CONSEQUENCE
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
Nuclear War
03-Jul-2012
If Israel carries through with its illegal threat of attacking Iran's nuclear facilities using the bunker busters America has sold it there is a strong possibility of radioactive contamination of millions of Iranians and fallout reaching Pakistan, India, and Afghanistan. (See "Nuking Iran").
Iran's most likely response will be to fire GPS guided missiles aimed at Israel's nuclear facilities causing a similar outcome. (See "Behind the Deepening Crisis with Iran: The Real Story Versus the Cover Story")
In other words conventional weaponry will cause the same results as a nuclear bomb. Therefore the argument could be made that if this is true then the principles of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) should apply.
Given the above context it is astonishing that the recent talks in Moscow between Iran and P5+1 failed to arrive at an acceptable agreement.
For an excellent analysis of the Moscow talks and why they failed Prof. Muhammad Sahimi's article at Tehran Bureau is a must read and which I've excerpted below.
"By mixing regional problems with the standoff over its nuclear program, the Islamic Republic only muddied the water and contributed to the failure of the talks."
"A better strategy would have been to pursue more modest goals. Not only would they have been more plausible to achieve, but such a strategy would also have demonstrated to the world the intransigence of the United States and its allies and the fact that they want negotiations only for appearances' sake."
"One such modest goal could have been to ask the E.U. to suspend its sanctions against Iran's Central Bank and its ban on insuring oil tankers that carry Iranian oil to South and East Asia, scheduled to go into effect on July 1. Iran may lose from 400,000 to 500,000 barrels per day in exports due to the insurance ban. In return, could have offered to allow the IAEA to visit the Parchin munitions site, and temporarily suspend its uranium enrichment at 19.75 percent for a fixed period, to which it has already agreed in principle."
But the following comments by Prof. Sahimi are so devastating and so on target that the incompetence and extent of how much the regime in Iran is out of touch with reality dispels any hope of preventing a nuclear war between Iran and Israel:
"Weak diplomacy, coupled with the Iranian hardliners' typical arrogance and self-righteousness, also contributed to the failure. What else could have been expected from a negotiation team that suddenly included Mehdi Mohammadi, until a short time ago the political editor for the hardline newspaper Kayhan? His presence was "justified" because he now works for the Supreme National Security Council, but what about any expertise in nuclear issues or experience in diplomacy?"
"In addition, on the Moscow talks' second day, Jalili, true to form, lectured the P5+1 and lamented about what the West has done to Iran over the past several decades. He has done this practically every time that he has met with the P5+1 collectively or Ashton one on one. Should this issue -- as valid as it is -- not be set aside? Should Jalili not concentrate on the current issues facing the nation in the nuclear negotiations? But, similar to other Iranian hardliners, Jalili is first and foremost an ideologue, and it is difficult, if not impossible, for an ideologue to set aside such thinking."
"Most absurdly, Iran's negotiation team insisted that Khamenei's fatwa banning the production of weapons of mass destruction is all that the West needs for peace of mind regarding the nature of Iran's nuclear program. Apparently, the negotiation team had the illusion that the Western leaders are Khamenei's moghalled (those who follow his religious instructions), when he has hardly any moghalled in Iran itself."
At the end of his article Prof. Sahimi presents a framework under which an agreement can be reached, and which should be carefully studied by all parties if they are to head off a nuclear war.
A couple of other very good articles have been written after the Moscow talks and which I've provided links to below. "Don't Underestimate an Iranian Response to a U.S. Attack" is a must read, especially by warmongers that are frothing at the mouth.
Here is an excerpt:
"Following a strike the U.S. will find itself in a prolonged conflict that will include conventional forces that are geared towards asymmetric warfare, an economic downturn and high oil prices stemming from instability in the Strait of Hormuz and non-state actors conducting operations across the region."
"In short, if the U.S desires another long term engagement that will lead to further destabilization, a huge military and financial commitment and what will likely be Iranian commitment to nuclear weaponization, then it should start down the long road of ‘limited strikes against Iran’s nuclear facility’."
As far as the problem of regime decision makers getting in touch with reality the first thing they need to do is greatly improve their English language skills as it seems they are only reading material that is in Farsi. If that is the case then they are trying to thread a needle with one eye closed.
