Printable View
seriousley does iraq think that they can fuck with us were the most powerful nation in the world...we could shit on them if we wanted too but that would be sad, like a mean kid burning ants with magnfuying glass....they live in wetted down sand huts and they think they can do something.
Do you mean Iran???:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by ChronicMike
LMAO Iran /Iraq
Get your story straight man and as for what damage they can do, have you forgotten so soon what a few extremists with no fear can achieve, I don't think New York will.
i hope this is a joke......i think it is....Quote:
Originally Posted by ChronicMike
:)
i don't know...i hope it is too...
we've only been bombing iraq for more than a decade...why don't they accept freedom and love us by now?
Its true people dont know wheres Iraq-Iran are located on a map without the help of FOXNEWS----Its a pity people think Iran's going to lie down and roll over for Israel/USA, oooh no i said Israel MY BAD......
Iran is not going to roll for anyone..imo. Kind of scary to me..them and China.
If we go to war with a country that actually has an army people will change thier tune real fast... When bombs drop on this side of the ocean people will wish they hadn't suppotred war... and when bullets and bombs kill your family you'll push for peace...
I just wish people would pull thier head out of thier ass and realize we are not the dominate country everyone thinks we are... can we blow up Iraq ya, but we still haven't won that war. It takes more to win a war than dropping bombs on everything... but our president doesn't seem to understand that and I'm sad that the trickle down effect works for killing people but not for money...
Are we still talking about Iran?:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby
he doesnt know....he just hates everything to do with the USA.
Here's a little strength comparison.....remember Iraq was considered the 4th strongest military before the Gulf War.
http://www.militaryfactory.com/count...son_detail.asp
Gumby hates Americans? If these Countries are doing this nuclear stuff then why are we not doing anything with Iran? Gumby you mess up my train of thought with the confusion on Iran and Iraq..who are you talking about?
heres one for ya. We will be in for a fight, but after about 6 months of smart bombs and cruise missles we will see whats up.
United States of America Country /Iran
$399 Billion Yearly Military Expense $4.3 Billion
3.9% % of GNP 3.3%
18 Min. Enlist Age 21
73,597,731 Available Manpower 20,937,348
471,500 Active Military 325,000
220,000 Frontline Personnel 240,000
18,169 Aircraft 954
29,920 Armor 2,380
5,178 Artillery 4,594
35,324 Missile Defense 1,760
2,441 Infantry Support 12,500
an iran/china/russia/north korea alliance would be formidable..
but the US has allies too, which combined keep them stronger.
Hey, but none of these countries have a strong economy because they are not utilizing legalized drugs..they are all wasting their economy on drug enforcement, prison systems and inferior healthcare
First country to get wise..cash in on the hemp industry, recreational drug industry, enthogen enchanced science, and drug enchanced soliders
will have a severe upper hand on the competition
hheh enhanced*
Wow Euphoric...could I hire you and psycho to speak at some "social gatherings" here at home? I am serious..Sometimes I read posts that make me want to actually meet the "real person"....some of you on here are very articulate at putting the right words together that actually are truth. There are a few people on here I would love to see "debate" with the alcoholics here that think they have all the answers haha.....you know that saying.."I would pay to see the look on their faces"...I would! haha...I guess I could just start having my napkins for social niceties printed with posts and daily factoids I read from CC....then watch their faces..uh-oh..I am really thinking now..haha..thanks.:thumbsup:
I was agreeing with Shelby, talking about Iran... we would not go into Iran like we did with Iraq. We would not have allies because they would not support another war. Look at how popular Iraq is right now, you really think we'd have other nations wanting to fight on our side?
We lied about fighting Iraq because the reason we went into war was becaues we believed they had WMDs... but they didn't and it was a lie covered up by our government. I just wish people would notice that we aren't the biggest dog in the park. We have an military that would destroy any other, but when the nation and other nations do not support the war you will not have the forces needed to fight, that's why they have a draft.
here are some numbers from your post psycho...And they don't even list the facts for Afghanistan our first war (that we still haven't won)
US/China
man power -
73,597,731/379,524,688 - that's 300,000,000 more than we have....
active military -
471,500/1,750,000 - that's 1,300,000 more than us
frontline personnel -
220,000/1,400,000 - that's 1,200,000 more than us
US/Iran
Active military -
471,500/325,000 - that's only 150,000 more than them
Frontline personnel -
220,000/240,000 - that's 20,000 LESS then Iran
US/Iraq
active -
471,500/375,000 (it's pre invasion #'s) - 100,000 more them, still not won...
frontline personnel -
220,000/280,000 - 60,000 MORE than the US (maybe why we haven't won??)
