Islamists smell weakness the way sharks smell blood.

In light of the election - Can a fish survive without water?

Should Israeli officials believe that the West will stand aside as Iran achieves nuclear capability and that a nuclear Islamic Republic poses an existential threat to the Jewish state, they may conclude that they have no choice but to launch a preemptive military strike—an event that could quickly lead to a regional conflagration from which the United States would have difficulty remaining aloof.

I'm not an Israeli, but I've concluded that they have no choice now with Dear Leader about to take office.

Not by The One it can't. This will be left to Israel.

Ya so we all know that, send it to Obama and what's her name, his anti-Israel advisor, Susan Powers?

The more I learn about the future under CBBHO the more I wish I HAD voted for him. Life is just going to be swell!

/

...could quickly lead to a regional conflagration from which the United States would have difficulty remaining.

Not to worry, nothing is too difficult for the Lord Obamessiah...counting down until Jan 20.

The other downside to the Obama presidency? He will stall-kill (it needs more testing!) missile defense in Europe because it's made Russia mad. There will be no stopping the Iranian missile when it comes.
Israel and others better gear up to do their own missile defense.

Israel should do it now, while they still have Bush.

Um, has there been any indication Obama would try to deter or contain Iran? Near as I can tell, he's encouraging them.

Should Israeli officials believe that the West will stand aside as Iran achieves nuclear capability and that a nuclear Islamic Republic poses an existential threat to the Jewish state, they may conclude that they have no choice but to launch a preemptive military strike—an event that could quickly lead to a regional conflagration from which the United States would have difficulty remaining aloof.

That thought caps a thoroughly depressing week...
(sigh)

Last update - 19:28 07/11/2008

Rice: Annapolis Mideast peace push was no failure

[Link: www.haaretz.com...]

And now a short commercial from Fantasy land!

But if the USA tries to do anything, we just get dumped on for throwing our weight around.

re: #1 Shug

Islamists smell weakness the way sharks smell blood.

See the difference between Carter and Regan with Iran.

Well we have deterred Iran from terrorism for the last 30 years, so deterring them from making and using a nuclear bomb should be no problem.

/

Even if contained, wouldn't a nuclear Iran give change the balance of power in the Middle East against the interests of the United States, and give Iran excessive bargaining power throughout the world?

Furthermore, how long do we really think we can contain them for? Assuming we could contain a nuclear Iran in the short term against their most recent threats against our allies in the region, nuclear capability is forever! They might not use their nuclear power in the near future, but we will have to contend with an nuclear bomb in the hands of an extremely volatile country, until we invent something stronger than the nuclear bomb, and I don't think that is going to happen any time soon.

we need to stop thinking in terms of 10 years or so. The mistakes we make now in these areas will affect us for the rest of history.

Israel should be preparing to strike right now. The New Order will not be very friendly de facto to Israel.
I know that people are generally not one issue voters, but it is inexplicable to me that Obama carried the Jewish vote.

re: #1 Shug

Islamists smell weakness the way sharks smell blood.

...and, it looks is if John F'kn Kerry will the Secretary of State.

God save us all.

KABOOM.

Israel does not have long to act while knowing there is a man in the Oval Office that will have their back. Compel Bush to defend Israel now and 0bama will not be able to waffle in January.

Not to fear.

Iran is a tiny country and not a threat.

/

re: #19 opnion

Israel should be preparing to strike right now. The New Order will not be very friendly de facto to Israel.
I know that people are generally not one issue voters, but it is inexplicable to me that Obama carried the Jewish vote.

I am pretty much a 3 issue voter: Security, Security, and the other stuff.

it is ridiculous to believe that a nuclear iran can be contained or deterred.
they need to be stopped now.
or we wait to see the doom they have promised.

The Iranians are like the Russians: they'll respond to strength, too bad we're far too reluctant to give them a real show of force. They've been tickling our feet for some time--with those speedboat raids and such--and it's high-time we hit 'em back. How we do that? I dunno, I'm just a college kid.

re: #20 MarkX

...and, it looks is if John F'kn Kerry will the Secretary of State.

God save us all.

G-D saves those who save themselves!

I am so livid about Obama this morning and if I thought that explaining why he's going to be a train wreck for our country could penetrate the thick head of an Obamaton I'd perhaps try to though I'd likely lose my patience first trying to reduce myself to their level of comprehension. Good luck defending his moronic policies in four years you idiots who voted him in! I don't think I'm getting back on lgf today. Enjoy the weekend, lizards! Try to stay more positive than I am.

No.

European politicians sail to Gaza from Cyprus

[Link: www.ynetnews.com...]

Are there typhoons in the Mediterranean?

re: #16 mattm

See the difference between Carter and Regan with Iran.

And Reagan pulled out of lebanon 4 months after they killed our marines

re: #28 Nevergiveup

Sorry, I don't buy your theology. God saves those who cannot save themselves...

re: #35 MarkX

Sorry, I don't buy your theology. God saves those who cannot save themselves...

That's ok, I wasn't selling it anyway.

Obama will use the UN's system of the "STRONGLY WORDED LETTER" as his nuclear deterrence policy toward Iran, since it worked so well for Carter during the hostage crisis.

All the while threatening to invade Pakistan.

Sheesh, this guy is a joke, and a very bad and scary one at that.

re: #4 Sharmuta

I'm not an Israeli, but I've concluded that they have no choice now with Dear Leader about to take office.

I worry that The One would have us side with the enemy.

I am not sure what I would do if this country were to turn on Israel.

Although I agree that Israel should take steps towards protecting herself against Iran, I am a bit put-off by the comments on this thread.

I just wish to remind everyone here that there are consequences to Israel attacking Iran. If the strike doesn't go 100% correct, the consequences could be apocalyptic.

These are the lives of my family you are brashly risking.

What makes anyone think Obama will even try containing or deterring Iran?

Remember, Shia Persian Iran hates the heretic Sunni Arab Saudis almost more than they hate the Israelis. Now, will 0bambi care as much as Dubya about protecting our friends the Saudis?

