Please make legitimate arguments why we are not going to Iran.

[hang a left]

If Russia and China say "no dice", then what? What if Russia and China threaten to put the hurt on the US? Wouldn't that give our regime the impetus to work things out diplomatically?

[Greeby]

1. China's "ecnomic trigger"

Thanks to Bush racking so much debt held by the Chinese, the day they cash in is the day they bring down the United States without firing a shot

[Toots]

17. What is to stop Bush* from defaulting

That is the Major Risk anyone buying US Treasury Bonds. The USA is not an honest dealer. Our Government LIES and would not hesitate to just declare China an enemy and freeze their assets. I think the US broke every treaty it ever signed with Native Americans.

[Buck Rabbit]

18. True, but our economy would still be toast.

We don't have the capacity to instantly produce the products that we are now getting from China. We would have major shortages and pay a fortune for those items we could manage to find elsewhere.

Need new rotors for the brakes for your cars? Most of the plants that used to produce them are shutdown and the equipment sold off, scraped or moth balled. This is true of thousands of products where the Chinese have replaced our manufacturing capability and it would take years to get it back on line.

Who would invest billions to retool these abandoned manufacturing facilities knowing that the minute this tiff is resolved the flood of Chinese product would pour back in.

[reichstag911]

2. The fact that we're bogged down in Iraq...

...should be sufficient deterrent to attacking a country three times Iraq's size and population, but never underestimate Bush's delusional tendencies. Rationalism doesn't seem to enter into their foreign policy calculus.

[MadMaddie]

3. You know what * is determined to attack Iran...

He is driven by insanity....He will attack Iran no matter what Russia and China say.....no matter what the consequences..

He wants to usher in the end of the world...This is the legacy that he wants for himself...
This is why there is (was) a seperation of Church and state.

Negotiation has never been a trait that * would use even if he had it...

[cali]

13. We won't be going into Iran

Iran is not Iraq. It's a country with 70 million people and a real armed forces. We don't have the military capacity to go inot Iran and bush knows it. In addition, bush is an unpopular 2nd term president already facing the specter of Impeachment should the Congress change to Dem. Making a move that would almost certainly make him even less popular, is not something the admin can afford to do.

[northzax]

4. no, why don't you make rational arguments about why we are?

but here are three anyway.

1: we don't have the military capacity.
2: we can't afford it.
3: see options one and two.

[hang a left]

8. Well I have always thought that ** would....

And we have talked about it for years here. We all thought it would be in the Spring of 05. Most of the arguments around here are WHY we are going to Iran. Once in a while someone will post reason why we are not.

I just want to be reminded....for hope's sake.

[northzax]

14. Iran was never really on the table

from any sort of rational framework. Now obviously, rational is not a word I would use in combination with much of the foreign policy of this administration, but there are still limits (you notice we never attacked North Korea, for instance. we don't like fighting people who strike back. And Iran can make us bleed much more than the insurgents/terrorists/freedom fighters/whatevers in Iraq.

We don't have the capacity to take Iran, we can destroy their military in the blink of an eye (except maybe those frightening as hell sunburn anti-ship missiles) but we would be facing an educated, relatively affluent and pissed off society. we'd lose 15,000 soldiers in the first 12 months.

Just because people keep posting old news as new news, and screaming about Iran, doesn't mean it's actually going to happen. We might once have bombed Iran, but we don't even have the capacity to take out their entire nuclear production systems (if we can even find them) without the use of Nukes. Bush is not crazy, and he's not that dumb, and the people surrounding him aren't that dumb. They had to lie to us to get into Iraq, and it was amateur night when they did. There is no way that Iran is next.

it's worth keeping an eye on, but not worth freaking out over, as so many people here tend to do, over and over.

[hang a left]

20. Would the US consider doing it with Israel.

Like for instance if Israel were to preemptively strike Iran?

[northzax]

22. I don't think so

but perhaps. The reason I don't buy it is because no one on this side, at least, wants a holy war, which would be the end result. If Israel were to strike Iran, at this point, the Arab states, including such putatively friendly ones like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Oman, would have no choice but to engage, in some way. If not militarily, then retribution against Israel in some way, and any perceived accomplices. If they didn't, their streets would rise and the governments would fall. There is no way that Dubai could continue as a US port, no way that Kuwait could continue to openly support the US in Iraq, etc. In addition, Russia would go, well, batshit on Iran's behalf, further destabalizing that section of the world. The Suez Canal would be closed, and much of the Gulf and Red Sea would be bascially closed to shipping from the threat of Iranian Sunburn missiles.

