+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
===========================================================
Some new info from ABC News: (Excerpt)
Is the U.S. stepping up preparations for a possible attack on Iran's nuclear facilities?
The Pentagon is always making plans, but based on a little-noticed funding request recently sent to Congress, the answer to that question appears to be yes. First, some background: Back in October 2007, ABC News reported that the Pentagon had asked Congress for $88 million in the emergency Iraq/Afghanistan war funding request to develop a gargantuan bunker-busting bomb called the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP). It's a 30,000-pound bomb designed to hit targets buried 200 feet below ground. Back then, the Pentagon cited an "urgent operational need" for the new weapon. (Link to PDF Pentagon Request: http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/reprogramming_memo_091006.pdf )
Now the Pentagon is shifting spending from other programs to fast forward the development and procurement of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator. The Pentagon comptroller sent a request to shift the funds to the House and Senate Appropriations and Armed Services Committees over the summer. The notification was tucked inside a 93-page "reprogramming" request that included a couple hundred other more mundane items.
Why now? The notification says simply, "The Department has an Urgent Operational Need (UON) for the capability to strike hard and deeply buried targets in high threat environments. The MOP is the weapon of choice to meet the requirements of the UON." It further states that the request is endorsed by Pacific Command (which has responsibility over North Korea) and Central Command (which has responsibility over Iran). Link to ABC Story: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-preparing-bomb-iran/Story?id=8765343&page=1 =========================================
The article further states that some monies are being allocated to modify a B-2 to carry the bombs. It looks like at this point we are either going to "lend" Israel the aircraft or also participate in the strike. The urgent request to fast track the MOP leaves no doubt that a strike on Iran is eminent. The thing to start thinking about now is what will the various consequences be after the bombing? If I had money in the stock market, I might think of pulling it out. If I lived in the city, I might consider an extended vacation in the country. Regardless, it is time to get ready for a lousy holiday season.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
ramblin_rose
amittaizero
emma peel
Gordon Wagner
Will Someone Feed The Cat?
scanner
Salon.com
Comments
Have any extra room in that bomb shelter Andy?
T.S., it looks like your wish will soon be granted.
I think that we will manage to neuter Iran without starting World War III. I sure hope so. Iran isn't worth World War III.
Diplomacy and discourse is the only way forward........no more wars!!!!!!Enough.
I agree Kyle, there is no good way out of this. If we let Iran get nukes, eventually one of their insane leaders would use them on Israel or another state they thought was an enemy. We pay now or pay later, but we still pay.
I don't like the person that is their current head of state, which is really a very weak, largely ceremonial position, anymore than you. Still, I think it is hugely unlikely Iran would use a nuclear weapon on Tel Aviv, less than 40 miles from Jerusalem. Certainly not without provocation. Imagine how many Moslems would be annihilated if that were to happen! And a fair percentage of those would be Shiite.
Regrettably, it is almost inevitable that Iran will seek nuclear weapons as long as its neighbors to the east, west, and north either have them already, or are hosting hundreds of thousands of hostile troops. I'd like to see our country engage Iran diplomatically, in a way that would make them view the United States more as a potential economic partner than a military threat. Maybe that's pie in the sky dreaming, but we really haven't even seriously tried to do that since 1979.
I really think it is unproductive and even dangerous to make assumptions that a nation is ruled by insane fanatics who are too foolish to consider the ramifications of starting a nuclear war. Similar arguments were made about China in the 1950's and 60's, and North Korea much more recently. Frankly, I'm glad we did not initiate a first strike against China or Korea. I think it would be a huge mistake to do so against Iran, both strategically and morally.
Bottom line, if you have nukes there is always the possibility they will be used. Iran is run by religious fanatics who may technically not be insane, but are capable of insane acts.
While modern Christianity does not use the violence it once did to deal with the heathens, the same cannot be said of modern day Islam, which now is the religion of choice to one in four of the world's population.
Diplomacy is always better than armed conflict and , as I have said previously, I do not think there is anything that cannot be worked out by intelligent discussion. Not everyone shares my view though.
Attacking Iran would be a strategic catastrophe, but you need to get your head around the fact that it will happen. Sooner or later, and I'm thinking sooner.
As the elections of this past summer illustrate, Iran's regime is not infallible, and certainly won't last forever. Even if change is not realized by the popular will of the people, change will happen through normal evolutionary processes, just as it did in Russia and China. The current leaders will grow old and die.
I think the far wiser course is to help that change occur peacefully (think Willi Brandt and the first efforts of detente with the Soviet bloc). Trying to force change militarily will destroy any chance we have in this generation of seeing a moderate government evolve in Iran. What would happen is the radicalization of the educated elite, and a new radical wildfire over the entire region, from Bangladesh (if not Indonesia) to Morocco.
I don't want to monopolize comments, so I won't comment further. I think it's a good thing to have civil discussions on such an important discussion as this. Thanks for initiating the discussion!