[bMc8F9ZI]

If John McCain had been elected President instead of Barack Obama, would we be closer to a direct military confrontation with Iran?

[BodeOmissemia]

Very unlikely. Iran has the biggest military in the region in terms of active troop numbers (they are ranked 8th in the whole world), on top of that, the Basij is a paramilitary group that's estimated to be 3-5 million combat ready. Iran is also technologically fairly advanced, with its own arms industry, Chinese and Russian supplies, in the region it is only behind Israel and Saudi Arabia. General John Abizaid chief of United States Central Command for the Middle East region regard Iran as having the most powerful military (after Israel) in the region. A ground invasion would immediatly result in tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of US casualties. No politician with a brain will get in a direct military confrontation with Iran.

The sabre rattling is more aimed at the US domestic constituencies and Israel than actually for Iran.

[shkarpet$]

In this area, Obama is following all of Bush's policies. Why would you think McCain would be closer to military action with Iran than Bush?

[Xxedxevh]

^ The same was said of Iraq 20 years ago.

The shooting has already started. They are planting IEDs in Iraq, and shooting their own people in the streets. McCain acknowledged the former during the campaign, and I believe would have publicly supported the post election rioting in Iran. How far that could have gone with the expectation of indirect American support is anyone's guess.

At some point restarting the Iranian Civil War would require western forces to shatter Iran's conventional military, which we could do fairly quickly, and affordably if we capture the oil fields. From there its a systematic smash, clear, fortify and rebuild effort across the country to liberate the people from paramilitaries still loyal to the Ackmedinnerjacket regime.

[drlifeech]

Not close at all.

It would be over by now.

[eljugadordepoquer]

Direct war, unlikely. But I think we would have found fun and interesting ways to fuck with them, and as a consequence Iraq (and Afghanistan) would be much, much more violent than they are today.

[CamVideoQl]

Direct war, unlikely. But I think we would have found fun and interesting ways to fuck with them, and as a consequence Iraq (and Afghanistan) would be much, much more violent than they are today.

Oh My God!
Oh My God!
Oh My God!

They might actually try and hurt our troops!

News flash for you there Sparky... They already are

So much for the Great Grand Obama 'engagement' strategy...

[capeAngedlelp]

Oh My God!
Oh My God!
Oh My God!

They might actually try and hurt our troops!

News flash for you there Sparky... They already are

So much for the Great Grand Obama 'engagement' strategy...

Do you understand the word "more?" Because it was kind of integral to my post.

[55Beaphable]

'closer' didn't cut it for me.
We would be at war.
Between that failed warrior/irresponsible warmonger who sang "Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Iran" (to the tune of the Beach Boys' "Barbara Ann") and the looney right through his Veep, a casus belli would have been found or fabricated and we would have been in there by the end of his first year.

[sciectotacype17]

Right, because there are no reasons to fight back against Iran.

[DraidodaRip]

Very unlikely. Iran has the biggest military in the region in terms of active troop numbers (they are ranked 8th in the whole world), on top of that, the Basij is a paramilitary group that's estimated to be 3-5 million combat ready. Iran is also technologically fairly advanced, with its own arms industry, Chinese and Russian supplies, in the region it is only behind Israel and Saudi Arabia. General John Abizaid chief of United States Central Command for the Middle East region regard Iran as having the most powerful military (after Israel) in the region. A ground invasion would immediatly result in tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of US casualties. No politician with a brain will get in a direct military confrontation with Iran.

The sabre rattling is more aimed at the US domestic constituencies and Israel than actually for Iran.

Iraq's military was (going off of memory) like the 5th largest in the world pre-Desert Storm. They didn't stand a chance and we had hardly any casualties. Iran would be the same. They have nothing, nothing, that could touch us. The only thing that would make a difference is if Iran got nukes, then we simply wouldn't attack them at all.

I think we'd be about where we are now. The reason for this is we are spread too thin. I don't think we could sustain a 3rd front and I think McCain would understand that.

[evarekataVame]

everyone seems to have forgotten that 10+ years of sanction have bleed Iraq dry prior to 2003's invasion. no such thing for Iran. Europeans, China, Russia, happily conduct business and arms trade with them and this has not been interrupted.

Iraq also lost the majority of its ground vehicle, equipments and aircraft during the first Gulf war. There had been no resupply since. And just to correct you: the pre-invasion number of personell of Iraq is roughly half of those active in Iran at the moment. If you include the paramilitary, then it's less than 1/10th of Iran. However mighty they were in the 80s when it was supported by Reagan, it could not have been the world's 5th largest army (which is Russia, at 1.04 million) prior to the 2003 invasion.

[DrKirkNoliss]

Were talking about Desert Storm Iraq. The veteran Iraq military that Iran fought to a draw only by throwing massed human waves to clog the muzzles of Iraqi guns.

[vioppyskype]

Were talking about Desert Storm Iraq. The veteran Iraq military that Iran fought to a draw only by throwing massed human waves to clog the muzzles of Iraqi guns.

pre-Desert storm is irrelevant. We are comparing Op Iraqi Freedom with a possible invasion of Iran.

[craditc]

Very unlikely. Iran has the biggest military in the region in terms of active troop numbers (they are ranked 8th in the whole world), on top of that, the Basij is a paramilitary group that's estimated to be 3-5 million combat ready. Iran is also technologically fairly advanced, with its own arms industry, Chinese and Russian supplies, in the region it is only behind Israel and Saudi Arabia. General John Abizaid chief of United States Central Command for the Middle East region regard Iran as having the most powerful military (after Israel) in the region. A ground invasion would immediatly result in tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of US casualties. No politician with a brain will get in a direct military confrontation with Iran.

