Jim in Anchorage Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Iran situation is very complicated .... On one hand you can't allow them to have nuclear capabilities, the odds of a nuclear arms races occurring in the middle east would dramatically increase, couple that with the hate for the Jews and their rhetoric, at some point nuclear war would be inevitable in that region... However we can't afford another war... I suppose tactical strikes on their facilities and enough boots on the ground to get the job done might be the solution....along with a lot of praying and hoping they the iranese don't attempt to dramatically escalate the war..... Also the Obama strategy with Libya, the lead from behind role may not be a bad idea...something along the lines of using our air capabilities and foreign boots on the ground such as the French or britsJesuse] Good God almighty, you're defending Obama? What was are need to get involved in replacing a long term, no threat to the US dictator with a some muslim hate monger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted November 14, 2011 Author Share Posted November 14, 2011 Silk worm missiles raining down on the straights of Hormuz.....oh boy! $12.56 a gallon gas! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Sorry Jim, I don't criticize him for everything he does just the majority of his decisions..... Also Dave if u believe allowing Iran to have a nuclear weapon won't impact long term prices well than you have a screw loose somewhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Yeah well I want worldwide peace and utopian unicorns as a backyard pet, but it's not gonna happen.... Well, if you want to go over there, fork over the money. Something has to be cut to do it, or we have to have a war tax (which we should have had, years ago) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Good God almighty, you're defending Obama? What was are need to get involved in replacing a long term, no threat to the US dictator with a some muslim hate monger? Didn't you hear? Moammar Gadhafi was hoarding gold and money and led Libya to the highest HDI in Africa (an HDI comparable to Portugal's and higher than many Eastern European countries). Can't have that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Silk worm missiles raining down on the straights of Hormuz.....oh boy! $12.56 a gallon gas! Please explain the operational parameters for and constraints on employing HY-2 missiles in the Straits of Hormuz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted November 15, 2011 Author Share Posted November 15, 2011 Please explain the operational parameters for and constraints on employing HY-2 missiles in the Straits of Hormuz. After having years to prepare, I'm pretty sure the Iranians will get more than a few shots off, if not many more, and in any event the cost to the world oil economy will be huge, and not just for the missiles, artillery and other methods that would be used. They don't even have to hit anything, but if they do...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 After having years to prepare, I'm pretty sure the Iranians will get more than a few shots off, if not many more, and in any event the cost to the world oil economy will be huge, and not just for the missiles, artillery and other methods that would be used. They don't even have to hit anything, but if they do...... But you're cool with a nuke hitting Isreal. Yeah that won't have any effect on oil prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted November 15, 2011 Author Share Posted November 15, 2011 But you're cool with a nuke hitting Isreal. Yeah that won't have any effect on oil prices. Israel has nuclear deference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 After having years to prepare, I'm pretty sure the Iranians will get more than a few shots off, if not many more, and in any event the cost to the world oil economy will be huge, and not just for the missiles, artillery and other methods that would be used. They don't even have to hit anything, but if they do...... "Other methods"? What "other methods?" And how do you address the backscatter issue in the C-band? Or do they just launch bearing-only off a visual fix? Israel has nuclear deference "No, no, we'll launch after you, I insist..." That's NUKYOOLUR deference to you, kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Israel has nuclear deference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Israel never refudiated whether they have nuclear deference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Israel has nuclear deference then I guess the answer to his question is "yes"... Typical... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Israel has nuclear deference I believe our esteemed liberal is attempting to explain that Israel has a nuclear deterrence strategy? ?? All Israel can do is strike first. They cannot absorb any type of attack , counterstrike and hope to save their country Afterall you have to keep in mind Israel is such a small country that even 2 relatively low yield 100 kiloton devices which Iran could produce without much trouble would be the end of Israel and they know it. And if those crazy Iranians every intentionally detonated an air burst they would send the middle east back to the stone age....which might be appealing for a hardcore Islamic regime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Allowing Israel to take care of it would be a worse option.....unless you are pulling for a regional war....the best strike scenario is to have a joint coalition mission Wrong. Israel alone would a quick affair. Over in days. Joint coalition would be months of ignored UN resolutions, followed by the US doing it alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'love Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Newt has a pretty damn strong base behind his bull **** of insane social opinions. Politicians need to stfu about stuff that's irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted November 16, 2011 Author Share Posted November 16, 2011 Sorry, missed this wonderful thread yesterday. Tom, ok, sure, Iran would just lay down and let us walk all over them if we attacked, just like Iraq The very idea that poor Iran is simply going to jump up and wipe Israel off the map and Israel's missles will all be destroyed is about as dumb as Tom's point that Iran could never fire at a ship in the Straights. Stupid, stupid, stupid Back to Newt. I see [ha ha] he's now calling himself a Housing Historian to explain away the million dollars in lobbying fees he took from one of the evil Freddies. As in the Housing Mortgage company Conservatives are blaming for the housing bubble. Housing historian? Hey, he's a real intellectual, though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Sorry, missed this wonderful thread yesterday. Tom, ok, sure, Iran would just lay down and let us walk all over them if we attacked, just like Iraq The very idea that poor Iran is simply going to jump up and wipe Israel off the map and Israel's missles will all be destroyed is about as dumb as Tom's point that Iran could never fire at a ship in the Straights. Stupid, stupid, stupid Please point to where I said either of those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Wrong. Israel alone would a quick affair. Over in days. Joint coalition would be months of ignored UN resolutions, followed by the US doing it alone. Wrong. If Israel goes at this alone it would cause such political domestic pressure on our Arab allies, that not even they would be able to support the strike, which would cause an upheaval specially in this "Arab Spring" middle east world we are living in today. What would be more politically palpable for our Arab allies is to have a unified coalition. There is a reason Jim, why Israel hasn't already done this, and that's because we have been telling them for years not to. This has been happening from both the Bush and Obama administration. Why? Because of the point that I just made. Housing historian? Hey, he's a real intellectual, though Sorry, when you say stuff like this, it just makes you look like a caricature of yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Sometimes I miss Conner, but Dave fills in nicely. It's just that Dave is a different kind of idiot then Conner. To watch them interact would be world class entertainment. But eventually I knew Conner was a real person. I wonder if Dave isn't a conservative just chiming in to stir the pot and trying to make libs look ridiculous. Kind of like a reverse Colbert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts