War With Iran

[Sir Winston Churchill]

Well, what with Iran hating all that is American, Jewish, and just Western in general, and the fact they are now building nukes, I can't help but feel war with Iran is not far off. Just in time for me to be of drafting age. >.>

Someone please tell me why not to believe what with given developments that in due time, something is going to happen. I can't tell if I need to come back to reality, or if I'm already in it.

[Mr. Scott]

Weary One, this will not even need a draft if does go down...

And even if, I'll be sure to see you on the battlefield (I turn 18 this spring)

What I'm curious is what effects this would have on the global economy (in the event of war, its sure to go down the tanker), and on the 2012 election (presidents always have high approval ratings at the beginning of wars)

[Exarch]

as i've said before, it's not about whether or not the US can take out those sites/invade Iran successfully-it's more than capable of that with acceptable casualties (depending on what u think constitutes acceptable casualties).

Bigger question is why, and how is this going to save US hegemony?

[hellheaven1987]

as i've said before, it's not about whether or not the US can take out those sites/invade Iran successfully-it's more than capable of that with acceptable casualties (depending on what u think constitutes acceptable casualties).

Any type of casualty (of course, more are better) is acceptable to my lord!!!

Bigger question is why, and how is this going to save US hegemony?

It would not, besides US really does not need or care to fight Iran now since Iran can be pretty much pinned down by Saudi Arabia and Turkey - both are not so happy to see Iran dominate Middle East.

The problem is Israel, which hijack US Congress.

[Mr. Scott]

as i've said before, it's not about whether or not the US can take out those sites/invade Iran successfully-it's more than capable of that with acceptable casualties (depending on what u think constitutes acceptable casualties).

Bigger question is why, and how is this going to save US hegemony?

I think it has little to do with US hegemony. The situation with Iran is not the centerpiece to American foreign policy.

[Caelius]

Bigger question is why

Because it would serve US interests.

and how is this going to save US hegemony?

US hegemony isn't in danger.

Why do you insist on sticking to that meme?

[hellheaven1987]

Because it would serve US interests.

What interest? Fix US and EU's broken economy and reduce unemployed rate by throwing all unemployed people to Iran and ask Iranians to kill them?

[Exarch]

Because it would serve US interests.

it'd help US allies like the Saudis and Israel but i can't see a strike as being particularly helpful to the American people;

US hegemony isn't in danger.

Why do you insist on sticking to that meme?

no, US hegemony isn't in danger, but i don't see a lot of benefits to be had for the US-especially with the spectre of a double dip recession hovering over us- just to attack Iran whereas i see a lot of benefits to be had by the Israelis and the Saudis, both of whom need some outsider to distract their own ppl from 'the arab spring'.

Plus in your other thread, Dr Barnett cited how the US may become a net exporter of oil and gas meaning they don't need to rely so much on saudi or mideast energy, so it can't be because of energy securityi don't think. Personally i don't think Obama's that dumb to start another war now, this is all merely sabrerattling for the sake of the jewish vote. simply put, the admin wants to focus on asia cuz thats where all the $$'s at, but israel keeps yanking them back there

What interest? Fix US and EU's broken economy and reduce unemployed rate by throwing all unemployed people to Iran and ask Iranians to kill them?

the US' economy is more salvagable than some of the PIIGS in the EU-hmmm a novel idea for fixing unemployment though lol, military recruitment does go up in times of economic downturn

[Prosaic Visitant]

Well, what with Iran hating all that is American, Jewish, and just Western in general,

Most Iranians have favorable or neutral views of American society and want reseted relations.

it's the government that has the chip on it's shoulder.

[Sadreddine]

Most Iranians have favorable or neutral views of American society and want reseted relations.

it's the government that has the chip on it's shoulder.

What does 'American society' mean? Government? People? Both?

A 2008 public opinion survey in Iran shows that Iranians absolutely hate US government and foreign policy, but as you say, are mostly neutral or favourable to US people. Which is more or less my case, you'll find me highly critical of the US foreign policies and government, although I have no particular beef with the american people, save neocon and zionist crazy warmongers. The thing is, iranians will most likely be gunned down by the US government's army rather than walk happily with American natives in N.Y., i.e., they'll have to deal with the US government foreign policy rather than a warm cultural exchange with the american people.

If you meant both (considering both people and government), average calculations show 60% unfavourable, 30% favourable to the US.

And...they are obviously interested in purely economic agreements, instead of being systematically boycotted in every endeavor they embark on, I imagine that's what you mean by 'reseted relations'.

[Roboute Guilliman]

What does 'American society' mean? Government? People? Both?

A 2008 public opinion survey in Iran shows that Iranians absolutely hate US government and foreign policy, but as you say, are mostly neutral or favourable to US people. Which is more or less my case, you'll find me highly critical of the US foreign policies and government, although I have no particular beef with the american people, save neocon and zionist crazy warmongers. The thing is, iranians will most likely be gunned down by the US government's army rather than walk happily with American natives in N.Y., i.e., they'll have to deal with the US government foreign policy rather than a warm cultural exchange with the american people.

If you meant both (considering both people and government), average calculations show 60% unfavourable, 30% favourable to the US.

And...they are obviously interested in purely economic agreements, instead of being systematically boycotted in every endeavor they embark on, I imagine that's what you mean by 'reseted relations'.

Public opinion survey's taken in Iran really don't say much. I have still got some family living there, and I really never hear them ranting off about the US. The rest of my family from the iranian side have been living happily in the US since over 30 years now. I never heard them complaining much about being abused by the government.

[Sadreddine]

Public opinion survey's taken in Iran really don't say much. I have still got some family living there, and I really never hear them ranting off about the US. The rest of my family from the iranian side have been living happily in the US since over 30 years now. I never heard them complaining much about being abused by the government.

Allow me to take the survey over your anecdotal evidence and related opinion.

[Prosaic Visitant]

I still doubt the US will go to war with Iran; Israel may be stupid/ proactive enough to try a raid or three, but I don't see a US invasion anytime soon. Sorry to all the war-mongers like Cruise here.

What does 'American society' mean? Government? People? Both?

A 2008 public opinion survey in Iran shows that Iranians absolutely hate US government and foreign policy, but as you say, are mostly neutral or favourable to US people. Which is more or less my case, you'll find me highly critical of the US foreign policies and government, although I have no particular beef with the american people, save neocon and zionist crazy warmongers. The thing is, iranians will most likely be gunned down by the US government's army rather than walk happily with American natives in N.Y., i.e., they'll have to deal with the US government foreign policy rather than a warm cultural exchange with the american people.

If you meant both (considering both people and government), average calculations show 60% unfavourable, 30% favourable to the US.

And...they are obviously interested in purely economic agreements, instead of being systematically boycotted in every endeavor they embark on, I imagine that's what you mean by 'reseted relations'.

Society; people not in government. Iranians, like Arabs, seem neutral, apathetic or in favour of the US economics and people; even if they may not like the government.
I myself don't like Iran's regime, but I'm interested in it's society and history.

There's polling done the attitudes of Persians and their views of the US society; in fact one research agency was kicked out of Iran for releasing a finding that showed that *shock* most Iranian respondants did not hate the US people.


As for the bit about Iranians not being able to interact with Americans (holidays, film festivals etc), it takes two to tango and Irans government hasn't been forthcoming in fostering relations with dem evul infidels. Why would they? it would betray their 'Islamic' revolutionary rhetoric and what happens when Iranians start wanting things like American music and coke and other thoroughly 'unIslamic' things? Tehran wouldn't dare allow this.

There's no point to the embargoes. Iran's regime is clearly not going to wither away and on things said and done, I'd rather America had a Saudi-like relationship with Tehran while treating Riyadh with contempt and embargoes. A switch between the two is best, I think.
Iran at least doesn't have the Wahhabi in such esteem as in Saudi Arabia and there is a stronger democratic movement in Iran.

Haha! wouldn't the elite in Tehran look like fools if that ever happened.

Anyway, can I have the stat' you have with the 30/60 divide?

Except most Native Americans died of disease, not the US killing them.

Shoosh, we have a political agenda to push. They died from Nazi like concentration camps where the White Man used lasers and robots to kill the 'Natives' (how I hate that word).
666 MILLION PEOPLE DIED.

[Sadreddine]

Anyway, can I have the stat' you have with the 30/60 divide?

