Washington Examiner: Iran endorses nuclear EMP attack on United States
Suspected for years of plotting to dismantle the U.S. electric grid, American officials have confirmed that Iranian military brass have endorsed a nuclear electromagnetic pulse explosion that would attack the country's power system.
American defense experts made the discovery while translating a secret Iranian military handbook, raising new concerns about Tehran's recent nuclear talks with the administration.
The issue of a nuclear EMP attack was raised in the final hours of this week's elections in Israel when U.S. authority Peter Vincent Pry penned a column for Arutz Sheva warning of Iran's threat to free nations.
WNU Editor: So .... a secret Iranian military handbook talks about plans to launch an EMP attack against the U.S. .... that's it? The Pentagon has plans to counter an alien invasion .... does that mean that aliens are planning to invade earth? Critics of the ongoing U.S. - Iranian talks are going to need more information and evidence than this if they want to put a stop to these negotiations.
6 comments:
WNU Editor,
How much did they pay "Curveball" for this "secret" manual? Another couple million?
Major EMP requires a reconfigured nuke, and most military hardware is shielded, as are more and more public areas of "the grid".
Iran doen't have nukes, doesn't have reconfigured nukes, so why would an "Army Manual", talk about using weapons that don't exist?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime
It is a favorite of science fiction, so maybe they are translating a Farsi copy of Ray Bradbury's Collected Works.
Speaking of Ray Bradbury .... my favorite Bradbury quote that I always enjoyed using when I worked for the FO in explaining what was happening at the Kremlin .... "The Gargolyles Have Taken Over The Cathedral".
He certainly had a way with words.
Is a nuclear world war really worth over that stupid thing? Risking billions of lives for that bs?
Peter,
The MSM.
What you are hearing, are the drumbeats of war,......
Just keep pounding out the make believe and the allegations, over and over and like the "45 minutes" it sticks in people heads.
The people who write this stuff are people who value the truth and care deeply about the safety and security of the American people to the point that they are willing to risk their careers, their prestige, and even the very lives of their families to warn the American people of the dangers faced by Iran. For Iran to acquire the necessary nuclear weapon and to configure as necessary is well within their reach. In fact, some reports have indicated they may already have nuclear weapons.
It's certainly not the MSM that generally covers this, however, if they do catch on instead of tirelessly advocating by Iran and conveniently ignore Iran's threats of death to America this would be extremely helpful.
Whomever reported this is likely 100% accurate or at the very least 90+% accurate. Reporting this likely has a twofold objective. 1.) The record despirately needs to be set straight with regards to Iran and the threat it poses to the United States. This is an attempt to set the record straight for historical purposes. In the future, at least people will not be able to say they were not warned. 2.)Deal or no deal on Iran's nuclear program, in all likelihood Iran will have nuclear weapons very soon, if they don't already. There's likely nothing we can do to prevent it. As such, this needs to be part of the public discussion so we can try and determine our policies in light of the reality of a nuclear armed Iran. In other words, the threat needs to be faced head on and those who have the courage to point it out should not be ridiculed. This is being published in the hopes of starting a serious dialogue on this. Again, if they MSM is finally catching on this can only be a good thing.
The most dangerous threats to America are as follows: 1.)an all out nuclear attack by Russia, 2.)an Islamic terrorist attack on the American mainland via the use of multiple suitcase nuclear weapons and perhaps "dirty bombs" resulting in the deaths of 10s of millions of Americans, 3.)n EMP attack of the type described above from Iran, North Korea, or any of several nations or terrorist groups who would like to do this, and 4.)an invasion of the American mainland by Russia, China, Russia and China, or Russia, China, and some combination of the BRICS.
When conducting foreign or domestic policy the question should be asked "does this course of action help or hinder us when counter these major threats to our national security?" As such, extricating ourselves from Ukraine for example becomes an absolute necessity or so it would seem. Even if we do at this point, the Russians may smell weakness and decide its time to "go for the jugular" so to speak.
I'd suggest some type of quid pro quo trade in this regard. We agree to Russia's position on Ukraine and Eastern Europe. In exchange they help us with Iran. Could something like this work? We'd likely need better leadership to find out. It does seem clear ignoring the threats or ridiculing those who point them out is not going to help.
Bottom line: deal or no deal Iran is going to have nuclear weapons including EMP capabilities very soon if it does not have them already as some reports have suggested. How do we represent our interests in this scenario? If this article, leads to frank and serious discussions on this it will have been useful.
Finally, part of the problem with this deal process is it is being done in secret. What's in this thing? What are we giving up? It'd be really helpful if Congress and the American people were being kept in the loop on this thing. Personally I'm for walking away with at least a smidgeon of our dignity still in tact and not having given up any more than we already have. Unfortunately I don't POTUS can do this and other members of the P5+1 would likely be delighted to see America hurt.
Additionally how do we ensure enforcement of any deal? America faces intense and very often hostile coverage under a very large media microscope. Iran does not face such scrutiny. Again, how do we ensure Iranian compliance with anything?
I think WNU has alluded to the problems of enforcement of such a deal a number of times and has speculated this would cause such a deal to fall apart.
His thoughtful analysis is spot on. At the very least, Congress needs to be involved in this and the American people need to be kept in the loop on this. So far this does not seem to be the case. We need to at least be pausing, take a breath, and say "let's wait a minute here."
Frankly, as pointed out earlier, at this point, there's nothing we are going to be able to do to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The purpose in walking away at this point or at least waiting a minute would be to avoid giving up anything else and making our position even more precarious than it already is. The Iranians must like the charade of negotiations. They get things, America gives up things, and they get their nuclear weapons at the end of the day anyway.
Post a Comment