'Iran will deliver telling blow to global powers on Feb. 11'

[Border-Rat]

Why would they hit Lebanon before bombing Iran?

Because thats where one of Irans MAD deterrents is.

Asymmetrical warfare is warfare for the weaker side.

Yes. By definition.

It is a cowardly sadistic way to fight, which inflicts immense suffering on the civilians of the side using it.

You're confusion asymmetrical warfare with terrorism.

Hezbullah's rockets are nothing spectacular, people can transport them so they are light and have a minimal range and limited destructive capacity. Since they are so simplistic they are probably not very accurate either. Admittedly if Hezbullah's 10,000 or more agents were able to fire all of them at once into Israel there would be quite a lot of damage, many housing estates and apartments would be burnt to the ground along with other civil structures, civilian casualties would be quite high.

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.

But would Hezbullah be able to fire all of these rockets into Israel? They would have to co-ordinate 10,000 or more individuals to simultaneously set up the 50,000 rockets within firing range of Israel, in other words right on Israelis border or very close to it. And they would have to do this without the Israeli army coming to know about it, extremely difficult given Israel is a particularly paranoid country that no doubt has spy satellites and reconnaissance aircraft and drones constantly watching it's border. Thousands of guys running around with portable rockets would not be able to operate unobserved by the Israelis.

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.

Even if Hezbullah succeed what would they accomplice? They would accomplice mass Israeli civilian causalities that would serve to motivate the Israeli army towards retribution. Small time temporary damage to some Israeli airfields and military equipment. It would change nothing for Iran since they do not have any conventional armies on Israelis borders and would not be able to follow through.

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.

Border-Rat you must really stop using all these acronyms without explaining them. What are a MANPAD, ATGM, MRBM and ACSM?

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

If the Iraqi militias and Badr Brigade and Mahdi Army were as unified and well trained and equipped as you say they are they would have already evicted the US army. I think you are just blowing smoke.

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.

Tell me Border-Rat do you really think that there are enormous numbers of well-trained Iranian suicide squads? There are probably some but the Iranians are not some strange alien creatures that live solely to martyr themselves for governments and theocrats. They are not dissimilar to people like you and me. There was the same BS pushed around before America went into Afghanistan and it did not transpire.

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

Iran is in a much stronger position than Iraq was particularly with geography. There probably are many underground tunnels and bunker complexes that the US does not know about. They probably do have chemical weapons but it has been demonstrated that such weapons are nearly useless against armies;

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

they are only useful against civilian populaces. Which is why many international organizations seek to ban them.

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

Their air-defence missiles are made in Russia.

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

They only have a limited number of them to deploy. Once they have used them all they are gone until the Russians send them a new shipment.

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.

Just out of curiosity who are Iran's enemies besides the USA and Israel?

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

Are Iran's enemies anyone that imports oil? Because a long blockade will hurt anyone that imports gulf oil, which is most people.

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

A few sleeper cells in the west causing terrorism will only give justification to an Iranian blockade.

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.

If Iran goes down the road of using religious nutcase suicide bombers then it will be justifying any pre-emptive attack that prevents them developing nuclear weapons.

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.

[Al.]

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

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?

[Thac0man]

Really? The only people reporting it are Iranian media.

To me it doesn't seem like anybody is getting their knickers in a twist except a few cranks on politics.ie. I would go as far as to suggest that there won't even be a response from a Western Government to his comments. You might therefore say on that measure, he is failing.

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.

[SideysGhost]

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.

Eh? That makes no sense.

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

[jcdf]

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.

[Border-Rat]

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?

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?

[Border-Rat]

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.

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.

[Thranduil]

Eh? That makes no sense.

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

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.

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.

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.

[Bi ciuin]

Its warming up!

Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Monday that Iran is set to deliver a "punch" that will stun world powers during this week's 31st anniversary of the Islamic revolution.

"The Iranian nation, with its unity and God's grace, will punch the arrogance (Western powers) on the 22nd of Bahman (February 11) in a way that will leave them stunned," Khamenei, who is also Iran's commander-in-chief, told a gathering of air force personnel.

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

[Thranduil]

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.

But given the dominance of Usrael in the region i cannot see Iran throwing it's weight around in the region much as Saddam had with Kuwait (and probably believed his former good relationship with the US protected him then) even if they were to acquire a few nukes, even if they obtained them i truly believe that nowhere else in history would the motive for acquiring nukes have been based on deterrence more than then.