The Iran War

DSGamer wrote:

It can't be underscored enough just how terrible the US has been to Iran. The irony of us asking them to stop building weapons is thick.

The ultimate irony is that one of the biggest things America holds against Iran--the Iran Hostage Crisis--nearly never happened. The student group that lead it essentially flipped a coin to see if they were going to hit the American Embassy for pushing Western everything on Iranians or hit the USSR Embassy because they were godless heathens.

The irony of us asking them to stop building weapons is thick.

I'm not sure irony is really the right word there -- it's more continuing the same old sh*t we've been pulling for fifty plus years. "Par for the course" might be more accurate.

It appears quite likely that we're still fomenting revolt in their state right now... we may partially have been behind the vote protests a couple years ago, and I've read multiple reports that we're supplying cash to resistance groups in the country.

Wouldn't shock me. We love throwing good money (and good will) after bad.

Malor wrote:

It appears quite likely that we're still fomenting revolt in their state right now... we may partially have been behind the vote protests a couple years ago, and I've read multiple reports that we're supplying cash to resistance groups in the country.

Cash and training. If you haven't been following the MEK circus it's worth checking out.

Also, I think the US has unofficially officially acknowledged that our special forces have been active inside Iran since 2003. Since 9/11 the US has stepped up its dirty tricks campaigns in many places, and Iran has been the victim of all kinds of secret warfare. Sy Hersh is a hero obviously.

grobstein wrote:
Malor wrote:

It appears quite likely that we're still fomenting revolt in their state right now... we may partially have been behind the vote protests a couple years ago, and I've read multiple reports that we're supplying cash to resistance groups in the country.

Cash and training. If you haven't been following the MEK circus it's worth checking out.

Also, I think the US has unofficially officially acknowledged that our special forces have been active inside Iran since 2003. Since 9/11 the US has stepped up its dirty tricks campaigns in many places, and Iran has been the victim of all kinds of secret warfare. Sy Hersh is a hero obviously.

When you're young you're indoctrinated to believe that we're always the good guys. We stand for freedom, liberty and always act with the most noble of intentions. It kinda sucks getting older and realizing that we do some seriously f*cked up sh*t.

Israeli Minister Agrees Ahmadinejad Never Said Israel ‘Must Be Wiped Off the Map’

Last week, Teymoor Nabili of Al Jazeera suggested during an interview with Dan Meridor, Israel’s minister of intelligence and atomic energy, that Mr. Ahmadinejad’s rhetorical flourish had been misinterpreted. “This idea that Iran wants to wipe Israel out,” Mr. Nabili said, “now that’s a common trope that is put about by a lot of people in Israel, a lot of people in the United States, but as we know Ahmadinejad didn’t say that he plans to exterminate Israel, nor did he say that Iran’s policy is to exterminate Israel.”

Also:

Report Finds Network News Misrepresents Intelligence On Iran Nuclear Issues

A new report from Media Matters released today finds that the broadcast news networks — NBC Nightly News, ABC’s World News and CBS’s Evening News — “frequently” distort or exaggerate key information regarding Iran’s nuclear program. “Two egregious misrepresentations in particular repeatedly came up,” the report says, reports “suggesting that Iran will imminently obtain the bomb and suggesting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has major influence over the country’s nuclear program.”
Malor wrote:

Stuff about Iran

So, we should attack them before they get a chance to nuke the country they really want to wipe off the map: Israel?

Seriously, though. The saber rattling over attacking Iran has got to stop. I understand the fear of them getting a nuclear weapon and using it as though they were a rogue state, but aren't they one of the signers of the non-proliferation act? They said, in writing, that they don't want to make nuclear missiles. From what I understand, they have gone well beyond the level of enrichment needed to make a power plant, but they still have not gone to weapons-grade levels. If they offer to drop back to 20% enrichment, that should be enough for us to back the hell off.

What drives me so crazy is that with Japan taking all of their nuclear power off-line after the tsunami, there must be a load of Japanese Nuclear Engineers who could use work, and look - a country with a desire to hire them!

Atras wrote:

What drives me so crazy is that with Japan taking all of their nuclear power off-line after the tsunami, there must be a load of Japanese Nuclear Engineers who could use work, and look - a country with a desire to hire them!

I'm sure there's still plenty of ex-Soviet nuclear scientists lying around. The US actually had a program going where we would pay their salary just to make sure they didn't do a little...freelance work. That and we'd fly over to what was left of the USSR, pack up nuclear materials, and fly them back here to make sure they didn't end up in the wrong hands.

