Iran

[brewer12345]

It mystifies me how the folks that post on this board can have so little faith in the military. As a former Air Force pilot, and father of a Marine pilot, I can assure you we are only 'over committed' in the eyes of the press! I have first hand knowledge as to the abilities of the average Iranian fighter pilot. I will pit our worst F-15 pilot against anyone they have. Are your memories so short that you don't remember the gloom and doom the press put forth if we were to venture into Iraq.... the third or forth largest military in the World!

I've no doubt that we have air superiority over Iran, Iraq, etc. That's not the problem. The stretch is coming at the point of the boots on the ground. Three years after the invasion, we still can't pacify areas of Iraq that we have leveled/swept through multiple times. Bobing them again won't help.

 

[Jay_Gatsby]

Bobing them again won't help.

So we shouldn't send in the "Bobs"? (an Office Space reference for those of you who don't get it).

And while we're on the subject -- a little bit of humor to lighten the mood...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Gibbons: You see Bob, it's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't care.
Bob Porter: Don't... don't care?
Peter Gibbons: It's a problem of motivation, all right? Now if I work my ass off and Initech ships a few extra units, I don't see another dime, so where's the motivation? And here's another thing, I have eight different bosses right now.
Bob Porter: Eight?
Peter Gibbons: Eight, Bob. So that means when I make a mistake, I have eight different people coming by to tell me about it. That's my only real motivation is not to be hassled, that, and the fear of losing my job. But you know, Bob, that will only make someone work just hard enough not to get fired.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Slydell: You see, what we're trying to do is get a feeling for how people spend their time at work so if you would, would you walk us through a typical day, for you?
Peter Gibbons: Yeah.
Bob Slydell: Great.
Peter Gibbons: Well, I generally come in at least fifteen minutes late, ah, I use the side door - that way Lumbergh can't see me, heh - after that I sorta space out for an hour.
Bob Porter: Da-uh? Space out?
Peter Gibbons: Yeah, I just stare at my desk, but it looks like I'm working. I do that for probably another hour after lunch too, I'd say in a given week I probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual, work.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Slydell: I'd like to move us right to Peter Gibbons. We had a chance to meet this young man, and boy that's just a straight shooter with upper management written all over him.

 

[Howard]

America may have won the battle for Iraq, but they certainly are not winning the war for Iraq.

Britain rationalised its' Invasion of South Africa as necessary to free the poor native from the tyranny of the Boer, the real reason, Gold Mines.

The US attack on Iran would make old enemies forces allies, Israel should certainly be the means to the end of Iranian Nuclear capablity

Walls and Fences are being built along US Borders to control who gets in, 911 proved they are already in.

The US Military is definitlly the most powerfully armed in the world, but in Ground Combat, my money would be on the Goat herder with a musket hiding in the hills waiting for revenge on the Infidels who bombed his family.

The Middle East contains many bodies of British Soldiers who, like todays US Army, thought they could march in and destroy the rag tags, the British learned, and lost, and retreated.

Iran worries me, North Korea scares the hell out of me, that is the real enemy.

The cartoon in the Post about Rumsfield and the disabled soldier goes beyond tasteless.

 

[Rustic23]

How can you claim to have in depth knowledge about the military and rest your argument on a statemt that ' that over 2000 troops have died? over 10,000 wounded? and that there is no end in sight? ' while that claim is true, only 2/3 have been combat deaths, and while to the families of those troops the loss is tragic, in a military since, these figures are far below what would be expected to take a country the size of Iran. Compare this to Vietnam, as the press did in the early stage of the war, 58,148 deaths! NO END IN SIGHT? Once more, if your only source of news is abc, cbs, nbc, and cnn, then you may believe this, however, facts don't bare this out. Free elections, in which 2/3 of Iraq's 15 milion registered voters voted.

I will admit that Bush does not do everything right. Want to talk about SS reform, health care, drug benifit, no child left behind.... OK, but the statements on Iraq and Afganistan are generally just not true. Well read them in the New York Times, so they have to be.... RIGHT!

I can assure you the iranian military bears little resemblance to the iraqi one.

