Is War With Iran Necessary?

[PeriscopeDepth]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Question - Would the use of American nuclear bombs of Iranian soil guarantee a nuclear reprisal by a non-state group?

Seems like using nukes to knock out nukes both legitimises the use of nuclear weapons and invites responding attacks.

Would you happen to know of any non state groups that have access to nuclear weapons for sure?

And I don't think we'll be nuking Iran, anywho.

PD

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth

Would you happen to know of any non state groups that have access to nuclear weapons for sure?

Not at all, but I think a nuclear strike would act as an incentive to get one.

This is irrespective of the likelihood of nuclear release, the idea just occurred to me.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Question - Would the use of American nuclear bombs of Iranian soil guarantee a nuclear reprisal by a non-state group?

Counterquestion: can one safely assume that terrorists - whose declared intention is to terrorise and cause shock and awe - would not use nukes, if they get access to them? Terrorists have no nation they stand for, so they do not care for retaliation against such nations. If they are relgious nutheads, they even accept the martyr death of people of the faith they claim to act for. Trust in such people, counting on their reason, negotiating and having treaties with them? Yes - but only it that helps to kill them. Every trick and every lie is acceptable that helps to kill them and prevent them from committing mass murder.

I do not believe that anyone has the courage and cold unscrupelousness to use nukes selectively to take out key components of the Iranian program, and that is why I think that the West will ultimately fail on Iran. The success of a cinventional strike by the Israelis is hgighly quesitonable, at best, and some of their analysts said that themselves. This is not osiriak - this is mutliple times as difficult, and much bigger in scale. I know that with every state gaining access to nuclear technology, the risk that we see nukes being used in the future, by terrorists, and then by nations, becomes greater. You cannot really separate civilian use from milurtry use of nuclear technology. the more nations use civilian nuclear energy, the smaller the line becomes we walk on. I fear that before the end of ma natural lifetime we will see nukes being used. and then we will curse ourselves that we did not act with determination to prevent the spreading of nuclear technology at all costs. Not only does nuclear technology by far not solve climate issues, and does not do much in lowering energy costs (all that is myths if you only look beyond the aparrently obvious arguments that are not so solid at all, and check the rat-tail of additonal background conditions) - it's spreading and current revival is an invitation for nuclear terror, and later nuclear wars. the more nuke tech there is, the more countries are possessing it or having acces to it, the smaller the basis for our luck becomes. It is only a question of time then before we run out of luck.

Is that what our policies come down to: hoping that we will be lucky...?

I see the threat of nuclear technology today multiple times as dangerous as just some years ago. just two years ago I wrote in one of the first threats we had on Iran that "the use of nukes in any conflict with Iran is totally unacceptable". Yes, in more or less these words that was said by me. You see, the more I thought about the issues, Iran and civilian use nuclear technology as well, the more I saw myself in need to change my mind. The resulting conclusions are not that scenario I want the world to be. But what I want the world to be, and what the world really is - are two totally different things, unfortunately, and wishful thinking or hopes and prayers will not help anybody for better or worse. The world is just what it is, and that is the one world we have to deal with in this life. Another one we will not be given. maybe when we die, but that is worth a discussion in a separate threat.

[peterloo]

The problems revolving around the nukes is that most country feel that the other countries (esp. USA / UK) which has nukes uses different ways to stop them having any, using so called Non proliferation treaties or whatsoever, and this makes them feel unfairly treated.

Even if they have nukes, well, they dare not strike anyway. Even if Iran got a nuke, she dare not strike Israel, nor USA, for fear of a nuclear respiral and international intervention. They don't want to give an excuse to USA to direct all her ballistic missiles to their little country, do they?

Any talks are fruitless unless additional benefit can be offered and this benefit > that offered by having a nuclear weapon. In this way, the problem can be solved at ease, like the case of N. Korea.

