A US soldier's predicition if bush is stupid enough to strike Iran...

[LynnTheDem]

***20,000+ US troops dead within the first week.

Iran's Sunburn missiles will take out every US ship in the Gulf.

Iran's allies will step into the fray.

China will be occupying Wisconsin within 3 months.

USA will concede defeat within 4 months.

1,000,000+ US dead.

And that's without Iranian allies India, Pakistan & China (or the rest of the world)throwing nukes at us.

***20,000 US dead is VERY conservative...one aircraft carrier holds 7,000 troops. TWO FLEETS are sitting in the Gulf.

[Loonman]

1. You forgot:

Russian ICBMs flying over the North Pole and midwestern Minutemen silos launching for a counter attack.


Russia has a LOT of money and assets tied up in Iran.

[XNASA]

2. Don't forget about the Bear.

http://www.worldpress.org/Mideast/1185.cfm

[Loonman]

3. I don't fall easily into paranoia or overreaction, but

If Bush attacks Iran, we couild all be screwed, just a matter of when.

[PunkPop]

4. I say Wisconsin can hold out

for at least 6 months - minimum. There's some tough boogers up there. I've met a few.

[TahitiNut]

7. I doubt it. I hear those Chinese are pretty rabid about cheese.

:evilgrin:

[Swamp Rat]

11. Not the CHEESE?!?

The Chinese will have a REAL fight on their hands if they go after our cheese!

[SpiralHawk]

68. Chinese Cheeseheads?

Oh my, now I am worried. But then again, so long as they don't get into Green Chile or bizcochitos, I guess I am safe here in Enchantmentville.

[Moochy]

80. Chinese Cheese Imports!!

http://www.globalpolicy.org/globaliz/cultural/2003/1211chinacheese.htm :evilgrin:

[htuttle]

8. But if it was Canada doing the invading...

...we'd surrender immediately. They have everything we want: Beer, hockey,....beer, etc...

[LynnTheDem]

20. ...cheap meds...beer...

:rofl:

[Jackpine Radical]

61. Pot, beer, Red Green..

Hell, why wait for them to invade? Let's do a pre-emptive surrender. Maybe Minnysoda and da yoopers wanna come with us.

[tlsmith1963]

22. I Want to Be Canadian!

*Please* save us from Bush!

Tammy

[TahitiNut]

53. Well, as long as I don't have to say "Gawd save the Queen" it'd be OK.

:dunce: Canada has a nicer song, eh? (See, I'm practicing.) :evilgrin:

[Generic Other]

67. Who wants to take up a collection to buy a DU safe house

on some land in Canada? So we have somewhere to go as refugees.

Tent City in the Yukon anyone?

[0007]

66. ....and dont't forget comely suitable ladies.

[stlsaxman]

69. From "Dr. Strangelove", right? n/t

[0007]

72. 'Ya sailed that one over coconut stlsaxman.

Give me a clue what ya meant, eh?

[stlsaxman]

89. At the end of the movie "Dr. Stranglelove" the president, cabinet and

joint chiefs are all assembled discussing how they will survive the "Doomsday Device". Of course the ratio of women to men in the underground bunkers would have to be 50 to one to rapidly repopulate the planet. One of the lines was real close to "... and don't forget comely suitable ladies".

If you haven't seen "Strangelove", I highly suggest you do. An hilarious tale about the end of the world.

[0007]

91. I've seen it a long time ago and indeed enjoyed the film.

Thank you kindly for your detailed response.

[Jamison]

87. Wisconsin could for sure hold their own in the winter!

If any invading army tried to take Wisconsin in the winter, they'd suffer the same feat as the Germans did at Stalingrad during WW2.

[spuddonna]

5. I had a co-worker who served in Gulf War I...

He was a communications person, watched satellite imagery, reported troop movement...

I asked him once what he thought was the 'worst case scenario' that the USA could get into, and he quickly replied, "A war with China. They have so many soldiers, and nukes to boot. We don't wanna go pissing off that Asian tiger!"

If we start mucking about in Iran, which is a big source of oil for China, we are going to have a much bigger fight on our hands than a 'limited middle eastern police action'...

[woodsprite]

15. Welcome to that most popular war, "Armageddon". n/t

[tatertop]

16. And yet they seem to be seriously thinking about it

[TahitiNut]

6. "1,000,000,000+ US dead."???

Are all us cats going to lose 4 of our 9 lives? With a population less than 300,000,000, 1,000,000,000 is going to be a pretty heavy death toll.

[Spinzonner]

13. Apparently we're expected to

Die, die, die

(plus 33%)

[acmejack]

14. It's how many times we are going to wish we were dead!

If El Idiotica invades

[thefool_wa]

17. If we are going to have nightmares

we might as well have grandiose ones. I could take it for the team a couple of times :)

Hell, 300M is only the census number, what about all the illegals, the homeless, the subversives. There are plenty of ways we could have an extra 700M people lying around. :sarcasm:

OP: no offense intended, just havin fun. Besides, China won't invade until they have a moon base, I assure you.

[LynnTheDem]

24. Oops, that was my posting booboo.

lol!

[thefool_wa]

29. what's an extra couple zeros

between friends :)

[LynnTheDem]

31. LOL!

:D

[mattclearing]

35. You sound like Ken Lay.

;)

[TahitiNut]

50. Sounds more like George talking to Laura about the twins.

:evilgrin: And Laura sez, "Pots and kettles, George."

[TahitiNut]

49. Yep. After all, zeroes mean nothing, right?

:dunce: :rofl:

[TahitiNut]

52. Well, I was just thinking about all those McMansions being empty.

:evilgrin: Between all those deaths and the Rapture, I figure I'll pick one with a hot tub and move in.

[DELUSIONAL]

9. The is as good a prediction as any

I doubt that China would invade -- they are smarter than that -- only the US "leaders" are stupid enough to invade and wonder why US troops keep dying.

There will be a lot of deaths and tactical Nukes will more than likely be used -- plus Iran's allies will have to respond.

It will take the combined forces of the world's powers to take the US dictator down.

We tried to vote the bastard out but with hacked and rigged elections there was no way the majority could prevail.

Right now military suppliers are producing "stuff" for the Iran invasion.

Now is bushie doing this to send a message? His history tells us that when he is determined to invade or attack he will do so -- ignoring all other opinions. So I have a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach.

[Loonman]

12. China

China would have to use about half of the fuel resources on the entire planet just to move it's massive army across the Pacific, so I rule them out as well. China only cares about Taiwan and having enough oil, it's Russia that will come after us.

[woodsprite]

23. Doesn't somebody want to build a bridge between NA and USSR?

Can't remember if it's true or if it was something that was gleaned from a "not-so-trusted" website. OR if it was some dufus in Congress getting paid off by the same guys that donated to DeLay.

[htuttle]

27. Sun Myung Moon wants to do that

He's already collecting money to build it (though he collects money no matter what he's doing). He wants to call it the 'Peace King Tunnel' (and Moon considers himself the 'Peace King').

[thefool_wa]

26. Russia?

They don't have the money to wage war on the other side of the globe, nor do I believe they have the cahones to wage a first strike (their nuclear weapons are worth alot of money on the black market. money they need).

We should fear asian/middle eastern conflict with China, but without a real reason to come after us I don't think we need fear invasion. If they were going to try and incorporate america they would have staged a beachhead on the Gulf Coast in september/october.

That and no moon base :)

[Loonman]

36. No they don't, but they will fight to protect their assets

Putin strikes me as a guy who does not back down. They won't invade the US.....in fact nobody ever will. Ever.

Russia would take an attack on Iran personally, as a personal affront.

[tatertop]

25. I think you are exactly correct. I am scared.

[Jawja]

59. IMHO,

I believe that if we exercise the folly of attacking Iran, it will incite world war. We will be clearly demonstrating that we intend to take and control the petroleum resources.

And I'm becoming more afraid that this cabal might just do it, because they are mad men. After all, Hitler invaded Russia and that wasn't the most prudent of moves. Never underestimate the arrogance of power hungry wanna-be dictators.

[thefool_wa]

10. Iran is a red herring

We will let Israel take care of any isues we have with Iran (i.e. nuclear facilities, etc). Syria should probably still watch its back (BushCo will need a new place to wage war soon), but they seem to be in the midst of political turmoil over the Lebanon assasinations still.

I wonder who we have planted to make sure that goes the wrong way?

[tlsmith1963]

18. If He Does This...

...I will be off to Canada. That will be what does it for me. If we invade Iran, it's over for America. Yes I think Iran is responsible for a lot of the terrorism in the world, but I think Bush wants an empire. He is not the right person to fight terrorism because he is just as evil as the terrorists. The problem is that there are no "good guys" right now. Everyone is bad, on both sides. I want to go to Canada so I can be in a neutral place that doesn't seem to be on either side.

tammy

[thefool_wa]

32. Anywhere

is starting to look better than here.

Think an American could get by in Japan if they don't speak Japanese? I work hard, don't object to exercise and am beginning to hate my automobile.

Or even mexico, that wouldn't be so bad (OMG: I don't believe I'm serious)

[wakeme2008]

34. I think New Zealand would be good.

:)

[thefool_wa]

90. Now there's an option

I hadn't considered. They speak english, have beautiful countrysides, I'll bet there is even work there.

Hmmmmm, I wonder how hard it is to immigrate there (or claim asylum).

[wakeme2008]

93. Info

here is a series of articles about NZ just in a funny order

http://www.escapeartist.com/efam/69/Living_In_New_Zealand.html

[stevietheman]

75. Just as evil?

Heck, Bush is worse than al-Qaeda in terms of the actual damage to our republic. In fact, it's almost as if Bush is al-Qaeda's "Manchurian candidate" robot set to run our beloved republic into the ground on all fronts, militarily, economically, and in terms of foreign policy. It's all-points ruination under Bush, and al-Qaeda's wildest fantasies are being met--Bush is their guy in the U.S.!

[htuttle]

19. "John Titor was a hoax...John Titor was a hoax"

I keep having to remind myself of that fact lately... "John Titor was a hoax..."

[tatertop]

30. The time traveler. He certainly talked a good game.

[tularetom]

21. Seems to me if this is the case

China has it in its power to stop the whole scheme in its tracks. All they have to do is redeem ths bazillions of dollars of US government bonds they hold in their central bank (and/or simply refuse to buy anymore) and bingo * has no more resources to fall back on since he wouldn't dare to raise taxes.

[QuettaKid]

33. scariest thing for me about the whole

war with Iran scenario is that the presidents of BOTH nations, bush and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are religious fundamentalist WACKOS who sincerely believe that their "messiahs" returns are iminent.

[PDJane]

28. If the US takes on Iran..........

It will be a nuclear strike, as being the most efficient way to get the job done.

That will lead to a world war that no-one will be exempt from and no-one will survive....nuclear fallout has this unhappy tendency to move around the planet.

And yes, Israel will be in the middle throwing nukes and bombs around......which is a short-sighted and stupid thing to do.

I despair of this world at the moment.

[butterfly77]

41. Some people here seem to think that we are dealing with ...

sane, rational thinking human beings in this country and the others mentioned. From what we already see out of the irrational Iranian leader and this arrogant dumbass(bush) who thinks he can rule the world.


I believe we are on the verge of some type of destruction. The people who are pushing for war in this country are a bunch of old arrogant greedy men and some women who will be dead soon , and are making choices for the younger generation.

They are reading history books and believe that what happened in the past will happen in the same way now , we have different technological differences and you never know what to expect. Not saying that you don't have to read history, you have to know where you have been, to know where you are going.

[gordianot]

37. Nuclear war is not a viable option even though Bush toys with the idea.

The United States could survive long enough to incinerate China, Russia or any nuclear power wanting an exchange even if they gang up on the United States (and probably other combinations would have the same capability). Reagan Administration brought out the concept of limited nuclear war in the place of Mutual Assured Destruction. MAD is the standard response for China, Russia and the United States. Bush appears to be playing with the idea of a limited nuclear war in the gulf. If one of the sunburn missiles takes out a Nuclear Carrier in the Gulf (breaching the reactor), you have an environmental catastrophe of the first order the first nuclear shot (without owning a bomb)in what could escalate quickly. Only a fool would play nuclear chicken, problem is there is not a fool shortage acting the Middle East.

[Loonman]

39. 'Viable' doesn't matter to Bush

He gets his orderes from God, remember?

[SnowGoose]

38. Why would Iran have to go after our military assets?

It all runs on oil. They turn off the spigot, lob everything they have over the gulf and take out Saudi Arabia's big depot, and convince Chavez not to sell us any oil.

What are we gonna run the planes, ships and tanks on? Testosterone?

I've heard a lot about how militarily devastating a war with Iran would be, but I wonder if they don't have more effective responses at their disposal than fighting us on our terms. A military needs an economy to support it, and our economy runs on oil.

[StellaBlue]

40. Smirkboy needs to be taken to the Hiroshima Museum IMMEDIATELY

What a delusional prick he is. I, too, think the misadministration may be contemplating a limited nuclear attack in the Middle East - which would be suicidal, not to mention blatantly and fundamentaly immoral.

* should be forced to listen to the views of Japanese survivors of the bomb for, oh, about thirty years. While in prison.

[LynnTheDem]

42. bye-bye US Pacific fleet...

The weapon that could defeat the US in the Gulf
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7147.htm

[woodsprite]

43. That's when we all stick our heads between our legs and kiss

our butts "Goodbye!".

There was a movie I saw as a child (probably wasn't supposed to), where there was some kind of global catastrophic action. The couple lived in some kind of hightech modern place and they had 2 children. They gave their children something to euthanize them before they put them to bed and it turned out that it wasn't as bad as they had thought, but now their children were dead, so the parents killed themselves. Think I'm remembering that right. For the life of me, I can't remember the movie title. I also watched Soylent Green and Hit the Beach, and I'm sure it wasn't either one of those.

I have fears that if it looked like Armageddon was here, we'd have fruitcakes galore doing stuff like this because they'd want to "hasten the rapture".

My mother had told me about communities handing out nuclear shelter plans and info where to get the iodine tabs when people left the theaters after watching Hit the Beach. She said she had NEVER been to a movie where everyone let in silence like that.

I hope someone in the admin or military has the cajones to stop the cowboy, the princess and the goon if they try to do this. Surely someone must be sane enough to think this thru and realize it would be a mistake for all mankind. The rich people wouldn't live for long, the world wouldn't be a place they'd want to live in, and let's face it, "You can't take it with you". Afterall, if we have the technology to genetically engineer breasts on mice, you'd think we could do it for "balls" too!

[MikeDuffy]

46. Don't you mean 1959's "On the Beach" (with Gregory Peck, etc)...

rather than "Hit the Beach"?

[Richard Steele]

58. That movie was "The Illustrated Man", 1969 IIRC.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/6300269582/104-4203680-0987942?v=glance#product-details

SNIP:
Description
Sci-fi film adaptation of Ray Bradbury's book
involving a young wanderer who meets a tattooed man
in search of the woman who "illustrated" his body.
When stared at,
the tattoo designs prompt elaborate futuristic visions in the wanderer's mind.

[puerco-bellies]

44. Invasion of the U.S. is impossible.

In order to move sufficient forces across the Pacific you would have to have absolute air, surface, and sub-surface superiority. No Naval force other then the U.S. Navy is even close to this requirement. Then supposing that China or any other potential enemy pulled total lines of communications superiority out of their ass they would still have to secure then hold massive and multiple amphibious landing zone at or near major transportation hubs to achieve a "break out".

If it was tried in L.A. the Chinese couldn't fight their way out of South Central/East L.A. axis (Those pussies in the valley would roll over like circus ponies). :-)

In reality we could bring 20 to 40 million fighters to bear by the time an invader concentrated then launched an invasion force. The only way to counter that would be to launch ICBMs and that would vaporize both sides.

If Dipshit wants Iran, he will use tactical nukes to invade if he does choose to do so. After that it's anyone's guess what happens next, but we can rule out a land invasion of the North American continent.

[gordianot]

48. That is true no invasion.

Another stupid scenario is the use of Nuclear bursts to create Electro Magnetic Pulse EMP or cyber attack, and fry the entire United States electronic infrastructure. From what I have read this would most probably result in a quick catastrophic nuclear exchange. Lots of ways to die in the 21st century.

