Bush and Iran

I do hope George W is not planning for a new war....

Journalist: U.S. planning for possible attack on Iran
White House says report is 'riddled with inaccuracies'

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Bush administration has been carrying out secret reconnaissance missions to learn about nuclear, chemical and missile sites in Iran in preparation for possible airstrikes there, journalist Seymour Hersh said Sunday.




http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/16/hersh.iran/

 

Lets hope not... Iran aint quite the same as Iraq...

Plus another 'Invasion' would probably ignite a few other Middle East nations.

I dont think Bush is that crazy... but then you never know with that one...

 

I'd be more interested in finding out this "journalist"'s political leanings before I believe a word he says, personally.
The only thing missing is an allegation of the whole thing being a masonic conspiracy...

 

Just out of interest... Would it not be standard military procedure to plan for ANY eventuality anyway?

Perhaps its just scaremongering based on some Pentagon hypothetical plans?

 

I hope it´s just a journalistic rumour.

But to be honest I´m afraid Bush might just be the kind of guy to do it and attack Iran...

 

I think you're BOTH right, as it happens....

 

if you all will recall several years ago right after 9-11 I mentioned that we had gents in Iran and Syria snooping............do not be surprised at anything that "ight" happen over there. syria is still not out of the picture either

 

I bet Bush and his gang do want to have a go at Iran and finish what Khomein¡ started during Carter's term…

But one thing is what you want to do and another very different one is what you can do.

Incredibly, the world's greatest superpower has a very limited power.

After almost two years of the US invasion of Iraq, the country has not been able to be pacified, stabilised and re-built (completely or as expected).

Iraq

Population: 25.374.691
Territory: 437.072 km2

Iran

Population: 69.018.924
Territory: 1.648.195 km2

The majority of the US' land units are now serving in Iraq (10 out of 11 divisions, I think) and still hard working to pacify a territory 1/3 of Iran's and with 1/3 of Iran's population.

The effort needed to conquer and pacify Iran would recquire a full war time expansion of the US military from 11 to some 30 divisions maybe, thus involving the introduction of obligatory military service and conscription and an stronomic amount of increase of the already gigantic US military budget.

Being a democracy, no party or president can afford the political cost of that. The US can't afford the economic prize and wouldn't have enough resources for the post-war without the UN and the international community. And of course, the people won't afford to pay the price in blood to attack Iran.

Fortunately for the world, the Project for the New American Century isn't much likely to happen…

 

Fried you mean the ugly word "New world order" ?

geez I hope not. We know from past history that the mide-east has always been a hot bed of activity. Even during WW2 Iran was looked at very seriously due to the defence of oiled areas by Germany during the early 1940's. "Contacts" are in the mid-east throughout and most likely, in fact I know that Israel is watching and ready if anything looks periously close to Nuke development in Iran. Israel has popped them once and will do it again without anyones permission........

it's a wait and see proposition. I think we all knew the mid-east was going to blow wide open, it was just a matter of time and when

 

Not really, I mean Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the ideological-political organisation/current of Murdoch, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Huntington…

I'm pro-American, but that is not a good sight…

 

But Erich,did not GW open up that can-o-worms[middle east]? What's the excuse going to be for invading Iran, more W M D's?
An article in the newspaper recently.From the Washington Post. Bush said the public's decision to re-elect him was a ratification of his approach toward Iraq and that there was no reason to hold any administration officials accountable for mistakes in pre-war planning or managing the violent aftermath.
"We had a accountability moment and that was the 2004 elections. The american people listened to different assessments made about what was taking place in Iraq,and they looked at the two candidates,and chose me."
I've lost any respect I had for that man. He and he alone,got us into this sh.. and because no one liked the 'other candidate', that means everyone approves of this?? The gall of this guy! Wonder how gun-ho he'd be if he had 2 sons instead of 2 daughters.

 

does it matter ? when I was over there in 1980 we had strong military notions of going in then. Our guys were already working with the Israeli's hand in hand and still are. ok if you think Bush opened it up fine........fact is we are there, but now what. Are wmd's in Iran, probably as well as Syria. the crap news media opend the doorway for Saddam to pull up his pants with plenty of time to spare to get his toys off to other spots. In any case my feelings are we need to let our guys go full bore instead of tying them up like "we" went through in Nam, otherwise another s***-hole to get through

v/r E ~

 

Iran is a truly formidable nation invade compared to Iraq. Iraq is mainly plains in the south and hills in North along the Turkish border, with the two rivers, Tigris and Euphrates going through the middle. Iran is heavily mountainous, with the Zagros Mountatins along the Iraqi border.

If the Iranians hold their ground, don't collapse en mass like the Iraqi army in the South, the fight to conquer Iran would certainly last more than a month. Also, the supply problems in keeping a large force going are daunting. Many regions would have to be supplied by air, and those Chinooks are magnets for RPG's. Partisan actions in the US rear would also hinder operations. The Iranian people would not welcome the us as liberators either. Of course, the US would prevail eventually, but the casualties taken would seriously hurt Dubya's image in the public eye. In the public eye, it's not completely whether you won or not, it's how you won.

Finally, a US invasion of Iran would give Osama thousands more recruits.

 

Yes indeedy, and after Iran we'll take out little ole N.Korea next. I'd better get digging on my underground bunker.

 

The US has a plan to invade nearly every country on earth, its the logical thing to do, always have a plan to deal with any eventuality.

But i honestly dont think we'll invade Iran, the change is already taking place there, their young population is being educated, and is becoming aware of the beauty of democracy. Iran will have an internal pro western revolution within 20 years, this one's not worth the American blood that would be spilled for now.

CvM

[ 25. January 2005, 08:20 PM: Message edited by: Carl G. E. von Mannerheim ]

 

that is exactly it. After the Carter debacle the youth of Iran wanted change and have worked ever so slowly in ousting the Ayatollahs''''' sp ?

 

And thank God that's happening. As long as world economy keeps liberalising politics and society will liberalise at the same speed. China will become a democracy in some years… free market and authoritarian rule simply don't match.

This is the whole point!

Now, let's thank God that Iran doesn't need to be invaded and if it were, the US simply can't do it.

 

Fried China is so large and militaristic that the overall change won't happen in my life-time but prayerfully yours..........

my opinion Iran and Syria are on the target

 

So Erich, are you that old or is Freid that young?

 

Yes Freid is that young..........and I'm timeless