US Military Not Ready to Take on iran

[rightwinger]

The reality.

How long would the US military last in a war against the rest of the world?

There is no way anyone could invade continental United States

Especially after Trump builds his wall

 

[rightwinger]

First of all....why would we want to take them on?
Haven't we learned our lesson on global military intervention

Secondly, we are the only military power in the world capable of executing wars around the globe

The US hasn't won a war since WWII. Capable of starting a war, yes. Capable of winning a war, no.

We are not stupid enough to fight a war of the magnitude of WWII
WWII left us as the worlds primary super power
Nothing has changed

Since WWII, US lost in Korea, Nam, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and got their ass booted in Somalia, Lebanon, Yemen and Libya. Did I leave anyone out?

Many of these you claimed we lost. I think you had best redefine your terms, because you don't know what "lost" means.

"Lost" means "didn't win". Now you know. Fool.

No it doesn't

Most wars in history haven't ended with total victory. Typically both sides would grow tired and some truce would be declared

England and France fought for a hundred years. Neither side "won"

 

[dani67]

 

[Mudda]

The US hasn't won a war since WWII. Capable of starting a war, yes. Capable of winning a war, no.

We are not stupid enough to fight a war of the magnitude of WWII
WWII left us as the worlds primary super power
Nothing has changed

Since WWII, US lost in Korea, Nam, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and got their ass booted in Somalia, Lebanon, Yemen and Libya. Did I leave anyone out?

Many of these you claimed we lost. I think you had best redefine your terms, because you don't know what "lost" means.

"Lost" means "didn't win". Now you know. Fool.

No it doesn't

Most wars in history haven't ended with total victory. Typically both sides would grow tired and some truce would be declared

England and France fought for a hundred years. Neither side "won"

US tried to stop communists from taking Korea and lost.
US tried stopping communist from taking Nam and lost.
US lost helping Iraq attack Iran and trying to save its hostages (ok, not technically their own war loss)
US tried to subdue Iraq and Afghanistan with war and lost on both counts.
US also tried to invade Canada twice and lost both time.

 

[SwimExpert]

We are not stupid enough to fight a war of the magnitude of WWII
WWII left us as the worlds primary super power
Nothing has changed

Since WWII, US lost in Korea, Nam, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and got their ass booted in Somalia, Lebanon, Yemen and Libya. Did I leave anyone out?

Many of these you claimed we lost. I think you had best redefine your terms, because you don't know what "lost" means.

"Lost" means "didn't win". Now you know. Fool.

No it doesn't

Most wars in history haven't ended with total victory. Typically both sides would grow tired and some truce would be declared

England and France fought for a hundred years. Neither side "won"

US tried to stop communists from taking Korea and lost.
US tried stopping communist from taking Nam and lost.
US lost helping Iraq attack Iran and trying to save its hostages (ok, not technically their own war loss)
US tried to subdue Iraq and Afghanistan with war and lost on both counts.
US also tried to invade Canada twice and lost both time.

Don't forget about Obama's foiled plot to invade Texas.

 

[rightwinger]

We are not stupid enough to fight a war of the magnitude of WWII
WWII left us as the worlds primary super power
Nothing has changed

Since WWII, US lost in Korea, Nam, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and got their ass booted in Somalia, Lebanon, Yemen and Libya. Did I leave anyone out?

Many of these you claimed we lost. I think you had best redefine your terms, because you don't know what "lost" means.

"Lost" means "didn't win". Now you know. Fool.

No it doesn't

Most wars in history haven't ended with total victory. Typically both sides would grow tired and some truce would be declared

England and France fought for a hundred years. Neither side "won"

US tried to stop communists from taking Korea and lost.
US tried stopping communist from taking Nam and lost.
US lost helping Iraq attack Iran and trying to save its hostages (ok, not technically their own war loss)
US tried to subdue Iraq and Afghanistan with war and lost on both counts.
US also tried to invade Canada twice and lost both time.

How did we lose?
We are still standing

We got involved in political conflicts we had no business getting involved in. We found the deaths were not worth the expected gain.

