Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Russians will extend their sphere of influence which is exactly what they want.
They can do that without firing a shot. All they have to do is put their thumb on the scale and help get a complete dunderhead elected as head of their major competition.
OK, the question stated in the thread title is "would an Israeli attack on Iran be successful". It doesn't factor a US involved joint attack. Thus my question is what is the objective of such an attack? Remember, all action in the ME has not involved Israeli forces. Even when a direct attack on Israel was undertaken in Desert Storm. The attack was an attempt to force Israel into the conflict, which would have alienated the Arab support in the war. (sigh)
It's a well known fact that any joint US/Israeli action against any Muslim nation would be a disaster to already tenuous US/ Arab or Islamic countries. Hypothetically, a joint US and Israeli attack on Iran would be .....effectively conducted. At least in initial strikes against Irans ability to wage war. Israeli forces are very good at breaking things and killing people, and combined with US forces a strike on it would be a serious punch. Now, are we talking about a preliminary strike as a precursor to and invasion? Attack and invasion are different subjects.
A joint US/Israeli invasion of Iran risks every Arab/Muslim nation declaring war on Israel and the US. The whole ME would go up like 20 gallons of gasoline and a Zippo. So factoring in US involvement with Israel in an actual invasion of Iran....my answer is no. It would be a total disaster. Could Israel pull off a successful heavy strike on Iran....yes, they could. Again, seeing the whole ME going up in flames and ally against Israel. Israel is a formidable nation, which has been proven in the past, but do thy have enough to take on Iran plus all those other countries that would be looking to smash them? I have my doubts as to that.
Egypt alone has some serious firepower. Supplied by the US. Israel would be up against some pretty serious problems, which US military involvement in would be drinking kerosene and whizzing on a brushfire. If Iran provokes a reason for war with them it needs to be of sufficient portent to justify it. Such as an organized and sizable strike against our naval forces in the region. Not with plywood and fiberglass speed boats, but with more capital naval and air power. Which I find unlikely they are stupid enough to try.
And with a threat like NK in the mix, we (being the US) do not have sufficient assets to deal with pretty much the entire ME and NK. A major conflict igniting in the ME would be just the thing Kim Jong Un would see as an open door. In Tsun Tsu's The Art of War there is a philosophy the Japanese call Kai Ho. It means a gap, an opening, enter swiftly. The North Koreans would see US involvement in a war with Iran and subsequently the whole ME, which would stretch our forces thin to transparency, as such a gap or opening.
The US does not currently have the deployable forces to contend with conflict on the scale we are talking about. Not even with NATO and UN support. Personally, I don't want to see war break out. I believe we should pull back from where we are involved already, Afghanistan in particular, and regroup and build up our forces. naval, ground and air. Not to go to war, but to be formidable enough to deter it. As things stand we are not ready.
And by any definition, the Iraqi war was NOT successful. It didn't achieve anything it wanted before the war, and it gives the US a bad name.
BS! So tell me what was "wanted before the war". "By any definition not successful" You're are joking right? It achieved exactly what was wanted. Chaos!
So we went to war with a country. Its leader was killed, cities destroyed, 500,000 of that countries population dead, region thrown into chaos and its standing army was destroyed. We lost
4,486 soldiers.
So what did you think we were going to accomplish with a war? When all the coalitions of countries joined the USA to take down Iraqi, what did you really think was going to happen?
You're naive. Before the war the reason given was to destroy WMDs, and links between Hussein terrorists. No WMD and no Saddam.
So tell me again what we wanted before the war? Terrorist? Hahaha. We wanted to eliminate Saddam and any power he could wield in that region regardless of anything stated as a cause. That was accomplished.
We have destroyed Syria, Iraqi, Libya and Afghanistan. Nearly helped topple Egypt and the other five countries where the Arab spring took hold. Who do you think is responsible for that?
Iraqi dead 500,000
Afghanistan dead 150,000
Syrian Dead 475,000
Libya estimate about 25,000
We lost4,486 soldiers in Iraq and 2,345 soldiers in Afghanistan.
You tell me what military analyst, historian wouldn't like those numbers and call it a success by any definition.
Take your rose colored glasses off. War is never for the greater good or lofty ideas. It is to destroy and we have done that at very little loss.
Gives the USA a bad name? LOL! Just wait until the next conflict. Every single country will line up again to support just like they did in Iraqi. Now, If it goes on for years again, then they will have time to throw some shade on the aggression for some time and feel a little guilty. Then back to it again.
The underlying threat presented by Iran is their plan to replace all their domestic utility oil consumption with nuclear power so they can then sell that oil on the internationals market. If they do this they will destabilize that market and destroy the control currently being exercised by the Saudi Kingdom. The Control of Oil is still one driving force in the Middle East.
Another factor is the endless enmity between most of the Muslims and Israel. This is less religion, as Judaism is in the Book, as it is Israel being a European, mostly Russian, cultural and economic colony in Muslim lands. Do not confuse Arabia with Persia. They are completely different. The religious leaders of Iran would just as soon get rid of Israel. This is all they have in common with the Arabs.
The other difference between Iran (Persia) and the Saudi's and other Arabs is the Arabs are mostly Sunni Islam and the Iranians are Shia. This conflict goes back to which tribe should have inherited Mohammed's power so is inherently a really long lasting family fight. Both side are really fanatical about this. This is definitely a fight we and the rest of the West, Christian or not, should stay as far away from as we can. If we have to sacrifice our Saudi oil suppliers it will be far less expensive than trying to fight the Iranians over oil they are willing to sell to anyone that can accept the discounted price.
In summary we, The US and the rest of the West, should get out of the Middle East and let the people that live there settle their own differences in their own way. All we can do, like anybody interfering in a family fight, is to loose far more then we will ever gain.
Even a short read of history tells us that many empires have collapsed because they became overextended and bankrupted by war. It was the main driver of the collapse of both Rome and England's empires. When you are the hegemonic power for too long you get lulled into thinking you have absolute power to mold the world to your wishes. The result is you spend your resources and national treasure on unnecessary wars of choice and end up bleeding your country dry.
From the initial invasion of Iraq to the end of 2007, the US spent $720 million dollars per day on that war. To put that in perspective, the 10 mile light rail line that Minnesota recently built between downtown Minneapolis and St Paul cost a billion dollars. We basically burned 3/4 of one of those every day we were in Iraq. Think of all of the other things we could have done with that money. Another major war of choice could bankrupt this country. We still have to pay for the last one, which we put on the credit card.
If we attack Iran, and it turns into a protracted war, we are probably done as the global superpower.
Destroy their nuclear energy program and foment a regime change.
Who will win and win what?
Ordinarily I don’t respond to troll threads, but the US will by ridding Iran of the mad mullahs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
