General Discussion

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)

2. Depends what the objectives are

Wed Jan 11, 2012, 04:06 AM

Jan 2012

It would be possible to do limited strikes and bury their nuclear program. Decapitation strikes would be a good idea first. We could not bomb them into capitulation, but back a century or two is well within the possible.

The real issue is that it would cripple their oil exports and really piss off China, who counts on it. Then there is the muslim reaction.

Yes we could really hurt them, but no, we won't do it unless a lot of other nations join in.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

No Way Can US Win A Non-Nuclear War With Iran [View all] SixthSense Jan 2012 OP

an iran war is designed to sell lots of weapons and give $$ to war profiteers nt msongs Jan 2012 #1

Depends what the objectives are ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2012 #2

if "win" is defined as gaining more than you lose SixthSense Jan 2012 #3

Goes back to your objectives ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2012 #4

Keeping open the Straits of Hormuz is the most important thing... damyank913 Jan 2012 #7

Here's a better option... Moostache Jan 2012 #5

Mullen was not implying a nuclear attack on Iran. DCBob Jan 2012 #6

Sure we can...it will be a cakewalk, as someone once said deutsey Jan 2012 #8

Of coure it's true. Of course (as you point out) there is no "winning" JackRiddler Jan 2012 #9

From the folks who predict the end of the world, 12/21/12 ... pinto Jan 2012 #10

Considering the source, I'm going to lock this as "Creative Speculation". gkhouston Jan 2012 #11