1
   

Bush To Attack Iran?

 
 
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 12:11 pm
They deny it... but few believe anything this guy has to say... it is my unimportant opinion that before launching an offensive against Iran.... bush, cheney and anyone who would do this need to be removed from office and restrained...

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1210668683139&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,585 • Replies: 23
No top replies

 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 12:39 pm
I do not see Iran posing a clear and present danger to the US.

If Isreal thinks Iran is a danger, let them attack. They are quite capable.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 12:47 pm
now you're talking... woiyo and I agree completely on something..... holy ****...
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 12:48 pm
can anyone say World War III?
0 Replies
 
Zippo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 12:57 pm
Bush is a coward. He only attacks defenceless countries.

The son of a Bush! Mad
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 12:59 pm
farmerman wrote:
can anyone say World War III?


which is why someone would need to take the bull by the horns and take bush/cheney out of Washington and lock them up.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 01:02 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
farmerman wrote:
can anyone say World War III?


which is why someone would need to take the bull by the horns and take bush/cheney out of Washington and lock them up.


Something tells me this will not happen. That something is printed on the front page of the Jersulam Post. Rolling Eyes

I am SURE this government has "plans" to attack Iran, but an actual attack at this time would not be in our best interests, nor would it be in Isreals best interests if the US attacked now.
0 Replies
 
Zippo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 01:02 pm
woiyo wrote:
I do not see Iran posing a clear and present danger to the US.

If Isreal thinks Iran is a danger, let them attack. They are quite capable.


Shocked wtf? are you okay?

For once I agree!
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 02:17 pm
Teddy ill (I don't wish it on him per se, but to get him out of the Senate and put that wretched legacy to rest) and now this - it's like Christmas with Bi-Polar as Santa Claus.

I'm not really anti-Iran, I mean, this is the USA, we're big enough to handle stuff we don't agree with with perspective and compared to the passive-aggression of other nations overt ****-talk and sincere militarism is a breath of fresh air - I mean, at least we speak the same language - still, in this modern age when an upfront, guns-blazing solution to a problem presents itself one should not look a gift-horse in the mouth...
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 02:32 pm
An attack on Iran would be a nightmare. I did a thread on this a couple of years ago when that idiot Shrub first started rattling his saber at the Persians. Look at a relief map sometime. Attacking from Afghanistan would make the Iraq invasion look like a cake walk. Alexander the Great lost half his army just marching from east to west across Baluchistan (the southern, desert portion of the country)--just marching, not fighting. It's nightmare terrain. An attempt to invade across the north from Afghanistan would be even worse, because it is also desert, and much more mountainous. I doubt if Kazakhstan would allow us to use them for a base for an invasion, but you'd have the same problems as you would from northwest Afghanistan, and in both cases, you'd be in remote areas without modern facilities, and it would be a logistic insanity.

Attempting to cross the Zagros Mountains would be equally insane, as there is only one relatively low, wide pass through the mountains--and that is where the Iran-Iraq war was fought, back and forth, for eight years. You can bet they'd be ready for us, and you can bet they wouldn't fold up the way the Iraqis did.

This is typical neo-con stupidity. Someone gets out a 12" child's globe, finds Iran on it (after about an hour, accompanied by many stupid arguments) and announces--"Hey, this would be easy."

Yeah, right.
0 Replies
 
Zippo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 02:46 pm
^ Good analysis by Setanta but only one problem. Nobody is talking about "invading" or "occupying" Iran. Bush's neo-cons want to fly a few stealths loaded with nuclear bunker busters and destroy their nuclear program. Now, can you tell us why that idea would also be as insane ? Mad
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 02:47 pm
Come, come, come, our ancestors-of-principle made it, Xenophon ran around there like he owned the place. I mean, can't say I've even looked at a modern map, but what could there possibly be, a country-sized bomb-proof dome? Don't invade, just daisy-cut them a bit and let someone else, maybe a non-combatant third-party pick up the pieces. Even if it becomes a wasteland of hostiles we'll have de-sophisticated them a bit. This is the US, people can't just be immune to us because of geography - and if we let it be the precedent going forward...

Tonight we pray to the gods of fear and panic!
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 06:47 pm
Xenophon did not come anywhere near what is today Iran. The army of which he was a part marched from the battlefield at Cunaxa to the north, through what is today the Kurdish portion of Iraq, and across eastern Anatolia (modern day Turkey) to Trapezos on the coast of the Black Sea, and then west to Byzantium, which became Constantinople and is today Istanbul. Fighting one's way through the Zagros Mountains is a different proposition altogether, and Alexander and the Greco-Macedonians could not have done it so easily if Darius in his arrogance had not marched his army west to defeat, leaving the Persian plateau undefended.

