How long before we ...
 

MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch

[Closed] How long before we invade Iran?

26 Posts
21 Users
0 Reactions
67 Views
Posts: 8
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Discuss.............


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 7:47 pm
Posts: 34473
Full Member
 

Not going to happen


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

seeing as oil's been found under Cuba, I expect the septics will be busy there next...


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 7:54 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

What with - Boy Scouts? In case you hadn't noticed, the armed forces can't even manage to fight the existing wars with the resources and manpower available.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 50252
Free Member
 

Only when we have totally reliable evidence that they can launch weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes. Perhaps a dossier of some sort.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 12
Free Member
 

We? Who is we? Are 'we' in the military?


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 7:57 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Only when we have totally reliable evidence that they can launch weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes. Perhaps a dossier of some sort.

Cue the murder of another whistle blower by MI5 (allegedly of course)


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 7:58 pm
Posts: 3351
Free Member
 

I reckon Israel will strike the installations first, probably using US supplied state of the art precision weapons and the full prior knowledge of the Saudi secret services. While Saudi Arabia and Israel aren't ever going to bedfellows, the Saudis don't want a nuclear armed belligerent Iran on their doorstep and will be more than happy for Israel to do their dirty work.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 7:59 pm
 GJP
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

What PJM1974 says


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 8:01 pm
Posts: 2
Free Member
 

will never happen,as per PJM1974 post


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 8:17 pm
Posts: 12
Free Member
 

An Israeli attack is probably the least likely thing that'll happen. They got away with Iraq because many arab states weren't exactly chums with Saddam either, Iran on the other hand is a different matter. Plus Iran still has the support of China and as such the US would be compelled to keep its mutt under control, lest China become 'unfriendly'.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 8:26 pm
Posts: 3351
Free Member
 

Israel has already taken out a suspected Syrian complex a year ago.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 8:29 pm
Posts: 2875
Free Member
 

Agree PJM1974's scenario is looking likely. US compliance will be necessary as well as the Israelis will have to use Iraqi airspace


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 1
Free Member
 

2nd sunday in race week.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 2580
Full Member
 

I hold out hope that we may have learnt this time round that military action should really be a last resort. Surely even the most fervent Neo-Con must now realise it's a lot more effort than they thought at the start of the decade that such ventures would be. The current US administration seems to be considerably less gung-ho about these things than the last one, too. Plus the fact that even the US military has been feeling the strain lately is probably going to keep things cool for a while.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 8:52 pm
Posts: 6
Free Member
 

The Iranians behave fairly rationally. I'm very sceptical that they will be attacked. They have a pretty good feel for how far they can push it, and they've got a lot of slack to play with yet.

I read something recently that reckoned that one of the main reasons the Iranians want nuclear weapons is that they are deeply concerned about ****stan having them. I share their view. Iran is a far less worrying prospect than ****stan is. 🙂


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 9:10 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

We? Who is we? Are 'we' in the military?

I hear that as we speak the Broonster has minions scouring the web to recruit a crack team of keyboard warriors who will mercilessly attack the Iranians' spelling, punctuation and choice of tyre until they surrender....


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 9:21 pm
Posts: 34076
Full Member
 

i believe the us and iran are currently engaged in their highest level diplomacy for 30 years

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/01/iran-uranium-enrichment-plant-inspection

can we have obama for pm?


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 9:28 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

'The Plan' was Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Iran (with more to come later as necessary).

The Yanks started making fairly serious noises concerning Syria and Iran soon after George Bush announced "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq.

However some Iraqis begged to differ, which put the plan in doubt. Then the Afghans started making a nuisance of themselves, and the plan went out of the window altogether.

Syria was probably always going to come before Iran, but only because they knew Iran was would be such a hard nut to crack. Basically the weakest first, and as experience and confidence grew, the stronger ones would be dealt with. And there really isn't any comparison between Iraq and Iran in that respect.

........... well imo anyway.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 9:34 pm
Posts: 34473
Full Member
 

the US can ill afford, nor can they really carry out a war on two fronts In Afghanistan and Iran, not without massive spending, a resurrection of the draft, and agreement of Russia and China. None of these things will happen. The Iranians know this, the US know this the Russians and Chinese know this. Iran will have sanctions, it will be the butt of condemnations, but in reality, nothing will happen.

Israel will not attack Iran for the same reasons, plus of course the Israeli military got it's arse well and truly kicked by Iranian backed Hizbollah, the idea that Israel is the regional power is out of date.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 9:48 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Relevant Family Guy Clip:

😀


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 10:30 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

nickc

Israel will not attack Iran for the same reasons, plus of course the Israeli military got it's arse well and truly kicked by Iranian backed Hizbollah, the idea that Israel is the regional power is out of date.

I wouldn't be too sure of that.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 10:34 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

SaboteurCherie - LOL...... excellent ! 😀


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 10:36 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I wouldn't be too sure of that.

Ah, but that's because you are a Christian Fundamentalist Zionist, tyger ....... and you don't get more pro-Israeli than that - do ya 😉


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 10:39 pm
Posts: 9
Free Member
 

I will put money that israel strikes irans nuclear facilities, and tbh I am not sure I would completely disagree, a nuclear Iran is good for no one. A nuclear ****stan, which has a danger of becoming more politically unstable, may yet prove disastrous, at least ****stan is still an 'friend' of the west....


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 10:56 pm
Posts: 2
Free Member
 

Iran has long been engaged in a commercial battle to take on the big players in the European markets for oil supremacy. American cannot let this happen and will use Iran's plans to develop nuclear weapons as a basis for invasion. That's what I think. There will be a whole load of bullshit around why they need to invade but it'll happen.


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 11:04 pm
Posts: 34076
Full Member
 

dont think invasion, who wants another ground war, just some bombin and a bit of special forces maybe


 
Posted : 01/10/2009 11:46 pm