blueblood Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 I'm sure the Saudis would happily bankroll a war against the Ayatollahs. The problem is that I don't think the US has the least bit of interest in actually going to war with Iran. It is, in every way, an entirely different operation than Iraq or Libya. We're talking about a populace nation, a very large and disciplined military, both professional and volunteer, that would almost certainly make any invader pay for each mile of territory with blood. It is an entirely different geography which means different logistics. I guess you could bomb the country into the stone age, but still, Iran is not without air defenses and most certainly would be far more costly in lives in equipment. Taking on Iran has substantial geopolitical ramifications. Heck, Russia and China won't even let the West go after Iran's lone ally, Syria. I also don't think the usa would want an adventure in iran, the usa can't afford it unless it were to seize irans assets which is a big no no in the geneva convention or some other big treaty. I suggested the saudi army only. Not even the saudis can afford to spend money on the usa blitzing iran. I think the saudis can pay for themselves. When the usa had money china and russia could do sweet bugger all to stop the usa steamroll through afghanistan and iraq, I don't know if china and russia would risk war with the usa to bail out lowly syria. Also one must remember in gulf war 1 the usa was supposed to take massive casualties against the iraqis which was similar to the iranian army today. Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 I also don't think the usa would want an adventure in iran, the usa can't afford it unless it were to seize irans assets which is a big no no in the geneva convention or some other big treaty. The US is only interested in thwarting Iran's nuclear weapons development. America has already surrounded Iran with firm footholds in Iraq, Afganistan, and Turkey (NATO). Iran is feeling the heat...internally and externally. ...Also one must remember in gulf war 1 the usa was supposed to take massive casualties against the iraqis which was similar to the iranian army today. Saddam's military inflicted severe damage on Iran during their protracted war. Iran is not so scary...not even today with more modern Rooskie kit. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
blueblood Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 The US is only interested in thwarting Iran's nuclear weapons development. America has already surrounded Iran with firm footholds in Iraq, Afganistan, and Turkey (NATO). Iran is feeling the heat...internally and externally. Saddam's military inflicted severe damage on Iran during their protracted war. Iran is not so scary...not even today with more modern Rooskie kit. Doesn't look good for those saying the iran army is "effective". If saddams conscripts did that to iran and got annhialated by the usa, iran vs the usa would almost be a turkey shoot. Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
GostHacked Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 When the usa had money china and russia could do sweet bugger all to stop the usa steamroll through afghanistan and iraq, China has been buying up USA debt for about a decade now. So they in a way helped fund the invasions/wars. I don't know if china and russia would risk war with the usa to bail out lowly syria. I don't think neither give a crap about Syria. Also one must remember in gulf war 1 the usa was supposed to take massive casualties against the iraqis which was similar to the iranian army today. I've heard some stories about sonic weapons used in Iraq which made the Iraqi army quickly lay down the arms without much of a fight. Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com
jbg Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 Iran needs to hire the drug cartel to carry out a hit? sounds highly unlikely if they want to take out an envoy there are many places they can do it other than the US and and they're fully capable of doing the job themselves...sounds like someone operating on their own... The whole point is for them to show they can operate on American soil and draw, maybe, a weak U.N. rebuke as punishment. 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).
GostHacked Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 The whole point is for them to show they can operate on American soil and draw, maybe, a weak U.N. rebuke as punishment. If the CIA gets out of Iran, maybe Iran will get out of the US. Still not buying any of this. Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com
wyly Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 (edited) Doesn't look good for those saying the iran army is "effective". If saddams conscripts did that to iran and got annhialated by the usa, iran vs the usa would almost be a turkey shoot. are you caught in a time warp? that war was 25-30 years ago, Iran has acquired significant weapons improvements since those days courtesy china and russia...it's cruise missile capability could be formidable depending on numbers, there is no defense at present to defend against it which makes the US carrier fleet highly vulnerable... Edited October 13, 2011 by wyly Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 ...it's cruise missile capability could be formidable depending on numbers, there is no defense at present to defend against it which makes the US carrier fleet highly vulnerable... I'm going to go out on a limb here, but I think the USA's cruise missile capabilities (and defenses) are more than just a "could be" compared to Iran's. Just sayin'.... Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
wyly Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 I'd say it's probably significantly easier to go after a high-level official in the United States than in Saudi Arabia. the saudi's have envoys in many places that would make easier targets than in the US... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
ToadBrother Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 I'm going to go out on a limb here, but I think the USA's cruise missile capabilities (and defenses) are more than just a "could be" compared to Iran's. Just sayin'.... I don't think there's any doubt that Iran could actually compete with any of the major powers in air operations. The point, I think, would be more along the lines of taking Iran being a logistical nightmare that not even GWB at the height of his popularity seemed all that keen to take on. The policy seems more to isolate Iran, not to invade or smash it to pieces. Quote
