posted on Apr, 18 2008 @ 08:14 PM
Based on what I know (which may be very little,) I must concur that, should the United States want choose to do so, and should it do so in an
unrestrained fashion and with maximum efficacy, the Armed Forces of the United States could subdue, destroy, and render ineffective any Iranian
military resistance within a relatively short period of time. Mere hours might be stretching it, however it is indeed possible, as the strategy
employed in Iraq was a modification of the "shock and awe" concept, and thus was arguably not a total application of the military's true potential
The United States Armed Forces are capable of levels of situational awareness, air superiority, communication, coordination, and transportation which
are, based on what I know (which again may be very little) completely unparalleled in human history. If they wanted to, and chose to do so
effectively, I believe they could do it without any significant resistance. The air campaign in the Balkans demonstrated that air power alone, with
sufficient numbers and relentlessness, while perhaps not as quick as when used in combination with other capabilities, can be effective against even a
reasonably determined and well deployed adversary. That would presumably need to be multiplied based on Iran's comparatively broader geographic
footprint and the probable dispersion of its military assets during any such campaign, but I believe it would be well within the capability of the
armed forces to do this.
All of this, of course, is contingent upon how fully the United States were to avail itself of its total military capabilities. There are several
scenarios I can imagine in which, without adequate consideration of seemingly improbable yet not impossible contingencies, U.S. forces might suffer
relatively significant losses, particularly in the naval context. Provided, however, that truly adequate planning and full utilization of our total
capabilities were drawn upon, I believe direct military victory would be both inevitable and rapid.
That said, please note that these are observational statements, as opposed to ethical statements or endorsements of such action. Personally (and
please take the use of the word "personally" literally, as it means that this is my opinion and mine alone - not intended to disparage, dissuade, or
argue against anyone else's opinion,) I do not believe that war is ever justifiable. That's right, I said ever, as in under any circumstances
whatsoever. I do not think less of or judge those who disagree, and I am well aware that it is an exceptionally unpopular opinion. I hope that it will
receive at least the same respect and tolerance that I have offered others, including those who disagree with me.
A war with Iran would be a tragedy in my opinion, and would sadden me greatly. The potential for further escalation and the involvement of other
nations in the conflict would be very real in my opinion, and the loss of life in that scenario could be enormous compared to other recent,
relatively limited conflicts. I do not have an alternative solution to the apparent threat posed by Iran or similar state actors. Nor do I have
a solution to the scourge of war, or any alternatives to the use of force that could result in ensuring our security. The lack of an alternative does
nothing to blunt or dull my distaste for this option, however. My opinion is less a reasoned, analytical stance, than an emotional, intuitive reaction
to a situation that causes me sorrow.
[edit on 4/18/2008 by AceWombat04]