posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 08:50 AM
Inresponse to those here who have asserted that "Iran could never resist an American attack" or that "Iran's military may be able to successfully
engage in warfare with a smaller Western nation, but not with the U.S.", I have this to say:
First of all, using logic one cannot generalize in regards to this issue by believing that since the U.S. has successfully agressed against countries
like Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and other smaller countries, that it should be as successful in a strike against Iran just because Iran is 1) located in
the Middle East 2) A Muslim nation 3) Does not (supposedly) have as sophisticated high-tech weaponry as the U.S.
There are many factors that support a potential U.S. defeat should it strike Iran, or use it's little puppet or master (which ever you like, if any)
to do the job. Iran is a vast country - almost the size of all of Western Europe, with a population of close to 80 million, out of which some 70%
are below the age of 30 (A good age-range for engagement in war) and it's terrain is very difficult to master. Yes, we have heard all this already.
But there are much more significant reasons that point towards why Iran would be a much, much greater challenge for the U.S. / Israel to attack and
subdue.
Iran has an armed forces consisting of some 800,000 men. In addition Iran boasts a 7 million man strong and heavily armoured voulountary militia
which is very experienced in warfare from the Iran-Iraq war. A significant number of this militia called the "Basiij" forces are extremely loyal
to the Islamic republic - many to the extent that they would gladly participate in suicide missions.
The notion expressed by some very misinformed individuals on this board that "millions of Iranians would welcome a U.S. strike" is so far from the
truth that it could possibly ever be! Iranians are extremely nationalistic people. It doesn't matter if you are on the left or right, Islamic
fundamentalist or very liberal secularist - Iran is sacred for Iranians, and I mean literally sacred. Iranians are a very civilized and peaceful
people, with a very strong humanitarian sense and noble spiritual values and very tolerant, hospitable and kind. BUT.... if you mess with their
country, they can turn very nasty. And a nasty Iranian is not a pleasant person to have to deal with. He/she is very shrewd and at the same time
very determined to defeat his/her enemy. Those Iranians who would support any foreign agression against Iran do not number more than 0.001% of the
Iranian population. On the contrary, Iranians strongly reject any foreing intervention, and any attack against their country would mean that
virtually all Iranians of all political, ethnic and religious groups would unite into an iron-clad platform of resistance against the agressor(s).
This whole thing that there are many Iranians who support a U.S. attack against Iran is totally absurd! And it's nothing more than a bad propaganda
stunt pulled by Washington.
If you look at the history of the world you will see that empires have come and gone, but few countries have made so many comebacks as an empire as
Iran has. The Greek, Roman, Ottoman empires all disappeared, and never made it back to empire-hood. But Iran has been an empire numerous times
throughout its long history: The Achaemenid dynasty, the Parthian dynasty, the Sassanian dynasty, the Samanid dynasty, the Saffaari dynasty, the
Safavid dynasty, and the Qajar dynasty, are some of the long periods during which Iran (Aka "Persia" in western countries) enjoyed super power and
empire status. I think its important to look at such historical events because they can tell you a lot about the psyche and capabitilites of a
nation. For instance by studying the history of the Iranian peoples you may understand why they are so determined to be independent (Which is why
the colonial powers never succeeded in colonializing them) Iranians do not see themselves as material for colonial powers - On the contrary, they
see themselves as a culturally superior civilization, and if you study their poetry and and culture in general, you may understand why they feel this
way. Iranian nationalism though differs in a major way from the Western nationalism which led to two devastating world wars. That kind of western
nationalism is a negative and agressive nationalism which rests on the notion that other countries and peoples must be sacrificed so that our people
can be the masters. Iranian nationalism as fierce as it can be rests on the noble values of Iran's ancient religions "Mazdakism" and
"Zoroastrianism" which both, but in particular the latter, preach tolerance, humanism, and good faith towards all humans. This fierce nationalism
of Iranians is the reason why Iranians have prevailed throughout their exremely chaotic history of turmoil. It is because of this nationalism that
Iranians have preserved their language and culture throughout thousands of years and numerous wars and invasions. While most of the nations which
were conquered by the Arab armies in the 7th century AD speak Arabic today, the Iranians manged to preserve their Indo-European language (Farsi)
Iran and Egypt are the only real NATURAL national-states in the Middle East. All the other ones are more or less the artificial creations of colonial
powers. This is why I don't believe in the future of a "democratic" Iraq. Iraq is a perfect example of British made state. It's not natural
and within its drawn up borders there is a lot of tension - tension between different ethnic and religious groups. This tension has always been
there since the Brits created Iraq, and the only reason it never erupted in a serious fashion is because a brutal tyrant and ruthless dictator ruled
that country and would use force against the smallest attempt to launch an uprising. Afghanistan is also a British artificial creation, and the only
reason that their country never experienced any major eruptions of internal violent conflicts (Prior to the Soviet invasion) is because their society
was so feudal and primitive, lacking all kinds of infrastructure so that there was no real sense of national identity except perhaps in the capital
Kabul. The tribal lords were content with their territories and their territory was their "country". Many Afghans view themselves as Iranians
because they ethnically are.
