Neocon argument: Paul is wrong about Iran's Army

G

grunt

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
36
I would assume that if we dig a bit deeper we will find out the real facts. I need some help arguing against this:

The more Ron Paul talks, the more he demonstrates his unfitness for the office he seeks — and maybe for the office he holds. Yesterday on Meet the Press, Paul came up with a number of stunners, but his take on Iran may have been the most clueless of all:

MR. RUSSERT: So if Iran invaded Israel, what do we do?

REP. PAUL: Well, they’re not going to. That is like saying “Iran is about to invade Mars.” I mean, they have nothing. They don’t have an army or navy or air force. And Israelis have 300 nuclear weapons. Nobody would touch them. But, no, if, if it were in our national security interests and Congress says, “You know, this is very, very important, we have to declare war.” But presidents don’t have the authority to go to war.

Paul shows himself to be completely clueless in this passage. Iran does have an army; in fact, their Revolutionary Guard comprises not just a military but also a financial and intelligence apparatus that keeps the mullahcracy safely in power. The Artesh (regular forces) consists of a navy, an air force, and ground forces, all of which are duplicated in the Revolutionary Guard. Instead of having no military, Iran effectively has two of each branch.

The military expenditures in Iran mirror that of the US. Teheran uses 2.5% of its GDP on military spending, while the US hovers around 4% — and our forces reach all around the world. Iran has a substantial military, one that is well-funded and one that serves a dual purpose of threatening its neighbors and cowing dissent at home. It also funds a serious ballistic missile threat which affects the balance of power in the region. The new Shahab-3 can reach to Europe and certainly represents an existential threat to Israel.

But that isn’t the extent of the Iranian threat. Iran also funds terrorist movements, especially Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad in Syria and Lebanon. Those funds don’t get counted in the percentage of GDP, but they sustain an important column in the aggressive Iranian strategy for hegemony in the region. Any consideration of the threat Iran represents to the world has to include this — which once again Paul inexplicably ignores.

More than anything else Paul has said or done in this cycle, this statement should disqualify him for any consideration, serious or not, for the Presidency. His constituents in Texas ought to rethink his qualifications for Congress, too.
Click to expand...
 
But their military is a major JOKE. Compared to ours, it might as well be non-existent.
 
Ron Paul was obviously talking comparatively. The premise of the conversation was a comparison that was being made between Iran and Israel wasn't it.

Basically he's saying that Iran's army is so abjectly pitiful in comparison to Israel’s that if they tried to invade they might as well be out there fighting with pots and pans, in comparison between the two, they have no army.

Just think about the grand army of Iraq, what a half million regular soldiers and the 'feared' Iraqi republican guard. How long did it take the American army due to the technological advantage to smash it apart? Same thing would happen when comparing Iran to Israel. RP apparently thought the fear-mongering question was idiotic.....cause it was. Isreal would rip Iran a new one in two seconds if they tried to invade.
 
jabrownie said:
Just think about the grand army of Iraq, what a half million regular soldiers and the 'feared' Iraqi republican guard. How long did it take the American army due to the technological advantage to smash it apart?
Click to expand...

We're still there.
 
"The military expenditures in Iran mirror that of the US. Teheran uses 2.5% of its GDP on military spending, while the US hovers around 4%"

O. M. F. G.

Are they joking? our GDP is 1 trillion, you know what we've spent on these disasters? I'm not even going to tell you, you go look it up and that's not counting the non-discretionary/black ops/intel spending.

How can someone lie that big and not burst into flames?
 
It is not the job of the president to protect Israel. It is the job of the president to protect the UNITED STATES! Israel will have to fend for itself for a while. Mommy and Daddy have some personal business to take care of.
 
All the Pro-war folks need to go fight in those wars.

I'd love to have a direct democratic vote for every war with mandatory enlistment for every "yes" vote.
 
Israel without American assistance could probably lay waste to the entire middle east, these guys you are trying to rebut were undoubtedly the ones who were brain washed by FOX and ran around telling everybody about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and the millitary might of the feared republican guard, they are war mongers who believe all the BS propaganda. you need to gather undisputed facts and lay them at thier feet.

One thing you must understand is don't waste to much time on these people because people who choose not to accurately inform themselve and believe in MSM are confrontational and not easily swayed from thier kill'em now before they get us attitude.
 
Thanks for the help. I posted some rebuttals using the information posted here.

This was my first reply, the second was just the Military Spending Calculations:

I sorry, but every candidate in this race has said something that should disqualify them.

Iran may have an air force, but it wouldn't stand a chance against Israel. Their army, doesn't have the logistical support to attack anything that's not next door, and if it could attack Israel with it's decades old technology, we would know about it long before they tried.

The only real method to attack Israel is through terrorist organizations. We currently put a straight jacket on Israel and then ask them to defend themselves from these groups.

Meanwhile, other candidates will continue to have us spend $1 trillion+ on a foreign policy that we charge to a credit card for our kids to pay. At this point in time, ignoring all future expenditures, we have charged $12,000 (per head, before the last war spending bill) to our government credit cards to pay for this war. We are not leaving Iraq anytime soon, so that number could double or triple. This should disqualify all of the other candidates from consideration, serious or not, from the Presidency.

Don't ask me, ask the General Comptroller of the Government Accountability Office:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=zXIufIXPsYs
Click to expand...
 
Was just trying to point out that compared to Israel, nobody else over there has an army. Anybody in the middle east who tried to invade Israel would lose, massively and quickly. For now, Israel can handle their own defense just fine.
 
Basically - if the US stopped trying to play games in the ME, Israel would have to negotiate and cooperate with its neighbors.

Despite the neocons wet dream, all those muslims/arabs aren't going anywhere. In fact they are out breeding Israeli Jews and Israeli Jews may soon be a minority in Israel.

If Israel ever set off a nuke - the price of oil would go thru the roof as Hormuz was shut down and it would set up WWIII with Russia and China stepping in and some Pakistanis would probably use it as an excuse to give a nuke to whoever they wanted in self defense.

Frankly Israel as it's run now is just a racist apartheid regime propped up by the AIPAC influenced US policy that needs a huge change in attitude.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top