Geo-Politics

[fett]

Heh, that's what everbody was sayin' in 2004. Some backlash.

Better late than never.:ROTF: :ROTF: :ROTF:

[horns666]

I'm going with Rich's theories on this one..He always "gets it"..

I think!

[SeventhSon]

I went To Canada once..I was on the Maiden of the mist..or whatever the hell that boat is called..

I wore a blue pastic thingy..it was kewl..

Niagra Falls! me too!

[SeventhSon]

Here's what I don't get. We, the neocons, ( I'm reading a great book about the Iraq War) saw fit to invade a country, Iraq, and overthrow a government based on "facts" that weren't. The muted response by the West regarding the current situation blows my mind. It's like they want this decades old "situation" to play itself out now and they know who will win. The status won't be so quo when this is all over.

This is precisely why the iraq war was a mistake. because iran and n korea HAVE nuclear weapons and we can't do fuck all about it.

[RacerX]

MAID of the Mist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maid_of_the_Mist

[MichaelLitvak]

Remember the big party when Lebanon told Syria to take a hike? What if they had kept pushing and risked civil war against Hizbullah? What if they had gone to the security council when things got dicey? I'm not saying I know how it would have turned out, but at least they could have tried.

i dont think a civil war would help.. Hizbullah is too powerfull.. right now they're kicking Israel's ass.. thats what i think .. thats my point of view.. since most of my family lives in northen Israel and now.. them and about 250 000 more people have to live in bunkers so missiles dont kill them.

Lebanon has a small military force but not big enough to compete with Hizbullah.. infact, since Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, a lot of Lebanese soldiers withdrew from Lebanon to Israel.. and they now live in Israel .. see the thing is.. Israeli people and Arabs get along very well.. its just these stupid terrorists

we got so much in common, we eat the same food, a lot of us know how to speak eachothers language, our cultures are very simular and we both smoke flavored tobbaco out of big bongs

but we still kill eachother..

[zeegler]

We should all just get high. There would be no wars if we all were high. There might be some discussion about who goes to the store to buy munchies, but no harsh words, and certainly no bloodshed.

[horns666]

W had Saddam in his sights as soon as he took office..he tried to kill his poppa.

[horns666]

MAID of the Mist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maid_of_the_Mist

Thanks Ron..

Yeah, That was a cool experience..I have pics!!

Fett, My dad was sent to the pricipal's office everytime he refused to do "Duck and Cover" drills..he told the nuns.."if we get hit, we'll be dead ducks"...scaring the crap out of all the kids..

I'm positive I would be sent there too..I lived in the Principal's office anywhoo..I had my own chair in there..

[lerxstcat]

This is precisely why the iraq war was a mistake. because iran and n korea HAVE nuclear weapons and we can't do fuck all about it.

Not entirely true. North Korea is under China's wing; we can't fuck with them without bringing in China unless L'il Kim does something really stupid.

Iran we aren't sure has nukes, we will probably find out soon as they'll use 'em if they've got 'em. IF they use 'em, the gloves are off and we will nuke the fuck out of the 10 largest Iranian cities. You can bank on that. Syria might get a few too, just in case they have Saddam's old WMDs and are thinking of using them. We will probably not start nuking, but if they're used on us or Israel we will use them liberally. No pun intended.

[YetAnotherOne]

Even disregarding China, North Korea has something just short of 20,000 large fixed artillery positions sunk into the mountains just north of the DMZ. Ten minutes after any action against them begins there would be nothing left of Seoul but a smoking crater. Military action against North Korea has never really been an option.

When push finally comes to shove on the Iranian issue the middle east's Arab states are very likely to decide that being subjects of the newly-revived greater Persian empire isn't really in their best interests. You can see this line of thought developing in today's Arab League meeting at which Hizb'Allah was roundly criticized while the expected criticism of Israel was a bit more muted than normal. I seriously doubt that many tears would be shed in private in that part of the world if Israel or the US decided to neuter Iran.

The real issue in addressing both the North Korean and Iranian threats is the fact that there's a very pronounced lack of seriousness in the international community right now. Most of the developed world are still riding their post-Cold War highs and until there are very pointed threats aimed squarely at them they'll continue to ignore the gathering stormclouds. In that respect we're definitely reliving the 1930s but the coming troubles will be quite different in character.

[petedz]

How would one go about neutering Iran? I'm only asking because I've read a lot of professional opinions saying that it can't be done. It's a similar situation to North Korea:geography combined with a darned big standing army.

[horns666]

How would one go about neutering Iran? I'm only asking because I've read a lot of professional opinions saying that it can't be done. It's a similar situation to North Korea:geography combined with a darned big standing army.

Nuke 'em if you got 'em..

I guess..

[lerxstcat]

How would one go about neutering Iran? I'm only asking because I've read a lot of professional opinions saying that it can't be done. It's a similar situation to North Korea:geography combined with a darned big standing army.

Iran doesn't already have nuclear weapons, and it doesn't have a superpower like China backing it up like North Korea does. Russia will object to us neutering Iran, but isn't in position to do anything. The PLA could pour into North and South Korea tomorrow, plus L'il Kim DOES have several nuclear weapons. He can't hit us, but he CAN hit Japan, which would hurt the world economy.

The Iranian army is on the US model of 30-40 years ago. It barely held off Iraq's Soviet-modeled army - the one we went through like a hot knife through butter. The geography is not a big obstacle when you can clear forces from mountain valleys with Predator drones using tactical nukes. Such tactical nukes might not even be detected as their effects will often be confrined to those small mountain valleys, and they are flash bombs with little residual radiation. You take out the military force behind the next pass, wait a day and march on through.

We also don't need to occupy the entire country to eliminate it as a military and economic threat. We can do that largely from the air and sea. We may take a few hits until we've sighted in on their air defense and command/control systems, then the next couple waves of US attacks will destroy those systems. Armies that can't communicate, or coordinate, will be cut apart. 100,000 US troops can beat a million Iranians that way, easily. With Israel's eager assistance we will cut their military to pieces.

[petedz]

Interesting.

I'm not sure the goalposts are set correctly. To me, neutering Iran would mean removing them from the table as a sponsor of terrorism. An occupation, which would be the only way to eliminate Iran as an economic (terror sponsoring) threat, is logistically and politically untenable. Without an occupation the oil money would still be in the hands of even more pissed off terrorists after the dust settles.

Although I can't argue the practicality, the political fallout from the use of tactical nukes would suck. Our name in the "international community" (whatever the heck that is) would be mud. Besides, elimination of Iran as a military threat is not a worthwhile aim--their military is mostly defensive for the very reasons you outlined.

A better place to set the goalposts is making sure the mullahs don't get nukes, but bombing their nuclear power sites has it's own pitfalls. The only thing keeping the mullahs fingers out of Iraq is the implicit threat of U.S. military action, so after we bomb.... Also, if we're the ones who stir the anthill with our big stick, Israel would be left holding the bag.

Better if we let Israel do the bombing and then brandish a rolled up newspaper and say, "Bad dog, Israel! Very bad dog!" That way we are still holding the threat of doing something worse over the mullahs heads, and Israel can polish its slightly tarnished reputation as badasses.

Unfortunately that scenario leaves Iran pretty much un-neutered.