NationStates Jolt Archive

Would like you to put yourself in the place as President of the United States. You have proof that Iran is involved in killing of US troops by either direct revolutionary guard involvement or through Iranian made weapons. What would your response be? It appears that the US will have a response but would like to hear how individuals on NS would respond to this type of action by the Iranians. However your view the war at this point. Come from the position that you were just elected President and you were handed this situation at the begining of your term.

I wouldn't care

Am I me, or am I the typical NS poster? If it's the latter, I praise the Iranian regime and offer to surrender to them, and then help them conquer the rest of the world.

If I were US president, I would pull out of there. The war is stupid and not necessary.

i wouldn't give a shit considering i would already be pulling troops out. iran has more right to intervene in iraq than the us does considering they're in the same region and share some significant cultral and religious characteristics

Am I me, or am I the typical NS poster? If it's the latter, I praise the Iranian regime and offer to surrender to them, and then help them conquer the rest of the world.

yay?

Am I me, or am I the typical NS poster? If it's the latter, I praise the Iranian regime and offer to surrender to them, and then help them conquer the rest of the world.

prone to exageration much?

iran has more right to intervene in iraq than the us does considering they're in the same region and share some significant cultral and religious characteristics

You know they fought a really bloody war, like, 20 years ago?

You know they fought a really bloody war, like, 20 years ago?

of course. your point being?

of course. your point being?

That's like saying that Germany has a right to put troops in Poland.

That's like saying that Germany has a right to put troops in Poland.

Don't you realize NS is like Bizzaro world. Everything is backwards here. In fact that statement makes perfect sense.....

I would start by sending more than 20,000 additional troops. Or retreat. What I wouldn't do is flip-flop in the middle trying to recover at least a little bit of lost credibility.

If at least I had made the right decisions concerning the war (namely, not starting one I couldn't finish)!

That's like saying that Germany has a right to put troops in Poland.

oh dear we didn’t make page 2 :(

I would start by sending more than 20,000 additional troops. Or retreat. What I wouldn't do is flip-flop in the middle trying to recover at least a little bit of lost credibility.

If at least I had made the right decisions concerning the war (namely, not starting one I couldn't finish)!

You obviously need to be running for president.:D

That's like saying that Germany has a right to put troops in Poland.

i'm not talking about as an invasion with intent to annex. The US had no right to invade Iraq. Iran has no right to invade Iraq. but Iran has a better chance of having the support of iraqis, at least the shi'a population, as some sort of international police force which is what the US seems to be self-styled as.

I'd hold a press conference and release the info to the media. Then I'd wait about a week to gauge public reaction. If the public is irate at me, thinking I want to widen the war, I retreat. If the public is irate at Iran and the military gets more volunteers, I widen the war.

I would withdraw from Iraq (providing that I support this war, which I don't). If I don't withdraw, I'll be at war with Mujahideen soldiers (who are miraculously destroying the best military in the world) AND Iran. Iran, in turn, would probably have help from North Korea. This'll get the South Koreans, the Japanese, and the Chinese angry and it'll be like this:

The United States of America, England, Japan, China, and South Korea VS. Iran and North Korea

Then, you'll have some people who'll want to join North Korea and Iran, and it'll be a full out World War.

Then, the POTUS would say: I can't afford these losses and then he'll nuke some random country. Then, Iran will nuke the U.S. while North Korea would nuke Japan, South Korea, or China (dumb move for them to even get into the war). All this nuking will be going on between all these countries either supporting the U.S. or Iran (the ones who started the war).

I'd build a giant fence on the Iran-Iraq border. That always seems to work.

In reality, there's nothing to do that could possibly prevent the distribution of Iranian arms, funds, or manpower throughout Iraq short of a large-scale invasion of the country. The only reasonable choice would be to accept it as a fact of life and concede that we have been militarily defeated. At this point, the only available option would be to send in massive contingents of troops to try to salvage a shred of hope from a desperate situation. It is possible to accomplish certain missions despite a light Iranian presence. Going after Iran would be a terrible blunder, however.

