How Iran would retaliate if it comes to war

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Magnus Ranstorp at the Center for Asymmetric Threat Studies at the Swedish National Defense College in Stockholm.

[HAL 9000 96]

And I doubt that you could destroy the will of the Iranian people to fight back. Something most military operations tend to ignore in conventional warfare.

There wouldn't be anyone to fight back against. We would bomb the sh!t out of them from the air and leave them to it. They wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

That brings me to a previous question... if we did that we could steak their oil but would have to decontaminate it... who's interested?

[GaryC 7]

And I doubt that you could destroy the will of the Iranian people to fight back. Something most military operations tend to ignore in conventional warfare.

There wouldn't be anyone to fight back against. We would bomb the sh!t out of them from the air and leave them to it. They wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

That brings me to a previous question... if we did that we could steak their oil but would have to decontaminate it... who's interested?

No need to nuke them, just drop a bunch of MOAB's on their military installations. I have nothing against the people, just the nut jobs running the place.

[HAL 9000 96]

And I doubt that you could destroy the will of the Iranian people to fight back. Something most military operations tend to ignore in conventional warfare.

There wouldn't be anyone to fight back against. We would bomb the sh!t out of them from the air and leave them to it. They wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

That brings me to a previous question... if we did that we could steak their oil but would have to decontaminate it... who's interested?

No need to nuke them, just drop a bunch of MOAB's on their military installations. I have nothing against the people, just the nut jobs running the place.

That would be fine assuming the people living in that country, including the ones that elected those nutjobs, would welcome such military action with open arms. Thinking of the country next door, I doubt that would be the case.

[mawilson 2,133]

And I doubt that you could destroy the will of the Iranian people to fight back. Something most military operations tend to ignore in conventional warfare.

There wouldn't be anyone to fight back against. We would bomb the sh!t out of them from the air and leave them to it. They wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

Nuclear physicists and engineers working at their underground military installations are hardly "innocents".

Edited June 20, 2008 by mawilson

[GaryC 7]

And I doubt that you could destroy the will of the Iranian people to fight back. Something most military operations tend to ignore in conventional warfare.

There wouldn't be anyone to fight back against. We would bomb the sh!t out of them from the air and leave them to it. They wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

That brings me to a previous question... if we did that we could steak their oil but would have to decontaminate it... who's interested?

No need to nuke them, just drop a bunch of MOAB's on their military installations. I have nothing against the people, just the nut jobs running the place.

That would be fine assuming the people living in that country, including the ones that elected those nutjobs, would welcome such military action with open arms. Thinking of the country next door, I doubt that would be the case.

Since no boots would be put on the ground it wouldn't matter if they liked it or not. As long as they could no longer make nuke bombs.

[HAL 9000 96]

And I doubt that you could destroy the will of the Iranian people to fight back. Something most military operations tend to ignore in conventional warfare.

There wouldn't be anyone to fight back against. We would bomb the sh!t out of them from the air and leave them to it. They wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

Nuclear physicists and engineers working at their underground military installations are hardly "innocents".

This is of course, assuming they're working on WMDs.

And you still have to address the whole violation of sovereign territory bit... I'd like to see the flipside argument... what anyone of us would do if any generic country was bombing our military installations with military personnel for working on WMDs that are known to exist.

And I doubt that you could destroy the will of the Iranian people to fight back. Something most military operations tend to ignore in conventional warfare.

There wouldn't be anyone to fight back against. We would bomb the sh!t out of them from the air and leave them to it. They wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

That brings me to a previous question... if we did that we could steak their oil but would have to decontaminate it... who's interested?

No need to nuke them, just drop a bunch of MOAB's on their military installations. I have nothing against the people, just the nut jobs running the place.

That would be fine assuming the people living in that country, including the ones that elected those nutjobs, would welcome such military action with open arms. Thinking of the country next door, I doubt that would be the case.

Since no boots would be put on the ground it wouldn't matter if they liked it or not. As long as they could no longer make nuke bombs.

Like I said, assuming. I guess (to put it in realistic context) you'd need actual proof and their use would be intentionally hostile, none of which have materialized to this date...

Again we remind ourselves of the country next door...

[GaryC 7]

Like I said, assuming. I guess (to put it in realistic context) you'd need actual proof and their use would be intentionally hostile, none of which have materialized to this date...

