The next Theater of War

Originally posted by Dreamstone
While there would be heavy casualties on both sides, the US would ultimately win. We would not have to deal with the Guerilla problem, SK would most likely police the area and attempt peace under a Korea united plan

NK fights to defend itself, SK fights to make a country whole. Which is nobler I wonder?

Anyway, I'd like to move onto another fascinating theater, Iran. We have some very good debaters here; Paradigm, forceofwill, monica,gookiing this means you. As you can guess I'll take the "US will crush all" side.

Yeah, I guessed that too!

Somehow, I find Iran a bit of an oddball. I mean, we're not really friendly with it, yet we consider it almost a friend in certain cases. What amazes me even more is the evolution in history.

From 1979 to 1990, our greatest enemy besides the Soviet Union was actually Iran. Ayatollah Khomeini was a leader like Marx, Lenin, and Ho Chih Minh, but he also supported terrorism. If you said Persian Gulf, you immedietely thought Iran. Nowadays, it's Iraq. Iran was simply that "bad" back then. It was a nexus for terrorism and did everything to find a way to bring America down. The Iran-Iraq War (which Iraq was a pal, strangely enough), didn't help matters. We shot down one of their civilian planes and that only stirred more anger. Then come the the Persian Gulf War, and just like that, Iran drifts into the shadows.

What I'm asking is, when did Iran go from being that hated adversary to becoming an afterthought? I mean, nobody mentions Iran anymore. Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Israel are the major issues now. This is really surprising, as it is rare to see your worst enemy simply slip away.

Personally, I think war with Iran is a bit unlikely. I mean, we have few hostilities with them and it's been quite some time since they've been much of a nuisance. But if we do go to war, I'd say we win because Iran does not have a capable military it once had or even Iraq had at one point. But it would be a much bloodier and more difficult conflict than the Persian Gulf War. Iran lives off Islam and will fight to the end for the Koran. It's a lot like a people's war, one for ideals as well. Which is why in the long run, war with Iran will end up in a political and ideological defeat.

Originally posted by gooking
I would think that the u.s. would win the war eventually. It would be a heavy toll on everyone.


We may drive out Kim Jong Il but I would bet his guerillas would still fight after the us wins.

While I doubt it, I also do believe the U.S. can win. Just unlikely.

You're right about the guerrillas. I see Korea as a never-ending war. Unless North Korea wins.

Maybe the US government will want to strengthen its position in the Middle East by helping its allies eliminate their enemies. It would be simple for the American army to "liberate" the Palestinians...

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

Originally posted by gooking
I would think that the u.s. would win the war eventually. It would be a heavy toll on everyone.


We may drive out Kim Jong Il but I would bet his guerillas would still fight after the us wins.

While I doubt it, I also do believe the U.S. can win. Just unlikely.

You're right about the guerrillas. I see Korea as a never-ending war. Unless North Korea wins.

How I see it is North Korea a park lot for the RICH REPUBLICIAN! AND YOU LIBERALS THINK IT TRUE!

Originally posted by Russian
How I see it is North Korea a park lot for the RICH REPUBLICIAN!

AND YOU LIBERALS THINK IT TRUE!

Thank you for posting on the internet.

Originally posted by Russian

Originally posted by Flinx
Let's see....

Iran-Can't win, causes more terrorism

Syria-Can't win, causes more terrorism

North Korea-Can win, great loss of life

France-Can't win, they have nukes. Also, they are our allies and France-haters are idiots.

Terrorism-Can't fight with military power, used as an excuse to take away our civil rights and start imperialistic wars (shovel money into the corporation's pockets).

WHEEEE! That was fun!

LIBERAL! For you nothing cant be DONE! Its because yousit on your ass all day and dont do anything!

Please you moronic Liberals tell me how we took your civil liberties away?

By making checks for bombs on the airports?

USA cant win in France cause they have a NUKE?

USA has enough nukes to make France a parking lot!

So goes to North Korea, USA can level that to!

