Completely non-boating related topic.

[hack4alivin]

In the past I have completely refrained from posting stuff like this on a boating forum. I never thought this was the place for it. But there are also a lot of very smart people on this forum so I figured I would throw it out there and see what others around the world are thinking about the subject.

I have always thought that Iran would be the next war; in fact I still think it may be coming very soon. But what if Iran acquired nuclear weapons? Would that make the area more unstable or would it become more of an equalizer, much like the US and Russia during the 50’s and 60’s? Both have them, but both know there use would mean mutual destruction.

In an area where extremist think nothing of strapping bombs to people to kill others are they really so stupid not to know the rain of destruction they would inflect on themselves for one quick strike? Is there any sense left in the world?

 

[HUMPH]

Simple reply is that it is terrifying to think that a culture that has no fear in blowing themselves up along with dozens of innocents having nuclear weapons! As far as is there any sense left......not much.

 

[Four Suns]

I'm thinking sanctions will work.

 

[MonacoMike]

simple reply is that it is terrifying to think that a culture that has no fear in blowing themselves up along with dozens of innocents having nuclear weapons! As far as is there any sense left......not much.

bingo!!!

 

[HUMPH]

I'm thinking sanctions will work.

Start the blockade, that always solves it!

 

[carterchapman]

I'm thinking sanctions will work.

Yes, our president, with all his worldly experience, will handle the situation perfectly.

 

[moparlvr4406]

I don't think the theory of assured mutual destruction would mean much in the middle east
They are acting in the name of thier "god" and IMO ...our politicians don't have the balls to pull the trigger anymore to finish the job.

 

[docofthebay]

The policy of mutually assured destruction while terrifying, worked because neither side wanted to die, and the fear of death was the ultimate controlling truth behind the plans made. Every battle plan made up until recently was predicated around the concept that your foe would act in certain ways to protect themselves. The Japanese changed that game a little in WWII. Their overall strategy and individual battles plans were drawn up based on the prevailing rules, but if it came down to it, they would fight on to the last man, to the death. Not out of religious zeal, but out of a sense of honor. They were soldiers and soldiers fought and did not give up and did not bring shame to their family name. This concept made battles last longer and with more casualties to the winning side.
Now the big game changer is we are dealing with not just pople but entire nations who are more than just not afraid to die. These people actually seek death in battle! That's how they get to heaven and bring great honor to their families. So now if they had nuclear weapons, it entirely plausible that certain leaders and radical militants would think that there is no greater way to honor Allah than to kill a few hundred thousand to several million infidels, then to gloriously die in the nuclear retribution we could give back. That is our current scenario. Therefore the only way to deal with this is to do everything possible now to keep the nukes out of their hands, whether that is peacefully done or whether we send force or even ultimately Chuck Norris

 

[Jack F]

The policy of mutually assured destruction while terrifying, worked because neither side wanted to die, and the fear of death was the ultimate controlling truth behind the plans made. Every battle plan made up until recently was predicated around the concept that your foe would act in certain ways to protect themselves. The Japanese changed that game a little in WWII. Their overall strategy and individual battles plans were drawn up based on the prevailing rules, but if it came down to it, they would fight on to the last man, to the death. Not out of religious zeal, but out of a sense of honor. They were soldiers and soldiers fought and did not give up and did not bring shame to their family name. This concept made battles last longer and with more casualties to the winning side.
Now the big game changer is we are dealing with not just pople but entire nations who are more than just not afraid to die. These people actually seek death in battle! That's how they get to heaven and bring great honor to their families. So now if they had nuclear weapons, it entirely plausible that certain leaders and radical militants would think that there is no greater way to honor Allah than to kill a few hundred thousand to several million infidels, then to gloriously die in the nuclear retribution we could give back. That is our current scenario.

That about sums it up….

 

[comsnark]

The one player not mentioned so far is Israel. The U.S. and Israel are capable of, and are showing signs of acting independently. So when you are talking about "war"; it is not clear the lineup against Iran.

- as for anyone having any sense left: I think there is increasing evidence AGAINST common sense. The US government is acting like disfunctional lunatics. No prospect for change until after the election. Little chance after that. The Israelis are hardly any better. I was with some Israelis a few years back: They were more concerned about the being around the crazy Orthodox in Jerusalem than the Arabs in the next village. As for the Iranians. . yes. . .the definition of nutjobs.

- As for what is going on: Has anyone been reading the news lately? Iranian scientists are being bumped off left and right. The Stuxtnet virus was not created by a teenager in some basement. And thats just the stuff that is *public*.

