Bush Admin planning post-Labor-Day "product rollout" of war-with-Iran hysteria?

Great Debates
41

[QUOTE=xtisme]
…That said…I’m not wrong about this. The US will not invade Iran…the US CAN NOT invade Iran. We simply do not have either the combat strength OR the political will for any such venture. The fevered dreams of unsable blogger types not withstanding…
[/QUOTE]

You are right that this is not a sensible prospect. What war ever was? The war with Iraq wasn’t a sensible prospect either, we told him so, and then?..

If Iran sends troops over the border, will we resist with our troops? Would that be something other than war, simply because of the territory it takes place upon?

42

[QUOTE=elucidator]
Not even close. Saddam was sane. Saddam didn’t want a war with the US, Saddam did not expect that Allah would save his bacon (so to speak…)
[/quote]

Ahmedinejad has very little actual power in Iran, and he isn’t going to be calling the shots over what they do or don’t do in response.

Dude, you’re preaching gloom and doom, drawing analogies to Vietnam, talking about the how “giant gears of war can start turning”, but all you really meant was that Iran might send a few suicide bombers our way. My bad for misinterpreting that…

43

[QUOTE=John Mace]
Ahmedinejad has very little actual power in Iran, and he isn’t going to be calling the shots over what they do or don’t do in response…
[/quote]

Really? I didn’t know that. Have you shared this with The Leader? Read and write Farsi, do you? Have a commanding grasp of political realities in Iran? Facts and cites at your fingertips? Otherwise, one might think you were bluffing.

No, your bad for deliberately misinterpreting me. And doing it again, when it suits. To save your soul, you can’t point to me saying that.

44

[QUOTE=elucidator]
You are right that this is not a sensible prospect. What war ever was? The war with Iraq wasn’t a sensible prospect either, we told him so, and then?..
[/QUOTE]

Well, there is a difference between sensible and possible. The war in Iraq, while perhaps not sensible (hell take the ‘perhaps’ right out) was POSSIBLE. We had the combat power to do it, even with our committments in Afghanistan. A war in Iran (if we are talking about an all out invasion and not tomahawk tossing or limited bomb droppage) is NOT possible. Regardless of whether its sensible or not (its not), its not feasible.

Thats kind of where BG’s house of cards comes crashing down. There is no practical POLITICAL reason for the Prez to push through an Iraq style propaganda campaign against Iran. If we are talking about tossing tomahawks…well, the Prez doesn’t really need popular support to do that. If we are talking about an all out invasion…well, its not possible given our current force structure. Certainly not in these blessedly waning days of GW’s presidency.

[QUOTE=elucidator]
If Iran sends troops over the border, will we resist with our troops? Would that be something other than war, simply because of the territory it takes place upon?
[/QUOTE]

No idea where you are going with this. Iran isn’t going to send any meaningful force across the border into Iraq as long as we are there. Thats crazy. They MIGHT (and probably will and are) sending covert units across the border to spread hate and discontent…but thats not going to spark an all out war. And if you are slanting for something along the lines of a Russian ‘excuse’ (i.e. ‘Iran sent troops across the border forcing us to move 29 divisions into Terhan last night’) then again all I can say is…its not possible. The force to do that simply does not exist. Even if our Euro buddies were on board and foaming at the mouth to help out.

-XT

45

[QUOTE=elucidator]
If Iran sends troops over the border, will we resist with our troops? Would that be something other than war, simply because of the territory it takes place upon?
[/QUOTE]

The Iranians aren’t stupid enough to send troops into Iraq. As I said above, that would be suicidal-- not so much for Iran, but for the military itself. Why on earth would they march their military into Iraq just to have it blow to smithereens by our airforce? Here, America, destroy our military for us!! A conventional military we can wipe out almost with the snap of a finger. They know that.

A few undercover Revolutionary Guards? Maybe they could slip them across the border to mess with us a bit. That’s exactly what I was talking about earlier when I said they might up the ante of how they’re meddling in Iraq. That ain’t war by any reasonable definition.

46

[QUOTE=xtisme]
…No idea where you are going with this. Iran isn’t going to send any meaningful force across the border into Iraq as long as we are there. Thats crazy…
[/QUOTE]

Yes. Its crazy. Your scenario depends on sanity. Would that it were so.

47

[QUOTE=elucidator]
Yes. Its crazy. Your scenario depends on sanity. Would that it were so.
[/QUOTE]

There are less difficult and painful ways for the Iranian military to commit suicide than marching out into the hot desert to be completely wiped out by the most powerful military the world has ever known…and a military that was specificially designed and crafted to do exactly that job. It would be like taking a bunch of little league players from different teams and putting them up against a major league baseball team…at their home field. Maybe worse.