[0rganism]

45. Attribution? Who is this soldier? Is s/he centcom or SAC?

Is s/he in a position to know?

> 20,000+ US troops dead within the first week.

Seems speculative and unprecedented. This isn't D-Day on the Normandy coast. We're talking unobstructed high-altitude bombing and guided missile strikes of hard-points such as airfields and radar installations in the "shock'n'awe" stage, long before any tanks cross the border.

> Iran's Sunburn missiles will take out every US ship in the Gulf.

If the US military is dumb enough to leave any Iranian airstrips, shipyards, and land-based missile silos intact during an initial bombardment, then this becomes a distant possibility. Still, assumes a level of cluelessness that I would hesitate to apply even to the stupidest Pentagonian.

> Iran's allies will step into the fray.

I would not expect them to be stepping in directly, nor would any forceful response necessarily be aimed at the US. Some may simply seek diplomatic concessions. Israel is a more convenient military target.

> China will be occupying Wisconsin within 3 months.

I have, shall we say, serious doubts about this prediction. China would greatly prefer to negotiate a deal with the US to re-establish stable Iranian oil output rather than risk an invasion of its grade-A #1 trading customer who owes them some serious bucks. They have something like a 1-2 ratio of young people (under 40) to old people (over 60), so a massive overseas deployment would not be considered a wise use of the flower of their youth. They might bring some financial pressure to bear, but an all-out invasion is not in their interests any more than the invasion of Iraq was in ours.

> USA will concede defeat within 4 months.
> 1,000,000+ US dead.

Uh... yeah, sure, whatever.

> And that's without Iranian allies India, Pakistan & China (or the rest of the world)throwing
> nukes at us.

Contrary to popular belief, MAD still exists. India and Pakistan would be loathe to shoot their few nukes our way (India has few if any ICBMs, Pakistan has zero) when they'd much rather aim at each other. China and Russia are a different story, of course, but I can't imagine a scenario where either or both would rather destroy the planet than see Iran's theocracy toppled by the US.

Don't get me wrong, there are lots of excellent reasons not to invade Iran, but Chinese occupation of Wisconsin just isn't on the callback list.

[puerco-bellies]

51. The Gulf is lined with mountains and caves.

There is so much area and favorable terrain to hide missile launchers that attempts to suppress ASCMs (anti-ship cruse missiles) would fall short.

I've done my tour treading between surf-n-turf and hamburger-n-hot dog (patrol points in the Persian Gulf). Believe me that the Iranian Coast is chock full of mountains and caves in which to hide launchers. Don't forget how unsuccessful our scud-hunts were during Gulf War I.

[Moochy]

81. re: Sunburn missles, The most optimistic estimates I've read...

These articles I read cited 2-3 weeks of bombing along that entire coastline would still not be enough to take out 100% of the Katyusha air-to-ship batteries in those mountains. This means they would be able to use these missles to disrupt the flow of oil, though I don't know what Iran's offensive missle capacity is with regard to the oil fields across the straights.

And the sunburns are 1 missle per ship, very high probability of a kill. The stand off range on the sunburn is 250 KM, which means all of our fleet would need to be far off shore, and out of the devastating ship artillery range.

Thanks for the info on the coastline there, Id read that the terrain just keeps getting rockier and rockier as you head east towards beluchistan.. Where Alexander the great lost so many troops, on the way back from india :)

[Balbus]

56. Not to mention there's no place for cheese in Chinese food.

[0rganism]

57. Wisconsonians will be forced at gunpoint to switch to tofu

"Army of Glorious Mao spit on you stinking yellow cow curds, capitalist running dog! You now grow soybean for communist party!"

The Horror!

[Jackpine Radical]

63. Soyheads! Hoodafuk wants ta be a soyhead?

[bpilgrim]

47. DON'T PANIC! WE GOT NUKES!

more...
http://GlobalFreePress.com

peace

[BelgianMadCow]

54. It would be like the invasion of Poland

in the sense of indicating similar moments in both dictator's path.

It doesn't make sense given the stranglehold on the dollar by the chinese, but when did that become a factor?

