Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Iran - To Contain or Strike Now?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Iran - To Contain or Strike Now?

    This is a good read for the current situation with regard to the Iranian nuclear program. It is rather long, but well worth your time. The question he addresses is whether the policy of containment currently being accepted by the US administration is better or worse than a policy of active engagement/warfare with Iran in order to stop them from getting the bomb. Is the mess such a war would cause today more or less than the mess a nuclear armed Iran would cause at some point down the road?

    With traditional US allies such as Turkey seeking better relations with Iran, the writing is on the wall that local powers are also of the view that Iran cannot be stopped from getting nukes. Failures in US diplomacy vis-a-vis Iran over the years are coming home to roost.

    Some really interesting viewpoints within;

    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/vi...15462?page=all
    Our forefathers died to give us freedom, not free stuff.

    I write books about zombies as E.E. Isherwood. Check me out at ZombieBooks.net.

  • #2
    The article makes no convincing arguments to bombing being the correct call. It does acknowledge there will be consequences for doing so.

    When in doubt, do nothing.

    Comment


    • #3
      If a strike on Iran is on the cards then now would be the best time. It's not that I think a military strike would necessarily be the best plan, but they only seem to be getting stronger day by day.

      The real problem would be convincing the public that three con-current conflicts in the same area is good for the US - and worth the cost.
      Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the cheesemakers

      That's right bitches. I'm blessed!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Rojik View Post
        The real problem would be convincing the public that three con-current conflicts in the same area is good for the US - and worth the cost.
        However,the three conflicts are interconnected.That doesn't make it feel any better.With all that's going on,it's beginning to look like we are on the verge of the third world war.At least that's what my gut tells me.
        ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

        BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

        BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
          However,the three conflicts are interconnected.That doesn't make it feel any better.With all that's going on,it's beginning to look like we are on the verge of the third world war.At least that's what my gut tells me.
          I think it has already started. The only difference between this one and the last two is that crushing the military and overthrowing a hostile government is the beginning of the real war and not the end.

          No more maps with black squiggles to denote the front lines, just spotfires everywhere and anywhere.
          Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the cheesemakers

          That's right bitches. I'm blessed!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Rojik View Post
            I think it has already started.
            Only history can tell.Will there be an ACG 50yrs from now to look back on all this?
            ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

            BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

            BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Rojik View Post
              If a strike on Iran is on the cards then now would be the best time. It's not that I think a military strike would necessarily be the best plan, but they only seem to be getting stronger day by day.

              The real problem would be convincing the public that three con-current conflicts in the same area is good for the US - and worth the cost.
              In my opinion, the only military option that is likely to command the undivided attention of the mullahs in Tehran is a limited nuclear strike against its nuclear facilities. However, the question that comes to mind is "will it be worth it?" I do not believe that it will be, primarily because it is likely to stop Iran only for a short period of time. Additionally, when our present military commitments are considered, I find it hard to believe that we could successfully engage Iran conventionally. It is simply easier, and probably more profitable to undermine the current regime from within. The more the average Iranian is bombarded with ideas and notions of what life could be without the mullahs and their lackeys, the faster the demise of theocrats in Tehran is likely to be. That is not nearly as sexy as putting troops on the ground to march into Tehran, but it is probably a far more sensible approach.
              Give me a fast ship and the wind at my back for I intend to sail in harms way! (John Paul Jones)

              Initiated Chief Petty Officer
              Hard core! Old School! Deal with it!

              Comment


              • #8
                Actually, the only reason Iraq and Aghanistan is so expensive is because of "nation building". IF we scratch out nation building from the options, the "attack" to destroy Iran as a nation will come cheap at the price.

                Of course, the real question is, should we?
                "We have no white flag."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by bass_man86 View Post
                  In my opinion, the only military option that is likely to command the undivided attention of the mullahs in Tehran is a limited nuclear strike against its nuclear facilities. However, the question that comes to mind is "will it be worth it?" I do not believe that it will be, primarily because it is likely to stop Iran only for a short period of time. Additionally, when our present military commitments are considered, I find it hard to believe that we could successfully engage Iran conventionally. It is simply easier, and probably more profitable to undermine the current regime from within. The more the average Iranian is bombarded with ideas and notions of what life could be without the mullahs and their lackeys, the faster the demise of theocrats in Tehran is likely to be. That is not nearly as sexy as putting troops on the ground to march into Tehran, but it is probably a far more sensible approach.
                  Of course that's the BEST option, but it raises a few question, mainly:

                  1. How long will it take to preform a coup? Wouldn't Iran be nuclear for quite some time by then?
                  Undermining a regime takes a very long time and is not a "sure bet" at all.

                  2. Who will raise instead of the Mullahs?
                  You'll need someone with good ties to the west and a large enough popularity rate within Iran, I don't see that now.

                  3. Precedents.

                  How many times in modern history was such a feat successfully preformed?
                  (A change in leadership of a dictatorship country by outside intervention, that brought about satisfying results, i.e not just changing leadership but actually having a new leadership that is better for "our" interests)

                  How many times did such tries failed?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Nations Do Not Have Friends, They Have Interests

                    We don't really need an Iran "friendly" to the west. Just as long as they do not support transnational militants or destabilize the already unstable Arab states they can be just as conservative as they like within their own borders.

                    Iran's conflicts with the West stem from its theological conflict with Sunni Islam. Iran's efforts against Israel are a means to further Shiite expansion and popularity among the Muslim faithful. Iran's deep history of Persian culture and power also engenders a sense that they deserve more respect and influence with the region.