Do we have a better military... the best in the world... but when you have to kill that many people, it's not about who has the better bombs, it's who has the better reason for going to war. You cannot kill that many people without someone wondering why... people are starting to wonder why people are dying, which is why Bush's rating is at 32%... you cannot CANNOT fight a global war when your country does not support you, and even more when the world doesn't support you (that's what Hitler tried).
ps. you could line up the chineese and shoot one a second and it would take 202,777 hours or 8,450 days or 23 YEARS to become even in man power... and that's if they stopped breeding... so why don't we go and bomb them next... We're the best around right??
The U.S. has the most technologcally advanced military in the world. We also have enough money to make sure our people are fully trained. This really becomes an issue when it comes to air power. It takes a shitload of cash every time an F-14 goes up for a training mission. Same goes for driving taks around and blowing things up with them. Most countries just can't afford to give their military the training we do.
The problem comes when we start to define what "winning the war" really means. No country in the world could invade the U.S or any of our possesions and "win". We won the first war with Iraq, the goal was to get Iraq out of Kuwait and we did it. But what does "winning" this current war with Iraq mean?
If "winning" in Iraq means a regime change than we have already won. If it means turning Iraq into the 51st state with a Taco Bell and 7-11 on every corner there's no way we can do it. The U.S. has never been an effective occupying force. We do not have, nor would the rest of the world support, the pure brutality it would take to completely conquer and take over another nation.
There will always be a signifigant number of people in a defeated country that will resent our presence and fight back. Vietnam is a perfect example. It's not a very popular idea but many educated people now say that we basically won the war for the communists and that there is a very good chance that the communists would not be in power today if we had not started to mess with Vietnam as soon as WWII was over. Think about it, for hundreds of years Vietnam had been under foriegn control: first China, then Japan, then France. Then, as soon as it looks like they'll be on their own we set up a puppet government and start telling them what to do. Many of the Vietnamese fighting against us were not fighting for the communists per se. Instead, they were simply fighting against yet another foriegn power trying to control them.
Which brings us back to Iraq and how do we define "winning" the current war? When should we pull out entirely and declare victory. We can't leave too soon or the country will fall apart. But, if we stay too long we are likely to continue to build up resentment in the people we are trying to help. I really don't know what's best in this case. I just hope whatever happens it works out in everyone's best interests.
As far as Iran is concerned, it looks like the big concern is one nuclear facility, right? So our goal would be to shut that facility down. A few well targeted cruise missles and the goal has been accomplished. Maybe. But would that just stir up a hornet's nest of it's own?
Bottom line, nothings simple in this game. We like to say the President should do this or do that but every action has a reaction. From what I can see, there are no right answers. We can only hope that the lesser of two evils is what is chosen
The thing is this; it's not about invading Iran, it's about taking out their nuclear capabilities. Destroyers with cruise missles to take out the radar and air defense followed by a strike from stealth aircraft will be hard for the Iranian military to deal with. Remember, they are using Russian garbage.
Have a good one!:thumbsup:
but do you really think they will stop after we attack them?? And do you think we'd have support doing that?? Much less resistance in doing that?? Don't forget that Russia and China wouldn't be too happy with us if we bombed Iran... I'm sure most other countries wouldn't be as well... we only have the greatest power because we have support not resistance. If other countries figure out that we are killing people and failing to complete what we set out to do they will become unwilling to support us in the decisions we make and that is not good... We do still have UN and we are not incharge of the world... after the neuclear power was obtained JFK made it a fact that no one country would ever be able to win a global war without killing everyone, which is why there are agreements with other countries. Which is why we do not want Iran to break those agreements... but we should go through due process before we go bomb someone else... it's set up that way so we don't have another world war, because the next one will be worse than the last...
they have done nothing wrong and we should not charge them or plan on bombing them until they do... they are free to create nueclear power... it's a free wolrd right?? Why should we not allow them to have power, yet allow North Korea?? Why not bomb them first?? They are much more of a threat than Iran... Iran is still 3-10 years from coming up with a bomb... yet we still allow a dictator to control bombs in North Korea
"North Korea has come under pressure to curb its nuclear ambitions. U.S. intelligence sources say the nation has enough weapons grade plutonium for two to five nuclear devices."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapc...9/korea.china/
that was two years ago and we haven't bombed them yet... I say either bomb the shit out of them as well... or use the same path for Iran and try not to get more people killed.
Ok, just to clear things up, we're not in a war!!! A war is when two armies are fighting eachother! Flying around dropping bombs on "al queda" (who has no relation to Saddam Hussein!) is not fighting a war. Also, yea Iraq had the fourth largest army, but look at what a difference it is between the third and fourth armies... shiit i'm pretty much the seventh largest army on that list.
I have a several friends serving in the Marines and Air Force, they're all confident we will be in war with Iran pretty soon. They also said it's going to be MUCH worse then anything Iraq has shown us.
