Originally posted by Chief
Israel is as dangerous with nukes as Iran will be.
Israel is as dangerous with nukes as Iran will be.
-
One difference though, Isreal never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, whereas Iran did.I post on GFY so that when people ask me what I do,
I can tell them that I work with the mentally retarded. -
True...so I will use '91 then. Iraq had the fourth largest standing Army in the world...you know the same one that Iran fought against for eight years. It took the US and coalition forces...six weeks of an air war and 100 hours of a ground war to decimate the fourth largest standing Army in the world. Better?Originally posted by BRISK
In the Iran-Iraq war, Iraq was heavily supported and financed by countries like the US, Britain, France, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc...
I don't think you can compare the state that Iraq was in during the Iran-Iraq war, with the state it was in during the recent invasion.When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me!
FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...http://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.htmlComment
-
I agree that at least that will happen. What I'm wondering is if Bush will try to use this situation to institute complete regime change in Iran. I'm sure that he wants to, but that's a very costly decision, much more so than Iraq was (still is).Originally posted by theking
Well...I personally do not think that a "war" will be fought...but I do think that if Iran continues on the path that it "seems" to be taking...their Nuclear power plant and facilities will be taken out via air strikes...and I suspect that it may be Israel that does it...just as they took out Iraq's Nuclear power plant and facilities...with unofficial approval from the US of course.I post on GFY so that when people ask me what I do,
I can tell them that I work with the mentally retarded.Comment
-
It may have been the 4th largest army, but it's well known that Iraq's military (and economy) was in very poor shape after the Iran-Iraq war, which is one of the reasons both countries ended the war. They were both worn down from nearly a decade of fighting.Originally posted by theking
True...so I will use '91 then. Iraq had the fourth largest standing Army in the world...you know the same one that Iran fought against for eight years. It took the US and coalition forces...six weeks of an air war and 100 hours of a ground war to decimate the fourth largest standing Army in the world. Better?I post on GFY so that when people ask me what I do,
I can tell them that I work with the mentally retarded.Comment
-
I for one do not think that a "regime change" will be directly attempted...certainly not any time soon as our military is stretched right now and will be for some years (unless Congress acts to increase the end force levels...as they control the size of the military)...but I do expect some covert operations that will support an overthrow of the current goverment. It is my understanding that this is being portrayed as a popular thought by a large younger population.Originally posted by BRISK
I agree that at least that will happen. What I'm wondering is if Bush will try to use this situation to institute complete regime change in Iran. I'm sure that he wants to, but that's a very costly decision, much more so than Iraq was (still is).When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me!
FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...http://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.htmlComment
-
Well lets just get down to the bottom line. Do you believe that Iraq's military and/or Iran's military now...or ever...was/is little more than a turkey shoot for the US military?Originally posted by BRISK
It may have been the 4th largest army, but it's well known that Iraq's military (and economy) was in very poor shape after the Iran-Iraq war, which is one of the reasons both countries ended the war. They were both worn down from nearly a decade of fighting.Last edited by theking; 09-30-2004, 01:26 AM.When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me!
FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...http://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.htmlComment
-
Lets face a few facts here.
As far as 90% of the population of the rest of the world think, the American people are being led by a man who is an equivalent to Hitler. he invades other countries on a whim, with ficticious claims of WMD.
If the clown is voted in again, he will most probably attack Iran, causing mayhem throughout the world, with massive loss of life to the Iranian people, including hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children.
What country has used WMD? Only one. The USA. What right do they have of telling other countries what they can and cannot do?
They have made a huge mess of Iraq, where more innocent people die every day at the blooded hands of Bush, and they havent a clue how to get out.
Afganistan proves the point that the USA cannot win a war of this type. That country is now almost back in the hands of the Taliban.
American people have the ability to get rid of this tyrant once and for all, by voting him out in the next elections. If not, expect a huge amount of carnage and ship loads of body bags being shipped out to the middle east in the next 4 years.Comment
-
No, it's no competition. Especially if the UN supports a military intervention like during the Gulf War, and many other countries get on board (which I think will be key to managing the Iran situation given how strained the current US military is in containing the Iraq situation right now).Originally posted by theking
Well lets just get down to the bottom line. Do you believe that Iraq's military and/or Iran's military now...or ever...was/is little more than a turkey shoot for the US military?
I think the big issues with going after Iran are:
1) Will it have UN approval?
2) Are they going to just destroy any nuke making facilities, or will they go all out and and do some good 'ol fashioned regime change?
3) How much is all this going to cost?
4) Will there be enough troops to handle this?
