2000: McCain Presidency and 2005 Invasion of Iran

What if John McCain won the Republican nomination, won the 2000 presidency, and invaded Iran instead of Iraq? According to research done about McCain, he was very pro-Israeli and anti-Iranian, and Iran was a bigger threat to Israel than Baathist Iraq. Ahmadinejad would become president in 2005 because eventually Iran would grow uncomfortable with the US in Afghanistan. The grounds for an Invasion of Iran would be Iran getting closer to detonating a nuclear bomb than in OTL. With no Invasion of Iraq, what would happen to Saddam? Who would become president in 2008? If Saddam was still in power past 2010, would an Iraqi-Russian Alliance be plausible or would Putin prefer Iraq's rival Assad? I would guess that Putin would try mediating Iraqi-Syrian rivalry and try to make anti-Americanism a common cause.
 

Deleted member 1487

Depends, does Iraq help? It would be a very nasty situation regardless and would make the occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the War on Terror look like a walk in the park. McCain goes down as a very bad president and probably forces a restart of the draft to make manpower ends meet, because volunteering will drop off a cliff and contractors won't be cheap or easy to come by. Casualties and cost will be high and the occupation will last at least a decade if not more. Its much worse if Afghanistan is involved.
 
What if John McCain won the Republican nomination, won the 2000 presidency, and invaded Iran instead of Iraq? According to research done about McCain, he was very pro-Israeli and anti-Iranian, and Iran was a bigger threat to Israel than Baathist Iraq. Ahmadinejad would become president in 2005 because eventually Iran would grow uncomfortable with the US in Afghanistan. The grounds for an Invasion of Iran would be Iran getting closer to detonating a nuclear bomb than in OTL. With no Invasion of Iraq, what would happen to Saddam? Who would become president in 2008? If Saddam was still in power past 2010, would an Iraqi-Russian Alliance be plausible or would Putin prefer Iraq's rival Assad? I would guess that Putin would try mediating Iraqi-Syrian rivalry and try to make anti-Americanism a common cause.

Two things:

1. Iraq wasn't just sitting around minding its business in the run-up to the Iraq War. The sanctions regime established at the end of the Gulf War was killing people by the hundreds of thousands and the Oil for Food thing wasn't a huge improvement. And the no-fly zone was also problematic - if not as costly in human lives. Bottom line - the situation was untenable. Whether or not McCain decided to do anything is another story, but it would be something he'd have to at least choose to ignore

(NB - this isn't an endorsement of the Iraq War, far from it. Just knocking down the idea that Bush picked it via dartboard and that nothing would have happened were it not for his administration).

2. Iran is not Iraq. It's bigger, with rougher terrain, more stable, and has a long history of not liking America. It'd be 1000 times tougher at least. I'm not sure America could invade and occupy Iran without total war level economic disruption and industrial scale human rights abuses. Which means he might have the crazy idea, but it has a snowball's chance in Phoenix of getting past Congress. And McCain's not reintroducing the draft for that same reason, because he can't do it unilaterally, and it would be counterproductive at best even if he could.
 
Depends, does Iraq help? It would be a very nasty situation regardless and would make the occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the War on Terror look like a walk in the park. McCain goes down as a very bad president and probably forces a restart of the draft to make manpower ends meet, because volunteering will drop off a cliff and contractors won't be cheap or easy to come by. Casualties and cost will be high and the occupation will last at least a decade if not more. Its much worse if Afghanistan is involved.
Iraq is left out of this invasion given its poor relationship with Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and the West. In OTL, following the September 11th Attacks and prior to the Invasion of Afghanistan, the government announced that a re-instatement of the draft would be done if necessary. What if the McCain administration reinstated the draft then and there?
Which means he might have the crazy idea, but it has a snowball's chance in Phoenix of getting past Congress.
From what I read from other threads, the Iraq War greatly affected the 2004 and 2006 legislative elections. Without an Iraq War in 2003, Democratic winners of OTL might not have won in 2004 but maybe in 2006 because of the more unpopular war. With Congress more conservative, they would probably react to the Iran War the same way as OTL's Iraq War.
 
