Iran threatens to target U.S. bases if attacked
Source: Reuters
(Reuters) - Iran has warned the United States not to resort to military action against it, saying U.S. bases in the region were vulnerable to the Islamic Republic's missiles, state media reported on Saturday.
The comments by a senior Iranian military commander were an apparent response to U.S. officials who have said Washington was ready to use military force to stop what it suspects is Iran's goal to develop a nuclear weapons capability.
World powers held talks with Iran in Baghdad on May 23-24 in an attempt to find a diplomatic solution to their concerns over its nuclear programme, which Tehran maintains is entirely peaceful. Another round was set for June 18-19 in Moscow.
"The politicians and the military men of the United States are well aware of the fact that all of their bases (in the region) are within the range of Iran's missiles and in any case ... are highly vulnerable," Press TV reported Brigadier-General Yahya Rahim Safavi as saying.
Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/06/02/uk-iran-usa-missiles-idUKBRE85106G20120602
MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)When we do war games, the people playing the Iranians always win using small, fast bomb boats like what was done to the U.S.S. Cole. Going to war with these guys is a terrible idea on a good day. With our decimated military, it could be a disaster of epic proportions. We'll be so humiliated we will go nuclear.
boppers
(16,588 posts)We put more on our military than the next top 5 nations.
*Combined*.
The "weak military" is a RW myth, to line the pockets of their defense contractor supporters.
Zorro
(15,749 posts)pennylane100
(3,425 posts)htuttle
(23,738 posts)That's pretty much what we would expect if we attacked Iran, right?
Does anyone imagine that they wouldn't shoot back? Does Iran think that we don't think they'd shoot back?
left on green only
(1,484 posts)And I also have to assume that the USA military intelligence already knows the locations of Iran's missile strike force, and that any first-strike action on the part of the USA would include the decimation of said locations, whether they be fixed or mobile.
Flatulo
(5,005 posts)In the first Gulf War, we actually destroyed very few Iraqi mobile launchers. Thankfully those Scuds were terribly inaccurate.
teddy51
(3,491 posts)Just like getting militarily involved in Syria, there may be extreme consequences for an attack on Iran. Who knows what will happen in the region, or what countries might become involved? This certainly could lead to unexpected consequences.
They had better think long and deep before taking that step. How many people will die, what will it do to the region, and what will it do to the world?
boppers
(16,588 posts)What, we're going to take out centrifuges, and then what? Play whack a mole when they rebuild them?
Keep in mind that we built nuclear our weapons in dusty shacks in a freaking desert, fed by centrifuges scattered and hidden "in plain sight" all over the place.
teddy51
(3,491 posts)may3rd
(593 posts)hey,
it could happen if the iranian internet filters fail to protect the people from all the LIES happening in the world.
DinahMoeHum
(21,809 posts)More saber rattling (ie. c**k-wagging)
(yawn!)
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)I'm not complaining about your post but the media are obsessed with it. Pakistan is more worrisome with its pile of nuclear weapons. They have even tested it! Any of these could travel a long way.
Lasher
(27,637 posts)The media, serving in their familiar role as MIC toadies, are drumming up support for this next disaster. This increased media obsession is an ominous sign.
Iran: Next Target of US Military Aggression dated February 2005
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)who is actually running this country? The media?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Occupy now.
pennylane100
(3,425 posts)The Iranians keep saber rattling to annoy Israel and Obama knows it. However, Romney is a whole different story. Let us hope that we never have to know what he would do, it may lead to world war III.
WHEN CRABS ROAR
(3,813 posts)Talk it up.
bhikkhu
(10,724 posts)They have to know that an escalating conflict would wreck a bunch of stuff, but they'd lose their whole country before leaving much of a dent in ours. Most of what they can do doesn't really matter.
So maybe its just asshattery, or maybe its a trumped up line of questioning to a guy who was unprepared - played for all its worth by the media outlet for the sake of ratings.
solarman350
(136 posts)may3rd
(593 posts)....
Youre seeing an evolution of warfare thats really intriguing, said Phil Lieberman, a security consultant and chief executive of Lieberman Software in Los Angeles. Warfare where no one is dying.
...
http://www.yalibnan.com/2012/06/02/iran-us-cyber-missiles-mean-war-without-bloodshed/