Iran War...probability?

[portsider44]

May not be the best thing to do but, I think Mr. Blair needs to quit looking to the UN for help or permission. If they truly only have the one refinery blow that SOB up & take control of shipments of gas coming in via sea.

SHouldn't take long to bring them to there knees. Irans action sure looks like they are looking for a fight. So give it to them & see how they stomach it.

[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by portsider44

SHouldn't take long to bring them to there knees. Irans action sure looks like they are looking for a fight. So give it to them & see how they stomach it.

Unfortunately the UK population appears to be very dissatisfied with the Iraq War. While it's not directly related to the situation, I'm sure Blair is feeling that concern and is reluctant to engage his country in another conflict / war.

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by Powerman

I was just unaware of Iran's new status as #1 State sponsor of terror. Is that of the World, or is that just a regional title? Is there a party? What security color are you suposed to wear for that?

US State Department, "most active state sponor of terror".

Iran
Iran remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism. Its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) were directly involved in the planning and support of terrorist acts and continued to exhort a variety of groups, especially Palestinian groups with leadership cadres in Syria and Lebanese Hizballah, to use terrorism in pursuit of their goals. In addition, the IRGC was increasingly involved in supplying lethal assistance to Iraqi militant groups, which destabilizes Iraq.

Iran continues to be unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qaida members it detained in 2003. Iran has refused to identify publicly these senior members in its custody on "security grounds." Iran has also resisted numerous calls to transfer custody of its al-Qaida detainees to their countries of origin or to third countries for interrogation and/or trial.

Iran maintained a high-profile role in encouraging anti-Israeli terrorist activity -- rhetorically, operationally, and financially. Supreme Leader Khamenei and President Ahmadi-Nejad praised Palestinian terrorist operations, and Iran provided Lebanese Hizballah and Palestinian terrorist groups -- notably HAMAS, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command -- with extensive funding, training, and weapons.
Iran pursued a variety of policies in Iraq, some of which appeared to be inconsistent with its stated objectives regarding stability in Iraq and with the objectives of the Iraqi Transitional Government and the Multi-national Forces in Iraq. Senior Iraqi officials have publicly expressed concern over Iranian interference in Iraq, and there were reports that Iran provided funding, safe passage, and arms to insurgent elements.

State sponsors of terrorism pose a grave WMD terrorism threat. A WMD program in a state sponsor of terrorism could enable a terrorist organization to acquire a sophisticated WMD. State sponsors of terrorism and nations that fail to live up to their international obligations deserve special attention as potential facilitators of WMD terrorism. Iran presents a particular concern, given its active sponsorship of terrorism and its continued development of a nuclear program. Iran is also capable of producing biological and chemical agents or weapons. Like other state sponsors of terrorism with WMD programs, Iran could support terrorist organizations seeking to acquire WMD.

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2005/64337.htm

I know....I know.....don't trust the government....

However, what other country do you think is a bigger sponsor of terror than Iran? They fund Hezbollah and their weapons and revolutionary guardsmen have been found in Iraq. They also fund terror groups who attack Israel. Does anyone really doubt that Iran sponsors terrorism?

Frank

[tenring]

Unfortunately the UK population appears to be very dissatisfied with the Iraq War. While it's not directly related to the situation, I'm sure Blair is feeling that concern and is reluctant to engage his country in another conflict / war.

Unfortunately that is the story being portrayed in the media and among the elites. The general UK populace is fed up with their own government's tepid response to what Iran is doing, and wonder why they haven't stepped up to what is obviously a ploy by the Iranians to disrupt the region, and create more excuses for the anti war pansies to say "see we shouldn't be there"

I say, take the gloves off, and I don't think there is any doubt that Bush would stand with him in this. Lord knows Tony has stood him back up after a pounding or two.


And Now for something completely different

[portsider44]

Just wonder how Tony's lack of force is setting with is troops??

[NewXD40fun]

Originally Posted by portsider44

Just wonder how Tony's lack of force is setting with is troops??

Iran has the home field advantage here. At least the hostage troops are still alive since they properly followed their rules of engagement.

I read somewhere that Iran has about 1,000 warships in this area.


Tom