There are rumors (probably somewhat unfounded) that there is a looming airstrike on Iran -- targeted at the nuclear reactors, naval warships, Republican Guard headquarters, etc.
While I highly doubt that anything is immediate, the US certainly has a plan drawn up somewhere that is likely similar in scope to the one I defined.
The question once again: the strike would certainly hurt Iran's military, and would set the nuclear program back ~7 years. What would be the impact on the current Iraq situation (given that Iran is mostly Shi'ite), the effect on radical Islam, and any boost in standing with our Sunni allies (Saudi Arabia and Egypt)?
2007-03-30 16:30:24 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
One thing it *might* do is trigger the activation of their so-called "Martyr's Brigade" which comprises some 50,000 suicide bombers who are ready and willing to die in the name of Allah. Many of them would be successful in their attacks, while others would give themselves (and others connected to them) away, and they would be arrested and incarcerated in places like Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Nothing can be ruled out in the event of a military strike on Iran. "Interesting" doesn't even BEGIN to describe the situation....
2007-03-30 16:51:00 · answer #1 · answered by Col. Kurtz 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. An even more pissed off Iran that would entrench further and develop nuclear weapons at an even faster pace (their program is in unknown locations deep below ground, our strikes would have little effect)
2. Loss of nearly every US ally in the Middle East (they'd face revolutions otherwise)
3. Reinvigoration of the unaligned nation’s movement
4. Setting back any hope of bringing Middle Eastern nations into the world family by decades
As per Iraq, since we've taken away the enemies of Iran (Iraq and the Taliban), Iran also wants stability there and recognizes that, while it is likely they would affect Iraqi decisions, their Shiites will not blindly follow their dictates. Stability brings them more power in the region. They would of course step up their help of anyone killing Americans but at the aim of forcing a quick withdrawal and its heavy negative implications for the USA.
2007-03-30 19:52:30 · answer #2 · answered by Caninelegion 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It would set off a situation for WWIII, but not immediately. Other events will happen first like a moderate condemnation from the UN, retaliation from iran directly to the US, Saudi and palestinian attacks on Israel which then would open Israel up to open defense and attack, Russia and China would join in and clean up while the British will be defending their own.
However, all those mentioned may actually defend the US strike if they agree that iran is out of hand and if a coup is successful, all parties may hold back if stability is promised.
No one wants WWIII, but many opportunities for power are open to the players of Asia depending what happens.
2007-04-03 16:51:07 · answer #3 · answered by ringolarry 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Quite frankly...I think it could make things worse for the region as a whole. Not a palatable solution. A hard question to answer no doubt as I am not well read on all aspects concerning the Middle East. I believe Iran's location and its obvious influence in Iraq is a "borderline" issue just waiting to " blow up in someone's face". Thats the scary part. Just look at the hardliners in its govt not to mention its President.
Sorry. I really cannot give a concrete answer to your question.
2007-04-06 12:10:28 · answer #4 · answered by msianmania 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It certainly could (would,) inflame Shia tensions in the region, which would be problematic as Shiites are the majority in Iraq.
That said, the Saudis and Egyptians do not trust Iran (or their claim of "regional superpower"). Also, Bush has said a few times that he doesn't want the legacy of allowing a nuclear Iran during his term.
2007-03-30 16:49:12 · answer #5 · answered by intelbarn 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
awe...what a difficult question to answer. specially for people standing or sitting outside of the middle east -- where most of the action takes place. let me try --a one-time strike is a possibility if all diplomatic avenues have been used -- right now we are very far away. as to the one time-strike it all depends where and how much devastation it does bring. whether the target is reached "yes or no" -- fanaticism could flare up and you would have some kind of continuation of the hostilities. thus the one time strike theory is non exist ant. the rest is pure speculation. hope it helps.
2007-03-30 16:43:03 · answer #6 · answered by s t 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, it might also do well in showing Hanoi and other prospective bullies and terrorists that US and UN are not too overly phased by the awkward aftermath of Iraq to do what they think is necessary nevertheless.
2007-03-30 17:18:55 · answer #7 · answered by dr c 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Iran is expecting and welcoming it. They think there is an afterlife.
I think a one time strike would have to taken everything out. That would be a nuke.
2007-03-30 16:44:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can see what happend with Iraq..may be 10 times of that.
Why we talk of strike..can't we live in peace and enjoy beautiful life.
2007-04-06 00:43:53 · answer #9 · answered by KISH 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Think! We have allies over there & it would bring harm to all. This isn't about to happen, merly somewhat unfounded
specalation. Don't ever trust Egypt.
2007-04-05 19:09:24 · answer #10 · answered by NJ 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