Archive for Sunday, February 11, 2007

U.S. attack on Iran would be huge mistake

February 11, 2007


Already bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, it would be sheer folly for the United States to take military action against Iran's nuclear infrastructure. Such a move could trigger a protracted conflict and have myriad, adverse consequences, from destabilizing the Persian Gulf and Iraq to a sizeable spike in world oil prices.

The administration is no doubt still mulling preventive military action against Iran's nuclear industry in order to make sure Tehran does not achieve a nuclear weapons capability. Indeed, leaks in January suggesting Israel was considering the use of nuclear weapons against Iranian nuclear targets may well have been meant to keep pressure on Washington to take this bull by the horns militarily.

Recent U.S. moves, such as the deployment of a second carrier battle group to the Gulf, are no doubt aimed at intimidating Iran in the hope of minimizing Iranian interference in Iraq at the time of our "surge" and also perhaps to begin putting in place the elements needed for a robust campaign of air strikes against Iran.

Some observers might not appreciate that if military action is taken connected to Iran's nuclear infrastructure, there would be nothing surgical about such an operation. The air strikes associated with contingency planning suggests that in addition to hitting a number of widely dispersed nuclear-related targets, much of Iran's air defenses would have to be taken out to clear paths to the targets.

In addition, to eliminate Iran's ability to retaliate in the Gulf, strikes also probably would be made against Iran's formidable array of anti-ship missiles near the Strait of Hormuz, Iranian Kilo-Class submarines, and perhaps even Iran's ballistic and medium-range missile capabilities.

Such an ambitious air campaign could spread out over nearly a week, involving well over 1,000 combat aircraft sorties and hundreds of cruise missile launches. During that period, Iran could strike back with whatever military capabilities escaped destruction in the course of the earliest strikes.

Indeed, a badly wounded Iran would likely do everything it could to retaliate, such as attacking U.S. fleet elements and commercial shipping with any anti-ship missiles escaping the first waves of air strikes. It might also launch whatever ballistic and medium-range missiles that survive the U.S. assault at various targets in the Gulf region, countries Tehran would likely view as complicit in such an attack. And Iran has other capabilities as well, such as various types of naval mines and asymmetric military retaliatory options including a Revolutionary Guard speedboat fleet trained to swarm against merchant ships or even enemy combat vessels.

Worst of all, shorn of much of its ability to strike back in the Gulf, a rather chaotic Iraq would doubtless have considerable allure as an ideal venue for payback against the United States. This could be carried out by Iran's allies among various Shi'a militias, (elements that probably would be enraged by such a U.S. attack on Iran in any case) or even by the insertion of hundreds of Iran's own personnel to carry out attacks on U.S. forces. In such a scenario, the situation in an already seriously destabilized Iraq would become that much worse.

Some in Washington would hope that in the midst of or following such heavy blows, Iranians would turn against the clerical regime, which is unpopular in many quarters. However, if history is any guide, patriotic Iranians of most all political persuasions would likely rally instead to the defense of their country, perhaps even strengthening the current regime.

Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of all this would be the absence of an end game. The last major military move against Iran was initiated by none other than Saddam Hussein back in 1980. The Ba'thist regime in Baghdad, feeling threatened by revolutionary Iran, lashed out at Iran militarily, assuming that an unprepared Iran would quit the fight to lick its wounds and that a humiliated revolutionary government might well collapse.

Instead, Iranians across the political spectrum fought back with grim determination, trapping Iraq in an 8-year war that eventually would cost Iraqis more than 150,000 casualties. Americans, ironically also now in Iraq, must be mindful of this great blunder on the part of a bullying and clueless dictator.

- Wayne White is an adjunct scholar at the nonpartisan Middle East Institute. He is a former deputy director of the State Department's Intelligence and Research Office, focusing on Middle East issues, especially Iraq and Iran.


Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Excellent piece here on a very critical matter. We are playing an extremely dangerous game with Iran right now, inwhich we can not afford to participate.

There is really no telling to the limits of disaster that could occur if the US bombs Iran. But yet again this administration is rushing to war on unconclusive grounds to further a prior agenda and the Congress is standing by... this is Very Dangerous.

Like Iraq was, Iran is not an immediate threat to the US; infact, Iran has offered to work with Washington on occasion and has been refused.

Become informed about Iran folks, this is obviously the next brutal chapter in the "W" Regime.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Well then I invite you to explain, with evidence of course, how the nation of Iran poses an immediate threat to the US.
Then of course indulge us in how a preemptive attack on Iran would eliminate that threat.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Perhaps I should have known there could be NO Intellectual discussion on this forum.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"As far as I am concerned and as far as any true American should be concerned, the oil fileds of the Middle East could all go up in flames!"

This is a tragically ignorant statement Marion, even for you, no wonder you chose not to even try and back it up.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Posted by Marion (Marion Lynn) on February 11, 2007 at 3:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well, get out of the Lefty media for a while and examine this scenario:

It's so funny Marion how you always give a link instead of answering a question or proving a point. It is such a pitiful substitution for your own intellect, which apparently is non-existent.

Did you actually have a point to make? Because your link does absolutely nothing to answer my questions.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago


Instead of posting links, why can you not engage in debate of the questions and issues? These links you provide are all old news to me.

Have you ever heard the term Mutual Assured Destruction?

And speaking of being in violation of UN Resolutions, ISRAEL is in violation of All nuclear resolutions. Should we take out their nukes too Marion?

Porter 11 years, 3 months ago

Doesn't N. Korea already have nukes? Why don't we wham 'em and bam 'em or whatever it is you call a military strike?

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Thank you Porter for bringing up North Korea. Those of you following the news will know that the US is currently very close to completing negotiations with North Korea to end their nuclear program in exchange for trade restrictions being removed and energy assistance. They must do this so they can feed their millions of starving people and avoid the complete collapse of their economy.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Like I said before, perhaps I should have known better than to assume an intellectual discussion can be had on the LJW forum.

Thank YOU again Marion, for making the entire community appear ignorant.

mick 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion' you say "if Hitler....he would have been neutralized." What you don't see is that we are the world's next Hitler and the ones who need to be neutralized. We have become the World Nuisance. I say this as a patriot because we are going to get our butts kicked. I don't blame the Republicans or Bush but the powerful forces of greed which are dependant upon a war economy. We need to make serious diplomatic efforts throughout the world now.

Porter 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion- What was that you said about 'substantiative responses'?

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Posted by Marion (Marion Lynn) on February 11, 2007 at 4 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I note only rhetorical rather than substantiative response from Mkh to my posts

Well I began to assume the rhetoric was all you could understand.

"Wham!" "Bam!" "No More Target Iran!"

your a joke, Marion.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Posted by Marion (Marion Lynn) on February 11, 2007 at 3:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"MAD does not deter religious fanatice such as those who rule in Iran."

Care to explain why? Or is it so becaue you said?

"The discussion is about IRAN, NOT Israel."

Well Iran has signed the non-proliferation pact, Israel has not.

"As far as Israel goes, Israel is in our camp so I have no problem."

Iran was in "our camp" too when we gave them their first reactor.

"IRAN threatens the USA, NOT Israel."

Have you ever looked at a map? Iran will not be able to launch a nuclear warhead into the US, to suggest this is idiotic.

"Stop IRAN and stop it NOW!"

How did this rhetoric slip in there?

"Iran ends up "back in the stone age"?

It's barely left it anyway, so no big deal."

If they are barely out of the stone age, why are you afraid of nuclear weapons?

"If it comes down to the survival of this nation or the survival of Iran, we know where I stand."

Most likely an attack on Iran could spell the end to the US Empire, this will be the final straw in our failure.

"oh wait

It may be there already."

You said it

"Take out Iran's nuclear capabilities NOW.

I refer you to Neville Chamberlain.





If Hitler had been met with force, by the testimony of his own General Staff, he would have been neutralised.

Neutralise the Islamic Hitlers NOW!"

Iran has not attacked anyone, nor do they have any real desire or purpose too. Your Hitler analogy is pure fiction. In case you have forgotten, it's the US that is occupying other nations, not Iran.



