WW3: over Gulf oil route??

josephpalazzo · Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:26 am Post subject: WW3: over Gulf oil route??

The Revolutionary Guards said Iran would impose controls on shipping in the vital Gulf oil route if Iran was attacked and warned regional states of reprisals if they took part, a newspaper reported on Saturday.

Fear of an escalation in the standoff between the West and Iran, the world's fourth largest oil producer, have been one factor propping up sky-high oil prices. Crude hit a record level on international markets near $143 a barrel on Friday.

Speculation about a possible attack on Iran because of its disputed nuclear ambitions has risen since a report this month said Israel had practiced such a strike, prompting increasingly tough talk of retaliation, if pushed, from Tehran.

Read more...

josephpalazzo · Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:31 am Post subject:

More reporting on this:

josephpalazzo · Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:39 am Post subject:

More glooming reporting:

Oradan · Visitor Joined: 27 Jun 2008 Posts: 23 Local time: 12:11 AM

Heres an idea, lets take on the whole fucking world while were at it. Lets spread our forces so thin that we are just begging to be attacked. This sounds like PHun huh.
_________________
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
Stephen Roberts

josephpalazzo · Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:10 am Post subject:

Depends if you define war as being PHun huh?!?

Vyrian · Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 9:57 am Post subject:

Bush WANTS a world war three. All republicans do, maybe they think if they get us all killed they will bring the fucking God'alypse quicker. I hate theists.
_________________

PJS · Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:09 am Post subject:

Bush may very likely take military action against Iran before he leaves office. The Israelis are probably pushing in that direction for fear that an Obama regime would be less hawkish. With the Iraqi quagmire it seems folly, but keep in mind this administration has been portraying the surge in very positive tones for months. Cheney and his ilk see Iraq as both moving in the right course and as a worthwhile sacrifice. Bush doesn't have to worry about burning political capital as he is leaving office(and he can hardly get lower ratings). Hell, some chest thumping threats and counterthreats can both boost McCain's chances and incite a desired conflict.
_________________
The path of least resistance and least trouble is a mental rut already made. It requires troublesome work to undertake the alternation of old beliefs.
-John Dewey

josephpalazzo · Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:48 pm Post subject:

I'll agree: A conflict with Iran can really boost McCain's chances.

Dawkadoodle · Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:58 pm Post subject:

josephpalazzo · Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:28 pm Post subject:

More news according to ABC:

Senior Pentagon officials are concerned that Israel could carry out an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities before the end of the year, an action that would have enormous security and economic repercussions for the United States and the rest of the world.

Wearing protective clothes, an Iranian security person walks at a part of the Uranium Conversion Facility, just outside the city of Isfahan, 410 kilometers south of the capital Tehran, Iran, March 30, 2005. A senior defense official told ABC News there is an "increasing likelihood" that Israel will carry out such an attack, a move that likely would prompt Iranian retaliation against, not just Israel, but against the United States as well.

The official identified two "red lines" that could trigger an Israeli offensive. The first is tied to when Iran's Natanz nuclear facility produces enough highly enriched uranium to make a nuclear weapon. According to the latest U.S. and Israeli intelligence assessments, that is likely to happen sometime in 2009, and could happen by the end of this year.

"The red line is not when they get to that point, but before they get to that point," the official said. "We are in the window of vulnerability."

josephpalazzo · Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 4:12 pm Post subject:

More news (July 4th):

Israel's message to its only ally, the United States was quite clear. Either President Bush orders military action or Israel will have to strike on its own.

It can't wait till a new U.S. president is sworn in because the new White House tenant could well be Barack Obama. And Mr. Obama almost certainly would not approve an Israeli air strike without first going several extra miles on the U.N. and Western diplomatic track.

Knight_of_BAAWA · Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 4:16 pm Post subject:

AIPAC is very powerful, and the Dispensationalists want to bring "Armageddon" so that jebus can come back. Further, the more the empire can expand, the better.

It's not about oil; it's about whacktard religious beliefs and grand visions of empire.
_________________
aa #51, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"

Aridiris · Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 6:53 pm Post subject:

I love Israel. They're like the Joe Pesci of nations.

Link

Think of de Niro as the rest of the international community.

josephpalazzo · Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 10:21 am Post subject:

More reporting:

The threats, counterthreats, and counter-counterthreats between Israel, Iran and the United States have reached new levels of hysteria in recent days. Israel openly threatens to attack Iran's nuclear program, Iran threatens to shut down oil-shipping lanes, and the commander of the U.S. fleet in the Persian Gulf, Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, says this would be an "act of war" requiring an American military response.

That was the backdrop yesterday as Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, faced the cameras in the Pentagon briefing room. Mullen, just back from a trip to Israel that further raised speculation about an Israeli attack, was asked whether Cosgriff's saber rattling would raise tensions with Iran.

"Actually," the chairman replied, "I think Admiral Cosgriff, who made that statement, is making an accurate statement."

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/02/AR2008070202798.html

josephpalazzo · Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 7:54 am Post subject:

More reporting (july 7):

Iran has resumed work on constructing highly sophisticated equipment that nuclear experts say is primarily used for building atomic weapons, according to the latest intelligence reports received by Western diplomats.

Iran's controversial nuclear enrichment programme at Natanz, which Tehran insists is designed to produce fuel for nuclear power, runs on P1 centrifuges. But Iranian nuclear scientists recently conducted successful tests on a prototype P2 centrifuge at Natanz, and the Revolutionary Guard has now set up a network of companies to build components for the advanced centrifuges.

This has raised concerns among Western experts that Iran is continuing work on its nuclear weapons programme, despite Tehran’s protestations that its intentions are peaceful.

“If Iran’s nuclear intentions were peaceful there would be no need for it to undertake this work in secret,” said an official familiar with the intelligence reports.
Read more...

	AtheistForums.com Forum Index -> General Discussion	All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2