- As for mutally assured destruction: You are confusing the self sacrifice of the pleebs with the Courage of the Leaders. I see no such zeolotry in the leaders of ANY Arab movement. Most of Al Queda's leadership dies in their house as the result of a missle fired from a U.S. drone aircraft; and not in a pitched battle with infidels. You put Iranian leaders in a crosshairs. . and you will see that leader sweat.

- Sanctions: This is a force multiplier, just like the air war in the first Gulf war. By itself . . .does nothing. Follow it up with ground troops, and the enemy folds like a house of cards. Plus, it builds up good will with your potential allies. So. . .Sanctions. Major covert actions. Hmmm. Certainly leaves options on the table for a nice war in time to steal headlines from the Republican convention this summer.

- And I can ASSURE YOU that if Obama acts against Iran, the Republicans in Congress will OPPOSE the action by all possible means. Is there anyone who dobuts that? Fear of Iran is one thing. Lust for power is another. Democrats are little better.

More later.

 

[Pack66Dad]

Hmmm..... just hope the "intelligence" on Iran's alleged nuclear arsenal is factual and not some fairy tale like Iraq's WMD's.

Haven't we had enough war in the last 10 years?

Besides, if we start another war how can we afford more tax cuts for billionaires?

 

[CV-23]

The problem with Iran is it's the size of Texas. Plenty of places to hide stuff and hundreds of miles to cover. Let the Massad do what they do best....just kill the key players.

 

[D-Sill-D]

No hijack intended....but similar issue; our security.....I am more concerned about the fact that aircraft drones have been cleared for use, as surveillance tools, in our own communities....... than Iran pulling the trigger on a nuke.....besides Iranian "leaders", Iran has real people living there, like us, with wives, children, and families....you have to have some faith, that ultimately, sanity will reign, we are all flesh and blood...these people probably don't like their leaders anymore than you and I, but, they can't do much about it....hopefully we won't wind up in a similar boat, helpless, to control our own government, after drones have been unleashed to monitor our every move, in the guise of our own "protection" ......call me crazy but I don't have that kind of "trust in government"....that was left somewhere in Vietnam.......

 

[comsnark]

Hmmm..... just hope the "intelligence" on Iran's alleged nuclear arsenal is factual and not some fairy tale like Iraq's WMD's.

Haven't we had enough war in the last 10 years?

Besides, if we start another war how can we afford more tax cuts for billionaires?

I think there is a bit less doubt about Iran's nuclear program. Most people say it's there; unlike Iraq which had all kinds of people saying nothing was there.

And we all know that upper end "tax cuts" do not contribute to the deficit. The right wing has been lecturing us for years on that point. Only middle class tax cuts affect government revenue.

No hijack intended....but similar issue; our security.....I am more concerned about the fact that aircraft drones have been cleared for use, as surveillance tools, in our own communities....... than Iran pulling the trigger on a nuke.....besides Iranian "leaders", Iran has real people living there, like us, with wives, children, and families....you have to have some faith, that ultimately, sanity will reign, we are all flesh and blood...these people probably don't like their leaders anymore than you and I, but, they can't do much about it....hopefully we won't wind up in a similar boat, helpless, to control our own government, after drones have been unleashed to monitor our every move, in the guise of our own "protection" ......call me crazy but I don't have that kind of "trust in government"....that was left somewhere in Vietnam.......

My friend, the "civil liberties" boat has sailed long ago. Drones are just the current tool. I am surprised those of Arab descent still can walk American streets.

 

[Ka1oxd]

I have this funny feeling that Israel at the right time, will take action. The Massad probably will be the method with a combined air strike. Somewhere I just read that the US is making and testing a new bunker buster to go deeper than before. I also believe that Iran will use them if they have them to win. I feel that there is a high chance that they have enough to make dirty bombs now. That I think is how they would strike here.

 

[MonacoMike]

I am more concerned about the fact that aircraft drones have been cleared for use, as surveillance tools, in our own communities.

We can agree on that.

... than Iran pulling the trigger on a nuke.....besides Iranian "leaders", Iran has real people living there, like us, with wives, children, and families....you have to have some faith, that ultimately, sanity will reign, we are all flesh and blood...these people probably don't like their leaders anymore than you and I, but, they can't do much about it.

Have you missed the point that for all the life and treasure we have spent to give these people in the Middle East the opportunity to freely elect democratic (small D democratic) governments, they almost always elect the radicals that will suppress and dominate them in the end.

