Iran's foreign minister: "U.S. can't afford another war"

I dont think anyone on here said the Persians were going to sit idly by. What we want YOU to tell us is what are they going to do when we havent sent any ground forces into their country and we have launched a massive storm of naval and air ordinance on their nuclear faclilities, their defesnse systmes, the "air force" they have as well as their RG troops?

So tell me, no tell everyone here, EXACTLY how are they going to respond massively when their forces are in such disarray? Please, i would really like to know.

Oh and before folks start posting about the missiles Iran hase that will sink our ships in the Gulf, PLEAEE dont think for a seconf that they are "that" secret.

reply to post by princeofpeace

---

You guys don't get it eh? the cannot respond force on force. Make no mistake in a straight up battle the US is going to win. The Iranian's do not have the combined forces needed to even make a dent. Sure we will take some hits and if they do hae a working WMD it may hit our troops in Iraq, but the Iranian military does not stand a chance in a straight up fight.

Ask the VietCong how things worked out. We are talking asymetrical warfare. The insurgents have held the most powerfull military the world has ever seen to at least a draw in Iraq. What do you think Iran is going to do?

Even if we do nothing more than reign death from above, the aymetrical warfare thing works on other US targets outside of the area etc. Afganistan, Iraq itself, all over the Middle East, the CONUS etc.

How is this assymetirc warfare going to take place exactly? After we have decimated a great number of RG troops from the air not to mention the means of delivering those troops into Iraq?

Also remember that when the Dems are voted in, the US troops are coming home so how exactly are these Iranian troops (what is left of them) going to be bringing our military to its knees?

reply to post by princeofpeace

---

Its a war of attrition going on and if you studied history at all (Hint Iran / Iraq War) you would realize that the Iranian people have much more stomach for that kind of thing.

Yes we rolled over the Iraq, kick ass so to speak, but how many years ago was that? Mission Acomplished you say? You ask me exactly how the Iranians will fight our troops? Tune intot he news, it does not matter all of the US media is basically much the same. How are things goin in Iraq? Care to run point on a patrol on the streets of the Iraqi capital? No the situation in Bahgdad alone is bad enough how exactly DO you propose to pacify tehran with 3 times the population and ALL openly hostile to our troops presence?

Ummm...i didnt say that at all. I want to know how Iran is suppose to kick our butts while our planes are in the air, our ships are at sea, our troops are home, and their Air force is depleted, their missle sites are destroyed, and their troops are largely decimated? Thats it, simple question that no one has YET to provide an answer to except that the US is so weak. Just keep thinking that.

If you would have actually READ my post earlier you would have seen that i said the US was not going to OCCUPY Iran as we are doing Iraq. Completely different situations and goals. You sound just like every other uninformed person around here who tries to liken a a STRIKE on Iran to a regime change and ground occupation of Iraq and again, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING!!!!!!!! Please read!!!!!

[edit on 3-10-2007 by princeofpeace]

I never said they would esp force on force. But as the lessons of Iraq have shown its far more than simple gunboat diplomacy needed. Yes as I have said 100's of time thier standing military would be crushed much like Iraq's So where is the peace there?

You seriously expect them to simply stand by? Sure it may take a while but they will retaliate at some point. It won't be waves of aircraft or tanks, but who thought Al Queda in Iraq would prove such a thorn. Or the Taliban who are still running amuk despite us taking down most of thier military as well.

Your Clancy esq scenarios do not really seem to be playing out in the real world. Hmmmmmm Al Qeada managed to hit us with out armies at hoome on 911 eh? Why makes you beleive that Iran could not do the same?

[edit on 10/3/07 by FredT]

Again, when our troops are brought home as they will be according to the Dems, then who exactly are the Iranians going to be attacking? I dont expect them to sit idly by, but i also dont expect them to be able to inflict much damage either esepcially if our guys arent around for them to do anything to, and especially if they dont have the ability to mobilize and move even modest amounts of troops.