/be careful what you asked for 0bambi

re: #38 Syrah

I worry that The One would have us side with the enemy.

I am not sure what I would do if this country were to turn on Israel.

That's why Israel should strike now- while Bush can still help.

re: #31 Iron Fist

His aides insist not, so it must be a done deal.

re: #38 Syrah

I worry that The One would have us side with the enemy.

I am not sure what I would do if this country were to turn on Israel.

It would not be so overt as that. Simply the withholding or delaying of both military aid and diplomatic cover for Israel could be devastating.

This is a nightmare.

re: #39 WrathofG-d

Although I agree that Israel should take steps towards protecting herself against Iran, I am a bit put-off by the comments on this thread.

I just wish to remind everyone here that there are consequences to Israel attacking Iran. If the strike doesn't go 100% correct, the consequences could be apocalyptic.

These are the lives of my family you are brashly risking.

Even if the strike goes 100% correct, the consequences could be apocalyptic - for Iran. And that sort of thing tends to have repercussions. There is NO neat way for Israel to do this thing, nor for the US to do so alone, without active support from virtually the entire security council, if not the entire world.

I doubt there's been a bigger conundrum in world history.

re: #42 Sharmuta

That's why Israel should strike now- while Bush can still help.

Help how exactly? I don't think either of them would stop israeli jets flying through Iraq.

I just hope that part of the security briefing O is getting from the State Department includes the Bush administration's plans on logistical support for an Israeli strike to take out Iran's nuke facilities before January. Well I can hope anyway ...

re: #43 MarkX

His aides insist not, so it must be a done deal.

Well the only good part about Kerry becoming Sec. of State. They all tend to evaporate into the vapor of foggy bottom and pretty much disappear after a year or so. Nobody actually listens to a Sec. of State.

OT

I posted the following at JW, in the most current thread "If Israel's next prime minister intends..."

"Off topic, but I am concerned with the "rift" between JW and LJF's. Robert, can you answer one simple question for me. This would help a lot in deciding what is really going on here. Which European political parties do you UNCONDITIONALLY condemn because of their proven ties to racist nationalism? Walter L. Newton, Golden, Co."

I'm curious to see if I get an answer, or how other users on that site decide to comment on my question.

re: #15 Iron Fist

... And we've just elected Neville Chamberlin to the Presidency. ...

Except that Obama can't be removed by a vote of no confidence followed by a new election for the House and Senate.

Here is the scary thing. Obama is so sure he can talk away any problem in the world he won't even consider that he could fail.
He has no plan B.

re: #52 redshirt

Here is the scary thing. Obama is so sure he can talk away any problem in the world he won't even consider that he could fail.
He has no plan B.

That would imply he has a plan A, no?

re: #20 MarkX

...and, it looks is if John F'kn Kerry will the Secretary of State.

God save us all.

I have heard reports that this is possible. It had some play on Fox News on Wednesday but I havent heard much since then. I am pretty sure it is still an unconfirmed rumor.

re: #48 turn

I just hope that part of the security briefing O is getting from the State Department includes the Bush administration's plans on logistical support for an Israeli strike to take out Iran's nuke facilities before January. Well I can hope anyway ...

It would be leaked.

If I were Bush and had that in mind, I would make sure that Obama was not told about that until minutes before the deal went down.

Need to know.

Lives are at stake.

re: #39 WrathofG-d

Although I agree that Israel should take steps towards protecting herself against Iran, I am a bit put-off by the comments on this thread.

I just wish to remind everyone here that there are consequences to Israel attacking Iran. If the strike doesn't go 100% correct, the consequences could be apocalyptic.

These are the lives of my family you are brashly risking.

I think that what people are saying is that your family & others are in greater danger if Israel does not act before Obama is sworn in.
Barack didn't spend time hanging out with Palistinian terrorist supporters or listen to anti Semetic tirades from Reverend Wright because he likes Jews, he does not.
Israel will not have a friend in the White House & I am really hard pressed to come up with another reliable ally.

re: #53 turn

His plan A is to talk them out of their aggression. He believes his own hype.

re: #55 Syrah

It would be leaked.

If I were Bush and had that in mind, I would make sure that Obama was not told about that until minutes before the deal went down.

Need to know.

Lives are at stake.

If I were Israel I wouldn't say a thing to the US- just DO IT!

re: #55 Syrah

It would be leaked.

If I were Bush and had that in mind, I would make sure that Obama was not told about that until minutes before the deal went down.

Need to know.

Lives are at stake.

It would likely have been leaked by Bush's administration by now if it were in the works. Like I said ... hope

re: #44 Nevergiveup

It would not be so overt as that. Simply the withholding or delaying of both military aid and diplomatic cover for Israel could be devastating.

Bingo! It will be passive hostility & lack of support.

re: #58 Sharmuta

If I were Israel I wouldn't say a thing to the US- just DO IT!

That would be best.

If they act weak, the Obamatons will just treat them like shit. If they can be at least a little bit scary, the Obamatons will reflexively want to appease them.

re: #59 turn

It would likely have been leaked by Bush's administration by now if it were in the works. Like I said ... hope

That's if the Israelis have bothered to fully inform the Bush administration of their plans. I have a feeling the there is going to be a lot of Israeli withholding of plans in the near future for roughly 4-8 years.

re: #58 Sharmuta

If I were Israel I wouldn't say a thing to the US- just DO IT!

That would be pretty near impossible with out at least tacit USA appoval. Israel would have to fly right thru America's Air Defence in Iraq and the Persian Gulf.

Lots of hungry hyenas out there, and we now have the wildebeast with a limp for President. Ain't life grand.

I do hope GWB is rapidly stocking the Israeli larder with all the appropriate munitions and technology needed to smack Iran. There will be no help in the forthcoming admin.

Can a Nuclear Iran Be Contained or Deterred?

