Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Putting a price tag on war with Iran


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#31 key2thecup

key2thecup

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,633 posts
  • Joined: 28-November 07

Posted 22 November 2012 - 12:26 PM

You never saw the thousands and thousands of Iraqi army waving white flags in 1991 and 2003 it took 21 days to roll on Bahgdad in 03 and just a month or so for Iraq army to be destroyed in 91 with a kill ratio of about a thousand to 1.. Afghan does'nt have an army they have an insurgency and hide behind women and children.


Oh yes that's why the Iraq war lasted from 2003-2011, and that's why the Afghan war has become the longest war in Canadian military history.

Its one thing to bomb military infrastructure, its another to 'take-over' a entire country.
  • 0

Dr. Ron Paul 2016!

 


#32 Dittohead

Dittohead

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,166 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 04

Posted 22 November 2012 - 01:04 PM

Oh yes that's why the Iraq war lasted from 2003-2011, and that's why the Afghan war has become the longest war in Canadian military history.

Its one thing to bomb military infrastructure, its another to 'take-over' a entire country.


So what's your point? that's what I'm saying. I'm not talking about invading and taking over their country. That's another story and no one is interested in that mess again but most of the violence after Saddam was toppled was muslims settling scores with other muslims with the USA in the middle trying to play cop..anyway Iraq is free job done.
  • 0

#33 key2thecup

key2thecup

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,633 posts
  • Joined: 28-November 07

Posted 22 November 2012 - 03:48 PM

So what's your point? that's what I'm saying. I'm not talking about invading and taking over their country. That's another story and no one is interested in that mess again but most of the violence after Saddam was toppled was muslims settling scores with other muslims with the USA in the middle trying to play cop..anyway Iraq is free job done.


I beg to differ, there is a lot of interest in launching another war. Obviously most citizens of America don't want another war, but since when do they ever make that type of decision.


Free of what? If your eluding to Saddam then yes they are free of Saddam. But Iraq is hardly a free country just yet..


And there will be no air-strikes in Iran, unless there is a full-scale ground invasion following it.

Edited by key2thecup, 22 November 2012 - 03:49 PM.

  • 0

Dr. Ron Paul 2016!

 


#34 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 23 November 2012 - 12:22 AM

The kind of nuke Iran would have would be a small crude one. Even if they were still able to get it into Tel Aviv (the best target), it would have the kind of casualties that the bombing of Hiroshima had (around 100k after you include the effects of radiation and fire). Meanwhile, Israel most likely has an arsenal of advanced Thermonuclear-type devices that can be launched from ICBMs. Estimates put Israel's arsenal in the 200 range.

Regardless of Israel's small size, Iran does not want to get into a nuclear exchange with Israel.


Iran hasn't attacked a country in a long time. In fact I can't remember when they attacked any country (Iran-Iraq war notwithstanding as Iran was defending).
  • 0

Posted Image


#35 MoneypuckOverlord

MoneypuckOverlord

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,932 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 09

Posted 23 November 2012 - 12:34 AM

It will cost many American lives. It will be the new Vietnam. USA will not win. USA can cripple their air force and thats about it. Vietnam had no air force and even USA coudln't defeat them. I don't think Iran will be defeated. Their army is around half a million, but their reserves is at 2 million. On top of that, one of every 6 people in Iran is a Paramilatery. So lets say they are like the "rebels" in Syria. So there is 10 million rebel fights in Syria defending their country, along side 2.5 million trained soldiers. U.S army with it's reserves is only a little over 3 million. Also we don't know if Russia will help. I the U.S decieds to invade Iran, it would be the biggest milatery mistake in American history.
  • 0
November 20th 2013, Canucks just lost their 5th straight game. Last time this happened the Canucks, they missed the playoffs.

#36 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,310 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 08

Posted 23 November 2012 - 02:18 AM

Oh yes that's why the Iraq war lasted from 2003-2011, and that's why the Afghan war has become the longest war in Canadian military history.

Its one thing to bomb military infrastructure, its another to 'take-over' a entire country.


Actually its not that hard.

What is hard is invading and staying and trying to build a country

US would roll Iran so fast if it came to a take no prisoners approach.

Also the idea that Iran is some homogenous society is laughable.

US cripples the security apparatus and everyones out to get theirs.
  • 0
Sent from my iPhone Canucks App

View Postnhlconspiracy, on 21 April 2011 - 02:05 PM, said:

It is not my intent to get in circular arguments with anybody. The reason i have avoided saying anything specific is because i know you or someone else will attempt to find an alternate explanation to my points which i intern will have to defend. I see no point in getting involved with the circular argument that is already well under way in this thread. I simply intended to voice my opinion on the subject. In the end either you accept the possibility of corruption and conspiracy or you don't.

Also i find your comments to be very childish. Does taking what i say out of context, paraphrasing and misquoting it make you feel good about yourself? Grow up.

Logic at its finest.

#37 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,310 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 08

Posted 23 November 2012 - 02:22 AM

Iran hasn't attacked a country in a long time. In fact I can't remember when they attacked any country (Iran-Iraq war notwithstanding as Iran was defending).


