Russians see US Attack against Iran Soon

[QueEx]

<font size="5"><center>Russian intelligence sees U.S.
military buildup on Iran border</font size></center>

Russian News and
Information Agency
March 27, 2007

MOSCOW, March 27 (RIA Novosti) - Russian military intelligence services are reporting a flurry of activity by U.S. Armed Forces near Iran's borders, a high-ranking security source said Tuesday.

"The latest military intelligence data point to heightened U.S. military preparations for both an air and ground operation against Iran," the official said, adding that the Pentagon has probably not yet made a final decision as to when an attack will be launched.

He said the Pentagon is looking for a way to deliver a strike against Iran "that would enable the Americans to bring the country to its knees at minimal cost."

He also said the U.S. Naval presence in the Persian Gulf has for the first time in the past four years reached the level that existed shortly before the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

Col.-Gen. Leonid Ivashov, vice president of the Academy of Geopolitical Sciences, said last week that the Pentagon is planning to deliver a massive air strike on Iran's military infrastructure in the near future.

A new U.S. carrier battle group has been dispatched to the Gulf.

The USS John C. Stennis, with a crew of 3,200 and around 80 fixed-wing aircraft, including F/A-18 Hornet and Superhornet fighter-bombers, eight support ships and four nuclear submarines are heading for the Gulf, where a similar group led by the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower has been deployed since December 2006.

The U.S. is also sending Patriot anti-missile systems to the region.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070327/62697703.html

 

[VegasGuy]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

The Brits would be up in there first and the US would be right behind.

-VG

 

[QueEx]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

<font size="4">
Intelligence sources in Moscow claim to have information
that a US strike against Iranian nuclear installations has
been scheduled for April 6 at 0040 hours. The Russian
sources say the US operation, code-named “Bite,” will
last no more than 12 hours and consist of missile and aerial
strikes devastating enough to set Tehran’s nuclear program
several years back.

</font size>

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=3980

 

[QueEx]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

`

Operation Bite: April 6 sneak attack by US Forces
against Iran planned, Russian Military sources war
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/1251/32/

`

 

[QueEx]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

<font size="4">Russia warns US against Iran attack </font size>

Web posted at: March 28, 2007 at 2:59:46
Source ::: AP

moscow • Russia’s Foreign Ministry yesterday criticised the United States for what it called over-reliance on force and warned Washington against military action against Iran.

But in a major review of foreign policy priorities, the ministry said Russia was ready to cooperate to end global crises if Washington treats it as an equal partner. Russia criticised what it called “the creeping American strategy of dragging the global community into a large-scale crisis around Iran,” saying that Iran helps maintain stability in Afghanistan and Central Asia.

At the same time, the ministry’s paper assailed Iran for its “unconstructive” stance, reflecting growing Kremlin irritation with its ally’s refusal to freeze uranium enrichment, as the UN demands. Russia and China, both permanent UN Security Council members with significant trade ties with Iran, have opposed US efforts to impose harsh sanctions against the country.

http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Di...th=March2007&file=World_News2007032825946.xml

 

[actinanass]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

they better hope that Israel don't fuck around and attack Iran first. If that happen, WE WILL BE OUT OF IRAQ....

 

[modified]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

I see Bush is making sure he leaves no stone unturned. I wonder what they plan on using for this "attack". Iran has been preparing for this confrontation by building a considerable underground infrastructure?

 

[QueEx]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

UPDATE: 30 March 07

<font size="5"><center>U.S. ready to strike Iran in early April</font size></center>

Russian News and
Information Agency
March 30, 2007

MOSCOW, March 30 (RIA Novosti) - Russian intelligence has information that the U.S. Armed Forces have nearly completed preparations for a possible military operation against Iran, and will be ready to strike in early April, a security official said.

The source said the U.S. had already compiled a list of possible targets on Iranian territory and practiced the operation during recent exercises in the Persian Gulf.

"Russian intelligence has information that the U.S. Armed Forces stationed in the Persian Gulf have nearly completed preparations for a missile strike against Iranian territory," the source said.

American commanders will be ready to carry out the attack in early April, but it will be up to the country's political leadership to decide if and when to attack, the source said.

