Pentagon: Bomb Iran....ehhh..Maybe not., page 1

posted on Jul, 2 2006 @ 03:26 PM

link

The New Yorker reported on Sunday that the Pentagon had released a report detailing how and why bombing Iran would be unsuccessful. This article is from Reuters who picked up the story today. With the controversy over WMD in Iraq War planners in the US are a little more hesitant this time round. Along with little or no evidence of clandestine nuclear activity it appears that the Pentagon is not exactly sure what to do Iran.

today.reuters.com
Another parallel U.S. military leaders drew with Iraq is the administration's desire for a swift and cheap intervention in Iran without sufficient regard for economic and political consequences, including oil supplies and a backlash in the broader Muslim world and in Europe.

"If you're a military planner, you try to weigh options," one senior military official was quoted as saying. "What is the capability of the Iranian response, and the likelihood of a punitive response like cutting off oil shipments? What would that cost us?"

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his aides "really think they can do this on the cheap, and they underestimate the capability of the adversary," the official told the magazine.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Well...im not really sure how to respond to this.....One would hope that the Pentagon has learned from Iraq that just because you have lots of big guns doesnt mean you can squash an ant hill. The repercussions of yet another assault on the Middle east are not calculable in my opinion. With the ever looming threat of civil war in Iraq and possibly in the greater middle east is now really the time to stir up more chaos and instability.

While the current Ayatolla of Iran may be slightly aschew I think that we have a chance with him that he have not had with previous rulers. Now is the time to use the carrot and not the stick. A solid at least amiable Iran is better than a Chaotic enraged Iran.

So hopefully the pentagon will take its own advice and not Bomb Iran.

[edit on 2-7-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

subz

posted on Jul, 2 2006 @ 06:06 PM

link

Cooler heads seem to be prevailing and the "crazies" in the Pentagon are losing their grip on power.

Let's hope this is the opening salvo of an all out recapture of the Pentagon by the usual sane, professional and rational American servicemen we used to know!

cyberdude78

posted on Jul, 2 2006 @ 11:09 PM

link

Hmm... make's me wonder what the situation would be like if Eisenhower was still around.

grover

posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 01:24 PM

link

I have said for some time now that we would not attack Iran with or without nuclears. My reasoning has been this...Iran is A if not THE major supplier of oil to China and China is not about to let that oil be jepordized but that they don't even have to consider getting militarily involved because they hold a huge number of loans to the U.S., specifically to this administration, attaboy Bush, and if their supply is threatened in any way all they have to do is threaten to call those loans in to bring this government and the world economy to a screaching halt. The U.S. govenment and the military have got to know this even if Bush and his chicken hawk advisors are too dim to realize it. The same reasoning goes for North Korea as well, not because of any oil though, simply because it is on China's border, after all they have already intervened once when we got too close there.