• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Finris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, I put some of that together half asleep.
China: they have a huge army 5 million man standing not counting reserves if I remember. Let me remind those of you who seem to think China wont confront the US militarily. Korea, 500,000 Chinese soldiers. Yes China’s military is hampered by soviet style doctrine. How many waves of Chinese troops did it take to take a better trained and equipped US position? The Germans during WW2 had the best trained and equipped military in the world at that time. The Soviets just kept sending waves of troops to the front. <span style="color: #FF0000">We all know the Germans lost and it wasn’t due to a lack of effort. The Soviets over whelmed them with troops, </span> and if you are losing more people than you can replace you will lose. (Eventually).
China has bought lots of Russian equipment. They reverse engineer it and manufacture it themselves. Yes on the outside the aircraft carrier looks like junk, but what is inside? The Chinese submarine fleet of Russian attack subs, very scary. The boat captains were all trained by the British at their Navy school for sub captains. Most people in the world know how big a mistake it would be to underestimate China.
Russia: They have made their position on Iran clear. If Iran is attacked Russia will consider it and attack on Russia itself! Russia has already sold everything on the Iranian wish list. Why? Simple Russia makes too much money on Iran. The real kicker here is no one is worried about the US military due to the weak POTUS that is in charge now. The Russians know that they have a chance to grab a sphere of influence while the US is under weak management.
Iran: Air force not so good. Anti aircraft teams have top of the line Russian equipment and were trained in Russia, and are good. Navy well not so good either. Missile technology, very good. Thanks you Russia and China. Terrorist groups that take orders from Iran are quite good, at being terrorists. I’m hoping that some of the older crowd remembers the Beirut Marine barracks bombing. Hezbollah (party of G-D) a Shia terror group that is ran, trained and equipped by Iran. Army is better than the Iraqi military and Afghanistan military after 10 years of US equipment and training. Please don’t forget the mentality of these people. During the Iran Iraq war the Iranian army use to go by soccer fields and gather up all the children so they could help demine areas. “Run children run” well that area is much more safe for our troops now!
Those who like to say how the US navy is invincible. I would like to remind you of the Falklands war. The British Navy had no respect for the Argentineans navy. Well unbeknown to the British the Argentineans had purchased anti ship missiles. How many ships did the British navy loose?
Suez Canal is kind of narrow and so is the Strait of Hormuz. I wonder how many anti ship missiles it would take for the US navy to get the hint. Probably nothing due to the current POTUS not allowing the US military to be involved.
Bottom line: Iran knows they have to have the bomb before the US president changes. Israel will have to deal with them before they get there. The US will not be involved. After Israel hits and deals with Iran they will be in a full scale all out war. Hezbollah in Lebanon and maybe even Syria, Egypt will have to help their Arabs brothers and Israel will have to deal with the Arab fifth column inside Israel.
The Chinese will probably not involve themselves in at this time. The Russians have a large navy contingent ported in Syria, and are providing weapons and may even attempt to put up a naval blockade of Israel. The Russian army doesn’t have enough transports to put any real number of troops on the ground. Turkey has been getting and selling things to Iran will they help or won’t they hard to say.
</div></div>

Thats not exactly true. IMHO, and from what Ive studied about the history, the real reason the Germans lost was more due to the Russian winter, and Hitler's insanity. Had he layed back and played his card wisely, waited til spring to attack Russia, it would have been a different story. And had he not lost the war there, its unlikely the allies would have been sucessful at Normandy.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone who sees war with Iran without China involved doesn't understand what's going on or why. </div></div>

Probably the most ignorant post I have read to date. While China has almost 100% opposing views as ours, they also realize their economy is married to ours. If we attacked Iran I promise you they wouldn't do a damn thing but officially protest it at the U.N. Same goes for Russia. Iran is not their life blood for oil. They buy only a portion from them. The economic and political repercussions of getting directly involved with a U.S.- Iran war FAR out weight the oil supply hiccup they would have of sitting it out.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

Germany lost to russia due to attrition, plain and simple. The german generals even told hitler that a war of attrition would mean germany losing.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Finris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">. If Iran is attacked Russia will consider it and attack on Russia itself!
</div></div>

confused.gif
Um..... please provide a link to where you heard this B.S. Russia would never think of threatening war on the U.S. if we attacked Iran. Just like the Cold War, they would simply up their Arms sales to Iran. But they have never and would never threaten war over Iran.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tengo1</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Finris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">. If Iran is attacked Russia will consider it and attack on Russia itself!
</div></div>

confused.gif
Um..... please provide a link to where you heard this B.S. Russia would never think of threatening war on the U.S. if we attacked Iran. Just like the Cold War, they would simply up their Arms sales to Iran. But they have never and would never threaten war over Iran. </div></div>
I got that quote right out of a Russian News paper. Russia wasn't threatening war to the US over Iran, Russia was threatening Israel.Russia knows the US will not get involved due to the POTUS. I'm sure the Historians will remember Russian threatened to launch a nuclear strike on Israel in 73 if the US didn't stop Israel from annihilating the Arab armies that had attacked them. I will look for the link in English.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

The defeat of the Nazis in WWII on the Eastern front was due to many factors. No one above has mentioned probably the most important one to a discussion of China and Iran: Logistics.

Should we fear a five million man army?

