Iran

[Jones]

You don't know what you are talking about.

You've reached the only logical conclusion.

 

[soberups]

Better than the nut jobs that believe negotiations with evil is the best course of action.

Josef Stalin was an evil dictator who killed almost as many people as Hitler. We successfully negotiated with him.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Nuclear weapons don't detonate by "accident."

They are highly complex devices that require a precisely timed implosion in order to achieve fission.

The crude, gun-type Uranium 235 fission weapon that we dropped on Hiroshima was only about 2% effective in terms of yield, and it consumed all the Uranium 235 that existed on earth at the time. Turning Iran into a "parking lot" would require a significant number of complicated, high yield implosion-type Plutonium 239 weapons, or else thermonuclear fusion weapons.

Nuclear "accidents" result in radiation leaks, or reactor meltdowns like the one at Chernobyl. They don't result in detonations.

Correct. And despite what we coming out of Hollywood, it's damn difficult to transport, or even make, nuclear devices that are small and compact enough to sneak into another country. Let alone the devices that would be required to actually turn Iran into a parking lot.

But.....

A limited nuclear strike that would be very hard to link to any particular nation's government is not so difficult to pull off. Most of the nations that have nuclear command and control capability can detect ANY missile just a few seconds (some faster) after they are launched. But a ship at sea that is unregistered or disguised that has been rigged with the capability to launch missiles can pull off a limited strike and be quickly destroyed to hide any connections to who is responsible for the operation. The odds that scenario will likely happen to our country are much, much higher than an actual nuclear exchange between us and another nation's government. Officially I mean. And the biggest fear in that scenario is that they will go for an EMP strike instead. Read "One Second After" for an example of that. Scary stuff.

 

[realbrown1]

Josef Stalin was an evil dictator who killed almost as many people as Hitler. We successfully negotiated with him.

Only out of mutual survival against the German onslaught.

Only when Stalin's Soviet Union had German armies invading from the west, did Stalin choose to co-operate.

To survive, and nothing else.

If you don't believe me, then why did he KEEP EASTERN EUROPE?

Once Hitler was dead and Germany defeated, there was no longer any need for allies, and no opposition to his desire to take what he wanted.

You really don't know your history.

Sad.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Israeli aircraft and pilots are among the best on earth, but regardless of the route selected they do not have the range to strike targets deep in Iran without multiple mid-air refuelings that are far beyond the capacity of the handful of tanker aircraft that they possess. They also lack bunker-busting munitions of the type required to penetrate hardened underground targets such as the uranium enrichment facility at Natanz. Israel does have Popeye cruise missiles and Jericho medium-range ballistic missiles that can reach Iran, but these weapons have small payloads and cant penetrate hardened targets either...unless they are tipped with nuclear rather than conventional warheads. Destroying Irans nuclear program with conventional weapons can only be done by long-range stealth aircraft carrying bunker-buster bombs. The only nation on earth with those resources is the USA.

There are some people in the neighboring countries that are rumored to be interested in "looking the other way" should Israeli jets "sway off course" and need to re-fuel, drop a few bombs, and then re-fuel on the way home. We'll see.

 

[realbrown1]

There are some people in the neighboring countries that are rumored to be interested in "looking the other way" should Israeli jets "sway off course" and need to re-fuel, drop a few bombs, and then re-fuel on the way home. We'll see.

Israel will not go out with out a fight.

Too bad it's being pushed to this point by the weakest president this side of Jimmy Carter.

 

[soberups]

There are some people in the neighboring countries that are rumored to be interested in "looking the other way" should Israeli jets "sway off course" and need to re-fuel, drop a few bombs, and then re-fuel on the way home. We'll see.

The Saudis would almost certainly experience " radar malfunctions" if the Israelis overflew them on the way to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, at least temporarily.

Problem is, it will involve a lot more than what you describe. Israeli strike planes would need to refuel 2 or 3 times on the way in and once or twice on the way back. Plus they would need a heavy fighter escort (that would also need multiple refuelings) to engage Iran's interceptors as well as electronic countermeasures aircraft (that would also need multiple refueling) to disable Iran's air defense systems. And this would be a prolonged air campaign, potentially lasting for weeks. If they want to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities in a single strike...which realistically is their only option given their lack of long range aircraft and tankers...then they will have no choice but to use nuclear weapons of their own.

