U.S vs Iran

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tabaco

New Member
If there were to be a war against Iran how would U.S approach it?fighting against Iraq wasnt felt as a citizen living in the U.S. I am sure that Iran poses a much better fight than Iraq since it has much more firepower. Do you think they would be capable of deploying a nuclear weapon against the U.S?Is the U.S as of now prepared to fight a war of that magnitude? Can the Iranians pose a brutal threat to the U.S airforce?



What do you think guys?
 
I'm sorry, but we've got really bad experiences with Country vs. country threads in the past (they've all turned real bad, without exceptions) so we don't allow any of them in here now.
The only exception are historical C vs. C threads..
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/faq.php?faq=forum_rules_features
12. No country vs. country threads are allowed (would X beat Y, my country is better than yours etc..) Almost all of these kind of threads have turned real nasty in the past! Historical country vs. country threads are still allowed.

Thanks for understanding. :smil:
 
Edit: Redleg's warning was posted while I was writing (very bad timing), so I didn't see it until after I posted. The thread doesn't seem to be locked, so I am not sure what I should do. I didn't post anything offensive, just an observation of Iran's military strength. I'll keep the post below, if the staff wants me to remove it thats fine, but let it be known that I am not intentionally defying the staff by posting this and would expect a little understanding before giving me an infraction.

Well first of all forget nuclear, its been proven that the Iranian nuclear program was closed in 2003. Thats not a consideration

Although I am certain what the final outcome would be, Iran could hurt us along the way.

First of all consider that unlike Iran is nothing like Iraq. Iraq is loose group of different Muslim tribes of very different ethnic backgrounds. Iran is 100% Persian, and they are very proud of it. Iran is very much like Israel. Its a small country (only 20 Million population) surrounded by Hostile nations on almost all sides, which means they take self-protection very seriously.

What does this mean from a military standpoint? Well unlike Iraqi's (pre-invasion) poorly educated, poor trained, poorly equipped, poorly motived conscripts, the Iranian military while smaller is British Army trained. They are highly disciplined, well equipped and supplied. But even more dangerous is that they are very nationalistic. They are simply ferocious when fighting an invader. Ahmadinejab and the Mullahs are not popular in Iran, but the population would swarm to their side in a patriotic fervor in case of an invasion. During the Iran-Iraq war there were Iranian adopted suicide tactics used by the Japanese at Iwo Jima. The initial invasion of Iraqi forces was stopped by soldiers strapping bombs to their chests and charging Iraqi tanks.

Secondly consider the numbers. Iran has about 420,000 Active Duty (and more could be Mobilized in case of a national emergency. The US is about 1 Million spread all over the world in our present situation. I have no idea how much could be mustered for an attack on Iran, but it would certainly be difficult to get 420,000 without either help (which we would not get) or a draft.

Since they haven't been cripped by a UN arms embargo there equipment is slightly out of date, but not by much. Most of it dates from the 70s and 80s. They have F-14s, Migs-29s, T-72s, BMPs, they also fabricate many of there own weapons locally.

Iranian Air-Defence is significant and it was recently upgraded with S-300 SAMS -the latest in Russian SAM weaponry. It also has some anti-surface ship missiles the Sunburn that are designed specifically to sink US aircraft carriers.

I have long argued against any military invention in Iran. I don't doubt the ultimate conclusion, but I think it would be very costly.
 
Last edited:
You spelled Tabacco wrong...

Now to the topic, I don't think my post will be over the line because I'm not advocating attack Iran or assuming an "Us vs. them" argument.

One in four people in Iran has been trained for combat, their "paramilitary force" is listed as being greater than 11,000,000 strong. Basically, Iran already has a highly trained insurgency ready to go so an invasion would be quick and almost painless, much like in both rounds in Iraq, but the occupation would be far more serious. But this whole idea of invading Iran may not even be necessary. The mullahs are not as popular amongst the students and other young Iranians as they were thirty years ago when it was Iranian students who helped put them in power. Additionally, Iran's population started to increase massively two years ago and their economy has not kept up, there are five Iranians entering the workforce for every one job every year right now and it doesn't seem to be changing any time soon. Combine those two elements and you've got a nation with a large, angry, unemployed population that's looking to blame someone, anyone but themselves really, for their problems. It's a breeding ground for revolution.

Attacking Iran is well within our capabilities but a stupid decision from our stand point, it would require the largest mobilization of troops since Korea with no public or political support from back home. Plus as mmarsh said, the second the first bomb hits we unify all 70 million people in Iran against us and they will rally around the Mullahs.
 
Plus as mmarsh said, the second the first bomb hits we unify all 70 million people in Iran against us and they will rally around the Mullahs.

Which is exactly what happened in the Iran-Iraq war. The Mullahs were already under domestic pressure and then Saddam did the Mullahs a giant favor by invading Iran. When that happened the Mullahs domestic opposition all but evaporated and they had a united nationalistic force taking up arms.

The rest was history, Saddam's conscript army got spanked.
 
Plus the Mullahs used that new public support to rid the government and military of any and all dissenters.
 
I'm going ot stay out of this one and re-report it...

Why report it? I see no "us versus them" posts here at all, and I am learning a lot about the capabilities of the Iranian defensive and political postures.

I fully understand RedLeg's concerns and, for whatever it is worth, I completely agree that CVC threads are dangerous ground to tread as they seem to always degenerate. While this thread was started as a CVC topic, it has not reached that point and has instead turned into a discussion of the ability of Iran to defend itself. Like it or not, they ARE our enemy, and studying the ways and capabilities of one's enemy is simple logistical sense.

Not that anyone asked me, and not that my opinion counts for anything here, I say let it stay open. Nothing wrong with discussing their capabilities and letting the rest of us learn a little bit in the process.
 
I'd say if the US just went in to smash and leave, Iran won't stand a chance. Unless it has a nuclear weapon and places it underground or something, draw US forces in and then remotely detonate it.
 
There's some different factors here I think...

First of all, in a scenario like that USA would no doubth win the war, but I'm not so sure that they will be able to win the peace, and that is far more important in my opinion.

Then we have to take a look at the history books again, how vise is it to open up a two front war, not to mention a three-front war?
Ask the Germans and you'll hear it...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top