[Smertios]

Persia is gone, all that's left is a bunch of mad muslim extremists...it needs nuking!

That would trigger an international conflict more dangerous than the Cold War. Any attack on Iran without them attacking first would simply bring a rage from Russia and China...

[layman]

That would trigger an international conflict more dangerous than the Cold War. Any attack on Iran without them attacking first would simply bring a rage from Russia and China...

Nah russia and china dont care enough. They both hate islamists too anyway, especially the russians.

They would probably just moan a bit like with Iraq.

[oppose_obama]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Iran the nation that photoshops their military maneuvers/ballistic missile launches? Which begs the question, if a base is hit with a photoshopped missile, is anyone around to record it?

[Smertios]

Nah russia and china dont care enough. They both hate islamists too anyway, especially the russians.

They would probably just moan a bit like with Iraq.

Geopolitics is a game, not too different from chess. Russia and China are waiting anxiously for the West to make a wrong move, so they can start cursing the US as much as they want...

[Baff]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Iran the nation that photoshops their military maneuvers/ballistic missile launches? Which begs the question, if a base is hit with a photoshopped missile, is anyone around to record it?

Perhaps you could counter this by photoshopping some imaginary evidence of a WMD.

[oppose_obama]

Don't need to, my side is militarily superior

We role on Tehran in 4 weeks. How many nuclear carrier groups does Iran have? Oh that's right they have speedboats. Good luck with that.

[Lokakyy]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Iran the nation that photoshops their military maneuvers/ballistic missile launches? Which begs the question, if a base is hit with a photoshopped missile, is anyone around to record it?

That picture you are probably referring to was indeed blatantly photoshopped, but it was like four years ago, and only one missile was photoshopped to the picture. Without doubt a clumsy, but understandable attempt to produce misinformation about the reliability of Iranian missiles. On the other hand, I doubt that the West would be as worried about Iran if they knew that it had no missile capability, which they most certainly do (a whole different matter is the sabre rattling that the original post describes).

[rmadison]

That picture you are probably referring to was indeed blatantly photoshopped, but it was like four years ago, and only one missile was photoshopped to the picture. Without doubt a clumsy, but understandable attempt to produce misinformation about the reliability of Iranian missiles. On the other hand, I doubt that the West would be as worried about Iran if they knew that it had no missile capability, which they most certainly do (a whole different matter is the sabre rattling that the original post describes).

A lot of nations have missiles, the issue is whether they are accurate, can be fitted/mounted easily, use liquid or solid propellant, provide a small radar footprint, and whose launches can be well hidden. N Korea's misslle program is way ahead of iran's, and even they have problems launching and directing them accurately.

Also, if you think the West / NATO does not have spotters / special forces all over Iran looking for and documenting launch sites, you'd be mistaken.

[Lokakyy]

A lot of nations have missiles, the issue is whether they are accurate, can be fitted/mounted easily, use liquid or solid propellant, provide a small radar footprint, and whose launches can be well hidden. N Korea's misslle program is way ahead of iran's, and even they have problems launching and directing them accurately.

That is correct, and it is why I said missile capability, not missile capability to do that they are threatening to do in their statement. The difference in essence is that I believe the assumptions that a Western military attack due technical superiority would be a tank parade to Teheran are wrong, not that I believe that Iran can actually militarily achieve a victory in such assault.

Also, if you think the West / NATO does not have spotters / special forces all over Iran looking for and documenting launch sites, you'd be mistaken.

That is impossible to know, but I doubt it. I'm sure that West/NATO are perfectly able to monitor Iranian missile programs both with satellites and information spying, though.

[Imperial Spaghetti]

Persia is gone, all that's left is a bunch of mad muslim extremists...it needs nuking!

There are a lot of intelligent free-thinking Iranians trapped in that country. You'd be surprised at how similar they are to Westerners. I think the best thing would be to nuke just the leaders and Ayatollahs and free them from repression.

[Baff]

That is impossible to know, but I doubt it. I'm sure that West/NATO are perfectly able to monitor Iranian missile programs both with satellites and information spying, though.

Overflights. Like that drone they shot down.
Also listening flights on the borders, and radar scanning flights on the borders.
But Iran is a big country. They need a certain amount of intelligence to even know where to start to look.

I don't think satelitte intellgence is all that much cop.
They couldn't spot Scuds with satelittes in Iraq. I doubt they can in Iran either.

I don't expect there to be any special forces there, but plenty of spies.
I can't see NATO having any intrest in Iran whatsoever.

[Franker65]

I'd also say its typical sabre rattling on Iran's part. They know that if they attack US bases, they'll incur a huge amount cruise missiles in return. The Iranians don't want a confrontation. If they did, they'd have initiated while the Americans were under pressure in Iraq.

[The Captain]

There are a lot of intelligent free-thinking Iranians trapped in that country. You'd be surprised at how similar they are to Westerners. I think the best thing would be to nuke just the leaders and Ayatollahs and free them from repression.

True enough, that's a better way to put it. Many people are trapped in this regime and could be considered as victims. It wouldn't be delusional to think that an strong opposition movement could be born, as it occurred in Libya or Syria.

I'd also say its typical sabre rattling on Iran's part. They know that if they attack US bases, they'll incur a huge amount cruise missiles in return. The Iranians don't want a confrontation. If they did, they'd have initiated while the Americans were under pressure in Iraq.

True as well, it seems that their leaders desperately need to provoke westerners in order to boast that they have more power than they actually have. It helps them maintain the illusion of a strong military position and a firm leadership. It may also help them to galvanize their supporters within the country.

[Baff]

I'd also say its typical sabre rattling on Iran's part. They know that if they attack US bases, they'll incur a huge amount cruise missiles in return. The Iranians don't want a confrontation. If they did, they'd have initiated while the Americans were under pressure in Iraq.

I think it's pretty clear that Iran is making a show of it's retaliatory capabilities to deter US attack.


If they were planning a pre-emptive strike they would not be advertising. They would be keeping their offensive capabilities top secret until they had already used them.

[Igor Antunov]

There is no way the 35 major US bases within range of hundreds of iranian missiles could escape obliteration indeed.

But such a war is on nobody's agenda right now. It's a type of cold war it seems, with syria and other proxies taking center stage.

[Zionist Nationalist]

Iran cant really do any significant damage to the US bases all they do is talk (psychological warfare).

[Igor Antunov]

They can easily lob a few 1-ton warheads with reasonable accuracy at each base. That would be enough. The destructive radius of each conventional airburst is up to 500m. Such a feat doesn't require great range, and at such range even developing nations have sufficiently accurate missile technology. Iran has been building silos for this purpose.

What it comes down to in the end is a spiral into an uncomfortable regional cold war. Iran is quite a large country with a decent resource base manpower-wise and materially speaking. It can present a viable boogeyman to Us military industrialists controlling the demofarcy in the country, because it does present real conventional threats to US interests in the middle east.

[skeptic-1]

Consider this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/20/world ... wanted=all

Regardless of political entanglements are we ready to fight yet one more war against a country who simply will not roll over for us ?

[Noelnada]

But such a war is on nobody's agenda right now. It's a type of cold war it seems, with syria and other proxies taking centre stage.

Oh well, some say it would be beneficial to Europe to see the US and Israel be dragged in this quagmire.

[skeptic-1]

The possibility of war seems to be on many agenda's lately including the "Defense and war Departments " of surrounding countries and our own.

If Israel attacks we will soon be at war.

I like my plan: Nuke the originator (s) who deal the first blow Israel OR Iran and be done with it !