U.S. planning for possible attack on Iran - VGF

Philip55 · 01-17-2005, 11:21 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/...ran/index.html

If it comes to that, I fully support it.

Blue Yoshi · 01-18-2005, 09:17 PM

good idea, Bush. bomb EVERYONE until we get bombed. If we would have attacked the Soviet Union during the Cold War, we would have destroyed Earth, because they would attack back. the same applies here.

Philip55 · 01-18-2005, 09:46 PM

Attacking the Soviet Union would have started a nuclear war. Attacking Iran prevents a nuclear war.

Iran has no modern airforce and no navy. Any counterattack by Iran would be futile, albeit amusing.

We are talking about raids and air stikes against specific targets. Think Israel's attack on Iraqi nuclear sites in 1981.

Would you rather Bush sit around and allow Iran to continue its nuclear program?

[ January 18, 2005, 08:50 PM: Message edited by: Philip55 ]

Erdawn Il Deus · 01-18-2005, 09:58 PM

Frankly I wish Bush would choke on a pretzel.

Philip55 · 01-18-2005, 10:08 PM

**Booyakasha** · 01-18-2005, 11:18 PM

The Iranian government should mind its p's and q's; Bush clearly doesn't have any reservations about stomping on our enemies.

Oh, and the fact that Hersh is reporting to the world about secret government reconaissance operations indicates that he's either a traitor or an idiot.

[ January 18, 2005, 10:28 PM: Message edited by: Cap'n Boo from Timbuktu ]

Nick · 01-19-2005, 07:05 PM

Issue here is where do you get the troops from? Iraq is still a war-torn insurrection-filled quagmire. If we divert US forces from there, we're going to have serious issues in keeping that country under control. The overall instability tends to make Iraq a shakey base of operations for the theatre of war, mainly because isurgants will see this as a massive opportunity to seriously mess up some stuff along supply lines and the rear end of the combat troops. While we could stick strictly to naval and long range bombers, what is the contigency plan if Iran decides to pour over the Iraqi border (again)? We could yank some troops out of Korea, although that region is already estimated to be very thin and weakening that force when the drum of war in the Korean peninsula, so that may not be a grand idea.

Somehow, I doubt that we'll simply do the same thing Israel did, and I'm pretty sure the current admin would go ahead with another regime change, which in itself brings up the bigger problem of yet another reconstruction and yet another costly (in terms of dollars and lives) occupation with an already thin and ill-equipted force.

Sure, we could backdoor draft reservists, national guards, and vets that haven't served their full 8 years, but that gives you untrained, unprepared troops with low moral.

You need extensive planning, not the same type of BS they used in Iraq.

Iraq plan:
Step 1: WAR!
Step 2: ??????
Step 3: STABILITY!

01-18-2005, 10:08 PM	#5
Philip55 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 142 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 4,562.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 5,062.00 Donate	yawn

01-17-2005, 11:21 AM	#1
Philip55 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 142 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 4,562.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 5,062.00 Donate	http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/...ran/index.html If it comes to that, I fully support it.

01-18-2005, 09:17 PM	#2
Blue Yoshi Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: DOES NOT COMPUTE Posts: 962 Thanks: 2 Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts Points: 801.25 Bank: 11,034.89 Total Points: 11,836.14 Donate	good idea, Bush. bomb EVERYONE until we get bombed. If we would have attacked the Soviet Union during the Cold War, we would have destroyed Earth, because they would attack back. the same applies here.

01-18-2005, 09:46 PM	#3
Philip55 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 142 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 4,562.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 5,062.00 Donate	Attacking the Soviet Union would have started a nuclear war. Attacking Iran prevents a nuclear war. Iran has no modern airforce and no navy. Any counterattack by Iran would be futile, albeit amusing. We are talking about raids and air stikes against specific targets. Think Israel's attack on Iraqi nuclear sites in 1981. Would you rather Bush sit around and allow Iran to continue its nuclear program? [ January 18, 2005, 08:50 PM: Message edited by: Philip55 ]

01-18-2005, 09:58 PM	#4
Erdawn Il Deus Senior Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Threading the jeweled thrones of earth under my sandalled feet Gender: Posts: 2,983 Thanks: 4 Thanked 45 Times in 39 Posts Points: 22,316.93 Bank: 742.97 Total Points: 23,059.90 Donate	Frankly I wish Bush would choke on a pretzel.

01-18-2005, 11:18 PM	#6
Booyakasha Mod of War Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Wisconsinland Gender: Posts: 6,812 Thanks: 75 Thanked 340 Times in 221 Posts Points: 9,934.64 Bank: 20,637.07 Total Points: 30,571.71 Donate	The Iranian government should mind its p's and q's; Bush clearly doesn't have any reservations about stomping on our enemies. Oh, and the fact that Hersh is reporting to the world about secret government reconaissance operations indicates that he's either a traitor or an idiot. [ January 18, 2005, 10:28 PM: Message edited by: Cap'n Boo from Timbuktu ]

01-19-2005, 07:05 PM	#7
Nick Banned Join Date: Dec 1969 Posts: 0 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 10,311.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 10,811.00 Donate	Issue here is where do you get the troops from? Iraq is still a war-torn insurrection-filled quagmire. If we divert US forces from there, we're going to have serious issues in keeping that country under control. The overall instability tends to make Iraq a shakey base of operations for the theatre of war, mainly because isurgants will see this as a massive opportunity to seriously mess up some stuff along supply lines and the rear end of the combat troops. While we could stick strictly to naval and long range bombers, what is the contigency plan if Iran decides to pour over the Iraqi border (again)? We could yank some troops out of Korea, although that region is already estimated to be very thin and weakening that force when the drum of war in the Korean peninsula, so that may not be a grand idea. Somehow, I doubt that we'll simply do the same thing Israel did, and I'm pretty sure the current admin would go ahead with another regime change, which in itself brings up the bigger problem of yet another reconstruction and yet another costly (in terms of dollars and lives) occupation with an already thin and ill-equipted force. Sure, we could backdoor draft reservists, national guards, and vets that haven't served their full 8 years, but that gives you untrained, unprepared troops with low moral. You need extensive planning, not the same type of BS they used in Iraq. Iraq plan: Step 1: WAR! Step 2: ?????? Step 3: STABILITY!