Can we imagine the ramifications which may be imposed if Iran aquires a NUKE? Some has suggested that it wouldn't equate to a war with it's neighbors, that it is inevitable that it happens wither or not they were attacked.
I believe there are many possibilities which could come out of them actually developing a neclear weapon and alot depends on the perceptions of their intentions, after it became known. The point at which, it could be considered too much to risky for national security of Israel would have to be considered by that state. It is not in question that Iran supports terrorist actions, as they have all along with the war in Iraq. They have a deep hate for Israel and the U.S. that isn't to be mistaken. If they developed such a weapon they shouldn't proclaim it was for their security interest against Israel's nuclear capacity, as if they were going to use the "bomb" on them, they likely would have already done that.
I believe it is the intentions of Iran to hold it's neighboring countries hostage to their infernal psychological terrorism and actual aggression through proxy of smaller radical groups, to which they fund. The size and scale of their development will only increase as time goes on. They may even poliferate nuclear arms to countries which otherwise do not have the capability to build their own. It is likely that sometime down the road they will sell or even attempt to establish trade with countries in South America, which will cause greater tentions and instability. Their ability to control the oil through the Strait of Hormuz will be unequivable at some point. In essents they could hold the oil for that region hostage from any transport. In seeing their objectives being met they would likely develop long range ballistic weapons in attempt to counter aggression from the U.S. and other nations that are now far from their reach.
All this sound far fetched, but only time would tell. Now we have the capability to stop potiential poliferation of neclear weapons or even a arms race in that region and perhaps a future WWIII. So what must be done?
During president Kennedy's term we faced a threat from the former Soviet Union led under Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev where the U.S. was only moments from an nuclear conferentation with Cuba and ultimately the Soviet Union. Then they were smart enough to realize the seriousness of the situation and the ultimate ramifications it would have on their country. The standoff was settled through mediations that took place only in the nic of time. It is my contiention that Iran is not likely to be persuaded to back down, as their perspective of their own power will influence the train of responsible and rational thinking. The communication gap is too wide between countries to get that close to conferentation. A decision would have to be made without reguard to an answer by the Iranian government.
The development sites in Iran are deep in trenched in so that attacking those sites might be hard to destroy or be even harder to determine if it were destroyed. The sites are likely to be reachable however, with the assistance of recently developed conventional weapons. Most all missles in use by Iran depend on crudamentry radar telemetery even though quite sophisticated over those of the past. It is possible for some of their weapons to be focused on inertial navigation or a form of doppler from some weapons. These changes in weapon systems may provide an edge over some third world countries perhaps increase the likelihood that one might get through, so to speak.
So what do we do; the balance lays in deploymacy but, not as forescribed by the conventions of embargo's. It will take an ultimatium given to that country, as with President Truman after the release of two atomic weapons upon Japan. If that isn't enough to detour their intentions nothing will and we should follow up our resolve. No need to explain how we can defeat Iran in a matter of a couple days, just know it can be done. What are the contraindications, if their missles do reach Isreal and an all out war between the countries presides or other countries are targeted at vital locations. The shift to standoff and assist via precision weapons would likely be a smart move. Our greatest concern would be to keep other countries out of the war or it could end in a regional or world wide conferentation, meanwhile not to have our troops so close they become collateral damage; if WWIII occured.
by 3Dman
I believe there are many possibilities which could come out of them actually developing a neclear weapon and alot depends on the perceptions of their intentions, after it became known. The point at which, it could be considered too much to risky for national security of Israel would have to be considered by that state. It is not in question that Iran supports terrorist actions, as they have all along with the war in Iraq. They have a deep hate for Israel and the U.S. that isn't to be mistaken. If they developed such a weapon they shouldn't proclaim it was for their security interest against Israel's nuclear capacity, as if they were going to use the "bomb" on them, they likely would have already done that.
I believe it is the intentions of Iran to hold it's neighboring countries hostage to their infernal psychological terrorism and actual aggression through proxy of smaller radical groups, to which they fund. The size and scale of their development will only increase as time goes on. They may even poliferate nuclear arms to countries which otherwise do not have the capability to build their own. It is likely that sometime down the road they will sell or even attempt to establish trade with countries in South America, which will cause greater tentions and instability. Their ability to control the oil through the Strait of Hormuz will be unequivable at some point. In essents they could hold the oil for that region hostage from any transport. In seeing their objectives being met they would likely develop long range ballistic weapons in attempt to counter aggression from the U.S. and other nations that are now far from their reach.
All this sound far fetched, but only time would tell. Now we have the capability to stop potiential poliferation of neclear weapons or even a arms race in that region and perhaps a future WWIII. So what must be done?
During president Kennedy's term we faced a threat from the former Soviet Union led under Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev where the U.S. was only moments from an nuclear conferentation with Cuba and ultimately the Soviet Union. Then they were smart enough to realize the seriousness of the situation and the ultimate ramifications it would have on their country. The standoff was settled through mediations that took place only in the nic of time. It is my contiention that Iran is not likely to be persuaded to back down, as their perspective of their own power will influence the train of responsible and rational thinking. The communication gap is too wide between countries to get that close to conferentation. A decision would have to be made without reguard to an answer by the Iranian government.
The development sites in Iran are deep in trenched in so that attacking those sites might be hard to destroy or be even harder to determine if it were destroyed. The sites are likely to be reachable however, with the assistance of recently developed conventional weapons. Most all missles in use by Iran depend on crudamentry radar telemetery even though quite sophisticated over those of the past. It is possible for some of their weapons to be focused on inertial navigation or a form of doppler from some weapons. These changes in weapon systems may provide an edge over some third world countries perhaps increase the likelihood that one might get through, so to speak.
So what do we do; the balance lays in deploymacy but, not as forescribed by the conventions of embargo's. It will take an ultimatium given to that country, as with President Truman after the release of two atomic weapons upon Japan. If that isn't enough to detour their intentions nothing will and we should follow up our resolve. No need to explain how we can defeat Iran in a matter of a couple days, just know it can be done. What are the contraindications, if their missles do reach Isreal and an all out war between the countries presides or other countries are targeted at vital locations. The shift to standoff and assist via precision weapons would likely be a smart move. Our greatest concern would be to keep other countries out of the war or it could end in a regional or world wide conferentation, meanwhile not to have our troops so close they become collateral damage; if WWIII occured.
by 3Dman
Comments
Post a Comment