Sept. 22, 2011: Members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard march during a parade to commemorate the anniversary of the Iran-Iraq war (1980-88) in Tehran.Reuters
Zachary Keck, National Interest: Exposed: Iran's Super Strategy to Crush America in a War
Iran would be able to impose prohibitive costs on the U.S. military, even before the occupation began.
Since assuming office in 2009, President Barack Obama has consistently held that the United States would carry out airstrikes to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. This position is supported by the vast majority of U.S. policy makers, lawmakers and the political elite, regardless of political affiliation.
Nonetheless, it is also generally agreed that airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities would only have a limited impact on preventing Iran from acquiring the bomb. To be sure, a concerted airstrike effort against Iran would delay its ability to build a nuclear arsenal by several years. Nonetheless, Iran would be able to rebuild its nuclear facilities before long, especially given the windfall in economic relief it would undoubtedly receive once the sanctions regime against it unraveled in response to America’s military action.
WNU Editor: If it was a war of choice .... like what Iraq was .... I doubt that there would be any U.S. political or public support for such a campaign. The costs would be enormous, and the occupation would be a nightmare. If it was a war caused by Iranian actions (i.e. attacking Saudi oil fields and sinking all oil tankers in the Persian Gulf/nuclear weapons used against Israel or an ally/etc.) .... a different story .... but it will be a very costly campaign in both blood and treasure, and the occupation would entail hundreds of thousands of US troops that would probably stay there for a few decades.
Posts
