Iran next ?

[Ddrak]

Aussie wines > all

Dd

[ZanypherCocoapuffs]

My favorite Aussie whine is "mama, gimme back my boomerang!!!"

[Partha]

Let me throw out this scenario.....

Embar, as a younger man, travels to Europe.

While there, he stays in a Paris hostel and has a night of rough gay sex with a Frenchman.

Embar later discovers that it burns when he pees.

Embar then begins throwing around antiEuro fantasies in public. He doesn't mention the specific image of a swarthy, he-man type he sees dispensing this justice, nor the fact that said justice is delivered one pork torpedo at a time.

It's at least as logical as Embar's scenario, and best of all, Tom Clancy will NEVER be tempted to write a novel about it.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Your fascination with me is cute Partha.

[maltheos]

Let me throw out this scenario...

Iranian fundmentalists take umbrage with European stances on the treatment of Muslims (doesn't have to be legit, it's just the rhetoric right now)

Europe tells Iran.. go pound sand. To save face, Iran pumps up the rhetoric. Europe does the same. Someone in Iran's decision tree says "fuck the infidels" and lobs a couple of nukes into Paris.

France immediately surrenders.

The rest of Europe says pelase don't do that again, while Paris smoulders. Iran says... piss us off again and you're next. We're ready to meet Allah... are you?

There are meetings in Europe.

There are more meetings in Europe.

There are protests in Europe.

There are meetings about the protests.

At the meetings, it's decided that no one wants to be next,l that Iran is crazy, that any retaliatory strike by a European nation would leave another smoking hole in some European city as Iran would lob another nuke.

Blair calls Bush... "Can you help us mate? We can't seem to pull our heads of the Euopean collective arse"

Bush says "Sure Tony B... we've been watching the Iranian leadership on satellite cam for the last few days. We know where they are, where they eat, and with what hand they wipe their ass. Got several Aegis missle ships loaded with Tomahawks off the coast. Been itching to try out the new guidance systems on those bad boys. Just say the word and I'll press the little red button on my desk"

Blair says "Go mate!"

Button is pushed, Tommies are launched, Iran's leadership meets Allah.

Europe condemns the US for using too much force.

Blair gives a call to France saying is ok to un-surrender now.

Plausible right up to the "nuke France" part. After that pure drivel.

Bombing, terror, or conventional weapons could vaguely be plausible, but Iran knows better than to nuke anything in Europe. Thats the cue for every one in the area to take one step away fropm them and let them get pounded by a coalition of the willing led by the nukee. Heck if the USA nuked someone out of the blue like that thats how the world would react in that case -- and we'd probably pay for it in blood too.

The USA is much better suited to reacting rapidly than Europe, but Europe , while it takes a bit to get it going, has a tendency to stay focused far more than the USA.

[foeham]

You have seen the new french army survival knife , 12 diffrent cork screws and a white flag that pop's up when the first shot is fired.

[jookkor]

Embar is probably one of those people who believe the propaganda about the usa "saving" europe on its own. When in actuality the Usa played patty cake with Hitler and then again refused to support Russia with troops even when theyfinally WERE entered into the war. I really dont understand why so many people in America are ignorant about their actual role in ww2 when some of the most objective books on the subject come from here.
Or maybe its just a case of simply saying things that are fun to say, whether or not they have any baring on reality.

[Rsak]

Yeah that is an objective view of WW2 that is going to prove a point!

[Burz]

When in actuality the Usa played patty cake with Hitler and then again refused to support Russia with troops even when theyfinally WERE entered into the war. I really dont understand why so many people in America are ignorant about their actual role in ww2 when some of the most objective books on the subject come from here.
Or maybe its just a case of simply saying things that are fun to say, whether or not they have any baring on reality.

...wow

[Relbeek Einre]

Oh, Jook, don't get my brother in law in law[sic] started. He's VERY down on the heroicized American role in WWII, but then he's a German historian.

that is a historian focusing on Germany, not a historian from Germany.

[vaulos]

*cough* We didn't play that hero alone. But we did play the hero.

[Relbeek Einre]

Tell that to a survivor of Dresden.

No, it was the right war fought for the right reasons, and there were plenty of heroes... and villains... on both sides. It's just the villain with the funny mustache kinda polarized history.

[Ddrak]

The US was pretty friendly with Nazi Germany *before* the war (as was most of Western Europe as well) but as far as I know became relatively neutral when the shooting actually started. After all, pre-war, Germany's industrial output was huge and people liked that sort of thing after the Great Depression.

In addition, the US was a huge proponent of the Eugenics that Nazi Germany took and ran with. While the US didn't slaughter its Jews, they did impliment sterilization programs for "unfit" parents in an effort to "improve" the gene pool and were the second most industrious nation in the world in implementing these sorts of programs (behind Germany of course). It's not hard to find US scientific literature from the late 30s praising Germany's work in the field of racial purity but after the facts of the holocaust came to light there seemed to be an awful lot more "Marriage Counsellers" and an awful lot less "Eugenicists" in America.