To quote  Brigadier General Mcauliffe, 'Nuts!' as I said, Iran had the 4th largest military in the world, their Air Force was 40,000 strong with about 1,000 aircraft,  40 MiG-21s, 50 MiG-23s a dozen MiG-25s and 10 MiG-29s, plus 50 French-built Mirage F-1EQs. These are very good aircraft. Iran, As of 2000 it was estimated that only 40 of the 132 F-4Ds, 177 F-4Es and 16 RF-4E. Phantoms delivered before 1979 remained in service. At that time, approximately 45 of the 169 F-5E/Fs delivered are still flying, while perhaps 20 F-14A Tomcats of the 79 initially delivered were airworthy. Another 30 F-4s, 30 F-5s and 35 F-14s have been cannibalized for spare parts. One report suggested that the IRIAF can get no more than seven F-14s airborne at any one time. Iran claims to have fitted F-14s with I-Hawk missiles adapted to the air-to-air role. There are reports that Iran has augmented their force with fighters from China and Russia. Still, they get little training, and their life on the battle field would be short.

The Iraq military looked ausome on paper, as does the Iranian. In reality it hold the same threat.

Now if you want to talk about occupation, that is a different question. As in Iraq, we should be prepaired to take casualties after the main military battles are over.  

 

[HFWR]

Preventing Iran from getting nukes is the primary goal, IMHO. Why invade?

 

[Howard]

"If I should die, think only this of me

That there is some corner of a Foreign Land that is forever England"

The Soldier, Rupert Brooke

Same scene, differant players, old men sending young men to march behind a rag on a stick.

I remember seeing the Veterans of WW11 come home, limbless, mindless, pennyless, no person with a conscience could ever advocate armed confrontation.

I am a Veteran, just not a War Veteran.

 

[Eagle43]

If I remember correctly, Harry Truman was told that we would lose a million fine young Americans if we invaded Japan.  He was presented an option of nuking them.  He made the decision based on saving American lives and shortening the war.  BTW:  The Japanese (at that time) were just as crazy as present-day crazies, what with their kamikazees.  A fine man, old Harry was.  Sure wish he was here today.    If you're gonna be the world's only superpower, than act like it. Do not allow under any circumstances the Iranians to get a nuke.  Because, as Tom Friedman says, then the Saudis gotta get one, and other countries got to get one, and then the game has just changed. Sadaam may not have had WMDs, but he sure wanted them. Wonder why?

 

[Howard]

To defend himself??

The fact that America delayed for almost 2 years it's entry into WW11 certainly gave the Japanese needed time to build up their war Machine.

Nuke 'em, ?

I am surprised at the Full Page Ads in the NY Times callimg for Bush's impeachment, that is something you would not find anywhere else.

 

[Marshac]

If you're gonna be the world's only superpower, than act like it.

And when China becomes a hyperpower? Will you still encourage them to act like the global bully cop? I really don't understand how we can try and deny any sovereign nation nukes, or whatever else they want to develop. I understand why we don't want them to have them.... but to actually say "don't develop them, or else." I wouldn't put it past this administration to use tactical nukes on Iran's nuclear installations- the radiation could easily be explained by the radioactive material once contained in the facilities.

My Iran fears-

We go to war, or Israel conducts a unilateral preemptive-strike on Iran's nuclear assets (as they did in 1981 with Iraq). This would be like pouring gasoline on a smoldering fire, and conflict would consume the region. Instability would cause oil production to precipitously drop, severely damaging the world economy, and almost certainly would push us into a global recession which would have repercussions of its own.

 

[brewer12345]

My Iran fears-

We go to war, or Israel conducts a unilateral preemptive-strike on Iran's nuclear assets (as they did in 1981 with Iraq). This would be like pouring gasoline on a smoldering fire, and conflict would consume the region. Instability would cause oil production to precipitously drop, severely damaging the world economy, and almost certainly would push us into a global recession which would have repercussions of its own.

You forgot something of presumably keen interest to you personally: the draft.

 

[sgeeeee]

How can you claim to have in depth knowledge about the military . . .

