I would say that a 3 day air campaign would greatly reduce the military strenght of Iran, without question. But then what?

I'd say baring some major concession by Iran, this quite likely to happen.

For all we know, the countdown has already began, or Israel has made a deadline, outside of which they will launch unilateral strikes on Iran, possibly hoping the U.S. will back them up despite the political implications.

Either way, a nuclear Iran is not something the western world should want left alone.

Didnt Bush say he would not tolerate a nuclear North Korea?

The same words he uses for Iran now.

One thousand two hundred targets, that seems a little excessive, especially for a quick three day plan, a plan lasting several weeks with more targets is likely. The coordination, logistics and assets required to pull something on this scale off are phenomenal. Even by my own personal list which includes economical, civilian, military, industrial and other critical infrastructure is not so large... I'm not saying we could not do it, just that it would take an incredible effort and amount of resources. This would require a build up similar to the one prior to Gulf War I. Such a build up would be noticeable and sizable. I would be pleasantly surprised if we can pull it off by using OCONUS units in combination with mobile assets and already in theater forces...

The POTUS has two months (plus some wiggle room) to use military force without congressional approval. I guess the aim is to use so much overwhelming force that Iran will not be able to respond, due to the time and scale of the destruction. In any case this would be almost an unprecedented show of modern US military force, one that might give too much away to more advanced enemies...

For intellectual enthusiasts however it will be a display of 'rapid dominance' like never seen before...

[edit on 2-9-2007 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by WestPoint23

For intellectual enthusiasts however it will be a display of 'rapid dominance' like never seen before...

[edit on 2-9-2007 by WestPoint23]

Just like the 'Shock & Awe' in Iraq - but wait! - what then follows?

The US surely cannot 'afford' to do this, and I mean that in a cashfold kind of way. Resources are stretched to near full capacity at the moment.
Maybe the 'Sabre rattling' will do the trick, but somehow I don't think so.
The Iranian government and their religious leaders, will not back down from a 'verbal' battle.

Hearts and minds of the populace is probably the best way to effect change.

Originally posted by The_Coo
Didnt Bush say he would not tolerate a nuclear North Korea?

I believe the exact word was 'nukular'!

Anyway, enough of the words, if they're gonna do it, why not get it over with already! Dragging it out has the effect of spreading fear and discontent among the world's population. If they do it, and Americans themselves can see their leaders in their true colours, then the resulting uproar would almost certainly lead to revolution - which I think would be positive for everybody. Everyone would be hung out to dry, it would be brilliant. Going into Iran would be like cutting their own throats.

The "3 days" will turn into 3 years, then to an uncertain date for troop pull out of Iran. I don't know what Bush is thinking, but we can barely find new recruits to send into Iraq, so what makes him think there are enough soldiers to serve in Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan all at the same time, while protecting US borders as well?

[edit on 2-9-2007 by DJMessiah]

USA will just bomb the crap out of Iran then sit back and laugh as another helpless country crumbles.

And meanwhile the Iranians will just sit back and suck it up?
You cannot win a war from the air alone, no matter how big a "shock and awe" bombing campaign is launched and shown to the folks back home 24x7 on the tv.
The troops on the ground will then have to face the likelihood of a ground engagement from Iran whilst having the Iraqis shooting at them from behind.
Needless to say it'll get very messy. Then there's the likelihood of land based units targeting shipping in the straits of Hormuz and surrounding area. Of course, I'd expect every patriotic flag waving idiot to immediately sign up and go fight the Ayrabs as soon as they hit back

Somehow I don't think the laughter would last very long.

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
I'd say baring some major concession by Iran, this quite likely to happen.

Either way, a nuclear Iran is not something the western world should want left alone.

I think your analysis is astute.

I have been assuming that the NWO folks have decided to schedule the next global conflagration after the 2008 Olympics in Beijing. I can't imagine that Beijing would like to scuttle all that effort. Though for pride alone they'd be willing to given some contingencies.

And when is the war in space with ET scheduled a la von Braun?

Some insist that the NWO folks are building a great new headquarters in ancient Babylon in Iraq for various reasons . . . some of them very evil, demonic related to that geography. And, that that's the reason for our super big embassy in the region.

If so, I can't imagine that Iran would be tolerated to keep doing what it's been doing . . . but who knows in such complexities. The NWO folks are on all sides of most issues--especially geopolitical ones. They likely set I'maNutJob up to his rantings and warmongering . . . only to take him out when it suits them.

In any case, a loose cannon on the world deck like that rabid character . . . the world could do without.

But I'd prefer facilitating an internal overthrow, personally.

War is really not a lot of fun except for the Patton's amongst us. But if it's necessary, then don't back down. And I'mANutJob sure has been working hard to make it necessary, it seems, to me.

It's all wrapped up in that Mahdi thing and his brand of Jihadi ridden Islam.

I have to say, if this is true, I fear it.

Yeah, this will weaken Iran, but Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and other Arab nations will explode. This has the potential to lead to a war between Israel and Syria, which could suck the US into another ground war.

The Middle East will become a bloodbath.

Originally posted by DJMessiah, while protecting US borders as well?

[edit on 2-9-2007 by DJMessiah]

What gave you the idea there was the least bit of interest in protecting the borders of AMERICA???

The North American Union seems to be a far higher priority of all the NWO greedy power mongerers.

Besides, gotta "earn" all that illegal drug money for all the dark projects . . .

I'm not a fan of Iran . . . but I'd sure prefer to avoid a global war as long as possible. Seems to me facilitating overthrow of I'mANutJob from within would be much wiser . . . messier? I don't know. Lots of collateral damage with massive bombings.

Originally posted by infinite




The Middle East will become a bloodbath.

BECOME a bloodbath? Well maybe the bloodbath will exceed its capacity and start overflowing if it hasn't already.

A plan on striking for three days, has to make you think, will the United States use a nuclear strike if its to "annihilate the Iranian military".

It will have to, if the plan is to cripple them from striking back. American cannot leave Iran in a state in which it could invade Iraq or strike Israel.

How many failed quagmires do we need to have worldwide simultaneously going on?

And how much more can the US financially afford?


I really hope this is just propaganda because the US governments ongoing campaign is a complete and utter failure.