Self explanitory. Americans have no protection here if Iraq or China or some other country with big guns try and come here. Bush has them in Iraq.
No Troop Protection.
- Thread starter Kiss Of Death
- Start date
|
REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS |
|
- Status
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2005
- Messages
- 6,465
- Age
- 31
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we more likely to die from a car crash then a terrorist attack?
Yeah. But, If or When they decide to attack us, we won't be ready.
Yeah, I guess. I agree that we shouldn't be in Iraq, but I really don't think that there is any sort of real threat being posed towards us, right now. I could be wrong, though. I guess if the "enemy," is good at what they're doing, I wouldn't know. 
The solution is simple: don't provoke anyone with said big guns.
How could Iraq attack us if we already have our troops there? China has absolutely no reason to attack us, considering that we're one of its biggest trading partners. Russia is in absolutely no position to attack us, considering their economic state.
Stop worrying. This is what diplomacy is for.
Speaking of death likeliness, we're more likely to die from a falling coconut than a shark attack.</Off-topic>
Anyway...do you have any idea of how large the armed forces are? Only a fraction of our troops are in the Middle-East, while others are here at home and Africa(which is strange, since we seem to want nothing to do with that continent).
Not to say that I don't think Iraq occupation is stupid and pointless, though. It most certainly is.
Anyway...do you have any idea of how large the armed forces are? Only a fraction of our troops are in the Middle-East, while others are here at home and Africa(which is strange, since we seem to want nothing to do with that continent).
Not to say that I don't think Iraq occupation is stupid and pointless, though. It most certainly is.
Did you forgot about of stockpile of nuclear weapons?Kiss Of Death said:
Two USS Carriers in the Gulf Stream. Lovely.
China might do something, should we attack Iran.
I do believe they still have their weapons from the Cold War, you know, the ones we neglected to contain. I thought they were making a good deal of money off these weapons.
As if two carriers there is going to scare living crap of China...
Oh? Just what might that something be and why would they do it?
"They make money off of something, therefore their entire economy is heathly."
gb2economicsclass
...Since when did China care about Iran? I must be missing something. You're thinking of North Korea. They're the crazy communists. While the Chinese are the communists that are moving toward capitalism.
My apologies. I put "Gulf" instead of "Persian". Anyhow, our carriers are in Iranian waters. If the Iranians are willing to capture 15 British soldiers (although released), they could just as well attack our carriers.
Iran basically controls the Strait of Hormuz, a major source of oil for both Russia and China. Should the US attack, Iran could easily blockade the strait to impend reinforcements but at the same time stop the export of oil.
As for what China would do, (as well as any other country) they could dump US dollars. They could also send forces (although uncertain of the possibility) considering they do have Russian technology.
Please, continue putting words into my mouth. Just keep assuming that whatever I post is disagreement and comes off completely inane.
There are no communist
North Korea IS a Communist Country, as was China. Now it's mostly considered a "second world" country, a country that is coming out of Communism/Still slightly is. I almost forgot about the oil crisis, as well, we really need to stop depending on it and just switch to E-85. Geez, it's not that hard. Besides, we all know the oil Barons would take over the ethanol industry as soon as it starts, anyway.
Capturing a couple of soldiers is hardly in the same league as attacking US carriers.
Why would Iran do that? Iran gets its money from oil.
What else is anyone supposed to think with that reply?
No, North Korea IS a *would-be* Communist Country. All "Communist" countries were/are in their proletariat state.
How exactly? Both (alleged presence of British soldiers in Iranian water and US carriers) could be considered acts of war by Iran. They would have all rights to attack.
Because they were just attacked by the US? I thought we were discussing why China might retaliate should the US attack Iran.
You mention Russia's inability to attack us because of their economic state. I mention their weapons and money.
America is no longer the unassailable military power that it was thought of after the Cold War. Iran stands to gain a nuclear parity with Israel.
We're fighting in their territory. Our previous encounters in the Persian Gulf weren't exactly a walk in the park. Iran also happens to be the regional 'leader' and still has the support of it's Muslim allies.
Can we afford a third front?
Russia also benefits Iran's export of oil and their weapons are sold to the Middle East. Any further intervention from the US to gain dominance in the area might result in Russia's involvement. If not Russia alone, China and India may join in via their previously announced "Multi-Polar World Order"
Mind you, I brought up the point because Square's last sentence made it seem as if the prospect of war was enough to drive Russia away, even when they were provoked by the US.
Perhaps not drive Russia completely away, but they would certainly be quite discouraged.
Unassailable? No. A state so powerful that it's a bad idea for small states to mess with? Yeah, even with nukes.
Do these supporters still offer the kind of economic support Iran would need for such action?
Does size equal power now? And it's not the small states messing with the the bigger one. The bigger one is provoking the smaller ones. Our troops are split, our people are split, they're focused and organized.
I was suggesting support in terms of military. I do know their current economic states to support Iran with money and the like.
No, but it helps. The important thing is US has more resources, money, and people than -say- Iran. Would you prefer I said "weaker" instead of "smaller?"
Also, wouldn't that direct military support call the attention of US allies?
- Status