Are we prebombing Iran yet?

[lonestarnot]

[Toots]

1. We will not "pre bomb" Iran nor will we send in troops

We will do something similar to what Israel did to Iraq in mid eighties. We will probably use "tactical nukes" the new bunker busting nukes to destroy what we say are nuke sites. There will be no way to determine if they really were nuke sites or not once a "tactical nuke" hits the area. It is the extreme form of intimidation and they are totally convinced that if we stike the Iranians will submit to our will. You know throw flowers at us for liberating them....... This is going to happen. People always assume that rational minds would never ever even contemplate such a thing. I suggest there are no rational minds within the Bush* Cabal so don't expect rational actions...

[lonestarnot]

4. Throw a nuke at it egh?

[Tesha]

5. You're quite wrong about that.

> There will be no way to determine if they really were nuke sites or not once a "tactical nuke" hits the area.

You're quite wrong about that. You'd be amazed what a good forensics expert
can learn, even from a nuked site. For example, the isotopes left behind
would be quite different if we blew up an aspirin plant as compared to, say,
a uranium separation or plutonium reprocessing plant.

Tesha

[Jemmons]

6. Your answer presuppose that WMS are really seen as the problem,

and not the declared economic warfare that was started when Iran decided to trade oil in euros instead of dollars.
You got to ask: What will it take to make the ayatollahs change their ways or limit the problem? I think that you will se a lot of Iranian oil-installations blown to pieces in near future.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

7. No we will not use tactical nukes.

That's just nuts.

[endarkenment]

13. And yet

exactly this scenario has been floated in the press, using the justification that the (supposedly) hardened underground Iranian sites would be immune to conventional weapons. The Bush administration has explicitly claimed that it has the right to first use of tactical weapons, and is busy developing a new generation of just such weapons, in particular a deep penetration tactical nuke.

So while I agree that this is 'just nuts' it seems that it is also not outside the parameters of what the administration might do.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

14. They aren't developing it any more.

Congress de-funded them, I believe.

[Canuckistanian]

8. Uh, nukes?

Now I realize that the Bush kleptocracy hasn't got a shred of morals left, but even they would realize that using any kind of thermonuclear device at this point would be disastrous, both internationally and at home.

Think how it would ramp up the tension with N. Korea, Israel or even China if they let that genie out of the bottle.

[megatherium]

9. The real issue is oil and gas. This is why we're not going to do anything

except get pissy. Iran has been signing huge oil and gas contracts with China and other countries. China will use its seat on the UN Security Council to block sanctions or other attempts to prevent Iran from getting the bomb.

If anyone troubles themselves to bomb Iran, it would be the Israelis.

[Pavulon]

11. B61-mk11

is the closest thing we have to a "tactical" nuke earth penetrator. Not really tactical. guaranteed radiological mess.

Any bombing will cause a radiological mess. Assuming we bomb the facilities and don't just kill their government.

It is very easy to tell the difference between a nuclear weapon that has produced the standard double flash, and left its radiological fingerprints that could be picked up on gas Chromatograph or mass spec.

An air war is possible, but not probable, but a nuclear strike on a third world nation with no real military or air defense is not likely.

Not saying we should but black jets dropping bunker busters on nuke sites or government with zero notice is the more reasonable route. (If a strike was ordered)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. As soon as they finish bombing in Pakistan.

Knocking off a multitude of #2 "terrorists" (aka - civilians) has priority right now.

[AzDar]

3. Probably. We'll never know....... n/t

[lonestarnot]

10. GEORGE BUSH IS A SERIAL KILLER!

[peekaloo]

12. Don't know....but for now their decrepit planes seem to be thinning

out the top military men.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4594104.stm