We "won" Iraq. Invaded, kicked their ass, put in a government of our choice. Still didn't work

Shows how effective military force is in resolving political conflicts

 

[irosie91]

He was an enemy to ALL CIVILIZED PERSONS
(not you)

Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 or WMD. A bogus invasion so that Cheney's friends could get the oil and contracts in Iraq. And Saddam had better control of the region than anyone since.

Yep......innocent little dictator Saddam Hussein. Ummmm....ummmmm..
Ummmmm

Not saying he was an angel, but neither is Putin, China's leader, North Korea, Iran, most of Africa... Is the US going to invade everyone?

It is not clear to me why so many of you (fellow posters) continue to talk about
INVADING countries-------who is advocating INVASION?

 

[paulitician]

He's very lucky he wasn't strung up in public like Mussolini. He fled before that could happen. He killed and imprisoned many of his own people. He was a U.S. Puppet Dictator. The Revolution was an easy quick one. They had a tremendous amount of support in the country.

The people OF TEHERAN still loved him--------why not admit the fact that
you never met an Iranian

No, they didn't. He was a U.S.-installed Puppet. He was placed into power by way of a U.S.-backed illegal coup. They overthrew the democratically elected Mohammad Mosaddegh. You really do need to brush up on history a bit.

uh huh------I got my Iranian history from Iranians and my sense of what they
felt about DA SHAH----from Iranians. Da coup was enacted by Iranians ---not
a single USA MILITARY BOOT hit the ground that day. What is true was a
very strong appeal to religious fanaticism that developed around
KHOMEINI -----he had a religious following with the declared enemy being----
not just DA JOOOOS but even more DA WEST. Just about all the
Iranians I knew back then---starting in the mid sixties, were either-----
medical school graduates or young jooos whose families were shipping
their kids OUT as the ISLAMIST SENTIMENT GREW. I learned about the islamist thing from muslims who alluded to "FANATICS IN MY COUNTRY" ---
they turned out to be the AYATOILET people that rid the country of the shah and
his BASPHEMOUS WESTERN IDEAS and----of course being a "tool of Zionism"
etc etc etc The PUPPET OF THE USA thing is a KHOMEINI LIBEL.
you are not the only person who swallowed it.

Iran's problems began with the U.S.-backed illegal coup that overthrew Mohammad Mossadegh. He was a democratically elected leader. If we hadn't gotten involved, there wouldn't have been an Islamic Revolution. The Shah was brutal and was truly hated by most Iranians.

how do you know that the shah was HATED? no doubt he was hated by people who got in trouble with SAVAK------but I never met an Iranian in the USA who LEFT
IRAN because of the shah -------or hated him------or did not like him. -------1965 thru 1990 was the time period in which I encountered LOTS OF IRANIANS who were recent migrants. I met lots who hated the AYATOILETS. Is there an entity called
LEGAL COUP. according to the brits----Benjamin Franklin and George Washington were CRIMINALS

They may have supported him, but most Iranians didn't. The Revolution ousted him in about a 2 days. He didn't have enough support there to fight back. Very few came to his defense. He ran for his life and fled the country immediately.

Like i said, we shouldn't have backed the illegal coup that overthrew a democratically elected Mohammad Mosaddegh. The Shah was from a Royal line like the Saudis. He was a Dictator. It was another case of Blow Back. We have to move away from all the meddling around the world.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

We are not stupid enough to fight a war of the magnitude of WWII
WWII left us as the worlds primary super power
Nothing has changed

Since WWII, US lost in Korea, Nam, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and got their ass booted in Somalia, Lebanon, Yemen and Libya. Did I leave anyone out?

We didn't lose anything

We intervened militarily in global conflicts because we thought it was in our best interests. When we realized it wasn't worth the cost...we got the hell out

Most of those we shouldn't have gotten involved in the first place

So the US didn't lose in Nam?

No, we didn't "lose". We left!

Ya, the US left Nam on their own free will to let the communists have Nam.

You have this bizarre concept of history. Did you have liberal history teachers?

