There is a strong, uneasy feeling amongst watchers of world events, that a huge storm is brewing over Iran and the Middle East in general, far greater than than the thunder and lightning already bashing the place.
Pulling the pieces together, the thinking is roughly that following the American mid term elections, the 'go-ahead' for a strike against Iran and probably others, will be given.

If the election results are good for Bush, he'll feel the hand of the people guiding him in what may become a calamity for the world. If the returns are bad, the neo-cons will imagine thay have limited time to achieve their aims and it'll be 'go' anyway.

Many people have taken the view that Iran and the whole area need some sort of final push to make the world safer. They have absorbed the neo-con line, and like the neo-cons, have no clear idea what will happen if the attack fails to go according to plan. Just as in Iraq.

To those people I say, you may be getting your wish and god help us.

See here: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...articleId=3361

__________________

'Never was so much owed by so many to so few.' Sir Winston Churchill.

Nearly 750,000 Iraqis have died since 2003 who might still be alive but for the US-led invasion. That is a cause for shame, not pride.

Hmmm. What will happen? Just asking your opinion of what would happen if Iran is attacked.

What I personally believe will happen is that most radicals spread throughout the countries in the Middle East will revolt (also Iran will let loose Hizballah on U.S., Israeli, and Western targets) . Out of 1.79 billion people that the Muslim faith makes up (world wide), there will be a large number of radicals as well as moderates. Now this can go 2 ways. The countries will fall under the weight of terrorism (unlikely). Or the moderates will fight the radicals. I highly doubt countries like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan (although they'll have a tough time), Turkey ect... will give up so quickly. And countries like France, Germany, Italy, ect... will finally have to join the fight at full capacity (they really would have no choice at this point as the threat to them will be great). Will more war continue for some time? Yes. Will the world benefit from the out come of such a conflict (considering we, and I mean we as the free and modern world, are succesful, and we will be)? Yes. Sometimes the ends, justifies the means. If war will secure a brighter and safer future for my children (the day I get there ) or their children ect... Then I say so be it. Iran poses a threat. And if no one wants to deal with it until it's too late, then someone will have to do something about it. I'm all about bringing friends on board (they say the U.S. acted unilaterally in Iraq but we did have 49 countries behind us) but we don't "need" the UN, what we need is loyal friends. Friends with the balls to fight for what is right.


One more point I forgot to add. The option of funding and training opposition groups in Iran is still the best action we can take. And I wouldn't be surprised if that is what happens if Iran continues to be defiant.

__________________
"We do not negotiate with terrorists, we put them out of business." - Scott McClellan

"War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over" - Gen William T. Sherman

Onepoint, appreciate your opinions on an Iranian invasion/consequences, but dont agree.. Firstly, Hezbollah is a parimilitary force whos only strengths like in conventional parimilitary warfare.... they are not Al Quada, and dont pose a threat to anyone outside of their base of operations... ie Lebannon and Israel.

Secondly, the fundamentalist movement in context to the overall Muslim population is Tiny, an invasion of Iran may cause an increase in numbers, but its still minute compared to the global Muslim population... Dont be fooled by biased Media reporting, that shows radical Islam growing faster then a plague of locusts... thats NeoCon media bias at its worst..... Its facticous.... and grossly exaggerated.... Al Quada will have an increasing number of dimwits joining its ranks and an Iran invasion will only support the current increase in their numbers... Moderates will not fight Extremists in the streets, thats not what its all about... its about the Isolation of the Extremists, and chastisation of them by their moderate kin.... You know its easy to ignore your enemy but hard to ignore your friend...

Middle East has already a hard time with Fundamentalism, and heres where the danger lies, further war by US against Iran will only increase pressure and possibly destablish regional governments, who are viewed as sleeping with the Enemy already.... The US does need the UN for any type of Credibility for offensive action against Iran, if it does not want to be labelled the new crusader of the Middle East.... perception and politics were closed out in Iraqi issue, and any turnaround in support for US action will need both to the aired for the International community to see... cos the US View is not the Freeworld view.... ask the French, they will have a very different opinion... US needs to stop large scale actions in a "war on terror" and get smarter about how they do things..... cos the cowboy shooting up the ranch days and coming out smelling of roses are unfortunately over....

I do partly agree with your point on internal insurrection against an instable government, but remember the lessons learnt of the Iran Contra scandel, the Backing of Saddam in the 80s and many more times when US interfered in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation..... Its got a habit of coming back and biting you in the ***... history has shown us this... However, In terms of destroying the government without ripping the middle east apart, its the best bet, but BE CAREFUL WHAT HORSE YOU BACK... it just might bolt from the corral, and thrash your garden fencing....

Onepoint, appreciate your opinions on an Iranian invasion/consequences, but dont agree..

Thanks and not a problem like I've said before everyone can't agree on everything every time.

Firstly, Hezbollah is a parimilitary force whos only strengths like in conventional parimilitary warfare.... they are not Al Quada, and dont pose a threat to anyone outside of their base of operations... ie Lebannon and Israel.

Ah! Yes, Hizballah is much more organized than Al Qaeda in the sense of a conventional military. However, they have used terrorist tactics before. Such as bombing our embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Lebanon. Among many others during the civil war (including the bombing of a French base). Also a member of Hizballah was caught trying to get into the U.S. through the U.S./Mexican border. The FBI has said that without a doubt there are Hizballah cells within the U.S. and their Canadian counterparts have said the same of them in Canada.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah

I thought I had made mention of the Iranian suicide squads in my post. But re reading it I noticed I didn't. That is also a card Iran holds.

http://www.iranpressnews.com/english/source/012158.html

Secondly, the fundamentalist movement in context to the overall Muslim population is Tiny, an invasion of Iran may cause an increase in numbers, but its still minute compared to the global Muslim population... Dont be fooled by biased Media reporting, that shows radical Islam growing faster then a plague of locusts... thats NeoCon media bias at its worst..... Its facticous.... and grossly exaggerated....

