radiosilence
jints
THAAD will be available to Israel in 2009 and they will need some time to integrate it. It also has some bugs that needs to be resolve.
Why Iran should be worried!
- Thread starter Areudoubled
- Start date
- Status
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Yes, I read the article.
radiosilence
jints
Thaad will play no part in any attack on Iran by Israel. ( i forgot to include this in my prevous post)Yes, I read the article.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
It touches upon the strategic outlook for Israel - its ability to counter a future threat from Iranian ballistic missiles.
It seems that though they have the ability (technology wise, and with US help) to develop an ABM defence, they don't have the resources to develop it further and deploy. They lack critical mass. Money.
Goes to viability of other responses than an attack of Iranian nuclear/BM capability.
Very interesting article, thanks for sharing it.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
what iranian delivery systems are we dealing with anyway? SCUDS??? surely not air launched??? Do we have any numbers, range, guidence, payload estimates??
Read this for a good description on the evolution of the Shahab-3, a particularly worrisome missile. http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_396.shtml Of particular note pay attention to the Iranian effort to improve the targeting systems in their missiles.
Heres some general information. http://www.missilethreat.com/missilesoftheworld/pageID.134/default.asp
http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2002/5/8/8s.html
http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Iran/Missile/index.html
Iran and North Korea are developing missiles together but there has also been bilateral help from Pakistan along with significant assistance from both Russia and China in their WMD program. Its an interesting tale.
These are not the SCUDs of the 70's and '80s. Even more ominous is the fact that Iran is developing a completly self contained infrastructure for both their WMDs and delivery systems. From A to Z.
Enjoy the Links.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
Thanx for the info Rich, sounds like a scary cabability, although were probably a fair way off from the Iranians from having a deliverable warhead.
No More Time For Iran
Iran is a big problim and its geting very big, big in Military Defence and with its
involvments in Iraq, now we know who the problim is and we need to act now,
if the United Stats Government and its alliys dont act we are and will be in a blood bath in Iraq AND Afganistan, we should start with a Red Hot Blast of new Military BombBardments by Air and sea for 3 to 5 Mounths of intenc Bombing, nuking it would be an option but that would hurt the hole Midil east
may be even Israil, what do you think we should do to iran ?
Iran is a big problim and its geting very big, big in Military Defence and with its
involvments in Iraq, now we know who the problim is and we need to act now,
if the United Stats Government and its alliys dont act we are and will be in a blood bath in Iraq AND Afganistan, we should start with a Red Hot Blast of new Military BombBardments by Air and sea for 3 to 5 Mounths of intenc Bombing, nuking it would be an option but that would hurt the hole Midil east
may be even Israil, what do you think we should do to iran ?
Target Iran - Air Strikes
One potential military option that would be available to the United States includes the use of air strikes on Iranian weapons of mass destruction and missile facilities.
In all, there are perhaps two dozen suspected nuclear facilities in Iran. The 1000-megawatt nuclear plant Bushehr would likely be the target of such strikes. According to the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, the spent fuel from this facility would be capable of producing 50 to 75 bombs. Also, the suspected nuclear facilities at Natanz and Arak will likely be targets of an air attack.
American air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osiraq nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq. Using the full force of operational B-2 stealth bombers, staging from Diego Garcia or flying direct from the United States, possibly supplemented by F-117 stealth fighters staging from al Udeid in Qatar or some other location in theater, the two-dozen suspect nuclear sites would be targeted.
Military planners could tailor their target list to reflect the preferences of the Administration by having limited air strikes that would target only the most crucial facilities in an effort to delay or obstruct the Iranian program or the United States could opt for a far more comprehensive set of strikes against a comprehensive range of WMD related targets, as well as conventional and unconventional forces that might be used to counterattack against US forces in Iraq. Available US Forces
Many aircraft are still in the region supporting Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. The United States had aircraft at multiple locations throughout the Persian Gulf, including Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and Diego Garcia. While the number of aircraft in the region has declined significantly since the end of major hostilities in Iraq, the United States continues to have some number of F-15Es, F-16s, naval aircraft, and some unidentified number of heavy bombers in the region.
