View Full Version: Our Next War Is With Saudi Arabia

Loose Change Forum > Middle East Wars > Our Next War Is With Saudi Arabia


Title: Our Next War Is With Saudi Arabia


JerichoApo - August 2, 2007 07:03 AM (GMT)
we sold iran weapons
we invaded iran

we sold saudi arabia weapons
we invaded...

DAV - August 2, 2007 08:11 PM (GMT)
Did you, by chance, mean to say Iraq instead of Iran?







.

JerichoApo - August 4, 2007 01:34 AM (GMT)
no we sold weapons to iran to help them in the iran-iraq war. now we are invading iran. wmd's were never found in iraq because we never sold them anything.

Silven - August 14, 2007 03:50 AM (GMT)
The thread title says war with saudi arabia?!?!

Nelly Jelly - August 21, 2007 03:43 PM (GMT)
This post makes no sense at all we never even invaded Iran...what are you people talking about.

jfk - August 21, 2007 03:47 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Nelly Jelly @ Aug 21 2007, 11:43 AM)
This post makes no sense at all we never even invaded Iran...what are you people talking about.

I believe he is referring to the Iran Contra affair......
Back in the 1970's. ;)

Nelly Jelly - August 21, 2007 08:44 PM (GMT)
Can you please supply the source of which you found this information from.

jfk - August 21, 2007 09:03 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Nelly Jelly @ Aug 21 2007, 04:44 PM)
Can you please supply the source of which you found this information from.

ummm... The Marine Corp which I was a part of at the time. ;)

seabhcan - August 25, 2007 10:47 AM (GMT)
Saudi has their entire oil infrastructure rigged with explosives. If the US steps out of line or threatens the kingdom, the Saudi princes can push the economic doomsday button. There will be no Saudi invasion.

Iran has a standing army of 700,000 troupes and has 11 million reserves. The US would be quickly defeated if they tried to invade, which they wont.

The real question is if the US will attempt a bombing raid on Iran, and what will Iran's reply be. Ive been reading in the CSM that Cheney is hell-bent on an attack on the Revolutionary Guard. In Kuwait Times, it reports that Iran is considering three options for a reply. The one favoured by the president is a strike on all US targets in the Gulf. Iran has a good chance of sinking 2 carrier groups and killing maybe 30,000 US troups in Iraq and Kuwait. The US will probably suffer their biggest losses since the civil war.

The religious leaders in Iran are pushing for a limited reply - just bombing and wiping out all US troups in Kuwait.

Watch some Iranian rap music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbiygasRFUU

adamTucker - August 26, 2007 06:17 PM (GMT)
"Diamonds are forever"


http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/diamond/prologue.htm


...forever, universal, untraceable, and never inventoried by our government or any other. Do you know any other industry or business that is allowed to operate in the US without having audits of some sort. Do you really think that the IRS is not aware of what they are selling in our country? And if they aren't, why?

in order to fund something without leaving a money trail, you first have to have a form of currency that is universal and untraceable...

Ken - August 28, 2007 09:27 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (seabhcan @ Aug 25 2007, 05:47 AM)
Iran has a standing army of 700,000 troupes and has 11 million reserves. The US would be quickly defeated if they tried to invade, which they wont.

The real question is if the US will attempt a bombing raid on Iran, and what will Iran's reply be. Ive been reading in the CSM that Cheney is hell-bent on an attack on the Revolutionary Guard. In Kuwait Times, it reports that Iran is considering three options for a reply. The one favoured by the president is a strike on all US targets in the Gulf. Iran has a good chance of sinking 2 carrier groups and killing maybe 30,000 US troups in Iraq and Kuwait. The US will probably suffer their biggest losses since the civil war.

The religious leaders in Iran are pushing for a limited reply - just bombing and wiping out all US troups in Kuwait.

Watch some Iranian rap music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbiygasRFUU

Laughable at best. I wanna know how Iran would sink two CV groups?

#1 Irans airpower is a joke compared to the USA's.
#2 The USA could take out most of Irans air defense in 5-7 days with minimal losess, regardless of whats going on in Iraq.
#3 Iran has no navy to speak of, and on a war footing no speedboats are going to get close to a cv goup. Even in the Persian gulf.

So, enlighten me on how they are going to take out two cvgs?

Repentless - August 28, 2007 10:54 AM (GMT)
No, I think we'll just invade Iran again.

adamTucker - August 29, 2007 02:32 AM (GMT)
...how many solar powered jets do we have?


Israeli colonel: Non-Muslim oil 'running out,' situation threatens the West

they could paralyze our economy and stop our ability to wage war, by just bombing some of the oil fields.

Regardless of when, or by who's hand, our oil is running out, and unless we can find a way to keep our economy moving without fossil fuels, we are on a path of implosion.

I would start sharpening your skills so that you have something to offer an economy that is based upon a barter system.

Nephilem - August 30, 2007 08:40 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
Iran has a standing army of 700,000 troupes and has 11 million reserves. The US would be quickly defeated if they tried to invade, which they wont.

The real question is if the US will attempt a bombing raid on Iran, and what will Iran's reply be. Ive been reading in the CSM that Cheney is hell-bent on an attack on the Revolutionary Guard. In Kuwait Times, it reports that Iran is considering three options for a reply. The one favoured by the president is a strike on all US targets in the Gulf. Iran has a good chance of sinking 2 carrier groups and killing maybe 30,000 US troups in Iraq and Kuwait. The US will probably suffer their biggest losses since the civil war.

The religious leaders in Iran are pushing for a limited reply - just bombing and wiping out all US troups in Kuwait.


That was really quite entertaining to read. However it is completely ridicules. I debated the topic of a NATO mission against Iran last year and am a member of the US armed forces, so let me point out a few important facts. If we Invaded Iran we would crush them. Iraq’s army was much larger then Iran’s is and we quickly took Iraq. The main problem that we have had is the insurgency; however the actual act of taking Iran would be easy.
As you pointed out we will not Invade Iran this is because we don’t want to get stuck in another country in the Middle East. We are already stuck in Iraq and so we would want to get stuck in Iran.

A bombing raid on Iran could easily be successful. Iran’s air force consists of aging planes that are dangerously low on parts and maintenance. What planes they did get in the air would quickly be shot down be the superior US Air force. Their air defense systems are inadequate to stop an aerial assault.

Now for Iran’s response. How in the world would they have a dream of destroying our carrier groups? As you mentioned we have not one but two carrier groups in the Gulf. One of them could take on the entire Iranian air force and nave by itself. As I already said their air force is in horrible condition, and the same goes for their navy. Their navy is really just designed to defend their own shores, and has virtually no striking power. Any ships that were not sunk by our planes would quickly be defeated by our Navy.

Also how are they going to kill all of these troops in Iraq and Kuwait? If we did hit them we would take out their air defense, missiles and military basses. What will they attack us with?

To summaries that US has the most powerful Military in the world, Iran has a junk military that may have a bunch of people but has very little fighting ability. Iran is much better at fuelling insurgencies and terrorists, then it would be at fighting a war.

To address the main topic our next war is not going to be with Saudi Arabia it will probable be with Iran.


alive and still talking - September 2, 2007 02:58 AM (GMT)
I think their next plan for us is to attack our navy, wherever we are docked.

we are sitting ducks.

mynameis - September 11, 2007 03:51 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Nelly Jelly @ Aug 21 2007, 08:44 PM)
Can you please supply the source of which you found this information from.

No attribution is not a valid position. Although the logic of said claims would provide a position of different impetus for selective blame. A leads to B. I think we have been in Saudi Arabia for at least 10 years prior to Iraq, probably since the first Gulf War. Bin Laden aka CIA says we've been there as much.

Delightful Cyberia - September 19, 2007 06:58 AM (GMT)
I fully agree, that the next war that U.S.A. would be waging, would be against Saudi Arabia.

According to the government of U.S.A., hook or by crook, all the terrorists, their cells (especially the Taalibaan and the Al Qaeeda), are all stationed (coincidentally of course), only in the oil-rich countries!!!!! Never are they to be found, in countries that do not have oil!!!! Strange to say the least. One of these days, you Americans can expect another spectacular attack on America (orchestrated & manipulated entirely by th U.S. Government of course), bringing about the death of thousands of people and causing damage to property worth billions of dollars. Which according to the official version, would have been, carried out by terrorist cells based in Saudi Arabia. Now that would be the license, for George W. Bush and his bunch of no-good cronies, to descend on Saudi Arabian soil, and wage war.

Waging war is one thing. Billions of dollars worth of petroleum & natural gas, have been simultaneously siphoned off, from Iraq & Afghanistan respectively.

Why isn't anyone talking about that?! javascript:emoticon(':o')
smilie

Nephilem - September 20, 2007 02:39 AM (GMT)
QUOTE
I fully agree, that the next war that U.S.A. would be waging, would be against Saudi Arabia.


Delightful Cyberia,

Actually this statement is not true. The US is currently going after terrorists in Somalia which is not a rich nation. We are also helping fight terrorism around the world. Now the Middle East has to big things Oil and radical Islam. Radical Islam is what drives Islamic terrorism which is why we have to fight in the Middle East. So there is an alternate causality for our being in the Middle East.
As for another attack I sincerely hope that we are not attacked by terrorists again. However there is that threat. What I do not worry about is an attack on America by the American Government. I am currently in the United States military and our job is to protect the nation not to destroy it. The conspiracy theory’s about 9-11 lack solid ground and a long line of experts have agreed with the official story. There is also no ground for suspicions that we would attack ourselves again.
Lastly why would we attack Saudi Arabia? Whether you believe that we were attacked by terrorists or the government, Iran would be the most likely target. Our next war will probably be with Iran and hopefully this time we will hit them, but not attempt to go in and re-due their country. We should just get ride of their nuclear and offensive capabilities and then back off.

Rossmancer - September 21, 2007 12:25 PM (GMT)
how powerful is iran compared to iraq?

Nephilem - September 21, 2007 07:11 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
how powerful is iran compared to iraq?


Rossmancer,

Compared to Iraq now or before we invaded? Before we invaded the Military of Iraq was stronger then the Iranian Military is. However now Iran’s military is stronger then Iraq’s.

Rossmancer - September 22, 2007 12:52 PM (GMT)
So as of right now, is the war on iran going to be worse than the war was on iraq? And by worse I mean greater power struggles and more loss of life.

Nephilem - September 24, 2007 02:25 AM (GMT)
QUOTE
So as of right now, is the war on iran going to be worse than the war was on iraq? And by worse I mean greater power struggles and more loss of life.


It would be worse if we tried to go in and change their country like we did in Iraq. However if we were focused on just taking out their nuclear and offensive capabilities the war would go much better then the war in Iraq has gone. Fighting an army is easier then fighting an insurgency. We if we know where the enemy is we can take them out and it is much harder to hide an army and nuclear sites then it is to hide an insurgency.




* Hosted for free by InvisionFree