Iran War About to Begin

[BluePhantom]

Unlikely?

Try impossible. It's not going to happen. But you have a point with Iranian dissidents. Then you might..and I repeat might..see something like Libya.

But that really would be a geopolitical nightmare.

I have learned in my life that there are no absolutes and nothing is impossible...especially when it has an impact on a politician's chances for re-election. Like I said...I think the "ground war scenario" is highly unlikely as it would require a precise combination of multiple events at the perfect time for it to come to pass. Honestly, I don't see that happening...but....you never know. Essentially, I would say that it's a 97% certainty that any military action will be restricted to air/naval, but a ground war is not quite "impossible".

 

[KissMy]

Hopefully our new bunker buster will bring Iran to it's senses.

 

[FuelRod]

Question, do you (anyone can answer) believe disabling the Iran nuclear threat will lower or increase oil prices?

 

[BluePhantom]

But the only option you are considering is bombing Iran's nuclear facilities into oblivion. No consideration at all for the colateral damage. No consideration of how endless war and bombing paints the United States as an aggressor in the Middle East.

Sigh....most of the Middle East wants us to bomb Iran. Remember, Iran is not an Arab nation. They are Persian and while they may be fellow Muslims they are still considered an enemy. The Arab nations are terrified at the prospect of Iranian military dominance in the region. Now will they go on TV and publicly condemn United States military aggression? Oh sure, absolutely. But behind the scenes they are begging for it. This is just the game of politics that gets played in the Middle east and everyone knows it. As far as collateral damage...we will certainly try to minimize it but war sucks. Iran can avoid it by allowing inspections, shutting down their nuclear weapons program, moving their military targets out of residential areas and using their own people as human shields, etc.

Are there options available that don't include these drastic situations? Or am I right in thinking that most Republicans cannot think any further than the red phone and a call to arms?

Where the hell have you been? We have tried inspections. Iran refused to comply. We have tried discussions. Iran's not interested in talking. We have tried sanctions. Iran said "**** you, we are proceeding". We tried seizing their foreign assets. Iran said "**** you, we are proceeding." We have been trying to find another way for years and Iran is simply not willing to play ball. A military option is about all that is left.

 

[BluePhantom]

Question, do you (anyone can answer) believe disabling the Iran nuclear threat will lower or increase oil prices?

Initially it will increase them, but ultimately it will lower them. This is because bombing Iran will ultimately secure the petrodollar and re-establish our hegemony on the oil trade. BTW...that's precisely why Iran wants a nuclear weapon. If they have a nuke we cannot take any military action against them because they will retaliate by nuking Israel. That means they will be free to do what they want economically and that means they will trade oil for currencies other than the United States dollar (which they have quietly started to do now but not very aggressively). We can't have that. If you think our economy sucks now, wait until oil is freely traded in Euros instead of dollars. The economy we are in now will look like a bull market and boom times.

 

[Katzndogz]

Sanctions aren't going to work and diplomacy isn't going to work. Neither Iran nor anyone else in the world is stupid enough to believe what an American says.

 

[SillyWabbit]

Sanctions aren't going to work and diplomacy isn't going to work. Neither Iran nor anyone else in the world is stupid enough to believe what an American says.

This American says: there are things in this world that people aspire to achieve. One cannot help but run toward these goals. It's a fact the world round, that, without Americans, the world would be a lesser place. People believe, and they want to believe, what Americans say. Wherever they are, they believe. We wouldn't exist if they didn't believe.

That's just the way it is.

 

[elvis]

How are we going to pay for this one?

Same way we'll pay for obamacare and the other wars.

 

[ekrem]

Definately agree with Sallow. Look for about 250 Tomahawks to start out with, probably delivered by submarine and missle cruisers. Probably looking to target anti-air, radar, and command and control first. Then you can count on B-2's and F-117's to drop JDAM's and Bunker busters.

If the Iranians bring their navy back to the gulf, look for Harpoons to put them on the bottom as quickly as possible. They have three? diesal powered submarines. Also look for ASW to take them out in the first couple hours or they will cause headaches for the carriers.

The first couple days will see an attempt by Iran to perform CAP, but Navy pilots will RULE the skies as always. Not sure where the Iranian Air Force will go, but they won't want to consign themselves to certain death by climbing into the sky. Hell, they might as well sit in the cockpit and put a gun in their mouths.

I'm becoming increasingly convinced that it's going to come to this. Iran wants a showdown.

You should click "Pause Game".

In Iraq they were supposed to greet you with flowers, look how that kind of planning turned out to be.
Some people never learn.

 

[ekrem]

I think the the likelihood is that it will be an air/naval war yes. But let me clarify what I am getting at. It all depends on our stated goals and our stated goals will depend on Obama's polling.

