Spreading ourselves even thinner -- Iran is next?
 

In my interviews, I was repeatedly told that the next strategic target was Iran. “Everyone is saying, ‘You can’t be serious about targeting Iran. Look at Iraq,’” the former intelligence official told me. “But they say, ‘We’ve got some lessons learned—not militarily, but how we did it politically. We’re not going to rely on agency pissants.’ No loose ends, and that’s why the C.I.A. is out of there.”

For anyone who caught the interview on The Daily Show some nights ago, here is the New Yorker article summarizing some rather interesting "interviews" done with people in the Pentagon.

"The only solution is to bomb."

Is it any wonder that the monkey's confused?

Shock the monkey!

shock, spank...what's the difference?

I've been trying to get "Janie's got a gun" out of my head all morning. It's gone, but at what cost?

I prefer a spanking.

I sense a fetish thread blossoming.http://www.cellar.org/images/newsmilies/ymca.gif

You guys are beyond retarded.
...and thats why I love you all so. ;)

A friend of mine and I have been tring to get a betting pool going on which country is next in our little 'holy war'... My money is on Syria, given the sabre rattling that's been going on, and a few things about Iran. it seems to me that it's more than likely a distraction technique, they really might have the bomb (and they've had a little while to get whatever chemical/bio weapons they might need ready, as well as bolster the armed forces of the country), and if we think the 'insurgency' in Iraq is bad... take another large middle-eastern counrty would really really piss off everyone else in the neighborhood. also IMHO Iran really wouldn't mind bombing the living fuck out of Iraq aka. our primary staging ground.

in comparison Syria is small and would be 'easy pickins' (although once again the 'insurgency' from the resulting attack would be staggering.

and North Korea is right out. (for now anyway)

I'll see you and raise you twenty on Iran, Cowhead.

As if on que, what appears in the news today? Nuclear No-Return

The gangsters in power will certainly look for an excuse to attack Iran if they aren't prevented from doing so by a genuine public outcry.

Genuine is the key word here. I don't think we can build it without some two-faced pol high-jacking it.

What do the odds look like on Somalia? You know gambling might be the answer to all our problems... I'd like to lay 20 bills on SoshSecurity not being available to me at retirement.

I won't take that wager, kid, because:

a) You get to pay for your folk's and my retirement plus every costly little invasion to "liberate" the people of an oil producing country. By time you hit 80 (the age it will then be required to reach to collect social security), there ain't gonna be nothing left in ANYONE'S pocketbook.
b) I'll be dead and I don't wanna mess around trying to collect on gambling debts from a previous life time.

Does Somalia have oil reserves? If so, I'll place one of my chips on it while the pol's spin the international roulette wheel greased with petroleum. No oil, and I'll fold.

We are going to leave N. Korea to the tender mercies of the Chinese unless Wal-Mart demands a US intervention, in which case US troops lacking proper equipment and supplies will be landing in N. Korea shortly.

At this point, there is no way we can invade Iran without a draft. Our military is already falling short of man power, as it is. Wounded soldiers are being billed for their damaged body armor; communities are holding bake sales to raise the money to send their young people serving in Iraq things like razors, frito's and underwear.

If we waltz into Iran at any time in the near future, we are either going to be humiliated militarily or else every single one of you guys under age 30 is going to be reporting in to his local selective service board.

If the latter happens, this will bring the fact of our leaders' stupidity home to enough Americans that a genuine outcry will be raised at long last.

Gee...and I thought I was the only one who referred to the situation in Iraq et al as a holy war on the part of western society.

Marichiko, do you really think that there will be anything left to outcry about if the US decides to invade Iran?

I'm a pragmatist, Aliantha. People will raise an outcry for themselves or their own sons and daughters long before they will ever raise an outcry over the sons and daughters of a people 10,000 miles away who have a strange religion and speak in a foreign tongue.

Its very easy to be complacent if you are not the one being called upon to make the sacrifice.

I think if the US were to invade Iran, it's almost certainly going to lead to nuclear war considering that it's common knowledge that Iran has WMD's. OK, maybe not common knowledge, but it's almost certainly true. Hence my question, do you think there'll be anything left.

I think Iran may have a nuke or two stashed away that they bought off the shelf from North Korea or A.Q. Khan...but it's far from certain. But in all honesty, I hope they do. The rest of the world has been putting up with our hypocritical crap for long enough.

No mystery about it. We intend to attack Iran. It is unlikely they have a bomb. Plans have long been ongoing for coordinated attacks on their 'well dug in' nuclear program. A least two American spy planes have been lost - maybe shot down - in Iran probably doing those searches. At least two that Iran is willing to admit to. Attempt will probably be a major and coordinated air attack on these well buried sights sometime before Iran gets uranium sufficiently enriched. IOW that air attack will probably be just under a year from now. What happens after that has just too many variables to predict.

How enriched need uranium be? Bomb on Hiroshima was only as enriched as uranium after being expended in a conventional nuclear power plant. Better bombs would be even higher grade. As I recall numbers, Iran would need something like 15,000 centrifuges to process uranium gas. It is believed they have just recently finished setting up most if not all this equipment.

No they do not yet have a bomb. And it will not be the mythical 'end of the world' scenario. What it would be is reams of US troops coming home with massive nuclear induced injuries. A problem that could have long ago been avoided had the United States not intentionally undermined the entire Iranian reform movement with all this open talk of war.

How long ago was it completely obvious to Iran that the US intended - actually intended - to attack? Not just threaten - literally make those intensions obvious.
In Jan 2005:
The real cost of IRAQ: PTSD and the second war
In Aug 2005:
Understanding terrorism
In Feb 2005:
100,000 Iraqi Civilians have died in current war
In Dec 2004: In Nov 2004: In Oct 2004:

It's been replaced by what is possibly the most awesome song in the universe. What's wrong with that?

Our troops might well sustain injuries from radiation. So might a lot of other folks in the vicinity. I haven't read enough on Iran's nuclear capacities whether real or imagined to comment on that aspect of it.

What I can state is that if the US plans on invading Iran at any time in the near future, it will be draftees coming home with injuries whether from radiation or conventional weaponary. The Army is already facing serious shortages of personnel in the war in Iraq. Morale is getting lower with every soldier's tour of duty over there. It is not uncommon for soldiers to have made three deployments to Iraq, already. Supplies of EVERYTHING are limited. Active duty soldiers see how the VA treats vets which is not well at all. The benefit package the armed services once offered career soldiers and their dependents falls far short of what was offered in the old days. New policies have the effect of keeping soldiers in the military indefinately, long after their enlistment period was supposed to have ended.

The politician who orders an invasion of Iran will also be ordering the re-instatement of the draft or be faced with the very real possibility of a forced withdrawal from the conflict due to manpower shortages. One or the other.