Skip to main content

View Diary: Battle Plan for Iran: The Khuzestan Gambit (90% of Iran's Oil) (246 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  CENSORED COMMENT (4.00)

    but you can't help but wonder if this Administration's leaders had to face their OWN mortality and put their own lives on the line they might seriously reconsider things..... it's too easy for these people to get others killed.
    •  And if you thought Iraq was bad (4.00)
      just WAIT until you see what happens in Iran.....

      Iran is far better prepared and has SUPPORTERS that are NOT going to be happy.....

      We go into Iran and we WILL have a REAL never-ending war that makes Iraq look like a training exercise....  and hint - the training exercise showed pretty clearly that we're in NO shape to handle this.....

      •  Invasion of Iraq=World War III (4.00)
        Possibly Japan and Europe, but almost certainly China, Will NOT stand for a US monopoly on middle eastern Oil.  If we Invade Iran, expect China to give serious military aid to Iran, and threaten missile launches, Treasury Bill dumps, and Export restrictions if necessary.  We'd be threatening China's Lifeblood, along with Europe and Japan.

        We have no desire to offend you -- unless you are a twit!

        by ScrewySquirrel on Thu Feb 23, 2006 at 07:28:33 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Exactly! (none)
          Pearl Harbor was triggered by an oil embargo. We attack Iran and our fingers are placed on China's jugular. China cannot permit that.
        •  Japan is going along with us. (none)
          they are already allied, have long-running disputes with China, and current offshore oil disputes with China.  They are re-militarizing for joint US-Japan operations.  Their public is not keen on it, but neither is ours.  
        •  Screwy, the Chines have no Navy (none)
          or long-range Air Force.  Are they going to have 1 million Red Army soldiers WALK to Iran?

          The Russians and Chinese are jsut making noise.  They are not even rattling sabers because they don't have any sabers to rattle.

          No one can stop Bushco, believe me.

          •  true (none)
            Thgat doesn't stop them from embargoing export goods to the US, selling off Teasury Bills, or launching an ICBM towards our navy in the Arabian Gulf.

            We have no desire to offend you -- unless you are a twit!

            by ScrewySquirrel on Thu Feb 23, 2006 at 08:03:51 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  The Chinese have time on their side... (none)
            ...because of demographics and the tailspin of our foreign policy and economy.  They would not dare challege the US directly at this point.  However, they may take the opportunity to reassert control over Taiwan while the US is busy with Iran.  The Europeans will be with the US if they think the war will be successful.  They opposed the Iraq war not because of dignified moral reighteousness but because they had dealings with Hussein and mostly thought the US was bringing on its own downfall as the sole super-power.  This of course would open up a whole new multipolar world, in which both France and Germany (still) hope to lead the European pole.  If the US successfully took control of such a large portion of oil supplies though, Chirac and co would not want to be left on the sidelines.  If they make the determination that the war will not succeed, they will not join in and wait for the US to continue to weaken itself.  Of course everyone will say they are "trying to stop Iran's nuclear program" or that they are "opposed to unilateral action until inspections have been completed".  Anyway, trying to think of all the factors involved just makes my head spin so I'll stop now.
        •  I think you mean Iran... (none)
          but you are right, I can see a nuke lobbing match between the US and China. I hope cooler minds IMPEACH this crowd before that could ever play out.
          Sad thing is, I know there are some of neo-con mind, that would like nothing more than to see it happen.

          When does 1984 end? [-4.75/-4.21]

          by weelzup on Thu Feb 23, 2006 at 08:13:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Plus, We Can't Afford It (none)
          We've already committed $700 billion to $1 trillion for the Iraq adventure.  We just don't have another trillion dollars to spare right now.
      •  ayupper EOM (none)

        life is not a dress rehearsal

        by johnfire on Thu Feb 23, 2006 at 07:46:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  we ARE in no shape to handle this... (none)
        which is what makes the nuclear option so realistic and frightening. As soon as we use nukes (even "tactical ones"), the Pandora's box is open. And at very least, millions will die.
        •  This is what Scott Ritter said would happen (none)
          Several weeks ago, the California Democratic Party Progressive Caucus had a panel discussion that included Scott Ritter. At the time he said war with Iran was 100% likely unless the Democrats do something. He said Bolton's speech to the UN was already written. And he said that it was likely we'd end up using those bunker busting nukes Bush had developed.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site