Here is an excellent article by Ray McGovern presenting the hard facts to the regime in Iran by pretending he is an IRI intelligence agent reporting back to the regime. Below is an excerpt showing the first nine issues that he identifies as being critically important.
1-The Islamic Republic is viewed by most Americans as Enemy #1. How best to defeat our "nuclear ambitions" has become the main foreign policy issue in the election campaign for president. This is BIG.
2-In dealing with Iran, U.S. corporate media are behaving just as they did before the attack on Iraq. It is as though the disasters of Afghanistan and Iraq never happened. This time the Islamic Republic is in the crosshairs and some influential figures seem eager to pull the trigger. For instance, Jackson Diehl, deputy chief of the Washington Post‘s editorial page, asked pointedly if it "would still be feasible to carry out an air attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities" if the U.S. gets involved militarily in Syria.
3-Within the "bubble" of Official Washington, the war in Iraq is often portrayed as a success and the pro-Israel neo-conservatives largely responsible for that catastrophe remain in very influential positions. The macho cry of the neocons — "Real men go to Tehran" — is again very much in vogue.
4-Cowardly politicians, especially in Congress, march "in lockstep" to Likud Lobby cadences. President Barack Obama privately may not wish to go along but he lacks the courage to break ranks.
5-Unlike the lead-up to Iraq, when Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were lusting for war, this time neither the White House nor the Pentagon wants hostilities. Yet, prevalent is an awkward, helpless kind of fear that, one way or another, Israel with succeed in provoking hostilities — with little or no prior notice to its superpower "ally."
6-As we have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan, the top U.S. generals are virtually all careerists, and none have forgotten what happened to Admiral "no-war-on-Iran-on-my-watch" William Fallon. He was soon a retired admiral. So, they will follow orders — legal or not — as reflexively as the Prussians of old, letting the troops and the "indigenous" people of the target countries bear the consequences. In the U.S., it is almost unheard of for a general to resign on principle, no matter how foolish the errand.
7-It is conventional wisdom here that the pro-Israel vote is sine qua non for election to the White House. Thus, Obama is acutely sensitive to the perceived need to appear no less supportive of Israel than Mitt Romney, who told an Israeli newspaper last fall: "The actions that I will take will be actions recommended and supported by Israeli leaders."
8-Some attention has been given to public warnings by prominent Israeli political, military and intelligence officials not to attack Iran. Their outspokenness betrays how seriously they view the danger that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may embark upon an adventure that could eventually result in the destruction of the state of Israel. But Netanyahu believes he still has the initiative and holds the high cards, which is certainly true with the U.S. political system.
9-As for Israel’s generals, they will obey — like their American counterparts.
Is anybody at regime headquarters listening? Reading? Trying to prevent the war that is on Iran's doorstep? Or are they all at Namaz or taking a tea break?
And please don't say, "It's all in God's hands." No, it is not. Preventing war is in the regime's hands just as much as it is in the hands of the regime in Israel and the regime in Washington.
Anybody advocating a precision surgical strike on Iran's nuclear facilities is in actual fact talking about nuclear war between Iran and Israel. Within this context all the issues that are being discussed change and therefore need urgent peaceful resolution. All the options on the table is not an option.
| Recently by Mohammad Alireza | Comments | Date |
|---|---|---|
| "We are children!" | - | Nov 12, 2012 |
| Did You Know You Are Not Anonymous on Iranian.com? | 12 | Nov 04, 2012 |
| Either you want war, or you want peace | 52 | Oct 26, 2012 |
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Oops, you exceeded your "this one time only exception" limit
by Anonymous Observer on Fri Jul 06, 2012 01:33 PM PDTin comments addressed to me my dear An-tellectual IR employee. What ahppened? Did I get under your skin? Made you nervous, did I?
Or is it that lying is second nature to you and your ilk? You just can't live without it. To partially quote CIM a/k/a "ILoveIran," you are "addicted to dishonesty."
Now, did you take my advice and gather some info. from your boyfriend's website for your next bowel movement...sorry, "article?"
To An Observer:
by Mohammad Alireza on Fri Jul 06, 2012 09:28 AM PDTI was going to aplogise for calling you a morally retarded ignoramus but then you came up with another wonderfully cretinous display of your insipidness.