Not that that matters anymore. AQ Khan's book, "Building Nukes for Dummies," is quite popular in several countries.

Atras wrote:
Malor wrote:

Stuff about Iran

So, we should attack them before they get a chance to nuke the country they really want to wipe off the map: Israel?

Seriously, though. The saber rattling over attacking Iran has got to stop. I understand the fear of them getting a nuclear weapon and using it as though they were a rogue state, but aren't they one of the signers of the non-proliferation act? They said, in writing, that they don't want to make nuclear missiles. From what I understand, they have gone well beyond the level of enrichment needed to make a power plant, but they still have not gone to weapons-grade levels. If they offer to drop back to 20% enrichment, that should be enough for us to back the hell off.

What drives me so crazy is that with Japan taking all of their nuclear power off-line after the tsunami, there must be a load of Japanese Nuclear Engineers who could use work, and look - a country with a desire to hire them!

Do you have a source that they've ever gone beyond 20%, I haven't heard of that.

Yonder wrote:

Do you have a source that they've ever gone beyond 20%, I haven't heard of that.

The IAEA would be screaming bloody murder if they went beyond 20%.

That and I understand that going to 20% is not a violation of the NNPT. Their explanation that they produced them out of scientific curiosity and to produce medically useful isotopes is actually the most plausible explanation currently available.

Yonder wrote:
Atras wrote:
Malor wrote:

Stuff about Iran

So, we should attack them before they get a chance to nuke the country they really want to wipe off the map: Israel?

Seriously, though. The saber rattling over attacking Iran has got to stop. I understand the fear of them getting a nuclear weapon and using it as though they were a rogue state, but aren't they one of the signers of the non-proliferation act? They said, in writing, that they don't want to make nuclear missiles. From what I understand, they have gone well beyond the level of enrichment needed to make a power plant, but they still have not gone to weapons-grade levels. If they offer to drop back to 20% enrichment, that should be enough for us to back the hell off.

What drives me so crazy is that with Japan taking all of their nuclear power off-line after the tsunami, there must be a load of Japanese Nuclear Engineers who could use work, and look - a country with a desire to hire them!

Do you have a source that they've ever gone beyond 20%, I haven't heard of that.

I don't, sorry. There was an "On Point" a while back, probably 3 weeks, where they were talking about Iran's enrichment program, saying that they had gone beyond what was needed for power plants, but still a significant distance, percentage-wise, from weapon-grade. Ironically, I can't recall if it was the "OMG we must wipe Iran off the map" guy or the "Everybody be cool, like Fonzie" guy who called out the numbers.

Not being terribly interested in making either power plants or nukes, I don't keep too close tabs on the specific Uranium or Plutonium enrichment goals, I just don't want people who do keep an eye on it to lie or overreact.

Atras wrote:
Yonder wrote:
Atras wrote:
Malor wrote:

Stuff about Iran

So, we should attack them before they get a chance to nuke the country they really want to wipe off the map: Israel?

Seriously, though. The saber rattling over attacking Iran has got to stop. I understand the fear of them getting a nuclear weapon and using it as though they were a rogue state, but aren't they one of the signers of the non-proliferation act? They said, in writing, that they don't want to make nuclear missiles. From what I understand, they have gone well beyond the level of enrichment needed to make a power plant, but they still have not gone to weapons-grade levels. If they offer to drop back to 20% enrichment, that should be enough for us to back the hell off.

What drives me so crazy is that with Japan taking all of their nuclear power off-line after the tsunami, there must be a load of Japanese Nuclear Engineers who could use work, and look - a country with a desire to hire them!

Do you have a source that they've ever gone beyond 20%, I haven't heard of that.

I don't, sorry. There was an "On Point" a while back, probably 3 weeks, where they were talking about Iran's enrichment program, saying that they had gone beyond what was needed for power plants, but still a significant distance, percentage-wise, from weapon-grade. Ironically, I can't recall if it was the "OMG we must wipe Iran off the map" guy or the "Everybody be cool, like Fonzie" guy who called out the numbers.

Not being terribly interested in making either power plants or nukes, I don't keep too close tabs on the specific Uranium or Plutonium enrichment goals, I just don't want people who do keep an eye on it to lie or overreact.

They were probably referring to the 20% mark. That is far beyond what is needed for power plants (3-6%, only Naval powerplants get to the 20% region, because they don't want to have to refuel them for the life of the submarine if they can avoid it), but also far from what is needed for bombs (90%+). Uranium of tat level of enrichment is useful for the production of some scientific and medical isotopes however, which is what Iran claims they want it for.