The reason your daisy-cutter bullshit won't work is because the Persians, who ain't stupid, have already taken that into account, and have built hardened underground bunkers. You're not going to "de-sophisticate" them with military action, they will be just as intelligent and just as well-educated no matter how many bombs you drop on them. The only way to take out their capacity to manufacture not just nukes, but any weapons of mass destruction would be an invasion and a long-term occupation--and you'd need at least a half-million troops, and about 10 times the start-up costs and logistical support the Shrub and his pack of idiots used in Iraq. Given Rummy's idiot plan to invade Iraq tourist class, and what that has cost us since, this would likely be the biggest fiasco in our history.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 07:17 pm
big dawg I love ya... in a manly heterosexual gladiator way of course....
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 May, 2008 10:01 pm
farmerman wrote:
can anyone say World War III?


Mccain
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 May, 2008 01:28 pm
Setanta wrote:
Xenophon did not come anywhere near what is today Iran. The army of which he was a part marched from the battlefield at Cunaxa to the north, through what is today the Kurdish portion of Iraq, and across eastern Anatolia (modern day Turkey) to Trapezos on the coast of the Black Sea, and then west to Byzantium, which became Constantinople and is today Istanbul. Fighting one's way through the Zagros Mountains is a different proposition altogether, and Alexander and the Greco-Macedonians could not have done it so easily if Darius in his arrogance had not marched his army west to defeat, leaving the Persian plateau undefended.

The reason your daisy-cutter bullshit won't work is because the Persians, who ain't stupid, have already taken that into account, and have built hardened underground bunkers. You're not going to "de-sophisticate" them with military action, they will be just as intelligent and just as well-educated no matter how many bombs you drop on them. The only way to take out their capacity to manufacture not just nukes, but any weapons of mass destruction would be an invasion and a long-term occupation--and you'd need at least a half-million troops, and about 10 times the start-up costs and logistical support the Shrub and his pack of idiots used in Iraq. Given Rummy's idiot plan to invade Iraq tourist class, and what that has cost us since, this would likely be the biggest fiasco in our history.



Alright professor, but he ran around like he owned the place - they counted him out and he scared them out of the way. And what can they do - conduct all their business from underground? It was a win when Hitler went in his bunker and now we've got UAV's to make sure. I mean, it would be more of a fight than we're used to but it ain't even like we've got to get in underneath trees with them.

I keep hearing wonderful details about gloom and doom if we don't turn ourselves in to Obama. Suddenly everyone's a fan of cold, hard reality - it's fashionable to whine about how screwed and limited we are - but are you starving? My trash got picked up this week. Liberals assessing our military prospects reminds me of those frustrated evangelicals trying to sell 'intelligent design' as science.
0 Replies
 
Zippo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 May, 2008 01:34 pm
Setanta wrote:
Xenophon did not come anywhere near what is today Iran. The army of which he was a part marched from the battlefield at Cunaxa to the north, through what is today the Kurdish portion of Iraq, and across eastern Anatolia (modern day Turkey) to Trapezos on the coast of the Black Sea, and then west to Byzantium, which became Constantinople and is today Istanbul. Fighting one's way through the Zagros Mountains is a different proposition altogether, and Alexander and the Greco-Macedonians could not have done it so easily if Darius in his arrogance had not marched his army west to defeat, leaving the Persian plateau undefended.

The reason your daisy-cutter bullshit won't work is because the Persians, who ain't stupid, have already taken that into account, and have built hardened underground bunkers. You're not going to "de-sophisticate" them with military action, they will be just as intelligent and just as well-educated no matter how many bombs you drop on them. The only way to take out their capacity to manufacture not just nukes, but any weapons of mass destruction would be an invasion and a long-term occupation--and you'd need at least a half-million troops, and about 10 times the start-up costs and logistical support the Shrub and his pack of idiots used in Iraq. Given Rummy's idiot plan to invade Iraq tourist class, and what that has cost us since, this would likely be the biggest fiasco in our history.


http://planetsmilies.net/happy-smiley-8769.gif
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 May, 2008 03:45 pm
This is off topic, but bunny.

After numerous rounds of 'We don't even know if Osama bin Laden is still alive," Osama himself decided to send George Bush a letter in his own hand writing to let him know he was still in the game.

