NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5275560.stm

Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, has said his country is ready to start "serious talks" with six world powers on Wednesday.

The US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, said the choice facing Iran was clear.

"They can either take up the very generous offer that the five permanent members and Germany have extended to them, and if they do there's a possibility of a different relationship with the United States and others.

"But if they don't we've also made it clear that their unwillingness to give up their pursuit of nuclear weapons will result in our efforts in the Security Council to obtain economic sanctions against them."

Could Iran actually take up the offer of the five permanent members and Germany after all we have till August for Iran to decide and looking at Iran offering the west serious talks they might actually be considering backing down on the issue!

But will Iran’s old mentality from the Iran-Iraq war of us against them get in the way? I for one don’t know

Could Iran actually take up the offer of the five permanent members and Germany after all we have till August for Iran to decide and looking at Iran offering the west serious talks they might actually be considering backing down on the issue!

But will Iran’s old mentality from the Iran-Iraq war of us against them get in the way? I for one don’t know
The deadline isn't until the end of August.

They can offer to talk "seriously" (one imagines that up to this point then, all talking has not been serious at all), and thereby gain an extension.

More talking! Oh, and more enriched uranium!

More talking! Oh, and more enriched uranium!

actually Iran might not be that far along after all:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4995350.stm

Western diplomatic sources have told the BBC that there is a very strong probability that the uranium hexafluoride gas used in these experiments was not made by the Iranians at all.

They say that it may well have come from a small stock of material sold to Iran by China back in 1991.

The negotiating states have been very generous in giving Iran time to consider its proposals and have worked diligently to bring as many states on board with their proposal as possible. Even nations with significant interests in Iran, like Russia and China, have been brought on board and agree with this position and that is a very important point to consider.

I think Iran is realizing that they can't stall anymore and these nations are serious about their proposal; a seven month plus waiting period is far too long for this issue, and I think all parties involved have reached the limits of their patience. Either Iran talks now and suspends enrichment, or it faces sanctions...their choice is clear.

actually Iran might not be that far along after all:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4995350.stm
So they might want to talk and talk, to stall for time to get it right.

Or, talk and talk, to get a deal for a lot of money...

Or, talk and talk, and switch the topic to Israel, and why the EU hasn't taken back all the Jews yet like he asked...

Or, talk and talk, to get a deal for a lot of money...

could be the plan and if it is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the sneakiest fucker alive (and may just get Iran the nuclear technology it wants!)

Yes infidels lets talk while we rearm hezbollah and continue with building our nuke and take a few more oil platforms and shell the kurds in north Iraq while we foment unrest in the south of iraq among the shiites ...lets talk indeed .

infidel fools .:p

Methinks the Iranian Government just realised they'd loose a war against us (the West)...

Methinks the Iranian Government just realised they'd loose a war against us (the West)...

well no one wins wars but I don't think Iran will lose a western invasion no matter how many nations jump on in

...well unless people don't mind black rain

I think Iran is just using this as a way to buy time.

They offer seriouse talks ...the same day they take an oil platform by military force from Rumania ...

fuck Godwin ...Amadababoobabob is Hitler ! he's actually doing the same shit and getting away with it !

Cyrus the waste with a passion for action...beware INFIDELS Iran is on the march ..;)

well no one wins wars but I don't think Iran will lose a western invasion no matter how many nations jump on in

...well unless people don't mind black rain

I think the US and its token allies would win, but it would be a bloody fight, and the aftermath would be even worse than in Iraq. I can just see the Taliban and al-Qaeda piling over the eastern border of Iran, eager to profit from the defeat of their Shi'a enemies. Bad news.

I think the US and its token allies would win, but it would be a bloody fight, and the aftermath would be even worse than in Iraq. I can just see the Taliban and al-Qaeda piling over the eastern border of Iran, eager to profit from the defeat of their Shi'a enemies. Bad news.

I have my doubts about winning a war against a modern highly trained army on its own turf especially one that has fanatical support from the population and which has the ability to get at least Syria on its side

Serious talks...sure.

