Quantcast

Iran Warns Of Preemptive Attack On U.s. Gulf Forces

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
I think we all can see where this is headed...

Iran warns of preemptive strike to prevent attack on nuclear sites
Agence France-Presse | aug. 18, 2004 | DOHA (AFP)

Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani warned Wednesday that Iran might launch a preemptive strike against US forces in the region to prevent an attack on its nuclear facilities.

"We will not sit (with arms folded) to wait for what others will do to us. Some military commanders in Iran are convinced that preventive operations which the Americans talk about are not their monopoly," Shamkhani told Al-Jazeera TV when asked if Iran would respond to an American attack on its nuclear facilities.

"America is not the only one present in the region. We are also present, from Khost to Kandahar in Afghanistan; we are present in the Gulf and we can be present in Iraq," said Shamkhani, speaking in Farsi to the Arabic-language news channel through an interpreter.

"The US military presence (in Iraq) will not become an element of strength (for Washington) at our expense. The opposite is true, because their forces would turn into a hostage" in Iranian hands in the event of an attack, he said.

Shamkhani, who was asked about the possibility of an American or Israeli strike against Iran's atomic power plant in Bushehr, added: "We will consider any strike against our nuclear installations as an attack on Iran as a whole, and we will retaliate with all our strength.

"Where Israel is concerned, we have no doubt that it is an evil entity, and it will not be able to launch any military operation without an American green light. You cannot separate the two."

A commander of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards was quoted in the Iranian press earlier Wednesday as saying that Tehran would strike the Israeli reactor at Dimona if Israel attacks the Islamic republic's own burgeoning nuclear facilities.

"If Israel fires one missile at Bushehr atomic power plant, it should permanently forget about Dimona nuclear center, where it produces and keeps its nuclear weapons, and Israel would be responsible for the terrifying consequence of this move," General Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr warned.

Iran's controversial bid to generate nuclear power at its plant being built at Bushehr is seen by arch-enemies Israel and the United States as a cover for nuclear weapons development.

The latest comments mark an escalation in an exchange of threats between Israel and Iran in recent weeks, leading to speculation that there may be a repeat of Israel's strike against Iraqi nuclear facilities at Osirak in 1981.

Iran insists that its nuclear intentions are peaceful, while pointing at its enemy's alleged nuclear arsenal, which Israel neither confirms nor denies possessing.

Shamkhani told Al-Jazeera it was not possible "from a practical standpoint" to destroy Iran's nuclear programs because they are the product of national skills "which cannot be eliminated by military means."

He also warned that Iran would consider itself no longer bound by its commitments to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in the event of an attack.

"The execution of such threats (to attack Iran's nuclear installations) would mean that our cooperation with the IAEA led to feeding information about our nuclear facilities to the attacking side, which (in turn) means that we would no longer be bound by any of our obligations" to the nuclear watchdog, he said.

Diplomats said in Vienna Tuesday that the IAEA would not say in a report next month whether Iran's nuclear activities are of a military nature, nor will it recommend bringing the case before the UN Security Council.

The IAEA board is due to deliver the report on Iran's nuclear activities during a meeting at the organization's headquarters in Vienna from September 13 after the last of a group of IAEA inspectors returned from Iran last week.

The UN's nuclear agency is conducting a major probe into Iran's bid to generate electricity through nuclear power.

The Islamic republic has agreed to temporarily suspend uranium enrichment pending the completion of the IAEA probe, but is working on other parts of the fuel cycle and has recently resumed making centrifuges used for enrichment.
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
"We will not sit (with arms folded) to wait for what others will do to us. Some military commanders in Iran are convinced that preventive operations which the Americans talk about are not their monopoly," Shamkhani told Al-Jazeera TV when asked if Iran would respond to an American attack on its nuclear facilities.

Of course this begs the question... With what..?

:p
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
fluff said:
Of course that begs the question... Why are you worried then..?

:p

Who's worried? Any attack would more than likey be terminated before the Iranian Air Force or Army could get out of Iranian airspace...
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
genpowell71 said:
I'M WORRIED!!!! If we tee off on Iran, I have to go back to the regoin and fight more arab people. As if the Taliban and the Iraqis were'nt enough. Now I gotta beat up the Iranians. Besides, I'm tired of that region, I want a break

I hear ya bro'!

