Are we going to "War" with Iran?

[redneck13]

:evilgrin: :!: I'd like to hear some views from other's to this topic. I think if King George will do whatever it takes to go after Iran. I think it's been on his agenda long before Iraq. I think he'll do as he did Iraq. Maybe though he'd better take notice of the fact that Iran has some good Military people. Just wanting to see what other's think, with the latest "defiant" words coming out of Iran, and the new threat of N. Korean missle's that can reach Europe. SF

[OLE SARG]

Iran is thumbing their nose at the U. S. and the U. N. ( the UN is the biggest joke in the U. S. since we support all of the foreign *******s who come there and don't pay their parking tickets). The U. N. will slap Iran on the wrist with the warning of "if you don't comply we will slap your wrist again!!!!!!!!!!" If anything happens it will fall on the back of the U. S. to do something (militarily and financely).

SEMPER FI,

[junker316]

This is my belief. GWB used everything he could to gain revenge against Iraq, Saddam Hussein, for the attempted assination against his father. As was stated on the News just after the attempt was done. He was a Senator then but his mouth flew open stating that he would " get even woith Saddam no matter how long it took and what he had to do ". Iran has proobably been on a back burner of his for a while. Knowing that Iraq and Iran has been producing Terrorists in nothing new. Knowing that Iran has been going after NUCLEAR Power is also nothing new. Knowing that Iran and the rest of the Muslum Nations want to destrory Isreal is nothing new. Iran actually having Nukes...to the public is something new but probably not to GWB and our government. Them using them to " rid the world of the evil against the Muslum world " is nothing new. So what would GWB use to gain acceptence for a fore going war against terror when Iran has done nothing really to the US directly? Is there some Intel that has not been braodcasted to the public to also gain his credituals? Is there money involved for the government to gain and fill thier pockets with? No. But the thought of taking out the Muslum world's two largest Armies and putting in puppet governments that are " Democratic " in nature and subserveant to the US in everything else would defintely gain GWB more numbers in the polls. But also GWB isn't so stupid as to push the limits of the US military so thin. He willl have to wait until Iraq is a better foot hold and agrees to allow it to be used for Base operations against Iran. Maybe even since Iraq and Iran hate each, Iraq would even be grateful enough to join in the War against Iran to help and show other Muslum nations how to become Democratic. Of course there rwill be more lies and deceit and many more pockets being filled with Blood money. Not the miliraty fighting men and women but the Governments.

[Hocker]

who gives a rats ass about iran ? I dont F'n care about sand nuggets .
I think Isreal will smoke'm

[BOOGIEMAN44]

I think Isreal will smoke'm

HOCKER, I DO THINK YOUR RIGHT ON THIS ONE, ISREAL WILL NOT STAND BY ON THE SIDELINE FOREVER... JUST MY THOUGHT.

[junker316]

who gives a rats ass about iran ? I dont F'n care about sand nuggets .
I think Isreal will smoke'm
Hocker

You may want to rethink that. If Iran gains Nukes and uses them to desolate Isreali nation then Isreal won't have an Army to defend itself. Them " Sand Nuggets " as you call them will colaborate and wipe out Isreal before it can rebuild itself. Then the U.S.A. will be over there against more than just one Country of Blind extremists ready to die. There will be millions of them against a few hundred thousand of us. Iran won't stop use of thier Nukes on just Isreal either. They will use them against any force that threatens them or thier way of life in a superior Jihad fashion. The few thousend will soon be a few hundred of us to fight off an entire region of Muslum extremists number in the millions. Isreal sits centered in between Muslum Nations that hate them. The only reason they are still around is because of the " Back Up " they have from countries like England, America, and even Canada. Other than that they would have been wiped out years ago when the Muslum Nation gathered together and tried to destroy them. Read up on your history. I believe it was in the late 60s early 70s when the event happened and the U.S. backed Isreal and sent them supplies and weapons to defend themselves while England and Canada sent forces to support them. As well and other Countries that backed Isreal. Syria and Iran are just two of trhe biggest Nations that want Isreal gone. There is still Jordan, Palestine, Eygpt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and the rest of the Muslum Nations that wish Isreal wasn't there.

