Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Its like Iraq lite. More untrained men, less real weapons.
|
It's as if GWBush declared "mission accomplished" and you stopped paying attention. It turns out that Iraq had far fewer functional conventional weapons and troops than our prewar intelligence indicated (and none, zip, zero, 0%, nada of the WMDs we thought they had). And yet we're in a position of facing 50-100 attacks per day on our troops with a steady casaulty rate.
Your statistics fail to address the biggest adversities our country would face in a possible Iran invasion. If only they lined up their tanks and troops and we could line up our weapons across from them and have at. Sorry ustwo, that kind of war hasn't occured in the past 50 years. It's much more important to look at the prevailing sentiment of the people (rabidly anti-American), experience of the troops (Iran has troops that have actually been in battle not just seen them on TV), terrain (Iran is mountainous which would provide ample cover for a resisitance), and distribution of
small arms (I'm not sure about Iran on this, but I would guess it's pretty similar to Iraq--an AK for every person).
If war is such a cakewalk why don't you enlist?