Official data says America's military presence in the region has reached the level of March 2003 when the U.S. invaded Iraq.

The U.S. has not excluded the military option in negotiations on Iran over its refusal to abandon its nuclear program. The UN Security Council passed a new resolution on Iran Saturday toughening economic sanctions against the country and accepting the possibility of a military solution to the crisis.

The source said the Pentagon could decide to conduct ground operations as well after assessing the damage done to the Iranian forces by its possible missile strikes and analyzing the political situation in the country following the attacks.

A senior Russian security official cited military intelligence earlier as saying U.S. Armed Forces had recently intensified training for air and ground operations against Iran.

"The Pentagon has drafted a highly effective plan that will allow the Americans to bring Iran to its knees at minimal cost," the official said.

Russian Col.-Gen. Leonid Ivashov, vice president of the Academy of Geopolitical Sciences, said last week the Pentagon was planning to deliver a massive air strike on Iran's military infrastructure in the near future.

"I have no doubt there will be an operation, or rather an aggressive action against Iran," Ivashov said, commenting on media reports about U.S. planned operation against Iran, codenamed Operation Bite.

A new U.S. carrier battle group has been dispatched to the Gulf. The USS John C. Stennis, with a crew of 3,200 and around 80 fixed-wing aircraft, including F/A-18 Hornet and Superhornet fighter-bombers, eight support ships and four nuclear submarines are heading for the Gulf, where a similar group led by the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower has been deployed since December 2006. The U.S. is also sending Patriot anti-missile systems to the region.

Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, however, was rather optimistic about the situation and said he ruled out a military resolution of the Iranian nuclear problem.

"We are constantly working on how to resolve the situation around the Iranian nuclear program and other conflicts peacefully," Lavrov said. "This policy is unchanged and we will pursue it in the future."

Russia and the U.S. are two of the six negotiators on Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran says is aimed at generating energy.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20070330/62861432.html

 

[QueEx]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

DEBKAfile Exclusive

<font size="5"><center>US financial sources in Bahrain report
American investors in Bahrain advised
to pack up business operations and leave </font size>
<font size="4">a hint at an approaching war with Iran</font size></center>

USS Nimitz nuclear carrier


March 30, 2007, 3:56 PM (GMT+02:00)

The advice came from officers with US Central Command 5th Fleet HQ at Manama, who spoke of security tension, a hint at an approaching war with Iran.

Arab sources report the positioning of a Patriot anti-missile battery in Bahrain this week; they say occupancy at emirate hotels has soared past 90% due mostly to the influx of US military personnel. They also report Western media crews normally employed in military coverage are arriving in packs.

Thursday, March 29, Gen. Khaled al-‘Absi, Bahrain’s chief of air defense operations disclosed that new alarm networks had been installed and air defense systems upgraded to handle chemical, biological and radioactive attacks.

The USS Nimitz and its support ships will be departing San Diego Monday, April 2, to join the John C. Stennis Strike Group in the Persian Gulf. The nuclear carrier is due to relieve the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower , but military sources in the Gulf believe all three US carriers will stay put if tensions continue to climb or if fighting breaks out involving American, British and Iranian forces.

The mighty American armada is further supported by the USS Bataan and USS Boxer strike groups.

War tensions have been triggered most recently by the crisis over the seized British sailors and large-scale US sea, air and amphibious exercises in the Gulf.

(1.) DEBKAfile’s Tehran sources report that in the contest within the Iranian leadership over how to handle the affair of the captured British seamen, the wildest radical element has gained the upper hand, reducing the prospects of their imminent release. Heading the tough Tehran faction are hardline president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Gen. Rahim Safavi, commander of the Revolutionary Guards whose naval wing performed the seizure.

They gained strength from the British premier Tony Blair’s initial passive, semi-conciliatory response. Tehran quickly grasped it had acquired not just a propaganda tool but a military asset, which the UK cannot match as long as the Americans desist from throwing their military might into the fray. Washington has refused to risk of a full-scale war confrontation with the Revolutionary Guards for the sake of the British sailors.