Had Napoleon's <span style="font-style: italic">Grand Armee </span> arrived in the Russian capital with 200,000 men (only one third of the original number), and achieved that in only sixty days (it took eighty-two), food consumption (to say nothing about ammunition) would have been 18,000 tons just for the soldiers to get there with a daily consumption rate when they stopped of over 300 tons per day.

That was in 1812, and although they had horses to feed back then there is fuel and ammunition and spare parts to plan for these days. War isn't fought like that any more. It's simply too hard to move (and to sustain when it stops for any length of time) any force larger than a Brigade.

As in small unit tactics where there is a limit to the force you can bring to bear on a building, with large armies there is a limit to the practical size of a functional army in wartime operations. Exceed this limit and either the forces can't eat, or they will will begin tripping over each other and presenting themselves as targets to the defending force.

Of course, a test of this theory will have to wait for a war between two highly developed countries, which is becoming less likely with every passing day as Iran moves toward becoming a member of the nuclear club.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

Graham you are right, but when you have a population that is 3 times smaller than the country you are attacking attrition is not in your favor. The USSR learned from the german bleiskrig(sic?) while the germans regressed to head to head tactics. You also, have to take into account the russian winter. When Napolean took Moscow the czar burned it to the ground, which left the grand amree without shelter. As hitler did napolean invaded late in the season and thus the russian winter forced his retreat and eventual defeat and first exhile. Hitler, invaded in June and used the bleizkreg to get within the moscow suburbs before winter stopped the unprepared germans in their tracks. Then Hitler gave the orders to stand their ground turning it into battles of attrition and thus passed the momentum to the russians. supply problems, lackluster allies, and their allies crappy equipment also, led to the germans taking the brunt of the attacks. Also, don't forget that the german army was still 65% horsedrawn at the start of the russian campaign. Take into effect the russian rail system was a narrower gauge than europe, plus effective partians and poorily equiped and trained rear echolon(sic?) troops added to the eventual defeat of the germans. Plus, hitler killing most of his effective generals and fieldmarshals add to their defeat. Also, with the russians mass moving their entire war producung factories beyond the urals, just outside the german airforce range add to their defeat. As I said before many things add to their complete and utter defeat, but the one that was the biggest contributer(sic?) was the attrition rate.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tengo1</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone who sees war with Iran without China involved doesn't understand what's going on or why. </div></div>

Probably the most ignorant post I have read to date. While China has almost 100% opposing views as ours, they also realize their economy is married to ours. If we attacked Iran I promise you they wouldn't do a damn thing but officially protest it at the U.N. Same goes for Russia. Iran is not their life blood for oil. They buy only a portion from them. The economic and political repercussions of getting directly involved with a U.S.- Iran war FAR out weight the oil supply hiccup they would have of sitting it out. </div></div>

Your 'promise' doesn't mean a thing.

You have failed to realize that China cannot and will not tolerate a massive hike in price of oil. You're all yapping on about weapons and armies and don't get that it doesn't need to come to that for their to be serious repercussions.

Israel won't attack Iran because the US won't allow it. The US won't allow it because it'll mean killing the US and Global economy. Israel exists militarily because of US support overtly and covertly. Israel is in standing contravention of dozens of UN resolutions in regards to Palestine but the US vetoes any discussion and sanctions in the security council. If Israel disobeys the US it will lose it's most powerful ally - especially if its actions are easily linked to putting the US economy in a recession/Depression. Think about that for a couple of minutes.

China won't allow it because of the same reasons - yes, you've stated the obvious of China's reliance on the US economy that means it will not allow the US to fuck with it's ability to produce and function. Do you understand the word symbiotic?

If Israel attacks then Russia will put the screws on Europe via its Gas pipeline like it did not so long ago. Anyone notice just how fast the Europeans fell in line with Russia's demands when they turned off the gas spigot. Furthermore, you're already seeing Russia supporting Syria. Syria doesn't mean shit in the grand scheme of things so given the resource rich nature of Iran what do you think RUssia will do in a hot conflict in Iran?

YOu think the only connection between China and Iran is oil? Think and research again. I won't do it for you. But if you think either Russia or CHina are going to let Israel and the US put boots on the ground in a major oil/gas/mineral rich country then you're living optimistically.

If the US moves strongly in military force against China's wishes you can bet that China will reply via stronger links with Pakistan, N. Korea and will turn the screws via the rare earth metals it owns - same as it did with Japan to great effect. Perhaps there'll be a strong influx of mysterious funds to all the extremist groups that have had their money sources taken away...

There are other ways now, thanks to the global economy, to mess with countries. Bullets and bombs are so yesterday...
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mustafa</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I believe they SURFACED a sub within torpedo range of a US carrier. As to how they did it, my guess is, look where the carrier is going. Get in front of it and sink to the bottom. Turn everything off. Surface when the carrier is in range. Viola!
Then again, what is to say that there wasn't an American SSN right behind the Chinese one when this happened. Might even be the reason they Chinese sub surfaced... "Hey Chinese sub! Surface or they will never find your bodies. Love, USN"
In international waters, there is nothing we can do to keep a Chinese sub from getting close to an American carrier unless it starts to TRUELY threaten the carrier.
Of course, when you combine that with a missile launch off the coast of CA, you can see that China is VERY concerned with making their submarine fleet at least LOOK very threatening.
</div></div>


Getting in front and setting up a shot is classic submarine tactics, that said, you may very close to correct about the location of an SSN. Maybe not exactly that way, maybe not this time, but...