[Hocker]

Hocker

You may want to rethink that. If Iran gains Nukes and uses them to desolate Isreali nation then Isreal won't have an Army to defend itself. Them " Sand Nuggets " as you call them will colaborate and wipe out Isreal before it can rebuild itself. Then the U.S.A. will be over there against more than just one Country of Blind extremists ready to die. There will be millions of them against a few hundred thousand of us. Iran won't stop use of thier Nukes on just Isreal either. They will use them against any force that threatens them or thier way of life in a superior Jihad fashion. The few thousend will soon be a few hundred of us to fight off an entire region of Muslum extremists number in the millions. Isreal sits centered in between Muslum Nations that hate them. The only reason they are still around is because of the " Back Up " they have from countries like England, America, and even Canada. Other than that they would have been wiped out years ago when the Muslum Nation gathered together and tried to destroy them. Read up on your history. I believe it was in the late 60s early 70s when the event happened and the U.S. backed Isreal and sent them supplies and weapons to defend themselves while England and Canada sent forces to support them. As well and other Countries that backed Isreal. Syria and Iran are just two of trhe biggest Nations that want Isreal gone. There is still Jordan, Palestine, Eygpt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and the rest of the Muslum Nations that wish Isreal wasn't there.
Uhh . I do know my history it was the yom kipper war of 1966 and the war in 1948 before that. The later war (1948) the jews were heavily armed by the UN and trained I believe. It was quick and decisive . In 1966 I believe it was the egyptians and syrians attacked Isreal (I could be wrong) the Isrealites whooped thier ass in 6 days and did you know out of 75 dragon missle anti tank crews they had 74 kills and all 75 anti tank crews were killed (wire guided sucks ole school).
The displaced jews had no real home after ww2 , and my theory is that the U.N knew by putting hated zionist in the middle of sand nugget country it would balance the powers Imy guess the nuggets would be to involved hating the jews then anyone else imo

[John Mayotte]

I think we will go to war with Iran in the near future, as well. Iran's leader, whazziz name "camel-*ucker", poses just a great, if not greater, threat as North Korea does. His overzealous, jihadist statements have proven that fact, over and over again, and by him acquiring nuclear technology, he has already added more instability to an unstable region. He has even threatened to export that technology to other nations who shouldn't have them. Last I heard was Sudan, should the UN (Waste of time and real-estate), impose santions on Iran.

So I believe that it will be inevitable that we do go to war with Iran... I just think we shouldn't go nuke...We have enough conventional weaponry to level out Iran without the use of "Schrooms".


Semper Fi


John :flag:

[Night Jump]

Afghanistan received needed attention because Osama bin Laden took refuge there and the country could not (would not) muster its resources to deal with him due to Taliban support. That issue is being dealt with, and it's a work in progress, but it appears to be going well and native Afghan forces are showing considerable progress in managing their affairs with U.S. military advisory guidance.
Iraq had blatantly defied the conditions of the treaty of 1991 and the UN does not have the resolve or the resources to deal with it. Saddam Hussein "edited" his country's role in Kuwait and the conditions under which the war ended to tell his people, through government-controlled media, that Iraq won the war and the very proof of it was that the U.S. was held at bay and afraid to deal with Iraq. If you were Iraqi, who would you believe.
If you were German and Hitler told you that you were a member of the "master race", you'd believe it because it fueled nationalist pride to do so.
When Iraq obtained Scud missiles with improved performance from North Korea that could reach Israel with their payload, was there any doubt that Hussein would use them against Israel? And when Israel launched a retaliatory strike, is there any doubt that the Islamic nations surrounding Israel would not have banded together in a costly attempt to crush Israel by military force? And the U.S., as an ally of Israel, would come to Israel's aid as another infidel nation against a unified coalition of Islamic jihad.
What do we havenow? Afghanistan cannot contribute to that effort. Iraq is unable to initiate the strike. In other words, the effort is now fragmented and there is a powerful U.S. military presence already in the area. To further fragment any serious consideration of such an effort, Iran would likely be the next to be economically or militarily destabilized.
Is Iran next? I would say "Yes", if current strategies or activities develop as they have, because Iran is building a nuclear capability and is volatile enough to use it to shatter the tenuous situation in the Middle East. For the present, we are dependent on Middle Eastern oil, and other Arab nations will not starve the cow that provides rich milk. The palaces in these nations were built primarily with funds generated by the U.S. thirst for oil.
China is emerging as an oil market. China's auto industry is blossoming and so is the industrial development and requirement for fuel. Don't expect gas prices to drop significantly because we are already competing with China for available oil. The prices will rise and fall, numbing us to the memory of old prices in the relief that the highest prices cyclically ease, but they wll not drop to the levels we previously considered acceptable. We're not the only large bidder in the game now.
Is Iran next? I think so. I have no idea what the timing or the means may be, but I believe Iran (an avowed enemy of the U.S. since Shah Reza Pahlavi was ousted) will be the focus of an effort to change its government and its hostile intent in the area. Whether that happens in the next administration or not, how it may be conducted or managed is beyond me.