[realFedUp]

55. I thought the Great Wal-(mart) of China were already occupiers

I call your dare Ms. Rice.

[Orangepeel]

60. more likely the Chinese will just foreclose on Wisconsin

rather than invading it directly

[Disturbed]

62. It does not seem likely that the Bush Junta will attack

Iran.

A lengthy article explains why it is highly unlikely.

http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_printable&report_id=205&language_id=1

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

64. I guess it's time to watch "Dr. Strangelove" again.

[alfredo]

65. Iran could make the Straits of Hormuz a killing zone. We'd have to go

nuclear if we wanted to stand a chance against Iran.

North Korea would have no choice but to strike, knowing they are the remaining name in the Axis of Evil.

[Sterling]

70. Not a very high ranking soldier or strategist

It will be ugly but won't go down like that. It will be a lot like Iraq in that the first part will be easy compared to the occupation if a land invasion is part of the plan at all. Russia and China will do nothing, at least above the table in terms of military intervention.

They will let us bleed ourselves dry while we spend our money degrading the capabilities of two oil rich countries. Russia and Chine benefit from us invading places like Iran on more than one level. The direct benefit is that we pay the price for securing the resources of those countries, they would rather deal with us than any potentially Mullah type entity, at least they know we will do anything for money. The long term benefit is we lose stature while they stay out of the fray and bide their time.

[LynnTheDem]

76. Yes he is, and yes he is.

:)

[JHB]

71. What's this "soldier"'s name? Rumsfeld? He has about that level of...

...understanding of the logistics involved.

The only part that's right is that it would leave the world a royal, eff-d up mess.

[LynnTheDem]

77. Sorry, I'm not giving out his name. And no need for the " ", he is indeed

a career officer. :)

[JHB]

83. Wasn't really asking for his name...

...just noting that you're friend's assesment of the capabilities of all the parties he thinks would be involved sound about as accurate as Rumsfeld's "parades, flowers, and no need for a plan B" foresight, which is even more disconcerting if he's a career officer. But then, Rummy was the only one of the cabal with military experience, and it didn't do him much good either.

[stevietheman]

73. I would even side with the Iranians!

That's how unjustified a strike against Iran is!

[Clarkie1]

74. You lost me with "China will be occupying Wisconsin within 3 months" n/t

[LynnTheDem]

78. And 76% of Americans lost me when they thought Iraq did 911.

:)

[sniffa]

79. this soLdier hasn't seen the movie, 'red dawn'

wisconsin wiLL never submit.

WOLVERINES!

[greblc]

82. Why would China attack the U.S.?

Then they couldn't sell all their shit to us. They own us.

Don't forget , wars are about money.

[Clarkie1]

84. They wouldn't. The idea is ludicrous.

Not to mention suicidal (for China). The Chinese are planning their worldwide economic domination in the context of a generational timeframe; "The New Age of China" is not contigent upon whatever geopolitical events transpire this year or next.

It won't happen militarily (the Chinese are to wise for that), and the East is very likely to succeed unless we are very, very smart. The best we can hope is a balance of power between the East and the West; we will not be the dominant power much longer.

I think the OP is obviously meant to be partly serious, partly flamboyant thought-provoking hyperbole.;)

[Dan]

85. Smile....

No one has to fight. If we attacked Iran, the oil will stop flowing from the middle east.

We will shut down within nine months.

All the rest of the world would have to do is what China would probably do within 30 days...cancel our credit card.

[sidwill]

86. The scenarios put forth in this thread

are not very realistic IMO.

A. Even the Chimps handlers know that an invasion occupation of Iran would be far more costly than Iraq, thus it ain't happenin.

b.Use of nukes against Iran ain't happenin either, primarily because you can accomplish the task of crippling Iran's nuclear program via conventional means alone. Consider that in the early 80's the Israelis decimated Iraqs nuclear program using a few fighter bombers, the damage and expense done to the Iraqi nuke plant was so extensive it basically crippled the program, it was a blow they never could recover from (despite what Cheney said repeatedly).

C. PAkistan may rattle its saber but at the end of the day they will not raise a finger against us as they need us to supply weapons to counter their chief concern India.

