What Other Countries Should America Liberate Next?

[quote]NotaQuitta wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]NotaQuitta wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This is in response to a request that usmcccds made in another thread. So, since, according to him, we should be liberating countries from unjust rulers, tyrants, etc., etc., what should be next on the list? Also, what other countries should be on that list and why aren’t we already in those places? Obviously, Iran and North Korea should be on that list, so let’s move past them for now and go to the next country on the list. Which one should it be? Which country is next up for the wonderful chance to get bombed into democracy?[/quote]

Actually, he’s right. If America and the West want to minimize the triple threat of radical Islam, economic migration (legal and illegal) and rogue states, they should be doing their best to liberate the shitholes of the world.

But speaking as someone who grew up in a Muslim nation (albeit not of a Muslim background) both sides are doing it wrong. Short of complete genoicide Mongol-style, bombs doesn’t work - its a very expensive short term fix that has unpredictable consequences. But the liberal lets-all-hold-hands-and-sing-kumbaya is equally stupid. Its an equally expensive way of making the fundies think you are weak kneed cowards, which only makes them want to kill you more. They are bullies and tyrants - they get off on oppressing the weak and stupid (their populace) so the last thing you want to do is show them that you, too, are weak and stupid. South Korea has been showing the Kims how weak and stupid they are for the last 20 years or so (“Sunshine Policy”). Every time the Kims needed money they just made a threat or fired a missile and voila, they get aid. Guess how well that worked out?

There’s one way America hasn’t yet explored in solving this crisis. IMHO its a no-brainer, cheap and easy solution - the only drawback is it’ll take at least a generation or two, but the cost would be negligible over all those years. The solution is - guns and books.

Take a typical shithole like Pakistan. The nation is pathetically overpopulated, high poverty, run by a corrupt government, has nukes and lots and lots and lots of fundies. On top of that, they also sponsor terrorism against their neighbors India, fund jihadis in Afghanistan and sheltered OBL. Perfect for regime change, right?

The first thing the US government should do is apply diplomatic pressure to acquire a huge tract of land in Pakistan, that should be considered as a diplomatic enclave - US soil. Next, build a school and university there, providing top-class Western education. Professors and teachers should be drawn particularly from those with a liberal, atheistic bent - they may even do it for free/cheap, they’re all bleeding heart about “helping people”, right?

Pakistan should then be “encouraged” (or forced) to send their best and brightest minds to the school, which would be accepting students young (starting from say, age 6). The school would be a strictly “no religion zone”, with no religious dress or classes permitted, and would be full board. Students would only be allowed to visit home for short periods. They would also need to sign bonds that ensure they work in their home nation for at least 10 years - in return for being provided a top education, that’s a sweet deal.

After being immersed in Western culture and provided quality education for over 15 years, these students would then be far smarter and more capable than their local counterparts and, hopefully form a Western-friendly “elite”. Over one or two generations, these elite would eventually take over leadership of the nation and begin ruling with a less tyrannical or fundamentalist approach. A constant pool of graduates from the schools would ensure that the best and brightest of the nation would only be pro-American.

It’s what the British did during the colonial era, and it worked like a charm, particularly in Southeast Asia - where they did it particularly well.[/quote]

I don’t like the idea of forcing education on Pakistan or taking a chunk of land for U.S. soil. I think you’d be pissing off a lot of people in the process of “helping” them. Helping to educate them is a good path imo, yet like Iraq, I think we need to do a better job of playing a supporting role vs. leading the way. The Pakistani and Iraqi people need to grown on their own and figure it out with us as a guide not a mentor, if that makes sense.

I also think the Middle East is a bit tired of western culture and we should be careful not to push it on them. [/quote]

The point is not education.

Rather it’s brainwashing the best and brightest so that they see things from the Western point of view. They, in turn, can brainwash their population. That is a good thing, and yes, I am being serious.

Its not as bad as it sounds out to be.

