We aren't invading Iran. Idiot Son has depleted the military.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

As much as Idiot Son wants to, he can't. Not enough soldiers.

[Donnachaidh]

1. yeah but he's got all those pretty PLANES with bombs

He's not going to leave office until he uses ALL out armaments. :frown:

[oldtimecanuk]

2. He does'nt care if we have.....

enough soldiers or not. His only reason to invade Iran would be to either still power by declaring Military rule, or just to deflect pressure off of his Administration. He is completely unbalanced, and nothing is beyond him doing.

ww

[leveymg]

3. Those he has left aren't particularly willing to go there, as well.

:kick:

[redqueen]

4. Oh how I dearly wish you were right.

Unfortunately, though... air attacks don't require lots of troops, do they?

[paparush]

5. Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations (Joint Publication 3-12)

Known in official Washington, as "Joint Publication 3-12", the new nuclear doctrine Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations , (DJNO) (March 2005)) calls for "integrating conventional and nuclear attacks" under a unified and "integrated" Command and Control (C2).

It largely describes war planning as a management decision-making process, where military and strategic objectives are to be achieved, through a mix of instruments, with little concern for the resulting loss of human life.

Military planning focuses on "the most efficient use of force" , -i.e. an optimal arrangement of different weapons systems to achieve stated military goals. In this context, nuclear and conventional weapons are considered to be "part of the tool box", from which military commanders can pick and choose the instruments that they require in accordance with "evolving circumstances" in the war theater. (None of these weapons in the Pentagon's "tool box", including conventional bunker buster bombs, cluster bombs, mini-nukes, chemical and biological weapons are described as "weapons of mass destruction" when used by the United States of America and its coalition partners).

The stated objective is to:

"ensure the most efficient use of force and provide US leaders with a broader range of strike options to address immediate contingencies. Integration of conventional and nuclear forces is therefore crucial to the success of any comprehensive strategy. This integration will ensure optimal targeting, minimal collateral damage, and reduce the probability of escalation." (Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations p. JP 3-12-13)

The new nuclear doctrine turns concepts and realities upside down. It not only denies the devastating impacts of nuclear weapons, it states, in no uncertain terms, that nuclear weapons are "safe" and their use in the battlefield will ensure "minimal collateral damage and reduce the probability of escalation". The issue of radioactive fallout is barely acknowledged with regard to tactical nuclear weapons. These various guiding principles which describe nukes as "safe for civilians" constitute a consensus within the military, which is then fed into the military manuals, providing relevant "green light" criteria to geographical commanders in the war theater.

THIS is how our administration plans to deal with Iran. They know we do not have the conventional forces. They know Iran has strong defences.

[Nutmegger]

6. They'll find the mercenaries that they'll need for an invasion.

They're already doing that with the escalation.

[Jacobin]

7. aerial bombardment does not require soldiers

He has three carrier groups in the gulf.

[oldtimecanuk]

9. Unforetuneatly.... if he does decide to Invade...

I don't see China, Russia, North Korea just standing on the sidelines and letting Iran be pulverized.

ww

[MadHound]

8. Can you say draft?

I can, and I can easily see how it comes about. There is some faux Reichstag moment, complete with horrific casulaties that is tied to Iran. Bush states that we need to invade Iran for all the usual faux patriotic reasons. And that we're going to have to sacrifice. One of those sacrifices will be the draft. And the shell shocked, easily herded American sheeple will baaa their approval as their great leader guides them into another hellish war.

Yeah, I can easily see it happening.

[The Blue Flower]

10. Image in my head

I have this cartoon image in my head of * shouting and saber-rattling across a fence at Ahmadinejad and Ahmadinejad taunting back, "Oh, yeah? You and what army?"

[Richard Steele]

11. That just means we can't invade Iran SUCCESSFULLY. Never stopped B*sh before.

[Captain Hilts]

12. The navy's the smallest it's been since BEFORE the First World War. nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

13. You're right. Bush would never do something stupid...

and without aforethought.

[Pathwalker]

14. Do you think we don't have an Air Force, with bombs?

Besides, not many have even suggested an invasion, but they have suggestedan air assault, which can easily be "accomplished".

[librechik]

15. that didn't stop him before. HE'S not affected by that. He just gives the orders.

If other people fuck up, that's not his problem--he still "looks strong."

[havocmom]

16. Don't need many. No plans to WIN, only keep a fight on to funnel $$

Gotta keep the alchemy goin... gotta keep turnin blood into gold

Destroying America is part of the Corporate Plan.

[Jim Warren]

17. What about the IDF

What do think they'll be doing during an attack?

[oldtimecanuk]

18. I can see them losing some Carrier Groups though....

Remember, Russia has armed the Iranians to the teeth with those missle launchers.... They say 29 in all, but there could very well be more. It would'nt take alot to take out an Aircraft carrier.

ww

[Ganja Ninja]

19. So he'll nuke them instead ...

or bomb them whatever. No matter what he does it will be turn out to be a disaster for everyone except his rich war profiteering buddies and the House of Saud.