Sure, you just have the POTUS negotiate with Mahmoud Ahmawackajob without pre-conditions. That will show them!

rotflmao

re: #49 Nevergiveup

Well the only good part about Kerry becoming Sec. of State. They all tend to evaporate into the vapor of foggy bottom and pretty much disappear after a year or so. Nobody actually listens to a Sec. of State.

I liked me some Cyrus Vance.

re: #62 Sharmuta

That's if the Israelis have bothered to fully inform the Bush administration of their plans. I have a feeling the there is going to be a lot of Israeli withholding of plans in the near future for roughly 4-8 years.

Heaven help us, I hope so.

re: #58 Sharmuta

If I were Israel I wouldn't say a thing to the US- just DO IT!

I would have to think there would be some heads up first and some level cooperation by the US if this were to take place.

i have a solution to the problem, but it would just get deleted... %-)

re: #68 Syrah

Heaven help us, I hope so.

If there is one force on the earth trained as well as Americans, it would be Israel. I hope they realize what's about to happen and keep an eye out for the inevitable bus.

re: #51 Son of the Black Dog

Except that Obama can't be removed by a vote of no confidence followed by a new election for the House and Senate.

And I thought the US Government was the best system until I read that...

re: #2 buzzsawmonkey

It is amazing how gutlessness always creates more problems than it solves.

What you said... Priceless.

Once they have nuclear weapons, they cannot be contained. They must be prevented from obtaining them!

re: #63 Nevergiveup

That would be pretty near impossible with out at least tacit USA appoval. Israel would have to fly right thru America's Air Defence in Iraq and the Persian Gulf.

Any prearranged sortie would certainly be leaked and thus killed in its planning stage.

Israel will have to execute and simply dare the US to block them. It's going to take some guts.

re: #63 Nevergiveup

That would be pretty near impossible with out at least tacit USA
appoval. Israel would have to fly right thru America's Air Defence in
Iraq and the Persian Gulf.

Does Israel have boomer subs?

The conflict between "War Islam" and the rest of the world is far far from over & IMHO ultimately there are three possibilities:

"War Islam" conquers and enslaves all others.

"War Islam" is crushed out.

"War Islam" is by some miracle changed internally beyond all recognition.

I am not sure what Obama plans to do, certainly words alone will not change things much.

re: #76 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

Does Israel have boomer subs?

Kinda. They do reportedly have nuclear capable ballistic subs.

re: #80 shiek al beif salami

4 words there.

re: #78 Iron Fist

That last part of your comment could be taken as racist, if this wasn't a post-racist society.

Come on, Israel can't nuke Iran. Don't even say that. A preemptive nuclear strike is absolutely morally indefensible.
Surely they have enough conventional capacity to get the job done. If not, they better stock up as fast as they can.

re: #37 Intrepid

Obama will use the UN's system of the "STRONGLY WORDED LETTER" as his nuclear deterrence policy toward Iran, since it worked so well for Carter during the hostage crisis.

All the while threatening to invade Pakistan.

Sheesh, this guy is a joke, and a very bad and scary one at that.

i get a good belly laugh every time i hear his plan to invade Pakistan... it just proves Juggy is too stupid to read a map. the logistics for Afghanistan get there through Pakistan.

if he's stupid enough to order our troops to cross the border, all the Pakis have to do is stop the trucks, and our troops are screwed.

Is this song and dance getting old ...

If the Israeli's get involved in {fill in the blank} the the whole region will be plunged into war ... yada yada yada ...

Hey did some one see a chicken running by ?

Isn't it up to the UN to enforce the nuclear non proliferation act?

Time to stop feeding the the horse that continually bites you.

re: #84 redshirt

I agree, an explosion is an explosion.

re: #47 greygandalf

Help how exactly? I don't think either of them would stop israeli jets flying through Iraq.

I think Obama would order the US military to actively oppose an Israeli attack on Iran.

re: #88 Son of the Black Dog

I think Obama would order the US military to actively oppose an Israeli attack on Iran.

Political suicide. He wouldn't dare.

re: #48 turn

I just hope that part of the security briefing O is getting from the State Department includes the Bush administration's plans on logistical support for an Israeli strike to take out Iran's nuke facilities before January. Well I can hope anyway ...

Obama and his advisers would leak this immediately.

re: #2 buzzsawmonkey

It is amazing how gutlessness always creates more problems than it solves.

Jimmy Carter & Iran Redux

re: #58 Sharmuta

If I were Israel I wouldn't say a thing to the US- just DO IT!

They can't.

re: #84 redshirt

Come on, Israel can't nuke Iran. Don't even say that. A preemptive nuclear strike is absolutely morally indefensible.
Surely they have enough conventional capacity to get the job done. If not, they better stock up as fast as they can.

why isn't it defensible? the targets are *not* civilian population centers, but weapons labs located in remote areas... and the people in charge have already promised to commit genocide, so it's clearly self defense.

of course, when they rebuild, the new plants will be located right in the center of their biggest cities, but that will take a few years...

re: #81 Ojoe

4 words there.

Went to biden's skool.. heh

re: #89 The Shadow Do

Political suicide. He wouldn't dare.

He might. He's got the MSM who can spin this - and he's got audacity.

This is the nightmare I've been trying hard not to think about since Tuesday night. Can't get away from it ...

Look, I think you are all off the reservation here. Our president-elect will talk to dinnerjacket without preconditions and clear this all up.

re: #95 Zippy_Slug
1 word: you got that right.

re: #54 fish

I have heard reports that this is possible. It had some play on Fox News on Wednesday but I havent heard much since then. I am pretty sure it is still an unconfirmed rumor.

Yes, it is rumor, but plausible to me. IMO, he would jump on it. Flyin' around the world in a faux Air Force One. His ego will not allow him to refuse the job, if offered.

re: #97 Iron Fist

IMHO Western Civ. is still paying for the folly of WW1; that was such a mistake that many still think there is nothing worse than war, which is not true.

