Early 1990's Iran pursed the nuclear dream practically by purchasing several nuclear warheads.
Iran does not currently have nuclear weapons, and would appear to be about two years away from acquiring nuclear weapons. By some time in 2008, however, Iran could be producing fissile material for atomic bombs using both uranium enriched at Natanz and plutonium produced at Arak. The Natanz facility might produce enough uranium for about five bombs every year, and the Arak facility might produced enough plutonium for as many as three bombs every year.
These facts represent pressure on Saudi Kingdom and Gulf countries who sees Iran as Shiites expansion and on Israel who sees an enemy getting more strength and more power
BUT... who is really capable to lunch any kind off attack against this outlaw country
* USA, the regional situation for the US troops need any help available to save face in the Iraqi bog and air strike won't achieve the goals of this war, not to mention that Iranian supporters in Arab world and fellow Shiites are capable to represent a real threat against every US base in Gulf Aria
and in this case the war US may lunch won't be limited in Iran only or on Iranian soil coz my friends; US will have to fight face to face with every Shiites in the region which of course each one of them is potential bumper
From the other side US Strategic Ally in ME Israel will have another military action against their north borders from Hizbullah which they have tried ti neutralize in July 2006 and for sure they have done good job but they didn't finish it and Eliminate brutal enemy like Hizbullah isn't walk in the park anymore and July war has proved this concept forever
From the other side bumping Iran with nuclear bump in a hope of repeating the same Scenario in WW2 isn't effective solution for Europe, Russia and China who are benefiting from the Iranian regime and this time they won't stand still like what happened in 2003 when US attacked Iraq
* Israel: this country is capable to lunch a full air strike with nuclear weapons and bumps but in this case Iranian reaction against Israel is unfordable for them not to mention the enemy that Confined themselves against Israel at their northern borders
* Saudia Arabia and Gulf countries... well this is possible way to attack Iran and eliminating or weaking a strong Shiites enemy... Saudia Arabia has been Arming them selves for the last two years heavily with billion and billion of dollars
But we can't ignore the fact the Iranian army is more experienced and well prepared through years and years of war in Iraq
My guess is if this scenario (which more likely) becomes in process the same story of Iraq-Iran war in 1980's will be repeated again on the screen of the history 7th art
1 comment:
Ever since the Iranian crisis, if it is right to call it so, started. I have been saying that there won't ever be a war against Iran. The strike will be against Syria. The whole fuss with Iran is a try to neutralize the Iranian reaction, so that when they hit Syria they won't have to face Iran.
Iran as a power serves the US interests the same way Israel does. But powers only serve powers when they are under control, and full control won't be feasible unless the Iranian sandwich is strong enough to hold.
Take a look at a map and you will know that the US is 90% successful in surrounding Iran. Yet, they didn't get to the position of neutralizing the Iranian reaction.
I don't think there will ever be a war on Iran though a KSA vs Iran war that follows the Iraq vs Iran war in the 1980's is an appealing scenario but it won't solve the real issue.
The real problem lies in the cursed fertile crescent.
Syria is the real target, not Iran
Post a Comment