HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Iran threatens to target ...

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 07:54 PM

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

21 replies, 2756 views

Thread informationRemove bookmarkTrash this thread

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply Iran threatens to target U.S. bases if attacked (Original post)
dipsydoodle Jun 2012 OP
MrSlayer Jun 2012 #1
boppers Jun 2012 #13
Zorro Jun 2012 #2
pennylane100 Jun 2012 #7
htuttle Jun 2012 #3
left on green only Jun 2012 #11
Flatulo Jun 2012 #12
teddy51 Jun 2012 #4
boppers Jun 2012 #14
teddy51 Jun 2012 #15
may3rd Jun 2012 #20
DinahMoeHum Jun 2012 #5
Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2012 #6
Lasher Jun 2012 #17
Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2012 #21
woo me with science Jun 2012 #8
pennylane100 Jun 2012 #9
WHEN CRABS ROAR Jun 2012 #10
bhikkhu Jun 2012 #16
solarman350 Jun 2012 #18
may3rd Jun 2012 #19

Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 08:03 PM

1. They'll fuck up our navy too.

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer (Reply #1)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 11:59 PM

13. "decimated military"? What?

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 08:11 PM

2. They're beginning to sound like the North Koreans

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Reply #2)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 09:22 PM

7. The North Koreans usually threaten to strike first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 08:14 PM

3. "We'll shoot at you if you attack us!"

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?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to htuttle (Reply #3)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 10:37 PM

11. +1 That is exactly my line of thinking

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to left on green only (Reply #11)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 11:48 PM

12. Mobile launchers are notoriously difficult to find and destroy.

In the first Gulf War, we actually destroyed very few Iraqi mobile launchers. Thankfully those Scuds were terribly inaccurate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 08:20 PM

4. If it were that easy for either Israel or the US to attack Iran it would have happened by now.

 

Last edited Sat Jun 2, 2012, 08:23 PM USA/ET - Edit history (3)

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?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to teddy51 (Reply #4)

Sun Jun 3, 2012, 12:03 AM

14. Oh, it's easy, just pointless.

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boppers (Reply #14)

Sun Jun 3, 2012, 12:32 AM

15. It's probably very easy to do, but it's what happens after that will be the problem. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to teddy51 (Reply #15)

Sun Jun 3, 2012, 07:38 AM

20. Perhaps a Persian spring will moot the point

 

hey,
it could happen if the iranian internet filters fail to protect the people from all the LIES happening in the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 08:23 PM

5. Neah neah-neah neah neah booga booga booga. . .

More saber rattling (ie. c**k-wagging)

(yawn!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 08:23 PM

6. Why do we keep hearing about Iran, it's annoying

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rosa Luxemburg (Reply #6)

Sun Jun 3, 2012, 02:05 AM

17. Because Iran is next on the neocons' hit list, after Iraq.

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lasher (Reply #17)

Sun Jun 3, 2012, 09:07 AM

21. the old axis of evil

who is actually running this country? The media?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 09:24 PM

8. All the poking is having the desired effect.

Occupy now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 09:28 PM

9. Obama is way to smart to attack Iran unless provoked.

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.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pennylane100 (Reply #9)

Sat Jun 2, 2012, 10:27 PM

10. Another valid reason to oppose a Romney Presidency.

Talk it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sun Jun 3, 2012, 01:39 AM

16. I'd say they're nuts, but that's how too much of the media plays it

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sun Jun 3, 2012, 02:49 AM

18. What Would bush do...again?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Original post)

Sun Jun 3, 2012, 07:33 AM

19. What do you need to disrupt nuclear facilities of your enemy? ? ? A thumb drive !

 

Iran, US: Cyber missiles mean war without bloodshed

....
“You’re seeing an evolution of warfare that’s 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/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread