Correspondent:: "nu-monet v7.0"
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:18:21 -0700
--------
paco wrote:
>
> anyone giving odds on who's next?
> Iran or syria? or maybe korea...
considerations:
Syria:
Russia just forgave Syria about $9Bn debt and
is giving them a bunch of advanced anti-aircraft
missiles and other weaponry. The US had a shit
fit, until two things were decided: first, that
they had to be big missiles, not easily moved and
smuggled, not shoulder fired; second, if any of the
serious weapons ended up in the hands of Hizbullah,
Syria was our bitch.
The US has also been pushing hard to get the
Syrians out of Lebanon, and to kiss off the
Hizbullah altogether. The Syrians have been half
willing to go with that, having a pitiful army,
but their main concern is self-survival, with
their inter-government rivalries being cutthroat.
Nothing can be done too fast, or you're dead.
The US is also planning to make unconventional
incursions into Syria in February, *not* to get
into any fights with Syrians, but to exterminate or
kidnap the Iraqi ex-Baathists hanging out there and
cutting up rough. They Syrians will probably just
ignore them as they run around shooting up the place.
"We haven't seen any Americans. What do they look
like?"
Iran:
Just about everybody in Iran wants their country to
have nuclear weapons. They have a fear of invasion
and xenophobia going back a thousand years. The
very idea that nukes could make them invasion proof
is irresistable. Current estimates say they will
have them within two years. Any talk about nuclear
power for other reason is bullshit. If they wanted
that, they could have spent a fraction of the money
for "pebble reactors", like the Chinese, that cannot
be used to make nukes.
For this reason, and that Israel will not tolerate
their having these weapons, in that Iran has stated
that it *will* use "any and all means" against Israel,
there are now two options:
Israel has determined it does not have the military
resources to destroy the entire Iranian nuclear
infrastructure. If the US won't help, then they will
probably launch nukes pre-emptively, just to show
the Iranians what nukes feel like.
The US can either destroy the 350 or so targets to
utterly stop their nuclear program, but this will only
stop them for 10-20 years, and they will try to rebuild
it with every available resource. Otherwise, the US
can topple their government, and force them to accept
the notion that "Bad Iranians. Nukes bad. No nukes."
North Korea is anybody's guess.
--
"Getting shot at was not that bad,
just the getting shot part sucked"
-- U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Villafane
Correspondent:: König Prüß, GfbAEV
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 00:50:51 GMT
--------
"nu-monet v7.0" wrote:
>paco wrote:
>>
>> anyone giving odds on who's next?
>> Iran or syria? or maybe korea...
>
>considerations:
>
>Syria:
>
>Russia just forgave Syria about $9Bn debt and
>is giving them a bunch of advanced anti-aircraft
>missiles and other weaponry. The US had a shit
>fit, until two things were decided: first, that
>they had to be big missiles, not easily moved and
>smuggled, not shoulder fired; second, if any of the
>serious weapons ended up in the hands of Hizbullah,
>Syria was our bitch.
>
>The US has also been pushing hard to get the
>Syrians out of Lebanon, and to kiss off the
>Hizbullah altogether. The Syrians have been half
>willing to go with that, having a pitiful army,
>but their main concern is self-survival, with
>their inter-government rivalries being cutthroat.
>Nothing can be done too fast, or you're dead.
>
>The US is also planning to make unconventional
>incursions into Syria in February, *not* to get
>into any fights with Syrians, but to exterminate or
>kidnap the Iraqi ex-Baathists hanging out there and
>cutting up rough. They Syrians will probably just
>ignore them as they run around shooting up the place.
>"We haven't seen any Americans. What do they look
>like?"
>
>Iran:
>
>Just about everybody in Iran wants their country to
>have nuclear weapons. They have a fear of invasion
>and xenophobia going back a thousand years. The
>very idea that nukes could make them invasion proof
>is irresistable. Current estimates say they will
>have them within two years. Any talk about nuclear
>power for other reason is bullshit. If they wanted
>that, they could have spent a fraction of the money
>for "pebble reactors", like the Chinese, that cannot
>be used to make nukes.
>
>For this reason, and that Israel will not tolerate
>their having these weapons, in that Iran has stated
>that it *will* use "any and all means" against Israel,
>there are now two options:
>
>Israel has determined it does not have the military
>resources to destroy the entire Iranian nuclear
>infrastructure. If the US won't help, then they will
>probably launch nukes pre-emptively, just to show
>the Iranians what nukes feel like.
>
>The US can either destroy the 350 or so targets to
>utterly stop their nuclear program, but this will only
>stop them for 10-20 years, and they will try to rebuild
>it with every available resource. Otherwise, the US
>can topple their government, and force them to accept
>the notion that "Bad Iranians. Nukes bad. No nukes."
>
Arrrrgh! fire BAD!
