Iran Nukes

[TC]

Not a nuke story, but this is basically the Iran thread, so seemed as good a place as any:

Iranians charged in U.S. over assassination plot

(Reuters) - U.S. authorities broke up a plot by men linked to the Iranian government to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in the United States, U.S. officials said Tuesday.

Attorney General Eric Holder said the United States would hold Tehran accountable for the plot.

Two men, originally from Iran, were charged in a U.S. court for the plot. One of them, Gholam Shakuri, was described in the criminal complaint as a member of the Quds Force, a branch of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Shakuri is still at large but the officials said U.S. authorities arrested the other man, Manssor Arbabsiar who is a naturalized U.S. citizen, at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York on September 29.

U.S. officials said there had also been initial discussions about other alleged plots, including attacking the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington, however no charges for that were revealed Tuesday.

Relations were already sour between the Islamic republic and Washington, which accuses Tehran of backing terrorism and pursuing nuclear arms.

Holder declined to say what measures the Obama administration would take, but said they would be coming soon...(continued at link)

[TC]

Apparently things just aren't crazy enough at the moment, so here's this:

Israel test-fires missile as Iran debate rages

(Reuters) - Israel test-fired a missile from a military base on Wednesday, two days after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned of the "direct and heavy threat" posed by Iran's nuclear programme.

The noon launch near Tel Aviv, which had not been announced in advance, coincided with a week-long surge of speculation in local media that Netanyahu was working to secure cabinet consensus for an attack on Israel's arch-foe.

Netanyahu's office declined comment on the reports, which were unsourced and unconfirmed, and which some commentators suggested might be disinformation designed to jolt war-wary foreign powers into stepping up sanctions against Tehran.

Benjamin Netanyahu seeks cabinet support for Israeli strike on Iran

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, is seeking cabinet support for a military strike on Iran, Haaretz newspaper has reported after days of speculation on plans for such an attack.

The report, citing a senior Israeli official, said Mr Netanyahu was working with Ehud Barak, the defence minister, to win support from sceptical members of the cabinet who oppose attacking Iranian nuclear facilities.

Israel test-fired a ballistic missile from a military base in central Israel on Wednesday, Israel Radio said.

The report said the launch was carried out from the Palmachim facility. It quoted a Defence Ministry statement as saying the launch was aimed at testing the missile's propulsion system. Israel has Jericho missiles widely believed to be capable of carrying nuclear warheads.

The reports of Mr Netanyahu pushing for a military strike on Iran came after days of renewed public discussion among Israeli commentators about the possibility that the Jewish state would take unilateral military action against Iran.

Haaretz said that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Barak had already scored a significant win by convincing Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman to throw his support behind a strike...(continued at link)

Duck and cover!

[phil_in_cs]

Duck and cover!

I saw that earlier and meant to post it, but I was too flabbergasted to know what to say.

[BigBossMan]

Duck and cover!

I saw that earlier and meant to post it, but I was too flabbergasted to know what to say.

With the recent regime change in Egypt and this IAEA report, I'd say Israel is feeling just a bit defensive at the moment. Get ready for higher prices at the pump.

[phil_in_cs]

Britain may also be getting ready
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/no ... ck-nuclear

UK military steps up plans for Iran attack amid fresh nuclear fears
British officials consider contingency options to back up a possible US action as fears mount over Tehran's capability

Britain's armed forces are stepping up their contingency planning for potential military action against Iran amid mounting concern about Tehran's nuclear enrichment programme, the Guardian has learned.

The Ministry of Defence believes the US may decide to fast-forward plans for targeted missile strikes at some key Iranian facilities. British officials say that if Washington presses ahead it will seek, and receive, UK military help for any mission, despite some deep reservations within the coalition government.

In anticipation of a potential attack, British military planners are examining where best to deploy Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles over the coming months as part of what would be an air and sea campaign.

