Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Gulf of Tonkin II: The Straits of Hormuz

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Jara sang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 02:17 PM
Original message
Gulf of Tonkin II: The Straits of Hormuz
This is how we will go into Iran. There will be "an attack" on a U.S. Naval vessel in the Straits of Hormuz. The attacker will be presumed to be Iran. We will go in and blow up their nuclear facilities. Their will be saber rattling leading up to and after the event. But the U.S. only response will be with air strikes against select targets, namely their weapons storage and nuclear facilities. Oldest trick in the book. We've used this card many times in the past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Correct
Iran has many varieties of weapons to attack shipping in the Gulf, particularly in the Straits. Everything from fast attack boats to hypersonic anti-ship missiles. It would be easy to make a big boom and blame Iran. Their leader may be crazy, but no more so than Dubya!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. Israel might do it for us..
:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
...of J.Temperance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yes, it'll be Israel...if Netanyahu becomes Prime Minister
I actually think that this would be the only way that would occur.

Israel bombs the Iranian nuclear facilities, then Iran lobs something at Israel...and then Junior comes out screeching that we have to go in now on the premise of protecting Israel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Irans nuke facilities will most likely not be damaged by an air strike
Iran claimed they are deep underground-- no nuke or conventional weapon can go very deep. At 100 ft. these facilities are not going to be harmed. IMHO.

though I like the scenario.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. the goal isn't to get the nuclear facilities anyway. It's to get the oil
and disable the gov't or at least physically separate them from their oil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. exactly but what if a suitcase nuke is used in retaliation, here- in the
USA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. why would ANY country invite overwhelming nuclear retaliation?
We have about 10,000 nuclear warheads. We could wipe any country off the map and still have more than enough left to nuke every other country in the world.

Even Russia at the height of the Cold War didn't dare nuke us because they knew unless they knocked out all our ICBMs, missile subs, and bombers, the retaliation would be too terrible to endure--and we knew the same thing about them.

As nutty as Iran seems to us, even if they get nukes, they will most likely use them exactly as all other countries but Pakistan and maybe North Korea have--as a deterrent to attack.

Noam Chomsky said something that sounded absurd at first, but the longer I thought about it, and the more things I read on pre-war intel, the more true it seems:

We attacked Iraq because we knew they DIDN'T have nukes.

If they did, the outcome of the initial invasion would not have been certain. Saddam could have nuked Israel and broadened the conflict, or even launched one at our ships in the Gulf.

Once someone gets nukes, they are more or less immune to invasion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kliljedahl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. You should listen to Chomsky more
He knows of which he speaks.




Keith’s Barbeque Central

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrotherBuzz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. How do we know if Rummy didn't get his nuclear bunker buster?
Edited on Sat Jan-07-06 06:38 PM by BrotherBuzz
Nuking a bunker, in three steps


1. A B-2 bomber flying at an altitude of 40,000 feet drops a modified B83 nuclear weapon carrying a 1.2-megaton warhead. It travels 2,000 feet per second toward its ground target.

2. Assuming the soil is composed of granite, the nuke will penetrate to a depth of 20 feet within 100 milliseconds. Radar sensors on the warhead detonate the nuke once it has plowed to its target depth, releasing the energy of more than a million tons of TNT.

3. The blast creates a 1,200-foot-wide crater and sends a shock wave traveling 1,116 feet per second through the ground. The wave will destroy everything down to 1,000 feet. Any bunkers deeper than that could survive the blast.


......

The National Academy of Sciences estimates that the explosion will shoot some 300,000 tons of radioactive debris up to 15 miles into the air. The total number of casualties will vary but could exceed one million, depending on weather, wind velocity and the blast’s proximity to towns and cities. But Rummy says wars is a messy thing, so the hell with these minor details
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
5. a problem with this scenario: Americans don't care unless it happens here
I think it will take a domestic terrorist attack bigger than 9/11 to rally support for the Iran War.

The Straits of Hormuz incident will happen, but after we attack. Iran will respond with Russian Sunburn missiles that apparently our ship defenses can't stop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MountainLaurel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Doesn't matter if Americans care
As long as the military industrial complex is raking in the dough, congresspeople are getting their bribes, er, campaign donations, and the oil companies are able to take over rights, it's all OK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-06 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. military is just short of open rebellion at the top
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 11:09 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC