What do you think would be the result of a US nuclear attack on Iran?

Question

The Vice President has been pushing for this for years, and there are signs of US military preparations.

Almost as worrisome, the Bush adminsitation seems to be preparaing for domestic resistance to such an attack.

How do you think this could play out, internationally, in Iran, and in the US?

Apart from the disgust I feel about the possibility, I'd like to face our uncertain future with open eyes.

Thanks, Edward I - here are some references, not all the sources. My local CBS radio affiliate reported in some depth this morning on the nuclear warheads flown to an airbase in Louisiana, and the wire services have been covering the Heritage Foundation's planning and the press releases, speeches and debates in which US pols speak aout about their opposition to Iranian influence, nuclear development, and potential threat, so it's not only avowed US opposition.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=%20CH20060103&articleId=1714
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/04/09/wbush09.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/04/09/ixportaltop.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/14/AR2005051400071_pf.html
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/2003/0125usweighs.htm
http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/040812.htm
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0907/p08s01-comv.html

Answer 1

Late - - - smart question but with several dozen (exageration) answers just gonna toss this out there - - - -

Armageddom - - - a wave of terrorism across America, accelerating the (coming) War Against Canada (can't have a neighbor harboring terrorist?) - - - personal freedom in American cit drastically - - - one Party rule by Republicans - - - maybe an o-k for a Democratic-Republican (sanctioned) opposition party - - - a lot of leaders named Bush the next fifty years.

Peace...

PS War is the New American Economy that is the harsh reality - - -

Answer 2

First, people who think it could not happen mistake low probability for impossibility. Perhapst it becomes more probable when so many deny the possibility. Most citizens of the U.S. cannot imagine what goes on in the mind of someone like Dick Chaney. We think that he actually believes in democracy, considers the will of the people and the intent of the constitution in any manner but pragmatically. He simply does not believe in the things that most of do, and most of us can not allow ourselves to accept that someone like him can become the most powerful man in this country, his presence demonstrates a failure in our system to ensure appropriate choices (really by any standards) for leadership and exposes to us the degree to which the system can be and has been manipulated. In this case I am thankful that we have the otherwise inadequate George W. Bush between Chaney and the full go ahead, makeing the senario that you suggest even less likely than if say Chaney were president. G.W. may be dense but he really wants to be a good man, I think.

Still, I think the relative few who both think as he does and who have the will and ability to gain power feel that they are an extreme minority, that they really do not wish to rule us by force when so many would be against them. that even they are not ready to kill millions of us (US citizens) not to mentions dissatisfied people the world over when we react to such an event and the resulting heavy handed means that they will find necessary to keep power.

The greatest danger remains though that as the clock ticks on this administration and it becomes increasingly clear that members of this administration are unlikely to gain positions of influence in the next, that they will come to believe that they will have no better time than this in many years to enact their private policy (one that they really believe in). Once one decides that a nuclear attack is good policy and feasible, why wait for someone else (an enemy) to do it first. The people are not ready neither are the neocons (an inadequate term to describe them and inaccurate but you know who I mean, even if we don't know who they really are), but they could decide that there will not be another opportunity as good in quite some time. It is possible that they initiate their plan, however unlikely.

Answer 3

You dont honestly think Russia or China will just sit by and let us do that right> They have too much money in Iran to let it go down. Attacking Iran will be a BIG problem.

Answer 4

The result would be WW3. Syria, Jordan, China and Russia would side with Iran and join the fight. The UK, Australia and Canada would then have to side with USA.

Answer 5

It would be catastrophic. Cheney is a mad man and would try anything if allowed to. I think this article is good from BBC.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6376639.stm

Answer 6

I have alwasy had a nasty feeling thet Iraq was attacked because George W has absolutley no idea of Geography and confused the two countries.

Answer 7

Nobody in the USA government has seriously considered that nor will they as it is counter to treaties and long-standing doctrine so the question is moot.

Answer 8

Oil prices would shoot through the roof.

Answer 9

Never happen as a first strike.
Where in H are you getting your information?

Answer 10

We aren't going to do it but there is nothing that says Israel won't, if need be.