Think of it this way, if you don’t do it, someone else will. Better America than the Mullahs, or someone opposed to the West, like the Chinese.[/quote]

I’ve never been of the mindset that just because someone else would do it, it’s okay for me to do it. I’ve got no problem giving them the car and teaching them to drive, but eventually they need to sit behind the wheel, so to speak.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_MYANMAR_RIOT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-22-09-59-47

Another prime example of a place we can help, without occupation.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_MYANMAR_RIOT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-22-09-59-47

Another prime example of a place we can help, without occupation. [/quote]

Myanmar is locate within China’s sphere of influence. What do we stand to gain from such an endeavor? I’m not saying there aren’t benefits to be yielded, I’m simply curious to what those may be. I understand the morality behind altruism, but when it doesn’t necessarily align with a State’s national interests it can at best amount to wasted resources and effort, and at worst lead to the State overextending itself.

[quote]Legionary wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_MYANMAR_RIOT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-22-09-59-47

Another prime example of a place we can help, without occupation. [/quote]

Myanmar is locate within China’s sphere of influence. What do we stand to gain from such an endeavor? I’m not saying there aren’t benefits to be yielded, I’m simply curious to what those may be. I understand the morality behind altruism, but when it doesn’t necessarily align with a State’s national interests it can at best amount to wasted resources and effort, and at worst lead to the State overextending itself.[/quote]

My stance doens’t revolve around what we as a nation have gain, but what we as a race has to gain. I wish China would help. I also think if we can help we should. Sometimes helping just to help is enough on it’s own, for me.

And no before any freaks, I am not advocating we neglect our own problems nor do I think we should over extend ourselves. The best way we could help right now is to square away our own house.

Legionary, you yourself mentioned globalization. In an ever shrinking world is Myanmar really out of our sphere of influence?

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This is in response to a request that usmcccds made in another thread. So, since, according to him, we should be liberating countries from unjust rulers, tyrants, etc., etc., what should be next on the list? Also, what other countries should be on that list and why aren’t we already in those places? Obviously, Iran and North Korea should be on that list, so let’s move past them for now and go to the next country on the list. Which one should it be? Which country is next up for the wonderful chance to get bombed into democracy?[/quote]

I say free America next.[/quote]
From who?[/quote]

Dunno, from those taxing you.

As I understand it, for the Greek Hoplites as well as American farmers pre revolution it was understood that free men would not accept direct taxation.

Wherever that was the commonly held position, civilization flourished.[/quote]

Didn’t you just recently write about how bad taxation is in Austria?

Free Austria next?[/quote]

Please do![/quote]

Ok.

Might want to find yourself a bomb shelter.
[/quote]

Dont be silly, just show up, the Austrian army is a fucking joke. [/quote]

You’re killing me here, O!

Is today “Backwards Day” or something?

For years you spouted off about how Austria was the perfect country, and refused to admit it had any problems.

Now these last few posts?

You trying to make me crazy or something???
[/quote]

Perfect, no, it just has a few problems the US do not have.

However, our mighty military was never counted among our assets.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Legionary, you yourself mentioned globalization. In an ever shrinking world is Myanmar really out of our sphere of influence?
[/quote]

If we have imperial ambitions in mind I suppose not. But seriously, Myanmar has close economic and political ties to China, and as the picture illustrates, Myanmar is in China’s geopolitical back yard. Not exactly like U.S. aid rendered in the Western hemisphere.

Typical responses in the thread to my post, perhaps theres not enough fuel to start a fire under me? Because I am not a nutjob who you can poke fun at because let me guess, you’re ignorant?

Heres the current situation (as it stands) now in the world of 2013.

Before you try and ignore a post thinking its either a load of BS because you dont think you’ll go in or because you think you’re the most unstoppable nation the world has ever seen, consider some logical thoughts about the matter.

War on terror is non-existent. Its merely drones operating in the ME and Pakistan/Afghanistan border regions.

Western forces are still fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, civilian and military losses are at what number now? Sorry I lost count.

During the time here we went into Iraq, threatened some other countries, namely Syria and Iran to keep insurgents in check, which they happily never did.

Iraq is still problematic at the least. Most civilians are without adequate water, electricity and sanitary conditions, how long did it take for New Yorkers to start complaining about conditions of Sandy? Not too long, now imagine it for 10 years, several of those being quite nearly your last days on this Earth. (maybe)

Iran is bigger, its has a better military, it has chemical weapons and by the looks of it you’re quite convinced it has nuclear material.