Information regarding how many aircraft are actually in the Persian Gulf region is scant as units are returning to the United States and it is not clear if units are being sent as replacements. By mid-June 2003 there were no longer any AWACs in region and stealth aircraft had long since departed for the United States. Insufficient information regarding available aircraft makes it impossible to predict how many Joint Direct Attack Munition capable aircraft were available for strikes and how many potential aim points this would provide to mission planners. Redeploying US forces to the region would take a small amount of time, but the absence of significant numbers of stealth aircraft, early warning aircraft, and other assets by September 2004 was a possible indicator that the United States was not actively considering the air strike option. The US had postured a number of strike aircraft to attack North Korea during the first half of 2003, and might make similar preparations in anticipation of a strike against Iran. Alternately, the US might wish to retain the element of surprise, and use heavy bomber forces staging directly from the United States.
Since the end of major hostilities in Iraq the United States has typically kept one aircraft carrier strike group in the Persian Gulf region in support of Iraqi Freedom. Tomahawk cruise missiles deployed on cruisers, destroyers, and submarines could also be used to strike fixed locations. A Carrier Strike Group would typically have about 500 verticle launch system cells, which could mean that roughly 250 Tomahawks would be available for tasking.
CBS News reported on 18 December 2006 that the Bush administration has decided to ramp up the naval presence in the Persian Gulf to send a message to Tehran. CBS reported that an additional aircraft carrier would be added to the Gulf contingent in January 2007. A Pentagon official called the report "premature" and denied knowledge of changes in deployments in the Gulf. The New York Times reported 20 December 2006 that the Bremerton-based aircraft carrier and its strike group could leave weeks earlier than planned as part of a move to increase the U.S. military presence in and around the Middle East. Cmdr. Dave Werner, a Navy spokesman at the Pentagon, said that no decision had been made about changing the level of naval forces in the region. Moving up the Stennis' departure date in January 2006 allows a longer overlap with USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, the carrier currently in the Persian Gulf. Eisenhower deployed 01 October 2006, and could remain on station into March 2007. According to the New York Times story, the move was intended as " ... a display of military resolve toward Iran that will come as the United Nations continues to debate possible sanctions against the country ... Doubling the number of carriers in the region offers commanders the flexibility of either keeping both strike groups in the Gulf or keeping one near Iran while placing a second carrier group outside the Gulf, where it would be in position to fly combat patrols over Afghanistan or cope with growing violence in the Horn of Africa. ... Senior American officers said the increase in naval power should not be viewed as preparations for any offensive strike against Iran. But they acknowledged that the ability to hit Iran would be increased and that Iranian leaders might well call the growing presence provocative."
Air power "persistence" is essential. During normal cyclic flight operations, a pilot spends a significant amount of time transiting to and from target areas. With the enhanced capabilities the CTF provides, by alternating air plan flight cycles, the CTF is able to maintain a nearly constant air presence over the targeted areas. It is difficult for one CVW to conduct flight operations for much more than about 12 hours before having to stop. However, with the combined striking power of two CVWs, the CTF is able to conduct air operations over a continuous 24-hour cycle. During the early days of Operation Enduring Freedom, USS Enterprise (CVN 65) was operating with USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70) off the coast of Afghanistan. When the order to launch air strikes arrived, together, both CVWs flew 24-hours a day.
One potential military option that would be available to the United States includes the use of air strikes on Iranian weapons of mass destruction and missile facilities.
In all, there are perhaps two dozen suspected nuclear facilities in Iran. The 1000-megawatt nuclear plant Bushehr would likely be the target of such strikes. According to the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, the spent fuel from this facility would be capable of producing 50 to 75 bombs. Also, the suspected nuclear facilities at Natanz and Arak will likely be targets of an air attack.
