Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (242668)	9/21/2007 3:07:56 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 281500

I agree on all your points.....the country is run by kooks who must be stopped before they get nukes....

To: carranza2 who wrote (242668)	9/21/2007 3:15:13 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Remember that the Iranians have not been tested in a 21st Century battlefied. I don't think they would last any longer than Saddam did. They would not see us coming before the bulk of their military assets would be destroyed. Oh, sure, they would let Hizbollah loose, there would be oil disruption, global terrorism, political upheaval everywhere, but at the end of the day, the Iranians could not possibly win. They would be ultimately pacified. At a substantial cost, no doubt, but ultimately rendered impotent. And it would not take boots on the ground to do it since the object would not be to take over Iran but to simply force them to give up their nuclear pretensions. Given smart bombs and other technology, the civilian population losses would be minimal. I think they would be too smart to offer set battles. They would follow the Hizbullah model: blow up civilians, use civilians (esp. those unsympathetic to you) as human shields, herd the world's compliant press corps through the resulting "atrocities", staging them where necessary. I don't see any reason why this wouldn't work as well against the US as it did against Israel. However, in the meantime their nuclear ambitions would be considerable disrupted.

To: carranza2 who wrote (242668)	9/21/2007 3:16:25 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 281500

I wonder what a world with a defeated iran looks like. Do the ayotollahs stay in power? Is there a democratic revolution or do the people adopt anti-americanism as their state religion with our without the mullahs? Do the kurds and other minorities make their move? What happens on the borders with their now stronger neighbors? What is the ultimate russian historical and geopolitical aim in the area? I would rather iran stay in one peace and not make nukes or support terrorism. And for that I would allow them into the world economy as a partner. I would give them the benefit of the doubt as nixon did with china. It doesnt strike me that this would be enough for these folks. They may not be stone cold killers like bin laden but they are messianic nevertheless and will be quite angry and vengeful if we attack. Last question, if they unleash terrorism and shut down the straits for a time or attack saudi oilfields, what will be the consequences for us.