Things are heating up fer Iran again. There's now 3 US carrier groups looking at them from the ocean (Eisenhower, Truman and Ashland), plus a recent report said the Iranians were not happy about a whole bunch of new US combat troopies on their border with Azerbijan and putting Iran on "War Alert", and I read that "the word" came down US channels that "hot persuit" would be taken on weapon smugglers and other bad people fleeing Afganistan back into Iran for safety. That means that if they are running down Pavement Challenged and the Pavement Challenged manage to get to the border, there's no more "Nya Nya, you can touch me, I'm safe on this side" and instead they will just follow them on into Iran and blow their azzes away. Then there's the recent reports of Osama Bin Laden living comfortably in Iran (I still think he's dead, but the reports are more important to this discussion than the reality.)
Is this one going to be The O's war?
No it will be my 7 year old sons war. Once it starts it will not stop until the last man is dead done dead.
What do you suspect a carrier group costs to operate on a daily basis?
I found evidence that carrier is about $298 million a year, or about a million a day. Not sure if that include personal costs or even the air groups. Add a few cruisers, two AA ships and two destroyers I am sure we are talking at least 2-3 million a day, ouch.
The US has 11 carrier strike groups... really, do we really need 11?!
Sadly, it is probably just a drop in the bucket defense budget wise... hey, at least we have all the money we can print eh?
Note: I am not trying to knock this off topic, just kind of taking note of the fact that we are spending all this money on these things, maybe we really want to put them to some use. Kind of like Iran and North Korea.
John Brown wrote:
No it will be my 7 year old sons war. Once it starts it will not stop until the last man is dead done dead.
Except I think it will be my grandson's war to (maybe) finish, but my son and his 'significant other' haven't yet got going on the whole 'gotta have a kid NOW, Dammit!' idea. And I SO wanted to be a grampa before I died...ah, well.
On NPR this morning (29 June 10), they had a piece on local cops in Afghanistan. The 'Chief' of police they talked to thought that maybe 7 or 8 years (!!)more of 'training' might be necessary for his guys to take the lead in local police work. Meanwhile, the MP's doing the 'training' continue to be IED fodder. And the local cop 'recruits' continue to smoke hash and be generally unreliable. And Prez O. continues to screw around being offended and micromanaging a war he has no clue about, instead of leading the folks on the ground get on with business. And here I thought he had a thick hide, growing up all disadvantaged and all.
Debka Sez:
http://www.debka.com/article/8918/
US and Israel fear Iran may be capable of a nuclear test this year
DEBKAfile DEBKA-Net-Weekly July 19, 2010, 6:07 PM (GMT+02:00)Tags: Iran nuclear Shahram Amiri US intelligence
Shahram Amiri's heroes' welcome raised suspicionsShahram Amiri's voluntary repatriation to Iran and a second close look at the nuclear data he passed to the CIA are raising grave doubts about its value, debkafile's intelligence sources report. There is mounting suspicion in Washington and Jerusalem that Tehran employed the scientist to strew red herrings in their path, namely, out-of-date material for concealing and misdirecting their attention from the rapid progress taking place secretly in Iran's nuclear program.
A high-ranking intelligence source in Washington remarked Monday, July 19, that he would not be surprised "if we woke up one morning to find the Iranians had conducted an underground nuclear test." This was not to say Iran had a bomb or nuclear warhead ready packed for delivery, he said, "Only that it was a lot closer to this option than the Americans and Israelis had been led to believe."
Therefore, as of now, their forecast of a nuclear test capability has been brought forward to within the five months remaining of 2010.
Our sources report this revised forecast has emerged from US intelligence analysts' examination of two new premises regarding Amirir's input in the years he served as US informant:
1. That he was an Iranian double agent and his apparent defection to the United States just over a year ago was fake, engineered by Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS).
2. That Shahram Amiri, the nuclear scientist, was a made-up identity. After he landed to a heroes' welcome in Tehran last Thursday, July 15, Deputy Foreign Minister Hassan Qashqavi said: "Shahram Amiri is not a nuclear scientist and we reject it." Another Iranian official called him a clever spy who had managed to infiltrate US intelligence and deceive them for years.
