I always wondered why the loonies in Israel are allowed to hold nuclear weapons. Surely they are too unstable to be in command of such . Iran and Israel both. Israel just wants an excuse to use one.Nuclear weapons have no place in such an unstable country and territory and amongst lunatics.

Because thats where one of Irans MAD deterrents is.

Yes. By definition.

You're confusion asymmetrical warfare with terrorism.


First of all, their rockets are nothing spectacular? Nonsense. They have ATGM's. ASCM's. MANPAD's. Did you pay any attention to their anti-ship antics in 2006? Short and medium range missiles numbering over 40,000. There are rumours that these can and will be equipped with biological agents if Tehran is attacked. Hence the 2006 invasion. Hence no attack on Iran since then because that failed.

Israel got its halls decked in 2006 by Hezbullah. You don't seem to appreciate the training, weapons or methods Hezbullah uses. Their tunnelling system combined with Kornets humiliated Israeli armor.

Well, they wouldn't hit Israel if Israel doesn't strike Iran. You seem to think its fine for the USA and Israel to kill Iranian civilians en masse, then expect no reprisal. There will be a reprisal. And, I think what that includes will surprise many.

MANPAD - Man portable air defense.
ATGM - Anti tank guided missile
MRBM - Medium range ballistic missile
ACSM - Anti ship cruise missile

That isn't their strategy. They're linked to Iran. A full frontal assault will offer casus beli for an assault on Iran. Politics in Iraq aren't that simple.

I urge you to research their most recent war. Their children threw themselves into minefields just to clear paths for their tanks. You think these people aren't adamant? One UK source cites 40,000 suicide bombers:

Iran suicide bombers ‘ready to hit Britain’ - Times Online

I'm not sure where you get this idea out of. Are soldiers invulnerable to chemical weapons?

Which I suppose is why Israeli and US forces are so fond of their military useage?

You do know that Russia, however much it may be lacking elsewhere, has lead this field for decades?

We don't know how many of them they have to deploy. Its a strategy that Iran and Russia share. Talk ******************** about what they sell and buy so much that nobody can take them seriously. Basic deception. Iran may have had S-300's since 1993. They've been purchasing and trading from Belorus for a long time. In fact who knows what they've bought. Even if they were exhausted, they'll do their job quick enough to mobilise an Iranian response. Which will be again, slaughter in Iraq, the stoppage of oil transit, an attack on Israel etc.

UK. Kuwait. Saudi Arabia. Northern Iraq. With the exception of the UK all of those will be hit with ballistic missiles.

A blockade of Iran is madness. It threatens the involvement of the Chinese Navy.

Not the West. The UK and USA. Let me ask you something. When or if the UK/USA/Israel eventually overcome Irans air defenses (Not without severe trauma) and kill probably hundreds of thousands and hit their reactors, what do you think will happen next? When fallout threatens to move god knows where at the behest of a trio of nations already despised by the international community, threatening another Chernobyl and possibly WWIII, do you think the rest of us will give a ******************** if they blow up London on a minor scale? Nobody will care.

Lol. How can you be this stupid. Let me give you an analogy to help you realise how stupid a statement you've just made. Your neighbour has a revolver. He is not going to use it. If you kill his wife, he'll use it on you. So, because he'll respond to you murdering his wife by attempting to kill you, its best to go and kill him now.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Making an apples-to-oranges "analogy" between individuals with guns and Iran with nuclear weapons, never mind the "killing his wife" scenario, and you have the nerve to call other people "stupid"? You've put your picture next to the definition in the dictionary.

To make your "analogy" more correct, your man with the gun has not used it, but he's let other people borrow it to kill other people. He's also paid those people who used his gun for those killings. Now he's switching tactics and is going to use high explosives. If it's incumbent upon you to make the next move and you have the power to stop his activities, what do you do?

__________________
“Our entire economic and political efforts in the future must be directed towards bringing about the unification of Europe as quickly as possible…Political propaganda must be carried out cleverly, and the unification of Europe must not appear as an enterprise holding out particular attraction for German interests…” (Madrid Circular Letter)

Spot on. Only last week President Ahmadamadindong claimed Iran was the most powerful and influenttial nation on Earth. Most of whats reported on Iranian state TV is for a captive audiance that has little or no external media access. But thats no excuse for those outside Iran to buy it.

The world would be suprised if Iran produced a viable nuclar weapon in March. Amongst the nations most suprised would be Iran.

But there is something in the air. Romania has agreed to host the US missile shield, a project that is back on the cards despite Russias objections. So the 'threat' the US and indeed much of NATO envisions is worth overriding the need to repair substantially relations with the Kremlin.

Those who like to cheerlead Irans appointed government and Theorcatic regime should bare in mind that hyping Iran and its capability only undermines objections to the US missile defence project.

Any March 'shock' I hope will deliver impetitus to the Middle East peace process at least.

Eh? That makes no sense.

The real target of the US missile shield is Russia, not some fantasy about Iranian ICBMs.

Moron!

The flight path of Russian missiles to the USA takes them over the arctic, no where near Romania or Europe. Iranian missiles on the other hand would have to fly over Europe to get to the USA, close by Romania.

__________________
It is only through failure that we can have success.
LUNATIC IGNORANCE!

Economic Left/Right: -0.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77

You're going to have to elaborate your allegations here. Iran has been giving weapons to who? In order to kill who? I hope you're not going to say something stupid like Hezbullah. Because by that reasoning, we'd have to begin the planning of bombing Berlin and US nuclear reactors. I hope you won't be even more stupid to say insurgents in Iraq killing US GI's, because Iran, a Shi'ite Nation, is not going to supply Ba'athist Sunnis with weapons while a war of ethnic cleansing is taking place. That was another blatant piece of propaganda.

People like you, however, are unfortunately not immune to propaganda. What is it Orwell said? 'Circus dogs jump when the trainer cracks his whip, but the really well-trained dog is the one that turns his somersault when there is no whip.'

Yes, thats about right. Admit it. You believed Saddam Hussein was training Al Qaeda back when the allegations were first made. And you thumped your chest over it. Probably the same with 'WMDs'. Do you thump your chest over Irans phantom nuclear weapon programme, too?

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Iran does not have ICBM's and even if it did wouldn't use them against the USA. More convincing is the stories that this 'Shield' was a bullying strongarm tactic into forcing Russia to 'desist' in any assistance to Iran. The only way Iran can hit the USA or UK with missiles is by launching from a civilian cargo ship.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

But for Russia surely it is cheaper to just build a few extra nukes for every new upgrade of the shield.... ie if it came down to a situation in which Russia and the US were in an arms race, US upgrading the shield and Russia building more nukes to compensate - at present levels of technology i believe Russia would win that race... though i could be wrong, maybe Russia doesn't want the technology near it in any form because of the possibility of 'surprising' developments in the capability of the technology itself.

Iran is being threatened because 1. Only emasculated countries run by client regimes may exist within 500 miles of Israel and 2. Oil.

The thing about nuclear umbrellas is that they escalate the likelihood of bad behaviour, MAD only applies between nuclear states - in encounters between nuke nations and no-nuke nations the possession of nukes by one side makes that country more bellicose in general.

Its warming up!

AFP: Iran anniversary 'punch' will stun West: Khamenei

__________________