Your government and military is convinced that the only logical response is to remove such facilities and hope for the best but thats not good enough is it? You reckon Iran’s hardliners have a few tricks up their sleeve so you need to remove them too.

That leaves an open military option involving NATO.

So we now have 3 countries in one sizable area which are in the shit. Syria, Iran and Iraq.

Turkey being on the edge of its seat is just itching to get into Syria, no expert opinion needed there.

You have god knows how many Jihad soldiers in Syria and plenty more in Iraq who are still eager to kill western people. You’ll have the battle hardened and experienced insurgents from Afghanistan coming along for the ride and then you have the Iranian military and civilian population.

Still with me? I like logistics and distribution from a military and commercial point of view (hobby of mine) and from where I am standing, you’re already in trouble.

Lets look at economics now shall we.

USA and western Europe are in deep financial trouble. The USA has no infrastructure to support itself, it relies too heavily on China like western Europe.

Oil is key, where is Iran? Slap bang in the middle of the richest oil source on Earth. They’re also right on the doorstep of your allies in Saudia Arabia and the Suez Canal.

Care to hazard a guess on where oil prices will go once a US naval fleet enters the area to “secure” oil operations there? The type of security required to stop Iranians mining the entire canal? If I was an Iranian hardline general that would be my first port of call, why should we care? You’re coming for us and you;ve been hitting us with UN sanctions for years.

Your economy will belly out before a theatre of war has even begun. The rest of the western world would follow because for some inexplicable reason, the $ is prized higher than anything else.

How much is gas/petrol for you guys now? Can you comfortably live on as you do if it doubles? How many others would be able to do the same without breaking into debt?

So you see, my post is not horse shit. We’re bound by the rules of war, thats why we cannot end a conflict in a shitty backwards country that has forced us to re-evaluate our position on fighting wars.

So what are the legitimate strategies you can undertake to remove Iran as a problem without the problems listed above? Please inform me because for all other reasons I dare not hope you’ll let the Israelis take care of the problem by themselves, that would be an even bigger mistake.

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]harrypotter wrote:
What country you should invade next?

Your country will end if it invades Iran so whats the point in choosing who is next? Yes I am serious.[/quote]

any post i have seen of yours seems to be complete horse shit and not even 1% amusing

the worst and stupidest troll on the board

please explain your post so we can all laugh at how thick you are

cheers[/quote]

I never cease to amaze myself by quoting your shitty posts and not reading them.

Because I can, lmfao!

[quote]harrypotter wrote:
Typical responses in the thread to my post, perhaps theres not enough fuel to start a fire under me? Because I am not a nutjob who you can poke fun at because let me guess, you’re ignorant?

Heres the current situation (as it stands) now in the world of 2013.

Before you try and ignore a post thinking its either a load of BS because you dont think you’ll go in or because you think you’re the most unstoppable nation the world has ever seen, consider some logical thoughts about the matter.

War on terror is non-existent. Its merely drones operating in the ME and Pakistan/Afghanistan border regions.

Western forces are still fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, civilian and military losses are at what number now? Sorry I lost count.

During the time here we went into Iraq, threatened some other countries, namely Syria and Iran to keep insurgents in check, which they happily never did.

Iraq is still problematic at the least. Most civilians are without adequate water, electricity and sanitary conditions, how long did it take for New Yorkers to start complaining about conditions of Sandy? Not too long, now imagine it for 10 years, several of those being quite nearly your last days on this Earth. (maybe)

Iran is bigger, its has a better military, it has chemical weapons and by the looks of it you’re quite convinced it has nuclear material.

Your government and military is convinced that the only logical response is to remove such facilities and hope for the best but thats not good enough is it? You reckon Iran’s hardliners have a few tricks up their sleeve so you need to remove them too.

That leaves an open military option involving NATO.

So we now have 3 countries in one sizable area which are in the shit. Syria, Iran and Iraq.

Turkey being on the edge of its seat is just itching to get into Syria, no expert opinion needed there.