As DEBKA-Net-Weekly 453 revealed on July 16, Amiri's work with the CIA did not begin in 2007but three years earlier in 2004.
The following is a short excerpt from that issue:
Many moves made by the administrations under George W. Bush and, since January 2009, Barack Obama, were based on the information and documents that Amiri provided.
If Amiri was a double agent planted by the MOIS, then Tehran had been able to manipulate these policies and anticipate their course.
Even if real nuggets were mixed in with the false data - a common ruse for making false intelligence appear credible - it still meant that Iran's leaders controlled the flow of factual information to the West and were in a position to change it in good time - so that when Amiri was asked by his US handlers to amplify on a piece of real information, it was no longer valid; Iran had moved on and created a new set of facts, unbeknownst to the Americans.
A striking example of this tactic was the secret enrichment plant in a mountain near Qom, which became the subject of a dramatic joint appearance on Sept. 25, 2009 in Pittsburgh by President Obama, French president Nicolas Sarkozy and George Brown, then British prime minister.
The US president's knowledge was based on data Amiri had relayed to the United States.
Throwing down the gauntlet, the US president gave Iran a two-week ultimatum to come clean on its hidden facility.
In fact, the Qom facilities had been dismantled six months earlier and relocated to a spot never revealed to this day. When the IAEA inspectors turned up, they found empty tunnels.
That is why nothing more was ever heard of the US president's ultimatum.
Only in recent months, have US and allied agencies begun to appreciate that this technique of misdirection allowed Iran to pursue its nuclear and missile programs out of sight of spies and monitors. While the West and Israel relied on Amiri to keep them abreast of Iran's activities, nuclear development work went forward at still unknown locations and may have progressed a lot further than is suspected in the West.
The rhetoric picks up some more and there's dead people littering Iran. Lessee:
-
It comes out recently that the Iranians are giving millions of something (dollars? cazunies? whatever) to our "friends" the Kharzies, currently the warlords running Afganistan.
-
"Wikileaks" releases 400K of documents that show that the Iranians were funding and supplying the Iraqi "resistance" or whatever they're called today. (As a side note, remember that Wikileaks got the documents from a U.S. homosexual soldier "protesting" that he couldn't openly practice his homosexuality while still wearing a U.S. uniform. The media has not been reminding us of that little fact. Don't ask, don't tell, right?)
-
An Iranian missle base capable of launching rockets deep into Israel and anywhere in Iraq, plus other US bases, burried deep inside a mountain just happens to blow itself up. There's rumors that "US and/or Israeli drones" may have been involved, although I suspect US and/or Israeli spooks would be a closer guess.
-
A virus/trojan called Struxnet wiped out the Iranian centrifuge set they were using to make Uranium for the atomic bombs to put on top of those missles that just blew up. The Iranians exterminated the "scientists" who may have deliberatly plugged that thumb drive into the USB port. (They should have known enough to run a free Linux distro instead of windoze. Another Bill Gates victory.)
-
There's another US carrier right across the street in Bahrain.
Humm. Good thing this is the next war and not the current one, or one might suspect it already went hot. Or warm. Whatever.
4eyes
HalfDork
10/25/10 3:22 p.m.
John Brown wrote:
No it will be my 7 year old sons war. Once it starts it will not stop until the last man is dead done dead.
This war started in the late '70s, people are just starting to notice though.
It will end in the end.
oldsaw
SuperDork
10/25/10 6:49 p.m.
wbjones wrote:
no this war started some 2000 yrs ago... not likely to ever end, whether we're involved or not 
Sorry, wb, but we're GONNA BE/ARE involved in this whether we like or not.
Thems the reality - like it, or not....
