Quantcast

Khamenei: 'Have 2 bombs ready to go in January or you are not Muslims'

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Khamenei: 'Have 2 bombs ready to go in January or you are not Muslims'
Geostrategy-Direct.com (Subscription Site) | 29 Sep 04

Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has urged his country's weapons developers to step up work on making a nuclear bomb, a U.S. official said.

According to the official, an authoritative source in the Iranian exile community has stated that Khamenei met recently with senior government and military leaders on the nuclear weapons program.

Khamenei told the gathering, "We must have two bombs ready to go in January or you are not Muslims," the official said.

Jafari-Jalali, a member of the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee of the Majles, stated in an Iranian press interview last week that the recent International Atomic Energy Agency resolution calling on Iran to halt uranium enrichment could lead to Tehran withdrawing from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Iran's military announced earlier this month that it would test-fire a "strategic" missile during the Ashura 5 military exercises of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.

Brig. Gen. Hossein Salami announced the missile test on Sept. 18. "The climax of this stage of the exercises is the actual missile operations and the testing of a series of missiles with different ranges," he said.

Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani said earlier this month that, "given that an effective deterrent policy does not halt at a certain point, the Islamic Republic of Iran continues upgrading its defensive capability." Shamkhani said Iran has acquired an effective deterrent power to confront its enemies in the region.

Iran test-fired a Shihab-3 on Sept. 18 and had also tested one in August.

Meanwhile, British intelligence, working with Iraqi security, has uncovered a cell within the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps that is working to destabilize Iraq.

The Iranians had paid insurgents to conduct attacks in southern Iraq.

"I don't think there's any doubt that the Iranians are involved and are providing support" to the Iraqi insurgents, Secretary of State Colin Powell said last week.

------------------------------------------

IRAN INTRODUCES NEW WARFARE DOCTRINE
Middle East Newsline (Subscription Site)

NICOSIA [MENL] -- Iran has introduced what officials termed a new combat doctrine meant to repel any attack by Israel or the United States.

Officials have termed the doctrine "asymmetric warfare"* and said it was aimed at countering a threat from a much larger and powerful adversary. They said the combat doctrine sought to identify and exploit Iranian military advantages in any war with a foreign power.

The new doctrine was said to have been demonstrated during the Ashura-5 military exercise in September. During the Sept. 12-18 exercise, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps tested the effectiveness of coordinated air and ground strikes, strategic medium- and intermediate-range missiles as well as other weapons and methods.

IRGC commander Gen. Yahya Rahim-Safavi said Iran developed the concept of asymmetric warfare based on the assessment that Teheran's greatest threats came from Israel and the United States. He said Teheran has sought to deter these two countries by demonstrating Iran's deep-strike capability.



*asymmetric warfare: the very same doctrine as employed by CHINA. Surprise, surprise
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
So what are you pi$$ed about N8, that they want a deterent to stop Israel and the US attacking them with impunity, or that they are support insurgents in another country that is currently occupied by their enemies?
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
fluff said:
So what are you pi$$ed about N8, that they want a deterent to stop Israel and the US attacking them with impunity, or that they are support insurgents in another country that is currently occupied by their enemies?

Is it viewed as an attempt at moral equivalency with Israel which has well over 50 nukes?

Cuz if it is, Israel is not bent on destroying its neighbors. The same cannot be said for the states that surround it though.

Perhaps this might be a solution to the situation; the US should declare the Middle East a nuclear free zone. With this declaration, United States should announce that an attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States...

Thoughts?
 

Tenchiro

Attention K Mart Shoppers
Jul 19, 2002
5,407
0
New England
What is so bad about asymmetric warfare? But they really need to stop actting like this was their idea, asymmetric warfare has been a staple of smaller forces since biblical times.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
26
SF, CA
N8 said:
the US should declare the Middle East a nuclear free zone.

Thoughts?
As opposed to the rest of the world, which we've declared an all-nukes, all-the-time zone?
 

Tenchiro

Attention K Mart Shoppers
Jul 19, 2002
5,407
0
New England
N8 said:
Perhaps this might be a solution to the situation; the US should declare the Middle East a nuclear free zone. With this declaration, United States should announce that an attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States...
I think the US just needs to cut Israel loose and let them do whatever they are gonna do on their own. They already have one of the most technically advanced and well trained military in the world, they really don't need our help anymore.