You have god knows how many Jihad soldiers in Syria and plenty more in Iraq who are still eager to kill western people. You’ll have the battle hardened and experienced insurgents from Afghanistan coming along for the ride and then you have the Iranian military and civilian population.

Still with me? I like logistics and distribution from a military and commercial point of view (hobby of mine) and from where I am standing, you’re already in trouble.

Lets look at economics now shall we.

USA and western Europe are in deep financial trouble. The USA has no infrastructure to support itself, it relies too heavily on China like western Europe.

Oil is key, where is Iran? Slap bang in the middle of the richest oil source on Earth. They’re also right on the doorstep of your allies in Saudia Arabia and the Suez Canal.

Care to hazard a guess on where oil prices will go once a US naval fleet enters the area to “secure” oil operations there? The type of security required to stop Iranians mining the entire canal? If I was an Iranian hardline general that would be my first port of call, why should we care? You’re coming for us and you;ve been hitting us with UN sanctions for years.

Your economy will belly out before a theatre of war has even begun. The rest of the western world would follow because for some inexplicable reason, the $ is prized higher than anything else.

How much is gas/petrol for you guys now? Can you comfortably live on as you do if it doubles? How many others would be able to do the same without breaking into debt?

So you see, my post is not horse shit. We’re bound by the rules of war, thats why we cannot end a conflict in a shitty backwards country that has forced us to re-evaluate our position on fighting wars.

So what are the legitimate strategies you can undertake to remove Iran as a problem without the problems listed above? Please inform me because for all other reasons I dare not hope you’ll let the Israelis take care of the problem by themselves, that would be an even bigger mistake.

[/quote]

What exactly do you think would be the result of a conventional war between Iran and the United States?

I’ll give you a hint: the answer’s somewhere in here–

[quote]harrypotter wrote:
Typical responses in the thread to my post, perhaps theres not enough fuel to start a fire under me? Because I am not a nutjob who you can poke fun at because let me guess, you’re ignorant?

Heres the current situation (as it stands) now in the world of 2013.

Before you try and ignore a post thinking its either a load of BS because you dont think you’ll go in or because you think you’re the most unstoppable nation the world has ever seen, consider some logical thoughts about the matter.

War on terror is non-existent. Its merely drones operating in the ME and Pakistan/Afghanistan border regions.

Western forces are still fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, civilian and military losses are at what number now? Sorry I lost count.

During the time here we went into Iraq, threatened some other countries, namely Syria and Iran to keep insurgents in check, which they happily never did.

Iraq is still problematic at the least. Most civilians are without adequate water, electricity and sanitary conditions, how long did it take for New Yorkers to start complaining about conditions of Sandy? Not too long, now imagine it for 10 years, several of those being quite nearly your last days on this Earth. (maybe)

Iran is bigger, its has a better military, it has chemical weapons and by the looks of it you’re quite convinced it has nuclear material.

Your government and military is convinced that the only logical response is to remove such facilities and hope for the best but thats not good enough is it? You reckon Iran’s hardliners have a few tricks up their sleeve so you need to remove them too.

That leaves an open military option involving NATO.

So we now have 3 countries in one sizable area which are in the shit. Syria, Iran and Iraq.

Turkey being on the edge of its seat is just itching to get into Syria, no expert opinion needed there.

You have god knows how many Jihad soldiers in Syria and plenty more in Iraq who are still eager to kill western people. You’ll have the battle hardened and experienced insurgents from Afghanistan coming along for the ride and then you have the Iranian military and civilian population.

Still with me? I like logistics and distribution from a military and commercial point of view (hobby of mine) and from where I am standing, you’re already in trouble.

Lets look at economics now shall we.

USA and western Europe are in deep financial trouble. The USA has no infrastructure to support itself, it relies too heavily on China like western Europe.

Oil is key, where is Iran? Slap bang in the middle of the richest oil source on Earth. They’re also right on the doorstep of your allies in Saudia Arabia and the Suez Canal.

Care to hazard a guess on where oil prices will go once a US naval fleet enters the area to “secure” oil operations there? The type of security required to stop Iranians mining the entire canal? If I was an Iranian hardline general that would be my first port of call, why should we care? You’re coming for us and you;ve been hitting us with UN sanctions for years.