Why did they have to wait a month or so before giving the rest of the world a 'final' response of 'we'll talk some more.'

I'd like to think this is due to something other than the failure of the hidden imam to appear............

Actually its an easy win . Destroy the military and the infastructure reduce Iran into ruins ...no water or electrical power ...no food or supply...the US is in a position to sit back and obliterate them .

Never having one soldier except special forces on iranian soil...why bother invading ?


you are forgetting the US has a major edge ...a huge advatage and has troops on two borders of Iran and logistics in place ALREADY .:D

Iran is destroyed ..the US takes terrorist hits ...thats the trade off .

Actually its an easy win . Destroy the military and the infastructure reduce Iran into ruins ...no water or electrical power ...no food or supply...the US is in a position to sit back and obliterate them .

Never having one soldier except special forces on iranian soil...why bother invading ?


you are forgetting the US has a major edge ...a huge advatage and has troops on two borders of Iran and logistics in place ALREADY .:D

Iran is destroyed ..the US takes terrorist hits ...thats the trade off .
Yeah, but Iran and others think Americans are too scared and soft to take any hits on their own territory. I'm not sure why. 9/11 only seemed to piss us off.

Actually its an easy win . Destroy the military and the infastructure reduce Iran into ruins ...no water or electrical power ...no food or supply...the US is in a position to sit back and obliterate them

Iran actually has an air force though and not just that it has the capability to hit targets that are near it with aircraft, rockets and artillery (like airbases and aircraft carriers) also Iran has prepared for an invasion for years there more than ready for anything America can throw at them and them some (well apart from nukes)

troops on two borders of Iran and logistics in place ALREADY .:D

whilst Iran has huge stockpiles of resources and maybe the support of the drug lords who decide who’s in power in Afghanistan

I have my doubts about winning a war against a modern highly trained army on its own turf especially one that has fanatical support from the population and which has the ability to get at least Syria on its side

I question the "modern" and "highly trained". Most of their equipment these days is secondline chinese knockoffs of russian crap that wasn't up to spec to begin with. And the Iran-Iraq war was long enough ago that they'll have lost most of their veterans; and since their military is heavily politicised, it probably isn't very good.
You are, however, dead right about the popular support.
If we have to go in, taking ground isn't going to be much of an option. Our best bet will be to destroy every suspect facility we can find from the air. And if that includes using a mini-nuke to get at a well emplaced bunker, I can live with that.

Iran actually has an air force though and not just that it has the capability to hit targets that are near it with aircraft, rockets and artillery (like airbases and aircraft carriers) also Iran has prepared for an invasion for years there more than ready for anything America can throw at them and them some (well apart from nukes)



whilst Iran has huge stockpiles of resources and maybe the support of the drug lords who decide who’s in power in Afghanistan
You're really underestimating US military technology.

I have my doubts about winning a war against a modern highly trained army on its own turf especially one that has fanatical support from the population and which has the ability to get at least Syria on its side

Syria would probably stay out of it. I'm sure Assad doesn't want to lose more than he has already, as he lost Syria's direct dominance over Lebanon.

They're only doing this so they can buy time.

Syria would probably stay out of it. I'm sure Assad doesn't want to lose more than he has already, as he lost Syria's direct dominance over Lebanon.

It's not like Syrian involvement would matter. Militarily, they're worse off then Iraq in 2003.

You're really underestimating US military technology.

look at Irans military technology:

http://archive.gulfnews.com/indepth/irancrisis/more_stories/10030593.html

yes a flying boat that no radar on sea and air can detect!

look at Irans military technology:

http://archive.gulfnews.com/indepth/irancrisis/more_stories/10030593.html

yes a flying boat that no radar on sea and air can detect!

And I drove to Maine in a Zeppelin.

look at Irans military technology:

http://archive.gulfnews.com/indepth/irancrisis/more_stories/10030593.html

yes a flying boat that no radar on sea and air can detect!

Yes. There is no chance that Iran is lying about that. None at all.

And I drove to Maine in a Zeppelin.

Wouldn't you have flown a Zeppelin?

