
After that they would beg for a bunker buster.:D
Bronk
-
Did anyone really think that they were going to suspend any more than north korea did?
-
formal response by Tue, Aug 22.... isn't that the date they said they were gonna light up the sky?
-
No, Iran said it would respond by the 22nd. The "light up the sky" comment comes from an American who's guessing what Iran is going to do.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
It doesn't solve anything. It simply delays the problem and hardens the resolve of the Iranians.
And what can solve the problem? UN? Direct talks Washington-Teheran?
If US would try to open diplomatic relations , would be seen by Teheran like a weakness , i don't think they will give up diplomatic , and are close to building the bomb, or acording with some analysts they have it already
-
Originally posted by Rino
I suppose we could send Sandman over to negotiate instead.
There's nothing to negotiate.
A conflict with Iran is a conflict of choice.
-
Originally posted by ghi
And what can solve the problem? UN? Direct talks Washington-Teheran?
If US would try to open diplomatic relations , would be seen by Teheran like a weakness , i don't think they will give up diplomatic , and are close to building the bomb, or acording with some analysts they have it already
I think Iran knows that keeping a few nukes around will ensure that discussions will remain more diplomatic than our involvement with Iraq.
They have nothing to lose and everything to gain by accelerating their nuclear program.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
I think Iran knows that keeping a few nukes around will ensure that discussions will remain more diplomatic than our involvement with Iraq.
They have nothing to lose and everything to gain by accelerating their nuclear program.
so everyone should just let them do whatever they want to do......maybe we should even let them take over checkoslovakia as well.
-
He is not telling you what to do or not to do, just stating how Iran sees it. And he is right too, bombing those facilities will amount to nothing on the long run.
-
Originally posted by Saintaw
He is not telling you what to do or not to do, just stating how Iran sees it. And he is right too, bombing those facilities will amount to nothing on the long run.
u may be right. i think it`s time to break out the soft cushins. poking them with soft cushins will for sure make them change their minds about wiping countries off the planet and founding terror armies....
-
Or maybe Israel should scrap their Nukes in favor for keeping the region Nuke free.
But that will never happen. So the US will probably hit Iran, with support from Israel.
WW3? no not yet, not untill China or NK sees an opening to hit, when US is tied up seriously somewhere.
-
...and we should stick some flowers in our hair and head for san fancisco
-
You admitting to being gey or something?
Well your solution is as good as any i guess. Much better then :
"In the name of God! We are the chosen ones!, RELEASE THE NUKES! WE SHALL BE RESURECTED BY GOD WHEN ALL THIS IS OVER AND DONE WITH!".
:aok
-
Could bomb their facilities but then the Iranians would just rebuild them so that we could bomb them again. What other alternative is there? Extremists with nukes? I dont like that idea one bit.
-
Originally posted by Maniac
You admitting to being gey or something?
Well your solution is as good as any i guess. Much better then :
"In the name of God! We are the chosen ones!, RELEASE THE NUKES! WE SHALL BE RESURECTED BY GOD WHEN ALL THIS IS OVER AND DONE WITH!".
:aok
just for your information: in judaism human life is the most valuable thing, period.of course our life is considered more valuable than of our enemies. we don`t belive in stupid crap like "love thy enemy". if there`s someone trying to kill us, we go and kill him before he gets to kill us.
there`s absolutelly no chance of israel nuking around everyone. if we were such morons we would have done that long ago. as far as israel goes, nukes are kept to keep others from doing silly sh#t like throwing cemical weapons at us. so far it worked.
otoh, i have no doubt iran would use their nuke if they had one.
-
Who decides who is the extremist?
Imho anyone who acts "in the name of god" or "in the name of Allah" are both equal extremists.
-
Originally posted by Maniac
Who decides who is the extremist?
Imho anyone who acts "in the name of god" or "in the name of Allah" are both equal extremists.
Well I would say if you are willing to strap on a bomb, then run into a cafe, night club, check point, bus etc and detonate the bomb killing yourself and others around you, that you might be an extremist.