Your economy will belly out before a theatre of war has even begun. The rest of the western world would follow because for some inexplicable reason, the $ is prized higher than anything else.

How much is gas/petrol for you guys now? Can you comfortably live on as you do if it doubles? How many others would be able to do the same without breaking into debt?

So you see, my post is not horse shit. We’re bound by the rules of war, thats why we cannot end a conflict in a shitty backwards country that has forced us to re-evaluate our position on fighting wars.

So what are the legitimate strategies you can undertake to remove Iran as a problem without the problems listed above? Please inform me because for all other reasons I dare not hope you’ll let the Israelis take care of the problem by themselves, that would be an even bigger mistake.

[/quote]

another one of your idiotic tin foil hat posts

you are a fucking moron get a real education rather than reading Google and imagining you have a clue

[quote]harrypotter wrote:
Typical responses in the thread to my post, perhaps theres not enough fuel to start a fire under me? Because I am not a nutjob who you can poke fun at because let me guess, you’re ignorant?

Heres the current situation (as it stands) now in the world of 2013.

Before you try and ignore a post thinking its either a load of BS because you dont think you’ll go in or because you think you’re the most unstoppable nation the world has ever seen, consider some logical thoughts about the matter.

War on terror is non-existent. Its merely drones operating in the ME and Pakistan/Afghanistan border regions.

Western forces are still fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, civilian and military losses are at what number now? Sorry I lost count.

During the time here we went into Iraq, threatened some other countries, namely Syria and Iran to keep insurgents in check, which they happily never did.

Iraq is still problematic at the least. Most civilians are without adequate water, electricity and sanitary conditions, how long did it take for New Yorkers to start complaining about conditions of Sandy? Not too long, now imagine it for 10 years, several of those being quite nearly your last days on this Earth. (maybe)

Iran is bigger, its has a better military, it has chemical weapons and by the looks of it you’re quite convinced it has nuclear material.

Your government and military is convinced that the only logical response is to remove such facilities and hope for the best but thats not good enough is it? You reckon Iran’s hardliners have a few tricks up their sleeve so you need to remove them too.

That leaves an open military option involving NATO.

So we now have 3 countries in one sizable area which are in the shit. Syria, Iran and Iraq.

Turkey being on the edge of its seat is just itching to get into Syria, no expert opinion needed there.

You have god knows how many Jihad soldiers in Syria and plenty more in Iraq who are still eager to kill western people. You’ll have the battle hardened and experienced insurgents from Afghanistan coming along for the ride and then you have the Iranian military and civilian population.

Still with me? I like logistics and distribution from a military and commercial point of view (hobby of mine) and from where I am standing, you’re already in trouble.

Lets look at economics now shall we.

USA and western Europe are in deep financial trouble. The USA has no infrastructure to support itself, it relies too heavily on China like western Europe.

Oil is key, where is Iran? Slap bang in the middle of the richest oil source on Earth. They’re also right on the doorstep of your allies in Saudia Arabia and the Suez Canal.

Care to hazard a guess on where oil prices will go once a US naval fleet enters the area to “secure” oil operations there? The type of security required to stop Iranians mining the entire canal? If I was an Iranian hardline general that would be my first port of call, why should we care? You’re coming for us and you;ve been hitting us with UN sanctions for years.

Your economy will belly out before a theatre of war has even begun. The rest of the western world would follow because for some inexplicable reason, the $ is prized higher than anything else.

How much is gas/petrol for you guys now? Can you comfortably live on as you do if it doubles? How many others would be able to do the same without breaking into debt?

So you see, my post is not horse shit. We’re bound by the rules of war, thats why we cannot end a conflict in a shitty backwards country that has forced us to re-evaluate our position on fighting wars.

So what are the legitimate strategies you can undertake to remove Iran as a problem without the problems listed above? Please inform me because for all other reasons I dare not hope you’ll let the Israelis take care of the problem by themselves, that would be an even bigger mistake.

