Article

2007-01-18 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

U.S. officials say rumour of attack by Iran not true

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 Anonymoose 2007-01-18 10:51|| || Front Page|| [11 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Well, if the Geraniums pull a "Stark" on us, they better expect some "Vincennes on steroids" action in return. Or - maybe more like a "Dresden" - or even a "Hiroshima".

'Couldn't happen to a more deserving regime.

That "Doomsday" clock that is sitting on five minutes to midnight is more like a Doomsday "Glock" pointed at the temple of the fruitcakes in charge in Tehran.

With two carrier groups soon to be on station together in the vicinity, Iran taking potshots at any US navel vessels is likely to bring some serious thunder and lightning down on them.

Let the games begin - we've been waiting for payback since 1979.

Posted by Lone Ranger 2007-01-18 11:23|| 2007-01-18 11:23|| Front Page Top

#2 I only wish the Iranians were that stupid.

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2007-01-18 11:39|| 2007-01-18 11:39|| Front Page Top

#3 Silence is Golden.

Posted by ed 2007-01-18 11:45|| 2007-01-18 11:45|| Front Page Top

#4 Darth-

I only wish the Iranians were that stupid.

Iranians aren't that stupid, but all it will take is ONE Al-Quds or RG commander to decide that it's a good day to commune with the Prophet, and it's over. I simply do NOT believe that the Iranian Government has full control over these guys.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2007-01-18 11:46|| 2007-01-18 11:46|| Front Page Top

#5 Shoot, all it takes is one lad with an inconvenient flea bite to twitch in the wrong direction with that silly button in the way of his finger (or whatever, y'all know I don't actually know anything about the mechanics of these things).

Posted by trailing wife 2007-01-18 11:56|| 2007-01-18 11:56|| Front Page Top

#6 Maybe Jimmah could lead the charge? Only question is: which side he would choose!

Posted by OyVey1 2007-01-18 12:39|| 2007-01-18 12:39|| Front Page Top

#7 I believe in the military axiom that you should never let your opponent have *any* advantage. Why should we let Iran pick the method, means, target, time and place for their attack?

Instead, we should insert a team of specialists who will obtain the use of an Iranian missile, place some incriminating nuclear material inside the missile, and launch it at a uniquely US target that has multiple anti-missile layered defenses that a gnat on meth couldn't penetrate, just as they are preparing a comprehensive missile defense test.

And, of course, that the team also insert multiple self-destruct devices on to the missile to insure that it is detonated exactly as it should be to leave irrefutable proof that it was a nuclear weapon.

Properly, the missile's flight path should light up Russia's entire defense grid, and be tracked by half a dozen or more non-US satellites.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-01-18 12:58|| 2007-01-18 12:58|| Front Page Top

#8 #4 Mike

That is the problem, they ain't that stupid. They will drag this thing through the press until the public opinion wanes so bad that we wouldn't even provide a tarp for Israel when they attack.
*sigh*

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2007-01-18 15:32|| 2007-01-18 15:32|| Front Page Top

#9 Instead, we should insert a team of specialists who will obtain the use of an Iranian missile, place some incriminating nuclear material inside the missile, and launch it at a uniquely US target that has multiple anti-missile layered defenses that a gnat on meth couldn't penetrate, just as they are preparing a comprehensive missile defense test.

I like it!

1. Insert team
b. Grab control of an Persian Missile
iii. Put the fickle finger power in the warhead (should be purdy easy)
Four. Shoot it a layered defense.
5. Profit!

Posted by Shipman 2007-01-18 16:26|| 2007-01-18 16:26|| Front Page Top

#10 gentlemen, gentlemen. I am not quite sure, and i wouldnt say so anywhere but here, but I am beginning to think we are seeing a turning point.

Check out (or someone post - i always mess these things up) the latest AP article on Baghdad. Mahdi army officials say Sadr City is effectively under siege, due to multiple raids, and they are no longer under Malikis protection. Now this COULD be disinfo from the Sadrists trying to make Maliki look good - but it fits too well with certain other things. A largescale naval buildup near Iran. Harsher rhetoric towards Iran. Condi visiting all the Arab states that dont like Iran. Hints of talks between Israel and Syria (to turn Syria?) The arrests in Irbil. Maybe Im seeing whats not there, but I think I see a plan coming together. A real crackdown on Sadr (but with an out for him - we will grab his midlevel guys, and disrupt his org, but neither kill him nor cause him to lose face by holding Sadr City) Iran can either sit quiet, and lose face itself, or it can react, and give us an excuse to escalate against them. At a moment when Imanutjob is looking weak domestically. (yeah its too bad Israel doesnt have a strong PM at the moment, but Israel isnt really central to this)

I await, with hope.

Posted by liberalhawk 2007-01-18 17:28|| 2007-01-18 17:28|| Front Page Top

#11 Me too, LH. The supposed raids on Sadr's gang was on Hannity's radio show this afternoon. Would like some video and/or DoD concurrence that the Iraqis are fryin' up some tater tots, but the media is all we got at the moment.

Posted by BA 2007-01-18 18:06|| 2007-01-18 18:06|| Front Page Top

#12 Kennedy's worried about Iran, too. He was grilling someone from the administration about it today. I couldn't stand to hear his drunken bloviating, so I didn't listen to the entire report and don't know what exactly he said.

Posted by Rob Crawford">Rob Crawford 2007-01-18 18:29|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2007-01-18 18:29|| Front Page Top

#13 My birthday is March 27th. I am hoping Bush for some geraniums as a present.

Posted by Mike N. 2007-01-18 20:24|| 2007-01-18 20:24|| Front Page Top

#14 LH, good to see your optimism. We certainly need to follow the fact pattern you outline. The Iran attack rumors could be disinfo on our part. It adds to the perception of increasing tensions which could make some of Amadinejad's domestic enemies that much more nervous. Certainly the recent crash in oil price is squeezing Teheran as well as their economy is on the razor's edge. The Soddies seem to be willing to keep them low for a while. We should know soon if it is a concerted effort against the Mullas.

Posted by JAB 2007-01-18 22:01|| 2007-01-18 22:01|| Front Page Top

#15 Iff I remember correctly, sever months ago in 2005 there were reports of Iran firing upon and storming Persian Gulf oil platforms allegedly owned by one of NATO's newest member-states from East Europe [name escapes me].

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-01-18 22:12|| 2007-01-18 22:12|| Front Page Top

23:56 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:55 USN, ret.
23:47 USN, ret.
23:34 USN, ret.
23:19 C-Low
23:06 Barbara Skolaut
22:55 Elmert Crosh5077
22:46 Glenmore
22:45 Glenmore
22:42 Shieldwolf
22:39 Swamp Blondie
22:32 Shieldwolf
22:21 Elmert Crosh5077
22:15 Shieldwolf
22:14 Jan
22:13 BA
22:12 JosephMendiola
22:08 CrazyFool
22:07 JosephMendiola
22:04 Frank G
22:02 KBK
22:01 JAB
22:01 JosephMendiola
21:56 Frank G