What would happen if we attacked Iran? As I understand it, there is no Sunni-Shia issue there, in the way Iraq had. (I may, of course, be wrong.) Let’s say we went in, blitzed the army, put in a figurehead government from the Shah-In-Exile… what would be likely to happen?
What, the Iranians? How are they going to invade Israel? They would have to fight their way across Iraq, SA and Jordan to get there.
Another revolution in less than a generation, and then lather, rinse, repeat…
Likely the same as last time. The people of Iran wouldn’t stand for it, they would rise up, toss our puppet out, and we’d be in the same mess all over again.
Both GBs think alike and simultaneously it seems… 
I’m still not sure what you mean by this. Russia is essentially a neighbor of Iran, and has a massive military presence within a few hundred miles of the border (Chechnya etc.)
If the US were to make any moves on Iran, this would bring more US forces close to Russian soil - I think it’s safe to say that Russia would be unhappy about that. There’s also the question of oil of course.
Possibly dire consequences for all concerned.
ISTM that Iran, Russia and China are all in their various ways simply trying to send a clear ‘don’t fuck with me’ message. As specifically regards Iran, it helps to remember that they consider the US to be an enemy, and that from the Iran-Iraq conflict to the Axis of Evil speech, the US has been clearly bellicose towards them.
Still pretty far out; it’s not like the Russian military is concentrated on their southern border… and it’s not like Russia has been doing a bang-up job training and paying their military recently. Militarily, I wouldn’t class Russia as a threat. Politically is a whole 'nother ball of wax.
Yep, necessarily. But if we’re doing air-strikes-only, we could do so with little / no risk to our own troops. Again, a ground invasion would be a whole different situation.
Yep, agreed. Politically it’s a buzz saw, no matter how good our military is.
Of course, so long as you don’t associate either of us with GWB 
Well, Im pretty sure that the far-left and all other reasonable people agree that the Iran has the right to do what it wishes within Iran, including protests, and also the right to defend itself foreign attack. Now George W. Bush has already declared his intention to attack Iran–recall the “axis of evil” speech–and he’s already shown that he’s serious about attacking Middle Eastern countries–recall that he attacked Iraq and slaughtered 655,000 mostly innocent people–so Iran has good reason to believe that an attack is coming. In that case, any reasonable theory of government gives Iran the right to prepare its own defense?
(Mind, I’m not saying that I think Iran is preparing for defense in an smart way; they clearly aren’t. But with some forces in America and elsewhere having the stated and actual goal of repeating in Iran the mass slaughter that’s already been committed in Iraq, Iran is required to defend its people. It says so at the start of the Declaration of Independence.
This I do not understand. What would Ahmenijad benefit by pushing for war? If Iran attacked American forces, he’d probably end up dead. True, the final result would be quite harmful for the United States, but Ahmenijad and other Iranian leaders wouldn’t live to enjoy it. So what would be the benefit for him?
On point 2, the United States is overextended and vulnerable in some ways, but possesses ample resources for fighting the Iranian military. On point 3, Ahmenijad is not stupid enough to believe that. China had made some friendly outreaches to Iran but there’s no way they’d join a shooting war against the USA, not when the USA pays China a billion dollars a day for cheap underwear and toys.
It pays to take a ddep breath at this point. Right-wingers are currently warning about the imminent attack by Iran. But right-wingers have been warning about the imminent attack by Iran continuous since before I was born. Personally I’m not going to sweat it.
The russians would have to redeploy fighters and bombers to beef up what ever they had in the area just to secure their own borders , and that would be noticed by the NSA among others.
What russia could do is to paint a few squadrons of Mig-29s in Iranian colors and lend them to Iran, in which case you would be having reports of blond persians going up against American fighters, just like the 73 war between the Arabs V Israel.
What it really comes down to is does Russia have the stones to actually go head to head with the States, and that I dont believe that they do, short of an American Invasion of Russian terrirtory.
Does Moscow want to trade st petersburg for Tehran or what ever is a nice turn of events from the cold war.
Declan
Sorry, can I get a cite for this? I have a hard time believing the US military has killed over half a million people in Iraq or anywhere else. Much less slaughtered them.
We’ve been over this before. 655,000 dead, not all at the hands of the U.S. Military, but certainly all as a predictable result of the U.S. invasion.
How does all this benefit Iran? Wouldn’t they be better off playing a waiting game, maybe discreetly helping Shia allies in Iraq, rather than posturing and saber-rattling? If I were the Mullahs or the Iranian people I’d be getting pretty sick of Ahmadinejad’s nonsense.
He may be operating under a deadline thats not quite visible to the rest of the world.
Declan
Not directly, but that is one estimate of the number of Iraqis who have died because of the war, occupation, and insurgency. See this thread, and the Lancet Report (pdf).
It’s always important to remember that in these situations the motivations of the other side may not exactly be transparent. Asymmetrical information is always a problem in diplomacy - we tend to see a reflection of our own range of motives in the actions of the other side, resulting in a complete miscalculation in responding.
It may be that the kidnapping happened because there was intense pressure on the regime from inside the Iranian military to ‘do something’ in response to U.S. capture of Iranian forces in Iraq. It could be a power play between two branches of government. Or it could be a miscalculation on their part due to a misunderstanding of British or American motivation. Hell, for all we know this could be a popularity plan on Ahmenijad’s part - he first came to prominence during the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis - maybe he thinks that another one is just what he needs to remind the people that he’s good at sticking his thumb in the eye of the Great Satan.
Why are we assuming Ahmandinejad is behind this. The military is controlled by the Supreme Leader right? Honestly I don’t understand why we talk about Ahmandinejad so much since his postition seems to be more or less that of a figurehead. If the elected president had more power, I would imagine Iran would be a much better place.
Sort of ironic if that were it. Right now we have a hundred talking heads on CNN saying we need to launch some sort of violent aproportional response lest the Iranians and other see us as “weak”. Would be funny (but also the opposite of funny) if the kidnapping of sailors was a response to the same rhetoric on the other side.
Sort of cycle that could go to a bad place for either side, here’s hoping calmer heads prevail.
Don’t underestimate incompetence also. The first coordinates that Iran provided were in Iraqi territorial waters. This could be nothing more than an attempt to save face after a blunder.
Absolutely. I was referring to people who continue to equate the behavior of Iran and the United States. No matter what Iran does…religious intolerance, hostage-taking, terror sponsorship…they will always claim that the United States does the same (or worse) and therefore the two countries are on a similar moral plane. Clearly, to everyone but the ideologically addled, they are not.
You are assuming that Ahmadinejad is not driven to reckless behavior by either extremist ideology or the idea of losing power or a combination of both. The powers that be in Iran are fully aware that a large portion of the population are not “true believers in the revolution”…and they may want to act while they still have thier hands on the levers of power.
Iran became an enemy of the United States in 1979 and will eventually have to be dealt with. On whose timetable remains to be seen.