Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

if they attack iran will it start ww3 ?


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#1    sean6

sean6

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 408 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2010

Posted 19 February 2012 - 08:23 PM

I just like to know what unexplained-mysteries thinks, if they attack iran will it start ww3 ?




#2    Mr.United_Nations

Mr.United_Nations

    hi

  • Member
  • 9,304 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 19 February 2012 - 08:44 PM

No, more like a cold war, a war with words and that will be it and what's this got to do with Science and Space?


#3    sean6

sean6

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 408 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2010

Posted 19 February 2012 - 08:57 PM

View PostErix, on 19 February 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

No, more like a cold war, a war with words and that will be it and what's this got to do with Science and Space?


science and space ? this is Earth, Disasters and the Environment

Edited by sean6, 19 February 2012 - 08:58 PM.


#4    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 19 February 2012 - 09:07 PM

yes, there is a good chance that will happen.
iran has tens of thousands of missiles, they are not going to stand still if they are bombed. it is likely they will fire some (maybe many thousands) at israel. israel will then probably nuke them. russia will at least support iran in the cold war sense, china maybe hot war sense since they get a lot of their oil from iran, so their strategic interests would be threatened.

interestingly the RAND corporation, a think tank that provides long term strategy and analysis for government policy stated in 2008 that the united states requires a world war to overcome its economic problems, so one should not think that a world war would be undesired by the powers that be.

http://www.prisonpla...us-economy.html


#5    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,783 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies for the hardest victory is over SELF.
    Aristotle

Posted 19 February 2012 - 09:46 PM

Interesting that the clip didn't let Romney finish his thought about the consequences of not attacking Iran.  Anyway, JMO but I don't think nuclear missiles get thrown around by anyone as long as no chemical or biological weapons(WMD) are used against Israel.  The mullahs will want to save what they can and will not attack US forces in the region.  They'll use Hamas and Hizballah to attack Israel and Israel will dismantle both with probably massive civilian casualties.  Keep in mind that Hamas and Hizballah think they win in the court of world opinion if Israel kills civilians.  It's why both of them hide their weapons and fighters among civilians.  Israel tried to fight half heartedly in 2006 and 2009 with these entities and lost both times. They won't make the same mistake again.  They will essentially END them both as a threat.  The UN will be absolutely apoplectic with anger but Israel has almost no friends there anyhow.  And the UN has proven itself utterly useless.  
If Egypt throws in then they lose US aid and their military gets decimated.  The one disturbing wildcard is Syria.  Assad is under intense pressure and he might miscalculate and attack Israel with WMD.  In that case Israel leaves Damascus a smoking hole in the sand and all bets are off...
Even then I don't expect nukes to be used by Russia, China or the US.  So it will be a regional bloodbath but not a true worldwide conflict.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#6    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 19 February 2012 - 10:17 PM

View Postand then, on 19 February 2012 - 09:46 PM, said:

The mullahs will want to save what they can and will not attack US forces in the region
I think it is a mistake to think that.
it is logical to assume iran will launch missiles at israel's dimona nuclear plant if the US or israel bomb its nuclear facilities. it is a proportional response and justifiable. any conventional escalation from that point would have to come from the US which is a siting duck in the gulf for irans sunburn and yakhont missiles.

Edited by Little Fish, 19 February 2012 - 10:18 PM.


#7    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,783 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies for the hardest victory is over SELF.
    Aristotle

Posted 19 February 2012 - 11:02 PM

View PostLittle Fish, on 19 February 2012 - 10:17 PM, said:

I think it is a mistake to think that.
it is logical to assume iran will launch missiles at israel's dimona nuclear plant if the US or israel bomb its nuclear facilities. it is a proportional response and justifiable. any conventional escalation from that point would have to come from the US which is a siting duck in the gulf for irans sunburn and yakhont missiles.
They may well launch against Israel if the US is not involved initially.  But I still think that if the US helps in the attack we will only see small scale attacks against embassies and such or possibly even against interests inside the country and not against forces in the theater.  US weapons are far superior to anything the Russians or Chinese produce and while it is possible we will suffer losses I don't think Iran would trade it's IRGC for a couple of ships sunk and a few hundred dead sailors.  If they actually got lucky and sank a US vessel then the IRGC would be pounded into oblivion.  They would lose thousands as well as infrastructure nodes that would be very expensive to replace.  And don't forget that the Ayatollahs fear their own citizens more than they fear the US or Israel.  They would want a strong Republican Guard left as a Praetorian to protect themselves.
For me this is evidence of how important acquiring the bomb is for them.  They are risking everything to acquire it and I believe they've made the calculation that Israel cannot attack and Obama won't attack.  And they may well be correct.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#8    NemoMysterio

NemoMysterio

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 82 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Parts Unknown

  • And that's the bottom line...

