Obama is the only one who would be willing to use diplomatic means, but the GOP will of course try to paint him in a bad light for wanting to use diplomacy

Wow!
Sounds like I live in the worst country in the world.
I guess the world would be a peaceful loving place if U.S. never existed.

None of you mentioned Korea - were the U.S. meddling with communism then as well? and stay home and leave Koreans alone?

Personally, I think the world would be worse off if it wasn't for U.S. Just my opinion, nothing personal against anyone who hates America.
At least we can agree that 360 is better than PS3. (I kid)

The US would most likely win a war with Iran, but it would be hell. Iran has three times the population and four times the land area of Iraq. Iran's military, while not a powerhouse, would give the US a lot of trouble. It's more formidable that what Iraq had, not to mention that it has and would use chemical and biological weapons. Casualties would be far worse than what they've been in Iraq. There's also the fact that the US military is currently stretched to thin because of Iraq.

And that's just the military part of things, which would be the least of the US's worries.

Iran could:

-Jack up oil prices and sink oil tankers coming out of the Strait of Hormuz, hurting the US and world economy.

-Use its influence to inflame the insurgency in Iraq, making it worse than what it already is.

-Fund attacks on US targets throughout the world.

Not to mention that it wouldn't end after the war. The US would have to stay behind and occupy Iran, and it doesn't have the manpower right now to do such a thing. It would also face a unified Shiite insurgency in Iran. There would be traffic jams full of carbombers ready to attack US forces.

A war with Iran would be a disgusting ordeal.

Griffin said: disolitude said: Do you guys think American troops have the desire to go and fight another war at this point. I mean, the bullshit Iraq has turned in to and all... plus Bush is on his way out anyways. He won't be able to get congress to approve this unless Iran gives him a damn good reason to attack. And thus far I don't see one. Bush had his swing at good international policy in the 8 years he was in the office and he missed it by a mile. Once he's gone things will get better with Iran.  If and when US troops get on the ground in Iran they will not be fighting like they were in Iraq, they will not be going door to door looking for retards hiding weapons under there beds.  They will set-up defensive postions in Iran, Iraq or Afghanistan and launch massive air attacks around the clock from bases in the US, Europe, South Pacific, middle east, air craft carries and cruise missiles from subs and battleships. The plan for Iraq was a good plan, but the US was too busy fighting the war the insugents wanted and not fighting the war they wanted.  Saddam and the Iraqi government just had to accept the rules of the UN and not their run around with the weapons inspectors, saddam could of stepped down and allowed the UN to do its job and the war would of never happened. I doubt things will get better with Iran, they will never change their minds and say their was a holocaust and that Jews don't need to be wiped from the planet, and allow UN inspectors to vist their Nuclear planets and Nuclear facilities.

If you are talking about the second war, that's what Iraq did. They let the UN inspectors do they job. UN did their job and said there are no WMD. If you want to think how USA would attack Iran, it would be pretty similar with how they attacked Iraq in the early 90:s. This time the technological gap wouldn't be what it was back then. The reason why USA got so easy victory was because of their supreme tech, mainly the GPS guided missiles. Yes, i agree, the possible attack would be massive tactical missile and air strikes and they succeed, then would be the turn for landtroops. But nothing guarantees they succeed and Iran can always strike back. And if you want to justify by moral a country in middle-east which should be attacked, it would be Israel. And the brits were sent to scout are Iranians aware. They were and had followed the british movements, waiting for them to cross border. It's pretty obvious that it was just a publicity stunt, which Ahmadinejad pulled out pretty damn good. @eab: The reason why armies can "respect the civilian", is todays technology makes it possible up to a certain point. Besides, it's much more efficient. After all, the only way to "respect civilian" is not to fight. Since you mentioned the WW2 bombings, it basically is equal to shooting GPS guided missiles to strategic locations. That's as close as you could get with the tech that time. I think nobody is saying that USA couldn't take Iran out, the point is that can USA take the cost of it. They could nuke the whole Iran down tomorrow if they want to, but the cost would be too much. They could put their whole army with everything they got to Irans border and attack ignoring losses, but expect high casualties. They could attack Iran with everything they got by air from sea, but expect few carriers becoming fishfood. Nothing new in the video. Didn't watch it, but by your description. But yes, getting a diplomatical solution is the best thing to do in the situation.