 

[soberups]

Only out of mutual survival against the German onslaught.

Only when Stalin's Soviet Union had German armies invading from the west, did Stalin choose to co-operate.

To survive, and nothing else.

If you don't believe me, then why did he KEEP EASTERN EUROPE?

Once Hitler was dead and Germany defeated, there was no longer any need for allies, and no opposition to his desire to take what he wanted.

You really don't know your history.

Sad.

We negotiated an end to the Berlin Blockade, we negotiated spy exchanges, we negotiated Soviet non-interference in the internal affairs of nations like Yugoslavia and Finland, and we negotiated an end to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Negotiation is the reason we didn't fight World War 3.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

The Saudis would almost certainly experience " radar malfunctions" if the Israelis overflew them on the way to attack Iranian nuclear facilities, at least temporarily.

Problem is, it will involve a lot more than what you describe. Israeli strike planes would need to refuel 2 or 3 times on the way in and once or twice on the way back. Plus they would need a heavy fighter escort (that would also need multiple refuelings) to engage Iran's interceptors as well as electronic countermeasures aircraft (that would also need multiple refueling) to disable Iran's air defense systems. And this would be a prolonged air campaign, potentially lasting for weeks. If they want to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities in a single strike...which realistically is their only option given their lack of long range aircraft and tankers...then they will have no choice but to use nuclear weapons of their own.

That is the worst case scenario. Meaning...they have little to no cooperation from the surrounding nations. Whether it be officially or through a back channel. And don't forget the cyber attacks that could help take care of some of those difficulties. And the fact that Israel likely has weapons/capabilities that the world hasn't seen. Unlike us....they don't gloat about every new piece of hardware they add to their arsenal.

 

[soberups]

That is the worst case scenario. Meaning...they have little to no cooperation from the surrounding nations. Whether it be officially or through a back channel. And don't forget the cyber attacks that could help take care of some of those difficulties. And the fact that Israel likely has weapons/capabilities that the world hasn't seen. Unlike us....they don't gloat about every new piece of hardware they add to their arsenal.

If they had long range stealth aircraft and bunker busting ordinance, they would have taken out Irans nuclear program years ago.

They don't. So they haven't. And without using nukes, they can't....regardless of what sort of tacit cooperation they might get from Saudi Arabia or Turkey. It is a simple fact of geographic distance.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

If they had long range stealth aircraft and bunker busting ordinance, they would have taken out Irans nuclear program years ago.

They don't. So they haven't. And without using nukes, they can't....regardless of what sort of tacit cooperation they might get from Saudi Arabia or Turkey. It is a simple fact of geographic distance.

Speaking as someone with a military background, including a stint that included a ridiculously high (and therefore extremely annoying for off duty life) security clearance I can sat that just because they haven't used them doesn't mean they don't have them. We, the general public anyway, simply don't know what cards they have up their sleeves. There are things that even our cocky, loosed lipped government/military are keeping secrets until they have to be used. Imagine if you are Israel and mostly surrounded by people that want you dead. Israel has had plenty of political roadblocks thrown in their way also. Plus, they aren't going to do anything until all other options are exhausted. I don't think they would rule out your scenario anyway if they didn't have a better way. They have to be a little more daring in their position.

 

[Babagounj]

If this deal is so good , then why didn't kerry get Iran to release all the American Citizens being held in Iran's prisons ?

 

[realbrown1]

We negotiated an end to the Berlin Blockade, we negotiated spy exchanges, we negotiated Soviet non-interference in the internal affairs of nations like Yugoslavia and Finland, and we negotiated an end to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Negotiation is the reason we didn't fight World War 3.

We did not negotiate the end to the Berlin Blockade.

We did not negotoate the end to the Cuban Missile Crisis.

What is wrong with you sober?

Google it.

You believe revisionist history?

 

[Jones]

We did not negotiate the end to the Berlin Blockade.

We did not negotoate the end to the Cuban Missile Crisis.

