No announcement yet.

Possible attack on Iran

This topic is closed.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Possible attack on Iran


    LONDON: Britain's armed forces are stepping up contingency planning for potential military action against Iran, amid mounting concern about Tehran's nuclear enrichment programme, a media report said on Thursday.

    The ministry of defence believed the US may decide to fast-forward plans for targeted missile strikes at some key Iranian facilities. The Guardian daily quoting British officials said that if Washington presses ahead it will seek, and receive, UK military help for any mission, despite some deep reservations within the coalition government.

    The British military planners of a potential attack are examining where best to deploy Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles over the coming months as part of what would be an air and sea campaign, the report said. The US would ask permission to launch attacks from Diego Garcia, the British Indian Ocean territory, which the Americans have used previously for conflicts in the Middle East.

    US officials are likely to seize on next week's report from the IAEA, which is expected to provide fresh evidence of a possible nuclear weapons programme in Iran.

    Quoting Whitehall officials , the paper said Iran has proved "surprisingly resilient" in the face of sanctions, and sophisticated attempts by the west to cripple its nuclear enrichment programme had been less successful than first thought.

    Longer article here:
    Last edited by JAD_333; 06 Nov 11,, 22:20. Reason: add sources

  • #2
    About 90% certain in the next year I'd say.


    • #3
      If so then I suspect we will all be paying a price.

      Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C


      • #4
        It's been 90% certain in the next 6 months since 2006. what are the realistic chances of obama starting a war with a regional power.
        In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.



        • #5

          Is this guy serious?


          • #6
            Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
            It's been 90% certain in the next 6 months since 2006. what are the realistic chances of obama starting a war with a regional power.
            Him starting it? low. Netanyahu? hard to say. The logical man in me says Israel won't go without full US support. On the other hand, they might just do it & present the US with a fait accompli - 'now we've done it you have to back us'.

            Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C


            • #7
              They did that with Osirak in 1981, and while behind the scenes the US was glad they did it, the US still condemned the attack in public. This case is slightly different because Iran at the moment is quite stronger, both in reality and via proxies than Iraq was back then
              Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

              Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.


              • #8
                Not to mention a corridor via KSA will be harder to find.

                Or IAF will go through Jordan, Iraq, 2/3 of Iran to hit the targets in lets say Parchin?
                No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.


                • #9
                  the news outlet has been busy these few days, with all sort of talking heads and their statements

                  the US has 2 carriers in the Arabian Sea atm


                  • #10

                    The F-15I's have a range of 4,450 that equates to a combat range of 2,200+ km. What makes you think though, if need be and something happen, that they might possibly land those planes in Iraq or refuel without anyone knowing about it? Also the F-16I's have a combat radius of over 2,100km also. The Jericho III has a range of up to 4,800 - 11,000km...

                    Anyone know, that the possibility is being brought up now, with the US exit strategy in Iraq? Even if the US leaves, how about the air space? Will it still be monitored? Essentially, does Iraq have any detection centers?



                    • #11
                      Will wait for JAD's comment on this one, he's the one that said back in 2007 it would not happen. Has anything changed much since ? doubtful.

                      I did see something similar in a blog recently but there were two alternate possibilities. That the troops drawdown in Iraq is the bigger factor for the reconfiguration of US assets in the persian gulf OR they were preparing to strike Iran.

                      US bracing for a fight in Persian Gulf | Oct 30 2011 | Badrakumar's blog

                      The New York Times reports Sunday that US is embarking on a big military build-up in the Persian Gulf region.

                      In the absence of a coherent policy toward Iran, with the loss of military presence in Iraq, with Saudi Arabia inexorably descending into crisis, with the ‘pro-West’ Arab oligarchies getting afraid of the dark, with the Aran Spring poised to arrive in the Persian Gulf, with Egypt preoccupied with its own regeneration and the israelis in existential despair, US is doing what comes most natural to it, namely, arrest the march of history with gunboats and missiles.

                      The NYT report says that in addition to ‘repositioning’ US combat troops in Kuwait, the naval presence in the Persian Gulf will be beefed up. Conceivably, the frightened Arab oligarchies will be asked to foot the bills for this big deployment. Most interestingly, US is also proposing a new regional security architecture to be choreographed around its military presence which would “integrate air and naval patrols and missile defence.”
                      Patrick cockburn from the Independent is pushing this 'attack iran' line with re-elections angle.

                      The most likely motive for the Obama administration's vigorously expressed belief in the plot is that it is preparing the ground for the 2012 presidential election. Mr Obama's economic and social policies are failing and his only undiluted successes have been the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan and Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen. By dramatising how he frustrated the fiendish plots of the Iranians, Mr Obama can present himself as the president who kept America safe, or at least protect his national security political flank from criticism by the Republicans.
                      What explains US’s anti-Iran tirade | Oct 29 2011 | Badrakumar's blog

                      There could be another powerful motive, though. To my mind, Obama is assuaging the fears of the US’s two most important allies in region - Israel and Saudi Arabia - that it is far from the case that the sun is setting for American military might in the Middle East.

                      The anti-Iran rhetoric coincides with:
                      a) Iraq snub to the US pleas to allow a long-term troop presence;
                      b) Syrian regime showing no real sign of cracks yet despite the outside intervention;
                      c) rise of islamist fervor in the region. All these accentuate Israel’s acute sense of insecurity. Jerusalem Post is bitter about Obama’s announcement of US troop withdrawal from Iraq.

                      But Saudi Arabia is a case by itself. I am surprised that Al Jazeera featured such a brutally frank assessment of the instability in Saudi Arabia. A decadent regime is tottering and a “critical period of domestic and foreign uncertainty” lies ahead not only for the Kingdom but for the entire region. “[King] Abdullah’s octogenarian line of successors recalls the final years of the Soviet Union, when one infirm leader after another succeeded to power for a brief period of inert rule.” US needs to figure out how to hold the crumbling citadel together and, most important, ensure Iran doesn’t give it a final push.
                      Last edited by Double Edge; 06 Nov 11,, 14:01.


                      • #12
                        yes, something has changed, it's election time 2012 baby


                        • #13
                          The only way this happens is if a WMD goes boom in Baltimore.
                          Those who know don't speak
                          He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36


                          • #14
                            don't give them scary ideas


                            • #15
                              To whom? :whome:
                              Those who know don't speak
                              He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36