Strategists at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for devastating bombing raids backed by submarine-launched ballistic missile attacks against Iran's nuclear sites as a "last resort" to block Teheran's efforts to develop an atomic bomb. Central Command and Strategic Command planners are identifying targets, assessing weapon-loads and working on logistics for an operation, the Sunday Telegraph has learnt. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/12/wiran12.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/02/12/ixnewstop.html)

Last resort or not. It is sure to stir up the hornet's nest we call Iran.

Wow.

Ironically, Iran's only hope is to actually develop nuclear weapons so that instead of sharing Iraq's fate they'll be treated to the type of respectful negotiations currently enjoyed by North Korea.

(Note: Just musing on a point of fact, not "supporting terror". So, please, no diatribes.)

Read this from the Oxford Research Group

http://www.iranbodycount.org/

Conclusion

A US military attack on Iranian nuclear infrastructure would be the start of a protracted military confrontation that would probably involve Iraq, Israel and Lebanon as well as the United States and Iran, with the possibility of west Gulf states being involved as well.
...
Moreover, Iran would be expected to withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty and engage in a nuclear weapons programme as rapidly as possible. This would lead to further military action against Iran, establishing a highly dangerous cycle of violence.
...
The termination of the Saddam Hussein regime was expected to bring about a free-market client state in Iraq. Instead it has produced a deeply unstable and costly conflict with no end in sight.I sure hope more consideration is given to the logistics of, and potential consequences resulting from, an attack on Iran than was given to the invasion of Iraq.

I didn't read the complete report from the Oxford Research Group but did it address the consequences of a change in US/Israel foreign policy? Most likely from a change in government.

I hope they will respectfully bomb their nuclear sites, and that they will go along with NATO in this, and there will be no ground war or invasion.

With all due respect, the Pentagon routinely carries out short and long range tactical and strategic plans at various levels of military action covering all parts of the world.

The problems happen when the Rumsfelds and Cheneys of the world override all that planning with their own nonsense and their own yes-men.

Your %100 right, usually the civilian leadership within the Pentagon, the ones who are supposed to balance out the military commanders get the US into some serious global problems.

Also please take the time to read the whole paper, it's only about 12 pages.

I hope they will respectfully bomb their nuclear sites, and that they will go along with NATO in this, and there will be no ground war or invasion.

You some kind of peacenik?

You some kind of peacenik?
Yes, I am. I don't think US should bother to take them out of the Medieval Age they are living in, if they don't want to. Look at Iraq. They just want their theocracy.

The U.S. has had 'war' simulation super computers for years (so have we). I'd call this due diligence and I'd expect nothing less. I hate surprises.:)

Yes, I am. I don't think US should bother to take them out of the Medieval Age they are living in, if they don't want to. Look at Iraq. They just want their theocracy.

But when Iran's President has called for the total destruction of Israel, we are not talking Medieval warfare and common sense tells you they should not go nuclear.
Imagine if they had the bomb and more cartoons were drawn...:o
I don't see a theocracy coming in Iraq, another big misconception.

With all due respect, the Pentagon routinely carries out short and long range tactical and strategic plans at various levels of military action covering all parts of the world.

They probably still have "Raid the Icebox", the Canada invasion plan drawn up in the 30s. I'll bet it's been updated since then.

Ricketty

They probably still have "Raid the Icebox", the Canada invasion plan drawn up in the 30s. I'll bet it's been updated since then.

Ricketty

You bet it is updated, there's even a movie about it. ;)

As for Iran's nuclear program, someone has to end it. If the US don't, Israel will - just like they did with Saddam's nuclear facilities.

Hey, then maybe we can sell chemical weapons to Iran, wait until they've massacred their own people and then send Rummy in for another photo op! ;)

With all due respect, the Pentagon routinely carries out short and long range tactical and strategic plans at various levels of military action covering all parts of the world

Exactly. I'd be surprised if they didn't have one for North Korea, China, and a few other countries with Nuclear capabilities.

They'd be foolish not to.

You bet it is updated, there's even a movie about it. ;)

As for Iran's nuclear program, someone has to end it. If the US don't, Israel will - just like they did with Saddam's nuclear facilities.

What about North Korea maybe we should strike while the irons hot.

What about North Korea maybe we should strike while the irons hot.

I don't know about that. My guess is that they have had half a century to hide everything deep underground where bombs can't reach it. After all, there is only one industry there - military.

Hey, then maybe we can sell chemical weapons to Iran, wait until they've massacred their own people and then send Rummy in for another photo op! ;)

Iran does have other options rather than bullheadedly going ahead with nuclear ambitions, let's face it, the story about wanting it for power is just that. If they would listen to the U.N. about it or maybe buy reactors from Canada, which have none of the byproducts that can be weaponized, there would be no need to bomb their facilities. But their Jew hatin' cuckoo leader will not be reasonable. Guys like that need a good punch in the nuclear facilities. The old saying is true, " If you build it, they will come."

Yes, Iran has options. However, given the on-going diplomatic efforts with North Korea - which, unlike Iran, actually possesses nuclear weapons - it's very clear that the West, too, has options.