I don’t think anyone is actually talking about invading Iran these days- though in the full flush of triumphalism after the fall of Saddam, many on the right certainly were at the time- remember the jokes?
“Everyone wants to go to Baghdad. Real men want to go to Teheran.”
" Turn left or turn right at Baghdad?"( i.e. Syria or Iran)
What’s on the drawing board now is an air attack possibly with special forces back-up.
[quote=“Toe Tag”]Sorry Captain genius, the title of the thread is “When will the US invade Iran”, if you can remove your head from wherever you stuck it and read it.
Why would it cost that much? Well, we’ve already spend $500 billion on the Bush regime’s Iraq adventure, as a rule of thumb. I’m sure any day now they’ll be greeting us with flowers as liberators! 
Why would an Iran adventure be any cheaper?[/quote]
What invasion? Is Bush talking about invading Iran? What are you talking about? :s
They are already there! Are you seriously trying to tell me that US and UK special forces won’t be doing a little recon work seeing as though they are just next door! :s
Absolutely. Here it is on the front page of Pravda. Where do you get your news? Pravda means “truth”.
english.pravda.ru/world/20/91/36 … _iran.html
“Bush is denying reports today that he plans to invade Iran.
Oh, we’re still going to invade, we just don’t have any plans.”
–Jay Leno
I have read or heard many anti-war activists bring up Iran as the better target. But had we invaded Iran, would the anti-war crowd not have materialized? Would you have applauded an invasion of Iran?
No one in the Administration is talking about a draft. In fact, the only rhetoric from the White House regarding a draft is that they are completely opposed to it. “The draft is coming” is an urban myth and scare tactic of the radical left. Do you really want to hop on that train?
Perhaps we should dustinguish between anti-war and anti-Iraq WarII groups. Anti-war folks oppose the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, etc. Anti-IraqII folks are free to support other wars like in Afghanistan, N. Korea, Sudan etc.
These camps can work together on Iraq, but may (or may not) split ways over Iran, that’s politics.
[quote=“Toe Tag”]Absolutely. Here it is on the front page of Pravda. Where do you get your news? Pravda means “truth”.
English.pravda.ru/world/20/91/36 … _iran.html[/quote]
So, you haven’t any statements by Bush speaking of an invasion of Iran, right?
Your point, if we can call it that, is that Bush isn’t talking about invading Iran. So therefore there are no plans for it? I mean, Bush talks to God after all. And Bush never lies.
Maybe its because Bush agrees with me… a stopped clock is right twice a day after all. He realizes that he’s “spent all his political capital”, that his own party is abandoning him, and assuming he even cares, that most people don’t support it. Do you seriously believe that if Bush doesn’t mention a draft or an Iran invasion that its not being planned? :loco:
Not sure why some of you can’t understand logic. Maybe you’re bucking for a job in the Bush administration. Let me spell it out for you one last time. We’ve spent a trillion dollars on the Iraq cluster-f*ck. If you want to invade Iran, tell me where we get another trillion dollars and another 300,000 troops. I’m listening. Tell me how we get those troops without a draft. Maybe all you young English teachers are planning to volunteer. Go for it son… the US Army has induction centers in Japan and Guam… don’t forget to write… oh actually they won’t let you post on Forumosa from the battle lines… well we’ll miss you… the gene pool will miss you also…
Yes, Bush has no plans to invade Iran: we’re going to invade, its just that he has no plan… just like Iraq.
President Bush is following, not leading, the push to confront Iran:
"Israelis tend to describe every threat in the starkest terms, but Iran is widely seen as their most dangerous enemy because it is the most likely to acquire nuclear weapons. Virtually all Israelis regard an Islamic country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons as a threat to their existence.
Pack your bags and fill up your gas tanks. Rice has just delivered the news to Britain that Teheran is the next stop on the Armageddon Express:
"The Government is to hold secret talks with defence chiefs tomorrow to discuss possible military strikes against Iran.
A high-level meeting will take place in the Ministry of Defence at which senior defence chiefs and government officials will consider the consequences of an attack on Iran.
It is believed that an American-led attack, designed to destroy Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear bomb, is “inevitable” if Teheran’s leaders fail to comply with United Nations demands to freeze their uranium enrichment programme.
Tomorrow’s meeting will be attended by Gen Sir Michael Walker, the chief of the defence staff, Lt Gen Andrew Ridgway, the chief of defence intelligence and Maj Gen Bill Rollo, the assistant chief of the general staff, together with officials from the Foreign Office and Downing Street."