 

[paulitician]

It wasn't the regime changing and initial invasions that made Iraq and Afghanistan failures. It was the failure to obtain surrender and terms and instead implementing nation building and entering into wars of insurgency and civil wars in those places. Should have left both places after the military assets in those places were destroyed and left the nation building to the people who lived there.

yes----the MISTAKE was in the conduct of the war-------but considering the Shiite/sunni thing already sickening the society-------chances are nothing
could have turned out well

The Iraq invasion has created this emerging Sunni/Shiite War. We handed the Shiites and Iran more power and influence in the region. Before the Iraq War, Iran and the Shiites had very little power & influence.

ROFLMAO since you know nothing about Shiites and sunnis and their
ONGOING feud------why do you comment?-----the CHANGE in the Iranian approach
to the area came when the IDIOT OF THE CENTURY -----JUMMAH CARTER stuck his tongue up the ass of KHOMEINI---------maybe you are too young to remember
The first muslim I knew WELL-------was a Shiite from India. He DESPISED
HINDUS-----and was not shy about discussing it with shy little youthful me. -------
that was about almost 50 years ago. When I commented "if hindus are so awful why did your family not migrate to Pakistan in 1948" ? The young surgeon
got so DISTRESSED that I thought he would die a cardiac death. I did not know ---way back then that Shiites were being shot in the streets of Pakistan and HE
did not tell me anything about it. It took me a few years to figure out why IRANIANS DESPISE PAKISTANIS--------real palpable hatred whenever they encountered each other ---------VIRULENT stuff

Hey man, wake up. Bush's horrific debacle handed Iraq over to Iran and the Shiites. You wanna be angry at someone, be angry at Bush and his crony assholes. Iran and the Shiites had less power & influence in the region before Bush's idiotic invasion.

Well, the problem with that is all of the stuff you're talking about happened after Obama left Iraq in 2012. Bush had been out of office almost 4 years.

No, Bush's blunder opened the door to Iran and the Shiites seizing the power. They run the show in Iraq now. Before the war, Iran and the Shiites had almost no power & influence in Iraq. Just more Blow Back. The Iraq War should have never hppened.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

We are not stupid enough to fight a war of the magnitude of WWII
WWII left us as the worlds primary super power
Nothing has changed

Since WWII, US lost in Korea, Nam, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and got their ass booted in Somalia, Lebanon, Yemen and Libya. Did I leave anyone out?

Many of these you claimed we lost. I think you had best redefine your terms, because you don't know what "lost" means.

"Lost" means "didn't win". Now you know. Fool.

No it doesn't

Most wars in history haven't ended with total victory. Typically both sides would grow tired and some truce would be declared

England and France fought for a hundred years. Neither side "won"

US tried to stop communists from taking Korea and lost.
US tried stopping communist from taking Nam and lost.
US lost helping Iraq attack Iran and trying to save its hostages (ok, not technically their own war loss)
US tried to subdue Iraq and Afghanistan with war and lost on both counts.
US also tried to invade Canada twice and lost both time.

Oh please! Go back to school and learn the REAL reasons those ended that way.

I am sure the South Koreans might disagree with your first stupid point.

 

[paulitician]

...U.S. China especially, has no interest. Why kill off your best customer? China owns much of the U.S. at this point. It doesn't need war. The mission has already been accomplished.

M(utually) A(ssured) D(estruction) - to destroy them, all we have to do is repudiate our China debt, and they collapse overnight. Mission accomplished.

That's the way to go. Destroy our credit rating because we don't know how to play well with others.

Merely articulating our trump (no pun intended) card, should we ever need to play it.

Not necessarily a 'trump card.' It would have a devastating impact on our own economy. American Business now relies heavily on China. But China relies heavily on us as well. That's why war makes no sense to either country.