But for the US to declare anywhere a nuclear free zone, when we ourselves have so many of the damn things and are hell bent on developing more. Seems slightly hipocritical.
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,024
0
Miami, FL
Sooner or later the saber rattling by the US (Bush's declaration that Iran will NOT have Nukes) is going to backfire on us. We are going to F*ck with the wrong insane little man, and a nuke will be launched.

That is probably why Bush isn't saying the same type of things about N. Korea... b/c that dude is NUTS!

And if the US wants to declare the Middle East a nuclear free zone - they need to take away Israel's missiles (last time I checked, Israel was in the Middle East…).
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
N8 said:
Is it viewed as an attempt at moral equivalency with Israel which has well over 50 nukes?

Cuz if it is, Israel is not bent on destroying its neighbors. The same cannot be said for the states that surround it though.

Perhaps this might be a solution to the situation; the US should declare the Middle East a nuclear free zone. With this declaration, United States should announce that an attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States...

Thoughts?
Morals don't really enter into it as the viewpoint from there is completely different to the viewpoint from here. They feel under threat due to US rhetoric and unsurprisingly view nuclear weapons and the ability to threaten US allies & troops as a deterent.

As for Israel's declared policy versus its Arab neighbours, when was the last time an Arab nation invaded Israel or occupied its territory, as opposed to when was the last time Israel invaded an Arab nation or occupied its territory? When did Iran last invade anyone?

The US is reaping what it has sown in the middle east. If you are serious about a nuclear free zone then the US should strip Israel of its nukes and declare that it will guarantee all of the borders of all of the nations of the region, give the West Bank & Gaza to the Palestinians and declare Jerusalem an Internation city governed by the UN.

Otherwise it's just the kettle calling the pot black.
 

golgiaparatus

Out of my element
Aug 30, 2002
7,340
41
Deep in the Jungles of Oklahoma
N8 said:
Is it viewed as an attempt at moral equivalency with Israel which has well over 50 nukes?

Cuz if it is, Israel is not bent on destroying its neighbors. The same cannot be said for the states that surround it though.

Perhaps this might be a solution to the situation; the US should declare the Middle East a nuclear free zone. With this declaration, United States should announce that an attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States...

Thoughts?
Yeah, we are digging around in a hornets nest of ruthless idiots that are scared and feel like they are backed into a corner. The results of this will not be good.

BTW how does the US declare the ME a nuke free zone? Its not... there are nukes over there. We relly need back off a bit and let those places deal with their own drama... why do we have to be some kind of big mediator(sp)? I'm sure GW is foaming at the mouth over all of this.
 

Zark

Hey little girl, do you want some candy?
Oct 18, 2001
6,254
7
Reno 911
Slugman said:
That is probably why Bush isn't saying the same type of things about N. Korea... b/c that dude is NUTS!
No doubt!, I vote him "Most likely to launch a nuclear strike and then sing show tunes"
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,024
0
Miami, FL
fluff said:
As for Israel's declared policy versus its Arab neighbours, when was the last time an Arab nation invaded Israel or occupied its territory, as opposed to when was the last time Israel invaded an Arab nation or occupied its territory?
So is it Israel's fault that they defeated and repeled every attack? There is a long history of Israel's neighbors attacking them, and Israel attacking it's neighbors. Both will try to justify and rationalize it... doesn't make either right.
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Do you think the Iranians who are protesting their gov't and looking to overthrow the regime have a solid understanding of the sense of urgency for their survival?

If the mullahs get the bomb, then use it, they're all dead, even if they had nothing to do with it.
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
Slugman said:
So is it Israel's fault that they defeated and repeled every attack? There is a long history of Israel's neighbors attacking them, and Israel attacking it's neighbors. Both will try to justify and rationalize it... doesn't make either right.
No, but as Israel has invaded and occupied Arab territory it shows why Iran might be paranoid...
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
N8 said:
Do you think the Iranians who are protesting their gov't and looking to overthrow the regime have a solid understanding of the sense of urgency for their survival?

If the mullahs get the bomb, then use it, they're all dead, even if they had nothing to do with it.
They are talking about a deterent. So long as they don't use it then they are no worse than the US, the UK, Israel et al. And they have a better record of non-aggression than any of those three countries.

Can you not see the hypocrisy of your standpoint: 'It's ok for us to have it but not for them to'?
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
fluff said:
They are talking about a deterent. So long as they don't use it then they are no worse than the US, the UK, Israel et al. And they have a better record of non-aggression than any of those three countries.

Can you not see the hypocrisy of your standpoint: 'It's ok for us to have it but not for them to'?

Ah, but Iran..???

Come on, what good can come of it?