The WPO and TFT polls found sharp contrasts in how Iranians view the United States, its government and people. The American people are predominantly viewed positively (about 50% positive vs. 30% negative, averaging the WPO and TFT surveys), while the U.S. government and President Bush are viewed very negatively (less than 10% positive compared to about 80% negative on the WPO survey). Iranian opinion of the "United States" is a composite of these and other impressions about American society and falls between these two extremes. About 30 percent of Iranians have a favorable opinion of the United States, compared to 60 percent unfavorable (average of the two surveys). [WPO, QQ 2a-2c and 49a; TFT, QQ 9b, 10c]

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pi...ricara/527.php

But as I said, iranians will have to deal with the US government and foreign policy, not with its people; as I already acknowledged, iranians are a nice bunch and thus relatively favourable to american people. Sadly, such warm feelings between the peoples are ultimately irrelevant in this scenario.

[Condottiere 40K]

That general area is a powder keg.

The Iranians are in the position to close the Straits of Hormuz, through which pass 17% of the world's oil production. If you have to fight down there, Shock and Awe really does need to be applied.

[hellheaven1987]

That general area is a powder keg.

The Iranians are in the position to close the Straits of Hormuz, through which pass 17% of the world's oil production. If you have to fight down there, Shock and Awe really does need to be applied.

Nuke alone would not close Persian Gulf, and in fact Iran does not need nuke to close Persian Gulf... Furthermore your statement only points out that US ultimately is still fighting for oil...

[Claudius Gothicus]

There's not going to be a war with Iran, but in case it does the West might have the need to forgive all of Greece's debts and call them into service... after all, they are experts at beating the crap out of Persians

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

Not really. The Iraqi forces were in such a state of disrepair due to the pounding they received in the first Gulf War and the ensuing arms embargo that they never offered up any real resistance. The Iranians would be able to put up much more of a fight, although it would still be relatively easy for US forces assuming we could get staging bases in adjacent nations.

Iraq beat the crap out of Iran. USA destroyed Iraq and made it into a province. Do the math.

There are also a helluvalot more Iranians.

..to kill. Their whole strategy is based around sending millions of kids to their deaths.

There's not going to be a war with Iran, but in case it does the West might have the need to forgive all of Greece's debts and call them into service... after all, they are experts at beating the crap out of Persians

In which case I am staging a campaign of terror in the west.

Say goodbye to the Acropolis.

[motiv-8]

Iraq beat the crap out of Iran. USA destroyed Iraq and made it into a province. Do the math.

How does one do math when discussing historical events? It may be wise to get those straight before we dive into arithmetic, because your conclusions are alread erroneous.

..to kill. Their whole strategy is based around sending millions of kids to their deaths.

Is it? Human wave tactics were very prevalent, on both sides, during the Iran-Iraq war, are you saying you have evidence that the Iranian military relies on the exact same tactics, shown to be failures, and have not developed anything new at all in the last 30 years? Share this information you have with us, please sir.

I think perhaps the most offensive to the sensibilities is that your entire post reeks of the overconficence that perforated American government in 2003, that the war in Iraq would be a cakewalk. Let's not even bother thinking about what we're supposed to do after we defeat the enemy in the field, I'm sure it will all fall into place, right?

OR

"Democracy is messy."

Because it would serve US interests.

What would serve US interests? A non-nuclear Iran, right? However, it does not necessarily follow that military action against Iran would serve our interests.

The most interesting thing about Iran is that, when it comes right down to it, they (regionally) just about have us by the balls right now, and that's despite attempts at both interventionism and non-interventionism. The only thing we've been able to accomplish against them is a mostly Sunni-Arab diplomatic coalition opposed to them, accomplished with soft power and not military action. Incidentally, it might come down to it that military action is the only option we have left with Iran, and then they truly have us by the balls, despite the destruction it would bring upon themselves.

[Roboute Guilliman]

Iraq beat the crap out of Iran. USA destroyed Iraq and made it into a province. Do the math.

..to kill. Their whole strategy is based around sending millions of kids to their deaths.


Say goodbye to the Acropolis.

It is true about the old world war 1 tactics, but was mostly due to the simple reason the revolution in Iran made the army pretty disorganised. They even stripped them off their gear and hand it out to their revolutionary guards. Yet they still beat the Iraqis back to Basra, an Iraq at its height being supported by the whole world.

Iraq after the war, never returned to the country it once was. It ended up with them invading Kuwait and we all know how that went. And 2003 was just the finishing blow.

Not overestimating Iran, but the terrain gives them a much better position than Iraq.