Iran warns of 'consequences' if referred to UN re uranium

Ballard · Post by **Ballard** » 20 Jan 2006, 12:34

So.

Oil embargo against Iran = Massive price rises = Recession

Military action against Iran = Massive price rises = Recession

And this happens in March ?

Andy Hunt · Post by **Andy Hunt** » 20 Jan 2006, 12:55

Best time to invade Middle Eastern counties, too.

I always remember this - the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a couple of days after my birthday. It seems best to start operations early in the spring, to avoid having to fight in the heat of summer. Even March is leaving it a bit late, really.

The first Gulf War was launched in January 1991.

fishertrop · Post by **fishertrop** » 20 Jan 2006, 20:42

On A7radio: Military Attack against Iran Now Imminent
10:36 Jan 20, '06 / 20 Tevet 5766

World renowned investigative reporter and terror expert Kenneth R. Timmerman, author of the bestselling book "Countdown to Crisis: the Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran," and Carl Limbacher, reporter for NewMax.com, reveal that the US and Israel will destroy Iran's nuclear facilities in less than 10 weeks from now.

http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=96976

The program itself - http://msmedia.a7.org:82/arutz7/shows/E ... as-w-1.mp3

fishertrop · Post by **fishertrop** » 21 Jan 2006, 09:29

Israel accuses Iran of funding bomb attack
By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem
Published: 21 January 2006

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/mid ... 340044.ece

Israel has accused Iran of funding the suicide bombing in a Tel Aviv caf? which injured more than 30 people on Thursday.

Andy Hunt · Post by **Andy Hunt** » 21 Jan 2006, 09:31

Israel accuses Iran of funding bomb attack

If you fling enough mud, some of it is bound to stick.

fishertrop · Post by **fishertrop** » 26 Jan 2006, 11:55

Iran accuses UK of bombing link

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 646864.stm

Iran has accused the UK of co-operating with bombers who killed eight people in attacks in the restive south-western city of Ahwaz on Tuesday.

"Britain must respond to the doubts of Iranians concerning the events," said Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki.

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 26 Jan 2006, 11:58

China backs Russian compromise deal.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 649182.stm

Sounds like a reasonable deal to me , just need the trigger yanks to agree

Bozzio · Post by **Bozzio** » 26 Jan 2006, 14:03

I think we are heading for war with Iran.

The movement of 5000 troops to Afghanistan in the next few weeks could be a sign of this. John Reid might say otherwise but such a large movement of our men and women does seem rather odd. Iran is only next door of course.

Thus far we have had 850 troops supporting work in Afghanistan. If the government wants 5700 there by July then that's an almost 7 fold increase. Why the sudden build-up? Have military tactics in Afghanistan suddenly changed? I think not.

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 27 Jan 2006, 14:16

The movement of 5000 troops to Afghanistan in the next few weeks could be a sign of this. John Reid might say otherwise but such a large movement of our men and women does seem rather odd. Iran is only next door of course.

Thus far we have had 850 troops supporting work in Afghanistan. If the government wants 5700 there by July then that's an almost 7 fold increase. Why the sudden build-up? Have military tactics in Afghanistan suddenly changed? I think not.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/is ... ckdown.htm

British military commanders are discussing proposals to move as many as 5,000 troops into one of Afghanistan's most lawless drug regions when Britain assumes control of Nato peacekeeping in the country the year after next. Planning is already under way for British forces to replace American troops in the two southern provinces of Kandahar and Helmand in 2006.

I think this is another example of people reading too much into things. This deployment has been planned for over a year.

I doubt very much we will invade Iran - it is simply a bridge way too far!

TB

MacG · Post by **MacG** » 27 Jan 2006, 14:25

Funny that the brits did not feel enough pain in Afghanistan in the 1800's, but keep coming back for more...

Bozzio · Post by **Bozzio** » 27 Jan 2006, 18:43

Totally_Baffled wrote:I think this is another example of people reading too much into things. This deployment has been planned for over a year.

I doubt very much we will invade Iran - it is simply a bridge way too far!

TB

Hi TB,

I agree very much in principle, although I guess anything could happen. Silly to speculate really.

However, the planning period of a year does not diminish the possibilty of an attack, after all the military exercise in Oman in September 2001 was a perfect military manoeuvre for the subsequent invasion on Afghanistan a few weeks later. I don't believe the Oman exercise was just concidence in the same way I don't believe Osama Bin Laden had anything to do with 9/11.

Just my opinion.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 30 Jan 2006, 10:27

In-depth look at the likelihood of a US-led war with Iran: Calculating the Risk of War in Iran

fishertrop · Post by **fishertrop** » 31 Jan 2006, 15:50

Iran nabs ten bombing suspects

Friday January 27, 2006 13:42 - (SA)

http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/zones/sund ... 62137.aspx

TEHRAN - Iran has made number of arrests after Tuesday's twin bomb attack in the restive oil city of Ahvaz with 10 suspects already lined up for charges, the local media reported.

"A number of the people involved in the bombing were identified and arrested and so far 10 of those have been handed over to the judiciary," Interior Minister Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi was quoted as saying by Iranian news agencies.

MacG · Post by **MacG** » 31 Jan 2006, 18:12

Here is an article from AsiaTimes which match my thinking on the subject: The talk about "military options" is intended as diplomatic pressure only. But it might not work this time:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HA27Ak01.html

fishertrop · Post by **fishertrop** » 31 Jan 2006, 20:20

Iran threatens end to diplomacy
Tuesday 31 January 2006

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ ... 8C7687.htm

Iran has struck back at the Big Five powers' decision to refer Iran's nuclear file to the Security Council, saying referral would mean the end of diplomacy over its nuclear programme.