Comments: This Is A Parody--Right?

Same old BS from Washington. Perhaps a massive missle strike on Tehran would be in order?

Posted by CI Roller Dude at October 11, 2011 09:26 PM

No weapons from Gun Walker/Fast & furious were used by the Iranian.

Posted by Dapandico at October 11, 2011 09:33 PM

Shouldn't they have waited until the (alleged) Iranian Official / Quds agent to give the 'go' before rolling this up?

Ya know, to tie-in official Iranian intent a little tighter, rather than breaking it up at the planning phase (no harm possible given that Iran inadvertently hired US agents as the trigger/fall men).

Seems a little premature to me - planning for an attack was stopped vs. an actual (though thoroughly countered) ineffective attack.

Almost like the cover was prematurely blown off the counter-operation intentially...

/adjusts tin-foil hat

Posted by Druid at October 11, 2011 10:31 PM

America—and the world—will be very fortunate indeed if our many enemies do not take advantage of what they must surely believe to be a historic opportunity between now and November of 2012.

I expected something spring of 2010 then last spring.
Spring because that's invasion season in eastern Europe and I figured there would be stuff going on all over the world, including Putin in some former SSRs and the middle east with a side worry about NoKo.
I'm not sure about China, I just don't think they're ready to try for Taiwan, but who knows? I can see Obama telling the Chinese and the Taiwanese to both cool it, China with the missiles and the invasion, Taiwan with the dying and bleeding all over the place.

Next spring will be their last chance. April or May could be very interesting.

Posted by Veeshir at October 11, 2011 11:47 PM

Clearly, Zero needs to have Hillary issue an emphatic "Tsk, tsk", then redouble his efforts to overwhelm the USA's enemies by inducing more adoration for his wonderful self. A few threats to convene a committee to discuss additional sanctions might be in order if that adoration is lacking.

Posted by Yrral Dleifsarb at October 12, 2011 01:02 AM

Well, obviously, this calls for a stern bowing to I'madinnerjacket.

Posted by Bill at October 12, 2011 07:51 AM

Thanks to being intentionally bogged down on two fronts, our military CAN NOT respond effectively to any provocation. The bogging down was absolutely forseeable but accepted by the previous Administration and this crew of clowns.

What bogs our troops down? Well how about completely idiotic "rules of engagement" that prohibit actions such as bombing a graveyard if the enemy leaders are congregated there? Does THAT qualify and BTW, it's one of the less foolish rules our military are following in order to "win hearts and minds". Phooey!

Add to that the use of our armed services as a sociological petri dish and the attendant exit of all too many highly qualified members, we're then well on our way towards another "hollow military" such as we had under Carter.

But Carter is really starting to look good compared to the present numbskull in the Oval Office.

Posted by Subvet at October 12, 2011 07:58 AM

You are wrong on several points.
1. The US military is sufficiently large enough to easily get bogged down in a third front. Most of our troops have already withdrawn from Iraq and the Air Force and Navy have been mostly sitting on their hands for the past ten years. Nor does every military action look the same. We may be able to accomplish the objective of making Obama look good with just a few cruise missiles and maybe a clandestine op to destroy a training camp.

2. Despite the petri dish example you used, there is no indication of a hollow Army forming. Units that are deploying are doing so at full strength. Soldiers who need schools and training are getting them. If anything, the SECDEF is planning a massive cut in personnel to save money (over 100K active Amry alone) and disbanding the units that go with them. No hollow army here.

There are two issues here that trouble me:
1. This is yet again one more terrorist attempt that never got beyond the planning phase because of FBI infiltration. In every case, it seems the terrorists were completely incompetent to even plan operations and gather resources without direct assistance from teh US Federal government. Then we move in and bust them for it. One wonders if they would have ever posed a threat without the assistance of our own government agencies.

2. Iran has been actively at war against our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for ten years. We didn't care aboout that. Why is this suddenly a big deal now that we won't stand for?

Posted by Professor hale at October 12, 2011 09:06 AM

Also, in all fairness, it wouldn't be opening a third front.

It would be moving to consolidate them into one front. Iran is, after all, smack between Iraq and Afghanistan.

Posted by Phelps at October 12, 2011 10:17 AM

Professor Hale,

Thank you for a reasoned & civil response. However I disagree with both points you raise.
1) The only reason the military has been able to meet their commitments in Iraq & Afghanistan is by the activation of National Guard units. I'll grant that contrary to what some fools believe, this hasn't been so widespread as to seriously affect the Guard's ability to respond to domestic tasks (hurricane relief). But it IS needed for the military to address it's assigned tasks in combat areas.

2) My argument for the hollow military is more a prediction. Just my opinion but with the open embrace of active homosexuals and their behavior I feel that hollow military will be seen really soon. I base this on my own experience in the military. Admittedly that only qualifies as anecdotal evidence but in talking to other military retirees I find the same mindset. Perhaps you are also intimately familiar with the armed forces, in that case it's "toMAYtoe versus toMAHtoe".

Regarding SecDef planning a drawdown, history has also shown that our military is not immune to having leadership that enthusiastically follows whatever is politically correct at the time. An example would be the torpedoes supplied to the Navy during WWII. I recommend you read up on it if you have the time. To summarize the problem: Although there was no doubt the "fish" supplied to combatant craft were defective, no formal complaints were allowed and anyone caught making field modifications to improve the effectiveness of the weapon would be courtmartialed PDQ. It literally took years before the problem was finally acknowledged and corrected.

As for your other concerns, while I don't share your concern about the Feds helping to further the schemes of incompetent would-be terrorists, I'll admit its something that is done and has been done for decades at least. An example would be a sting in the late '70's that netted two conspirators planning to steal a sub from the State Pier in New London, CT., take it to sea and sell it to the Russians once the boat was beyond the 12 mile limit. Believe me, THAT is a fantasy from the getgo!

Yet they were finally indicted and served about 10-15 years apiece if I remember correctly. Like I said, this efforts by the Feds isn't something new.

Regarding your other point about the aid Iran has given to fight our forces over the years, I'd say you're absolutely correct as far as it goes. But this could be seen as an effort to up the ante in the game. Therefore it warrants attention.

Posted by Subvet at October 12, 2011 11:22 AM

" prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons it has repeatedly sworn to put to immediate, genocidal use..."

Don't come down to hard on me here and forgive me if I'm missing something obvious (I can only be so informed) but are we sure about this?

And, professor hale, can yo clarify this?--
"Iran has been actively at war against our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for ten years."

Don't get me wrong, if these things are indeed true then I would like to know but I'm always hesitant and cautious when talk of lobbing missiles comes up. And if we're going to engage in military activity, let's engage in war no nation-building/hand holding/j***ing off.

Posted by rechill at October 12, 2011 01:29 PM

Was this the same country that threatened to put warships off our coasts ?

Posted by Neo at October 12, 2011 07:42 PM

Dear Rechill:

Merely Google "Ahmadinejad threats." You'll find more than sufficient information to satisfy you that Iranian threats are real and substantial. They consider it their religious duty. Most Americans have a hard time understanding that other cultures, despite wearing blue jeans, using American consumer goods and watching American movies, really are nothing at all like Americans.

Posted by Mike Mc at October 12, 2011 08:34 PM

Druid, I wouldn't discount your suspicions as a tin-foil hat theory. Something about this story just doesn't smell right. The motive is unclear at best - the Saudi ambassador to the US? Why him? The method was sloppily amateurish for Quds - hiring a drug cartel to commit an assassination? There's a lot about this story that makes little to no sense. I'm suspecting the Obama Regime is exaggerating it for the obvious reasons. That DOES make sense.

Posted by Col Bat Guano at October 12, 2011 11:01 PM

Mick Mc, I was discussing this last night with a guy who's always been an anti-war activist and pulled the same card on me that "they're more like us than we know" and it was based on this superficial blue-jean level. I conceded that I would bet that the Persians, as a people, on average have a higher IQ than the surrounding Arabs but them being "just like us" seems to be a stretch.

And I realize that we're not engaged in hostilities with the entire population of Iran, we have been adversaries of the ruling regime since 1979. I can get behind the idea of keeping Iran from obtaining nukes but I'd really like to know why Pakistan STILL is allowed to have them and can we do something about that too?

Posted by rechill at October 13, 2011 09:31 AM