American air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osiraq nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq. Using the full force of operational B-2 stealth bombers, staging from Diego Garcia or flying direct from the United States, possibly supplemented by F-117 stealth fighters staging from al Udeid in Qatar or some other location in theater, the two-dozen suspect nuclear sites would be targeted.
Military planners could tailor their target list to reflect the preferences of the Administration by having limited air strikes that would target only the most crucial facilities in an effort to delay or obstruct the Iranian program or the United States could opt for a far more comprehensive set of strikes against a comprehensive range of WMD related targets, as well as conventional and unconventional forces that might be used to counterattack against US forces in Iraq. Available US Forces
Many aircraft are still in the region supporting Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. The United States had aircraft at multiple locations throughout the Persian Gulf, including Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and Diego Garcia. While the number of aircraft in the region has declined significantly since the end of major hostilities in Iraq, the United States continues to have some number of F-15Es, F-16s, naval aircraft, and some unidentified number of heavy bombers in the region.
Information regarding how many aircraft are actually in the Persian Gulf region is scant as units are returning to the United States and it is not clear if units are being sent as replacements. By mid-June 2003 there were no longer any AWACs in region and stealth aircraft had long since departed for the United States. Insufficient information regarding available aircraft makes it impossible to predict how many Joint Direct Attack Munition capable aircraft were available for strikes and how many potential aim points this would provide to mission planners. Redeploying US forces to the region would take a small amount of time, but the absence of significant numbers of stealth aircraft, early warning aircraft, and other assets by September 2004 was a possible indicator that the United States was not actively considering the air strike option. The US had postured a number of strike aircraft to attack North Korea during the first half of 2003, and might make similar preparations in anticipation of a strike against Iran. Alternately, the US might wish to retain the element of surprise, and use heavy bomber forces staging directly from the United States.
Since the end of major hostilities in Iraq the United States has typically kept one aircraft carrier strike group in the Persian Gulf region in support of Iraqi Freedom. Tomahawk cruise missiles deployed on cruisers, destroyers, and submarines could also be used to strike fixed locations. A Carrier Strike Group would typically have about 500 verticle launch system cells, which could mean that roughly 250 Tomahawks would be available for tasking.
CBS News reported on 18 December 2006 that the Bush administration has decided to ramp up the naval presence in the Persian Gulf to send a message to Tehran. CBS reported that an additional aircraft carrier would be added to the Gulf contingent in January 2007. A Pentagon official called the report "premature" and denied knowledge of changes in deployments in the Gulf. The New York Times reported 20 December 2006 that the Bremerton-based aircraft carrier and its strike group could leave weeks earlier than planned as part of a move to increase the U.S. military presence in and around the Middle East. Cmdr. Dave Werner, a Navy spokesman at the Pentagon, said that no decision had been made about changing the level of naval forces in the region. Moving up the Stennis' departure date in January 2006 allows a longer overlap with USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, the carrier currently in the Persian Gulf. Eisenhower deployed 01 October 2006, and could remain on station into March 2007. According to the New York Times story, the move was intended as " ... a display of military resolve toward Iran that will come as the United Nations continues to debate possible sanctions against the country ... Doubling the number of carriers in the region offers commanders the flexibility of either keeping both strike groups in the Gulf or keeping one near Iran while placing a second carrier group outside the Gulf, where it would be in position to fly combat patrols over Afghanistan or cope with growing violence in the Horn of Africa. ... Senior American officers said the increase in naval power should not be viewed as preparations for any offensive strike against Iran. But they acknowledged that the ability to hit Iran would be increased and that Iranian leaders might well call the growing presence provocative."