–Sunday Telegraph
Are they talking about an invasion, spook? Just curious, because Toe Tag up there keeps buzzing about an invasion of Iran. I just don’t see it.
Are they talking about an invasion, spook? Just curious, because Toe Tag up there keeps buzzing about an invasion of Iran. I just don’t see it.[/quote]
No, no invasion. The below with special ops, though I think the Telegraph misidentifed the GBU-28 as the “BLU-28”:
"Tactical Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from US navy ships and submarines in the Gulf would, it is believed, target Iran’s air defence systems at the nuclear installations.
That would enable attacks by B2 stealth bombers equipped with eight 4,500lb enhanced BLU-28 satellite-guided bunker-busting bombs, flying from Diego Garcia, the isolated US Navy base in the Indian Ocean, RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire and Whiteman USAF base in Missouri. . . .
There are thought to be at least eight known sites within Iran involved in the production of nuclear materials, although it is generally accepted that there are many more secret installations."
Nobody wants another war, but the coalition wants can’t wait for Islamic nations to catch up with reality.
Well 2006 is going to be a busy year. I suggest that we invade in the winter of this year, say Nov. 15 or so. That or Spring 2007. Time to take the worst offender out of the terrorism column once and for all. Cannot wait until the next election to trust some Democrat with “feelings” to do what needs to be done. Onto Teheran. I really do hope that Kerry gives it another try. I love people to try. Try try a little bit harder. Besides, I have not had much of a laugh since TereZa disappeared. Wonder what she is up to these days? At least, Kerry would be able to come back and explain to us what “nuance” is all about. I forgot the definition… can anyone remind me again…
Oh and by the way,
Love Fred
P.S. Here until April 19 so get used to it. Lock and load and all that sort of stuff. and for my many fans hahahaahahah
[quote=“fred smith”]Well 2006 is going to be a busy year. I suggest that we invade in the winter of this year, say Nov. 15 or so. That or Spring 2007. Time to take the worst offender out of the terrorism column once and for all. Cannot wait until the next election to trust some Democrat with “feelings” to do what needs to be done. Onto Teheran. I really do hope that Kerry gives it another try. I love people to try. Try try a little bit harder. Besides, I have not had much of a laugh since TereZa disappeared. Wonder what she is up to these days? At least, Kerry would be able to come back and explain to us what “nuance” is all about. I forgot the definition… can anyone remind me again…
Oh and by the way,
Love Fred
P.S. Here until April 19 so get used to it. Lock and load and all that sort of stuff. and for my many fans hahahaahahah[/quote]
You’re banging your war drums a little more frenetically than even you used to, my good man. Feeling the cold chill of reality on the back of your neck?
What were you doing in Washington D.C. in early March anyway? Were you there on government business?
[quote=“fred smith”]Well 2006 is going to be a busy year. I suggest that we invade in the winter of this year, say Nov. 15 or so. That or Spring 2007.
[/quote]
Well, Tigerman, fred certainly is talking about an invasion, though he doesn’t say what army he’s planning on using.
Let me guess- you don’t need a big invasion force, just a few special forces types and the trusty exile groups, because the Bush-loving Iranians will greet you with rose petals.
And of course, things are going so swimmingly in Iraq that by November the US forces will be sitting around twiddling their thumbs, looking for something to do.
The “Divine Strake” weapons test to be conducted in June at the Nevada Test Site and being billed by the Pentagon as a 700 ton high explosive conventional weapons test is actually a cover for testing the effects of an earth-penetrating nuclear weapon. Current thinking is that only a 10 kiloton nuclear weapon will be able to take out Iran’s deepest nuclear fuel cycle facilities. If it can penetrate below around 850 feet before detonating a shaped nuclear charge the theory is it won’t spew the normal million cubic feet or so of radioactive fallout into the air.
I don’t like the name.
Why not call it “Tear a new asshole?”
[quote=“jdsmith”]I don’t like the name.
Why not call it “Tear a new asshole?”[/quote]
Divine (superhuman, godlike) Strake (device for directing fluid flow – or in this case, pressure fronts) is a more appropriate moniker for the tools of the religious warfare trade.
Imagine the irony. We’ll be the first to use weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East in an unprovoked attack on another country.
Here’s a good article from the New Yorker about the current horrendous state of human rights in Iran:
[quote]One afternoon in June, three days before Iran