| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| Former Mossad chief: Israeli strike on Iran will lead to regional war |
| 2011-11-30 |
| Posted by:Durnham Freebody |
| #16 TOPIX > IRAN SPOOKED BY US, ISRAELI COVERT OPS. * SAME > IRAN NAVAL VESSELS ARMED WID "QADER" CRUISE MISSLES, i.e. the most potent + capable in Iran's inventory. * SAME > ARMED IRANIAN SHIP [MV Assa] WORRIES INDIA. ME > What's interesting for me is that I've had personal Dreams/Visions of this ship. ET TU, MOUD - FIRST US INTEL-PYWAR, THEN THE RUSSIANS, NOW THE IRANIANS??? --------- VARIOUS BLOGGERS = In wake of Pakistan [Russia?] closing down US-NATO land-based Supply Routes into Afghanistan, the so-called "IRAN ROUTE" IS CLEARLY THE NEXT MOST OBVIOUS/EXPEDITIOUS OPTION FOR THE US-NATO. A viable alternate route would be from the "TURKEY ROUTE" vee Turkey + ex-Soviet SSRS [Armenia + -Stans] in Central Asia, BUT IS LONGER + LIKELY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE MORE DIRECT "RUSSIA ROUTE". "AFGHAN AIRLIFT", land or sea-based, would not only be cost-prohibitive but effectively moot iff Pakistan fails to allow US cargo planes to use its airspace to fly inside Pak along the PAK-IRAN border. ITS A GIVEN THAT IRAN WON'T. IIUC, IOW PAKISTAN'S VIEW > THE US-NATO EITHER CONCEDE + FORMALLY APOLOGIZE, ETC. TO PAKISTAN'S SATISFACTION; OR ELSE THE AFGHAN SITUATION FOR US-NATO STEADILY DETERIORATES + DESTABILIZES IN FAVOR OF THE MILTERRS DUE TO LACK OF RELIABLE SUPPLY/LOGISTICS, I.E. ROTATION + REPLACEMENT, BE IT MILITARY ANDOR CIVILIAN. IOW, TO PROTECT + SAVE AFGHANISTAN FROM MILTERR TAKEOVER, THE US-NATO MUST INVADE IRAN??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2011-12-01 00:21 |
| #15 Let's see,...Troop positions in IRQ, PAK, AFG, LIB and SML. Rearming NATO with fresh meat after the Joint LIB exercise. New rockets to ISL and TRK. Carrier fleet(s) in MED and IO. Soviets moving, and a new election coming up. Practiced logistics across the board. Yeah, it's about time. |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2011-11-30 23:59 |
| #14 He probably just wants to say outloud what everyone sort of knows so that those begging Israel to do something can't claim anger and surprise later. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2011-11-30 14:35 |
| #13 No, it's pretty much home-grown. Russia and China are backers because Iran and Pakistan are counterbalances to both Western influence and other nations within Iran and Pakistan's geographical areas. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2011-11-30 12:56 |
| #12 I dont know who is the worse enemy an open enemy like Iran or a lying ally/enemy like Pakistan. Are China and Russia pulling the strings in both countries? |
| Posted by: Glatle Glealing7009 2011-11-30 12:16 |
| #11 No 'moose. His simply believes covert style ops better than straightforward military ops---"if you're a hammer" etc... |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2011-11-30 10:18 |
| #10 This guy is doing one of three things. Either he is being deliberately treasonous, leaking sensitive information to the media; or he is doing so as a favor to the government, to get the word out that would be problematic done officially, yet sending a message to Iran and others; or he is putting out disinformation for nebulous purposes. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2011-11-30 10:11 |
| #9 There's a lot of war in Afghanistan. semi-civil war/WOT in Pakistan, something going BOOM in Iran, Iranian backed terrorists bombing and shooting in Iraq, a civil war in Syria, and shooting and boomings going on in Lebanon. So, how do you lead to something that already is on going? Now an adjustment of intensity is something else. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2011-11-30 08:44 |
| #8 Regional war would still be a better outcome than Iran with Nuclear capability. Once they have nukes, you can bet they will enslave Israel or wipe them from the map. Then it will go from regional to global nuclear war. The Iranian leadership are a cancer on this world and we need to understand that killing cancer is painful but necessary, otherwise the cancer wins. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2011-11-30 08:06 |
| #7 What doesn't lead to regional war in that part of the world? |
| Posted by: BrerRabbit 2011-11-30 04:58 |
| #6 4000 years of history teach that disregarding gentiles' promises to "Solve the Jewish Problem" is stupid. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2011-11-30 04:01 |
| #5 Despite the anti-Israeli rhetoric, Iran's nuclear program is about holding the Gulf littoral states to ransom and taking over the Shiia Arab areas, which is where almost all the oil is. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2011-11-30 02:40 |
| #4 But we can't just use nukes and wipe them all out, Meir---at least not until EUrodrekia collapses. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2011-11-30 01:31 |
| #3 Also from TOPIX > PANETTA: US AT TURNING POINT ON WOT, SECURITY, after 10 years at war since 2001. Yuuuuppp. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2011-11-30 00:35 |
| #2 Where will a failure to strike Iran lead? |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2011-11-30 00:34 |
| #1 Compare wid TOPIX > [Examiner.com] KING OF THE SOUTH [Iran] WILL HAVE FIVE NUKES BY APRIL 2012 -FOUR MONTHS. ARTIC = claims that the Bammer WH has reliable INTEL supporting this conclusion. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2011-11-30 00:09 |