So, it really is true:
The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide". The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender". The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country's military capability.
debka said:
First steps for French pullout from Afghanistan day after Bin Laden threat
DEBKAfile Special Report October 28, 2010, 5:46 PM (GMT+02:00)
On their way out of AfghanistanJust a day after Osama bin Laden warned France to remove its troops from Afghanistan, French Defense Minister Herve Morin announced Thursday, Oct. 28 that the withdrawal of French troops would begin in early 2011. Paris then raised its terror alert level to "red" after confirming the authenticity of the Bin Laden audiotape aired Wednesday.
The French government is obviously taking very seriously the threat issued by al Qaeda's leader: "The only way to safeguard your nation and maintain your security is to lift all your injustice and its extensions off our people and most importantly to withdraw your forces from Bush's despicable war in Afghanistan," said Bin Laden.
Paris appears to believe that al Qaeda teams may already be in Paris poised to back up the threat, debkafile's counter-terror sources report. Defense minister Morin was pressured enough to make two separate statements: First he said, "There is a fixed date by NATO in the framework of its new strategy. That is the start of 2011." He then stated: "At this moment, there could be the first movements or withdrawal of allied forces from Afghanistan."
French President Nicolas Sarkozy was interior minister with responsibility for the war on al Qaeda in March 2004 when its bombers blew up Madrid trains and railway stations killing 191 people and injuring more than 1,800. Then too Al Qaeda gave the Spanish government an ultimatum to withdraw its troops from Iraq - and struck with lethal force when it was not heeded.
Sarkozy appears determined to prevent this happening to France.
Morin tried hard to explain that the decision to pull French troops out of Afghanistan was not connected to the Bin Laden warning - but he was not convincing.
debkafile's counterterrorism sources say that never since the September 11, 2001 attacks on America, has any Western country caved in so quickly and precisely to an Al Qaeda ultimatum.
its almost amazing that there are any obstetricians in France considering how quick the French are ready to pull out.
4cylndrfury wrote:
its almost amazing that there are any obstetricians in France considering how quick the French are ready to pull out.
You still need them to care for all the Bob Costas.
oldsaw
SuperDork
10/28/10 2:09 p.m.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:
4cylndrfury wrote:
its almost amazing that there are any obstetricians in France considering how quick the French are ready to pull out.
You still need them to care for all the Bob Costas.
Wrong kind of doc, GPS.
Think Greece and gyrocologist; you'll be on the right track.
In reply to oldsaw:
Rule #a) Do not let facts get in the way of a punchline
Side-note... the guy who delivered both my kids also takes care of Mrs GPS Bob Costas. Now I am wondering if maybe the kids don't look a little like him for a reason.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:
both my kids also takes care of Mrs GPS Bob Costas. Now I am wondering if maybe the kids don't look a little like him for a reason.
depends on definition of "takes care of"
giggity.
From 0 to in the gutter with blinding speed. I can always count on you guys.
Toyman01 wrote:
From 0 to in the gutter with blinding speed. I can always count on you guys.
Sorry I did not mean to derail this discussion. Back on topic:
Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
From http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=222641
Pat Buchanan said:
Is this the key to 2nd term for Obama?
Though Obama "may lose control of Congress," says columnist David Broder, he "can still storm back to win a second term in 2012."
How does Broder suggest Obama go about it?
"Look back at FDR and the Great Depression. What finally resolved that economic crisis? World War II."
Conceding the prospect of a new war is "frightening," Broder goes on to list the rich rewards of Obama's emulating FDR.
"With strong Republican support in Congress for challenging Iran's ambition to become a nuclear power, (Obama) can spend much of 2011 and 2012 orchestrating a showdown with the mullahs. This will help him politically because the opposition party will be urging him on. And as tensions rise and we accelerate preparations for war, the economy will improve. ...
"(T)he nation will rally around Obama because Iran is the greatest threat to the world in the young century. If he can confront this threat and contain Iran's nuclear ambitions, he will have made the world safer and may be regarded as one of the most successful presidents in history."
Cynicism aside, what is wrong with Broder's analysis?
First, how exactly are "preparations for war" on Iran going to improve our economy when two actual wars costing $1 trillion have left us in the deepest recession since the 1930s?
