Should the US and it's allies go to war with Iran?
147997
This is actually to rebuke what v_aaragorn  has said. He is looking for sources on the questioners question. I have a few listed here. These all document the threat that Iran is to the US and to the free world\nhttp://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=1705\nhttp://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2005/10/29/irans_threat/\nhttp://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2004/august/shamkhami_threats_19804.shtml\n\nHere is a link detailing some of the illegal tactics of the Iranian Gov. against it's people who are not Muslim.\nhttp://www.sullivan-county.com/id3/bahai_educators.htm\n\nAlso from reading the comments from the poster it is very obvious that this person is not Iranian or in Iran at this time. I actually have a gentlemen sitting next to me who is a political refugee in this country from Iran because he is not Muslim, he is Bahi. He and his escaped Iran so that they wouldn't be arrested/beaten for there religious beliefs.
563523
First of all the US has never threatened war with Iran.\n\nWe have never threatened military action.\n\nAll of the 'threats' are being made by people who do not speak for the US government.  The truth of the matter is that every nation wants the US to resolve the Iran problem militarily - but does not want to be seen as supporting that action.\n\nSad that you did not catch this.
117807
No, Israel would probably do so first. If we did attach Iran, we would only use missiles to disarm their nuclear plants. I do not see a full out war with Iran, we are have to many other problems for our troops already
470312
I don't think USA can afford another war. Iran has a pretty good military force, but US can defeat them. Just that it's going to cost lots of money and many soldiers will die. So I do not agree we should wage war on Iran now. We still facing problems in Iraq and new problems are now arising in Afghanistan. \n\nI think US should focus on helping the refugees in Darfur Region in Sudan. There's evidence of genocide over there and its time to stop the killing.
345177
The us is already at war with iraq and terrorism mainly. if we were to go to war with iran our problem would be multiplied by a catastrophic amount possibly leading to world war three.\n\nI also disagree with the person right before me it is a problem to every one . iran will want to use those weopons on the first person that pisses them off they are a ticking time bomb.
595556
The outcomes of such war would be pretty unsure, provided the US don't use chemical or nuclear weapons. The reason being that Iranians can be less equipped than the US but they are millions (millions of people in the Army i mean + those who would take a weapon should the US attack, exactly as it is happening in Iraq). \nDespite what many Americans or other people may think, Iranians are not stupid nor very much afraid of Americans. I think a war against Iran would end up exactly as the war in Iraq. Thay may fix Ahmadinejad but not all the clones coming out of there, turning the war into a permanent guerrilla, which in turn would cause a Vietnam-like situation. \nIt's what is happening in Afghanistan; it's what's happening in Iraq (And the US don't seem to envisage any tactics change) and it will also happen with Iran and Syria (Where Bush is planning to go immediately after Iran, as soon as he gets another valid excuse to gain some more oil fields). \nAnother point is: Are you all sure that EVEN IF, should the US win a war against Iran, causing millions of victims, that would be a victory in economic and diplomatic terms. No because what many out there didn't get yet is that in the world there are other countries too apart from the US and that means that certain actions are subject to the approvals of others too, at least because if you start a war next to my home country, i may have to handle refugees, terrorists etc. \nIn short, i think the outcomes of a war between US and Iran are very very far from seeing the Americans 100% winners. As a matter of fact they are not winning in Afghanistan nor in Iraq at the moment (It's a fact!).\n\nAnd mind me, all the above doesn't come from an antiamerican integralistic muslim, but rather from a Pro-America italian who has simply realized that the US are going a little bit too far in their so called "DEMOCRATIZATION" of middle east. And for those who may find my statements insulting, i'd suggest you all to wonder why the US didn't invade Saudi Arabia yet, since they are the root of the problem in that area...Will it be because Saudi Arabia produces 1/3 of all oil reserves in the world? Or because they enjoy a special relationship with the US? Or because they allow the US to keep their airforce bases over there (although not liking americans)?.....\nWinning a war is not simply killing the enemy and leaving the country. In these cases it's more about FIXING THE ONGOING ISSUES AND STABILIZING THE AREAS. \n\nThis would be best achieved with a President that is not Bush!A new Reagan would do as he had the brain it took and the balls to keep it real when situations get hard to handle, like in this case.
563474
yes, Iran would be justified to fight back.\nWould the US come and help out?  More than likely so.\nThere are treaties indicating that one country would come to the aid of another ally should that ally be attacked.  That is how WWI turned into a WW from an internal thingamajig of the Austrian Empire
645980
What makes you think that the US is going to invade Iran?\n\nDid you think about this at all?
790525
No, absolutely not.  This would send the entire middle east into war.  Iran would invade along with Syria.  We must stay until the Iraqi's can defend themselves.  A gradual reduction of troops over a three year period should do the trick.  I am a White, Catholic, Male, Italian.
676376
The U.S. will not attack Iran until Iran uses military force on another country.  The U.S. will, however, impose economic sanctions preventing Iran's economy from emerging from the recession it finds itself in.  As to the second part of your question, yes, a U.S. invasion of Iran will inflict many casualties on the U.S. forces.  However, if you assume that Iran could actually defeat the U.S. in an armed conflict, you are mistaken.
