Obama Preparing for War With Iran

[ryan86]

Part 1

First off, This gets speculated atleast twice a year since George Bush declared Iran as part of the "Axis of Evil", in his 2003 "State of the Union" adress. And under the Obama Admin, Iran has steped up It's agressive behavior and defiance of the world community. Rather it be further misleading I.A.E.A. inspectors, continuing against the NNPT, or defying more rounds of U.N. sanctions.

In this thread I will be looking at all dementions of Iranian behavior, the cost of war (political, economic, and casualties), our strategic allies, what a military first strike might look like and it's fall-out (consequences, unintended or forseen), the Iranian responce, and what the Obama Admin might be looking at.

Continuation to Part 2...

 

[Gelgarin]

Are you really twenty-five?

 

[ryan86]

Part 2

Iranian Behavior:

Befor the Iraq war, Iran was entering talks to cease it's nuclear program in-exchange for full international-diplomatic-recognition and coroperation. Also for direct economic ties with the U.S., and shared influence in the new direction for Afghanistan. Iran showed it's good will by offering economic and political cover for the U.S., in Afghanistan, and even was a part of the early stages of the rebuilding process of Afghanistan through direct monetary support.

Then came the George Bush '03 State of the Union speech. He was building the case for war and included Iran in the "Neo-Con" doctrin policy of forced regeim change. The Iran-U.S. relations drew to a diplomatic breakdown and the I.A.E.A. inspectors were kicked out of Iran.

The U.S. was showing defiance of international law and launched an unprovoked attack on Iraq, less than 18 months after launching a full military strike on Afghanistan. The U.S. was now on both sides of the Iranian boarder.

Continuation...

 

[Coco]

Ryan, could you cite your sources? This all sounds a little far-fetched to me.

 

[ryan86]

Continuation of Part 2:

Iranian Behavior:

U.S. Aircratf carriers and entire Navy fleets were in the Straight of Hormuz (Gulf of Oman), where 40% of the world's oil is shipped through. It is also in with-in range of the disputed waters of Iraq and Iran who shelled eachother for 8 long years, and right along the Iranian coast.

In 2003, with the fear of an immenent U.S. attack, the Iranian people elected an extremest hardline President; Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

He began to watch the third memeber of the "Axis of Evil"; North Korea. The U.S. nor it's allies would attack. He saw the respect that N. Korea commanded when at the negotiating table. He saw that N. Korea could act like a spoild child and still come out with economic assistance. And most of all, he saw that the U.S. would never launch a pre-emptive strike on the North. Why?... Nuclear weapons.

So why wouldn't Iran pusue them? It obviously means long-term national and soveriegn security from a U.S. attack.

 

[Dr. Stinger A. Zoidberg]

Ryan, could you cite your sources? This all sounds a little far-fetched to me.

I'd put my money on Wikipedia.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Collaborate with Milenko and make this a politically erotic story.

 

[ryan86]

Part 3

Our Strategic Allies:

The Middle east is divided by Arab and Persion regions. The Arab regions are largley made up of Sunni Muslims, while the Perion region is largley made up of Shi'ite Muslims. The two are historical enemies. The Middle East is over-all, predominatly Sunni. And Iraq is one of the few exceptions of an Arab counry being mostly Shi'ite.

Example of the Arab world: Saudi Arabia
Example of the Persion world: Iran

In the event of a U.S. and Nato strike on Iran, we would have some allies in the region that would be strategic to any quick victory.

These allies would be both covert and overt in support. They include:

Overt:

Saudi Arabia (GCC)
Oman (GCC)
U.A.E (GCC)
Egypt
Jordan
Morroco
Bahrain (GCC)
Kuwait

Covert:

Iraq
Afgshanistan
Israel
Turkey

If Israely involvment were publicly know, we would get NO Coroperation from any Muslim nation.

 

[Coco]

Collaborate with Milenko and make this a politically erotic story.

Do you ever do anything on here other than troll?

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Do you ever do anything on here other than troll?

Look who's talking.