Thirty years of work doing strategic planning exercises with the DoD. Eleven years working directly on defense contracts for various military systems. Attendance at countless pentagon briefings on US mission effectiveness. Clearances and access that I still can't even talk about. . .

And you?

 

[Nords]

You forgot something of presumably keen interest to you personally: the draft.

I keep tellin' ya, Brewer, even the Marines will start recruiting high-school dropouts before the military will put up with Congress' fuss over a draft. Heck, they'll even swear in Bush's daughters.

Don't sweat it. The Navy Reserve has been turning thousands of officers over to the Army and they haven't mobilized even half of them yet.

Next time Congress introduces draft legislation, the JCS will publicly obtain the names/ages of the children of all congressional incumbents & staff. End of debate.

 

[brewer12345]

I keep tellin' ya, Brewer, even the Marines will start recruiting high-school dropouts before the military will put up with Congress' fuss over a draft.  Heck, they'll even swear in Bush's daughters.

Don't sweat it.  The Navy Reserve has been turning thousands of officers over to the Army and they haven't mobilized even half of them yet.

Next time Congress introduces draft legislation, the JCS will publicly obtain the names/ages of the children of all congressional incumbents & staff.  End of debate.

Don't be so sure. I never thought I would ever see some of the ongoing shenanigans we see today justified by "national security". Its not that much of a leap to justify the draft.

 

[dylar]

A wierd place to delurk on this board but holy crap. For what reason do you think Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons? (Hint: it starts with an R and ends in egime change)

It is the stated policy of the United States to overthrow the government of Iran. If they weren't trying to develop the only way to keep us off their ass I'd be amazed. We have 130000 odd troops in Iraq, another 30000 in Afghanistan, we own Musharraf in Pakistan, bases in Uzbekistan, Kyrgizstan, maybe soon Turkmenistan, across the water in Saudi Arabia, Qatar (home of our central command), Kuwait etc. And half of our fleet off their southern coast. I'd be real scared and looking for the only way to survive if I were them.

Then you throw in the fact that we installed a hideous dictator that they overthrew, then supported Iraq and Saddam Hussein in a war that killed 300000 of their citizens, blew up a civilian airliner "accidentally" and so on. They have every reason to hate us and fear us.

What have they done to us? They did take hostages at our embassy. That's not a nice thing to do. Too bad we rewarded them by selling them weapons, but Reagan needed to get elected.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Iranian government is a disgrace. But they're no threat to us.

 

[eriter]

I have a solution for the whole mess--bomb Israel.  Why not do like the Italians in WWII and switch sides?  Think about it, no more Middle-East conflict, the US could immediately come home from Iraq, and we would be heros to the rest of the arab countries.

The only drawback I see is that we would be killing our friends and allies.  Well, I don't suppose any plan is perfect.  

 

[sgeeeee]

I have a solution for the whole mess--bomb Israel.  Why not do like the Italians in WWII and switch sides?  Think about it, no more Middle-East conflict, the US could immediately come home from Iraq, and we would be heros to the rest of the arab countries.

The only drawback I see is that we would be killing our friends and allies.  Well, I don't suppose any plan is perfect.  

We wouldn't have to bomb Israel, just stop supporting them. The country is not viable economically without US military support dollars. They would wither and be overrun.

And what was it that makes Israel our friends?

 

[retire@40]

And what was it that makes Israel our friends? 

It may be more like the enemy of our enemy is our friend definition. In this case our enemy is Iran, Syria, etc.

 

[eriter]

And what was it that makes Israel our friends?

I think they share many of our ideals and values--much more so than their neighbors, who share almost none.

Barry Goldwater had an interesting solution for the Middle-East problem a number of years ago--transport all the Israelis to the US and carve out a new state for them in Arizona-New Mexico.  He felt that as an industrious people they would make good citizens and could help develop that uninhabited area.

That made sense to me, but there are too many extraneous factors involved for it to work--mainly religion and nationalism

 

[Mr._johngalt]

I think they share many of our ideals and values--much more so than their neighbors, who share almost none.

Barry Goldwater had an interesting solution for the Middle-East problem a number of years ago--transport all the Israelis to the US and carve out a new state for them in Arizona-New Mexico.  He felt that as an industrious people they would make good citizens and could help develop that uninhabited area.