Hey An Obersver, you are in the news again:
"With Israel's foreign ministry organising volunteers to flood news websites with pro-Israeli comments, Propaganda 2.0 is here."
//www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/0...
Ahhhhhh...a lover's quarrel
by Anonymous Observer on Fri Jul 06, 2012 10:02 AM PDTCome down now boys...we don't want to have infighting now...we [or rather you] are all here for one thing: making sure that the Jews get annihilated. Let's not let minor differences and procedural / office errors get in our way. There must have been a mix up at the "ministry" where the efforts of you two "sarbazan-e gomnam-e imam-e zaman" were not coordinated. Or perhaps you missed each other at the last meeting in Tehran, you know--the one with unlimited chelo-kabab for an entire week. Or maybe you haven't come across each other because Wahid joon ("CIM") is in a different department (Australia operations) whereas Mammali joon is in the U.S. operations department.
Anyway, Mammali joon, this Wahid "CIM" character is a fellow "Israel must be destroyed" foot soldier. He is no other than "ILoveIran," "BoosBoos," "Kurosh Mazandarani," "Shahab Ferdowsi," (and many other current and former usernames) on IC. Here's some choice stuff written by him that you will just love, love, love:
//iranian.com/main/blog/kuroshmazandrani/2-ugly-jews-run-google-joogle-persian-gulf-forever
Or how about this one (dude, he even says the words f***ing k*kes...how exciting!!!):
//iranian.com/main/news/2012/03/31/iran-suspends-reuters-over-faulty-headline
He even has a new website set up dedicated to Jew and Bahai hate:
//iranianfacebook.com/
Check it out. You may be able to get some quotes from the site for your next "article."
Remember the roles assigned to you guys. Mammali, you are supposed to be the "An-tellectual," peace loving, "opposed to the IR--but also opposed to war and Israel," minor Jew hater, while Wahid joon is supposed to be the foam at the mouth, "lumpen," arbadeh kesh antisemite. But at the end of the day, what unites us...well acttually the two of you...is your endless hatred of the Jews and your desire to wipe them off the face of the planet...as your religious duty--and your commander in chief--dicatate:
//english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9102112759
Now, why don't the two of you get a room and resolve your differences. You can then take a long walk on the beach at sunset...holding hands and reminiscing about the good old days when Sheik Ahmad Yasin was alive,...and then figure out how many GPS guided missiles you will need to finish off the Jews around the world....one can only dream....
Don't let minor differences get in the way of the greater mission. Remember, as one of your other fellow "fadaii -e Felestin" always says:
"Hambastegi" is the main key to victory.
CIM you are just an email address!
by Mohammad Alireza on Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:28 PM PDTYou make comments as if you are some non-profit organization that deals with journalism and use the name Center for Independent Media in your email but it turns out all that you are is an email address!
Your dishonesty and false pretence have totally destroyed your creditability.
If you want to play Internet cop by pretending you are something beyond an email address I suggest you at least create a 501 (c) (3) non-profit, create a Web site, get proper funding from recognized organization, and use a name that is original and not stolen from some other organization.
It can be found in our first post
by CIM on Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:16 PM PDTInformation about what we do and whether we take money from any outside sources.
To CIM:
by Mohammad Alireza on Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:04 PM PDTWhy are you dodging my question? It seems you are just some email address using the name Center for Indpendent Media, an organization that changed it's name two years ago.
What is your Web site address? Your funding sources? And what gives you the right to judge other sites?
Once again:
And who or what is CIM?
Is this you?
"The American Independent News Network, formerly The Center for Independent Media until January 2010 is an American 501 (c) (3) non-profit founded in May 2006 with the stated mission of funding websites that report news from an independent, investigative perspective."
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Independent_...
If this is you then why are using CIM, Center for Independent Media, when you are now known as The American Independent News Network?
Mohammad Alireza
by CIM on Thu Jul 05, 2012 09:43 PM PDTThe issue of a nuclear program existing or not existing or whether it is good or bad is not relevant to our responsibilities.
You cite to PBS/TEHRAN BUREAU in your article and, as the information provided two comments below indicates, PBS/TEHRAN BUREAU obtains funding from an agenda-driven source that has stake in the content it publishes and, secondly, PBS/TEHRAN BUREAU has previously falsified news stories in the past (see the link). That's what those links indicate. If PBS/TEHRAN BUREAU sent you an email about those matters, you are welcome to forward it to us and I will take it up with them. If what they stated in their email was accurately represented, they misled the public: it's as simple as that.
