And The Next War Is..........

[bluemonday]

In the Times today

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle6955351.ece

“The most shattering conclusion is that, if this was an effort that began in 2007, it could be a casus belli. If Iran is working on weapons, it means there is no diplomatic solution.”

 

Happy 2010.

[manxy]

Will sanctions work?

 

If they get this up and running, then what?

 

I tend to agree BM, that this will probably initiate pre-emptive strikes as suggested in the article and therefore lead to another war.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Why should we impose sanctions? Let them carry on building their weapons. The UK has them.

Iran might pose some threat to Israel, but then the USA and UK and Israel pose a threat to most of the Middles East.

With reference the to the INP: The UK hasn't made concerted efforts to decommision its nuclear weapons, it has upgraded its capability. When the nuclear powers continue to develop their weapons, what credibility do they have in trying to ask others to stop their development?

[MilitantDogOwner]

*** WARNING THE FOLLOWING IS IN JEST ***

 

Now I wonder what all those illegal Iranian nationals are doing in the UK?

 

I wonder if they are waiting for something, kind of like "sleeping" until something happens and then they do something...

 

[/conspiracy]

[MilitantDogOwner]

Why should we impose sanctions? Let them carry on building their weapons. The UK has them.

Iran might pose some threat to Israel, but then the USA and UK and Israel pose a threat to most of the Middles East.

With reference the to the INP: The UK hasn't made concerted efforts to decommision its nuclear weapons, it has upgraded its capability. When the nuclear powers continue to develop their weapons, what credibility do they have in trying to ask others to stop their development?

 

Where to begin on that one, LDV, just where do I begin...

[P.K.]

Will sanctions work?

 

If they get this up and running, then what?

 

I tend to agree BM, that this will probably initiate pre-emptive strikes as suggested in the article and therefore lead to another war.

The US will pinpoint the targets and then the IDF will take them out.

 

All the neighbouring Arab states will then howl in protest but in reality and behind closed doors they'll be very pleased indeed.

[Albert Tatlock]

Will sanctions work?

 

If they get this up and running, then what?

 

I tend to agree BM, that this will probably initiate pre-emptive strikes as suggested in the article and therefore lead to another war.

The US will pinpoint the targets and then the IDF will take them out.

 

All the neighbouring Arab states will then howl in protest but in reality and behind closed doors they'll be very pleased indeed.

That'll be about the size of it. The IDF did exactly the same over the same issue -

 

I think we are in the process of being softened up for this...and have been for some time...but bombing their facilities back into the stone age is probably the best option. Once these religious fanatics get hold of the bomb, all hell could break loose. You only need to get a ship around a mile or so off the coast of a major city such as New York and still be able to kill millions. You don't necessarily need missile launchers if you are a suicide bomber, hell-bent on detonating one - a ship or a truck would suffice. Irans' hatred of Israel will cause someone at sometime in Iran to launch something in the future, of that I'd be pretty certain.

[MilitantDogOwner]

Unfortunately the war will be over before we know we are fighting one.

 

Pre-planted insurgants will set off small yield devices in major cities. Manchester, London, Birmingham, etc. will all be gone in a flash.

[bluemonday]

I think we are in the process of being softened up for this...and have been for some time.

 

Agreed

 

The tone of the article in parts suggests it is inevitable.

UN as usual will make noises but do sod all else.

With Russia and China obstructing the security council, there are few other options.

I should imagine the Israelis will be rather keen to resolve the issue and will do so with support from other states albeit covert from some.

A nuclear Iran with looneys in charge is in no-ones interests.

 

Having said that I'm also quite sure that at one point in the future, Pakistan and India will try incinerating each other.

It amazes me, both of them have terrible poverty, health and social issues yet both prioritised nukes before their own peoples wellbeing.

[MilitantDogOwner]

It amazes me, both of them have terrible poverty, health and social issues yet both prioritised nukes before their own peoples wellbeing.

 

Social well being, perfect health and social financial mobility don't mean squat when your neighbour nukes you back into the stone age.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Where to begin on that one, LDV, just where do I begin...

Well if you don't know, don't say anything!

[MilitantDogOwner]

OH sigh, I tried. I really did.

 

"Why should we impose sanctions? Let them carry on building their weapons. The UK has them."

 

We're not a rebel nation lead by a group of religious fanatics hell bent on converting the world to Islam or putting the infidel to death.

 

"Iran might pose some threat to Israel, but then the USA and UK and Israel pose a threat to most of the Middles East."

 

Yes because the West started it all with our bombing and suicide attacks.

 

"With reference the to the INP: The UK hasn't made concerted efforts to decommision its nuclear weapons, it has upgraded its capability. When the nuclear powers continue to develop their weapons, what credibility do they have in trying to ask others to stop their development?"

 

Because the developed nuclear powers have all agreed the nuclear proliferation is a bad idea. I've got some, you've got some. We agree that using them on each other is a bad idea. Unfortunately, the Iranians don't care if the go out with a bang as long as the infidel goes with them.

 

 

There you go LDV.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I think we are in the process of being softened up for this...and have been for some time...but bombing their facilities back into the stone age is probably the best option.

And under such thinking let's hope that Israel receives the same treatment, and why not ask that the UK and USA are bombed to smithereens.

 

Once these religious fanatics get hold of the bomb, all hell could break loose.

What makes you think that because the Iranian government is religious that they will be inclined to use bombs? They aren't Al Qaeda. I think you are overlooking the interests of the Iranian government members and the military elite.

 

You only need to get a ship around a mile or so off the coast of a major city such as New York and still be able to kill millions. You don't necessarily need missile launchers if you are a suicide bomber, hell-bent on detonating one - a ship or a truck would suffice. Irans' hatred of Israel will cause someone at sometime in Iran to launch something in the future, of that I'd be pretty certain.

You think the Iranian government are going to hand over their nukes to suicide bombers?

 

Iran's hatred of Israel is far more likely to result in the nuclear weapons being used as bargaining tool and gain some leverage internationally in a region where Israeli and American interests and power is exceptionally strong.

It doesn't seem to require deep thinking to realise that a nuclear bomb dropped on Israel is going to result in some nasty consequences for Iran.

[MilitantDogOwner]

It doesn't seem to require deep thinking to realise that a nuclear bomb dropped on Israel is going to result in some nasty consequences for Iran.

 

Um, I think your thinking to small.

 

Iran nukes Isreal. Isreal fights back, with assistance from the US. Korea and some Middle Eastern states get involved. Soon we're fighting WWIII and fighting over who gets the better cave to live in.

 

Edit to add: The reason the Iranians wouldn't trade nukes in the conventional sense is because they would have the nukes smuggeled in and set off by insurgent forces. That way Isreal's capacity to retaliate is significantly reduced if not completely comprimised.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

A nuclear Iran with looneys in charge is in no-ones interests.

It is in Iran's interest, as the holding of weapons by other states is in their interest.

 

Having said that I'm also quite sure that at one point in the future, Pakistan and India will try incinerating each other.

Doubtful, and that is precisely because they have a lot to lose from launching nukes against each other.

It amazes me, both of them have terrible poverty, health and social issues yet both prioritised nukes before their own peoples wellbeing.

It is the same in any country. All countries have serious wealth disparities yet plough huge funds into defence. The UK spends massively on defence and has considerable problems in trying to resolve many of the social problems that crop up due to inequal wealth distribution.