NEEEXXXTT!!! Iran???

[DMC]

Now - should I (as an average Joe American) trust this information after we got slammed so bad on bad Iraq information????
Is this enough to send us into another war???
If we do go in there - will our troops get nuked????
Can we fight multiple wars without starting a draft????
Remember - these questions may not be my own.. Just stirring the pot

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/ ... index.html

Powell: Intelligence suggests Iran trying to adapt missiles for nukes
Thursday, November 18, 2004 Posted: 4:26 AM EST (0926 GMT)

SANTIAGO, Chile (AP) -- The United States has intelligence indicating Iran is trying to fit missiles to carry nuclear weapons, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said.

Powell partially confirmed claims by an Iranian opposition group that Tehran is deceiving the United Nations and is attempting to secretly continue activities meant to give it atomic arms by next year.

"I have seen intelligence which would corroborate what this dissident group is saying," Powell told reporters Wednesday as he traveled to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Santiago, Chile. "And it should be of concern to all parties."

Pressed by reporters on the intelligence reports, Powell said the intelligence indicates that Iran "had been actively working on delivery systems" capable of carrying a nuclear weapon.

Powell said there is no evidence to suggest that Iran has developed the technology to make a nuclear weapon, but suggested that the regime is working to adapt missiles for nuclear warheads.

"I'm talking about information that says that they not only had these missiles, but I'm aware of information that suggests they were working hard as to how to put the two together," Powell said.

A senior official for the National Council for Resistance in Iran said Tuesday that a bomb diagram -- along with an unspecified amount of weapons-grade uranium -- was provided to Iran by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the disgraced former head of Pakistani's nuclear development which was tied to both Iran and Libya. (Full story)

The official said the designs were handed to the Iranians between 1994 and 1996, while Khan delivered HEU -- highly enriched uranium -- in 2001.

Banned in the United States as a terrorist organization, the group was instrumental in 2002 in revealing Iran's enrichment program in the central city of Natanz, based on what it said was information provided by sources in Iran.

The opposition group says a facility at Lavizan-Shian northeast of Tehran was part of a secret nuclear weapons program.

Powell declined comment on Khan but said that "for 20 years the Iranians have been trying to hide things from the international community."

Iran says its sole interest is to generate nuclear fuel through low-level uranium enrichment, but the United States suspects Iran wants to produce weapons-grade enriched uranium.

Enrichment does not violate the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but the International Atomic Energy Agency and most of its members want Iran to scrap enrichment plans as a confidence building measure.

Iran announced suspension of enrichment last week, and the agency said it would police that commitment starting next week, in advance of a Nov. 25 IAEA board meeting.

The pledge reduced Washington's hopes of having the board refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council for alleged violations of the Nonproliferation Treaty.

Tehran has not dropped plans to run 50,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium for what it says will be the fuel requirements of a nuclear reactor to be finished next year.

It currently possesses less than 1,000 centrifuges. But if it added 500 centrifuges, experts say Iran would be able to make enough weapons-grade uranium to make a bomb annually.

[CAPBOY]

Now - should I (as an average Joe American) trust this information after we got slammed so bad on bad Iraq information????

Why, what do you intend to do with it?

Is this enough to send us into another war???

No.

If we do go in there - will our troops get nuked????

No.

Can we fight multiple wars without starting a draft????

No.

[XtremeJibber2001]

Now - should I (as an average Joe American) trust this information after we got slammed so bad on bad Iraq information????

No

Is this enough to send us into another war???

No

If we do go in there - will our troops get nuked????

No

Can we fight multiple wars without starting a draft????

Yes

[DMC]

Can we fight multiple wars without starting a draft????

Yes

How?

[XtremeJibber2001]

Can we fight multiple wars without starting a draft????

Yes

How?

