So what will happen if we go to war with Iran?

[BlueStorm]

What will happen to BushCo and America? My feeling is that a whole shitload of things are going to happen that will probably crash this world.

I'm sorry if this seems like a dumb question. I only got around to reading DU as I have been helping my mother who just got a kidney transplant last week so I am a bit behind the news.

All I got to say is that Bush has to be totally insane if he plans to do this. What the hell has Iran done that has provoked a war with them?

God I really am hating Bush now.

Blue

[madeline_con]

1. The burning question....

How? where are the troops supposed to come from? Has anybody told Monkey Boy about finite numbers?

[originalpckelly]

4. No, they're going to whack the bee-hive and run and leave...

the poor soldiers in Iraq to deal with the swarm. It's the same fucking neo-con game.

[Toots]

23. I guess you haven't heard the phrase wingers use so casually.."Glass Em"

They have no intention of using troops to invade Iran. They only want to decimate all of Iranian Commerce and Infrastructure...

[uberllama42]

2. We will lose.

We can't beat Iran. We don't even have enough troops for the escalation in Iraq. We don't have a snowball's chance in hell of defeating Iran. They could easily kill our overburdened troops and destroy our carrier groups with land-to-sea missiles and Russian Migs. Bush would be impeached, without question. It would be the end of his reign of terror. I don't know what would happen to us as a nation. Probably not good though.

[Warren DeMontague]

3. You're right about the troops. Wrong about the rest.

There's no way in hell Iran would "easily" destroy our carrier groups. 2nd Hand Russian Migs? While I think the half trillion/year we spend on the Military Industrial complex is far too much, it does buy us the most advanced navy and air force on the planet- two branches of the armed forces that, you might note, are not bogged down in Iraq.

Would we be able to invade and occupy Iran? Leaving aside the "why", I can't imagine how-- But that's a far cry from saying that they're going to take out the Air Force and the 5th Fleet. That's absurd.

[jody]

6. 100% correct. n/t

[Big Pappa]

19. I concur

During Gulf Storm the AF and Navy destroyed Saddam's military. But no way in hell we could send in ground troops.

[newyawker99]

25. Hi Big Pappa!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[atreides1]

10. What you say is true, but there are other considerations

Yes we have advanced ships and planes, the down side is that the Iranians have advanced AAA and anti-ship missiles, thanks to our friends the Russians and our loving trading partners the Chinese.

Remember our air force isn't that big and the navy hasn't had any significant growth in years, so eventually those forces will be whittled down as well.

The navy needs carriers to get it's planes into the region, the air force will need bases to fly missions from, I doubt if any of our "allies" in the Gulf are going to want to have a large bullseye
painted on their countries. And since this won't be a NATO operation, they won't be joining in either. Any landing rights we get will be costing us, the taxpayer tons of money, because we won't
have a lot of friends.

And all the air power in the the navy and air force combined will be useless without ground troops to take positions, and eventually even they will become bogged down and break under the constant missions that they will have to fly.

Should the Israelis decide to join the party, then the rest of the Muslim world be rally to the cause.

[Warren DeMontague]

12. Don't get me wrong- I think attacking Iran would be a monumentally idiotic idea.

But it's one thing to say that we couldn't occupy the country- which we obviously couldn't- it's something else entirely to say that they're going to "take out" our Navy & Air Force.

[uberllama42]

21. I agree- my brother made the post about our navy getting destroyed

I guess he's too lazy to switch over to his own username. Anyway, I think the best we could do in Iran is to repeat what we did in Iraq- utterly destroy their military capabilities and a large chunk of the civilian infrastructure from the air and let the country descend into sectarian anarchy. Iran is not divided in the same way as Iraq, but they do have enough dissension among the population to assure that a power vaccuum will lead to another low-grade civil war.

I do think that other Arab nations will rally behind Iran and Syria if we continue to provoke them. I'm also worried that if we do not make a complete reversal of our policies, a draft will at least be attempted to meet the troop requirements there.

Personally, if they try to draft me, I'm going kicking and screaming to federal prison.

[Warren DeMontague]

26. Fo sho.It would be a tremendous mess.

And I agree, short of a draft, I can't fathom where they think they'd find the troops.

The fact that it would so obviously be a giant disaster is the thing that keeps me from getting too worked up about it, although I suppose the Bush Administration's ability to outdo it's own incompetence still has capacity to astound.

