War with Iran...

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Here's the crux of the issue as I see it:

"Military action against Iran's nuclear facilities would have a decent chance of succeeding, but at a staggering cost. And therein lies the excruciating calculus facing the U.S. and its allies: Is the cost of confronting Iran greater than the dangers of living with a nuclear Iran? And can anything short of war persuade Tehran's fundamentalist regime to give up its dangerous game?"

An air assault would have to be huge... about 30 nuclear-related targets, plus the necessary anti-air aim points, possibly dozens. This would require 1000s of sorties over at least a week. It would probably set the nuclear effort back about 3 or 4 years.

What would the reaction be? Perhaps the Iranians might develop second thoughts about their leader's plans as a nuclear power. Some believe that the crisis of legitimacy that the ruling clerics would face in the wake of a U.S. attack could trigger their downfall, although others are convinced it would unite the population with the government in anti-American rage.

What's the alternative? A nuclear armed Iran... a country that says Israel doesn't have the right to exist and actively supports terrorist groups. Probably a Middle East arms race at best, or regional war at worst.

What will it take to get Iran to scrap the nuke program?

Let then enter the MAD MAD world and test out how soon they want those 72 virgins.

 

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: daniel49

It most likely will be hemmed and hawed around till something has to be done.
At which time if there is a democrat in the whitehouse, it would be very interesting to see how they handle that. Most likely the plan would consist of dropping copies of the New York Times over Iran so that they can see Democrats understand them.

I'd much rather they drop you war-mongering righties (heated La-Z-Boy chairs, keyboards and all) and see what happens.

 

[Deptacon]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Let then enter the MAD MAD world and test out how soon they want those 72 virgins.

They misinterpretued the text.... when they get there...after killing innocent people...its not 72 virgins.....its 72 Virginians...and not friendly ones....

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: Arkaign
The Iranians are downright docile compared the the Pakistanians. When Musharraf falls from power, you're going to see some serious shite.

Perhaps India will take care of them for us, but you are right, Pakistan is much less stable than Iran.

So now you idiots are experts in Pakistani politics? :roll: Pakistan was a nuclear power before Musharaff came into power and long before this fraudulent war on "terror". The military has ruled the country since it's inception and will continue to do so forever, just like how US's other close ally Turkey is ruled by its military. You can pretty much put away your wet dreams of Pakistan being attacked by India or Israel because both countries would be incinerated in the process.

 

[Aimster]

If certain people inside pakistan get a hold of nuclear weapons ...

but I dont know anything about Pakistan or the people. I just know what I see on T.V and I always see a bunch of flag burning, Allah Akbar violence, protesting people who seem very fanatical.
I never see anything good coming from Pakistan...
Not to say there isn't anything good, I am just misinformed most likely.

but I think the current regime in Pakistan is perfect for the world and Pakistan. Lets hope it never falls.

 

[ZzZGuy]

The question of weather or not to attack iran is "Just how sane are their leaders, and who's really in power?". When it comes to ruling iran, there is the goverment and then there's relgion. The top relgious leader has veto (i think thats the right term) powers if it wants to over every decision made by the goverment. So if they get a nuke, who actually has the big red button? and how willing are they to use it.

From what i have read, both are pritty nuts. I would not be suprised if they manage to assemble enough nukes to litterly whipe israel off the map and launched a sucidal attack using long range missiles (and it would be sucidal). Or they could give nukes to terrorists so it's harder to trace it back to them. Although israel is in the most danger, the iranian goverment chanting "Death To America" whith the unvaling of their nuclear program doesn't sound good.

This is not another "IRAQ HAS WMD's....... sorry but we can't tell you how we know this". If they can supply nuclear reactors with the nuclear fule to run them, then they can easily make fule for nukes, and it's not much of a stretch to build a nuke.

I would believe they don't intend to make nukes IF they completely opened up their nuclear program for the world to see and let the inspectors look wherever they want, and take active steps to show they don't intend to make a nuke. They have not done this. I belive the EU deal also offered to supply all the fule for their nuclear reactors if iran didn't take steps to make the fule themselves, Iran rejected this offer.