By getting other countries involved. Also, our military I "think" numbers close to 500,000 or somewhat close to that. Right now we have a little over 100,000 troops in Iraq. I think with our superior fire power coupled with our advanced technology we can fight a more effiecient battle using less soldiers to fight latge army's like that of Iran. What hurts the US army is close quarters combat in city like battles. I don't think there is an army in the world that could beat us in a normal war time arena. The question remains what arena the war will be fought in, and if we even decide to go in, whether it be alone, or with the rest of the west/world.

E

[DMC]

Can we fight multiple wars without starting a draft????

Yes

How?

By getting other countries involved.

Nice... thats been my position for a year now...

[XtremeJibber2001]

Can we fight multiple wars without starting a draft????

Yes

How?

By getting other countries involved.

Nice... thats been my position for a year now...

I just hope it can be done. If the same corruption between Iran and France/Germany/Russia/UN, I think we can expect the same problems we did with the Iraq war. But lets hope for the best.

In terms on South Korea, I don't think we, as well as many other countries, face much opposition. I think a multi-latteral force will be much easier to obtain in that arena.

E

[Pedro]

U.S. Doctrine since the end of the cold war outlines the capability to be able to fight two non-nuclear wars at the same time.... but that equals no more skiing for pedro.

[ski_adk]

"By getting other countries involved..."

So...foreign nations are conscripts for hire that should drop what they're doing just because we're too damned lazy to do it ourselves?

Also, since when do we get to decide the theatre of battle in a foreign land? We tried to do this before and it just doesn't work. Sure, we can win traditional battles with ease. Guess what...the enemy knows that too! Now, why would you ever expect anyone to face us in a traditional battle ever again? That would be suicide. Patton was right...you don't win wars by dying for your country, you win them by making the poor bastard on the other side die for his.

[XtremeJibber2001]

"By getting other countries involved..."

So...foreign nations are conscripts for hire that should drop what they're doing just because we're too damned lazy to do it ourselves?

Also, since when do we get to decide the theatre of battle in a foreign land? We tried to do this before and it just doesn't work. Sure, we can win traditional battles with ease. Guess what...the enemy knows that too! Now, why would you ever expect anyone to face us in a traditional battle ever again? That would be suicide. Patton was right...you don't win wars by dying for your country, you win them by making the poor bastard on the other side die for his.

We're a superpower. Ultimately we may decide what we wish. Whether that is ethincal or not is something that's been in debate for years.

I also never said that "nations are for hire". I simply said it would most likely be in their best interest to help us. I think it would be in bordering nations best interest that Iran didn't develop WMD's.

E

[BigKahuna13]

Can we fight multiple wars without starting a draft????

Yes

How?

By getting other countries involved. Also, our military I "think" numbers close to 500,000 or somewhat close to that. Right now we have a little over 100,000 troops in Iraq. I think with our superior fire power coupled with our advanced technology we can fight a more effiecient battle using less soldiers to fight latge army's like that of Iran. What hurts the US army is close quarters combat in city like battles. I don't think there is an army in the world that could beat us in a normal war time arena. The question remains what arena the war will be fought in, and if we even decide to go in, whether it be alone, or with the rest of the west/world.

E

Silly boy, 500,000 soldiers does not equal 500,000 people with rifles ready to invade someplace. Pedro would know much better than I, but I'd doubt more than 25% of that number are actually combat troops.

[Pedro]

Silly boy, 500,000 soldiers does not equal 500,000 people with rifles ready to invade someplace. Pedro would know much better than I, but I'd doubt more than 25% of that number are actually combat troops.

Its definately a pyramid with the Infantry and Armor troops at the the top, supporte by the Combat Engnieers, Aviation, Filed Artillery, Air defense Artillery. The rest of the army supports the above groups.

Technically two wars could probably be done, but it would leave the country very vulnerable, and the troops very tired. There would be no left at home.

[XtremeJibber2001]

Can we fight multiple wars without starting a draft????

Yes

How?

By getting other countries involved. Also, our military I "think" numbers close to 500,000 or somewhat close to that. Right now we have a little over 100,000 troops in Iraq. I think with our superior fire power coupled with our advanced technology we can fight a more effiecient battle using less soldiers to fight latge army's like that of Iran. What hurts the US army is close quarters combat in city like battles. I don't think there is an army in the world that could beat us in a normal war time arena. The question remains what arena the war will be fought in, and if we even decide to go in, whether it be alone, or with the rest of the west/world.

E

Silly boy, 500,000 soldiers does not equal 500,000 people with rifles ready to invade someplace. Pedro would know much better than I, but I'd doubt more than 25% of that number are actually combat troops.

.....I never specified these people were soldiers with guns in hand. I generalized and said our "military". Please try not to make your miss-interpretations of what I said a chance to hastily label me as "silly".
Thanks
E

[BigKahuna13]

Can we fight multiple wars without starting a draft????

Yes

How?

By getting other countries involved. Also, our military I "think" numbers close to 500,000 or somewhat close to that. Right now we have a little over 100,000 troops in Iraq. I think with our superior fire power coupled with our advanced technology we can fight a more effiecient battle using less soldiers to fight latge army's like that of Iran. What hurts the US army is close quarters combat in city like battles. I don't think there is an army in the world that could beat us in a normal war time arena. The question remains what arena the war will be fought in, and if we even decide to go in, whether it be alone, or with the rest of the west/world.

E

Silly boy, 500,000 soldiers does not equal 500,000 people with rifles ready to invade someplace. Pedro would know much better than I, but I'd doubt more than 25% of that number are actually combat troops.

.....I never specified these people were soldiers with guns in hand. I generalized and said our "military". Please try not to make your miss-interpretations of what I said a chance to hastily label me as "silly".
Thanks
E

The clear implication of the statement Also, our military I "think" numbers close to 500,000 or somewhat close to that. Right now we have a little over 100,000 troops in Iraq. is that there are 400,000 guys and gals sitting around waiting to be turned loose on the bad guys. That is not the case. A significant fraction of our combat forces are tied up in Iraq.

Since Pedro's ex-Army I'll take his word that we really don't want to be in a position of fighting two simultaneous conflicts with our current troop levels. The there would be no one left at home statement doesn't sound too good and I'm too old to be fighting off hordes of invaders with my father-in-law's old WWII vintage M1 carbine.

[XtremeJibber2001]

How?

By getting other countries involved. Also, our military I "think" numbers close to 500,000 or somewhat close to that. Right now we have a little over 100,000 troops in Iraq. I think with our superior fire power coupled with our advanced technology we can fight a more effiecient battle using less soldiers to fight latge army's like that of Iran. What hurts the US army is close quarters combat in city like battles. I don't think there is an army in the world that could beat us in a normal war time arena. The question remains what arena the war will be fought in, and if we even decide to go in, whether it be alone, or with the rest of the west/world.

E

Silly boy, 500,000 soldiers does not equal 500,000 people with rifles ready to invade someplace. Pedro would know much better than I, but I'd doubt more than 25% of that number are actually combat troops.

.....I never specified these people were soldiers with guns in hand. I generalized and said our "military". Please try not to make your miss-interpretations of what I said a chance to hastily label me as "silly".
Thanks
E

The clear implication of the statement Also, our military I "think" numbers close to 500,000 or somewhat close to that. Right now we have a little over 100,000 troops in Iraq. is that there are 400,000 guys and gals sitting around waiting to be turned loose on the bad guys. That is not the case. A significant fraction of our combat forces are tied up in Iraq.

Since Pedro's ex-Army I'll take his word that we really don't want to be in a position of fighting two simultaneous conflicts with our current troop levels. The there would be no one left at home statement doesn't sound too good and I'm too old to be fighting off hordes of invaders with my father-in-law's old WWII vintage M1 carbine.

The fact I said "think" and "military" should clearly show you that I did not mean individuals with guns nor did i have factual information. Does our military not work together as a whole? Does that pyramid work for the better of our "military"? Yes it does. Lets not be so quick to label people...here you are acting like a five year old calling me a "silly boy"....and you're the admin? Ha

E