View Single Post
  #2  
Old October 19th 06, 05:07 AM posted to us.military.navy,rec.aviation.military.naval,sci.military.naval,alt.politics.bush,us.politics
jJim McLaughlin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default the USS Eisenhower Carrier Battle Group doesn't make for a 'massive'build-up for war with Iran

William Black wrote:

As usual some thought provoking and interesing materal, which can best
be found by

SNIPS OF MUCH FOOLISH CHEST THUMPING BY BOTH "DEFENDARIO" AND "DARN GOOD
INTELLIGENCE"



After a nuclear attack on Iran Russia and China would almost certainly start
a campaign to marginalise the US internationally, and they'd get a lot of
support. I don't know if you noticed but the US isn't that popular at the
moment.

Ports all over the world would close to US shipping, attacks on US
embassies and tourists and US owned industrial plants. Along with
international boycots of US products plus China would dump all those
dollars.


Dump them where?

The only "victim" of a Russian or Chinese led "boycott" of the US or
attempt to marginalize would be the comlete implosion of the PRC's
economy, and the subsequent melt down of the domestic authority of the
PRC government.

How does the old line go, " If ypu owe the bank a mllion bucks ad ca't
pay ou are in trouble. If youowe the bak a illion bucks and can't pay,
the bank is in trouble."

The PC economy, and the PRC work force, can not risk edangering their
American markets.

World War III or a huge US depression...

Your choice...