PC: U.S. fights all the Axis of Evil under Bush
- Thread starter Gurroruo
- Start date
Iran, perhaps, although the further on you go from 2003 the less likely it is, as the American public get war weariness from the lack of total victory in Iraq. North Korea, not so likely unless they attack South Korea first.
The 2005 Stand-up comedy tour...possible...
The 2005 Stand-up comedy tour...possible...
Konrad Sartorius
Banned
If the US were to successfully occupy Iraq right after invading it (i.e. 300,000 troops+ serious political plan) than there is no insurgency.
The American public might be more supportive of going after Iran then.
North Korea, probably not.
The American public might be more supportive of going after Iran then.
North Korea, probably not.
Which brings us into another problem, 300k troops unable to leave Iraq for the time being, say at least a decade or two, certainly not within Bushs two terms. With those, plus Afghanistan, pushing into Iran is going to stretch things a fair bit.
During a famine, North Korean troops fire upon South Korean positions (not unlike when they did so recently) and accidentally hit American installations. The South Koreans and Americans fire back. A truce is very quickly called and the North Koreans deeply apologize and receive some foreign aid.
An American patrol in Iraq gets lost and wanders near the Iranian border. Some Iranian troops do the same and with some bad luck the two groups run into each other. After skirmishing for a while, they both realize who they're dealing with. A crisis begins the next day, which ends in Iran and the US agreeing to keep a better ey on where their soldiers go.
An American patrol in Iraq gets lost and wanders near the Iranian border. Some Iranian troops do the same and with some bad luck the two groups run into each other. After skirmishing for a while, they both realize who they're dealing with. A crisis begins the next day, which ends in Iran and the US agreeing to keep a better ey on where their soldiers go.
PODs for Iran and North Korea could make the wars plausible and completely justified but the Bush administration was hellbent on settling unfinished business in the unjustifiable Iraq. France and Germany saw right through that WMD presentation and would not join a senseless invasion. The earlier the US fights Iran, the better but if they face North Korea and/or Iraq first the worse. For North Korea to occur, the justifiable POD would be for North Korea to invade South Korea again or accidentally nuke the US, Japan, or South Korea. Though the US would have a chance to end the Korean War once and for all, China would probably intervene diplomatically or militarily, as their worst nightmare was to have a Korean Peninsula unified under Washington's influence. To prevent China from intervening, the Second Korean War would have to begin with North Korea accidentally nuking the US or its allies. New tensions between the United States and China leaves me unsure of whether China still purchases part of the US debt. The earlier the US invades Iran, the better chances they have of overthrowing the Islamic Republic, as they'd have more troops to commit. To justify an invasion of Iran, the PODs would have to be that Iran feels unsafe about the US being right on their border (Afghanistan), resulting in an earlier election of Ahmadinejad and the Iranian nuclear program is accelerated and much closer to a nuclear weapon than OTL. Bush could reasonably sell the world that Israel and the United States are in jeopardy, considering Iran could secretly sell terrorist organizations Hezbollah and Hamas Weapons of Mass Destruction. Without the Second Gulf or Korean Wars happening first, the US could throw everything they have at Iran via Afghanistan. Israel and an Arab coalition (save Saddam, Assad, and Gaddafi) might join in to eliminate the Iranian threat once and for all. The Shah will be restored but, the best option to prevent him from having absolute power would be to establish a constitutional monarchy like the UK's. Either way, Iran's mountainous terrain and strong resistance would make any war against it hell for the invaders, forcing the US to focus on Iran the most. With Iran's new friendly government in place, the US could use the Two Pillars Strategy (that is, if Saudi Arabia is willing to join) to make short work of Iraq. (The Iranians would be eager to settle unfinished business from a decade before the US'). Iraq is almost unjustifiable but, for the sake of OP's scenario, the US uses its phoney bologna WMD excuse. The three wars would be very consequential however. The US would have overextended themselves and would be much weaker politically and economically. With significantly less troops, the US might have to resort to the draft again, as they would be committed to Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, and (if China does not intervene), the newly unified Korea. Iraq's lack of credibility could get Bush impeached and earning a legacy as a warmonger. However, Bush could be remembered positively for being the president that ended the Korean War and Gulf War for good. The US having spent their troops and weaponry against the "Axis of Evil" would be less vocal about the actions of leaders worldwide such as the Russo-Georgian and Russo-Ukrainian Wars. Although Iran was the first invasion, Iraq would be the first for the US to withdraw troops from because there is a lot more work to be done in Iran. Obama's bombings against ISIS and Gaddafi would either be extremely limited and on a lesser scale or not happen at all. Combining war weariness and the draft, ending wars would be most appealing to the American public, rather than starting new ones. Iran would make Vietnam look like a petty disagreement.
Last edited:
That scenario would require John R. Bolton to be vice president and take over once Bush is impeached. Except, you forgot to add Libya.
elkarlo
Banned
I remember Newsweek or Time beating the war drums soon after Iraq. They wanted Syria and Iran taken out. Esp Syria as they felt it was low hanging fruitIran, perhaps, although the further on you go from 2003 the less likely it is, as the American public get war weariness from the lack of total victory in Iraq. North Korea, not so likely unless they attack South Korea first.
The 2005 Stand-up comedy tour...possible...
Ian_W
Banned
Any serious political plan needs to acknowledge that the surviving Shi'a political figures survived because they largely escaped over the border into Iran.
Sistiiani - who is a believer in democracy as a protection against tyranny, which is hated by God - is going to be calling his people onto the streets if GWB starts massing forces for an invasion of Iran ... just like he did when the Americans started dragging their feet on democratic elections.