Your Welcome

Porter 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion, You're obviously very passionate about this subject, but you still haven't told us how a nuclear Iran is a threat to the U.S.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"Get it?"

I think you are absolutely Delusional if you are somehow connecting Iran with family members lost in the Holocaust, and then in the same post calling for your own Holocaust on Iran.

You are sick.

mick 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion, how about if the USA fields a team and Iran fields a team and they play a game of Roller Derby. Wouldn't that be better?

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Posted by Das_Ubermime (anonymous) on February 11, 2007 at 4:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I doubt Bush actually intends to go to war with Iran. To take an unpopular war and expand it would be a straight path to massive protests across this country. I'm willing to bet that any funding from Congress for such a endeavor would be completely out of the question.

Well I hope you are right that "W" is bluffing Das. But I believe he is more likely waiting for the right moment to strike, which fortunately has not come for him, but could be due in the Spring.

Do you really think "massive protests" would change the mind of the "Decider" though? After all he did not listen to the Millions who protested in 2002/2003 for Iraq. To this day he does not listen to 3/4 of this country which does not agree with his handling of the war.

I don't think funding for the attack from Congress is even necessary. Most likely this would be conducted without the approval of Congress and without a formal Declaration of War.

Porter 11 years, 3 months ago

So I'm an idiot because 1)I'm ignorant, 2) a radical muslim, or 3) stupid. That's some great logic, genius. I can't argue with that!

Now. Tell me in big-boy words how a nuclear Iran is more dangerous to the U.S. than a nuclear N. Korea. If you can't do that, than try this one. How is a nuclear Iran more dangerous to the U.S. than a nuclear Pakistan (where there really ARE Al Qaeda cells)?

Do you support blowing up all 3 countries?

Porter 11 years, 3 months ago

Thanks for stating a position. That wasn't so hard, now was it?

In your opinion, what constitutes a nuclear threat? It sounds like if countries you don't like have nuclear capabilities, than that constitutes a threat. Would you maintain the same position for Russia, China, and the U.S.? If not, why not?

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"Should those countries fail to do so, their nuclear facilities should be taken out by any means required."

My goodness what a brilliant and well thought out plan. I'm sure that is going to work just fine.

Your insanity is scary Marion.

Porter 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion, I can't learn from your wisdom if all you give me is "You ARE an idiot".

All I asked is what makes Iran, N.K., and Pakistan nuclear threats (as opposed to other countries with nuclear capabilities). If you can't answer that, than I hope you would change your previously stated position.

Please enlighten us.

Porter 11 years, 3 months ago

So, the countries mentioned previously are run by religious radicals?

Or, are you afraid that religious radicals might obtain atomic weapons from the previously mentioned countries? I hope this isn't the case, cause the argument would be too easy. I don't want to put words in your mouth, though.

When you take the time to educate us "idiots", please explain how you would go about deciding which countries are being led by religious radicals.

mick 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion, when you have war that means people die. When people die it's not like they just go to sleep. They never wake up. Ask your Mommy about it. And be careful what you wish for. By the time you're old enough they might reinstate the draft and they might draft girls this time. Thank you Honey.

Richard Heckler 11 years, 3 months ago

Saudis reportedly funding Iraqi Sunni insurgents option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

The Corporate Occupation of Iraq (December 11, 2006) In light of the Iraq Study Group recommendations and their failure to address the real problems facing Iraq, the author of this TomPaine opinion piece advises that the US end the corporate invasion of Iraq. US companies, which were awarded lucrative contracts by the US government following the 2003 invasion, failed to reconstruct war-torn Iraq as intended. The author concludes that "the Bush administration must abandon its plan to remake Iraq into an economic wonderland for US corporations," and return Iraq to the Iraqi people "to remake as they themselves see fit."


The longer we stay the higher the price tag in tax dollars. It is in the economic best interest of the USA to bring this Bush admin war for oil to an end. Should USA and British oil firms privatize Iraq oil the troops will not be allowed to come home per se. This alone is going to cause the breaking up of many family homes. Iraq will likely not be a safe haven to ship families. Reducing Iraq and Afghanistan to rubble is not an acceptable goal.

What follows is a list of some of the worst Iraq war profiteers who have bilked American taxpayers and undermined the military's mission:

No. 1 and No. 2: CACI and Titan No. 3: Bechtel: Precast Profits No. 4: Aegis Defense Services No. 5: Custer Battles No. 6: General Dynamics No. 7: Nour USA Ltd. No. 8, No. 9 and No. 10: Chevron, ExxonMobil and the Petro-Imperialists

Read more here:

All of the above likely would repeat them selves in Iran.

Porter 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion- You haven't answered my question.

How can you tell if a country is being led by a religious fanatic?

Porter 11 years, 3 months ago

This can't be for real. You're lecturing us on fanatics by quoting Warren Zevon??

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Wow Marion your BS is pilling up extremely high this evening.

First of all, you don't have evidence that Iran is building nuclear weapons. Plus you have no clue the consequences of fighting the Iranians.

Second of all, you cannot just attack other countries that Do have nukes, such as India, Pakistan, NK, etc. without suffering extremely grave consequences in retailation.

Right now the "Religious Radicals with Atomic Bombs" are the United States and Israel.

Perhaps a bombing campaign on Iran would end in a matter of hours. But if you think that Iran would then just lie down and take it, you are even dumber than I thought.

Iran is Not threatening America's survival!!! America is threatening it's own survival by engaging in this peeing contest with Iran.

Are you really afraid that these "primitives from the stone age" are going to take over and destroy America???

America is the greatest country in the World, remember? You are starting to sound like one of those "America Haters" now.

WE defeated Germany, Japan and the USSR and now you go and s*#t your pants everytime a Muslim speaks ill of America. So to compensate your own fears, you call for the killing of millions of people, which of course you will only be brave enough to watch on Fox News.

Your pathetic, ignorant, delutional, and frightened.

You talk about the Holocaust and that you'll "NEVER FORGET" and then you call for every Muslim living in a country with nuclear power be exterminated. You are a disgrace. Good luck with your "Final Solution".

Richard Heckler 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion the world will not allow america to survive at all cost to the rest of the world.

Godot 11 years, 3 months ago

Merrill, if you do not believe that it is important to sustain America as a free nation and as a strong economy, are you willing to have your children be among the ones who suffer?

Godot 11 years, 3 months ago

Thanks for the support. Still waiting for an answer from Merrill.

If no one defends the US, what do you foresee for your children?

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Posted by Godot (anonymous) on February 11, 2007 at 7:41 p.m. "If no one defends the US, what do you foresee for your children?"

Godot, I believe you missed the point entirely, go back and read the thread again.

No one is saying not to Defend the US, but there is a huge difference between that and attacking every nuclear country other than Israel.

Porter 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion, You're just full of good explanations today!

I still haven't heard the one about how you can tell if a country is being run by a religious fanatic. Care to enlighten us?

mick 11 years, 3 months ago

I think the girls need to re-load with Rush Limbaugh before they can argue any further.

Godot 11 years, 3 months ago

MKH, my post was directed at Merrilll, in response to his post of 7:23.

mick 11 years, 3 months ago

Aren't you supposed to be watching Desperate Housewives?

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Posted by Das_Ubermime (anonymous) on February 11, 2007 at 6:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Were Bush to attack Iran, he would have only a limited amount of time before permission from Congress was necessary. This is where the popular opinion comes into play. It would be political suicide to support the expansion of hostilities right now."

"However, the most recent mid-term elections have been taken by many to be a sign of war weariness and general opposition to a lack of resolution in Iraq."


I agree with parts of these statements. But consider this, there are some Democrats who want very much to deal with Iran, and would prefer to have it be blamed on "W" than carry over to their probable administration in '08. Sen. Clinton is on record saying that she also will not tolerate a nuclear Iran.

So given that, if infact the attack escalated into a conflict lasting more than 90 days and the Congress was forced to vote on it, it is very conceivable that Bush would once again find the votes he needed.

My thoery on the "anti-war/war weariness" coming out of the November election is that the tidal wave of politicians and voters coming over to the anti-war side are in a large part due to the fact that those people hate to lose. That meaning if the War had been turned around by now, those people would have never come to the realization that this foriegn policy agenda is insane. So perhaps some of these folks will be looking for a new desperate struggle that America can redeem itself with.

