So when do we invade Iran?

[Vince278]

Originally posted by germanos
and the US has the obligation to provide security and stability in Iraq.

Not at all. Still their country. Can't have them doing nothing for themselves so we can take the blame.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Joseph
Russia today said hands off of Iran.

That would be alright with me if they were planning to handle the situation themselves.

[NeOmega]

Israeli attack on Iranian sites:

countries had to offer their airspace. Syria would not. Iraq might

this would give Iran justicfication to take southern Iraq... the shiite section.

American attack on Iran, woudl be staged from Iraq, put a vise on the 150000 in Iraq, and they could very well be slaughtered, dozens per day for months, not to mention many airbases etc would become unstable and prone to attack.

The first signs of an attack on Iran would be the US withdrawing it's fleet from teh Persian gulf, or else they could face annihilation from the coast from odff shore crusie missiles, whcih Iran has been stocking up on.

Iran has 3 times the population, and an economy 12x as strong as Iraq had when GW 2 started. Iran is no joke, and Iran has been developing nukes since the mid-80's. Many believe Iran already has a dozen nuclear weapons.

So if you want to hop off of a transport for an amphibious assault on Iran, you won't see me saluting your sorry boots and rifle sticking in the sand. That's just caled evolution, where the stupid are killed off so the smart are left to procreate.

[C0ckney]

Many believe Iran already has a dozen nuclear weapons.

like who?

[NeOmega]

can't remember off the top of my head, but since I have spent hundreds of hours reading on the subject, I assure you, I did not make this up.

from what i remember reading, it is surmised many of the missing nuclear weapons from the former soviet 'stans ended up in Iranian hands.

[Alexander's Horse]

its like Indochina all over again

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
its like Indochina all over again

Only from the US perspective. It won't be as bad on from the point of view of the inhabitants of the region unless the US were to re-adopt the tactics from Indochina that resulted in millions of civillian casualties.

If the military situation ever becomes uncomfotable enough for the US that such tactics began to seem tempting then it will be time to withdraw at once consequences be damned, since a withdrawl from unacceptable outcome will already have become inevitable.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by NeOmega
Israeli attack on Iranian sites:

countries had to offer their airspace. Syria would not. Iraq might

this would give Iran justicfication to take southern Iraq... the shiite section.

American attack on Iran, woudl be staged from Iraq, put a vise on the 150000 in Iraq, and they could very well be slaughtered, dozens per day for months, not to mention many airbases etc would become unstable and prone to attack.

The first signs of an attack on Iran would be the US withdrawing it's fleet from teh Persian gulf, or else they could face annihilation from the coast from odff shore crusie missiles, whcih Iran has been stocking up on.

Iran has 3 times the population, and an economy 12x as strong as Iraq had when GW 2 started. Iran is no joke, and Iran has been developing nukes since the mid-80's. Many believe Iran already has a dozen nuclear weapons.

So if you want to hop off of a transport for an amphibious assault on Iran, you won't see me saluting your sorry boots and rifle sticking in the sand. That's just caled evolution, where the stupid are killed off so the smart are left to procreate.

One boat carries 24 missile with 10 ea. warhead. What would Iran look like after 240 warheads hit.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Joseph
One boat carries 24 missile with 10 ea. warhead. What would Iran look like after 240 warheads hit.

like a crime against humanity?

[GePap]

The US has control over the airspace of Iraq. No ME government would allow IDF planes to overfly them en route to Iran, so Israel would have to violate the airspace of at least one neighbor to do so. Mosdt likely JOrdan and Iraq, since Jordan has no real defenses and the US would not stop Israel from flying over Iraq.

Saudi Arabian airspace is too well guarded, Going over Syria creates too many issues, and there would be little will to purposefully antagonizing Turkey.

[Colonâ„¢]

Originally posted by C0ckney


like who?

That's new for me too.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by GePap
The US has control over the airspace of Iraq. No ME government would allow IDF planes to overfly them en route to Iran, so Israel would have to violate the airspace of at least one neighbor to do so. Mosdt likely JOrdan and Iraq, since Jordan has no real defenses and the US would not stop Israel from flying over Iraq.

Saudi Arabian airspace is too well guarded, Going over Syria creates too many issues, and there would be little will to purposefully antagonizing Turkey.

But the last time, they did fly over Saudi just south of the Iraq border until it was time to head north to the rector.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Joseph
But the last time, they did fly over Saudi just south of the Iraq border until it was time to head north to the rector.

That was before SA bought F-15's, AWACS, and Patriot Batteries from the US.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Geronimo
like a crime against humanity?

They're already there.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by GePap
That was before SA bought F-15's, AWACS, and Patriot Batteries from the US.

They're not necessarily top of the line.