Iran has drawn American "first blood" they are aiding and abetting the pro-Iranian militants in Iraq with the expertise and the sophisticated materials to kill young Americans and destroy millions of dollars in American military equipment, is this an act of war? Do we protect our solders from this growing regional threat? Does the U.S. simply slap this government of Islamic fanatics on the wrist or go all out this time and make sure they cannot rebuild their military for another hundred years or so? Let's face reality here, if we let the Iranians continue with their present day policies they'll control the middle east within 10 years and by then the U.S.A. won't be able to stop that run away train.
2007-02-27 11:23:11 · 14 answers · asked by anthony p 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Why don't America bomb Israel instead because Israelis currently has nuclear weapons which they should not have. You are really one-sided bigot.
2007-02-27 12:54:33 · answer #1 · answered by halo 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It will be just like Iraq all over again. What is happening in Iraq will exactly happen in Iran if it's military is totally destroyed. Insurgency and guerilla warfare will surely take place. Is the U.S. prepared for such a scenario?. Furthermore, Iran shares its border with both Syria and Russia. I'm sure that the Iranian insurgents will be eventually supplied by these neighbors with weapons across the border to kill American troops. Then what?. Bomb Russia?. Oh boy, I love to see that. It will be real fun.
2007-02-27 12:21:24 · answer #2 · answered by roadwarrior 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I suspect a lot of the military activity in Iraq is being diverted to building a military base closer to the boarder. I also suspect the reason for the increase civil fighting in Iraq is really Iran civilians and military personnel bring the fight to us before it reaches them within their own boarders.......
As I see it today, we are on the path to war with Iran, and such a war will be short, using sophisticated air power combined with the use of modern technology for the field soldier. Advancements in fuel cells, wireless technology and "black ops” technologies....We will target only the top political leadership, and sponsor and fund a coup....
A war with Iran is not a war against the great people of Iran; rather it is a war against the current policies of the current political leadership. For this reason, a war with Iran will be a strategic group of strikes over a period of months.
2007-02-27 11:38:00 · answer #3 · answered by libertyproject 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iran has been living on borrowed time for a year.
The clerics have already given their support to the United States to remove Mohamed by force,and has guaranteed support.
I think the best course of action would be a ground war for about 1month or however long it would take to destroy Iranian military,and political power. Then withdraw,wait for them to get set up again,then re-attack. That should be ebough to destroy Mohamed's influence and any supporters he has,with out having to attempt to set up US troops like Iraq.
If carter had not allowed the Shaw to fall we would not be in this boat...
2007-02-27 12:19:29 · answer #4 · answered by Jessica_The_kitty 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If we attack Iran, we'd better be prepared to engage in the biggest staring down contest the world has ever seen. Once we nullify Iran's power, we'd literally have to tell the other Middle Eastern countries: "Do any of you punks want to be next?"
If we took such a drastic step, the oil supplies would be disrupted, maybe indefinitely. I don't think we can afford that.
Military power is not unlimited power.
2007-02-27 11:38:07 · answer #5 · answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Excellent point. I couldn't agree with you more. It may come to a showdown with Iran unless they get rid of that SOB who is their president then the middle east has a chance. Iraq still presents a problem that must be resolved.
2007-02-27 11:32:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can't destroy a government - or effect regime change - by bombing. Jeez! Where did you learn military history, Hollywood Upstairs History School? Either you invade (not a popular option, and one almost guaranteed to fail), or you satisfy yourself with small-scale tactical strikes against specific targets. Except you don't know where they are, or if they exist.
2007-02-27 11:28:47 · answer #7 · answered by surroundedbyimbeciles 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I UNDERSTAND THAT 147 SOLDIERS HAVE BEEN KILLED BY BOMBS WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN SOLD TO THE IRAQIS BY IRAN. WHAT ABOUT THE WEAPONS THAT KILLED THE OTHER 3000 SOLDIERS? DID THEY COME FROM FRANCE, RUSSIA, USA, CHINA? WHY DOESN'T THE SOURCE OF THOSE WEAPONS MATTER? DON'T FEAR IRAN. THE MIDDLE EAST COUNTRIES CAN STOP IRAN. DON'T SWEAT IT. REMEMBER, IRAN COULDN'T BEAT IRAQ IN THEIR WAR OVER A DECADE AGO. COULDN'T DO ANY BETTER THAN A STALEMATE.
2007-02-27 11:31:12 · answer #8 · answered by CaesarsGhost 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I say let's finish what we started with in Afghanistan and Iraq,don't mess with the Iranians, yet.
2007-02-27 11:30:29 · answer #9 · answered by Georgewasmyfavorite 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Uh, do you mean we should "nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure"? Sure sounds like Ripley to me.
2007-02-27 12:35:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