Iran.

[piece-it pete]

What do we do?

THIS is where using WMD as our sole reason to take out Saddam bites us on the butt. Iran is not only pursuing nukes but wiping our face in it. No renegade wannabe Hitler like Saddam, the ruling theocracy of Iran is much closer to the radical Islamicists than he ever was.

Do we:

Do nothing, and;
-hope (pretend?) that Europe can handle it?
-hope (?) that the UN will handle it?
-who cares?

have the public and "secret" nuke sites taken out by bombardment; by
-ourselves?
-a proxy (Turkey, Isreal, etc.) (Iraq?!)

Ground invasion?

Or are there any suggestions?

Pete

[mystic]

What do we do?

THIS is where using WMD as our sole reason to take out Saddam bites us on the butt. Iran is not only pursuing nukes but wiping our face in it. No renegade wannabe Hitler like Saddam, the ruling theocracy of Iran is much closer to the radical Islamicists than he ever was.

Do we:

Do nothing, and;
-hope (pretend?) that Europe can handle it?
-hope (?) that the UN will handle it?
-who cares?

have the public and "secret" nuke sites taken out by bombardment; by
-ourselves?
-a proxy (Turkey, Isreal, etc.) (Iraq?!)

Ground invasion?

Or are there any suggestions?

Pete

Bombing the nuke sites seems like the obvious answer, but there could be some downside to this that I haven't considered. I doubt that if Iran had nukes, the leadership would hand them out to terrorists, but the risk of terrorists getting nukes might be greater.

[piece-it pete]

I agree with you. I think the biggest downside is having to bomb at all - and look how Saddam used civilians as sheilds, I could see the Iranian gov't building schools or hospitals over the underground sites.

It would be a good thing if we could use a proxy, if Turkey would do it (I doubt it) that would be good, no way Israel. Best case IMO would be France, that would be a GREAT show of western will (and scare the pants off Syria and N. Korea) but just don't think that's gonna fly.

Pete

[Justlisten2]

What do we do?

THIS is where using WMD as our sole reason to take out Saddam bites us on the butt. Iran is not only pursuing nukes but wiping our face in it. No renegade wannabe Hitler like Saddam, the ruling theocracy of Iran is much closer to the radical Islamicists than he ever was.

Do we:

Do nothing, and;
-hope (pretend?) that Europe can handle it?
-hope (?) that the UN will handle it?
-who cares?

have the public and "secret" nuke sites taken out by bombardment; by
-ourselves?
-a proxy (Turkey, Isreal, etc.) (Iraq?!)

Ground invasion?

Or are there any suggestions?

Pete


It looks like it's time to call TEAM AMERICA---WORLD POLICE!!!!


http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/paramount_pictures/team_america__world_police/smokingparis.jpg

[kexodusc]

This is where our egos get the better of us. Iran is NOT Iraq. They have serious capabilities to fight back during any invasion plans we could afford. This leaves us with the military actions we can't afford. Sure, we could win a confrontation, but not without getting our noses bloodied and setting the economy back in a big way.

I'm not really in favour of flexing our muscles only to send our economy, our standard of living and everything great about America into a tailspin because another country is making the same weapons we already have.

Like you said Pete, this is where we see the lying hipocracy that has been our foreign policy exposed. One short sighted mistake after another. Iran and N. Korea were always far bigger threats than Iraq, but we don't dare spend trillions of dollars in a war on their soil...we just can't afford it. The voters just won't support it. Too expensive.
What's worse, these lunatic leaders would love nothing better than to sacrifice their populations just take a few trillion dollars out of our economy and thereby significantly lowering our standard of living.
If it costs that much just to disarm these countries, then no thanks. America wouldn't be America anymore.
Bet we're wishing we didn't tick off most of our allies now.

You know these countries are just doing all this to make life difficult politically and economically. Ya know what? It's kind of working.

[piece-it pete]

Howdy Kex!

I don't believe this is a case of flexing our muscles, many of these folks don't want to hurt us, they want to destroy us, us being anything that stands in the way of rebuilding the glorious Islamic Caliphate. Sharia law, anyone?