[U-84]

should we go to war with Iran, i say no...but it is known that Iran has sent weapons to assist insurgents in iran, you also have to take into account that if any nation were to go to war with iran immediately it would be Israel before the U.S. or U.K. could respond with military might...personally i think iran wants to just show like North Korea, that they "Think" they are big players in this world...remember several months ago they had those gunboats in the straight (the name i can't remember off the top of my head) their goal (or so we believe) was to have the Saudi's block the straight therefore no oil of us aka U.S. so i think Iran just wants the U.S. and Israel to hurt financially and economically...they saw how badly we (americans) mauled the Iraqi army, which is considered a 1st rate army due to they are able to transport their soldiers anywhere in da world so i don't think they would want to go to war wit us.

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by U-84

should we go to war with Iran, i say no...but it is known that Iran has sent weapons to assist insurgents in iran,

You mean Iraq?

But even then, that couldn't be farther from the truth. General Kevin Bergner in Iraq said himself that there has actually been no evidence acquired to link Bush's accusations of the insurgents receiving weapons to Iran.

Originally Posted by U-84

personally i think iran wants to just show like North Korea, that they "Think" they are big players in this world...

Well, they are actually a major society in the world and they are actually pretty powerful. They've got us by the balls in oil imports, and if they decided to quit giving us the oil and shift their trade focus to Russia, their ally, it would cause oil here in the US to skyrocket to over $250 A BARREL.

Originally Posted by U-84

they saw how badly we (americans) mauled the Iraqi army, which is considered a 1st rate army due to they are able to transport their soldiers anywhere in da world so i don't think they would want to go to war wit us.

Well, one of the only real reasons why the Iraqi army was "mauled" was due to the fact that Hussein's soldiers really weren't as dedicated to him as he thought. They were not impressed by his strict rule, and they really didn't give a damn what happened to him. In fact, hardly any were killed. Most surrendered.

And President Ahmadinejad himself has stated that the last thing he wants between Iran and the United States is war... what makes me laugh so hard though is how John McCain even claimed that President Ahmadinejad had said he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map", which is actually WRONG. He said, and I quote:

"The Imam [Khomeini] said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."

[August]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

President Ahmadinejad had said he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map", which is actually WRONG. He said, and I quote:

"The Imam [Khomeini] said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."

Or in other words wipe [the nation of} ISRAEL off the map. Same thing really.

[Foxtrot]

of course, war is necessary to keep our Military Industrial Complex alive.
It is a source of income for many you know.

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by August

Or in other words wipe [the nation of} ISRAEL off the map. Same thing really.

It's a prophecy from the Quran, which states that Israel's government will break down and the country will be no more, signalling the end of the world. The Bible predicts and says the same thing, actually. It means nothing about anyone wiping Israel off the map. It just means that when this happens to Israel, the world is going to end... soon... Then again, I don't believe any of that supernatural hocus pocus.

[nikimcbee]

I'm undecided. I see no reason to invade like Iraq, maybe we can kick them in the balls really hard. That might fix some things.

[UnderseaLcpl]

If we became non-interventionist and were willing to trade with Iran freely and not back nations that have strained relationships with them then no it would not be neccessary.
If we continue to support Israel and maintain presence and/or support of Iraq I can see trouble ahead.
It's kind of a lose-lose situation; either we stay the hell out of Middle Eastern affairs so as to appease them and place our allies and other nations in jeopardy, or we play policeman and piss off Iran. And I'm certain that either way some extremist or another will be mad at us for either decision.

[StdDev]

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

I'm undecided. I see no reason to invade like Iraq, maybe we can kick them in the balls really hard. That might fix some things.

Hmmm ironic that I just read THIS this morning.....

[nikimcbee]

Originally Posted by StdDev

Hmmm ironic that I just read THIS this morning.....

Whoa, that's too funny. Small world:rotfl: .

[UnderseaLcpl]

I rescind my earlier opinion. I change my answer to "no". Partially, this is because of skybird's post but also because I have decided that isolationism is preferable to war until we can take care of our own country. As Jefferson said; "Trade with all nations, alliances with none".

[Sailor Steve]

:rotfl: StdDev! As a friend of mine once said, "America's policy is to leave people alone. If you mess with us, we'll come to your house and kick it into rubble. Then we'll go back home, put our feet up and have a beer."

Would that it were still so.