Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring

[[email protected]]

Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring

Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
are well advanced

Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Saturday February 10, 2007
The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2010086,00.html...

Stop the Coming Iran War (for Israel) Before It Starts:

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=67774

[Ian MacLure]

wrote in
oups.com:

> Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring

Why wait for spring?
Do it now.

> Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
> are well advanced

I should certainly hope so.
It will give the Ayatollahs something to occupy themselves with.
Well any who survive that is.
And the Najaf hierarchy will smile in private becuase the upstart
Persian scum who wouldn't know Fatwa from Farts have been put in
their place.

IBM

[Mark Test]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
>
> Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
> are well advanced
>
> Ewen MacAskill in Washington
> Saturday February 10, 2007
> The Guardian
>
Hey nomorewar.....what are you doing to prevent Iran from
buildings nukes? It seems to me you want Iran to go nuclear....

Do you really believe Iran has peaceful intentions? We all lose
if the mid-east goes nuclear....

Mark



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[[email protected]]

On 2ÔÂ11ÈÕ, ÉÏÎç6ʱ26·Ö, wrote:
> Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
>
> Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
> are well advanced
>
> Ewen MacAskill in Washington
> Saturday February 10, 2007
> The Guardian
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2010086,00.html...
>
> Stop the Coming Iran War (for Israel) Before It Starts:
>
> http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=67774

really? I don` t think the US will attack Iran.Iran has a powerful
army after all.
If the US attack Iron ,Iron might use the missle attack the base or
the carrier of United States.
I don`t think Americans like to see this situation

[David Nicholls]

The mid-east is already nuclear (Isreal) - it is the appearance of a balance
that appears to worry the US.

David

"Mark Test" > wrote in message
.. .
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
>>
>> Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
>> are well advanced
>>
>> Ewen MacAskill in Washington
>> Saturday February 10, 2007
>> The Guardian
>>
> Hey nomorewar.....what are you doing to prevent Iran from
> buildings nukes? It seems to me you want Iran to go nuclear....
>
> Do you really believe Iran has peaceful intentions? We all lose
> if the mid-east goes nuclear....
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>

[Defendario]

Mark Test wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
>>
>> Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
>> are well advanced
>>
>> Ewen MacAskill in Washington
>> Saturday February 10, 2007
>> The Guardian
>>
> Hey nomorewar.....what are you doing to prevent Iran from
> buildings nukes? It seems to me you want Iran to go nuclear....
>

Why not? No nation can consider itself truly free without the Atomic
bomb, or so Charles DeGaulle thought.

He was right.

> Do you really believe Iran has peaceful intentions? We all lose
> if the mid-east goes nuclear....
>

Little****tystan is nuclear. Pakistan and India are too, and not far
away at all. Some say the KSA is cryptonuclear armed, and some fSoviet
Republics as well.

Frankly just about everyone in the region has WMD of some sort or other,
except the Iraqis. Of course, that's who we attacked.

I wonder why...NOT!

;D

> Mark
>
>
>

[Michael Wise]

In article >,
"David Nicholls" > wrote:

> The mid-east is already nuclear (Isreal) - it is the appearance of a balance
> that appears to worry the US.

That and the fact that officials in the Iranian government (from the top
down) have repeatedly made public comments that various countries (such
as Israel) should be wiped off the map.


--Mike


>
> David
>
> "Mark Test" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> >> Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
> >>
> >> Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
> >> are well advanced
> >>
> >> Ewen MacAskill in Washington
> >> Saturday February 10, 2007
> >> The Guardian
> >>
> > Hey nomorewar.....what are you doing to prevent Iran from
> > buildings nukes? It seems to me you want Iran to go nuclear....
> >
> > Do you really believe Iran has peaceful intentions? We all lose
> > if the mid-east goes nuclear....
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
> >

[Defendario]

Michael Wise wrote:
> In article >,
> "David Nicholls" > wrote:
>
>> The mid-east is already nuclear (Isreal) - it is the appearance of a balance
>> that appears to worry the US.
>
> That and the fact that officials in the Iranian government (from the top
> down) have repeatedly made public comments that various countries (such
> as Israel) should be wiped off the map.
>

You make that sound like a *bad* thing...
:-\

>
> --Mike
>
>
>> David
>>
>> "Mark Test" > wrote in message
>> .. .
>>> > wrote in message
>>> oups.com...
>>>> Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
>>>>
>>>> Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
>>>> are well advanced
>>>>
>>>> Ewen MacAskill in Washington
>>>> Saturday February 10, 2007
>>>> The Guardian
>>>>
>>> Hey nomorewar.....what are you doing to prevent Iran from
>>> buildings nukes? It seems to me you want Iran to go nuclear....
>>>
>>> Do you really believe Iran has peaceful intentions? We all lose
>>> if the mid-east goes nuclear....
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>>
>

[Michael Wise]

In article >,
Defendario > wrote:

> Michael Wise wrote:
> > In article >,
> > "David Nicholls" > wrote:
> >
> >> The mid-east is already nuclear (Isreal) - it is the appearance of a
> >> balance
> >> that appears to worry the US.
> >
> > That and the fact that officials in the Iranian government (from the top
> > down) have repeatedly made public comments that various countries (such
> > as Israel) should be wiped off the map.
> >
>
> You make that sound like a *bad* thing...