[hrscowboy]

Well gentlemen i guess i need to put my 2 cents in, First of all I dont give a rats behind about afganistan,iraq,syria or iran. These are people that have shown in the past and even now they want the American people dead and gone.. Japan was the same way until a certain Commander in chief put the big bomb right up there arses and look what happened.. The bottom line these terriosts drew first blood on American soil, American Property, and American Human beings, They have been doing it for years and as long as we Americans let them, there going to keep on doing it.. When are The American people going to say enough is enough and turn to our present Commander of chief and say, the talking is over now Mr President turn the Devil Dogs loose with everything they have.. Screw the liberials and the crybabys and Kick the dog crap out of them like we did in Japan, And tell any other country that goes crying to the U.N. that if you get envolved there going to be next to feel the wrath of the American People. The Buttom line should be if you harm an American or you strike on American Soil or Property you better be ready to pay the ultimate price. No more diplomatic bull crap talking. The only thing they are going to see or hear is a big boom and a mushroom cloud who ever survives...

[Hocker]

Well gentlemen i guess i need to put my 2 cents in, First of all I dont give a rats behind about afganistan,iraq,syria or iran. These are people that have shown in the past and even now they want the American people dead and gone.. Japan was the same way until a certain Commander in chief put the big bomb right up there arses and look what happened.. The bottom line these terriosts drew first blood on American soil, American Property, and American Human beings, They have been doing it for years and as long as we Americans let them, there going to keep on doing it.. When are The American people going to say enough is enough and turn to our present Commander of chief and say, the talking is over now Mr President turn the Devil Dogs loose with everything they have.. Screw the liberials and the crybabys and Kick the dog crap out of them like we did in Japan, And tell any other country that goes crying to the U.N. that if you get envolved there going to be next to feel the wrath of the American People. The Buttom line should be if you harm an American or you strike on American Soil or Property you better be ready to pay the ultimate price. No more diplomatic bull crap talking. The only thing they are going to see or hear is a big boom and a mushroom cloud who ever survives...

Yea turn them sand nuggets back yard into a glass parking lot.
For every American slain by hostile intent we should kill 100,000 of them and keep going until their are none left , because they aint going to stop until all of us are dead. I mean **** , I heard they have a former taliban LDR going to Yale University what kinda crap is that I had to flip burgers work 2 jobs plus GI bill to do college at UMASS , I say round up all nuggets on USA soil wrap his arse with a portable nuk device load the up on C-5 and air drop everyone on all those sand nugget countries:idea: just a thought:flag:

[Sgt Sostand]

F*** War just drop the bomb on them and get it over with

[ivalis]

check this out

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/042906.html

[tntmondy]

Whatever happens they need to keep the news media out of it and let the Marines take care of business. They can report when it is all done and over with.

[John Mayotte]

Whatever happens they need to keep the news media out of it and let the Marines take care of business. They can report when it is all done and over with.

That's something I will agree with

Semper Fi


John :flag:

[DanCross]

Uhh . I do know my history it was the yom kipper war of 1966 and the war in 1948 before that. The later war (1948) the jews were heavily armed by the UN and trained I believe. It was quick and decisive . In 1966 I believe it was the egyptians and syrians attacked Isreal (I could be wrong) the Isrealites whooped thier ass in 6 days and did you know out of 75 dragon missle anti tank crews they had 74 kills and all 75 anti tank crews were killed (wire guided sucks ole school).
The displaced jews had no real home after ww2 , and my theory is that the U.N knew by putting hated zionist in the middle of sand nugget country it would balance the powers Imy guess the nuggets would be to involved hating the jews then anyone else imo

You sure you know your history there, Lance Corporal? The Yom Kippur war was in 1973. The war in 1967 was the 6 day war. Before that was the Suez war in 1956, and before that was the Israeli war for independence in 1948. Let's not forget about the war against Lebanon in 1982, and the various border skirmishes and minor actions that have taken place for the last 60 years, plus special forces raids, the Entebbe rescue, the bombing of Iraq's reactor in the 1980's, etc. No one would arm the Israeli's, or train them, in 1948. They managed to survive that war with weapons purchased by funds raised, mostly by Golda Mier, from American Jewish patrons. The training they got was mostly from semi-organized paramilitary organizations that had existed in pre-partition Palestine under the British mandate, in particular, the Haganah. The strategic location of their border Kibbutzim also gave them an advantage. Militarily, the Israeli's have generally been pretty successful, and they are pretty tough; you get that way when you're surrounded by enemies and water on *all* sides, and their stated goal isn't just your subjugation but your entire destruction.

In 1967, they fought Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. In 1973, the Syrians and Egyptians invaded at the same time and were well on their way to pushing into Tel Aviv before the Israeli's could raise their reserves and repell them in counterattack (Yom Kippur is the biggest holiday in Judaism; the entire country was more or less shut down for it, and it was several days before they could organize. Remember that in Israel, practically everyone is in the military). The reason they didn't was that the Egyptians and Syrians were trained in a Soviet ``top-down'' style of warfare. They squandered their early tactical advantage by stopping and waiting for orders from Damascus and Cairo, respectively, and by the time those orders came, the Israeli's and mobilized their defenses and were positioning to mount a counterattack. The war ended when they pushed the Syrians back over the Golan heights and trapped the Egyptian third army in the Sinai peninsula, trapped against the Suez Canal, with Israeli artillery preventing an escape over the Canal.

With respect to Iran, I think the Israeli's have the best shot of doing something about it; certainly better than us. One of our problems is that, if we invade Iran, it'll be about 5 seconds before the Iranians start lobbing missles into Jerusalem and Tel Aviv and about another 5 seconds before the Israeli's declare war against Iran and about another 5 seconds for Syria to declare war against the Israeli's and the whole middle east turn into a big brawl. However, if the Israeli's launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran with the rest of the middle east under the understanding that, ``if you touch Israel, the US Military is going to descend on you in full force and you will feel pain'' then they may have a shot. Basically, the question boils down to who throws the first punch and who can bind the arms of the other guys standing around quicker.

In retrospect, I wonder why we wasted time with Iraq when Saddam, though not a nice guy, was largely rendered impotent militarily. It seems like Iran would have been a much more logical target. Instead, we gave them three years to get that much closer to developing a nuclear capability. We could have pumped half a million troops into Afghanistan to (a) quell any semblence of resistance in that country, and (b) use it as a staging area to attack Iran. Oh well.

[Hocker]

Uhh . I do know my history it was the yom kipper war of 1966 and the war in 1948 before that. The later war (1948) the jews were heavily armed by the UN and trained I believe. It was quick and decisive . In 1966 I believe it was the egyptians and syrians attacked Isreal (I could be wrong) the Isrealites whooped thier ass in 6 days and did you know out of 75 dragon missle anti tank crews they had 74 kills and all 75 anti tank crews were killed (wire guided sucks ole school).
The displaced jews had no real home after ww2 , and my theory is that the U.N knew by putting hated zionist in the middle of sand nugget country it would balance the powers Imy guess the nuggets would be to involved hating the jews then anyone else imo
(i could be wrong) I guess you missed that part, pay attention to detail:flag: I guess you ran and googled that info stat didnt you .I was pulling from a distant memory thats why I implied "I could be wrong "
I went to edit it but my 5 min. expired and if the Marines didnt have terminal lance coolies like me certain NCO's wouldnt have ever made it to NCO. Sempir Fi

[DanCross]

(i could be wrong) I guess you missed that part, pay attention to detail:flag: I guess you ran and googled that info stat didnt you .I was pulling from a distant memory thats why I implied "I could be wrong "
I went to edit it but my 5 min. expired and if the Marines didnt have terminal lance coolies like me certain NCO's wouldnt have ever made it to NCO. Sempir Fi

The only part you said you could be wrong about was who attacked Israel in 1967 (at least, that's how I read your post).

Nope, I knew all of that from memory, though I do admit verifying that the Suez war was in 1956, and the spelling of `Haganah' online. But the thing is, when you're confronted with having to fight in a place you don't know much about, in behooves you to do sit down and do a little research about that place, who's there, who your enemies are most likely going to be, who your friend's are going to be, the history, languages, cultures, etc. It's like PT, but for the brain: the more you bore yourself just a little in peace, the less you and your Marines are going to bleed in war.

In the case of Iran? Well....let's just say, it ain't Iraq.

[junker316]

The only part you said you could be wrong about was who attacked Israel in 1967 (at least, that's how I read your post).

Nope, I knew all of that from memory, though I do admit verifying that the Suez war was in 1956, and the spelling of `Haganah' online. But the thing is, when you're confronted with having to fight in a place you don't know much about, in behooves you to do sit down and do a little research about that place, who's there, who your enemies are most likely going to be, who your friend's are going to be, the history, languages, cultures, etc. It's like PT, but for the brain: the more you bore yourself just a little in peace, the less you and your Marines are going to bleed in war.

In the case of Iran? Well....let's just say, it ain't Iraq.

The one thing that Hocker has forgopteen is that Iran has the capablity, from what the public is told and I can guess about as much as every-one else just how much this information is correct, to launch a nuclear attack in the next few years if not immediately. Isreal would be devastated by such an attack and them open to all the Muslum countries that want them gone.

DanCross thanks for the actual dates for the Wars because I only knew round about years.