As for "W", I am positive he is looking to Iran as a chance to redeem himself, he is a very ego centered man who is desperately worried about his legacy. He knows that Iraq will always be blamed on him. But in his delusion, he just might believe that Iran is his ticket to end on a high note.

ASBESTOS 11 years, 3 months ago

Sorry folkks, Marion is correct in this assessment. Those whom do not agree with Marion, simply DO NOT UNDERSATAND enough about how the world works to make an informed decision.

"Doesn't N. Korea already have nukes? Why don't we wham 'em and bam 'em or whatever it is you call a military strike?"

Do you think Bush would really start any craps after all the hell he has received over doing the right things???

One thing folks, if we don't, Israel WILL, as they did 10-15 years ago. Iran with nukes is worse that what this so called "opinion writer" served up.

Risk assessment is something best not left to political agenda driven people and misinformed idealogues.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

You just don't know when to stop do you Marion?

Ok, Marion, Asbestos, Would you two be so kind as to explain to us the ramifications that an attack on Iran would have on the struggling concept of Western Democracy in the Middle East? Exactly what will be the fallout from the Muslim world, will democratic supporters grow in numbers? How will this further enrage radical elements?

Please explain how and why?

And yes I used the word "fallout" on purpose.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

And while your at it. Please enlighten us as to how the attack in Iran will change the situation on the ground in Iraq?

Is this going to make the job of US forces easier or more difficult? How many more troop surges will be needed when the 10 million BASIJ members flood into Iraq to kill Americans?

Don't be a fool Marion, You will be giving Iran the perfect motive to take over Iraq.

Are you comfortable with having Hezzbollah cells here in the Midwest?

I am sure you considered all of this before you unvieled your plan of "Wham!" and "Bam!". Right?

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"Just like a woman!"

Are you being attacked by invisible females? Take your medicine!

"That being said, "democracy" has a much better chance of flourishing in an environment in which radical Muslims are not armed with Atomic Freaking Bombs"

So democracy flourished better when the person enstilling it is bombing your country and killing your family? How democratic.

"You could try dealing with my earlier proofs before playing the "What about this?" game as you attempt to cover up your loss."

PROOFS! LOL! Wow you are good for a laugh this morning. I must have missed those, what exactly did you prove?

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"That being said, "democracy" has a much better chance of flourishing in an environment in which radical Muslims are not armed with Atomic Freaking Bombs"

The truth is Marion, that you will immediately lose the pro-democratic/anti-religious element in Iran the second the bombs drop. You will only give incredible power to Ahmadinejad, who right now is losing popular opinion rapidly in Iran. An attack will rally every Iranian around the cause to hate the west.

You will eliminate all good will that the huge young popluation has toward America in Iran. The youth are too young to remember the other atrocities the US committed in Iran, they are pro-democratic, but they will turn away the moment you bomb them.

Right now the people of Iran are pulling away from hard-liners, they are toning down thier nuclear rhetoric and are trying to avoid a confrontation. Currently there is not a good chance that Ahmadinejad could be reelected. Attack Iran and it is a certainty he will be.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"You could try dealing with my earlier proofs before playing the "What about this?" game as you attempt to cover up your loss."

Nope still haven't found anything you've proven in regards to why attacking Iran is a huge mistake. Yes the president of Iran is considered a "radical Muslim", SO? This is not news, this is not Proof of anything. The leaders of the US and Israel are radical fundamentalists as well.

You see Marion, the "What about this game" is what grown-up people discuss before going to war. We look at all the possible options and outcomes before killing people. Did you not learn anything from Iraq? Guess not.

You still have not answered my original question from the start of the thread? How is Iran an immediate threat to the US, and how will an attack permanently end that threat?

Sorry but "Wham!" and "Bam!" haven't proven anything.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion's "Proofs":

"I do not care if EVERYONE in Iran ends up dead as the result of someone; anyone, stopping the Iranian program to build ATOMIC BOMBS!"

"Iran ends up "back in the stone age"?

It's barely left it anyway, so no big deal."

"I suggest that a coaltion of the more civilised nations of the world tell both Iran and Pakistan as well as India to disarm as far as ATOMIC BOMBS go and to do it now." "Should those countries fail to do so, their nuclear facilities should be taken out by any means required."

"As far as I am concerned and as far as any true American should be concerned, the oil fileds of the Middle East could all go up in flames!"

"Prehistoric peoples cannot be allowed the use of modern technology to hold the rest of the world HOSTAGE!


"I will NOT live under the threat of a tyrant; wherever that tyrant may be."

"Hit'em hard; hit'em once, hit'em right.





Marion how DARE you attempt to call someone Else a RADICAL! Take a long look in the Mirror!

Christine Anderson 11 years, 3 months ago

Hey, enough already! My daughter is half Iranian, and still has family over there. Don't any of you stop to think that such a thing would cause untold pain??? Her father also still has the same family in Iran. Even though he's an "ex", I do not wish to have to watch either of them go through the horror they would experience.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"Don't any of you stop to think that such a thing would cause untold pain???"

Yes cheesehead, some of us do. You will note their are two sides to the discussion here. Not all of us are blood thirsty.

Thank you for bringing a very human and personal element to the discussion. I very much understand the horrible situation that your daughter and "ex" are in and certainly do not wish to watch any harm come to the Iranian people.

Claire Williams 11 years, 3 months ago

For marion, who made the statement that Iran is barely out of the stone age:

Some images of Iran you don't see every day.

If we are to force another country to disarm, then we should be prepared to do the same. Who are we to say that "this country is ok to have nukes, but YOU aren't." Either encourage GLOBAL disarmament, or don't do it at all. Picking and choosing who can have nukes and who cannot is hypocritcal.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Posted by scenebooster (anonymous) on February 12, 2007 at 10:02 a.m. "Attacking Iran right now IS NOT feasable. It cannot happen - either from a personnel standpoint or a world opinion standpoint"

SB, but you are perhaps thinking too rationally here. Remember who we are dealing with, "W" and Dick and not exactly the world's smartest guys. They surely don't care about world opinion, I'm not sure what a few million more people hating those two would stop at this point. Also as far as a lack of personell, again, when have these two ever proved that they are worried about stretching the military or increasing the burden they must carry? None of their pals have sons and daughters dying over there.

This is what they set out to do from the beginning and I think they will stop at nothing in order to achieve it. They are certainly not going to let a few details get in the way. Remember what Dick said at the start of this, "an endless war", a "war which will not end in our lifetimes". I don't he was bluffing. Iran is just the next step.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion I've Delt with you easily, save yourself further humiliation.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion you have been repeatively owned and abused in this thread. You have permanently lost any shred of credibility you once had.

Either stop posting here or start to answer the long list of questions pilling up at your feet. You haven't even begun to outline or back-up any of the ridiculous statements you've made. Put up or shut up!

Again, you are a discgrace.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion, you don't get it. Nobody wants to hear your rambling. Either back up your claims and answer the questions put in front of you or Shut Up!

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion writes:

"An Iran armed with atomic freaking bombs places my family's neck in a noose with a lunatic on the drop lever."

How is an Iranian atomic bomb going to end up at your family's house in Kansas??? PLEASE explain this Marion, I'm sure you are an expert on rocket-delivered warheads. Ha!

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago



I'm not making this thread about anything other than Iran.

You said that if Iran had a nuclear weapon it would be a direct threat to the US safety.

So PLEASE explain how Iran will be able to fire this nuke warhead into the US. Be a man (if you are one), and back up this ridiculous claim or stop posting.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 11 years, 3 months ago

The swirl that goes on inside Marion's head makes me nauseous just thinking about it.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Well now it's obvious why you avoided answering any questions for two days. You are full of BS Marion!!!

scenario #1: False. The US does not import oil from Iran. And if they went nuclear with weapons chances are we wouldn't let them leave the Persian Gulf.

scenario #2: False. Iran Air does not travel to the US, nor does it ever enter US airspace. Furthermore it's activities are heavily sanctioned by the US.

