Remember the Iraq War?

"I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that."--Donald Rumsfeld, November 14, 2002

Remember the Iraq war?  Well, here are a couple of comparisons for those who are planning our next cakewalk in Iran:

Population:
Iran:  78.47 million
Iraq 2003:  25.96 million

Armed Forces:
Iran:  Army: Frontline and Reserve Personnel:  2,345,000
           Navy: 397 ships
           Air Force: 471 aircraft
Iraq 2003:  Army: 375,000 troops
           Navy: virtually totally destroyed during 1991 Gulf war, and never rebuilt
           Air Force:  Estimated 90 flyable planes

And this time we will be going in with absolutely no allies.  As in the last two wars in the Middle East, Israel will have to stay out, or we will risk a unified Muslim front against us, stretching over a third of the world.

The fools that think we can go halfway around the world and defeat an army that is vastly larger than the one next door that made total idiots of our government- well, of course, they are the same fools that think we can go on ignoring global warming, and somehow the mess will get cleaned up; the same fools that think the free marked fixes everything.  Greed, not reality, is their guiding light, so don't be surprised if they actually find a way to start a war with Iran.  Just don't have any illusions that we will win that war.  It will be a military blunder that will make even the Iraq war look like a minor incident- it will be more like the Austrian invasion of Serbia in 1914, which not only made the Austrians look like one of the most pathetic military powers on earth, but managed to start a world war that killed 20 million people.  And the next world war killed 50 million.  How many do you think we could go for this time?

Comments

ez said…
The right wing loves to bust on Neville Chamberlin and exult Churchill as the Man because he stood against Hitler.

You never hear them using this Churchill quote though "To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war" He made that in his remarks at a White House luncheon, June 26, 1954.

You also never hear them talking about Churchill's support for the creation of the NHS

April 3, 2015 at 9:44 AM
Anonymous said…
lies. Nobody wants to got to war with Iran. But what they need to think is that we would be willing to.
Right now they know they can continue on with no consequences.
All you lefties are concerned with is Barry's pathetic legacy
April 3, 2015 at 9:52 AM
Green Eagle said…
" Nobody wants to got to war with Iran."

What kind of an idiot are you?
April 3, 2015 at 10:32 AM
Green Eagle said…
And ez, my reading of English history indicates that Chamberlain knew perfectly well that the Munich agreement was worthless, but, being a Conservative, he would not agree to a military buildup in England, because it would require raising taxes and thus threaten the Conservative government. So, he just ignored the problem and left it for someone else to deal with. That someone was Churchill, who, whatever his flaws, seems to have been just about the only Conservative willing to spend money on a military buildup. By that time, of course, it was too late to avert World War II, and thus 50 million people paid with their lives for Conservative refusal to raise taxes.
April 3, 2015 at 10:35 AM
ez said…
Agreed.

Although there is another school of thought that postulates Chamberlin's agreement gave Britian the time to begin to build forces.

The main point is much like that of the Generals who prepare for the next war based on the tactics of the last one. The Republicans are worse and view everything through the lens of 1938-1939.
April 3, 2015 at 11:08 AM
Green Eagle said…
ez,

Yes, that's their claim. Do you buy it? Or do you think they are just doing their best to invent, after the fact, some justification for their miserable behavior?
April 3, 2015 at 4:33 PM
ez said…
I think having lost most of a generation of young and not so young men in WWI they were happy to believe what they hoped true.
April 7, 2015 at 4:34 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's Okay, Never Mind

Image
The woman in this picture, equipped with the weapons and ammunition shown, was found outside a National guard base. She is apparently a big Glenn Beck fan, and believed that the base was a FEMA concentration camp. Think she's the only one out there? You just know this sort of thing is not going to end well.
Read more

Wingnuts Slightly Annoyed about that $83 Million

Image
How can you look like a decrepit old geezer and an out of control two year old at the same time? I thought it might be nice to look in on wingnut world to see how they are taking yesterday's $83 million dollar Trump legal loss.  You kind of know that they will decide it shouldn't affect their opinion of him in any way, but it might be helpful to see just how the Republican party has trained them to reject any fact they don't like.  Not that surprisingly, a lot of the usual wingnut suspects didn't touch this loss at all, preferring to just ignore anything that interferes with their hateful daydreams, but here are a few excerpts from an article at Gateway Pundit, along with a sample of the hundreds of comments it received.  Enjoy.  Or not. "Trump attorney Alina Habba WENT OFF after the crooked New York City court slapped President Trump with an $83 million judgment for speaking out against the disgusting lies of a crazed woman who said he lured her into a Bergdorf Go
Read more

If a Tree Falls In the Woods

Image
 And nobody hears it, is it really running for President at all? First of all, a note about my absence lately:  My wife got me to sign up for an account at Threads, which is sort of like X without the assholes.  I've spent a little time establishing myself there, and I have to say, I do like the relatively immediate exchange of views, but I don't mean to give up my blog- there are still so many things that can't be dealt with in a couple hundred words, so, perhaps to your dismay, I am back. So, what motivated the above question is the fact that the Sunday New York Times today had seven articles about Trump, and absolutely zero about Kamala Harris.   The Republicans have a problem with Harris, in that virtually everyone who sees her likes her and immediately understands how qualified she is to be President.  They have tried mightily the last month to find some way to smear her, but have been spectacularly unsuccessful- the tactics of character assassination that worked so we
Read more