Iranian strategists also registered that, although the Blair government has begun moving mountains to gain the freedom of the marine crew held in Tehran, London appeared fairly laid back about the kidnap of BBC correspondent Alan Johnston in broad daylight by gunmen in Palestinian Gaza, although three weeks had gone by.

Revolutionary Guards serving with Palestinian terrorist groups in Gaza no doubt filed a full report on the Johnston case to Tehran, which drew its own conclusions.

(2.) Taking part in the big demonstration of American naval, air and marine force launched March 27 are the two nuclear carrier strike forces Stennis and Eisenhower , thousands of marines and 100 warplanes. Maneuvers on this scale in the tight, overcrowded waters of the Persian Gulf carry risks of a collision between American and Iranian craft.

DEBKAfile’s military sources report that the Nimitz group is composed of the Princeton guided-missile cruiser, four guided missile destroyers – the Higgins , Chafee , John Paul Jones and Pinckney . The strike force is armed with two helicopter squadrons and a special unit for dismantling sea mines and other explosive devices.

Earlier, DEBKAfile quoted intelligence sources in Moscow as predicting that a US strike against Iranian nuclear installations codenamed Operation Bite has been scheduled for April 6 at 0040 hours. Missiles and air raids will conduct strikes designed to be devastating enough to set Tehran’s nuclear program several years back.

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=3990

 

[Makeherhappy]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

That April 6th date is a interesting date. Especially being the fact my company network is shutting down on on April 3rd, for a "disaster recovery test."

Time will tell.

 

[African Herbsman]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

U.S. could strike Iran but not win: Russian general

Tue Apr 3, 6:17 AM ET

The United States cannot inflict a military defeat on Iran and any attack would be a huge political mistake, Russia's top general said on Tuesday.

"It is possible to damage Iran's military and industrial potential, but it is impossible to win," Russian news agencies quoted General Yuri Baluyevsky, head of the Russian general staff, as saying.

"The United States has a contingent in the region capable of launching a strike on Iranian territory.

"However, such possible strikes would be a huge political mistake. Shockwaves from this attack could be felt around the world."

Washington and its Western allies accuse Iran of wanting to build nuclear bombs, a charge Tehran denies. Tensions have been further aggravated by Iran's capture of 15 British sailors and marines in the northern Gulf on March 23.

Russia sells weapons to the Iranian military and is helping Tehran build a nuclear power station on the Gulf although work there is on hold over a payment dispute.

Russian media late last month quoted unnamed sources in Russian military intelligence as saying the United States could launch a strike on Iran as early as April 6.

RIA news agency quoted a Russian security source as saying Moscow has military intelligence reports that the U.S. has already approved a list of Iranian targets for bomb and missile strikes. The source said a land operation could follow.

U.S. President George W. Bush has said he will pursue diplomatic means to persuade Iran to drop its uranium enrichment plan but he has refused to rule out the use of force.

Baluyevsky said military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan showed the United States would face a fiasco if it took on Iran as well.

"The Americans must think twice (about attacking Iran)," he said. "They have already got stuck in Afghanistan and Iraq."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070403...c&printer=1;_ylt=AiHimmAB6XLuK2CUEpodv6kb.3QA

 

[LennyNero1972]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

If the US attacks Iran, I see more terrorist attacks on American soil in the near future. And yes they will be devastating!!!

 

[sitai]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

someone tell bush not to fuck it up this time.... with all his "miscalculations"

 

[LennyNero1972]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

someone tell bush not to fuck it up this time.... with all his "miscalculations"

Puh-lease bruh, where ya been he already dun fucked up!!!!

 

[CarryOn]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

The US could easily destroy Irans infrastructure and military. But attempting to occupy the country would be stupid. Time has shown over and over again you cant win a war on two fronts.

 

[Truechoice2004]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

At this point nothing shocks me with this current administration, and believe me the US had planned scenarios for attacking Iran years ago - when Bush called them the 'axis of evil' - so thats nothing new. But the Iraq war didnt go well for the administration.

Nonetheless, I dont see us attacking Iran...Bush cant be that stupid...or can
he?

 

[actinanass]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

The US could easily destroy Irans infrastructure and military. But attempting to occupy the country would be stupid. Time has shown over and over again you cant win a war on two fronts.

See the beauty about Iran is the fact that a lot of Iranians WANT to work with the US. Remember, Iran was one of OUR biggest allies during the 70's. A lot of Iranians left Iran during the Islamic Revolution. If we knock the current regime, it will not be like IRAQ by no means. The only thing I'm worried about is if this fool end up getting nukes. Thats the only threat we truly have...

 

[Sango]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

History tends to repeat itself...

ABC: U.S. Engaged in Secret War With Iran
ABC News is reporting the U.S. is engaged in a secret war with Iran. Since 2005, U.S. officials have been advising a Pakistani tribal militant group with ties to the Taliban on how to carry out deadly guerilla raids inside Iran. The Pakistani group – called Jundullah -- has taken responsibility for the deaths and kidnappings of more than a dozen Iranian soldiers and officials. Most recently, Jundullah took credit for a bus bombing that killed at least 11 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in February. Officials say the U.S. relationship with Jundullah is arranged so that the U.S. provides no funding to the group, which would require an official presidential order or "finding" as well as congressional oversight. Some former CIA officers say the arrangement is reminiscent of how the U.S. government used proxy armies to destabilize the government of Nicaragua in the 1980s.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/04/1343204

REUTERS

5:08 p.m. April 3, 2007

WASHINGTON – The U.S. has been secretly advising and encouraging a Pakistani militant group that has carried out a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran, ABC News reported Tuesday, citing U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources.
The raids have resulted in the deaths or capture of Iranian soldiers and officials, ABC reported.

The group, members of the Baluchi tribe, operates from Pakistan's gas-rich province of Baluchistan, just across the border from Iran, the report said.

The only relationship with the group that U.S. intelligence acknowledges is cooperation in tracking al Qaeda figures in that part of Pakistan, ABC reported.

The group, called Jundullah, has produced videos showing Iranian soldiers and border guards it says it has captured, ABC said.

ABC cited U.S. government sources it did not identify as saying the United States does not provide direct funding for the group but has maintained close ties to its leader, Abd el Malik Regi, since 2005.

A CIA official said the account was not accurate.

Regi claims to have personally executed some of the Iranian captives, the ABC News report said.

“He is essentially commanding a force of several hundred guerrilla fighters that stage attacks across the border into Iran on Iranian military officers, Iranian intelligence officers, kidnapping them, executing them on camera,” said Alexis Debat, a senior fellow on counterterrorism at the Nixon Center and an ABC News consultant.

“He used to fight with the Taliban. He's part drug smuggler, part Taliban, part Sunni activist,” Debat told ABC.

The group took credit for an attack in February that killed at least 11 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard riding on a bus in the Iranian city of Zehedan, ABC said.

According to the report, Iranian state television last month broadcast what it said were confessions by those responsible for the bus attack.

They reportedly admitted to being members of Jundullah and said they had been trained for the mission at a secret location in Pakistan, ABC said.

ABC cited Pakistani government sources as saying the secret campaign against Iran was on the agenda when Vice President Dick Cheney met with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf in February.

A spokesman for Cheney's office did not immediately respond to a phone call seeking comment.


Pakistani militants staging raids inside Iran-ABC

 

[actinanass]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

ahh here we go again... US IS MESSING WITH LIL BITTY IRAN. Oh lemme guess, YOU WANT TO GO FIGHT FOR IRAN NOW. *sigh*

 

[QueEx]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

<font size="3">
Has anyone considered the Russians motivation here?</font size>

- Could the Russians be telling the Iranians, in a round about way, to COOL IT? The Russians have been a part of the group "supposedly" trying to convince Iran not to make its own nuclear fuel for its up-coming reaction (which can be turned into weaponized material). Perhaps, the Russians, who play both sides of the fence to its best financial interest, are not all that interested in seeing a Nuclear armed Iran, either ???

- Iran shares a border with parts of the former Soviet Union; some of those former parts have large Muslim populations; while the Russians are anxious to do business with (sell arms and export Russian technology) any country that has beef with the U.S. (thats another way the Ruskies can try to balance U.S. power and bolster Ruskie influence), aren't they also mindful of the religious nuts to their south that don't exactly share Russian ideals ??? In other words, does anyone think the Russians are anxious to create a monster, so close to them ???