Besides, I look for combo if one or several of the following Israel/Saudi/US/India to launch a covert operation and eliminate the threat.
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,024
0
Miami, FL
fluff said:
No, but as Israel has invaded and occupied Arab territory it shows why Iran might be paranoid...
Only once has Israel invaded a country w/out first being attacked (June 5th 1967 - Israel launches a pre-emptive attack on Egyptian forces aimed at them).

So unless Iran is about to attack... they have no reason to fear Israel.
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Slugman said:
Only once has Israel invaded a country w/out first being attacked (June 5th 1967 - Israel launches a pre-emptive attack on Egyptian forces aimed at them).

So unless Iran is about to attack... they have no reason to fear Israel.
Israel does have a history of taking out their neighbor's new-clur facilities though.
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,024
0
Miami, FL
N8 said:
Israel does have a history of taking out their neighbor's new-clur facilities though.
Would that be the counrty that we are currently occupying?

So was this a statement for or against? (since you are pro Bush's mandate of attack first and don't ask questions later...)
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Slugman said:
Would that be the counrty that we are currently occupying?

So was this a statement for or against? (since you are pro Bush's mandate of attack first and don't ask questions later...)

Yep, Iraq is what I'm talking about.

I am for Israel conducting premptive strikes against countries that have sworn to eliminate them.

Iran really should take heed because I don't see Israel letting them become a nuclear player in the region.
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,024
0
Miami, FL
I don't see Israel doing anything about it. If they were to attack Iran while the US is occupying Iraq - Every Muslim nation would go F'ing NUTS...
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Slugman said:
I don't see Israel doing anything about it. If they were to attack Iran while the US is occupying Iraq - Every Muslim nation would go F'ing NUTS...

...and do what?

Complain to the UN?

Clearly there in no Muslim nation that can tangle with Israel and prevail. Besides if they did attack Israel, it could be the excuse Israel needs to crush the Palistinians as well.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,737
1,820
chez moi
Slugman said:
Only once has Israel invaded a country w/out first being attacked (June 5th 1967 - Israel launches a pre-emptive attack on Egyptian forces aimed at them).

So unless Iran is about to attack... they have no reason to fear Israel.
Depending on your point of view, the formation of Israel itself can be an invasion.

MD
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
N8 said:
...and do what?

Complain to the UN?

Clearly there in no Muslim nation that can tangle with Israel and prevail. Besides if they did attack Israel, it could be the excuse Israel needs to crush the Palistinians as well.
How's this for a nasty scenario?

Israel attacks Iran. The Muslim world, already pissed off at Israel (for some good reasons, some bad ones) and the US (mostly good reasons lately, yes Dorothy, deporting Cat Stevens was a stupid thing to do, a small thing, granted, but still stupid) gets all riled up, and religious fanatics in Pakistan with access to nuclear weapons smuggle one into Tel Aviv.

N8, just because you think every other nation in the world is impotent, doesn't make it so.
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,024
0
Miami, FL
N8 said:
...and do what?

Complain to the UN?

Clearly there in no Muslim nation that can tangle with Israel and prevail. Besides if they did attack Israel, it could be the excuse Israel needs to crush the Palistinians as well.
No single nation, but with the US in Afganistan and Iraq, to then have Israel attack another Muslim country... Terrorist and Islamic nations couldn't find enough weopons to hand out to all the people willing to go to war.
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,024
0
Miami, FL
MikeD said:
Depending on your point of view, the formation of Israel itself can be an invasion.

MD
So can the settling of the USA... but does it make it relavant to the current situation, and would it be realistic to try and turn back time? Where are all the Israelis going to go? You think we could give them Germany or Poland, I'm sure they wouldn't mind. Anyone got an island for a couple million people?

That discussion is one big steaming pile of Poo that I do not care to step in...
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Slugman said:
No single nation, but with the US in Afganistan and Iraq, to then have Israel attack another Muslim country... Terrorist and Islamic nations couldn't find enough weopons to hand out to all the people willing to go to war.

Thus bringing on WWIII and the Final Conflict and the End of Times as predicted...???
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
26
SF, CA
N8 said:
...and do what?

Complain to the UN?

Clearly there in no Muslim nation that can tangle with Israel and prevail.
As a nation no, but individuals and extremist groups seem to do alright against both Israel and the US when their goal isn't survival. There's 3000 dead new yorkers and thousands more dead israelis that demonstrate exactly what burning hatred can do.

Not to mention Pakistani nukes, and Russian broken arrows floating around.
 