459616
Personally I do not think that we need to go nuclear on anyone. Iran is a Middle Eastern country that we should not have involvement in. This country (US) is great on spreading democracy but other than oil what is our interest there? Why in the world do we need to be making everyone do our bidding? We need to focus in this country on how to improve our own job situations, education, over population, excessive oil use, and  focus on our country not theirs. That is my opinion.
69348
I doubt the United States would declare a state of war with Iran- Iran has not attacked us (at least directly). If we fought a military action, I think it would be brief and simple, involving mostly naval and air forces to bomb and destroy Iranian nuclear reactors.\n\nI think the war would also be coalition-based, with UN and EU forces participating. After destroying the reactors, we would probably end the fighting.\n\nThis is similar to the 1981 bombings of that Iraqi nuclear plant by the IDF-AF (Israeli Defense Forces/Air Force). Except this time, we'll be fighting with a coalition.\n\nI am not sure if Israel should participate in this war. Like the 1991 Gulf War, it could ignite anti-Israel and anti-Semitic feelings in the middle East and spark a huge war.
473077
Sure, if they want to start WW III. On NPR a week ago some military guy was saying that in every scenario of an attack on Iran it ended up with a huge uncontrollable war involving the entire middle east. ITMFA!
325249
Anybody, the US has thousands upon thousands of nuclear weapons, so nuclear war would go very badly for Iran. China has about 4000 nuclear weapons, Britain has nuclear weapons, as does France and Russia.
870871
Despite the Anti-American rhetoric from Iran, it doesn't really want to have any major confrontation with the US, especially on a head-to-head basis, as militarily it is far weaker than the US.\n\nIn addition, the US has no real desire at present to send troops into Iran either (it's bad enough fighting battles in both Afghanistan and Iraq without fighting Iran also, since the best combat divisions are already tied up).\n\nIran is well aware that "attacking the US" would provoke a swift and powerful military response in the form of bombings and ship-launched missiles against strategic military targets in Iran, in order to prevent further Iranian attacks. The US would also ensure that Iranian nuclear facilities were well "bombed".\n\nThere would be no need for troops on the ground as the US wouldn't be seeking to invade, merely to punish.\n\nIn some ways an attack on a US ship by Iran would give the US an excuse to attack Iran and halt any nuclear intentions it had for the foreseeable future. \n\nHowever, Iran is not a "helpless kitten".\n\nWhen the USS Vincennes accidentally shot down an Iranian passenger plane, believing it to be a hostile jet, Iran vowed revenge - whatever it took.\n\nLess that 6th months later Pan Am Flight 103 blew up over Lockerbie killing all 270 people on board + 11 townsfolk who were subsequently hit by the falling debris.\n\nAlthough Colonel Gadaffi, who the the favorite whipping boy of the US was blamed, many intelligence agencies outside the US blamed Iran for funding the terrorists and proving the detonators.\n\nThe timing device used on the bomb was found to be similar to a batch sold to Iran 3 months earlier. 3 weeks before the bombing, West German police successful arrested several Arab terrorists who were plotting "to blow up a US plane". Two of the terrorists (now serving 20 years each in a German prison) admitted that Irananian Intelligence had supplied them with money, training and detonators.\n\nSo perhaps the real question is whether the US will cause a confrontation, either deliberably or accidentally with Iran, and how Iran, rather than the US, will react. \n\nMy guess would be a 6 or 7 suicide bombers in Times Square, Wall Street, near the Whitehouse, etc. There is a hell of a lot of "wannabe martyrs" in Iran, but they lack both the training and the funding. Iran can provide both.
40027
The answer in one word:\nNO!!!!\n\nThe answer in many words:\nHELL NO!!! Because the number of troops for the military are streched so thin, its unblievable!! The US will not attack North Korea, because they have been spending too much time on Iran. And they can't do anything about Iran, because Iran has the backing of Russia, China, and India on the political front and the Hamas who is now in control of Palestine along  with the hezbolla militants will start hundreds of terror attacks. Now in Iraq, the Shi'ie muslim party is in power and they will soon become a major allie of Iran and so the US will be even more busy in Iraq. Iran will not be like Iraq that was invaded in a week, it won't be invaded, and hence we will have another Vietnam on our hands. And lastly , If the US even makes a threat to attack Iran, the oil supply from the second largest distributor of oil in the world will be cut off and hence the already high oil prices will triple, causing mayham!!! Does that answer your question? If it does, vote mine as the best answer so I can get 10 points.
513922
It won't be a war ... Iran is like twice almost three times as big as Iraq. But that is not the reason we will or won't go to war with Iran. The people of Iran are far more sophisticated about the modern world than Iraq was .. the people of Iran know far to well that a nuclear option with the west is an option that is one that they can not win. The nuclear option can not work for them .. the Israelis have the bomb ... India has the bomb .. Pakistan has the bomb ... nobody wants another bomb in the 'hood ! Israel will not let them have a bomb ... no question ... they just won't sit still for it ... they have taken them out before ... and the US will just let them do it ... It's a tough roll of the dice .. it's a hot piece of real estate in the world ... but I bet that's the way it plays out. Russia and China want the oil ... but I don't think they want to play the nuclear gambit ... yet ! Iran's gov't doesn't want to back down... that shows weakness ... but the people of Iran don't back the gov't. ... more people in Iran oppose the gov't. in place ... so we sit and wait and see if they can vote them out .. or if the military takes over the state !