Iran - Back in the Hotseat

[Jimbeaux]

The IAEA has now decided that the evidence is substantial that Iran is very close to Nuke-weapon readiness. According to them, a Russian sicentist has been helping them with "tricky" detonator issues while North Korean and Pakistani scientists have been pitching in as well.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-ea...

[Frankeh]

So, how long can Obama keep his generals at bay? He obviously doesn't want more military action before the election. Then again, if played right nothing unites a country like a good war.

[Mojocvh]

What's it got to do with any other country if they DO create a nuke?

I am heartily sick of the near constant warmongering of the western political system and it's politicians.

[Frankeh]

Nukes are the bargaining chips of governments. You get even a single one and you're now a proper player. You can expect to be safe from the bigger aggressors (The USA) military action for the foreseeable future.

[andymadmak]

Mojocvh said:

What's it got to do with any other country if they DO create a nuke?

Well, I suppose that all depends on what they intend to do with that nuke, and whether those intentions could lead to Armageddon for the planet.
I don't know the answer to those questions. I only know what Iranian politicians like Dinnerjacket say to the worlds media, and having the destruction of Israel on your "to do list" would seem to me to be a genuine cause for concern. No doubt many will argue that Dinnerjackets utterances are mostly rhetoric, and that the real risk of Iran lobbing a nuke missile at Israel is slim. Even if this were to be the case, I'm still unable to compute the odds of some sort of incident involving an Iranian nuke given that missiles are not the only available delivery system, and too many people who could gain access to the weapons at some point in the forseeable future might believe that significant virginage would be available in heaven were Israel and/or the great satan to be "struck".
Either way, an Iranian nuke MUST logically bring closer the prospects of lots of middle eastern glass in the next 20 years, and the fallout (pun intended) would not be good for any of us.

Mojocvh said:

I am heartily sick of the near constant warmongering of the western political system and it's politicians.

Oh I agree, old fruit. The trouble is, you can pretty much leave these bods to play alone inside their borders ( and I bloody well wish we would) when all they are doing is waving AK47s at each other. However the prospect of them pointing world ending weapons at the neighbors might just require some preemptive action, especially as MAD does not really apply to someone who welcomes death as the path to his God ....

[Mojocvh]

andymadmak said:

Mojocvh said:

What's it got to do with any other country if they DO create a nuke?

Well, I suppose that all depends on what they intend to do with that nuke, and whether those intentions could lead to Armageddon for the planet.
I don't know the answer to those questions. I only know what Iranian politicians like Dinnerjacket say to the worlds media, and having the destruction of Israel on your "to do list" would seem to me to be a genuine cause for concern. No doubt many will argue that Dinnerjackets utterances are mostly rhetoric, and that the real risk of Iran lobbing a nuke missile at Israel is slim. Even if this were to be the case, I'm still unable to compute the odds of some sort of incident involving an Iranian nuke given that missiles are not the only available delivery system, and too many people who could gain access to the weapons at some point in the forseeable future might believe that significant virginage would be available in heaven were Israel and/or the great satan to be "struck".
Either way, an Iranian nuke MUST logically bring closer the prospects of lots of middle eastern glass in the next 20 years, and the fallout (pun intended) would not be good for any of us.

Mojocvh said:

I am heartily sick of the near constant warmongering of the western political system and it's politicians.

Oh I agree, old fruit. The trouble is, you can pretty much leave these bods to play alone inside their borders ( and I bloody well wish we would) when all they are doing is waving AK47s at each other. However the prospect of them pointing world ending weapons at the neighbors might just require some preemptive action, especially as MAD does not really apply to someone who welcomes death as the path to his God ....

significant virginage would be available in heaven

well, we can see where you're coming from with that one bud.

[Jimbeaux]

Mojocvh said:

What's it got to do with any other country if they DO create a nuke?

I am heartily sick of the near constant warmongering of the western political system and it's politicians.

Sounds like the IAEA of the UN making this noise. As to what has it got to do, well, if you seriously have to ask........

[andymadmak]

Mojocvh said:

significant virginage would be available in heaven

well, we can see where you're coming from with that one bud.