Air power "persistence" is essential. During normal cyclic flight operations, a pilot spends a significant amount of time transiting to and from target areas. With the enhanced capabilities the CTF provides, by alternating air plan flight cycles, the CTF is able to maintain a nearly constant air presence over the targeted areas. It is difficult for one CVW to conduct flight operations for much more than about 12 hours before having to stop. However, with the combined striking power of two CVWs, the CTF is able to conduct air operations over a continuous 24-hour cycle. During the early days of Operation Enduring Freedom, USS Enterprise (CVN 65) was operating with USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70) off the coast of Afghanistan. When the order to launch air strikes arrived, together, both CVWs flew 24-hours a day.
you have got to be jokinnfloorl:
haven't you learned anything by what happened to america in iraq?
the answer to iran is not war its diplomacy and I think NUKES are a bit over the top, do you want america ( which I am assuming is your country) responsible for a nuclear war keeping in mind the reprecussions?
nfloorl:haven't you learned anything by what happened to america in iraq?
the answer to iran is not war its diplomacy and I think NUKES are a bit over the top, do you want america ( which I am assuming is your country) responsible for a nuclear war keeping in mind the reprecussions?
The US won't do any of the above if it's smart. it doesn't want to bloody its hands again so soon. it's popularity is already very low and this will just make it worse. Besides attacking iran will sky rocket oils prices and hurt the global economy so it's not going to happen.
by the way nuking is not an option. america isn't stupid the international backlash would be huge. not to mention the problems it would cause at home. in all likelyhood all our allied countries in the middle east would probably shut down oil supplies or if the situation was really extreme declare war.
i don't knw :unknown i think soyou have got to be jokin
Gold, Silver and the Coming Crisis in Iran
Some might call it the Deja Vu War, the same war happening all over again. The same accusers and the same accusations, the same threats and the same predictable UN sanctions, the same script and timetable. The same Shock and Awe air attack. The same stalemate. The same wasted lives, wasted resources and squandered billions by the exact same culprit, the state.
Since I wrote Day One - The War With Iran, I’ve noticed many more columnists predicting some sort of attack on Iran . Even Pat Buchanan penned a scenario (The American Conservative to The Weekly Standard: Challenge Accepted) mirroring the scenario I had outlined. Say what you will about the rogues running our government but they are nothing if not predictable.
BRAVE NEW WAR?
Now I’m not a big believer in numerology or the Illuminati but the statists in power (some say Satanists) seem to love the cleverness of numbers. Also, I lack clairvoyance regarding such mundane things as possible Super Bowl scores or the exact days until the End Times. Admittedly, some numerologists have a better spin on the whole numbers thing than I (UPDATE II: TERROR ATTACK NUMEROLOGY) but what they offer makes more than a little sense.
So, according to numerology (if you are keeping score at home), there might be 1,111 days after the beginning of the Iraq War until the possible beginning of the war with Iran . Or 1109, or 1107 or 1066, if the shooting starts earlier than expected. Who knows.
What does this all mean to you sitting at home, with no more voice in the inner workings of the state than a fruit fly has on a bushel of rotten apples? Time to look at things the way an intelligent man might have looked at the New York stock Exchange a month before the Crash of 1929.
Only this time the US government can’t bail anyone out, not even itself.
GOLD , SILVER & POT METAL POLITICIANS
Is it just my imagination or does everyone in the Bush administration and US Senate appears to be a gold-plated, pot metal trophy? I stare at the faces of Rove, Rice and Rumsfeld and see sociopaths, a sinister dishonesty. The same for the shifty Cheney and the smirking Bush.
The leading Democrats look even worse. Joe Liebermann looks like Chucky on ecstasy. Warmonger Hillary strikes me as the Lizzie Borden of presidential axe murderers posing as presidential candidates. What would Diogenes make of such a dishonest cast of characters?
So if we cannot trust our national leaders, who or what can we trust? Now its the time to buy Silver my dear friends Silver
Some might call it the Deja Vu War, the same war happening all over again. The same accusers and the same accusations, the same threats and the same predictable UN sanctions, the same script and timetable. The same Shock and Awe air attack. The same stalemate. The same wasted lives, wasted resources and squandered billions by the exact same culprit, the state.