I dont think people are worried about them shooting a missile anywhere. I think people worry about back room suitcase nukes being given to radical groups.

karmajay wrote:

I dont think people are worried about them shooting a missile anywhere. I think people worry about back room suitcase nukes being given to radical groups.

The problem with that fear is that almost any amount of enriched uranium could be used to make a plenty nasty dirty bomb, right? You put a few pounds of that in a car, blow it up, and you have scattered radioactive junk all over a given area. It falls directly into the mindset of assuming that your enemy is an irrational actor - causing pain just for pain's sake. Threatening those irrational actors with returned pain, or even death, isn't a deterrent of any kind, and acting against them preemptively only engenders more of the sentimentality that pushes someone to that kind of extremist thinking in the first place.

I think the best plan is to assume you are dealing with rational actors, since you can, in fact, deal with them, and try to prepare for irrational actors as best as you can, because you can't really do much else.

karmajay wrote:

I dont think people are worried about them shooting a missile anywhere. I think people worry about back room suitcase nukes being given to radical groups.

Then why haven't we sanctioned the f*ck out of Pakistan and threatened to attack them unless they disarmed? After all, Pakistan has a very direct link to the people who made 9/11 possible, housed bin Laden for years, and actually has nuclear weapons.

OG_slinger wrote:
karmajay wrote:

I dont think people are worried about them shooting a missile anywhere. I think people worry about back room suitcase nukes being given to radical groups.

Then why haven't we sanctioned the f*ck out of Pakistan and threatened to attack them unless they disarmed? After all, Pakistan has a very direct link to the people who made 9/11 possible, housed bin Laden for years, and actually has nuclear weapons.

Kinda answered it yourself.

Jonman:

Precisely. Regardless of the rhetoric the US is pouring out of its airwaves, its actions are telling Iran that they're going to continue to f*ck with it and renege on deals and generally act in bad faith until they get a nuclear weapon, at which point they'll get the respect everyone else with that weapon gets.

This message is most probably unintentional, but that's what it looks like.

I heard on the news that another prominent Israeli screamed something like"Bloody murder ~the government is crazy and it's going to attack Iran " . The king is naked and they are just cheering him on. There is a very little chance Israel would attack anything.

I heard on the Radio ("What's Burning" on Galei Tzahal) that everyone thinks that Israel are heading toward early Elections in early September and there was a dispute weather or not it would cost much to the economy(Jurnalist say yes, but Yaron Zelicha , a Macro economist ,said not necessarily) . The political annalists think that Netanyahu will keep his opponents off balance because Likud is not showing any signs of weakness while Kadima (biggest party in parliament) is crumbling . The government usually won't go to war before election unless it's provoked or it's headed by Kadima .

Netanyahu holding elections so he is free to deal with Iran in September-October

Netanyahu is set on Sunday to announce that he is dissolving parliament and calling elections for September 4 — a year ahead of schedule. In the weeks immediately after that vote, said well-connected commentator Amnon Abramovich on the top-rated Channel 2 news, Netanyahu will head a transition government at home and have no need to worry about voter sentiment, and he knows that President Barack Obama will be paralyzed by the US presidential campaign.

Plus, Israel doesn't like Obama, so if they attack just before the Presidential election in this country, they'll do as much damage as possible to his re-election chances.

93_confirmed wrote:

Netanyahu holding elections so he is free to deal with Iran in September-October

Netanyahu is set on Sunday to announce that he is dissolving parliament and calling elections for September 4 — a year ahead of schedule. In the weeks immediately after that vote, said well-connected commentator Amnon Abramovich on the top-rated Channel 2 news, Netanyahu will head a transition government at home and have no need to worry about voter sentiment, and he knows that President Barack Obama will be paralyzed by the US presidential campaign.

This remind me about a video (time offset link)who joked about Abramovich (always comes out clean).It's an advertizement for a T-Shirt that doesn't let dirt stick to it .

Yes, Channel 2 news is very popular and very well funded . I found the original article which include the video . Abramovich claims Netanyahu will use a transitional government to attack Iran. This is something that the supreme court forbids unless here are special circumstances. Abramovich thinks Netanyahu would create those circumstances.

Udi Segal another prominent journalist doesn't agree with Abramovich because it has too many conspiracy theories. Udi Segal claims that Natanyahu prefer to avoid difficult choices after he worked hard on all kind of legislations ,protests and strikes and this is why he's going to the election because he got an advantage.

