Iran 2019

pikeshot1600

Ad Honorem
Jul 2009
9,958
As the apparent tension(s) increase over what pass for US-Iran "relations," it seems that NSD John Bolton has maneuvered his boss into a posture - if not a strategic position - of looking for a military encounter in the Persian Gulf region. The issue is less strategic than it is John Bolton has been looking to kick somebody's ass for decades. That tough guy stance, minus any discernible plan, has found a willing audience in POTUS.

The United States currently has no strategy, and no serious public policy positions, other than an ongoing reality TV performance. Its a problem in international relations. US diplomacy, and US military policy are being determined by an old fat guy's "gut."
 

redcoat

Ad Honorem
Nov 2010
7,812
Stockport Cheshire UK
The U.S. Armed forces typically achieve a kill ratio of 10-100 too1. And that's enemy combatants not collateral civilian casualties. The Warthawg will get a lot of them, brrrt. What the A-10s don't get the Apaches will, won't be much left but mopping up for the ground pounders.
Let’s say your appraisal is correct, what happens afterwards. While many Iranians dislike their government, the one thing certain to unite them is an attack by the USA.
The USA will find itself faced with the anger of a nation of 80 million who now really do view the USA as the Great Satan.
Is the US then going to garrison an Iran whose population will make the insurgency in Iraq seem like a minor squabble.
 
Last edited:

M9Powell

Ad Honorem
Oct 2014
4,451
appalacian Mtns
Let’s say your appraisal is correct, what happens afterwards. While many Iranians dislike their government, the one thing certain to unite them is an attack by the USA.
The USA will find itself faced with the anger of a nation of 80 million who now really do view the USA as the Great Satan.
Is the US then going to garrison an Iran whose population will make the insurgency in Iraq seem like a minor squabble.
I don't believe in nation building. I say go in destroy their military, eliminate their current leadership, destroy their nuclear program, then leave. A punitive expedition, not an occupation.
 
Mar 2019
1,859
Kansas
I don't believe in nation building. I say go in destroy their military, eliminate their current leadership, destroy their nuclear program, then leave. A punitive expedition, not an occupation.
That is better known as a war crime
 

M.S. Islam

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
3,333
Dhaka
I don't believe in nation building. I say go in destroy their military, eliminate their current leadership, destroy their nuclear program, then leave. A punitive expedition, not an occupation.
Punitive expedition for what crime?
 
Mar 2019
1,859
Kansas
Trying too deny shipping through the Persian gulf.
So let me get this right. You want to take a country to war to protect a treaty you withdrew from? The US has no right to a voice on international shipping questions since the country withdrew from the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1994.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redcoat

M9Powell

Ad Honorem
Oct 2014
4,451
appalacian Mtns
So let me get this right. You want to take a country to war to protect a treaty you withdrew from? The US has no right to a voice on international shipping questions since the country withdrew from the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1994.
No, I prefer not too go too war at all. But I do believe in protecting our national interests.
 
Mar 2019
1,859
Kansas
No, I prefer not too go too war at all. But I do believe in protecting our national interests.
Which interest is that specifically. Two Saudi and a Norwegian ships were attacked in the gulf. How does that affect US interests?