it's been done before... 
Posted on 09/06/2007 2:45:49 PM PDT by Seabee133
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”.
President George Bush intensified the rhetoric against Iran last week, accusing Tehran of putting the Middle East “under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust”. He warned that the US and its allies would confront Iran “before it is too late”.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
meh, this is the teaser.. 3 day plan, bet they have a 24 hour version of the same thing, should include the airdrop of weapons to the students that hate the mullahs guts...
Related
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1889805/posts
Duncan Hunter Calls for Iran Strike Soon
Someone on the radio said just that, yesterday. We’ve done it before.
Humanitarian aid, bags of rice with handgun stuffing
Assuming this is accurate, this won’t stay the plan for long now that it has been made public.
its all hoooeey
i am an expert, matter of fact expert of experts, I did my research, did my calculations
the US does not have the resources
the US does not have the resolve
the US is weak, overextended and does not have allah on its side!
The Pentagon may call it a Blitz — but, if they pause for a coffee break anytime during it, the media will call it a quagmire.
I’ve said it here multiple times to the Iranians that post here on FR, it is the Iranians that hate the mullahs who must get the ball rolling, and start making the mullahs disappear, instead of asking for the USA to do it for them.
I am sure it is somewhat accurate. This was nothing more than a purposeful leak by the Pentagon to the Iranians to let them know we are thinking about them.
hmmmn,
lets see ^bin Laden is posting a new tape^ for the anniversary of Sept 11?
surprise, surprise
My guess this may mean that while they are filming in Iran, the back drop will be something Far greater than shock and awe.
what was that? poetic justice?
it's been done before...
Probably. The US certainly has the capacity.
should include the airdrop of weapons to the students that hate the mullahs guts...
Less wise. Plenty of Iranian students who hate their regime are not going to love the US should this plan go ahead. The size of the bombing required is going to cause a fair few casualties in the military and unavoidable collateral, so you'll get plenty of them angry about relatives or innocents dead. Plus, there's that strong human streak that it's okay for them to dream about taking out the current regime, but when a foreigner does it that's like interfering in a family quarrel. If this goes ahead, I suspect a lot ofcurrent pro-American Iranians (And there are plenty) will be eager to spill western blood.
Below this article at The Times are more than 850 responses from all over the world. They make some interesting reading.
yitbos
A country which enjoy overwhelming superiority is no better" than the "weakest", if timidity or "Political Correctness" prevents its use.
When going to war, any war, either go for it or don't bother. My children and their children deserve no less. Unless our top leaders decide to personally lead "kinder and gentler" wars.
< /s >
I think the Irani’s just want us to go in and rebuild ‘em, after we get done in Iraq.
Once again, let me argue that air strikes are not enough, for two reasons.
1) Iran could already have nuclear weapons, with plutonium from North Korea. Enriching uranium might just be a ruse to buy time. Their Taepodong-1/Shahab-4(+) missiles are more than adequate to attack most of the ME, even reaching far into Europe. And they would NOT be stored where we would attack. And after such an attack, the assumption that they were disarmed could allow them to assemble many nuclear weapons, so that by the time they “went nuclear”, they would have too many nuclear missiles to stop.
2) Iran is correct in the assumption that after a particular point, even if their uranium enrichment facilities are destroyed, they can in a few years reconstitute their nuclear program. This is because they have the money and mineral resources to do so. And by then they should have a missile capable of reaching much of the United States.
For these reasons, a short air war by itself will not prevent them from achieving their goals. What must happen in addition are two things.
1) The Iranian military and especially the IRGC must be reduced. This would prevent Iran from being a conventional military threat to the ME.
2) Iran must be partitioned. A crescent of land from their Kurdish provinces in the northwest, along their Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea coast, including the Bushehr reactor, all the way to Iranian Baluchistan in the southeast, must be taken away from them and given to the adjacent nations.
These provinces have most of their oil and mineral wealth, and are populated by hated and despised minorities, who have far more in common with people in neighboring nations than Persians. Their Kurdish provinces would go to Kurdistan, their Arab provinces to Iraq, and Baluchistan to Pakistan.
This would also cut off Persian access to the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea, and so would end their threats against the world’s oil supply. Persia proper would not need to be invaded, but it would no longer have the resources to menace others, nor to reclaim these annexed territories. Nor to rebuild their destroyed nuclear weapons infrastructure.
With their military and IRGC destroyed, a slicing maneuver by the US divisions in Iraq, and perhaps the Pakistani army, would make the partition, and the annexed lands would be occupied, defended and integrated, respectively by the Kurdish Peshmurga, the Iraqi and Pakistani armies.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070913/ap_en_tv/fake_interviews_3
A former ABC News consultant fired last year because he couldn’t authenticate academic credentials is at the center of a new dispute over apparently faked interviews with Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Gates and others.
ADVERTISEMENT
The consultant, Alexis Debat, quit the Nixon Center, a Washington think tank, on Wednesday after Obama’s representatives claimed an interview with the senator appearing under Debat’s byline in the French magazine Politique Internationale never took place. The interview quoted the Democratic presidential candidate as saying the Iraq war was “a defeat for America.”
Pelosi, Gates, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg all said they never gave interviews that appeared in the magazine under Debat’s byline, ABC News’ Web site, the Blotter, reported on Thursday.
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.