General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: We're not going to intervene in Iran. [View all]karynnj
(60,429 posts)Gabbad is not just pro Russia, but has been consistently against strikes in the middle east.
I suspect that with Trump, it may come down to whether he thinks people will think BiBi by attacking Iran and not eliminating the nuclear program which he knew he couldn't do is now using Trump as a puppet to do what the US had not decided to do.
Will Americans buy that: 1) Israel has already been very successful in what they did. 2) all the US has to do is this one bombing that only we have bombs.and planes capable of doing
3) the bunker busting bomb(s) will definitely work. 4) if the bunker busting works, a ceasefire and end of hostilities is likely. 5) This Iranian defeat will lead to a popular uprising leading to regime change and a west friendly democracy.
Each of these has a big problem.
1) Israel has destroyed much of their military leadership and because of last year's attacks, controls the airspace. However, look at both Afghanistan and Iraq. The US shock and awe were far greater, but even as GWB declared mission accomplished, it wasn't. Look also at Vietnam. All of these countries were smaller and weaker than Iran, but they all became quagmires.
2) it is naive to think that our role could be just this surgical strike, especially in context of everything Israel has done.
3) The facilities are built into a mountain. The best information we have on whether it will work has to be from computer simulations. Modeling the facility and the mountain it is in is
tricky. Could there be unknown crevasses etc that could create a manmade earthquake or other devastating event?
4) see 1) why would the Iranians accept all this destruction and do we think Israel would not continue when Iran is greatly weakened?
5) I didn't believe Cheney or Rumsfeld in 2002. The net affect of the Afghan and Iraq wars, is we lost Iraq as a counter to Iran, the Taliban is back, and Syria is led by people allied with ISiS a decade ago. Given where we are, the neocon fantasies seem less believable now than in 2002.
Edit history
Recommendations
3 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):