M.Dancer Posted January 7, 2008 Report Posted January 7, 2008 Five Iranian speedboats harassed three US navy ships at the weekend, approaching them and radioing a threat to blow them up, US officials say. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7175325.stm There's testing resolve, probing defenses, and then there's begging to be de-selected because your genes and intelligence are unfit to pass on.... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
DogOnPorch Posted January 7, 2008 Report Posted January 7, 2008 Damn close to shooting. Not cool. --------------------------------------- ...merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, life is but a dream.... Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Wilber Posted January 7, 2008 Report Posted January 7, 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7175325.stmThere's testing resolve, probing defenses, and then there's begging to be de-selected because your genes and intelligence are unfit to pass on.... Martyr Complex has taken on a whole new meaning in the last few years. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Topaz Posted January 7, 2008 Report Posted January 7, 2008 The US would be crazy to take on Iran right now. They have a million soldiers plus the fact if they got in trouble, Russia and China would be right there. I do hope that Harper keeps Canada out of that war should it come to be. Bush and Cheney want a reason to go into Iran and like someone said on the radio....where is that other nuke?? Refering to the bombs that the US military transported within its border this past year. Apparently one is missing??? Quote
Sulaco Posted January 7, 2008 Report Posted January 7, 2008 (edited) The US would be crazy to take on Iran right now. They have a million soldiers plus the fact if they got in trouble, Russia and China would be right there. I do hope that Harper keeps Canada out of that war should it come to be. Bush and Cheney want a reason to go into Iran and like someone said on the radio....where is that other nuke?? Refering to the bombs that the US military transported within its border this past year. Apparently one is missing??? Do you hear Topaz? It would be madness to take on the Iranian military giant and its explosive packed speed boats! The only reason not to take Iran on is that the resulting slaughter would make the road to Basra look like a peace walk. WInning too handily always makes one look bad. Edited January 7, 2008 by Sulaco Quote Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Those who learn from history are doomed to a lifetime of reruns.
DogOnPorch Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 The US would be crazy to take on Iran right now. They have a million soldiers plus the fact if they got in trouble, Russia and China would be right there. Iranians are generally poorly led, equiped and motivated. China and Russia would not risk a full confrontation with the US. What are they going to do? Start exchanging nukes with the US over Ahmedinnerjacket's stupidity? The one thing the US is really good at is taking a military force out from over the horizon... Thus, in any upcoming war with Iran, I predict that ground forces would be kept out of the action. Just a long, dark rain of cruise missiles until anything of importance infrastructure-wise was destroyed... Some of the opinions over at Iran Defence Forum are worth reading... http://irandefence.net/showthread.php?t=26865 ...and like someone said on the radio....where is that other nuke?? Refering to the bombs that the US military transported within its border this past year. Apparently one is missing??? There are no missing nuclear weapons in the American inventory. Some weapons were transported across country with the fuses installed if I recall prompting this wild rumor. Very much against SOP...but all accounted for. http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/05/loose.nukes/index.html You had more to worry about from the crashed B-36 Peacemaker in the BC wild that had an armed nuclear weapon onboard when it ran into trouble near the Queen Charlottes back in the 1950s. http://www.air-and-space.com/b-36%20wrecks.htm#44-92075 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Grab a bucket and mop...Scrub the counters and tops...There is nothing so clean as my burger machine... --- Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 The one thing the US is really good at is taking a military force out from over the horizon... Beyond that the US is useless. What's the plan after Iran's military force is taken out? Start rebuilding their next one of course. Recall that Einstein warned us about a couple of things we should avoid doing. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 Beyond that the US is useless. Sure, bud...keep dreaming that dream. Walked on the Moon lately? What's the plan after Iran's military force is taken out? Nothing, I'd imagine. Stone-age country = no threat. Start rebuilding their next one of course. Oh...yawn...why bother...USA is Evil...rah, rah, rah. Recall that Einstein warned us about a couple of things we should avoid doing. Is it...? Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius...and a lot of courage...to move in the opposite direction. or is it...? Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding. Albert didn't have provocative Revolutionairy Guards to deal with... ------------------------------------------------------------------ Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe. ---Albert Einstein Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
jbg Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 Beyond that the US is useless.Apparently that reflects your world view and extrent of knowledge. Would you rather have the former Soviet Union with a 5000 km border? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
