Neoconservative 'hopes, prays' Bush will bomb Iran

[Errigal]

Neoconservative 'hopes, prays' Bush will bomb Iran

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, prominent neoconservative Norman Podhoretz writes that he 'hopes' and 'prays' that President Bush will bomb Iran.
"Although many persist in denying it, I continue to believe that what Sept 11, 2001, did was to plunge us headlong into nothing less than another world war," writes the editor-at-large of Commentary, who also sits on the Council on Foreign Relations. "I call this new war World War IV, because I also believe that what is generally known as the Cold War was actually World War III, and that this one bears a closer resemblance to that great conflict than it does to World War II."
Podhoretz believes that "the plain and brutal truth is that if Iran is to be prevented from developing a nuclear arsenal, there is no alternative to the actual use of military force--any more than there was an alternative to force if Hitler was to be stopped in 1938."
"Since a ground invasion of Iran must be ruled out for many different reasons, the job would have to be done, if it is to be done at all, by a campaign of air strikes," the op-ed continues. "Furthermore, because Iran's nuclear facilities are dispersed, and because some of them are underground, many sorties and bunker-busting munitions would be required. And because such a campaign is beyond the capabilities of Israel, and the will, let alone the courage, of any of our other allies, it could be carried out only by the United States. Even then, we would probably be unable to get at all the underground facilities, which means that, if Iran were still intent on going nuclear, it would not have to start over again from scratch. But a bombing campaign would without question set back its nuclear program for years to come, and might even lead to the overthrow of the mullahs."
Podhoretz thinks that Bush "intends, within the next 21 months, to order air strikes against the Iranian nuclear facilities from the three U.S. aircraft carriers already sitting nearby....If this is what Mr. Bush intends to do, it goes, or should go, without saying that his overriding purpose is to ensure the security of this country in accordance with the vow he took upon becoming president, and in line with his pledge not to stand by while one of the world's most dangerous regimes threatens us with one of the world's most dangerous weapons."
"It now remains to be seen whether this president, battered more mercilessly and with less justification than any other in living memory, and weakened politically by the enemies of his policy in the Middle East in general and Iraq in particular, will find it possible to take the only action that can stop Iran from following through on its evil intentions both toward us and toward Israel," Podhorez writes in conclusion. "As an American and as a Jew, I pray with all my heart that he will."
Podhoretz has a book set for release on September 11 entitled World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism.


FULL WSJ OP-ED CAN BE READ AT THIS LINK

source

[Monolith]

"Since a ground invasion of Iran must be ruled out for many different reasons, the job would have to be done, if it is to be done at all, by a campaign of air strikes," the op-ed continues. "Furthermore, because Iran's nuclear facilities are dispersed, and because some of them are underground, many sorties and bunker-busting munitions would be required. And because such a campaign is beyond the capabilities of Israel, and the will, let alone the courage, of any of our other allies, it could be carried out only by the United States. Even then, we would probably be unable to get at all the underground facilities, which means that, if Iran were still intent on going nuclear, it would not have to start over again from scratch. But a bombing campaign would without question set back its nuclear program for years to come, and might even lead to the overthrow of the mullahs."

I think that the Americans will suffer great casualties and even catastrophic defeat if they launch their ground invasion.
We all know what happened in Iraq. Americans performed a swift and decisive strike and they soon destroyed Iraq's army.
But I think it's necessary to mention that Iran counts over 70 mil. of people, while Iraq has about 20.
Another thing, Iran has a massive and pretty powerful army that can match every European force.
And most of all, the Iranians hate Americans, so that gives them extra motive when/if fighting them.

[Lucas Corso]

Mmmmmh i don't know how much -really- powerful is the Iranian Army...
Surely the mountain terrain will help a lot to defeat a very (in my opinion) unlikely ground invasion...
I belive more in air strikes to to try disrupt the government, however they've brought from russian a very good air defense system Tor-1...
However the major treat that can be used by the Iranians is the blockade of the Ormuz Strait using simple means lke mines or sinking one or two ships in the less deep area, with the strait blocked the oil price will skyrocket to 120$ barrel...

[Herceg-Bosna]

Maybe Iran doesnt have powerful army but Iran have 80 000 000 muslim fanatics who will defend the "holly" land

[Lucas Corso]

Originally Posted by KING

Maybe Iran doesnt have powerful army but Iran have 80 000 000 muslim fanatics who will defend the "holly" land

I think they'll defende mainly their land...