You are a pathetic liar.

Let's hear some more scenarios Marion, I bet next your going to tell me than Iran is planning to build "suitcase nukes". LOL!

Your ignorance and BS are massive.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion: "Well, if you're of a nuclear terrorist mind as is Iran, whatach do is build yourself a very small atomic freaking bomb of let's say only one or two kilotons.

Then ya wrap the bomb with cobalt."

STOP! STOP your lies Marion, you either cannot tell the truth or you are truly STUPID and need to stop pretending otherwise.

Do you have any idea how far of an advanced nuclear system it takes to make "very small atomic freaking bomb". NO you obviously Do Not. Iran would not be able to produce tiny nukes in our lifetime, if ever. Only the most highly advanced nuclear systems of the US and Russia are even capable of this.

Marion: "Now, why don't some of you get on the 'net or go to the library and try to become less stupid?"

Remember when I recommended taking a long look in the mirror earlier? Now is the time to try it.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Ha Ha Ha HA!

Marion give it up!

Those links you posted are not even about mini-nukes aka suitcase nukes.

You are such a joke.

"The Judge", yeah that was real cute, maybe I'll create a another forum identity called the "Appeals Judge", oh wait, I'm not that retarded.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

So the Iranians are planning to produce Cobalt bombs, huh Marion? I'm sure you have hard evidence of this so perhaps you can refute this from the article YOU Linked:

"No cobalt or other salted bomb has ever been atmospherically tested, and as far as is publicly known none have ever been built. In light of the ready availability of fission-fusion-fission bombs, it is unlikely any special-purpose fallout contamination weapon will ever be developed. "


If you had any self respect you would have ceased your embarrasing rants long ago.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Posted by Marion (Marion Lynn) on February 12, 2007 at 7:25 p.m never mentioned "suitcase" nukes or "mini-nukes

Posted by Marion (Marion Lynn) on February 12, 2007 at 5:54 p.m. "Well, if you're of a nuclear terrorist mind as is Iran, whatach do is build yourself a very small atomic freaking bomb of let's say only one or two kilotons."

Did you not say this Marion? Oh my God there must be two Marions on here! That explains everything!

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Well there is no doubt why you ruled in favor of Marion. Either you are Marion or you relate to him perfectly since neither of you can offer in substance to your argument.

Do you have anything to actually contribute, or are you just a troll? Well, troll along then.

compmd 11 years, 3 months ago

I'm coming in here because I'm pretty sure by now that I'm the only person who posts here who has actually dealt with Iran and its citizens on a one-on-one basis.

Do any of you know any Iranians that live there now or have lived there recently? Have you learned anything about the people that live there from sources other news media? Do you think that the citizens of Iran are on the same page as you?

They aren't on the same page. If you think you have a clue about Iran, you're likely mistaken. Most of the people of Iran have extremely limited access to information outside of their nation. In simple terms, it is a less strict, more economically viable version of North Korea; alternatively, like a more strict China. The people know what their leader and his government tell them. If the people decide to put up a satellite dish (which is illegal) and watch some MTV, there are harsh punishments. Most of the people of Iran have no idea what their diplomatic status is with other nations, especially the US. I have personally dealt with dozens who don't grasp the fact that the US does not have any relations with Iran and cannot understand why. There are those that are taught to hate the United States and everything it represents, but how is that different from what some of the people here do?

But there's the Internet, right? Not exactly. Iran's filtering and censoring of the Internet is second only to China. To top that off, broadband connectivity is banned by the government to reduce the impact of western influences.

How advanced do you think Iran is? Probably more advanced than you think. Industry is alive and well in this nation, especially in science and engineering. Sharif University of Technology is a good school home to a lot of research and some bright individuals.

compmd 11 years, 3 months ago

If you want to take issue with Iran, take issue with its leader and his government. Mr. Ahmadinejad is a little crazy. However, based on the structure of government and the religious influences, people do (and believe) what he says. Remember how I said that broadband was banned? Well, the government and some academic institutions have no bandwidth cap. I have witnessed this to be true time and again. Mr. Ahmadinejad is certainly a charismatic leader, but his anger and frustration with Israel and the Jewish people doesn't win any hearts in the US administration. Could things change if we were not so unilaterally aligned with Israel? Possibly. Are we ever going to change our stance on Israel? I don't think that is going to happen in the forseeable future. But I digress.

This appears to be a government-to-government debacle. On both sides, there are droves of civilians who have nothing against each other, or each other's nation. Of course, there are those who do believe "we should blow the crap out of [US, Iran]!" but based on what people are exposed to, that is to be expected.

All I ask is that you all think about this stuff, and keep an open, inquisitive mind. What is it that you know, and how do you know it? I've been "working on" Iran for close to a year now and have seen and experienced a lot. I've been asked why the US hates them, I've drawn the ire of some religious leaders in Tehran, I've frustrated and dismayed students in Isfahan. I've been ridiculed by those who wish to crush America.

Is Iran a threat to the United States? They are more a threat to our interests. Should we have military preparations for an attack on Iran? It would be negligent and irresponsible of any military to not be prepared for battle against any sort of threat posed to a nation, its people, or its interests. Should we preemptively strike against Iran? No. Could Iran fight back? You bet.

Take what you will from my thoughts on this topic. I am not going to engage in any sort of debate or argument in this thread. I'm just a guy in Lawrence who asks the question "What do I do about Iran?" every day at work, and I don't always have an answer.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

First of all Marion, you need to be more specific when talking about devices. Secondly, the mini-nukes aka suitcase bombs are in the 1-2 kiloton range.

Finally now you have hit the final straw in stupidity. You think that Iran is going to get exterminated off the face of the Earth so they can let a "low-yield" nuke off in America???

You are certified crazy! As soon as Iran attacks ANYONE with nukes they would be bombed to pieces by the nuclear powers that surround them. There is no way they would end thier thousands of years of civilization over a measily low-yield nuke. This is proposterous.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Judge it's clear that you have no idea what you or anyone else is talking about , so please just zip it.

Marion, well according to that link you were wrong again, no suprise there.

But I'm getting extremely curious as to where your evidence is of what Iran is planning on producing and how that will be delivered. You have made some wild claims that need to be backed up with solid facts. Your imagination is running much farter than the cieling of reality in terms of how Iran would produce and deliver nukes.

Let's see what the liberal media of Fox News says that the Iranians will use as a potential delivery system:

"The delivery method - the long-range Shahab-3 missile - was successfully tested in July, and experts said Iran is to begin serial production within two years."

mmmmmmmmmmm funny that they left out your theory of the Gulfstream IV delivery system. LOL!

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Judge and Marion,

I notice that your writing styles are exactly alike.

I also notice that neither of you can seem to write in a


Both of you offer no evidence for claims

I also notice that both of you like to say


at the end of your posts.

How suspicious.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Posted by The_Judge (anonymous) on February 12, 2007 at 9:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mkh can't refute his 8:01PM post so he attempts a dismissive gesture.

Why would I "refute" my own post of 8:01? For Christ sake, do you even know what "refute" means? You don't refute things that you believe to be true, moron.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion aka "The Judge",

I'm glad you were able to find out the definition of the word "refute."

The smallest nuke the US produced was the W54, which has about the equivalent power of 1 kiloton.

But I'm still not sure if you are going to have a point to make in all this blabbering. Iran does not have the capability to make these types of weapons. Period, end of discussion.

You have still not provided any evidence of how the Iranians will develope nukes able to destroy America. Until you do this, your entire argument is nothing but stanky BS.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Why do you act like a 5 year old?

From Wiki:

"The smallest nuclear warhead manufactured by the USA was the W54, used for the Davy Crockett warhead which could be fired from a 120 mm recoilless rifle, and a backpack version called the Mk-54 SADM (Small Atomic Demolition Munition). While this warhead, with a weight of only 51 lb (23 kg), could potentially fit into a large suitcase, it would be a very tight fit. While the explosive power of the W54 - up to an equivalent of 1 kiloton of TNT - is not much by the normal standards of a nuclear weapon (the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II were around 13 to 15 kilotons each),"

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

We can sit around and debate about yields and ranges all night Marion.

