Has war started with Iran?

[Rep]

http://www.slate.com/id/2157489/fr/flyout

What we can see going on is already quite provocative. Iranian consulate being shut down in Iraq by force. US planes flying nuke strike training runs into Iran to intimidate them. Funding Iranian opposition (NED) to pressure their govt. and pass info about their bases to the US. And then talking up their inprisionment.
Deploying special forces in Iran. Having a long standing policy of regrime change.
I'm not an Iran fan boy , and they do use groups around the Mid East to project
violence etc. , but a regoinal way in the Mid East could see NBC weapons used
by any side very fast.

Question is , what else is going on.

[Hannibal]

Well, Steorn is back in the news, about to release their free energy device. Once announced and verified the U.S. will pull out of the ME.

[CCS]

Free energy device? That's almost as good as a free boobies device!

[StN]

Meh - I want to see what Targos has to say about it...

[shootme]

No - this is just a few pokes with a blunt stick.

[com]

makes you think...

[Rep]

Are you people are some kind of cruel script?

You know automated Cynic 2.0

[Wally Simmonds]

Since the Islamic revolution things have always been pretty tense.

[Trigger]

US have a good knack of picking on countries with not too many (or strong enough) allies, so they can pick them off 1 by 1

wonder how Iran would scale up vs the US, probably same as Iraq? but much much bigger territory to control

will be interesting to see how confident the US feels to start a war, not just *poke* *poke*

[Russian]

If they go to Iran expect a shitstorm of epic proportions.

[Trigger]

*crosses fingers*

fight you sand monkeys, fight!

[FireStorm]

Originally Posted by Hannibal

Well, Steorn is back in the news, about to release their free energy device. Once announced and verified the U.S. will pull out of the ME.

Any recent web articles relating to this? I hope it's not a sham and that it really works....

[Mongorize]

Originally Posted by Trigger

US have a good knack of picking on countries with not too many (or strong enough) allies, so they can pick them off 1 by 1

China and Russia are two that support Iran.

[Trigger]

when has China ever cared for a country that isn't China

and I think Russians are still recovering from their Afghanistan 'intervention'

US has free reign as the hyper-power, and it's taking advantage of it

[CCS]

Originally Posted by Trigger

when has China ever cared for a country that isn't China

They like to look out for countries that buy shit from them. China and Russia will be seeking diplomacy over a US led invasion.

US has free reign as the hyper-power, and it's taking advantage of it

Meh, Russia and China are just quietly building up their forces.

[Draco T Bastard]

Originally Posted by Trigger

when has China ever cared for a country that isn't China

and I think Russians are still recovering from their Afghanistan 'intervention'

China wants access to that oil as well. Russia wants to keep the US out of its backyard. China and Russia are are already in alliance - this alliance has been offered to Iran although I haven't heard if Iran has accepted yet or not.

Support will flow from China/Russia to Iran even if it is only high tech weapons.

[Trigger]

oh yeah, Iran will get sweet sweet delicious weapons that's for sure

it's gonna be fun for the whole family!

[com]

WW III

[Wally Simmonds]

The only thing the US is capable of doing at present is a strategic bombing campaign of Iran's nuclear facilities. My guess is they'll get Israel to do it, too.

Look at how the Iranians fought in 1980-88. They had chemical weapons dropped on them, and they still kept coming. Similar doctrines were used in the last Israeli war against Hesbollah/Lebanon, and from memory Merkevas didn't do too well.

The Americans and Israelis are very good at conventional wars with piss-ass countries, but I don't even think they're stupid enough to engage Iran in a land war. Strategic bombing ftw

[Rep]

If they do than , many Arab countries may lose control of their populations.

And you would see those large Fema prisons starting to get filled with any arabs and muslems. I believe the contract was to house a couple of hundred thousand. Strange days.

[Native]

Iran doesn't exactly has piss pot defence forces either. I think it would the first time in a quarter of a century that the US would fight a relatively 'Modern' power.

Planes will be falling out of the sky and tanks are actually gonna go 'Boom'.

[r3x]

If Iran is seriously and publically attacked, America will lose Iraq completely, and the greater Gulf region will be destabilized. America might not have cared about countries like Laos and Cambodia, but the whole world does care when its oil supply is disrupted. This raid is probably just what it appears. A way to get intelligence and proof of Iranian interference in Iraq, not a full-fledged provocation for war.

I dislike how states like Iran and Syria and to a lesser extent, Venezuela, who are not under America's thumb, are being made into pariah states. Even most of the media does not question this viewpoint anymore. Their not the "good guys" by any standard, especially Iran, but their being threatened, and by cornering them and painting them as evil is not going to make it any better. America had a chance to improve relationships with all these states, but it always seems to want enemies.

[DrTiTus]

Go Iran!

[Draco T Bastard]

Originally Posted by Native

Iran doesn't exactly has piss pot defence forces either. I think it would the first time in a quarter of a century that the US would fight a relatively 'Modern' power.

Planes will be falling out of the sky and tanks are actually gonna go 'Boom'.

QFT

[Rep]

Another problem is Isreal is planning to use ground penatrating weapons , and then mini-nukes. This could collapse the world markets , and then anyone who's listed as a public company go bye-bye.

[Draco T Bastard]

No, that's ground penetrating weapons armed with mini-nukes. Most likely the B61-11 or similar. It's a variable yield device with 0.3 to 300 kiloton range. It cannot penetrate deep enough to contain the detonation creating massive fallout over a large area. It also happens to be a rather dirty bomb developed in the 60s or 70s repackaged for earth penetration.

[Rep]

The article i saw said the Isrealis are training to use a conventional weapon to do the hole , and then when it's deep enough , send a mini-nuke down there.

[Wally Simmonds]

Ha! I strongly doubt the US or Israel would go as far to use mini-nukes, at least not publicy. The percieved moral high ground they had would no longer be available to them that's for sure.

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by FireStorm

Any recent web articles relating to this? I hope it's not a sham and that it really works....

Here's their latest press release
http://www.steorn.net/en/news.aspx?p=2&id=981

Their 12 man "jury" is currently evaluating their technology.

[Rep]

Pretty hard to use nukes in private , Russia would find out because of the Start treaty related monitoring.

And I have never heard of a country that would make a nuclear weapon , then not have the balls to use it.

When it comes to nuke wars , Govt's are led by emergency police's and war plans. Human decision making becomes mearly a function.

One of the biggest problems of the Cuban Missles Crisis and the conflict between India and Pakistan in 97 was then couldn't turn turn it off once they started.

[ilk]

Originally Posted by Rep

And I have never heard of a country that would make a nuclear weapon , then not have the balls to use it.

I don't usually follow these end of the world threads because I know enough about global politics to know that I don't know enough about global politics, but to the lay person it would seem that your paranoia has made you...stupid.
The whole point of of nukes is that nobody has the balls to use them. The "mutually" part of mutually assured destruction is kind of a mood killer.

Even if MAD doesn't apply, regardless of how bad you might think things are I find it extremely hard to believe that any western power would survive initiating nuclear war, it would be political, if not actual, suicide.

[Draco T Bastard]

Originally Posted by ilk

The whole point of of nukes is that nobody has the balls to use them. The "mutually" part of mutually assured destruction is kind of a mood killer.

Except that most nuclear powers have now said that they are willing to use tactical nukes on a convetional battlefield and the US has given authorisation to it's field commanders to use them. The theory being that it is a limited nuclear engagement with only one side having nukes, ergo - MAD no longer applies.

Even if MAD doesn't apply, regardless of how bad you might think things are I find it extremely hard to believe that any western power would survive initiating nuclear war, it would be political, if not actual, suicide.

It's very hard to say in todays environment if it would be political suicide or not. The politicians are certainly using the retoric and don't seem to be getting any flak for it. What would happen if they did - well, that may just come down to someone being a fall guy. The present garbage about how good Ford's pardon of Nixon was is a good indication of just how far such a 'fall guy' would fall. One person may fall or even a few but the group and the ideology behind the action would continue on undisturbed.

