posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 05:57 AM
As I see it the "mighty"
military of Iran could not defeat Saddam in all those years of conflict (jeeze they have short
The US with shock and awe obliterated the military and infrastructure in such a short space of time, IMHO no-one thought that Iraq would enter the
state of collapse that it did. That is part of the reason for the heavy involvement now.
I feel the US will learn from that engagement besides there is no need to take out everything this time...just some strategic decapitation strikes,
even perhaps the odd mad mullah or two.
I dont think there is any reason to get involved in a ground war as such...perhaps to keep the oil secure
There is no real love lost there, some of the US believe that Iran owes them one, from when they were kicked out last time. Either way I cant see the
pretence of an "Operation Iranian Freedom" this time. No need to waste troops on the ground, well certainly not to the extent of Iraq.
I can see the deluded Iranian hierarchy looking towards Iraq and thinking we can do better than that (the insurgency). Wrong, next time it will be
I feel the Iraq thing was more about showing the world the US might. To some extent it worked, Libya came onboard didnt it? But unfortunately getting
bogged down with the awfulness of foot sloggers trying to irradicate "heroic Islamic warriors" (ie. non uniformed combatants hiding behind children
etc.) has not helped.
The US can kick your military butt with relative ease but has trouble with the peace thereafter. The world now knows this, more importantly the US now
knows this and would be foolish not to learn from Iraq.
It will be different this time. As someone has already said a couple of MOAB every 6 months or so to keep there heads down. I believe that would
achieve regime change anyway...especially if El Crazyman is a target..which of course he wouldnt be..there are rules.
I still like the silent stealthy nuclear "accident" scenario, though.