If the USA went to war with Iran, who would win?
 

Iran?

USA?

or would it be the start of ww3?

USA would fuck Iran up, but yes, it would probably start more shit...

We'll probably see more Americans like the OP - headless.

I think it would be long and very painful. Fuck iraq is still going on for what over 5 yrs. Also count on the draft happening.

there is no way in hell the draft would be brought back

Iran would wipe us off the map.

Bush is one his way out. We pray. so he stands to lose a lot of money so it may not last as long as you think. If the US really felt threatened, they would turn the place to glass.

We would bomb the fuck out of them for about 2 weeks stright then embargo them for the next 10 years.

Israel...

we would beat the Iran army but never beat the people.

Just like if china came to the USA they might take down our army but never the people

Halliburton!

and who does that punish the most? Not the government of Iran but the poorest of the people living there. What sense does that make?

This chap would..








and no. It would NOT be WWIII. It would be the USA vs Middle East III.

:2 cents:

bingo :thumbsup

There are no winners in war. Only losers and dead bodies.

Trick question... You first have to define what a "win" is...

The only one with the BALLS to stop these wars is Ron Paul.

I think the fundamental question in the title is self explanatory. USA has proved throughout the history that they are NOT capable of winning any war. They have just embarrassed themselves each time as not capable of accomplishing a jack shit and had to withdraw with their asses squeezed tightly. Fucking losers…

If the US wanted to simply pacify the country, and did it the right way putting the population down, it would be quick and easy.

But the US is driven, at least in part, by Liberals. Liberals don't know how pacify people, so you end up with failed nation building instead.

Quoted for truth.... and the neo cons are libs all the way. :thumbsup

Sound's like you are describing France....

China would win, if anyone gained anything,. Most likely it would be bad for everyone.

weapon company shareholders

You hit the nail right on the fucking head. People mistaken the war with the aftermath. We won the actual Iraqi war quite easily, but we fucked up by hanging around there afterwards trying to run their country for them. Now it's a quagmire we can't ever hope to win...

A couple A bombs will smarten them up

Awesome Mate!, I LOVE THAT MOVIE..........funny JD .....:thumbsup

I believe that the very same thing that has happened in Irak would repeat itself with Iran.....USA bombing the shit out of Iran but THEN after everything seems to be in order........several groups of people disguised as civilians would fight US troops through bombings and shit like that......

The problem fighting these people is that they are willing to blow themselves up just to kill a few americans........on the other hand American soldiers value their lives very much.......

So yeah....itd be American VS Muslim land III.........the return of the Yeti

Say what you want about the Nazis, but they knew how to pacify a population.

Or even better yet, the Romans. Rome never had these problems because you either were with them or dead.

USA should just mind its own fucking business.

Who the fuck do they think they are telling other countries what they can & can not do? Since when is the fucking USA the world police.

umm sorry but it was your Bush buddy, whom tried to do the failed nation building. lol You righties always try to blame anything bad on the the lefties..

Never fails..

Have you ever read a history book before? I always thought the education system in Canada was good.

It would be the same success that the current war in Iraq is. (err, war against terrorism I meant..., sorry)

Hey, now THERE is an idea. :thumbsup

North Korea.

Rome never managed to conquer Persia though.

I'm not a rightie or a leftie, I'm not even American. I'll try to break it down for you, slowly, so you can keep up.

What you have in a Republic, which is what the USA is, is a small majority of the people (around 51%) telling the other people what to do. In other words, there's a big split. It's not like Democracy works in a way that everyone gets what they want, happy, happy.

So even if Neo cons are running things, there's a huge chunk (read most of) the population that are not of that same mind set and presumably would never stand to see the US army carpet bombing schools, Mosks and whatever else. Putting people to death if they don't get back in line. That's what's needed to actually pacify a population. Occupation forces will never be seen as liberators, only opressors.

If the population were say 90% neo conservative, or to use an example from the past National Socialists, then the ruling party could rage war in any fashion they saw fit without fear of problems in the population at home. As this is not the case and never will be, best just to stay out of trying to occupy countries all together.

Revolution - win
War of 1812 - tie
Mexican-American - win
Civil War - win
Spanish-American - win
WWI - win
WWII - win
Korean - tie
Vietnam - loss
Iraq I - no contest
Iraq II - losing

What I meant was, when Rome did conquer a population, they knew how to pacify it afterwards.

Just one small correction to your post... we don't have a 51% small majority.. it's more like a 25% small majority (conservatives) and a 25% small minority (liberals) and a 50% moderate base.... it's the moderates in the middle that could control the country but don't give a fuck most of the time... so we all let the nutjobs on the left and right do it because no one ever provides a better option.... well that and most of them were brought up to think the same things as their religious parents and haven't figured out how to think for themselves yet. If the middle ever figures things out, it may be an interesting place to live.

Correction... Iraq II win... follow up to win inadequate.