Correspondent:: "Rev. Richard Skull"
Date: 26 Jan 2005 17:42:35 -0800
--------
<
is giving them a bunch of advanced anti-aircraft
missiles and other weaponry. The US had a shit
fit, until two things were decided: first, that
they had to be big missiles, not easily moved and
smuggled, not shoulder fired; second, if any of the
serious weapons ended up in the hands of Hizbullah,
Syria was our bitch.>>
For all the bragging about the stealth aircraft no one mentions one
minor detail. None of the "stealth" planes have gone up against a
Radar/SAM system that was anything like "state of the art". Syrias
SAM's are mostly older stuff dating back to the Soviet Union in 1980 or
so. And the Soviets NEVER exported their Top-O-Line stuff. The Russians
have claimed to have developed a way to make radar see the stealth
planes. A british Cell phone company discoverd that the stealth F-117
effected their frequencies in the Gulf War I.
<
Syrians out of Lebanon, and to kiss off the
Hizbullah altogether. The Syrians have been half
willing to go with that, having a pitiful army,
but their main concern is self-survival, with
their inter-government rivalries being cutthroat.
Nothing can be done too fast, or you're dead.>>
What is present day Lebonon was partitioned by the French in the 1920's
(about the same time all the present Arab nations were formed) out of a
Syrian Provence. At that time the area was predomenatly Christain. And
the French wanted to protect them. Syria has never reconised Lebonon's
existance as a independent State. they insist it was illegally stolen
from them by the French Colonial Rulers. The Syrian Army was reformed
after the death of Assad. The older rigid Soviet Style Command
Structure was scraped and a professional NCO Corps formed. Their
professionalism has increased. But their equipment dates form the
1980's at the latest. But even old equipment can do the job is is used
right.
<
incursions into Syria in February, *not* to get
into any fights with Syrians, but to exterminate or
kidnap the Iraqi ex-Baathists hanging out there and
cutting up rough. They Syrians will probably just
ignore them as they run around shooting up the place.
"We haven't seen any Americans. What do they look
like?">>
Or the Baathist can set traps for the death squads, which are what they
really are.
>>Just about everybody in Iran wants their country to
have nuclear weapons. They have a fear of invasion
and xenophobia going back a thousand years. The
very idea that nukes could make them invasion proof
is irresistable. Current estimates say they will
have them within two years. Any talk about nuclear
power for other reason is bullshit. If they wanted
that, they could have spent a fraction of the money
for "pebble reactors", like the Chinese, that cannot
be used to make nukes.<<
One of the largest rallying point for the Islamic Jihad has been its OK
for Christain, Hindu and Jewish nations to have nukes, put as soon as
Pakistan detenated theirs, everyone was conecerned about proliferation.
If I was Iran, I'd just say, we open ours up for full inspections when
Isreal opens theirs up.
<
resources to destroy the entire Iranian nuclear
infrastructure. If the US won't help, then they will
probably launch nukes pre-emptively, just to show
the Iranians what nukes feel like.>>
And Then the Real WW IV breaksout. Isreal has no Missiles to luanch
Nukes that far. To do it, they will have to send planes. And that means
they will have to fly over Syria and Iraq. Syria will surly alert the
Iranians.
Also the Iranians are not stupid. They have a very smart & experianced
military. Thier actual labs are probally nearer the Afghan Border,
requireing either US refuling of Isreali Suicide missions as the
Isreali F-15 cannot fly that distance under a combat load unless the
fly above 15,000 Ft. Then the Iranians will see them coming to alert
their air defenses. F-15 carring a bomb load are not good Fighters.
Even the Iranian F-4 Phantoms will bea able to handle them
>>The US can either destroy the 350 or so targets to
utterly stop their nuclear program, but this will only
stop them for 10-20 years, and they will try to rebuild
it with every available resource. Otherwise, the US
can topple their government, and force them to accept
the notion that "Bad Iranians. Nukes bad. No nukes.">>
To strike at that many targets, would take a major air campign. The
Iranians and the Syrians might not have modern equipment, but unlike
Saddams people, the know how to use what they have. They will not sit
down while the US and/or Isreal Attacks them. And seeing how smothly
our "regeme Change" is going in Iraq, the Bushies are sure to fuck this
up too.
If we get tinto a gorund war, the US will have to bring supplies
through Iraq, Through the Shiite Territory. Its all htye cna do to
supply the forces in Iraq now while they are in "occupation Mode", in
full battle mode with no secure lines of Communication, this will sure
to turn into a fiasco. besides, we can take the Syrians, we can take
the Iranians. But can we take both of them, as well as a large
insurgancy in a COMMZ at the same time?
>>North Korea is anybody's guess.<<
In action against North Kore will have to include Ground forces. Since
th end of the Korean War, the North has been preapring all sorts of
bunkers, traps, etc in case the US invades again. Air Power alone will
not do it. Like Iraq, it will take Boots on the Gorund. Lots of them.