From a commentary on "Knights Under the Prophet's Banner":

Zawahiri said jihadis should not lose sight of the ultimate goal - the creation of an Islamic state in the heart of the Muslim world, notably in Egypt, as a base from which to "lead the Islamic world in a jihad against the West" and recreate the Caliphate.

_________________________________

So far we have left the Iran issue to Europe. It is possible they will do something this time. I earnestly hope so, as it seems much more likely that Paris or Rome gets the mushroom cloud than a US city (logistics).

Pete

[kexodusc]

Good point Pete....we've got enough problems at home I think to worry about before giving Iran a 2nd thought. China and N. Korea scare the hell out of me. Irans just a minor annoyance.
Maybe we should just leave it to Europe. In the even something terrible happened, and a country was nuked (and only then) we would have clear evidence of capability and intent. Then the world could and would gang up on them and force disarmament.

It's a slippery slope. Pre-emptive action against countries that don't like us is a bad precedent. There's probably 50 of them out there with some type of WMD's. Can't fight em all at once.

Man, we need to start spending more money on R&D...the sooner we got off our oil addiction, the sooner these problems will go away.

[piece-it pete]

One of those problems is rebuilding the WTC and spending untold billions on homeland security. The burial costs have already been paid.

We have to wait for a city to be vaporized before we act? I am currently in the middle of "The rise and fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer (one of the best ww2 books I've read). The west handed Hitler Austria and shamefully Czechoslovakia while giving Hilter the time he needed to build.

This current problem isn't the same - although in many ways potentially worse - my point is those things were done in the name of peace. Our current issues aren't going away.

I fully support the development of nuclear power plants.

Pete

[Justlisten2]

One of those problems is rebuilding the WTC and spending untold billions on homeland security. The burial costs have already been paid.

We have to wait for a city to be vaporized before we act? I am currently in the middle of "The rise and fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer (one of the best ww2 books I've read). The west handed Hitler Austria and shamefully Czechoslovakia while giving Hilter the time he needed to build.

This current problem isn't the same - although in many ways potentially worse - my point is those things were done in the name of peace. Our current issues aren't going away.

I fully support the development of nuclear power plants.

Pete

You seem to be a gung-ho warmongerer, just out of curiosity, why don't you and your family enlist for the cause.
I've noticed all of the sabre-rattlers want to fight, without any actual personal involvement.
I'll know the cause is just when Dubya's girls are on the front line, leading the Senators children into the battle, 'til then, this is just a big distraction.

Confucius say: Maybe if you stop poking the hornets nest with a stick, you'll avoid getting stung. :D

[piece-it pete]

I volunteered for Desert Storm. I considered it my duty. Like all supporters of our current President, I want to kill babies and loot other countries. :p .

Warmonger? I was against the action in Somolia and Serbia. I have no problem shooting people aiming a gun at me while saying they'll kill us all - and have proved their intention of doing so.

Boogeymen? Yes, history is REPLETE with boogeymen. Real ones, like our current enemy. In the Caliphate you have two choices: Accept Mohammed, with Sharia law, or have your head cut off. Slavery, rule by Imams, it's just a blast.

No I do not believe the US will be part of a foreign empire anytime into the foreseeable future. We are too well armed. But, you think the price of gas is bad now...

and the fact is poor people worldwide will die by the millions if these people in the ME, those warmongering boogeymen, get their way, not just by beheading and torture but by the price of shipping and oil-based commodities. Bluntly: if we (the 1st world) get poor the current poor will starve.

On the plus side, AIDS will no longer be their biggest concern.

Anyway an invasion of Iran is extremely unlikely. They are playing us for saps, though (particularly Europe, right now). The stakes are higher than prestige.