The sabre rattling is more aimed at the US domestic constituencies and Israel than actually for Iran.

Yeh, right, now note the tone of all the conservative posts in here and remember that McCain is also senile while VP Bimbo would be even less well informed than most of them. What the fuck does it MATTER that we would be losing money by the bale and people by the score, we're MURIKANS and ain't nobody gonna be no muzlims round us, you betcha.

We'd probably have gone in before Bush left office. Well OK not that soon but certainly by the time when the Iranian elections meant we had to SAVE THE POOR BENIGHTED IRANIAN PEOPLE. By now we'd be facing a full scale military disaster (after those same downtrodden victims of tyranny fought us like tigers) and an economic meltdown that would make us pine for the good old days of banking failures.

Think how much fun that new F350 would be with gasoline at $10 a gallon...yeeeehaww

Iraq's military was (going off of memory) like the 5th largest in the world pre-Desert Storm. They didn't stand a chance and we had hardly any casualties. Iran would be the same. They have nothing, nothing, that could touch us. The only thing that would make a difference is if Iran got nukes, then we simply wouldn't attack them at all.

I think we'd be about where we are now. The reason for this is we are spread too thin. I don't think we could sustain a 3rd front and I think McCain would understand that.

Yes, we'd roll right over them and they'd dance in the streets. Sweet jesu, it's been several thousand YEARS since Fabius Cunctator showed how to deal with that strategy, and they're STILL repeating the lesson in Iraq even right now, do you people EVER learn??

[NowFloabDow]

Yeh, right, now note the tone of all the conservative posts in here and remember that McCain is also senile while VP Bimbo would be even less well informed than most of them. What the fuck does it MATTER that we would be losing money by the bale and people by the score, we're MURIKANS and ain't nobody gonna be no muzlims round us, you betcha.

We'd probably have gone in before Bush left office. Well OK not that soon but certainly by the time when the Iranian elections meant we had to SAVE THE POOR BENIGHTED IRANIAN PEOPLE. By now we'd be facing a full scale military disaster (after those same downtrodden victims of tyranny fought us like tigers) and an economic meltdown that would make us pine for the good old days of banking failures.

Actually, Bush's Office of Special Plans did speculate a possible invasion of Iran, also did Pentagon's Iranian Directorate, this was prior to invading Iraq, late 2002. They reached the same conclusion as I did before, that it would be insane.

That's why Obama was silent post-Iranian election. Bush would have done exactly the same, or McCain for that matter. These people know better what they are dealing with.

[selayeffethy]

Yes, we'd roll right over them and they'd dance in the streets. Sweet jesu, it's been several thousand YEARS since Fabius Cunctator showed how to deal with that strategy, and they're STILL repeating the lesson in Iraq even right now, do you people EVER learn??

Fabian strategy was well thought out and did its job that is to buy several years of breathing space, but in the end, invading Africa and defeating Hannibal directly is what ended the war.

Just saying.

[krek-sikUp]

Lost in all this is the general lack of need to put ground troops in… at least in any large numbers or formations.

A very doable plan might go something like this:

An air campaign to remove their air defense systems and coastal
An air campaign to damage their nuclear facilities
An air campaign to destroy their major military formations and equipment not listed above.
A sea blockade shutting down all oil exports and all imports of any type including gasoline.

All the while calling for the current government to surrender and hand themselves over to the UN. Not the US… to the UN. The UN then to sponsor, and monitor new free and open national elections in 90 days.

If necessary take and hold (from the sea):
Kharg Island,
Lavan Island
Kish Island,
Abadan,
Bandar Mahshar,
and Neka,

While keeping the Strait of Hormuz, open and flowing.

40k air and sea personal?
12-15k Marines IF, if we have to take the oil terminals. And hey… just what might they do? Human wave? They don’t have an air force. They don’t have much of a Navy… and will have less after the first 24 hours. Army? Most would be destroyed in the same opening air assault. So… they going to fade away? Fine… won’t be a guerrilla war if there is no occupying force now will there? Attack the Marines holding the terminals? With full air and naval support? Good luck with that.
On a limited, but overwhelming force campaign it is Iran that quickly runs out of options not the US.

[Innoloinarp]

No guerilla war? Hello, Iran borders both countries that the US is occupying.

[Lhtfajba]

Yeh, right, now note the tone of all the conservative posts in here and remember that McCain is also senile while VP Bimbo would be even less well informed than most of them. What the fuck does it MATTER that we would be losing money by the bale and people by the score, we're MURIKANS and ain't nobody gonna be no muzlims round us, you betcha.

We'd probably have gone in before Bush left office. Well OK not that soon but certainly by the time when the Iranian elections meant we had to SAVE THE POOR BENIGHTED IRANIAN PEOPLE. By now we'd be facing a full scale military disaster (after those same downtrodden victims of tyranny fought us like tigers) and an economic meltdown that would make us pine for the good old days of banking failures.

There is no realistic call for invasion of Iran. I don't know where you dreamed this up from but it's just not there. The only reason there is a slightest hint of people thinking about it is because no one wants to see a nuclear Iran.

Yes, we'd roll right over them and they'd dance in the streets. Sweet jesu, it's been several thousand YEARS since Fabius Cunctator showed how to deal with that strategy, and they're STILL repeating the lesson in Iraq even right now, do you people EVER learn?? Yes, we'd roll right over them. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't want us there but that is irrelevant. Yes, they could do gorilla warfare, just like what is happening in Iraq and what is happening in Afghanistan. The point is that we would roll over the Iranian military establishment.