Ok I really dont want to get into another "my nations better than yours" argument but quite frankly those who think that you can bomb a country into oblivion are just plan silly.
I would suggest you look at the logistical issues, the financial issues and the political issues when suggesting a war without an end game because then I think you will find you have greatly over estimated your capacity to wage such a war.

Originally Posted by MontyB

Ok I really dont want to get into another "my nations better than yours" argument but quite frankly those who think that you can bomb a country into oblivion are just plan silly.
I would suggest you look at the logistical issues, the financial issues and the political issues when suggesting a war without an end game because then I think you will find you have greatly over estimated your capacity to wage such a war.

This part I don't think is the my country better... blah blah blah part. I think it is a very sensible option. I happen to believe that America's best asset is its airpower. It is very true that such a war would be costly, but Americans don't really give a about the $$$ in a war they think they should be fighting, they care much more about the bodycount. Everytime someone throws out "well Iraq has cost so much!" it never gets them anywhere. When you hear these anti-war demonstrations they talk about the 1900 dead. Americans LOVE an air war because they get to see pretty footage on CNN and feel like it isn't real killing, air wars are popular.

And you say it is silly? Have you heard of a little war we fought in Yougoslavia? We won it entirely from the air and, correct me if I am wrong, but I believe America is the only country that has won a war entirely from the air.

Logistics are easy, flanked by two countries that America owns many HUGE bases in. Not to mention the very aptly placed ocean where lots of carriers can just sit.

And it isn't a war without end. You can bomb them to hell until only targets of oprotunity are left. Send sorties out 24/7 just to patrol and hit what they think would make for a good use of ordanaince at that point. And you can have spec. ops. forces roving accross the country doing their thing. And just to be sneaky, you can aid pro-american resistaince groups to grow discord within the country without endangering American troops.

You try to build a nuke when your country is in the stone age and you've got rebels fighting an insurection and Army Rangers hunting your ass down!

You seem to be under the impression that Iran is some 10 square mile back water island that you can fly over whenever you feel like and drop a bomb on while they sit around polishing their camels and cursing the shiny things in the sky.

The fact is Iran is huge and it will be shooting back and oddly enough they border several countries themselve and many of those will happily supply them with arms so without putting people on the ground you are going to lose aircraft in increasing numbers and as the "strategic" targets dry up you will be losing those aircraft for little to no gain.

Then what happens if Iran doesnt give in?

Please remember Yugoslavia/Iraq were small countries surrounded by nations who were not overly friendly Iran is not in the same boat they would be a much tougher nut to crack and given that the Iraq war is losing popularity how much home support do you think there will be for a much tougher opponent with even less justification than Iraq?
Even politicians have to get voted in.

I think you make many valid points, especially about polishing camels

However, I think that such a strategy would indeed be effective against Iraq. They need not even give in so much as suffer and be unable to create nukes.

The strategic objective here is not that the Iranian government succumbs, but rather that they are unable to threaten America's strategic objectives through nuclear force of arms.

On politics I think it would be a dicey proposition for Bush, he could concievably pull it off but it would require far more tact than the Iraq invasion. In 3 years in a hypothetical Giuliani Presidency, however, I think this option would could be very politically expediant.

whay don't we just give lots of money and support to the Iranian anti-mullah freedom fighters, I don't know why anybody hasn't thought of this yet. Unless they did, and the are doing it, or it isn't feesable.

That is not happening right now, unfortunately.
If the US does it, then there is no need to invade Iran. People of Iran who are unhappy with this terrorist regime will take care of the issue without any further bloodshed.

Originally Posted by phoenix_aim54

That is not happening right now, unfortunately.
If the US does it, then there is no need to invade Iran. People of Iran who are unhappy with this terrorist regime will take care of the issue without any further bloodshed.

...well we thought the same thing would happen in Iraq...

I sincerly hope that this clash of civilizations takes place soon. Let the long term goal of every Islamic radicial take shape and show their true faces. I am sorry for all Europe etc etc, unfortunatly there are more Islamic radicals out there then there are battle ready Europeans. But they will have to force themselves into a mode of survival if they want to save anything of what they have built up. This clash of civilizations have just been a question of IF. Today I would like to say it is rather a question of when this will finaly break loose. And hell on earth will have a new meaning I can promiss that much. However, whatever any leftist faschist may think about George W Bush taking the U.S into a third war, can just role over in bed and put the pillow back over their heads again.

You see, Georgi boys hands are allready tied up behind that seat. This last term is as they say, His last term. What worries me though is that it will be very hard, if not impossible to find another president that will actually lift a finger to do something about this war when it finaly breaks loose. I think we will have another U.S isolated policy to look forward to and with the U.N still in power and all friendly Iranian extremists around in the E.U you will soon find out how a real nazi empire will take form and bring an end to the civilization that we know of.

There will be nothing new on the front that will effect people on a grander scale more then some natural disasters before this clash has finaly been introduced and engaged. I will personaly thank all these peaceful people around the globe when the storm hits the fan, and I will remember them as they want to be rememberd. A bunch of people, that just didnt get it. After all, Islam means subjection. And we all want peace dont we? Convert or die..... That is something I think a couple of million people will dream about for many generations to come.

Peace:
Doc.S

Originally Posted by Whispering Death

...well we thought the same thing would happen in Iraq...

My friend, Iran & Iraq are 2 different countries with different cultures, languages and heritage.

I wouldn't put them in one basket!

Please watch this clips:
Part1
Part2
Part3
I'm waiting for your ideas.

It is excellent propaganda.

The idea of fast small attack boats is a concept that Italy and Germany also tested during WWII. They were no match against warships then.
Against the Countermeasures that modern warships are equipped with today, they make no substantial threat.