I don’t think sanity really comes into it…NO ONE is that crazy IMHO. Not to be that divorced from reality. No, if Iran wanted to fight the US they’d be fools not to look closely at Iraq and Afghanistan (and earlier examples like Vietnam) and fight us in ways where our military is not so effective. That would STILL be crazy (one has but to look at how it worked out for Saddam or the Taliban…regardless of how badly it worked out for us)…but it would be crazy with at least a glimmer of a chance to make a difference.

-XT

48

[QUOTE=elucidator]
Really? I didn’t know that. Have you shared this with The Leader? Read and write Farsi, do you? Have a commanding grasp of political realities in Iran? Facts and cites at your fingertips? Otherwise, one might think you were bluffing.
[/quote]

Actually, I do know quite a bit about the Iranian political system. I thought it was common knowledge around here about the president not being the real guy in charge. Cite.

I don’t have a soul.

49

[QUOTE=John Mace]
The blogger is talking about war, so if by “this horror” you mean actual war with Iran, you might want to reconsider that wager.

If Bush wants to drop a few bombs on Iran, he doesn’t need to whip up any support for that. He’ll just do it. But war… No, that’s just not even possible with how we’re bogged down in Iraq. In fact, it’s hard to imagine how we’re going to sustain Bush’s adventure in Iraq past next year.
[/QUOTE]

Erm…pardone moi, John, but if your Decider In Chief decides to drop a “few bombs on Iran” it’ll be hardly up to him to Decide what the Iranian’s response is going to be. And I need not remind you that Iran is no Iraq…and you couldn’t even handle the latter. Think you can take Iran lightly? Think again. They’ve been readying for this for at least the past five years.

Never mind the fact that neither the Ruskies nor the Chinese are going to sit idly-by while Jr gets his rocks (bombs) off…again.

Major shit-storm if he does. You can take that to the bank.

50

Tell you what, John. You quit saying I said things I didn’t, and I won’t ask you to prove it. So far, you’re zero for three.

51

Russia, China and India—Coalition to Offset U.S. International Dominance?

Like I said, while George & Co. dream of further conquests, the rest of the world is not sitting idly bye.

52

[QUOTE=John Mace]
The Iranians aren’t stupid enough to send troops into Iraq. As I said above, that would be suicidal-- not so much for Iran, but for the military itself. Why on earth would they march their military into Iraq just to have it blow to smithereens by our airforce? Here, America, destroy our military for us!! A conventional military we can wipe out almost with the snap of a finger. They know that.

A few undercover Revolutionary Guards? Maybe they could slip them across the border to mess with us a bit. That’s exactly what I was talking about earlier when I said they might up the ante of how they’re meddling in Iraq. That ain’t war by any reasonable definition.
[/QUOTE]

You’re making the same mistake your Dear Leader made prior to launching his crazed “greet us with flowers” Iraq invasion. And that is, ‘misunderstimating’ the intelligence/will of your foes.

Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice…can’t get fooled again!

53

XT, we’re having a disconnect here. I tell you that people don’t always behave sensibly and sanely, you answer that of course they do, otherwise it wouldn’t be sensible and sane.

It reminds me of a point in the revered Ms Tuchman’s book, or one of several that I’ve devoured. She mentions a man who wrote a book before WWI proving that, due to the economic interconnections between the powers, war was impossible, couldn’t happen, it would be insane.

But it did. War isn’t sane, compromise and accomodation are sane. That our human history is written with the blood of the innocent is not proof of sanity and reason, but its opposite.

I agree entirely that an attack by Iran would not make sense. I do not, for even a moment, take any comfort in that.

54

[QUOTE=RedFury]
Erm…pardone moi, John, but if your Decider In Chief decides to drop a “few bombs on Iran” it’ll be hardly up to him to Decide what the Iranian’s response is going to be.
[/quote]

I didn’t say otherwise.

Considering that I already said that in an earlier post, no you don’t.

Tell me exactly what you think Iran would do if we bombed their nuclear facilities.

What would they do?

If we invaded, yes. But that ain’t gonna happen. If we make a “surgical strike” against some alleged nuclear facility, not so much. Oh, there will be much gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands, sure. But so what? I’d be worried about a significant increase in the risk of terror attacks against the US, but not any military action by any of the players you mention

n.b.: I am not saying I endorse an attack on Iran. I most emphatically do not. I just don’t think there’s much they could do about a “surgical” air strike.

55

[QUOTE=elucidator]
XT, we’re having a disconnect here.
[/QUOTE]

Well, I certainly agree with this assertion at any rate.

