William S. Lind - The US and Athen's Syracuse Expedition
- Thread starter devil39
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 838
- Points
- 1,060
Without commenting on accuracy, I think this short sentence deals with the past few years in a tidy, summary fashion: "But apparently just an accusation is enough to justify preemption."
Although the suggested Iranian invasion of Iraq would be suicide, I am in agreement that is a sacrifice the Iranian leadership is quite prepared to ask of its youth. Certainly, the US would be happy to eventually oblige in a non-discriminating manner. But could Iran even pull it off? If Iran "massed" a few armoured divisions, wouldn't that take time, and would there not be the detectable tell tale signs that go with it? Whats the flight time from Missouri to Iran, because it seems to me that is the measure of the window of opportunity to assemble and execute, figuratively and literally.
Although the suggested Iranian invasion of Iraq would be suicide, I am in agreement that is a sacrifice the Iranian leadership is quite prepared to ask of its youth. Certainly, the US would be happy to eventually oblige in a non-discriminating manner. But could Iran even pull it off? If Iran "massed" a few armoured divisions, wouldn't that take time, and would there not be the detectable tell tale signs that go with it? Whats the flight time from Missouri to Iran, because it seems to me that is the measure of the window of opportunity to assemble and execute, figuratively and literally.
devil39
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 39
- Points
- 330
Lind's quote on insurgency is a classic. "My favorite last week was the American general who claimed Falluja had "broken the back" of the insurgency. Insurgencies, like octopi, are invertebrate."
The Iranians have a lot of tricks up their sleeves not deployed just yet. Fomenting Shiite insurection in the south of Iraq would be a start. Greater destabilization of Western Afghanistan would be another. Both have the potential of tying up great numbers of coalition troops.
It is questionable whether the US has the political capital to preemtively strike an Iranian troop movement within the boundaries of Iran.
Iraq has fixed the majority of the US military establishment. Iran has the initiative at this moment I would suggest.
The Iranians have a lot of tricks up their sleeves not deployed just yet. Fomenting Shiite insurection in the south of Iraq would be a start. Greater destabilization of Western Afghanistan would be another. Both have the potential of tying up great numbers of coalition troops.
It is questionable whether the US has the political capital to preemtively strike an Iranian troop movement within the boundaries of Iran.
Iraq has fixed the majority of the US military establishment. Iran has the initiative at this moment I would suggest.
- Reaction score
- 838
- Points
- 1,060
The Afghanistan theory is more likely even without a strike on Iran, since Iran has much too lose to a healthy prosperous A'stan. This worries me since I have a familial interest in seeing everyone come home safe, since they already have enough to deal with. Do you have a link for the 1989 4GW article? Cheers.
- Reaction score
- 33
- Points
- 560
Historical analogies are always suspect (and I am probably the chief suspect), but one thing to remember is Athens invasion of Syracuse was a naked act of aggression against a fellow Democracy (as opposed to an Oligarchy like Sparta and her client states, or an absolute monarchy like the Persian Empire).
Whatever else you might think of the American action in Iraq, they are not there to take tribute or plunder like the Athenians were, and since the motivations are entirely different, I suspect the outcome will be as well.
The Iranian element is very disturbing, and I for one am not qualified to say if the Americans have the strength to take on Iran as well as deal with all the other theaters of WW IV. Conventional analysis would suggest "no", but that sort of thinking also indicated the invasion of Iraq would take seven weeks to complete and require up to 300,000 troops. There could be some real surprises in store for everyone.
Whatever else you might think of the American action in Iraq, they are not there to take tribute or plunder like the Athenians were, and since the motivations are entirely different, I suspect the outcome will be as well.
The Iranian element is very disturbing, and I for one am not qualified to say if the Americans have the strength to take on Iran as well as deal with all the other theaters of WW IV. Conventional analysis would suggest "no", but that sort of thinking also indicated the invasion of Iraq would take seven weeks to complete and require up to 300,000 troops. There could be some real surprises in store for everyone.
Similar threads