Udi Segal still agrees that the timing for the attack Abramovich suggested would be ideal . He said that Obama would have a very hard time not being dragged into another war right before his election.

It's still far fetched . Abramovich isn't always right and it's not really his job he's an Analyst that sells news. I usually don't watch TV I sometimes hear channel 2 news on the radio if I come home late.

Irrespective of one's position on the current US government, as a citizen, this kind of dog wagging by Israel should not be encouraged. Should Netanyahu start a war in the hopes that the US will come bail them out of a long and ugly (and possibly existential) engagement so as to take down the current US government, the cost shouldn't be ours to bear.

Seriously. Any "right to exist" a Jewish state might have does not equal an obligation anyone in the world has to bailing them out for deliberately ignorant actions.

The US is not likely to bail Israel out. The only time I remember that happening was in Yom Kipur war where the US started Operation Nickel Grass. The Russians were also involved in supplying the Egyptians with weapons and pilots. The Egyptians still messed up and the Russians pilots didn't fair too well against a well trained IAF that knew all the weaknesses of the Mig-21 after getting one from an Iraqi defector in 1963.

Abramovich is fairly adventurous so I seriously doubt Israel would go into war this year. I'm not the only one who dismiss this as a crazy dream. It would be pointless to attack if we can't stop them so we'll let them be nuclear. All Netanyahu is doing is making noise.

I think the main reason the US like supplying Israel with weapons is for marketing reasons. Many military forces demand military equipment used by the IDF. This makes it easier to sell weapons to countries with bigger budgets.

I know all the ministers say "We won't let Iran get nuclear weapons" but I don't think they are telling the truth. I don't think Israel can stop Iran unless it use unconventional weapons. The alternative is a paralyzing conventional attack against petroleum infrastructure which would force Iran to plea for help. Both are very unlikely. The only other option is a commando mission (aka suicide mission) against Iranian installations and that's not going to happen.

Niseg wrote:

The alternative is a paralyzing conventional attack against petroleum infrastructure which would force Iran to plea for help. Both are very unlikely.

The attack on Iran's oil industry has already begun. The irony of trying to force a country to stop development of a nuclear energy industry by disrupting the existing energy industry is delicious. It's also an indication of what I have been saying before, nuclear power is an excellent choice for a country with a number of enemies willing to take random potshots at it for little reason, there is much less of a logistics train to defend once the system gets up and running.

It's tempting to try to fit that into the 'US or Israel being aggressive against Iran' narrative, but I don't think we have enough data yet. From the limited amount of information released, it sounds like the usual drive-by hackers hitting a website, nothing unusual or special.

They say their oil production wasn't affected in any way, so there's no special reason to think this was a state actor, unless we get additional information suggesting that their production was, in fact, disrupted.

I suspect you're right about nuclear facilities being harder to disrupt than petroleum-based ones, though.

As far as I know the Israeli early election is canceled . Kadima joined the government coalition after the first vote for early election (need 3 to pass a law). Now Bibi can pass a universal conscription law and prevent the evacuation of a neighborhood in Beit El . Kadima has 28 (out of 120) seats while the religious parties have 15. If the election happened in September as planed Kadima would have lost about 20 seats.

This changes the government from a shaky 66~ to 94/120 seats or 79 if the religious parties quit. This might cause a bigger chance for war because Kadima is known to be CRAZY!!!!!!!!! 80 people is enough to cancel basic laws. This means the current government has a lot of power.

Remember Stuxnet? Turns out we did it. And we did it, in part, to prevent the Israelis from launching preemptive airstrikes.

Now imagine what hell we'd be raising if the Iranians managed to infect computers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and destroy some equipment. We'd consider it an act of war.

OG_slinger wrote:

Remember Stuxnet? Turns out we did it. And we did it, in part, to prevent the Israelis from launching preemptive airstrikes.

Now imagine what hell we'd be raising if the Iranians managed to infect computers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and destroy some equipment. We'd consider it an act of war.

Oh thank goodness, when I woke up this morning I had a moment of bewilderment as I contemplated a world where the US wasn't Israel's bitch. Now I can again relax in the comfort of familiarity.

OG_slinger wrote:

Now imagine what hell we'd be raising if the Iranians managed to infect computers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and destroy some equipment. We'd consider it an act of war.

True. There seems to be an ongoing battle over the networks with Chinese hackers, but nothing destructive like that.

It sounds like Iranian security was not so good. Thumb drives loading stuff onto the secure network? Laptops? You're talking about working on a program for nukes. The security program should be crazy restrictive.