Whatya think? The source of this story is not one I trust, but is it possible?


Fox News asked former CIA field officer Bob Baer on Tuesday whether the US is "gearing up for a military strike on Iran." Baer has written a column for Time indicating that Washington officials expect an attack within the next six months.

"I've taken an informal poll inside the government," Baer told Fox. "The feeling is we will hit the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps." His Time column also suggested that "as long as we have bombers and missiles in the air, we will hit Iran's nuclear facilities."


LINK

I still believe the US will use Israel to make the first strike. If it takes place within 6 months is anyone's guess.

Any war begun with Iran will result in our losing. Our military is stretched thin; we haven't enough ground troops for an invasion, to say nothing of maintaining an occupation; and Russia and China will not abide an attack that would destabilize their own oil interests.

We have a pile of unused armament. I say that an attack will be from the air and the sea, troops will not be needed at that time. remember, the is an old saying in the military, "an used weapon is a useless weapon." That would help the MIC, because the armament would need to be replaced after it was used. Cash--profit and war!

Something to consider aboiut the impending attack, they could fight back.


IRAN has developed a 900kg "smart bomb", official media quoted a Defence Ministry statement in the latest announcement from Tehran about progress regarding military hardware.

The guided bomb, named "Qased" ("Messenger"), was developed by specialists within the ministry and is now operational, IRNA news agency said, adding it could be dropped from F-4 and F-5 jets.

Iran still uses planes, such as the F-5, supplied by the US to the Government of the former shah of Iran, who was a close US ally


LINK

An excellent question asked by this article.


In a nondescript room, two blocks from the American Capitol building, a group of Bush administration staffers is gathered to consider the gravest threat their government has faced this century: the testing of a nuclear weapon by Iran.

The United States, no longer prepared to tolerate the risk that Iranian nuclear weapons will be used against Israel, or passed to terrorists, has already launched a bombing campaign to destroy known Iranian nuclear sites, air bases and air defence sites. Iran has retaliated by cutting off oil to America and its allies, blockading the Straits of Hormuz, the Persian Gulf bottleneck, and sanctioned an uprising by Shia militias in southern Iraq that has shut down 60 per cent of Iraq's oil exports.


SOURCE

It is becoming a very popular speculation. Yet another story on an attack.


THE Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.

Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military,” he said.

Debat was speaking at a meeting organised by The National Interest, a conservative foreign policy journal. He told The Sunday Times that the US military had concluded: “Whether you go for pinprick strikes or all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the same.” It was, he added, a “very legitimate strategic calculus”.


SOURCE

By most accounts Iran is a ways from doing any testing so the rush to attack them is premature at this point. As for the plans, I'm sure those were drawn up a long time ago.

Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military,” he said.

If they attack Iran it's a declaration of war, and they have a military capable of retaliating against our interests. They have no choice but to take out their military capabilities.

To do that , the US will have to destroy most of the country of Iran. Will the American go for that?

An interesting tilt on the story of an attack.


PRESIDENT Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has sought to justify his confidence the US will not attack Iran, saying the proof comes from his mathematical skills as an engineer and faith in God, the press reported today.

Mr Ahmadinejad told academics in a speech that elements inside Iran were pressing for compromise in the nuclear standoff with the West over fears the US could launch a military strike.

"In some discussions I told them 'I am an engineer and I am examining the issue. They do not dare wage war against us and I base this on a double proof'," he said in the speech yesterday, reported by the reformist Etemad Melli and Kargozaran newspapers.

"I tell them: 'I am an engineer and I am a master in calculation and tabulation.

"I draw up tables. For hours, I write out different hypotheses. I reject, I reason. I reason with planning and I make a conclusion. They cannot make problems for Iran."'


LINK

PRESIDENT Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has sought to justify his confidence the US will not attack Iran, saying the proof comes from his mathematical skills as an engineer and faith in God, the press reported today.

It's going to take more than that dumbass.

It is getting closer, if the story is true, it is a beginning.


General David Petraeus will press Gordon Brown to increase the number of British troops patrolling the Iraqi border with Iran when he meets the Prime Minister this week.

The US commander in Iraq wants Britain to move a significant proportion of the 5,000 troops garrisoned at Basra airport to cut off the smuggling of Iranian weapons to Shia militias.

But British commanders fear that the move carries a serious risk of embroiling the UK in a war with Iran at a time when they want to withdraw from Iraq.

A former US under-secretary of defence who is now a Pentagon adviser told The Sunday Telegraph that Gen Petraeus would use the meeting to brief Mr Brown on how Iran is stepping up the supply of weapons and the training of insurgents.


LINK

General David Petraeus will press Gordon Brown to increase the number of British troops patrolling the Iraqi border with Iran when he meets the Prime Minister this week.

There is another failed policy. Great time to enforce border security, 4 years after an invasion.

I guess they were too busy f*cking up the country to worry about the borders. LOL

[font=Tahoma]Have you heard yourselves?
Don't you think you'd better sort out the mess you've created in the 'tiny' country of Iraq (not to mention the forgotten country of Afghanistan) before you embark on another mission to disaster in a 'massive' country like Iran?
The country mass of Iran is 3, possibly 4 times the size of Iraq with 5 times as many citizens.
If you think it would be an easy task, then go ahead.
Do you know what I think?
I think if the USA was stupid enough to invade Iran, it would have been done by now!!
And while we're on the subject of invasion, what would be the grounds to such an invasion?
If memory serves me correct, Saddam was supposed to possess a few WMD's, but we all know how true that was, don't we?
So, based on another US theory more millions would have to die, is that right?
Iran hold's no threat to you, me or anyone else. The only threat they hold is to their own people!
America doesn't like someone if they refuse to go America's way, so for that I would like to shake Mr Ahmadinejad's hand (a feat I also came close to a few week's ago when I was in Iran on holiday and learned that he was lecturing down the road from the Golestan Palace where I was at the time - but there you go....)
I don't like the guy, for personal reason's, but I wouldn't call him half the names that are directed his way by American tongues!!!

There will be NO war with Iran. If Bush or anyone else is crazy enough to try it, then it will be bigger and bloodier than WWII.[/font]