I would say the odds of a war with iran just doubled, more or less!

[dan/california]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/world/middleeast/israeli-embassy-officials-attacked-in-india-and-georgia.html#commentsContainer

They sure as heck aren't headed in the direction of peace, and prosperity.

[Blackhawk1]

It's only a matter of time to be honest.

Iran will develop nuclear weapons one day, and the US + UK won't let that happen.

[Sakai007]

Exactly Blackhawk, that's the whole story in a nut shell. A news story I heard earlier compared Iran now to North Korea a decade ago. We put put while they split the atom. We wake up one morning to a nuclear armed North Korea. That is just what Iran wants, and if we think they are 1 year from the bomb, it's probably closer to 8 months. They want us to think we know it all, and when you are giving out the info, you know what they know, which is very dangerous in today's world. We need to hit them now, no messing around, hit them hard with every dirty trick we've got.

[Erik Springelkamp]

> We need to hit them now, no messing around, hit them hard with every dirty trick we've got.

Yes, you can't allow countries to be independent of the US. Kill them all.

[Sakai007]

I am not talking about making Iran dependent on the US. Far from it, we have far too many dependents as it is. I am talking about preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear armed state, that is all. We let Pandora out of the box in 1945, and since then several nations have acquired the bomb. There are more then enough all ready to make sure responsible states don't use them at all, prevention of nuclear war through the major parties having the ability to wipe out the world. I don't see a need for any more nations to have the ability, none at all. Israel has non confirmed nukes, this we can be almost certain of, but they have never stated that they WANT to bathe Tehran in a sea of fire either! Iran is the definition of a 'rouge' state, and they should be treated as such. They should not be allowed to responsibility of nuclear arms until they have proven they can treat their own citizens with respect, let alone the citizens of other nations (including Israel and other 'zionist' states) and done so long enough for it to be considered routine, not extraordinary.

If military action is required to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, then do so, and do so quickly. If the world waits too much longer, it will be too late to do anything about it and Iran will be able to hold the threat of nuclear war over all proceedings after. Not acceptable!!!

[Erwin]

Given someone seems to be able to assassinate their nuke scientists, the best outcome is a nuke "accident" at their facility.

[Cuirassier]

Have to agree with Sakai on this one. If Iran were to get the bomb, I think there is a fair chance they'd use it. And they would certainly use it as diplomatic leverage. Surely they would have no problem arming Hezbollah, Hamas, or any other anti-western faction either.

One of the scarier considerations one has to make, however, is what other nations will do. China and India have serious interests in Iran and everyone knows Russia would be adamantly against any sort of military response.

Its a crazy time.

[costard]

Have to agree with Sakai on this one. If Iran were to get the bomb, I think there is a fair chance they'd use it. And they would certainly use it as diplomatic leverage. Surely they would have no problem arming Hezbollah, Hamas, or any other anti-western faction either.

One of the scarier considerations one has to make, however, is what other nations will do. China and India have serious interests in Iran and everyone knows Russia would be adamantly against any sort of military response.

Its a crazy time.

Iran knows that if they use a nuke they're liable to end up as impurities in quite a large puddle of molten glass - and the rest of the world will shrug it's shoulders and say "Well... nothing to do now but clean up this latest nuclear mess." Currently, Iran isn't fighting a war. The only stimulus to war I can discern is coming from the US/Israel/UK axis. Whilst it may be true that some aspects of civil rule in Iran are a little hard to deal with given the holywood-centrist nature of our conditioning here in the west, the absolute contempt for the law evident in the behaviour of many of our own leaders is no reason for delighting in the prospect of imposing our leadership on the populace of Iran, particularly given the costs to be extracted in the pursuit of this aim.

I think what is happening in Syria is payback for Russia interfering in Georgia, and I do not think the west has the wherewithal to impose empire upon the world any more. The sooner it wakes up to this fact and starts to behave in a semi-civilised fashion the better.

[Pandur]

lol guys id like to have your problems, some ppl just pay rent others contemplate on the complexity of live while sitting in the warm chair

NK is already forgotten again, but why the interest in iran out of a sudden? people getting hyped into a angst frenzy again by media about some weapons that would never be used and noone is sure they exist?

has written WMD´s all over it to me.

[Sublime]

North Korea is still certainly a scary possibility. The famous scenario of use it or lose it with their gigantic military if their facing a countrywide collapse is very plausible.

