Iranian leader: No one dares threaten us

[T@T]

"Today our nation is one of the strongest in the region and a great part of the world," President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said, according to Mehr. "And no country dares to threaten it."

And he wonders why countries don't want him messing with uranium


http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/...ef=mpstoryview

[Table 5]

Well, in a way it's kind of true. After seeing the mess that is Iraq, who in their right mind would want to deal with the problem of fighting the bigger, stronger, and possibly crazier, brother?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Well, in a way it's kind of true. After seeing the mess that is Iraq, who in their right mind would want to deal with the problem of fighting the bigger, stronger, and possibly crazier, brother?

If we're ever forced to deal with Iran, I highly doubt that a single troop would step foot on Iranian soil.

The plan would be to hit Iran with a time on target barrage of everything in the American inventory and then sit back and roast marshmellows by the Flames of a burning country.

You take out their infastructure and barricade their borders. Iran may have lots of weapons on the ground, and lots of boots to go with it. But their airforce is terrible, and America has shown that it can defeat high end sam defenses.

[Table 5]

Im sure America can defeat any army on earth. It's just that stuff that happens afterward which poses the real problem. You can have the most deadly equipment ever, but if the country isn't equipped to deal with the people on the ground afterward, it becomes a slow death for everyone. I still think the best thing the country can do is take funding away from a lot of the fancy multi-billion dollar doo-dads that shoot rockets from mars, and funnel it into intelligence/clandestine services and people on the ground in the midst of these countries.

[ResAlien]

Challenge accepted. Iran, I dare to threaten you and challenge you to Kumite!

[tjinaz]

I still think the best thing the country can do is take funding away from a lot of the fancy multi-billion dollar doo-dads that shoot rockets from mars, and funnel it into intelligence/clandestine services and people on the ground in the midst of these countries.

I would think you do both. If you go back to the intel/HUMINT side you effectively level the playing field. They can counter. What would happen if the US didn't care what happened after and stopped rebuilding the other country?

The US is nice actually. After they destroy something they spend double the money rebuilding it nicer than it was before. Go back to the British empire, the Soviets, the Nazis or even the Romans. Back then when they destroyed a city the sprinkled salt on the ground so nothing would grow there again. If the US were to really take the gloves off they would flatten every city of a certain size, blockade the borders and when they got organized enough to start rebuilding flatten it all again. A low cost effective solution. They could even call it the George W. Bush gunnery range. Keep Iran in the Stone age for an indefinite period of time, with very little risk to troops on the ground. Of course the public backlash would be enormous but it could be done all that is lacking is the political will.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by tjinaz

I would think you do both. If you go back to the intel/HUMINT side you effectively level the playing field. They can counter.

The US is nice actually. After they destroy something they spend double the money rebuilding it nicer than it was before. Go back to the British empire, the Soviets or even the Romans. Back then when they destroyed a city the sprinkled salt on the ground so nothing would grow there again. If the US were to really take the gloves off they would flatten every city of a certain size, blockage the borders and when they got organized enough to start rebuilding flatten it again. A low cost effective solution. They could even call it the George W. Bush gunnery range. Keep Iran in the Stone age for an indefinite period of time, with very little risk to troops on the ground. Of course the public backlash would be enormous but it could be done all that is lacking is the political will.

Thats the only way to fight a country that you have no interest in taking control of over the long term.

Make them focus on rebuilding efforts, make them spend their treasury on restoring themselves and then knock it over again.

The problem is that nobody really fears the American's because the American's don't have the resolve to be anything but the guys that will slash you with a sword with one hand, and then bandage your wounds with the other one.

One day you might just get a president thats not interested in being a friend to the world anymore.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by tjinaz

all that is lacking is the political will.

Well that and the whole "killing millions of innocent people" thing.

[BavarianHorde]

With Obama in the White House, I don't believe that he will go GW Bush on Iran.
As for America defeating any army on earth? They have the most might and fire power, there is no doubt. But China has shear numbers. At the very least, hand to hand, the Chinese win hands down.

As the Chinese economy grows, they will only get more powerful. So millitary might coupled with shear numbers? I am afraid that America is going to get bumped down to number two in the near future.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by BavarianHorde

But China has shear numbers. At the very least, hand to hand, the Chinese win hands down.

I doubt that.

US troops have been fighting in an active war for over 8 years now. I'll take actual experience over sheer numbers anyday of the week.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

If we're ever forced to deal with Iran, I highly doubt that a single troop would step foot on Iranian soil.

The plan would be to hit Iran with a time on target barrage of everything in the American inventory and then sit back and roast marshmellows by the Flames of a burning country.

I doubt that, and I doubt your strategy would work. Bombing Iran into the ground will take the progressives, the youth/students, the women that have been backing Mohammed Khatami in an effort to throw Ahmadinejad out on his ear, and destroy any progress they have made against Ahmadinejads policies. Unfortunately, with Khatami's backout out of the election, it looks like Ahmadinejad, despite his incredibly low popularity numbers, will gain another term.

There is a silent revolution going on in Iran. It's small things. The traditionalists hard-liners have banned Valentines day, but many young people ignore the laws and buy heart-shaped-boxes of chocolates and flowers for their girlfriends anyway. Following the religious orders of their religious leaders isn't their way of life. It doesn't control them.