Iran actually has an air force though and not just that it has the capability to hit targets that are near it with aircraft, rockets and artillery (like airbases and aircraft carriers) also Iran has prepared for an invasion for years there more than ready for anything America can throw at them and them some (well apart from nukes)



whilst Iran has huge stockpiles of resources and maybe the support of the drug lords who decide who’s in power in Afghanistan


Irans airforce and military are what you call a " target rich enviroment " and would survive less than a month. The Air Force..if they choose to fight... maybe days .

They could attack positions in iraq and most likely Israel...but they would die ...horribly and decisively...hasn't anyone learned the lessons of both Iraq wars and Kosovo and any other engagement pitting US military equipment against others ????

Did you miss it ??

Most of their equipment these days is secondline chinese knockoffs of russian crap that wasn't up to spec to begin with.

ah but what gun you use doesn't matter as much as training Iran isn’t expecting to be fighting any wars outside of the middle east so they will be trained for combat on terrain like Iran’s (lets not forget the troops also have home turf)

look at Irans military technology:

http://archive.gulfnews.com/indepth/irancrisis/more_stories/10030593.html

yes a flying boat that no radar on sea and air can detect!

No, no radar based on 1970's Soviet technology could alledgedly detect a missile w/ no outside confirmation of capabilities.

Wouldn't you have flown a Zeppelin?

No, I drove, Goddamnit!

WHY WONT YOU PEOPLE BELIEVE ME?!

And I drove to Maine in a Zeppelin.



was it a LED ZEPPELIN by any chance ?:D

Yeah, but Iran and others think Americans are too scared and soft to take any hits on their own territory. I'm not sure why. 9/11 only seemed to piss us off.


It seems Iran is betting the house on it...and so far they are winning .

ah but what gun you use doesn't matter as much as training Iran isn’t expecting to be fighting any wars outside of the middle east so they will be trained for combat on terrain like Iran’s (lets not forget the troops also have home turf)

No one actually wants to invade Iran. They just want to destroy it. You don't need people on the ground to destory a nation.

They could attack positions in iraq and most likely Israel...but they would die ...horribly and decisively...hasn't anyone learned the lessons of both Iraq wars and Kosovo and any other engagement pitting US military equipment against others ????

Iran isn't Iraq (funny how Iran flies American planes)

was it a LED ZEPPELIN by any chance ?:D

..and that's why I drove.

Iran isn't Iraq (funny how Iran flies American planes)

Old F-14s that can hardly fly?

EDIT: IIRC, they have a few F-5s too. Hooray!

look at Irans military technology:

http://archive.gulfnews.com/indepth/irancrisis/more_stories/10030593.html

yes a flying boat that no radar on sea and air can detect!
The Soviets had similar "flying boats" that use the "Ground Effect to skim over water rather than plowing through it. It's not new or advanced. It didn't make a difference then and it won't make a difference for Iran now.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/row/rus/903.htm

Fact is that the US spends more money on military R&D than anyone else on earth and we get plenty of bang for our buck. Iran doesn't stand a chance.

Old F-14s that can hardly fly?

EDIT: IIRC, they have a few F-5s too. Hooray!

According to "global Security", maybe 2 doz f-14's are still flying and a few dozen f-5's. Mostly they fly older Soviet/Russian stuff nowadays.

Even still. All the US planes Avionics are 30+ years out of date.

Iran isn't Iraq (funny how Iran flies American planes)
What, a couple of outdated F-14s from the seventies? Sorry, Iran's airforce would be gone in the first couple of days. The only Iranian planes that stand a chance would be the ones that don't take off. Even those would likely be found and destroyed.

What, a couple of outdated F-14s from the seventies? Sorry, Iran's airforce would be gone in the first couple of days. The only Iranian planes that stand a chance would be the ones that don't take off. Even those would likely be found and destroyed.

Some people seem to be unaware that an airframe =/= capabilities.

Iran isn't Iraq (funny how Iran flies American planes)
sure when did they get parts ?:D

Some people seem to be unaware that an airframe =/= capabilities.