I will try not offened you liberalies but I heared something on the radio I want to quote.

"What do modern democrats do everyday?"

"Smoke crack and worship satan."

Wow, you're really smart... I wish I was as smart as you! Really....

LIBERAL!!!! Oh nooooo. He called me a liberal!!! OHHHHH NOOOO!!!! Master of the freaking obvious.

"Durrr....we hav nukes we cuud kill dem frenchie's cuz they is librulz like you...duh radio dun told me dis"

I apologize if what you said satire and you aren't actually a drooling moron. Really I do.

[Edited on 11/11/2003 by Flinx]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Hmmm, having just read this thread, besides an obvious hand and a half people......N. Korea seems to be the "next Theater of War"?

It makes the most sense to me. The others, with the exception of France, all seem possible. Iran and Syria make sense because there's been plenty of talk about what they're supposedly doing wrong (I say supposedly because I don't know one way or the other) and the fact that I'm sure that any recent or upcoming American President would LOVE to take control of the Middle East. As for France, just thinking about it boggles my mind. As much as it'd be wrong to go to war with Syria or Iran (in my opinion) it just seems so much more worse to do that to France. Sure, they're not our greatest Allies, but the thought of that just seems so weird to me. I mean, I just can't even begin to really comprehend it. Maybe that just means it's the most possible... Anyway, my gut says North Korea, so that's my guess.

Doesn't NK have 30 nuclear warheads? But only one strategic missile? Kinda pointless at that point eh?

naw....the US empire will seek out another Haiti or Granada sized country to mobilize against...

the masses NEED a success very soon !!

or the puppet masters will have to quell the populace
(re-directing valuable resources & manpower)

probably a west african small nation...in need of saving!

In case no one got it, I was making a joke about france

I doubt NK would be our next theater of war, Syria fits the bill of a small, easily conquered country much better. What we really need is a strong ally in the middle east.

This sounds crazy but couldn't we solve some of the guerilla problems simply by giving control of Iraq and Afghanistan to an Arab country, say..Jordan? Like I said, this is pure speculation. I just think that Jordan, as our strongest ally in the middle east, would be the best to give such a responsibility to.

There is a topic on this, but could there be a war in Saudi Arabia?

Iran has a little better air cover than Iraq, I would guess that they would last about two to four months before they get toppled by us.


[Edited on 11-11-2003 by gooking]

True Iran has better air cover, but we have a far more open field to fight in. We would really be able to put our technology to its best use there, multiple attack points from multiple bases around Iran would allow us to pigeonhole their forces in. And long range missiles, which some seem to think would be ineffective in NK, would show their best.

lets think logical, it seems were going alphbetically
afghanistan
iraq
(we've passed iran and france)
so maybe,...
northkorea
syria
zimababwe

Yep, but iran has another advantage over iraq in that they sponsor terrorism. The terrorist could strike the u.s. troops and sabotage our vehicles here before they get shipped off to fight in Iran.

That last comment was a little off. Terrorists are good at promoting terror, but unless they get their hands on a WMD, they can't do much more than that. They can attack troop movements, which are heavily guarded to say the least, but not disrupt inany real way

I hate to say it, but I do believe North Korea is the next logical step in the war on terror. I don't see either Syria of Iran being a problem, after what they have seen what we did in Iraq.

I do see the US taking aim at Syria though. At the beginning of our "War on Terror" Syria offered us assistance in almost everything we asked for... and yet we are beginning to acuse Syria more and more of harboring Iraqi soldiers and members of various terrorist cells. I do not doubt certain Syrians are doing this, but I do doubt that the Syrian Government is doing this. I like the idea of hitting Iran personally, they are close to Iraq, suffering from internal conflicts of their own (which we can expliot like we did with the Kurds in Northren Iraq). Also they have openly announced they are enriching uranium.

Actuallt, Syrias government is made up of people with terrorism connections, and is a classic example of state-sponsored terrorism.