if you scroll up when you’re editing, there’s a Reason for Edit" box into which you can type your reason.
Gracias. Much obliged. Had me mystified.
Ahmadinejad is not wholly popular within his own nation. I doubt he’s much of a threat and anyone with a scrap of sense would have to agree. What leader - even an insane one - would attack the US with a WMD and risk retaliation in kind? And there’s no doubt who would lose.
Which was always the problem with this whole ‘Saddam has WMD’ scare; he’d never use them because the retaliation would have meant obliteration.
I can’t believe that people buy all this BS about ‘threats to the US’. It’s simply not anything to worry about. Yes, yes, 911 bla bla but that’s the point; America lost a few thousand lives and has taken or caused to be lost many times that.
After eight years studing world affairs and conflict, I came to the conclusion that international affairs is hypocrisy writ large (‘in good faith’ - please tell me you don’t think that’s the order of business) accompanied by bouts of sabre-rattling to look good at home. Minor nations (Israel, Syria) will go to war but nobody will take on the US or NATO and survive to tell the tale. And they’re not so stupid that they don’t know that.
Although I have no dog in this fight, I invite some of you to check out this thread about a hypothetical war between the US and China, post 10 in particular. It has some interesting links. If the information there is wrong, it would be interesting to get the straight dope.
I don’t know why everyone is jumping on Oakminster. He clearly said it’d be insane and crazy to do but we could bomb the hell out of Iran if we wanted. Of course we could. We couldn’t occupy it but we could certainly raze it.
If we wanted to we could bomb every city in Iraq until there’s nothing but rubble. This would result in the death of about 10 or 15 million people but there’d be nothing but our moral sense (and the global reaction) stopping us. We could do the same to Iran. Or France. Or any country, really. Our airforce is practically invincible.
Airpower does not win wars. Boots on the ground is what wins wars. Successful iron-hand occupation is what wins wars. If all we’re talking about is a bunch of bombing raids, sure, we could do that, but to what end? If you start a war you had better be prepared to finish it, and we cannot do that right now by any means in Iran.
And you honestly think the rest of the world is going to sit idly-by while you engage in an unprovoked holocaust? If so, my belief in the inner goodness/decency of most human beings is just as whimsical as those who believe a human being can come back to life after being dead for three days.
PS-France has NUKES in case you’d forgotten. So your attack best be pretty through, otherwise they’ll be plenty of ICBMs coming your way as well. Can’t imagine what a “winner” would look like after a nuclear war. But hey! Congrats on that “invincible” air force of yours. Lots of good it did in 'nam…or Iraq for that matter.
Jebus! What an unbelievable militaristic society you’ve become! Have a problem with a mosquito? Use a sledgehammer.
Anyhow, you bet your ass “global reaction” is a mighty deterrent to your global ambitions. Back to MAD I guess.
With all due, of course you can. You can render your opponent helpless. Destroy water treatment, electricity, roads, ports. Render the people destitute and starving. Destroy military depots and ammunition, render the roads impassable.
If the enemy is helpless, whether or not you occupy his capitol is moot. And this doesn’t even bring in the Mother of all Trump Cards, the thermonuke.
We can’t change their minds, but we can kill them.
You’ve got a baseline problem there.
And do you honestly think you – the US of A – can butcher 70 million human beings and get away with it?
Because as far as I know, every empire in history has been toppled and/or replaced by yet another, more powerful one. How’s current American supremacy supposed to maintain its global hemogeny? PNAC? Tell me how that’s been working out for you.
Afraid we’re headed that way…and gathering speed towards it.
Another way to put it is that their nutbar is held in closer check than ours. He just says crazy shit, and ours does them.
The other, hitherto-unmentioned problem with invading Iran is that I would not bet that the rest of the world would sit on the sidelines munching salted peanuts and placing bets.
I’m not saying the UK would rush to deploy troops and resources on behalf of Iran and against the US, but the largest “Coalition of the Willing” might be agin’ us rather than for us. And that’s not even taking into account the behaviors of people as it might exist apart from the official actions of their government.
Make up a list of people & nations most likely to figure there’s on our “You’re Next, Buddy” list were we to invade Iran:
Iran, Syria, and North Korea all on the “to do” list and less than two years left to do it. W must be in quite the state of panic these days.
Speaking of which, I saw a bumper sticker on the way to work today that I really liked. It had the alphabet, A-Z, except there was a red circle with a slash through it where the W should go. 
:eek:
that’s one big ass bumper sticker!
Actually no. It was quite small and discrete, which was partially why I liked it. The letters were in two rows. The top with 13 and the bottom with 12 and the circle with the slash. If you think about it, that’s less letters than those tacky “My son is…” stickers or most others really.
It occurs to me that there might have been a joke in that post too… What’s that? I can’t hear you over that whooshing sound…
huh. for some reason, I can’t simply put 
into the post - it automatically changes to :d
anyhow, yes, by now the contrails are fading, though.
d
Pbthththththththththt
Nice trick, thanks.
My dad can beat up your dad.