To Bahmani and CIM:
by Mohammad Alireza on Thu Jul 05, 2012 08:33 PM PDTBahmani:
If Iran's nuclear sites are bombed you can be certain that the entire world will know about it and it will not be something that can be hidden by Iran. Natanz can be seen from a major road between Tehran and Esfahan and I drove past it a couple of years ago.
But you are right, the regime should abandon all it's nuclear activities, including the closure of Bushehr – and only keep what it needs for nuclear medicine. This is something I have advocated on several occasions:
"Iran's Nuclear Mistake"
//iranian.com/main/2008/irans-nuclear-mis...
"No Nukes for Iran"
//iranian.com/main/2012/may/no-nukes-iran
"How Do You Say "Chernobyl" in Farsi?"
//iranian.com/main/blog/mohammad-alireza/...
CIM:
The above article was addressing the issue of poor communication and immature diplomacy in the context of the preventive use of conventional weapons that will be similar to the use of a nuclear weapon and Prof. Sahimi's article on Tehran Bureau was quoted to support the position taken by the author.
For you to distract from this critical issue because you supposedly have evidence that Tehran Bureau has funding sources that are questionable makes me wonder what your intentions are.
And who or what is CIM?
Is this you?
"The American Independent News Network, formerly The Center for Independent Media until January 2010 is an American 501 (c) (3) non-profit founded in May 2006 with the stated mission of funding websites that report news from an independent, investigative perspective."
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Independent_...
If this is you then why are using CIM, Center for Independent Media, when you are now known as The American Independent News Network?
It seems that if you have a problem with Tehran Bureau you need to write a blog or an article addressing the issues you have raised in your comments because they have no relevance to the content of the article above.
Mohammad Alireza: Tehran Bureau Has Simply Lied
by CIM on Thu Jul 05, 2012 01:08 PM PDT"by Mohammad Alireza on Wed Jul 04, 2012 08:30 PM PDT Below is an email I received regarding accusations made by CIM:
'Tehran Bureau never received any funds from the organizations that CIM mentions. ' "
Their one line denial is meaningless; we have the documents and it is interesting that Tehran Bureau responded to you and not us. Here is our email. centerforindepdentmedia@gmail.com. If the sources of Tehran Bureau's funding and their management agree to an interview, we will show you; we gladly will interview all of them if they agree. CIM unambiguously states that Tehran Bureau has misled the public on this issue if that is what they wrote to you.
1. PBS/TEHRAN BUREAU has been caught publishing falsified photographs as news. Secondly, after the issue was forwarded to us we asked TEHRAN BUREAU to print a retraction or to note that the picture was manipulated by photo editing software, which they refused. They simply wanted to continue to run the doctored photograph that showed an Iranian youngster wearing a "God Bless America" T-shirt by an evangelical Christian music artist. The logo had been photoshopped onto the T-shirt. These are facts - not opinions.
2. PBS/TEHRAN BUREAU has as one of its "major funders" a group that (a) pushed for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and (b) that also funds hate groups, particularly against African Americans and persons that are Muslims. Whether an author featured on Tehran Bureau claims to hold opinion 'X, Y, or Z' is not our concern - people claim a lot of things. What is important is what the facts show. One of the first rules of journalism is impartiality and PBS/TEHRAN BUREAU's content has been shown in the past to be deliberately falsified and backed by an agenda driven organization that has an interest in the stories published. If you started a news magazine that ran stories touting the health benefits of eating hamburgers and later people discovered your news magazine was owned or funded by McDonald's, people would be correct in highlighting that. Again, we are not breaking new ground here: There are acceptable and unacceptable journalistic practices.Who said they would need to use a GBU-28?
by bahmani on Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:38 AM PDTYou assume there will be a fair observer who will tell you exactly what happened when it happens. There won't be. We will have to rely on Iran coming clean or covering up.
Would Iran ever admit Israel got through? NO.
Would Iran cover it up if they did? YES.
Would everyone outside of Iran think Fordow exploded on its own? MAYBE.
