Iran v. U.S.

#1
V

Vol Main

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Messages
12,792
Likes
4,446
#1
The Arkenstone -

"Shahab Ballistic Missiles
While China might be sweeping the headlines for their famed “carrier killer” ballistic missile, Iran similarly may deploy their ballistic missiles in an anti-ship role. In November, 2006, Then-General of the IRGC, Yahya Rahim Safavi had this to say on the subject in an interview on Iranian channel 2 TV:

'The Shahab-3 missiles has a cluster warhead and and consequently, it's destructive power exceeds several kilometers, because the warhead spreads into bomblets. It can be used against large bases, large concentrations of people, aircraft carriers, even against aircraft carriers because it explodes from above so it can completely destroy an aircraft carrier with it's planes.'

So, while it's not the same as China's program for sure, it still represents an interesting strategic choice. Furthermore, given China and Iran's cooperation in the anti-ship weapon development, one shouldn't be quick to ignore the 'coincidence' that both countries are pursuing roughly the same path."
 
#5
#5
#8
#8
prop·a·gan·da   [prop-uh-gan-duh]
noun
1.
information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.
2.
the deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc.
3.
the particular doctrines or principles propagated by an organization or movement.
 
#9
#9
volmaverick said:
Would Take Hundreds of Planes, Ships, and Missiles???

Well the writer is wrong and very stupid!

it would just take ONE BOMB!!!

Maybe two smaller ones if we wanted to play with them a bit.

They would get the message real quick!
Click to expand...

You have no clue what you are talking about. Congrats.
 
#10
#10
My brother (air force) just got word they will be deploying to Kuwait in April. With all the rhetoric being thrown out an escelated military standoff is undoubtedly in the process.

This election will decide the course of events, I fully expect Israel to react decisively if If Obama is reelected. If Romney is elected it will buy more time. I'm not endorsing either candidate with this particular post just saying how I see it playing out.
 
#11
#11
Obama: US will 'do what we must' to stop Iran getting nuclear weapons - World News

"Make no mistake: A nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained. It would threaten the elimination of Israel, the security of Gulf nations, and the stability of the global economy," it adds. "It risks triggering a nuclear-arms race in the region, and the unraveling of the non-proliferation treaty. That is why a coalition of countries is holding the Iranian government accountable. And that is why the United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."
 
#12
#12
KB5252 said:
My brother (air force) just got word they will be deploying to Kuwait in April. With all the rhetoric being thrown out an escelated military standoff is undoubtedly in the process.

This election will decide the course of events, I fully expect Israel to react decisively if If Obama is reelected. If Romney is elected it will buy more time. I'm not endorsing either candidate with this particular post just saying how I see it playing out.
Click to expand...

Good to see you KB - best wishes for your brother
 
#14
#14
Thanks guys, wish I had more free time but work keeps me very busy. Miss the nation but glad to have the work.
 
#16
#16
I don't know what you guys are talking about with all this war stuff, we have The Nobel Peace Prize POTUS in office.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#18
#18
7thgroupvolfan said:
Iran just talks alot of sh!t, nothing more.
Click to expand...

They do probably more than you think.

obama_israel_iran_nukes_noise.jpg


Court reveals Iranian operatives in charge of Obama’s Iran policy since 2009 « « Coach is RightCoach is Right

A ruling handed down on September 13th by the D.C. District Federal Court has finally made clear what many have known for years–that the Obama Administration’s Iran policy was initiated and advanced by a group with illicit, hidden ties to the Iranian Regime and financed by the U.S./Israel hating George Soros.

In 2009, Barack Obama turned over virtually all responsibility and authority for foreign policy negotiations with Iran to Trita Parsi and his National Iranian American Council (NIAC). Founded by Parsi in 2003, the Washington based NIAC is a powerful lobbying group which is “…widely considered the de facto lobby for the Iranian Regime in America.” (1)

Like too many organizations which claim to represent the best interests of the nation of Iran and Iranian-Americans, the NIAC is tightly connected with and known to be funded at least in part by the George Soros empire. Small wonder NIAC advice on dealing with Iran was replete with claims that Israeli propaganda was responsible for the negative image imposed on otherwise peace-loving, misunderstood Iranian mullahs. Not exactly a friend of Israel, is George Soros. (2)

And how did the reputedly “non-partisan,” NIAC suggest the Obama Administration proceed with negotiations? Simple. The Council “…opposes sanctions on Iran, soft-pedals any controversial events in Iran, and counsels “patience” regarding Iran’s stance towards its nuclear program.” (3)

What better way for NIAC representatives to serve their hidden masters in Tehran than by promoting a policy of “peaceful coexistence” between the US and Iran. And to the NIAC, peaceful coexistence meant “…acceptance of [the] Iranian government, accepting Iranian hegemony in the Gulf and its place in other parts of the Middle East, removal of sanctions and pressure against Iran, abandon of assistance to the Iranian people’s resistance against the regime and etc.” (4)

For the U.S., the consequences of this game of intrigue played by the Administration’s hand-picked, Iranian representatives are summed up in this statement by Barack Obama: “I’ve made it clear that the United States respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and is not interfering with Iran’s affairs.” And indeed, this is the path Barack Obama has followed. Not exactly reassuring words from a president charged with keeping the American public safe from a nuclear-bound administration of religious fanatics dedicated to our demise. (7)