                    Three decades of US financial and political sanctions combined with Iran's own religious/political hard liners have combined to restrict the growth and development of the Iranian economy and the ability of the government to serve the population. In other words, Iran has paid a price for continued confrontation against the modern world and some within the country seem to be cognizant of that factor.

                    The Iranians are going to discover that having nuclear weapons may keep some troubles at bay but contribute nothing to solving their society's deeper problems while imposing enormous costs. At that point they are going to have the bomb on one hand and a population saying, 'great, now what about us?'

                    I don't know if there will be a coup, a revolution, some other form of radical regime change or just a political upheaval that changes the mandate of the ruling clerical class. At some point however, there is a strong chance that Iranians will decide they are tired of being a second class nation and express the desire to join the 21st century. Then things could get REALLY interesting.
                    Last edited by GCoyote; 16 Jun 10, 10:23. Reason: possessive case error
                    Any metaphor will tear if stretched over too much reality.

                    Questions about our site? See the FAQ.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by GCoyote View Post
                      We don't really need an Iran "friendly" to the west. Just as long as they do not support transnational militants or destabilize the already unstable Arab states they can be just as conservative as they like within their own borders.

                      Iran's conflicts with the West stem from its theological conflict with Sunni Islam. Iran's efforts against Israel are a means to further Shiite expansion and popularity among the Muslim faithful. Iran's deep history of Persian culture and power also engenders a sense that they deserve more respect and influence with the region.

                      Three decades of US financial and political sanctions combined with Iran's own religious/political hard liners have combined to restrict the growth and development of the Iranian economy and the ability of the government to serve the population. In other words, Iran has paid a price for continued confrontation against the modern world and some within the country seem to be cognizant of that factor.

                      The Iranians are going to discover that having nuclear weapons may keep some troubles at bay but contribute nothing to solving their society's deeper problems while imposing enormous costs. At that point they are going to have the bomb on one hand and a population saying, 'great, now what about us?'

                      I don't know if there will be a coup, a revolution, some other form of radical regime change or just a political upheaval that changes the mandate of the ruling clerical class. At some point however, there is a strong chance that Iranians will decide they are tired of being a second class nation and express the desire to join the 21st century. Then things could get REALLY interesting.
                      I do not see a coupe d'etat in Iran's future, but another revolution is something altogether different. Eventually, the mullahs and their henchmen will sow the seeds of their own demise. Iran is a country that has two parallel military organizations, one of which is clearly favored over the other. What I can see happening eventually is perhaps a scenario in which the regular armed forces side with Iran's youthful intelligentsia, aspiring middle class, and virtually anyone else that is tired of the mullahs breathing down their neck. When that happens, we may see a full blown revolution or perhaps even a civil war; things will get ugly when that happens.
                      Give me a fast ship and the wind at my back for I intend to sail in harms way! (John Paul Jones)

                      Initiated Chief Petty Officer
                      Hard core! Old School! Deal with it!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Hopefully it does happen in that way.

                        Another possibility, of course, is that the regime could become so desperate (either to distract the population or to "defeat" its enemies therefore gaining credibility and reputation) that it actually makes use of it's nukes (either directly or indirectly).
                        "We have no white flag."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Have I lost something here?

                          The current NIE on Iran states that Iran cannot be detected as to having a program in effect to build a nuclear weapon.

                          So belying notions run contrary to the US IC. Are y'all aware of that fact?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by bass_man86 View Post
                            I do not see a coupe d'etat in Iran's future, but another revolution is something altogether different. Eventually, the mullahs and their henchmen will sow the seeds of their own demise. Iran is a country that has two parallel military organizations, one of which is clearly favored over the other. What I can see happening eventually is perhaps a scenario in which the regular armed forces side with Iran's youthful intelligentsia, aspiring middle class, and virtually anyone else that is tired of the mullahs breathing down their neck. When that happens, we may see a full blown revolution or perhaps even a civil war; things will get ugly when that happens.



                            Nope. Not with this current appeasement administration. No insiders and no incentives for the friendlies as that was proven last year with the Obamanation Defecation response to the election disturbance demonstrations.


                            The sanctions will fail and they will get a nuc thereby de-stabilizing the entire region with everyone going for them. Solution? None are easy, none are guaranteed. But in the end to assume, Intel estimates aside for the moment, that it's not their intent is dangerous, naive and not to mention ludicrous.

                            Re-read the stated genocidal rhetoric. That's all it takes.

                            Answer?

                            As many cruise missiles as you can put into the region; concentrating on identifiable defense infrastructure-communications, refinery's-docks-warehouses, shipping and transportation (rails-ports-airfields etc.) facilities and power plants.

                            When they come up for air: slammmmmmmmmmm them again.

                            It won't get em all but it'll slow them down and send the message, that cruise missles while expensive, can be made and re-logged quickly enough.

                            Thunder Dome

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yeah, I don't get it. A trillion dollars wasted on a war in Iraq, and the thirst for more borrowing and further warfare seemingly insatiable to some.

                              Doesn't make sense.

                              Thunder Dome, I pointed out the deliberate mistranslation about "genocidal" comments, and further elaborations on the subject through interviews with Larry King, for example. Are you unaware of this?

                              What is it with lust for warfare, borrowing trillions of dollars (from China, of all sources) and the prospect of $10+/gallon fuel that drives such a compulsion?

                              The money is not there. Even though the Tea Party is misdirected in some regards, they do face up to the fact that the money is not there. Another trillion dollars for another war is plain insanity.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X