Politics

[Brent in Az]

I would bet they if Iran had a functional nuclear bomb, it would not be used on Israel. In Jerusalem sitting on top of the Temple Mound is Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque both the third holist site in Islam. Doubtful the Iranians would risk destroying the Dome.

Very good point. I never thought of that. I know about the Dome of the Rock and it's significance, but it would be be matter of the Zealot's sacrificing it or not

 

[Red Leg]

Very good point. I never thought of that. I know about the Dome of the Rock and it's significance, but it would be be matter of the Zealot's sacrificing it or not

No it is the third holiest site in Islam. They would also kill more Arab Muslims than Jews. If they were to ever target a city in Israel, it would be Tel Aviv. Destruction of Tel Aviv would destroy Israel as a functioning state. Nearly 50% of the population lives there and virtually all the institutions that allow a nation to function are there.

 

[CoElkHunter]

An interesting analysis of Canada. I have often thought that the only politician that had an idea for state structure in Canada was Trudeau Sr. All the rest, whether conservative or liberal, have played within the parameters he created. Yes, even Harper who squandered any real opportunity to change how the federal and provincial governments interact. Only Quebec has maintained its control over its constitutional jurisidcition. All the rest have bargained off their legislative control to a strong central government. This all has been a terrible experiment that emphasizes all of Canada's weaknesses and does nothing for its strengths.

Eric Lombardi: The death of merit, the birth of aristocracy, and Canada’s quiet descent into neofeudalism

thehub.ca

Very interesting article. IMHO, a strong Central government is necessary for National Defense, transportation infrastructure, international trade policies, LEGAL immigration policies and Federal taxation to support THOSE entities alone. Provinces or states should have the responsibility and Constitutional jurisdiction over most everything else. Whether it's Canada or the US or many other countries, this has been turned upside down in recent years by the ruling elite and not for the betterment of their citizens.

 

[Altitude sickness]

Apparently, after the Trump administration sanctioned the strike to kill General Soleimani.

Iran gave the US advanced notice of 6 targets they were going to strike. They asked that we not retaliate. They were just showing that they were responding to the killing of Soleimani

 

[Altitude sickness]

Iran retaliates for Gen. Soleimani's killing by firing missiles at U.S. forces in Iraq

There were no reports yet of casualties or damage at the two Iraqi military bases housing U.S. forces.

www.nbcnews.com

No casualties, because we knew what they were going to hit.

 

[Tanks]

...

-I agree on Turkey %100 but I would do the same if I were them and they don't like Arabs over there.

They do like Arab money though. Qatar keeps bailing them out financially.

 

[Doubleplay]

They do like Arab money though. Qatar keeps bailing them out financially.

It's true but who doesn't like Arab money? Including our defense industry here.
Ottomans ruled Middle East for centuries but lost the region because Arabs deceived them and cooperated with British(Lawrence of Arabia) and attacked them from behind.
For that there'll always be bad blood between Turks and Arabs and most Arabs don't consider Turkey as a muslim country because of their secular constitution and modern laws adopted from Switzerland.

 

[Altitude sickness]

With the earlier discussion on this thread around the subject of solar flares , and CME’s

I’m curious why the US wouldn’t get all of our equipment away from Yemen and just pop off a couple EMP pulse bombs over Yemen and Iran nothing but equipment is destroyed.

I know it is sensitive on exactly what we have. and we don’t want to start that by having somebody do it to us but it seems like it’s about due

 

[Doubleplay]

With the earlier discussion on this thread around the subject of solar flares , and CME’s

I’m curious why the US wouldn’t get all of our equipment away from Yemen and just pop off a couple EMP pulse bombs over Yemen and Iran nothing but equipment is destroyed.

I know it is sensitive on exactly what we have. and we don’t want to start that by having somebody do it to us but it seems like it’s about due

There are Non Nuclear Electro Magnetic Pulse Weapons(NNEMP) but you won't get accurate answers on this subject from this forum because most of it is classified.

 

[Altitude sickness]

Yeah, I don’t need the design specs or the parameters of how far it damages

but it’s strange that we wouldn’t cook off a few over strategic areas in Iran and all of Yemen. It would effectively put them back into the early 19th century without killing them out right

Of course, hardened military complexes or equipment wouldn’t be affected because all you need is a faraday cage, or a metal structure to protect equipment, but most of the country would be set back centuries

 

[sestoppelman]

End of earth possibilities really dont interest me, or cause me any angst. Fact is if these things happen we wont be able to do anything about it, they cant for the most part be prevented so may as well just go on with life while you have it.
Like the guy said in Enter the Dragon, "wont worry about it till it happens, I'll be too busy looking good!".

