Iran warns any attack would start 'world war'

That's what I'm wondering...Where did they all go?

We have a little over a million troops of every function, why again are we overstretched? Or are we undercutting the official figures? Which would mean that someone is giving the idea that America is weakened for the element of underestimation, or we really are weak, and we can't afford to pursue this policy of war any longer...It is threatening to destroy us, even without a 3rd World War.

Hmmm... Eh.

Of course Iran would say it would trigger WWIII - it gives people in the West the willies and dilutes support amongst people for striking Iran.

But realistically... We've had talk of Iran "about" to be attacked for the past, what, 3 years or more?

Israel says there's an 18-24 month timeline for diplomatic pressure to work.

I really honestly don't know what to make of the situation any more. People are highly skeptical of the 'weapons of mass destruction' argument that we had for the foray into Iraq, I don't think striking Iran by the West has much support.

Israel on the other hand is bit of a wild card.

[edit on 30-8-2008 by mattguy404]

Because folks believe everything they hear and the same people on here who say they dont believe the media, DO believe the media when they say the US military is overstretched.

There is PLENTY more left.

A. The media says we are overstretched for obvious political reasons and for reasons why the gov wants them to say so.

B. The folks who like to downplay the US military actually end up agreeing with the media on this (because it fits their purposes) even though most of the time they say the media is complete BS.

Basically a bunch of hipocracy/lying by both the media and the conspiracy theorists (who say they dont listen to the media).

That's what I'm wondering...Where did they all go?

We have a little over a million troops of every function, why again are we overstretched? Or are we undercutting the official figures? Which would mean that someone is giving the idea that America is weakened for the element of underestimation, or we really are weak, and we can't afford to pursue this policy of war any longer...It is threatening to destroy us, even without a 3rd World War.

reply to post by projectvxn


2.9 million actually with only 340,000 in active deployment at any given time worldwide.

iran though has 12 million ..

i'm counting paramilitary too.

reply to post by princeofpeace


I don't know where they all went?? Ask the US leaders that complain about being overstretched and not being able to give their troops leave...asking me?

Israel says there's an 18-24 month timeline for diplomatic pressure to work.

I don't think there's a chance in hell they'd leave it that long.


I remember Dick Morris saying something on Fox 'News' a few weeks ago; he was totally sure of it.

1. If it looks as though McCain is going to win the White House, they (the Bush administration) will leave it for him 'to handle.'
2. If it looks as though Obama is going win the White House, they'll give the 'green light' to the Israelis before Bush leaves office.

Either way, Iran gets attacked.

The only possible way I can see this not happening is if:

1. The Iranians give in and stop enriching uranium.
2. The Israelis have a change of heart and decide they can live with a 'nuclear-armed' Iran.

So, yeah, not looking too good.

I also think many US military people have joined private contractors cause money is better and the media does not report their casualties, maybe more US soldiers are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan but they go unreported because they are contractors. Iran said they will bury 300.000 US soldiers if they attack, where did Iran get that figure? If 300.00 are in Iraq and maybe another 100.000 in Afghanistan, that is nearly half of the total, you need a large amount in the US to protect the land and that would leave the US with few men to fight Russia and China or even Iran. I think the US attack Iran you can kiss goodbye to those 400.000 and that is a huge advantage to Russia and China, they would seize the moment and attack, the latino's would finish the US off by invading....I don't know where the US soldiers are.....???

I'm not exactly sure why people have bought up the US military as being "overstretched" - the US is a hyper power with military posts all around the globe and an undisputed amount of military technology.

No one has mentioned the Hormuz Strait though - if Iran managed to block that, 40% of the world's oil supply, then strategic reserves would probably need to be tapped to keep the war machine going.

Either way it'd be pretty messy. Iran is huge, it's nuclear stuff is underground and dispersed throughout the country, I don't think it wouldn't exactly be a fly-in fly-out job.

