Prepping started for Iran war

I love the picture used to represent 'extremists' crossing the border. If that's their extremist army, I think the U.S. is safe.

No

Ya

No -- America is stretched too thin. Not going to happen.

Besides, France, Gremany, Russia, China and Kofi don't have oil-for-food bribes riding on this -- so we will actually have their cooperation; war shouldn't be necessary.

It won't be a war in Iran.
Morale side apart, even the US can't afford two wars simultaneously.
Note also that I don't know many democracy ready to commit suicide by entering in the war against all the muslim world.

Let's all hope not.

I like two letter words.

eh?

Dra...
...aft

ya. na. no. si. da. nien. oops.

I have seen reports on Iranian misdeeds being directed to Conservative Evangelical viewers/readers in recent days.

Not sure why, since So-Cons won't support a war on Iran any more than the general public will. I'm thinking it's part of a hard-line approach in the first days of the new mandate, trying to get Iran to back down on nukes a la Libya.

If only people knew history. Lybia "backed down" after almost twenty years of sanctions, and it had little if anything to do with Bush's idiotic threats and mindlessly chosen war.

Sure we can. We're doing it right now. Right...this...very...second. Just now. At this moment.

I beleive the general aim for the US militray was to be capable to fight 3 wars anywhere on the globe at the same time. I haven't heard that statement in a while, I wonder why?

maybe we could get the vp and Halliburton to show them how bribing is done. Halliburton could also show them how to do business with countries under sanctions through subsidiaries aswell.

Heck, Rummy could also show them how to play dumb when a company he sits on the board of sells systems and equipment for light water nuclear reactors to axis of evil country members like North Korea.

I also don't believe that it'll happen. But as far as preparation for a war... well, the hardest part is done. The troops are already there. If they successfully wrap up Iraq within a year or two, elections take place and a sense of order and a self sustaining government takes hold.... they could easily move across the border.

Halliburton doesn't have a vote on the UN security council.

I'll need you to cite chapter and verse on those.

Didn't need anyone's "permission" to go around the sanctions did it?
You mean Limbaugh didn't talk about that today? You had no clue did you?

I think you're smart enough to find links on your own. Here's a hint: there's a story about the Nigerian "bribes"(or "payments that may have been made") that came out just today.

No, I'm not "smart enough" to find those links. I disagree, so I'm stupid -- how refreshing.

In any event, it will not diminish the fact that the oil-for-food corruption surrounding Iraq wont be involved in any Iran decision.

Props to you for your honesty.

"God helps those who help themselves".

Real war. Afghanistan do not count.

I'd also like to add that Iraq, now as our ally, would serve as the base and staging point for any assault on Iran. So many troops, armaments and supplies are already there. Certainly it's plausible and honestly, it wouldn't surprise me at this point if it did happen within the next four years. Think of this... if it takes 3 or close to 4 years to get this fully prepared and get Iraq's shit together that would bring us to the next election. Another war time election. I don't doubt for a second that someone high up isn't thinking about some of this shit. Only time will tell if it happens. Like Segovius said, the rhetoric has started and that's the seed that's planted in the minds of the people. The earlier this is put into people's minds that we have to do it, the easier it is for the government to implement it.

[/drunken post]

There's the War on Islam and the War against the lower and middle classes.

Draft what?

I don't understand the fear of a draft. It is not bodies that the military is in need of. There is no shortage, nor will there be. Even at the current casualty rate, it is no where near severe enough to even consider a draft as a possibility.

Anytime there is a war in this country, there is going to be rumblings of a draft. That is just how it is.

I don't know about that.

I think I'm justifiably worried about getting drafted, for several reasons. The first is that no one can categorically rule out a draft, especially when our military is heavily engaged in a conflict right now. There was a story at DailyKos the other day about a former soldier who received an honorable discharge 13 years ago. The military called him back. That's one example of the "backdoor draft" already going on because our forces *are* stretched thin at the moment. What if another conflict breaks out? You can assure a draft will happen then.

