12
   

What Will It Take to Go To War With Iran?

 
 
Reply Sun 16 Oct, 2011 11:08 pm
I searched for a thread on Iran's thwarted plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the US in Washington, but could not find one. I find this surprising so if there is already a thread up and running on this topic, i would appreciate directions.

In any case...

News reports on the discovered Iranian plot were often accompanied by the comment that the mere fact that such an act was planned could be considered an act of war by the US (not to mention the Saudis), and certainly if it had gone off as planned the matter would have been even more critical.

Because the plot appears to have been somewhat amateurish, there has been a lot of speculation that it was never actually developed by the Quds Force, and would not have been known to, let alone approved by, the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Yet the Administration insists that intelligence strongly supports the notion that the plot was approved at the highest Qud levels. This morning in an interview with Chris Wallace, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D), Chairwoman of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence confirmed that the intelligence is solid.

Assuming the plot was the brainchild of the Qud Forces a number of Iranian "experts" voice the opinion that the Supreme Leader would have known about it.

Whether through fine intelligence efforts, a bumbling execution of the plot, or some combination of both, the assassination didn't happen. If it had, it is believed likely that explosives would have been used which of course would have created the possibility of a number of injuries and fatalities in addition to the Saudi targets.

As often seems to be the case with thwarted plots (and particularly those that involve some degree of bumbling) the matter has been somewhat downplayed, certainly in comparison to how it would have been treated if there was a smoking ruin in DC where a restaurant once stood and ten or eleven American citizens were dead, along with the Saudi Ambassador and his retinue.

Obviously the existence of the plot is not being considered by the US government as an act of war on the part of Iran but what if the scenario described above had taken place? What do you think the US government's response would have been and should have been?

Certainly, if Saudi Arabia didn't previously consider themselves to be at war with Iran, they should now.

The Saudis have interests all over the world and their ambassadors are not the most vulnerable to attack in the US, and so I think we have to assume that the DC location was not coincidence or convenience, but a key intentional element of the design.

Iran has been killing Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan for some time. In July the Treasury Dept announced it had formed a strategic partnership with al-Qaida. It is the primary backer of both Hamas and Hezbollah, and it has been exporting terrorism around the region and the world for years. What's more, the regime has shown it is capable of the very same acts of violence against its citizens that prompted NATO and the US to invade Libya.

And...it is developing nuclear weapons.

Existing sanctions and the threat of stricter ones don't seem to have warned the Iranians off of attempting something as outrageous and provocative as this plot, and so it seems almost seems inevitable that there will be some sort of military faceoff between the US and Iran within the next 5 years.

Do you agree, and if so care to predict roughly how soon from now and in response to what particular action?
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Oct, 2011 11:33 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
http://able2know.org/topic/178612-1
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 11:38 am
@Butrflynet,
Thank you - now I see why I missed it.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 11:42 am
Quote:
This morning in an interview with Chris Wallace, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D), Chairwoman of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence confirmed that the intelligence is solid.


Whew, she's probably the dumbest and least trustworthy senator out of the whole bunch on the D side. If she says it's solid, I'm almost 100% sure that it isn't.

Curveball, anyone???

Cycloptichorn
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 12:07 pm
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheYoungTurks#p/u/2/Gjdv2GNHa8c
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 12:46 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
This morning in an interview with Chris Wallace, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D), Chairwoman of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence confirmed that the intelligence is solid.


Whew, she's probably the dumbest and least trustworthy senator out of the whole bunch on the D side. If she says it's solid, I'm almost 100% sure that it isn't.

Curveball, anyone???

Cycloptichorn


She's one of yours Cyclo.

I'm sure you would have trusted a Republican Senator even less so.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 01:03 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
This morning in an interview with Chris Wallace, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D), Chairwoman of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence confirmed that the intelligence is solid.


Whew, she's probably the dumbest and least trustworthy senator out of the whole bunch on the D side. If she says it's solid, I'm almost 100% sure that it isn't.

Curveball, anyone???

Cycloptichorn


She's one of yours Cyclo.


Don't I know it. The lady has been endlessly frustrating.

Quote:
I'm sure you would have trusted a Republican Senator even less so.


Most but not all of them.

The curveball question is serious, though - do people not remember that we were very recently manipulated into war using completely false information?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 01:03 pm
@edgarblythe,
I'm perfectly willing to believe Obama is not lying about this.

The Young Turk in the clip you provided makes an appealing case, but the claim wasn't made by the Bush Administration. It was made by the Obama Administration and announced by Obama himself. I didn't listen to the entire clip but does the guy ever try to explain why the Obama Administration would make this up? Because the plot seems unlikely, doesn't mean it didn't exist.

Clearly, I'm not someone who has great faith in the Administration's competence, but even I find it hard to believe that if, for whatever reason, they decided to manufacture this plot they couldn't have done a more convincing job of it.

Why trot out a phony plot that everyone will immediately question as being well outside Qud's MO?

I don't think you can offer the Qud's usual competency as proof that the story is a lie, without declaring the Administration's usual incompetency (or mendacity) proves the same thing.



edgarblythe
 
  4  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 01:21 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Obama is following in Bush's footsteps re the war on terror. He certainly seems as capable of lying as Bush, in my view.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 01:27 pm

I don 't know what we r still doing in Iraq.
There 's not much chance that Saddam or Sons will come back into office.

We shoud attend to danger (nuclear danger) in Iran
and forget about Iraq; enuf is enuf.





David
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 01:31 pm
@edgarblythe,
Why lie though?
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 01:35 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
What Will It Take to Go To War With Iran?

A military capable of doing so, for one.

Too bad our blood and treasure were squandered in that quagmire in Iraq.

Now our military is worn down by repeated overseas deployments, and our finances are strained by the previous two wars and a recession.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 01:36 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
To make a case to the world to sanction Iran much more harshly?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 01:51 pm
@edgarblythe,
Seems like an awfully meager end, but I guess it can't be ruled out.
0 Replies
 
George
 
  3  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 02:12 pm
This may sound like a rhetorical question, but it isn't. Has any nation ever
changed its evil ways due to outside sanctions? Perhaps one has, but I
can't remember it happening.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 03:07 pm
The President has not seen fit to confide in me, so I can only suppose.
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  2  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 04:14 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Well, we will soon be out of there at the end of year as the deadline approaches and there is no agreement for immunity for service members serving Iraq past the dead line of the security agreement which was signed in 2008 by Bush. All along Obama said he wanted to bring a responsible end (past time in my opinion) to the Iraq war but wanted to leave a residual of forces behind to protect our interest so to speak. Its looking doubtful that will happen.

U.S. Troops Out of Iraq by End of 2011. Or Not.

As for going to war with Iran, I hope not regardless if there is any validity to the claims.



roger
 
  2  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 04:18 pm
@George,
So far as I recall, no economic sanctions have ever produced their desired results. Sounds illogical, but sometimes, logic must yield to reality.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Oct, 2011 05:01 pm
@revelette,
I hope not as well, but it just seems inevitable.

I don't have trouble believing the plot was real, but I certainly don't believe its mere existence warrants military action. There has to be some consequence but I'm sure they will be limited to ineffective sanctions (Another reason not to believe the plot was a sham).

Again, assuming the plot was real (and I don't know why we shouldn't) it reveals an alarming degree of recklessness somewhere within the regime, and I'm not sure why they won't try it again.

Unless the decision makers are insane (and I don't believe they are) a nation doesn't take a chance like this unless they feel pretty certain that they can survive retaliation.

What would the consequences have been if the Saudi Ambassador had been blown up along with a dozen Americans in a DC restaurant? Hard to imagine invasion and all out war and so if military action was felt to be required, a couple of cruise missiles would likely have been fired at Qud headquarters.

The Iranian theocracy and the Qud Forces both can survive a pair of missiles.

Iran is probably counting on the US to prevent Israel from attacking its nuclear reactors, but they can't be certain we will. Some part of their accepted equation has to include limited bombing of their country by a foreign power. I imagine that the regime at least believes it can survive such an attack.

Bold actions taken with serious risk at stake and so I have to believe the expected payoff is pretty dramatic: Iranian control over the entire region; including its oil reserves.

I know that there are some deluded souls who actually believe Iran is developing nuclear capabilities as a source of energy alone, but I doubt that any of them occupy a seat of power in the Middle East.

From where does any message sent by the murder of the Saudi ambassador come from? Iran's purely defensive concern that it simply be left alone by a country (Saudi Arabia) that has shown no interest in military belligerence?

Iran is either a very paranoid, but essentially peaceful country, or they have plans for controlling the region. Pretty easy choice for me.

It's impossible for me to see a way that Iran achieves their expansionist goal without coming to actual blows with the US.

I would say within the next five years; perhaps in the early days of a new president's administration, and that it will involve Israel in some way (hardly have to climb out on a limb with that predication).

engineer
 
  4  
Reply Tue 18 Oct, 2011 08:54 am
@George,
George wrote:

This may sound like a rhetorical question, but it isn't. Has any nation ever
changed its evil ways due to outside sanctions? Perhaps one has, but I
can't remember it happening.

Both Libya and South Africa changed policies after prolonged economic embargo. China made accommodations to get into the WTO (if you consider refusal to allow entry to the WTO as an economic sanction.)
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » What Will It Take to Go To War With Iran?
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/23/2019 at 08:10:01