Russian General Speaks out against coming End Times War

[truedelphi]

General Ivashov

The US and its allies started the psychological preparation of world public opinion for the possibility of using tactical nuclear weapons to resolve 'the Iranian problem'. The US propaganda machine is working hard to create the impression that a 'surgically precise' use of the nuclear weapon with only limited consequences is possible. However, this has been known to be untrue since the 1945 US nuclear strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

After the very first nuclear strike, it will become totally impossible to prevent the use of all of the available means of mass destruction. In the situation of a mass extermination of their nations, the conflicting sides will resort to whatever means they have without limitations. Therefore, not only the nuclear arsenals of various countries, including those whose nuclear status is not recognized officially, will come into play. No doubt, chemical and biological warfare (and, generally, any poisonous substances), which can be produced on the basis of minimal industrial and economic resources, will be used.

Currently, one can assert that peace and mankind are in great danger.

Consider the military-technical aspect of the situation. Practically, the operation's objective declared by the US - destroying some 1,500 targets on the territory of Iran - cannot be accomplished by the forces already amassed for the mission. This objective can only be met if tactical nuclear munitions are used.

An examination of the military-political aspect of the matter reveals even more significant facts. The attack on Iran is not planned to include a ground offensive. Strikes on selected military and industrial installations can cause a severe damage to the Iranian defense potential and economy. Casualties are likely to be substantial, but not catastrophic from the military point of view. At the same time, it is impossible to gain control of the territory of a country as large as Iran without a ground operation. The planned offensive will entail a consolidation of forces not only in Iran, but also in other Muslim countries and among the public throughout the world. The support for the country suffering from the US-Israeli aggression will soar. Certainly, Washington is aware that the result will be not the strengthening but the loss of US positions in the world. Consequently, the goal of the US attack against Iran has to be seen in a different light. The nuclear offensive must boost the use of nuclear blackmail in global politics by the US and fundamentally transform the world order.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=IVA20070409&articleId=5309

[iconoclastic cat]

1. Mmm, there's a lot I don't buy here,

especially the idea that those 1500 sites couldn't be taken out by non-nuclear means.

[CGowen]

2. too deep

A strike - something the Pentagon insists is not planned - would be hampered by lack of intelligence on the number and location of nuclear facilities dispersed throughout Iran, the analysts said.

And the most sophisticated U.S. "bunker-buster" bombs might be unable to dig deep enough to reach buried, hardened nuclear sites, according to analysts and defense officials.




http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/022407D.shtml

[truedelphi]

4. I am NOT saying that I buy one thing or another - I am posting what others are

Saying - A necessity on account of how sadly our MSM only portrays the news in a propagandist fashion - They never let it slip that our nation is a nation sharing a globe with many other countries - Any one of whom could decide to retaliate if we undertake a nuclear strike. (And the fact that a retaliation might not be the enxt day or next week - but a year down the road...)

Who was it? In 1942, Himmel or Goebbels that told the German people that foreign bombs would never touch German soil??

And I am very much interested in what my DU colleagues offer as their interpretation of the above remarks - I have little wisdom when it comes to voices from Russia and what they ultimately mean.

[11cents]

3. Didn't another one of these wonderful Russian sources say...

...that the airstrikes on Iran would start on April 6? Why yes, and the alert was widely posted here.

[left is right]

7. but can we be a 100% certain

that a strike wasn't in the works and all the chatter that was generated by the Russians claim didn't cause Bushco to back away from it?

[truedelphi]

8. Could be they are off by twenty days. And the Russians certainly had

No way of knowing that the English soldier hostages would be returned - if they had not been, we might be at war now.

[MasonJar]

5. Just remember Bush and Cheney are nuts! This may be the Russians

trying to stir up antagonism against such a move. Whatever their reasons, if it stops these madmen, I am grateful.

[Karenina]

6. That has also been my view.