The difference in our subs and theirs, we don't talk about what we do, we don't have to. (and the Blind Mans Bluff should have never been written)

MM1(SS) 81-87
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tengo1</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone who sees war with Iran without China involved doesn't understand what's going on or why. </div></div>

Probably the most ignorant post I have read to date. While China has almost 100% opposing views as ours, they also realize their economy is married to ours. If we attacked Iran I promise you they wouldn't do a damn thing but officially protest it at the U.N. Same goes for Russia. Iran is not their life blood for oil. They buy only a portion from them. The economic and political repercussions of getting directly involved with a U.S.- Iran war FAR out weight the oil supply hiccup they would have of sitting it out. </div></div>

For the most part I agree with you.

China and Russia have been trading in their own currencies for a bit - the more likely scenario rather than a direct attack against the US. India is currently dealing with IRAN to purchase oil from them based on the Rupie, whether that happens is yet to be seen.

China isn't in all of the great of financial shape either. Sure they've shed some of our treasuries, bought tons of Gold. But prior their currencies were largely backed by copper, undervaluation, false economy etc. Look at their "Ghost Cities", no one lives works their etc. It takes a lot of copper to run electricity to all of those uninhabited buildings, streetlights etc.

I mean really think about it, Russia might be holding a bit of a grudge post their Afghan adventure - something about "turnabout is fair play" comes to mind.

China, Russia and many other countries have been discussing and trying to promote moving from the US dollar as the reserve currency. Not one shot need be fired. If that happens oil prices for us immediately go to EU level prices, at least double where they're at now, overnight.

Combine that with the fact that "we" are actively devaluing our Dollar, let alone other players with a vested interest in it happening doesn't bode well for the economy.

As far as Iran is concerned, I'm not really sure why many folks are discussing details of a ground war at all. Imahandjob, the Assaholas and Rep. Guard are the only one's that need be "smacked". Drone's and small groups could accomplish that much more effectively. The majority of Iranian's actually like the West.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

I don't know where everyone is getting the idea that a majority of China's oil demand is being supplied by Iran. It gets oil from all over the world including Angola, Azerbaijan, Canada, Chad, Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Kazakhstan, Myanmar (Burma), Nigeria, Peru, Russia, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Venezuela in addition to the oil that China itself produces. Iran accounts for only 11% of China's oil importation.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

China is securing resources all over the world. Even in FSU and Africa and South America and several other Asian countries. China is trying to guarantee these precious natural resources which a manufacturing country depends.

Israel has lots of US equipment.That being stated it is being dropped a tier for domestically produced weapons and so forth. Example The Bunker buster bombs the US is so proud of talking about the vast majority are produced by Rafael which is a subsidiary of IAI. They partner with a US company so they can use aid money to purchase them. The M16 lots of them in Israel, but the Tavor has replaced them in front line combat units. Israel saw this stuff coming 10 years ago and started making changes. When it comes to the Survival of the Jewish people and the nation of Israel, they have always done what ever was necessary to survive. No matter who it pissed off.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Truckman11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its predicted that Israel will attack the nuke plants in Iran in the next few months. Israel is gonna take care of this little problem for us</div></div>

I was somewhat surprised this didn't happen when Iran had it's "internal" issues/protests over the elections.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Finris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">China is securing resources all over the world. Even in FSU and Africa and South America and several other Asian countries. China is trying to guarantee these precious natural resources which a manufacturing country depends.

Israel has lots of US equipment.That being stated it is being dropped a tier for domestically produced weapons and so forth. Example The Bunker buster bombs the US is so proud of talking about the vast majority are produced by Rafael which is a subsidiary of IAI. They partner with a US company so they can use aid money to purchase them. The M16 lots of them in Israel, but the Tavor has replaced them in front line combat units. Israel saw this stuff coming 10 years ago and started making changes. When it comes to the Survival of the Jewish people and the nation of Israel, they have always done what ever was necessary to survive. No matter who it pissed off. </div></div>

All good points. We both know however that toys aren't the only thing that Israel gets from the US. Israel enjoys a unique influence on US politics which it would risk losing if it attacks Iran in an 'unscheduled' manner. The ramifications of which would put that 'Survival of the Jewish People' at more risk than whatever risk Iran is meant to pose.

I seriously don't believe that even if the Iranian regime were to get the bomb that they would use it. It would be like firing the only bullet in your gun when there are five guys with guns of their own. The security is in the stand-off - a model well established by the US and Russia over many years. The only threat to anyone is escalation in the spirit of 'kicking ass'. Besides, I don't believe there is anyone in the Iranian military who believes they can handle a hot conflict. Twice they had front row seats to watch US aircraft superiority destroy Iraq in a few days it seemed. A country Iran itself fought for years without even half the success.

Iran's current security is how it will impact the price and flow of oil and the many 'insurgent' like cells it has around the world ready to deploy against US/Western targets if it's attacked itself.

The balance of power in Iran is shifting away from the Mullah's to the Republican Guard. The Guard is more pragmatic, more focused on retention of power and economic recovery then they are of religious zeal and expansion/exertion of force. The support structure is shifting as well with the Mullahs' having greater proportion of support in the poor rural areas than within the more education urban population. In the end, the full belly and the warm fire wins over more people all over the world and the Guard realize this. To attack Iran and inflict high civilian tolls would risk shifting this favorable trend to a nationalistic one focused on revenge.