BBL Lizards

Please don't hit me. I'll be good.

re: #90 Iron Fist

Didn't you read the news story? His family in Kenya did slaughter a bunch of animals in celebration!
Maybe we should refer to him as "Thulsa Doom" from now on...

re: #102 Iron Fist

you are right, it was against the man race and not other persons of gender.

re: #78 Iron Fist

God help us. If Obama just does what he says he'll do, we'll look back on the wonderful Carter administration. We've really stepped on our dick with this one.

His administration will be filled with the Clinton & Carter retreads & rejects. Madeleine Halfbright will be on TV soon with her words of wisdom... I bet you a weeks salary.

To repeat myself, God save us all.

Y'know, gang, Iran can build themselves a nuke or ten, and they can still be deterred and contained, as far as the US is concerned. Israel maybe doesn't see it that way - but even Israel might survive getting hit with one or two of the kind of nukes Iran is likely to be able to produce. And then they would have free reign, if not obligation, to smash Iran, probably with much bigger nukes. This may never happen.

And, I have no problem talking to Iran. I might like very much to talk to Iran. I'm not sure how much they would be enthused about talking to me. I think Bush's refusal to publicly talk to Iran was a huge mistake. Maybe 0bambi *can* do better on this. It's not hard. I say we can outtalk Iran, even as we can outfight them. They're not completely nuts, they're just a certain kind of nuts. We dealt with the Soviets who weren't all that different.

Given the immense mess this is, I'd certainly give talk a chance.

I wonder what the likelihood of Obama taking some kind of "See, I'm a tough-guy too" action might be...if the economy is completely hosed, the peons are in an uproar over Democrat/Obama plans for yet another fiasco, and the next set of elections are imminent.

Do the Iranians have any aspirin plants?

This is merely for the sake of discussion.

Assume Iran does develop a nuclear weapon. Does it have a delivery system which would enable it to attack Israel? Isn't that the biggest concern?

Moreover, let's assume Dinner Jacket's eschatological views are more political red meat than real. In that case, he would not be eager to use said weapon in any event for a real fear of overwhelming and disproportionate response from Israel and the US. He would use it as a Shia bargaining chip; as a means of extract concessions (tribute) from his Sunni neighbors.

Let's face it. If Iran does have as many centrifuges as it claims, it is only a matter of time before they can make enough U235 or weapons grade plutonium for a simple Hiroshima-type bomb. I do not think this can be stopped. Keeping Iran in check once it does is the only viable means available right now.

Let's hope the first test is a fizzle, though.

We need to keep our heads high in this time of trouble. Here is one of my favorite poems, applicable now, especially for men like GB.

[IF]

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream--and not make dreams your master,
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings--nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And--which is more--you'll be a Man, my son!

--Rudyard Kipling

re: #105 redshirt

Didn't you read the news story? His family in Kenya did slaughter a bunch of animals in celebration!
Maybe we should refer to him as "Thulsa Doom" from now on...

I always thought "Tree of Woe" would make a great title for a game show.///

re: #46 itellu3times

re: #56 opnion

I would like to know why Israel does not use the extra time Iran is being given to THEIR advantage. From my extreme limited knowledge on the actual make up of the nuclear sites, I am of the understanding that a air strike probably wouldn't work.

Israel should definitely do something to end the nuclear program, but I am wary that it be a conventional strike. As I have recommended numerous times before (while hoping someone that actually makes these decisions is watching) Israel, the United States, or anyone that doesn't want to be forever threatened by Iran, should put people on the ground in Iran and begin to eliminate scientists, disrupt necessary items to the facilities, or otherwise make creating the nuclear plants impossible.

Iran is being given more and more time. Israel should use this time to get their own guys into Iran, and into the facilities. We need to be smarter about our tactics.

re: #109 itellu3times

I disagree, the Soviet Union was very different than Iran, they had a culture, and they did not want to see their cities and landmarks vaporized, Iran does not give a shit about their people or the shithole they call home.

I believe the people of Iran are good, the leadership is pure evil.

re: #112 calcajun

To answer your questions.

1. yes they have the delivery systems. Tested a couple months ago actually.

2. Iran's actual leaders, the Mullahs, have actually already spoken to this point. In summary, they stated that one nuke would destroy all of Israel, but it would take many to hurt the entire Muslim world, and thus the trade off would be acceptable to them.

re: #94 redc1c4

why isn't it defensible? the targets are *not* civilian population centers, but weapons labs located in remote areas... and the people in charge have already promised to commit genocide, so it's clearly self defense.

How do you know where the targets are? There is no way a nuclear strike is contained only to a small targeted area. Nukes not only destroy their targets, they make the areas uninhabitable. Nuking Iran would only remove what little restraint the islamic world ha shown. So unless Israel is ready to destroy the entire islamic world, they better stay conventional.

not anymore thanks to obama!

Cool OT.

My city newspaper, The Savannah Morning News posted as their headline today: OBAMAS PICKS CHANGE TONE.
Referring to his picks of Rahm Emanuel and John Podest, both infighters at partisan politics.

Interesting.

The most frightening thing I see going on here on LGF, and in the thinking of the Bush administration is the WW2/Cold War type strategy and thinking, when the Islamists have blatantly shown us that War has evolved.

Like the British during our revolution, we continue to march into the battlefield in perfect order, with our respectable bright Red Coats. The enemy is hiding behind trees, and sniping at our leaders, while we scream how uncultured that is.

We need to evolve with the warfare.

Without significant US co-operation there's nothing the Israelis can do. The raid on Syria was considered daring. Take a look at a map of the Middle East. Iran may as well be on the other side of the world. Not only is Iran 5 times the size, but there isn't just one target like with Syria.

And advocating a pre-emptive nuclear strike is sheer madness.

re: #116 buzzsawmonkey

Oh, Iran can "be contained."

Bush did not and will not attack Iran to preempt Iran from going nucULar.
Will Obama? No evidence exists in anything Obama has done or said to date to think he would actually lift a finger.

If Israel attacks now, at least Bush will probably resupply Israel and perhaps fend off the Russians from immediately resupplying Iran. After his inauguration Obama cannot be counted on for even this much.

