Author Topic: Breaking News: Iran may be behind deadly attacks on US forces (Read 8377 times)

240 is Back · « **on:** January 30, 2007, 06:00:48 PM »

on msnbc now.

ToxicAvenger · « **Reply #1 on:** January 30, 2007, 06:05:37 PM »

you mean israel ...right?

240 is Back · « **Reply #2 on:** January 30, 2007, 06:11:59 PM »

5 men gunned down. "secret" report blames Iran.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #3 on:** January 30, 2007, 06:44:51 PM »

Just like we said it would happen... Now the attack with Iran is on and we'll be officially in a full scale world war... Fuck it...

240 is Back · « **Reply #4 on:** January 30, 2007, 06:46:59 PM »

Eh, we must have had 3 or 4 military men on here this week talking about how pisspants excited they were about warring into iran. Well, maybe they got their wish.

Will this go down in history as Gulf of Tonken 2?

Hedgehog · « **Reply #5 on:** January 31, 2007, 01:54:10 AM »

Why the fcuk would Iran attack US forces?

Seriously?

-Hedge

240 is Back · « **Reply #6 on:** January 31, 2007, 04:59:13 AM »

Quote from: Hedgehog on January 31, 2007, 01:54:10 AM

Why the fcuk would Iran attack US forces?
Seriously?
-Hedge

Depends who you ask.

Bush Admin: "They hate our freedoms and want to kill us."

Iran: "We've been begging for negotiations for the last year and you've ignored us. We've started nuclear development - and never denied it - because you have invaded both of our neighbors and called us Axis of Evil. You have 2 carriers off our coast. Donald Rumsfeld admitted the US is already doing covert operations INSIDE Iran."

Of course, if you don't blindly swallow the Bush story, you're a traitor and should be shot, according to the 25% neocon element in govt and media.

mightymouse72 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:07:10 AM »

MAY be behind attacks???

240 is Back · « **Reply #8 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:13:10 AM »

Quote from: mightymouse72 on January 31, 2007, 05:07:10 AM

MAY be behind attacks???

It's a "secret document".

The only verification/evidence is Bush's word.

And while it used to be 90% of AMericans believed him, it's not about 25%. This is not an accident. He's abused the trust. Did you watch the state of the union address? Those 4 terror attacks he claimed he stopped, well, it turns out 3 of those events never happened. THe only *terror* that came from these things was Bush throwing them in peoples' faces.

Mighty, you're in the minority if you still believe Bush's word. He's lied, he's stated he does not care what Americans want, and while many of us respect the office, we lend no credibility to the man.

Bottom line: Should we declare war on Bush's word alone? Yes or no?

mightymouse72 · « **Reply #9 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:18:16 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on January 31, 2007, 05:13:10 AM

It's a "secret document".

The only verification/evidence is Bush's word.

And while it used to be 90% of AMericans believed him, it's not about 25%. This is not an accident. He's abused the trust. Did you watch the state of the union address? Those 4 terror attacks he claimed he stopped, well, it turns out 3 of those events never happened. THe only *terror* that came from these things was Bush throwing them in peoples' faces.

Mighty, you're in the minority if you still believe Bush's word. He's lied, he's stated he does not care what Americans want, and while many of us respect the office, we lend no credibility to the man.

Bottom line: Should we declare war on Bush's word alone? Yes or no?

now your spouting off about bush.
the topic was iran may be behind attacks on US.
have you been under a rock?? i've seen report after report about iran shipping fighters over to iraq. and i don't watch that much news.

240 is Back · « **Reply #10 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:37:35 AM »

Quote from: mightymouse72 on January 31, 2007, 05:18:16 AM

now your spouting off about bush.
the topic was iran may be behind attacks on US.
have you been under a rock?? i've seen report after report about iran shipping fighters over to iraq. and i don't watch that much news.

Are you saying that Bush isn't related to the Iran info we've been told? I would contend he's VERY MUCH related, as it's TOny Snow telling us everything we know.

Dude, the problem is that when all the info about Iran comes from the guy who is dying to invade iran, it's going to be be slanted to serve his agenda. Remember the WMD? 90% of the intel said no WMD. Bush chose to follow that 10% which said yes WMD.

IMO it's a foregone conclusion. We're going to invade Iran. I know you've been drooling over the prospect, MM. let us know how it goes.

headhuntersix · « **Reply #11 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:40:55 AM »

240..ur wrong on this. Its been widely reported that Iran has had Revolutionary Guard in the south of Iraq, The Brits had a fire fight with them in Basra. They meddle here all the time and our SOF units encounter them near their border with Afghanistan. Not to mention the stuff (reports) I get to see. Yeah we may use this as an excuse to bomb the hell out of them, but I don't think we will. We won't go ground because our forces are engaged already in Iraq. I find it funny that any of u guys think these rags would stand a chance in a conventional fight. Like shit through a gooose, but then they will melt into the hills and we'll have Iraq all over again. The Mullaha's are getting sick of his shit anyway. We may go air but i doubt it.

headhuntersix · « **Reply #12 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:47:11 AM »

Since ur into facts..I want to know how we're going to do it. With what units. Who....what heavy armor is postioned to invade. The entire 82nd is either in Iraq or here. So their out. Most heavy armor is still in Germany 1ID or 1AD..those that aren't in Iraq. Or transing to iraq..FT Hood with the 4th ID etc. That leaves the 3rd ACR at Carson. I think they may be the only full unit not currently deployed but they are spinning up to go soon as well. WHO is going...u can't launch a huge invasion like this without telegraphing what ur doing.

240 is Back · « **Reply #13 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:52:51 AM »

Quote from: headhuntersix on January 31, 2007, 05:40:55 AM

240..ur wrong on this. Its been widely reported that Iran has had Revolutionary Guard in the south of Iraq, The Brits had a fire fight with them in Basra. They meddle here all the time and our SOF units encounter them near their border with Afghanistan. Not to mention the stuff (reports) I get to see. Yeah we may use this as an excuse to bomb the hell out of them, but I don't think we will. We won't go ground because our forces are engaged already in Iraq. I find it funny that any of u guys think these rags would stand a chance in a conventional fight. Like shit through a gooose, but then they will melt into the hills and we'll have Iraq all over again. The Mullaha's are getting sick of his shit anyway. We may go air but i doubt it.

i'm referring specifically to the secret report that 5 US troops were killed by Iran. We won't declare war over materials assistance. We will declare war over dead soldiers. And congress would be in a hard spot to deny war with US blood right there. If the only source of this particular 5 deaths is white house, i'd be very wary of it until independent verification.

Also - can we just go air and not ground in Iran? after we blow some things up, they're going to release the hounds and you can't stop that with only air power. Imagine trying to defend Iraq from the border while at the same time trying to contain the usual city civil war. Perhaps this is the FUBAR mess Bush wanted all along, to justify a complete US takeover of the region

headhuntersix · « **Reply #14 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:57:55 AM »

Yeah...it was most likelya SOF team/A team SEAs etc. Yeah sure. They would pound them with air....disable power..water, Command and Control. Most airfields..Tank depots, troop concentrations.....those nuke sites. We would scare the crap outa them. But yes then they would hit us with terror attacks, unless they think the mullahs will remove him. Stopping a conventional attack compared to what we face in Iraq would be the easy part.

240 is Back · « **Reply #15 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:01:08 AM »

Quote from: headhuntersix on January 31, 2007, 05:57:55 AM

Yeah...it was most likelya SOF team/A team SEAs etc. Yeah sure. They would pound them with air....disable power..water, Command and Control. Most airfields..Tank depots, troop concentrations.....those nuke sites. We would scare the crap outa them. But yes then they would hit us with terror attacks, unless they think the mullahs will remove him. Stopping a conventional attack compared to what we face in Iraq would be the easy part.

Air strikes haven't worked anywhere else. I don't see how they'll do anything to stop Iran, a rich nation with good army and weapons. What would stop them from sending 200 suicide bombers to Israel and 2000 to Iraq? What would stop them from taking oil away from america? You know once they do that, Snow/Bush say it's US' right to invade them. It's like we're going to create the very set of circumstances we use to justify a full scale invasion.

Logistically, it doesn't matter if we can do it or not. Bush knew he didnt have the resources to win over insurgency and has been bombing away anyway. Do you really think he'll suddenly have great judgment in Iran?

headhuntersix · « **Reply #16 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:06:26 AM »

Dude ur not getting it. The very fact that Iran has an army and infastructure to bomb makes them an easy conventional target. Yes any attack will result in suicide and terror attacks. We crippled Iraq with in 72 hours in gulf war 1. 72 hours.then we picked what was left off at our leisure. WE know where everything is....They know we know. Its who will blink first. The mullahs do not want to live in caves....