Besides, Israel has the bomb, despite getting it illegally according to the non-Proliferation Treaty so the 'right' to survival is not unique or sacred to any one nation or people. Folks will do the same, for the same reasons, all over the world. To think otherwise would be naive.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a zealot and moron at best. He's probably from the same gene pool as Kim Jong il. He's an opportunist and if he thinks he could be successful in hitting Israel he would simply to glorify his name to Allah. He gives the Napoleon Complex a whole new definition.

And then there's Israel... "What air strike? Someone bombed Iran? That's most unfortunate..."
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a zealot and moron at best. He's probably from the same gene pool as Kim Jong il. He's an opportunist and if he thinks he could be successful in hitting Israel he would simply to glorify his name to Allah. He gives the Napoleon Complex a whole new definition.

And then there's Israel... "What air strike? Someone bombed Iran? That's most unfortunate..." </div></div>

Hmmm... as I recall Kim Jong Il never bombed Japan...
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

I seem to recall something about a Supreme Council, more powerful, than the Iranian president.

Some nights I lay awake thinking that the office of the Iranian president, could be nothing more then a puppet for the Supreme Council.

Then I hammer back two fingers of scotch, and my "give-a-shit" alarm gets broken.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Finris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">China is securing resources all over the world. Even in FSU and Africa and South America and several other Asian countries. China is trying to guarantee these precious natural resources which a manufacturing country depends.

Israel has lots of US equipment.That being stated it is being dropped a tier for domestically produced weapons and so forth. Example The Bunker buster bombs the US is so proud of talking about the vast majority are produced by Rafael which is a subsidiary of IAI. They partner with a US company so they can use aid money to purchase them. The M16 lots of them in Israel, but the Tavor has replaced them in front line combat units. Israel saw this stuff coming 10 years ago and started making changes. When it comes to the Survival of the Jewish people and the nation of Israel, they have always done what ever was necessary to survive. No matter who it pissed off. </div></div>

All good points. We both know however that toys aren't the only thing that Israel gets from the US. Israel enjoys a unique influence on US politics which it would risk losing if it attacks Iran in an 'unscheduled' manner. The ramifications of which would put that 'Survival of the Jewish People' at more risk than whatever risk Iran is meant to pose.

<span style="color: #CC0000"> I seriously don't believe that even if the Iranian regime were to get the bomb that they would use it. It would be like firing the only bullet in your gun when there are five guys with guns of their own. </span> The security is in the stand-off - a model well established by the US and Russia over many years. The only threat to anyone is escalation in the spirit of 'kicking ass'. Besides, I don't believe there is anyone in the Iranian military who believes they can handle a hot conflict. Twice they had front row seats to watch US aircraft superiority destroy Iraq in a few days it seemed. A country Iran itself fought for years without even half the success.

Iran's current security is how it will impact the price and flow of oil and the many 'insurgent' like cells it has around the world ready to deploy against US/Western targets if it's attacked itself.

The balance of power in Iran is shifting away from the Mullah's to the Republican Guard. The Guard is more pragmatic, more focused on retention of power and economic recovery then they are of religious zeal and expansion/exertion of force. The support structure is shifting as well with the Mullahs' having greater proportion of support in the poor rural areas than within the more education urban population. In the end, the full belly and the warm fire wins over more people all over the world and the Guard realize this. To attack Iran and inflict high civilian tolls would risk shifting this favorable trend to a nationalistic one focused on revenge.

Besides, Israel has the bomb, despite getting it illegally according to the non-Proliferation Treaty so the 'right' to survival is not unique or sacred to any one nation or people. Folks will do the same, for the same reasons, all over the world. To think otherwise would be naive. </div></div>

Though rare, in this case I disagree with you EH. As Broker stated, these guys ike Achminijad ARE zealots, and would think nothing of sacrificing millions of their own to destroy Israel(who are the utimate zealots themselves and would think nothing of sacrificing the United States if it served their ultimate purpose). The truth....uglier than fiction. Just dont live too close to DC or NYC and you should be ok.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a zealot and moron at best. He's probably from the same gene pool as Kim Jong il. He's an opportunist and if he thinks he could be successful in hitting Israel he would simply to glorify his name to Allah. He gives the Napoleon Complex a whole new definition.

And then there's Israel... "What air strike? Someone bombed Iran? That's most unfortunate..." </div></div>

Hmmm... as I recall Kim Jong Il never bombed Japan... </div></div>


No they didn't, but they did do "Test Launches" in the direction thereof...
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just dont live too close to DC or NYC and you should be ok. </div></div>

Try living next to the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bangor, Keyport, and roughly 40 miles from Lewis-McChord... lol. If World War III breaks out you know Western Washington is screwed...
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

Ah yes, the old/middle aged religious suicidal zealot...

Kinda reminds me of WMDs...
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The key there - navy to navy - probably resides in submarine capability. On that note, it is in the public domain that China has claimed they have had a sub within torpedo range of a US carrier. To my knowledge that claim was never confirmed. </div></div>

Whoa..
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/nov/13/20061113-121539-3317r/#

It popped up right in the middle of the battle fleet.

Deisel electrics are far quieter - the ONLY thing here is that we were not on ASW excercises or it would not have gotten that close...

However back at point, a war with Iran is an ugly ugly DAMN ugly proposition. We don't need it.

