Do you think we'll go to war with Iran? - Page 3 - Politics and War Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Sunday, February 06, 2005 6:46 AM on j-body.org
Condoleza Rice says, "War with Iran is not on the Agenda now" So, we'll see if that holds true.









~2014 New Z under the knife, same heart different body~
______________________
WHITECAVY no more
2012 numbers - 4SPD AUTOMATIC!!
328 HP
306 TQ

Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Sunday, February 06, 2005 8:06 AM on j-body.org
Who wants to take bets on it???

Dubya torpedos the military?



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Monday, February 07, 2005 5:15 AM on j-body.org
Wow... Here's a little nugget worth reading, I'll bold the interesting parts

Quote:


Senate Committee Focuses on CIA's Iranian Assessments
By Greg Miller and Bob Drogin
The Los Angeles Times

Friday 04 February 2005

WASHINGTON - The Senate Intelligence Committee has launched what its chairman called a "pre-emptive" examination of U.S. intelligence on Iran as part of an effort to avoid the problems that plagued America's prewar assessments on Iraq.

Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said in an interview Friday that he had sought the unusual review because the erroneous prewar claims about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction had made lawmakers wary of the CIA's current assessments on Iran.

"We have to be more pre-emptive on this committee to try to look ahead and determine our capabilities so that you don't get stuck with a situation like you did with Iraq," said Roberts, who also voiced concern about current intelligence on the insurgency in Iraq.

The White House has made it clear that Iran will be a focus of U.S. foreign policy in President Bush's second term. In his State of the Union speech earlier this week, the president identified Iran as "the world's primary state sponsor of terror, pursuing nuclear weapons while depriving its people of the freedom they seek and deserve."

A recent CIA report concludes that Tehran is vigorously pursuing programs to produce nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.

The aim of the Senate review, Roberts said, is to ensure that any weaknesses in American intelligence on Iran are being disclosed to policymakers, and that U.S. spy agencies have adequate resources to fill gaps in collecting information on the Islamic republic.

Roberts said the review was in its early stages and that the committee had not reached any preliminary judgments about the quality of U.S. intelligence reports on Tehran's alleged weapons activities.

Senior aides on the committee stressed that the panel was not opening a formal investigation or inquiry. Rather, they said that the review of intelligence on Iran was part of a broader shift in the way the committee approaches its oversight responsibilities, toward anticipating problems rather than investigating intelligence failures after they occur.

Roberts said the review of U.S. efforts to spy on Iran would largely take place behind closed doors, involving interviews with analysts and intelligence officials, and a review of classified documents.

Aides said that unlike the committee's review on Iraq -- which culminated in a 500-page public report containing harsh criticism of the CIA -- there was no plan to go public with its findings on the quality of intelligence on Iran.

The top Democrat on the committee, Sen. John D. "Jay" Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, said Friday that he supported the review of intelligence on Iran.

"One of the lessons we learned from Iraq was not to take all information at face value and to ask more questions in the beginning than in the end," Rockefeller said in a statement.

A CIA spokesperson, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the agency was aware of the committee's plan to examine intelligence on Iran, and would assist in the review.

"We will, as usual, be working closely with the committee in this effort," the official said.

Senior intelligence committee aides from both parties said that the panel also intended to examine U.S. intelligence gathering and reporting on other important U.S. espionage targets, including North Korea and China.

Roberts said that the committee's efforts would focus on Tehran first because Iran has become "the big bully on the block" since the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Amid mounting speculation that the United States is contemplating a pre-emptive military strike against Tehran, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, traveling in Europe this week, said such an option was "not on the agenda at this point in time."

"We have many diplomatic tools still at our disposal and we intend to pursue them fully," she told reporters after meeting in London with British Foreign Minister Jack Straw.

The European Union and Iran are expected to resume talks on Tehran's nuclear program next week in Geneva.

A series of inspections in Iran by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog group, over the last 18 months have exposed a long-hidden Iranian program to produce fissile material that could be used for nuclear weapons, but IAEA officials say they believe Tehran has frozen the program. Iran insists that its nascent nuclear program is designed to produce energy, not weapons.

The CIA, in its recent unclassified report, said Tehran was using its civilian nuclear program as a shield for illegal weapons development. But U.S. intelligence officials have acknowledged that the CIA and other agencies have few reliable sources of information on the regime's alleged weapons-related activities.


Roberts was also critical of the CIA's efforts to penetrate the insurgency in Iraq, saying that while the agency has deployed a large number of officers to the country, many CIA operatives are hunkered down in the heavily fortified sector of Baghdad known as the Green Zone.

"They're inside looking at flat (computer) screens," Roberts said of CIA operatives. "They're not out there with that poor damn Marine out there getting his tail shot off."

Roberts, a former Marine, said there have been quality reports on the insurgency. "We get, I think, pretty good briefings on who people are, how many, where they are, where they're going," he said.

But he said key assessments had been significantly flawed. In particular, dire predictions about violence and expected participation in the Iraqi elections proved wrong.

Asked about the overall quality of intelligence on the insurgency in Iraq, Roberts said, "I don't know how to rate it except to say we can do better."

He declined to disclose details from the latest assessments on the scope and composition of the insurgency.

The CIA spokesperson staunchly defended the agency's recent intelligence on Iraq, noting that in an appearance Thursday before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had praised a recently issued, classified CIA report that focused on the motivation of Iraqi insurgents.

"The CIA has received a positive response from many in the policy community with respect to our reporting in Iraq," the spokesperson said.

Asked to comment on Roberts' statement that agency operatives are confined to watching "flat screens," the spokesperson said, "There are CIA officers who are risking their lives on a daily basis in Iraq and elsewhere around the globe."


Apparently Rice thinks it's a good idea to negotiate before storming in. Maybe that would have been a better idea in Iraq also, eh?



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Monday, February 07, 2005 4:39 PM on j-body.org
Powel was all for diplomacy, and it didn't make on stitch of difference. The executive branch does what it wants regardless.

PAX
Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Tuesday, February 08, 2005 6:12 AM on j-body.org
True, but Iran actually has the capacity to MAKE bombs within a few months, whereas Iraq couldn't because their reactors had been made output the wrong kind of isotopes.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Sunday, February 13, 2005 6:46 AM on j-body.org
12 years we dealt with Iraq, how did that work out for us?

And FYI, Iran and NK is not just a US problem you morons. The EU and Britian has been trying to negotiate with Iran for a few years to get them to drop their nuclear program, as have China and Japan with NK.


If military action has to take place, the UN will be involved as will other nations, not just the United States. I doubt it will happen though. I think going the diplomatic route is teh best thing to do and strides are being made to make that happen.
Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Sunday, February 13, 2005 7:09 AM on j-body.org
the US military is strong but not invincible we are VERY short manned unlik eback in the WW1 and 2 era where there were 30000 soldiers A DAY dieing. i do agree we cant afford going to war with anyone right now until Iraq is undercontrol. this theory may sound a bit ignorant but i thnk it would be the smartest and that is to, like said before, let israel go at them. then it would be a middle east conflict. if the US were to go in there the terrorists would flock in and add to the chaos just lke they did in Iraq. part of our problem with fighting any ground war with anyone, and is evident in Iraq right now, is political correctness you cant have that and it should not excist during war time. they are cutting our f_cking heads off and we take pictures of them naked and all hell breaks lose f_ck that. cut there heads off to.
hopefully things can be talked over with Iran but i highly doubt it. its not a popular conclusion in todays world. noone wants to cooperate cause they hate the US. and war with a nuclear force in the world would be bad no matter the size of our ground forces.


i do actually agree to a point with GrandAmMatt this time hahaha just messin with ya man




04 sunfire auto 16.3@82.5.................for now
Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Sunday, February 13, 2005 8:07 AM on j-body.org
mrgto wrote:

12 years we dealt with Iraq, how did that work out for us?

And FYI, Iran and NK is not just a US problem you morons. The EU and Britian has been trying to negotiate with Iran for a few years to get them to drop their nuclear program, as have China and Japan with NK.


If military action has to take place, the UN will be involved as will other nations, not just the United States. I doubt it will happen though. I think going the diplomatic route is teh best thing to do and strides are being made to make that happen.


Oh...

My...

God...

MrGTO advocating the UN and diplomacy... I thought I'd never see the day.

I don't think that NK is going to do anything because they're immediately south of the rock and north of the hard place. China can reign in Radicals at will pretty much. Japan, I'm not so sure they have much of a position due to the fact that they have little in the way of an expiditionary military, and they can't bey the US into defending their land... although, I'm betting there's more than one boat carrying a few sticks of Trident in the area.

Iran is a pretty big radical also, but I think the better idea is to reign in what Israel might do. Either way, I doubt Mossad will fully or truthfully disclose what's going on in Iran if they know.

How about looking at Pakistan and India next? We KNOW that Paksitan accrued most of its nuclear ability from North Korea and has sold fissile materials and plans to "other agencies." Hell, that'd settle the Kashmir dispute as is.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Sunday, February 13, 2005 8:40 AM on j-body.org
GAM (no doot aboot it) wrote:

Japan, I'm not so sure they have much of a position due to the fact that they have little in the way of an expiditionary military, and they can't bey the US into defending their land... although, I'm betting there's more than one boat carrying a few sticks of Trident in the area.


Our whole point of having permanent Military Installations on Sovereign Japanese Territory is to Protect them due to their lack of a Strong Military




Yella02-I promise I will return to you in one piece and this will stay up until I am safely home

Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Sunday, February 13, 2005 2:41 PM on j-body.org
^^^ Score one for the good guys

I didn't know that much aboot the US installations, I had figured they were only until such time as Japan's military was sufficient to defend themselves... Didn't realise they were permanent.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: Do you think we'll go to war with Iran?
Monday, February 14, 2005 2:20 AM on j-body.org
GAM (no doot aboot it) wrote:

^^^ Score one for the good guys

I didn't know that much aboot the US installations, I had figured they were only until such time as Japan's military was sufficient to defend themselves... Didn't realise they were permanent.



You think it was going to take 75 years for Japan to have a strong military? LOL

Their military isn't anything to sneeze at actually.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/

And yes, to my previous comments, as I said, this isn't a US problem with NK and Iran. It is a world problem. And the rest of the world better take notice. The EU and British have been doing a lot with Iran. China better step the F up when dealing with NK.

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search