Posted on 12/20/2004 10:38:20 AM PST by West Coast Conservative
And what do these stupid snad fleas think the USA will do, beg them to stop or turn their countries to glass parking lots?
We are probably at a point in our technology where our defensive capabilities are still better than their offensive capabilities.
The problem will be what happens if they try and we do in fact shoot their stuff down. What is our response? That should be what we are addressing. Like MAD, we need a published paper detailing our response to an offensive attack on our interests.
Saying that any strike, whether WMD or conventional against our interests both domestically and abroad will be countered by the full arsenal of American weaponry, which would include but not limited to our own WMD capabilities.
Now talk to Iran and North Korea.
....."Iran and Syria can currently reach the territory of U.S. friends and allies with their ballistic missiles," .....
Most excellent. Fire one of them suckers, and youse guys better get back in your caves fast, so's you can miss the incoming!
5) Wait it out
And if that doesn't work, (I don't see how it wouldn't work but in the case that it doesn't)
Iran and North Korea will not be getting a Christmas card
Was that the "Global Test" Kerry was talking about?
That would be a Bad Idea, but a nice way to kick off the century. Speaking of which, is the Moslem calendar the newest, the youngest, the most recent and the least respected calendar on earth if not in the universe?
They will attack Israel...
bump
Much the same as we made it plain during the Cold War with the Russians it should be stated in no uncertain terms: Any attack, or threat of attack, will be met with a devastating counterstrike (ie. ain't gonna be anyone left to pick up the pieces Achmed; Make our Day).
All we need is a couple more years, then the plane-based laser anti-missle system will be operational. This system can knock up to 40 missles out of the sky on one fuel load. While it shoots down thier missles, we can rain JDAMS & MOABs down on their firing positions. Nice, huh?
We're not going to do anything to stop this. It's too late. We're locked into a scenario where we (or Israel) have to absorb the first hit before we do anything about it. Just be mentally and spiritually prepared. That's all you can do.
Chicken Little, signing off...
"We're not going to do anything to stop this. It's too late. We're locked into a scenario where we (or Israel) have to absorb the first hit before we do anything about it. Just be mentally and spiritually prepared. That's all you can do."
Would you please tell us how we are locked into a scenario where we have to absorb the first hit?
Who's going to have the political stomach to perform a first strike on Iran? It's not going to happen. If it was possible, it would have happened already. We wouldn't be scraping along in Iraq while the dragon sharpens his claws next door.
This is the same presidency that expressed confidence in Kofi Annan as recently as last week. Once Iran can publicly demonstrate its nuclear capacity, we will be at the same place, if not worse, than North Korea. We're buying time right along with the Iranians. They're going to launch their spy satellite before we're out of Iraq.
This also known as the sissification of the West, thanks to the U.N., Europe, and the American left. We've said for years they will be our destruction. America has become the villain of the world - how perverted!
"We wouldn't be scraping along in Iraq while the dragon sharpens his claws next door."
We now have US GIs running around on the borders of Iran, and you think this is an indication that we are NOT preparing for the possibility of a first strike?
I think the exact opposite could be said: If we hadn't moved in next door at all, it would indicate that we had no realistic intention of a first strike.
What exactly is it about the fact that we are next door in Iraq that causes you to believe that we are not going to strike first?
Because a first strike would involve more than a bunch of GI's on the border. It would have to be a concerted bombing/insertion campaign whereby Iran's array of nuclear development sites could be captured/destroyed. This isn't Osirak. They're spread out across Iran. And much of it is reportedly underground. Not even Israel can admit they have the capability of repeating what they did at Osirak.
So tell me again how we're going to pull off an effective first strike in Iran unless it involves the nuclear option?
A first strike has to be the last strike, if Iran achieves critical nuclear mass (if it hasn't already). It would have to be a decapitation of leadership, and all those attached to the decision makers in their military.
"Because a first strike would involve more than a bunch of GI's on the border. It would have to be a concerted bombing/insertion campaign whereby Iran's array of nuclear development sites could be captured/destroyed."
And a concerted bombing/insertion campaign would be impossible unless we had based right next door in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I'm playing devil's advocate with you here, and I honestly still do not understand how you wouldn't draw the opposite conclusion based on the reasoning that you've given so far.
So what do you think we will do about it?
ANSWER: not a damned thing. Thanks for nothing potus. Take 'em out now or our children will be victims later.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.