It's much easier to attack countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan because of the lack of national identity and unity. Iran is the total opposite of
these countries. Iran is the historically dominant power of this whole area and beyond. Most of these countries have all fallen into the Iranian
dominion of cultural and political influence during long periods of history. And the traces are still there in major ways. Take Iraq as an example
- The majority of Iraqis are Shia Muslim and have been under the influence and directives of Iranian religious leaders for centuries. (Shi'ite Islam
itself is an Iranian creation which dates back to the Safavid dynasty in the 16th century AD) The most powerful man in Iraq today, Ayatollah Sistani
is an Iranian himself. (His name "Sistani" suggests that he is from the Iranian South-Eastern province of "Sistaan") Almost all the religious
leaders of Shia Islam have been Iranian (Sistani, Khoi, Boroujerdi, etc...)
Because of the strong Iranian influence in Iraq, many Iraqis are actually ethnically Persian, which is why many of them bare Persian names, like for
instance "Shahrestani" the prominent Iraqi nuclear scientist, and many also have Iranian features. This why Saddam Hussein and his minority Sunni
Muslim followers were so hostile towards the Shia majority - Because they viewed them as "Ajam" meaning "Persians".
The reaction of a nation in a war is very important and can play a major role in how that war will proceed. Vietnam was a small and weak country,
and yet it defeated the super power U.S.. The reason is because the Vietnamese were determined and they were driven by a strong motivation to defeat
the enemy. Sure the terrain helped, but more than anything it was the determination of the Vietnamese which led to the gigantic defeat of the U.S.
agressors. Iranians will have the same determination and will be driven to fight the enemy with a motivation even much stronger than that of the
Vietnamese. Why? Well, to understand that you would have to understand the by the West intentionally much ignored ancient Iranian civilization and
culture and its history. You would then understand the enormous national pride of Iranians and the strong sense that their country has been the
victim of a brutal and agressive colonial and imperial onslaught which has seeked to rob their country of the profits of their own natural resources
and their right for self-determination during much of the last two centuries. The last wave of this onslaught is the Western attempts to deny Iran
its legal right to pursue a peaceful nuclear program. Not at all because the West fears an Iranian nuclear arsenal, but because the West fears a
potential future strong industrial and economic competitor. And should Iran go the extra length and aquire nukes, then that would even be worse,
because that would mean the end of British and American intervention and manipulation in Iran. Iranian nukes would cut of off the bloody and greedy
hands of British and American imperialism in Iran once and for all.
To think that no country except perhaps Russia could stand up against U.S. agression as some people here have suggested, is to be severly out of touch
with reality. To those people I say: STUDY THE HISTORY OF MANKIND! The same kind of arrogant attitude has lead many empires and super powers to
their grave! America is a paper tiger. The American war machinery has always been used against small and defenseless countries. Vietnam and Korea
were also small countries, but the difference was the determination of these two nations to resist the imperialist agressors, and thus they were
successful in their combat efforts. The U.S. knew how worthless the Iraqi army was prior to deciding to attack Iraq. Had it believed otherwise, it
probably would not have attacked. But Iraq was the perfect situation for the American agressors - It was what they had dreamed about for a long
time. Here we had an oil-rich Arab country, ruled by a brutal lunatic, and with a huge army, but an army which was largely incapable of engaging in
warfare. The Americans knew this since Iraq had attacked Iran during a time when 65-70% of the Iranian military forces had been eliminated by the
revolutionary regime right after the Iranian revolution 1979. Almost all Iranian military commanders had been executed. Those pilots who had not
been executed were rotting in jail. Some 70% of the Iranian armed forces had either been executed, jailed or deserted because of the revolution.
Iran was in the heydays of revolutionary turmoil. The streets of Tehran were scenes of daily battles between different revolutionary factions. Then
early one September morning Saddam attacked Iran by air and by ground. The Iranians were majorly surprised. There had been no warning, no
indications whatsoever. Yet the Iranian nation united and fought back with bare hands even. Women, men and children of all ages. Eventually they
forced the "mighty" Iraqi army out of Iran, and at that point Saddam was begging for a cease fire. But Ayatollah Khomeini refused to even hear the
word. The Iranians, and I mean regular folks, not the armed forces, pushed into Iraq until they surrounded the strategically and economically
important city of Basra. At that point it was evident that the Iranians could very soon cause the fall of Baghdad, and it was then that the
Americans gave their green light to Saddam that he should use chemical weapons against the Iranians - A crime against humanity which Washington one
day must pay for. So it is evident that the U.S. knew very well what an incompetent and incapable war machinery the Iraqis had. And it was
precisely what they wanted because it gave them the golden opportunity to create a scenario where they would have to invade the oil-rich country in
order to "save the world", secure the oil riches for themselves, while controlling much of the Middle Eastern world with their military presence,
and at the same time put up a big high-tech propaganda show in a typical disgusting and tasteless American manner, boasting their technological
superiority. The U.S. will never be able to do the same with Iran. And their zionist masters in Tel Aviv will attack Iran only if they enjoy
getting showered with upawards 10,000 missiles.