[ilk]

At least it sounds somewhat reasonable coming from you. Rep just sounds like a crazy person. Still have major doubts that the general population is that docile but then I just finished reading V for Vendetta so who knows. Bowing out now, as mentioned above I am not the most informed on global politics.

[Nahaz]

The US would roll over Iran with ease. Then you'd have two countries destabilized and maybe a region.

The best option is honest dialog and engagement.

[Chingo De Mecos]

There's a whole heap of info about Irans military here, if what it says is true then they're pretty geared up compared to what the US has in Iraq ATM.

[Tranquil^]

Nuke's are unnecessary when modern pgm's have a circular error of probability of >1m and have penetrative capabilities exceeding 30m of reinforced concrete. This coupled with Novel Explosive warhead's (FAE) provides a lethality against hardened structures target's which EXCEED's that of sub MT nuclear devices.

Many people seem to be deluded in the use of tactical nuclear weapons, they were not intended to wipe out 10's of thousands of soldiers/civilians. They were to be used as Fire Strike/Blow (huge initial fire to disrupt/prevent formation of the defenders), as Break Through weapons (intended to literally blow a hole in the enemy's line to allow penetration by mechanised exploitation units) and against high value fixed targets (e.g. enemy nuclear complexes/airfields/HQ's.
A nuclear payload was necessary to ensure destruction of the target. Ballistic Missiles (both Strategic and Theatre) of the day had CEP's of over 600meters.. With air launched weapons having a CEP of roughly 200-300 (depending on the bombing method. Lay down, toss, etc).


Simply put, Nuclear weapon provided the necessary level of target effect overmatch to ensure destruction of the intended target, even if missed by 600 metres. Today with the inherint accuracy of modern muntions, once you have acquired a target, you can kill it... Simple as that.

[Native]

Originally Posted by Nahaz

...The US would roll over Iran with ease...

Sorry Nahaz. But that really is BS... unlike Iraq - Iran hasn't been starved of military finance nor hardware for the past 15 years. Additionally they have the largest military in the middle east along with one of the largest (per capita) Army Reserves in the world.

They also have frequently purchased modern anti-air missle systems from Russia, have an entirely anti-US poplulation (who were not particularly anti-US, but even we would be pissed if they invaded your country) and then you have the US forces faced with an unpopular war, in a media heavy environment with a military which has predominately used air power as a means of conquest because the US hate sending home body bags.

I fail to see any way that the US could roll over Iran with ease. If you care to back up that statement - I'll rescind my comments.

Edit: http://www.iranmilitaryforum.com/ind...=130&Itemid=54

Supplied on the first page of Chingo's link above.

[Hannibal]

Originally Posted by FireStorm

Any recent web articles relating to this? I hope it's not a sham and that it really works....

Was some stuff on Digg a few days ago. The 1st wave of big press was their announcement of free energy, the 2nd was a full page national ad calling for top scientists to independently verify the claims. The independent verification team was formed and apparently they are on the verge of announcing success and a new era for mankind. It's for real, unlike other free energy claims Steorn has a good reputation, they have also turned away any and all VC funding requests, they do not want a cent until the world knows it's legit.

[[Malks] Pixie]

Interesting read - I always knew that Iran was quite self sufficient but I didn't realise quite how so until I read that...

Sounds like they do a lot of their own production and modification to their weapons and armour - which means they are skilled at maintaining as well as usage. Quite a range of military ordanance too - plenty of artillary (crap loads more than what the US has in place at the moment from the looks of it!).

Pixie

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by Hannibal

It's for real, unlike other free energy claims Steorn has a good reputation

They have a dodgy reputation if you ask me - prior to their full page ad they weren't even in the business of energy or manufacturing, they specialised in credit card security. One of their techs just stumbles on a new form of free energy while trying to build a better magnetic card reader? Come on now..