[quote="ashleykennedy";p="401857"]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashleykennedy";p="
The highlighted bit is a (*)(*)(*)(*) good reason for Iran to pursue Nuclear arms.
|
Maybe so, but the consequences of an Iranian bomb go far beyond that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashleykennedy";p="
"As someone earlier in the thread pointed out, nations act primarily out of self-interest."
and Iran's interest is:-
"They guarantee that they are able to deter any significant attack against them."
Being a bit Gung Ho to attack a nation is not likely to disuade a nation from wanting to build up its defence capability.
|
If you think Iran is interested only in defending itself then we may as well stop this debate now. If you're not going to approach this political situation realistically, then we're wasting our time. Iran is acting out of a desire to increase its securiy, but more importantly, its own power and influence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashleykennedy";p="
And those that suppose a military machine is capable of taking on a guerilla army are crack pots. if iran is supposedly arming most of the regions terrorists which sort of tactics is Iran most likely to use?
|
What are you talking about? There is no need to destroy Iran's standing army or "guerrilla forces." The targest are the nuclear installations and ballistic missile caches. Are you suggesting that Iran is going to try use guerrilla tactics to counter an American bombing campaign? Because that would be completely pointless...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashleykennedy";p="
There is no short term tactics available as occupying and holding the ground is the only option, unless you'd like the global terrorism option? Iraq was supposed to be a short war, but now looks like it will run longer than the "thirty year war".
|
Apparently you haven't been following the news lately... Did you not notice America's enormous naval deployment to the Persian Gulf? Did you forget that America has airbases right next door in Iraq? Did you forget that Turkey is a NATO ally and America would likely be able to make use of its airspace? There are plenty of options that do not require any substantial ground deployments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashleykennedy";p="
While ignoring Arab Middle East interests.
|
Yes... That's right... America looks out for American interests, Arabs look out for Arabs interests... What's your point?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashleykennedy";p="
So first you need a Democratic Iran before bombing it.
|
Is that what I said? Nope.
The Iranian government WOULD NOT BE TOPPLED BY AN AMERICAN BOMBING CAMPAIGN, BECAUSE AMERICA HAS NO INTEREST IN TOPPLING THE IRANIAN REGIME (I bolded that to make sure you don't miss it this time). What I said was that the campaign needs to be relatively quick so as to cause minimal civilian casualties among Iranians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashleykennedy";p="
The problem with bombing Iran is that the Persian Nationalistic weltanshuaung will only be more polarised producing a more radical Iran.
People tend to follow the nation flag more closely during wars.
|
Finally, you say something that I can agree with. This is why the attack must be as quick as possible.