US and UK getting ready to attack Iran

[RuanuLaw]

H.R. 282: Iran Freedom Support Act

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h109-282

The British government is to hold secret talks with defense chiefs tomorrow to discuss possible military strikes against Iran.

A high-level meeting will take place in the Ministry of Defence at which senior defence chiefs and government officials will consider the consequences of an attack on Iran.

It is believed that an American-led attack, designed to destroy Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear bomb, is “inevitable” if Teheran’s leaders fail to comply with United Nations demands to freeze their uranium enrichment programme.

Tomorrow’s meeting will be attended by Gen Sir Michael Walker, the chief of the defence staff, Lt Gen Andrew Ridgway, the chief of defence intelligence and Maj Gen Bill Rollo, the assistant chief of the general staff, together with officials from the Foreign Office and Downing Street.

The International Atomic Energy Authority, the nuclear watchdog, believes that much of Iran’s programme is now devoted to uranium enrichment and plutonium separation, technologies that could provide material for nuclear bombs to be developed in the next three years.

The United States government is hopeful that the military operation will be a multinational mission, but defence chiefs believe that the Bush administration is prepared to launch the attack on its own or with the assistance of Israel, if there is little international support. British military chiefs believe an attack would be limited to a series of air strikes against nuclear plants – a land assault is not being considered at the moment.

But confirmation that Britain has started contingency planning will undermine the claim last month by Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, that a military attack against Iran was “inconceivable”.

Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, insisted, during a visit to Blackburn yesterday, that all negotiating options – including the use of force – remained open in an attempt to resolve the crisis.

Tactical Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from US navy ships and submarines in the Gulf would, it is believed, target Iran’s air defence systems at the nuclear installations.

That would enable attacks by B2 stealth bombers equipped with eight 4,500lb enhanced BLU-28 satellite-guided bunker-busting bombs, flying from Diego Garcia, the isolated US Navy base in the Indian Ocean, RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire and Whiteman USAF base in Missouri.

It is understood that any direct British involvement in an attack would be limited but may extend to the use of the RAF’s highly secret airborne early warning aircraft.

At the centre of the crisis is Washington’s fear that an Iranian nuclear weapon could be used against Israel or US forces in the region, such as the American air base at Incirlik in Turkey.

The UN also believes that the production of a bomb could also lead to further destabilisation in the Middle East, which would result in Egypt, Syria and Saudi Arabia all developing nuclear weapons programmes.

A senior Foreign Office source said: “Monday’s meeting will set out to address the consequences for Britain in the event of an attack against Iran. The CDS [chiefs of defence staff] will want to know what the impact will be on British interests in Iraq and Afghanistan which both border Iran. The CDS will then brief the Prime Minister and the Cabinet on their conclusions in the next few days.

“If Iran makes another strategic mistake, such as ignoring demands by the UN or future resolutions, then the thinking among the chiefs is that military action could be taken to bring an end to the crisis. The belief in some areas of Whitehall is that an attack is now all but inevitable.

There will be no invasion of Iran but the nuclear sites will be destroyed. This is not something that will happen imminently, maybe this year, maybe next year. Jack Straw is making exactly the same noises that the Government did in March 2003 when it spoke about the likelihood of a war in Iraq.

“Then the Government said the war was neither inevitable or imminent and then attacked.”

The source said that the Israeli attack against Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981 proved that a limited operation was the best military option.

The Israeli air force launched raids against the plant, which intelligence suggested was being used to develop a nuclear bomb for use against Israel.

Military chiefs also plan tomorrow to discuss fears that an attack within Iran will “unhinge” southern Iraq – where British troops are based – an area mainly populated by Shia Muslims who have strong political and religious links to Iran.

They are concerned that this could delay any withdrawal of troops this year or next. There could also be consequences for British and US troops in Afghanistan, which borders Iran.

The MoD meeting will address the economic issues that could arise if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president – who became the subject of international condemnation last year when he called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” – cuts off oil supplies to the West in reprisal.

There are thought to be at least eight known sites within Iran involved in the production of nuclear materials, although it is generally accepted that there are many more secret installations.

Iran has successfully tested a Fajr-3 missile that can reach Israel, avoiding radar and hitting several targets using multiple warheads, its military has confirmed.

 

[OmegaBlack]

:thumbdown

 

[Mandingo]

The thing most Americans fail to see is that an attack in Iran will solidify the entire Middle East against us. There are lots of freedom fighters over there that we call terrorists but they are fighting for the removal of the westerners. Look all through out history Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia all of them have been fought over by Europeans. Each and every time they found a way to drive them out. Iraqis even hooked up with the Nazis in an effort to get the British out of their land. Put yourselves in their shoes what if every 20 years Canada came and tried to take over Cleveland? I don’t know about you but id be trying to build anything I could to take out as many of them as soon as possible.

 

[RichOne]

Do you know what Bushs exit plan for this mess in the Middle east is going to be?