Israel should back off, if Iran builds a nuke and they can confirm it, then let them fly...and we stay out of it.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

Articlight,
Israel has been on a very tight leash now for the last 20 years. Iran has made unequivocal statements about destroying Israel. The majority of terrorist groups are getting funding from Iran. Lets not leave out training and weapons. Israel pulled out of south Lebanon in 2000. Israel has given back Gaza and lots of the West bank of the Jordan. The second Lebanon war of 2006 Israel didn't complete the mission. The good ole USA demanded a quick resolve. Israel has lost its not edge but the ability to keep its enemies in check. Please don't forget the US pulling out of the middle east. Israel will have to deal a critical blow to Iran. then Israel will have to deal with the 2 main terrorist groups and a more Islamist Egypt to boot.

When the Yom Kippur War was about to begin. The Russian advisers put their families on Antonov carriers 24-48 hours prior to and attack SOP. Israel had the option of hitting them before they attacked. Golda called and talked it over with Kissinger and Nixon. They said to wait so you wont be labeled the aggressor. Israel took the loses of both men and what little equipment they had. Kissinger and Nixon both kept putting them off about their promises to resupply and support Israel. Golda called up Nixon and said I have 5 minutes to make a decision.You promised if we took the hit you would support with what ever we needed.Nixon, well congress isn't in session and I have to wait to get their approval blah blah. Golda I told you I had 5 minutes to make a decision 2 minutes are up and since the airlift you and Kissinger promised isn't coming we will use what we have to end the war(read Demona option). Golda hung up on him. Nixon immediately called back and told her the airlift will begin you will have plans landing early in the morning. Many years later we get to hear the Nixon tapes of him and Kissinger talking about letting the Jews bleed for a while... Well, when the Osirak reactor needed to be taken care of and the US said oh don't worry about it. Manachem Begin said no its a threat we can not live with.

I look at it this way my Father fought in 6 day war and in 73 year war and in Lebanon. I had to go and fight in Lebanon as well. The questions is will my son have to go and fight in Lebanon as well? My son wouldn't have to go if the politicians would stop worrying and let us finish the fight. Patton said "the damned politicians stop the wars to soon and always leaves the military with another war to fight"!
Obama has talked about being for Israeli security and blah blah blah. Obama will do nothing and all the Muslim countries know it and are preparing for the fight now before a republican can get elected. Long story short Israel has no other option than to make a preemptive strike.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

If the upper management lets the Military do their job the way it needs to be done, there will be less blood shed on the US side…
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

China would be involved.

MacArthur thought otherwise and got his butt cashiered ultimately. More importantly, he got a lot of troops (on all sides) slaughtered for his mistake.

I think it doesn't matter whether we initiate hostilities; either we will, or Isreal will and we'll get drawn in shortly after.

The war between Iran and Iraq was long and bloody, mainly because neither one had nukes or even the most rudimentary stategy. Isreal and we do not suffer from such deficiencies.

This nation is tired of surgical measures and the long casualty lists they bring. We go in on this one, and I seriously think it won't be long before the nukes (somebody's nukes) arrive on ground zero; very simply because Iran <span style="font-style: italic">will</span> strike us inside CONUS, and then the gloves will come off once and for all.

Iran thinks with its prayer books, and does not realize that a war on a religious basis will bring their utter anihillation. Be careful what you wage war for, you may get it. Folks have been tolerating Arab/Islamic expansionism for nearly a millenium, and they have scant tolerance left to extend.

The world will learn lessons it's been resisting for damned near ever. A) Nice guys hurt everyone in the end. B) Bad guys always need to get their comuppance, and the longer we wait to do it, the more it costs in everything that's dear to people of real conscience.

America needs to recognize that ever since Korea, we've been forcing our young people to fight wars with one hand tied back.

The folks who made that a requirement are the ones who are most responsible for the damage and wreckage I see in the VA hospitals a half dozen times each month. This one is looming, and if we do things 'business as usual' it will be the end of us as a decent society.

I'm not sure even that would assauge the hand wringers. Maybe they think we <span style="font-style: italic">need</span> to suffer such prices for our wars.

I don't.

I want folks to fear even the barest possibility of awakening America's rage.

That's my approach to 'peace in our time'. They can have all the 'peace in our time' their tiny little hearts desire; right after we finish up with <span style="font-style: italic">this</span> one; permanent-like...

Roosevelt and Truman understood that part. If you pound 'em 'til the rubble bounces, it doesn't matter how badly they might want to get back at you. If they can't, they won't.

No matter how it starts, we'll finish it; and a lot of strategies and policies regarding the West and the Middle East will change massively and abruptly.

'Bout time for that, long time coming.

I think this is something that will unfold the same no matter how the elections go.

Meanwhile, if you ever did any serious thinking about a societal collapse; this ain't such a terribly bad time for recollecting a few prudent possibilities. When this stuff comes down the pike, things will likely get worse before they get better.

Greg
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArcticLight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Israel should back off, if Iran builds a nuke and they can confirm it, then let them fly...and we stay out of it. </div></div>

I do not agree, allowing someone that has made public it's thoughts about you, to arm to that level, before striking, is stupid.

Israel knows what going to happen if Iran proceeds. In a few months(God willing)new blood will hold our highest office. Sometimes in life you don't have the luxury or time line of waiting/predicting the out come in advance. You do what you have to based on your best guess, an past history. Stopping an surviving total destruction is different than losing a few folks, ships or planes.