That depends on how inept the western media can paint Iran to be at playing with dangerous nukes.
I think western media can do a pretty good job of it.
Now, is all of this worth it? Is it worth it for Iran to press it's luck like this just to have a nuke? To be belligerent, to be the asshole of the world? Or is it more prudent for Iran to give in, shut the fuck up, take the loss, and stop being such a prick all the time?
I think Iran is showing the height of arrogance in insisting on this nuke path, and it is a risky game with no prize worth winning. You and I would have given up a long time ago, found a way to stay in power by conceding a few things here and there, and Iran would be flourishing now instead of on the tippy top of the world's shit list.
This is where the fault really lies. The risk and fault of nuclear contamination killing innocent Iranians lies at the foot of this government of animals blinded by obsessive faith in a God who is hilariously absent.
Don't blame Israel for Iran insisting on playing a losing hand. Again, you and I would have folded a long time ago. Because it is a shitty hand. Playing a shitty hand by bluffing is risky. And addictive. But it rarely wins.
The problem with statistics is you can use them to make any argument:
//www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-secur...
To read more bahmani posts visit: //brucebahmani.blogspot.com/
Yawwwwnnnn...
by Anonymous Observer on Thu Jul 05, 2012 03:12 PM PDTsame old "you're a Zionist" accusation when insults fail and the regime propagandist is caught in a lie and has no response to facts...
Nicely done, and nicely proved who you are and where you're coming from.
Now go write another blog about the Palestine / Israel conflict and settlements to divert attention from Iran.
The "electronic intifada blog" :-)) ...classic obsession of regime supporters who want to destroy Iran over the Palestinian cause.
An Observer Go Pick Up Your Pay Check
by Mohammad Alireza on Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:07 AM PDT"Israeli students to get $2,000 to spread state propaganda on Facebook"
//electronicintifada.net/blog/ali-abunimah/is...
Lying regime propagandist Mohammad Alireza
by Anonymous Observer on Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:02 AM PDTSpeaking of retards, what is in this paragrpah that you don't [want to] understand?
"He reiterated the Iranian nation and Supreme Leader's emphasis on the necessity of support for the oppressed Palestinian nation and its causes, and noted, "The Iranian nation is standing for its cause that is the full annihilation of Israel.""
"The top military official reminded that the Iranian Supreme Leader considers defending Palestine as a full religious duty and believes that any kind of governance and rule by anyone other than the Palestinians as an instance of usurpation."
From the horse's own mouth:
//english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9102112759
Why quote Juan Cole when you can go to the source? Obviously, Juan Cole is as big of an idiot as you are if he interpreted the quote as being a "response." Firouzabadi is not talking about a "response." He is clearly--through the regime's own propaganda aparatus (your colleagues)--claiming that he wants to destroy Israel over the Palestinian cause, and as a matter of religious duty. Now, how--in your moronic mind--does that constitute a "response" and not a threat?
To An Observer:
by Mohammad Alireza on Thu Jul 05, 2012 09:50 AM PDTAn Observer you have on so many occasions proven that you are a morally retarded ignoramus through your comments and posts on Iranian.com that I make a point of not responding to you but just this time I will make an exception:
"First of all this is not a threat to commit an act of aggression. Iran has "no first strike" policy, repeatedly reaffirmed by Khamenei. Brig. Gen. Hajizadeh is threatening to retaliate with everything he has if Iran is itself the victim of a naked act of aggression."
"Moreover, while Iran is not threatening to attack (i.e. launch a first strike against) Israel, Israel is daily threatening to attack Iran (i.e. launch a first strike against Iran). Actually Netanyahu in threatening a unilateral act of unprovoked aggression against Iran is violating the UN Charter, which forbids member states to menace one another with aggression. Hajizadeh’s statement is not nearly as bad, since he is only talking about retaliation."
//www.juancole.com/2012/07/hajizadeh-if-israe...
Then come and stand downwind
by Mohammad Alireza on Thu Jul 05, 2012 09:36 AM PDT"Fallout from the use of RNEP against the Esfahan nuclear facility in Iran would spread for thousands of miles across Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. It would kill 3 million people within 2 weeks of the explosion and expose 35 million to cancer causing radiation."
//www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_weapons_and_global_s...