[LSK]

30. wrong, Iran has Russian missles that can be our defenses

[atreides1]

5. We won't lose, but we won't win either

The troops in Iraq will pay a heavy price for Bush's arrogance, with their lives.

[Mnemosyne]

16. "We don't have a snowball's chance in hell of defeating Iran." One word:

Nukes

It's the only way idiot can "win" against Iran. Scary.

Read "On the Beach" by Neville Shute. Northern hemisphere nuked, people wait in the southern hemi. for the repercussions.


And welcome to DU!

[uberllama42]

22. Thx- I should check that out n/t

[Mnemosyne]

34. I hope you like it. Really chilling. n/t

[LSK]

29. and when China and Russia retaliate?

We all loose.

[Mnemosyne]

35. We will be well and truly *screwn* then. * doesn't care about

losing, other than cash and power. If he wasn't insane I would have more doubts about the Iran attack, but he is, so...

I hate that we even have to think about this, it sucks.

[bdamomma]

7. Iran will shut down the strait of hormuz, no oil, that would detrimental

to these thugs.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

14. Shutting Hormuz would be detrimental to most of us ...

... working slobs who have to drive to the job. Or heat the house with oil.

It's not the thugs that'll feel the pain worst.

[The Magistrate]

8. Several Things, Ma'am

U.S. air and naval power would destroy most every target it was aimed at, but it would fail to destroy the heart of the Iranian nuclear program, owing both to the hartdening of the targets involved it it, and the successful sheltering in locations unknown to us of some facilities.

The Shia of Iraq would rise against the U.S. occupation, roughlu tripling the intensity of hosilities U.S. forces would need to contenbd with. These would not take the pattern of mass action, but rather a "sparrow war" of tremendous depth, a death of ten thousand cuts in hundreds of daily incidents.

Oil prices would shoot through the roof, crippling Western economies and triggering recessions and depressions all over the globe.

[Poiuyt]

9. Nightmare scenario

Bush will keep pushing Iran, like he did the other day when he attacked that Iranian consulate. He'll keep prodding and provoking them until they shoot a missile at us (in Iraq). That will give Bush/Cheney all they need to launch an air assault on Iran. Since we don't have the ground troops to occupy Iran, Bush will start nuking targets. Tehran will be destroyed by nuclear bombs.

[BlueStorm]

11. Oh that 's horrible....

What a dismal outlook.

Blue

[Mnemosyne]

17. The US has been trying to set up Iran for a while now:

Bastards never quit.

[uberllama42]

24. Why don't they just blame Iran for a particularly nasty insurgent attack?

If the Iranians don't take the bait and hit us themselves, I think that's a pretty likely scenario. It worked on the banks of the Rio Grande in 1846, it worked in Havana Harbor in 1898, it worked in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964, and it worked on all the news networks in 2003. Why abandon such a successful tactic?

[MrSlayer]

13. There will be real terrorism in America.

No inside jobs, no bullshit warnings. We'll have suicide bombings and busbombs and all that shit. It will not be pretty.

[bridgit]

15. in addition to what The Magistrate has posted in post #8, DU'ers...

will be wringing the palm prints off their hands

[ConsAreLiars]

18. Read this two part commentary "Striking the US where it hurts." China and Russia

will be players.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HJ19Ad01.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HJ20Ad01.html

[Sir Jeffrey]

36. These are excellent links nt

[PerfectSage]

20. What happened to the Soviet Union after invading Afghanistan?

Eventually there was only one superpower. If Bush invades Iran, eventually there won't be any superpowers and Bush 41's New World Order will go down the toilet thanks to Bush 43. Yabba Dabba Doo!!!! ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWXPh3zEkMU&mode=related&search=

Gotta hand it to Ministry, they had the Bush's pegged as good for nothin' NWO Mother Fuckers way back.

[sakabatou]

27. A draft?

[sweetbriarose]

31. Remember 2nd Night of Debates

on Oct 8 04? Bush stared right into the camera and promised me that there would never be a draft as long as he was president "Period". My son turns 18 in April. I'm sick at heart...so sick.

[sakabatou]

37. Well, Bush says a lot of things

Not a lot is true.

[LSK]

28. gas = $5, possible massive inflation, possible war with China or Russia

[Sir Jeffrey]

32. Cross posted from another thread...

http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/publications/briefings/IranConsequences.htm

This group had an excellent pre-war Iraq study and I am willing to bet their pre-war Iran study is equally spot-on.

[majorjohn]

33. WWIII n/t