Strike on Iran before Christmas?

[434 2]

Do you believe there will be any strike against Iran before Christmas? Will the election resoult have anything to say? We do hear more and more often in the media that something will happens, and likely Israel will strike with or without help from USA.

[quade 4]

No. That would be insane. Even for a crazy President.

Unless there is a direct threat (not made up bullshit like with Iraq) but a REAL, DIRECT and IMMINENT threat against the US, you will not see any new major action against anyone by the US before January 20, 2009 (and probably a few months afterward as well).

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[shropshire 0]

Nope not enough working days before Christmas, what with the Election, Thanks Giving (what ever that is) and Christmas shopping - who's got the time to invade another country..... best wait for spring... after the ski season and before the summer holidays start.. Jeeze, how's a guy to fit in all this imperialism crap?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[SpeedRacer 1]

I think we should invade someone smaller than Iran, so we can fit it in between all the holiday preparation.

Luxembourg, maybe.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[quade 4]

Quote

Nope not enough working days before Christmas, what with the Election, Thanks Giving (what ever that is) and Christmas shopping - who's got the time to invade another country..... best wait for spring... after the ski season and before the summer holidays start.. Jeeze, how's a guy to fit in all this imperialism crap?

Well, that's not actually the reason.

No action will be taken before November 4 due to election ramifications.

No action will be taken before January 20 due to lame duck status.

Again, unless Iran came out with a statement and said, "OK, we finished our bomb and are going to use it tomorrow," it's just not going to happen.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

Nope not enough working days before Christmas, what with the Election, Thanks Giving (what ever that is) and Christmas shopping - who's got the time to invade another country..... best wait for spring... after the ski season and before the summer holidays start.. Jeeze, how's a guy to fit in all this imperialism crap?

Well, that's not actually the reason.

No action will be taken before November 4 due to election ramifications.

No action will be taken before January 20 due to lame duck status.

Again, unless Iran came out with a statement and said, "OK, we finished our bomb and are going to use it tomorrow," it's just not going to happen.

Me thinks you are going out on a limb w/ that statement. As I've stated before the US may covertly let isreal do the dirty work.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

]Me thinks you are going out on a limb w/ that statement. As I've stated before the US may covertly let isreal do the dirty work.

It would be Israel's dirty work - they have as big a stake in the affair as we do.

Unless Iran thinks (false) that they can exploit the lame duck period, nothing will happen before Obama takes office.

The senior Bush sent troops into Somalia in December before leaving, but that was a very different situation and scope of involvement.

[quade 4]

Quote

Me thinks you are going out on a limb w/ that statement. As I've stated before the US may covertly let isreal do the dirty work.

Israel has far more at stake than the US does. They would more than likely be the target of an Iran nuke than US soil. There would be nothing "covert" about Israel carrying out their own action against Iran. Israel isn't exactly known for its "subtlety" when it comes to preemptive strikes either.

While a nuclear strike on Israel is, by long held US policy (dating back +50 years?), a strike which would be responded to by the US, again, it would have to be a real, direct and immediate threat or actual strike before the US got involved before January 20. That's not even going out on a limb, that's just the way the Presidential transition periods work.

BTW, the Somalia incident was actually a humanitarian effort that had started several years earlier and had turned sour. It certainly wasn't a "new" hostile presence in that country by any means. Things just kept going south and when Clinton took over he eventually had a bad situation on his hands.

Wow, this all sounds familiar doesn't it?

Lesson that should have been learned, don't mess in the affairs of other countries and especially not anywhere near the middle east unless it's unavoidable. Even if you "free" people, they eventually will resent you for what they see as oppression and turn on you. Much better is to contain the threat within their borders and stay the fuck out.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[miked10270 0]

Quote

Again, unless Iran came out with a statement and said, "OK, we finished our bomb and are going to use it tomorrow," it's just not going to happen.

Even then?

(With a dread sense of deja-vu) When (not if) Iran builds nuclear weapons their sensible course of action would be to produce sufficient weapons and delivery methods to satisfy Clausewitz' definition of Absolute War. In effect a war which is unwinnable because the losses far outweigh any possible gains.