[QUOTE=elucidator]
I tell you that people don’t always behave sensibly and sanely, you answer that of course they do, otherwise it wouldn’t be sensible and sane.
[/QUOTE]

Did I say people always act sensibly or sanely? Certainly not. There are degress here however. Our buddy, 'lil Kimmy over there in North Korea, is stark raving mad. Foaming at the mouth mad. Shoot on site like a rabid dog mad. And yet he has never attempted to simply toss his countries limited nukes at South Korea or the pod people way up north. Why? Well, because mad as he is, he doesn’t want to become radio active glass. Or, perhaps his loyal minions don’t want too. Same thing really.

The theocracy in Iran may be mad or sane…but they aren’t stupid enough to put their military in the field against the US. Not after examples like the first Gulf War…or even the Second (up until the time we got completely bogged down doing something that we don’t do very well). No nation on the earth, no matter how bonkers their great leader(s) may be is going to be stupid enough to try and fight the US military at our own game.

This is neither because I’m presuming they are sensible OR sane.

[QUOTE=elucidator]
I agree entirely that an attack by Iran would not make sense. I do not, for even a moment, take any comfort in that.
[/QUOTE]

Its not that it wouldn’t make sense. Of COURSE it wouldn’t make sense. Its just that, no matter how stark raving mad you might be, sticking your arm into a blender is probably not in it. Putting Iran’s military into the field would accomplish nothing except humiliation and defeat for Iran’s military. It would gain them nothing and lose them everything. Oh, we couldn’t invade them afterward…but it might very well spark a revolution in Iran, a disaster of that magnitude. Even if they are chewing the carpets no one is that stupid…let alone that crazy.

Even if the US tosses the tomahawks Iran would be better served taking the ‘outraged nation’ stance and simply continuing the covert war they are waging (IMHO) in Iraq and elsewhere. The very last thing they would ever do is try and fight the US head on.

-XT

56

First off, the “surgical” air strike is a bit of military fantasy. Civilians will die, period, full stop. Absent a declaration of war, that’s murder. And a strike on a nuclear facility? All that radioactive shit, turned to dust and scattered to the winds?

57

[QUOTE=elucidator]
Tell you what, John. You quit saying I said things I didn’t, and I won’t ask you to prove it. So far, you’re zero for three.
[/QUOTE]

Like I said, I got it wrong. You and I are both in agreement that the US isn’t going to invade Iran. End of story.

But I notice that you’ve been asked twice now to define what “this horror” is. Once, indirectly, by me and once directly by XT. You know, you could clear up this whole misunderstanding by just tell us what you mean. Until you do, don’t be surprised if people are going make an assumption as to what you mean, and maybe they’ll get it wrong, too. What with just having read The Guns of August and all… That was, IIRC, an actual war. You know, the kind you seem to want to distance yourself from now.

58

[QUOTE=xtisme]
…Even if they are chewing the carpets no one is that stupid…let alone that crazy…The very last thing they would ever do is try and fight the US head on…
[/QUOTE]

Why not? The Japanese did. Were they “crazy”? In a way, yes, they believed in their own exceptionalism, that their “samarai spirit” would overcome the material advantage enjoyed by the corrupt gai-jin Were they crazy?

Islamic fundamentalists believe that Allah hates us as much as they do, that supernatural forces will come to their aid. Is that crazy? Hugh Betcha! Are there Islamic fundamentalists in positions of power in Iran? I daresay.

On the other hand, is belligerance and provocation the sensible course of action when dealing with such dangerously deranged people? Well, it is if God is on your side…

59

[QUOTE=John Mace]
Like I said, I got it wrong. You and I are both in agreement that the US isn’t going to invade Iran. End of story…
[/quote]

Getting on my nerves with this shit, John. This is about the fourth time you’ve stuffed words into my mouth and extracted them as if it proves your point. If you can’t win honestly, at least lose with some dignity.

I notice I’ve asked you three times to prove that I said what you claim. Since when am I obliged and you get a pass? Nobody gave you an umpires whistle, best I can tell.

Pure snark. Meaningless, irrelevent, and masturbatory. I can’t imagine what you think you’ve proven with this.

60

John, as opposed to getting into a paragraph by paragraph war of attrition and futility, I’ll just remind you that Iran could fairly easy render the Persian Gulf void and null for mercantile purposes. In fact, I am sure such plans are already in place. Guess what that would/could do to the world’s oil market?

Secondly, I’d invite to read the following article from no less a lefty publication as The American Conservative.

Iran: Gulf War III?

You might find Iran’s retaliatory capabilities far more formidable than your “what could they possibly do?” current attitude.

Lastly, what would China and/Russia do? Sorry, have no inside scoop to give you as my Kremlin/Beijing connections have faded throughout the years. But are you sure you really want to find out? Hmmmm…methinks you’re smarter than that.

Know what? If 'nam and Iraq hasn’t shown you already, you might have the coolest deadliest toys around, but short of going nuclear, there’s nothing that’s undefeatable about your armed forces – especially outside of conventional warfare. They are certainly not constituted out of Supermen.