"No one is talking about the harm that “surgical air strikes” against “suspected Iranian nuclear facilities” with GBU-28 “bunker-buster” bombs, which derive their ability to penetrate concrete and earth from depleted uranium, would inflict on 74 million Iranians, nearly a quarter of whom are under the age of 14 and under and half of whom are under the age of 30."
"No worries are being expressed about the release of radioactive materials into the biosphere of Central Asia"
"Nor is anyone questioning the wisdom of dropping unprecedented numbers of 5000 lb. “bunker busters” capable of penetrating 100 feet of earth or 20 feet of concrete into the bowels of an already earthquake-prone region."
//www.lobelog.com/consequences-of-an-attack-o...
Not a convincing argument
by bahmani on Thu Jul 05, 2012 08:37 AM PDTNice try and well argued, but there are several weaknesses you failed to address to my satisfaction:
Bunker busters go deep into the ground and then explode. Leaving the radiation in the ground, so any contamination would be underground, or minimal. Given these secret installations are not in the Mall in Tehran, any general population exposure is 0. The wind does not blow 700 meters underground.
If Iran is hit by the Israelis, it has to admit weakness and ineptitude. That is a huge internal loss of face. Supposedly Iran is strong and no one would dare to... If Israel hits Iran, it makes Iran look weak and inept to its people, the region, and the world.
So would Iran even admit that Israel was able to hit it?
Probably not. That would admit defeat.
Israel has the latest anti-missile defense systems, including the rollout of the newest "Iron Dome" (Iran Dome?), so that plus the US in the neighborhood to shoot down the slightest stray Iranian missile means the likelihood of Iran hitting Israel with a missile is just about 99% unlikely.
If Iran puts a dirty nuke on a missile, and manages to shoot it at Israel, that will show Iran's "real" support and "care" for Palestine, because many innocent Palestinians would be killed in that attempt. Possibly all of them.
That's the problem with "wiping Israel off the map" talk, it also includes Palestine, and parts of Jordan and Lebanon and Syria.
So:
If Israel attacks Iran with quiet unobtrusive underground damaging bunker busters that would barely go "bump" in the night:
A) Iran would make a huge mistake in admitting it by showing the Iranian people that they cannot really defend them. The regional supporters would lose faith in Iran's bluster, and Iran would look the fool.
B) Risk further ridicule and failure by firing a missile only to have the US shoot it down 3 seconds after it took off, possibly even before it took off, if the US and Israel coordinate. (which they most certainly will)
C) If Iran launches, it would only show it's utter contempt for Palestine, and that after all these years of feigned support, in the end, the Palestinians are totally expendable.
Basically, as I see it, the fact that Israel hasn't attacked (or has it and we just haven't heard Iran admit it?) Iran yet, is a total miracle.
To read more bahmani posts visit: //brucebahmani.blogspot.com/
which logic?
by مآمور on Thu Jul 05, 2012 07:50 AM PDTit is the sugar or cube sugar!!!!
I wear an Omega watch
Mammali joon, what about this threat, legal or illegal?
by Anonymous Observer on Thu Jul 05, 2012 07:37 AM PDTبگشای لب، بنمای رخ
مآمورWed Jul 04, 2012 10:08 PM PDT
لب که خیلی وقت گوشدی
حالا بعد از قند پراکنی! کی میخواهی رخ بنمای که ثخته پاکنم آرزوست؟؟!!
I wear an Omega watch
IRR's advocates
by Fred on Thu Jul 05, 2012 03:10 AM PDTTime will come when advocates of nuke weapon for the warmongering Messianic Islamist Rapist Republic (IRR) will have to explain their compensated position to the victims of the Islamist Rapists.
“The crux of the issue about Iran's nuclear program is, in my opinion, as follows: If Iran has the ability to make the bomb on a short notice, it becomes unattackable. That is not something that the US and Israel can tolerate. They want to be the hegemone of the Middle East.”
In other words, to make the Messianic Islamist Rapists the "hegemone" of the regiona in addition to the insurance for them to keep on raping, maiming and murdering Iranian men, women and children.
Time will come when compensated advocates will have to answer, it will.