We understand that Israel is not, for both good and bad reasons, very popular in that neck of the woods right now, and hitching our star to them in such an action would be suicide for any regional ambitions we might still have.

This is not to say that Israel doesn't have good reason to try and eliminate the Iranian Nuclear threat, it well may have, but we should not be along for the ride.

[ProfessorGAC]

24. You're Dead On The Money, northzax

With all of these past few posts. It's not going to happen. The military won't play ball, the Congress won't play ball, they will never be able to sell it to the people (even the stupid ones), and the international community will finally say "Enough!"
The Professor

[northzax]

25. thanks, prof-

sometimes fighting the tide is tough, you know?

[ProfessorGAC]

26. I Know

See the threads on the iranian bourse subject. My work shows that it is much ado about nothing. I get hammered over that opinion.
The Professor

[northzax]

27. work? but when you actually study things

they aren't as bad, and then the bogeyman isn't in the corner anymore. that requires thought, mi amigo, thought. and that's no fun, is it?

[ProfessorGAC]

28. No. I'll Just Sit Over Here And Shutup Now!

Not fun, amico mio!
The Professor

[hang a left]

29. That makes total sense to me.

You have convinced me. I will just worry about getting enough tuna under the beds in the house now. ;)

[northzax]

30. make sure you get mercury-free tuna!

otherwise you'll end up in the loony bin next to Rummy!

[Redstone]

5. What'll we go there WITH? We don't have much left. Also: The Iranians

(unlike the Iraqis) will fight. I mean to say that they'll give us a damn bloody nose before following the Iraqi lesson and bleeding us bit by bit.

Redstone

[katinmn]

6. The wackos in the WH have themselves in a corner.

Unpopular president, unpopular war, Republicans fleeing, serious debt that cannot be sustained.

They need to follow through with "the Long War" to hang on to their power.

[IsItJustMe]

7. The Chinese and the Russians were not on board when chimp invaded Iraq. So

I don't think that argument would keep chimp from going in.

I think that the biggest reason why chimp would have second thoughts is oil.

If chimp attacks, Iran could cause the beginning of the end, if they turned on their own oil wells and started destroying them. This could cause international oil markets to crash overnight and bring on a world wide depression. The results of this is totally unpredictable and have very very serious consequences.

Another reason is that Iran has huge support in Southern Iraq. So far, Iran has been playing it cool there; however, don't let that fool you. They could cause a literal hell on earth for our troops there, if they so desired.

[hang a left]

10. If I remember correctly....

we got a resolution from the security counsel for inspections, I think it was resolution 1441. We unilaterally determined that Iraq was in violation of that resolution. But we didn't go back to get a vote to use force because we didn't have the votes.

[IsItJustMe]

12. That's the way I recall it. But at the time, both the Chinese and the

Russians were issuing serious warnings that this going into Iraq was not a good idea. The extent of their objections is always hard to measure.

[msatty99]

9. Rhetoric isn't Ripe Yet

I don't think Iranian invasion or war is immenient. The Prez isn't hyperventilating like he
did before Iraq. He is bluffing. My guts tell me they are actually going to do whatever they
are going to do in cooperation with UN.

Second, it seems pretty obvious that we are WAY too bogged up in Iraq and Afghanistan right
now.

Third, Pakistan is a HUGE problem.

Fourth, I understand reliable intel is that a large portion of Iranian society is much more
moderate than the Iraqui or Afghan government prior to our invasions.

Fifth, Bush, at such a low ebb in popularity doesn't have the political capitol to get it
done even if he wanted to.

I could go on...but I will suffice to say that I actually think that we are desperately looking
for a face saving way to exit the Iraq nightmare. Bush has to have a plausible way out that
lets us 'look good' and leaves the country intact enough for us to continue to get some oil
outta there.

[TomClash]

11. Here's why

Iran probably already has nuclear weapons.

We can't invade because we are bogged down militarily in Iraq.

It could disrupt the supply of oil and throw the world into a recession.

There's no support on the Hill for an invasion of Iran - not even from Repukes.

[warrens]

15. We don't have the troops

We can't even beat a few dead-enders in Iraq...

[elehhhhna]

16. 130,000 troops as sitting ducks,

[magneto]

19. peace

It might give OUR regime the motivation to work things out peacefully, sure, it could happen. However, for real peace to take hold, IRAN will have to be motivated to be peaceful.

That's a variable that is not under our control.:think:

[Sgent]

21. I wouldn't rule out

a strike or strikes (see Libya 1984) if we can get to their nuclear programs, but I don't see us performing an all out invasion / occupation.

[rucky]

23. What does "rational" have to do with it?

They're going to do what they're going to do & damn logic, reason, security, diplomacy...