Iran vows 'crushing response' to attack by U.S., Israel

TEHRAN - Iran warned on Sunday of a "crushing" response if its nuclear and military facilities were attacked by the U.S. or Israel.

"Iran has prepared itself ... they will get a crushing response if they make such a mistake," Larijani said on state-run television late Sunday.

European media have indicated in recent days that the U.S. was preparing its allies for a strike against Iran's nuclear and military facilities with the aim of curtailing Iran's nuclear program.

The U.S. President George W. Bush has said his administration would not exclude the possibility of using military force against Iran over its nuclear program, which the United States believes is aimed at producing weapons.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/664893.html

- The Iranians can inflict a punishing response on US if it tries such an Imperialistic menace!--unleashing it's militias in Iraq-and being able to control the narrow point in the Persian Gulf with artillery, missles would affect traffic of oil tankers. - The price of OIl would skyrocket!
This happened in the Iran- Iraq WAr- with the result the USA shot down a civillian Iranian airliner to send a message

--GEO political aim is the name of the game--destabalising IRAQ- and possibly Syria--with sectarian war may be on the horizon.....

The airliner was out of its chanel and did not respond to radio calls. They choose not to risk a starke.

I knew a guy who served on the Vincennes. They did shoot down the airliner on purpose.

This rumor has been flying around for at least 2 years. No strike yet.

The crew of the Vincennes shot a civilian airliner out of the sky. Period, blanco! 'On purpose' is one of the only ways to fire a SAM, no accident here, just a military weapon being launched against a commercial aircraft. I wonder how much more you will believe before searching the archives for more reliable information.

A guy I have known for almost 10 years who served on the boat as a petty officer in communications.

They thought it was a fighter jet. They shot it down. Giant fuckup from the beginning.

Assuming everything is a conspiracy and he was ordered by naval operations to shoot down an airliner, what does that accomplish?

A ship that could launch a massive strike against fixed targets in iran with cruise missiles, chooses to shoot down an airbus. Does not compute.

Guess the navy shot down 800 too, they have to keep up appearances and all.

You can bet that was an intelligence operation-

Lets bring the 17 troops home from Grenada now!

Unfortunately, with the advent of the "strap-on male extender", it's made things a bit more dangerous again.

would be a bad mistake.


just sayin'

http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/nst/AfpNews/200601020636091136154969.2/afp

snip>

"It is an idea, not a structured proposal, we don't see it as mature and it has serious problems," the secretary of the country's Supreme National Security Council, Ali Larijani, said on national television. Moscow has suggested allowing Iran to conduct uranium enrichment in Russia, giving the country access to the nuclear fuel cycle while guaranteeing its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

snip>

However, Larijani did not completely reject the Russian proposal.

"The (Russian) plan could be complementary and supporting, there are technological benefits, we have to examine them. It is not rigid and there is room for maneuver," he said.

Russia enjoys close ties with Iran and is helping build the Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran.

snip>

Larijani warned the West, which has threatened to push for the Security Council to impose sanctions, against taking strong action.

"If they act harshly, our behaviour will change. We have prepared scenarios and they cannot checkmate us easily," he said.

more...

The neocons are just that fucking insane. All of the horrible ramifications of an attack will come to fruition including a draft because no one seems to want to stop them.

<snip>

Recent visits to Turkey by CIA Director Porter Goss, the head of the FBI, NATO General Secretary Jaap De Hoop Scheffer and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have increased speculations about a possible military strike against Iran. NATO member Turkey is Iran's northwestern neighbor.

The U.S. President George W. Bush has said his administration would not exclude the possibility of using military force against Iran over its nuclear program, which the United States believes is aimed at producing weapons.

They felt they had to get even with Saddam and they need their egos fixed after their 1979 letdown.

This is an "honor" thing.

"... this administration would not exclude the possibility of using military force against Iran over its nuclear program, which the United States believes is aimed at producing weapons."

Hmmm ... with the exception of the word 'Iraq', this sounds soooo familiar. Where have we heard this statement before?

it is deja vu all over again. :(

... better start getting busy discussion Iraq's nuclear program and ability to produce WMDs, otherwise this Admin won't be able to use the old 'The Whole WORLD thought they had them ..." excuse.

Need a job? They'll probably be looking for good document forgers very soon. Knowledge of Niger government personnel an asset ...