 

[irosie91]

The people OF TEHERAN still loved him--------why not admit the fact that
you never met an Iranian

No, they didn't. He was a U.S.-installed Puppet. He was placed into power by way of a U.S.-backed illegal coup. They overthrew the democratically elected Mohammad Mosaddegh. You really do need to brush up on history a bit.

uh huh------I got my Iranian history from Iranians and my sense of what they
felt about DA SHAH----from Iranians. Da coup was enacted by Iranians ---not
a single USA MILITARY BOOT hit the ground that day. What is true was a
very strong appeal to religious fanaticism that developed around
KHOMEINI -----he had a religious following with the declared enemy being----
not just DA JOOOOS but even more DA WEST. Just about all the
Iranians I knew back then---starting in the mid sixties, were either-----
medical school graduates or young jooos whose families were shipping
their kids OUT as the ISLAMIST SENTIMENT GREW. I learned about the islamist thing from muslims who alluded to "FANATICS IN MY COUNTRY" ---
they turned out to be the AYATOILET people that rid the country of the shah and
his BASPHEMOUS WESTERN IDEAS and----of course being a "tool of Zionism"
etc etc etc The PUPPET OF THE USA thing is a KHOMEINI LIBEL.
you are not the only person who swallowed it.

Iran's problems began with the U.S.-backed illegal coup that overthrew Mohammad Mossadegh. He was a democratically elected leader. If we hadn't gotten involved, there wouldn't have been an Islamic Revolution. The Shah was brutal and was truly hated by most Iranians.

how do you know that the shah was HATED? no doubt he was hated by people who got in trouble with SAVAK------but I never met an Iranian in the USA who LEFT
IRAN because of the shah -------or hated him------or did not like him. -------1965 thru 1990 was the time period in which I encountered LOTS OF IRANIANS who were recent migrants. I met lots who hated the AYATOILETS. Is there an entity called
LEGAL COUP. according to the brits----Benjamin Franklin and George Washington were CRIMINALS

They may have supported him, but most Iranians didn't. The Revolution ousted him in about a 2 days. He didn't have enough support there to fight back. Very few came to his defense. He ran for his life and fled the country immediately.

Like i said, we shouldn't have backed the illegal coup that overthrew a democratically elected Mohammad Mosaddegh. The Shah was from a Royal line like the Saudis. He was a Dictator. It was another case of Blow Back. We have to move away from all the meddling around the world.

a discussion of that which took place in Iran in 1979 during a time when Iran was
in GREAT ECONOMIC STRESS and when a religious fervor led by the animal
AYATOILET KHOMEINI was sweeping the land---especially among the MAJORITY---uneducated, does not preclude the POPULARITY OF THE SHAH
in 1941---- after a "reign" as "king" for a full 38 years. Also---keep in mind---
THE SHAH was from a "royal household"-----he did not jump out of the wilderness
with a band of wicked CIA agents and TAKE OVER. Getting back to my sources------IRANIANS------the big issue about which they complained (the few who actually complained and were optimistic about the "revolution" ) regarding
the shah was-----ECONOMIC STRESS AMONGST THEIR COUNTRYMEN---due
to corruption-----a condition which the AYATOILET KHOMEINI WAS SURE TO
CURE ------

 

[irosie91]

yes----the MISTAKE was in the conduct of the war-------but considering the Shiite/sunni thing already sickening the society-------chances are nothing
could have turned out well

The Iraq invasion has created this emerging Sunni/Shiite War. We handed the Shiites and Iran more power and influence in the region. Before the Iraq War, Iran and the Shiites had very little power & influence.

ROFLMAO since you know nothing about Shiites and sunnis and their
ONGOING feud------why do you comment?-----the CHANGE in the Iranian approach
to the area came when the IDIOT OF THE CENTURY -----JUMMAH CARTER stuck his tongue up the ass of KHOMEINI---------maybe you are too young to remember
The first muslim I knew WELL-------was a Shiite from India. He DESPISED
HINDUS-----and was not shy about discussing it with shy little youthful me. -------
that was about almost 50 years ago. When I commented "if hindus are so awful why did your family not migrate to Pakistan in 1948" ? The young surgeon
got so DISTRESSED that I thought he would die a cardiac death. I did not know ---way back then that Shiites were being shot in the streets of Pakistan and HE
did not tell me anything about it. It took me a few years to figure out why IRANIANS DESPISE PAKISTANIS--------real palpable hatred whenever they encountered each other ---------VIRULENT stuff

Hey man, wake up. Bush's horrific debacle handed Iraq over to Iran and the Shiites. You wanna be angry at someone, be angry at Bush and his crony assholes. Iran and the Shiites had less power & influence in the region before Bush's idiotic invasion.