But if you carpet bomb their country, it will.

[Ozy_Flame]

America could probably defeat an Iranian army, but then you've got one really...REALLY pissed off Russian bear at your doorstep.

[tjinaz]

Well that and the whole "killing millions of innocent people" thing.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Caesar, all had that will. The US has more power than any previous empire but wields it with kid gloves. They are like the huge kid in Jr High that doesn't know his own strength. If he ever did he would put the beat down on everyone but only fights in the defense of his friends.

I also think Ahmadinejad has the will as well and if he ever did get a nuke he would use it on Israel. He would go down as a legend in the Islamic world and that would be enough for him.

[tjinaz]

America could probably defeat an Iranian army, but then you've got one really...REALLY pissed off Russian bear at your doorstep.

Eh you could make a deal with the Russians in advance like Hitler did with Poland. Let them extend their borders 100mi or so into what was Iran and they wouldn't care a wit.

I doubt that, and I doubt your strategy would work. Bombing Iran into the ground will take the progressives, the youth/students, the women that have been backing Mohammed Khatami in an effort to throw Ahmadinejad out on his ear, and destroy any progress they have made. Unfortunately, with Khatami's backout out of the election, it looks like Ahmadinejad, despite his incredibly low popularity numbers, will gain another term.

There is a silent revolution going on in Iran. It's small things. The traditionalists hard-liners have banned Valentines day, but many young people ignore the laws and buy heart-shaped-boxes of chocolates and flowers for their girlfriends anyway. Following the religious orders of their religious leaders isn't their way of life. It doesn't control them.

But if you carpet bomb their country, it will.

You aren't getting it.... we are talking total war. The WWII mindset where you wipe out everything. Ever read Slaughterhouse 5? That kind of thing. They don't care who is in charge because they will be incapable of doing anything for a very significant period of time.

[Jason14h]

We need a Team America 2 movie right about now

[icecube]

U.S. doesn't have the money to fight a war with Iran. That would be the straw that broke the camels back. You're witnessing the fall of an empire right before your eyes.

[BavarianHorde]

Originally Posted by icecube

U.S. doesn't have the money to fight a war with Iran. That would be the straw that broke the camels back. You're witnessing the fall of an empire right before your eyes.

That camels back was broken a long time ago. A LOOOOOONNNNNG time ago!

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

I doubt that, and I doubt your strategy would work. Bombing Iran into the ground will take the progressives, the youth/students, the women that have been backing Mohammed Khatami in an effort to throw Ahmadinejad out on his ear, and destroy any progress they have made against Ahmadinejads policies. Unfortunately, with Khatami's backout out of the election, it looks like Ahmadinejad, despite his incredibly low popularity numbers, will gain another term.

There is a silent revolution going on in Iran. It's small things. The traditionalists hard-liners have banned Valentines day, but many young people ignore the laws and buy heart-shaped-boxes of chocolates and flowers for their girlfriends anyway. Following the religious orders of their religious leaders isn't their way of life. It doesn't control them.

But if you carpet bomb their country, it will.

If Iran ever decides to first strike, which is probably the only reason why the American's would go to war with them, then the silent revolution doesn't matter, Moderates trying to take over it won't matter.

The assumption is that Iran's model of attack would be a WMD strike on Israel, which means that America would respond in kind.

If America had wanted to go to war with Iran in a conventional way they had lots of opportunities by now with the funding and encouragement of various terrorist groups.

America knows that they could never occupy Iran, the insurgency there would be a hundred times what they've seen in Iraq.

It would be a standoff war, Iran as a nation and a country with the ability to bear and support life would cease to exist 15 minutes after any nuclear attack on Israel.

Nothing taller then 3 feet would be left standing.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by icecube

U.S. doesn't have the money to fight a war with Iran. That would be the straw that broke the camels back. You're witnessing the fall of an empire right before your eyes.

We've been hearing that since the start of the last century. People continually misjudge the states and the resolve of Americans.

They appear to be weak because of their political process, but they just flat out seem to be able to rise to the occasion to adversity.

I very much doubt that as a nation we're witnessing anything of the sort. And I'd prefer not to see it. A world with China or Russia as the predominant super power would be bad news.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by BavarianHorde

With Obama in the White House, I don't believe that he will go GW Bush on Iran.
As for America defeating any army on earth? They have the most might and fire power, there is no doubt. But China has shear numbers. At the very least, hand to hand, the Chinese win hands down.

As the Chinese economy grows, they will only get more powerful. So millitary might coupled with shear numbers? I am afraid that America is going to get bumped down to number two in the near future.

Sheer numbers means nothing in terms of modern warfare. While the Chinese have manpower, the American's have the advantage of force multipliers and its not even close. Remember that China has a mainly land locked military, they don't have a navy that can prevent maritime exclusion. They're airforce is improving but still about 20 years behind the American's in terms of sheer technology and training. The American military is battle hardened and experienced while the Chinese military is experienced in shooting civilians.

The sheer numbers advantage is no advantage when your numbers are peeled back miles before they're in range to do any damage.

The American's are not great at the post war phase, but the actual war phase, they're wizards.

The 1000 pound gorilla is what Russia would do, however I think they'd be content to watch China fall. Plus they're armed forces is going through significant changes and is probably not capable of successfully fighting a mass war right now.