Are you saying that the guaranteed nuclear counter response and
resulting regional death, destruction, and nuclear fallout around the
world are good things?


--Mike

[Defendario]

Michael Wise wrote:
> In article >,
> Defendario > wrote:
>
>> Michael Wise wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> "David Nicholls" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> The mid-east is already nuclear (Isreal) - it is the appearance of a
>>>> balance
>>>> that appears to worry the US.
>>> That and the fact that officials in the Iranian government (from the top
>>> down) have repeatedly made public comments that various countries (such
>>> as Israel) should be wiped off the map.
>>>
>> You make that sound like a *bad* thing...
>
>
> Are you saying that the guaranteed nuclear counter response and
> resulting regional death, destruction, and nuclear fallout around the
> world are good things?
>

Iran will recover, but IsReeL will not.

And that, of course, would be a *good* *thing*

>
> --Mike
>

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

"Mark Test" > writes:

> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
>>
>> Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
>> are well advanced
>>
>> Ewen MacAskill in Washington
>> Saturday February 10, 2007
>> The Guardian
>>
> Hey nomorewar.....what are you doing to prevent Iran from
> buildings nukes? It seems to me you want Iran to go nuclear....
>
> Do you really believe Iran has peaceful intentions? We all lose
> if the mid-east goes nuclear....

It just postpones the inevitable. Think of it like this: if a country,
under proper guidance, develops nuclear power (and weaponry) they have
a strong infrastructure, education and scientific community to handle
it. Compare this with a country importing weapons from somewhere else
out of desperation. Which do you think is going to make a "mistake"
first? The developed nations cannot forever pretend that they are the
arbiters for the rest of the world, even if some in their populations
believe this.
--
BOFH excuse #288:

Hard drive sleeping. Let it wake up on it's own...

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

Michael Wise > writes:

> In article >,
> Defendario > wrote:
>
>> Michael Wise wrote:
>> > In article >,
>> > "David Nicholls" > wrote:
>> >
>> >> The mid-east is already nuclear (Isreal) - it is the appearance of a
>> >> balance
>> >> that appears to worry the US.
>> >
>> > That and the fact that officials in the Iranian government (from the top
>> > down) have repeatedly made public comments that various countries (such
>> > as Israel) should be wiped off the map.
>> >
>>
>> You make that sound like a *bad* thing...
>
>
> Are you saying that the guaranteed nuclear counter response and
> resulting regional death, destruction, and nuclear fallout around the
> world are good things?

Guaranteed nuclear response is what kept the cold war from becoming
too hot in the developed nations for half a century. The wars went on
in other countries with all manner of other weapons, with resulting
death and injuiries by the tens of millions. I don't think you're
making a good point in isolating "nuclear" from "non-nuclear"
here. The fact that developed countries might suffer if many nations
obtain deliverable powerful weapons is about the only thing that
worries them. IMHO its a good thing, since it will bring out statemen
with wider vision, and force all nations to make greater efforts to
cooperate, and not merely divide the world into something along the
lines of the G8 and all the others.

--
BOFH excuse #198:

Post-it Note Sludge leaked into the monitor.

[Mark Test]

"David Nicholls" > wrote in message
...
> The mid-east is already nuclear (Isreal) - it is the appearance of a
balance
> that appears to worry the US.
>
> David
>
Cite where Israel has nukes, or has ever threatened anyone with nukes.
A nuclear Iran will not create balance...




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[qui si parla Campagnolo]

On Feb 12, 4:24Â*am, wrote:
> On 2月11日, 上�6时26分, wrote:
>
> > Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
>
> > Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
> > are well advanced
>
> > Ewen MacAskill in Washington
> > Saturday February 10, 2007
> > The Guardian
>
> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2010086,00.html...
>
> > Stop the Coming Iran War (for Israel) Before It Starts:
>
> >http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=67774
>
> really? I don` t think the US will attack Iran.Iran has a powerful
> army after all.
> If the US attack Iron ,Iron might use the missle attack the base or
> the carrier of United States.
> I don`t think Americans like to see this situation

If they are going to attack a CV, they gotta find it first..no assets
I know of to do that.