If he is close then our stated goals will be "destroy Iran's nuclear facilities" and you will see a relatively short bombing campaign focused on a smaller number of specific targets. If he is way behind then the chances increase that our stated goal will be something like "to cripple Iran's military capabilities". Well now the door is opened for not just nuclear sites but any military target and that means a far more protracted campaign.

If the Iranian dissidents are smart they will launch another round of demonstrations right around that time. If that happens then Obama has the ability to change our goal to "support the rebels in Iran in an effort to curtail abuses against humanity" and now we really have a protracted war which would almost certainly involve more than just air and naval power.

Whether we have done it before or not is somewhat irrelevant. Obama has a bad habit of ignoring history to begin with and frankly, and I personally don't think the man has any problems whatsoever rolling tanks into Iran if he thinks it will score him a November win. That's my personal opinion. I could be wrong. Time will tell but the point is that Iran's treatment will directly depend on how Obama is polling....unless Israel says "**** it" and does it anyhow.

I think a ground campaign is highly unlikely, but I think that because I feel this election will be close and, while it would be in their best interests to do so, the Iranian dissidents will probably not rise up again...therefore the chances of a ground war are very slim.....but not completely eliminated.

On which legal basis are you even attacking Iran ?
Where's the legitimation?

You can wish a contained air/naval operation as much as you want, Iran will destabilize the whole region.

 

[ekrem]

Sanctions aren't going to work and diplomacy isn't going to work. Neither Iran nor anyone else in the world is stupid enough to believe what an American says.

What did the members of your "Coalition of the willing" get in return ?
Georgia was bombed, rest ignored and Poland got squeezed between Germany and Russia.

 

[Ropey]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IDjBiuHPqE]The Muslim War Council - YouTube[/ame]

War or Islamic Conflict Resolution?

 

[rhodescholar]

Bring on the draft.....

Israel asks U.S. for arms that could aid Iran strike | Reuters

Cannot get in there soon enough. I just want the regime targeted, because if it is destroyed and a rational one takes over, the nuke program becomes less of an issue.

 

[rhodescholar]

How are we going to pay for this one?

SA and other arabs have already offered to pay for it.

 

[rhodescholar]

On which legal basis are you even attacking Iran ?
Where's the legitimation?

Perhaps their violating FOUR UNSC resolutions demanding they cease enriching uranium, and the other UNSC resolutions requiring that they cease shipping weapons to terrorist groups, for starters, including Crimes Against Humanity and running one of the world's largest gulag and concentration camps.

Funny how far left posters like this mentally ill dimwit who screech about human rights and protecting freedom/democracy have no interest in doing so for the populace of any nation that is an enemy of the US.

 

[Mr Natural]

How are we going to pay for this one?

SA and other arabs have already offered to pay for it.

Well, then, if they offered to pay for it, why don't they just take care of the problem theselves and leave us out of it?

 

[Urbanguerrilla]

How are we going to pay for this one?

The Chinese will lend the US a few trillion bucks...

"Where you go to bomb today unca sam, you a fun guy unca sam, you love boom-boom..."

The USA will soon be one big China town

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVdtR_iN3_c&feature=g-all-lik&context=G2773fd0FAAAAAAAAAAA]Rick Santorum Can't Explain How Attacking Iran Is Part Of Just War Theory - YouTube[/ame]

 

[KissMy]

Pentagon war game forecasts U.S. would be pulled into a new war if Israel strikes Iran

"The apparent results of the war game reported by the Times suggest that it will be much more difficult than Israeli leaders assume to keep the United States out of the conflict," former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East Colin Kahl told Yahoo News by email. "In the retaliatory spasm following an Israeli strike, the odds that Iranian actions and miscalculations could drag the United States military are substantial."

 

[KevinWestern]

Cannot get in there soon enough. I just want the regime targeted, because if it is destroyed and a rational one takes over, the nuke program becomes less of an issue.

What makes you think a "rational" regime will take over?

I think a strike will:

-Delay the inevitable for about 2-3 years.

-Will push the Iranian nuclear weapons program even further underground.

-Potentially motivate the Iranians to ramp up their efforts, because if a country like Israel (with 550+ fully armed nuclear warheads, mind you) is capable of striking at will, then there's a greater case for Iran to build up its own defenses.

-Will likely escalate into a larger-scale ground war which could destabilize the region and will cost the United States a lot of lives and a lot of money.

*One scenario would be if ran, for instance, retaliates by filling the strait of Hormuz with mines. If these are to be cleared out, the US/Israel will have to take out all of the ground defenses that overlook the straight so that Iran does not attack when the mines are being dismantled.

I don't want Iran to have nukes either, I just don't know if the pros of an attack are worth all of the cons I list above.