Actually its more the radar and avionics and targeting systems and missiles...not to mention the ability to maintain the fleet with spare parts:D

you think you can compare 1980's tech with 2006 ??:D

No, I drove, Goddamnit!

WHY WONT YOU PEOPLE BELIEVE ME?!

I beleive you schatzi.

Actually its more the radar and avionics and targeting systems and missiles...not to mention the ability to maintain the fleet with spare parts:D

you think you can compare 1980's tech with 2006 ??:D

1970's tech actually. We stopped supporting them after the '79 revolution. The last deliveries were in '77 IIRC.

Actually its more the radar and avionics and targeting systems and missiles...not to mention the ability to maintain the fleet with spare parts:D

you think you can compare 1980's tech with 2006 ??:D
Also US planes can approach with their radar turned off guided by AWACS which makes them harder to spot and to target. Iran doesn't have AWACS. Their planes will be clearly visible as they scan the sky and target their missiles with their radar.

Also US planes can approach with their radar turned off guided by AWACS which makes them harder to spot and to target. Iran doesn't have AWACS. Their planes will be clearly visible as they scan the sky and target their missiles with their radar.

Alledgedly, they used some of the F-14's as a version of AWACS during the IRan-Iraq war as they had the most sophisticated radar of the fleet.

Even so.....

Alledgedly, they used some of the F-14's as a version of AWACS during the IRan-Iraq war as they had the most sophisticated radar of the fleet.

Even so.....
No shit? That's pretty ingenious, but it doesn't compare with US technology.

No shit? That's pretty ingenious, but it doesn't compare with US technology.

Apparently it didn't work perfectly then either. Iraqi AF pilots would fly F-1's under the F-14's radar horizon, pop up, paint and target them.

Can we all agree that it would be an extremely bloody fight, no matter who would win? The Iranian military won't lie down like the Iraqi did. Saddam was a hated dictator; the Iranian government, on the other hand, does have popular support.

Can we all agree that it would be an extremely bloody fight, no matter who would win? The Iranian military won't lie down like the Iraqi did. Saddam was a hated dictator; the Iranian government, on the other hand, does have popular support.
Depends on what kind of fight it is. More likely than not the US military response would be an air war. If so it would only be bloody for the Iranians.

the Iranian government, on the other hand, does have popular support.

You'd be suprised actually.

You'd be suprised actually.

More than Saddam's government, I would think. I'm sure there are plenty of dissidents.

Iran actually has an air force though and not just that it has the capability to hit targets that are near it with aircraft, rockets and artillery (like airbases and aircraft carriers) also Iran has prepared for an invasion for years there more than ready for anything America can throw at them and them some (well apart from nukes)



Much like Saddam before the first Gulf War? They said the same thing about Iraq's military and we all know what happened.

Iran would fold within days.

Can we all agree that it would be an extremely bloody fight, no matter who would win? The Iranian military won't lie down like the Iraqi did. Saddam was a hated dictator; the Iranian government, on the other hand, does have popular support.

Bzzzt. Not all that much. There is a strong dissident movement, and in fact many young Iranians like the US and hate their Mullah leaders.

BS, iran's not going to talk, except to russia and china when they ask for more missiles.

Can we all agree that it would be an extremely bloody fight, no matter who would win? The Iranian military won't lie down like the Iraqi did. Saddam was a hated dictator; the Iranian government, on the other hand, does have popular support.

Here's the thing, it would be most like a far less bloody war, for us anyway, simply because of that fact. The Iraq army knew they had no chance against our far superior technology (will detail upon request), Iran however thinks they are "bad" and have the power of allah on their side. They will all stand up to us with out-dated technology and tactics, while we drop a few bombs fly a few planes then send in the tanks and troops to clean up what is left. The fact that Iraq did not fight us is why it is so hard, we don't know who might be our enemy, could be any random farmer with an AK hidden in his robe. Iran would show their soldiers, and we would simply kill all of them and get it over with. It would however be very bloody on the Iranian side, and would cause much international panic and anger towards us for killing 100,000's+ people, it would be a bad scene, but it is/will soon become necessary.