Iran's right to a pre-emptive strike

Originally posted by My.mind.is.mine

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
I THINK you are forgetting US's LARGEST ally in the region..

The Iraqi Military.

US has trained, armed and funded them for almost a decade. They owe you; especially if their interests get attacked.

They don't owe us nothing but an illegal occupation, destroyed infrastructure and history, and an 8 year ass whooping!! LOL

You all may laugh at my comment, but they will stand with the US army if they have any cross border excursions with Iran. Guaranteed.

Originally posted by Burgo1010

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
I THINK you are forgetting US's LARGEST ally in the region..

The Iraqi Military.

US has trained, armed and funded them for almost a decade. They owe you; especially if their interests get attacked.

USA invaded Iraq illegally, killed thousands of innocent civilians & children & you say "they owe" hahahahah, that was worthy of a good morning laugh

Actually the number of Iraqis killed is closer to a million by some number. About one out of every 25 people living there when we first invaded have been killed, many of whom have been women and children. People who wounder why the militants still fight the US troops Iraq have never had there son, daughter, mother, brother, sister, father, or wife killed by a drone. Imagine going to a shopping mall, school, or amusement park... where every 25th person you see just fell dead while others around them became maimed or injured.

I have friends in the United States from Iran, they are good, normal, and sane people. My heart go out their family members still in Iran, and to everyone who may be a victim of this impending massacre.

reply to post by RizeorDie


All due respect, you seem to have thoroughly researched your point here, but I totally disagree with your perception of events. Primarily, time is on Iran's side. Even if they violate the NPT, nuclear Iran is probably a more stable regime than neighboring Pakistan. While Pakistani nukes are counterbalanced by Indian nukes, if Iranians acquire them, the Saudis will want them -- Israel will weigh in, and generally, a Middle Eastern nuclear arms race ensues.

Iranian goals are subject to regional stability, and realize the Iranian populace still remember the devastating border war with Iraq -- where Iraq invaded to take advantage of Iranian political instability, subsequently dragging both parties into the longest conventional war of the 20th century (that's from Wiki ). In short, I question the Iranian belly for this kind of war. If they needed to act against Israel, they would need to sort through their issues with Hezbollah -- but without any Muslim allies, unless you're counting on a big Shi'a uprising in Iraq defecting, I simply don't believe Iran could mount this kind of strategic undertaking.

Iranian isolationism is essentially the precipice of your argument, and I also believe that to be its downfall.

reply to post by CREAM


Iraq is divided into two factions, Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan. Iraqi Kurdistan has its own army divisions and they are the Peshmerga, their numbers exceed 200,000 as of 2011.The Iraqi armed forces total 800,000 personal, most of which are security forces specialized in anti-terrorism duties. The Iraqi armed forces are made mainly of Shia, and Iran has a lot of influence over the Shia of Iraq.

The Kurdish Peshmerga might support an attack if promised to unite with Iranian Kurdistan. This action will not be tolerated by Turkey. The Turks could share the middle east with Iran for now, theres no hurry, but there's a new idea for Islamic order.

Iran must act now before its too late, they must begin the invasion

If you want to get down to brass tacks Iran and Israel are already in a defacto state of war. With Iran using thier proxy Hamas and Hezbollah to launch repeated attacks on Israel and Israel retaliating it would be nothing more than an escalation of the actual combat. This propaganda that Iran is being threatened by big-bad Israel is about as childish as it comes. Cut the nonsense. Iran threatens to wipe Israel out, Israel threatens to take out Iran. Then both claim to be the innocent in the game. And many on here perpetuate the lie.

From the strategic perspective, a pre-emptive strike by Iran would be suicide.

1) Iran actually benefits from the current Iraqi regime in many ways, and would do well to seek alliance with another Shi'a majority state. An attack against American forces on Iraqi soil would remove that possibility.

2) The more successful such a strike would be, the more it would galvanize public opinion in the west against them, and if there was any significant American life loss, I am absolutely certain this country would demand Persia to be turned into a crater. Fair or not.

I'm not saying waiting is necessarily a better strategy, but frankly, if I'm Iran, I don't try to make my own nukes to play the game. I'd outsource it to Pakistan or somewhere else, and see if I can't get the weapons alone.

And beyond that, I wouldn't even consider looking at a conventional war. The only way you can fight the west these days is asymmetrically, and I suspect Iran knows that. Whether it would be terrorist like strikes or something we aren't talking about, I think that's how they have to fight.

I wouldn't blame them for acting, but it's a weak hand either way.