What is wrong with you sober?

Google it.

You believe revisionist history?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Blockade#The_blockade_ends

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis#Secret_negotiations

 

[soberups]

We did not negotiate the end to the Berlin Blockade.

We did not negotoate the end to the Cuban Missile Crisis.

What is wrong with you sober?

Google it.

You believe revisionist history?

It is a historical fact that the Berlin Blockade and the Cuban Missile Crisis were both resolved without resorting to the use of military force. No bombs were dropped, no missiles were fired. Negotiations resulted in an outcome that was tolerable to both sides, and open warfare was averted.

 

[soberups]

"After a period of tense negotiations, an agreement was reached between Kennedy and Khrushchev. Publicly, the Soviets would dismantle their offensive weapons in Cuba and return them to the Soviet Union, subject to United Nations verification, in exchange for a US public declaration and agreement never to invade Cuba without direct provocation. Secretly, the US also agreed that it would dismantle all US-built Jupiter MRBMs, which were deployed in Turkey and Italy against the Soviet Union but were not known to the public.

When all missiles and Ilyushin Il-28 light bombers had been withdrawn from Cuba, the blockade was formally ended on November 20, 1962. The negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union pointed out the necessity of a quick, clear, and direct communication line between Washington and Moscow. As a result, the Moscow–Washington hotline was established. A series of agreements sharply reduced U.S.-Soviet tensions for the following years.

 

[realbrown1]

"After a period of tense negotiations, an agreement was reached between Kennedy and Khrushchev. Publicly, the Soviets would dismantle their offensive weapons in Cuba and return them to the Soviet Union, subject to United Nations verification, in exchange for a US public declaration and agreement never to invade Cuba without direct provocation. Secretly, the US also agreed that it would dismantle all US-built Jupiter MRBMs, which were deployed in Turkey and Italy against the Soviet Union but were not known to the public.

When all missiles and Ilyushin Il-28 light bombers had been withdrawn from Cuba, the blockade was formally ended on November 20, 1962. The negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union pointed out the necessity of a quick, clear, and direct communication line between Washington and Moscow. As a result, the Moscow–Washington hotline was established. A series of agreements sharply reduced U.S.-Soviet tensions for the following years.

It is a historical fact that the Berlin Blockade and the Cuban Missile Crisis were both resolved without resorting to the use of military force. No bombs were dropped, no missiles were fired. Negotiations resulted in an outcome that was tolerable to both sides, and open warfare was averted.

The Berlin Blockade ended after a long period because Stalin gave up trying to starve the Berlin people into giving up because of the US led BERLIN AIRLIFT.

That doesn't sound like a negotiation to me.

And the Soviets gave up on the Cuban Missile base because of the blockade the US put together.

What military pressure have we put on Iran?

Nothing. Not a damned thing.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

"After a period of tense negotiations, an agreement was reached between Kennedy and Khrushchev. Publicly, the Soviets would dismantle their offensive weapons in Cuba and return them to the Soviet Union, subject to United Nations verification, in exchange for a US public declaration and agreement never to invade Cuba without direct provocation. Secretly, the US also agreed that it would dismantle all US-built Jupiter MRBMs, which were deployed in Turkey and Italy against the Soviet Union but were not known to the public.

When all missiles and Ilyushin Il-28 light bombers had been withdrawn from Cuba, the blockade was formally ended on November 20, 1962. The negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union pointed out the necessity of a quick, clear, and direct communication line between Washington and Moscow. As a result, the Moscow–Washington hotline was established. A series of agreements sharply reduced U.S.-Soviet tensions for the following years.

............. AFTER a naval blockade by the United States that showed the Russians we meant business.........

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

The Berlin Blockade ended after a long period because Stalin gave up trying to starve the Berlin people into giving up because of the US led BERLIN AIRLIFT.

That doesn't sound like a negotiation to me.

And the Soviets gave up on the Cuban Missile base because of the blockade the US put together.

What military pressure have we put on Iran?

Nothing. Not a damned thing.

Those were some serious negotiations.

 

[realbrown1]

Those were some serious negotiations.

Exactly my point.

Thank you.