Going to war with Iran.

macgyver06 · May 2007

Anyone think Kim Jong Crazy is gonna get in on the action?

definitely WWIII talks going on now.. all this anti-iran stuff being fed to us through the media.

this blows.

P.S. brought to you by our administration which also told us to not like the French for some odd fucking reason?? our allies forever...

macgyver06 · May 2007

i forgot to mention..unlike the soverign nation of Iraq... Iran has an Army that isnt depleted through ongoing war..they also have a Navy which can rival ours and An Air-Force...which of course their air force is no where near ours..but ya..

ledvedderman · May 2007

sooooo.....we're going to war w/ Iran?

puremagic · May 2007

Sure, as soon as they find a way to link the kidnapping of the U.S. soldiers on Iran, I think they'll do something to see what kind of reaction they get. I wouldn't be surprised if they go for a blockade for search and seizure, Cheney don't do surprises and the British weren't lost.

NCfan · May 2007

macgyver06 wrote:

i forgot to mention..unlike the soverign nation of Iraq... Iran has an Army that isnt depleted through ongoing war..they also have a Navy which can rival ours and An Air-Force...which of course their air force is no where near ours..but ya..

What are you talking about??? We have been using all kinds of dipolomacy to deal with the Iranians. Nobody wants a war, okay? Not even Bush and the neo-cons.

NCfan · May 2007

puremagic wrote:

Sure, as soon as they find a way to link the kidnapping of the U.S. soldiers on Iran, I think they'll do something to see what kind of reaction they get. I wouldn't be surprised if they go for a blockade for search and seizure, Cheney don't do surprises and the British weren't lost.

Yep, I bet that's exactly what they'll do! Great thinking!!!

macgyver06 · May 2007

NCfan wrote:

What are you talking about??? We have been using all kinds of dipolomacy to deal with the Iranians. Nobody wants a war, okay? Not even Bush and the neo-cons.

it would be interesting if Bush didnt have a say.

gue_barium · May 2007

NCfan wrote:

What are you talking about??? We have been using all kinds of dipolomacy to deal with the Iranians. Nobody wants a war, okay? Not even Bush and the neo-cons.

They thrive in war, that's their chosen profession (not as soldiers, mind you), why wouldn't they want war?

NCfan · May 2007

macgyver06 wrote:

i forgot to mention..unlike the soverign nation of Iraq... Iran has an Army that isnt depleted through ongoing war..they also have a Navy which can rival ours and An Air-Force...which of course their air force is no where near ours..but ya..

Check out this excerpt from Jane's Intelligence Review about Iran's naval capabilities. You were right on the money! Our fucking Coast Gaurd could take out their so called navy. The only weapons they have that threaten our ships are mines and anti-ship missles. Do you enjoy sounding like an idiot?

Jane's stated that the regular Iranian navy currently is in
a state of "overall obsolescence," and has not
been equipped with modern ships and weapons. Iran's three
destroyers are over 50 years old and are not operational.
The readiness of the three 25-year-old frigates is "almost
non-existent," "Jane's" said And the two 30-year-old
corvettes do not have sophisticated weapons. Ten of 20
missile-equipped fast attack craft have "limited
operational readiness," and four of them are not seaworthy.
Only 10 Chinese-made Thodor-class craft are operationally
reliable. The four 30-year-old minesweepers are obsolete,
lack seaworthiness, and do not have a mine-sweeping
capability. Iran has many amphibious and auxiliary ships,
but these are "superfluous to requirements" and are used
purely for training personnel. Iran's ten hovercraft are
"old and used sparingly."
Nor does Iran have the airlift capability required for
offensive operations across the Persian Gulf. Also, its F-4
and Sukhoi SU-24MK Fencer aircraft are rendered less
effective due to weaknesses in maritime reconnaissance
capabilities. The Iranian navies do not have fixed-wing
combat aircraft, and the P-3 and C-130 reconnaissance
aircraft were purchased 25 years ago. All the naval air
assets suffer from parts shortages, worn avionics, and
ineffective maintenance.
There also are personnel problems. Iran's navy has
20,000 men, but according to "Jane's," they are young and
inexperienced, and most of them are riflemen and marines
based on Persian Gulf islands. And at higher levels, there
is fierce rivalry between the IRGC and regular navies for
scarce resources.
Due to these shortcomings, Iran's three Kilo-class
submarines would be vulnerable, according to "Jane's," and
they are limited to laying mines in undefended waters.
Mines, however, are one area in which Iran has made
advances. It can produce non-magnetic, free-floating, and
remote-controlled mines. It may have taken delivery of
pressure, acoustic, and magnetic mines from Russia. Also,
Iran is negotiating with China for rocket-propelled rising
mines.

pjfanatic4 · May 2007

NCfan wrote:

Check out this excerpt from Jane's Intelligence Review about Iran's naval capabilities. You were right on the money! Our fucking Coast Gaurd could take out their so called navy. The only weapons they have that threaten our ships are mines and anti-ship missles. Do you enjoy sounding like an idiot?

