US vs Iran

So guys....do you think the US or Israel will attack Iran?

Its hard to say whats really going on in the world. No ones telling us anything and where the people that are going to have to fight in it.
The US may.... but not yet when they have structed it forces better so there not streached.

Ive been thinking and correct me at anytime.its just a thought ok. After world war II the Allies showed they where the ones who had control by winning the war they took back control over Europe. The same went in Asia, the Allies won there to.

Now to my point. If you take away the two Iraq wars western counrtys have not had a major conflict with a middle east country. On the same scale as we have done in Europe and Asia.
If we tried to disarm Iran. countrys all over the world would escalate the conflicts they are in because no-one could stop them. We're to busy in the middle east.

for many political and military reasons, my guess is that nothing will take place. russia is backing iran

It seems they may use the same tactic they used with Iraq.
Weaken them with sanctions first and then go in.

Jpost.com
The US Senate late Thursday passed unanimously a resolution urging the International Atomic Energy Agency to refer to the UN Security Council Iranian violations of their pledge not to pursue nuclear weapons.

The Senate said the Security Council may need to impose economic and diplomatic sanctions on Iran to thwart the program. The House approved a similar vote in May.

I'm not sure if it'll work though.
A lot of countries have economic interests in Iran.
Plus a war in Iran will drive oil way past $50

They need to develope hydrogen fuel engines instead of using petrol/diesel/kerosine powered ones. That way it'll put the oil rich countries out of business.

Didn't Bush Jnr want to switch to hydrogen fuel cell technology?

The U.S. knows enough about what happened in the Iran-Iraq War to be smart not to fight Iran.

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
The U.S. knows enough about what happened in the Iran-Iraq War to be smart not to fight Iran.

Why wouldn't we want to take Iran out?

Here's a silly thought....
Lets let Iran build a nuke or two and then sit back and wait for them to be foolish and stupid enough to use it, be it on Israel or anyone else...then simply just turn Iran to a molten pool of glass!?
Again, just a silly thought...I figured I'd add mine since it would easily fit in with some of the comments within this topic already.




seekerof

Acually its said that they have around 8 nukes currently in there possesion.

Originally posted by Murcielago

Why wouldn't we want to take Iran out?

Iran and Iraq, two world-class, modern military powers of the 1980s went at it in the '80s. The result? A nine year war, the most destructive and brutal since World War II.

Anything that makes war awful, it had it. Chemical warfare, bloodly firefights, high-tech weaponary, etc., it had it all.

Now, it is not 1988 anymore, it is 2004. However, Iran still has the stone cold, tough attitude that allowed it to last as long as it did against Saddam Hussein.

Don't expect to see any white underwear-toting soldiers to surrender to one Apache.

Originally posted by Seekerof
Here's a silly thought....
Lets let Iran build a nuke or two and then sit back and wait for them to be foolish and stupid enough to use it, be it on Israel or anyone else...then simply just turn Iran to a molten pool of glass!?
Again, just a silly thought...I figured I'd add mine since it would easily fit in with some of the comments within this topic already.

seekerof

It took me a while, but now I realize that seekerof disguises all of his bitterness against the rest of the world by using the many smilies at his disposal!

This is an intresting one,that i had heard was going to take place.When i was in the Marines i had partied way too hard and had this thought to ask higher ranking Marines what they thought of the coming conflicts..and this came up alot,,

Originally posted by Flyboy211
They need to develope hydrogen fuel engines instead of using petrol/diesel/kerosine powered ones. That way it'll put the oil rich countries out of business.

Didn't Bush Jnr want to switch to hydrogen fuel cell technology?

Bush's energy plan is all about making himself and his family's buisness interests hundreds of billions. Why would someone earning that much money want to switch to earning 1/2 or 1/3 of that? Even these new "Fuel Cell" cars are still petroleum based and the "Hybrids" only utilize the electric engine while in 1st gear. Hydrogen cars are coming but being suppressed by big oil as usual. The technology is much more expensive but running costs are very low so the car manufacturer's are encouraged to go with buisness models that deliver savings while having a very high TCO "Total Cost of Ownership" tab from regular maintainence.

I Still say Zero Point Energy is the way to go.
We need to force this issue with our government. If we don't our children are going to suffer.
www.disclosureproject.org

My point earlier being that if we developed hydrogen powered engines further, zero point, fusion or whatever other new type of power it would put the oil rich countries, i.e Iran & Iraq out of business as we wouldn't need to rely on them for oil.

Obviously if the West developed this technology, then there'd be nothing stopping other countries from aquiring this technology. IMO it's better to be self sufficient rather than relying on some far away country for a valuable resource.

On a different note, we do need to develope a cleaner from efficient source of energy, and i do agree with the sentiments of the last poster that this is important and does effect us and will definitely matter to our children.