 

[Canadian Ninja]

Good thread, but do some more research. Iran's problems with the United States long pre-date's Bush's 03 State of the Union address. Try going back to the 1970s during the Iranian Revolution when several students seized the US Embassy. The US-Iran relations have been horrible ever since.

Israel isn't a "covert" ally of the United States, it is well established that Israel and the United States have very close relations. Also, NATO couldn't make a strike without the permission of the United Nations. Though Iraq wasn't completely allowed by the UN, they also didn't get in the way of the American/British move to attack Iraq. The UN will do what they can to prevent military aggressivness from member nations by putting sanctions to nations who are acting up, such as North Korea.

Overall, this is a good thread. Not sure where the point of discussion is with this, but it's good. Just do a little more research and digging to get more accurate points.

 

[ryan86]

Part 4

First Military Srtike:

A first strike on Iran would happen from the sea. This would include American/British/French/German/and Itallian Naval fleets. The U.S. would provide all the Unique Naval assets with our nuclear powered Aircraft carriers and submarines. The rest would be an international mix of Cruiser/Destroyer/Battel ships with several Nato Subs. Their job would be to close the shipping lanes and cut off the "Straight of Hormuz". This is commonly referred to as a Naval blockade. The objective is to put an economic strangle-hold on Iran preventing it from funding it's government and conducting offensive military operations.

This alone might put enough political pressure on Iran to sign an unconditional cease-fire agreement, with favorable Western demands.

Continuation.

 

[ryan86]

Good thread, but do some more research. Iran's problems with the United States long pre-date's Bush's 03 State of the Union address. Try going back to the 1970s during the Iranian Revolution when several students seized the US Embassy. The US-Iran relations have been horrible ever since.

Israel isn't a "covert" ally of the United States, it is well established that Israel and the United States have very close relations. Also, NATO couldn't make a strike without the permission of the United Nations.

I am aware of all of that. How-ever, to get the strategic Muslum support we would want, Israel would have to be a covert ally and would most likely, be publicly asked to stay out out. Are you not thinking about the politics involved with muslim allies?

And I am fully aware of the 1979 over-throw of the Shaw and the showdown over the hostages, comonly referred to as the "Iran Contra Scandle". And all of my facts are historically accurate. JUST LET ME FINISH PLEASE.

 

[ryan86]

Continuation of part 4:

The unconditional "Cease-Fire", won't happen that easy though. So the second faze would most likely start with-in minutes of the Naval blockade, after quick analysis of the "diplomatic cable channles".

Their would be a 30 day air/sea campain mixed with Tommahawk cruise missiles/B-2,B-3 stealth bombers/B-52 Bombers/Armed Drones/ and Stealth FA-18 Super Hornets targeting and taking out the command and controll/radar defences/AAA fire and missle systems/warehouse production plants/ the electronic grid/Hydro-water producing facilities/and every nuclear producing site known.

After this, Nato forces would have complete Air and Sea controll, forcing Iran to either face a complete ground assault overthowing the government, or sign a conditioned cease-fire. This is the hopoefull end-point.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

When it comes crashing down and it hurts inside...

 

[ryan86]

The Iranian Responce:

This is very difficult to predict. They have arms that reach well out-side their boarders. Sryia and Hez'balah are basicly components of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and political system. Srya is an actor-state for Iran and hez'balah is it's proxy terror group. They could lauch waves of strikes against U.S. targets/interest in the region. All 3 are tightly connected Shi'ite groups that could draw the U.S. and Nato into a worse protracted situation than Iraq, mainly in the immediate onslaught of any attack. This would draw 90% of SE Asia into war.

It gets more dangerous when you enter in the Hamas equation, that while a sunni extremest group, would join with it's Iran/Sryia/Hez'balah Shi'ite counter-parts for waves of terror attcks against Isreal. Hamas controlls the West Bank and Gaza Strip, putting it in prime position.

The goal of Iran would be to draw in Isreal as quick as possable to mak it politicaly impossable for U.S.-Arab allies to sustain a coalition.

Continue...

 

[ryan86]

Part 6 (Part 5 was the Iranian Responce)

Cost of War:

The cost of war has three main components: Political/Economic/and casualties.

