Iran tests ballistic missile in defiance of UN resolution, US officials say

We are going to surround Iran with a Anti-ballistic Missile System the first parts are already deployed in Poland and at sea on U.S. Navy Ships.

AA

 

Certainly without American leadership there was no interest in punishing Iran though I'm still unclear as to how Obama and Kerry went from simply letting Iran slip away (even though still, along with N. Korea, they were one of the globe's true bad guys) to mentoring and aiding Iran's drive to get a nuclear bomb.

Yes....that's a recipe for something good: helping the theocratic crazies in Tehran achieve their dreams of the ultimate weapon. Nice thinking by the suicidal left wing.

 

DUDE!! There was no chance of renewing the plan.

Zero.

China and Russia were totally against that. Nobody was wild about it, because after years, the trade sanctions were really not inflicting any more political pain on Iranian leaders.


And, NO. This was NOT a deal that Kerry negotiated and subsequently sold. Kerry was the principle negotiator, but he was in close and continuing contact with negotiators from the other countries on a step by step basis throughout the formation of the deal.

 

The United States will NOT allow Israel to bomb active Iranian Nuclear Facilities.

Bombing them would kick up a massive amount of radioactive dust and material which would poison the entire region.

The way to do this would be to seize all Iranian Nuclear Sites and the ONLY nation capable of doing this would be the United States.

AA

 

It just boggles the mind that Iran would be so stupid as to do this now.

Especially with Trump just itching to do something about Iran.

AA

 

That sounds ridiculous.

 

Sanctions are stupid. We need to send in our hollywood movies, our music, and our liberals. That is sure to destroy their country or at least declaw it.

 

Yes.

That's the arms race component of dealing with Iran and others who want to continue developing nuclear deterrence.

 

"Punishing Iran"?? WTF does THAT mean? The issue was how to address their approach to achieving nuclear weapons capability.

Are you proposing military attacks?


Also, please cite how the US went about "mentoring and aiding Iran's drive to get a nuclear bomb."

 

I think there is some truth to that.

Dearborn, MI has had an interesting progression. At one point, the main mosque there demanded that women toe the line on dress, being separated during services, etc.

Exposed to our culture, they complained, but weren't heard by the old guard in control.

So, they pooled their money and started a new mosque. Sooner or later, the men began joining them, following the newer interpretations.

I really don't know how else to make progress besides allowing there to be contact between people from both sides.

Bombing ME cities into gravel pits just isn't going to change their minds for the positive.

 

Do you really think he's going to invade Iran?

 

It would be insanely irresponsible to not deploy a comprehensive ABM System around Iran.

AA

- - - Updated - - -

I honestly don't know what the HELL he is going to do!! LOL!!!

But I do know this.....if Iran publicly declares it has nuclear weapons or worse that it has a delivery system for them.....the U.S. would most likely invade.

We cannot allow a nation to sign the NPT and then develop nukes.

To do nothing would be even worse!!!

AA

 

Exactly. That's what I meant.

Then it would be insanely irresponsible for them to not deploy an anti ABM system.

Then, it would be insanely irresponsible for us not to deploy an anti anti ABM system.

...

I doubt we're going to invade Iran.

Invading Iran proves that nuclear deterrence is an absolute requirement - a message that every nation in the world will hear loud and clear.

My bet is that would create partnerships that we would have very serious problems with, while radicalizing a far larger community.

I think Mattis and other generals can think this stuff through.

That's one of the scary aspects of having the Joint Chiefs excluded from National Security Council meetings while the profoundly compromised Banon is allowed presence.

 

Uh.....we are the one's deploying the ABM system around Iran and Iran is many many decades away from even being able to develop a rudimentary Anti Anti ABM system.

Usually this is done by developing ICBM's that have decoy MIRV's.

AA

 

Doesn't this become complicated?

In order for the sanctions to work, Obama asked Putin who agreed then promptly stabbed him in the back by refusing to stop building Russian nuclear reactors.

Trump is now arguing for better relations with Russia while also wanting to hurt Iran. A favoured customer to the Russian military industrial complex. So no matter what Trump does next. Destroys relations with Iran or Russia. Iran will build more Kremlin reactors. As part of the on going proxy war.

 

There is a growing rift between Russia and Iran as Iran as it continues to expand energy and oil producing capabilities will be directly in competition with Russia for sales to Europe.

Putin very well may be more than interested in helping apply new sanctions upon Iran which would allow Russia to have a greater energy market share.

AA

 

Woulden't Russia do both. Use sanctions and sell them nuclear reactors? Business is always business.

 

Well the sanctions would be placed upon Iran do to their Nuclear Program so no.

Russia would have a choice to either help apply new sanctions which would stop or limit Iranian energy exports or sell Iran more reactors.

Russia would make much more money limiting Iranian energy exports.

AA

 

We would have to get China, too.

And, one might have to wonder how the rest would view a new sanctions regime, as there are those who see trade and normalization as important.

Plus, so we sanction them again. How would that change what they do?

I really believe the inspections w/ requirements on what we find and where we look are the one thing we have a chance to force them to do without the use of military force.

 

Why would Russia have no choice?

 

A1... Gov Moonbeam would just bend over and hand them the KY.

 

Because the new sanctions would be imposed due to Iran breaking the U.N. resolutions specific to nuclear weapons and delivery systems.

The very FIRST thing on the sanctions list would be no nation being allowed to provide Iran with anything specific to nuclear materials or delivery systems.

AA

- - - Updated - - -

The Iranian population has had it with sanctions and now that they were lifted a return to sanctions would be explosive as far as a possible uprising.

Understand over 70% of the entire Iranian population is 30 years old and under!!!

AA

 

Hmm. Then more complex? Iran are allies now with both China and Russia, Veto holders. And why would they sanction again?

America is involved with cold wars with both in Ukraine and the South China Sea.

I am trying to view your logic, why sanctions are not dead except from America and western allies.

 

We can easily sway China as if China is given a choice of either supporting new sanctions against Iran or losing access to the words largest consumer market that being the U.S. China will vote as we wish.

Russia is interested in halting Iran's energy export business as this is in direct conflict with Russian energy export sales.

AA

 

Well, they may well want to focus on the low tech/cheap direction. For example, perhaps specific detonations at various altitudes can make it hard to "see".

Plus, there is the fact that what is being purchased is nuclear deterrence. For example, Pakistan didn't build its nuclear arsenal with the idea of using it. I don't see any indication that Iran is likely to go that route, either. Further complicating the calculation is that we may not know precisely what their approach to our ABM system might be.

So, these things don't actually have to be perfect before the cost X odds of a rocket getting through to the east coast, or whatever, becomes too high to contemplate - deterrence.