[ClearCase_guy]

We were told that Iraq had a very strong military. But they wilted under US firepower.

Iran, however, really does seem to be a more serious challenge. It’s a big country, they have a good military and they have foreign friends.

I suspect that fighting Iran in a “limited” way would not work well for us. But one of these days we will get back to waging war by obliterating entire cities. That tends to finish things off more decisively. Ask Germany and Japan.

[cuban leaf]

I suspect that fighting Iran in a “limited” way would not work well for us. But one of these days we will get back to waging war by obliterating entire cities. That tends to finish things off more decisively. Ask Germany and Japan.

---

That’s kinda how I see it as well. I suspect Trump does too.

[MSF BU]

I suspect that knocking our their only oil refinery, their power plants, power distribution and hydro facilities then walking away would save many American lives. Let the Gulf States fight them.

[Leaning Right]

> But one of these days we will get back to waging war by obliterating entire cities. <

If not now, that will soon be a two-way street. I wouldn’t expect Iran to have the ability to fire an ICBM at the states for decades. But a dirty bomb on a tramp steamer?

The Iranian leadership would be foolish to challenge the U.S. But they would also be foolish not to be developing some sort of minimal “mutual assured destruction” capability.

I was reading an article about that awhile ago. Bush’s invasion of Iraq taught both Iran and North Korea an important - an unintended - lesson. If you don’t want the U.S. to come in and knock you off, you better have some sort of MAD capacity.

[Mark17]

I was stationed at a pilot training base, in the 70s. We had foreign student pilots, including Iranian student pilots. Almost to a man, these dudes couldn’t fly airplanes to save their rear ends.
I don’t know if they have made any progress, but at least at that time, the USAF, USN and USMC pilots, would have massacred them.