Warmongering

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Fred
by Fred
23-Nov-2009
 

On Sunday the armed forces of IRR, the Islamist Rapist Republic began a five day 600,000 square kilometer wide maneuvers ostensibly to test and hone the air defense capabilities with special attention on defending the illegal nuke sites from aerial attacks. 

In announcing the war games Ahmad Mighani commander of the newly created Army Air Defense said:

"Due to the threats against our nuclear facilities it is our duty to defend our nation's vital facilities and so these maneuvers cover Bushehr, Fars, Isfahan, Tehran and western provinces," adding, "Our unit will be in charge of the maneuvers but there will be units from the Revolutionary Guards and the Basij (militia)".

And

Zolnoor, Head Rapist Khamenei’s personal representative in the Guards Corps said:

"If the enemy attacks Iran, our missiles will strike Tel Aviv,"

And

Haijazi, head of the Guard’s Air wing, which is independent of the regular Air Force, speaking of attackers said:

"Even if their planes escape and land at the bases from which they took off, their bases will be struck by our destructive surface-to-surface missiles."

Of course the recent confirmed reports of Russia refusing to deliver the S-300 air defense system leaves IRR to their short range Russian Tor-M1air defense system which is highly susceptible to electronic jamming and therefore no real use in any potential aerial attack(s). What this means is the only measure IRR can take is firing a volley(s) of its inaccurate Ballistic Missiles acting as terror weapon very much like Hitler’s V2 against London or Saddam’s Al-Hussein against Tel Aviv.  And should the Islamist rapists instigate a conflict their local terrorist proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah will be the first victims.

If the Islamist Rapists are under any illusion to scare off attacks their bellicose statements promising devastating retribution will work, they are making the same fatal mistake that Saddam made. What their threatening posture does, as hollow as it might be, taking into account the existing apprehensions the sane world has about the illegal nuke program and the long standing, consistently verbalized, IRR desire to wipe a UN member state from the map--only increases the likelyhood of attack(s).

The Islamist rapists are playing with fire and unfortunately it is the lives of enslaved Iranians and other innocent Middle Easterners that they are playing with.

Before it is too late and the nuke acquiring IRR instigates a conflict which will quickly spread, by helping Iranians to overthrow the Islamist menace, the sane world has to head it off. Airtight sanctions with unremitting moral and material support to the enslaved Iranians who in facing up to the barbaric Islamists have shown their mettle is a must. Time is of the essence.   

  //news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091123/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_war_games

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by FredCommentsDate
ادا اطوار اسلامی
5
Dec 05, 2012
مسجد همجنسگرایان
1
Dec 05, 2012
Iranians are legitimate target
10
Dec 04, 2012
more from Fred
 
ex programmer craig

MOOSIRvaPIAZ

by ex programmer craig on Tue Nov 24, 2009 08:40 AM PST

Interesting howout of everything in Fred's post, you only want to talk about sanctions. What's your alternative to sanctions? Do you even have one?


  •  
MOOSIRvaPIAZ

Sanctions dont work. only the fools erand.

by MOOSIRvaPIAZ on Tue Nov 24, 2009 03:50 AM PST

Fred still doesnt get it.

 

Stratfor’s George
Friedman on gasoline sanctions:

No one expects Russia or China (or even many of the
European states) to fully comply with a sanctions regime on gasoline.
Even if they did, no one expects the flow of gasoline to be decisively
cut off. There will be too many people prepared to take the risk of
smuggling gasoline to Iran for that to happen. Even if the U.S.
blockaded Iranian ports, the Caucasus and Central Asia are far too
disorderly and the monetary rewards of smuggling are too great of an
incentive to make the gasoline sanctions effective. Additionally, the
imposition of sanctions will both rally the population to the regime as
well as provide justification for an intense crackdown. The probability
of sanctions forcing policy changes or regime change in Iran is slim.

 

------- 

"Criminalizing Consequences of
Sanctions," Peter Andreas, International
Studies Quarterly 49 (June
2005): pp. 335-60.
Read

One of the biggest flaws of the sanctions literature has been the
failure to discuss unintended consequences. Humanitarian costs have been
raised above, but what about other side effects? Peter Andreas looks at
the consequences of the multilateral sanctions directed at the former
Yugoslavia during the 1990s and finds a disturbing legacy. Economic
sanctions, it turns out, can unintentionally contribute to the
criminalization of the state, economy, and civil society of both the
targeted country and its immediate neighbors. By trying to evade the
sanctions, private entrepreneurs and public officials are encouraged to
disregard the rule of law. This fosters an unhealthy symbiosis among
political leaders, organized crime, and transnational smuggling
networks. These criminal networks can persist even after sanctions are
lifted, contributing to public corruption and undermining governance.

 

"Are Smart Sanctions Feasible?" By
Arne Tostenson and Beate Bull. World Politics
54
(April 2002): pp. 373-403.
Read

The comprehensive United Nations sanctions on Iraq during the 1990s
were a humanitarian disaster, leading policymakers to recognize that for
any future sanctions regimen to be politically sustainable its human
costs would have to be limited. Thus was born the concept of "smart
sanctions" -- tailored measures, such as asset freezes, travel bans, and
arms embargoes, that would supposedly target an offending regime while
minimizing collateral damage to the country's population at large. The
question now is whether smart sanctions can achieve significant results
with fewer downsides than more conventional forms of economic coercion.
Arne Tostenson and Beate Bull review the evidence and conclude that the
answer is no: "Although smart sanctions may seem logically compelling
and politically attractive, such regimes are difficult to establish and
enforce because of numerous inherent operational problems and the
intricacies of the Security Council's political processes."

 


  •  
pedro

ey dade bidad.

by pedro on Mon Nov 23, 2009 03:12 PM PST

The unnecessary 8 years war with Iraq, gave strength to the Islamist. Now again, in their weakest days, They are clinging to the same war strategy. KHoda be dademoon bereseh.


  •  
mahmoudg

propoganda from a scared regime

by mahmoudg on Mon Nov 23, 2009 07:00 AM PST

They know their defenses would be worthless against the might of the combined American/Israeli forces.  They can sing the "rajaz" all they want.  They are more afraid that these attacks will unleaash the iranian populace back into the streets, at which time the final lines for the obituary of the regime can then be written.


  •