At this point, Iran & Israel enter a situation faced by NATO & The Warsaw Pact during the Cold War; Viz: Each nation has the power to destroy the other, but doing so would guarantee their own destruction (or unacceptable loss).

Thus, the fundamentally defensive nature of mutually possessed nuclear weapons is exposed. They can be used to posture. They can be used to guarantee the worst outcome in a conflict is stalemate. But they can't actually be used.

I have no doubt that the current Iranian regime is fully aware of this, hence their dedication to joining the Nuclear Club alongside Israel.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[quade 4]

Quote

In effect a war which is unwinnable because the losses far outweigh any possible gains.

There is no way for Iran to ever win a nuclear war with Israel because of existing US policy. You are right in that their only 100% guaranteed "defense" against the threat of a nuclear attack BY Israel would be to arm themselves to mutually assured destruction, but, they could eliminate the threat entirely on their own through diplomatic means if they choose to as well by proving that's not a road they're going down.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[miked10270 0]

Quote

Quote

In effect a war which is unwinnable because the losses far outweigh any possible gains.

There is no way for Iran to ever win a nuclear war with Israel...

The very nature of a nuclear war (started by anyone) is that it is unwinnable. In a world with multilateral nuclear capability, only a side with nothing to lose would order a nuclear strike. Thus a nuclear armed nation must never be placed in a situation where they feel they have nothing to lose.

Every controller of nuclear weapons since Truman & Stalin have understood this.

Quote

(Iran) could eliminate the threat entirely on their own through diplomatic means if they choose to...

Is that a realistic chioce for Iran?.. Given their view of American behaviour toward them over the past 55 years?.. It would be rather like an armed burglar promising not to break into your house AGAIN, as long as you don't buy a gun!

So... As far as Iran is concerned their motive is simple; They're pursuing Nuclear Power for peaceful means... Their guaranteed peaceful existence.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[quade 4]

Quote

The very nature of a nuclear war (started by anyone) is that it is unwinnable.

And by that you mean -modern- nuclear war. I believe at least -1- nuclear war has already been "won."

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[miked10270 0]

Quote

Quote

The very nature of a nuclear war (started by anyone) is that it is unwinnable.

And by that you mean -modern- nuclear war. I believe at least -1- nuclear war has already been "won."

Sorry. Yes. I think I said multilaterally or mutually possessed nuclear weapons in an earlier post & continued in that vein.

If the nuclear weapons are only posessed by one side, then it's not a nuclear war... Which is surely the whole point of Iran's project.

From there, is it a bad thing for Iran to have nukes? It's obvious they can't actually use them except in extremis, and it will reduce their paranoia.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

From there, is it a bad thing for Iran to have nukes? It's obvious they can't actually use them except in extremis, and it will reduce their paranoia.

If your country opposes their actions in the Middle East, yes, of course it is bad. You've lost your ability to credibly threaten them with force. You can only negotiate with money and given their oil status, that's likely to backfire.

If you're Iran or an ally of their's, it's definitely a positive.

[miked10270 0]

Quote

Quote

From there, is it a bad thing for Iran to have nukes?

It's definitely a positive.

Heh Heh ... Sorry. I couldn't resist that one!

Do you prefer Iran to be "bullyable"? Right now, they see themselves as surrounded by all the enemies who've taken over their country in the past - hence their aggressive posture. they see nukes as the only sure way to stop "The Big Red One" marching through Tehran City Centre.

Wouldn't something (given their history, the only thing) which allowed them to relax and feel more secure be good?

Mike.

PS: Didn't Obama raise the likelyhood of attacking Pakistan? I assume the Man-From-Everywhere KNOWS they are a nuclear power.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Wouldn't something (given their history, the only thing) which allowed them to relax and feel more secure be good?

Not if you believe Israel is an ally that has a right to exist. I'd prefer they remain a bully based on their petrodollars, not their nuclear deterrence.

Given Israel's history and mentality, the move to a nuclear program may be destablizing instead. Israel can't survive a first strike and will certainly act to stop Iran from completing if they can.

[miked10270 0]

Quote

... if you believe Israel is an ally that has a right to exist...

