Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

[Federate]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Israel, U.S. exacting date of attack on Iran

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Al-Siyassa Kuwaiti daily quoted sources in Washington as saying that the date of an Israeli and American attack on Lebanon and Iran is approaching.

According to the sources, preparations for the attack were coordinated during recent frequent visits by senior Israeli officials to the U.S., and that Israeli Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi has got a green light from President Bush to carry out an extensive air and ground attack against Hezbollah. The sources added that this attack, which could be in late September or early October, would be a prelude to an expected attack on Iran in November or December.

It was also reported that the Israelis informed the Bush administration about the transfer of surface-to-air missiles from Iran to Hezbollah, that the missiles had already been positioned in the Beq'a Valley and at the foot of Mt. Lebanon, and that all Hezbollah missiles were deployed in extensive areas of the country.

Also according to the sources, Syria was refraining from arming Hezbollah with similar missiles that it and Iran received several months ago from Russia. They said that in recent talks in Turkey between Israeli and Syrian representatives, Syria had received guarantees that it would not be attacked, and at the same time the Syrian representatives announced the removal of a surface-to-air missile network from the western mountain chain bordering Lebanon, placed there out of fear of an Israeli aerial attack.

Kayhan Iranian daily, which is close to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, stated that the frequent trips by senior Israeli officials to Washington attest to Israel's fear of concessions being made by the U.S. in light of Iran's increasing demands, and that these trips were unplanned and not routine, MIGnews reports.

From http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=26817

[freakyfreaky]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Blogger opines that attack on Iran would start a regional war in the Middle East and lead to political and economic turmoil in the U.S. http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/...f_destruction/

Journalist discusses competing views - one, that attack on Iran will precede Bush's exit as president in January as forwarded by Seymour Hersh - the other view, possible attack remote because economic consequences greatly outweigh any potential benefits. http://online.barrons.com/article/SB...lenews_barrons

[crusader1492]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

So why even bother? And even I could've done a better job than that hack job and I have like 0 artistic talent.

True...it was a stupid thing to do as it cheapened the psychological message that they wanted to convey.

[Sip]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Photoshop or not, 3 nuclear missiles = 4 nuclear missiles.

So why even bother? And even I could've done a better job than that hack job and I have like 0 artistic talent.

[crusader1492]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried



WEST THREATENS AZERBAIJAN WITH “ORANGE” SCENARIO

The U.S. doesn’t need the stability Aliyev has maintained for many years in Azerbaijan, RBC reports. “Ilham Aliyev is undoubtedly the favorite for the October 15 presidential election while the opposition forces announce that they boycott the election. The Communist Party and Azaldyg bloc has already refused to join the campaign. If Democratic Party follows their example, the republic will face a serious political crisis. The fact is that the U.S. needs an unstable Azerbaijan on the threshold of war with Iran,” the article says. Aliyev was officially nominated by Yeni Azerbaijan party last Saturday. According to expert Alexey Vlasov, Baku is considering a possibility to empower Aliyev with lifelong presidential commission. “The project of referendum is being elaboration,” he supposes. “Ilham Aliyev has secured Azerbaijan’s pro-western line, what forced the U.S. and Europe to turn a blind eye to authoritarian regime. Now, the U.S. needs destabilization, according to Oktay Aksoy, analyst at Foreign Policy Institute. “Preparing for a war with Iran, the ideas of formation of Great Azerbaijan are treated seriously. Aliyev, who doesn’t wish to plunge into adventures, can be threatened with an orange scenario,” the article says.

[crusader1492]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Photoshop or not, 3 nuclear missiles = 4 nuclear missiles.

[Sip]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Iran's Missile Test: A Clear Reminder That an Attack Would Be Disastrous

Iran's Missile Test: Now let's see the ACTUAL picture

.
.
.
.
.
.

[freakyfreaky]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Middle East Times op-ed piece opines that Iran's dual track in threatening Israel while seeking nuclear 'technology' results in wild ride ending with Israeli attack on Iran possibly before Olmert exits in September; concludes that sanctions would be impotent because they could not be effectively enforced.

http://www.metimes.com/Editorial/2008/08/04/irans_fatal_choice/7244/

[freakyfreaky]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Ahmadenijad welcomes U.S.'s potential conciliatory change of position; and, foreshadows that positive advances by US in its dealings with Iran will be reciprocated with positive response from Iran. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080728...eZpilyH.lSw60A

[freakyfreaky]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Ahmadenijad announces Iran has accumulated 6,000 centrifuges for enrichment of uranium. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080726/D925PJJG0.html

Ahmadenijad to be interviewed by Brian Williams on NBC in Tehran on July 28, 2008. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_115027.html (by the Ahmadenijad will be interviewing Brian and Brian won't know what to say)