Iran warns US over nuclear threat

[sabra]

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,16262339%255E1702,00.html

Iran warns US over nuclear threat

IRAN'S ultra-conservative President Mahmood Ahmadinejad has unveiled a new hardline cabinet as Tehran warned the West not to resort to bullying over its nuclear program.

....

Iran bluntly told US President George W. Bush that it would respond to any attack, and warned that it could consider ending a freeze on uranium enrichment, a process that can make fuel for a nuclear bomb.

"Bush should know that our capabilities are much greater than those of the United States," foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said. "We don't think that the United States will make such a mistake."

The US president on Friday refused to rule out the use of force against Iran over its resumption of limited nuclear activities last week, saying "all options are on the table."

[iconoclastic cat]

1. Oh, great. That's just great.

Now what, chimptator?

[iconoclastic cat]

2. I can't believe that nobody's commented on this.

[BootinUp]

4. Love that pic.

Oh, as far as the news thing....what's new. I'll take another beer.

[eggman67]

16. Good taste in beer BTW

I prefer Guinness, personally but certainly enjoy a nice cold Bass from time to time.

[neverforget]

3. One hardliner threatening another hardliner......thanks Bush you fucking

idiot.

[Barrett808]

5. Does he really believe Iran's "capabilities are much greater" than the US?

That's almost a neocon level of delusion.

Hmm, there's an idea -- we can measure delusion in "neocon" units. So, for example, this statement would measure about 1 neocon of delusion.

[ixion]

7. who cares? the end result is that innocent civillians die

and that's what simply should not be allowed. :grr:

[eggman67]

13. I just posted about this on another thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1696784#1700922

Where do they think this is going to get them?

[0007]

30. Re-post it here I'm not going over there on a guess-what!

BTW welcome to DU

[leesa]

22. They might be because they have the backing of both China and Russia

Our military has been decimated by Bush. We HAVE no military.

[daleo]

26. I presume he means "our capacities in the region"

It may be bluster, but he has a point when he says that they have a relatively strong military force with short supply lines, while the U.S. has a stretched force with long supply lines. It is assumed that U.S. airpower would make up for this, but it hasn't really been tested against strong air defenses for quite a while (i.e. they may have Russian or Chinese air defense technology).

He may also be implying he has something up his sleeves - some completed nukes, nuclear capable allies they can trust, or non-nuclear assets that could take out significant U.S. naval forces.

Not that any of this would bother neo-cons. I think they would rather like to see significant U.S. losses, under the assumption it would create a "rally round the flag" effect.

[Earth_First]

6. Re-recycled threats...

Same 'news' different headlines.

This gravely reminds me of the lead up into Iraq...

[WLKjr]

8. It's officially started

I am calling it now. We will be at war with Iran before GWB is out of office in 2008. It's going to be a damn long 3 years...........

[Mizmoon]

10. With what troops?

I think Iran is going to make herself a bomb while we're too entangled to stop her.

[WLKjr]

12. I don't believe it will be with troops

One of us will launch a nuke and then China will intervene.

[eggman67]

15. I don't believe it will be with troops or nukes

We'll just carpet bomb them into capitulation. These guys are not stupid or politically suicidal. As a matter of fact, I think that the fact that people continue to think they are stupid gives them a significant part of their power. Misunderestimate indeed.

[Miss Chybil]

28. Just how will they justify carpet-bombing an entire population, again,

without being politically - or literally - suicidal? China and Russia are not going to play games when it comes to Iran. The day we push that button, is the day WWIII begins. I think this whole thing is STUPID and the people behind it have their heads so far up their greedy, egomaniacal asses they can't see past the shit they spew.

[AndyTiedye]

21. Could Be a Lot Longer than 3 Years

If ** does get us embroiled in a war with Iran, do you really think he
will leave in 2008?

Their plan is obvious.

Stage another fake terrorist attack (MIHOP).
Blame Iran and start bombing.
Start up the draft.
Declare martial law.
Bushler** declares himself pResident-for-life.

[Betty]

9. Is there no end to what this asshole can do

and get away with it with at least a large number, if not a majority of Americans??? HIs approval rating should be 0%. Anyone who approves of this is a fucking idiot or a homicidal maniac.

[delen]

11. Iran's capabilities much greater than US's

Maybe he was blowing smoke
Maybe he was talking about ground forces
orrrrr
Maybe he was talking about the fact that China has purchased 51% of the drilling rights for to the Yadavaran oil fields, located in Khuzestan province which is on the Iran-Iraq border, giving China a major interest in the area.
The closest Iraqi city btw is Basra.

[eggman67]

14. If he's counting on China

He's making a mistake.

China will "object" at the UN then do nothing after we buy them off behind the scenes by assuring them that the "new Iranian regime" will honor the oil deals.

[delen]

19. That had crossed my mind

The only problem is will * allow Chinese drilling operations to continue or will he demand "over site" by Halliburton?

[eggman67]

20. Either way

None of that will come up until after the "regime change" in Iran.

That said, I think he just might allow it. There's always room for dealing between the big boys where oil in concerned. Neither the US nor China has any interest in military conflict with each other. No the big guns are smart about picking their fights.

[delen]

24. Agreed

or just plain greed. Could be that's the reason * economists let China accrue such a financial foothold in the US, they can't f*** us without feeling some pain themselves.

[eggman67]

25. I hadn't thought of that

but now that you mention it it makes perfect sense.

[Miss Chybil]

29. We're going to pay off China, when they own huge chunk of our debt?

There is very little of anything we use everyday that doesn't come from China. I'm sure we are a very good customer to China, but we are not the only customer and they will not stand for us being in charge of Iran's oil for a mere payoff. They could dump our debt and send this country into an economic tailspin without having to fire a single shot.

[eggman67]

31. And China would benefit from that how? (n/t)

[Miss Chybil]

32. They would benefit more than they would taking a "pay-off" then hoping

we honor our word regarding "their" oil.

[phusion]

17. What's with the unnecessary labels?

"IRAN'S ultra-conservative President Mahmood Ahmadinejad has..."

Bad journalism.

Unless they use "Neo-conservative President George W. Bush..."

[delen]

23. To Everything

Spin, Spin, Spin


We or * aren't "extremists" they are.

[NNN0LHI]

18. Oil embargo best response to nuclear boycott

http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=8/14/2005&Cat=14&Num=001

Thursday’s resolution of the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors, issued under pressure from the United States and the European Union big three, actually indicated that the status of international organizations, including the IAEA, has declined seriously in the face of the blackmail of the neocolonialist powers.

The resolution was ratified despite the fact that the Islamic Republic had proven its good faith and observed all IAEA regulations.

Unfortunately, under the tutelage of the U.S., the EU trio of Britain, France, and Germany drafted an unfair resolution against Iran by fostering disunity among the member states of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).

The resolution, which violates the terms of the Tehran and Paris accords, was ratified to meet the objectives of the Zionist regime and the United States.

[VegasWolf]

27. Bush's credibility at home and abroad is smaller than the little cowboy

himself.