However, Iran has been waging a de facto cold war against the US/coalition forces since we moved into Iraq, and against Israel for longer. They seem to have very little if no scruples at all. I think part of the very real threat with Iran as opposed to NK is it seems most if not all the world (except maybe China) has some problem, big or small, with how NK does stuff. While this is true with a lot of the world with Iran, many Middle Eastern states completely support their agenda, and worldview - including ideas like the holocaust is a myth, the US is being ran by a Zionist secret society thats based in Israel, that they've been selected by god to start the armageddon, yada yada yada.

What scares me most of all isnt Iran starting a war itself, because they're a nation with a population, and stuff to lose. What scares me is what someone else posted - them giving nuclear weapons, chemical, or even just radiated bits of junk to a terrorist group that has nothing to lose..

[Erwin]

"They seem to have very little if no scruples at all."

And you know this how...?

Cos "Crappy News Network" told you? Or, are you a well-informed intelligence or somesuch operative?

Alternatively, if you are living in Iran right now, or have in the past I will also listen...

Having seen documentaries on rap etc made by regular people in Iran, it seems "the people" can be very much like us with similar interests. Religious extremists and cults are a problem whether in North Korea, Saudi Arabia or Utah.

[Pandur]

there are iranian documentrys on rap? i hate rap but id like to see the documentary, is it online somewhrere id like to see that iranian ghetto gangster rappers, oh yea ?. yesterday i have seen 50 minutes of kim jong un "inspecting" troops in NK, documentary(well not realy) aired on NK TV, its on youtube, get yourself some food and drink and immerse yourself in a different world while you watch it. its pretty hilarious.

[Sublime]

Im going on statements made by their own government for one. The uproar by their own people about how their government handle the 'election' a few years ago. And evidence pointing to support of terrorism, and sending weapons and money to the insurgency in Iraq. I am an American after all.

And documentaries I've seen on Iran, show that actually a large number of people my age (26) want nothing to do with a war, and rather want the Iranian state to loosen its religious laws, and laws on freedom of speech etc. However, the same students, etc also have pointed out that they were puttiing themselves in a dangerous position saying even that on camera, and that it's unlikely change will happen anytime soon. In the end its all just my opinion anyways.

[Erwin]

A friend is involved in DOCUTAH (Southern Utah Documentary Festival) and we screen submissions.

You would be surprised at how many docs come from the ME including Iran. I think we saw at least one from Iraq as well. The provide a fascinating window into what the younger gen are into over there.

[Capt. Toleran]

Without trying to start an argument or undermine anyone here, I would argue that we are almost at the furthest extent of any "war" we will fight with Iran - My reasoning:

1. Given some of the very significant economic sanctions we have already imposed, and are in the process of considering, we are applying a tremendous amount of "cold war" pressure to them already, similar to the position we put Japan in before WWII (and we were justified in doing so), if not more intense. Some of what we are considering has potentially catastrophic effects to the system at large, so we are really walking a fine line here.
   
   
   
2. Air strikes, naval blockades and drone wars are about as far as we will ever go. No chance of a land invasion -- Iran has the terrain of Afghanistan, 3 times the population of Iraq, much more sophisticated military equipment and training (compared to Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan), and a highly educated populace in many cities that we really wouldn't want to turn against us. Our land forces are in shambles already because of the "forever war" we're in right now, and the public will not support an invasion of Iran.
   

One has to wonder why Iran is really even going this far with the bomb. North Korea didn't even really need it for a deterrent -- they already had thousands of well-bunkered artillery pieces in the mountains ringing Seoul to the North that guaranteed that we would never invade (too many civilian casualties in the retaliatory strike). Iran has terrain, population, and our war fatigue on their side.

So I speculate here -- how much of this is them trying to taunt us into attacking to turn their internal public opinion back on their side? They are already on the brink of their own "Persian Spring" -- a bunch of foreigners invading lets them spin it into their version of Stalin's "defend the Motherland." 33+ years after the revolution, most of the people there are regretting their fundamentalist regime. Us doing anything that makes the population miserable as a whole helps the regime, not us.

As to them being crazy fundamentalists -- maybe. But why go the suicidal route now? Even the religious zealots have families, financial interests, their own corruption, etc. They know any WMD attack on Israel only increases the chances of their own doom, and are they really ready for the end (retaliatory strikes by us)? A lot of this doesn't make sense, unless you look for other motives. Iran (and most other countries) is being run by old men, not crazy young activists. What forces are really at work here, and why are they pushing for war? Let's not go blindly into whatever the military/corporate/media machine wants us to think and see. A lot of us need to step back, and look objectively at what the real motives are and why anyone would go hurtling towards "doom."