Depends, does Iraq help? It would be a very nasty situation regardless and would make the occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the War on Terror look like a walk in the park. McCain goes down as a very bad president and probably forces a restart of the draft to make manpower ends meet, because volunteering will drop off a cliff and contractors won't be cheap or easy to come by. Casualties and cost will be high and the occupation will last at least a decade if not more. Its much worse if Afghanistan is involved.

This.

Two things:

1. Iraq wasn't just sitting around minding its business in the run-up to the Iraq War. The sanctions regime established at the end of the Gulf War was killing people by the hundreds of thousands and the Oil for Food thing wasn't a huge improvement. And the no-fly zone was also problematic - if not as costly in human lives. Bottom line - the situation was untenable. Whether or not McCain decided to do anything is another story, but it would be something he'd have to at least choose to ignore

(NB - this isn't an endorsement of the Iraq War, far from it. Just knocking down the idea that Bush picked it via dartboard and that nothing would have happened were it not for his administration).

2. Iran is not Iraq. It's bigger, with rougher terrain, more stable, and has a long history of not liking America. It'd be 1000 times tougher at least. I'm not sure America could invade and occupy Iran without total war level economic disruption and industrial scale human rights abuses. Which means he might have the crazy idea, but it has a snowball's chance in Phoenix of getting past Congress. And McCain's not reintroducing the draft for that same reason, because he can't do it unilaterally, and it would be counterproductive at best even if he could.

Under the right circumstances, it's not politically impossible to get Congressional support for an invasion of Iran (without the bad memory of the Iraq War, it's probably even more likely to happen). McCain could always argue they are the greater threat to the US/Israel, compared to Iraq. And they probably were. It's also not impossible to reinstate the draft, either.

Allow me to plug an exceptional timeline about an invasion of Iran

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=365466

Thanks for the plug! :)


Iraq is left out of this invasion given its poor relationship with Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and the West. In OTL, following the September 11th Attacks and prior to the Invasion of Afghanistan, the government announced that a re-instatement of the draft would be done if necessary. What if the McCain administration reinstated the draft then and there?

From what I read from other threads, the Iraq War greatly affected the 2004 and 2006 legislative elections. Without an Iraq War in 2003, Democratic winners of OTL might not have won in 2004 but maybe in 2006 because of the more unpopular war. With Congress more conservative, they would probably react to the Iran War the same way as OTL's Iraq War.

IMO, the best chance for a draft is right after 9/11. Congressional support is the key.
 
2015

This.



Under the right circumstances, it's not politically impossible to get Congressional support for an invasion of Iran (without the bad memory of the Iraq War, it's probably even more likely to happen). McCain could always argue they are the greater threat to the US/Israel, compared to Iraq. And they probably were. It's also not impossible to reinstate the draft, either.



Thanks for the plug! :)



IMO, the best chance for a draft is right after 9/11. Congressional support is the key.
So how might 2015 look? The Arab Spring would still begin in late 2010-2011 but there would be no ISIS and Iran having nuclear weapons wouldn't be an issue either. Would the Democratic president keep the draft or end it? When's the earliest the US could withdraw from Iran?
 
IMO, the best chance for a draft is right after 9/11. Congressional support is the key.

Right after 9/11 is probably the only realistic chance a President would have for getting a draft implemented in recent history.

If McCain waits until 2005 how is he going to get America on board to go invade Iran? Go on an even bigger propaganda campaign than the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq? Try to make congress and the American people think Iran is on the verge of building nuclear weapons and the only chance is to strike now before it's too late. Would he try to invade Iran using the existing military and then be forced to try to get a draft doing when it wasn't doing well?

Before the 2003 Iraq invasion a majority of Americans did favor the idea of invading Iraq. However as the war dragged on public opinion dropped, I could only imagine the reaction if Bush had tried to get a draft implemented a few years after the invasion.

A draft would make war hit home to many more Americans, unless the President could make the people they were under direct threat I don't see how the American people could be convinced to go along with the sacrifices of a draft and the effect to the economy that would come along with it.
 
I don't think he can sell an invasion of Iran to the American people.