And it is thanks to an ill-advised lawsuit that proof of the NIAC’s wrongdoing has finally been placed before the American public. In 2008, Trita Parsi and his organization filed a defamation suit against perpetual critic Seid Dai. Dai had publicly accused Parsi of secretly working with the ruling Iranian Regime against the interests of the United States and the Iranian people. But when Parsi filed suit hoping to silence-through-intimidation such potentially lethal criticism, it opened the floodgates of legal discovery allowing Dai to demand internal NIAC documents and emails which eventually “… confirmed [Parsi’s] ties to the [Iranian] mullahs…” (5)

Not only did recovered emails reveal that Parsi had held “…numerous secret meetings with top level IRI [Islamic Republic of Iran] officials,” “Court documents show the NIAC was guilty of: lying to members of Congress, fraudulent membership numbers, tax law violations and evasions, Lobbying Disclosure Act violation, the Foreign Agents Registration Act violations, foreign bank accounts, defrauding of federal funds, bribing of eye witnesses, etc…” (6)

And so egregious were NIAC attempts to duck its legal responsibilities of discovery, Judge John Bates dismissed the Parsi defamation suit, ordered sanctions against Parsi for his failure to comply with discovery and ordered Parsi to pay significant percentages of Dai’s costs and fees.

This is an immensely important story, not surprisingly “missed” in its entirety by the mainstream media.
Click to expand...

wclnpj.gif
 
#20
#20
"Iran...it's just a tiny country. The US would wipe it off the face of the map."

Barack Obama, some time during the 2008 campaign. Yes, he included a couple of other nations, but IIRC, he was still hurting from Hillary's "3am phone call" ad.
 
#22
#22
voltnh said:
prop·a·gan·da   [prop-uh-gan-duh]
noun
1.
information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.
2.
the deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc.
3.
the particular doctrines or principles propagated by an organization or movement.
Click to expand...

Side note...the US has perfected the bomb umbrella also known as the force field with an effective radius of 100 miles... beat that
 
#23
#23
Vol Main said:
U.S. Attack on Iran Would Take Hundreds of Planes, Ships, and Missiles | Danger Room | Wired.com

This article provides a war scenario between the U.S. and Iran, using one of the better authorities on the subject as its source.
Click to expand...

Iran fought Iraq for eight years and a stalemate.

The USA defeated Iraq in less than twenty four hours or a little longer if you want to believe Baghdad Bob.
And that even though our supposed NATO ally wouldn't allow us to use their country to make a two front attack.

You are talking strictly tactical stuff here and fail to mention Iranian submarines etc.

Let's talk strategic over the long run.

Iran is working 24 7 to produce nuclear weapons.

They have shipped missiles to Venezuela capable of reaching the USA.

They have launched a couple of satelites, so that means they have achieved or have closely proximated the ability to deliver nuclear warheads to America and that doesn't even consider the real possibility of smuggling in weapons via shipping containers etc.







PKT_VOL said:
Way to make that non-partisan news, partisan. Kudos.
Click to expand...

If it wasn't a patisan issue main and the slimes wouldn't even be reporting on it.

Let's see, Carter I helped overthrow our best ally in the mideast other than Israel in exchange for the murderous marxist mullahs.

The Shah was our ally and was slowly moving his country into the twentieth century with more rights for women, protection for minorities and increased manufacturing and westernization in his country.

Carter II has helped overthrow Mubarak who was also an ally and who has been trying to do the same for Egypt that the Shah had been doing for Iran and what do we have in exchange?

The muslim brotherhood that was allied with Hitler in WWII and has been the mother of al-qaeda, hamas, hexbollah and practically every other islamo fascist terrorist group in the world.

Now we find that Obama has been cooperating with iran behind the scenes.

I oppose traitors no matter to what party the belong.

In this case we have a marxist president pretending to be a democrat.
 
#25
#25
DjCrenshaw said:
Didn't the shah torture and murder many of his own people?
Click to expand...

The mullahs tortured and killed more of their own people in one year than the Shah had in 30+ years.

One of the things that helped bring down the Shah was the fact that Carter wouldn't let the Shah have rubber bullets for riot control.

Our experiences on 9/11, 2012 demostrate how well organized moslem riots can be, they did so in 30+ countries.

Some thing the Shah DID NOT do.

Continually call for wiping another country of the face of the map.

Sponsor a national holiday called; Hate America Day.

Attempt to develope nuclear weapons with which to threaten other countries.

Sponsor the rape of political prisoners both male and female.

Deploy missiles to other countries that target central Europe and America.

Sponsor al-qaeda front line troops in Europe.

Sponsor other islamo-fascist terrorist groups such as hezbollah world wide.

Oppress it's Christian (and other religious including Zoroastrian and Ba'hain) minorities in the name of islam.

Suppress women and promote sharia law.

That's just a partial list of activities by the current Iranian regime that controls one of the most repressive governments in the world.

And Carter has a room in his Atlanta based Carter Center devoted to praise of the Ayatollah.

Go figga!

No doubt Obama will someday have a center with a room devoted to the praise of Morsi.

16030


They also claim Mubarak was repressive but then he sure as hell didn't allow Christians to be crucified in front of the presidential palace or to tell us to cancel the 1st amendment or face the consequences.

Now did he?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top