|
Interesting article, Man. Possibly relevant as well. The implications, however, abound. There will undoubtably be civilian casualties when nuclear sites are destroyed, and those are acceptable losses. Even the article that Man posted mentions the possibility of nuclear weapons. So even the "anti-American military" people are willing to speculate that Iran has nuclear weapon capability.
Purple, Man brought up the Viet Nam reference, however, it is, as you pointed out, as good an analogy as any. We lost in Viet Nam because of the exact same things we are doing in Iraq. Policing the population. There were no decisive military victories in 'Nam, because we would take hill 17 today, give it back tomorrow, and then take it again. What a way to fight a war.
Bombing the whole country to a parking lot would indeed be a war crime, but bombing the enire political structure, and the nuke testing sites into oblivion wouldn't be. Again, there will be civilian losses, but unless the leaders just stand out in front of their capital building and get shot, there is very little way to avoid that. I believe the phrase is "Fortunes of War".
The other thing is, what is the impetus behind going to war with Iran? Is it just "flexing muscle we don't have"? Whatever. You are probably correct. Iran is the real world power, and all the rest of us should just bow down and kiss Allah's Holy Pink Ass. After all, if Iran decided to, they could take over the world in 5 minutes. At least, that's the impression I'm left with, reading the dissent.
Edit for a spelling error.
[ 02-11-2007, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: robertthebard ]
|