You're assuming that once in posession of nuclear weapons, Iran would use them offensively, rather than Iran realising the fundamentally defensive nature of such weapons when posessed by more than one side.

Quote

...Israel can't survive a first strike and will certainly act to stop Iran from completing if they can.

Agreed that Israel would not coherently survive either a first strike, nor a retaliatory strike. Neither would Iran. That's the whole nature of "Absolute War". Can't win it so don't start it. The result is a relatively tense peace where neither side dare hurt the other too much.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[billvon 3,120]

>No action will be taken before January 20 due to lame duck status.

Agreed. And I don't think either candidate is foolish enough to take on Iran in the current climate. (Unless McCain wins tomorrow and dies shortly after winning, that is.)

[quade 4]

Quote

(Unless McCain wins tomorrow and dies shortly after winning, that is.)

Yeah, people talk about not knowing Obama well enough but we have no idea whatsoever who might be pulling Palins strings.

Lemme tell you, if my some tragic circumstance McCain did win and died shortly thereafter, I think I would have to personally start a walk toward DC with the idea of finding out.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

... if you believe Israel is an ally that has a right to exist...

You're assuming that once in posession of nuclear weapons, Iran would use them offensively, rather than Iran realising the fundamentally defensive nature of such weapons when posessed by more than one side.

Quote

...Israel can't survive a first strike and will certainly act to stop Iran from completing if they can.

Agreed that Israel would not coherently survive either a first strike, nor a retaliatory strike. Neither would Iran. That's the whole nature of "Absolute War". Can't win it so don't start it. The result is a relatively tense peace where neither side dare hurt the other too much.

This is the accepted doctrine, and 60 years supports it.

But Israel may be an outlier given the same period of history. Because of its geographic compactness and the large number of hostile nations around it, it may not wait, or be deterred, because it's unwilling to stake its existence on the tenets of MAD.

I do believe that Iran would treat its weapons as a defensive tool. But it would also be emboldened to act more offensively below the nuclear option, so the end result is a more activist Iran than we currently see.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

(Unless McCain wins tomorrow and dies shortly after winning, that is.)

Yeah, people talk about not knowing Obama well enough but we have no idea whatsoever who might be pulling Palins strings.

[url "http://www.tribbleagency.com/?p=2337"]Sure you do

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[miked10270 0]

Quote

(Israel)... its geographic compactness and the large number of hostile nations around it... unwilling to stake its existence on the tenets of MAD.

The same could be said of Iran, surrounded as it is by states under "hostile" control and with a concentrated population and natural resources.

Quote

Iran... emboldened to act more offensively below the nuclear option...

That's a possibility. Alternatively, they could follow the North Korean model, where posession of a delivery system and an apparently credible test of a nuke has actually resulted in an opening of dialogue and a reduction in tension in the area.

Thus does a "Rogue-State" become respectable and respected?

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

(Unless McCain wins tomorrow and dies shortly after winning, that is.)

Yeah, people talk about not knowing Obama well enough but we have no idea whatsoever who might be pulling Palins strings.

Sure you do

No. That just means she's susceptible to having her strings pulled.

If the unthinkable happened and she ended up in The Oval Office, I can assure you the witch doctor thing would be the least of my worries and the "fear" would be that the entire thing had been rigged from the beginning including the untimely demise of McCain.

Fortunately, THAT conspiracy theory is locked DEEP in a back room and probably can remain there forever.

I mean, I have an active imagination, but I'm not freekin' nuts.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[headoverheels 334]

Quote

Fortunately, THAT conspiracy theory is locked DEEP in a back room and probably can remain there forever.

I mean, I have an active imagination, but I'm not freekin' nuts.

Maybe McCain caught on, and that is why he has been trying to lose the race.

Cuntry first.

[miked10270 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

(Unless McCain wins tomorrow and dies shortly after winning, that is.)

... the untimely demise of McCain... Conspiracy theory... Locked deep and never opened...

Hmmm... Let's "open" with two words: Dewey Wins

For me, the issue isn't the sudden death of McCain, it's his ability to do the job for the next 4 years.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites