BF2S Forums How to beat Iran (without firing a single shot)

Refining fuel costs a fortune and its something that other nations specialise in and it costs alot to do so. i already said this idea a couple of days ago in another topic but hopefully people will notice it now. you can't really say that a nation that may have nucleur weapons has no bark, though it would honestly depend on what generation these nucleur weapons were i.e. the original nucleur bombs dropped on hiroshima and nagasaki had a blast radius (not counting the radius of the shockwave just the explosion) of 2km  whereas the most powerful one was the USSR's "Fat boy" which had a radius of 96km which would make a hell of a difference to a nations bite say instead of destroying all of manhatten or canary wharf with 1 first generation you could destroy the entire city of new york and much of the area around it or all of greater london and alot more area besides including other cities (not too sure of the geography around london and new york so feel free to correct me). Iran exports most of its oil to other nations.

Im_Dooomed wrote:

I wonder why Iran has done this. It just puts a message out to the world that they are desperate for oil as much as a lot of us. And they are crippled without it. But if any kind of War happened...I wonder who would be giving them oil?

They tried to avoid putting out the message, but it was inevitable. And it pissed off Iranians even more that they were caught by surprise. I doubt Ahmanedija will survive this blow.

Noobeater wrote:

Refining fuel costs a fortune and its something that other nations specialise in and it costs alot to do so. i already said this idea a couple of days ago in another topic but hopefully people will notice it now. you can't really say that a nation that may have nucleur weapons has no bark, though it would honestly depend on what generation these nucleur weapons were i.e. the original nucleur bombs dropped on hiroshima and nagasaki had a blast radius (not counting the radius of the shockwave just the explosion) of 2km  whereas the most powerful one was the USSR's "Emperor Bomb" which had a radius of 96km which would make a hell of a difference to a nations bite say instead of destroying all of manhatten or canary wharf with 1 first generation you could destroy the entire city of new york and much of the area around it or all of greater london and alot more area besides including other cities (not too sure of the geography around london and new york so feel free to correct me). Iran exports most of its oil to other nations.

Just thought I'd be a correction nazi, carry on .

Here's a good vid about it



As for Iran, cutting off their supplies from the Western world will make a blow eventually, they can't get everything from China or Russia.

Last edited by M.O.A.B (2007-06-30 17:30:08)

I read that the bomb was called the fat boy, i shall trust you though and check my sources, its just a pity I've forgotten what they were again

according to wiki they're called the Tsar bombs so I acknowledge your correction as being correct

Last edited by Noobeater (2007-06-30 17:35:47)

Damm it seems I just created an amalgamation of two different bombs then.

Noobeater wrote:

Refining fuel costs a fortune and its something that other nations specialise in and it costs alot to do so. i already said this idea a couple of days ago in another topic but hopefully people will notice it now. you can't really say that a nation that may have nucleur weapons has no bark, though it would honestly depend on what generation these nucleur weapons were i.e. the original nucleur bombs dropped on hiroshima and nagasaki had a blast radius (not counting the radius of the shockwave just the explosion) of 2km  whereas the most powerful one was the USSR's "Fat boy" which had a radius of 96km which would make a hell of a difference to a nations bite say instead of destroying all of manhatten or canary wharf with 1 first generation you could destroy the entire city of new york and much of the area around it or all of greater london and alot more area besides including other cities (not too sure of the geography around london and new york so feel free to correct me). Iran exports most of its oil to other nations.

there was a TV program which had a simulation of Russias largest bomb the tsar bomba (in M.O.A.B.s vid) with its 50Mt blast landing in London
It would in fact take out the entirety of London, parts lucky enough not to get hit would most likely get the fallout, which if the weather was right would coat the entire country if not the whole of the GB isles and parts of France and the R.O.E. So thats between 8.5 and 14 million people dead in an instant.

Poseidon wrote:

They had something like this on CNN Headline News the other night. Can't remember the guy who was saying it...

He was also saying that Mahmoud Ahmadinijad (or whatever) is just gonna be a scapegoat if they do get rid of him and probably will. He's not even fully in control. The Ayatollah is.

I had some awesome Ayatollah thread derailment pics, but then chuy enacted the Forum Images Act of 2007.

This shows that there is plenty of room for diplomatic and sanction actions to deal with Iran.  But as was said by others, you'd need support from at least Russia. If Bush wasn't such an idiot in terms of foreign relations he could bring Russia to their side, like his father did in the first gulf war.

wow Iran having oil issues,  you know what might help solve their energy issues ??  A NUCLEAR POWER PLANT !!

lol

ShaitanArba wrote:

Only one question to topicstarter - WHY do you want to BEAT Iran, or why is it needed?

No more than your leader does.

EVieira wrote:

If Bush wasn't such an idiot in terms of foreign relations he could bring Russia to their side, like his father did in the first gulf war.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6262718.stm

Kmarion wrote:

No more than your leader does.

What do you mean particulary?

So what? There is an art of high diplomacy, nevermind

I'm just trying to realise the hawks' reason (not occasion) of starting the war against the independent state. In fact, there are some, but they're seem to be too bombastic to post them here.

But how do they explain their media campaign against Iran, both as it was for Yugoslavia, Iraq and so on?