[/quote]
You are misguided on a few things. We won the “war” with Iraq by any meaningful measure. The problem is the attempt to stay and do some nation building and humanitarian things. The same would be true with any war with Iran. We could entirely destroy their infrastructure and let those that didn’t die from the bombings starve or die from disease.

Certainly it would be impossible to make any of these countries a 51st state, but destroying them would be easy.

But ultimately you miss the point of the entire series of wars since we lost our dearest frenemy the Soviets.

“War , not peace , is the goal of each nation’s oligarchy . War is a form of control by the ruling elite uniting the citizenry against a common enemy .
It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and, since no decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is going badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist.”

I don’t know that we should free these nations alone.

But, I would like to see the people of Myanmar and N. Korea from under their regimes. We are missing out big time on beautiful land, crazy diverse culture and languages, and of course the food.

Little bit of Burmese food I’ve had is almost opposite of Italian but amazing. I’ve never had more ingredients, in some dishes. I hit this place called http://www.burmasuperstar.com/menu.html while traveling and that tea leaf salad with all the ingredients was impressive. Few dishes I had, it was like the opposite of Italian cuisine where you relish in the simplicity and freshness of the food. With Burmese you relish in the complicated flavor combinations, sometimes you wonder why complicated combinations of food bring about completely new flavors.

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:
I don’t know that we should free these nations alone.

But, I would like to see the people of Myanmar and N. Korea from under their regimes. We are missing out big time on beautiful land, crazy diverse culture and languages, and of course the food.

Little bit of Burmese food I’ve had is almost opposite of Italian but amazing. I’ve never had more ingredients, in some dishes. I hit this place called http://www.burmasuperstar.com/menu.html while traveling and that tea leaf salad with all the ingredients was impressive. Few dishes I had, it was like the opposite of Italian cuisine where you relish in the simplicity and freshness of the food. With Burmese you relish in the complicated flavor combinations, sometimes you wonder why complicated combinations of food bring about completely new flavors. [/quote]

Not to be a smart ass, but really? Talking food in the middle of a liberation thread?[/quote]

Sorry, I think of Burma and the first thing that comes to mind is the tyranny of their Military, 2nd thing that comes to mind is the food.

There are a lot of Australians who’d like to be liberated from our oppressive Communist regime. Liberate Australia.

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]harrypotter wrote:

[/quote]
You are misguided on a few things. We won the “war” with Iraq by any meaningful measure. The problem is the attempt to stay and do some nation building and humanitarian things. The same would be true with any war with Iran. We could entirely destroy their infrastructure and let those that didn’t die from the bombings starve or die from disease.

Certainly it would be impossible to make any of these countries a 51st state, but destroying them would be easy.

But ultimately you miss the point of the entire series of wars since we lost our dearest frenemy the Soviets.

“War , not peace , is the goal of each nation’s oligarchy . War is a form of control by the ruling elite uniting the citizenry against a common enemy .
It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and, since no decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is going badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist.” [/quote]

You “won” the war?

It wasn’t a war, it was a conflict that killed many that didn’t deserve it and you ignored the real issues, religion and factions.

If a victory was seen as removing Saddam Hussein then yes, it was a victory but you tried and failed to get anything worthwhile out of the country.

You spent a lot of money and ended up with no oil contracts which were the prize at the end of the day. I bet you’re forgetting that aren’t you?

I bet you also forget how the US defence contractors also profited from this little jolly and still do. They would never allow the US fed to tax them on the money they made, off shore accounts made that impossible.

Then you have the normal Iraqis, still without basic amenities after all of this time. I say again, do you really believe all is won when suicide bombs and no real political processes are evident in a country you so happily liberated?

You also quote something about the goal of war.

Ghengis Khan, the Romans, Germany in WW2, heck every single empire in history has one thing in common except the USA/western powers of today.

They went and secured assets, prizes, women (not Germany), resources and land. What have we got in return except for thousands of dead, recession and a conflict that will never end.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]harrypotter wrote:
Typical responses in the thread to my post, perhaps theres not enough fuel to start a fire under me? Because I am not a nutjob who you can poke fun at because let me guess, you’re ignorant?