For Israel this is about surviving, nothing less. For if she fails to act, Iran's end game goal may come true.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

The leaders of the countries, Iran, Korea, etc, while zealots, are not stupid and are not morons. We need to remember that. There are other ways to strike the CONUS, besides with nuke armed missles. I can think of a couple which I will not mention here....no need to give them ideas they may not have come up with. Have you forgotten 911. Despite our technological superiorty, yuo cant be everywhere, all the time. All they need is to find the right guy, and bribe, or threaten him/her, to look the other way at the right time, and its deja vu all over again. As I mentioned earlier in this post, its probrably best not to live near DC, or NYC.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No one under 21 cares about these trivial issues.

As long as they have newest smart phone, Ipad, wifi and name brand clothing "who cares?". </div></div>

Yeah, those 19-20 y/o Marines don't care... Don't make generalizations.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

Iran talks a big game, but lets be realistic. Take away China's support and they've got nothing but bankrupt and/or corrupt countries that we and our allies could annihilate if we didn't let Congress or the UN call the shots. Their technology is decades behind ours as well. They may be the #2 OPEC exporter, but all that oil is useless if it's burning.

They can only ride China's coat-tail so long as China doesn't decide that they would rather just annex Iran than pay oil prices. History says it all in regards to China and their resource acquirement methods. Iran's President is an idiot at best with his speeches, threats, and shallow ultimatums. One day his mouth will override his ass, or he'll get cocky and make a bad decision because he thinks he can get away with it, and then we'll own his ass pending the UN and Congress pulls their head out of their own.

I find the whole embargo ideology useless. I recall someone breaking the Treaty of Versailles over, and over, and over... then they embargoed, made threats, and what happened? Oh yeah that's right... Hitler and the Third Reich. You can only let someone get away with so much before action must be taken or else you reap the consequences of shallow threats.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Iran talks a big game, but lets be realistic. Take away China's support and they've got nothing but bankrupt and/or corrupt countries that we and our allies could annihilate if we didn't let Congress or the UN call the shots. Their technology is decades behind ours as well. They may be the #2 OPEC exporter, but all that oil is useless if it's burning.

They can only ride China's coat-tail so long as China doesn't decide that they would rather just annex Iran than pay oil prices. History says it all in regards to China and their resource acquirement methods. Iran's President is an idiot at best with his speeches, threats, and shallow ultimatums. One day his mouth will override his ass, or he'll get cocky and make a bad decision because he thinks he can get away with it, and then we'll own his ass pending the UN and Congress pulls their head out of their own.

I find the whole embargo ideology useless. I recall someone breaking the Treaty of Versailles over, and over, and over... then they embargoed, made threats, and what happened? Oh yeah that's right... Hitler and the Third Reich. You can only let someone get away with so much before action must be taken or else you reap the consequences of shallow threats. </div></div>

be6369a9-8fed-4536-a3cd-dfbf071409bf.gif
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gunfighter14e2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArcticLight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Israel should back off, if Iran builds a nuke and they can confirm it, then let them fly...and we stay out of it. </div></div>

I do not agree, allowing someone that has made public it's thoughts about you, to arm to that level, before striking, is stupid.

Israel knows what going to happen if Iran proceeds. In a few months(God willing)new blood will hold our highest office. Sometimes in life you don't have the luxury or time line of waiting/predicting the out come in advance. You do what you have to based on your best guess, an past history. Stopping an surviving total destruction is different than losing a few folks, ships or planes.

For Israel this is about surviving, nothing less. For if she fails to act, Iran's end game goal may come true. </div></div>

I do not disagree, however, given this country's lack of political will to actually FINISH a fight I do not see it doing "US" any good. If Israel wants to attack them that's fine - have at it.

We finished Japan and Germany in four years, FOUR YEARS. We are in Afghanistan for the lack of will to win the war, we'd rather be nation rebuilding and I for one do NOT want to see us rebuilding the entire frickin middle east one country at a time!
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArcticLight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gunfighter14e2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArcticLight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Israel should back off, if Iran builds a nuke and they can confirm it, then let them fly...and we stay out of it. </div></div>

I do not agree, allowing someone that has made public it's thoughts about you, to arm to that level, before striking, is stupid.

Israel knows what going to happen if Iran proceeds. In a few months(God willing)new blood will hold our highest office. Sometimes in life you don't have the luxury or time line of waiting/predicting the out come in advance. You do what you have to based on your best guess, an past history. Stopping an surviving total destruction is different than losing a few folks, ships or planes.

For Israel this is about surviving, nothing less. For if she fails to act, Iran's end game goal may come true. </div></div>

I do not disagree, however, given this country's lack of political will to actually FINISH a fight I do not see it doing "US" any good. If Israel wants to attack them that's fine - have at it.

We finished Japan and Germany in four years, FOUR YEARS. We are in Afghanistan for the lack of will to win the war, we'd rather be nation rebuilding and I for one do NOT want to see us rebuilding the entire frickin middle east one country at a time! </div></div>

Actually, were in A-stan for 10 years because, some (un named) moron started a second war in Iraq before we finished the one there.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MontanaKid</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No one under 21 cares about these trivial issues.

As long as they have newest smart phone, Ipad, wifi and name brand clothing "who cares?". </div></div>

Yeah, those 19-20 y/o Marines don't care... Don't make generalizations. </div></div>

Montanaskid mark, I can make all of the generalizations I please. The 19-20 y/o Marines you reference are the 1% and have my respect. Look at the other 99% and get back to me.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArcticLight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gunfighter14e2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArcticLight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Israel should back off, if Iran builds a nuke and they can confirm it, then let them fly...and we stay out of it. </div></div>

I do not agree, allowing someone that has made public it's thoughts about you, to arm to that level, before striking, is stupid.

