The single greatest obstacle to an invasion of Iran is the complete lack of troops. We simply lack the force strength to mount any major operations whatsoever. We have 147,000 ground forces in Iraq alone out of a total Army force strength of 504,000. Of course we still maintain our troops in Germany, Japan, the Philippines, Panama, and South Korea. Oh yeah, and in Afghanistan too.
Of the troops not stationed in those security zones and not currently deployed in our two war zones, virtually every other combat unit is either recuperating from tours of duty in Iraq or Afghanistan or gearing up to deploy over there in the coming months.
Almost half of our combat equipment has been rotated thru Iraq in the last 3 years and much of it is in need of repairs.
Bush & Cheney may want to attack Iran for all I know (tho that doesn't fit their behavior pattern at all--they've NEVER attacked a country with a decent military in their lives. A war against Iran would require several times over more troops and equipment than what was deployed in Iraq--for that matter the offensive against Iraq was ridiculously understaffed.
I'm not arguing that we won't attack Iran. I'm saying literally that we
can't. There's no Army there to attack them with. The worst threat we have to offer is an unsupported air strike. Only China and Russia have both warned us off against a preemptory strike on Iran--Iran is one of Russia's biggest weapons and systems clients and China is dependent on Iran for its oil supplies.
Besides the fact that any airstrike against Iran that wasn't backed up with a ground invasion would be a joke, the almost certain retaliation by Iran against US fixed positions in the Persian Gulf would result in an economic shutdown of the Persian Gulf. You may not think Cheney & Bush care about world opinion but you know damn well they won't jeopardize oil sales! Here's some facts to chew on...
from Asia Times
"Twenty-one reasons Iraq is not working"
How many US troops are in Iraq today?
About 147,000, according to General John Abizaid, head of US Central Command, significantly more than were in-country just after Baghdad was taken in April 2003 when the occupation began.
How is the Pentagon keeping troop strength up in Iraq?
Four thousand troops from the 1st Brigade of the 1st Armored Division, operating near Ramadi and nearing the end of their year-long tour of duty, have just been informed that they will be held in Iraq at least six more weeks. This is not an isolated incident, according to Robert Burns of the Associated Press. Units are also being sent to Iraq ahead of schedule.
US Army policy has been to give soldiers two years at home between combat tours. This year alone, the time between tours has shrunk from 18 to 14 months. "In the case of the 3rd Infantry," writes Burns, "it appears at least one brigade will get only about 12 months because it is heading for Iraq to replace the extended brigade of the 1st Armored."
<snip>
As of now, write Shanker and Gordon, "so many are deployed or only recently returned from combat duty that only two or three combat brigades - perhaps 7,000 to 10,000 troops - are fully ready to respond in case of unexpected crises, according to a senior army general".
How many active-duty US Army troops have been deployed in Iraq?
About 400,000 troops out of an active-duty force of 504,000 have already served one tour of duty in Iraq, according to Peter Spiegel of the Los Angeles Times. More than one-third of them have already been deployed twice.
How is Iraq affecting the army's equipment?
By the spring of 2005, the US Army had already "rotated 40% of its equipment through Iraq and Afghanistan". Marine Corps mid-2005 estimates were that 40% percent of its ground equipment and 20% of its air assets were being used to support current operations, according to analyst Carl Conetta. In the harsh climate of Iraq, the wear and tear on equipment have been enormous. Conetta estimates that whenever the Iraq and Afghanistan wars end, the postwar repair bill for army and marine equipment will be in the range of US$25 billion to $40 billion.
<snip>
How many American and Iraqi troops and police are now trying to regain control of the capital and suppress the raging violence there?
About 15,000 US troops, 9,000 Iraqi army soldiers, 12,000 Iraqi national police and 22,000 local police, according to the commander of US forces in Baghdad, Major General James Thurman - and yet the mayhem in that city has barely been checked at all.
You can continue to think of Bush and Cheney as omnipotent and capable of unleashing any hazard on the world at will. But the fact is that what you're seeing as "indications and evidence OF an invasion" is really just their hollow, pathetic saber rattling trying to scare Iran into a compliance that it has no need to seek. Iran has already called our bluff. The only reason they continue the posturing is their oversized unjustified egos and the need to keep as many voters scared of Iran as possible.
I for one have no intention of swallowing their usual fact free shit.