Heres the current situation (as it stands) now in the world of 2013.

Before you try and ignore a post thinking its either a load of BS because you dont think you’ll go in or because you think you’re the most unstoppable nation the world has ever seen, consider some logical thoughts about the matter.

War on terror is non-existent. Its merely drones operating in the ME and Pakistan/Afghanistan border regions.

Western forces are still fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, civilian and military losses are at what number now? Sorry I lost count.

During the time here we went into Iraq, threatened some other countries, namely Syria and Iran to keep insurgents in check, which they happily never did.

Iraq is still problematic at the least. Most civilians are without adequate water, electricity and sanitary conditions, how long did it take for New Yorkers to start complaining about conditions of Sandy? Not too long, now imagine it for 10 years, several of those being quite nearly your last days on this Earth. (maybe)

Iran is bigger, its has a better military, it has chemical weapons and by the looks of it you’re quite convinced it has nuclear material.

Your government and military is convinced that the only logical response is to remove such facilities and hope for the best but thats not good enough is it? You reckon Iran’s hardliners have a few tricks up their sleeve so you need to remove them too.

That leaves an open military option involving NATO.

So we now have 3 countries in one sizable area which are in the shit. Syria, Iran and Iraq.

Turkey being on the edge of its seat is just itching to get into Syria, no expert opinion needed there.

You have god knows how many Jihad soldiers in Syria and plenty more in Iraq who are still eager to kill western people. You’ll have the battle hardened and experienced insurgents from Afghanistan coming along for the ride and then you have the Iranian military and civilian population.

Still with me? I like logistics and distribution from a military and commercial point of view (hobby of mine) and from where I am standing, you’re already in trouble.

Lets look at economics now shall we.

USA and western Europe are in deep financial trouble. The USA has no infrastructure to support itself, it relies too heavily on China like western Europe.

Oil is key, where is Iran? Slap bang in the middle of the richest oil source on Earth. They’re also right on the doorstep of your allies in Saudia Arabia and the Suez Canal.

Care to hazard a guess on where oil prices will go once a US naval fleet enters the area to “secure” oil operations there? The type of security required to stop Iranians mining the entire canal? If I was an Iranian hardline general that would be my first port of call, why should we care? You’re coming for us and you;ve been hitting us with UN sanctions for years.

Your economy will belly out before a theatre of war has even begun. The rest of the western world would follow because for some inexplicable reason, the $ is prized higher than anything else.

How much is gas/petrol for you guys now? Can you comfortably live on as you do if it doubles? How many others would be able to do the same without breaking into debt?

So you see, my post is not horse shit. We’re bound by the rules of war, thats why we cannot end a conflict in a shitty backwards country that has forced us to re-evaluate our position on fighting wars.

So what are the legitimate strategies you can undertake to remove Iran as a problem without the problems listed above? Please inform me because for all other reasons I dare not hope you’ll let the Israelis take care of the problem by themselves, that would be an even bigger mistake.

[/quote]

The issue with you and your earlier stupid post was not that a war with Iran would be problematic, which it obviously would be, but that you missed your meds that day when you said it “will end your country.”[/quote]

The “issue” with YOU (Americans) and anyone misguided to believe your war mongering is the fact that your country is slowly changing and you’re not realising it.

A new police state was created by the US administration and by all means it is enforced to this day, basic freedoms are being eroded because it falls under the umbrella of these actions by the Bush administration.

It is getting tweaked by Obamas administration today.

When I mean end I do not mean in a literal way, you wont suddenly dissapear but how about you think about this for a minute when you next fill up your vehicle at a gas station.

Gas price, food, basic commodities. Three valuable things people take for granted here in the west, we’re selfish and ignorant.

Take away those basic rights, reduce services, inflict law and order on a stressed populace to keep order (this is what the Romans encountered) and then finally, have their sons, fathers and brothers come home dead, de-humanised and broken or exhausted.

War is not good unless you take something valuable enough to compensate your losses.

Ancient empires took resources and cities with influence, you took nothing from Iraq except to stir up hate and give a bigger reason to hate the west.

Think about paying your fuel bill and then triple it. How big an impact would it have?