Let's liberate someplace fun that has some hot looking babes next time... like Brazil, Austraila or even southern France!

:D
 

valve bouncer

Master Dildoist
Feb 11, 2002
7,843
114
Japan
Well General the Iranians aren't Arabs so that shouldn't be a problem. The latest comments from the Iranians seem more designed for domestic consumption than anything else, a puff out the chest exercise. I can't see too much happening mainly because both sides have too much to lose. Despite N8's locker room bravado the Americans are too stretched at the moment to open up a third front. Besides it's not the Iranian air force that I'd be worried about, it's their missiles.
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Aw heck, with the US's arsenal of stand-off weapons, we could easily wipe out all of Iran's war fighting infrastructure. This would remove then as a threat for years afterward.
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Slugman said:
Becasue we need their oil since the USA is not smart enough to develope any new technology...

I think we need to partner up with the Russians because they've got far more oil than the middle east.
 

golgiaparatus

Out of my element
Aug 30, 2002
7,340
41
Deep in the Jungles of Oklahoma
we could always stoop to their 10 yr old level and say... OH YEAH!!!!
WELL!!!! WE WILL PREEMPTIVE STRIKE YOUR PREEMPTIVE STRIKE ON US!!!!! AND THEN WHAT WILL YOU DO!? :eviltongu

BTW, what kind of fly by night dumbass organization TELLS you that they are going to perform a preemptive strike? Fuhking cowardice I tells ya, they are paranoid/scared as hell.

valve bouncer said:
It's not the Iranian air force that I'd be worried about, it's their missiles.
NOTE: Iran has 300 f-16s, and about an equal number of F14s.
 

DHiDave

Chimp
Jan 28, 2003
19
0
Lakewood, CO
We can all thank our pseudo-president for the great relationships he has developed with countries throughout the world. Thank you Mr. Bush for the great work!
 

Andyman_1970

Turbo Monkey
Apr 4, 2003
3,105
5
The Natural State
golgiaparatus said:
NOTE: Iran has 300 f-16s, and about an equal number of F14s.
I'm not sure about those F-16's, but the F-14's they do have are hold overs from the days of the Shah, and are practically worthless since they have not had spare parts since 1979.
 

valve bouncer

Master Dildoist
Feb 11, 2002
7,843
114
Japan
Andyman_1970 said:
I'm not sure about those F-16's, but the F-14's they do have are hold overs from the days of the Shah, and are practically worthless since they have not had spare parts since 1979.
Yep, might as well melt them bastards down and make cans of revolution cola with them.
 
valve bouncer said:
Well General the Iranians aren't Arabs so that shouldn't be a problem.
Your right, I apologize to the people that are reading this thread. 4000 years ago they were indo aryans from the steppes of southern Russia and people from the plains of western Pakistan and eastern India. All true, 4000 years ago. TODAY we call them arabs. They worship Allah, read the quran, and believe in Jihad as much as the average terrorist. Please feel free to call me hotheaded, bias, of whatever you feel you need to. Fact is, I was there, you were not. I sit in a good position to speak about the Iranians.

Yes, we are stretched too thin now. but what's to stop Bush from calling up the rest of the reserves and going off to "talk" with Iran? He did it a year ago, what's changed since then? Nothing
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
genpowell71 said:
I'M WORRIED!!!! If we tee off on Iran, I have to go back to the regoin and fight more arab people. As if the Taliban and the Iraqis were'nt enough. Now I gotta beat up the Iranians. Besides, I'm tired of that region, I want a break
Actually, most Iranians are not Arab. They get sensitive about that...

Edit:

Should have read the whole thread before posting :)

I have being valvebouncer's sloppy seconds...

Still, class, please pay attention. Muslim does not equal Arab, mmmkay?
 

roee

Chimp
Mar 13, 2004
98
0
They are terrified, and rightly so.
No one is going to let them posses nuclear weapons, and that's a question that's far outside politically correctness and public debate.

It's just not going to happen. We just have too much to lose.

