F-16.net

Enthusiast Joined: Nov 21, 2005 Posts: 67

Driver wrote:

RoAF wrote:

Quote:

to build a coalition (Israel, NATO, Gulf Monarchs, Siria, Turkia)

I hope you're not serious about this. You'll NEVER see Israel alied with any Arab state - even if the aliens attack.

I think its more realistic to expect Syria to help Iran then that they attack Iran... This goes for most Arab nations with maybe Turkey as an acception who's really stuck in the middle and probably will remain neutral.

Lapsus mendis, I mean to say "Jordania" instead Siria... Embarassed

Israel as Enemy of My Enemy is my "Friend", maybe not an open alliance, but Gulf monarch may deal covered Israeli cooperation.

F-16.net Sponsor

Enthusiast Joined: Nov 20, 2005 Posts: 67

elp wrote:

Things that are buried still need support from the outside. Killing things around the area doesn't hurt. Killing off access to and from a known location can also help.

Good point, but it requires a heavy intelligence work, but there is a problem... burried is not dead...

Enthusiast Joined: Nov 20, 2005 Posts: 67

firefox99 wrote:

An attack on the Iranian nuke sites would neither be accomplished through F-22's, F-117's, F-16's, F-18's, B-2's, or B-1's. Back in June last year there was a retired USAF General on Fox News who point blank said to the audience that if we (the USA) thought that NK was going to mount a live nuke warhead onto thier missiles that were about to be test fired, that we (the USA) have classified hardware to take out those missile on thier launch pads without sending over a fleet of airframes or cruise missiles. I was a bit shocked that anyone in the loop would come out and spill a couple of beans on classified program(s) and I highly doubt we've got space based lasers (yet).

It would only be a dumb idea to bomb Iran and leave it at that. Now then, if we're going to roll some M-1's through Tehren afterwards, that maybe not so dumb. Considering what's going on in Kurdistan and the unrest of the populace (homogenous populace) of Iran with it's own hardline government, I'd wager that we'd have more success in turning Iran into a pro-democracy country than with Iraq.

Warning... Spoilers of the next episode....

...DeepDigger? Anti-Materia? Aliens? Clinton's a$$hole?

RoAF wrote:

Quote:

I'd wager that we'd have more success in turning Iran into a pro-democracy country than with Iraq.

If the US will send ground troops in, you'll have a bloodbath several times bigger than in Iraq. You know, people don't like being invaded (whatever the reason).

Oh, easily 100x bigger then Iraq, those Iranians don't fool around when it comes to defending their turf, and they wont fight eachother, because 95% + of Iran is Shia.

F-16.net Editor Joined: Sep 23, 2003 Posts: 2862

VMF-214 wrote:

elp wrote:

Things that are buried still need support from the outside. Killing things around the area doesn't hurt. Killing off access to and from a known location can also help.

Good point, but it requires a heavy intelligence work, but there is a problem... burried is not dead...

If what is buried is a true threat to our national security ( we haven't done any of those wars since WWII ).... then it is worth nuking and nuking well.

elp wrote:

VMF-214 wrote:

elp wrote:

Things that are buried still need support from the outside. Killing things around the area doesn't hurt. Killing off access to and from a known location can also help.

Good point, but it requires a heavy intelligence work, but there is a problem... burried is not dead...

If what is buried is a true threat to our national security ( we haven't done any of those wars since WWII ).... then it is worth nuking and nuking well.

You do know that it's likely other nations wont tolerate such a thing from the USA? You can even expect your closest allies the brits to turn on you.

Elite 1K Joined: Jan 31, 2004 Posts: 1561 Status: Offline

Driver wrote:

You do know that it's likely other nations wont tolerate such a thing from the USA? You can even expect your closest allies the brits to turn on you.

Well gee whiz Wally...didn't the EU try to talk Iran outta developing nukes? See how that turned out?

"Pleeeeeeaassse Mahmoud...quit with the nuke buildin' already or we're gonna have another meeting to tell ya to quit with the nuke buildin' already".

When that glowing braintrust called the EU can't get somethin' done right and quits, it usually falls to the US to rectify the matter. And to hear the world's media tell it, everyone hates our guts now anyway. So how much worse could it get?

Dennis Miller made a good observation (which I'll paraphrase): When the USSR was still alive and kickin', it was easy to like the US 'cause we could counter the eeeeeevil Soviets. When the USSR went kaput-ski, people needed a superpower, ANY superpower, to hate. Because that's what superpowers are for. So people can hate something. And we just happened to be the only one left.

So let's try this: LET Iran get the Bomb. Yeah...that's it. And when the first one detonates in, oh...I dunno....Tel Aviv, let the EU try to wipe the blood of a couple million Israelis off their hands and come up with a plan to address a "nookyooler"-equipped Iran. And don't come runnin' to the US, 'cause hell.... we couldn't even get Iraq right. What makes ya think we can do any better in Iran? Whistle

Enthusiast Joined: Jun 01, 2004 Posts: 53

Quote:

So let's try this: LET Iran get the Bomb. Yeah...that's it. And when the first one detonates in, oh...I dunno....Tel Aviv, let the EU try to wipe the blood of a couple million Israelis off their hands and come up with a plan to address a "nookyooler"-equipped Iran. And don't come runnin' to the US, 'cause hell.... we couldn't even get Iraq right. What makes ya think we can do any better in Iran?

man's got a point.......

F-16.net

Forum: F-22A Raptor

Raptors impact on Iran attack