Coca-Cola said: Wow! Sounds like I live in the worst country in the world. I guess the world would be a peaceful loving place if U.S. never existed. None of you mentioned Korea - were the U.S. meddling with communism then as well? and stay home and leave Koreans alone? Personally, I think the world would be worse off if it wasn't for U.S. Just my opinion, nothing personal against anyone who hates America. At least we can agree that 360 is better than PS3. (I kid)

 No, it just shows that the US has done good and bad things, and is only about spreading democracy when it sounds good on the news

You are over estimating the US military strength by a great deal. While you think it is a numbers game, count how many tanks Iraq had and how many Iran has, it is not that simple. I guess you play too much games.
The US keeps whining that Iran supplies the Iraqi militia with bombs, do you really think that they give them their top notch stuff? If the US military is so scared of 2nd rate bombs that Iran gives to Iraqi militia - and you must be sure that even if they do give it to them they can only give so much bombs, then what will it do when it tries to enter Iran?
Yeah I can see more Iranians being killed than US soldiers, but does that matter? If you think you won the Vietnam war because you killed more people, you seriously fail. Can the US win? Yes it can, it can win because it is the only country in the world to have ever used all three WMD's, being chemical, biological and nuclear. In an attack against Iran it will have to use all of those to "win".
It is interesting that you compare it to the first persian gulf war, since Iraq had already lost one war and it was fighting a new one, and almost every country in the world was pro-US in that war, which I doubt will happen now.
Regardless, I find the video was very well made, tries to address the main problem. I found it quite right.

Vertigo-X said: Not sure how a lot of you will take this video. It's pretty influential, though, nonetheless.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJRcOF7rEfQ&eurl=http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iran/video.html

A good video, this sparked hatred against the Shah / US and eventually resulted in the system Iran has today. I am travelling to Iran next summer, first and only time I have been there before was in 2000 for a duration of 1 and a half months. Nice people, all were very kind towards Europeans like me even met some fellow Dutch people (KLM employees and tourists) in Esfehan while visiting tourist cites. Quite a few Germans as well, like at the Reza Shah and his son's Mohammed Reza Pahlavi's palaces in Tehran.

Griffin said: You guys are just insane if you think Iran would have any chance against the US. Do you guys not remember during the first golf war, Iraq had one of the largest militaries in the world and it was destroyed no problem by the US forces.

Do not underestimate Iran, they are not as devided as Iraq was (Iraqi government was only supported by ~20% of its population). I know Iranians who are not fond of the current system, but state they would go to Iran to fight the Americans as they are far less fond of them controlling Iran.

If a war would come I think Iranians will unite en masse (hardliners and moderates alike). They have beaten Iraq when the country was at its top of its military strenght due to US support before. The Iraqi Shia will revolt in Iraq, more trouble can be expected in Afghanistan, other countries like Syria might fear they are next and get involved. Turkey is an ally, but the people feel far more connected with Iranian culture, etc.

disolitude said: Do you guys think American troops have the desire to go and fight another war at this point. I mean, the bullshit Iraq has turned in to and all...

Iraq has become a total mess (living standards dropped remarkably), I know an Afghan official residing in Denmark who goes back there pretty often, Afghanistan is far more a mess except for a few cities, travelling in between them is very dangerous. Afghanistan has been a mess for a long time especially after Carter started to fund the Mujahideen.

If the US would try to invade Iran it may even spark World War 3.

http://www.sectsco.org/

China and Russia combined are fully capable of waging a total war on the United States (and NATO), so this fear will likely and hopefully prevent such an invasion.