Nuclear facilities of Iran

http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2004/10/06/56451.html

Nuclear facilities of Iran

05:38 2004-10-06
Iran has increased the range of its missiles to 1,250 miles, a senior official was quoted as saying on Tuesday, putting parts of Europe within reach for the first time.
Military experts had earlier put Iran's missile range at 810 miles, which would allow it to strike anywhere in Israel.
"Now we have the power to launch a missile with a 2,000 km (1,250 mile) range," the news agency IRNA quoted influential former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani as saying. "Iran is determined to improve its military capabilities."
"If the Americans attack Iran, the world will change ... they will not dare to make such a mistake," Rafsanjani was quoted as saying in a speech at an exhibition on Space and Stable National Security.

more...

:nuke:

Europe is delighted to be under a potential nuclear umbrella from Iran.

I think it makes sense that without USSR as the cold war balance that something like this would have to happen - countries taking the counter threat into their own hands.

the EU will cut them off financially.
It would be their loss and be of no strategic value. IMHO.

Let us in or else!!!

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/world/story/0,4386,276493,00.html?

Iran claims its missiles can now reach Europe
TEHERAN - Iran has increased the range of its missiles to 2,000km, putting parts of Europe within reach for the first time.

Military experts had earlier put Iran's missile range at 1,300km, which would allow it to strike anywhere in Israel
more...

It will be interesting to see Israel's next move....:crazy:

I think Iran has Israel in a check position...

security agreement with Israel would be an interesting thing. Any unprovoked first strike by Iran would bring our 3000mt online. That would balance the equation.

Russia has no interest in backing Iran in a theater war against Israel. IMHO.

They are moving into a cold war. We could back Israel with assured aid or actual hardware (less likely). No nation is willing to enter a nuclear pact with Iran.

would unilaterally strike Israel? I don't mean it rhetorically--I think it's an interesting question. Deterrence theory says no way; Iranian mullahs have said yes way.

Mother Russia is providing them with the fuel(which recently let us know that fuqin with their economy could be trouble) and France just sold them nuclear subs.

is to talk the U.S. into a preemptive strike. They can't take out the sites, all fifteen of them, by themselves. Their pilots would have to fly over Jordan, presumably, and the Iranians know they're coming and can detect them. That's what I've heard from military guys at least. This is not the case for the U.S.--we can get there from a number of places and we can get there undetected. The problem is we don't know where their underground sites are. Surface sites can be found.

There was a thread in Economics forum about Iran, and why the US might attack:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=114x11328

there, the main issue is talk of an Iranian Bourse, or Oil futures market based on the Euro, rather than the dollar.

Given that scenario, there would be no reason for Iran to want to attack Europe.

But a strike capability would have some effect in influencing the EU to try to dissuade the US from strikig Iran.

And here's a question I've never seen addressed; if Iran has a nuclear program, but no nuclear weapons capabilty, would it be possible/feasible for them to load up missiles with nuclear waste, or something, and have a deliverable "dirty bomb" that wouldn't be as devastating as an atomic warhead, but still very deadly in terms of nuclear fallout/radiation?

I tried to keep it. and here is the point Iraq will never settle down unless Iran is taken care of

personally, I don't think Iraq will settle down until the US pulls out, regardless of anything that happens in Iran.

But I'm curious about your use of the phrase "Iran is taken care of"

Do you mean taken care of the way the Mafia takes care of informants? i.e. killing them
or
Do you mean taken care of the way a mother takes care of a crying infant?
i.e. pacifying and comforting, easing whatever may be the cause of the crying.

I think it would be a very bad idea for the US to attack Iran, whether by missile strike, or ground force invasion; though ground force invasion would be the worst of those choices.