Will there be war with Iran?

imperialman

Admiral
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
1,028
Location
Glasgow
I can't help but wonder whether there will be war with Iran soon or not. Headlines like the ones below certainly make me think that there will be;

Iran protesters break into UK embassy in Tehran
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15936213

Report: U.K. preparing for military strike on Iran nuclear facilities
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...ry-strike-on-iran-nuclear-facilities-1.393361

UK military steps up plans for Iran attack amid fresh nuclear fears
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/02/uk-military-iran-attack-nuclear

Iran parliament votes to downgrade relations with UK
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15908525

EDIT: By war I mean any significant military action against Iran. Be it air or cruise missile strikes, armed incursions, a ground war or anything inbetween.

UK calls for further sanctions against Iran
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2011/nov/09/uk-sanctions-against-iran-video

US fears uncoordinated Israeli strike on Iran
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4141689,00.html

Is this just alarmist press nonsense or could there be any truth in theme of these articles? Will the west (at least the US/UK/Israel) be at war with Iran any time soon?
 
If anything Iran should declare war on the west considering all the crimes against Iran that have been committed in the past 100 years. Irainians have a lot of good reasons to hate the british.

I don't really see the value in doing that for Iran, they have no power projection abilities and wouldn't be able to harm Britain directly. Nothing would change really.
 
They could save Iraq and Afghanistan from NATO occupation.

Why not just wait? US forces are basically out of Ira operationally as it is IIRC. Also, NATO forces are leaving Afghanistan in 2015 I believe. I can't tell if you're joking or not. :confused:
 
I don't really see the value in doing that for Iran, they have no power projection abilities and wouldn't be able to harm Britain directly. Nothing would change really.

According to some reports, the Iranian intelligence agencies have significant resources outside of their nation and are able to compel Iranian nationals living aboard to assist these agencies. This opens up significant opportunities by Iran to effect terrorist strikes (or other intelligence goals). That's not the same as launching a nuclear bomb at London, but it is a projection of power nonetheless.
 
I certainly hope so! We can't let those madmen get their hands on nukes. We have enough madmen in the world with nukes already.
 
According to some reports, the Iranian intelligence agencies have significant resources outside of their nation and are able to compel Iranian nationals living aboard to assist these agencies. This opens up significant opportunities by Iran to effect terrorist strikes (or other intelligence goals). That's not the same as launching a nuclear bomb at London, but it is a projection of power nonetheless.

That's a good point, I was thinking more along conventional military lines but you're quite right.
 
Given the constant state of war over the past 60 years, it's pretty much inevitable that the aggression will continue. Iran looks like the most likely target at this point, yeah. It's incredibly tragic.
 
They could save Iraq and Afghanistan from NATO occupation.

No they can't.

If you think Arabs and Pashtuns want to be "saved" by Persians then you're completely clueless about Middle Eastern politics.

So is budget of every NATO country. If you think Iraq and Afghanistan was pricey Iran is going to be several times that much. The USA can't borrow that much money.

Yes they can.
 
No they can't.

If you think Arabs and Pashtuns want to be "saved" by Persians then you're completely clueless about Middle Eastern politics.



Yes they can.

I didn't say occupy them, make the current occupiers lose and then get out.

The European NATO members have finances that are a joke. Europe is on the verge of bankruptcy. Europe doesn't have trillions to spend on yet another war. The USA has the largest budget deficit in the history of budget deficits.
 
I didn't say occupy them, make the current occupiers lose and then get out.

And that requires entering the country doesn't it? The Iranians couldn't handle the forces we still have in the area, even given the decline in troop levels as we prepare to exit the country.

Their society is carefully balanced between competing factions, and the single biggest thing uniting them is the siege mentality against the West. If Iran goes on the offensive all that collapses. By necessity, they can't start a war.

The European NATO members have finances that are a joke. Europe is on the verge of bankruptcy. Europe doesn't have trillions to spend on yet another war. The USA has the largest budget deficit in the history of budget deficits.

This may shock you, but I'm American. I know the state of our budget.
 
And that requires entering the country doesn't it? The Iranians couldn't handle the forces we still have in the area, even given the decline in troop levels as we prepare to exit the country.

Their society is carefully balanced between competing factions, and the single biggest thing uniting them is the siege mentality against the West. If Iran goes on the offensive all that collapses. By necessity, they can't start a war.



This may shock you, but I'm American. I know the state of our budget.
Considering that enemy troops are on their border it is a defensive war. England and the USA owe Iran a lot of compensation for the anglo persian oil company and for installing a dictator.

So where are these hundreds of billions of dollars per year that you plan on spending?
 
Considering that enemy troops are on their border it is a defensive war. England and the USA owe Iran a lot of compensation for the anglo persian oil company and for installing a dictator.

This is not what the word "defensive" means in English.

So where are these hundreds of billions of dollars per year that you plan on spending?

With the rest of the money that Congress "doesn't have," yet will somehow spend anyway. Right where the money to fuel the last war came from. Countries don't work like private bank accounts.
 
This is not what the word "defensive" means in English.



With the rest of the money that Congress "doesn't have," yet will somehow spend anyway. Right where the money to fuel the last war came from. Countries don't work like private bank accounts.

It is a lot more defensive than the wars all around the world that a certain country likes to start.

Money can only come from thin air if you print freely, that is what happened to Germany in the early 20s. Sure you might have Tehran, but it wouldn't take many pesos to buy a pile of dollars.

I am still wondering how congress plans on financing the two previous wars.
 
Back
Top Bottom