They also believe the US would ask permission to launch attacks from Diego Garcia, the British Indian ocean territory, which the Americans have used previously for conflicts in the Middle East.

more at the link

[andygates]

Key there being "deep reservations". The Lib Dem part of the coalition are our mainstream peaceniks, and while not cooperating with the USA would be very unlikely, they'd put pressure to ensure that such strikes were a last resort. Such a strike would definitely result in Cabinet-level resignations.

[phil_in_cs]

Key there being "deep reservations". The Lib Dem part of the coalition are our mainstream peaceniks, and while not cooperating with the USA would be very unlikely, they'd put pressure to ensure that such strikes were a last resort. Such a strike would definitely result in Cabinet-level resignations.

To be fair, in the Western world where the civilian governments run the military, the military has to plan and prepare for all sorts of unlikely things in case the civilians order it. If something will take weeks to get ready, and there's a 5% chance it will happen, the military better get their shit ready because when it gets ordered it will be "right now" and not "when you can get around to it".

[phil_in_cs]

Iranian exile group claims yesterday's accident at an Iranian arms depot was actually at a missile base

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... litics_pop

Debka, who usually has a big scoop or is full of disinformation, says foreign scientists were among those killed
http://www.debka.com/article/21474/

[KentsOkay]

Iranian exile group claims yesterday's accident at an Iranian arms depot was actually at a missile base

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... litics_pop

Debka, who usually has a big scoop or is full of disinformation, says foreign scientists were among those killed
http://www.debka.com/article/21474/

Thanks for the info, hadn't realized things where heating up so much.

Does anybody else read their foreign news with BBC Telecaster voice in mind?

[phil_in_cs]

Iran confirms "the godfather of the missile program" was killed in the explosions

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15741989

I saw yesterday but am not finding today a report than one of the big time Iranian nuclear scientists was killed in a car wreck in Bahrain this weekend.

[Orphancow]

One man......Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is probably the most dangerous man in the world, world leaders have admitted this and discontent is growing stronger daily amongst the nations of the world. Iran, might only have a few or just one nuclear weapons in progress, but just one WILL destroy millions in a hot second. I feel that, if the United states and other allies, Israel included were to invade/attack Iran in anyway, whether solid proof is there. It would be justified by the threats Ahmadinejad has made towards Israel and the USA. I feel that it is no different that if a person were to post on facebook a threat of some kind, resulting in being detained and charged by the FBI. But just on a much larger scale. Inevitably, there will be some attack on one an another, its just a matter of who will strike first. The United States and Israel/Allies would only use a nuke as a last resort, where as i feel Iran would use a nuke at the first chance it was given. It would be methodical, Iran would not put itself at risk in reality, only the radicals that have been bread to hate and destroy in the name of Jihad. This is a war of differences, its just a sad truth. Regardless of whether we are able to mend holes in political differences, Its the moral differences that will still cause an issue. Its like have an obnoxious neighbor, politically you agree, but morally you are different, never will you two become great buddies.

We need not fear the Muslims as a whole, just the radicals. As a Bible believing man, I would have feared the Crusaders that were apart of the Crusades set forth in the Dark ages. They were radicals that stretch their beliefs to a whole different realm, resulting in massacres/pillaging/murder.

But all in all this is why we are all here on this forum, we all have our fears and we all prepare to "something" no matter what that something maybe.

[angelofwar]

Interesting stuff here as of late...Israeli "spies" offing Hezbollah agents in the UAE...computer worms taking down Irans Nuke Computers...make no mistake, that these things are being done on our behalf/with our support (and I fully support them). Isreal WILL bomb (or worst case, nuke) Iran if they are pushed into a corner. Other than Israel bombing Iraq back in the day, intel from (reliable) folks in the military, Israel HAD jets taxi-ing with tactical nukes, heading to Baghdad, not long after Saddam launched a ton of scuds into Israel, at the onset of Desert Storm. Israel was going to turn Baghdad into a glass parking lot...the only thing that stopped them was a call from the POTUS.

If Iran knew what was good for them, they would cease their actions. Don't be surprised to hear of "explosions at Irian nuclear facilities" shortly before, or after, the US POTUS elections next year....Israel knows this may be there LAST chance (for the next four years) to stop slippy slappy minijiad (who-ever) in his his tracks...they are surrounded by people that want to see them diminished, and will stop at nothing to preserve their state-hood/existence.