[God's Creator! (TEXT & HTML)]

Mark Test wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
>>
>> Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
>> are well advanced
>>
>> Ewen MacAskill in Washington
>> Saturday February 10, 2007
>> The Guardian
>>
>>
> Hey nomorewar.....what are you doing to prevent Iran from
> buildings nukes? It seems to me you want Iran to go nuclear....
>
> Do you really believe Iran has peaceful intentions? We all lose
> if the mid-east goes nuclear....
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>

Thus Spake: *G* *O* *D* *S* *C* *R* *E* *A* *T* *O* *R*


The Mid-East is already Nuclear... Israel was the first Mid-East
Nuclear state, without even having to do testing... :-\

_Everything_ in America is "FOR SALE", including the U.S.
Presidential elections.
(Advanced U.S. military thrown in as a rebate) :-)


IN $-GOD-$ AMERICA TRUST



God's Creator!
(I am Life & Death)
8-)

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Todays U.S. Holy Wars News:
http://www.antiwar.com
http://icasualties.org/oif/

[Tankfixer]

In article . com>,
mumbled
> On 2ÔÂ11ÈÕ, ÉÏÎç6ʱ26·Ö, wrote:
> > Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
> >
> > Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
> > are well advanced
> >
> > Ewen MacAskill in Washington
> > Saturday February 10, 2007
> > The Guardian
> >
> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2010086,00.html...
> >
> > Stop the Coming Iran War (for Israel) Before It Starts:
> >
> > http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=67774
>
> really? I don` t think the US will attack Iran.Iran has a powerful
> army after all.

Iran has lots of people in uniform.
Not a particulary effective army though.


> If the US attack Iron ,Iron might use the missle attack the base or
> the carrier of United States.

Iran gets most of if not all of her refined petrolium from the other
Gulf countries.
If she attacks them they turn off the fuel.

> I don`t think Americans like to see this situation

No wants Iran to be stupid and end up destroyed, except her leaders...



--
--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."

[Mark Borgerson[_2_]]

In article >,
says...
> In article . com>,=20
> mumbled
> > On 2=D4=C211=C8=D5, =C9=CF=CE=E76=CA=B126=B7=D6, NOMOREWAR_FORISR...@yaho=
> o.com wrote:
> > > Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
> > >
> > > Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
> > > are well advanced
> > >
> > > Ewen MacAskill in Washington
> > > Saturday February 10, 2007
> > > The Guardian
> > >
> > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2010086,00.html...
> > >
> > > Stop the Coming Iran War (for Israel) Before It Starts:
> > >
> > > http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=3D67774
> >=20
> > really? I don` t think the US will attack Iran.Iran has a powerful
> > army after all.
>
> Iran has lots of people in uniform.
> Not a particulary effective army though.
>
>
> > If the US attack Iron ,Iron might use the missle attack the base or
> > the carrier of United States.
>
> Iran gets most of if not all of her refined petrolium from the other=20
> Gulf countries.
> If she attacks them they turn off the fuel.

Not true according to this site:

http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntm40816.htm

Iran seems to be a net exporter of kerosene, but a significant importer
of gasoline.

This somewhat dated website says that Iran produces about 1/2 its daily
needs for gasoline:

http://regimechangeiran.blogspot.com/2005/10/gasoline-silent-bomb.html
>
> > I don`t think Americans like to see this situation
>
> No wants Iran to be stupid and end up destroyed, except her leaders...
>
>
>

Mark Borgerson

[David E. Powell]

On Feb 12, 7:34 pm, Defendario > wrote:
> Michael Wise wrote:
> > In article >,
> > Defendario > wrote:
>
> >> Michael Wise wrote:
> >>> In article >,
> >>> "David Nicholls" > wrote:
>
> >>>> The mid-east is already nuclear (Isreal) - it is the appearance of a
> >>>> balance
> >>>> that appears to worry the US.
> >>> That and the fact that officials in the Iranian government (from the top
> >>> down) have repeatedly made public comments that various countries (such
> >>> as Israel) should be wiped off the map.
>
> >> You make that sound like a *bad* thing...
>
> > Are you saying that the guaranteed nuclear counter response and
> > resulting regional death, destruction, and nuclear fallout around the
> > world are good things?
>
> Iran will recover, but IsReeL will not.

Um... how will Iran recover if there is a nuclear counter strike? They
don't just "repopulate" like a MUD computer game. You are talking
about millions of deaths here.

> And that, of course, would be a *good* *thing*

Only if you are a keyboard commando who gets off on the idea of
nuclear holocausts, with zero empathy for anyone who would be caught
in one, or ability to comprehend that the fighting and/or radiation
and killing could spread to the very place you sit right now.

