There is no appetite for war in the UK. Zero. We're fucking done, Afghanistan and Iraq were unpopular here and a massive waste of money. No way the Liberal Democrats would okay this (they were the only party to vote against the Iraq war), if the Conservatives went through with it the government would break down. Nobody wants war.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK military steps up contingency planning for Iran attack amid fresh nuclear fears
- Thread starter Ether_Snake
- Start date
- Status
el retorno
Member
This is pretty much what every US officals and probably Euro offical fears. Nobody fears Iran launching a missle at Israel. The Saudis and other gulf states were lobbing hard for this and with Iran actually planing attack I'd imagen that that has gone up.Schattenjagger said:
If Iran gets nukes the Saudis will needed them next and the US and the West wouldn't be able to really stop that... I thinking the military strike is looking more and more likely. I dont think it is going to be an Iraq though if it does happen just coordinated strikes at military targets with Obama yelling at the top of his lungs he doesnt want a wider war.
The Incarnation
Member
Mammoth Jones said:
Yeah, when has that ever happened in our lifetime?
There practically nothing in this world that convinces me that the need for war isn't part of human nature.
Guerrillas in the Mist
Member
Meadows said:
David Cameron: "I agreed with Nick, and now Nick agrees with me... FOREVER"
zomgbbqftw
Banned
Meadows said:
Yup, the Lib Dems took a lot of convincing for the Libya intervention and there was a clear case of war crimes in Libya. I can't see how they could continue in a coalition government angling for an unwarranted invasion rather than an intervention.
There is absolutely no chance of an Iran invasion. The only thing I can think of is if they start a military campaign against Israel, but even then I think it would be a US invasion in which we would have a secondary role with intelligence, special forces and air power rather than troops on the ground.
chaostrophy
Member
Ignis Fatuus said:
Israel has nukes. They are the first country in the region to obtain them, so if there is a nuclear arms race, they have already started it. Why punish Iran for Israel's actions? If the US wants to be taken seriously on stopping nuclear proliferation, how about it cuts off funding to Israel until they give up their nukes? Then it can talk to Iran.
PumpkinPie
Banned
crazy monkey said:
I know. I'm fucking tired of it too, our governments cry because they have no money yet they spend billions inventing wars.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
War is big business, so they won´t have anything to do beside that.crazy monkey said:
zomgbbqftw
Banned
Meadows said:
Send me a message should the situation arise, I would go an protest as well. Though a whole day with lefty socialists might be too much, so I would probably go home early!
HammerOfThor
Member
What would happen if they bombed the reactors? Would it be the same as dropping a nuke ?
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
We've been hearing about the West bombing Iran since the early 2000s.
StealthGoblin
Banned
zomgbbqftw said:Send me a message should the situation arise, I would go an protest as well. Though a whole day with lefty socialists might be too much, so I would probably go home early!
I'm in London and I'd join you.
It'd just be the three of us looking like bellends.
Nah, but seriously, the people of the UK are weary from hearing "A Soldier from X platoon was killed in Helmand province yesterday after a large IED explosion. Next of kin have been informed" and then the day after: "The soldier killed in Helmand yesterday has been named as Lance Corporal X. He is survived by a wife and two children.". We've had enough. If people thought the Iraq protests were big, then the Iran ones will be fucking insane.
Nah, but seriously, the people of the UK are weary from hearing "A Soldier from X platoon was killed in Helmand province yesterday after a large IED explosion. Next of kin have been informed" and then the day after: "The soldier killed in Helmand yesterday has been named as Lance Corporal X. He is survived by a wife and two children.". We've had enough. If people thought the Iraq protests were big, then the Iran ones will be fucking insane.
Something Wicked said:
I know, sometimes people forget.
False evidence provided to engage war in Iraq,leading to death of hundered and thousand of civilians . A pre-emptive attack
Putting Saddam andBath party in power, leading thousand of death by saddam
Iran-Contra affair, giving weapons to Iran
Wikileaks has reported that the US government has been covertly funding the Syrian opposition
This just top of my head. Of course all this even though 6,211 miles away.
ooooh. Iran. we are doomed.
Large Professor
Member
Have you guys heard about this "grand bargain" fax from 2003?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/showdown/themes/grandbargain.html
Talk about a missed opportunity!
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/showdown/themes/grandbargain.html
Talk about a missed opportunity!
Speedymanic
Banned
Meadows said:
And the Government will just ignore them, just as they did the Iraq war protests.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
No, see, no matter what you think of Israel this is factual nonsense. The arms race in question is about the Sunni and Shiite divide. Saudi Arabia has publicly announced on several occasions that they will pursue a nuclear program if Iran does obtain a nuclear weapon and you can expect other Sunni states to follow suit. It has shit all to do with Israel. House of Saud would've pursued that nuke a long time ago if Israel was really the catalyst.chaostrophy said:
This is like saying the Chinese obtaining the bomb was what started the nuclear race between India and Pakistan. Nonsense. People like you who support Iran's bid for nukes play right into Tehran's hands by promoting the idea that it's about Israel when the real threat is an ancient religious blood feud that's threatening to go nuclear.
And regardless of who "starts" the race, the end result of mass nuclear propagation throughout an unstable region should give any pragmatic mind pause. The reason western governments are so threatened by the possibility of a nuclear Iran is precisely because they want to avoid that nightmare scenario.
Iran should be allowed a nuke although I'd prefer they didn't. The US and UK have enough to destroy the entire world. Iran isn't stupid, they won't use it as a weapon. Nukes are used as deterrents. Even Iran would know if they used a nuke, they would be the one who would suffer so much more. It's nothing but beating their chests.
Speedymanic said:
suicide. The coalition would fall and Labour, who presumably would go against the war, would win by a landslide in the snap election
I fucking hate Labour, but if this happened even I would vote for them, Zomg would consider it too, but he hates poor people more than Arabic people so he's stick with Dave.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
I'm not here to defend Israel. If you want to blame Israel, go ahead and blame Israel. I think that is actually misplaced and that Iran would've sought the bomb anyway for the obvious strategic benefits it would lend them, but let's go ahead and blame Israel.beast786 said:
Say that it's all Israel's fault. Are you still cool with loose nukes all over the middle east? If no, then Iran needs to be stopped.
Just sayin' - I thought that about Tuition Fees and everything else so far. I'm just not at all convinced that Clegg would force an election and suffer early obliteration at the polls, rather than keep in line with Cameron and hope everyone forgets in three years time.Meadows said:
I'd love to be optimistic when it came to the LDs, but fool me once...
Speedymanic
Banned
Meadows said:
You put too much faith in the Lib Dems. They've shown on numerous occasions that they are willing to go against what they believe in/what they've promised to stay in power, what makes you think they'd suddenly go back to their old ways if war were declared?
el retorno
Member
Darklord said:
So the Iranian regime should be aloud to have a weapon that would ensure that that rotten, antidemocratic, autortarian theocracy can´t change?
Ignis Fatuus said:
For the sake of balance of power and making sure it WONT be use. The best answere is for nation to have them or none at all. Attacking nations because they are acquriing weapons for themself is the most idiotic reason to go on war.
If Japan had Nuclear bomb do you think we have used it?
The things the Lib Dems gave up to the Tories were premeditated in the coalition agreement. A war with Iran would NOT fly. If Clegg didn't have the backbone to go against it, and Labour went against it, you'd probably see a lot of defections to Labour or failing that, a lot of resignations, a la Robin Cook.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
You're avoiding the question. Loose nukes in potentially unstable states, y/n? In a perfect world no one would have them, yes. We do not live in a perfect world.beast786 said:
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
We're having enough trouble securing shoulder launched missiles in Libya. Imagine if there were nukes lying around Gaddafi's stockpiles and you might understand why western governments are spooked.beast786 said:
The House of Saud won't be in power forever. If you're fine with nukes sitting around when the Kingdom collapses then you're basically willing to roll the dice on the future of the region if not the world.
Ignis Fatuus said:
If your are coming shoulder launch missiles to nuclear weapons, then you obviously have no idea. You are exactly the perfect candidate of spreading the fear tactics.
There is a reason only the very few can create a single nuclear weapon after billions of dollar spend in R&D. Its not a freaking shoulder launched missile for love of god.
How many of these nuclear bombs since the collapse of USSR?
They were also behind the attempted coup in Gaza some years back. Hamas caught wind of it and ran the PA completely out of Gaza. The CIA and MI6 probably played their part in instigating the Iranian election protests in 2009 too. Not sure there's any concrete evidence on that though.beast786 said:
el retorno
Member
beast786 said:
Trying to premptivly prevent a weapon that can be used aganist you or your allies is the "most idiotic reason to go to war"?
el retorno
Member
Igo said:
Both of you guys have some crazy opinions. The US and/or western powers helping democracy protestors is now bad?
Pollux
Member
beast786 said:
As an American:
I view the CIA as a more inept version of ONI from Halo. All the big CIA operations tend to end up FUBAR.
As far as bombing Iran and the Middle East goes....how about we try not fucking around in their playground and see if they like us more?
I'm all for justifying our insanely high military budget by doing things that are useful to the world (like the Navy protecting global trade routes, and the Army performing humanitarian work in Japan and Haiti, or putting the money towards R&D that could lead to huge technological break throughs e.g. Economist article about relationship of military research to consumer products--> GPS, Internet, advanced computers...etc.
Also I'm all for going to war when it is justified. Afghanistan was justified (arguably). Iraq was not (Bush: "B..b...but he tried to kill my daaaaad" "Hey look WMDs"). However at the moment there is no justifiable reason to go to war with Iran.
So let's start fixing our own house before shitting on someone else's again. Let's not invest in attacking countries that haven't really done anything that horrible (at least nothing that would constitute overt military action), and put our money towards something more useful to the American people, such as focusing on rebuilding our infrastructure which is teetering on the verge of collapse
- Status