General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn thumping the drums for war with Iran, has no one told Trump that military recruiting levels are
perilously low?
What's he going to fight a war with? Clone troopers? Cardboard cutouts? Shadow puppets? Jared and Ivanka?
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,658 posts)armed with a nine-iron and a sack of soggy hamberders.
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)Just like last time
SoCalNative
(4,613 posts)gotta have cannon fodder! maybe his supporters can be the first few waves.
Aristus
(66,307 posts)tantamount to political suicide. Americans love war; they just don't want to have to 'do their bit'. They're fine having someone else's sons and daughters risk their lives while they themselves get a Fox News wargasm.
Strelnikov_
(7,772 posts)(personally, I like the taxman line . . same as it ever was)
Some folks are born
Made to wave the flag
Ooh, they're red, white and blue
And when the band plays
"Hail to the Chief"
Ooh, they point the cannon at you, Lord
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no senator's son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no
Some folks are born
Silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves? Yoh!
But when the taxman
Comes to the door
Lord, the house look a like a rummage sale, yeah
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no millionaire's son, no, no
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no
Yeah, some folks inherit
Star-spangled eyes
Ooh, they send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask 'em
"How much should we give?"
Ooh, they only answer, "More, more, more" yoh!
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no military son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, one
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no, no, no
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate son, no, no, no
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)Between their army, navy and air force, they have the capability of pretty much overrunning our troops. We do not have the military capabilities to wage any kind of ground war with Iran. Even an extensive bombing campaign wouldn't do nearly the damage.
Bolton wants regime change and tRump stopped short of saying that.
120,000 troops is no where near enough. The US does not have the troop levels to wage the kind of war they want.
It'll be far worse than Iraq ever was on it's worst day.
Aristus
(66,307 posts)Iran is also three times the size of Iraq, and largely mountainous. These features could sustain an insurgency the hapless Iraqis could only dream of.
Another liability in an invasion is that ground troops would have to jump off either in Iraq or Afghanistan, and neither country would be cooperative in such a scenario. The alternative is an amphibious invasion, which carries so many risks, it would be sheer folly to attempt. (But since a fool is in charge, that will almost certainly be overlooked...)
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)This has disaster written all over it. A bombing sortie could be a treacherous idea.
The Iran Nuclear agreement was to prevent this kind of shit.
delisen
(6,042 posts)Xolodno
(6,390 posts)...Iran will get near limitless support from Russia....despite being centuries old adversaries. Russia want's to know if their military hardware is up to their expectations....and Iran is more than willing to take free military hardware against a super power.
This won't be Iraq with a dictator that managed to piss the whole world off with 1960's equipment. Nor is Iran fractured like Iraq where you had essentially three countries. Iranians may not like their leadership...but the despise the US even more.
Strelnikov_
(7,772 posts)prices will stay sky-high.
The worlds No. 2 exporter will vault to No. 1
Strelnikov_
(7,772 posts)Using Iranian supplied anti-tank missiles, and Iranian training developed from observing our weaknesses in Iraq, they fought the Israeli armor to an (effective) stalemate.
hack89
(39,171 posts)The Iranian military is hopelessly antiquated.
hack89
(39,171 posts)With the caveat that I am not talking about us invading Iran. We can muster such overwhelming firepower that it would be suicide for them to mass their troops. Their military is poorly equipped with ancient equipment that is poorly maintained.
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)Their equipment is not as ancient and poorly maintained as you believe. It may not be brand new, but neither is the US's.
Iraq was supposed to a pushover, too.
hack89
(39,171 posts)The capture of Baghdad by 3 divisions was a feat unprecedented in military history.
The occupation was a failure. But that was because there never was a military solution in the first place.
EX500rider
(10,832 posts)Their Sunni insurgency was not their military.
Iran's military would lose for the same reason's, mostly no way to maintain air superiority and several generations behind US equipment and tactical doctrine. They could have a successful insurgency of course. Although the Iraqi insurgency wasn't successful in that they did not take back the country from the Shia majority.
safeinOhio
(32,656 posts)for the Navy and other branches.
DeminPennswoods
(15,273 posts)for starters.
hunter
(38,309 posts)Aircraft carriers are the 21st century version of the Maginot Line.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maginot_Line
No sane person wants to see that shit go down.