Iran, Issues and Possible War

Posts: 707

Quote:

Is Iran preparing for a US war?

By Amir Taheri, Special to Gulf News

Incredible though it may sound, there are signs that Tehran may be preparing for a military confrontation with the United States and has convinced itself that it could win.

The first sign came last June with the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president of the Islamic republic, an event that completed the conquest of all levers of power by the most radical elements of the establishment.

Since then the revolutionary factions have conducted a little publicised purge of the military, the security, the civil service, state-owned corporations and media. The most significant purges have affected the military high command.

Among those replaced are the defence minister, the commander-in-chief of the regular army and his four deputies, 11 senior commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and five commanders of the paramilitary Mobilisation of the Dispossessed. Some of the purged officers have been 'parked' in a mysterious new organ called The Defence Guidance Commission attached to the office of the 'Supreme Guide' Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The minister of intelligence and security and the minister of the interior, who controls the police and the gendarmerie, have also been replaced.

Another sign that Tehran may be preparing for war is the appointment of military officers to posts normally held by civilians, such as governors, mayors and directors of major public corporations.

But, perhaps, the surest sign yet is the military build-up under way in the five provinces bordering Iraq. The region, with a population of 20 million, has been put under the control of the IRGC which has also taken over units of the regular army, including the 88th Division and the border police. Iran is estimated to have 250,000 troops in the area, its biggest military build-up since the end of the Iran-Iraq war in 1988.

One of the first acts of the new cabinet led by Ahmadinejad was to approve an "emergency" fund of $700 million (Dh2.57 billion) to be disbursed at the discretion of "the supreme guide" for "sacred defence purposes".

Defence disbursements

The new administration has also decided to speed up defence disbursements under a five-year plan approved by Khamenei last year. The plan aims at doubling the military budget by 2010. But it now seems that, thanks to rising oil revenues, most of the plan could be completed by 2008.

In the past few weeks top regime figures, including Khamenei and Ahmadinejad, have made a series of unscheduled visits to Mash'had, Iran's second largest city. One curious fact revealed during these visits is that a bunker-like structure to house the 'supreme guide' is being completed close to the holy shrine of Reza, the Eighth Imam. The complex could also house the top echelon of government, including the president, the cabinet and members of the Islamic Majlis (parliament).

The choice of Mash'had is not accidental. The city is located 1,000 kilometres from Tehran and thus as far as possible inside Iran and away from American fire power in Iraq and the Arabian Gulf.

The United States is also expected to shrink from attacks against the Mash'had bunker for fear of collateral damage to the holy shrine of the Imam a few hundred yards away. The summer's comings and goings in Mash'had have provoked rumours that Khamenei plans to appoint Abbas Va'ez Tabasi, the mullah who runs the Eighth Imam's foundation, as "deputy supreme guide", just in case!

The belief that the Americans would not attack sites close to the holy shrines has also led to the creation of a massive new military base at Fadak, a suburb of the holy city of Qom, south of Tehran, where the Eighth Imam's sister is buried. Work on the base which covers an area of 7.2 square kilometres started in August.

Piecing together the bits of the jigsaw, one may guess the outline of Tehran's scenario for what it believes is an inevitable clash with the United States:

• The diplomatic tussle over Iran's nuclear plans goes to the Security Council which will fail to take a decision thanks to Russian and Chinese vetoes.

• The US, after much huffing and puffing, launches air strikes against Iran's nuclear installations (Tehran loves Israel to also participate because that would give the Islamic Republic a better claim to be fighting on behalf of Islam as a whole.).

• Iran retaliates by ordering the forces it controls inside Iraq to attack American and British troops. At the same time the Lebanese branch of the Hezbollah launches massive rocket attacks against Israel while Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, whose leaders spent the past month in Tehran meeting Khamenei and his aides, organise a wave of suicide operations against Israel from Occupied Jerusalem and the West Bank.

• The United States and its British allies, stationed in southern Iraq, launch a three pronged attack, from Shalamcheh, Hamroun and Shatt Al Arab to seize control of Khuzestan, the province that accounts for 70 per cent of Iran's oil production.

• Iranian Special Forces attack Iraq from the Zaynalkosh salient, south of the Kurdish provinces, some 80 kilometres from Baghdad's first defences in Ba'aqubah.

• Hazara Shiites strike against Kabul, the Afghan capital, from Maydanshahr while Pushtun warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and the remnants of the Taliban, some of whom are under Iranian protection, attack across Afghanistan.

• The Americans and their allies attack Khuzestan.

• Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz.

• The Americans attack the Iranian provinces of Kermanshahan and Kurdistan.

• US-led forces attack across the Mandali-Ilam axis. The Iranians retreat to the Zagross mountain range, the first line of Iran's natural defences. (To fight along the Zagross the IRGC is building new bases at Khorramabad, Pessyan, Borujerd, Zagheh and Malayer in the province of Luristan. The bases would assure the logistics of a quarter of a million troops and provide temporary shelter for half a million refugees from the border. These bases will complement older ones further west, at Sahneh and Kangavar. )

• Oil prices top $100 (Dh367) and the global economy plunges into a crisis.

