If the US uses nukes against Iran,

Iran won't be the only country affected. Nearby countries could get some of the fallout, depending on which way and how strong the wind is blowing.

Have the neocons thought of that, I wonder?

:shrug:

I know that story's been floating around here, but there's no credibility to it. Do you think we'd get away with it?

Strikes at specific targets using low yield warheads, would be the best way to do it.

Besides who would stop us? The UN, the EU?

As for credibility, remember Bush claimed that there were no war plans for Iraq on his desk, I guess they must have been in a drawer?

Since the invasion of Iraq, I have learned to accept the fact that this administration and its supporters are capable of any abomination, they can now torture, hold indefinitely anyone that Bush
or his lieutenants mark as an "enemy combatant", and cannot be prosecuted for war crimes. They are also trying to make it legal for the NSA to wiretap without warrants anyone they think may be in league with terrorist.

So let's not give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to something like this, especially after all of the things that BushCo has done since coming into office.

With these people, it's better to hope for the best but expect the worst.

Tactical nukes are used for specific kinds of targets, such as large armor formations. Political and moral considerations aside, their use would make no sense since it impacts friendlies as well.

That tactical or even strategic nuclear weapons have been included in the analysis of alternatives is standard procedure. Those evolutions are supposed to look at ALL options.

Given that the the effectiveness of the bunker busters (penetration depth etc) are easily modeled, Iran has been very public about burying their centers beneath their effectiveness. That limits an air power only option. That is the scary part of all of this.

:shrug:

The Bush Administration is evil and stupid... But they aren't going to go there.

tactical nuclear weapons. I would not rule it out, though I think it would be highly unlikely they would use them.

There is no noise in the news regarding Iran lately. If we were going to attack them, there would be some "event" to trigger it.

And if the Israel/Lebanon/Hezbollah event wasnt enough to trigger an attack, I dont know what would.

like the coverup of a child predator in Congress? While I don't see the use of nukes I wouldn't put it past the admin to "Wag the dog".

It would be too transparent right now and has no chance of working.

Iran is a COMPLETELY SILENT issue this week.

with uranium enrichment, against sanctions by the U.N. This is pretty much all Bush used as an excuse to go into Iraq...

http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/10/04/ap3066362.html

If Bush was going to invade, he would have used the Israeli/Lebanon conflict last summer as an "excuse".

And Iraq dominated the headlines in the leadup to the war. They are not doing any such media blitz right now.

I would not be surprised if the admin did create a crisis. I know its a MIHOP situation, but I do have one of these:

:tinfoilhat:

I wouldn't be so sure.

Kissinger is the one who in the 50's wrote a book supporting the idea that limited nuclear war was a good idea.

Paul Craig Roberts said we'd be a the US would be a pariah nation if that happened.

And he's right.

believe Herr Rumsfeld requested a study of that. My personal feeling is they will use bunker busters

If this is true, then how can you make the statement "But they aren't going to go there.", when we have seen over and over again that this just isn't a fact.

They went for torture, they are going for warrant less wiretaps, they got immunity from prosecution for war crimes, at least under US law, and they had their Patriot Act I & II passed.

Percentage wise all of the places they weren't suppose to go to, they did.

but just thought I'd point this out about the fallout.

I bet a lot of people don't realize that fallout can end up in other places besides where one intended it to go. That's why I posted this.

Although they are working with Chavez to get more.

Do the neocons really care? The answer of course is, no they don't!

n/t

nukes against Iran or any other nation. The neocon target practice with their latest weaponry MUST END.

Just sayin'

it wouldn't be effected.

Rain transports it down to the oil. No one would want to work in a nuclear wasteland. Not good,if you want the oil.

when they were still doing above ground nuclear testing and most of my generation has managed to survive so far, despite all the radiated cow's milk that we ended up drinking. I'm sure my car won't care much either.

The cast of the movie "The Conquerer" filmed on the site of a nuclear test,didn't fair to well.


http://www.contentmart.com/ContentMart/content.asp?LinkID=32940&CatID=199&content=1

The Day We Bombed Utah
by John G. Fuller

Publisher: Signet; Reprint edition (March 10, 1985)
Language: English
ISBN: 0451134826

“…This book was a thin wedge which finally opened the US Government's files on Atomic Testing and the low-level and high-level fall-out we all live with. Particularly liked the way the book begins with an ordinary day or what had become an ordinary event --- the explosion of a nuclear bomb in Nevada.”

http://www.amazon.com/Day-We-Bombed-Utah/dp/0451134826/sr=8-1/qid=1160052419/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-7848489-3788047?ie=UTF8&s=books

have "doomsday" plans. In the event of imminent defeat they will destroy their oil fields with explosives, including a radioactive element.

"Saudi Arabia, bracing for the possibility of an attack either by an outside power or restive Shiite residents, implemented an intricate doomsday plan in the 1980s giving officials the power to blow up their own oil wells, according to a new book by journalist Gerald Posner. In the event of an attack, says Posner, the Saudis would trigger a series of "dirty bomb" explosions designed to destroy use of the kingdom's oil supplies for decades. Posner's account, related in his new book, Secrets of the Kingdom (Random House) is based on both Israeli and American intelligence."

Iran has done the same, according to Iranian Defense Minister interviewed in Saudi newspaper.

They had his oilfields back on line in about two years. I'm sure BushCo has preprinted contracts for the repair work.

but the Saudi plan includes a radioactive element which would make the oil itself useless.
While Iran has said it would destroy their own oil fields, they have not mentioned a radioactive element.
It seems likely that they would destroy the fields in the same manner as Saudi Arabia.

had a radioactive element? At least not yet.

I can't see them doing that.
That's pretty extreme even for their standards.

If they did, however, I think hate for the US would increase 10 fold and most other countries would probably take Iran's side.
Very very bad.