I would say that if you are calling for the total annhilation of one group of people that you might be an extremist.
I would say that if you are calling for a Jihad against those that dont have the same religious beliefs as you, that you might be an extremist.
Etc, etc, etc.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Could bomb their facilities but then the Iranians would just rebuild them so that we could bomb them again. What other alternative is there? Extremists with nukes? I dont like that idea one bit.
i think iran would have a tough time rebuilding their nuke facilities. things like uranium centrifuges and such aren`t easy to make or come by.they don`t have the technology to manufacture them.
i hope that no country would sell them that sort of equipment again, after it`s been destroyed. i hope i`m right.
-
Someone would see dollar signs flashing in their eyes like in a cartoon and sell them the same equiptment again Caligula, just a matter of time imo.
-
Originally posted by Maniac
Who decides who is the extremist?
Imho anyone who acts "in the name of god" or "in the name of Allah" are both equal extremists.
israelis don`t operate in the name of god. they might pray for he`s help if they`re religious,wich many aren`t.
-
Originally posted by ~Caligula~
i think iran would have a tough time rebuilding their nuke facilities. things like uranium centrifuges and such aren`t easy to make or come by.they don`t have the technology to manufacture them.
i hope that no country would sell them that sort of equipment again, after it`s been destroyed. i hope i`m right.
From what I understand... it will just slow them down 3-5 years.
-
Originally posted by ~Caligula~
israelis don`t operate in the name of god. they might pray for he`s help if they`re religious,wich many aren`t.
This whole conflict is based on religion, you should know this.
-
Originally posted by Maniac
This whole conflict is based on religion, you should know this.
nah dude...this conflict is about land.
-
Story through Yahoo news, indicated that iran just denied inspectors access to their enrichment facility. I'm sure the forthcoming nasty letter from the UN will set them straight. It worked for north korea so well.
Iran denies inspectors access to site By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 53 minutes ago
Iran has turned away U.N. inspectors wanting to examine its underground nuclear site in an apparent violation of the Nonproliferation Treaty, diplomats and U.N. officials said Monday.
The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the confidentiality of the information, told The Associated Press that Iran's unprecedented refusal to allow access to the facility at Natanz could seriously hamper international efforts to ensure that Tehran is not trying to make nuclear weapons.
Meanwhile, Iran's supreme leader said Tehran will pursue nuclear technology despite a U.N. Security Council deadline to suspend uranium enrichment by the end of the month or face the threat of economic and diplomatic sanctions.
"The Islamic Republic of Iran has made its own decision and in the nuclear case, God willing, with patience and power, will continue its path," said Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, according to state television.
His declaration came on the eve of Iran's self-imposed Tuesday deadline to respond to a Western incentives package for it to roll back its nuclear program. The United Nations has given Tehran until the end of August to suspend uranium enrichment.
Khamenei accused the United States of putting pressure on Iran despite Tehran's assertions that its nuclear program was peaceful. "Arrogant powers and the U.S. are putting their utmost pressure on Iran while knowing Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons," he said.
Iran said Sunday it will offer a "multifaceted response" to the incentives proposal. It insisted that it won't suspend uranium enrichment altogether.
At a news conference Monday, President Bush said the United States is getting an inkling of Tehran's response.
"We are beginning to get some indication, but we'll wait until they have a formal response," Bush said. "Dates are fine, but what really matters is will. And one of the things I will continue to remind our friends and allies is the danger of a nuclear-armed Iran."
The U.N. Security Council passed a resolution last month requiring the halt to enrichment under threat of economic and diplomatic sanctions.
Also Monday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel pressed for a "solid answer" from Iran on the package.
"I still hope that it will be positive, although some signals have been very confused," said Merkel, whose country drew up the package with the five permanent Security Council members.
The proposal includes promises that the United States and Europe will provide civilian nuclear technology and that Washington will join direct talks with Iran.