But what difference does it make as long as you can ignore the point of this thread right?

Explain your position: Marion: "I do not care if EVERYONE in Iran ends up dead as the result of someone; anyone, stopping the Iranian program to build ATOMIC BOMBS!"

You claim that the very existence of America is at risk by this atomic threat of Iran. So show us the evidence of what Iran is building and how they will deliver those weapons to destroy the US.

Prove why our "survival" depends on starting this war with Iran.

You also have not adressed any other issues as to what consequences will come out of an attack. You have not adressed the BASIJ, or what you plan on doing when those 10 Million+ come after US troops in Iraq.

You need to outline how we are going to take out all the possible targets in Iran without missing a single thing. You need to prove where every Iranian nuclear location is, including the scientists, so you can guarantee they will never be able to rebuild the nuclear program.

Furthermore, you have not delt with the issues of what chaos this would cause throughout the Middle East.

And also, how are prepared to deal with the retaliation of Hezzbollah?

Not to mention, you really need to explain the motive for Iran to attack a country with nuclear weapons, which would certainly bring the immediate end to Iran. They are surrounded by many nuclear weapons, far more than they can ever produce. If they ever fired one shot, they would be disentigrated.

After you get that far, I'll ask some more questions.

Claire Williams 11 years, 3 months ago

I went to work, came back a few hours later, and found that Marion had spawned a child....The_Judge!

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Oh NO Marion! What Happened?!?

Did the LJW moderators catch on to your little game and erase your alter ego "The_Judge"?

Poor Marion, now I guess your sad game is over and you will have to get back to making insane rants.

Just yet another example of how much of a pathetic joke you truly are.

OldEnuf2BYurDad 11 years, 3 months ago

If its true that Iran is sending trained soldiers to Iraq to attack our troops, then we are already at war with Iran. The only question is whether we wish to continue our efforts in Iraq AND bomb Iran back to the stone ages, OR do we immediately pull our troops from Iraq so that we no longer have to deal with Iran & Iraq at the same time. The two conflicts can no longer be considered exclusive of each other. If we stay in Iraq, we have to deal with Iran. We either escalate this into a "regional" war, or we run. Ambivalence is not an option.

The big question is: are the reports of Iran being behind the latest wave of bombings true, or is this another "WMD report" that has no basis in truth?

I personally don't see attacking Iran as being much more of a commitment than the one we have already made. As it is, we ARE ALREADY fighting insurgents from Iran. Part of why we "lost" in 'Nam was our lack of commitment to attack our enemy. We'd say "we cannot attack above this line". We didn't box with both fists.

We need to bomb Iran, or run. "Kinda-sorta" dealing with the problem will just mean a much greater loss of American lives, and the eventual evacuation of U.S. troops. Does anyone remember the footage of the people being airlifted from the roof of the embassy in Vietnam? We'll be doing that again in Iraq if we fail to commit to a strong escalation or to an immediate withdrawal.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Oh Marion,

Deny Deny Deny!

You STILL have ignored all the questions and concerns that I outlined in my 10:47pm post.

I'm waiting "Judge", I mean "Marion".

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion writes:

"I did not say that Iran could "destory" America with a nuke or any group of nukes."

Marion also writes:

"If it comes down to the survival of this nation or the survival of Iran, we know where I stand.

oh wait

It may be there already."

"You are merely a self and America hating wimp who would sacrifice not only yours but MINE on the altar of "Peace At Any Price".

"When someone says to me, "I will kill you and will do everything that I can to do so!", it gets my attention and I tend to believe them..

I beleive them."

"Prehistoric peoples cannot be allowed the use of modern technology to hold the rest of the world HOSTAGE!"

"The Jewish branch of the family was WIPED OUT.

I will NOT walk a path akin to the path at Sobibor.

I will NOT stand in line for the SELECTION!

The Holocaust involved more than Jews.

I am a PROUD Shabbas Goy as my business teachers were JEWS who SURVIVED!


"Do you think that I would kill without regret?

I would kill ONLY to survive."

Marion also writes:

"An Iran armed with atomic freaking bombs places my family's neck in a noose with a lunatic on the drop lever."

"Better eggs broken in Iran taking out their nukes than millions of eggs getting broken in New York City, Philadelphia, Charleston or other large American city because Iran was allowed to develope atomic freaking bombs."

But here is the good stuff, Marion:

"Iran is a primitive, superstitious country led by religious radicals, which country is the sworn enemy of THIS nation and will undoubtedly use such weaponry as it can to try to destroy this nation."

Note that last line "Judge", I mean Marion. Do I need to repeat it for you?

Marion: "the sworn enemy of THIS nation and will undoubtedly use such weaponry as it can to try to DESTROY this nation."

I like how you used "undoubtedly", very nice touch. But it seems to contrasts with this statement:

Marion: "I did not say that Iran could "destory" America with a nuke or any group of nukes."

Once again Judge, I mean Marion, you are proven to be a pathetic joke and a liar.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Excellent response Marion.

Thank You.

I knew you had Nothing to back up your BS.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Nice links Marion aka "The Judge". You want actually try this time?

The National Review! Are you serious? How long did they predict the War in Iraq was going to last... six days?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 11 years, 3 months ago

John Wayne's real name was Marion, and our little Marion think's he's John Wayne. But John Wayne's heroics were just as imaginary as are Marion's.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion/Judge claims that the Iranians are planning to "try" to destroy the US using a "very small atomic freaking bomb" that could possibly be delivered in a Gulfstream IV.

Marion/Judge has provided no evidence of how Iran could produce those weapons, or deliver them. Yet that is his catalyst to Kill Every Iranian.

If you want to believe in Marion/Judge's wild doomsday fantasy, go ahead.

But the truth is, IF the Iranian ever could build an atomic weapon, it would be delivered like so:

Thus uncapable to "try" to destroy the US. Yes it would be a threat to it's neighbors. But should Iran ever launch a nuke it would mean the end of Iran since they are surrounded by tremendous nuclear firepower.

The "radical" Iranian president that runs his mouth is running himself out of office, losing support everywhere, he needs a US attack to stay in power.

I obviously do not wish to have a nuclear armed Iran, but that is what the IAEA is for, that is what sanctions and international pressure is for. Just look at what has happened in North Korea this week, the US has Negotiated with a Radical with "atomic freaking bombs" to end his weapons ambitions. It can be done.

There are other alternatives to starting WWIII in the Middle East. Marion apparently does not care if the 10 Million+ member BASIJ are unleashed on American soilders in Iraq, but I do. If you want the hard-liners in Iran to forever gain ahold of the youth and for them to take over the entire Middle East, Attack Iran. Because that is what will happen. Do not make the same arrogant mistakes that were made just four years ago!

Good Day.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Your unbelievable Marion/Judge, the saddest part about people like you, W, and Dick is that you actually believe the BS you speak.

You are like a little boy playing war in his sand box with his kid sister.

You honestly think that killing 10 Million people will be a weekend job with a few gas bombs and some machine guns. Well, you should get your butt out from behind the keyboard and go hold one of those 350 GE mini-guns. But you and I both know you'll never leave the sandbox.

Your Arrogance is your downfall. You and W can't even handle the "insurgents" in Iraq and you think your going to mow down the BASIJ over a cup of tea.

Ignorance+Arrogance=Innocent Lives in Danger

Clean up your s*#t hole in Iraq before you go digging a grave in Iran.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

I love it Marion/Judge! You argue with my stats regarding death tolls and then you provide a link which backs up my claims exactly, Thank You!

It's also very interesting how you are now backing away from your claims of how the BASIJ will be mowed down. So now they are just going to give up, huh? But I thought they were insane "Radical Muslims" who would stop at Nothing to Kill Americans and Destroy America, I thought they had no Fear of Death? Seems like your story is full of holes, but that is no surprise.

It also seems like in order to have the Millions of BASIJ back down you are once again calling for a full on Invasion of Iran. Where are you going to find the additional hundreds of thousands of troops needed to Kill these Millions of people? Keep in mind that the BASIJ will be not be alone, but escorted by the Iranian Military.