Posted 19 February 2012 - 11:19 PM

If world leaders and high up government people read this site I hope they read this....how 'bout you just **** and don't do ****? How bout that? Just throw down nuclear arms and spend that money on cheaper energy and food production?

Honestly you make me want to bury my face in my hands. We could do great things and discover new wonders yet all you world leaders ever seem to want to do is piss on each others chips....


#9    sean6

sean6

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 408 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2010

Posted 19 February 2012 - 11:28 PM



found this

Edited by sean6, 19 February 2012 - 11:29 PM.


#10    sean6

sean6

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 408 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2010

Posted 19 February 2012 - 11:32 PM

View PostNemoMysterio, on 19 February 2012 - 11:19 PM, said:

If world leaders and high up government people read this site I hope they read this....how 'bout you just **** and don't do ****? How bout that? Just throw down nuclear arms and spend that money on cheaper energy and food production?

Honestly you make me want to bury my face in my hands. We could do great things and discover new wonders yet all you world leaders ever seem to want to do is piss on each others chips....

you right!!


#11    spud the mackem

spud the mackem

    Spud the Mackem

  • Member
  • 4,169 posts
  • Joined:28 Oct 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yeo Valley,Darkest Somerset.

  • man who ask for nothing shall never be disappointed

Posted 19 February 2012 - 11:51 PM

Camel jockeys rattling their sabres again,they wont get nuked by anyone as there is too much oil subsurface,but if they start it,Israel and ships in the gulf maybe the first target,but I wouldnt fancy their chances if they upset Israel.

(1) try your best, ............if that dont work.
(2) try your second best, ........if that dont work
(3) give up you aint gonna win

#12    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,783 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies for the hardest victory is over SELF.
    Aristotle

Posted 20 February 2012 - 12:24 AM

View Postsean6, on 19 February 2012 - 11:28 PM, said:



found this
Thanks...it was interesting but I still don't think global nuclear war is going to happen over Iran.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#13    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 20 February 2012 - 12:28 AM

View Postsean6, on 19 February 2012 - 11:28 PM, said:



found this
as always adrian salbuchi is spot on.


#14    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 20 February 2012 - 12:49 AM

View Postand then, on 19 February 2012 - 11:02 PM, said:

They may well launch against Israel if the US is not involved initially.  But I still think that if the US helps in the attack we will only see small scale attacks against embassies and such or possibly even against interests inside the country and not against forces in the theater.
you will see both. it's not a case of one or the other. why would iran not attack US ships in the gulf if they are at war with the US? iran has said they will block the straits if they are attacked, which they can do easily. US have said they will keep the straights open. the only way the US can keep the straits open is to invade and hold the Arabistan region of iran. iran will not let that happen. they fought a bloody 8 year war with iraq over that territory, of course they will attack US ships.

Quote

US weapons are far superior to anything the Russians or Chinese produce
germany had better weapons than the soviets in ww2. it's will that wins wars not technology, vietnam? it has been argued than US has no defence against sunburn cruise missiles, they travel fast, far and low with high accuracy and are easily launched, unless the US has a technology we don't know about, I'd say any US ship in the gulf will certainly be sunk including carriers.

Quote

and while it is possible we will suffer losses I don't think Iran would trade it's IRGC for a couple of ships sunk and a few hundred dead sailors.  If they actually got lucky and sank a US vessel then the IRGC would be pounded into oblivion.
and then? kill all 80 million iranians?

Quote

They would lose thousands as well as infrastructure nodes that would be very expensive to replace.
which is no different to what will happen if they do nothing. the iranian "nuclear program" cannot be removed by a couple of bombing runs.

Quote

And don't forget that the Ayatollahs fear their own citizens more than they fear the US or Israel.  They would want a strong Republican Guard left as a Praetorian to protect themselves.
For me this is evidence of how important acquiring the bomb is for them.  They are risking everything to acquire it and I believe they've made the calculation that Israel cannot attack and Obama won't attack.  And they may well be correct.
this is neocon fantasies. if you bomb iran, the citizens will rally around their government. The US is duty bound under treaty to defend israel. if israel attacks, the US will be dragged in no matter who is president.


#15    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 20 February 2012 - 01:01 AM

View Postand then, on 20 February 2012 - 12:24 AM, said:

Thanks...it was interesting but I still don't think global nuclear war is going to happen over Iran.
don't be so sure. china has said it would regard an attack on iran as an attack on itself. they have strategic interest and military cooperation with iran, china gets most of its oil from iran. if they allow the US to conquer iran, then the US will have its thumb on china's main artery.

don't forget russia, they have a naval base in tartus, syria. this is their only link to the meditteranean sea. they won't give that up.

Edited by Little Fish, 20 February 2012 - 01:06 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users