So now if Bush* bombs Iran WITHOUT nukes we'll all be relieved?

[spanone]

We could be being set up again folks.

[JuniperLea]

1. Like how we are happy to pay $2.50 a gallon for gas... n/t

[walldude]

We bomb Iran with or without nukes and

gas will be alot more than 2.50 a gallon.

[TheDebbieDee]

2. Good point, Spanone......

[incapsulated]

3. Exactly.

This isn't popular and now it's leaked, besides even some in the military are threatening to revolt if nukes are used.

So... they will bomb the usual way. Like they did in Iraq.

It isn't nukes or nothing.

[Lerkfish]

6. if they bomb a nuclear facility, though, it will be the equivalent of a

dirty bomb.

so, it doesn't matter whether they use tacnukes or moabs, the result will be flying radiological debris regardless.

[incapsulated]

8. That's right.

Like the bright idea to blow up chemical weapons in the first Gulf War.

[berni_mccoy]

4. From the Brookings Institute:

On July 8, 1996, the International Court of Justice ruled that any use or threat of use of nuclear weapons, other than possibly in the case where the very survival of a nation was threatened, was against international law. After this landmark decision, it is difficult to legally support the deployment, let alone the new development, of any tactical nuclear weapon? especially one whose development appears to have been motivated by a desire to target non-nuclear weapon states.

And yes, I will be relieved, because there is no way we have the resources to mount a conventional war.

Iran has 2 million ACTIVE DUTY soldiers, a fully equipped army, navy and air-force (all with maintained early 90's Soviet Equipment/Weapons, including Tanks, Helicopters, Figher Jets, Bombers, Cruisers/Destroyers/Battleships and Subs). They have 15 million able bodied, all who have served at least 2 years of active duty and many who have served 4. They have missles that can reach Israel and Europe and would destroy most of our Navy that is in the gulf not to mention launch a full-out invasion of several million troops into Iraq. The Pentagon KNOWS that conventional warefare in Iran is SUICIDE... the only option is bombing/nuking.

[atreides1]

13. So, Answer me this

How does the bombing of nuclear facilities in Iran going to prevent the Iranians from retaliating, by
invading Iraq and launching missiles at all US military facilities in the Gulf region?

And what about those Sunburn anti-ship missiles that they probably have ready to launch against any US military ship that tries to enter the Straits of Hormuz?

Short of a bombing campaign that wipes out all command and control facilities, as well as political
entities, and kills thousands and thousands of Iranian civilians, there will be a conventional war,
and we will lose!!!!!

[berni_mccoy]

14. It's not, but no Pentagon Official is going to put together a conventional

war plan that they know they can't win...

If you don't commit the troops and equipment to a conventional war, you can move them out of harms way while you bomb the hell out of Iran... and who said anything about them just bombing nuclear facilities... of course they'll bomb other targets, including the 15 million people that could serve as military. That's another reason for using nukes... with a pre-emptive nuclear strike, you are going to destroy not only a lot of life but also most of their electronic equipment (nukes give off electro-magnetic pulses that destroy unshielded electronics).

And finally, Bush doesn't give a damn about the damage that would come from such an attack. He only wants to disrupt the Iranian oil supply. If Bush cared about our troops he would have sent in 500,000 troops as recommended by the Pentagon and he would have equipped them properly. But he didn't do that because he wanted to give taxpayer money to defense contractors like Blackwater and Haliburton. That's where the 100's of billions of taxpayer money that is funding the Iraq war has gone.

[Skink]

5. Try this on...

Bush Co. intentionally wishes drag the Rethugs down so then they'll have to support the invasion.They wish to do this because they are oil men and weapons merchants. For them there is no higher purpose.

[5X]

7. If bush drops a firecracker in Iran....

we are screwed.

[movonne]

10. You are damn right we will be screwed...they (Iran) will start bombing

here in America,Europe,cut off oil,we go financial down the drain more than we are now..if we Americans stand for this we will get what we deserve...

[Beelzebud]

9. HELL NO. Why do people seem to think we're that damn simple?

Give me a break.

[incapsulated]

11. Because everyone, the MSM and DU both...

Keep repeating "Nuking Iran! Nuking Iran! Will Bush nuke Iran?! New Yorker says Bush will NUKE Iran!" etc. etc.

The issue should be Bush wants to ATTACK Iran. Nukes or no nukes.

[BlooInBloo]

12. What an asinine inference.

[spanone]

15. It's a bush* pattern. Just asking the question. Asinine?

[BlooInBloo]

17. Overheard the following conversation in the diner today...

Albert: Don't get the beef here - it blows!
June: Really? It's that bad?
Albert: OMFG! It's the worst beef EVER!
June: Oh. So it would be a good idea to get the pork then!
Albert: Most asinine inference EVER. The pork blows too.

[Raksha]

16. You make a VERY good point! n/t

[SPKrazy]

18. I Said This Yesterday (although not so succinctly)

in the idea that people like Hersh may be getting set up

like we all are

will we be relieved if we don't nuke Iran?

I'll be relieved when we get the hell out of the middle east

but I'm afraid that ship has long since sailed since there are permanent bases there.

I'm looking at bombing strikes (some coming from planes flying above the Iranian air space that can hit targets with satellite guided accuracy-of course we all know that isn't always right on- and sooner rather than later)

I'm sure that Iran will be linked more closely with terrorists than Iraq ever was,(because they always were!) and the truth may be that Iraq was just an entry point to the M.E. and that the future holds some scary shit for all of us.