![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
It's nothing to do with the West. They are not developing nuclear weapons because of anything we've done, in the same way that they do not pose a direct threat to us.
They have far more local concerns and beefs than the West..
DELETED_74993
- Thread starter DELETED_74993
- Start date
It's nothing to do with the West. They are not developing nuclear weapons because of anything we've done, in the same way that they do not pose a direct threat to us.
They have far more local concerns and beefs than the West..
my god theyre really pushing it to try and sway public opinionall LIES!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15643460
Did you even read the HEADLINE!?!
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 4,698
- Location
- Wiltshire
Jesus christ, calm down Michael Moore. Have a read of this.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._words/2010/08/its_not_just_about_israel.html
GOVERNMENT PROPAGANDA
Why, I don't understand what you're getting at? Have you looked up Iran on a map? Operational bases at Iraq, Qatar, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Oman, UAE to list a few and not to mention the Gulf up which carriers may operate.
Not that I advocate any action.
Really and would you like to be stationed at one of those bases. Would the governments let those bases be used. Would you like to be on a carrier with silent kilo potentially around and very close to land. It is actually a great deal harder than people appreciate.
While it may be operationally feasible to commit forces to an armed incursion into Iraq, it is still hugely problematical. Just the closing of the The Strait of Hormuz would create global havoc in the Oil markets and thus the wider economy, something none of us can afford right now, not to mention the legality of attacking another sovereign nation pre-emptively.
Politically and economically attacking Iran comes with huge risks and Iran isn't Iraq which was bad enough and Iran shares very good relations with both Russia and China as well as the other Arab States, which is something the Iraqi Regime generally did not.
It would be simple to fly bombers out of Diego Garcia and begin a bombing campaign, what would not be simple is dealing with the political, economic and regional fallout if such an action was taken and given that Iran is moving ever closer to real reform and the current Iranian Govt has more important issues internally to deal with than worrying about nuking Israel, attacking them now would be foolhardy as it would unite a people currently fractured and set back any reform more than a decade.
Last edited:
No it is very relevant because the military is not going to commit forces to bases where they can not guarantee local support.
Seeing as I've been to most of those bases and seen the capability, defensively and offensively, of each (Al Udeid is the biggest US military air base outside of the US) my opinion is the West has the upper hand.
They're already commited!
Good for you I've been to some of those bases as well and don't hold such hope if the whole region sets on fire which doing something as stupid as attacking Iran may well do. It's one thing dealing with insurgents it's another dealing with the amount of problems this would cause. I would think I could safely say that attacking Iran may well push Saudi Arabia to lose the Saud part.
Yes in a very different context. They can not use those bases for a pre-emptive attack on another sovereign nation without express permission of the hosting government without severe ramifications. And I really doubt the local governments are going to want to stir that nest up when the one they want out of Iran is about to go if the clerics get their way.
Lets hope that doesn't happen.
Yes and I am sure the air force would be promising they can deliver here without and mission creep or ground commitment like they have done in all the other recent conflicts. And yet when push comes to shove they do not deliver and inevitably there is always mission creep.
I think it is on the cards soon enough anyway - especially with the succession problems. There is good reason that the place is a melting pot of discontent along with the Yemen. They are reducing payments out for nationals year after year and the princes are still living it up in Monte Carlo. Not a good combination.
Not only mission creep, but putting men on the ground to enable strategic strikes in the first place is a tactical and logistical nightmare, of course they could just go for the Shock and Awe BS, but that would negate the "We are only stopping the Nuclear program" defence.
The only real way to deal with this is by negotiation. As someone said in an article I read today, the carrot and the stick, with the emphasis on the carrot as it is far harder to fight off an embrace than it is an attack and in today's political climate in the Middle East that could not be more true.