Political:
A short Gulf War 1, is the most politicaly advantagous. Iraq (like Veitnam) can ruin a Presidency and sharply divide the country. Can a democracy with-stand long-term commitments that are politically divisive? Iraq and Veitnam prove we can, but it also should humble us as THE superpower. Will the country put up with another middle east war?

Economicly:
War can be very profitable in a capitalistic scence and spur mass production for economic growth, but with no-one asked to pay higher taxes to pay for the war; won't we be just ensuring hundreds of billions in extra debt passed down to my generation, and the ones to come?

Casualties:
Almost certainly we would have downed Nato forces and a sinking Nato ship for Iran to use as propagand to fuel it's natioalismn, while U.S./EU (esp. EU) would lose resolve. And thousands of Iranian caualties would be heartbreaking.

 

[Chess]

I think America will be on their own if they decide to attack or invade Iran. The people of the UK would not vote to target Iran despite the nightmare that is Ahmajinedad. So far we haver followed the US into both Iraq and Afghanistan and all it has done is bring more death and destruction to these countries and many dead soldiers. Cameron is not stupid enough to go against his countries ideals as he would soon be booted from power.

I think most of the world has had enough of the US trying to be the worlds police force and people from the UK have had enough of following the US into all their battles just because we are pals.

We all know the dangers that will arise if Iran gets nukes but I think the UK and Europe would rather we just bury our heads in the sand and ignore it like we do with the rest of the crazy dictators of the world.

If the US wants to increase their cost of oil and become even more hated in the muslim world, good luck to them, but this time the rest of the world will not follow.

Just out of curiosity how do you know how the US will attack or are you just guessing? I only ask as you word your message like they are facts and not just speculation.

 

[JGlass]

Dammit, I knew I shouldn't have shot all those Iranians in Battlefield 3. Sorry ya'll.

 

[ryan86]

Part 7

My Professional Advise to the Obama Administration:

With all do deference,

It is almost unthinkable that you, Mr. Pesident, would launch a war based on the "Bush Doctin". The saber-rattling that has come out of your administration is very concerning. A pre-emptive strike should only be used as a last resort to aviod significant harm or damage to U.S. Interest or our allies.

You excepted the Nobel Peace Prize for your inspiring rhetoric against wars that caused deep wounds to the international comunity and mobilised a movement of hope that would bring change to not only our domestic differences, but bring about change for a more humble foreign policy, that would respect the rights and norms of international law.

So in closing, I would like to ask you to rely more on the wisdom and experience of Secratary of State Hillary Clinton, and let her do what she does better than anybody else; diplomacy. Use it, and give Mrs. Clinton the weight of the Whitehouse behind her. Your country needs it.

Ryan.

 

[Gelgarin]

Professional?

 

[Coco]

One Future President to the Current Commander in Chief. You wouldn't understand.

 

[ryan86]

I think most of the world has had enough of the US trying to be the worlds police force and people from the UK have had enough of following the US into all their battles just because we are pals.

We all know the dangers that will arise if Iran gets nukes but I think the UK and Europe would rather we just bury our heads in the sand and ignore it like we do with the rest of the crazy dictators of the world.

Well, a few things you need to be aware of:

EU was the reason the U.S. got involved in Libya. We have no interest there. It is EU that gets oil from their, Not the US. We "led from behind" while Europe took a major role. And yes, all of western Europe would join with the U.S. and the GCC (Gulf Coperation Council), which includes; Saudi Arabia, Oman, The U.A.E, and Bahrain. We would also get Arab league support as long as the mission was confined to a sea and air campain, but NO western ground forces. And a war is NOT iminent but the signs are slowly building.

 

[ryan86]

Professional?

Yes, I have a B.A. in Poli Sci with minors in economics from he great UT Austin. Graduated this spring. And I have worked great hours on presidential campains (Hillary's '08 bid as a volunteer organizer) and am a current registered volunteer organizer here at the Dallas area DNC. Politics and geo-politcial thinking is my passion. And yes I will hold office one day.\

 

[Gelgarin]

I'm not intimately familiar with US politics, but the country hasn't yet degraded to the point where they elect people incapable of using the written word... has it?

And professionals are people who get paid to do things.