[Tankfixer]

In article >,
mumbled
> In article >,
> says...
> > In article . com>,=20
> > mumbled
> > > On 2=D4=C211=C8=D5, =C9=CF=CE=E76=CA=B126=B7=D6, NOMOREWAR_FORISR...@yaho=
> > o.com wrote:
> > > > Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
> > > >
> > > > Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites
> > > > are well advanced
> > > >
> > > > Ewen MacAskill in Washington
> > > > Saturday February 10, 2007
> > > > The Guardian
> > > >
> > > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2010086,00.html...
> > > >
> > > > Stop the Coming Iran War (for Israel) Before It Starts:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=3D67774
> > >=20
> > > really? I don` t think the US will attack Iran.Iran has a powerful
> > > army after all.
> >
> > Iran has lots of people in uniform.
> > Not a particulary effective army though.
> >
> >
> > > If the US attack Iron ,Iron might use the missle attack the base or
> > > the carrier of United States.
> >
> > Iran gets most of if not all of her refined petrolium from the other=20
> > Gulf countries.
> > If she attacks them they turn off the fuel.
>
> Not true according to this site:
>
> http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntm40816.htm
>
> Iran seems to be a net exporter of kerosene, but a significant importer
> of gasoline.

Can she sustain her economy on just kerosene though ?


>
> This somewhat dated website says that Iran produces about 1/2 its daily
> needs for gasoline:
>
> http://regimechangeiran.blogspot.com/2005/10/gasoline-silent-bomb.html

A study I read authored last summer by Mr Cordesman was the basis of my
claim.
I would assume his data was up to date.



--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."

[Defendario]

David E. Powell wrote:
> On Feb 12, 7:34 pm, Defendario > wrote:
>> Michael Wise wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> Defendario > wrote:
>>>> Michael Wise wrote:
>>>>> In article >,
>>>>> "David Nicholls" > wrote:
>>>>>> The mid-east is already nuclear (Isreal) - it is the appearance of a
>>>>>> balance
>>>>>> that appears to worry the US.
>>>>> That and the fact that officials in the Iranian government (from the top
>>>>> down) have repeatedly made public comments that various countries (such
>>>>> as Israel) should be wiped off the map.
>>>> You make that sound like a *bad* thing...
>>> Are you saying that the guaranteed nuclear counter response and
>>> resulting regional death, destruction, and nuclear fallout around the
>>> world are good things?
>> Iran will recover, but IsReeL will not.
>
> Um... how will Iran recover if there is a nuclear counter strike? They
> don't just "repopulate" like a MUD computer game. You are talking
> about millions of deaths here.
>

Iran is a big country. They can withstand a strike much more robustly
than can Little****tystan, which will be destroyed by non-nuke WMD

>> And that, of course, would be a *good* *thing*
>
> Only if you are a keyboard commando who gets off on the idea of
> nuclear holocausts, with zero empathy for anyone who would be caught
> in one, or ability to comprehend that the fighting and/or radiation
> and killing could spread to the very place you sit right now.
>

Then if you are such an advocate of peace, support the removal of the
dangerous and militaristic Bushler Cabal who hold the levers of power.

Touch Persia, death to IsReeL

Peace = survival

Choose wisely

>

[David R]

"Mark Test" > wrote in message
.. .
> Do you really believe Iran has peaceful intentions? We all lose
> if the mid-east goes nuclear....
>
> Mark

of course they have peaceful intentions, they aren't going to comitt suicide
just as the russians didn't even though they continually ran their mouths,

you hillbillies are a bunch of chicken little's,

actually chickens of every type

[redc1c4]

David R wrote:
>
> "Mark Test" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > Do you really believe Iran has peaceful intentions? We all lose
> > if the mid-east goes nuclear....
> >
> > Mark
>
> of course they have peaceful intentions, they aren't going to comitt suicide
> just as the russians didn't even though they continually ran their mouths,
>
> you hillbillies are a bunch of chicken little's,
>
> actually chickens of every type

as opposed to you being a turkey, eh?

redc1c4,
pointing out the obvious, to the oblivious. %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide

[David R]

"redc1c4" > wrote in message
...
> David R wrote:
>>
>>
>> of course they have peaceful intentions, they aren't going to comitt
>> suicide
>> just as the russians didn't even though they continually ran their
>> mouths,
>>
>> you hillbillies are a bunch of chicken little's,
>>
>> actually chickens of every type
>
> as opposed to you being a turkey, eh?
>
I would say that a proud, colorful, free turkey beats a yellow, cowardly,
protected chicken any day