I'm thinking some high explosive goodness would be in order.

Establish direct and proper talks and diplomatic relations with them. Talk to them as equals and involve them in Iraq on an official level.

Since the US doesn't have the means right now to actually do anything to Iran, the only way of stopping it would be to make other actions more attractive to them.

Establish direct and proper talks and diplomatic relations with them. Talk to them as equals and involve them in Iraq on an official level.

Since the US doesn't have the means right now to actually do anything to Iran, the only way of stopping it would be to make other actions more attractive to them.

We couldn't conquer them, but we could blow them up. With high explosives, that is.

Since the US doesn't have the means right now to actually do anything to Iran, the only way of stopping it would be to make other actions more attractive to them.

Given that the US does not have the means to do anything detrimental to Iran and that it would not be a politically tenable position to offer Iran some sort of reward for "good behavior," it would seem as though we are out of options.

You obviously need to be running for president.:D

Damn US Constitution and its insistence on only allowing US Citizens to run for president :)

Damn US Constitution and its insistence on only allowing US Citizens to run for president :)

Not only citizens, but US-born citizens.

Am I me, or am I the typical NS poster? If it's the latter, I praise the Iranian regime and offer to surrender to them, and then help them conquer the rest of the world.

You are starting to get on the list with O'Reilly,Sean Hannity and Glen Beck as being one of the most unreasonable people in the world. You are surely trolling.

I would withdraw from Iraq (providing that I support this war, which I don't). If I don't withdraw, I'll be at war with Mujahideen soldiers (who are miraculously destroying the best military in the world) AND Iran. Iran, in turn, would probably have help from North Korea. This'll get the South Koreans, the Japanese, and the Chinese angry and it'll be like this:

The United States of America, England, Japan, China, and South Korea VS. Iran and North Korea

Then, you'll have some people who'll want to join North Korea and Iran, and it'll be a full out World War.

Then, the POTUS would say: I can't afford these losses and then he'll nuke some random country. Then, Iran will nuke the U.S. while North Korea would nuke Japan, South Korea, or China (dumb move for them to even get into the war). All this nuking will be going on between all these countries either supporting the U.S. or Iran (the ones who started the war).

I hope to God you're kidding.

I hope to God you're kidding.

It was serious up to "Iran, in turn..."

Would like you to put yourself in the place as President of the United States. You have proof that Iran is involved in killing of US troops by either direct revolutionary guard involvement or through Iranian made weapons. What would your response be? It appears that the US will have a response but would like to hear how individuals on NS would respond to this type of action by the Iranians. However your view the war at this point. Come from the position that you were just elected President and you were handed this situation at the begining of your term.

Well, since projecting any military power short of an airstrike in Iranian territory isn't possible, the only thing left to do is wag my finger at them in impotent rage while delivering veiled threats through the media and diplomatic channels.

We couldn't conquer them, but we could blow them up. With high explosives, that is.
Which means that they march their troops right into Iraq, where US forces are already stretched just trying to keep order. They'd also have the support of various Shi'ite militias.

At the same time they'd shut down the Straight of Hormuz, sending oil prices through the roof.

All in all, firing at Iran is just not a good idea, because they won't just sit back and take it. So things will immediately get out of hand.

Which means that they march their troops right into Iraq, where US forces are already stretched just trying to keep order. They'd also have the support of various Shi'ite militias.

At the same time they'd shut down the Straight of Hormuz, sending oil prices through the roof.

All in all, firing at Iran is just not a good idea, because they won't just sit back and take it. So things will immediately get out of hand.

If it was deemed appropriate to attack Iran, I have full confidence that the US military would be able to blunt any armored advance into Iraq, while destroying the ability of Iran to both close the Straits of Hormuz, and engage in any further hostilities. A war against enemies that can be seen and targeted is exactly what the US Military is built for. The Army and Marine Corps may be stretched to the breaking point, but the Navy and Air Force are intact.