Tehran says uranium enrichment does not violate any of its obligations under the Nonproliferation Treaty, and that its nuclear program aims to produce electricity.
But U.N. officials suggested that its refusal to allow International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors access to the underground nuclear site being built at Natanz was in itself a violation of the treaty because it contravenes Tehran's commitment under the pact to inform the Vienna-based watchdog of the progress of such projects.
Khamenei accused the West of wanting to obstruct scientific progress in the Islamic world and called for Islamic countries to stand together in the face of such pressure.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
From what I understand... it will just slow them down 3-5 years.
it stopped iraq`s a-bomb program. why wouldn`t it stop iran`s?
-
Originally posted by ~Caligula~
nah dude...this conflict is about land.
Nice spin. Trying to get rid of the religious aspect to the conflict must be an way to get rid of your extremist "stamp". Even so, if its truly about land, then you guys still are the aggressors, still occopying land that is not yours.
Maybe you should try to retreat to your own borders, remove the illigall settlements etc. And things might get better.
-
Originally posted by whels
B2's droping multiple MOABs :) or the 5k bunker busters
Clasic bunker busters don't penetrate deep enough
Depth of Penetration War head designation Weapon Systems
Penetration of reinforced concrete: 1.8 m (6 ft) BLU-109 Penetrator (Mark 84 bomb) GBU-10, GBU-15, GBU-24, GBU-27, AGM-130
Penetration of reinforced concrete: 3.4 m (11 ft) BLU-116 Advanced Unitary Penetrator (AUP) GBU-15, GBU-24, GBU-27, AGM-130
Penetration of reinforced concrete: 3.4 m (11 ft) BLU-118/B Thermobaric Warhead GBU-15, GBU-24, AGM-130
Penetration of reinforced concrete: more than 6 m (20 ft) BLU-113 Super Penetrator GBU-28, GBU-37
[edit]
Fuzing
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/04/09/wbush09abig.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Maniac
Nice spin. Trying to get rid of the religious aspect to the conflict must be an way to get rid of your extremist "stamp". Even so, if its truly about land, then you guys still are the aggressors, still occopying land that is not yours.
Maybe you should try to retreat to your own borders, remove the illigall settlements etc. And things might get better.
just tell me what do u consider "our own borders"?
in case it`s the 1967 borders, u should go find a palestinian and ask what is he`s take on this.
give up ur hopes for israelis commiting mass scuicide just to please the arabs and ur kind. we`re here,we`ll stay and if we have to go down, we`ll go down swinging.
-
give up ur hopes for israelis commiting mass scuicide just to please the arabs and ur kind. we`re here,we`ll stay and if we have to go down, we`ll go down swinging.
My hopes for Israelis committing mass suicide? where did you get that from? By the sound of your last post, you dont even want peace.
-
Originally posted by ~Caligula~
it stopped iraq`s a-bomb program. why wouldn`t it stop iran`s?
This is not 1981.
Iran's facilities (which it insists are for peaceful purposes) are at the far edge of combat range for Israel's aircraft; They're also widely dispersed and, in many cases, deep underground.
...
But America certainly could do it—and has given the idea some serious thought. "The U.S. capability to make a mess of Iran's nuclear infrastructure is formidable," says veteran Mideast analyst Geoffrey Kemp. "The question is, what then?" NEWSWEEK has learned that the CIA and DIA have war-gamed the likely consequences of a U.S. pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. No one liked the outcome. As an Air Force source tells it, "The war games were unsuccessful at preventing the conflict from escalating."
MSNBC source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6039135/site/newsweek/)
-
Originally posted by Maniac
My hopes for Israelis committing mass suicide? where did you get that from? By the sound of your last post, you dont even want peace.
to go with your proposal on peace would be scuicidal for israel.
israel pulled out of gaza. since rockets are flying out of gaza aimed at israei civilians.
why should i belive that if we had given them the west bank,they wouldn`t use it as another launch-pad to try to kill us? the int. airport of israel is just a few miles away from the `67 border. it`d be shut down for business a day after the pals took over.
and another small detail that might have missed your attention: the palestinian`s elected government`s (hamas) main goal is the destruction of the state of israel.
i do want peace, but that peace must include us living here. as i see the islamic numbnuts who are calling for the destruction of israel, would be happy if this land was reduced back to a desert and totally uninhabited, as long there are no jews here.