If Obama is serious about deterring Iran, he needs to publicly warn Iran right now that he will use American force to eliminate Iran's nuclear program and that he will unconditionally support Israel if Israel attacks Iran.
The chances of Obama doing this are slightly less than zero.

Israel is on its own and will attack or not according to whether they believe that their nuclear deterrent will be effective to keep Iran from attacking.

re: #112 calcajun

... Let's face it. If Iran does have as many centrifuges as it claims, it is only a matter of time before they can make enough U235 or weapons grade plutonium for a simple Hiroshima-type bomb. I do not think this can be stopped. Keeping Iran in check once it does is the only viable means available right now.

Let's hope the first test is a fizzle, though.

It would be a HUGE mistake to assume that Iran doesn't have the blueprints for a working, reliable, implosion type warhead, capable of being delivered by a missile with sufficient range to reach Israel. They probably wouldn't even feel like they needed to expend their fissionable material on a test, unless they think a test is the best way to blackmail the world.

re: #118 WrathofG-d

To answer your questions.

1. yes they have the delivery systems. Tested a couple months ago actually.

2. Iran's actual leaders, the Mullahs, have actually already spoken to this point. In summary, they stated that one nuke would destroy all of Israel, but it would take many to hurt the entire Muslim world, and thus the trade off would be acceptable to them.

One nuke to destroy Israel? How? A 20kt blast would do a tremendous amount of damage to Tel Aviv (they'd never hit Jerusalem) but would not destroy the country. The IDF CNC is (supposedly) hardened against such an attack. They would need a lot of bombs to obliterate Israel.

However, if you want to kick over the mother of all anthills, 50 -100 kt bursts over Mecca, Medina, Qum, Tehran, Damascus, Riyadh would most certainly "hurt" the Muslim world. I do not believe the IDF does not have such a strike planned or that they never wargammed it.

re: #122 WrathofG-d

The most frightening thing I see going on here on LGF, and in the
thinking of the Bush administration is the WW2/Cold War type strategy
and thinking, when the Islamists have blatantly shown us that War has
evolved.

Like the British during our revolution, we continue to march into
the battlefield in perfect order, with our respectable bright Red
Coats. The enemy is hiding behind trees, and sniping at our leaders,
while we scream how uncultured that is.

We need to evolve with the warfare.

Just to be a historical nit-picker, we Yanks didn't beat the Brits by fighting a guerilla war - we learned how to fight like a professional army at Valley Forge & that's how we defeated the British. That & naval support from France.

All of the people here and elsewhere that keep talking about the negative effects of a first strike on Iran have valid points, but think about a first strike on Israel, ground zero Tel Aviv. 765,000 dead, another 400,000 maimed, all in the time frame of three minutes, kind of puts things in perspective, no?

Analogy: Think of how awful it would have been if someone with foresight chose to murder 19 people at 6:00 am, Sept. 11, 2001 in a few airports in the northeast U.S. Terrible huh?

re: #128 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

Just to be a historical nit-picker, we Yanks didn't beat the Brits by fighting a guerilla war - we learned how to fight like a professional army at Valley Forge & that's how we defeated the British. That & naval support from France.

Cite the battles of Monmouth, Cowpens, Yorktown, Saratoga, Trenton, etc.

109...

The Soviet Union was evil incarnate, no doubt. However, they were not merely interested in being a superior military power. They wanted to show the world that they could compete and beat the "capitalist pigs" in sport, technology, culture, etc. Iran could give a fig about landing on the moon, winning gold medals, or producing top quality basic research. They are led by a nut hell-bent on full-filling a bat-ass crazy messianic prophecy, and it precisely this difference that requires a completely different strategy in dealing with them. When one does not care about the consequences of his actions in the here and now, one CANNOT be contained.

BTW, we have been "talking" to these fools for the past 5 years, along with GB, Germany, and France. And what has all of this talking yielded? Armed insurrection in Iraq (both troops, I.E.D.'s, leadership) and numerous people taken hostage, including a dozen or so British Navy personal.

re: #130 calcajun

Cite the battles of Monmouth, Cowpens, Yorktown, Saratoga, Trenton, etc.

The sniping from behind the trees is certainly demoralizing for an army, but it won't win the war. We fought that way because it was the only way we could fight at that particular time. As the war went on and our army became better trained and disciplined, we fought the way they did-all the way to WWI when modern warfare made it...impractical and far too costly in human lives.

re: #129 Tarkus289

All of the people here and elsewhere that keep talking about the negative effects of a first strike on Iran have valid points, but think about a first strike on Israel, ground zero Tel Aviv. 765,000 dead, another 400,000 maimed, all in the time frame of three minutes, kind of puts things in perspective, no?

Analogy: Think of how awful it would have been if someone with foresight chose to murder 19 people at 6:00 am, Sept. 11, 2001 in a few airports in the northeast U.S. Terrible huh?

I agree. A strike on Iran's nuclear weapons program would produce fewer casualties than an Iranian strike on an Israeli population center. But, the idea of pre-emptive war is not as popular as it was a few years ago. There also has to be solid proof that it really exists.

Just for the record, I am not saying Israel should use nukes in a first strike manner, it is fortunate that they do have second strike capability, however.

Personally, I believe we should have taken care of this problem immediately after the '04 election, but that is ancient history now. I suppose we will have to wait it out and see what happens.

I am no expert, but I feel Israel would hold its own for a while against Iran for a while, but only with our heavy support, Th U.S. military on the other hand could and would flatten that country, virtually unopposed is a very short amount of time, but it would require a real Shock and Awe, not the watered down version of '03.

re: #127 calcajun

Some silly percentage ( like 80% or so) of the actual population of Israel lives in that radius of Tel Aviv. That is why.

