UK/US draw up plan to attack Iran

[scottish]

The UK and U.S. are drawing up plans to attack Iran amid growing tensions in the Middle East, it was claimed last night.

Barack Obama and David Cameron are preparing for war after reports that Iran now has enough enriched uranium for four nuclear weapons.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s hardline regime in Tehran has been linked to three assassination plots on foreign soil, according to senior officials in Whitehall.




Iran has come sharply back into focus following the end of the Libya conflict.

And the unrest has been inflamed by sabre-rattling from top politicians in Israel.

Yesterday it was revealed that Tel Aviv had successfully test-fired a rocket capable of carrying a nuclear warhead which could strike Iran.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak are reportedly agitating for a pre-emptive attack against the Islamic state.

The UK would be likely to agree to any U.S. decision to invade, even though the Ministry of Defence are stretched to breaking point by swingeing budget cuts and wars in Afghanistan and Libya.

An MoD spokesman said: ‘The British government believes that a dual track strategy of pressure and engagement is the best approach to address the threat from Iran’s nuclear programme and avoid regional conflict.

‘We want a negotiated solution – but all options should be kept on the table.’
A special unit at the MoD has been instructed to work out the UK's strategy if the Army should invade Iran.

War planners will look at potential deployments of Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles and RAF fighter jets armed with precision-guided Paveway IV and Brimstone bombs and missiles, surveillance planes and air-to-air refuelling.

Senior Whitehall figures have expressed alarm that Iran appeared ‘newly aggressive – and we are not quite sure why’.

Western intelligence has also suggested that Iran is hiding the material for a covert nuclear weapons programme in fortified bunkers which cannot be reached by conventional missiles.

Barack Obama is understood to have no wish to attack Iran in the run-up to the White House elections next year. But Washington may be pressured by Israel if Iran’s nuclear programme is not curtailed.

Mr Netanyahu is apparently also lobbying Cabinet members for a military strike, despite the likelihood it would draw a retaliation from Iran.



An Israeli defence official said the rocket launched by the military had merely been a long-planned test for a 'propulsion system'.

Further information about the rocket was censored by the military, but foreign reports said it was a long-range Jericho missile - capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and striking Iran.

Israel considers Iran its most dangerous threat. It cites Tehran's nuclear programme, ballistic missile development, repeated references by the Iranian leader to Israel's destruction and the government's support for anti-Israel militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah.

Mr Ahmadinejad denies his country is trying to produce a bomb, claiming its nuclear programme is only intended to produce energy for the oil-rich country.
But the work could only be for the design and development of a nuclear warhead, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency's report.

Israel have repeatedly insisted that economic sanctions could persuade Iran to halt its nuclear ambitions.
Diplomats have been lobbying the international community for tougher sanctions - but have now stepped up their interventions.

It comes as Mr Netanyahu defended his decision to expand settlements in east Jerusalem.

He said it was Israel's 'right' and 'duty' to build in all parts of its capital.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...=feeds-newsxml

[Ardemax]

Although there are more solid grounds to attack Iran than Iraq, it probably wouldn't be the best to do so.

We should wait it out until it's too late until some significant progress is made either through democracy or....

[Chippiewill]

I guess we have another one of these on our hands:

[Slowpoke]

I don't know how true all of this is, I take it with a pinch of salt since it's the Daily Mail reporting. As everybody knows, all they ever seem to do is scare the public with false headlines

However, it wouldn't surprise me if this is true. I hope they know what they're doing as it'd be a crying shame to see our planet destroyed in the near future due nuclear war. To be honest, I'm not 100% sure why we are getting involved. Oh wait, because we're Americas *****

[-:Undertaker:-]

Vote Republicrat or LibLabCon and get more war, its as simple as that.

I don't know how true all of this is, I take it with a pinch of salt since it's the Daily Mail reporting. As everybody knows, all they ever seem to do is scare the public with false headlines

Like the Beeb with swine flue and Iraq's non-existant WMD?

But as for Iran being a threat, even if it were a threat (which its not) would it still be right to attack Iran? there are many nations around the world which we could consider a 'threat' yet that does not mean we attack them. Iran however you can class as not a threat, because Iran has no nuclear weapons and even if it did, we have thousands more. Iran does not have a blue water navy or even a large naval presence in the Persian Gulf, Iran does not have the means of delievering a nuclear weapon to us or our allies.

And besides, what makes anyone think Iran would attack us? Iran is not a warmongering nation (see list of conflicts involving Iran).

[Slowpoke]

British media for you I suppose

[Chippiewill]

I don't know how true all of this is, I take it with a pinch of salt since it's the Daily Mail reporting. As everybody knows, all they ever seem to do is scare the public with false headlines

I'm inclined to agree, nothing makes a newspaper sell like a good war related news headline.

However, it wouldn't surprise me if this is true.

Well, we do have a very legitimate reason for drawing up plans to invade Iran, if threats are made or sufficient evidence produced to confirm a nuclear weapon then we need to be in a position where we can destroy targets and dissolve a corrupt government. Unlike Libya there are threats to be made against us and unlike Iraq, David Cameron knows it's political suicide to invade without overwhelming evidence and a referendum.

But I don't think Iran really has a motive to attack us and it really isn't right to decide that we're the only ones allowed to have nuclear weapons.

Just because it's in the middle east doesn't make it evil.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well, we do have a very legitimate reason for drawing up plans to invade Iran, if threats are made or sufficient evidence produced to confirm a nuclear weapon then we need to be in a position where we can destroy targets and dissolve a corrupt government. Unlike Libya there are threats to be made against us and unlike Iraq, David Cameron knows it's political suicide to invade without overwhelming evidence and a referendum.

Ermmm since when do we get to decide who is and who isn't allowed nuclear weapons?

But if you're wondering why Iran might want nuclear weapons, here's a picture of U.S. (a hostile country to Iran) military bases in the Gulf;

[Slowpoke]

Well, we do have a very legitimate reason for drawing up plans to invade Iran, if threats are made or sufficient evidence produced to confirm a nuclear weapon then we need to be in a position where we can destroy targets and dissolve a corrupt government. Unlike Libya there are threats to be made against us and unlike Iraq, David Cameron knows it's political suicide to invade without overwhelming evidence and a referendum.

But I don't think Iran really has a motive to attack us and it really isn't right to decide that we're the only ones allowed to have nuclear weapons.

Just because it's in the middle east doesn't make it evil.

Totally agree buddy. It definitely feels like playing with fire though

If it's all true it worries me that this information has been leaked, the Daily Mail shouldn't know any of this

[Chippiewill]

Ermmm since when do we get to decide who is and who isn't allowed nuclear weapons?

I just added that caveat, I forgot to include it initially.

But if you're wondering why Iran might want nuclear weapons, here's a picture of U.S. (a hostile country to Iran) military bases in the Gulf;

I guess any missile launch could be intercepted with ease then..