5) If they try to go the distance for regime change, what are the chances they'll be able to accomplish that task without spending the next 5 years and trillions of dollars to keep the country under control?I post on GFY so that when people ask me what I do,
I can tell them that I work with the mentally retarded.Comment
-
The King.
You are totally blinded with your country's propaganda.
The USA is hated by the rst of the world for the way its acted over the middle east. Its troops have bombed and murdered thousands of innocent women and children. And you support it!
Bush attacked a country, against the rules of the UN, which was an illegal move. Bush should be indited for war crimes the second he steps foot outside the States.
Thanks god the British people are fully aware of Blair. He tried to wriggle out of it this week by apologising for the fact that he was wrong about WMD. The people of UK are not stupid. Today he faces his party at theior conference and is expected to lose big time.
The sooner the election comes about the better. He and his crap Laobour Party are OUT.Comment
-
Does the US have total control of Iraq yet?Originally posted by theking
Well lets just get down to the bottom line. Do you believe that Iraq's military and/or Iran's military now...or ever...was/is little more than a turkey shoot for the US military?
I can't believe you are comparing the military of a poor nation to the military capabilities of rich Western nations.
Comment
-
Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Every country that signed that has the right to tell every other country what they can and cannot do when it comes to Nuclear weapons.Originally posted by loco12
What country has used WMD? Only one. The USA. What right do they have of telling other countries what they can and cannot do?I post on GFY so that when people ask me what I do,
I can tell them that I work with the mentally retarded.Comment
-
That is a very important point. Most people just think of war as defeating the other country's military, then you're done and you can go home. I'd say that today, defeating the other country's military is the easy part, actually occupying and keeping the country under control until it is stable and democratic is the hard part.Originally posted by ControlThy
Does the US have total control of Iraq yet?I post on GFY so that when people ask me what I do,
I can tell them that I work with the mentally retarded.Comment
-
1.Does the USA care? It operates outside the law taking no notice of the UN!Originally posted by BRISK
No, it's no competition. Especially if the UN supports a military intervention like during the Gulf War, and many other countries get on board (which I think will be key to managing the Iran situation given how strained the current US military is in containing the Iraq situation right now).
I think the big issues with going after Iran are:
1) Will it have UN approval?
2) Are they going to just destroy any nuke making facilities, or will they go all out and and do some good 'ol fashioned regime change?
3) How much is all this going to cost?
4) Will there be enough troops to handle this?
5) If they try to go the distance for regime change, what are the chances they'll be able to accomplish that task without spending the next 5 years and trillions of dollars to keep the country under control?
2.No they will go blindly wading in killing thousands of innocents, who will be labelled "insurgents".
3.Cost is imaterial. The USA people will lap it up like a video game and hail Herr Bush.
4.Probably. Good excuse to call for inscription, to keep unemployement figures low and fool the people into believing he has everything under control.
5. the chances are he will make a millionsuicide bombers, who will be out to avenge the death of their families.
If a country attacked and killed my wife and child, Iwould take a gun and shoot the first invader I saw. Most people would do the same. The USA has done untold world damage under Bush. Every beheading is blood on his hands. Every Iraqi school kid shot or bombed is blood on his hands.
Get him out.Comment
-
In the case of Iran, I think America has to care a lot about UN approval, because without UN approval I'd say the most America's military can handle at the moment (without a draft) is to simply destroy the nuke factories (not regime change).Originally posted by loco12
1.Does the USA care? It operates outside the law taking no notice of the UN!
The problem is, I'm sure Bush wants regime change in Iran, and if he can dig up proof that they're making nukes, then that's a great excuse to go in and pull off a regime change, but now isn't the best time because America's military is tied down in Iraq and bringing in a draft is political suicide. Of course if he wins the election, he can never get re-elected again anyway, so he might bring in the draft and get enough people in the military to go after Iran. But then again, all that would be extremely costly, and America's finances aren't exactly amazing these days.I post on GFY so that when people ask me what I do,
I can tell them that I work with the mentally retarded.Comment
-
Exactly. Under the Bush-lies no coalition wants to support the US anymore in any kind of war adventure. If they would go after Iran on their own, they stand no chance of winning.Originally posted by BRISK
It may have been the 4th largest army, but it's well known that Iraq's military (and economy) was in very poor shape after the Iran-Iraq war, which is one of the reasons both countries ended the war. They were both worn down from nearly a decade of fighting.
If they can't even handle a weakened country like Iraq fighting people with small weapons on flipflops they definitely can't handle Iran...Comment
Comment