Marion/Judge" "It is to be further noted that Mkh/HGA/Wendt has offered the gentle readers no alternative plan to prevent Iran from developing and using atomic freaking bombs"

Well if you had noted anything beyond your own ramblings you would have seen examples of alternative plans. I have noted that you have ignored the mentions of recent DIPLOMATIC agreements met with North Korea to halt their weapons program.

You are a wannabe Radical Tyrant whose arrogance, ignorance and blood thirst drives your perverted agendas.

I'm assuming it is due to your ignorance that you also glossed over the important threat of other nations transferring their debt holdings over to the Euro. This would not only be a weapon to cripple America financially, but it also makes ecomonic sense for other nations since the Euro is rising in value.

P.S. Have you found those WMD's yet? How is Iraq going?

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Also Thank You compmd for adding your technical experise to the discussion. It is a welcomed contrast to the wild fantasy theories being spewed from the neo-con.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

From the current issue of Newsweek article regarding Iran:

"But the generals are convinced that no amount of firepower could do more to delay Tehran's nuclear program. US military analysts have concluded that nothing short of regime change would completely eliminate the threat-and America simply doesn't have the troops needed."

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 11 years, 3 months ago

"Aside from the fact that the peaceniks hereabouts have been so thoroughly trounced in this little debate "

Actually, I wish Bush would follow your example, Marion-- just declare victory end this war.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 11 years, 3 months ago

Come on, Marion, you know that any thread you participate in becomes exclusively about you, mainly because you incessently scream "Look at me, look at me, look at me!!!!!"

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

WOW Marion now your just rambling on and on.

I guesss you can't answer any of my questions regarding your Final Solution, so I'm just wondering why you keep posting. It seems your desperate for attention, you must be so lonely.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

why do you not simply re-post them in cogent form in a single post.

Yeah that is a good idea Marion/Judge, that is why I did that in my 10:47pm post from Feb. 12! That's right, it's been a day and half that you have been running your mouth and ignoring the issues.

When you get done with those, I already have another long list that I've been waiting to give you.

Don't worry I won't hold my breath.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

WTF! You continue to dodge every issue Marion/Judge, this is beyond amazing, I've had more productive conversations with three olds.

You explained how you were going to handle the BASIJ!?! Are you nuts, I'm still laughing at your elementry fantasy of mowing down 10 million people. That is not an acceptable answer because it has no basis in reality, try again. The US military cannot control the Iraq/Iran border as of present. You are in a land of fiction.

Where are you going to get the additional hundreds of thousands of troops Marion?

You completely dismiss the politcal ramifications of choas that will result from an Iran attack because you lack any knowledge to understand the circumstances. 'Oh well those crazy Muslim are killing each other' is as far as your understanding of Mid-East relations can go.

That is why I thank God that you will never be given one ounce of responsiblity, you will continue to play with G.I. Joes in your sandbox.

"Their religion is motivation". Again this means nothing, you have no ablility to think critically, so you gloss over these extrememly complicated questions.

You have again also chosen to ignore the issues of how Iran will produce "very small atomic freaking bombs" to "try" to "destroy" the US, and how they will be delivered. Why? Because you know that you lie through your teeth and that these "primitives from the Stone Age" will not be able to manufacture "very small" nukes that can be delivered discreetly.

I knew you had nothing to offer but more BS, and now I have a feeling you know it as well.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Posted by mrhanky (anonymous) on February 14, 2007 at 1:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

marion wins!

This what happens when you give JR. High Students high speed internet. Shouldn't you be building a snowman?

Either contribute something from your own thoughts or Bug Off!

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion/Judge a Gulfstream IV is not a delivery system, it is your sick fantasy. I already showed what international experts say the Iranians would mount nuclear war heads too. To which you had no response.

I refuse to acknowledge your "answers" because none of them are backed up with facts, they are all your sandbox dreams.

Tom McCune 11 years, 3 months ago

  1. Iran gets nukes
  2. Iranian religious fanatics use a couple of them on Israel
  3. Israel retaliates with its nukes from submarines in the Mediterranean
  4. Russia comes to the defense of Iran, per treaty
  5. USA comes to the defense of Israel, per treaty
  6. WWIII begins
  7. The World ends

I don't know the answer, but that is the sequence of events the planners are worried about. It's not about the oil. We can buy the oil.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Great Marion/Judge, now we are getting down to the core of your sick cold heart.

Correction, not "hundreds of thousands flaming Basenji!", but infact around 12 Million. You'll note that is over half the entire population of Iraq, a country which we are currently getting our butts handed to us in.

Of course you don't offer any logistical realities of how to carry out your mission. But I'm sure you can't think that hard, so I will accept your substitute. Let's pretend for a moment that your fantasy came true.

So now congratulations you have killed about 12 Million Iranians and completely crippled the infrastructure of the country. I guess your mission must have worked...

Oh Wait a Minute! I almost forgot, now you have attacked and disrupted the critical flow of OIL to the fastest growing manufacturing country in the world, CHINA.

Ooooops! Somebody did not think this one through. What do you suppose the Red Chinese Masters will have to say when the US forcibly shuts down their ability to get the vital oil they need to run their country? And don't forget about old Russia either.

Once again, looks like the neo-cons bit off more than they could chew.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Seriously. I'd be lauging but I'm starting to feel sorry for Marion/"The Judge".

Wait a minute, what am I saying. LOL!

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Once again Marion's War Games are just that, games.

While it is true that Iran could possibly build a "Little Boy" device, the notion that the Iranians could deliver it to a US city via a bomber plane is once again Fiction.

Of course Marion/Judge fails to take into account the multiple layers of satelites that blanket the activities of Iran. Nor the massive air defense system headed up by NORAD.

Certainly the US needs to step up even more domestic defenses, especially in our ports. So I suggest we take care of those weak spots like we should have done years ago instead of starting another war. We have at least a decade before Iran could even start to manufacture bombs, and even only one or two a year.

Also Marion, where is that Iranian "Radical Muslim" bombing squad going to get airspace "fly over" permission from, what about refueling?

Once again, Marion's War Games only belong in the sandbox.

Nice job completely avoiding CHINA, as I expected.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion writes in all his international expertise:

"China would in such a situation most likely sit back and wait for the dust to settle as it has no interest in becoming the target of inbounds from parites engaged in nuclear sparring.

Arrangements for China's continuing oil supplies would be made by those who would then dominate the Iranian landscape.

No biggie there!"

Come on! Marion I don't believe that you are that stupid. Well maybe I do, perhaps that is why you gloss over every tough questions thrown your way, and instead you retreat to these wild conspiracy theories out of a "24" episode.

China "would sit back and wait". WRONG! China and Iran could destroy the US economy without ever lifting a finger. All they have to do is switch their debt holdings over to the Euro, and then it's "Wham!" "Bam!" for the US Dollar.

"No Biggie". LOL!

If you so much as blow up 1 pipeline heading into China they Will defend their interests. DO NOT Underestimate China in the same combination of Arrogance and Ignorance which you have shown regarding Iraq and Iran.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion: "Arrangements for China's continuing oil supplies would be made by those who would then dominate the Iranian landscape.

No biggie there!"

Marion I'm not even sure you understand what you are writing now. Are you now also calling for a full Invasion and Occupation of Iran in order to control Iranian oil???

I thought you were just going to Kill Them All?

You are a Mad Man!

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion perhaps you didn't suggest the cutting off of China's oil because you have no idea the extent of what your Final Solution entails.

You claim that you have responded to everything in my 10:47pm of Feb. 12th, so I assume you have already outlined All of the potential Iranian nuclear sites to destroy. In doing so I'm sure that you noticed heavily civilian areas surrounding many of those bombing sites. I'm sure you took special note of the heavy industrialized sections close to the those target sites, including that of Iranian Oil production. Therefore I am sure you can calculate the damage that would occur to the Iranian infrastructure.

Not to mention the damage done after you kill those 10+Million BASIJ in DESERT where many vital oil pipelines travel through.

Perhaps that is why you did not suggest it, hmmmmmm?

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"Pipelines are easily repaired if damaged anad repair crews could be placed on standby to move in immediately after the dead Basenji are bulldozed out orf the way."