Well, the problem with that is all of the stuff you're talking about happened after Obama left Iraq in 2012. Bush had been out of office almost 4 years.

No, Bush's blunder opened the door to Iran and the Shiites seizing the power. They run the show in Iraq now. Before the war, Iran and the Shiites had almost no power & influence in Iraq. Just more Blow Back. The Iraq War should have never hppened.

wrong again----SADDAM and his barbaric practices OPENED THE DOOR TO THE
REALLY ANGRY SHIITE MAJJORITY's TAKE OVER-----Saddam was a glorious
BAATHIST------<<< a fascist ideology which did not have much of a track record---
ANYWHERE

 

[paulitician]

No, they didn't. He was a U.S.-installed Puppet. He was placed into power by way of a U.S.-backed illegal coup. They overthrew the democratically elected Mohammad Mosaddegh. You really do need to brush up on history a bit.

uh huh------I got my Iranian history from Iranians and my sense of what they
felt about DA SHAH----from Iranians. Da coup was enacted by Iranians ---not
a single USA MILITARY BOOT hit the ground that day. What is true was a
very strong appeal to religious fanaticism that developed around
KHOMEINI -----he had a religious following with the declared enemy being----
not just DA JOOOOS but even more DA WEST. Just about all the
Iranians I knew back then---starting in the mid sixties, were either-----
medical school graduates or young jooos whose families were shipping
their kids OUT as the ISLAMIST SENTIMENT GREW. I learned about the islamist thing from muslims who alluded to "FANATICS IN MY COUNTRY" ---
they turned out to be the AYATOILET people that rid the country of the shah and
his BASPHEMOUS WESTERN IDEAS and----of course being a "tool of Zionism"
etc etc etc The PUPPET OF THE USA thing is a KHOMEINI LIBEL.
you are not the only person who swallowed it.

Iran's problems began with the U.S.-backed illegal coup that overthrew Mohammad Mossadegh. He was a democratically elected leader. If we hadn't gotten involved, there wouldn't have been an Islamic Revolution. The Shah was brutal and was truly hated by most Iranians.

how do you know that the shah was HATED? no doubt he was hated by people who got in trouble with SAVAK------but I never met an Iranian in the USA who LEFT
IRAN because of the shah -------or hated him------or did not like him. -------1965 thru 1990 was the time period in which I encountered LOTS OF IRANIANS who were recent migrants. I met lots who hated the AYATOILETS. Is there an entity called
LEGAL COUP. according to the brits----Benjamin Franklin and George Washington were CRIMINALS

They may have supported him, but most Iranians didn't. The Revolution ousted him in about a 2 days. He didn't have enough support there to fight back. Very few came to his defense. He ran for his life and fled the country immediately.

Like i said, we shouldn't have backed the illegal coup that overthrew a democratically elected Mohammad Mosaddegh. The Shah was from a Royal line like the Saudis. He was a Dictator. It was another case of Blow Back. We have to move away from all the meddling around the world.

a discussion of that which took place in Iran in 1979 during a time when Iran was
in GREAT ECONOMIC STRESS and when a religious fervor led by the animal
AYATOILET KHOMEINI was sweeping the land---especially among the MAJORITY---uneducated, does not preclude the POPULARITY OF THE SHAH
in 1941---- after a "reign" as "king" for a full 38 years. Also---keep in mind---
THE SHAH was from a "royal household"-----he did not jump out of the wilderness
with a band of wicked CIA agents and TAKE OVER. Getting back to my sources------IRANIANS------the big issue about which they complained (the few who actually complained and were optimistic about the "revolution" ) regarding
the shah was-----ECONOMIC STRESS AMONGST THEIR COUNTRYMEN---due
to corruption-----a condition which the AYATOILET KHOMEINI WAS SURE TO
CURE ------

If we had left things alone there, we probably wouldn't have seen an Islamic Revolution. Mohammad Mosaddegh was fairly popular. He wasn't a religious radical either. The People supported him for the most part. He was democratically elected.