Abu Musa.
  • 0
Sent from my iPhone Canucks App

View Postnhlconspiracy, on 21 April 2011 - 02:05 PM, said:

It is not my intent to get in circular arguments with anybody. The reason i have avoided saying anything specific is because i know you or someone else will attempt to find an alternate explanation to my points which i intern will have to defend. I see no point in getting involved with the circular argument that is already well under way in this thread. I simply intended to voice my opinion on the subject. In the end either you accept the possibility of corruption and conspiracy or you don't.

Also i find your comments to be very childish. Does taking what i say out of context, paraphrasing and misquoting it make you feel good about yourself? Grow up.

Logic at its finest.

#38 key2thecup

key2thecup

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,633 posts
  • Joined: 28-November 07

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:43 PM

Actually its not that hard.

What is hard is invading and staying and trying to build a country

US would roll Iran so fast if it came to a take no prisoners approach.

Also the idea that Iran is some homogenous society is laughable.

US cripples the security apparatus and everyones out to get theirs.


I never said it would be "hard" for the US to send bombers and fighter jets on runs in Iran, decimate the infrastructure via the air and support via sea.

What will be "hard" is winning over the Iranian people..... "Oh don't mind those cruise missiles that killed some of your family, were here to give you freedom!"

Majority of the population would unite around the Mullah's to fight off the "invaders"
  • 0

Dr. Ron Paul 2016!

 


#39 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 24 November 2012 - 01:05 AM

Abu Musa.


Abu Musa isn't a country and its part of Iran. When has Iran attacked a country without being provoked is my question.
  • 0

Posted Image


#40 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,310 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 08

Posted 24 November 2012 - 02:31 AM

Abu Musa isn't a country and its part of Iran. When has Iran attacked a country without being provoked is my question.


Yes now it is part if iran.
  • 0
Sent from my iPhone Canucks App

View Postnhlconspiracy, on 21 April 2011 - 02:05 PM, said:

It is not my intent to get in circular arguments with anybody. The reason i have avoided saying anything specific is because i know you or someone else will attempt to find an alternate explanation to my points which i intern will have to defend. I see no point in getting involved with the circular argument that is already well under way in this thread. I simply intended to voice my opinion on the subject. In the end either you accept the possibility of corruption and conspiracy or you don't.

Also i find your comments to be very childish. Does taking what i say out of context, paraphrasing and misquoting it make you feel good about yourself? Grow up.

Logic at its finest.

#41 aeromotacanucks

aeromotacanucks

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 858 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 24 November 2012 - 06:27 AM

It will cost many American lives.  It will be the new Vietnam.  USA will not win.  USA can cripple their air force and thats about it.  Vietnam had no air force and even USA coudln't defeat them.  I don't think Iran will be defeated.  Their army is around half a million, but their reserves is at 2 million.  On top of that, one of every 6 people in Iran is a Paramilatery.  So lets say they are like the "rebels" in Syria.  So there is 10 million rebel fights in Syria defending their country, along side 2.5 million trained soldiers.  U.S army with it's reserves is only a little over 3 million.  Also we don't know if Russia will help.  I the U.S decieds to invade Iran, it would be the biggest milatery mistake in American history.


1) Vietnam has an airforce. composed by MIGs, obviously supported by Soviet Union...</p>2) Guerrilla fighting style with "fight in the jungle" tecnic, USA isn´t used with this...</p>3) biggest question. what USA will do IF RUSSIA DECIDES HELP IRAN?2)
  • 0
Shup up and fly! you´re not payed to think, you´re payed to fly!

#42 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,518 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 24 November 2012 - 01:39 PM

America would need to sustain another 9/11 in order to justify a full-out invasion. Not sure what would be targeted though. The WTC was perfect last time. Maybe the white house and the pentagon again? Or maybe a suitcase dirty nuke in a major US city? That would give the US a go-ahead for anything they'd want to do in the mid-east.

I'd prefer a diplomatic resolution myself. The 'swatting the hornets nest' approach hasn't led to much success so far.

All might be moot for now as the Republicans failed to secure the election.
  • 0
Posted Image

#43 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 24 November 2012 - 02:56 PM

America would need to sustain another 9/11 in order to justify a full-out invasion. Not sure what would be targeted though. The WTC was perfect last time. Maybe the white house and the pentagon again? Or maybe a suitcase dirty nuke in a major US city? That would give the US a go-ahead for anything they'd want to do in the mid-east.

I'd prefer a diplomatic resolution myself. The 'swatting the hornets nest' approach hasn't led to much success so far.

All might be moot for now as the Republicans failed to secure the election.


I would say sanctions is more effective than war. With sanctions, Iranians will turn against their own government and it might lead to a revolution. War will only cause chaos and unite the Iranian government with the Iranian population to fight against the invaders. Right now, a lot of Iranians hate the government because of the inflation and how expensive it is to live there. The lack of jobs and the bad economy is really hurting them and the sanctions is working effectively.
  • 0

Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.