- May 3, 2009
- Reaction score
The rescue mission was a disaster. But it could've been an even bigger disaster. The U.S. military had privately estimated that the BEST case scenario for the hostage rescue mission was for HALF the hostages to be killed and from 300-500 Iranians to be killed. They did not come clean with President Carter about these estimates because they knew he would chicken out. And coming barely half a decade after the Vietnam War, the U.S. military wanted to put a "win" in the column...... I meant the Hostage Crisis --we had every right to go to war and/or blast some shit.....I was just thinking the other day about a thread on what options we had during the Hostage Crisis ...I'll have to post that sometimeYou support the U.S. going to war with Iran? Great! Something we can agree on. We're probably more alike than you think.lots of wars what??Lots of wars last for decades. Why the American obsession with extremely short conflicts?..that's all they needed--air support and supplies!! HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHWe did NOT have troops in Vietnam after 72 you fucking MORON. The South just needed air support and to be supplied with ammo parts and fuel. they proved that in 72.DamnitThe idiots in this thread that insist we lost can not face the FACTS or REALITY. By 72 we had stabilized South Vietnam. No Insurgency was left. In 72 the South with our air support stopped a major North Vietnamese invasion with NO US Troops involved in combat. In 74 the Democrats cut off South Vietnam from supplies and our Treaty agreement. In 75 the North Invaded again with a small incursion we they saw the US would not honor the committment of a VALID SIGNED TREATY they switched to an all out INVASION. 25 North Vietnamese Divisions, NO internal insurgency at ALL. With out our supplies and fuel the South still fought. With out our air support they fought for a month out numbered over 2 to one. The dems sold out an ally with a VALID Treaty.
If we only had a little more time and just a few more casualties, we would have WON
the US had air support and it didn't win the war--the North kept fighting
--you want to keep the war going for decades!!!!
--like i said--doing the same thing over and over--expecting different results = insanity
....also, if you mean why the Americans don't want long wars?? if the war is worth fighting for --like WW2, no problem...if it is something like Vietnam--no shit it should be short!!!!!!!!--should not have been there in the first place
..we had more reason to be at war with Iran than NVietnam
A big part of the problem was Carter wanted the rescue force to minimize Iranian casualties at all costs. Including using nonlethal weapons whenever possible. One of the top officers who ended up carrying smoke grenades later said "He expected us to fight our way out of a hostile capital city of 5 million people with smoke grenades!!".
If things went to hell, the officer planned to fire one and only one smoke grenade...and that would be the signal for AC-130 gunships to start making attacks into the heart of Tehran.