posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 06:11 AM
Putting aside my ethical, spiritual, personal, and humanitarian reasons for being opposed to any such conflict in the region, and forgetting all
In my opinion, if U.S. foreign policy were to reach the point at which the consensus was that war with Iran was a viable, favorable option, both
nations would have to already be too short-sighted and subjective in their policies to fear defeat at all. They would careen headlong into conflict
mutually. A war in Iran would be a catastrophe, win, lose, or draw, and would be an even bigger mess than Iraq has turned out to be for both
Taking out Iran's initial air defenses in a sufficiently timely fashion would require more ordinance and many more sorties on average than Iraq's if
the goal were similar to that in Iraq. We would see a repeat of the "shock and awe" strategy, having as its purpose both those intended
psychological effects, as well as the rapid degradation and elimination of those air defenses. Greater civilian casualties would result, in all
likelihood. There is a reform movement in Iran, but we've seen in Iraq what resentment and bitterness can result in if we aren't careful to stay on
the good side of the general public, and the sheer scale of the initial air-strikes - particularly if there were genuine concern about Iran's
nuclear capabilities - would all but ensure civilian casualties great enough to sew those seeds. Yes, the insurgency in Iraq is in fact a minority,
but it is an effective enough minority to have become a serious liability and a threat to the lives of everyone there - American, Iraqi, British, or
otherwise, and an insurgency in Iran would likely be worse.
More feet on the ground would be required in Iran than in Iraq, unless the aforementioned reform movement is organized and equipped well enough to
play a role similar to that of the northern alliance in Afghanistan, which I sincerely doubt is the case, and even then it would be pushing it. This
would absolutely require greater European participation, which would no doubt lead to a greater emphasis on terrorist strikes against European allies.
The dissention between western nations over Iraq would probably seem like a happy memory compared to the rancor and divisions that would open up over
I am not too proud to admit when I'm wrong, and if proved wrong, I would concede it, however my fear, right now at least, is that this
apparently growing “clash of civilizations” will result in little more than massive bloodshed all around, and a smoldering insurgency and
bitterness throughout the region for years to come - which is not at all conducive to the reduction of terrorism. Quite the contrary, in fact, as my
understanding is that this is precisely how terrorists are forged.
If I factor back into the equation my personal beliefs, then the suffering of the people I'm supposed to view as enemies also counts as a strike
against it in my mind. In conclusion, my hope is that whatever the rationale for not entering into an armed conflict with Iran, it will never