You are underestimating the scare effects of "Iran with nukes" plus the power of the Dark Side of the Force: i.e., Right Wing Media:(


What if the McCain administration reinstated the draft then and there?

"The McCain Administration" wouldn't be the ones to do it. Its Congress or nothing. And the last time it was voted on (during the W Administration) it was voted down nearly unanimously, with only two members of the House Democratic Black Caucus voting for it.

It's also not impossible to reinstate the draft, either. IMO, the best chance for a draft is right after 9/11. Congressional support is the key.

Look at all those kids, and their parents, storming the White House lawn and Capitol Hill screaming: 'NOT WITH MY KIDS YOU'RE NOT!'

Right after 9/11 is probably the only realistic chance a President would have for getting a draft implemented in recent history. (1) Would he try to invade Iran using the existing military and then be forced to try to get a draft doing when it wasn't doing well? (2)

Before the 2003 Iraq invasion a majority of Americans did favor the idea of invading Iraq. However as the war dragged on public opinion dropped, I could only imagine the reaction if Bush had tried to get a draft implemented a few years after the invasion. (2)

A draft would make war hit home to many more Americans, unless the President could make the people they were under direct threat I don't see how the American people could be convinced to go along with the sacrifices of a draft and the effect to the economy that would come along with it.(3)

1) The US military didn't need the Draft for A-Stan.

2) Imagine the death of the Republican Party, or at least the killing of the Tea Party in its crib. Congress angrily rejects McCain's request for a Draft, which the military will oppose anyway! A Draft produces more disciplinary problems in a platoon of draftees than in a division of volunteers!

3) At the end of Vietnam, as the Draft was winding down, the Draft was gutted of many of its "protect the children of the rich" deferments, but only because the number of Drafts were drying up and Vietnamization had reduced the number of GIs in SE Asia so drastically. To have the Draft instituted today, you'd either see all those boys of privilege putting on COMBAT uniforms or else see the mega-deferments returned. Lots a luck.

Congress would pull the plug on the war first.
 

So how might 2015 look? The Arab Spring would still begin in late 2010-2011 but there would be no ISIS and Iran having nuclear weapons wouldn't be an issue either. Would the Democratic president keep the draft or end it? When's the earliest the US could withdraw from Iran?

Chaotic. McCain's reputation plummets because you have a Conservative Congress reinstate the draft and approve his invasion of Iran. The GOP is mortally wounded and the Tea Party dies in its crib. Mitt Romney runs in 2008 and loses to Hillary or Obama. The only Democratic President who could really clean up this mess is Hillary. OTL has shown that Obama's promised "change" was only a baby step and that he was largely politically inexperienced. If he becomes president per OTL and joins the NATO intervention in Libya, he would lose the Democratic Primaries of 2012 to another Democrat, otherwise, Benghazi would be blamed on him, affecting the elections. Sure there would be no ISIS and no discussion of Iran going nuclear but, ISIS would be replaced by a radical Shiite organization operating between Iran and Iraq. The Civil War in Iraq is between Baathist Saddam, Radical Shiites, and the Kurds. The Civil War in Syria is between Baathist Assad, the Kurds, al-Nursa, and the Opposition. Once the Democrats take over Congress in 2007, they pull the plug on the draft. Because the Occupation lasts a decade, the US would most likely be still withdrawing in 2015. I can see what you were going for with a new Cold War. With the Shah restored, Iran is allied to the United States again and with the Baathists still around, Iraq and Syria are allied to Russia.
 
Last edited:
With the Shah restored, Iran is allied to the United States again and with the Baathists still around, Iraq and Syria are allied to Russia.

Good luck getting the Shah visiting Iran as a citizen, let alone restored. He would have even less legitimacy than a puppet "democratic" Iranian government consisting of flunkies plucked from Westwood, which is most likely to occur under McCain.
 