[Praetori]

I am not talking about making Iran dependent on the US. Far from it, we have far too many dependents as it is. I am talking about preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear armed state, that is all. We let Pandora out of the box in 1945, and since then several nations have acquired the bomb. There are more then enough all ready to make sure responsible states don't use them at all, prevention of nuclear war through the major parties having the ability to wipe out the world. I don't see a need for any more nations to have the ability, none at all. Israel has non confirmed nukes, this we can be almost certain of, but they have never stated that they WANT to bathe Tehran in a sea of fire either! Iran is the definition of a 'rouge' state, and they should be treated as such. They should not be allowed to responsibility of nuclear arms until they have proven they can treat their own citizens with respect, let alone the citizens of other nations (including Israel and other 'zionist' states) and done so long enough for it to be considered routine, not extraordinary.

If military action is required to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, then do so, and do so quickly. If the world waits too much longer, it will be too late to do anything about it and Iran will be able to hold the threat of nuclear war over all proceedings after. Not acceptable!!!

Well it's always been a matter of time. Had the US not built the bomb the Germans or the Brits or the Soviets would've and then the US would have been forced to build one anyhow.

The US did USE the bomb, twice, which in the long term showed just how horrific a weapon it is.

As technology becomes cheaper and more available it's just a matter of time before everyone who feels threatened by the larger world-powers will try to get one. That won't mean that they'll use them, just that conventional war is less likely once they got 'em.

[Sakai007]

I agree with all the above points. I do feel, however, that with the reduction of the odds of a 'conventional war' the chances for a proxy way or an asymmetric war increase two fold. The Cold War proved this, with proxy wars between the ideologies of the USA/NATO vs. USSR/WP in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Malaysia, and numerous other brush wars that were just as dangerous to soldiers on the ground as any other type of war. With the end of the Cold War, the world entered a new and dangerous phase. The days of mutually assured destruction were certainly still with us when it came to a conflict between the more wealthy and well armed nations. But the proliferation of nuclear technology was so rapid and extensive that the full effect IMHO has yet to be felt. Cold War technology had allowed powerful nuclear devices to be mounted in a suitcase, and religious and/or political radicals now have the ability to strike the heart of their enemies with no return address for the inevitable retaliation.

On September 11, 2001 this theory was proved true in a less than nuclear way. The enemies of America were able to strike at our homeland with no national address to send the same favor back. And with this the modern day asymmetric war was born. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are textbook examples of this type of war. Where conventional forces are so powerfully over matched that resistance was honestly futile. So the remainders of the national army and loyalist to the former government form an insurgency against the occupying forces and position them selves to take control when they leave following the meeting of the mission statement.

So what would happen in Iran??? As has been stated, the Iranian Military is more powerful then the Syrian or Iraqi military. Their terrain precludes any fantasies of a quick and clean total victory. While quick and clean are not the words to describe the military outcome, victory is quite valid. There is no doubt in my mind that, should the United States and a Coalition of the Willing decide to strike Iran first from the Air and Sea followed by a ground invasion, victory from the shortest and narrowest point of view is assured. I dare not even venture a guess as to what would happen after that victory. There is a large highly educated population in Iran, and my common sense tells me that these people would be the ones to join us first. But there is also a large number of people in Iran who benefit from the current situation and wouldn't want to change it for fear of what the newly freed peoples or conquering army would do to them.

In my humble opinion, a ground invasion would serve no purpose other then to cut short the lives of our service men and women, some of whom I have known well and served with. A full scale aerial campaign with the appropriate intensity and duration would accomplish our goals. Our enemies goals must also be considered. As said before, the effects an air campaign would have on their nuclear capability needs to be weighed against the total political victory that the Iranian regime would gain in internal politics.

[LongLeftFlank]

Only Persians have any hope of sorting out the ills that presently beset Persia. And foreigners have no hope whatsoever of determining what form that sorting out takes.

That pithy wisdom dispensed, the anti-intellectual rural populist claque of Guardians who presently run the country backed by the SS-like paramilitary organization for advancement of amoral undereducated thugs known as the Revolutionary Guard is going to prove exceedingly hard to displace. The best that can be hoped is that younger, pragmatic elements within both groups evolve into something more predictable and businesslike, like the Inquisition slowly giving way to the Jesuits. The alternative, I fear, is the mutual evisceration of two 3000 year old civilizations: Iran and Israel.

is going to be extremely hard to remove from power