To those who say that a preemptive nuclear strike by Israel is morally indefensible, I would ask this question:
If American intelligence had conclusive proof that Chavez had several nuclear warheads and that they were deployed in Caracas on ICBM's and aimed at Miami, Atlanta, Dallas, Washington, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and Boston; and if Chavez announced that he would be firing them in 2 hours - would you not agree that a preemptive nuclear strike by the USA was a moral imperative?

re: #128 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

Ok well I learn something new everyday then. That was always my understanding. But then again I get all my Civil War information from Mel Gibson's "The Patriot". ;)

re: #135 WrathofG-d

Did not know that.

re: #131 SaneInMN

The thing is, commies never learned to make concrete. No matter how well they did in the Olympics, they still couldn't make concrete. Now that entire region is crumbling and falling apart.

re: #136 Spare O'Lake

if Chavez announced that he would be firing them in 2 hours - would you not agree that a preemptive nuclear strike by the USA was a moral imperative?

If he made such a threat, our strike would no longer be preemptive. Pointing the gun with intention to fire is as good a reason to shoot first as already having been fired at.
That said, I still feel we could do the necessary damage with non nuclear weaponry.

Oh, but the way (O.T.), it looks like our MN DFL is attempting to steal Norm Coleman's Senate seat...

From [Link: www.powerlineblog.com...] (Edited)

When the polls closed Tuesday evening, Minnesota's Secretary of State's office showed that Norm Coleman had a 725-vote win in his closely contested race against Al Franken. By the next morning, however, Coleman's victory was already shrinking. As various precincts and county auditors have "corrected" their totals, Coleman's lead has dropped to a mere 237 votes. Minnesota Republicans are concerned that the fix may be in.

An example of the kind of thing now going on was reported in today's Minneapolis Star Tribune:

Just as Secretary of State Mark Ritchie was explaining to reporters the recount process in one of the narrowest elections in Minnesota history, an aide rushed in with news: Pine County's Partridge Township had revised its vote total upward -- another 100 votes for Democratic candidate Al Franken, putting him within .011 percentage points of Republican U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman.

The reason for the change? Exhausted county officials had accidentally entered 24 for Franken instead of 124 when the county's final votes were tallied at 5:25 Wednesday morning.

Optical scan ballots are used nearly everywhere in Minnesota. The system is simple: once the polls close, absentee ballots are run through the machines with Republican and Democratic poll watchers both present. The machines are then locked down. The machine prints a tape that looks like a grocery store printout that summarizes the number of votes cast for each candidate in each race. At the same time, the totals are uploaded electronically, via a secure phone line connected to the box, to the county where the precinct is located; from there, they are reported to the Secretary of State. The tape showing the precinct's vote totals is signed by the precinct's election judge and is required to be publicly displayed.

There is essentially no human input here. There is no room for new ballots to be "discovered," or for counting "errors" to be corrected. The process is electronic. My understanding had been that optical scan voting is in use in every one of Minnesota's several thousand precincts. Based on the Strib's account of what happened in Partridge Township, it appears this may not be the case.

The Coleman campaign has reportedly dispatched volunteers to try to guard the security of ballots in some locations. The danger, of course, is that they could already be too late. Minnesota's Secretary of State, a left-wing activist who was elected in 2006 after MoveOn.org and other nationwide groups targeted the Minnesota Secretary of State race, has yet to certify vote totals. If fraud is to be committed, it most likely has taken place already, or will occur before the recount begins.

UPDATE: Hot off the press, the first apparent evidence of fraud. Last night at around 7:30, a precinct in Mountain Iron, St. Louis County, mysteriously updated its vote total to add 100 new votes--all 100 for Barack Obama and Al Franken.

Mountain Iron uses optical scanning, so the Coleman campaign asked for a copy of the tape documenting the ballots cast on election night. St. Louis County responded by providing a tape that includes the newly-added 100 votes, and is dated November 2--the Sunday before the election. St. Louis County reportedly denies being able to produce the genuine tape from election night, even though Minnesota law, as I understand it, requires that tape to be signed by the election judges and publicly displayed.

re: #138 calcajun

you also have to take into consideration the minimal distance between Tel-Aviv-Jaffa on the Mediterranean (west) and Jerusalem on the East

Here is some information about the population of Israel, I don't know how accurate it is.

139...

Is it the concrete, our the massive polution/zero upkeep? Also, wasn't it true that only about 10% of the crops they planted actually were harvested and consumed? And is this the eventual paradise "the ONE" has in mind for all of us?

re: #45 formercorpsman

This is a nightmare.

Respectfully, no it's not.

Nightmares are something that you wake up from.

This is reality. Much worse.

re: #122 WrathofG-d

The most frightening thing I see going on here on LGF, and in the thinking of the Bush administration is the WW2/Cold War type strategy and thinking, when the Islamists have blatantly shown us that War has evolved.

Like the British during our revolution, we continue to march into the battlefield in perfect order, with our respectable bright Red Coats. The enemy is hiding behind trees, and sniping at our leaders, while we scream how uncultured that is.

We need to evolve with the warfare.

Good point!
I hope some bright minds are working on this.
Like Gen. Petraeus, for example. I'd guess the recent successes in Afghanistan and Pakistan are due to a change of strategy instigated by him since he took over as top commander.in

re: #141 buzzsawmonkey

Actually, the concept of volley fire was a natural progression of massed-rank infantry tactics. The musket--with an effective range of less than 100yds--was meant to weaken the enemy line; two volleys followed by the bayonet charge.

This ended with the American Civil War where rifled muskets were applied. Damn few bayonet charges in that war. It was not until breach-loaders and smokeless powder were developed that modern fire and movement tactics came about.

re: #146 yma o hyd

I guess this is a good time to inform President Obama that I am free for an advisory position in his cabinet.

re: #127 calcajun

One nuke to destroy Israel? How? A 20kt blast would do a tremendous amount of damage to Tel Aviv (they'd never hit Jerusalem) but would not destroy the country. The IDF CNC is (supposedly) hardened against such an attack. They would need a lot of bombs to obliterate Israel.

However, if you want to kick over the mother of all anthills, 50 -100 kt bursts over Mecca, Medina, Qum, Tehran, Damascus, Riyadh would most certainly "hurt" the Muslim world. I do not believe the IDF does not have such a strike planned or that they never wargammed it.

