| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| U.S. could destroy Iran military in 3 weeks, report |
| 2012-05-02 |
| The U.S. military is discussing significant changes in its war plans to adhere to President ObamaÂ’s new strategic guidance that downplays preparing for conflicts such as Iraq and Afghanistan, and counts on allies to provide additional troops. War planning for Iran is now the most pressing scenario, or what the Pentagon calls a contingency. U.S. Central Command believes it can destroy or significantly degrade IranÂ’s conventional armed forces in about three using air and sea strikes, according to a defense source familiar with the discussions. Such strikes are an option in a response to TehranÂ’s striking U.S. and international ships in the Persian Gulf and attempting to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz, through which about one-fifth of the worldÂ’s oil is transported. The Pentagon now is conducting a step-by-step surge of forces in the Gulf. It is maintaining two aircraft carriers in the region and is increasing the number of mine-detection ships and helicopters. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #12 Afghanistan is still hard going after 11 years. Catching lybian Kadaphi took several months rather than "a few days" per Hildabeast and Big Zero. I wouldn't count out the Soviets and china supporting an afghan style warefare. |
| Posted by: George Unique7923 2012-05-02 22:11 |
| #11 Maybe we could resurrect a couple of battleships just for fun. |
| Posted by: gorb 2012-05-02 18:45 |
| #10 How many times have we heard this sort of thing in history. Why sugarcoat such an event. I choose to ignore it. |
| Posted by: Dale 2012-05-02 15:49 |
| #9 The only reason Barry would do it would if he or Axlerod did the calculus and thought they could come up with a few extra votes to add to the ACORN votes, Mickey Mouse, etc., and the dead voters. I wouldn't trust him to run a war against Iran. I didn't trust him to run a war in Afghanistan. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2012-05-02 15:39 |
| #8 I've always been kinda hawkish on Iran but with Obama in control, I dunno. I might rather wait until after November to see if we can get somebody who is a little more reliable in the White House. |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-05-02 15:23 |
| #7 Well, what are we waiting for? I've got plans this summer. |
| Posted by: dk70 the scantily clad 2012-05-02 11:30 |
| #6 I don't include Israel in that. This is their conflict, they should be involved in whatever level they feel appropriate. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2012-05-02 09:05 |
| #5 If the US gets involved in Iran we should plan to do so without any serious ground forces and without any allies that might cause operation and political problems. Naval assistance and filling in for the US in other areas would be wonderful, we don't need to buy them off to add their planes to the sorties and that sort of thing. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2012-05-02 09:04 |
| #4 This would have to happen before November if it would increase Obammer's votes. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2012-05-02 08:31 |
| #3 BP, he is also planning on fueling the ships and aircraft with pixie dust and unicorn farts. |
| Posted by: Rambler in Virginia 2012-05-02 08:03 |
| #2 >counts on allies to provide additional troops Really?!? After all the "appreciation" The zero has shown. |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2012-05-02 07:29 |
| #1 or if it got really bad ... in seconds. |
| Posted by: Water Modem 2012-05-02 02:32 |