The Shah came to power by way of an illegal coup. Things went downhill in Iran ever since. We liked the Shah because he was our Dictator Puppet. But we underestmated how much the Iranian People despised him.

 

[paulitician]

The Iraq invasion has created this emerging Sunni/Shiite War. We handed the Shiites and Iran more power and influence in the region. Before the Iraq War, Iran and the Shiites had very little power & influence.

ROFLMAO since you know nothing about Shiites and sunnis and their
ONGOING feud------why do you comment?-----the CHANGE in the Iranian approach
to the area came when the IDIOT OF THE CENTURY -----JUMMAH CARTER stuck his tongue up the ass of KHOMEINI---------maybe you are too young to remember
The first muslim I knew WELL-------was a Shiite from India. He DESPISED
HINDUS-----and was not shy about discussing it with shy little youthful me. -------
that was about almost 50 years ago. When I commented "if hindus are so awful why did your family not migrate to Pakistan in 1948" ? The young surgeon
got so DISTRESSED that I thought he would die a cardiac death. I did not know ---way back then that Shiites were being shot in the streets of Pakistan and HE
did not tell me anything about it. It took me a few years to figure out why IRANIANS DESPISE PAKISTANIS--------real palpable hatred whenever they encountered each other ---------VIRULENT stuff

Hey man, wake up. Bush's horrific debacle handed Iraq over to Iran and the Shiites. You wanna be angry at someone, be angry at Bush and his crony assholes. Iran and the Shiites had less power & influence in the region before Bush's idiotic invasion.

Well, the problem with that is all of the stuff you're talking about happened after Obama left Iraq in 2012. Bush had been out of office almost 4 years.

No, Bush's blunder opened the door to Iran and the Shiites seizing the power. They run the show in Iraq now. Before the war, Iran and the Shiites had almost no power & influence in Iraq. Just more Blow Back. The Iraq War should have never hppened.

wrong again----SADDAM and his barbaric practices OPENED THE DOOR TO THE
REALLY ANGRY SHIITE MAJJORITY's TAKE OVER-----Saddam was a glorious
BAATHIST------<<< a fascist ideology which did not have much of a track record---
ANYWHERE

You hate Iran and the Shiites so much, yet you still defend the buffoon who invaded and handed them all the power. I think you're very confused. Or you're just very stubborn.

 

[Camp]

No nation in the world has anything to compare to our B-1 bomber fleet. They alone would pulverize Iran the first day of warfare. They are currently being upgraded to make them more awesome than they already are.

 

[paulitician]

No nation in the world has anything to compare to our B-1 bomber fleet. They alone would pulverize Iran the first day of warfare. They are currently being upgraded to make them more awesome than they already are.

There is no threat the U.S. military can't deal with. As long as we don't start a war with Iran, i doubt there will be one. Iran fully understands it's own position. It can't possibly win a war with the U.S. So if we play it smart and don't try to invade and occupy Iran, we'll be fine. The only way there will be war with Iran, is if the U.S. starts one.

 

[irosie91]

uh huh------I got my Iranian history from Iranians and my sense of what they
felt about DA SHAH----from Iranians. Da coup was enacted by Iranians ---not
a single USA MILITARY BOOT hit the ground that day. What is true was a
very strong appeal to religious fanaticism that developed around
KHOMEINI -----he had a religious following with the declared enemy being----
not just DA JOOOOS but even more DA WEST. Just about all the
Iranians I knew back then---starting in the mid sixties, were either-----
medical school graduates or young jooos whose families were shipping
their kids OUT as the ISLAMIST SENTIMENT GREW. I learned about the islamist thing from muslims who alluded to "FANATICS IN MY COUNTRY" ---
they turned out to be the AYATOILET people that rid the country of the shah and
his BASPHEMOUS WESTERN IDEAS and----of course being a "tool of Zionism"
etc etc etc The PUPPET OF THE USA thing is a KHOMEINI LIBEL.
you are not the only person who swallowed it.