Jane's stated that the regular Iranian navy currently is in
a state of "overall obsolescence," and has not
been equipped with modern ships and weapons. Iran's three
destroyers are over 50 years old and are not operational.
The readiness of the three 25-year-old frigates is "almost
non-existent," "Jane's" said And the two 30-year-old
corvettes do not have sophisticated weapons. Ten of 20
missile-equipped fast attack craft have "limited
operational readiness," and four of them are not seaworthy.
Only 10 Chinese-made Thodor-class craft are operationally
reliable. The four 30-year-old minesweepers are obsolete,
lack seaworthiness, and do not have a mine-sweeping
capability. Iran has many amphibious and auxiliary ships,
but these are "superfluous to requirements" and are used
purely for training personnel. Iran's ten hovercraft are
"old and used sparingly."
Nor does Iran have the airlift capability required for
offensive operations across the Persian Gulf. Also, its F-4
and Sukhoi SU-24MK Fencer aircraft are rendered less
effective due to weaknesses in maritime reconnaissance
capabilities. The Iranian navies do not have fixed-wing
combat aircraft, and the P-3 and C-130 reconnaissance
aircraft were purchased 25 years ago. All the naval air
assets suffer from parts shortages, worn avionics, and
ineffective maintenance.
There also are personnel problems. Iran's navy has
20,000 men, but according to "Jane's," they are young and
inexperienced, and most of them are riflemen and marines
based on Persian Gulf islands. And at higher levels, there
is fierce rivalry between the IRGC and regular navies for
scarce resources.
Due to these shortcomings, Iran's three Kilo-class
submarines would be vulnerable, according to "Jane's," and
they are limited to laying mines in undefended waters.
Mines, however, are one area in which Iran has made
advances. It can produce non-magnetic, free-floating, and
remote-controlled mines. It may have taken delivery of
pressure, acoustic, and magnetic mines from Russia. Also,
Iran is negotiating with China for rocket-propelled rising
mines.

Shhhhh.... be quiet. Remember, they really ARE a threat! Just like Saddam's Iraq was...

josevolution · May 2007

why not spread our selves a little thinner on the army front hell we could probably take on IRAN ,NORTH KOREA and throw RUSSIA in there as well i bet CHENNEY believes we can ..........

El_Kabong · May 2007

NCfan wrote:

Check out this excerpt from Jane's Intelligence Review about Iran's naval capabilities. You were right on the money! Our fucking Coast Gaurd could take out their so called navy. The only weapons they have that threaten our ships are mines and anti-ship missles.

i wonder if any of those anti-ship missiles were part of the thousands of missiles we sold to iran in the 80's, ya know after they kidnapped all those americans?

Cosmo · May 2007

Thanx to Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld... Iraq = Iran.

puremagic · May 2007

NCfan wrote:

Check out this excerpt from Jane's Intelligence Review about Iran's naval capabilities. ...

Mines, however, are one area in which Iran has made
advances. It can produce non-magnetic, free-floating, and
remote-controlled mines. ....

Was Cheney there to say goodbye to the men and women of the aircraft carrier? Did he make sure that Bush's nephew was on the carrier so that he could identify with the sacrifices of America. Are they willing to sacrifice more lives and a navy carrier just to ensure an all out first strike assualt on Iran?

Cosmo · May 2007

The bottom line...
The message the Bush Administration has sent out...
"If you don't have Nuclear Weapons... we will attack you. So, the best way for us to negotiate with you is for you to acquire Nuclear Weapons."
...
Ummmm... is it just me... or does that make no sense at all?

Drew263 · May 2007

EK..

Been meaning to ask you..I saw an article recently where the head of PNAC is throwing his support behind Obama..found that interesting. Have you seen that?