D. China, doesn't have to fight a hot war. They are positioned to dominate us economically in the coming decades, they ain't chucking that for a roll of the dice. plus the idea that China could invade mainland USa is a freeper pipe dream. The logistics of transporting a million red chinese fighters across the Pacific to land on the Cali coast are IMPOSSIBLE. Ain't happenin.

Finally, the most realistic scenario is either the US or Israel using conventional weapons to bomb reactor sites in Iran in a limited fashion. this would serve the dual purpose of putting the Iranians years behind schedule in developing a nuclear option and MORE IMPORTANTLY it would serve a useful purpose from a domestic political standpoint, since most of you have noticed the alarming rise in admin support whenever we start blowin shit up.

[LunaC]

88. Some supportive background info

If Israel to attacks Iran as it‘s been threatening, it must cross US-occupied Iraqi air space and in doing so make the U.S. complicit by virtue of acquiescence. Iran will likely retaliate against Israel and U.S. forces with its Sunburn missiles - “the most lethal missile in the world today.”

The Sunburn can deliver a 200-kiloton nuclear payload, or: a 750-pound conventional warhead, within a range of 100 miles, more than twice the range of the Exocet. The Sunburn combines a Mach 2.1 speed (two times the speed of sound) with a flight pattern that hugs the deck and includes “violent end maneuvers” to elude enemy defenses. The missile was specifically designed to defeat the US Aegis radar defense system. Should a US Navy Phalanx point defense somehow manage to detect an incoming Sunburn missile, the system has only seconds to calculate a fire solution –– not enough time to take out the intruding missile. The US Phalanx defense employs a six-barreled gun that fires 3,000 depleted-uranium rounds a minute, but the gun must have precise coordinates to destroy an intruder “just in time.”

The Sunburn’s combined supersonic speed and payload size produce tremendous kinetic energy on impact, with devastating consequences for ship and crew. A single one of these missiles can sink a large warship, yet costs considerably less than a fighter jet. Furthermore, US ships in the Gulfs northern shore will be within range of the Sunburn missiles and the even more-advanced, unstoppable, Russian-made Yakhonts missiles. Protection from the Yakhont antiship missile does not exist.

With enough anti-ship missiles, the Iranians can halt tanker traffic through Hormuz for weeks, even months. With the flow of oil from the Gulf curtailed, the price of a barrel of crude will skyrocket on the world market. Within days the global economy will begin to grind to a halt. Tempers at an emergency round-the-clock session of the UN Security Council will flare and likely explode into shouting and recriminations as French, German, Chinese and even British ambassadors angrily accuse the US of allowing Israel to threaten world order.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7147.htm

Iran is the home of China's largest energy-related investments so a conflict with Iran will not only bring China to the table, but its Russian ally as well. ”The Putin government has consistently maintained that Russia would not support UN Security Council resolutions that condemn Iran's nuclear energy program or apply economic sanctions against Iran.

“Beijing has echoed Moscow's opposition to UN action against Iran. After concluding the historic gas and oil deal between China and Iran in October 2004, China's Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing announced that China would not support UN Security Council action against Iran's nuclear energy program. Opposition in Moscow and Beijing to UN action against Iran is significant because both countries hold UN Security Council veto power. “

“To China and Russia, Washington's "democratic reform program" is a thinly disguised method for the US to militarily dispose of unfriendly regimes in order to ensure the country's primacy as the world's sole superpower. The China-Iran-Russia alliance can be considered as Beijing's and Moscow's counterpunch to Washington's global ambitions. From this perspective, Iran is integral to thwarting the Bush administration's foreign policy goals. This is precisely why Beijing and Moscow have strengthened their economic and diplomatic ties with Tehran. It is also why Beijing and Moscow are providing Tehran with increasingly sophisticated weapons.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/GF04Ad07.html

With Iran on the PNAC “hit list”, Israel and Iran locked in a stand-off and refusing to back down, and Russia and China waiting in the wings ready to protect their own interests and ally, we are quickly coming to the Brink of Disaster.

But I can't see Wisconsin being occupied.......

[yurbud]

92. All accept Wisconsin accurate--China isn't that stupid and

they don't have the naval and air power to cross the ocean anyway.