 

[WAB]

No it is the third holiest site in Islam. They would also kill more Arab Muslims than Jews. If they were to ever target a city in Israel, it would be Tel Aviv. Destruction of Tel Aviv would destroy Israel as a functioning state. Nearly 50% of the population lives there and virtually all the institutions that allow a nation to function are there.

I’ve been to a lot of tough places, but I think the Temple Mount may be the most spiritually dark place I have been. Police travel in packs with riot gear staged, everyone seems to be on edge waiting for the next blow up.

 

[Zambezi]

I respect all your posts Zambezi, but this is military idealism. It sounds exactly like the "shock and awe" crowd under Rumsfeld who were convinced Iraq would collapse under precision strikes and any US ground force involvement would be purely as a mop up effort lasting a few weeks.

I agree the shock and awe thing was ill advised. I'm not talking about that. I'm suggesting a good pasting without the ground invasion thereafter. This would purely be a devastating series of strikes to firstly ensure they are put on their heels for a decade or two and secondly let them know they areally are just a pimple on the butt that is the middle east "powerhouses"

I didn't leap from drones to nuclear weapons ignoring everything in between. However, I did leap to the first weapon that I would be certain could actually take out such buried facilities. The only other military option, in my professional opinion, that I could offer that same certainty would be an infantryman. There is whole is a whole lot of Iran between any entry point and those facilities.

I will definitely defer to your military and strategic experience. But I am not advocating an invasion or trying conquer Iran purely via the air. I am saying, allowing them to continue unopposed is mindboggling and will embolden them. A devastating show of real power that puts them back decades is what is required. Failure to do so will lead them to believe they are invincible. And a real nuclear player.

econd, what strategic goals do you believe a military could accomplish that would assure destruction of Iranian nuclear development and inability to retaliate destructively across the Middle East that didn't entail invasion? The targets you mention would certainly be on any target list, but none of them assure the first two goals are met. I mean this is a serious question. The oil refining facilities of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are simply impossible to defend against a wave of ballistic missiles. Like all such refineries, they do not respond well to even the smallest explosions, much less several thousand pound warheads going off inside the wire. Iran would be irrational not to respond to a an air campaign in just that way.

I would love to actually nullify their nuke program and facilities but doing so with either air ir ground invasion is not an option. Like I said earlier there are more subtle or ingenious ways to hamstring their capability (Israeli operation to speed up their centrifuges). We have some very clever people in the military and intelligence agencies ( I know as an army man military intelligence might be a sticking point. Even if it is only a Hollywood stereotype).

I do not think that a US pounding of Iran would result in Iran destroying the Saudi or Emirati oil infrastructure. There is no gain for Iran. It would only result in Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, NATO and other interested parties levelling Iran.

I will again note that no war or undeclared military campaign has been won by air power alone. If you haven't, you should read T.R. Fehrenbach. I wish Donald Rumsfeld had,

You may fly over a land forever; you may bomb it, atomize it, and wipe it clean of life - but if you desire to defend it, protect it, and keep it for civilization, you must do this on the ground, the way the Roman Legions did - by putting your soldiers in the mud.

Agreed. As mentioned above and previously.

And you are correct, a nuclear weapon into the Jafurah Gas Plant would indeed be far more destructive than a couple of 1K warheads. But the effect on world markets would be very similar and very nearly equally economically destructive. A real conundrum isn't it.

Agreed.

One other thing about nuclear weapons. Iran would quickly realize if nuclear armed is that any attempted first use would free the United States to retaliate in kind. It is one reason we actually do not pay much attention to North Korean nuclear saber rattling.

But they bring a bigger stick to the table. Currently they are little more than a pain in the ass. Later we'll all have to kiss their ass.

So, striking Iranian proxies does seem to me to be the most logical course of action. What frustrates me is the administration's dilatant approach to that decision. The first strikes should have been as decisive as possible with no warning. The intent should have been to kill as many of the RGC advisors as possible. For reasons I find unfathomable, we decided to telegraph this operation for days. I am sure Iranian losses were minimal. That to me was a lost opportunity to deliver a far more destructive message.

100% mindboggling! The result of politicians making military decisions.

Finally, perhaps it is because I have spent much of my professional life around Arabs and Islam, but Muslims are not my enemy, and the vast majority of Muslims do not see me as theirs. More importantly, except for a proportionately few Shia fanatics, the Arab world does not see Iran as a religious confrontation. As I noted above, Iran is a non Semitic regional power that threatens Arab goals and objectives.

Agree to disagree. You come from a secular angle and I from a biblical one (It doesn't end well)

One other point. The one real catalyst, beyond Iranian strategic goals, to the current situation is Israel and the lack of any sort of Palestinian solution. It is a festering sore that Tehran and every religious radical in the region exploits every single day.

Once again I agree 100%. The Palestinian issue is a smokescreen for anti Semitic war. If the Israelis were reduced to one block on Ben Gurion avenue and the Palestinians owned the rest they would still wage war. Israel has bent over backwards to the point of cutting their own throats to make peace. The Palestinians are the scourge of the Arab and Jewish existence. Funny how no Arab country will take them and the only people who actually will give them land, hospitals, water, autonomy, etc is the people they have vowed to obliterate.

 

[Zambezi]

I never said you are not informed but I don't agree on some subjects and I'll list them:

-Do you really believe any kind of tightened sanctions will have any more effect on Iran when they can buy and sell anything with Brics countries?

So you're saying the sanctions on Russia have no current effect? And yes, the rest of BRICS is a fraction of their current market.

-Combined Brics if they can get their shit together has the power of a very powerful country and not third rate.


Lovely word "ïf"

You are talking about India, China and to some extend Russia even after their beatdown.

-Do you realize if we engage directly with Iran hundred thousands of people will die in Israel and World economy will spiral into chaos?

Sorry but you're talking out your Democrat end. You are proposing the worst case scenario. Allow me to do the same: Iran develops the bomb, strikes, Israel, Turkeys and Saudi Arabia. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs and Israelis die. The world economy spirals into chaos.

-I agree on Turkey %100 but I would do the same if I were them and they don't like Arabs over there.

 

[Red Leg]

Tucker Carlson, as the West's most recognizable pro-Russian anti-Ukraine broadcaster, is getting movie star treatment and recognition by the state controlled press in Moscow. Apparently, he is angling for an interview of Putin. Must be exciting. Perhaps he has that same proud feeling John Elliot of the New York Herald Tribune had when being praised by Joseph Goebbels in Berlin just after his story rationalizing Kristallnacht in 1938. It is not so different I suppose. Kristalnacht was the fault of the Jews just as the invasion of Ukraine was the fault of the Ukrainian people. Perhaps Elliot was angling for an interview with Hitler.

Of course, Tucker is getting heroic treatment over in the farther right wing reaches of internet news.

 

[Doubleplay]

Tucker Carlson is a low life and will do whatever he can to stay relevant after costing FOX millions of dollars in law suits and getting fired.

 

[LivingTheDream]

I disagree with Tuckers stance on Ukraine but think it is worthwhile to ask questions. But I also find opposing viewpoints interesting.

As far as interviews go, lots of Western media has interviewed Putin including Barbara Walters and Oliver Stone.

I will say that this is Tucker trying to relevant and Putin trying to spin propaganda. But I believe that is the self fulfilling intention of almost every interview.

 

[Corey0372]

Tucker Carlson, as the West's most recognizable pro-Russian anti-Ukraine broadcaster, is getting movie star treatment and recognition by the state controlled press in Moscow. Apparently, he is angling for an interview of Putin. Must be exciting. Perhaps he has that same proud feeling John Elliot of the New York Herald Tribune had when being praised by Joseph Goebbels in Berlin just after his story rationalizing Kristallnacht in 1938. It is not so different I suppose. Kristalnacht was the fault of the Jews just as the invasion of Ukraine was the fault of the Ukrainian people. Perhaps Elliot was angling for an interview with Hitler.

Of course, Tucker is getting heroic treatment over in the farther right wing reaches of internet news.

Should he go to the Bandera Book Club meeting with Oleh Odnoroshenko and Dmytro Yarosh after this trip?

 

[Brent in Az]

 

[Corey0372]

I saw this, so now you guys have to