2008... When this idiot leaves office. The United States will suffer for many years, and my generation, for the decisions he has made.

 

[cavincali]

And if he doesnt do anything will just get attacked all the time here on our soil. Its a no win situation.

 

[Mandingo]

I don’t think we will. Iran doesn't have ICBMs yet the furthest they
can reach now is Europe. The Middle East doesn't like the idea of
America being in their land and we have bases all over the globe. We
need to start scaling back we have the ability to take photos and see
what everyone is doing from space; we have planes that can fly half
way around the world and can refuel in mid air. America needs to
think about what its goals are and what its future outlook is. Right
now the rest of the world looks upon Americans as the cowboy country
because we run into everything asses out and dicks swinging that’s not
the way to be. I've said it before and I’ll say it again its time to
hang up your party cards and do what’s right. A lot of you are around
my age, this is the only chance we will have to fix things this isn't
Vietnam we are dealing with nukes here and id hate to have my kids
dealing with an irate Iran holding nukes. Blowing them up won't help
will just empower the bin ladens of the world to step up. The news
and the govt. say that they can hit a building and have no civilian
deaths. Bullshit. War is ugly. Deaths happen. Each and every one of
you reading this need to speak up to your statesmen and tell them to
find another way. America CANNOT continue on its current track and
expect to divert all attacks. The only way to handle this is with a
level head and common sense, something we seem to be lacking at this
moment. It’s frustrating that people don't understand the magnitude of
what is going on right now. Please stop being cowards and help fix
shit.

 

[Mac]

Cali...get a clue.

When has their ever been an attack on US soil? Pearl Harbor. By a nation that fielded a very good air force. Iran doesnt even have planes for goodness sakes.

Bush is taken the US vs the World mentality and by the time 2008 comes along, there will be no army.

If you feel so strongly for it cali, join the army. If this is such a good idea and you are all for it, why arent you helping for the fight you believe in so strongly?

 

[cavincali]

Cali...get a clue.

When has their ever been an attack on US soil? Pearl Harbor. By a nation that fielded a very good air force. Iran doesnt even have planes for goodness sakes.

Bush is taken the US vs the World mentality and by the time 2008 comes along, there will be no army.

If you feel so strongly for it cali, join the army. If this is such a good idea and you are all for it, why arent you helping for the fight you believe in so strongly?

9/11 **EDIT**

-Cali, please read the Off Topic rules. Cursing and name calling will not be tolerated in regular OT. -Inf

 

[RuanuLaw]

And if he doesnt do anything will just get attacked all the time here on our soil. Its a no win situation.

OR...DONT attack anyone...and THEN concentrate all that power to better homeland security to fortify our nation!

Have you ever thought of that?

 

[Mac]

9/11 you x piece of corn.

Last time I checked, that was terrorists, not a nation.

 

[cdt]

Dingo is right. We can't take on the entire world, and that's essentially what is happening. We are picking fights with everyone that bumps into us at the bar and our friends are getting a little tired of having to go out in the alley and kick ass.

Bush has no exit plan, only his own exit in 2008. He never thought of how to get out of Iraq..he got there and said " by golly they didn't have any missiles " well I didn't anticipate that so lets just chill over there. We are going to keep starting fights with countries until we run into an ally of theirs that is too much for us. I'm not sure where we stand with Russia or anything but they scare me..

 

[RuanuLaw]

Cali, whatch urself.

1. Don't take things personal

2. We are trying to keep debates professional

3. Stop swearing.

 

[cavincali]

Stop PMS'ing goodness. I said a$$, and corn, gollie. :thumbdown

 

[Mac]

He's right...the rules here were set to be very strict. I even said if we started to discuss politics, odds are, i wouldnt be able to control myself. lol..

so im gonna back out. Im not going to be able to post sensiable in here.

 

[Mandingo]

We can't take on the entire world, and that's essentially what is happening. We are picking fights with everyone that bumps into us at the bar and our friends are getting a little tired of having to go out in the alley and kick ass.

Good analogy.


This whole thing could have been avoided. Back in 1990 when Saddam invaded Kuwait the Saudis were worried that Saddam would keep on marching and eventually reach them because at the time Saddam was bent on taking over and unifying the Middle East. America stepped up and went to the Saudi royal family offering help but needed to build bases on their land in order to have a foot hold in the region. Bin Laden came down from Afghanistan with his mujahedeen army and offered to push Saddam back because he didn’t want Westerners in the region, didn't want our culture to corrupt the area. The Saudis turned him down but the US knew of his offer. Right then the US should have let him handle it. Now our govt is saying that Saddam and Bin Laden were working together and that’s not the case the people of the Middle East didn’t care for Saddam he was a common enemy that could have worked for us. Bin Laden is seen as a hero over there much like Washington is here. If you don't believe me look it up its all there.

(I know its kinda straying from the original topic but it's all related.)