Wouldn't this be the beginning of a new MAD situation?
Israel lets the Magic Kingdom know that any attack - nuclear or conventional - by Iran and its Allies would have as consequence the assured nuclear destruction of Islam's greatest holy places?

Hm.
Might work ...

we're not the ones that put a nuclear threat on the table .Had this been dealt with properly years ( if not decades ) ago,we would not be in this situation.Due to the western worlds sense of common decency we're too squeamish about war to respond an d the longer we delay the more horrid the necessary response will be .Initially a good "bitch slap" would have beensufficient but now that we've shown several decades of weakness the necesary response is bloody. I'm starting too think Osama's analyses is right and we're the weak horse .Like Gulliver our massive superiority in strength and technology is meaningless without the will to defend ourselves

Obama is having a press conference now, and is giving his "solve our financial problems through Big Government" spiel. Lord help us.

To an apocalyptic fanatic like Ahmadinejad, Mutually Assured Destruction is not a deterrent, it's an inducement.

re: #149 yma o hyd

Israel would never do it. They respect the religious places of other religions.

re: #141 buzzsawmonkey

The British tactic of massed ranks and volley fire was based on Alexander the Great's phalanx. Alexander conquered most of "the known world" with that tactic, and the British did pretty well with it too.

British tactics were based on the psychological advantage of incredible discipline in the face of often less-disciplined troops. There is something extremely unnerving in facing a solid rank of troops that keeps advancing in the face of opposing fire and that, no matter how many times you knock out someone in the front ranks, re-fills and keeps advancing in a solid wall. That stolid onslaught caused many opposing troops to break and run.

The other British tactic was that of disciplined volley fire. Front rank would fire in a volley; the second rank would fire in a volley as the first rank re-loaded. Volley fire can be--was--devastating in the days before machine guns. You can see how this worked in the films Zulu and Khartoum. Moving forward or, if necessary, backward, under continuous sustained volley fire enabled the British to do very well for a very long time.

(Whisper it quietly - but the Brits actually learned these tactics from none other than Frederick the Great, whom they supported with money during his wars against Austria and Russia, and of whom Napoleon said that he'd not have won Prussia if that great King and strategist had still been alive ...)

re: #149 yma o hyd

Wouldn't this be the beginning of a new MAD situation?
Israel lets the Magic Kingdom know that any attack - nuclear or conventional - by Iran and its Allies would have as consequence the assured nuclear destruction of Islam's greatest holy places?

Hm.
Might work ...

Sounds a lot like the old MAD to me, with a touch of hummus.

Another scary scenario is not just an attack on Israel, but an electrmagnetic pulse attack from the detonation of a nuke at high altitude over the United States. The electromagnetic pulse would short out every computer chip not hardened against such an attack, taking us back to the horse and buggy era - famine to the max. U.S. intelligence noticed the Iranians launching missiles from ships in the Caspian sea, and it took a while to figure out that one of the Iranian's plans may be to launch a nuclear armed missile from a cargo ship in the Atlantic and have the nuke detonate at high altitude, triggering the pulse. The Iranians have bragged about picturing a world without the United States, and this is what they may be referring to.

re: #148 WrathofG-d

I guess this is a good time to inform President Obama that I am free for an advisory position in his cabinet.

Go for it!
(If you can make it through the ideological vetting procedure ...)

re: #155 yma o hyd

(Whisper it quietly - but the Brits actually learned these tactics from none other than Frederick the Great, whom they supported with money during his wars against Austria and Russia, and of whom Napoleon said that he'd not have won Prussia if that great King and strategist had still been alive ...)

Say, weren't the Germans the first to use matchlocks with any degree of effectiveness in the late 16th century?

re: #156 mahatma coat

That post violates LGF's TOS. I figure it'll go byebye Real Soon Now.

re: #159 yma o hyd

I was practically a Marxist for 4 or so years. I think I'd be ok.

re: #158 Judge Bean

I don't know if they are capable of something like that, but I do believe they could give the green light to all of the sleeper cells (remember those) that are here and we could suffer two, ten, or four hundred "small" attacks here at home, on one day, and then they could say that they can do this whenever they choose. Scary, really scary.

re: #154 WrathofG-d

Israel would never do it. They respect the religious places of other religions.

They are not required to respect the religious places of an idolatrous religion whose adherents are out to wipe them off the face of the earth, are they?

In a MAD situation, the point is to make sure the opponent knows you can and will do what you threaten - so that you never have to.
Worked with Soviet Russia.
And of course - its not for public consumption in the msm!

re: #162 NomadOfNorad

Maybe he was describing a new construction material and its application?
Nope.

re: #162 NomadOfNorad

That post violates LGF's TOS. I figure it'll go byebye Real Soon Now.

Hmmm... on the other hand, I guess it depends on who you're expecting will be the cause of that which you mentioned as to whether it violates the TOS. If you're advocating it, it does. If you're warning that the enemy will bring about such, then it doesn't.

...difficulty remaining aloof.

I belive remaining aloof comes natural to those who favor pandering and nuanced dialog.

re: #147 calcajun

Actually, the concept of volley fire was a natural progression of massed-rank infantry tactics. The musket--with an effective range of less than 100yds--was meant to weaken the enemy line; two volleys followed by the bayonet charge.

This ended with the American Civil War where rifled muskets were applied. Damn few bayonet charges in that war. It was not until breach-loaders and smokeless powder were developed that modern fire and movement tactics came about.

At Kings Mountain, the colonists, mostly irregulars armed with Kentucky long rifles, arguably used WWII style fire and maneuver to inflict a crushing defeat on the British.

re: #170 Iron Fist

I know, that is what makes this whole situation so frustrating.

re: #162 NomadOfNorad

your probably right .See my #150.I'm getting more than a bit frustrated at our (the west's) insistence that this must be dealt with in some polite fashion .Its nigh time to ditch the dinner party etiquette.

re: #160 calcajun

Say, weren't the Germans the first to use matchlocks with any degree of effectiveness in the late 16th century?

