Comments on: CROSSing The Line

By: Bryan

Bryan — Wed, 20 May 2009 02:07:39 +0000

Most of the oil in the Middle East is in majority Shi’ia areas, even in Saudi Arabia. Iran has the weapons and willingness to attack those oil facilities, as well as close the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran was fighting a defensive war against Iraq without allies, so while I don’t think they are up to NATO standards, they will not be the pushover that Iraq was, and frankly, the US military doesn’t currently have the resources to attack the country.

We have been hurt, and hurt badly, by the Iraq War. We have mountains of damaged equipment that hasn’t been repaired, and our ground troops are stretched.

We don’t need trouble anywhere right now.

By: Badtux

Badtux — Wed, 20 May 2009 00:42:59 +0000

The Muslim world is learning a lot about irregular warfare and how to effectively conduct it against high tech militaries. But that's a way different thing from being able to threaten places outside their borders. Irregulars, by definition, can only survive by being able to disappear into the civilian populace when not fighting. I.e., they're great at dealing with invaders of their own country by making it too expensive long-term for the invaders to stay, but no good at invading someone else's country. Iran's tactics during the Iran-Iraq War were Massive Fail that showed little difference from that of Arab armies, and there's no indication that their conventional military thinks any differently today than they did then, when, remember, they had a large supply of US-trained personnel who knew modern tactics and strategy -- and all it resulted in was years of stagnant trench warfare. In short, I'm not convinced that Iranian ways of thinking about fighting are significantly different from Arab ones. Given that the current ruling class in Iran is Turkik in origin (the Safavids were Azerbaijani), that isn't surprising. In any event, invading Iran or bombing Iran would be a horrible idea, but not because Iran would be a danger to the Western world if it happened... rather, because it'd be yet another pit to throw money and men into with no (zero) possible victory conditions, further draining the U.S. towards its eventual economic collapse. Badtux´s last blog post..Has-beens

By: Bryan

Bryan — Tue, 19 May 2009 17:08:50 +0000

I’m not as concerned about the Arabs, as I am about the Persians, Turks, Pathans, etc. who could be pulled into this war, with many trained by the US and UK military.

Even if they don’t attack, if they close supply routes there are a hell of a lot of US troops in deep yogurt. We are having trouble maintaining the land route through Pakistan now, and, after the reign of Rumsfeld, we have major supply problems.

It was a stupid thing to do, and too typical for the amateurs who were in charge for 8 years.

By: Kryten42

Kryten42 — Tue, 19 May 2009 08:27:16 +0000

That might be true but assumes the Iranians are ignorant savages without a clue, which, as Iraq discovered, is a very foolish way to think of them. 🙂

The Iranian military is well versed in modern weapons systems, tactics and strategies thanks originally to the USA and now to China & Russia. So are many other Arab countries.

I laugh every time I hear that Iran has obtained parts for it’s weapons systems (like the F-14’s) via the black market from US and Israeli sources. (Which in fact happens a lot more often than most people think, I know for a fact!) The best thing that happened as far as Iran is concerned is the US war’s with Iraq & Afghanistan, as it has provided much needed parts and ammunition for theor systems. LOL

The other Arab Nations are similar, and if forced to choose sides… I doubt even Saudi Arabia would choose the USA. (Speaking as someone who worked there for over a year). 🙂 The Arab’s only love US money, which the USA is running out of, not the US people. 😉

And as the USA has discovered in Iraq, The *ragheads* have become very good at being covert and the use of IED’s and that the only suicide mission they will now undertake is where they can swap one life for many. And there are a lot more of them! 🙂

By: Badtux

Badtux — Tue, 19 May 2009 06:32:37 +0000

Kryten, the problem with Arabs when it comes to fighting is exactly what you say -- they like fighting and have no problem with dying for their faith. The problem with that attitude was summed up by General George S. Patton when he said, "The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his." The reality is that no Arab army, and for that matter no current Muslim army, is ever going to be capable of taking on a Western army head-to-head within our lifetimes. Not because of equipment -- remember, Israel never had as good of equipment as the Arab armies that it faced until the U.S. started arming Israel after the 1967 war. Rather, it's a matter of ways of thinking, of attitude. It's sort of like when the Syrian soldiers outran their SAM batteries during the 1973 war, and ran straight into Israeli tiger traps and kill zones where combined arms chewed them to shreds. They were too friggin' eager to fight, and it killed them. To effectively threaten the west via military force would require a complete change of thinking on the part of the Islamic world. I see no such change anywhere I look. Badtux´s last blog post..In which the penguin is very rude

By: Kryten42

Kryten42 — Tue, 19 May 2009 05:51:17 +0000

Well, I for one can assure you that if there is a Muslim uprising against Christians over this (or anything else for that matter), then you can call me Boulos (Arabic form of Paul) and I’ll be saying ‘Allah be Praised’ quicker than you can say “Jebus H Ch***t” 😉

I’m not stupid, or stubborn and I am a survivor. I’m sure they could find a use for my skills. 😉

Don’t forget, there are a lot more Islamics/Muslims than Christians, and they have a history of joining forces and temporarily ignoring differences when fighting a common enemy. 😉 Also, they are much better fighters who don’t surrender, and most are trained to fight when they learn to walk.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Tue, 19 May 2009 05:38:22 +0000

The total ignorance of the world on display in those cover sheets is beyond comprehension. They are a gold mine for terrorist recruiters, in some ways superior to the torture photos because they are easier to explain, and they are insulting to even moderate Muslims.

Apparently some analysts in the Pentagon warned them about the impact if they were seen outside, but that didn’t stop Rumsfeld from continuing. Since he hand delivered many of them to the White House, you can’t say he wasn’t aware of what was going on.

By: Kryten42

Kryten42 — Tue, 19 May 2009 05:19:06 +0000

Yes Bryan. It still amazes me totally that even the moronic GOP seem to think there won’t be any backlash from Muslims over the use of torture, not to mention justification for every other group with an axe to grind against the USA. It really maters not a single iota to any of them whether the USA want to call it torture or not, or wants to justify it. They know the truth, it’s only the ignorant American’s who don’t have a clue and don’t want to know. I know there are many exceptions within the USA, but you wouldn’t know it from the media.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Mon, 18 May 2009 20:08:55 +0000

I see people claiming that it isn’t bad because only a few people saw them.

The problem is that the few people were the ones who made all of the decisions, and the Islamist propaganda machine are going to be hammering home the point that this was the real attitude of the people in power.

By: JimD

JimD — Mon, 18 May 2009 17:34:55 +0000

Isn’t this something? What simpletons.