Posted on 04/14/2006 5:21:41 PM PDT by Btrp113Cav
TEHRAN, Iran - The president of Iran again lashed out at Israel on Friday and said it was "heading toward annihilation," just days after Tehran raised fears about its nuclear activities by saying it successfully enriched uranium for the first time.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1615117/posts
Regardless of political party in power in Israel, they Israelis ALL understand they live surrounded almost on all sides by sworn enemies of the state. An Iranian nuclear attack will result in just about every major Iranian city being turned into radioactive glass in very short order.
I agree. Just look at how Iran is now basically surrounded.
Future headline, "IAF craters Tehran".
News at eleven....
Taken separately, each of his comnents is not really a declaration of war. However, he makes a lot of them, and I think it's getting to the point where Israel will soon be able to make the case that putting them all together, Iran has indeed declared war on it, and can justify a first strike.
Having said that, I always have this comment in mind: "Unilateral Israeli action, without provocation from Iran, could unleash a diplomatic, economic and military backlash such as the Jewish state had never witnessed since 1948, Mr. Sharon argued."I interpret that to mean military provocation. Regardless, Israel will indeed pay a heavy price for a first strike if they should make one.
The US should be the one to do this, but last night I saw a Democratic Rep saying there is no way the Pres could get approval for military action against Iran with Rumsfeld as SecDef, Bush had no credibility (lied over Iraq), blah, blah. Maybe that was just bluster -
If the Third Reich had even a fraction of the money, natural resources, technology, or munitions that Iran has, the world would have been speaking German a half-century ago.
<< It's a good thing there's no real reason to take this guy at his word. Fortunately, this is just talk. >>
Rubbish.
The kind of suicidal rubbish spouted by other gutless clowns and other gutless idiots throughout the nineteen thirties.
About Adolf Hitler.
Whatever Ahmadinejad says is the policy of the "government" of the mad mullahs that is but fronted by their shill, the career terrorist, Ahmadinejad.
Iran, for all its madness, is NOT some flyweight military power. It is NOT Iraq. It has some serious muscle, and we ignore it at our own peril.
It would only take ONE Iranian nuke, lofted over the continental USA via an aging wildly inaccurate SCUD, to EMP us into the dark ages. No power, no transportation, no communication... and then our other adversaries strike, taking advantage of our having been brought to our knees.
We would quite possibly NEVER recover from that blow -- not, at least, to any recognizable semblance of what we have known as "our way of life."
Make no mistake, the Iranian madman knows this -- as do our leaders. It's mainly "the great unwashed" who are kept ignorant of it, their heads filled with insipid "entertainment", to keep their minds occupied. Bread and circuses.
Wow, that is definitely interesting- thanks for the info.
Or Syria. But in either case it's only important for a staging area if you want to put boots on the ground and that is something I think we'll never do. Otherwise, it's a pretty easy flight from almost anywhere our B2's or even B52's are based to drop some large ordnance including Daisy Cutters or nuclear bunker busters. Don't think we won't use 'em either. Lots of loud condemnation for this option. However, it's only overt uses of nukes that will get the U.S. in trouble with certain other countries. Do you really think the Iranians could ever prove that one of our stealth bombers dropped a nuclear bunker buster that burrowed deep into the ground and detonated? We could just get on TV and say "We told you nuclear bombs are dangerous, now one of your so-called peaceful installations blew itself up." Since there would be so much of their radioisotopes contaminating the site, they could not even determine the weapon's "signature." Point made. Problem stopped. Liberals and UN continue to bleat like the sheep they are. Order cheese to accompany whine.
"Heading toward annihilation"
No, dickweed, you are.
I don't doubt that. As a matter of fact, that's exactly where I believe this is headed.
I think preemptive action needs to be taken before it comes to that. Unfortunately, I have little hope that any is forthcoming. If Iran isn't stopped, a nuclear exchange is inevitable.
This guy needs to be slapped down. Hard.
<< Iran, for all its madness, is NOT some flyweight military power. It is NOT Iraq. It has some serious muscle, and we ignore it at our own peril. >>
I speak and read Arabic and understand Farsi and have spent many years in and around the Middle East -- including around 70 trips each to both Iran and Iraq, [Different passports one left at either the Amman Intercontinental or Mariot during visits to each] during the eight years of stalemate that was the Iraq-Iran war. So you'll get no argument from me about Iran's potential to do us harm.
On the other hand, Iraq held the mad mullahs to stalemate for eight years and we once routed Iraq's forces in 100 hours and later took the entire country in 21 days.
We should therefore also ponder those facts before we become too exercised.
And of course that an intelligent and/or courageous United States government would have retaliated adequately to Iran's act of war against us in 1979. And have thus altered the history of the the past 27 years. That the hapless traitor, Carter, did not, simply delayed the inevitable. And made our task more difficult.
Iran will also require more sorties to take out their CNC, and also we have to factor in supporting ground troops and armor attacks. (We will have to invade parts of iran to prevent missile attacks on Israel and the Straits of Hormuz.)
What's "good news and bad news" in Persian..?
It has often been said that they hate the Jews more than they love their own children.
I ment CAC (Command and Control)
I agree also. Iran is pursuing the same brinkmanship game that Saddam did, but expecting a different result. What's that old saw about "insanity"?
I'll be happy to volunteer Cindy Sheehag
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.