Why would a sovereign nation feel the need
to prepare for an invasion?
Because the rule of law has flown out the window!
They have just witnessed the invasion and occupation
of their neighbors- hmmm, now why would they want to
arm themselves?
Gee, I wonder how they came to the conclusion
that they might need to defend themselves against
an expanding hegemonic empire...
What a riddle that is, NOT!
BHN

I think both sides are playing to their constiuients

at the same time I believe the only way to resolve this is through dialog, but it isn't going to happen with the bush administration

Incidently, I do NOT belive the American people would accept a draft

there is still about 25% of bush's base that would. It is scary but I really think between that and the faux news propaganda machine they think they can get another war. Remember I said they were insane.

Bush has the ignorant brutes in his pocket.
For the last five years most of the rest of us (Congress in particular) sat quietly in the corner and apologized for
breathing air. They will bully us and we will go.
(Remember when we were going to stop the illegal invasion of Iraq?
We couldn't even slow him down.)

thanks to the wonderful wisdom of bush and company we invaded Iraq, and created a Shiite theocracy in Iraq

If we then attacked the Shitte theocracy in Iran, we would be doubled screwed

It just isn't going to happen, in spite of the spineless democrats in congress

The sad thing is that we cannot rely on the American people
to do the right thing - and we certainly cannot rely on Congress
for anything at this time. If Bush wants this war (and I fear he does) he shall have it.
As always - let the consequences be damned.

my mother included. There is no reality for those folks, only the US/bushco propaganda via Faux. And I do agree, we would be doubly screwed. :(

I have seen NOTHING during the past five years to indicate this is not the case

I'm willing to bet a draft would overflow prisons in this case...people are stupid, but lazy too. They'd rather suffer in their own country than suffer abroad where no one (in our country) can hear them scream. Atleast that's my POV.

I hope Latin America can become a refuge, too.

You give waaaaaay too much credence to the American people.
Waaaaaaaaaaay too much. They will be drafted. They will go.
And they will like it.
Bush has taken A LOT from the American people in the past
five plus years. Where is the outrage? I hear none.

With anti war demonstrations and rallies being marked as threats, I'm assuming a lot of the outrage is in secret. Like a lot of the lurkers on DU...

When bush won the election again, I could hear down the street what I couldn't hear on radio or tv...it's there. Just, the media would wish us to believe it isn't.

I agree people are stupid though and would accept a draft. They'd be given the "you can guarantee you lose, or have a chance at winning" speech about jail vs iran.

Unless the informed silent masses can manage to get
some real traction.

Been there.
Done that.

Bush that Iran would roll over and be nice and it is OK to bomb them..... I believe reports like this will NEVER be told much less read by Bush. :grr:

...toss them out, and welcome the invaders with flowers and oil contracts, and beg them to write a new constitution for them, privitizing all government assets so they can be run by properly foreigners instead of Iranians.
:sarcasm:

this is all revealed in PNAC. Securing the realm, a clean break, or whatever they say. One of these days, this Zionist foreign policy of ours will come back to bite us in the @$$.

it remains a FACT OF HISTORY that the US is the ONLY nation to have used nukes against another nation in all of histroy AND we did it TWICE!!!

WE ARE THE EVIL WE SAY WE ABHOR!!

Whatever you think of Israel, don't think for one second they don't have the capibility or will to find and take out anything and everything they would see as a threat in Iran.

Iran has spent the last 20 years building impenetrable bunkers for their defensive positions.

In the last 5 years, Iran has been purchasing the latest missile technology and hardware from Russia and China. Including Russia's Sunburn missiles for which there is no current defensive technology to use against them.

Israel could drop every nuclear weapon they possess on Iran and still not completely shut them down.

Thinking otherwise is naive.

at the same time into a semi modern country would cause chaos. No bunker can withstand the precursor wave caused by exploding a nuclear weapon on top of it.
Sunburn is a anti ship missile.
The weapon is on the open market, it can be bough. I'm sure we have reverse engineered it.
This story floats around every few years, nothing ever comes of it.

Not saying they should or would use nukes.

You're including mini-nukes that have very little offensive use.

At most, Israel is estimated to have 20 nukes capable of causing mass destruction in an offensive attack. What they lack are the delivery systems for launching that many nukes in one offensive.

The Sunburn isn't available on the open market. Russia and Iran are the only two nations known to possess it. It hasn't been physically inspected by any other country. A 2004 Pentagon report on the missile states there is no known way to prevent it from successfully hitting its target.

The Sunburn is recent, so I don't know where you get the idea it floats around every few years. Perhaps you can provide a cite for this "story floats around every few years" theory of yours.

The U.S. has ships in the Straits of Hormutz which the Sunburn could hit and close off all oil shipments through it, and 100% of Middle East's oil goes through the straits.

has the weapon. Jane's cites China as a purchaser.