Pete

[Justlisten2]

The real boogeyman are the ones after world domination. In the end, all attempts have fallen apart. Be it Alexander the Great, the Roman Empire, the British Empire, Napoleon, or Hitler. One would hope that the Reagan/Bush America would learn from the past and realize that the attempt for world domination is the only thing that can bring the American Empire to it's knees as well. Eventually the Giant grows tired from putting out fires all over the globe, and grows too weak at home, and his own home crashes in on him.
We should learn from other civilizations, and strenghten our home instead of flexing our muscles all over the world. All we are doing now is entrenching the next generation of Ayatollah Khomeni's, Bin Laden's, and Hussein's. They will continue to fight the oppression as long as it exists. No country enjoys being occupied. I know we didn't enjoy the British occupation of America. We fought it any way we could, even if our fight was considered 'terroristic' by the rules of engagement of the times.

Robert McNamara once said that the only difference between heros and war criminals was winning and losing.

[piece-it pete]

JL,

I understand your position. As I have said before, my big concern is that we will become too jingoistic.

We walked away from the ME. Well, no, Bush Sr. did "invade" Kuwait. Now Kuwait is a vassal state of the US?

Heck Clinton bent over backwards trying to bring resolution to the Palestinian problem. We know now the plans for 9-11 were being laid while that was going on. Maybe we should have been flexing our muscles then.

Fact is, the mullahs have been painting us as weak (with good cause) and blaming the ruination they caused their own people as our fault. Classic, like Hitler blaming the Jews.

The empires you mentioned. Any one of them would have invaded whatever country they thought they could and RULED it. Similar?

Yes, in one way. Our success as a nation. The current worldwide golden age is the direct result of our actions over the past many decades.

The UN was our creation. We saved Europe - twice. Then rebuilt their countries (including Japan and the offer to the USSR). Then stopped the red menace. Now we're first in fighting radical Islam, a threat to ALL civilized societies.

Our "price"? Do business with us. Don't blow down our buildings.

Countries all over the world emulate our political system. Personal freedom and prosperity are our hallmark.

We go to take out a clear enemy - the Talibans' Afganistan. We drop food first. I'm SURE the Islamicists would do that, of course.

If we are truly an Empire then the roots go back far, far past Reagan and would have to include every President from the second Roosevelt.

Bin Laden is our creation? Saddam? These people would not exist except for us? We must be far more powerful than I thought. Were'd bad guys come from before the US?

We were never occupied by Great Britian until the war of 1812. We never targeted civilians. Suicide bombing?!

I think the central issue is, some believe we can disengage and these problems will go away. Time and again, from the torpedos that brought us into ww1, Pearl Harbor, and now 9-11 those problems if ignored will come crashing through the door. With the spread of nukes the threat is much much larger.

No one here wants these problems. Maybe if we just sit down and talk to these folks, they'll play nice?

Pete

[Justlisten2]

Our "price"? Do business with us. Pete


More like 'Do business for us.'



Bin Laden is our creation? Saddam? These people would not exist except for us? We must be far more powerful than I thought. Were'd bad guys come from before the US?Pete

We supplied Bin Laden with weapons to help Afghanistan fight Russia when they were our enemy. We supplied Hussien his weapons when Iran was our enemy. We tend to 'befriend' countries who are not our friends to stand down while we beat up the bad country du jour. All the while, they are building a festering hatred. Like we did with Pakistan in our invasion of Iraq. We absolve their national debt, so they would stand down. The Pakistani's hated their own government for 'selling out' to the Evil Empire. No hatred festering there, huh? Then the festering comes back to bite us in the butt. Surprise!



We were never occupied by Great Britian until the war of 1812. We never targeted civilians. Suicide bombing?!Pete


I didn't say we targeted civilians in the Revolutionary War, hell, we were fighting in our own country. I said that we used terroristic methods according to the approved rules of engagement of that time. The Brits were kicking our asses fighting by standard rules of engagement, soldiers lined up and walking straight at each other in an open field. We discovered much more success with the hidden attacks, like a bunch of savages. My point is that when the undermanned opponent is fighting the stronger establishment, they have to be creative and change the current rules of engagement for any possibility of success.
BTW, we have targeted and killed many civilians, especially in Japan in WW II during the fire bomb raids. We were killing as many as 100,000 a night with our night fire bombing of cities like Tokyo.



