It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do we attack Iran?

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArcAngel
Hi all! Just my humble opinion here.

I do not think we should attack Iran. We, as a country are stretched thin to the point of bringing back discharged veterans and extending the reservists time. Whilst it is true we could operationally support from Iraq, we do not have the men to put on the ground. And, as everyone knows, the enemy may be weakened from the air, but may only be defeated from the ground. In addition, Taiwan is heating up and we have the nemerable North Koreans, who are just waiting on their master (China) to release their leash, which believe me, if we have an altercation w/ China over Taiwan, China WILL release North Korea so that our forces will be split.

But, let's say it does happen. Who will support us? already the pasted together coalition is falling apart (Philipines left Iraq, other nations are considering). Britain (i.e. Tony Blair) could not politically undertake another hostile takeover of a country. We'd be on our own. But even scarier, we would be weakened to the point of an invasion by multiple countries.

So, again, MHO. Let's stabilize afghanistan and Iraq, pull out, strengthen our borders and internal security, redefine the military for the war we are fighting now and get Bush out of the White House before we all start speaking Chinese.


Red China is the greater threat. But things wouldn't be as bad as you say. As long as we have nukes, and if Kerry isn't elected (meaning we'll respond to the wholesale murder of our citizens, and will continue with the missile shield) we'll be the strongest nation in the world. One volley of nukes and we can bring any section of the world to its knees. Everybody knows that, which is why they've been somewhat self-restraining. If we only had conventional weapons, there'd be a problem. By the way, have you heard about the research on new nuclear bunker busters? Obviously, Kerry's against them (He's got the whole "sensiiiiiitive" War on Terrorism thing goin' on, you know.
).


stupid quote
----------------

"Remember, America - I gave you the internet, and I can take it away." - Al Gore




posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by persian

Originally posted by saeediran
I believe that the struggle in Iraq, Israel and Afghanistan is all related to Iran, if the government changes in Iran the situation on terrorism would 80% vanish.

[edit on 18-8-2004 by saeediran]


Actually you are wrong. We have been dragged into this mess. After Iran’s revolution, US convinced Saddam to start the war with Iran. During the 8 years war we have lost more than 600 thousand people and more than half a trillion dollars and of course there is a country with 250+ nukes treating us. Also for the last 25 years we have been called terrorist by US government for not following their rule.



Actually, Iran is terrorist. It is terrorist for wholeheartedly supporting the wholesale slaughter of innocent American civilians. If that's not terrorism, than tell what is.


stupid quote
----------------

"Remember, America - I gave you the internet, and I can take it away." - Al Gore



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Posting twice? 'Stupid quote' lol



But even scarier, we would be weakened to the point of an invasion by multiple countries.


What countries would invade the US? Russia, China, North Korea, Iran? The only likely one would be China but i doubt they'd pick a fight this time. What trouble is brewing in Taiwan?



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Please explain to us how we could possibly sustain a fighting force against Iran. I'm very curious as to how you suggest we go about taking the Iranian government out.



I'm curious too. The administration has been pretty quiet about Iran which means we're on tender ground. Tender ground? The unstoppable US military? Surely no! Well Iran has a #load of these little missiles called Kornets made by Russians and as we all know the limited number of Kornets ragtag Iraqis were able to shoot stopped the unstoppable Abrams dead. Also um look at the geography of the Persian gulf, our aircraft carriers are usually 4 to 6 minutes away from the Iranian coast at supersonic speed. Iranians still have many many Exocets and the aircraft able to deliver them. Also check out a cool little Russian toy called the Sunburn, a missile that flies over 2 times the speed of sound at about 40 feet off the ground and is nuclear capable. Are there any deployed in Iran? We know the Russians have interests in the Middle East and have sold the missiles to China but we hear nothing about selling them to Iran.

Despite the current impression that the US military is infallible, history shows us that no military is infallible and that if you believe it is you're screwing yourself. If Iran was a soft target like the administration would be slamming the wardrums pretty hard.

Any attack on Iran would have to be done carefullly. We'll see what happens.

As far as the Iranians being crazy fundamentalists this is not true. The US would go a bit insane too if GW Bush sat on a throne of peacock feathers and the CIA made midnight calls to execute your family members at will. Look up what the Shaw did and you might get an understanding of what was going on in that country to inspire a revolution.



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 06:40 PM
link   
One volley of nukes and we can bring any section of the world to its knees.

HELL NO! One volley of nukes and you bring any section of the world to it's knees? One volley of nukes and you murder 6-12 million people. If a soldier kills someone with a rifle, it is a targeted kill against someone considered to be a threat. If a smart bomb is dropped, it is against a target which is considered to be a threat (even if it goes astray 1% of the time). If a nuclear weapon is used, millions of people are killed indiscriminately. Target the military with a nuke? Sure, if they have the common courtesy to site their base about 50 miles from the nearest populated area (can't really see that happening if they're expecting an invasion). One result of the end of the cold war seems to be that people are more willing to consider the use of nuclear weapons. IMO a nuke is still an incredible weapon that should be used only if your very existence is threatened, not just because you don't happen to like the way a SOVEREIGN NATION runs it's affairs.

As for Iran, they will have the covert support of russia, check out the link.


www.russiajournal.com...

www.findarticles.com...

www.atimes.com...

www.iran-press-service.com...

edited to include quote from Oppenheimer:

We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried, most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form and says, “Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.” I suppose we all thought that one way or another.

- J. Robert Oppenheimer




[edit on 20-8-2004 by Chris McGee]



new topics

 
0
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join