I gave Israel 200 weapons at 100kt a massive over estimate. In reality they probably do not have the ability to launch an effective second strike. By effective I mean something equating to MAD 80% casualty rates.

To be clear i am speaking theoretically in some of what is below I do not advocate the idiocy being tossed around. In reality we will end up with an India Pakistan standoff, if we are lucky.

http://www.nti.org/db/nisprofs/russia/exports/general/expmsl.htm

You can't link into Jane's, they make you pay.

Other moronic sources such as news max and Sf based papers which refer to it as Iran's awesome new weapon are not credible so I will spare you their crap.

No single weapon system wins wars. It is a combination of systems that make US effective in OPEN war. Air Superiority, Target tracking, and coordinated attacks win wars. The german v-2, the biggest leap "forward" in weapon delivery in 100 years was just a Wunderwaffe because the germans did not have the combined power to sustain a war with a superior force when they brought it online.


I was referring to the Iran story. It pops up for a while and then goes away.
The sunburn has been around for almost 13 years. It is a standard cruise missile that runs a turbine with a rocket assist for last few miles to intercept. It makes evasive actions. But at 2500 claimed mph there are physical limits to how a missile can maneuver and not break apart and still hit its target.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/moskit.htm

It is a fixed target or air delivered. It flies from airplanes, which would be shot down before they can get to far in the event of a shooting war. If and i say IF iran started firing on neutral ships the air based retaliation would be massive. That can happen well outside the range of this magic weapon.
Phalanx is a second line now, most ships use a missile based interceptor system as well as radar guided guns.

I've lurked here for 6 months before signing up. Seen it come up at least once. Iran has us over the fire in Iraq, they have no need to escalate. We are not going to bomb them because of the political climate and because it gets us nothing.

"Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing—that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack—but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections."
Link:
http://www.amconmag.com/2005_08_01/article3.html

Sorry to be a realist and all,
BHN

almost the inevitability of a nuclear assault on Iran. Ingredients: long standing lust to do so by the neocon fringe, Bush while failing has not been held to account for anything, while not adverse to wrecking the military to achieve their goals the nuclear option is swiftly becoming the easy fall back plan, conventional attacks on Iran would be useless and costly and repercussions extreme, REAL shock and awe seems to be the endgame of their faith in aerial bombs substituting for boots on the ground(that is an absolute MUST for long term US control), they seem to have simply let slide a host off other options.

It is almost by process of elimination. ALL other plans to change or disrupt, pressure or strike, seem tepid and slipshod compared to the run-up to the Iraq War. And remember the beauty of the nuclear option. It can be hidden in the mind of one or a few with the simple task of making the single call to a nuclear sub. BTW, is the pre-targeting of Iran necessary to prepare such a sneak attack and is it subject to any kind of review or oversight? How far does that circle extend.

The spin of course will be only single words and phrases couched in hysteria: the imminent threat of Iran going irreversibly nuclear, the islamic extremist government, no choice, Truman's decision(TO SAVE THE LIVES THAT WOULD BE LOST IN AN INVASION), "bunker buster", non-civilian target, minimalized casualties, sophisticated smart use of nukes.

In the firestorm after the shock, Bush will somberly propose high road nuclear disarmament reconciliation that will of course eventually morph to our advantage or nothing- most likely the latter but blamed on everyone else. The goal will be to keep the "shocked" tongue tied and on the defensive or gabbling like grapeshot turkeys. We will even "offer" aid and radiation treatment to the victims! Troops can move in within the shock to secure the "world's vital flow of oil", but not of course to take over Iran as such.

I was convinced that some provocation would have been necessary to jumpstart iraq but that proved not the case. Rebuffed by Turkey and the world, slipshod phonied evidence and neatly lackadaisical arrogance simply brushed aside all that and even all the American casualties. Assuming that dare all damn the cost attitude is still bunkered safely in the WH and noting the EXTREME disregard the MSM has for recent lessons or the facts I think we have a sadly learned pattern before us.

They will use the nuke(s). Turn on the Noise Machine. It is too easy and the signs of continuing against Iran despite horribly weak strategies in diplomacy or conventional preparations are there without doubt or signs of slowing. A bluff will not work like it would have last time, an ironic state of affairs considering.

Why else could the WH, under some state of disarray and proved incompetence, be thought to be conducting anything other than a military pretext in its preparations? To wag the dog it is as simple as pushing a button, terrorist attack pretext or none and I think judging from how calmly they moved through the UN fiasco last time, there bluntly will be NO pretext necessary other than the will of Bush. That is the signal they want to send for the new world order. All the eggs under the dominant nuke umbrella. Anything else is too hard and too dependent on smart competence engaging unpredictable opposition. Just maybe AWOL boy will find some way of taking his fingerprint off the trigger and giving it to a short lived scapegoat like the rabid Veep. I think this is an essential part of the plan considering Junior's drop in the polls.