You are also making a huge assumption that we get everything in those strikes. As I pointed out earlier the only way to ensure total destruction is to put troops on the ground. The facilites are scattered and buried in deep. Iran has gotten a center seat on US Airpower, look at the link I posted above, unless your with the doctor who has no issue with using nuclear weapons then you will not be able to target everything from the air. You don't know where everything is AND how good is the intel on Iran? Prewar Iraq estimates ring a bell?

But the goal is not total destruction,l the goal is to dismantle Irans nuclear infrastructure and to inflict heavy damage on the RG. Both can be done with just naval and air power. Iran wont sit idly by, but their means to respond will be token and limited and greatly reduced. Not to say they cant do anything, but i am responding to the General Consensus on this board, no this entire website, that somehow the US will be defeated by Iran or the US cannot do what its goals are against Iran and that is Totally false.

The uninformed on here think the US is going to be sending tens of thousands of ground troops into Iran and that is just totally ridiculous. The US can obtain its objective in Iran without troops on the ground their and also with out troops in Iraq here at home.

Im sure they said the same thing during shock and awe in '03

once we drop a few billion dollars worth of bombs on Iran, Its not like its just going to end.

Iran will not just roll over and allow us to rape their resources..
It will continue such as Iraq has, and it will cost a lot more money.

reply to post by Agit8dChop

---

Exactly. Drop all the bombs you want. can you be 100% assured of desruction of the matieral and capacity? You have to get the ground pounders out there and get the ground truth. Period. Satelites are not going to give you that.

reply to post by princeofpeace

---

and after the airstrikes it will end and everyone will go home and settle back down to their nice little lives?
Puhlease!

reply to post by FredT

---

Also, the other HUGE assumption is that only Iran and U.S.A. will be involved.

This gung-ho rhetoric about being mighty and superior just smacks of reckneckism and misunderstanding.
Sure, you may beat them at first, but remember it is their country and they will be as passionate about defending it as you would be about defending your homeland.

I just hope it never happens, that everyone can sit down and talk about it and come away with a mutually beneficient outcome.
I think it would be a tragedy for all involved.

On topic:

I think the Foreign Minister's comment would be quite correct... except he's not understanding that they are dealing with a nation that literally prints money to feed their war machine.

No nation constrained by real economics could afford yet another war, but since dept is no obstacle to the Bush Administration (and backers), in this case cost simply isn't a factor.

Now, if you want to talk about "cost" in terms of "terrorist" backlash, world opinion, and moral degradation... well, that's a different story.

reply to post by BitRaiser

---

"No nation constrained by real economics could afford yet another war, but since dept is no obstacle to the Bush Administration (and backers), in this case cost simply isn't a factor."

Wow you got that right. The "backers" would probably see out this one to the end if their goal is to actually wipe a religion off the face of the Earth then with Americas military and an endless amount of financial aid it will most likely come to pass.

Good day to be the worlds police heh?

1. Iran has missile batteries scatterd around its countries (mobile)
2. its not Iraq all sand and almost flat, they have mountains and so on
3. as mentioned they have sunburns that can easily strike US navel targets which is a good thing.
4. Irans nuclear infrontstructure is spreadwide so air strikes wil just delay not destroy.

so in my view Iran would use all weapons at its disposale in defence.

also you really think the Iranins wont get anything through before the idiots start their shock and aw version 2 on Iran?

in the end it wont change jack as the Iranians will just be even more united


edit: why are you princeofpeace?
and not princeofwar?

[edit on 4-10-2007 by bodrul]

Seems to me, if Iran could not defeat Iraq in eight years of war, then how could Iran (on their own turf) defeat a nation such as USA without super weapons of some sort, if that?

Dallas

And again, if we arent sending in ground forces then how are they going to attack us? Also the equipment that was mentioned above that Iran has would be largely destroyed. Folks are acting like they are just going to able to use 100% of what they have now and that is not the case LOL. Yes our bombs may not get 100% of everything as a few posters have mentioned but lets say we get 80-90%. That doesnt leave Iran with very much to retaliate with. And on top of that, are you expecting the US to lose 80-90% of its stuff as well? I dont think so.