I think there is a bit less doubt about Iran's nuclear program. Most people say it's there; unlike Iraq which had all kinds of people saying nothing was there.

I agree on the Iran part but who in the know was saying Iraq did not have WMD that had intelligence knowledge? The government of Iraq said they had them and worked to create the illusion they really did and they fooled the world, not just the US.

And we all know that upper end "tax cuts" do not contribute to the deficit. The right wing has been lecturing us for years on that point. Only middle class tax cuts affect government revenue.

Most I know want tax cuts for all earners not just the upper end, so who is promoting this?

My friend, the "civil liberties" boat has sailed long ago. Drones are just the current tool. I am surprised those of Arab descent still can walk American streets.

Agreed, but very few of us actually seem to care about this issue, why?

MM

 

[D-Sill-D]

Have you missed the point that for all the life and tea sure we have spent to give these people in the Middle East the opportunity to freely elect democratic (small D democratic) governments, they almost always elect the radicals that will suppress and dominate them in the end


Not exactly sure what you mean here.....but, realistically, how can we assume their elections are anywhere near genuine???...... democracy, in the Middle East, is a fighting word, as evidenced in every country there.....take ourselves, back to our own revolution with Britain....these people's lives appear to be s***t, they have record oil revenue, in the region, but, are literally slugging it out in the streets, for the right to voice their opinions and vote.....imagine that same scenario here....I think they need whatever compassion we can muster....we need to find solutions other than nuking them....



Agreed, but very few of us actually seem to care about this issue, why?

MM[/QUOTE]

Beats me....... but I have barely seen any word of this in the media and for me, at least, it is more disconcerting than the Middle East.....

 

[hack4alivin]

The policy of mutually assured destruction while terrifying, worked because neither side wanted to die, and the fear of death was the ultimate controlling truth behind the plans made. Every battle plan made up until recently was predicated around the concept that your foe would act in certain ways to protect themselves. The Japanese changed that game a little in WWII. Their overall strategy and individual battles plans were drawn up based on the prevailing rules, but if it came down to it, they would fight on to the last man, to the death. Not out of religious zeal, but out of a sense of honor. They were soldiers and soldiers fought and did not give up and did not bring shame to their family name. This concept made battles last longer and with more casualties to the winning side.
Now the big game changer is we are dealing with not just pople but entire nations who are more than just not afraid to die. These people actually seek death in battle! That's how they get to heaven and bring great honor to their families. So now if they had nuclear weapons, it entirely plausible that certain leaders and radical militants would think that there is no greater way to honor Allah than to kill a few hundred thousand to several million infidels, then to gloriously die in the nuclear retribution we could give back. That is our current scenario. Therefore the only way to deal with this is to do everything possible now to keep the nukes out of their hands, whether that is peacefully done or whether we send force or even ultimately Chuck Norris

Yes but isn’t it odd that the very people telling them to be martyrs and they will be inundated with virgins in their heaven are the ones hiding in caves and behind women. I have always wondered about the logic of that. If someone was preaching that to me the first question I would have would be why aren’t you coming? The honor they would bring to their families would mean they all go together!

 

[Banagy]

What boils me is that all the European Countries near Iran just sit on their duffs and want the US to take care of the problem.

 

[comsnark]

What boils me is that all the European Countries near Iran just sit on their duffs and want the US to take care of the problem.

The only European countries close to Iran are Turkey and Greece. The rest are comfortably far away.

And somehow. . . many in this country were upset when we let the French and English take the lead on Libya.

Have you missed the point that for all the life and treasure we have spent to give these people in the Middle East the opportunity to freely elect democratic (small D democratic) governments, they almost always elect the radicals that will suppress and dominate them in the end.

Life and treasure?

What are you talking about? US foreign aid is generally to buy the friendship of the current regime in power. The only countries where we risked "life" and went about setting up elections for is Iraq and Afganistan . .and we don't want to talk about those. correct?

I agree on the Iran part but who in the know was saying Iraq did not have WMD that had intelligence knowledge? The government of Iraq said they had them and worked to create the illusion they really did and they fooled the world, not just the US.

I seem to remember something about a pile of "weapons inspectors" floating about the country prior to the war. They couldn't find anything. I cannot speak for "those in the know who weren't talking" but "those in the know who were talking" were questioning what the Americans were smoking. Do you remember the dog and pony show Collin Powell put up for the U.N.? <<sigh>>

Agreed, but very few of us actually seem to care about this issue, why?

A worthy discussion. . but for another thread, alas.