Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (92164)	12/24/2004 2:00:27 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793717

<< I think the worst Iran has to fear is a MASSIVE air attack designed to take out simultaneously deep bunkers containing nuclear equipment, government centers, communications centers, and military headquarters.>> <<I agree. Thats really what I meant. I believe that MASSIVE attack will or would be less measured than the one we used to kick things off in Iraq >>> The NYT, by concentrating on casualties, opinions, and politics is missing a bigger story - the improvements in our Military capabilities. There has been much Defence work going on behind the scenes which has properly been kept out of the reach of the the Press -which would much enjoy disclosing publically and thus to our enemies. Here is an example of military planning discussed back in 1995, which would be much farther along by now.. csbaonline.org In addition, Defence has had nearly two years to review every missile strike , bombing, or mission in Iraq. And compute ways to improve its effectiveness. If Iran is so foolish as to provoke an attack , it would not be treated to a mere shock and awe operation, it would be more like a limited armaggedon. Keep an eye on the positioning of our Carriers, and if there are more than 5 in the Gulf then something is cooking. There is no way to tell the location of our new undersea battleships (submarines). Our operations in Kosevo, Afghanistan, and Iraq should be enough to convince Iran, Syria, and N Korea to do some real serious thinking about their potential losses. Let us hope that Condolesa Rice, backed by the GWB's overseas image as a wild-a$$ed cowboy, tells them the straight story without the more accomodating and politcally oriented talk by Colin Powell. Make sure there are no misunderstandings. Although France, Germany, and Russia will do very little outside their own borders and pose little threat to misbehaving ME nations, the US would not be so accomodating. IMO there is only a very minor chance that Iran or Syria will call down an enraged US on their backs. We would not "go in" with force without approval of most of the UN members. But dont tell them that, let them guess that we would. Meanwhile, Syria and Iran continue to send their meddling terrorists into Iraq while denying they approve of it. Its the way they are confined to fighting and expressing their disagreements with the West when any major action( such as sending missiles) would bring down a very large hanmmer. Sig