Korean Job Discussion Forums

bucheon bum · Joined: 16 Jan 2003

anyone who thinks the united states will attack iran while George W. Bush is President really needs to take American Politics 101.

TML1976 · Joined: 10 Jul 2005 Location: South Korea

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

At this point, 11 of 16 have voted 'no'. Have any of the 'yes' voters heard something recently the rest of us haven't? Or is this just a generic the-US-is-a-boogey-man thread?

lastat06513 · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:15 pm Post subject:

The US military has fallen into a state of severe disrepair.

~ All functioning equipment is now being used for the war effort.
~ A severe lack of sufficient equipment to do training.
~ A lack of funds to support a quick, massive mobilzation of forces needed to fight a war of that magnitude.
~ A public's lack of will to deal with another debacle where the pentagon powers-that-be have no entrance and no exit strategy, like what we see in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
~ Lack of sufficient operational and logistical planning for such a venture.
~ STRONG LACK OF PUBLIC OPINION- "no more coffins for oil" is the slogan now.

I think that if the US were to launch some kind of attack on Iran (which is highly unlikely since even the outgoing CENTCOM commander himself even strongly objected to any such adventure)- I think we might see something like a 'mutually assured destruction' type of scenerio in that the US would treat Iran as an example of what a nation will get if they try to tip the balance of power away from the US.
Such strategies have been discussed with the French, who even said they would have no problem with using their nuclear arsenal against Iran. And Sunni nations like Saudi Arabia and the GCC states have said they would turn a blind eye to what happens to their Shiite neighbor to the north.
I think there will be 2 obstacles to that kind of strategy.

- The fact that radical groups, such as Al Qeada, would use a nuclear attack as their rallying cry to fight the west using terrorism.

- I really think Russia and China would come to the rescue of Iran for the simple reason that it would balance the fight and that they want to protect their interests in Iran (Also, the Iranian aid that is given to the fighters in Iraq is useful in that it keeps the US busy while both Russia and China use the time to revamp and modernize their militaries to the point they can match the US)

The US and the world has alot to lose if the US starts a war with Iran, alot more than it did when it fought in Iraq.

pkang0202 · Joined: 09 Mar 2007

I voted no because its not likely the US will go to war with Iran until this Iraq matter is settled.

HOWEVER,

If the US has proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that Iran is intentionally fueling the unrest in Iraq, then yes, I can see the US going into Iran.

Its like this, the US keeps stomping out fires while Iran keeps lighting new ones. Eventually, the US is going to say "Enough is Enough" and knock Iran out cold.

They just need to catch Iran with the lighter, red handed, so the rest of the world will agree that the attack was the right course of action.

mindmetoo · Joined: 02 Feb 2004

Didn't EFL claim Bush wasn't going to give up the presidency and launch an attack on Iran and suspend elections?

desultude · Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 5:27 am Post subject:

There are certainly those within the administration who want to attack Iran. I would hope that they would be out flanked this time.

All of the rhetoric would make one believe that this is the plan- maybe one of their "shock and awe" strikes that would deal with Iran in a short time. We sure know how that story ends.

Personally, as someone living a couple of hundred miles from Iran, I sure hope the answer is no. Shocked