- Could the Russian "Warning" of imminent U.S. action against Iran be nothing more than chumming-up to the Iranians ... "see, I'm your friend telling you to watch your back" -- enamoring the Iranians so that they may sell more weapons and nuclear power plants ???

- Aren't the Russians well aware that its "Warning" will cause the price of oil to rise ??? And, besides arms, what is the Russians greatest export? - you got it, OIL AND GAS.​

<font size="5">???

</font size>
Has anyone noticed that the more the Iranians test missiles, sabre-rattle with Israel, provoke Hezbollah to turn up its heat, or capture foreign nationals (whether in or outside of Iranian territory/waters) -- the price leaps on its only significant export - OIL ???

Does anyone really believe the "Iran Matter" is just the U.S. threatening Iran - without cause or provocation ??? Could be. Could not be.

QueEx

 

[actinanass]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

<font size="3">
Has anyone considered the Russians motivation here?</font size>

- Could the Russians be telling the Iranians, in a round about way, to COOL IT? The Russians have been a part of the group "supposedly" trying to convince Iran not to make its own nuclear fuel for its up-coming reaction (which can be turned into weaponized material). Perhaps, the Russians, who play both sides of the fence to its best financial interest, are not all that interested in seeing a Nuclear armed Iran, either ???

- Iran shares a border with parts of the former Soviet Union; some of those former parts have large Muslim populations; while the Russians are anxious to do business with (sell arms and export Russian technology) any country that has beef with the U.S. (thats another way the Ruskies can try to balance U.S. power and bolster Ruskie influence), aren't they also mindful of the religious nuts to their south that don't exactly share Russian ideals ??? In other words, does anyone think the Russians are anxious to create a monster, so close to them ???

- Could the Russian "Warning" of imminent U.S. action against Iran be nothing more than chumming-up to the Iranians ... "see, I'm your friend telling you to watch your back" -- enamoring the Iranians so that they may sell more weapons and nuclear power plants ???

- Aren't the Russians well aware that its "Warning" will cause the price of oil to rise ??? And, besides arms, what is the Russians greatest export? - you got it, OIL AND GAS.​

<font size="5">???

</font size>
Has anyone noticed that the more the Iranians test missiles, sabre-rattle with Israel, provoke Hezbollah to turn up its heat, or capture foreign nationals (whether in or outside of Iranian territory/waters) -- the price leaps on its only significant export - OIL ???

Does anyone really believe the "Iran Matter" is just the U.S. threatening Iran - without cause or provocation ??? Could be. Could not be.

QueEx

Sounds like Putin to me.

 

[QueEx]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

<font size="5"><center>Russian general says U.S. continues preparations
for military action against Iran</font size></center>


MOSCOW. April 8 (Interfax-AVN) - The release of the 15 British sailors and marines captured by Iran has robbed the U.S. of a pretext to attack Iran, but the U.S. has not given up plans to attack Iran militarily, said Col. Gen. Leonid Ivashov, president of the Academy for Geopolitical Problems, a Russian think tank.

"Preparations to strike Iran's strategic facilities continue. Three major groups of U.S. forces are still in the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf. Altogether, they have up to 450 cruise missiles on alert," the general told Interfax-AVN.

<u>Two Phased Attack</u>

"Military operations against Tehran will begin with the launch of at least two unexpected strikes using Tomahawk cruise missiles and air power in order to disable Iran's air defense capabilities," he said.

"According to our data, up to 150 aircraft are to be involved in each strike on Iran. Land-based air defense systems will be disabled in the first place, then mobile short-range systems, which Tehran has (including some 30 new systems)," he said.

<u>Primary Strike</u>

Primary targets will include command centers, air defense installations, the navy, airfields, ports and docking facilities, the general said.

<u>Secondary Strike</u>

"Nuclear facilities may be secondary targets. According to expert assessments, at least 20 such facilities need to be destroyed in order to stop Iran's nuclear program," Ivashov said.

Ivashov did not rule out that nuclear weapons may be used against Iran.