Iran's problems began with the U.S.-backed illegal coup that overthrew Mohammad Mossadegh. He was a democratically elected leader. If we hadn't gotten involved, there wouldn't have been an Islamic Revolution. The Shah was brutal and was truly hated by most Iranians.

how do you know that the shah was HATED? no doubt he was hated by people who got in trouble with SAVAK------but I never met an Iranian in the USA who LEFT
IRAN because of the shah -------or hated him------or did not like him. -------1965 thru 1990 was the time period in which I encountered LOTS OF IRANIANS who were recent migrants. I met lots who hated the AYATOILETS. Is there an entity called
LEGAL COUP. according to the brits----Benjamin Franklin and George Washington were CRIMINALS

They may have supported him, but most Iranians didn't. The Revolution ousted him in about a 2 days. He didn't have enough support there to fight back. Very few came to his defense. He ran for his life and fled the country immediately.

Like i said, we shouldn't have backed the illegal coup that overthrew a democratically elected Mohammad Mosaddegh. The Shah was from a Royal line like the Saudis. He was a Dictator. It was another case of Blow Back. We have to move away from all the meddling around the world.

a discussion of that which took place in Iran in 1979 during a time when Iran was
in GREAT ECONOMIC STRESS and when a religious fervor led by the animal
AYATOILET KHOMEINI was sweeping the land---especially among the MAJORITY---uneducated, does not preclude the POPULARITY OF THE SHAH
in 1941---- after a "reign" as "king" for a full 38 years. Also---keep in mind---
THE SHAH was from a "royal household"-----he did not jump out of the wilderness
with a band of wicked CIA agents and TAKE OVER. Getting back to my sources------IRANIANS------the big issue about which they complained (the few who actually complained and were optimistic about the "revolution" ) regarding
the shah was-----ECONOMIC STRESS AMONGST THEIR COUNTRYMEN---due
to corruption-----a condition which the AYATOILET KHOMEINI WAS SURE TO
CURE ------

If we had left things alone there, we probably wouldn't have seen an Islamic Revolution. Mohammad Mosaddegh was fairly popular. He wasn't a religious radical either. The People supported him for the most part. He was democratically elected.

The Shah came to power by way of an illegal coup. Things went downhill in Iran ever since. We liked the Shah because he was our Dictator Puppet. But we underestmated how much the Iranian People despised him.

and if adolf had not been born----world war II would not have happened. Your statement is silly----the REAL galavanizing forces that fueled the IRANIAN
CULTURAL REVOLUTION----were ----RELIGION------Khomeini did not do it all
on his own--------the Islamic "religious revival" has been gaining in momentum
for MANY DECADES. It is all mixed up with 'UMMAH PRIDE' ---a kind of
weird nationalism (baathism is actually a nationalistic manifestion of the same
"EMOTION" ) -----and complicated by economic disaster. How do I know???----
the stuff was introduced to me by real Iranians with real minds way back in the
late 1960s------the growing "FANATICISM" -------so I was told by my good friend---
came to the US to get training in his field---"INTERNAL MEDICINE"----a top
student in Teheran---in fact published-------one of his several brothers had fallen under the sway of THE FANATICS (circa 1968)----the other one----the neurologist----was incensed about the corruption and poverty which he KNEW
would "go away" under the ayatoilets (1978) ---------despair and religiosity are
the BIG FORCES in lots of Islamic lands------Pakistan too<<< that's where
sunnis are so distressed that they shoot Shiites in the streets --in "DRIVE-BYS"
IT's virtually a world wide thing---for quite awhile------as you should have noticed

 

[irosie91]

No nation in the world has anything to compare to our B-1 bomber fleet. They alone would pulverize Iran the first day of warfare. They are currently being upgraded to make them more awesome than they already are.

There is no threat the U.S. military can't deal with. As long as we don't start a war with Iran, i doubt there will be one. Iran fully understands it's own position. It can't possibly win a war with the U.S. So if we play it smart and don't try to invade and occupy Iran, we'll be fine. The only way there will be war with Iran, is if the U.S. starts one.

INVADE IRAN? what for?------we are going to have to deal with Iran's growing
INVASIONS of other lands and ambition for control of sea trade routes----
<<<<THAT'S where our military comes into play