Ezrail Goh mikhore....
by Bavafa on Wed Jul 04, 2012 09:49 PM PDTو اگر حمله کرد به گوه خوردنش میندازنش
'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory
Mehrdad
Tehran Bureau's response to CIM:
by Mohammad Alireza on Wed Jul 04, 2012 08:30 PM PDTBelow is an email I received regarding accusations made by CIM:
"Tehran Bureau never received any funds from the organizations that CIM mentions. It has a partnership with Frontline, but that did not provide much funding.
The only reason that TB has survived and thrived was due to the hardwork of its three permanent staff. TB's regular columnist has never received a penny for his work, nor has he expected or asked for any.
With few exceptions, TB's contributors have always consistently been anti-war, anti-sanctions, but at the same time TB publishes a variety of opinions.
TB has also consistently published articles that describe past and present crimes in the Islamic Republic. The record is there for all to see."
Maybe not MAD but still mad
by Mohammad Alireza on Wed Jul 04, 2012 08:21 PM PDTFaramarz, you are right it may not technically be Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) but it still would be catastrophic.
I have no idea if Israel WMD's are buried underground or not but one thing I do know is that missile shields have always failed under real circumstances and tests may have been successful but are done under very tight control.
If I lived in Israel the possibility of a hundred missiles that are GPS guided heading my way is not something I'd be laughing about.
The only real solution is to talk and establish peace.
Israel lost its war with Hezbollah!
by Immortal Guard on Wed Jul 04, 2012 05:37 PM PDTIsrael lost its war with Hezbollah!
//www.conflictsforum.org/2006/how-hezbollah-d...
Iran must have something credible in its bag of arsenals. It would be simple-minded to think they are just big-mouthing!
As George Galloway said Iran is not a punchbag:
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_XNnbQId8M
New Bunker Buster Bombs
by Faramarz on Wed Jul 04, 2012 09:54 AM PDTIn the meeting with Netanyahu back in March, it was reported that Obama promised the new bunker buster bombs, the 15-ton Big Blu, capable of penetrating 200' of cement, and refueling tanker planes, if Israelis pulled back on their threats till the end of the year and after the elections.
You are correct that back in 2009 and a few months after his election, Obama carried through with Bush's promise to sell the Israelis the older bunker busters.
As for your point about hitting the Israeli site with conventional missiles, that's not what one would call "Mutually Assured Destruction!'
A souped up scud missile, even if it manages to escape the 2 layers of anti-missiles shields and somehow hits the target, it still lacks the potency to penetrate, let alone do any serious damage to a highly-fortified facility.
In other words, the Regime's capabilities are laughable to say the least!
Hey
by Fred on Wed Jul 04, 2012 09:08 AM PDTDemagoguery, especially of the lefty capitalist kind, is hard to master. But I have been learning from you; it has made it easier to spot others.
Have a good 4th, keep on truckin!
Keep following
by Mohammad Alireza on Wed Jul 04, 2012 08:59 AM PDTJust keeping following my lead Fred, you may just learn something.
Hey
by Fred on Wed Jul 04, 2012 08:50 AM PDTHey Mohammad,
I got it, just following your lead;
by Mohammad Alireza on Tue Jun
12, 2012 02:47 AM PDT
Thanks for the laughs.
I do have a plan. Post
your fax number and I'll fax it you.
__________________________________________
So what is your fax number in Iran?
To Farmarz:
by Mohammad Alireza on Wed Jul 04, 2012 08:44 AM PDTObama has sold Israel bunker busters. Go check.
Nobody is talking about a "nuclear chain reaction"; the issue is radioactive contamination and fallout as a result of a military attack on nuclear installations using conventional weapons.
Just as I thought Fred, you don't have any "varifiable" connections; just a little "poz da-dand" on your part.
Fact Check
by Faramarz on Wed Jul 04, 2012 07:51 AM PDTI just read the first two paragraphs and there are two huge inaccuracies there.
First, the US has not sold Israel bunker-buster bombs. Bush decided against it in his final days in the office. Obama has said that he might sell Israel bunker buster bombs under the condition that they will not be used against Iran.
Secondly, when you hit a nuclear site, like Dimona in Israel with a conventional weapon you are not going to get a nuclear chain reaction and a nuclear explosion. You will get a dirty bomb and a conventional explosion, fire and some radiation release that will not have serious effects if you are not near the site.
Happy 4th of July from the US!
Have a BBQ and stop the war mongering!