CJMST3K · May 2007

macgyver06 wrote:

i forgot to mention..unlike the soverign nation of Iraq... Iran has an Army that isnt depleted through ongoing war..they also have a Navy which can rival ours and An Air-Force...which of course their air force is no where near ours..but ya..

...and they're soon gonna have nuclear weapons.

CJMST3K · May 2007

Cosmo wrote:

So, the best way for us to negotiate with you is for you to acquire Nuclear Weapons."

With N. Korea they tried to do the "we're not negotiating with you" thing, since they had developed nuclear weapons - but the democrats thought Bush administration was being to inflexible.

...so, at least under the Bush admin, the least accessible they are is after a country acquires (or attempts to acquire) nuclear weapons.

macgyver06 · May 2007

NCfan wrote:

Check out this excerpt from Jane's Intelligence Review about Iran's naval capabilities. You were right on the money! Our fucking Coast Gaurd could take out their so called navy. The only weapons they have that threaten our ships are mines and anti-ship missles. Do you enjoy sounding like an idiot?

Jane's stated that the regular Iranian navy currently is in
a state of "overall obsolescence," and has not
been equipped with modern ships and weapons. Iran's three
destroyers are over 50 years old and are not operational.
The readiness of the three 25-year-old frigates is "almost
non-existent," "Jane's" said And the two 30-year-old
corvettes do not have sophisticated weapons. Ten of 20
missile-equipped fast attack craft have "limited
operational readiness," and four of them are not seaworthy.
Only 10 Chinese-made Thodor-class craft are operationally
reliable. The four 30-year-old minesweepers are obsolete,
lack seaworthiness, and do not have a mine-sweeping
capability. Iran has many amphibious and auxiliary ships,
but these are "superfluous to requirements" and are used
purely for training personnel. Iran's ten hovercraft are
"old and used sparingly."
Nor does Iran have the airlift capability required for
offensive operations across the Persian Gulf. Also, its F-4
and Sukhoi SU-24MK Fencer aircraft are rendered less
effective due to weaknesses in maritime reconnaissance
capabilities. The Iranian navies do not have fixed-wing
combat aircraft, and the P-3 and C-130 reconnaissance
aircraft were purchased 25 years ago. All the naval air
assets suffer from parts shortages, worn avionics, and
ineffective maintenance.
There also are personnel problems. Iran's navy has
20,000 men, but according to "Jane's," they are young and
inexperienced, and most of them are riflemen and marines
based on Persian Gulf islands. And at higher levels, there
is fierce rivalry between the IRGC and regular navies for
scarce resources.
Due to these shortcomings, Iran's three Kilo-class
submarines would be vulnerable, according to "Jane's," and
they are limited to laying mines in undefended waters.
Mines, however, are one area in which Iran has made
advances. It can produce non-magnetic, free-floating, and
remote-controlled mines. It may have taken delivery of
pressure, acoustic, and magnetic mines from Russia. Also,
Iran is negotiating with China for rocket-propelled rising
mines.

whats your motivation psycho path....i never said our navy would lose...but it would be war..unlike iraq was entering. YOU FOOL. IRAN IS MORE POWERFUL THAN THE INSURGENCY IN IRAQ...which no one can still answer me who the fuck the insurgency is...

PaperPlates · May 2007

El_Kabong wrote:

i wonder if any of those anti-ship missiles were part of the thousands of missiles we sold to iran in the 80's, ya know after they kidnapped all those americans?

If so, then sweet, we should know how to counter/destroy/disable them. Good thinking 80's leaders.

Cosmo wrote:

The bottom line...
The message the Bush Administration has sent out...
"If you don't have Nuclear Weapons... we will attack you. So, the best way for us to negotiate with you is for you to acquire Nuclear Weapons."
...
Ummmm... is it just me... or does that make no sense at all?

I kinda took the message to be..................

"if you don't currently have nuclear capability, but you plan to attempt to attain it, we will ask you nicely 80 times to not do so, then, if pushed, and threatening you another 80 times doesnt work, and you ignore all pleas and attempts by the UN and other useless organizations, we will pre-emptively strike. " Just my interpretation of it, of course.

RolandTD20Kdrummer · May 2007

El_Kabong wrote:

i wonder if any of those anti-ship missiles were part of the thousands of missiles we sold to iran in the 80's, ya know after they kidnapped all those americans?

American terrorism is ok for some reason... Lot's here subscribe to it...

dumb and blind they are...

Going to war with Iran.

Comments

Categories