Beat me to it. Iran's military neither has the ability to project power anywhere near the United States of America, nor has it ever shown any desire to randomly invade other countries. Given those two factors, I cannot consider them a threat to the United States of America. We need to take care of our own house now...because it is crumbling right beneath our feet...both literally and figuratively. Projecting military power all over the globe is about the most expensive thing a nation can do, and given that we are 15 trillion in debt, well, we cannot afford it any longer. And one more thing, our troops, both active duty and retired, overwhelmingly support Dr Paul over all other GOP candidates, and dear leader. If you support the troops, then you need to support Ron Paul.
I agree. The misconception about Paul is that he doesn't appreciate that Iran is dangerous or that he is some sort of pacifist who blames America for 9/11 etc. What I heard him saying last night made sense. He pointed out that our own actions, eg Libya, only reinforce the desires of these regional powers to have nukes. We bully countres with no nukes, but we let the likes of pakistan and N. Korea piss all over us. Plus our ability to stop them forcibly is very limited. We can delay them, but short of another invasion and occupation, how can we stop them? A boycott will be ineffective, plus it will hurt the very people we want to befriend there. Plenty of countries will trade with them, boycott or no boycott, eg the UAE, Pakisitan, Iraq, Tuyrkey, Russia, China. Imposing a naval blockade is an act of war that would put us in potential conflict with Russia or China. Is it worth that? I think the reality is that our policy, no matter who is president, will be pretty similar toward Iran, if only because the options are so limited. The Bachmanns are talking tough, but talk is cheap. When he points to our actions as the trigger for 9/11, he's not saying that justified it or that we should submit to extortion. It's just a fact that if we hadn't had troops in Saudi Arabia, there would not have been a 9/11. He is pointing out that these foreign adventures carry unforeseeable risks for us.
I don't think you have read this story. You may very well be wrong about Iran's capabilities. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011...destep-sanctions-thanks-to-assist-from-north/
If the facts in that story are even remotely accurate the you are wrong about agreeing with this statement by Das Trader. " Iran's military neither has the ability to project power anywhere near the United States of America, nor has it ever shown any desire to randomly invade other countries."
Here is an overview of Iran's limited conventional capabilities: Total forces: 500,000 to 525,000, including Revolutionary Guards. (Most are poorly trained conscripts) Regular army: 350,000 Regular navy: 18,000, including some 3,000 to 5,000 Marines Regular air force: 25,000 to 35,000 Reserves: An additional 350,000 poorly trained reserves Paramilitary: Some 40,000. In theory, it can mobilize up to 1 million more men (3,500 battalions) in the Basij Resistance Force, which has a nominal strength of over 11 million. Only a fraction of that force receives meaningful training, although Iran has created a substantial local mobilization capability and gives Basij core elements some training with the IRGC. Virtually all regular military officers are now products of the revolution Iranâs annual defense budget of roughly $10 billion excludes much of its spending on defense industry, missile programs, support of foreign non-state actors, nuclear capability and intelligence activity. The total is likely to be in the range of $12 billion to $14 billionâless than the United Arab Emirates, and only between 25 percent to 33 percent of Saudi defense spending. Iran spends only about 20 percent of the amount allocated by the six sheikhdoms in the Gulf Cooperation Council â a consistent trend since the Iran-Iraq War ended in 1988. Iranâs land forces Iranâs land forces are large by regional standards, with some 350,000 men in the army and 100,000 in the IRGC land forces. Neither is well equipped. They do not have modern tanks or armored vehicles. Their roughly 1,600 tanks are largely locally made Zulfiqars and some 480 aging versions of the Soviet-designed T-72. (T-72's lol) Iranâs air and air defense forces Iranâs air force and the IRGC air branch are its weakest military elements. They have 25,000 to 35,000 members. The International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) says Iran has an inventory of some 312 combat aircraft. But 40 percent to 60 percent have limited or no mission capability at any given time, and many are so old or poorly supported that they cannot sustain a high sortie rate. Iranâs navy and the naval branch of the IRGC Iranâs 18,000-man navy and 12,000- to 15,000-man Naval Guards pose the most serious threat to other Gulf states and the U.S. Navy. Iranâs Navy oversees operations in the Caspian and the Gulf of Oman. The naval branch of the IRGC oversees Gulf operations. Both have serious limitations. They lack modern surface vessel combat capability and depend on four obsolete frigates and three obsolete corvettes from the shahâs era with limited modernization and uncertain combat readiness. Iran is apparently building a prototype Mowaj-class corvette/destroyer, which is not yet operational. Analysis: The United States could destroy all key elements of Iranian military power in virtually any scenario in a matter of weeks, if Washington had the support of Iranâs neighbors. It could inflict devastating damage in a matter of days. Iranâs missile and potential nuclear capabilities should be weighed against vast U.S. and Israeli superiority in existing missile and nuclear capabilities. Israel alone could win any nuclear arms race with Iran for at least the next decade. Iran could not win any serious confrontation with Turkey, and cannot match the rate of modernization and defense spending by Saudi Arabia and the five other Gulf Cooperation Council sheikhdoms. *My Comment: Nobody over there needs us to deal with Iran. http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/conventional-military Trying to find a good Jane's link.
The only one of our "allies" (and I use this term loosely) Iran has the capability to affect is Israel and Saudi Arabia. That's it. And their military is not designed for conquest, it is designed for defensive structure. The moment they start wandering around outside of Iran, they'll be easy to pick off. They are no threat, and Paul has the right of it.
This video is exactly what you need to see. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/I8NhRPo0WAo?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>