Were those wars just not big enough?
If war is good for the economy, why is this nation, at war for a decade, growing at 2 percent, while China, which invests in rogue regimes rather than bomb them, is booming?
Moreover, any attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would be carried out by air and missile strikes from ships and planes already in the U.S. arsenal. We would not need the tens of thousands of ships, tanks, guns and planes we needed in World War II, or the 12 million men under arms.
The first result of a U.S. strike would be to pull Iran's oil off the world market. If Iran responded by mining the Gulf or sinking a tanker, oil would go to $300 a barrel and gasoline to $10 a gallon. Does Broder think that would give a nice boost to the U.S. and world economy?
Japan's attack at Pearl Harbor united us in rage and resolve. Were we to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, when its nuclear program is supported by both sides of that divided country, we would likely unite Iranians in patriotic anger and convince any doubters that Tehran must acquire nuclear weapons to deter us.
We would then have to invade Iran to win the war, as that would be the only sure way to remove a regime that would be hell-bent on revenge through terror and every other means.
Memo to Broder: We don't have the troops to invade Iran, which is three times as large as Iraq.
And as Obama's "preparations for war" are under way, how does Broder propose we defend our diplomats and civilians in Lebanon, who are a cab ride from Hezbollah in south Beirut?
Broder says, "Iran is the greatest threat to the world in the young century."
But a threat to whom?
Iran's next-door neighbor Turkey does not see Iran as a threat. Indeed, Turkey's prime minister got Tehran to agree to trade half its low-enriched uranium to the West for fuel rods for a reactor that makes medical isotopes. It was America that slapped away the offer.
Iraq's leaders make regular treks to Tehran for advice in forming a new government. Our man in Kabul, Hamid Karzai, admits to getting "bags of cash" from Iran. Syria has excellent relations with Tehran. Lebanon just hosted President Ahmadinejad.
If the neighbors can live with Iran, why are we, with 5,000 nuclear weapons, 6,000 miles away, so fearful?
Israel calls Iran "an existential threat."
But Israel has 200 nukes and the planes, subs and missiles to deliver them, while U.N. inspectors claim Iran has not diverted any of its low-enriched uranium for conversion to weapons grade.
Should it do so, say U.S. officials, we would have a year's notice before Iran could even test a device, let alone build a bomb.
We are told Ahmadinejad is a madman, a religious fanatic, a Hitler who would die happy, even if Iran were incinerated, if only he could explode a nuclear bomb on Israel or the United States.
But when Israel attacked Iran's ally Hezbollah in 2006 and Hamas in 2008, Ahmadinejad did nothing. Does that sound like Hitler?
When was the last time Iran started a war with anyone?
America has deterred Stalin, Mao and Kim Jong-il, all men with nuclear arsenals and far more frightening than Ahmadinejad, who is well into his second term, unpopular, with an economy in shambles. Moreover, Ahmadinejad does not make the war-or-peace decision for Iran.
If Obama prepares for war and Iran refuses to back down, how many U.S. dead and wounded would Broder consider a fair price to pay for a second term for his "enduringly superior" leader?
Stuxnet slowed them down, but Debka sez the Iranians have almost enough uranium to make a bomb now, and have all internal (domestic) sourses for all the uranium they could want. They should have enough for a boom-boom by February. The Iranians are also pissed about this wikileaks thing and think it is a US deliberate leak to make them look bad because no one likes them and even the Saudies are talking with the Israelies to go bomb the Iranians. That's pretty bad.
Somehow, The O has managed to screw up everything he has touched. Or has he? The Iranians seem to be taking advantage of this in building their own bomb. Are the Israelies just going to let them do it? Does anyone care if the Iranians get an atomic bomb? Should we? One bomb does not make you a nuclear power. One bomb makes you a nuclear target. Or is this a secret strategy of Soros to finally destroy Isreal, completing the work he did as a young man (the happiest time of his life)? Tune in next week for the next exciting episode of As The Iranian Burns.