• Americans launch cruise missiles against "regime targets" in Tehran. But the regime is already in Mash'had, protected by the Eighth Imam.

• Global TV networks air images of "indiscriminate carnage" and "wanton destruction" in Iranian cities.

• The Security Council meets in emergency and orders a ceasefire while the American media and Congress revolt against President George W. Bush and his "pre-emptive" strategy.

• Anti-Bush marches in Washington and dozens of other cities with Hollywood figures and other celebrities calling for Bush to be overthrown.

• Bush accepts a UN-brokered ceasefire and withdraws his forces.

• The Islamic Republic emerges victorious from what Ahmadinejad sees as "a clash of civilisations".

• The Americans leave Iraq and Afghanistan as Bush becomes a lame-duck for the rest of his presidency.

• The Islamic Republic gains new domestic legitimacy and proceeds to crush its opponents as "enemies of the nation and of Islam".

• Iran can speed up making its nuclear weapons arsenal

http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/05/09/21/182774.html

Posts: 1

they think they could win, but theres just no chance in hell

Posts: 443

	Dudeman wrote:
	they think they could win, but theres just no chance in hell

Yeah right! For to long now USA and it's puppet-master Israel has always thought that they could dominate and destroy any other country on this earth. Israel found out last year when it started picking on Lebanon just how much the muslim world would tolerate it's bullshit. When Hezbollah troops started blasting Israeli tanks into scrap metal thanks to Russian supplied shoulder launched anti-tank missiles. After the Israeli bloodlust of bombing innocent civillians and killing over 1,000 of them the tables were turned when Israel lost some tanks and they beat a hasty retreat.
Iran also has Russian supplied aircraft, as well as the Russian "sunburn" missile which can take out a Nimitz class aircraft carrier just by using a conventional warhead and advoids detection by radar and the US Phalanx close in weapons system (used to destroy incoming missiled) is totally useless against them.
We have seen in Iraq and before that in Vietnam just how unbeatable the US is

You might also want to goto
www.vialls.com
And read up about the sunburn missile, remember Vietnam and Iraq have just shown us how "unbeatable" the US and it's allies are.

Posts: 226

	Dudeman wrote:
	they think they could win, but theres just no chance in hell

Wake up to reality Dude!

I agree with false flag, the US of A has not got a good track record, any previous wins have come via other countries military coups, America provides the hardware not the manpower. They are fighting on too many fronts in order to comlete their mission of world domination, ie they have the tiger by the tail. The days of the Super power classification are over. Their super powers are in industry and business, which is the true driving force of the NWO.

Not only Iraq and Viet Nam are the true indicators of their dud ops but also Afghanistan. What a farcical mess that is, and it's been going on since 2002 with no end in sight there either.

The Hydra is a pussy cat when it comes to muscle.

The whole idea of conquering Iraq and Iran is to gain more control of the corporate world via OIL to complete the scenario. Not to mention to hide their REAL agenda, which is to provide an escape route when the Sun boils over.

BUT if renewable, natural energy were to come into it's own (which is fast catching on with the fully aware brigade) it would spell the end of power for the U.S.

By attacking Iran America will earn the wrathe of not only the muslim world, (and ultimately unite them), but also all other democratic countries of Europe who have the most to lose if total war breaks out.

If your jumping up and down in glee and hoping that America wins the race to world domination you better start packing survival gear right now, because IF it should happen, then all of Americans will suffer first and foremost. And if you don't know what I am talking about I suggest you go and get yourself informed ... before it's a fait accompli.

Posts: 519

	Quote:
	they think they could win, but theres just no chance in hell

...

Posts: 4

No chance in hell, eh? Well it depends on what the objectives are.

- Destroying their nuclear facilities.

It is possible that they can destroy their facilities, but a number of points must be considered.

i) Will conventional weapons be sufficient? Some of their facilities are 75ft below ground and are heavily fortified. Add to that, they have TOR-M1's sitting on the ground above. If not, the use of nuclear warheads will be a public and international immoral disaster for the USA. That they would be 'low yield' is irrelevant, that they would be atomic weapons would be relevant.

ii) Will attacking Irans nuclear industry force them into actually chasing an atomic weapons programme? (Note: I would no problems with that, only pointing it out as Counter-productive).

- "Regime change".

No chance in hell? You're right. But for the USA. To bring about a regime change you need a land invasion. Ain't happenin'. At least success ain't happening, whether they're mad enough to attempt it is another thought. Iran has over 12,000,000 troops. The USA has 1.5. A land invasion will require a draft. US draftees vs Iranian hardcore paramilitary = lamb/sheep/slaughter.

Iran also a great natural terrain for defensive measures, as the article has suggested. As someone else has mentioned here, they're also in possesion of Moskit missiles. US carriers are defenseless against them because the Moskit was designed for exactly that. Why then are US carriers positioned in such a bold manner in the Gulf. False flag? Possibly. Iran can also easily hit the US Greenzone in Iraq.

Come to Iraq, the Mahdi army will launch a full offensive should Iran be attacked. They'll no doubt go for the Kuwaiti fuel line, which unfortunately for the US is the only one feeding their army in Iraq.

