Iran to deliver "harsh blow"

Meanwhile, state-run Press TV quoted Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Sunday as saying that the nation will deliver a harsh blow to "global arrogance" on February 11.

Press TV offered no details on or explanation of the statement.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/...ion=cnn_latest

Is this statement justification for a preemptive strike by the US? What about Israel?
China has indicated that it will support Iran if the US takes any preemptive actions. What does that mean? Does China take military action against it's largest debtor and importer?

I seriously doubt that even an Iranian nuclear attack on America would be sufficient justification for retaliation in Obama's mind. He'd be warning against jumping to conclusions regarding the alleged attack, and sending someone to Ahmedinejad to Mirandize his ass. But that's just my opinion. Here's another:

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100...e_buildup_gulf

I seriously doubt that even an Iranian nuclear attack on America would be sufficient justification for retaliation in Obama's mind. He'd be warning against jumping to conclusions regarding the alleged attack, and sending someone to Ahmedinejad to Mirandize his ass. But that's just my opinion. Here's another:

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100...e_buildup_gulf Originally Posted by Don T. Lukbak

I'm guessing the US response will be "crippling sanctions" and further diplomacy. That is working so well in N. Korea.

"We" seem to be beefing up the aerial defenses around the Southern-Western areas that would be a corridor for a retaliatory strike from a swift assault by the Israelis ... and perhaps provide some "cover" for UTR approaches to the Iranian coastal areas. Sure would bring up the numbers for the Administration.

that's the day they'll let the world know they have nuclear bombs.

Meanwhile, state-run Press TV quoted Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Sunday as saying that the nation will deliver a harsh blow to "global arrogance" on February 11.

Press TV offered no details on or explanation of the statement.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/...ion=cnn_latest

Is this statement justification for a preemptive strike by the US? What about Israel?
China has indicated that it will support Iran if the US takes any preemptive actions. What does that mean? Does China take military action against it's largest debtor and importer? Originally Posted by boardman

When do the Olympics start?

Good point about China. They refused to show up at the sanction meeting last year and pretty much got it cancelled.
Does Iran owe China more than we do? That would be huge. I am sure they are paying back with oil for some of it.
Ahmadinejad says a lot of things for his own people's consumption that should be paid any attention to over here. Really.
If he is so scarey about Jews, why does he have the biggest population of Jews in middle east outside Israel. Why do they have over 40 temples in Tehran, untouched since the regime change? Jews still excercise their constitutional power to send a representative to the parliament.
He is full of hot air for domestic rah ,rah, rah.

Ahmadinejad says a lot of things for his own people's consumption that should be paid any attention to over here. Really. Originally Posted by Htowner

Just like that other windbag Hugo Chavez. It's what every dictator does when he looks around and realizes that he's driving the domestic economy into the ground, "Look, over there, an evil enemy!" While all the suckers are rallying around that made-up issue, anyone who is a serious problem gets rounded up by the secret police and disappears.

There is a real easy solution to this whole affair which would mean making a hole… ahm, excuse me I meant to write making a glass parking lot and just refeshing the air a bit... after 10,000 years that is.

Don’t give the Israelites too long as they might beat us to the need for SPF million plus one when they do some brush burning in their neighborhood.

"We" seem to be beefing up the aerial defenses around the Southern-Western areas that would be a corridor for a retaliatory strike from a swift assault by the Israelis ... and perhaps provide some "cover" for UTR approaches to the Iranian coastal areas. Sure would bring up the numbers for the Administration. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Under the appearance of putting defenses in place for countrys such as Kuwait and Qatar?
I would like to think that we are providing cover for an assault by the Israelis. I just don't think this admin is that concerned about protecting them.

Let there be no mistake, as our pres likes to say, once the nuclear threat becomes imminent Israel will take swift action. The only way to keep it from turning into WWIII is if the US stays out of it. Even then it may be the beginning of Armageddon.

The WMDs dabacle in Iraq makes the whole world more sensitive to an ill timed preemptive strike justified or not.

We have talked about this before and it is very difficult to make a clean, swift,effective action here.
Over thirty sites to destroy with know current knowledge of where the main stuff is.
Current bunker busters cant got deep enough effectively for many of those facilites. Hence the need for ground troops which we are spread pretty thin over .
It would be the third moslem country in just a few years US is militarily involved in ,right smack in the middle of the other two, making it a nice strip of three Islamic countries in a row.
China would have no part of it. This is not 1982 Iraq where you have a baby nuclear site for Israel to fly over and knock it out in an hour. China will defend its gas station.

that's the day they'll let the world know they have nuclear bombs. Originally Posted by simpleton

Is "they" the Israelis or the Iranians?
If the Iranians drop one (and how many or few might they have?), it likely will be aimed at Tel Aviv, which would bring down a torrent of hell from the Israelis.
These are perilous times, given the 'martyrdom' mindset of Islamic fundamentalists.

rr

Is "they" the Israelis or the Iranians?
If the Iranians drop one (and how many or few might they have?), it likely will be aimed at Tel Aviv, which would bring down a torrent of hell from the Israelis.
These are perilous times, given the 'martyrdom' mindset of Islamic fundamentalists.

rr Originally Posted by randyrogue

I think the more dangerous scenario will be Iran giving a nuke to Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. How long before some Iranian nuclear material comes up "missing" thus giving them plausible deniablilty?

Anything is possible but Iranians are a few years behind of that scenario.
One key member of the nuclear scientists mysteriously died couple of years ago of fumes from the heater at his own house.
Israelis didn't claim any credit for that of course and the Iranians didn't take the embarrassment and went along with the official version released to the public.
So don't think Israelis are sitting back for a years waiting for that to develop. My own thinking only on this

Al Qaida is in Pakistan. Pakistan has had nukes for years. Israelis already have rehearsed the plan on neutralizing any attempts by anyone to get their hands on the nukes should the regime fall which is much more dangerous situation than anything that we worry about happenning in Iran, Iraq or Afghanistan.

The Olympics start the 12th...Iran says something will happen on the 11th. The CIA says in the next 3-6 months we have a terrorist attack...in Vancouver (home of the Olympics) there are materials missing. Seems like a prime time for yet another false flag attack. We haven't had one in North America since 9/11. The govt will probably blame it on Iran, if they even said the above statement and use it as an excuse to go to war with Iran.

Originally I thought the Olympics would be where they unleashed the "new" pandemic flu virus. Well, it is only 2 weeks away...lets see what happens.