Same type of thing that was being said about Iraq before the Gulf War. They were expecting very large casulties and when the dust cleared....the coallition forces had only a few hundred.Quote:
Originally Posted by skarz
As for the U.N......get real! Veto power from the top 7 scammers drove this outfit to be obsolete.
Have a good one!:thumbsup:
sorry to break up this american jingoistic jizzfest but if everyone takes a deep breath.....
the US wont (and doesnt have the capabilities) to mount a ground campaign in Iran. The US administration knows this, Iran knows this - all the bluster from both sides is empty rhetoric - kinda like when ur held apart from a fight by ur mates, and u struggle a bit - but not enough to actually break free.....
looking at things objectively you have to realise the huge resentment that the nuclear moralising provokes in just about every country in the middle east. We (the US, UK, USSR etc) sign a treaty limiting the membership of the nuclear club to an elite group - a treaty that was largely ratified throughout the world - on the proviso that we (the nuclear states) would disarm our nuclear arsenal and stop development of all new nuclear weapons. This has been laughably ignored and as such where is the moral highgound on which we in the west can stand with regards to the nuclear issue?
"You can't have nuclear weapons. You can't have nuclear power."
"Why not?"
"Because we signed a treaty 50 years ago...."
"Which you broke....."
"Doesnt matter - we don't trust you. We'll have to act strongly if you do devlop them..."
"like you did against India...?"
"Erm....they're too big....."
"Like you did against Pakistan....?"
"Er....they're too big too......"
"Israel...?"
"Erm....they're our allies...."
"North Korea?"
"well....they're more the size for a fight....but they got the bomb before we could..."
"so if we get the bomb then we'll be safe from aggression..."
"er....yes. So you better stop developing it!"
Besides which, any kind of take out strike on nuclear facilities in iran would be hugely counterproductive for the US.
It would cause massive resentment in the middle east and deepen anti-US sentiment, and it would actually strengthen the position of the hardline regime in Iran which is pretty unpopular at the moment (nothing like nationalism to get the country behind u eh?)
and what would it achieve? Iran's nuclear program would continue - and be forced undergound where it would be out of the reach of any weapons inspectors or international accountability....
it's a pretty scary era we're entering into - one in which nuclear proliferation will result in a widening of the elite nuclear club upon which 20th century diplomacy has been built (the permanent places of the UN security council all go to nuclear powers....) but as a result of the failures of the West (and the US in particular) in disarming and stopping development of nuclear weapons, there is no moral authority to prevent this happening.
quite simply, we're all fucked.....im off to build myself a bunker.....:)
No we don't and I still say that Israel will be the first and only strike on Iran. They did it with I Iraq, without the support of the U.N., and will do it with Iran.
possibly....tho with the demise of sharon im not sure there's enough political strength for new ruling party (Kadina) to embark on such a divisive course of action.....they've only just been elected about a month back - with a really small majority. Post Sharon i think there's too much flux for a strike.....tho i could be wrong......in the murky world of middle eastern politics, nothing would surprise me :)
Here's an example of what I mean:
Israeli Defense Minister: Iran Threatens Our Existence
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2...5/145308.shtml
Israeli spy satellite launched to watch Iran
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12481685/
yeah i dont doubt that Iran is pretty low down on Israel's hanukkah card list.....not surprising since the Iranian PM says israel is "heading toward annihilation" and then tops it off by casting doubts on the holocaust.....but i dont think the current israeli government could survive the international fallout from a strike.....of course, if pres Bush gets involved and puts his full support behind their actions.......
oh dear.....
i need to have a lie down.....
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
that einstein fella was a smart guy.......good at maths too.....
Don't know if ya remember but the world community was PISSED when Israel took out Saddams reactor. This would go over easier in the middle east considering that Iran is the only real Shi-ite dominant country in that area. The Sunni's would secretly breath a sigh of relief if the truth were told.Quote:
Originally Posted by andyandy
Have a good one!:thumbsup:
just as long as no one nukes the UK....... :)
later
:thumbsup:
iraq iran its all the same too me...im not very smart so i probley shouldnt have posted something were the smart people are.
A little advice dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by ChronicMike
1 Don't ever put yourself down there are plenty arseholes who will be only too glad to do it for you.:mad:
2 Nobody knows everything about everything even though they may believe they do.:p
3 Never be afraid to ask questions, without the answers to questions you have how can you educate yourself? :thumbsup: :cool:
4 We all have our talents and shortcomings but it's better to concentrate on making your more positive points stronger and bettering your weak spots ,you will find what suits you and hopefuly excel at it.:thumbsup:
Peace man :thumbsup: :D :cool:
VERY well said!Quote:
Originally Posted by psychocat
Have a good one!:thumbsup: