Should These United States Go To War With Iran?

Mine as well. I agree with BB that we would have to begin a draft to even think about doing so. As far as how this war is being executed, it hasn't gone any differently than any other war in history. To many variables in war to have an exact science. And the nature of war has changed dramatically in recent years.

 

Thank you for the reasonable post.

 

This is mainly for Tim, who keeps asking "who in the administration has advocated going to war with Iran?"

Y'all need to pull your heads out of the sand. Do a search for "pentagon," "plans," "attack," and "Iran." One of the several hits you'll get is the following: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/16/wiran116.xml

Understand that this is a verified fact. The Pentagon was tasked to develop some courses of action in the event of hostilities with Iran.

The Pentagon doesn't go around creating plans because they don't have any other work to do. The National Command Authorities(President, SECDEF, etc.) identify a strategic objective, and then place the responsibility on the Joint Chiefs of Staff to come up with a way to achieve that objective (this is a greatly watered-down, condensed version of how this process works).

So stop asking the question about who in the administration wants to go to war with Iran. The "optimistic" answer is that no one wants to; the realistic answer is that the administration is preparing for such an eventuality.

 

First I will ask questions. Apparently this one question cannot be answered and thus your frustraton. Having a plan doesnt mean a build up. This practice has gone on most likely in every Presidency. Clinton had a plan for Iraq.

The op was about santions against Iran yet the title of the thread was asking wether we shold go to war with them. I am not the only one who was puzzled by this. You arenot the first to try to get me silenced on this board. apparently you all are takng your ques from media matters. Working to silence those you don't agree with.

 

That was way out of line. In no way am I trying to silence you. I'm trying to get you to change your mind.

 

I'm torn about Iran.

On the one hand, I understand that war may be inevitable. On the other, I think what most people don't realize (although part of it came to light last week when President Tom was here) is that, although the government of Iran is rabidly anti-American, the citizenry is actually pro-American and could be a great ally.

I would be much more in favor of equipping and enabling pro-American supporters to stage a coup, rather than go to war with them, ourselves.

These days, everybody wants to compare everything with Vietnam but the truth is, it's really much more like the late 1930's. Just as in the late 30's, the storm is gathering and the American people don't see it coming.

President Tom and Kim Jong Il have already pledged their versions of Hitler's "Non-Agression Treaty". The only thing that's missing is a Tripartite Pact.

One way or another, war is coming and the question really becomes are we going to take it to them and fight it on our terms, or are we going allow them to bring it to us and fight it on theirs.

 

What link was this?

 

Not at all you told me to stop asking a question.

 

Asking you to stop asking a question that has been answered, can hardly be considered trying to silence you.

 

With statements like this the whole article is disputable.