Since I wrote Day One - The War With Iran, I’ve noticed many more columnists predicting some sort of attack on Iran . Even Pat Buchanan penned a scenario (The American Conservative to The Weekly Standard: Challenge Accepted) mirroring the scenario I had outlined. Say what you will about the rogues running our government but they are nothing if not predictable.
BRAVE NEW WAR?
Now I’m not a big believer in numerology or the Illuminati but the statists in power (some say Satanists) seem to love the cleverness of numbers. Also, I lack clairvoyance regarding such mundane things as possible Super Bowl scores or the exact days until the End Times. Admittedly, some numerologists have a better spin on the whole numbers thing than I (UPDATE II: TERROR ATTACK NUMEROLOGY) but what they offer makes more than a little sense.
So, according to numerology (if you are keeping score at home), there might be 1,111 days after the beginning of the Iraq War until the possible beginning of the war with Iran . Or 1109, or 1107 or 1066, if the shooting starts earlier than expected. Who knows.
What does this all mean to you sitting at home, with no more voice in the inner workings of the state than a fruit fly has on a bushel of rotten apples? Time to look at things the way an intelligent man might have looked at the New York stock Exchange a month before the Crash of 1929.
Only this time the US government can’t bail anyone out, not even itself.
GOLD , SILVER & POT METAL POLITICIANS
Is it just my imagination or does everyone in the Bush administration and US Senate appears to be a gold-plated, pot metal trophy? I stare at the faces of Rove, Rice and Rumsfeld and see sociopaths, a sinister dishonesty. The same for the shifty Cheney and the smirking Bush.
The leading Democrats look even worse. Joe Liebermann looks like Chucky on ecstasy. Warmonger Hillary strikes me as the Lizzie Borden of presidential axe murderers posing as presidential candidates. What would Diogenes make of such a dishonest cast of characters?
So if we cannot trust our national leaders, who or what can we trust? Now its the time to buy Silver my dear friends Silver
My friend i don't think you see the bigger picture. attacking iran causes war. the US does not have significant numbers to hold their own in afghanistan and iraq. the iranian military is the largest military in the world. it has reserves of 11 million. think about it. i'll just throw out a number of how many troops the US has in the middle east that could be used to hold the line at the borders of iraq-iran and afghanistan and keep the country together. say...200,000. the US has a huge tech advantage, but it would not be able to hold its' own against 11 million. especially with the increase of terrorist activities. sure the air force can perform a large number of bombing runs, but the advent of war with iran would cause the rest of the middle east to join if israel joines (which is very likely). and considering most of the middle east would go against the US it would lose all its air bases there. so wihtout air power and no troops we would be kicked out pretty quickly. obviously once the US starts going it take back its lost land and more, but i don't think that the US wants to spend the time and money and manpower doing this when it can use diplomacy.
what are you talking about?
Welcome to politics. Sorry to break it to you, but tHis is normal.
Is this a joke?? Where do you come up with this?
nfloorl:Facing Iran
January 10, 2007 -- FRENCH Foreign Minister Philippe Douste Blazy calls it "unthinkable his Russian colleague Sergei Lavrov prefers "unimaginable." The terms are also used in Western diplomatic circles to describe an event few wish to contemplate: a military showdown with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Yet a recent tour of Arab capitals presents a different picture: Arab leaders appear resigned to such a showdown as inevitable, and are preparing for it.
The first sign came at last month's annual summit of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC, a group of six oil-exporting Arab states) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. "There were four items on the agenda," says a participant. "As we examined each, we found out that in every case we faced Iran."
* One item was Iraq: The leaders concluded that Iran had already developed plans to dominate that country once the U.S.-led multinational force withdraws.
* Another item was Lebanon: The Arab leaders agreed that Tehran, using Hezbollah, was working to attach that country to an emerging "Shiite Crescent."
The Islamic Republic is also consolidating its hold on Syria, whose weak and isolated regime now depends on Iranian economic and military support.
