General Dempsey sends a message of U.S. weakness to Tehran

Really like the beyond a reasonable doubt that we had about Iraq's WMDs? Going to war with Iran right now would do little but push it's citizenry straight into the arms of the current regime. Let their election happen see what shakes out.

We found WMDs in Iraq. Saying we did not is a flat out lie. What we didn't find, were fully assembled nukes. We did find chemical and bio weapons...both of which are WMD. We also found yellowcake.

Mike please link us to a legitimate news site/source that backs up your claim.

The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war documents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion, Wired magazine reported.

The documents showed that US troops continued to find chemical weapons and labs for years after the invasion, including remnants of Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons arsenal -- most of which had been destroyed following the Gulf War.

In August 2004, American troops were able to buy containers from locals of what they thought was liquid sulfur mustard, a blister agent, the documents revealed. The chemicals were triple-sealed and taken to a secure site.

Also in 2004, troops discovered a chemical lab in a house in Fallujah during a battle with insurgents. A chemical cache was also found in the city.

we did not find anything that hadnt been previously reported.

we did not find the wmds the right claimed he had.

we found some expired chems from the first iraqi war which inspectors said probably wouldnt do more than make you feel a little ill.

minor chemical weapons and crap are just more ways the right try to obfuscate the issue.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Small_number_of_degraded_chemical_weapons_recovered

we did not find the wmds the right claimed he had.

And the left...including Bill Clinton...

Wasn't that same "undiscovered" yellowcake tracked to Canada but left unverified by the press? If the press never verified it, then was it true or not true?

Iran has already provoked Israel...

Your move...

Provocation is an attack on another nation including military attacks and economic sanctions. Iran has not attacked Israel.

Mohammed Hejazi, the deputy head of Iran's armed forces, hinted that Tehran could order proxy militant groups in Gaza and Lebanon to fire rockets into Israel. Iran has steadily built up the rocket arsenals of Hizbollah, the Shia militant group in Lebanon, and Hamas, the Palestinian movement whose stronghold is the Gaza Strip, after both were depleted during military operations launched by Israel in 2006.

The two movements are believed to have tens of thousands of rockets capable of reaching cities deep inside Israel.

Mohammed Hejazi, the deputy head of Iran's armed forces, hinted that Tehran could order proxy militant groups in Gaza and Lebanon to fire rockets into Israel.

Probably as a response to an Israeli attack against Iranian nuclear facilities.

Iran has already provoked Israel...

yes by existing.

Israeli attack against Iranian nuclear facilities

And that was when?

And that was when?

Stuxnet

Remember Israel is the rogue nation. The one that is not the signatory to the NNPT and through espionage against the US gained the ability to even produce nuclear weapons.

Actually Israel is a real nation and a member state of the UN.

Neither Pakistan or India are NNPT signatories. And North Korea withdrew from the treaty. Iran on the other hand is a signatory.

Israel has the intellectual and scientific capacity to develop nuclear weapons. Whether they have or not is a state secret.

All of this is well know and obvious. So what is your agenda of throwing out factual distortions of reality.

Israel has the intellectual and scientific capacity to develop nuclear weapons. Whether they have or not is a state secret.

they have the capabilities to get them from the us along with all the technology to create more. they also got the hydrogen bomb thanks to the us.

You seem to have no basis for underestimating Israel's capabilities. Can you provide any sources (links) to back up your assertions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Israeli_inventions_and_discoveries

p.s> I belive that it was Russai that got the H-bomb thanks to the US. An H-bomb does not fill a strategic need for Israel.

the us did not give russia a hydrogen bomb. second of all so what? what's your point of that list? who said that israel did not invent anything?

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/05/how%E2%80%99d-the-russians-get-the-h-bomb/

For historians, there’s the rub. How did Moscow acquire the secret of the hydrogen bomb? A new book — “The Nuclear Express” (Zenith, 2009) — purports to have the answer: an unnamed Soviet agent, code-named PERSEUS, working at Los Alamos.

The authors of the book — former nuclear weapons designer Thomas C. Reed and Los Alamos physicist Danny B. Stillman — argue that the secret behind a thermonuclear bomb could have been conveyed in a single phrase: “radiation implosion.”

My point is that you have yet to make a point.

they also got the hydrogen bomb thanks to the us.

Link?

http://www.rense.com/general26/bombs.htm

"stole" would be a better word to use, we gave Russia Nothing.

I have spent several years now trying to discover why our government sends too few ground combat forces to prevail. The under-resourcing in Iraq and Afghanistan II was criminal. To add more insult to injury (literally) the need for "surging" was found to be the solution. Fancy that!

The Powell Doctrine is well known in Washington by any military leader and most civilians. This notion of sending in the troops on the cheap, is despicable. If using military force is decided, send in a "force" to cripple armed resistance, and get out.

As an old combat vet from WWII, I have always taken exception to our worrying so much about collateral damage while our people were in harm's way. I guess I don't see the big picture here in training our warriors in the fine art of killing and then forbidding them from doing what they are trained to do and that is win. Our mission was to win an Unconditional Surrender at all costs except our people. People that we train for combat should not be used to win the hearts and minds of the enemy as well since that is up to the diplomats. If we worry that they will be mad at us then we have lost going in.

Yep. Kill em all and let doG sort them out. How dare those (foreigners, brown people, others) not believe in amerikkka and the 'merican' way of life.

The Klan reference reflects your loyalties. Should, then, your opinion be considered meritorious?

CitizenX: Yep. Kill em all and let doG sort them out. How dare those (foreigners, brown people, others) not believe in amerikkka and the 'merican' way of life.

Yep and we did all of that so you could be a traitor to your country and your people. Show me please exactly where I specifically mentioned brown people. As a Red Man, I am truly aware of just what the White Man has done in his/your interest of the Genocide of the First People. How many of your family are you willing to sacrifice under the order of: "Do not return fire even when fired upon if there is a possibility of collateral damage"? This is what you and your kind are advocating here in the interest of humanitarianism and our enemies use it like shooting fish in a barrel. You are aptly named since X being an unknown quantity.

I guess I look at it like this after you brush aside all the b.s.

The United States is the worlds only true Super Power.

We have the capability to end pretty much (with a few exceptions) any war started ,very very swiftly. (I'm not talking about nation building ala Afghanistan, or Iraq, or ... insert overly concerned engagement of any U.S. involvement since WW2... )

Everyone and their cousin Knows this.

When there is someone like that in a room and some other ninkapoop is acting a fool, others look up and too the known super power for assistance, and most of the time, to stay as far out of the "conflict" as possible, given the "super power" should be able to take care of it themselves.

Now... should we be going and fighting every single dim witted persons battles for them?

Nooooo.... but.. when we can foresee the eventual involvement of our "super power". We should do what is necessary to nip it in the bud as soon as possible, opposed to later...

Of course with the approval of the other bodies in the room...

I also think we burnt alot of our credit with our last two Campaigns and anything from today forward, willl have to have concrete proof to get the support that is desired for any involvement of the worlds "only" "super power".

Bottom line, Iran talks alot of trash, and no we shouldn't listen, no we shouldn't give it credit, but when they're talking about wiping out people just because of how they pray, or because they couldn't be dislodged from a place they've called home for at least a century, that's getting a little ridiculous, and should be met with a little opposition...

not to mention we have our own beefs with Iran over past transgressions.... I think I've a good grasp on Iran and it's being, from Persia, to the U.S. Puppet Shaw, to the current Leadership, ... Their people are and were better off with our involvement in their lives than without, Shaw or Ayatollah , they would be ... no everyone would be better in a better world with rather than without, the U.S. presence being involved in their lives....

The U.S. government makes mistakes, is not infallible but, is the very best thing for the people of this planet since the invention of the wheel.... think about it ;)

Nice tirade, I must say. I will agree with the fact that WWII, my war, was the last one decisively won, though. Good observation. We were considered as the only standing super power with the collapse of the Soviets but we were not then nor are we now the only atomic power in the world so considering that we are reduced in stature to being a member of the UN along with the other signatories who also have the same obligation, which they refuse to honor, in supporting the UN charter. We, our government, is composed of ego maniacs who will gladly send the young people into harm's way, for what? The sooner we stop interfering in the internal affairs of sovereign nations around the globe whether they like it or not the sooner the simmering stew will cool off. I did my time in hell (1942-45 PTO) in order to preserve what we had then and generations have come and gone and thrown away what we/I bled for. Like it or not, I am NOT my brothers keeper.

No sir, no you are not, but were at one point, and I'd guess if the @!$%# hit the fan again you would have done it pretty darn close to the same way, again.

Decisive victory... and then talk.

Unconditional surrender! ... but but .. no f that hit them again...

I wish things were as simple today as they seemed then. ( I know they weren't but humor me)

I mean that if anyone is to say what is right and what is wrong, it only makes sense that a free population free of state sponsored fear mongering, (to a degree) free to make choices, makes much better decisions for any given group, than the hate filled leaders of that group... (most of the time anyway, there are exceptions, but not many) (in today's context, I knowwww the U.s. government is guilty of it's own atrocities, but today's government would literally have purple kittens if some of the U.S.'s past policies were brought before the floor today)

I guess...

Back on topic before I get us booted, ... the Message delivered is " Iran, we're trying to keep this pit bull from ripping your head off, why do you insist on smacking it in the nose and rubbing bloody steak across your chest taunting it?" ...

in my opinion. :)

Just like the 9/11 bombers were no threat to the US.

They weren't Iranians.

List of Iranian (and Iranian surrogate)attacks on americans

http://www.iranterror.com/content/view/38/56/

August 1983 An Air France 747

vienna isn't in america

i also wasn't able to find anything on the august 1983 highjacking except this:

http://books.google.com/books?id=hP7jJAkTd9MC&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=air+france+hijacking+august+1983+vienna&source=bl&ots=PFryfVf9_N&sig=m5nH_v09ace5yse3WFhExsKzgx8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=01hET4HnFPOrsAKnxfnCDw&ved=0CEkQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=air%20france%20hijacking%20august%201983%20vienna&f=false

but the passengers were released.

aRTieA, I suprised they didn't blame the Lindberg kiddnapping on Iran!!

Lindberg would have been an Iranian advocate!

Didn't America shoot down an Iranian passenger plane? Didn't America lead a coup in Iran to install a puppet?

Hippocrates of Cos

but puppets are fun, you don't like the muppets?

Muppets, like clowns and carnies, scare me. All jokes aside, if Iran and Israel continue their low intensity geopolitical war, through proxies, eventually it can escalate into a regional fur ball.

lol any country the U.S. has a hand in tampering is a better nation becuase of it, i.e. running water, electricity, example of a stable government... etc.

the ones that don't ... well look no further than North Korea.

lol any country the U.S. has a hand in tampering is a better nation becuase of it, i.e. running water, electricity, example of a stable government... etc.

lol, so millions of dead Vietnamese is ok because we were trying to bring them democracy? Though, we weren't interested in helping them so much as we were interested in the heroine and opium found in 'Nam, Burma, Louse, Cambodia, etc etc... I wonder how drinkable their "running water" is? Good thing we left South Vietnam with a "stable" government...

Statistically speaking, the US has assisted in the overthrow (regime change) of more governments that were Democratically elected to power compared to those under dictatorships...

It is one country now yes? free of it's colonial powers? they feel better off, they feel nice and at home with their fabulous factories, their wonderful exports, and not to mention a nice tourism industry, yes... they are better off now than before.

You cannot stop progress, but you can slow the hell out of it.

Iran would take pre-emptive action against its enemies if it felt its national interests were endangered

Again what does that have to do with the US?

Again what does that have to do with the US?

it is exactly what the us has done numerous times.

Again what does that have to do with the US?

You have probably been away for awhile. Iran considers the US an enemy.

The deputy head of the Islamic Republic's armed forces was quoted by a semi-official news agency as saying on Tuesday that if Iran felt that its interests were threatened they would launch a preemptive attack against their enemies, including Israel and the United States.

You have probably been away for awhile. Iran considers the US an enemy.

Only because of our saber rattling support of Israel. End that support and end their antipathy towards the US.

End that support and end their antipathy towards the US.

That is illogical and incorrect.

Only because of our saber rattling support of Israel. End that support and end their antipathy towards the US.

Correct. If the US government did not unconditionally support their enemy then they would not be antagonistic towards the US.

That is unsubstantiated BS.

Osama attacked the US because Saudi Arabia allowed US troops onto Saudi soil.

Osama attacked the US because Saudi Arabia allowed US troops onto Saudi soil.

how is osama bin laden related to iran?

Huh! Please read all the comments in the branch.

Polka insinuated that if Israel did not exist, we would be lovey-dovey with the radical Islamics.

Polka insinuated that if Israel did not exist

Polka insinuated if us didn't support israel unconditionally then iran would not be angry.

but polka is incorrect to a degree, the us did mess with the iranian elections.

but polka is incorrect to a degree, the us did mess with the iranian elections.

I don't think that is relevant to current hostilities. I have always believed that it was US and western interference in Iran's sovereignty and the support of its enemy that has lead to the hostilities.

it is, the us installed a dictator that brutally murdered thousands of iranians.

We can not change the past but we can do the right thing and not interfere in that nation in the future and not support its enemies.