I think the central issue is, some believe we can disengage and these problems will go away. Time and again, from the torpedos that brought us into ww1, Pearl Harbor, and now 9-11 those problems if ignored will come crashing through the door. With the spread of nukes the threat is much much larger.Pete

I'm not for a weak America, I just think that decades of stirring the hornets nest hasn't worked, maybe we try a different approach. Strengthen our internal defenses. Focus on Intelligence and warnings could have prevented 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. Stop invading other counties and inserting 'puppet' leaders, like The Shah in Iran, or the current process in Iraq.
You just might find out that if you stop attacking others, they might leave you alone. Ask Switzerland. I believe 9/11 was in retaliation for Bush Sr's war. We killed 300,000 Iraqi's, many more of them civilian than the few that died in the 9/11 attacks.



No one here wants these problems. Maybe if we just sit down and talk to these folks, they'll play nice?

Pete

I don't want to sit down and talk with them, I just want to ignore them and let them keep killing each other. There is enough hatred between all the countries in the ME, that we don't need to unite them by giving them a common enemy. We only got pulled into this as a supporter of Israel, let them fend for themselves. They'll all kill each other within 10 years. That's the way they are. I know we only keep stirring the pots in Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, the ME just to feed our biggest business, Defense. When you constantly need to keep stimulating you economy with war, you need a good marketing department to keep the people believing that all the fighting is necessary.

Hussein the next Hitler.......ROTFLMAO...that was brilliant marketing. ;)

[piece-it pete]

JL,

How do we keep an effective intellegence program if we disengage? What then is the carrot and/or stick?

If we vacate the superpower position, who fills the void? Will this be a good thing for us?

Before our entry into ww2 the isolationist Republicans were derisively called "Know-Nothings" by the Democrats (even though Roosevelt ran on an anti-war platform). Further events proved the Dems right.

Pete

[Justlisten2]

JL,

How do we keep an effective intellegence program if we disengage? What then is the carrot and/or stick?Pete

We had the intelligence, we just ignored it. You don't need to have troops on the ground to know what's going on in a country. The Army/Navy is the arms and legs, the eyes and brain (CIA/FBI) can operate without the arms and legs moving, especially in this day and age of sattelite reconnisance.



If we vacate the superpower position, who fills the void? Will this be a good thing for us?
Pete

Why does there have to be a superpower? Why does there have to be a schoolyard bully?
If we focus on our intelligence programs and Homeland security with the funds we've saved from spending on military action, no one can or will mess with us. If they do, we need to hit the target, which was Al Queda, not Iraq. No sense beating up someone who's just standing next to the one that hit us, just because we can't catch the one that hit us. What happened to Bin Laden??? Why is all the $$$ and time spent on Iraq? Just cleaning up daddy's business? Why not spend the $$$ on intelligence to find the real villian.

I would like to think that the world does not need a superpower. That's what makes so many resent us in the first place. They wonder who the hell we think we are telling them how to live.

[piece-it pete]

I'm talking about the CIA too. But without other gov'ts blessing we will only go so far - we NEED their info. If we're not a player, the only thing we'll be able to do is pay them. That usually takes the form of foriegn aid - just slightly less popular than deploying troops.

Even then, paying didn't get us the info most ME countries are sharing with us now, the threat of force did (after 9-11, they did tremble with fear, for good reason). Carrot, and stick.

There will be superpowers, be it us, or someone else. Maybe not as big, at first.

China would LOVE us to throw in the towel. I doubt if this would be to anyones' benifit (except them).

JL, I don't like it to be this way. It just is, and we're not doing right by ourselves and our family, friends and neighbors if we don't deal with it squarely.

Pete

[Justlisten2]

Hey Pete,

Not really anywhere else to go from here.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Is the glass half full or half empty?

Are they attacking us because we won't leave them alone, or are we not leaving them alone because they're attacking us?

Once you start down the slippery slope, it's very hard to stop.
Besides.....the Cheif's of Staff are having so much fun, why should they stop playing?
I would just love to see politician's families going over to war, then I might believe the cause is just.
(Not Bush style service either, REAL duty) ;)

John

[piece-it pete]

JL, agreed, it's the differences that make this country work, it's nice we can be civil about it :yes: .

Real duty, like Clintons'? :D

Pete