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
ohio said:
As a nation no, but individuals and extremist groups seem to do alright against both Israel and the US when their goal isn't survival. There's 3000 dead new yorkers and thousands more dead israelis that demonstrate exactly what burning hatred can do.

Not to mention Pakistani nukes, and Russian broken arrows floating around.

Pakistan is far more likely to nuke Inja given a chance, than Israel, over a premptive strike on an Iranian nuclear facility.
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
N8 said:
Pakistan is far more likely to nuke Inja given a chance, than Israel, over a premptive strike on an Iranian nuclear facility.
You're assuming that Musaraff has full control of Pakistan's nukes...which would be nice to think, but it may not be true.
 

golgiaparatus

Out of my element
Aug 30, 2002
7,340
41
Deep in the Jungles of Oklahoma
ohio said:
As a nation no, but individuals and extremist groups seem to do alright against both Israel and the US when their goal isn't survival. There's 3000 dead new yorkers and thousands more dead israelis that demonstrate exactly what burning hatred can do.

Not to mention Pakistani nukes, and Russian broken arrows floating around.
I think the Russians like to call them "Missing Vodkas".
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,737
1,820
chez moi
Slugman said:
So can the settling of the USA... but does it make it relavant to the current situation, and would it be realistic to try and turn back time? Where are all the Israelis going to go? You think we could give them Germany or Poland, I'm sure they wouldn't mind. Anyone got an island for a couple million people?

That discussion is one big steaming pile of Poo that I do not care to step in...
Realistic in our view? No. Do we have to deal with an entire subcontinent that thinks so? Yes. Wishing 'they' saw it 'our' way is just whining.

So that leaves us the options to:

1) Force them to see it, or at least accept, our way, a'la the native americans. Not palatable, but it has worked in the past. We don't, however, have the national cajones to do this sort of thing anymore. (Case in point: the current world situation.) This lack of will to subjugate other peoples and cultures is a good thing on every level I can think of, except perhaps for the bottom line.

2) Coax them to see it our way...classic american cultural imperialism. Might work in the long run, but we need to vastly change our policies and suck up some hurt in the meantime if this is going to work.

3) Stop trying to force them to see it our way and step out of the situation altogether.

MD
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,024
0
Miami, FL
MikeD said:
3) Stop trying to force them to see it our way and step out of the situation altogether.

MD
That would get my vote... but I'm an athiest *coughrealistcough* so I see no real value in the land.

There are way too many people in the US with a LOT of money who will keep bribing, er donating to their favorite political group to insure that we never turn away from Israel. Besides, at this point we have put our reputation into the situation, and so we could never walk away now... it might us look bad.
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,024
0
Miami, FL
N8 said:
Thus bringing on WWIII and the Final Conflict and the End of Times as predicted...???
I don't buy into that garbage.

And I don't care who is in the oval office, if some dumbass country launches nukes against the USA - they will be glowing for a millenium. Even if that president didn't agree with the decision, he would know that the citizens of the US would DEMAND it...or his head.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,737
1,820
chez moi
Slugman said:
That would get my vote... but I'm an athiest *coughrealistcough* so I see no real value in the land.
Well, since Zionism is basically an atheist movement, you're not making much of a point. Most Israelis are secular, and look at orthodox Judaism in the way you might look at the Amish...a bit odd and out of touch with the world, but worthy of respect as the keeper of cultural tradition.

You don't have to believe in God of any kind to think Jews need a national homeland. Nor do you have to believe Jews need a national homeland if you're Jewish. Nor do you have to think Jews need a national homeland if you support Israel...you might just see them as a democracy where there needs to be one. ("a stabilizing influence on the Middle East"...ha)

And 'Jewish' denotes not just a religion, but a culture and ethnicity...plenty of atheists still consider themselves Jewish. You can convert to the religion of Judaism and appropriate its culture, but you can't make yourself ethnically Jewish, either. It's not just a religion issue.

Unless Roee knows otherwise...? I'm not an Israeli, and maybe I'm totally wrong here.

MD
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
Slugman said:
Only once has Israel invaded a country w/out first being attacked (June 5th 1967 - Israel launches a pre-emptive attack on Egyptian forces aimed at them).

So unless Iran is about to attack... they have no reason to fear Israel.
In 1982 Israel invaded Lebanon creating a huge fvcking mess which is still steaming.

They have also carried operations of one kind or another in Syria and Iraq in recent years.

Now I'm not saying nukes in Iran are a good idea, I also don't think nukes in Israel are a good idea but you and N8 are coming from a very narrow viewpoint and if you cannot understand why Iran wants them you're not thinking very hard.