eyeball Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 DogOnPorch, look up Einstein's definition of insanity. Look it up as many times as you need. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
moderateamericain Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 DogOnPorch, look up Einstein's definition of insanity. Look it up as many times as you need. that million man army they vaunt would last about 3 days or less. Its amazing what a c130 gunship can do to a tank column. Since the US F22 would sweep everything out of the sky within the first day or two I doubt very much we would have any problems. Also if you think china is gonna side with Iran over its biggest buyer your out of your mind. Business first. Quote
M.Dancer Posted January 8, 2008 Author Report Posted January 8, 2008 The US would be crazy to take on Iran right now. They have a million soldiers plus the fact if they got in trouble, Russia and China would be right there. I do hope that Harper keeps Canada out of that war should it come to be. Bush and Cheney want a reason to go into Iran and like someone said on the radio....where is that other nuke?? Refering to the bombs that the US military transported within its border this past year. Apparently one is missing??? Why would they attack a million soldiers? Better to attack where the million soldiers are not, then laugh as the iranians struggle to move those million soldiers to where the attack was. Then the US could attack where the million soldiers were..... ...oh...and your toaster called... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
kengs333 Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 that million man army they vaunt would last about 3 days or less. Its amazing what a c130 gunship can do to a tank column. Since the US F22 would sweep everything out of the sky within the first day or two I doubt very much we would have any problems. Also if you think china is gonna side with Iran over its biggest buyer your out of your mind. Business first. Yeah, just like with Iraq... Quote
kengs333 Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 Why would they attack a million soldiers? Better to attack where the million soldiers are not, then laugh as the iranians struggle to move those million soldiers to where the attack was. Then the US could attack where the million soldiers were........oh...and your toaster called... Sun Tzu would be proud... Quote
kengs333 Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 This is such a non-issue, just like that hostage situation with the Royal Navy. Even if there was some shooting, neither side would use it as a pretext for war since neither side really wants a war at this point. The Americans are all bluff; their military isn't half as good as they make it out to be--one of the few things that the war in Iraq has proven. Quote
M.Dancer Posted January 8, 2008 Author Report Posted January 8, 2008 The Americans are all bluff; their military isn't half as good as they make it out to be-- Which is still about 4 times more capable than any other power. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
kengs333 Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 Which is still about 4 times more capable than any other power. Yeah, I guess if they're dumb enough to use nukes, but in reality, I think the Russkies and Chinese could give them a good run for their money. The US hasn't fought a real war for quite some time, and lost the last one that they did. Until this fact changes, I'm of the opinion that they're all bluff. Quote
Argus Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 Yeah, I guess if they're dumb enough to use nukes, but in reality, I think the Russkies and Chinese could give them a good run for their money. The US hasn't fought a real war for quite some time, and lost the last one that they did. Until this fact changes, I'm of the opinion that they're all bluff. Why do people let political ideology blind them to the obvious? No, I don't think the US is going into Iran, but there is no doubt whatsoever the US military is the best equipped in the world, and it's people have the most experience in warfare of any modern military. It makes a huge difference when your generals and colonels actually have been shot at and have experience in warfare as lietenants and captains, and the US has that benefit. It also has the benefit that virtually it's entire army, from privates up, has plenty of combat experience. It's also a professional army of volunteers. Now you place that up against the poorly equipped, poorly trained teenage draftees in the Russian or Iranian army, none of whom want to be there, led by officers who got their jobs due to bribery (russia) or religious zealotry (iran) and you wind up with slaughter. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
M.Dancer Posted January 8, 2008 Author Report Posted January 8, 2008 Americans are all bluff; their military isn't half as good as they make it out to be--one of the few things that the war in Iraq has proven. I'm not sure what metric brings you to that conclusion. Dedicated insurgencies as past history has shown us have been resilent and resourceful. Given the almost 5 years of fighting the US has suffered relatively few casualties in proportion to the losses inflicted on the insurgents and terrorists. So much so it seems that the will to fight seems to be waning on both fronts, against the coalition and against each other (shia-sunni). Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