Israel knows what going to happen if Iran proceeds. In a few months(God willing)new blood will hold our highest office. Sometimes in life you don't have the luxury or time line of waiting/predicting the out come in advance. You do what you have to based on your best guess, an past history. Stopping an surviving total destruction is different than losing a few folks, ships or planes.

For Israel this is about surviving, nothing less. For if she fails to act, Iran's end game goal may come true. </div></div>

I do not disagree, however, given this country's lack of political will to actually FINISH a fight I do not see it doing "US" any good. If Israel wants to attack them that's fine - have at it.

We finished Japan and Germany in four years, FOUR YEARS. We are in Afghanistan for the lack of will to win the war, we'd rather be nation rebuilding and I for one do NOT want to see us rebuilding the entire frickin middle east one country at a time! </div></div>

Lack of will has nothing to do with it. War = money flowing into very large pockets that pay to keep the game rolling by any means. Many folks an Country's are good for business. Once your on a roll it's cheaper to keep the force local to the new fight, saves the transportation costs, so that money can be funneled into the contractors as well. Propaganda machine's run in all country's, an some run better than others. We are the king in many things, an I.T. has a different meaning to those inside the circle.
Save the bigger Military funds, how much money do civies spend to try an be like uncles guys? Just here, the Hide, how much money has been spent on trying to have/build a M40a1-3, Xm21-M25, M24 clones. Now take the rest of the weapons SR-25 M-4 an the list goes on. Glass is another area, then start adding up the rest of the gear. How about the money training to be like GI joe?
War is big money pure an simple, but it is sold an packaged totally different.

Had I known in the 60's-80's what I found out in the late 90's, I might of had a real life.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

"Had I known in the 60's-80's what I found out in the late 90's, I might of had a real life."

You said a mouth full in your post, Gunfighter. Its something Ive kind of wanted to say here for a while, but didnt want the fine men here to think I was shitting on them. The ones who are behind all this dont give a tinker's damn about me, or you, America, or anything else but the money and power. They sit on their 150 foot boats in the mediterranean and laugh at the poor grunts who fight suffer and die.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gunfighter14e2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> In a few months(God willing)new blood will hold our highest office. </div></div>

Man I wish that were true, but Obama will get reelected. The Republican party is to divided. Ron Paul won't get the nomination, and will go independent again. That will divide the votes again.

If you haven't already started stocking up on reloading supplies, ammunition, and any gun parts that you may be interested in you are already behind the eight ball again.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fireguyty</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gunfighter14e2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> In a few months(God willing)new blood will hold our highest office. </div></div>

Man I wish that were true, but Obama will get reelected. The Republican party is to divided. Ron Paul won't get the nomination, and will go independent again. That will divide the votes again.

If you haven't already started stocking up on reloading supplies, ammunition, and any gun parts that you may be interested in you are already behind the eight ball again. </div></div>
I hate to admit it, but I agree with you. I used to think Paul was crazy until I became "enlightened" about things such as the war machines, and now I realize he IS the only one that makes sense and might restore the Constitution.

Now, as far as Iran goes with nukes I suspect that Israel will destroy their plants before operational just like Begin did to Iraq. I doubt a US blessing given the relationship between Obama and his commitment to the Palestine cause, and if anything Israel may go after our Mr. O (he, not words from me - they put it in their press and apologized.)
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

If he gets re-elected after how much further he has been able to dig a deeper hole for the U.S. then i've lost all faith in this country. That's utterly ridiculous for him to get re-elected. For him to even have a chance is alarming.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Blackops_2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If he gets re-elected after how much further he has been able to dig a deeper hole for the U.S. then i've lost all faith in this country. That's utterly ridiculous for him to get re-elected. For him to even have a chance is alarming.
</div></div>

O I agree completely, but he has more than a chance. He nearly is a certainty.

Romney can't beat him because he is Mormon. Gingrich can't beat him because is is a low life. Ron Paul's ideas are great, but to extreme for most. But Paul is the worst because when he goes independent it further weakens the Republicans.

The way I see it Israel is alone and knows it.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Had I known in the 60's-80's what I found out in the late 90's, I might of had a real life."

You said a mouth full in your post, Gunfighter. Its something Ive kind of wanted to say here for a while, but didnt want the fine men here to think I was shitting on them. </div></div>
I'll do you one better, the smart guys went to Canada. I believed the dog an pony show I was washed with, an took it to the bank. Knowing what I know now, it can all go to shit for all I care.