"Combat nuclear weapons may be used for bombing. This will result in radioactive contamination of the Iranian territory, which could possibly spread to neighboring countries," he said.

"If Iran strikes back at Israel with missiles, Tel-Aviv is likely to use nuclear weapons on Iran," Ivashov said, adding that such a "development of the situation would undermine stability not only in the Middle East, but also in the entire world."


http://www.interfax.ru/e/B/0/28.html?menu=1&id_issue=11708925

 

[QueEx]

Re: Russians see US Attack against Iraq Soon

<font size="5"><center>A third US carrier, the nuclear-powered
USS Enterprise Strike Group is speeding
towards the Persian Gulf </font size></center>

June 21, 2007, 12:17 PM (GMT+02:00)

According to DEBKAfile’s military sources, the US naval build-up off the shores of Iran marks rising military tensions in the region, accentuated by last week’s Hamas victory which has endowed Iran with a military foothold on Israel’s southwestern border.

The USS Enterprise CVN 65-Big E Strike Group, the US Navy’s largest air carrier, will join the USS Stennis and the USS Nimitz carriers, building up the largest sea, air, marine concentration the United States has ever deployed opposite Iran. This goes towards making good on the assurances of four carriers US Vice President Dick Cheney offered the Gulf and Middle East nations during his May tour of the region.

The “Big E” leads a strike group consisting of the guided-missile destroyers USS Arleigh Burke DDG 51, USS Stout DDG 55, Forrest Sherman DDG 98 and USS James E. Williams DDG 95, as well as the guided missile cruiser USS Gettysburg CG 64, the SS Philadelphia SSN 690 nuclear submarine and the USNS Supply T-AOE 6>

On its decks are the Carrier Air Wing CVW 1, whose pilots fought combat missions in the Gulf and Arabian Sea during 2006. The Air Wing is made up of F/Q-18 Super Hornet strike craft, the Sidewinders Strike Fighter Squadron VFA-86, the 251st Marine Fighter Attack Squadron MFA, and the Electronic Attack Squadron VAQ 137.

The 32nd Sea Control Squadron VS consists of S-3B Vikings. The Airborne Early Warning Squadron VAQ 3 flies E-2C Hawkeye craft. The Fleet Logistics Support Squadron VRC is based on C-2A Greyhounds.

DEBKAfile’s military sources report Washington is considering deploying the fourth US carrier for the region in the Red Sea opposite Saudi Arabian western coast to secure the three US carriers in the Gulf from the rear as well as the Gulf of Aqaba and Suez Canal.

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=4334

 

[GET YOU HOT]

one nation under god

support your troops

 

[blackIpod]

Trusting news from the Russian press,"media," is like believing a part-time porn star can get a job hosting a bible study show on TBN.

@ Bush being a KING

We needed to bomb Iran back in 1980 not now.

It's too late they have nukes already.

 

[QueEx]

<font size="5"><center>Iran moves closer to making a nuclear bomb</font size></center>

The Telegraph (London)
By David Blair, Diplomatic Correspondent
Last Updated: 4:53pm BST 22/06/2007

Iran claimed today to have stockpiled 100kg of enriched uranium, enough in theory to create two nuclear bombs of the kind that destroyed Hiroshima.

The news will once again stoke fears that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime is seeking to build a nuclear weapon.

Iran would need 50kg of weapons-grade uranium in order to make one nuclear weapon equal in power to the one dropped by the Americans in 1945.

So far, the regime’s uranium has only been enriched to the level needed for generating electricity in civilian nuclear power stations.

But if Iran chooses to enrich it to 84 per cent purity, it would reach weapons-grade level and become the essential material for building a bomb.

Mustapha Pourmohammedi, Iran's interior minister, told the official news agency that the moment of maximum international pressure on his country had passed and that Teheran would press ahead with its nuclear programme.

"When the world saw that the nation is pursuing this goal with unity, the world has surrendered. We have passed the dangerous moment," he said.

By storing such a high quantity of low-enriched uranium, President Ahmadinejad's regime is widening its options.

It could choose to enrich the stockpiled uranium to weapons-grade level in a matter of months – perhaps after formally withdrawing from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and breaking out of all international safeguards.