You are Delusional Marion/Judge, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about, nor do you ever offer any logistal way to carry out your plans, you assume that a snap of the finger will do the trick.

I doubt you are aware of this but it Valentines Day, therefore I'm going to spend my evening with the beautiful woman in my life. I'd suggest you do the same, but then again I know women are a touchy subject for you.

Don't worry, then I will return to your Fantasy Land of Millions of dead bodies being bulldozed out of the way. Good thing we don't have to worry about "radicals" here in the US.

Your little war should be very intersting to watch on Fox News. Let's see, assuming that there are ONLY 12 Million dead at the end, where would such a conflict fall historically?

Well, it wouldn't be quite as bad as WWII, and it wouldn't reach the death toll of the Mongolian Invasion. Unless of course you achieved your goal of Killing "Every Iranian".

Most likely though you'd stop short around WWI death toll numbers. But you could still brag to your imaginary friends that your Holocaust far surpassed that of the Russian Civil War,the Napoloenic Wars, and the Thirty Years War. And I'm sure you will be very proud to Kill Millions and Millions more people than the Korean, Vietnam Wars and the Chinese Civil war. You'd make Khmer Rouge look like a picnic.

Yeah I'm glad we have perfectly sane people like you to keep us safe from the "RADICALS".

compmd 11 years, 3 months ago

I'm returning because I know airplanes, aircraft design, and aerospace engineering much better than most people here.

Iran would never send in a nuclear armed Gulfstream.

1) MTOW of a GIV is 76500 lbs. 2) Max range of a GIV is 4220nm. 3) Useful load minus max fuel is 1600 lbs.

Check it if you don't believe it.

Safe assumptions for weight of the two pilots is 360-400 lbs. Gutting the interior is suicide itself; its no 9000-11000 pounds, but you'll shift the CG back and screw up the static margin. Empty, you'll have an uncontrollable aircraft because it will no longer be longitudinally statically stable and the control system will be unable to account for that. If you place a large object then in the cabin and do not have weight distributed the same way as the cabin was originally designed, you will again run into problems with CG excursion. Aircraft designers aren't stupid, and aircraft are not meant to be modified by just anyone.

Now, outside of the aircraft being unable to fly, it has insufficient range, and there is the problem of the transponder, registration, and the necessity for an IFR flight plan coming into the US. A Gulfstream wouldn't make it within 50 miles of shore.

However, Iran's UAV business is very active, with advanced composite manufacturing techniques used in the manufacture of Iranian designed unmanned aircraft. There are even training drones that are capable of mimicking the radar and IR signatures of known enemy aircraft in order to more effectively train their military. Some of their UAVs are considered "stealthy" and just today Iran has announced a stealth UAV capable of attacking US naval ships. Once again, do not discount their level of technology. Now, even if they did build a stealthy UAV capable of flying a nuclear weapon to the US, the weapon itself would light up on radar because it is going to have a lot of metal. Since there is nobody onboard, failed ATC contact attempts will result in a fighter escort and likely destruction of the aircraft.

Can the Gulfstream thing be put to rest? Don't bother arguing with it unless you're going to be prepared with the aircraft pitching moment, airfoil, CG excursion plot, AC location, and knowledge of what to do with it all. Gah.

dcsarcasm 11 years, 3 months ago

Is Washington D.C. is listening to any of us! Bush is putting OUR TROOPS, in Iraq hoping the taliban won't come down from the mountains (oops, the real war)! He has put the elite of OUR TROOPS in Afghanistan and sold them out!

His kids misbehave in discos like Paris Hilton & Anna (lawyer bait). I suppose they support his agenda.

G. Dumbya's Administration is a puppet of Corporate Corruption! They went for the oil and lied about it!

compmd 11 years, 3 months ago

Lining anything with metal foil is going to cause an object to light up like a christmas tree on radar. In this case, it would be reflection. However, remember, there are methods other than looking for a reflection to detect an object with radar.

Hiding from radar is not an easy task, even when approaching the target in your scenario. During cruise in the aircraft you mention, you are going to have an IFR flight plan, it doesn't matter where you are coming from; you can request it in flight. That aircraft is likely going to be cruising between FL250 and 350. Dropping down to below 1000 ft AGL is not instantaneous, its going to take at least a couple minutes at maximum safe rate of descent. Suddenly that properly filed flightplan has changed. This will very obviously be noticed by ATC and they will act upon it.

Newell_Post, the acquisition cost of a 767 might not be that much, but its not like flying it is a piece of cake. You need to be well trained. Additionally, you need several engineers and mechanics to ensure that the aircraft is operational. Besides, a stray 767 is a metric crapload more noticeable than a business jet.

Anyway, Marion's concept is not inconceivable, but it is so complicated and easy to screw up that the technical chances of success are trivial. As we have agreed, Iran isn't stupid. They can come up with something much better. The Gulfstream Delivery Plan is a case of "just because you might be able to, doesn't mean you should try."

compmd 11 years, 3 months ago

The specifications listed on are incomplete. My weights listed are from the operations manual. I have the manuals for the aircraft you mention, the G500, the entire Citation line, Lear 25, 35, and 55 and a roomful of other aircraft if you'd like to compare against those as well. The CG issue as I noted earlier is qualitative, I performed no calculations, but small jets have a tendency to be sensitive to reconfigurations where the CG location changes.

Gutting the interior is not going to save you as much weight as you think. The cabin equipment is no more than a few hundred pounds. All the components of an aircraft are made to be as light as possible. Are you suggesting that the aft pressure bulkhead be removed? If you were to do that, you would have to leave the ring frame in place because its a structural component. Also, you would DEFINITELY move the CG forward. You will need to come up with a way for the pilots to breathe as well. Best solution would be to put oxygen tanks where the aft pressure bulkhead used to be and run lines up to the cockpit. Does this really sound like a good idea though?

In general, you are correct about point #3.

Part 4 I think you misinterpreted me. I was referring to the new manufacturing techniques at Iran's disposal. In particular, composites for aircraft components. As you likely know, the composites used would have no measurable radar reflectivity as they are transparent to RF. Properly S-ducted intakes on the engines would eliminate reflectivity from the compressor face. The transmissivity of the composite materials will allow a dense metal object to be detected by radar. Also keep in mind that surface reflectivity is not the only method of radar detection...

A UAV would be their best chance with a far greater likelihood of reaching any desired target. Iran does have the claim to the first unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV). They know how to build a UAV very well.

Of course if the aircraft did not originate in Iran and just blended in with other traffic it would not draw attention.

"Properly planned" refueling is not trivial for this case, especially if you are playing games with weights. To ensure mission success, range should be kept very conservative; however, every stop on the ground is a risk for detection.

What big city could a business jet like that go to after dropping off radar and not be noticed? How much of a threat is a 172 accidentally flying a few miles into a restricted area? Its enough to scramble a pair of F-15s that will escort him to the nearest airfield where the pilot will get reamed. This has happened before. ATC does not like disappearing jets or aircraft going where they aren't supposed to. Additionally, GA pilots are certainly going to notice a G-IV flying where he isn't supposed to and they will call it in.

compmd 11 years, 3 months ago

If Iran were to covertly strike at the United States, you are absolutely correct in that they would do it professionally, and make sure to do it right the first time, assuming no intervention from counterintelligence and our military. But there is a difference between wackjob terrorists and a nation declaring war against a nation. Iran is far more clever, capable, and civilized than the average American gives them credit for. The government of Iran has grander ambitions for their nation than a shaky plot to deliver a nuclear weapon to a US city using an aircraft whose manufacturer has close ties to Israel.

Marion, you know that I practically never question your technical knowledge, and unlike many other posters, I have no personal vendettas or bones to pick with you. But, aircraft design is an extremely difficult subject, and I have no idea what your knowledge level and experience is on the topic.

I'm not going to argue about this here. If you want to talk about why I don't think the Gulfstream nuclear delivery method won't work, message me off the board.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion: "I have shown that Mkh/HGA/Wendt/Butterball cannot count: he/She/It stated that the possibility of 10-12,000,000 Basenji(sic) being killed would exceed the number killed in the "Russian Civil War"; merely the reigns of your heroes, Lenin and Stalin;l that number was 20,000,000 plus."