Iran is also producing their new MBT. As far as i'm aware, its reverse engineered from captured Abrams tanks. Although i wouldn't expect it to play a major role by the time this conflict starts because i'm not sure how many would be available, if any. But -- having said that, Irans military has been very tightly sealed in recent years (with good reason) so its difficult to tell how many, if any they currently or would have active. So finding info on it is quite difficult. One photographer has caught snaps of it, though. Aesthetically, it does resemble the Abrams. Although i'm inclined to believe the tank in this particular photograph is a mock-up, i'm told it has been shown in live manoeuvres on Iranian TV. I'd say during the conflict their workhorse though would definitely be their uprated T-72 variants.

I think the most important thing to be realised here is, Iran is not Iraq of 2003. There are many many idiots in this World, and this is a naive comparison they have in their feeble minds. When Iran is attacked, boy, are they ever in for a shock.

Posts: 638

with our shit military usa wouldnt stand a chance... however, if they truely wanna fvck not just iran but the whole world over all they have to do is hit the "i win" button....

Posts: 499

If you are referring to whatever secret weapons the federal US might have by the "I Win button", then I would agree...

I can't find my source for this info, I saw it in a documentary...an Iraqi man describing how a US tank destroyed a bus-load of Iraqi civilians without damaging the bus. The travelers in the bus were dismembered and all their insides (brains, organs) were found outside of their bodies. He stressed that the bus took no physical damage.

There are other reports of unusual weapons being used by the US to be found.

Posts: 638

1 sub packed with nukes = "i win" button

but secret weapons are too i guess, tho i see those having a more sinister purpose...

Posts: 10

Listen, I'm in the US navy right now as an Airman in a strike/fighter squadron. On my last deployment I was on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln serving a 5 month RIMPAC for operation valiant shield. The CO of our squadron had set up a Captain's Call for all the E-3 (Airman) and below which is basically where we get to ask him questions about our squadron and other things.

Most of us just asked him obvious questions like "Are we still going to Guam?" and "Is cruise going to be extended?" Just stuff like that. One question in paticular though was something about the carrier attacking Iran last minute. As this idea presented itself, it lead to a serious discussion about what would happen and why. Before you know it, someone asked if the carrier had any secret ordanace(weapons) for the F-18's to attack Iran with. Now, our Commanding Officer was a native Texan (Dr. Strangelove anyone?) couldn't tell us directly about these 'secret weapons' if there were any, but he did say this. "If we do attack Iran, we won't use nuclear weapons, but something much much better. And we would win."

When he said that, it scared the shit out of me. Although, it's probably just fluff, right?

Posts: 443

Anything at all is possible. With all the money spent on US "black ops" and ultra secret research I shudder to think what weaponry is now available. But i'm guessing it's stuff that would make Star Wars blasters and turbo-lasers look out-dated by comparison. I have read numerous reports of US testing of secret weapons in Iraq involving energy beam technology..very scary stuff.
But then again who knows what Iran has up its sleeve. Remember that during the height of the soviet union they too were testing a lot of ultra secret weaponry. One of those weapons is in the exclusion zone around Chernobyl and was sometype of radio transmitter that was designed to alter a person's brain waves. Heck look at some of the technology the third reich had back in the 1940's!

Posts: 499

Quoting Ujika (who was quoting his CO):

	Quote:
	"If we do attack Iran, we won't use nuclear weapons, but something much much better. And we would win."

My father got high enough into the military to declare with confidence that the military has technology that is about 20 years ahead of what we know about. After the militarized technology is obsolete, they commercialize aspects of it for sale to the civilian populations. He talked about the "non-lethal" weapons before they were used in Iraq. (Specifically, the type that damages or destroys eardrums or eyes.) This was about the time of the Mogadishu Mile in 1993.

Posts: 4

If they did have something revolutionary, it sounds plausible that Iran would take the brunt. Iran ought to be a tough little nut to crack for the US. But "much much better" than Nuclear weapons?

I mean what the hell?

It reminds me on certain exerpts from the Goebbels diaries when he talked about a non-nuclear weapon so awesome and vast, it was sure to change the war (circa Winter '45). Historian Igor Witkowski wrote a book on it - his implication was that it was anti-gravitatonal technology.

Posts: 8183

Wars aren't just fought physically; they're also fought mentally and by people who aren't or shouldn't be the real enemy.

Posts: 108

Let me just put this into a bit of perspective for you as far as what the USA is able to do. There are roughly 20-30 submarines which circle somewhere around the globe. These submarines on average carry 16 Nuclear warheads each. The submarines are undetectable by any radar, sonar, etc., standards today. 1 submarine has enough Nuclear warheads to destroy human civilization on earth. The USA has THOUSANDS of nuclear warheads. I live in San Diego. I am surrounded by Marines, Navy, Seals, you name it. Both my roommates are in the Navy and on the USS Nimitz (currently deployed to the gulf). This information I just gave you is common knowledge given to me by my roommates as well as other friends in the Navy. No one religion, country, power, nation will EVER take down the USA because when push comes to shove the USA will destroy the world......

Humans and their struggle for power sickens me..