Is anyone prepared for this? Is anyone prepared for the pale or red-faced pundits marching out with Rove's talking points, shakily or pompously with false sorrow and mocking gravity spewing the abomination of all propaganda abominations? As soon as the finger lifts off the button the word will go forth. Everyone else by a failure of imagination or denial will give them ample time for the first information strike. Fear will reign. Chaos will hide the crime and delay and stall and sputter all accountability. Cheney can be thrown to the wolves then pardoned for "health" considerations. But make no mistake that this would be a plausible rogue strike. They ALWAYS hover on the edge of wanting to brag about it or to spin off outrageous cowardly excuses. Guilt points from both those directions and the preparations(mainly lack of practical, passionate meat therein) seem unerringly to draw them to the easy, unhindered path where all their policy eventually leads anyway.

NK may be hit at the same time.

The Russians know, hence the ploy of trying to get the gambling Shiites to move facilities(and thus the pretext) onto their territory.

I do not think the Executive branch is ready to launch a nuclear first strike.
Are the crazy enough to launch conventional strikes, maybe.

The use of nuclear weapons would have massive worldwide consequences. A lay person like me can see that using them is not needed to turn the lights in Iran and remove their ability to fight. Massive coordinated attacks on civil works and military and civilian targets would cause chaos. This is more "realistic" than a modern military using nuclear weapons on a third rate military.

FP magazine and other reliable publications that don't have wacko banner ads sum up the situation in a more realistic view.

My 2 cents. Once we get to this point it is really impossible to back this stuff with real facts.

Even if they were to agree to use nukes, I think the very first nuke that's used on a non warring nation would create civil war in this country. Probably eventually creating 2 governmental systems or renewing it (it DOES say the people can alter or remove a government if it no longer suits them). The government is the people, but right now the people sleep. I think a nuke would be loud enough to wake them, and there wouldn't be enough nukes sent after the people revolt to actually cause so much damage.

And guaranteed a general nation-wide draft.

Thank GEORGE W. "LIAR" BUSH.

Is an anti ship missile. They get blown up by airplanes. A russian weapon never tested in combat. rense loves it, Jane's defense not so much.

This story comes up twice a year, nothing ever happens.

Iran will get their nukes and there will be a arms race - standoff in the region. And the saber rattles on..

If open war breaks out in the gulf, my belief is that relatively simple ASM's will trump relatively complex ASM countermeasure systems, in a modern day Gulf of Taranto.

Say goodbye to 20% of the worlds oil supply overnight.

That is why I agree that Iran will get their nukes. They hold an economic checkmate since the flow of oil cannot be guaranteed. We would face both an energy shortfall and, more importantly, a monetary shortfall as our foreign lenders, on whom we now depend, will be calling in our loans to pay for $200/bbl oil.

Then again, who would have thought . . .

You have been missed!

:hi:

:loveya:

6 more weeks and I'm permanently Vancouver, Canada-bound!!! :) :) :)

Been busy packing. :)

:hi:

just kidding but man, some days I want outa this country. :(

Are you there forever?

:)

Vancouver...voted 2005 (for the 8th year in a row) the most beautiful city in the world...voted 2005 the city with the highest standard of lifestyle...voted 2005 best city in the world to live in...

Oh yeah, gonna be there forever. Was born there, am going HOME! :) :) :)

They have a sharp, well-trained army, and they are VERY well-armed even without nuke capability. *bushco does NOT know what they are fucking with here- even if they did, I doubt it would slow this idiotic idea down.

Did you monitor this post, NSA? Just checkin' to make sure.

Can't kick Israel's ass. They have a leftover soviet block main corps. Kind of like Iraq did before we stripped it down and reduced it in the first gulf war. T-72s and old jets. Lost of infantry to bomb with black jets.

They have no ability to maintain air cover, never mind superiority. They have no air force capable of defending its self from the naval air and USAF. They have no communication system that would stay online for more than 12 hours in the event of a war.

In a true open war there is no occupation, like Iraq. Iran has no reason to participate in a war with us when they can support a proxy war in Iraq.

To be clear I am not saying we should bomb, or otherwise bother Iran.

Iran would have the ability to gain a lot of allies against isreal. Fairly isreal would probably gain them against iran too...if nothing else it'd be the crusades all over again...only with nukes. Wouldn't that be lovely?

