***SNIP***
Our technology alone would kick their a$$ while we wait for reinforcements.
It hasn’t been enough in either Iraq or Afghanistan to quell either the sectarian violence or al-Quida…
Technology is all well and good, and we certainly have it on our side. But if there is one thing we’ve learned recently, it is that technology is not enough – you have to have boots on the ground. And we simply don’t have enough of those to continually open up new fronts – especially against a militarized country that is 3 to 5 five times larger (depending on whether you measure geographically or by population) than Iraq.
Now, should Iran be foolish enough to try a troop movement through Iraq similar to the German march across Europe, than yes, we should be able to handle it. But if they simply use the current “underground railroad” method of transfer and delivery of troops or weapons, or simply go around by way of mountainous regions of Turkey or northern Iraq, technology will offer little advantage.
Simply ask your self this – if technology was enough, why haven’t we deployed it against Iran? A country that is developing nuclear power, that – unlike Iraq – is based on a united religious crusade against the West, that has taken hostile actions against America, and that sponsors, funds, and arms radial terrorist organizations?
And where would these reinforcements you mention come from? What few coalition forces we had to begin with are leaving – Japan will be gone shortly. It is quickly coming down to the US and Britain – and the sentiment in Britain increases each day to pull out.
Plus a benefit of Iran invading Iraq enroute to Israel is we could pick off their army little by little and it would make it that much easier to deliver the final blow to Tehran.
Again, what if they deploy troops via the north? That’s the kind of country that makes it difficult to impossible to strike using just missiles. You have to send in large numbers of men to blanket the valleys and passes – a good way to get slaughtered by those that know the terrain far better than we. And if we do manage to pin them down, we have found via Afghanistan that rooting them out is nigh-on to impossible. But we couldn’t simply leave them there – which means we would have to deploy massive amounts of soldiers to cover that front, thereby weakening our (limited) ability to police Iraq.
As far as delivering the “final blow to Tehran” – just take a look at Iraq. And, again, Iran is three to five times the size of Iraq…
I guess it is time for congress to enlarge our numbers once again and get those troops trained and ready to lay the smack down on these people who do not show any concern for human life. Not their own and not anyone that does not believe in their psychotic radical muslim beliefs.
How – through a draft? Or do you see some kind of congressional bill that authorizes incentives for volunteering? If the former, look to Bush’s statements about a draft during the campaign. Then, add to that the growing desire of Americans to leave Iraq – more than 50% by far of the population. No Senator or Congressman would dare vote for a draft under those circumstances.
If the latter, what incentives do you think they could offer that would reverse the precipitous decline in recruitments that has occurred?
The realities are far more complex and subtle than simply saying, “Hulk smash”. Any actions we take against Iran will have to be carefully weighed in light of the repercussions. Virtually none of our nominal middle-east allies would support it. Most of the democracies don’t support it. It would further polarize the populations of the Middle East, thereby ensuring even more entrenched hatred toward America and the desire to harm us.
Nuclear strikes are almost out of the question. If anything, it would spur radical Islamic countries to greater speeds in developing and deploying intercontinental nuclear warheads against the US.
The truth of the matter is that we should never have entered Iraq. The country had no WMDs, no ties to al-Quaida (in fact, the government under Hussein was anathema to al-Quida’s stated goals and interests), no terrorist training camps, and no ties to 9/11.
All of which was known to the administration prior to the invasion. Because of that, though, we lost our best chance to topple the Taliban in Afghanistan, rid the world of Osama bin Laden, develop a united front with China, Russia and most other powers and allies, and we’ve now stretched out military so thin that when a legitimate threat occurs, we lack the manpower and resources to address it. And worst of all, we've seen over 2,500 American lives lost unnecessarily.
Opening up a new front is not a realistic scenario…