[TC]

There has been some interesting stuff going on lately regarding unusual explosions, computer worms and increasing sanctions and rhetoric from Western nations (France urges Iran oil purchase freeze, sanctions, UK severs ties with Iranian banks).

However, I do still believe that any kind of military action will be taken as a true last resort under in an extreme situation only. There can be no doubt that starting a war with Iran would be disastrous for all involved, for the region and for the world at large. The coordination of an effective strike on Iran's nuclear sites would be very challenging indeed from my understanding, especially when it comes to completely destroying the program in all of its locations. There would be massive and long term retaliation even if such a strike was successful, which we all know is exactly what we don't need right now. There is also the problem of the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran knows they could make hell and cause serious problems with moving oil out of the region, effectively shutting that off. No one wants any of these things.

I'm not saying that military action will never happen, just that things would have to be very, very bad for the above to be seen as the lesser of two evils. Instead, I expect to see more sanctions on the overt side and a more rumours of mystery accidents involving hardware and personnel associated with Iran's nuclear projects on the more hush-hush side of things.

Worth keeping a close eye on regardless.

[DarkAxel]

One man......Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is probably the most dangerous man in the world...

I just need to step in here and say something about Ol Ahadinejad. Not picking on you specifically, Orphancrow something just needs to be cleared up.

The President of Iran has no power except what is given to him by the Supreme Leader and the Guardian Council, and that power can be revoked at any time. Before Ahmadinejad could even run, he had to approved by the Guardian Council, and after his election, he still had to be appointed by the Supreme Leader. The President of Iran has little to no control over the military, the foreign policy of the country, and internal affairs (policing the country).

Make no mistake about it. If Iran makes a move, it is the Ayatollah, not the president, that ordered it.

[Orphancow]

One man......Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is probably the most dangerous man in the world...

I just need to step in here and say something about Ol Ahadinejad. Not picking on you specifically, Orphancrow something just needs to be cleared up.

The President of Iran has no power except what is given to him by the Supreme Leader and the Guardian Council, and that power can be revoked at any time. Before Ahmadinejad could even run, he had to approved by the Guardian Council, and after his election, he still had to be appointed by the Supreme Leader. The President of Iran has little to no control over the military, the foreign policy of the country, and internal affairs (policing the country).

Make no mistake about it. If Iran makes a move, it is the Ayatollah, not the president, that ordered it.

Absolutely, sorry i alluded to MORE of him as being the only one in charge. Its more of when you think Iran you associate it more with Ahmadinejad is all because he is the president.

[Apollo-11]

Report of another explosion at a facility in Iran. Pictures of the before/after. It appears that several buildings were destroyed.

Work of foreign agents?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45477062/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/

[tomstedham]

Just a reminder: the same people that lied us into a war in Iraq are the same people trying to lie us into a war in Iran.
Iran is in no way a threat to us or our legitimate interests, and we should distance ourselves from any "ally" who tries to start a war with them...

[Cpt. MelonBuster]

Just a reminder: the same people that lied us into a war in Iraq are the same people trying to lie us into a war in Iran.
Iran is in no way a threat to us or our legitimate interests, and we should distance ourselves from any "ally" who tries to start a war with them...

I recommend reviewing the rules and lurking more.

[TC]

Iranians claim to down US drone

Iran's armed forces have shot down an unmanned US spy plane that violated its eastern borders, military sources say.

Iranian media reports said the drone - identified as a type RQ10 - suffered minimal damage and was now in the hands of the armed forces.

The military response to the airspace violation "will not be limited to Iran's borders any more", one unnamed source told Iran's al-Alam TV.

Iran is locked in a dispute with the West over its nuclear programme.

The US and its allies believe the programme is aimed at developing nuclear weapons. Iran denies the accusations, saying it is entirely peaceful.

Iran said in July it had shot down a drone over the holy city of Qom, near its Fordu nuclear site.

Last January, it said it downed two "Western spy drones" in the Gulf, but produced no evidence to support the report.

[phil_in_cs]

Guardian piece http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/de ... n-us-drone says it was an RQ170 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_M ... 0_Sentinel

Supposedly a recon drone (maybe seeing what was the effect of the 'mysterious' kabooms there recently) but some speculate it could carry ordinance as well.

[TacAir]

Just a reminder: the same people that lied us into a war in Iraq are the same people trying to lie us into a war in Iran.
Iran is in no way a threat to us or our legitimate interests, and we should distance ourselves from any "ally" who tries to start a war with them...

Welcome to the board.

Why don't you drop by the Intro section and tell a bit about yourself?

The welcome wagon will be buy in a bit and give you a set of links - including the board rules, stickies (permanent threads) worth reading and so on.

[Nutpantz]

If Iran knew what was good for them, they would cease their actions. Don't be surprised to hear of "explosions at Irian nuclear facilities" shortly before, or after, the US POTUS elections next year....Israel knows this may be there LAST chance (for the next four years) to stop slippy slappy minijiad (who-ever) in his his tracks...they are surrounded by people that want to see them diminished, and will stop at nothing to preserve their state-hood/existence.

Not to stir up sh#t but these are the reasons NOT to back the country that did not exist before ww2. The same country that dose not allow it's citizens to be incarcerated with out its permission.and yet again the same country that has been linked to corporate and industrial sabotage (which would be called terrorism if it happened in our country) in many of its neighbors.
the same country that assassinates people all over the world and admits it half the time.and the same country that treats a large portion of its population worse than blacks in South Africa in the 80's.and the same country that has said it had a doomsday policy to attack random cities of its neighbors with weapons of mass destruction of it is the victim of unknown assailants.
Weapons that we gave them.
Which is the dangerous country in the area?

Every country in the area should be treated the same way regardless of religion or government.
It's not though.

For the record any country capable of production of pesticides is capable of wmd's any country that has any nuclear power plants could be building nukes or radiation bombs of one type or another.none of that is a reason to go to war or attack a country.
Unless you have made such a ass of your self that you fear everyone.
Then it's just fear making the decisions

All spelling and grammar errors the fault of my phone.

[Bunsen]

Not to stir up sh#t but politics. Politics politics politics politics. Politics politics politics politics politics politics. Politics politics.

Dude, there's a reason for the no politics rule, and it's because it's impossible to discuss politics on the internet without stirring up shit. Let's leave that pile un-stirred, shall we?

[phil_in_cs]

If Iran knew what was good for them, they would cease their actions. Don't be surprised to hear of "explosions at Irian nuclear facilities" shortly before, or after, the US POTUS elections next year....Israel knows this may be there LAST chance (for the next four years) to stop slippy slappy minijiad (who-ever) in his his tracks...they are surrounded by people that want to see them diminished, and will stop at nothing to preserve their state-hood/existence.

Not to stir up sh#t but these are the reasons NOT to back the country that did not exist before ww2. The same country that dose not allow it's citizens to be incarcerated with out its permission.and yet again the same country that has been linked to corporate and industrial sabotage (which would be called terrorism if it happened in our country) in many of its neighbors.
the same country that assassinates people all over the world and admits it half the time.and the same country that treats a large portion of its population worse than blacks in South Africa in the 80's.and the same country that has said it had a doomsday policy to attack random cities of its neighbors with weapons of mass destruction of it is the victim of unknown assailants.
Weapons that we gave them.
Which is the dangerous country in the area?

Every country in the area should be treated the same way regardless of religion or government.
It's not though.

For the record any country capable of production of pesticides is capable of wmd's any country that has any nuclear power plants could be building nukes or radiation bombs of one type or another.none of that is a reason to go to war or attack a country.
Unless you have made such a ass of your self that you fear everyone.
Then it's just fear making the decisions

All spelling and grammar errors the fault of my phone.

I'm pretty sure this crosses the no politics line, but it is so poorly written I'm not totally sure. Please pay attention to our rules and the rules of grammar and sentence construction.