Article

2008-05-05 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

U.S. drawing up plans to strike Iranian backed terrs

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2008-05-05 00:00|| || Front Page|| [1 views ] Top
File under: Govt of Iran

#1 DEMOCRATICUNDERGROUND.com/TOPIX > SUNDAY TIMES: ISRAELI EVIDENCE JUSTIFIES IRAN ANTI-NUCLEAR STRIKE; + REDDIT > COUNTERPUNCH.org - THE RETURN OF LIMITED NUCLEAR WARFARE. RAND Study - Over next ten+ years, America faces an increasing number of small nuclear nations-powers, to include from NON-TRADITIONAL ORGANZ ENTITIES [read - Terror Groups-Networks] More importantly, new nuclear nations-powers,etc. wid PENCHANT TO RESORT TO USING CHEAP BUT EFFEC STEALTHY NUKE = STRATEGIC WEAPONS DELIVERY SYSTEMS, AS WELL AS LAUNCHING NUCLEAR WEAPONS IMMEDIATELY AND FIRSTLY IN A MAJOR CRISIS, e.g. "USE THEM OR LOSE THEM" "BOLT FROM THE BLUE".

ALso, YOMIURI [Japan] > GOVTS. GIVES OK FOR US WORK ON [Joint JPN-US][BMD-TMD Interceptor]MULTIPLE WARHEADS. Multiple Attack Vehix = Multiple Intercepting Vehix.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2008-05-05 03:02|| 2008-05-05 03:02|| Front Page Top

#2 This is where espionage protocols come into play. As with military operations, "escalation" is a factor. This means if the US wants to send them a message, it does so in a covert manner.

For example, if there is a training camp, it just suddenly stops radio traffic. When they arrive to investigate, everyone in camp is either dead or missing, with no obvious indication as to who is responsible.

This says two things. One, that we could do it. And two, that we did it in such a leisurely manner that we cleaned up after. This adds a considerable element of fear to the equation.

Posted by Anonymoose 2008-05-05 09:12|| 2008-05-05 09:12|| Front Page Top

#3 There's a two-step going on here.

The Iraqi government basically stated that their conclusion is that the Iranian 'government' is not involved in supplying the Shiite militas.

Meaning they consider Al Quds Force to be outside the official Iranian government.

Meaning the Iraqi government won't officially protest if their territory is used to launch strikes against IRGC camps, supply depots or personnel with an Al Quds Force support role.

Meaning the Iranian government is forced, in order of likelihood:

a)Acknowledge that the Quds force is indeed an official unit (either verbally or by defending against such attacks), or

b)Stand by and let the attacks against the Quds force happen, or

c) They 'discover the illegal operations' and shut them down.

Posted by Pappy 2008-05-05 14:17|| 2008-05-05 14:17|| Front Page Top

23:58 tipper
23:39 gorb
23:34 Anonymoose
23:19 CrazyFool
23:07 smn
22:57 Silentbrick
22:55 Verlaine
22:52 smn
22:51 Verlaine
22:48 Frank G
22:47 McZoid
22:35 McZoid
22:13 mojo
22:01 JosephMendiola
21:57 mojo
21:53 JosephMendiola
21:52 DMFD
21:47 DMFD
21:45 JosephMendiola
21:40 Deacon Blues
21:39 JosephMendiola
21:37 RWV
21:34 Shieldwolf
21:31 RWV