Dunno - I'm not that good on ancient German History, its just that I've been fascinated by the Prussian Frederick the Great.
This is an excellent biography - written by a British former General.

re: #166 yma o hyd

Israel as a secular nation would never do it, despite the fact that they "religious places..."

As for MAD, I don't think it would work on the Death Cult. They would see it as further proof of the Final War between the Muslims and the Jews and work towards it.

I'm not against doing anyway however. /

re: #175 Iron Fist

Yet the bayonet charge remained a weapon in the arsenal until the Korean war. I've actually met the gentleman who led the last bayonet charge in Korea. He got a Medal of Honor out of it.

2nd Bat. Paras, who just came home from their tour in Afghanistan, Helmand Province, had to use bayonet charges - thats what they said on a Beeb report I linked somewhere on a thread here last week.

re: #176 yma o hyd

Dunno - I'm not that good on ancient German History, its just that I've been fascinated by the Prussian Frederick the Great.
This is an excellent biography - written by a British former General.

So many books... so little time. I've already got a gazillion books in my To Read pile, so many that I'll probably never get to them all... :-%P%

re: #177 WrathofG-d

Israel as a secular nation would never do it, despite the fact that they "religious places..."

As for MAD, I don't think it would work on the Death Cult. They would see it as further proof of the Final War between the Muslims and the Jews and work towards it.

I'm not against doing anyway however. /

Sigh.
Yeah - I understand ... Its just that the Saudis might not be so terribly keen on having their Black Rock destroyed just to please the Mullahs whom they loathe anyway.

re: #175 Iron Fist

A Scottish outfit did a bayonet charge in Iraq

Bayonet charge

BBL

re: #175 Iron Fist

Yet the bayonet charge remained a weapon in the arsenal until the Korean war. I've actually met the gentleman who led the last bayonet charge in Korea. He got a Medal of Honor out of it.

I am reminded of the story regarding bayonet practice. A recruit asks, "What if the bayonet gets hung in the body?"

"Fire your weapon and the recoil will dislodge it."

"You think I'm going to bayonet someone if I still have a cartridge left?"

re: #172 Son of the Black Dog

True.

How did Ferguson's Rifles fare at Long Island?

my first deleted comment!

re: #183 calcajun

True.

How did Ferguson's Rifles fare at Long Island?

There's a lot of history that might have been different if the British had adopted the Ferguson rifle.

During the campaign, did anybody ask Comrade President Obama his views on Iran going nuclear? Did he give a straight answer? I guess we're going to find out what his views are and what he plans to do. I just hope he doesn't screw it up. Relying on Jimmy Dhimmi Carter's advisors is a serious mistake. And my faith in Biden isn't very high, either.

re: #185 Son of the Black Dog

By the turn of a screw. ;) If that thing had an interrupted thread, it would have been fantastic.

re: #186 Irenike

Obama said he was against it and that he would do everything necessary to prevent it. Including, if it came to it, talking with them without preconditions.

One of the "tests" that Biden spoke of?

Obama will fail miserably, and America (and Israel) will suffer terribly

The ecocrazy scientists rant that 2008 has seen the 2nd lowest area of arctic polar ice cover since satellite records started being kept in 1979.
But guess what year saw the lowest area of arctic polar ice cover.
That's right - 2007. Which of course means that the arctic polar ice cover is now INCREASING.

And the increase in the antarctic ice cap is even greater! Note that the ice extent for October 1979 (when satellite measurements began) is 18 million sq km, for October 2008 the ice extent was 18.1 million sq km. Ice concentration shows even greater increases, from 13.6 million sq km, to 13.9 million

Global warming my ass.

Linky for Antarctic data

Linky for Arctic data

Can a Nuclear Iran Be Contained or Deterred?

Short answer: No.

re: #136 Spare O'Lake

To those who say that a preemptive nuclear strike by Israel is morally indefensible, I would ask this question:
If American intelligence had conclusive proof that Chavez had several nuclear warheads and that they were deployed in Caracas on ICBM's and aimed at Miami, Atlanta, Dallas, Washington, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and Boston; and if Chavez announced that he would be firing them in 2 hours - would you not agree that a preemptive nuclear strike by the USA was a moral imperative?

I would nuke his ass and any country that aided him in a heartbeat. But then, I'm just an evil rightwing, rethuglican whitey racist bigoted homophobe hillbilly cracka that loves life and his country.

Don't get me started. I'll get banned.

/ok then, off to the range. Firearms Friday and all...

re: #1 Shug

Islamists smell weakness the way sharks smell blood.

BUSH CAN GO FUCK HIMSELF. THAT'S WHERE THE WEAKNESS BEGAN, THE DAY HE WEAS ELECTED.

re: #10 Sharmuta

Israel should do it now, while they still have Bush.

Yeah, Bush had 8 years. While they still have Bush? Gimme a break.

re: #196 So?

Yeah- because 0bama's totally going to help them out. Your BDS has gotten old.

Bush had ample opportunity to join forces with Israel and knock the shit out of Iran's nuclear ambitions. Just the fact that Iranians were coming across the border to kill US troops was enough impetus to hit Iran.

BUSH DID NOTHING. NOTHING. DE NADA.

re: #197 Sharmuta

Yeah- because 0bama's totally going to help them out. Your BDS has gotten old.

And "The One will do something" is pretty stale too.

re: #39 WrathofG-d

If Iran gets nukes, it will mean ALL our families will be in the crosshairs.

re: #58 Sharmuta

I think from January 20, 2009 on, Israel will cease sharing intelligence with the United States, as Israel will be on its own, having lost its one reliable ally once The Omamessiah takes over. Israel is facing an existential threat, and knows it; it also knows it will have to stand alone in confronting it come January 20, 2009. Israel will do what it needs to do.

re: #115 WrathofG-d

Believe me, Israel already has people in Iran, and they are conducting operations (as much as they can). It may slow Iran's nuke developments for a few weeks or months, but that's all. The program must be destroyed, not just slowed.

Test message for my new avatar. Please disregard.