The second and third reasons apply specifically to me. I'll be of-draft-age during the next 5 years (the time when our military will be bogged down in a major conflict. (The selective service snatches 20 year olds first, then 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 19, and 18 year olds). Finally, there are no more education exemptions, which in the past would cover all seven years of my draft eligibility from college to law school.

It's a concern.

Prior to the Iraq war, the military wanted 450,000 troops. Rumsfeld wanted far less. The compromise was around 140,000.

By all accounts we don't have enough troops in Iraq to control it.

That would be a great idea to motivate 100,000 pissed of Iranians over the border to fight with the insurgents in Iraq.

not having enough troops in Iraq is completely different from not having enough troops and requiring a draft.

there is no shortage of troops. the only shortage would be self-imposed.

A war against Iran would be a totally different proposition to Iraq. First Iran is far larger in surface area, second, the mostly mountainous terrain is far tougher to move an invading force across, thirdly, Iran's military is more disciplined and better equipped than the ragtag remains of Saddam Hussein's army when the Iraq war started, fourth, land access to Iran to an invading ground force would be via Iraq only (Turkmenistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan would be untenable launch points).

If the US was to attack Iran, it would be a "shock and awe" campaign, similar to how the Iraq war started, but on a far larger scale, with the first targets being Iranian Airforce bases. An air campaign would probably be launched from the recently constructed bases in Iraq, from ships in the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf, and possibly Israeli airbases as well. Heavy conventional bombs and limited yield 'bunker busting" nuclear weapons would be the weapons of choice, similar to what was used in northen Afghanistan in late 2001. As a last resort, larger nuclear weapons could be deployed against major urban centers where heavy industry and military support systems are concentrated. Ground forces would go in to secure vital facilities once the air war was 'complete', and ground resistance had been reduced to near zero from the intensity of the bombing campaign.

This I feel is more realistic than the more classic ground campaigns of the Gulf War and the ongoing Iraq war. The USA doesn't need to occupy Iran, and practically cannot...it is too large.

Just my 2cents

I still think this discussion is insane.

Nobody's going to back an invasion of Iran, especially with Iraq being such a powder keg and the US low on available troops. The neo-cons may be detached from reality, but the Christian right, libertarians and the moderates like Powell and McCain will not stand for such nonsense in a second term. Pat Robertson's attack on Bush sent a good signal of that. There would likely be a battle in the halls of the White House and Congress that sends Cheney back to his undisclosed location.

I think the most realistic assessment says that an Israeli air strike would be far more likely.

Yeah, but there were a whole lot of things we thought were too insane to be possible until the bush admin did them and got away with them. Now, with addition of all of the changes in the admin during the past couple weeks, we don't know what to expect.

I think that many republicans politicians will admit secretly that the Iraq war did not help them in the last elections. Without this war, the election would have been a cakewalk.

The Bush admin is discovereging the complexity of the islam world, and even acoording to my agenda, they commited an error with Iraq, I dont think that they will be fool enough to repeat this error.

The Iraq war created a huge shift among occidental countries, and I think that both USA and many countries are interested to regain good relationships.

I'd love to agree with you, but segovius is absolutely right. No one believed that the Bush admin was going to go through with most of this stuff it has done and is planning to do. During the 2000 campaign most people believed that there was no way a bush admin could be anything but moderate, even though Bush and his future advisors all were proposing radical changes on everything from social security to the structure of the US military. Now we know better.

I'm not saying that I know at this point what they plan to do with Iran, but I have no illusions about the fact that the Bush admin is willing to totally blow off allies and engage in conflicts it can't sustain using justifications that don't stand up to scrutiny at all.

And right now it's clear the administration is removing opposition, no matter how slight, from itself and the intelligence community, so there is even more of a chance for abuse in the future.

If what you say is true, it will mean that Bush is truly insane.
Let's expect it's not the case ....