Should the US attack Iran?

[Sunstone]

Should the US attack Iran? Why or why not?


The "Bomb Iran!" debate from hell - Iran - Salon.com

The Point of No Return - Magazine - The Atlantic

 

[England my lionheart]

Yes but it should have done it 7 years ago whilst the wheels were rolling

 

[xkatz]

No. There is no real good reason to attack Iran.

 

[LuisDantas]

Of course not. Haven't we given the Middle East enough reason to hate the USA already?

Now, encouraging opposition, opposing it diplomatically, and other measures are completely justifiable. But really, what is the point of any military initiatives?

 

[England my lionheart]

There will come a point when it becomes inevitable unless the people of Iran can depose the current regime and council of experts

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Absolutely not.

 

[sandandfoam]

"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away

All empires come to an end and I fear the USA is warring itself out of existance.
Should the US attack Iran? No. War is never the answer.
Will it? Maybe. Obama seems more of a warmonger than even Bush. Another war would be the end of the US as we know it.

 

[England my lionheart]

I think it may come to a point that Israel will have to do something,after all they have most to fear from Iran

 

[xkatz]

.Will it? Maybe. Obama seems more of a warmonger than even Bush.

I don't think Obama is a warmonger. Rather, I think he is doing what he is doing b/c he feels if he pulls out of Afghanistan and Iraq, they will have essentially wasted time, money, and manpower.

 

[xkatz]

I think it may come to a point that Israel will have to do something,after all they have most to fear from Iran

Iraq also has a lot to fear about Iran, but they are in no shape to do anything about them.

 

[England my lionheart]

Iraq also has a lot to fear about Iran, but they are in no shape to do anything about them.

True,this is why it should all have been dealt with 7 years ago

 

[Revoltingest]

Should the US attack Iran? Why or why not?

No. Because it would be evil, stupid, costly, deadly, wasteful, inflammatory, dangerous, thuggish, boneheaded, painful, destructive, destabilizing, radioactive....
..& cuz it would make too many posters here happy.

 

[xkatz]

True,this is why it should all have been dealt with 7 years ago

Why? What would be the point of fighting Iran? What would there be to gain?

 

[England my lionheart]

Why? What would be the point of fighting Iran? What would there be to gain?

From a Miltary point of view it would have made sound sense,7 years ago Iran were not close enough to Nuclear weaponry to cause much harm unlike now where the threat to Israel becomes more real,i guess the gain would be the prevention of a Nuclear confrontation.

 

[LuisDantas]

Preventing a nuclear confrontation at such a price is probably not worth it. At this point military solutions are a contradiction in terms.

 

[England my lionheart]

Preventing a nuclear confrontation at such a price is probably not worth it. At this point military solutions are a contradiction in terms.

So WW2 was'nt solved by military conlflict? sometimes its the only solution as unfortunate as that may be.

 

[xkatz]

From a Miltary point of view it would have made sound sense,7 years ago Iran were not close enough to Nuclear weaponry to cause much harm unlike now where the threat to Israel becomes more real,i guess the gain would be the prevention of a Nuclear confrontation.

So in other words, a preemptive strike?

 

[LuisDantas]

So WW2 was'nt solved by military conlflict? sometimes its the only solution as unfortunate as that may be.

WW2 was the last hurrah of the delusion that military solutions were legitimate. It began under that assumption, and by the time it was ended people realized what a cruel joke the whole idea was.

But that is besides the point. Invading Iran might well avoid a nuclear threat from Iran. But it would be moot, because such an act would further ignite the ill will from so many people, and involve the US in yet another useless and unsustainable conflict. Trying the patience of those who want to believe that a nation that mongers war is not a warmongering nation is quite self-defeating.

 

[England my lionheart]

So in other words, a preemptive strike?

Yes but conventional, and from a military POV would make sense,this has different connotations than say China having Nuclear weapons where its a political difference,the Iran capability has some solemn promises to obliterate Israel and an interpretation of a prophecy to back it up.

 

[YmirGF]

Should the US attack Iran? Why or why not?

Hasn't America done quite enough meddling already? I'm not saying that someone should not take action, but it shouldn't be America. I would not be against Nato taking the Chihuahua by the horns, as it were. Surgical strikes only with minimal causalities. In my view, a group of thugs is better than a rogue going it alone. The thing is, the Iranian people don't want their current government any more than we do, but are unable to do anything serious about it. It would have to be made clear that this is not against the Iranian people, but rather, against their current government.