240 is Back · « **Reply #17 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:27:24 AM »

Quote from: headhuntersix on January 31, 2007, 06:06:26 AM

Dude ur not getting it. The very fact that Iran has an army and infastructure to bomb makes them an easy conventional target. Yes any attack will result in suicide and terror attacks. We crippled Iraq with in 72 hours in gulf war 1. 72 hours.then we picked what was left off at our leisure. WE know where everything is....They know we know. Its who will blink first. The mullahs do not want to live in caves....

What would be the goal in Iran?

COuldn't just be "remove the nuke facililities" because doing that would create a second goal, "stop attacks from iran".

IMO you're in the mindset of "we could destroy X targets in 72 hours and stop their capabilities". But what about the next 72 months, when an already thin military has to go in to stop the instability which will result?

You destroy their infrastructure and they will leave and enter Iraq. Period.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #18 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:40:18 AM »

Quote from: mightymouse72 on January 31, 2007, 05:18:16 AM

now your spouting off about bush.
the topic was iran may be behind attacks on US.
have you been under a rock?? i've seen report after report about iran shipping fighters over to iraq. and i don't watch that much news.

Because 240 and I have been talking about/predicting how the Unitied States would go into Iran. We had both estimated at one time or another over the last year that the only way it would happen is after an Iranian attack on our guys in Iraq or here in America, possibly false flag attacks. That's why we're talking about it.

Camel Jockey · « **Reply #19 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:47:52 AM »

What a bunch of horseshit.. Sad thing is that most people buy into this garbage and it'll bombs away on Iran.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #20 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:49:39 AM »

Quote from: headhuntersix on January 31, 2007, 06:06:26 AM

Dude ur not getting it. The very fact that Iran has an army and infastructure to bomb makes them an easy conventional target. Yes any attack will result in suicide and terror attacks. We crippled Iraq with in 72 hours in gulf war 1. 72 hours.then we picked what was left off at our leisure. WE know where everything is....They know we know. Its who will blink first. The mullahs do not want to live in caves....

What you're not telling people is the missery that will go down immediately with an attack on Iran. You know full well that the chance of serious attacks in America would be immediate. They've had a long long time to prepare for this and a full wide open boarder to roam into America at their leasure... They say they have, they say they're ready, they have the funds, it's the only real way they have at stricking back, if we strike them they will have no remose or worry about using whatever defense is at their disposal. If they do that, you know we will obliderate Iran like we've never obliterated a country before... Shock and Awe will look like nothing compared... When that happens, it's on... Globally and there is little chance the world will emerge for the better... Little... But this is all in the playbook... all in the plans.... It has been written... and it will probably be done...

Hedgehog · « **Reply #21 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:49:49 AM »

Problem is, Iran isn't even fighting in Iraq.

No Iranian troops are deployed there.

There are no evidence of any Iranian military presence in Iraq.

Read that again.

Once there is, I think Bush may have a case, although he's not exactly following the international principles of states, sovereignity among others.

But until there is hard evidence of Iranian intervention, Bush has got jack shit.

So right now, he's got to sit tight in his boat, whether he wants to or not.

He won't be able to fcuk up US foreign relations much more, the Republicans and the Democrats will probably get together in the House and the Senate to cut down the worst of his antics.

I have great hopes for the next president, whether it will be Giuliani, McCain or Clinton.

-Hedge

Camel Jockey · « **Reply #22 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:56:26 AM »

Quote from: Hedgehog on January 31, 2007, 06:49:49 AM

Problem is, Iran isn't even fighting in Iraq.

No Iranian troops are deployed there.

There are no evidence of any Iranian military presence in Iraq.

Read that again.

Yet people like headhunder and mightymouse are still calling for a strike because they believe iran to be meddling in iraq.

And they do so just because Bush said so..

240 is Back · « **Reply #23 on:** January 31, 2007, 07:25:21 AM »

Quote from: Camel Jockey on January 31, 2007, 06:56:26 AM

Yet people like headhunder and mightymouse are still calling for a strike because they believe iran to be meddling in iraq. And they do so just because Bush said so..

Imagine how shitty it must be when debating politics with other military men. They must argue about who is more right: Bush or Cheney.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #24 on:** January 31, 2007, 07:28:44 AM »

Quote from: Hedgehog on January 31, 2007, 01:54:10 AM

Why the fcuk would Iran attack US forces?

Seriously?

-Hedge

Israel and the United States will soon be destroyed, Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday during a meeting with Syria's foreign minister, the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) website said in a report.

"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad… assured that the United States and the Zionist regime of Israel will soon come to the end of their lives," the Iranian president was quoted as saying.