So the question should be "How do we stop them". The best solution would be to cut off all trade, i mean ALL if they don't stop. Currently russia is building their nuclear power plants and is supplying them with "Defencive" weapons such as new and effective SAM's. China is buying raw materials such as oil form iran to help fule their econemeny. I doubt both will cut off trade with iran any time soon. So that plan is out the window.

Then their's the military option. Right now a lot of coutnries are P/Oed with the US and will not help in a miltary action. I doubt the Britan will even help, so that leaves israel (proably the most effective military for it's size, against armies), which WILL attack iran if they don't stop with or without the US. Israel has barly the ability to take out all the nuclear related targets, and the US ground forces are stretched to thin and after Iraq i doubt they will attempt basicly the same thing again. So that means a MASSIVE air campain with special forces to take out specific targets. Problem with a air capmain is that no one knows where all the nuclear ficalities are. Then there are the USSR desgin bunkers built in case of a nuclear war, bunker busters may not be able to get through (i'm taking over a dozen attacks on one bunker), and SF's may not be able to get in. So the Iranians have their program set back 5 years max with a renewed effeort to get a nuke.

The losses to the america/israel depends on how well their military is trained. Iran does have the ability to defend key locations agaisnt air attack from the US, but that is only if they are smart (look at what happened in Iraq), which i have my doubts.

Then how will iran re-act. Most likely they will attempt to shut down oil flow out of the middel east by attacking tankers, oil lines, wells and infrastructure. It would require a LARGE effort to protect the tankers from all forms of attacks, and iran could send speical units into nearby countires to sabotage oil infrastructure. This would result in massivly high oil prices which would damage the american econemey and ripple effect proably through out the world.

So basicly, it doesn't look good.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
What will it take to get Iran to scrap the nuke program?

The world, or UN, as a whole will promote Iran?s nuke program. I say that because they will never act in any manner that would prevent it. So regardless of any hoops they leap through over us pushing them, the result will be the same.

Only threat to Iran?s nuclear program is if Israel or the US decides to go it alone, again. The world would continue to demonize us for our actions to stop nuclear proliferation.

The war itself, would be more realistic. Although we?d brutally crush their military, it would resemble attacking mainland Japan. Every man, woman, and even child would fight us to the death. They have seen our weakness in Iraq, our willingness to permit a populace uprising, they will exploit that exact weakness against us should we attempt to rebuild Iran before completely crushing them.

 

[Aimster]

The U.S will never be able to fully occupy Iran. It'll be Vietnam part 2. The only option is air attacks.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Should the US take military action against Iran if it's clear they will not stop nuclear production? I know the subject has been done before, but this is an interesting read.

TIME magazine article

I think there's a lot of variables and we'll have to see how things play out. This is one of "what if" problems... do you pay a small price upfront in the off-chance that you'll be detering a HUGE problem later?

I certainly would not rule out a massive air campaign.

Absolutely not. This must be the new Republican plan: start another failed war before even cleaning up the previous failed war. You guys really need to take a breath.
bu bye.

Actually Nancy Pelosi is in favor of spanking Iran!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: TravisT
Lets try to reestablish some alliances and work with other countries to resolve this issue before we just run in and try to wipe out another country. We've already written some history in the last 6 years, and everyone knows that one thing history can be used for is to learn from others mistakes.

Another person who actually believes that sweet talking them will accomplish something....rofl

 

[Orignal Earl]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

The world, or UN, as a whole will promote Iran?s nuke program. I say that because they will never act in any manner that would prevent it. So regardless of any hoops they leap through over us pushing them, the result will be the same.

Only threat to Iran?s nuclear program is if Israel or the US decides to go it alone, again. The world would continue to demonize us for our actions to stop nuclear proliferation.

You should check out some history on the UN attempts at stopping nuclear proliferation,Wmds etc and post your findings here

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Should the US take military action against Iran if it's clear they will not stop nuclear production? I know the subject has been done before, but this is an interesting read.

TIME magazine article

I think there's a lot of variables and we'll have to see how things play out. This is one of "what if" problems... do you pay a small price upfront in the off-chance that you'll be detering a HUGE problem later?

I certainly would not rule out a massive air campaign.

Absolutely not. This must be the new Republican plan: start another failed war before even cleaning up the previous failed war. You guys really need to take a breath.
bu bye.

Actually Nancy Pelosi is in favor of spanking Iran!!

I don't give a damn.