Iran claims that its nuclear ambitions are entirely peaceful and designed to do nothing more than generate electricity for its growing population of 70 million. But western governments disbelieve this assertion.

Iran is defying three United Nations resolutions with its nuclear programme. In spite of international pressure to halt the programme it announced in April that it had started enriching uranium on an "industrial scale".

Uranium is enriched using machines called centrifuges. These have now been installed in Iran's nuclear plant at Natanz. A snap inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency last month found that 1,312 centrifuges were operating.

Iran's official target is to bring 3,000 into action – enough to produce sufficient weapons-grade uranium for one bomb in about a year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/22/wnuke122.xml

 

[VegasGuy]

Yo QueEx, why are you bother to post these dates and shit? Are you trying to be provocative, stir debate, make jokers fearful or you got some serious intel on the low?

Whats seriously in the pipeline and it's already been mentioned is Isreal laying waste to that Nuke program. Isreal already feels like Humas is positioning itself to run up on em and getting help from Iran. Who has stated that Isreal, by some fucked up interpretation of Islamic law, will be wiped off the face of the earth. If I was leading that nation, Iran would be gone already. Fuck being a head of state and threating to exterminate everyone in my country. That's some barbaric shit and worthy of a mother of all beatdowns.

One thing that is happening is there are moves to cut off Irans money supply. Next, would be to drop a few cluster bombs on their ability to refine oil. There is only one facility. That nation would look like China with everybody on bikes.

-VG

 

[QueEx]

Dates are important VG. They allow one to track and analyze, over time. That is, if anyone gives a shit. LOL.

I try to be a little of all of those (provocative, stir debate, encourage reading, comprehension and analysis) but never, ever FEAR. Once upon a time, there were quite a few posters on this board who appreciated those things and contributed on a regular basis. I think as the boards get younger, fewer and fewer appear to do anything other than let talking heads, rumor and over-simplification mis-educate, mal-educate or un-educate them.

Rarely do I post things because I totally support or agree with them. On the other hand, I try to post things (not always successful) that have important implications in our lives -- hoping to spur a lil debate, hoping the give and take gets at the facts and slough off the mere unsupported opinion.

No Bro, I don't have intel on the d/l ... LOL; just using what I know as an ex-intel and that expensive ass education I paid for.

I hadn't said this in a while: this is my mufkn country; I gave some yrs of my life for it; I want to make it the best in can be; I want us to reap every benefit from it; and I don't want no other mufker fukkn it up for me, mine and ours.

QueEx

 

[QueEx]

One thing that is happening is there are moves to
cut off Irans money supply. Next, would be to drop a few cluster bombs
on their ability to refine oil. There is only one facility. That nation would
look like China with everybody on bikes.

Do you really think that (dropping a few cluster bombs) on their refinery
capacity would seriously affect Iran's attitude? - without there being
repercussions and consequences that we're neither ready, willing and
prepared for ???

I don't have any doubt in my military mind that, without putting serious
boots on the ground and without using nuclear weapons, we could seriously
decimate Iran's nuclear and refinery capacity. But, then what?

I hardly hear people talking about winning "hearts and minds" any more.
Are we going to multiply the already multiplying enemies or get smarter
at being smarter in how we deal with them?

And, when are we going to stop under-estimating shit? Iraq was classic
underestimation. There was absolutely no need, IMHO, to invade Iraq,
except we could. It will take some serious convincing to convince me
that Iraq was necessary to the <u>Al Qaeda war</u> in Afghanistan/Pakistan.
Nevertheless, the Iraq planners failed miserably in understanding the
Muslim (Sunni-Shia) dynamics in Iraq. Fucking and utterly, Miserably.

Bomb Iran? Have we considered and made preparations for the fallout
from same? Hell, if its necessary to do, its necessary to do. If so, we
need to get and be prepared. Joe Corner American needs to know
whats at stake (none of that guessing shit and listening to exiles
who have their own agenda that don't give a shit about our interest,
just their own narrow interest).

Is Israel looking at reality? Can it survive Hamastan to the south and
Hezbollastan on the north? Can it fight guerilla/insurgency campaigns
on two opposing fronts? Has it passed on opportunity in the past to
make some kind of peace with the Palestinians that it could have lived
with and built upon? Might they best be looking to see what they can
salvage of reasonable peace attempts before their only option is a
fight against those who have emphatically stated their aversion to
their existence ? (Their nukes will be totally ineffective against those
in So. Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank; and, the confrontation
last year raises serious questions of its ability to fight unconventional
forces, i.e., Hezbollah).

People laugh at ole Jimmy Carter.

But Egypt and Israel have had more cooperation
than confronation since the Camp David Accords.

QueEx

 

[thismybgolname]

I appreciate the info.

 

[VegasGuy]

Do you really think that (dropping a few cluster bombs) on their refinery
capacity would seriously affect Iran's attitude? - without there being
repercussions and consequences that we're neither ready, willing and
prepared for ???

Oh hell yeah I think so and if those in the leadership have a death wish, expect their to be some cooked asses in IRAN. You gotta know by now, Bush could give a fuck about public opinion and no liberal politician in their right minds would allow Israel to be fucked over basically agreeing with Iran that they somehow deserve it. Didn't happen when Iraq tried to bum rush Kuwait, won't happen if that crazy dickhead running Iran tries to bum rush Israel either.

And I don't know that it's Iran's attitude as much as it is those running the place. (If you could say that, one could deduce you wanted war with Iraq, as much as George Bush and the congress wanted it.)

Unless the ones running the place are prepared to engage marshall law on the people of Iran, you dang gone real I think so. When the refinaries quit and the gas prices jump from 22 cents to 1 buck a gallon, (just guessing the current price ya dig) and banks can't get financing to do business, expect the people to demand new leadership.

But something is up.

The low key news about these successful intecepter missiles and how Russia is pissed about where Bush wanted to station them. That suggests even if Russia wanted to enter the picture, it would be largely a wasted effort.

-VG

 

[QueEx]

<font size="5"><center>Bush, Putin agree to curb nuclear Iran</font size></center>

Jim Rutenberg in Kennebunkport, Maine
July 4, 2007

ANNOUNCING he was "here to play", the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, said after two days of meetings with President George Bush, he was ready to expand on his proposal for a shared missile-defence system, a step he said would take US-Russian relations to "an entirely new level" of co-operation.

But the system he described would be largely under Russian control and built on Russian terms. While Mr Putin portrayed the proposal as a compromise, it was viewed as a continued rejection of a US plan to base a missile defence system in the Czech Republic and Poland.

The US President, George Bush, says the US plan is necessary to combat any new threats from nations seeking nuclear weapons, like Iran.

But Mr Putin sees the US system as a threat to Russia, and he proposed that his alternative system be developed jointly by the NATO-Russia Council, a co-operative formed in 2002.

The proposal surprised US officials and seemed likely to lead to still more haggling after a set of meetings that had been portrayed mostly as an attempt to smoothe over differences both sides consider to be the most daunting since Mr Bush took office.

Mr Putin's new plan would continue to include a site in Azerbaijan that he proposed last month as an alternative to the US system and that American officials have described as insufficient.

US and NATO officials have said that the Azerbaijan site is less useful than those selected for Poland and the Czech Republic because it is too close to Iran to intercept missiles fired from there.

Mr Bush said Mr Putin's new plan did not at first glance satisfy his concerns. "I think it's innovative, I think it's strategic," Mr Bush said. "But as I told Vladimir, I think that the Czech Republic and Poland need to be an integral part of the system."

Speaking later, Mr Bush's National Security Adviser, Stephen Hadley, said Mr Putin's new proposal was a good sign that he was willing to work with the US and NATO to create a missile defence system.

The leaders did not announce any breakthroughs on independence for Kosovo, though Mr Hadley said the United States and Russia would announce this week that they had hammered out the details of a pact on sharing nuclear materials that they agreed on last year.

They also did not announce any agreement on new sanctions against Iran for its uranium enrichment program.

Mr Bush and Mr Putin said they agreed on the need to send a forceful message together, but Mr Putin pointed to possible new signs of Iranian co-operation with international inspectors.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/bush-putin-agree-to-curb-nuclear-iran/2007/07/03/1183351210229.html