Israel will probably get the ball rolling sooner or later.

Iran would go berserk and bring everyone around them into it.

reply to post by bubbles75


theres only about 250,000 / 300,000 in those 2 countries.

World War my a55... why would anyone want to save Iran. Just like when Russia attack Georgia. The US didn't want to get their hands dirty...it would be too costly, it's the same thing with any other countries backing Iran. Plus, the US would bomb them into the stone ages, not a full scale invasion as some people would think, so Iran wouldn't be able to do much, but a sitting duck.

They arent overstretched...thats what im saying. What is being publicized is the illusion that they are being overstretched. And folks buy into it. Even the so-called anti media believing naysayers on here believe it.

Originally posted by bubbles75
reply to post by princeofpeace

 

I don't know where they all went?? Ask the US leaders that complain about being overstretched and not being able to give their troops leave...asking me?

[edit on 30-8-2008 by princeofpeace]

reply to post by princeofpeace


I'm throwing around ideas looking for the most plausible motivation for something I see as the steps toward insanity. Things very much appear to be getting ugly.

I'm asking questions. You're making accusations.

Another interesting article in relation to the approaching dangers of WW111 becoming a reality!

rense.com...

reply to post by lee anoma


Freedom fries, freedom bread, freedom dip, freedom awnings...the whole bit. Tis good we are on the same page.

reply to post by pluckynoonez


How long before they rename the nuke Freedom Bomb?

It's only a matter of time, really.

I like how "free" everything is. After you've paid your taxes, your insurances, your rent, your debts...

...but no, you're "free" to do what ever you like. Oh yes, you have to follow a bunch of laws first, not chosen by you nor up for referendum to you...but you're "free".

So what exactly constitutes a World War, anyways?

The so-called "Coalition of the Willing" that went into the Iraq war constituted 49 countries. On the other side, there are probably "insurgents" fighting in Iraq from nearly every Islamic country in the world - and who's to say which ones have some secret government backing? And on top of that, you have all the countries involved in the conflict in Afghanistan. So if "World War" means a "whole bunch of countries" are involved, then couldn't you say it's already World War 3?

Maybe a World War is one where the actual fighting is brought to the soil of a large number of countries. But would that happen with Iran? It's doubtful. While the Middle East might see region-wide conflict on its soil, I don't see the fighting actually leaving that area.

Unless of course people start nuking each other. But then, would it be "World War Three" or "Extinction Level Event Six?" That's a rhetorical question, by the way. The real answer is: It would be called neither, because there would be nobody left to name it.

reply to post by mattguy404


You state that we should not buy into the fact that the military is overstreched. Without conveying sensitive information I would say look at three things: 1 The military needs civillian contractor support to opperate at all levels these days and no they are not all prior service, 2 What is the focus of training and preparation for the armed services at their National Training Centers, 3 What is the true condition and rediness rate of equipment which needs the "just in time" industry to support and recruitment of quality personnel. Find these answers and you will know the true meaning of overstreched.

Originally posted by bubbles75
The only strong military country is the US and partly Britain, France has nukes but the rest are no more significant militarily than Iraq was...probably less because if invaded Nato countries will surrender and cry as opposed to fight like the Iraqui's.. One Nuke on a European city and Europeans will not want to fight, they will want to hang their leaders (apart from brits that love war).

Not quite true, while we Brits do love war (well alot of us anyway), I think you are underestimating the military power of European nations, while they may not have as much force as before WW2, countries like Germany make some of the best military equipment and vehicles and many of Eurpoean nations have very good militaries

Originally posted by Counter Intelligence
If we American stop licking feet's of Israelis i think usa be more suffer but our greediness not allow us to think about us.We not have to forget that 911 was done by Israelis it self. i think we need to think about our future.

Your statement is incorrect. Israelis did not do this horrible thing. It was carried out by Homosexual, Islamic cowards. I was at the WTC on 9/11/01. I lost friends on that day.