That made sense to me, but there are too many extraneous factors involved for it to work--mainly religion and nationalism

Stop the presses! Arizona and New Mexico are "uninhabited" Man, I must have missed some major news while I've been away.

JG

 

[Mr._johngalt]

A wierd place to delurk on this board but holy crap. For what reason do you think Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons? (Hint: it starts with an R and ends in egime change)

It is the stated policy of the United States to overthrow the government of Iran. If they weren't trying to develop the only way to keep us off their ass I'd be amazed.  We have 130000 odd troops in Iraq, another 30000 in Afghanistan, we own Musharraf in Pakistan, bases in Uzbekistan, Kyrgizstan, maybe soon Turkmenistan, across the water in Saudi Arabia, Qatar (home of our central command), Kuwait etc. And half of our fleet off their southern coast. I'd be real scared and looking for the only way to survive if I were them.

Then you throw in the fact that we installed a hideous dictator that they overthrew, then supported Iraq and Saddam Hussein in a war that killed 300000 of their citizens, blew up a civilian airliner "accidentally" and so on. They have every reason to hate us and fear us.

What have they done to us? They did take hostages at our embassy. That's not a nice thing to do. Too bad we rewarded them by selling them weapons, but Reagan needed to get elected.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Iranian government is a disgrace. But they're no threat to us.

This is a good post. I agree that what Iran appears to be doing makes perfect sense to me.

JG

 

[eriter]

Stop the presses!  Arizona and New Mexico are "uninhabited"  Man, I must have missed some major news while I've been away.

The last time I drove through NM I thought the whole state was uninhabited, but apparently there are some people who live there:

2000 census report--inhabitants per square mile:

NY                       409
CA                       217
USA average           80
NM                        19
ALASKA                 1.1

 

[Marshac]

ALASKA                 1.1

Looks like an annual $1k check from the state isn't even enough to get people to live there Too bad new residents aren't eligible anymore...

 

[F-One]

Worry - Yes, but we (US citizens) can't change anything. The US is pretty ignorant of the area and have for years done a poor job of learning about the area. We always focused on communist Russia.
Should Israel attack Iran, only if you want WWIII. Not to mention the impact on the global economy, ie oil prices. Also, Iran learned from the Israeli raid on Iraqi nuclear program to build it under ground and divide it so it would take a number of attacks. This would only make the region worst and from what I've read the best estimate of delay to Iran's nuclear program if attack was successful (which is very doubtful) was only 5 years.
Question that must be answered is what does Iran want and can another option be agreed upon? I believe it is a return of the days of Persian Empire type unification of the Middle East.
Do you have any faith that the current US administration could help resolve this? I don't.

 

[Rustic23]

When dealing with the Middle East you should always keep in mind the statement made about the Ayatollah Khomeini:

If man talks to God, you can reason with him, I man believes God talks to him no power on earth can change his mind.

Presently there are many of the Middle East leader that talk to God, however, there are some who believe God is talking to them. Our problem is which or which and Is he?

 

[just_hatched]

Quote from F-One:
"Also, Iran learned from the Israeli raid on Iraqi nuclear program to build it under ground and divide it so it would take a number of attacks"

From looking at Wikipedia, I never realized it took so many attacks to destroy a nuclear site.
I wonder how the Israelis did it in one strike?

From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osirak
-----
When tensions in the Persian Gulf flared up in September 1990, following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, the Iraqi government made efforts to recover components from the site. During the Gulf War several months later, the Iraqi nuclear program was put into high gear in order to create a weapon by using radioactive fuel. The site was then targeted by Coalition forces on January 17, 1991, halting the weapons program. Three days into the Desert Storm air raids, 56 F-16s attacked the facility followed by F-117 raids three days later. The facility, one of Iraq's most fortified targets, was not fully destroyed until another raid, when 48 F-117s targeted the facility 7 more times for over a month as well as 17 F-111Fs weeks later. Only 19 days into the strikes did the US Defense Intelligence Agency, find the site to be "severely degraded".