I would start talks with Iran and try to convince them to rein in their dogs of war lest they wanted sunni Arab countries to escalate the situation.

But then this assumes that I am looking for overall stability, peace and prosperity in Iraq and the region. But I am not. I am only interested in keeping my Arab clients pumping oil - which I am addicted to - for dollars which they are forced to spend in the global economic order that so benefits me. Having the sunnis and shi'ites kill each other gives me the perfect excuse to stay longer in Iraq and it helps that they keep shooting at each other instead of pointing it at me.

I would engage in diplomatic talks with Iran and attempt to defuse the situation, I would then try to get our respective countries on better terms and maybe allow them to be involved in this moronic war I've started.

If the talks fall through, well then I can demonstrate how Iran is being aggressive and does not want peace, hopefully gaining the support of the U.N.

Would like you to put yourself in the place as President of the United States. If I was president we would be out of Iraq in a hearthbeat.

Iran is involved in killing of US troops by either direct revolutionary guard involvement or through Iranian made weapons. Iranians, Palestineans, Lebanese, etc die through US made weapons all the time.

You have proof that ....().... What would your response be? depends.. what is the "proof"?..
and -most important- who is producing this "Proof" ???
American intelligence?
Mossad, Turkish, Nigerian, or other allied intelligence?
the CIA? the Pentagon?
who?.. the same people who produced the "intelligence" for Saddam's WMD?


It appears that the US will have a response.. it appears?
and just what is that response?

Establish direct and proper talks and diplomatic relations with them. Talk to them as equals and involve them in Iraq on an official level.

Well, since projecting any military power short of an airstrike in Iranian territory isn't possible, the only thing left to do is wag my finger at them in impotent rage while delivering veiled threats through the media and diplomatic channels.

I would engage in diplomatic talks with Iran and attempt to defuse the situation, I would then try to get our respective countries on better terms and maybe allow them to be involved in this moronic war I've started.

If the talks fall through, well then I can demonstrate how Iran is being aggressive and does not want peace, hopefully gaining the support of the U.N.

Indeed, diplomacy, diplomacy, and more diplomacy. Churchill's jaw-jaw comment was spot on.

Since the US doesn't have the means right now to actually do anything to Iran, the only way of stopping it would be to make other actions more attractive to them.

Which means that they march their troops right into Iraq, where US forces are already stretched just trying to keep order. They'd also have the support of various Shi'ite militias.

At the same time they'd shut down the Straight of Hormuz, sending oil prices through the roof.

All in all, firing at Iran is just not a good idea, because they won't just sit back and take it. So things will immediately get out of hand.

Well, there's always the Kennedy approach used to defuse the Cuban Missile Crisis - let them know we don't have any real alternative except the nukes. And, yes, I know that's unacceptable, particularly over a minor incident like the OP.

Iran has every right as a sovereign state to arm and support insurgents directly or indirectly in Iraq to fight US troops. The US military presence in Iraq represents a clear threat to Iranian interests in the region, as Iraq borders them, while the US is miles away and there is no threat to them, no matter what the neocons spin.

Furthermore, the invasion and occupation of Iraq constitutes a violation of international law as a war of aggression as defined at Nuremberg. Defense is all the more justified because of this. The US President should realize this and pull out.

Meh.

Would like you to put yourself in the place as President of the United States. You have proof that Iran is involved in killing of US troops by either direct revolutionary guard involvement or through Iranian made weapons. What would your response be? It appears that the US will have a response but would like to hear how individuals on NS would respond to this type of action by the Iranians. However your view the war at this point. Come from the position that you were just elected President and you were handed this situation at the begining of your term.

