There’s no way the Iranians have the balls to nuke the US.
Period. We could, and would, just carpet nuke them to green glass, and dare the rest of the world to say shit about it. No more Iran. Instead, a lovely new country called “Piss off America, and this is what you get”. Never mind civilians, they wouldn’t even have bacteria left.
OTOH, they MIGHT be stupid enough to nuke Israel.
That would be a huge mistake, because Israel would ALSO carpet-nuke them. This is a more worrisome scenario, because the Pakistanis might actually jump into the whole thing, and THEY have nukes too. It could get real ugly, real fast. The entire Arab world might be green glass, or close to it, and certainly unlivable for many years after.
Unless they had somehow secured their nuclear arsenal in such a way that a nuclear response was the only way to guarantee no further attacks, I seriously doubt nuking a country that could be reasonably easily occupied by conventional forces would ever be considered. In this day and age, we fight wars against regimes, not whole populations.
Can you imagine what would happen to the local Iranian population if the angry, grief-stricken, well-armed sons/brothers/husbands/fathers of millions of dead Americans were the ones doing the occupying?
Ouch.
Because you know those fucking Iranians haven’t got the good sense to take it quietly.
Garbage. We weren’t trying to help anyone, we conquered them and tried to turn them into a Republican free market fantasy while stealing their oil and randomly murdering & torturing the populace. And there were hundred of massacres; many much larger. The entire war was just an exercise in mass murder.
As if we’d care.
And? At no point did I say that the leadership of Iran were nice people. And I doubt that they would have done “far, far worse” to Iraq; about the only thing worse that they could have done than what we did would have been an outright genocide campaign of Iraq. They would have gone far out of their way and invested immense resources in being as evil as possible to match us.
Beyond that, I think the OP showed a rather dramatic overestimation of Iran’s capabilities by suggesting that if they got a bomb they could launch one at New York.
It would be horribly difficult to occupy them. Look at the problems we have with Iraq; they are not only smaller than Iran, but the Iranians have been preparing for just such a guerrilla war. They know they can’t beat us in an open fight and are preparing for the likely eventuality of us trying to conquer them. And if they did have nukes, they could use them on any army we send to invade them. A much more likely use for them than nuking some city.
MAYBE they could sneak one onto a plane that would get into New York airspace. MAYBE. It would take some epic sneaking. That is one huge MAYBE.
I’m not even sure they’re stupid enough to nuke Israel, though. It would be immediate suicide, that’s just a fact. Israel would take great pleasure in nuking civilian targets, especially ones where high government leaders might be.
American soldiers seemed to do a reasonably good job separating the regimes from the population in their minds during the post-war occupation of Japan and Germany.
Actually occupying Iraq was a snap, it was maintaining the occupation where things became troublesome. Iran is somewhat more capable of repelling an invasion, but still couldn’t actually keep US forces out of their country. They undoubtedly could resist the actual occupation as much or more than Iraq did, but a long-term occupation wouldn’t be necessary. Just invade, remove whoever is deemed responsible for the attack, forcibly dismantle the military and WMD production capability and leave. You know, kind of like the war Bush and co. were supposedly selling us in Iraq, instead of the grandiose scheme they actually had in mind.
Japan and Germany killed almost no American civilians.
An unprovoked nuke hit on a population center is a bit different than the Pearl Harbor attack, which was on a military base that the Japanese considered to be in ‘disputed’ territory. (disputed means they wanted it, and it was closer to Japan than the US)
Also, the occupation of Japan happened 4 years after Pearl Harbor, and after tens of thousands of lives had been lost on both sides. At that point, it was simply a war. Also, the Japanese had given up by that point. There was no real resistance.
If Iran dropped a nuke on the US, soldiers would be there just a few weeks after their loved ones had been killed. The attack would have been unprovoked, and there’d be vigorous, STUPID resistance.
It’d be the Rodney King beatdown, hundreds of thousands of times over.
The U.S. and other nuclear capable countries still follow the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) policy to the best of my knowledge. That means that if anyone launches or detonates a nuclear warhead against you, the only responsible response is a full and disproportionate retaliatory response up to and including destruction of all major military installations, urban centers, and industrial capability with massive loss of civilian lives.
For Iran, that would be more like an Assured Destruction policy on their side but it is the only responsible response for the long-term future of humanity. It doesn’t matter what Europe thinks about it anymore than we care what they think is the hot economic plan of the day. It is just responsible game theory and has to be carried out no matter what.
You can’t have any nations now or in the future that think they can use nuclear weapons against an enemy offensively with less than total destruction and tens of millions of their own civilians dead. That is the reality of dealing with a world where many nations have nuclear capability and the only way to keep it stable for the most people.
Well, if you say so, but I give us a little more credit. I’m sure you’ll say it’s a completely different situation, but FWIW there weren’t any indiscriminate reprisals against Afghan civilians for 9/11 either.
Afghan civilians didn’t elect Osama bin Laden, or tolerate him ruling them. He ruled nothing. Most of them knew nothing about him, AFAIK.
The Taliban didn’t commit 9/11. For that matter, I think they’re probably sorry it happened. Not because they love the US, but because it got them kicked out of the country, mostly, for about 10 years.
I don’t believe for an instant that Iran would launch an unprovoked nuclear attack. But let’s go with the hypothetical.
Even if the American people would settle for that, not only the US government wouldn’t, but many other countries wouldn’t, either. If Iran is is nuking New-York today out of the blues, it could be Tel-Aviv, Paris, London, Ryad, whatever, tomorrow. Even countries usually more acceptive of Iran’s stance, like Russia, would be on board.There’s absolutely no way Iran could conceivably get away with this.
The first issue would obviously be the risk of Iran launching another nuclear attack. So the first move would obviously be to make sure that any possible lauching capability is immediately anhililated. If the best, quickest way to do that is nuclear weapons, then they would probably be launched before the “american public” even heard of the initial attack. And I strongly suspect the surest response would indeed be nuclear weapons.
After that initial phase (that is when everybody is convinced that there’s no way Iran could still have any nuclear weapons) then people would sit down to discuss what the best way to win the subsequent and unavoidable war. Whether or not nuclear weapons would be used again during this war I wouldn’t know. But regarding the definition of “winning”, it would be most probably a WWII-like “unconditional surrender” with occupation to make sure that the current power structure is totally eliminated along with any supporting organization and that there isn’t any risk that power could be again seized by an agressive faction.
Regarding a retaliatory strike (for instance nuking Teheran) : there would probably be not much real military reason to do such a thing. However, obviously, the call for blood in the initially targeted country could lead to it happening. Also, it might be done solely to make sure that nobody will doubt that the targeted country would retaliate in kind if it were to happen again.
ETA : People might also want to make of Iran a big, really bad example so that any other country envisioning a similar action in the future would think very hard about it.