Fox just announced those that were stupid are getting a bail out from Uncle. I suffered long hrs, did w/o, an paid all my bills on time, all my life. What do I get? The fucks now want more of my money to give to a bunch of lazy fucks, who know nothing but sucking from another's tit, or stealing money with a pen.
<span style="color: #FF0000">WHERE IS MY MOTHERFUCKING BAIL OUT?</span>
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

If we get into a war with Iran (which is looking very likely, because all the possibilities for President except Ron Paul are for it), I definitely do think it would be bloody and disastrous. Though their conventional military would probably be a tougher nut to crack than Iraq's, I'm sure they wouldn't last too long. But the real fight, and where most of our casualties would occur, would be in the occupation. As the article said, they do indeed have a very patriotic and nationalistic population, and even the ones who don't like the current regime would like a foreign occupier even less. There would be no one welcoming us with open arms. They would disperse their military and their man-portable weapons throughout the population, and would make it very costly for us to occupy them. Iran's military has some very modern and effective man-portable anti-armor weapons. Remember the toll Hezbollah took on Israel's armor several years back when Israel invaded Lebanon after those soldiers were taken prisoner? Ultimately the casualties were such that Israel didn't have the resolve to continue that campaign, and they left with their tails between their legs. Those were Iranian-supplied anti-tank rockets (of Chinese design), and there are plenty more of them where those came from. The point being, our guys would not necessarily be safe in their Abrams', Bradleys, and MRAPs. If we invaded Iran, we would have to get used to substantially higher casualty figures than what we are seeing in our two current wars. It would take decades of occupation, trillions of dollars, and tens of thousands of American lives to fully subdue Iran. It would just hasten our country's economic decline and the popping of the worldwide dollar reserve bubble. And don't forget the fact that Iran, or Hezbollah, almost certainly has shit loads of cells lying dormant here in the U.S.; and if we attack Iran, they will bring war right to our doorsteps.

I also want to say a word about the stupidity of embargoes. They are an act of war, plain and simple. You are forcefully preventing people in a country from trading with others. In addition, they do not harm the folks we actually have beef with (the country's government)... they harm the general population of the country. It stiffens the resolve of the population against us, and makes them more hostile to us. Embargoing a country actually fortifies the ruling party's position, just like it did in Cuba for all those decades. All the ruling party has to do is to say that the meddlesome foreigners are on the side of the opposition, and then they can paint the opposition as a bunch of foreign puppets. The last thing the Iranian opposition party wants is for us foreigners to support them -- it just hurts their credibility among the very patriotic and nationalistic population.

For a little insight, consider this from the perspective of another very patriotic, nationalistic country... the USA. If some semi-hostile foreign country, say China, supported one of our domestic political parties (say the Democrats), do you think that would help or hurt that party's chances of winning? Now consider what would happen if that foreign country embargoed us, which directly caused all of our citizens' standard of living to go down, and seized billions of our overseas dollars. The Republicans would hit the Democrats hard on their association with these foreigners, and it would resonate with a lot of the population. What would make you think it would be any different in Iran?

Now think what would happen if that foreign country invaded us. What would you guys do, as patriotic citizens of this country?

I really hate to think what it would be like to be one of our soldiers who is invading Iran, and has to kill people who, if he were in their place, would be doing the exact same thing. We would not have the moral high ground in a war like that, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

What we need to do is to mind our own god damn business. We just need to sit back, trade with people, and get rich. No more entangling alliances, and no more wars over little piss-ant shit holes that don't pose a threat to us. If any of our citizens want to pick up a rifle and go help Israel, or the Libyan rebels, or the Syrian people, then no one should stop them. But I don't want to be forced to pay one dime to help one group of crazy fucking middle easterners just because they decided to make a home in the middle of a bunch of other crazy fucking middle easterners who don't want them there, both of whom think they are God's chosen people or some such bullshit.

Our foreign policy should be this: if anyone is ever actually stupid enough to attack the United States, our Congress should declare war on them, like the Constitution requires, our military should turn them into a self-lighting parking lot, and then we should walk the fuck away and get back to trading with people and making money.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Had I known in the 60's-80's what I found out in the late 90's, I might of had a real life."

You said a mouth full in your post, Gunfighter. Its something Ive kind of wanted to say here for a while, but didnt want the fine men here to think I was shitting on them. The ones who are behind all this dont give a tinker's damn about me, or you, America, or anything else but the money and power. They sit on their 150 foot boats in the mediterranean and laugh at the poor grunts who fight suffer and die. </div></div>

Both posts are actually very true.

My mom swears to this day that's why JFK was hit.

I don't mean any disrespect to the soldiers, they are the finest in the world and THAT'S FACT. The politicians are the problem.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MontanaKid</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No one under 21 cares about these trivial issues.

As long as they have newest smart phone, Ipad, wifi and name brand clothing "who cares?". </div></div>

Yeah, those 19-20 y/o Marines don't care... Don't make generalizations. </div></div>

Montanaskid mark, I can make all of the generalizations I please. The 19-20 y/o Marines you reference are the 1% and have my respect. Look at the other 99% and get back to me. </div></div>

Be cool honeybunny. Just making sure were on the same page.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MontanaKid</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MontanaKid</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No one under 21 cares about these trivial issues.

As long as they have newest smart phone, Ipad, wifi and name brand clothing "who cares?". </div></div>

Yeah, those 19-20 y/o Marines don't care... Don't make generalizations. </div></div>

Montanaskid mark, I can make all of the generalizations I please. The 19-20 y/o Marines you reference are the 1% and have my respect. Look at the other 99% and get back to me. </div></div>

Be cool honeybunny. Just making sure were on the same page. </div></div>

Honeybunny... LOL. That's awesome. Montana, we are definitely on the same page. Cheers. My man.
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

Ron Paul believes the whole 'Iran has the bomb' buzz is the same BS as Saddam has WMDs.

Something in that perhaps....

I get tired of seeing this country get twisted around the little finger of other countries and do their bidding just because they have surrogate citizens here. When will the agenda in this country be one where it's for Americans who put the US first?
 
Re: CouldWar w/ Iran be Bloodiest Conflict Since WWII?

I think Iran would fall more easily than Iraq.