I would ignore it and let them do what they will. But in reality if I were elected President I would cut all funding to the Israelis and shift it all to the Palestinians. I would then pull out from Afghanistan and Iraq. On top of that I would call the Russians out on their human rights abuses in Checnya and release the innocent brothers in Gitmo. All within the 1st 100 hours.:)

I would ignore it and let them do what they will. But in reality if I were elected President I would cut all funding to the Israelis and shift it all to the Palestinians. I would then pull out from Afghanistan and Iraq. On top of that I would call the Russians out on their human rights abuses in Checnya and release the innocent brothers in Gitmo. All within the 1st 100 hours.:)

there's a reason you're not president.

Given that the US does not have the means to do anything detrimental to Iran...

Eh.. might want to ask that carrier fleet sitting conveniently near Iran about that one.. they tend to specialize in doing things "detrimental" to certain people when asked.

I think it would be rude for Iran to intervene in Iraq until we are finished intervening in Iraq. Besides, if both the U.S. and Iran intervened in Iraq simultaneously, our balls might touch - Which is not cool.

Iran has every right as a sovereign state to arm and support insurgents directly or indirectly in Iraq to fight US troops .

Not without consequences. That's the question. I don't see anyone debating whether nations have a right to self-defense, do you?

Shoot illicit iranian operatives found in iraq.

The US has not one grain or iota of a right more than Iran to puts its armed and secret services in Iraq, but since we're there, we might as well repay any of our Iranian colleagues that we happen to find in kind.

Not without consequences. That's the question. I don't see anyone debating whether nations have a right to self-defense, do you?

I am not debating that point, in fact I am accepting it. But the other fact remains that in Iraq their is no threat to the US, except any that they themselves have created by invading anyway.

Consequences are always their, both for Iran and the US, but the US does not likely want escalation to a regional conflict with Iran and the like. Plus it's pretty much accepting now that Iran is helping insurgents in Iraq to a lesser degree, and the US can talk all they like but will ultimately do nothing.

Eh.. might want to ask that carrier fleet sitting conveniently near Iran about that one.. they tend to specialize in doing things "detrimental" to certain people when asked.

As long as Iran maintains the capability to wreak havoc the world over and deeply injure the United States by annihilating middle eastern oil exporting capacity, no number of aircraft carriers is sufficient to overcome their deterrence and do something detrimental to them.

As long as Iran maintains the capability to wreak havoc the world over and deeply injure the United States by annihilating middle eastern oil exporting capacity, no number of aircraft carriers is sufficient to overcome their deterrence and do something detrimental to them.

I think you're overestimating Iran's influence and defense capabilities by miles, but that seems like another topic. In any case, I probably agree with you that direct conflict with Iran in the short term is unlikely.

Iran intervenes in Iraq. What do you do?!

I would secretly authorize the Vice President to act on my behalf because he would be more knowledgeable then I would be in all domestic and international affairs. Then, I would take a vacation for an indefinite length of time at my ranch to reduce my stress and avoid the media and comedians who make fun of me and how I talk.

Would like you to put yourself in the place as President of the United States. You have proof that Iran is involved in killing of US troops by either direct revolutionary guard involvement or through Iranian made weapons. What would your response be? It appears that the US will have a response but would like to hear how individuals on NS would respond to this type of action by the Iranians. However your view the war at this point. Come from the position that you were just elected President and you were handed this situation at the begining of your term.

the US was responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Iranians when it directly aided Iraq during the Iraq-Iran War so Iranians killing US troops seems a logical reaction...so if I was Pres. I'd negotiate a ceasefire with Iran and pull out of Iraq...

US declares war on Iraq and Iran wins...weird...

I would quietly inform the government of Iran that if they do not cut it out, I'm going to bomb the living shit out of them.... with pornography.

I would ignore it and let them do what they will. But in reality if I were elected President I would cut all funding to the Israelis and shift it all to the Palestinians. I would then pull out from Afghanistan and Iraq. On top of that I would call the Russians out on their human rights abuses in Checnya and release the innocent brothers in Gitmo. All within the 1st 100 hours.:)

and promptly be assassinated by the CIA or another member of your own military infrastructure

which is not to say i wouldn't attempt similar (although at a slower pace, to hopefully prevent the inevitable coup)

Am I me, or am I the typical NS poster? If it's the latter, I praise the Iranian regime and offer to surrender to them, and then help them conquer the rest of the world.


But not you, because you're the Last Great White Warrior....

As regards the OP - as the American presence in Iraq is the problem, I suggest the remedy for it is withdrawal. In the mean time the chimp in chief would be best advised to tone down the rhetoric.

Don't you realize NS is like Bizzaro world. Everything is backwards here. In fact that statement makes perfect sense.....

Who has more right to put troops in Poland? Germany or the USA?

Who has more right to put troops in Iraq? Iran or the USA?

You have proof that Iran is involved in killing of US troops by either direct revolutionary guard involvement or through Iranian made weapons.

You mean like when they had "proof" that Iraq had WMD? :rolleyes:

You mean like when they had "proof" that Iraq had WMD? :rolleyes:

Indeed. It's so hypocritical to suggest that this would be such an outrage to a country that funds guerilla movements around the world to forward their own political agenda.

I'd build a cooperative relationship based on common interest - I'd make Iran a stakeholder in the mission to bring peace to Iraq. I'd necessarily engage other nations in the area. I'd get off my high horse and start trying to build cooperative relationships instead of relationships based on either patronage or aggression.

Would like you to put yourself in the place as President of the United States. You have proof that Iran is involved in killing of US troops by either direct revolutionary guard involvement or through Iranian made weapons. What would your response be? It appears that the US will have a response but would like to hear how individuals on NS would respond to this type of action by the Iranians. However your view the war at this point. Come from the position that you were just elected President and you were handed this situation at the begining of your term.
Speaking as both an NS poster and a head of state and head of government merged into one title ("President"), I would try to be diplomatic and careful with the scenario. Of course, I would try to be diplomatic and be as neutral as possible without trying to clamper on national interest, as it is better to talk than throw fists. But given the fact that Iraq is very much broken apart, and no one faction is the most dominant (AKA, not very likely!), I figure that the Islamic Republic would be biting off more than it could chew and find itself over its head should it desire to expand its borders or create a puppet state then do the former in order to project its influence not only throughout the Middle East, but also to send a message to the Sunni classes which are the dominating group (and small religious minority) in Southwest Asia that their time on keeping the Shi'ites (the large but low masses) at the bottom is at end.

As the POTUS, I would have to intervene anyway regardless if it suited my personal principles or not, as Southwest Asia contains a sizable amount of US oil imports (half of US oil is imported, and 19% of it is from the Middle East, may seem small when the other countries are combined, but really, significant) and it would be dentrimental to the nation's economy.

But I would, be careful, and time my intervention with conventional forces to when it is most politically beneficial with the most well done timing to the USA...initially of course, indirect aid through secret dealings along with confidential intelligence and special forces deployment will be used prelude to official word...and do keep aware, that this is what I would do if and when diplomacy fails, which is probably in that scenario, probable.

Am I me, or am I the typical NS poster? If it's the latter, I praise the Iranian regime and offer to surrender to them, and then help them conquer the rest of the world.

Of course.

After all, conservatives would bomb every other country in the planet, make sure to send some soldiers to rape whoever survives and cause armageddon with their sheer hubris, all the while screaming the name of God.

Now will you stop the straw-manning and have an ACTUAL discussion or should I play straw-man some more? I can do this all day.

Am I me, or am I the typical NS poster? If it's the latter, I praise the Iranian regime and offer to surrender to them, and then help them conquer the rest of the world.

Of course the only alternative to that is turning the middle east into a glass crater and then sending all known muslims, and anyone they've ever had contact with, to cuba...And then nuke cuba, of course.
http://www.entertainmentearth.com/images/AUTOIMAGES/DC25349.jpg