Korea is one HUGE mountain range. Tanks can only do so much. It will be
a straight leg war like the last one. And most of the troops that are
supposed to be stationed in Korea are now in Iraq. Opps!
Correspondent:: "nu-monet v7.0"
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 20:24:39 -0700
--------
Rev. Richard Skull wrote:
>
> And Then the Real WW IV breaksout. Isreal has no
> Missiles to luanch Nukes that far.
Jericho II - 4000km (possibly more)
Popeye Turbo (submarine launched) - 200km
additional information:
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/missile/jericho-2.htm
Israeli strategy would almost have to include the
entire middle east in range of its ballistic missile
program. The addition of SLCMs means that every last
major Islamic nation can be threatened.
But here's where it gets interesting. It is questionable
that if Iran were to make nukes, that even if Israel
launched against every one of their 350 sites, they
could be assured of no retaliation *from Iran*.
Israel, however, has for a while countered the threat by
creating its own version of MAD, that being, if *any*
Moslem country throws a nuclear weapon at them, they will
attack *all* Moslem countries.
But are some of these Moslem "leaders" crazy enough to
throw a nuke at Israel, *even if* it results in a HUGE
nuclear exchange?
There was lots of speculation that Saddam had been crazy
enough, and not just to attack Israel, but to try to
ignite the whole region.
This is brinksmanship taken beyond Dr Strangelove.
What do you do when your enemy is fanatical, ignorant of
what the HELL a nuclear weapon can do, and maybe crazy
enough to launch? What choice do you have?
--
Unless there is some reason for investigation,
the federal law and the Constitution still
protect the rights of citizens.
--FBI agent Greg Stejskal
Correspondent:: Zapanaz
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 20:17:04 -0800
--------
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 20:24:39 -0700, "nu-monet v7.0"
wrote:
>What do you do when your enemy is fanatical, ignorant of
>what the HELL a nuclear weapon can do, and maybe crazy
>enough to launch? What choice do you have?
Attack the world trade center?
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
The Godzilla Rule: knocking over one building is an accident
and two could be an oversight,
but three is a rampage.
Correspondent:: Eddie Vroom
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 07:37:29 GMT
--------
nu-monet v7.0 wrote:
> Israel has determined it does not have the military
> resources to destroy the entire Iranian nuclear
> infrastructure. If the US won't help, then they will
> probably launch nukes pre-emptively, just to show
> the Iranians what nukes feel like.
The way I read it, once the contents of whatever old libraries the
Mullahs haven't burned are smuggled out, they're toast. Yes, I said
libraries. Figure Israel will spearhead the effort, and probably frag
Syria on the way over.
Wisdom of the East...
> North Korea is anybody's guess.
Once some of our boys have been "hardened" in the Iran/Syria theater,
they'll train up the new kids - who will be given North Korea to cut
their teeth on. Although they may posess a "working device", it would
probably break under the g-force of an actual launch. For now, they're
just the sideshow.
--
Art and Fashion for the New Conspiracy
http://www.cafepress.com/luciddragon
the Mystical RevvedErrand Doktor Eddie Vroom
Certified God by the holy authority of
the White Lotus Fortune Cookie Company
June 23, 2004
Correspondent:: "angelicusrex"
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:18:21 -0700
--------
Since most of the insurgents and Al Qaeyda trainers are from Iran and are
already pouring in over the borders, my money is on Iran. Plus, G.W. thinks
he's got them in a pincer grip between Iraq and Afghanistan...and they know
Kim Il Jon is a whacko, not really a threat...yet.
Archimandrite Pudlevitcz.
This is all not going to go well at all.
Correspondent:: nikolai kingsley
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 17:21:06 +1100
--------
> ...and they know Kim Il Jon is a whacko, not really a threat...yet.
look a little closer.
--
"If I was having a bad day, I would beat people."
- Kwan Huk, former head of North Korean Prison Camp 22
Correspondent:: "«BONEHEAD>>"
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 04:56:20 GMT
--------
Plus, G.W. thinks
> he's got them in a pincer grip between Iraq and Afghanistan...and they
know
> Kim Il Jon is a whacko, not really a threat...yet.
>
This is what scares me... a fucking clown who was never
able to even run a successful business, is now running
military operations from a ranch in texas...
GeeDub reminds me of Hitler in alot of ways...
Popular fanatacism leads to power...
overwhelming delusion that his way is the best way...
does not listen to experienced military advisors...
get's bitch slapped...
--
"I have no special talent. I am only passionately curious." Albert Einstein
Correspondent:: Ued
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 00:52:03 -0500
--------
In article , "paco"
(deathtospam)ody.ca> says...
> anyone giving odds on who's next?
> Iran or syria? or maybe korea
Probably whichever country has the most oil.
(This is undoubtedly a major reason why we haven't even touched North
Korea -- no significant oil deposits. You know it's true.)