kengs333 Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 Why do people let political ideology blind them to the obvious? No, I don't think the US is going into Iran, but there is no doubt whatsoever the US military is the best equipped in the world, and it's people have the most experience in warfare of any modern military. It makes a huge difference when your generals and colonels actually have been shot at and have experience in warfare as lietenants and captains, and the US has that benefit. It also has the benefit that virtually it's entire army, from privates up, has plenty of combat experience. It's also a professional army of volunteers.Now you place that up against the poorly equipped, poorly trained teenage draftees in the Russian or Iranian army, none of whom want to be there, led by officers who got their jobs due to bribery (russia) or religious zealotry (iran) and you wind up with slaughter. I'm not sure where "ideology" factors into this. My opinion is based on what I've seen and read. Sure the American's have some of the most advanced military technology, but that can only give them the advantage in certain respects. In straight up combat, the Americans would not fare near as well as people like you would like to believe. Remember, many of the insurgents that they engage in firefights consist of men and boys who wear no body armour and have substandard weaponry. Whatever the case, the greatest deficiency is the quality of the American soldier--they are not what they used to be, that's for sure. These are people taken out of highschools from impoverished parts of the country, people who have difficulty finding work, people who need money and don't know what they want to do in life. Once they get in combat, they can't hack it, and once they finally get out of the military they have a slew of mental illnesses/emotional disorders. The whole concept of citizen soldiers may have been realistic back in 1776 or 1861, but things have changed, and expecting men from a consumeristic, liberal-democratic society to make good soldiers is ridiculous. Note, I stated that China and Russia could give the Americans a run for their money, not Iran. Quote
kengs333 Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 I'm not sure what metric brings you to that conclusion. Dedicated insurgencies as past history has shown us have been resilent and resourceful. Given the almost 5 years of fighting the US has suffered relatively few casualties in proportion to the losses inflicted on the insurgents and terrorists. So much so it seems that the will to fight seems to be waning on both fronts, against the coalition and against each other (shia-sunni). Waning, or they're smart enough to realize that if they tone it down the Americans will leave... Quote
M.Dancer Posted January 8, 2008 Author Report Posted January 8, 2008 In straight up combat, the Americans would not fare near as well as people like you would like to believe. In staight up combat americans rule the battlefield. You must rememeber the insurgents in any of the battles they have chosen to stand, they have been devastingly defeated. The only area where the insurgents have any impact is in mine laying and terrorism. And while hoping that attrition wouyld weaken the US resolve, the insurgents were attritted to an even greater degree. What is the loss ratio? 50 to 1? The American public took notice when the war was bringing home 100 troops a month. If that number stays below 50, (oct 40, Nov 40, Dec 23) they could stay there indefinately without much political fall out. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Sulaco Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 In staight up combat americans rule the battlefield. You must rememeber the insurgents in any of the battles they have chosen to stand, they have been devastingly defeated. The only area where the insurgents have any impact is in mine laying and terrorism. And while hoping that attrition wouyld weaken the US resolve, the insurgents were attritted to an even greater degree. What is the loss ratio? 50 to 1? The American public took notice when the war was bringing home 100 troops a month. If that number stays below 50, (oct 40, Nov 40, Dec 23) they could stay there indefinately without much political fall out. Hold on. When "straight up combat" is brought up - often the declarant is speaking of a knife fight, rather than unfair use of technology. Quote Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Those who learn from history are doomed to a lifetime of reruns.
White Doors Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 This is such a non-issue, just like that hostage situation with the Royal Navy. Even if there was some shooting, neither side would use it as a pretext for war since neither side really wants a war at this point. The Americans are all bluff; their military isn't half as good as they make it out to be--one of the few things that the war in Iraq has proven. How has that proven that? They took out the Iraqi armed forces in not time flat. In fact, they took them out SO fast it was part of the problem with the insurgency after. An insurgency is an equal part political problem as it is military. People willing to kill themselves to kill you doesn't make the vistims any less professional or 'good' as you say. Your postings and politics are bizarre and non-sensicle in every one of the subjects that you post in. They are also quite often self contradictory. Have you not noticed this? Quote Those Dern Rednecks done outfoxed the left wing again.~blueblood~
White Doors Posted January 8, 2008 Report Posted January 8, 2008 Yeah, I guess if they're dumb enough to use nukes, but in reality, I think the Russkies and Chinese could give them a good run for their money. The US hasn't fought a real war for quite some time, and lost the last one that they did. Until this fact changes, I'm of the opinion that they're all bluff. And your opinion isn't going to make Jane's monthly. Quote Those Dern Rednecks done outfoxed the left wing again.~blueblood~
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.