My God your BS is Unbelievable! You really just ramble on and on with no regard for the truth. You think you would have gotten the hint last time I corrected your error here, but I guess it's just real thick up there.

Read YOUR own damn link Marion!!!:

The Link YOU provided lists the death toll of the Russian Civil War at 9 Million.

You want further proof, read here:

This source lists the Russian Civil War death toll between 5-9 Million. You are Wrong! Again!

The 20 Million dead you referenced is the historical number estimated killed during Stalin's regime AFTER the Russian Civil War. Don't try to lecture me about history Marion, you are not qualified in the least.

SB was absolutely right, you have ZERO Credibility.

You are a Fraud and a Blood Thirsty Joke.

I'm going to repost this again because you obviously did not get it:

From the current issue of Newsweek article regarding Iran:

"But the generals are convinced that no amount of firepower could do more to delay Tehran's nuclear program. US military analysts have concluded that nothing short of regime change would completely eliminate the threat-and America simply doesn't have the troops needed."

You War Games are Finished Marion, you have no credibility and now even the leaders and experts in the Military are saying that we will not be able to stop Iran's nuclear program with Force!
Go back to the Sandbox!

Tom McCune 11 years, 3 months ago

There are a lot of used 767s on the market right now for sale pretty cheap. Probably cheaper than most Gulfstreams and with much larger payload. (The owners of Google reportedly bought a used 767 and are having it rehabbed in Wichita as their corporate jet because it was both larger and cheaper than a Gulfstream.)

The detailed specs of any one particular aircraft model aren't really the main point.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"The so-called "Russian Civl War" is considered by many historians not to be a truly separate event from the reigns of Lenin and Stalin but merely a stage in the Bolshevik Revolution so thematter is open to question."

LOL! Hey Marion can I get a couple of truck loads of BS from you to fertalize my garden with this Spring?

It's so funny how you are completely unable to admit when you are wrong and thus forcing yourself to backpeddle, making you look like an ignorant jack*#s in the process.

Your Wrong Marion deal with it!

I'd ask you what the references you insist on repeating mean, "HGA, Wendt, ButterBall", but I really don't care.

Let me repost this for the 3rd time!!! From the current issue of Newsweek article regarding Iran:

"But the generals are convinced that no amount of firepower could do more to delay Tehran's nuclear program. US military analysts have concluded that nothing short of regime change would completely eliminate the threat-and America simply doesn't have the troops needed."

Game. Set. Match.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

Marion your argument is Washed Up... learn about Acceptance.

You are right about one thing though, Mr. White is not the only Expert on this subject, I would consider the Generals and US Anaylsts I quoted as being against the attack experts as well.

SB has alrealdy exposed your "EXPERTS" for what they truly are, but I've got a minute so let's take a deeper look inside the "EXPERTS".

Link #1:

The Jerusalem Post. While the quoted "expert" claims that the airstrike would only last two days, he has no plan as to what would happen if Iran decides to respond to the attack. The "expert" also shares this opinion later in the article:

"However, Berntsen believes that the US should first exhaust all the political options before carrying out a strike.

"We should do what we're doing right now. That means taking them to the United Nations and make this 'the world against Iran,' because the Iranians appear determined to create a weapon," he said. "

Link #2:

The American Chronicle. This so-called "expert" is actually only a Media Analyst. This "blurb" is nothing more than an uneducated rant that once again offers to logistical details and is not an "expert".

Link #3:

Space War: "Your World at War". I think the title of this site speaks for itself. Furthermore this article is Not even about the US, it is in regards to Israel, a country which is possibly threatened by Iran.

Link #4:

THE WEEKLY STANDARD. This is of course my favorite. Marion is quoting the mouth piece of the Project for the New American Century as an "EXPERT" an carrying out an attack in the Middle East! LOL, once again, how are those PNAC boys doing in Iraq, found the WMD's yet? How long has it been again? "Six days, six weeks...six months?"

Link #5:

The American Conservative Magazine. Another Neo-Con rag, which again is discussing a hypothetical situation inwhich ISRAEL would attack Iran.

Once again there is nothing here but fluffy War Games being dreamed up by the US/Israel Conservative War Freaks whose main objective is an "endless war" for the Empire. You have ZERO credibility Marion. ZERO.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"Your problem, Mkh/HGA/Wendt/Butterball, is that you simply hate this nation and do not believe in defending it."

HA! You are so washed up that you had to bring out and dust off the old "America Hater" rhetoric. Whatever, Marion. You have no idea my patriotism to this country; I'm not going to be insulted by the small mind of you.

I care about the safety of our citizens and troops which is why I am determined to stop you from using them as War Game puppets. You call arrogant and ignorant knee-jerk attacks as "Defending the country", but you're wrong, you got your Flank wide open.

I am the one who had proposed real Defense of the country. Tightening security at our Ports and Air Defenses is what this country needs to do to be more secure. International Diplomacy is the way to deal with Iran, especially while we are too busy messing up Iraq to do much else. We need to go back to Afghanistan and help those troops left behind before you go starting an all out War across the Middle East. No fly-zones, sanctions, and strict inspections from the IAEA and the UN are the only option that is viable.

satchel 11 years, 3 months ago

yeh.. I think we should hit Iran ONLY AFTER they have nuked us or Israel.. If they nuke ISrael, shoot.. Just let em' die, we should never ever go after another dangerous country again and make our military go to war. I mean, after all that is not what they are trained to do.

Nancy Pelosi has our best interests at heart! She wants to really DO SOMETHING about getting our VOLUNTARY men and women out of that horrible situation that seems to be improving now. But we need to get them out! After all they never signed up to end up in a war! So, Nancy decides to put out a NON BINDING resolution?? I thought she promised to get our men out of there!! What a loser/lier! We want them out now!!

We want the kiling to stop!! When the war comes back over here and a nuke goes off, I still don't want our men and women to die so we should just let the enemy have our country. We should 'work with them' as they bomb us and force us to bow to Allah.

Does this sound kind of strange? It is exactly what all you liberals on this thread believe. It is totally logical you would come to this conclusion. It is sick and you are ruining our nation and you will lose your freedoms some day if you are not willing to fight and pre-emptively protect our nation.

If covert action within Iran doesn't succeed, we need to bomb Iran from the air. We need to take out their nuclear sites. If Israel doesn't do it, we need to. Otherwise, you liberals are risking losing your freedom to live how you want to live. When you whine about gay marriage not being passed.. Just remember if we are taken down you won't even be able to talk about your support for gay marriage, or Darwin for that matter. You think living in a 'Christian nation' is bad.. Try living under Islamic rule.

Mkh 11 years, 3 months ago

"Otherwise, you liberals are risking losing your freedom to live how you want to live. When you whine about gay marriage not being passed.. Just remember if we are taken down you won't even be able to talk about your support for gay marriage, or Darwin for that matter. You think living in a 'Christian nation' is bad.. Try living under Islamic rule."

I must say this is an interesting theory. So if we don't start an uprovoked war now with Iran, then we will soon be "living under Islamic rule".

Wow, pass the kool-aide over here buddy! This is better than the sci-fi channel.

When is the Islamic Invasion set to begin? Do you think they will come up from Mexico, or head straight for DC down from Montreal? Boy I bet Texas would be surprised to wake up tomorrow being forced to pray toward Mecca at gunpoint. Though if Iran Invaded Vermont, they'd feel right at home and greet them with a plate of pita and hummus, right?

Wait a minute though, maybe it has already happened. I think they have taken over Minnesota, after all how else could Keith Ellison have been elected, right?
That must be their plan, cozy up nice and quite in Minn, and then wait for the Socialists in Vermont to open up the border so the Iranian Army can waltz in and take over.

It should be pretty wild to watch on Fox News the Iranians hunt down and kill every member of government and replace it with one of their own. I wonder if Ahmadinejad will chose to live in the White House or not?

Yeah I can see it now, all 300 Million Americans on their knees praying to Allah.

The question though is will Iran succeed in conquering America before the Martian Invaders? After all they have Ray Guns.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.