Bush opened the letter and it contained a single line of coded message:

370H-SSV-0773H

Bush was baffled, so he e-mailed it to Condoleezza Rice. Condi and her aides had not a clue either, so they sent it to the FBI.

No one could solve it at the FBI so it went to the CIA, and then to MI6.

Eventually they asked the Mossad (Israeli intelligence) for help.

Within a minute the Mossad e-mailed the White House with this reply:

'Tell the President he's holding the note upside down.'
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 May, 2008 05:48 pm
hanno wrote:
Alright professor, but he ran around like he owned the place - they counted him out and he scared them out of the way.


I suggest that you actually read the Anabasis of Xenophon before you make **** up about it. Xenophon was not the commander of the mercenary force which marched to Cunaxa in the employ of Cyrus the Younger, who was trying to put the Persian emperor Ataxerxes out of business. The commanders were the leaders of the individual detachments of mercenaries who had signed on. Clearchus from Sparta was recognized as the top commander. The Persian commander, Tissaphernes, lured the commanders to a negotiation, and murdered most of them, including Clearchus. Thereafter, the Greeks elected a group of commanders, of whom Xenophon was only one. Their sole object was to get out alive--which is why they marched north. Neither they, nor Xenophon, "ran around" anywhere. It was certainly true that the Persians were not going to attack them without good reason--they counted on starvation to do their work for them, and they recognized that the Greeks at bay would be a savagely dangerous opponent.

They had no food, except what they could take by force from the population. Tissaphernes gave them some supplies, but the "marching republic" (as it came to be known) discussed it, decided that they were being strung along, and that their best bet was to march and fight their way out. They marched north as the best way to quickly get back to familiar territory (the Black Sea coast was dotted with Greek trading post cities), and to avoid retracing their steps through hostile territory where most of the food and fodder was already used up. Their march was heroic and remains a popular account to this day because of the hardships they endured to accomplish it. When you don't know what the hell you're talking about, maybe you shouldn't talk about it.

Quote:
And what can they do - conduct all their business from underground? It was a win when Hitler went in his bunker and now we've got UAV's to make sure. I mean, it would be more of a fight than we're used to but it ain't even like we've got to get in underneath trees with them.


The point, about which you are being willfully obtuse, is that to take out their weapons of mass destruction programs, we would have to go in on the ground. Their population is almost 66,000,000 (source at the CIA Factbook) as compared to the 26,000,000 Iraqis we faced, an increase of 250%. They are not a demoralized nation of an oppressed majority suffering under the rule of a tribal minority government. They are wealthy and have not been subjected to ten years of international embargo. Their leadership is not simply unified, they control almost every aspect of life in Iran, but they don't micromanage, and they don't have to deploy a huge army and police force to protect themselves from their own people.

And their own people are an ancient and proud nation that will fight us as the Iraqis wouldn't. As of 2004, the Iranian army numbered as much as 350,000 men (source at Global Security-dot-org), of which about 200,000 are conscripts, which leaves 150,000 professionals, a force nearly as large as the army we already have in Iraq. Where are you going to come up with the troops to fight this war, Professor?

Quote:
I keep hearing wonderful details about gloom and doom if we don't turn ourselves in to Obama. Suddenly everyone's a fan of cold, hard reality - it's fashionable to whine about how screwed and limited we are - but are you starving? My trash got picked up this week. Liberals assessing our military prospects reminds me of those frustrated evangelicals trying to sell 'intelligent design' as science.


Your political predilections and prejudices have absolutely no bearing on the issue of attacking Iran. If you bomb them, you are not going to stop their weapons of mass destruction programs, and you are just going to piss them off, as well as the rest of the Muslim world, without having accomplished any lasting results--and you will have given them incentive to attempt to get us in return. No other nation in the world has more experience (except perhaps Libya) in sponsoring terrorist activities. If you want to completely take out their capacity to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, you'll have to go in on the ground, and it will be a blood bath.

Conservatives rattling their sabers always remind me of bullies on the playground, who'd piss in their pants if they ever got into a real fight. What's sad is that you're willing to spill American blood because you are an unwitting shill for Israeli policy goals.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 May, 2008 07:12 pm
More like the bullies on the play ground that would beat your ass, then go beat your families ass, then kick your dog if they ever got in a fight.

That being said, I don't think an Iran attack will take place under the Bush Administration.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bush To Attack Iran?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 11/16/2024 at 06:46:53