No one can know what would have became of Iran if there was no Puppet U.S. Shaw installed, they could be as dysfunctional as Afghanistan has been for the past 20 years, or they could have been the 4th coming of a Reich, you never know , but we do know their progress forward rather than backward has been expedited by the U.S. presence in the area/world.

No one can know what would have became of Iran

Who are Westerners to interfere with the development of another nation? Does rich Iranian resources justify oppressing the Iranians and installing a dictatorship over them?

It is what it is man,...

I didn't ask the world to be an unfair place it just is, and if I have an opportunity to make something BETTER than what it is, I am going to try.

If I see impoverish people misusing natural resoruces becuase they either don't know they're there, or just don't have the education to know they're there, well it's our obligation to either help those people use those resources, or... blow their ass to @!$%# so we can.

and that's the way the world is. coke heroine, whatever medium you want to use as an example, if it's there, someone will find a way to exploit it.

Back in 1960ish we tried to help the Iranians, ....... they didn't like it, they wanted more faster, without actually going through te pain staking motions of earning the tech, the industrial the political science themselves, they wanted what we had, and they wanted it then..... and here we are today... Maybe blowing them to @!$%# would have been simpler then but hey, here we are today .

Who? We are that we f'in are man, We are nations of laws, and nations of people, We learn, we read, we listen, and from my most recent edumakation (see what i did there) about 70% of Iran's population doesn't really like their own government, (about 50% of our population is dissatisfied with our government) ...

what that tells me is , if everyone had their own way ,we wouldn't get @!$%# done... EVER.

Sometimes what we want isn't what we need, and if they don't know any better, well... shame on them , and me for wanting to enlighten them, to the end result of them hating me for not having what I have, and being able to provide it to them on a silver plater....

but they got to smart to fast and now we're the bad guy. ... sounds like a teen who needs to be put in check to me but...

hey man, this is just my opinion and there'd be reasons I don't make decisions for anyone else but me :)

I don't think that is relevant to current hostilities. I have always believed that it was US and western interference in Iran's sovereignty and the support of its enemy that has lead to the hostilities.

What many American don't have is a historical perspective of WHY our relationship with Iran has reached the point it has. While our support for Israel is partly to blame, so is the oppression of the Palestinians and the US supported invasions of Lebanon by the IDF.

Many Americans know that Iran overran our embassy and held Americans hostage but have, absolutely, no idea of the reasons why.

Polka is right, US support for Israel has lead to low intensity conflicts between the three nations, BUT by far, the largest piece of the puzzle is Operation Ajax and the installation of Mohammad Rezā Shāh Pahlavi by Eisenhower and Churchill.

That has lead to the hatred for the United States by Iranians. The Savak (the Shah's secret police) were supported by the CIA and MI6 and provided the intelligence that allowed the Shah to stay in power, the US armed the Iranian military, even going as far as given them F14s and many other top line US weapons.

We've made Iran in the sole bad actor in this drama, but there is enough blame to go around for all concerned.

playing devils advocate here:

Cue 1945 Nazi Germany , a beat to crap nation being rebuilt, re armed and given leeway because of past transgressions..

No, we HAVE to have learned from that.

(hehehe I knew I was spelling shah wrong. thanks ;)

dbmcc:

Everything you "said" was "well-put" following your first sentance; which was too silly.

Silly in your opinion, but IMO, the Military-Industrial Complex is always looking for ways to justify our involvment in a war. It's all about money and Greed. They make more money when wars flair up and less when they don't. They play on the public fear and they buy the politicians to achieve their ends.

We have no business interfering in Syria or Iran. All we need to do is let them fall under their own failed policies.

alpha,

I simply do not yet understand the sanctions. Cuba has been sanctioned for 50 years, instead of becoming the 51st state.

Iranian peoples experiencing 35% inflation. How many children are now hungry there, in addition to the 25 million children her in USA? How are the Persian peoples our enemy?

Carefully read the history of American involvement there since the Korean war. Who did we do all that for? British Petroleum is the only culprit I can see from here. There must be more.

Persia has been the enemy of Democracy since the times of Sparta if I read my history right... ;) just saying.

supersaiyan, you know who else uses logic and facts and sane reasoning?!? NERDS!!!!!! and you know what nerds are? WEAK!!!!!

infra,

I met a responsible nerd once. 6 ft 3 inches and 300 pounds. Big nerd, big military commander, accomplished. We need more.

There has been enough saber rattling from every side.

It is time for the governments (and religions) of the world to stop acting like spoiled-rotten children, and bring peace to this planet.

How many more generations of our children will grow up fearing, and hating people they don't know, just because our leaders are still being @!$%#s?

Just think what this world could be like if we devoted the same amount of resources towards repairing it, as we have trying to destroy it.

You mean the President that thought it was important to continue to pursue Osama? The President who ordered more drone attacks so that now Al Kyeta has been decimated.

I am talking about the Dempsey comment only. Those other things were good and the Dempsey comment in not.

Please keep focus on the topic at hand instead of deflecting.

Buzz, I'm sorry but in looking back I have been guilty of some of this too in that I attempted to bring a historical perspective to the General's remarks and pretty much failed. I shall stand down.

Some officials regarded a powerful Germany as a bulwark against the Soviet Union.

But they eventually allied with the Soviet Union despite the fact that it committed the same egregious crime that provoked the western allies to declare war on Germany.

It's a good thing they did or we would all be sending our kids to school; raising a "Heil" every morning.

It's a good thing they did or we would all be sending our kids to school; raising a "Heil" every morning.

No, we would not be effected and the German defeat was inevitable. I don't see it as very fair that they would only declare war against one offending nation and not both. Maybe if they did declare war on both nations then the western allies could have destroyed both Hitler and Stalin and rid the world of two evil regimes and prevented the cold war and the arms race, Vietnam war, Korean conflict, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and Red China.

To make the world.... England!?

No, we would not be effected and the German defeat was inevitable.

Glad your crystal ball into alternate realities is so clear.

As is, what reality actually presented, saw the monstrous affects and the huge epic will and bravery it took to defeat it. Some of the largest of that bravery coming from folks who were willing to stand against the tide and appear as reactionary in the face of those who would stick their head in the sand, appease and then roll over and offer their children as a living sacrifice.

Glad your crystal ball into alternate realities is so clear.

It isn't crystal ball. The Soviets inflicted the vast majority of Nazi casualties. They would have won in the East even if the US did not get involved and I think they would have won even if we were bombing them too in addition to waging war on the Germans and we should have went to war against both when we entered WWII alongside the UK, Canada and Australia. But if we went to war against the Germans and Soviets then we could have destroyed both evil empires.

I don't think anyone rolled over when war was inevitable. Appeasement could be needed to prevent an unnecessary and costly war and that is sometimes needed but the appeasement from the western allies had its limits and it was reached when the Nazis and the Soviets invaded Poland.

:/

Russia was desperately holding onto Stalingrad during the portion of the war that the U.S. was introduced, the United States being involved did loosen Nazi Germany's grip on it's Eastern Front.

To suggest the Russians were going to be able to repel the Nazis, AND the Japanese without U.S. intervention is well silly.

They were on their proverbial Knees when the U.S. was introduced to the theater.

No one can know for certain if they would have been able to resist the onslaught, but to say they were certain in victory solo, opposed to what actually happened, is ... a stretch.

In my opinion.

No one can know for certain if they would have been able to resist the onslaught, but to say they were certain in victory solo, opposed to what actually happened, is ... a stretch.

I think they would have won with greater casualties and that is not something they concern themselves with. Only victory matters to them. A weakened Germany and Soviet Union would have been advantageous as the western allies could have taken advantage of that while waging war on both nations for the purposes of seeking the collapse of both regimes. We should have bombed the Soviet Union while bombing areas in Germany. In my opinion, it would have been equally just.

as would the expulsion of non indiginous people from North America?

as would the expulsion of non indiginous people from North America?

I don't understand what you are referencing. I do not think that would be just.

I apologize for off-topic discussion. Maybe I should write my own article about it.

Buzz

You have managed to bring out the best and the worst in this seed.

So what is the Iranian threat to the big and little devil. Everyone talks about a missile deliverable nuclear device as the end game and proof positive that Iran is (has) developed a nuclear weapons capability. But I am more concerned with a dirty bomb that essentially does little property damage over an area but spreads radioactivity making a large geographical area uninhabitable for decades.

buzz,

this is a good seed, maybe most important of the week, because people are writing different opinions, viewpoints that differ from facts as they see it. And getting any facts onto the table in America is hard to do.

Normal here on the vine. Folks do not have the time available to read all printed about the new chief of staff. We do not have soldiers and marines available now or in the near future to do Iran correctly in the second place. In the first place, we are being driven to war by too many blinded by their desire for democracy in the middle east - even at the point of our sword.

prefer we turn Hilary loose on Iran for good results. And the elected there are moderate in comparison to republican guard generals. Humorously, they match up to many of our white house czars pretty well! Living in the today with angry attitudes from the long ago.