Even maniacs realize there are limits to what they can do. The question that I have is: why now? Why do they feel the urge to attack right at this moment? There is no urgent need, unless Bush feels an urgent need to start World War 3.

If he wants it, he'll get it. Iran has 68 million people. They've been doing some shopping lately......Russia sold them lots of missiles, I'm sure other countries have given them some nice Christmas presents.

The Iranians are positioned to cut off the world's oil supply in the Strait of Hormuz. The minute the first bomb drops, Iran will close off the strait and bomb all the oil tankers sitting there. This will cut off a huge portion of the world's oil supply. We'll be up shit creek without a paddle.

They will be sitting ducks. The entire strait will be in flames. Within minutes, Iran will also bomb Israel. The entire Middle East will be in flames.

If Bush has the balls to do it, he will open the Gates of Hell. It's Iran, in fact, that has the advantage in this Global Chess game.

Check mate, George.

They WANT to see that mushroom cloud over Jerusalem.

They are in for a rude awakening when Jesus forgets to show up...

I can't help remembering that the Shrub was reported to be 'reading' a fictionalized history of Alexander the Great when he first became Resident.

He has claimed to be divinely touched or inspired.

Delusions of grandeur.

Add in the PNAC strategy and you have a very dangerous mix here.

When can the men in white coats move in, take him away, make sure he gets help?

just kidding, that book only came out in '04

If Iran is let alone to open it's own oil market and trade in a 'basket' of currencies as they have threatened, the value of the dollar will plummet.

In fact, if you look back in time about four years, you'll find the same reason behind our invasion of Iraq.

Look back to the year 2000 when Saddam stated he was moving to the euro as his reserve currency for oil trading. That was the reason we invaded Iraq. It had nothing to do with terraists, and everything to do with protecting the US dollar.

The same thing is now going on with Iran.

But the media will say nothing about the real reasons we act like bullies.

Remember: Bush NEVER tells the truth.

Britain has dropped its allegation that Iran has been supplying extremist groups in southern Iraq with bombs.

After a thorough assessment of the latest intelligence, military and diplomatic officials have stopped pointing the finger at Tehran, merely saying that the new technology matched bomb-making expertise traditionally found in Syria and Lebanon.

The roadside explosive devices at the centre of the allegation have an infra-red triggering system and have killed ten British soldiers since the beginning of May.

It is ackowledged that the devices or the technology to construct them must have been smuggled to Iraq across the Iranian border into Maysan province in the south, but British officials no longer say that there is any intelligence linking the bombs to Tehran or even to elements of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,170-1966498,00.html

Well there certainly hasn't been a shortage of these stories in the past week and a half. Makes you wonder what is going on behind the scenes. Seems like its the U.S. making claims, and Iran making claims back. Is this all just sabre rattling? Or is there more to this story developing while we watch the propaganda roll in?

I'm not sure how much credit there is to the story out of Germany from late last week about the U.S. planning airstrikes, but there seems to be quite a response between these two countries.

Reminds me of the back and forth between the U.S. and Iraq...

But there's always some kind of 'phoney war' just before the real thing.

this is NO different than bush's standard propaganda about 'dead or alive'. funny how every PEEP from iran is suddenly newsworthy eh?

:(

That can be shifted JUST enough to make the american people see it as a threat. War with Iran is probably more than likely now...so much bloodshed. And for what? A man that comes in with a close call against a war with garden plants? The gods must be crazy, and bush is the coke can =p

They knew they would be next, they read, unlike the average American or US 'journalist'. They know about the plans in the PNAC, I'm sure.

A while ago, Syria said they would join forces with Iran if the US attacked them. They may as well, because they are next on the PNAC agenda.

However, one small problem, Congress has to declare war. I know, Bush ignores the Constitution, but still, Congress holds the purse strings. Crazy as the Bush administration is, I feel certain that this time, even Republicans in Congress will not go along with another war.

I do think the PNACers are getting desperate to get their agenda rolling before they are all impeached or the election throws out the Republican Congress. However, they were always regarded as crazy, until 9/11 when people simply were blinded for a while. I have a feeling many in Congress, in both parties, are remembering why they were ignored in the past. They ARE crazy.

Bush WILL most likely go to Congress with another IWR. This time, I really hope that all those Democrats who desserted their fellow Dems last time, will not do so again ~ and I do believe that even Republicans, like Jones of NC eg, will not be on board this time.

Iran may be on the neocon agenda, but I don't think it's on Congress' this time. We'll see, and he is crazy enough to do it. But for some reason, I feel there are forces behind the scenes who are seriously worried about this country and are working hard to stop these lunatics. If so, I hope they succeed before it's too late.