ToadBrother Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 the saudi's have envoys in many places that would make easier targets than in the US... But that wouldn't be anywhere near as spectacular. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 ...The policy seems more to isolate Iran, not to invade or smash it to pieces. True, but there are existing operations plans to not only keep the strait open for crude carrier traffic, but also to suppress Iran's offensive capabilities. The US and Israel are just waiting for an excuse to "test" some bunker busters. Iran can play ball the easy way or the hard way. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
wyly Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE79B7VO20111012?irpc=932 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iran's supreme leader and the shadowy Quds Force covert operations unit were likely aware of an alleged plot to kill Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the United States, but hard evidence of that is scant, U.S. officials said on Wednesday reading that link it seems quite a strech of logic to link that plot to iran... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
GostHacked Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 True, but there are existing operations plans to not only keep the strait open for crude carrier traffic, but also to suppress Iran's offensive capabilities. The US and Israel are just waiting for an excuse to "test" some bunker busters. Iran can play ball the easy way or the hard way. So the US and Israel are pressuring Iran to take action just so the USA and Israel can take action against Iran. Seems to me like another 'create the problem to offer the solution' scenario. Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com
Wild Bill Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 So the US and Israel are pressuring Iran to take action just so the USA and Israel can take action against Iran. Seems to me like another 'create the problem to offer the solution' scenario. I won't shed any tears for Iran! They'll do just fine. They can go lash some women, kill some gays, behead some Israelis and then go get a good night's rest, to rise up refreshed the next morning! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
olp1fan Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 reading that link it seems quite a strech of logic to link that plot to iran... i know but the american populace are dumb, they'll buy into it Quote
GostHacked Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 I won't shed any tears for Iran! They'll do just fine. They can go lash some women, kill some gays, behead some Israelis and then go get a good night's rest, to rise up refreshed the next morning! When was the last time Iran attacked another country? When was the last time the USA attacked another country? Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com
olp1fan Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 True, but there are existing operations plans to not only keep the strait open for crude carrier traffic, but also to suppress Iran's offensive capabilities. The US and Israel are just waiting for an excuse to "test" some bunker busters. Iran can play ball the easy way or the hard way. why attack a country which hasn't attacked another country in 200 + years? go ahead and attack iran ..that will only infuriate Veneuzela, Pakistan, China and Russia, Palestine, Egypt, Syria you don't wanna screw with those countries Quote
wyly Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 I don't think there's any doubt that Iran could actually compete with any of the major powers in air operations. The point, I think, would be more along the lines of taking Iran being a logistical nightmare that not even GWB at the height of his popularity seemed all that keen to take on. The policy seems more to isolate Iran, not to invade or smash it to pieces. Iran has the most advanced cruise missile technology available, there is no effective defense, warships in the persian gulf are quite literally sitting ducks...the US will win any full out war but the cost will be high, carriers will be lost... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
GostHacked Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 why attack a country which hasn't attacked another country in 200 + years? go ahead and attack iran ..that will only infuriate Veneuzela, Pakistan, China and Russia, Palestine, Egypt, Syria you don't wanna screw with those countries Even if Iran gets invaded, China and Russia will do squat about it. That I am sure of. Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com
wyly Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 i know but the american populace are dumb, they'll buy into it true they bought into the iraq has weapons of mass destruction lie... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
olp1fan Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 Iran has the most advanced cruise missile technology available, there is no effective defense, warships in the persian gulf are quite literally sitting ducks...the US will win any full out war but the cost will be high, carriers will be lost... Plus the U.S can't afford to start another war Quote
olp1fan Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 true they bought into the iraq has weapons of mass destruction lie... Yes, and they still believe they found WMDs, eve though all they found was a bit of stuff left over from the 80s Quote
GostHacked Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 Plus the U.S can't afford to start another war Actually, the wars are about the only thing keeping the USA from going completely under in a NY minute. The industrial military complex is the only thing keeping the USA afloat. Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com
wyly Posted October 13, 2011 Report Posted October 13, 2011 Even if Iran gets invaded, China and Russia will do squat about it. That I am sure of. there will be no invasion, even a decision to bomb iran will not be taken lightly ...should iran lash out at us naval forces and commercial shipping in the gulf with it's cruise missiles it will cause immense damage to the world economy, the persian gulf tanker traffic will shut down and oil production stopped, no insurance company will cover tanker traffic in the gulf... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
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.