there should be a tough-man contest against iran vs. usa yes or no?
408927
It would be great if all the worlds military problems could be solved in this way, \nif it ever happened i think life would be wonderful.
618
Never. Iraq was not a succesful example for US. They'll put more economical pressure on Iran rather than military action.
488035
I would also have to agree.\nAlso it is presumbly part of a ploy in order to get Iran to operate in a way that is more acceptable to the West.
748031
I don't think saturation nuking will work, as that they won't penetrate the underground bunkers. The USA will just have to invade and risk yet another Vietnam. The invaders will all become junkies (20% of Iranians are on hard drugs) and when they lose they will have to admit millions of Iranian Shiite refugees into the USA. It's tough, I know, but there is really no alternative. The USA must stay the course. They can't let the terrorists claim victory.
19886
I, myself being an Iranian, I would say I hope the best for it. But the problems it is having on the international front are causing some problems. But on the other hand, IRAN will be kicking butt in the world cup in Germany!
124046
India is no little child that needs to suckle on America's tit!\nWe are quite capable of taking down Pakistan on our own,we did it without the US three times.Let Iran join the fight for kashmir,i doubt they have any reason to.\nKasmir is an issue that goes back to the time of independence for both the nations (India and Pakistan).\nWe are neighter liable to the US nor are we its lap dog.\n\nThe Indian government stated that the US need not interfear with intimate Iranian matters of state.The US swiftly acted on that descision as irrational and threatened to stop US investmenst in India.India has always been a follower of NAM (Non alligned Movement).\nWhich is a safety stand for a developing nation.We get oil form Iran and we have never had bad ties with any muslim nation other than Pakistan,we want to keep that track record straight.Its easier to do business that way.\nIndia should in no way be a subject to bullying and we wont.
322678
Probably not. The US is currently involved in both Iraq and Afghanistan, plus the cost of attacking Iran could prove to be very, very high. I imagine the Israelis will take out the Iranian nuclear capabilities at some point, should the US not intervene.
179065
I think the USA is more of a world wide danger than Iran is.  Iran might be a "threat", but the USA is currently a world wide problem in many ways.\n\nIn fact, there are dozens and dozens of country that seem to benefit from when the American market goes south.  Many foreigners also contributing to American business so that hopefully will elect a president that will support the needs of the world for the upcoming election.\n\nMore than anything, we need the world on our side, and right now, much of the world (besides England) is not in our favor.
1101029
No way!  The U.S. needs a lot more practice and a lot more humility before they get anywhere past the first round, especially if they keep playing like they did against the Czechs.
322245
We've beaten the odds so far, but probability has way of catching up to up you. Let's look at current crisis.\n\nTargeting sites in a nuclear war with Iran, or any country in the region, would involve widespread nuclear contamination and large numbers of casualties. It would be impossible to limit this to Iran alone. And even in extreme circumstances, the only clear requirement for high-yield strategic nuclear weapons would be on some selected command and control facilities; their use would have to be restricted to a small number of targets because of fallout considerations.\n\nIf Iran did acquire atomic bombs, it would put pressure on other countries in the region to do the same. Many Arab countries believe it is unfair that Israel has nuclear weapons. If Arab countries, notably Saudi Arabia but also Egypt and possibly Syria, found themselves caught between a nuclear-armed Israel and a nuclear-armed Iran, it would greatly increase pressures to pursue their own nuclear options. \n\nThis could result in a regional arms race in the Middle East which is likely to be quite destabilizing, given the number and intensity of conflicts and instabilities in the region. \n\nBecause of Murphy's Law, the conflict could escalate into a major confrontation between US and Russia/China, especially when long range missiles are fired by the US at Iran (for instance), it could be interpreted by early warning systems in Russia and China as an attack against them. \n\nThe military people call it "accidental or false attribution". How does China know the missile is headed for Iran and not them? By the time the flight path is determined, it could be too late to form a retaliatory response, hence, it's better to "launch on warning". A global nuclear exchange could be initiated in a nuclear war in the Middle \n\nThere's been over 20 close calls during the Cold War and Post Cold eras, from the Cuban Missile Crisis to the accidental training tape incident at NORAD in the late 1970's, to the more recent 1995 incident involving a Norwegian science satellie launch. The hair triggers nearly put the world into a nuclear inferno. Most people in the world did not know how close they've come for the nuclear sword of damacles to come tumbling down on the heads. \n\nEven today, we only stand 28 minutes from a nuclear at any given time. The aging Russian early warning systems and their reduced security after the break-up of the Soviet Union should be real concerns. \n\nIf anything, a nuclear war will be the result of accidental launches from a false alarm from the two 'strategic' superpowers.
210236
I don't see anything happening over Iran too soon.  Any US president would be insane to start a war with Iran and should be sent to a psychiatric facility immediately.  The EU and NATO definitely won't do anything to piss the Iranians off, Iran has missiles that are within range of their countries.  The UN doesnt have the balls to do anything either (plus you have Russia and China who'll oppose a lot on the Security Council).  Frankly, I think Israel is the only one who can be counted on to do anything at all--which in their case is going to be military action.  That, sadly, is going to drag us (the U.S.), if not Europe, in as well.
1166034
I think so, but not for more than one goal of difference.\n\nBesides, I think is gonna be a pretty violent match.
366943
Since I am avid USA fan (let us not mention Iran-USA since I am in therapy to overcome the US performance in France 98) and I have lived in Mexico and seen how crappy the fans are toward the US (and it is nice the we now kick their "culos" most of the time).  I would hope that Iran kicks the living crap out of Mexico and send them to a humiliating defeat as the US did in Japan-Korea 2002.  Go Iran!  (con disculpas a los aficionados del "Tri")
131581
There's lots of saber rattling right now, but I think the people in power would be stupid to try and invade Iran - the Islamic view of the Western nations isn't so great as it is (especially now), and any attack against Iran would really be adding fuel to the fire.
195644
damned if you do---and damned if you dont..\n\ncant win
1150512
Iran does not stand a chance against Mexico. Mexico is a very experienced team and i expect them to run over Iran. Mexico should win 3 goals to nothing.
106532
One thing's for sure, US won't go for another war, it already has too many on its hands.\nAfter being referred to UN Security Council, pressure will be placed on Iran. \nWith no country coming to its rescue at this point, let's see whether Iran buckles under the pressure or not.\nMost probably, it won't. Because developing a nuclear capability is more of a pride for each nation, even if its only a deterrant.\nBut, only time will tell!