Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Conventional War Against Iran Is Not Feasible
Big Peace (Breitbart) ^ | 11/13/11 | Kerry Patton

Posted on 11/13/2011 1:17:21 PM PST by yup2394871293

The International Atomic Energy Agency is expected to release a report about Iran’s nuclear program this week. Many nuclear experts and diplomats expect the worst. Israel is getting sketchy, and rumored plans of military operations against the Shiite state are increasing—operations vehemently opposed by Russia.

Iran’s recent foiled plot to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador on U.S. soil exemplifies Iranian defiance against the United States and our ally Saudi Arabia. Their continued influence in Iraq sparks grave concerns among many Iraqi citizens. The Arab Spring uprisings induced by Iranian proxies haunts many Middle Eastern nations. The list of reasons to engage war against Iran is endless, but is war feasible?

Prior to launching Operation Enduring Freedom, the United States could have easily squashed the Ayatollah regime. In fact, the United States and our allies could have defeated Iran while simultaneously conducting operations in Afghanistan. When we entered Iraq and pushed outward to other “red zones” in places like the Horn of Africa, our capabilities swiftly deteriorated.

(Excerpt) Read more at bigpeace.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Israel; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: axisofterror; iran; iraq; israel; lebanon; nukes; saudiarabia; syria; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last
Too little too late.
1 posted on 11/13/2011 1:17:22 PM PST by yup2394871293
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: yup2394871293

The Iranians have been begging to be nuked since November, 1979. I say grant them their wish.


2 posted on 11/13/2011 1:21:19 PM PST by Astronaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yup2394871293

An EMP over the nuke plants and a couple over power plants and game over for 10 years.


3 posted on 11/13/2011 1:25:20 PM PST by mountainlion (I am voting for Sarah after getting screwed again by the DC Thugs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Astronaut

Yup, we’ve ignored Iran for too long. Like ignoring a lump under the armpit that turns out to be cancer.

Bringing them to heel even ten years ago might have been cheap. Now the price will be high indeed.


4 posted on 11/13/2011 1:26:55 PM PST by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Astronaut
I think it has been a great mistake for the US not to use nuclear weapons against rogue nations developing nuclear capability. We should have nuked Stalin as soon as he tested a weapon. We should have nuked Pakistan. North Korea. Iran.

Non-proliferation would work a whole lot better of the dictators developing the technology had a tendency to disappear in a cloud of radioactive dust.

This sort of approach would probably have had to be applied only a couple times before people got the message -- and the result would have been a late 20th century world with a single nuclear power. Things would have been better.

And I say the opportunity is not yet totally lost. Iran should be used as an object lesson -- it's too big to invade. We cannot hope to win a ground war there. So: let's nuke it.

5 posted on 11/13/2011 1:27:25 PM PST by ClearCase_guy (I won't vote for Romney. I won't vote for Perry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

The emp from a nuke would knock out electronics for hundreds miles except for hardened targets!


6 posted on 11/13/2011 1:28:35 PM PST by tallyhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yup2394871293
Any country that can land men on the moon (multiple times), build the atomic bomb, put a rover on Mars, build HUNDREDS of aircraft carriers during World War II, cure polio and invent the Internet can defeat a country like Iran.

"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right.” ― Henry Ford

7 posted on 11/13/2011 1:29:33 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (You can't invade the US. There'd be a rifle behind every blade of grass.~Admiral Yamamoto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yup2394871293
Prior to launching Operation Enduring Freedom, the United States could have easily squashed the Ayatollah regim

Ah no they couldn't. No bases in the region to launch such an attack from. Also impossible to squash Iran while leaving Iraq untouched on our flank.

8 posted on 11/13/2011 1:31:15 PM PST by MNJohnnie (Giving more money to DC to fix the Debt is like giving free drugs to addicts think it will cure them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Afganistan (which borders Iran?)


9 posted on 11/13/2011 1:32:35 PM PST by yup2394871293
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

Does the US have EMP weapons of this power in their arsenal?


10 posted on 11/13/2011 1:34:00 PM PST by yup2394871293
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yup2394871293

American Military Forces could certainly defeat Iranian forces and win a war there.
IF WE FOUGHT IT AS WE DID WW2. TO WIN. TO DESTROY THE ENEMY, THEIR CITIES, THEIR ABILITY TO WAGE WAR.
We stopped doing that once we went into Vietnam.


11 posted on 11/13/2011 1:35:18 PM PST by SECURE AMERICA (Where can I sign up for the New American Revolution and the Crusades 2012?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
I think it has been a great mistake for the US not to use nuclear weapons against rogue nations developing nuclear capability.

The enviro-whacko's and MSM have over-hyped the dangers of nukes and most folks don't want to let that Genie out of the bottle.

Nagasaki, Hiroshima, even Chernobyl and the latest Japan incidents didn't produce the longterm massive devestation that was hyped.

12 posted on 11/13/2011 1:35:37 PM PST by umgud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Seems to me that the same argument could have been used against Operation Enduring Freedom and the Iraq war.


13 posted on 11/13/2011 1:37:32 PM PST by yup2394871293
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SECURE AMERICA

What about N. Korea?


14 posted on 11/13/2011 1:38:20 PM PST by yup2394871293
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: yup2394871293

They can dial down the blast yield on a conventional nuke and have it detonate high in the atmosphere over the target. There were tests conducted on this back in the 50’s and 60’s, but they were mainly to study the effects such blasts (from a nuke exchange with the USSR) would have on the US.


15 posted on 11/13/2011 1:39:12 PM PST by Stonewall Jackson (Democrats: "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I guess our government generally thinks that would set a bad precedent.


16 posted on 11/13/2011 1:39:58 PM PST by yup2394871293
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion
Does EMP travel deep underground? Just asking?

You might be able to take out the grid that powers the underground bunkers, but they might be able to jury-rig something to keep their efforts going.

17 posted on 11/13/2011 1:43:54 PM PST by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tallyhoe
The emp from a nuke would knock out electronics for hundreds miles except for hardened targets!

Explode it at low altitude and the footprint will be smaller. An EMP bunker buster would be interesting.

18 posted on 11/13/2011 1:45:41 PM PST by mountainlion (I am voting for Sarah after getting screwed again by the DC Thugs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SECURE AMERICA
People used to win wars by capturing the enemy's capitol. It was a little like chess.
Another good way to win a war was to bring the enemy army to a major encounter and to decisively beat that army. It was sort of good sportsmanship for the loser to recognize defeat.
In an age of Total War, you could win a war by firebombing cities, nuking cities, and by inflicting millions of causalities (men, women, children, civilian, combatants, whatever) on the other side. Make them cry for mercy and make them accept unconditional surrender. That approach seemed pretty effective.

In my lifetime, all of these approaches have been taken off the table. There seems to be no acceptable replacement, and we no longer have any real strategy for "winning" a war. We just fight until we lose the political will, then we come home.

We need to relearn what works: The old ways are the best ways.

19 posted on 11/13/2011 1:45:51 PM PST by ClearCase_guy (I won't vote for Romney. I won't vote for Perry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SECURE AMERICA

You’ve got that right. Once we stopped fighting wars to win, we started having troubles. With Iran, the stated goal should be that we intend to break things and kill Iranian soldiers and terrorists. We should clearly state we will not be rebuilding Iran only destroying its military and nuclear capabilities. I would also add that we should take out every government palace, house, vacation spot where that nutjob goes.


20 posted on 11/13/2011 1:46:17 PM PST by Dutch Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson