You clearly don't understand what you're talking about. My advice is to read some actual military doctrines and research things instead of just regurgitating left wing rhetoric renowned for its fallacious simplicity.IRONCHEF wrote:
yeah because they haven't learned our EVERY move in dealing with the damned near impossible to find enemies we're fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq...so naturally Iran would fight us conventionally... lolnukchebi0 wrote:
Because they don't realize Iran is a more conventional enemy more susceptible to sustained air attacks?FEOS wrote:
Why does anyone think a conflict with Iran would be anything remotely like Iraq and Afghanistan?
IRAN> USA
Sorry, what?Kmarion wrote:
Winston Churchill is rolling in his grave. Something happened to the British Naval might. They could learn a thing or two from our friends.Braddock wrote:
You're right, In many ways they have benefited but one could also view their defiance on the nuclear issue as them saying 'screw what people think, we have to stop the US destroying us no matter what and that's our primary objective'. On the issue of the British 'kidnapping' I still think that was 6 of one and half a dozen of another as they say...did we really 'tolerate' some British sailors been giving new suits and an audience with the head of State? It wasn't exactly the Munich Olympics now was it? ...and those waters are disputed, the Iranians had every right to be defensive especially given the civilian airplane the US shot down in that region a number of years ago.Kmarion wrote:
Iran has benefited. America now has the world justifying any and everything Iran does. Do you think Iran would be telling the whole world to screw off while they built Nuclear reactors 10 years ago? Do you think the International community would be looking for an excuse to accept British Sailors taken being hostage in international waters? ... No, playing the part of the victim has emboldened them. If they were worried they would be willing to listen to the world, including their long time friends.
It's not like they're technologically backward. They are socially backward. The numerous stoning incidents over the last couple of years are just one example of the medieval, theocratic mindset that prevails in Iran. Call it insulting, but that is still my opinion. I'm willing to change it when I see thatBraddock wrote:
What many people dislike about US foreign policy is that when it suits them they arm these despots and the minute their interests are compromised they send in the bombs and act like the great heroes saving the day for democracy and freedom...utter hypocrisy.Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Iraq ignored the UN's demands to allow inspectors in to do their job. There was no way to know whether Saddam still had WMDs. The UN and the US had been threatening Iraq for years and had never acted. Saddam was a genocidal maniac and the people of Iraq are much better off with him dead. According to the 9/11 commission, Saddam had been in contact with several terrorist organizations that had attacked the US. I don't agree with that particular war, but I think that it could be considered justified.A pretty insulting and seemingly ill-informed judgement on your behalf. The Iranians aren't a bunch of simpletons rolling around in the sand throwing rocks at each other you know.Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Iran... a backward country
they've progressed enough, but I haven't seen it yet.