Originally Posted by Cadet Seaman
Originally Posted by TBA_PAKI
Originally Posted by Whispering Death
Originally Posted by JumpingFrog
Pres. Bush just said on BBC World that he is not ruling out a future military intervention.
Do you think the US still has the added ooomph to take on Iran considering their current situaton in Iraq?
We have 12 Nimitz class aircraft carriers and multiple large airforce bases in Iraq. We've got enough free assets to cripple Iran even without ground pounders if such a decision was deemed in our National interest.
IRAN has ballistic Missiles that are much better then SCUD Missiles of IRAQ and these Missile will become a major problem for US bases in IRAQ and also the US cannot afford to avoid IRAQ in case of conflict in IRAN.
Also that their would be no European Allies like in case of IRAQ and US forces will have to battle with a fresh and experienced military of IRAN who have studied the GULF WAR and also the current WAR and that means a more drastic challenge.
If you are opting for this option then prepare for a long and bloody conflict until US withdraws from both nations.
And how do they plan to deal with our heavy armor, gunships, ect.. they would have to devert to unconventional tactics just like Iraq.
Thoughout history every enemy has fear the U.S. Japan feared the "Sleeping Dragon", the NVA and VC found out you can't fight the U.S. in conventional ways, thats why most enemies have fought in unconventional tactics.
Besides our contigancy plan is if we are hit with cehmiclas, nukes, or bio weaposn we hit the enemy with a nuclear strike. Land, Sea and Air.
IRAN has no Nuclear Weapons and that option gets ruled out easily and if it has some then their would be no talk of conflict.
Use of Ballistic Missiles as conventional weapons is not a provocative case for a Nuclear War. But the problem is that these are weapons of fear for the troops on ground. Stationary US forces in IRAQ and on border regions would face a grave danger from these weapons.
Plus the US will have to commit much more soldiers then it did in case of IRAQ, if they want to get a sweeping victory.
IRAN is a big country and geographically very ideal for gurreilla warfare and Iranians are not starved like Iraqis and there do not exist such ethnic diversities like in the case of IRAQ.
The occupation process would take much more time compared to the 21 days in IRAQ. The conventional battle would be a success for US forces but death toll would be high and then cost of maintaining the occupation of such big country would be enormous and not to forget that massive resistance program that Mullah's will originate.
Just because we dont live in IRAN does not means that they have not been preparing for this ultimate situation.
Iranian leader already said that his armed forces have made the necessary preparations for the in-evitable situation if it develops. You have to keep this thing in mind.