Again we remind ourselves of the country next door...

There is very little doubt of what they are doing. When you consider the public statements of their leader their intent also leaves little room for doubt.

[HAL 9000 96]

Like I said, assuming. I guess (to put it in realistic context) you'd need actual proof and their use would be intentionally hostile, none of which have materialized to this date...

Again we remind ourselves of the country next door...

There is very little doubt of what they are doing. When you consider the public statements of their leader their intent also leaves little room for doubt.

And that is not proof. Wars to destroy first strike capabilities are waged when the intended target has them.

[mawilson 2,133]

And I doubt that you could destroy the will of the Iranian people to fight back. Something most military operations tend to ignore in conventional warfare.

There wouldn't be anyone to fight back against. We would bomb the sh!t out of them from the air and leave them to it. They wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

Nuclear physicists and engineers working at their underground military installations are hardly "innocents".

This is of course, assuming they're working on WMDs.

And you still have to address the whole violation of sovereign territory bit... I'd like to see the flipside argument... what anyone of us would do if any generic country was bombing our military installations with military personnel for working on WMDs that are known to exist.

We're not "any generic country". We're America, the most powerful nation on Earth -

the only country in the world that can make tough decisions such as this one.

[HAL 9000 96]

And I doubt that you could destroy the will of the Iranian people to fight back. Something most military operations tend to ignore in conventional warfare.

There wouldn't be anyone to fight back against. We would bomb the sh!t out of them from the air and leave them to it. They wouldn't have anyone to shoot at.

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

Nuclear physicists and engineers working at their underground military installations are hardly "innocents".

This is of course, assuming they're working on WMDs.

And you still have to address the whole violation of sovereign territory bit... I'd like to see the flipside argument... what anyone of us would do if any generic country was bombing our military installations with military personnel for working on WMDs that are known to exist.

We're not "any generic country". We're America, the most powerful nation on Earth -

the only country in the world that can make tough decisions such as this one.

My country- right or wrong ey... ?

SSDD, brother.

BTW- generic country could be any country.

[mawilson 2,133]

My country- right or wrong ey... ?

SSDD, brother.

BTW- generic country could be any country.

I don't know what "SSDD" is, but I know what your problem is.

You think America is "just another country", like Belgium or Uruguay.

[Scott & Lai 12]

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

That brings me to a previous question... if we did that we could steak their oil but would have to decontaminate it... who's interested?

What common ground do with have with Iran that would be the basis for diplomacy, considering Ahmadinejad's stated goal of wiping Israel off the map, and his looking to a future without the existence of the U.S.?

[HAL 9000 96]

My country- right or wrong ey... ?

SSDD, brother.

BTW- generic country could be any country.

I don't know what "SSDD" is, but I know what your problem is.

You think America is "just another country", like Belgium or Uruguay.

"Same Sh!t, Different Day"

The USA is one of many nations on the planet. It just so happens that we are lucky to be in it. For great things then super! For the not so super we have a choice to change them.

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

That brings me to a previous question... if we did that we could steak their oil but would have to decontaminate it... who's interested?

What common ground do with have with Iran that would be the basis for diplomacy, considering Ahmadinejad's stated goal of wiping Israel off the map, and his looking to a future without the existence of the U.S.?

I think, given our diplomatic power, something like telling the squirt to "STFU with all that nonsense or your Presidency will reach an untimely end."

I mean, that is diplomatic, is it not?

[Scott & Lai 12]

Well I guess you should be the one to push the button to nuke 'em all to high noon since that is apparently the only way to get rid of them all. May I remind you that plenty of innocents would die, right? I'd prefer to use diplomacy.

That brings me to a previous question... if we did that we could steak their oil but would have to decontaminate it... who's interested?

What common ground do with have with Iran that would be the basis for diplomacy, considering Ahmadinejad's stated goal of wiping Israel off the map, and his looking to a future without the existence of the U.S.?

I think, given our diplomatic power, something like telling the squirt to "STFU with all that nonsense or your Presidency will reach an untimely end."

I mean, that is diplomatic, is it not?

Doesn't that involve the threat of military action and the willingness to follow through with it, the very thing instead of which you prefer to use diplomacy?