do you think iran will be invaded ?
Chat Forum
do you think iran will be invaded ?
-
Posted 4 months ago #
-
no but the fat one might
Posted 4 months ago # -
not while Obama is president - he's spent the whole time since coming to office trying to get US troops out of the middle east...
Posted 4 months ago # -
Invaded? No.
Nuked? Depends on the results of the American elections. But probably, yes.
Posted 4 months ago # -
No.
Posted 4 months ago # -
What with mountain bikes??????
Posted 4 months ago # -
There maybe something nasty round the corner. Israel will not let them develop nuclear weapons, Iran will keep trying. Syria may join in to try and rally the people from infighting to a commom enemy.
There are accidents waiting to happen
Posted 4 months ago # -
at the moment it seems that mossad (+ usa?) can waltz around inside iran unopposed anyway
theyve bombed at least one suspected nuclear site,
released viruses into their cybersphere
and are happy to assassinate scientists on their way to work or whilst dropping their kids off at nursery
etc etcPosted 4 months ago # -
Romney and Gringrich - We'd go to war to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons
Romney said that if "crippling sanctions" and other strategies fail, military action would be on the table because it is "unacceptable" for Iran to become a nuclear power.
Gingrich agreed, saying that if "maximum covert operations" and other strategies failed there would be no other choice. First, though, the United States consider "taking out their scientists," and "breaking up their systems, all of it covertly, all of it deniable," Gingrich said.
"If we re-elect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon. And if you elect Mitt Romney, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon," said Romney.
Ron Paul strongly disagreed with his two rivals, stressing the need to go to Congress before taking military action and saying it isn't worthwhile to use military force against Iran.
"I'm afraid what's going on right now is similar to the war propaganda that went on against Iraq," he said.
Posted 4 months ago # -
not from this forum
Posted 4 months ago # -
The only redeeming feature of that Lifer is that Romney and Gingrich probably don't actually know where Iran is on the map
Posted 4 months ago # -
Bilderberg , has probably declared it is time for another conflict, with the US at the helm ...Obama having control !!! he has the control he is told to have ,like every other puppet
and relax
no way ,why would they ?
Posted 4 months ago # -
Gingrich agreed, saying that if "maximum covert operations" and other strategies failed there would be no other choice. First, though, the United States consider "taking out their scientists," and "breaking up their systems, all of it covertly, all of it deniable," Gingrich said.
What's the point in telling everyone what you're intending to do and stating that it'll be deniable?
What truly bizarre statements. The americans are gonna love him.Posted 4 months ago # -
i could see a limited campaign/invasion to make sure all nuclear facitities are destroyed and as a many techs captured as possible. With secondary object of engaging the iranian army and complete obliterating it as per the iraqi army in the first gulf war. I don't think they'll try the occupation thing again. Go in wreak havoc and get out.
Posted 4 months ago # -
aran will fight harder and better than iraq.. they will fight dirty and they will only care about beating up israel.. they have nuclear weapons ( dirty bomb potential) and the russkies and chinese dont dislike em..
Posted 4 months ago # -
probably true, but once you've lost your airforce in the first 24 hours your doomed, even the french/italian and the raf managed to bomb an army back to the stone age in 8 weeks.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Iran did not play dirty in the Iran Iraq war. While Iraq bombed Iran with chemical weapons Iran did not. Iran did kill loads of its own people though and used the whole thing to go more and more extreme. Strange seeing pictures of Iran before the revolution. They seem so western. Anyway to me it seems that the main reason the people in Iran live under the regime they do now is down to the USA and UK policy. The status quo kind of of suits the US as they can sell weapons to the other gulf states "for defence" against Iran.
Oh I I am pretty sure that a dirty bomb is not actually a threat/real weapon in reality. They just do not work.dirty bomb
Posted 4 months ago # -
binners - Member
The only redeeming feature of that Lifer is that Romney and Gingrich probably don't actually know where Iran is on the mapThis is not a redeeming feature. They will launch the nukes a long tine before they pass 11+ geography. As long as they don't land within their own borders, they will then claim victory and justify doing it again.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Strange seeing pictures of Iran before the revolution. They seem so western.
Well the Shah had quite a lot of help...
But that's one thing that led to his downfall, the perception that he was a US puppet, along with the oppression that went on under him.
Posted 4 months ago # -
The shah was installed as as a result of UK and US involvement. They got rid of a democratic government as the leader wanted to nationalise the oil.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Lifer
Romney said that if "crippling sanctions" and other strategies fail, military action would be on the table because it is "unacceptable" for Iran to become a nuclear power.
Gingrich agreed, saying that if "maximum covert operations" and other strategies failed there would be no other choice. First, though, the United States consider "taking out their scientists," and "breaking up their systems, all of it covertly, all of it deniable," Gingrich said.A good public debate always helps keep things covert and deniable.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Quite enjoyed this when I saw it:
Posted 4 months ago # -
With secondary object of engaging the iranian army and complete obliterating it as per the iraqi army in the first gulf war
And that war went well, even from a US viewpoint ;
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/09/03/the-u-s-war-in-iraq-is-over-who-won/
shouldn't we beat some of the weaker teams such as the Taliban before asking the Iranians for a match?
Posted 4 months ago # -
Israel will continue to get all jumpy
The rest of the world will be all indecisive
Israel will launch a pre-emptive strike against Irans nuclear installations
Iran will retaliate and the US will be drawn into the defence of Israel.
In the meantime China will have built another 30 aircraft carriers and increased the size of their army by another 10million.Posted 4 months ago # -
To OP what for? More mouths to feed? Too much free time on our hands to feed others?
No, even if they invite others to rule them ...
But if they cause trouble just nuke them bits by bits ...
Posted 4 months ago # -
yes, its not IF but When, we have been pushing for total middle east control sorry (regime change) for Years now ... its just around the corner IMO (cheers Israel) :O(
Posted 4 months ago # -
And that war went well, even from a US viewpoint ;
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/09/03/the-u-s-war-in-iraq-is-over-who-won/
shouldn't we beat some of the weaker teams such as the Taliban before asking the Iranians for a match?
the key phrase in my point was
With secondary object of engaging the iranian army and complete obliterating it as per the iraqi army in the first gulf war
Posted 4 months ago # -
Israeli troops look up for dropping in on the Iranians either that or their the ones that will nuke them. After all one of Nostradamus Prophecies is that war will come from the East resulting in the end the world, oh joy!
Posted 4 months ago # -
If they only sell their oil in Euros then it'll happen.
Posted 4 months ago # -
we sure as hell wont if they have nukes which is the very reason they want nukes.
Apart from the US no one has used them offensively as there primary function is defensive ...dont **** with me as I have nukes.
It works a treat for North Korea.Will we ..no idea the wests startling hypocrisy knows no limits so possibly.
Posted 4 months ago # -
The EU has just put in place a ban on purchasing oil from Iran (though existing contracts can run till July).
Posted 4 months ago # -
I think it's highly likely that Iran will be extensively bombed. We aren't being fed this daily anti-Iranian propaganda for nothing.
Whilst of course western governments kept very quiet about oil-rich Saudi Arabia announcing last week that they needed to build their own nuclear industry.
China to Aid Saudi Arabia in Nuclear Power Development
Still, the totalitarian regime in Saudi Arabia which stones to death its citizens are our mates, so that's alright then. Specially as the Saudi regime is so stable that there is no chance it will fall into the hands of "extremists"
Posted 4 months ago # -
Klunk
I stand corrected (well siting in the kitchen actually)
Posted 4 months ago # -
I think that war with Iran would be a line that the secular Israelis wouldn't be prepared to cross. Tensions are already running high between the Ultra-Orthodox, Religious Zionists and Secularists; in fact there was an article in Haaretz saying that is heading to a point where the only solution will be a 4 state one under a federal government - Palestinians, Secular Israelis, Religious Zionists and Ultra Orthodox Jews.
Posted 4 months ago # -
<selfish>
I hope not as a good friend and an ex GF (EDIT and loads of other nice people) live there.
</selfish>Posted 4 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