Chaotic. McCain's reputation plummets because you have a Conservative Congress reinstate the draft and approve his invasion of Iran. The GOP is mortally wounded and the Tea Party dies in its crib. Mitt Romney runs in 2008 and loses to Hillary or Obama. The only Democratic President who could really clean up this mess is Hillary. OTL has shown that Obama's promised "change" was only a baby step and that he was largely politically inexperienced. If he becomes president per OTL and joins the NATO intervention in Libya, he would lose the Democratic Primaries of 2012 to another Democrat, otherwise, Benghazi would be blamed on him, affecting the elections. Sure there would be no ISIS and no discussion of Iran going nuclear but, ISIS would be replaced by a radical Shiite organization operating between Iran and Iraq. The Civil War in Iraq is between Baathist Saddam, Radical Shiites, and the Kurds. The Civil War in Syria is between Baathist Assad, the Kurds, al-Nursa, and the Opposition. Once the Democrats take over Congress in 2007, they pull the plug on the draft. Because the Occupation lasts a decade, the US would most likely be still withdrawing in 2015. I can see what you were going for with a new Cold War. With the Shah restored, Iran is allied to the United States again and with the Baathists still around, Iraq and Syria are allied to Russia.
How does the Obama joining the 2011 NATO Intervention suddenly make him lose face bad enough to make him lose the 2012 Democratic National Convention?
 
McCain, according ATL, invades Iran after winning reelection in 2004 which he would have to defend a war that will take up a lot of resources but also the financial collapse which the Democrats may see the same electoral success in 2006 and 2008 as they did in OTL.
 
What if McCain, like Bush, places Iraq, Iran and N Korea as the Axis of Evil in 2002. Same as Bush.

Iraq and N Korea are contained. McCain focuses on Iran. He has the Pentagon draw u plans for an invasion of Iran in 2002 (USA still involved in Afghan)

The Casus Belli is not made up, but an actual blunder by Iran. Iran does something to provoke the USA. How close were they to detonating a test nuke? Lets say they actually do? Or President Iamanutjob places his goal as exterminating Israel and any country that backs Israel. He comes out as saying that he would use nukes against the USA, he says that it would be easy to smuggle nukes in to detonate.

McCain uses this and his McCain doctrine that the USA will respond to threats the same as actual events to start an air campaign against Iranian nuclear facilities and military targets.

Iran responds by attempting to shut down the Persian Gulf.

USA escalates to invasion to secure world oil supply.
 
Chaotic. McCain's reputation plummets because you have a Conservative Congress reinstate the draft and approve his invasion of Iran. The GOP is mortally wounded and the Tea Party dies in its crib. Mitt Romney runs in 2008 and loses to Hillary or Obama. The only Democratic President who could really clean up this mess is Hillary. OTL has shown that Obama's promised "change" was only a baby step and that he was largely politically inexperienced. If he becomes president per OTL and joins the NATO intervention in Libya, he would lose the Democratic Primaries of 2012 to another Democrat, otherwise, Benghazi would be blamed on him, affecting the elections. Sure there would be no ISIS and no discussion of Iran going nuclear but, ISIS would be replaced by a radical Shiite organization operating between Iran and Iraq. The Civil War in Iraq is between Baathist Saddam, Radical Shiites, and the Kurds. The Civil War in Syria is between Baathist Assad, the Kurds, al-Nursa, and the Opposition. Once the Democrats take over Congress in 2007, they pull the plug on the draft. Because the Occupation lasts a decade, the US would most likely be still withdrawing in 2015. I can see what you were going for with a new Cold War. With the Shah restored, Iran is allied to the United States again and with the Baathists still around, Iraq and Syria are allied to Russia.

Agreed with all save two points:

1) A return to the Draft is ASB. You could do a doctoral dissertation on all the reasons why.

2) Benghazi was, is, and will always remain an issue of the Republican Party Base and the Republican Base ONLY. Any Independent who polls as saying that they are "concerned" about Benghazi, or would in any way have Benghazi as an issue to determine their vote, is actually a Republican who doesn't want to admit their party affiliation. That, or they are an Independent who votes Republican in every election except Dogcatcher.:p
 
Figurehead

Good luck getting the Shah visiting Iran as a citizen, let alone restored. He would have even less legitimacy than a puppet "democratic" Iranian government consisting of flunkies plucked from Westwood, which is most likely to occur under McCain.
Is the Shah becoming a figurehead with virtually no power plausible?
 
Top