I wasn't aware that I was "coming from" anywhere. I was simply stating the fact that some people with strong religious beliefs might get access to the nukes. I was not suggesting that the current Iranian Government would act themselves.
But who can predict what the make up of a future Iranian Government might look like? Will the Iranian nukes be kept secure enough to ensure that a fanaticist could not get to them? Do you want to gamble on this?

[Jimbeaux]

Frankeh said:

So, how long can Obama keep his generals at bay? He obviously doesn't want more military action before the election. Then again, if played right nothing unites a country like a good war.

As long as he tells them to. This isn't Burma.

[Jimbeaux]

Frankeh said:

Nukes are the bargaining chips of governments. You get even a single one and you're now a proper player. You can expect to be safe from the bigger aggressors (The USA) military action for the foreseeable future.

Why do you and others keep saying this? Do you really believe that?

[Zod]

Well, the Iranian government is already led by a loon who believes that the second coming of the Hidden Imam is imminent and that a violent event may precipitate it. I do not want Ahmedinejad to have the ability to launch nuclear missiles.

[koolchris99]

iran having a nuke is not a great prospect given i suspect within a minute of it being ready to go it will be aimed at the guys nextdoor.

[Victor McDade]

Frankeh said:

So, how long can Obama keep his generals at bay? He obviously doesn't want more military action before the election. Then again, if played right nothing unites a country like a good war.

An Iran backed attack on US soil (like the one they foiled against the Saudi Ambassador) + some tomahawks sent to Tehran would give Obama's re-election chances a massive boost. However, unless they are directly attacked (or threatened) can't see America going anywhere near this conflict (not after Iraq).

Question is, will the Israelis do something or is their bark worse than their bite?

[IainZ]

koolchris99 said:

iran having a nuke is not a great prospect given i suspect within a minute of it being ready to go it will be aimed at the guys nextdoor.

Next door but One I think

Dinnerjacket is a mentalist. Mentalist+big red button =

[s1962a]

Jimbeaux said:

Frankeh said:

Nukes are the bargaining chips of governments. You get even a single one and you're now a proper player. You can expect to be safe from the bigger aggressors (The USA) military action for the foreseeable future.

Why do you and others keep saying this? Do you really believe that?

I do - hence why Pakistan and North Korea haven't been invaded (yet).

[s1962a]

andymadmak said:

I was simply stating the fact that some people with strong religious beliefs might get access to the nukes. I was not suggesting that the current Iranian Government would act themselves.
But who can predict what the make up of a future Iranian Government might look like? Will the Iranian nukes be kept secure enough to ensure that a fanaticist could not get to them? Do you want to gamble on this?

I would be more worried about nutters in Pakistan getting hold of nukes rather than Iran.

[koolchris99]

Victor McDade said:

Question is, will the Israelis do something or is their bark worse than their bite?

They wont do anything, their gov are a bunch of cowards who only pick on people they know they are bigger than, and do so with america standing behind them.

but thats for another thread.

[andymadmak]

s1962a said:

Jimbeaux said:

Frankeh said:

Nukes are the bargaining chips of governments. You get even a single one and you're now a proper player. You can expect to be safe from the bigger aggressors (The USA) military action for the foreseeable future.

Why do you and others keep saying this? Do you really believe that?

I do - hence why Pakistan and North Korea haven't been invaded (yet).

But surely the reason why Pakistan hasn't been invaded is because it has not threatened to nuke India just because it exists? And the Chinese sit very hard indeed on the North Koreans, so no need to worry there.

[Zod]

If action is taken, I suspect this is one we'll hear about once it has happened. From what I've read, the facilities are deep underground, so short of a nuclear strike (obviously not acceptable), it would require men on the ground to conduct a raid.

[andymadmak]

Zod said:

If action is taken, I suspect this is one we'll hear about once it has happened. From what I've read, the facilities are deep underground, so short of a nuclear strike (obviously not acceptable), it would require men on the ground to conduct a raid.

Or an Avro Lancaster and a Grand Slam bomb!