Let the fun begin :D
 

mattv2099

Monkey
Aug 16, 2004
192
0
Bellingham, WA
golgiaparatus said:
we could always stoop to their 10 yr old level and say... OH YEAH!!!!
WELL!!!! WE WILL PREEMPTIVE STRIKE YOUR PREEMPTIVE STRIKE ON US!!!!! AND THEN WHAT WILL YOU DO!? :eviltongu

BTW, what kind of fly by night dumbass organization TELLS you that they are going to perform a preemptive strike? Fuhking cowardice I tells ya, they are paranoid/scared as hell.



NOTE: Iran has 300 f-16s, and about an equal number of F14s.
I think it is them stooping to the Americans 10 year old level. A couple years ago when the Iraq war was in the first phases the Bush administration was using the 'preemptive strike' clause left and right. My only hope is that Iran can liberate us from the right wing wacko's in office who continue to waste time, money, and lives in the middle east.
 

Trond

Monkey
Oct 22, 2002
288
0
Oslo, Norway
N8 said:
I hear ya bro'!

Let's liberate someplace fun that has some hot looking babes next time... like Brazil, Austraila or even southern France!

:D
wait wait! Do us, we're the second largest oil producing country in the world. It's a socialist-democracy, and that can't be a good thing.

Plenty of hot babes too :love:
 

-BB-

I broke all the rules, but somehow still became mo
Sep 6, 2001
4,254
28
Livin it up in the O.C.
Trond said:
wait wait! Do us, we're the second largest oil producing country in the world. It's a socialist-democracy, and that can't be a good thing.

Plenty of hot babes too :love:

This post is worthless w/o pics.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,737
1,820
chez moi
genpowell71 said:
Your right, I apologize to the people that are reading this thread. 4000 years ago they were indo aryans from the steppes of southern Russia and people from the plains of western Pakistan and eastern India. All true, 4000 years ago. TODAY we call them arabs. They worship Allah, read the quran, and believe in Jihad as much as the average terrorist. Please feel free to call me hotheaded, bias, of whatever you feel you need to. Fact is, I was there, you were not. I sit in a good position to speak about the Iranians.

Yes, we are stretched too thin now. but what's to stop Bush from calling up the rest of the reserves and going off to "talk" with Iran? He did it a year ago, what's changed since then? Nothing
Dude, they're still not Arabs. They're Persians. They don't even speak Arabic.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,737
1,820
chez moi
N8 said:
Aw heck, with the US's arsenal of stand-off weapons, we could easily wipe out all of Iran's war fighting infrastructure. This would remove then as a threat for years afterward.
Man oh man, you are an Air Force devotee to the heart, aren't you?

"Standoff weapons" do not win wars or change minds...they may damage or *possibly* destroy pinpoint targets, but ground war is the only decisive war.

-Jarhed
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
MikeD said:
Man oh man, you are an Air Force devotee to the heart, aren't you?

"Standoff weapons" do not win wars or change minds...they may damage or *possibly* destroy pinpoint targets, but ground war is the only decisive war.

-Jarhed

True... the Infantry is indeed the Queen of Battle... but stand-off's will buy quite a bit of time and besides... once the threat from airborne delivered nukes is neutralized then why would the US even wanna go into Iran on the ground?

Totally different scenerio than Iraq.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,737
1,820
chez moi
N8 said:
True... the Infantry is indeed the Queen of Battle... but stand-off's will buy quite a bit of time and besides... once the threat from airborne delivered nukes is neutralized then why would the US even wanna go into Iran on the ground?

Totally different scenerio than Iraq.
How do you know the threat from airborne delivered nukes is neutralized unless you've got men on the ground telling you so...bringing in experts to tell you that this was indeed a real military nuclear facility, not a decoy, and that it's 100% destroyed??

Gulf War I really spoiled people into thinking that wars could be fought and won from the air.

Look at Clinton's brilliant missile strike in the Sudan. PR nightmare, militarily insignificant, yet a significant contributor to the hatred that fueled 9/11...air power used alone is American clumsiness at its best, and shows our enemies, who are strong-willed, shrewd, and hardened fighters, that we're unwilling to engage on a meaningful level and far too reliant on technology alone/

MD