Last year, the Islamic Republic asked two official clerics, Ayatollah Shirazi and Ayatollah Lenkorani, to recognize the Syrian Alawite sect as a branch of Shiism. Mainstream Shiites (like Sunnis) regard Alawites as a heretical sect. Thus, the Iranian move may seem designed to rehabilitate the Alawites. More, the fatwas open the way for Iranian missionaries to pursue a mass conversion of Syrian Alawites to the Khomeinist version of Shiism.
* On another item, the Palestine-Israel conflict, the Arab leaders agreed that Iran was the chief stumbling bloc to a revival of the peace process.
Tehran's influence among Palestinians had hitherto been limited to small groups such as Islamic Jihad. In the past two years, however, Tehran has spent "vast sums of money and energy" to procure clients in the Sunni Islamist Hamas movement and leftist guerrilla groups. The Islamic Republic has launched a new program under which thousands of Palestinian "volunteers for martyrdom" are trained in Iran, Lebanon and Syria to fight both Israel and the secular faction of Mahmoud Abbas, the chairman of the Palestinian Authority
January 10, 2007 -- FRENCH Foreign Minister Philippe Douste Blazy calls it "unthinkable his Russian colleague Sergei Lavrov prefers "unimaginable." The terms are also used in Western diplomatic circles to describe an event few wish to contemplate: a military showdown with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Yet a recent tour of Arab capitals presents a different picture: Arab leaders appear resigned to such a showdown as inevitable, and are preparing for it.
The first sign came at last month's annual summit of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC, a group of six oil-exporting Arab states) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. "There were four items on the agenda," says a participant. "As we examined each, we found out that in every case we faced Iran."
* One item was Iraq: The leaders concluded that Iran had already developed plans to dominate that country once the U.S.-led multinational force withdraws.
* Another item was Lebanon: The Arab leaders agreed that Tehran, using Hezbollah, was working to attach that country to an emerging "Shiite Crescent."
The Islamic Republic is also consolidating its hold on Syria, whose weak and isolated regime now depends on Iranian economic and military support.
Last year, the Islamic Republic asked two official clerics, Ayatollah Shirazi and Ayatollah Lenkorani, to recognize the Syrian Alawite sect as a branch of Shiism. Mainstream Shiites (like Sunnis) regard Alawites as a heretical sect. Thus, the Iranian move may seem designed to rehabilitate the Alawites. More, the fatwas open the way for Iranian missionaries to pursue a mass conversion of Syrian Alawites to the Khomeinist version of Shiism.
* On another item, the Palestine-Israel conflict, the Arab leaders agreed that Iran was the chief stumbling bloc to a revival of the peace process.
Tehran's influence among Palestinians had hitherto been limited to small groups such as Islamic Jihad. In the past two years, however, Tehran has spent "vast sums of money and energy" to procure clients in the Sunni Islamist Hamas movement and leftist guerrilla groups. The Islamic Republic has launched a new program under which thousands of Palestinian "volunteers for martyrdom" are trained in Iran, Lebanon and Syria to fight both Israel and the secular faction of Mahmoud Abbas, the chairman of the Palestinian Authority
Gold, Silver and the Coming Crisis in Iran
Some might call it the Deja Vu War, the same war happening all over again. The same accusers and the same accusations, the same threats and the same predictable UN sanctions, the same script and timetable. The same Shock and Awe air attack. The same stalemate. The same wasted lives, wasted resources and squandered billions by the exact same culprit, the state.
Since I wrote Day One - The War With Iran, I’ve noticed many more columnists predicting some sort of attack on Iran . Even Pat Buchanan penned a scenario (The American Conservative to The Weekly Standard: Challenge Accepted) mirroring the scenario I had outlined. Say what you will about the rogues running our government but they are nothing if not predictable.
BRAVE NEW WAR?
