Assuming that the US finally finds an excuse to wage war on Iran, will the Americans fare any better than they have in Iraq?
Those of you who think the Iraq adventure is going swimmingly, need not reply)
2007-03-25
07:09:27
·
17 answers
·
asked by
Dr Watson (UK)
5
in
Politics & Government
➔ Military
Hi Hendog - how come you haven't signed up for the army then instead of signing onto Yahoo?
2007-03-25
07:26:06 ·
update #1
Hi Scrappy. I'll tell you what amazes me mate, the daily body count in Iraq. It amazes me there's anyone left to blow up!
2007-03-25
07:27:17 ·
update #2
Hi Newjdgy. You obviously still have great faith in the american war machine if you long for that solution to the current problems. Dream on chum:)
2007-03-25
07:31:21 ·
update #3
Hi Mr Thumb - you're like Newjdgy, you should get married.
2007-03-25
07:35:16 ·
update #4
It is imminent that some kind of 'pre-emptive' actions will take place with the 'blessings' of the perpetrators and the arrogants and ignorants. When ? Wait for few more days, or weeks...
2007-03-25 07:14:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by deevoonay 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
The American war machine worked pretty well in Iraq. It's not the military's job to secure the peace. It's the job of the poiticians.Mainly the Iraqi's. But to answer the question, yes.
The American military machine is more than capable of leaveing Iran in the same situation as Iraq.
2007-03-26 00:41:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Iran taking those 15 sailors...could be an act of war. Not to be the village asshole here, and I'm aware I'll get this deleted, but Everyone cries about war until they need it to defend their homeland. Iran is trying to produce Nuclear material, and if they drop something via terrorist on your hometown killing your family, along with everyone in your favorite pub, you'll ***** that the US didn't do enough. I'm ok with that, i think Iraq is a huge failure, but what else could we do? Saddam even admitted to trying to make it look like he had WMD to keep Iran out. So why wouldn't we think he had them, if he tried to make it look like he did?
To answer the original question, Israel will be the first to strike IMHO. It'll be nonstop bombing, no foot troops. To me, thats the best method. Cripple their abilty to feed themselves, them embargo everything until they give. Why take in foot troops when you can starve them out in less time? Iran will be bombed in the comming months, we've all seem the mounting tension. I'm sure, being an expert on the subject, you know that the majority of Iran doesn'ty like where this is heading either. they want their economy fixed from inside, and their asshole president to stop waging war when people are already piss broke.
2007-03-25 14:22:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
No, we need to strike swiftly and surely leaving nothing but a weather forecast with highs in the 3000 degree F range. Iraq and Afghanistan and all the other little Craplanistans too. They want to live like it's 1100 AD, then let's help 'em out.
Our troops withdraw completely in six months. When the last piece of US inventory is removed, we light the candles. Problem solved. Fifty years from now, we go back and take the oil you libs say this war was for.
2007-03-25 14:17:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Whether we like it or not, war is just over the horizon. Iran is
flaunting the West and openly admits its carrying on with its nuclear program no matter what. The first thing on their itinery would be to wipe Israel off the map and with an atom bomb they think its possible. So with this attitude, its up to the west
to decide whether to take the matter up with further dialog
which I think is a complete waste of time amd effort.
2007-03-26 05:55:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by CAPTAIN BEAR 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
It amazes me how everyone find negativity instead of the positive aspects of Iraq. I don't blame you though, if I was glued to what the media fed you everyday I would be the same way. As far as Iran, the UN is following the same mistakes it made with Iraq. Throw out some useless sanctions that will do absolutely nothing to stop Iran. If you ask me I think we should just go to Isolationism as we tried to do prior to being attacked in WWII. Let the Muslims destroy themselves, take the leash off of Israel and let them handle there business. I think it is time we stop being the World's Police, and just take care of ourselves.
2007-03-25 14:16:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
No, a war in Iran would be another disaster for more reasons than the war in Iraq. Going to war in Iran would finish destablizing the region and could really escalate into something close to a world war.
2007-03-25 14:20:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by afreshpath_admin 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Iran borders what two countries, Afghanistan and Iraq. Were already got them surrounded. If we move into Iran things will only get worse than they are right now. In say we let Israel get involved
2007-03-25 15:04:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by mhs.jasper 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think they will invade but iran has some pretty neat technology. I was reading today about their stealth detection systems. No B2 bombing runs for the US against Iran. I haven't got the link handy but in Yahoo search under Iran stealth technology.
2007-03-25 14:25:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
What do you mean better, its a total screw up, with the majority of the globe asking why it happened and why are we not pulling out, its down to the politicians but they are not able to admit they messed up so keep trowing money at the problem in the hope that there bully boy tack-tics will win in the end
2007-03-25 14:15:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by doctordog1uk 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
They will find an excuse .. any excuse will do and then they will pull their troops out of Iraq to go and fight in Iran , just leaving the country in more turmoil that it already is ...
reep what u sow ...
2007-03-25 14:25:18
·
answer #11
·
answered by jizzumonkey 6
·
1⤊
1⤋