Not at all, I'll be the first to say that there are more moderates than radicals. What I did say was that out of the 1.79 billion Muslims worldwide, there is a fair amount of radicals in that number. Enough to make it a difficult and long war. I agree 100% that the moderates out weigh the radicals, and that is exactly why we will succeed if it comes down to the scenario I outlined in my previous post.


Al Quada will have an increasing number of dimwits joining its ranks and an Iran invasion will only support the current increase in their numbers... Moderates will not fight Extremists in the streets, thats not what its all about... its about the Isolation of the Extremists, and chastisation of them by their moderate kin.... You know its easy to ignore your enemy but hard to ignore your friend...

Well... I don't think an invasion or attack on Iran would increase Al Qaeda's numbers. Mainly because Iran is mostly ****e and Al Qaeda is a Sunni group. And both sects have not been quite fond of one another since Muhammed died. But I do think within their own sects the numbers will rise in terror groups as those who sympathize with the radicals join the cause. However if an explosion of terror groups happen along with an explosion (no pun intended lol) of their acts the moderate governments will most certainly fight against it in a way they never have. Those in seats of power are not so quick to give those seats up.


Middle East has already a hard time with Fundamentalism, and heres where the danger lies, further war by US against Iran will only increase pressure and possibly destablish regional governments, who are viewed as sleeping with the Enemy already....

That was exactly what I was refering to. Thats why I said the moderate governments will have to join the fight 100% as will any European country that has a high population of radical Islam within its borders. I never said it was going to be a quick and easy thing. It will be a long and very difficult process. Much fighting? Yes (sadly). More death? Yes (again sadly).But it will ultimately be better for the world if radical Islam is destroyed. If the events I described in my previous post happen that would be the only option.

The US does need the UN for any type of Credibility for offensive action against Iran, if it does not want to be labelled the new crusader of the Middle East....

They already label us as such now. What would be the difference?

perception and politics were closed out in Iraqi issue,

Indeed, Saddam closed them for 12 years.

and any turnaround in support for US action will need both to the aired for the International community to see... cos the US View is not the Freeworld view....

I agree but it was the view of 49 other countries. Like I said we don't "need" the UN we need loyal friends with the balls to fight.

ask the French, they will have a very different opinion...

Yes, they would have prefered to continue making money off of Iraq instead of doing what is right.

US needs to stop large scale actions in a "war on terror" and get smarter about how they do things..... cos the cowboy shooting up the ranch days and coming out smelling of roses are unfortunately over....

Yes those days are unfortunately over. I think I would have been better off living back then lol. But there is no other way to fight terrorism. You either fight it or you deal with it when it hits your home. We're in 100 countries waging the GWOT. It's not being fought the same way in all of those countries. But it does have to be fought.

I do partly agree with your point on internal insurrection against an instable government, but remember the lessons learnt of the Iran Contra scandel, the Backing of Saddam in the 80s and many more times when US interfered in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation..... Its got a habit of coming back and biting you in the ***... history has shown us this... However, In terms of destroying the government without ripping the middle east apart, its the best bet, but BE CAREFUL WHAT HORSE YOU BACK... it just might bolt from the corral, and thrash your garden fencing....


Yes we have a tendency to get bit back by who we support. But if it prevents the events I described in my previous post, then it's the best option we have. We will have to move much smarter than we did in the past.

__________________
"We do not negotiate with terrorists, we put them out of business." - Scott McClellan

"War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over" - Gen William T. Sherman

Dang! you liberals are so full of **** . The Iran persons /mothers just need greasin,every last one of em . All this dancin around the Iran camp fire BS .....give me the strength lord .
As for N. KKKorea .......Respect ,those guys are just askin to be salami man . Quit *****in an Nuke every last one of em .....SIMPLE!

__________________
Heads or tails?

well.. atleast he's pleasures are simple.

Ah tiny texas I thought we could go a record 3 months without a Nuke em argument by you.

__________________
SI VIS PACEM PARA BELLUM

And I thought I was a simple man lol.


Quick question Tiny. Lets say your method is the only way, and we have to bomb them to devastate everything there. Wouldn't it be better to use the MOAB instead of a nuke? Big bang and all that but no radiation going all over the damn place.

__________________
"We do not negotiate with terrorists, we put them out of business." - Scott McClellan

"War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over" - Gen William T. Sherman

any one who can handle ar15 shouldnt be "that" simple.
my friend is local practical shooting champ. and
he's all for he's fine tuned ar15 with the gadgets.

(he had sako, but he swiched to ar15 when the "sport conditions" become
the prime factor.)

Hehe. The AR15 is actually a very simple rifle to use. I wanted to go to the range earlier and I didn't, now I feel like I should have lol . Oh well there's always tomorrow.

What sorts of gadgets does he have on his AR? I planned on doing quite abit of work on mine. Aimpoint Comp M3, Aimpoint 3x Magnifier, Wilson Combat quad rail, Samco pistol grip, Vortec butt stock, Wilson Combat vertical grip, GG&G flip down front and rear iron sites, and a SureFire Z2 attached to the quad rail. (I wish there was a drool smilie to use lol) But I leave in 2 1/2 months so it's kind of pointless to do all of that now. Maybe I'll just throw Comp M3 site on it for now though.

__________________
"We do not negotiate with terrorists, we put them out of business." - Scott McClellan

"War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over" - Gen William T. Sherman