Now I’m not a big believer in numerology or the Illuminati but the statists in power (some say Satanists) seem to love the cleverness of numbers. Also, I lack clairvoyance regarding such mundane things as possible Super Bowl scores or the exact days until the End Times. Admittedly, some numerologists have a better spin on the whole numbers thing than I (UPDATE II: TERROR ATTACK NUMEROLOGY) but what they offer makes more than a little sense.
So, according to numerology (if you are keeping score at home), there might be 1,111 days after the beginning of the Iraq War until the possible beginning of the war with Iran . Or 1109, or 1107 or 1066, if the shooting starts earlier than expected. Who knows.
What does this all mean to you sitting at home, with no more voice in the inner workings of the state than a fruit fly has on a bushel of rotten apples? Time to look at things the way an intelligent man might have looked at the New York stock Exchange a month before the Crash of 1929.
Only this time the US government can’t bail anyone out, not even itself.
GOLD , SILVER & POT METAL POLITICIANS
Is it just my imagination or does everyone in the Bush administration and US Senate appears to be a gold-plated, pot metal trophy? I stare at the faces of Rove, Rice and Rumsfeld and see sociopaths, a sinister dishonesty. The same for the shifty Cheney and the smirking Bush.
The leading Democrats look even worse. Joe Liebermann looks like Chucky on ecstasy. Warmonger Hillary strikes me as the Lizzie Borden of presidential axe murderers posing as presidential candidates. What would Diogenes make of such a dishonest cast of characters?
So if we cannot trust our national leaders, who or what can we trust? Trust me People i have just fished buying 125kiloss of silver at $12.55 an ounce. go do your studdying on silver and gold befor the war start now,
Some might call it the Deja Vu War, the same war happening all over again. The same accusers and the same accusations, the same threats and the same predictable UN sanctions, the same script and timetable. The same Shock and Awe air attack. The same stalemate. The same wasted lives, wasted resources and squandered billions by the exact same culprit, the state.
Since I wrote Day One - The War With Iran, I’ve noticed many more columnists predicting some sort of attack on Iran . Even Pat Buchanan penned a scenario (The American Conservative to The Weekly Standard: Challenge Accepted) mirroring the scenario I had outlined. Say what you will about the rogues running our government but they are nothing if not predictable.
BRAVE NEW WAR?
Now I’m not a big believer in numerology or the Illuminati but the statists in power (some say Satanists) seem to love the cleverness of numbers. Also, I lack clairvoyance regarding such mundane things as possible Super Bowl scores or the exact days until the End Times. Admittedly, some numerologists have a better spin on the whole numbers thing than I (UPDATE II: TERROR ATTACK NUMEROLOGY) but what they offer makes more than a little sense.
So, according to numerology (if you are keeping score at home), there might be 1,111 days after the beginning of the Iraq War until the possible beginning of the war with Iran . Or 1109, or 1107 or 1066, if the shooting starts earlier than expected. Who knows.
What does this all mean to you sitting at home, with no more voice in the inner workings of the state than a fruit fly has on a bushel of rotten apples? Time to look at things the way an intelligent man might have looked at the New York stock Exchange a month before the Crash of 1929.
Only this time the US government can’t bail anyone out, not even itself.
GOLD , SILVER & POT METAL POLITICIANS
Is it just my imagination or does everyone in the Bush administration and US Senate appears to be a gold-plated, pot metal trophy? I stare at the faces of Rove, Rice and Rumsfeld and see sociopaths, a sinister dishonesty. The same for the shifty Cheney and the smirking Bush.
The leading Democrats look even worse. Joe Liebermann looks like Chucky on ecstasy. Warmonger Hillary strikes me as the Lizzie Borden of presidential axe murderers posing as presidential candidates. What would Diogenes make of such a dishonest cast of characters?
So if we cannot trust our national leaders, who or what can we trust? Trust me People i have just fished buying 125kiloss of silver at $12.55 an ounce. go do your studdying on silver and gold befor the war start now,
- Status