-
Imho it wouldnt be an bad move by Israel to show some intent in giving some land back. Give the palestinians chance to move around without passing 50 checkpoints an day. We all know why the settlements exists, and that is crowd controll.
You have an unedjucated people, an extremly poor people, an people who has nothing to live for, an people who lives in fear of bulldozers and tanks taking their homes away, and you wonder why hamas gains support?
The bombing of the Libanese infrastructure comes to mind, setting them back 10 yrs economically... I find this peculliar. Instead of supporting the economy of the surrounding countries, bombarding them with cell phones, sattillite dishes, laptops with satillite internet access, sending teachers etc to get people educated to form their own oppinion about issues. But instead it seems like isaels main mission is to keep these people living in the middle ages (midieaval ages perhaps).
If i was an palestinian,. and my home was taken from me. I certainly would be fighting you. Or if my brother or sister, father mother or friend was killed by you. As much as you would im sure.
I may sound Pro arabic, but im really not, i dont take any sides in this, but that wont keep me from speaking my mind, no matter if you deem me anti-semetic or not. I just hate the "Your either with us or against us" mentallity that hit us after 9/11 that im sick of it.
An big part of my familly got killed in the concentration camps in poland, if that counts for anything. So no im not an Jew hater, or want to see you all dead.
-
Imho it wouldnt be an bad move by Israel to show some intent in giving some land back. Give the palestinians chance to move around without passing 50 checkpoints an day.
Israel has given land back, Sinai noodleula, Gaza Strip. Giving back the Gaza Strip has done nothing for the peace process that I can see. The IDF was attacked as they were pulling out, now Gaza is just another place for Muslim extremists to launch attacks on Israel.
The check points wouldnt be necessary if the suicide bombers and such would stop.
*edit* And the Sinai is just another route for weapons to be smuggled into Gaza now. Giving land back hasnt been all that good for Israel. At this point, it's time for the Palestinians to show some good faith and stop the attacks, but that wont happen.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Story through Yahoo news, indicated that iran just denied inspectors access to their enrichment facility. I'm sure the forthcoming nasty letter from the UN will set them straight. It worked for north korea so well.
.
UN to do what? Sanctions to set them straight !? Iran has been living over 27 years under US sanctions, they don't care about UN or US sanctions
-
Bush wouldn't flinch at a pre-emptive strike if Iran goes anywhere near giving him a reason to do so. He still wants to impress his dad.
(just my opinion)
Personally .. I hope Israel drives thru Lebanon right up to the opposite border ..and declares it occupied territory.. come take it back if you've got balls enough or STFU .. but .. that's just me.
It's been proven over and over that Israel needs a buffer zone.
Istrael should make one.
Permanent.
Coupla hundred miles in every direction would prolly work.
Legible signs marking it ..'buffer zone, enter at your own peril'
Foreign policy should be clear and direct: ie: You shoot at us, we SHOOT BACK ..at you, your family, your town, your dog, *anyone* in your blast radius.. cause dood .. yer ground zero.
-GE -evil grin-
-
Originally posted by Grayeagle
Foreign policy should be clear and direct: ie: You shoot at us, we SHOOT BACK ..at you, your family, your town, your dog, *anyone* in your blast radius.. cause dood .. yer ground zero.
-GE -evil grin-
I believe that's the russian way of handling.
Back when the extremists in Iran grabbed the US embassy, they also grabbed a few Russian Nationals and Diplomats in the process.
Within the day, the KGB had agents in Iran, seeking out those responsible.
A day afterwards, some of the extremists got something from their wives, children and mothers. One of their hands, all gift wrapped.
Within hours, the russian hostages were released.