However, during the war itself, the US intervention when they decided to join in was critical in pushing Germany back out of Western Europe and drawing the attention from Russia to allow them to take Eastern Europe. While Americans tend to see themselves as the sole saviour of the world in WW2 (as is common among many allied nations), the real fact is all the allied nations were critical. Had England remained neutral, Europe would have fallen. Had the French not been incredibly brave in their resistance, Europe would have fallen. Had the Russians not suffered enormous casualties yet still fought on, Europe would have fallen. It was an alliance and it's as true to say that America saved Europe as it is to say Europe saved themselves.

Dd

[vaulos]

And what (pray tell) do the people of Dresden have to do with it?

[Burz]

It's just the villain with the funny mustache kinda polarized history.

Damn that Stalin and his Socialist scum!

[Atira]

gosh , i go shopping for the afternoon and my thread question turns into a Tom Clancy novel about a gay terrorist with the clap, making France surrender while holding a swiss army corkscrew ? *sigh* Cant leave you guys alone for a minute *smack* lol

Seriously though, look at the demographics and a good world map. The US has Iran flanked on both sides with Afganistan and Iraq, in the fetus stage of democracy. Saudi is already in their pockets, and Pakistan got a spanking for not looking for Osama Binladen hard enough.

Iran already is in the bad books for their nuclear developement, and that upsets the US. Heaven forbid another enemey nation that is nuclear capable. Remember the US went in to Iraq for not complying hard and fast enough with the UN over the "weapons of mass destruction". Even though the UN at the time said that the inspections were working. What do you think the chances are they are contemplating the same type of spin doctor routine with Iran over the Nuclear issue ?

yes Drak, i agree that it would be a stupid move . BUT ..that doesnt mean it isnt in the think tank stage, and that the propoganda war will begin, escalating matters for the near future . War with another Muslim nation will have catastrophic effects on the world i fear. Not to mention the loss of life for your soldiers, and the impact of the horrendous financial burden to the US people for generations.

Tira

[Torakus]

Embar,

That would never happen. In this new fluffy age of no loss is an acceptable loss because we allow the media to show us the horrors of war world, us chucking a couple hundred Tumblehawks (you have to see one do that, some funny/scary shit) at a country with an ability to hit back is not going to happen.

This country is so polarized as it is, a big loss, such as an aircraft carrier taking a wake homing torp up the poop shoot from an Iranian Kilo and the resultant loss of life would have devastating effects.

As good as our Navy is (and we are good) we are not invulnerable. Im going back to sea in a couple months for my last tour, and it will be on a ship that does pretty much nothing but ASW. I for one really don't want to test our tactics against their Kilos. I think we could kick their ass, but then again the British thought the Sheffield could not be sunk by the Argentinians.

Even establishing overwhelming superiority in the air as we have done in our last 3 big outings will not take away the fact that Iran has a viable naval threat that precludes the use of cruise missle shooting ships until they are neutralized. They are not an Afghanistan or Iraq like bombs away, balls to the wall chicken shoot.

These are the same reasons we can't just pop Korea in the ass with some missiles and have a tea party. In fact I don't see a potential target out there, that is in that group of "on the edge of nukes" nations that fit into the shock and aweable campaign category. It just doesn't work on people that can fight back.

Of course this administration knows it, the Pentagon knows it and thats why you see us taking a different approach with them. That is the biggest reason I hate hearing whiny ass liberals say "oh why don't we invade Korea if WMD is your beef". We don't because we are not stupid. We realize that there is no way in that confrontation to achieve a quick, if not a bit unstable, victory and minimize troop attrition by fire to levels acceptable in these new care bear days. Don't get me wrong, I am all for reducing troop loss in war to zero or even /gasp dare I say it? getting rid of warfare altogether as a solution to our international problems. I would love to see that, I don't forsee it happening in our lifetimes unfortunately.

Anyway, no, I don't see Iran as next. Korea is not next. I don't see any new Next target unless we just have to have one, then it will likely be Syria, Yemen, Oman or UAE, basically someone who can't fight back. (I don't think we will do anything to any of these countries, just giving examples).

Torakus

[Embar Angylwrath]

Dd...

If the US had not entered into the war, who most likely would have won?

Nuff said...

[Relbeek Einre]

That, Embar, is far from certain. The US's involvement in the war tipped the scales against Japan, to be sure, but in Europe? Hitler had both England and Russia to deal with.

[Partha]

Dd...

If the US had not entered into the war, who most likely would have won?

Russia. They had more men, better and more reliable armor, and Germany could not have kept up the war effort once they lost the oilfields in Romania.