I fully intend to rip Frosty a third hole to speak from (he's already using something significantly lower than his mouth) but first I want to answer
ShadowXIX who made a much better point.
In short, America will not retaliate against MRBMs which are not aimed at American nuclear facilities until they impact because it is not unheard of
for ballistic missiles to carry conventional payloads.
In both wars against Iraq there have been attacks by Scud B and Al Hussien SRBMs which were belived at the time (and in some cases really were) armed
with chemical weapons. America never retaliated in kind.
It is likely that Iran could make gas and incindiary attacks, in clear violation of international law, without suffering a response in kind unless
these tactics made it utterly impossible for America to win conventionally. Even if these tactics resulted in a sudden defeat, America would likely
not retaliate if already beaten, simply because there was nothing to gain but plenty to lose politically. As stupid as it may seem, Iran would almost
be able to go to the UN and say "America is picking on poor defenseless peaceloving Iranians" right up until they had driven the last nail into
America's coffin. Thats just how things are when everyone gets sick of you calling yourself "the last super power".
Originally posted by Frosty
Haha, this is a joke right? Our B-2 base in Diego Garcia is well out of range of Iranian missiles, and well within range for the B-2 to run bombing
missions full throttle. Logistics also come to mind. The US, when it fights wars, fights them half way around the world ie. Iraq, Yugo, WWII, Iraq
(again), Vietnam, and Korea. It is able to mantain a constant supply of troops, food, and ammunition. Would the Iranians in their own country be able
to afford such methods?
Meanwhile, back on Earth, distance is still a disadvantage, the Iranians are by no means in the grips of a famine, and as long as they like rice and
small amounts of chicken the Chinese would never let them be.
Phase One: Once Iranian military provokes the US, it will be the first such instance that a government has ordered it's military to attack US service
men since Pearl Harbour. The US will quickly mechanize itself and quickly on the advantage by having two large concentrations of troops and air power
on BOTH sides of Iran.
I have already stipulated that Afghanistan would be invaded at the outset and Pakistani cooperation would be minimal thanks to the assisstance of
China. The lack of pakistani cooperation would mean that no US heavy assetts such as tanks could ever reach Afghanistan, and even troops would have to
violate Pakistani airspace to be dropped in. The US would have to go to war with Pakistan first if they wanted to take Iran form both sides. I'm so
glad to see that you didn't read my post, or else I'd have to take you seriously.
In Diego Garcia B-2's will immediatly begin to bombard the Iranian strongholds, sparring no expense (these meaning we will most likly go back to the
Patton and MacArthur days of bombing tactics which included HEAVY amounts of civilian casualties. You think civilian casualties are horendous in Iraq,
wait till a nation provokes the US in the manner you are suggesting.
I'm calling the DEA- you are obviously on crack if you think that the US is going to intentionally massacre civilians in a nation as outmatched as
Iran. Such an act would DEMAND internatonal intervention, and the Chinese would have a blank check to move any amount of their own airpower, pilots,
and airdefenses that they wanted into Iran.
Not to mention there are large concentration of US troops in Japan and South Korea and a host of B-2's in Guama just iching for deployment the second
something like this happens.
Yeah that's a great idea. Let's just pull everyone out of the Pacific and tell North Korea to sit still while we go fight Iran. I'll call my buddy
Kornflakes tomorrow and ask him if he's itching for a war too. Last time I checked he is only in South Korea because he thought the uniform would get
him laid, and he can't wait to get out of the Army before he has to go get shot at.
Phase Two: There is no way the Iranian Navy can compete with any US Aircraft carrier or sub. What are the Iranians going to blockade the Persian Gulf
with, the iron clad steamships they have?
First of all, Iran has a large supply of Silkworm cruise missiles if I recall correctly. Furthermore, landbased airpower, even if less advanced than
the enemy carrier airwing, is a real threat to a ship, which in and of itself should keep the US out of the Persian Gulf or Northern Arabian Sea. It
does not take a destroyer or a nuclear submarine to fight a naval war either. Small patrol boats and diesel submarines supported by the proper sonar
equipment and armed with a sufficient supply of torpedoes can hold a small area of coast easily, especially when a straight or other form of
You are assuming way too much that the US is not going to respond immediatly, and you assume that any provoking of US forces by Iranian military will
not gain the US any significant allies such as the UK, Austalia, Netherlands, and maybe even France, Germany, Japan, and hell who knows the Russians
might take offense to this, they share the Caspian Sea with Iran do they not?
1. It takes 3-6 months for America to plan, prepare for, and launch an invasion even without being attacked in transit. The Iranian strategy I have
outlined concentrates on a strategy of delaying American deployments by attacking them at sea using a tactic which was HORRIFYINGLY SUCCESSFUL (in
fact the entire US invasion force ended up at the bottom of the gulf in that pentagon excercise) in a wargame prior to the invasion of Iraq. The
Pentagon didn't learn either- they just tied General Van Ripper's hands so that he couldn't embarrass them anymore, and finally he quit because
they weren't learning anything from him.
2. France disagrees with American foreign policy and wants to see America embarrassed. Germany is not culturally focused on the outside world and is
slow to fight when Prussians aren't in charge. The Netherlands simply does not have the necessary size to affect this scenario appreciably, nor would
they have any stake in this war. Japan only sends token forces with America to lend the appearance of internationalism and they do it because of
American oil-blackmail. Australia is a fine partner to have but they'd taken even longer than America to mobilize large forces to Turkey because of
their location and the avenues which Iran makes unavailable. The UK would almost certainly give assistance but they have been factored in because the
wars in which American deployment time was 3-6 months were all fought with UK cooperation.
Yes, Russia would help- they would be helping the Iranians by murdering everything America tried to do in the UN and selling food and any other
necessities, possibly even weapons to Iran. Russia is certainly not afraid of Iran but is certainly peeved by America meddling in former soviet
republics such as Georgia and Azerbaijan- which would likely come to an end as the result of this war.
Phase Three: So it has been 3-4 months and the US has done nothing to counter the Iranian attack?
It took 2 or 3 months to counterattack Afghanistan when they had no appreciable regular military and a friendly rebel group which controlled part of
the country. We also had an ally on their border to help us, which we dont have in this case. It was not stated, because it was not important, that
the airwar would have been going on for all of these first 4 months, but it would be far less productive than past air campaigns because Iran is not
quite as bass-ackwards as Iraq, and would have heavy support from China in terms of hardware and training.
Phase Four-Five: Wait, now you say it will take the US nearly a half year to counter Iranian actions? Even more laughable. How long did it take the US
to mobolize its forces in the Pacific when Japan attacked Pearl Harbour?
At the beginning of WWII America had been anticipating hostilities from Japan and had been preparing for quite some time. Even still it took 8 months.
Pearl Harbor was attacked on December 7 1941. A relatively small force of 10,000 Marines landed on Guadalcanal for the first US offensive of WWII on
August 7, 1942. Anyone who wishes to debate successfully must always remember never to ask a question without knowing the answer- learn that now and
I'll embarrass you less often.
That was over 50 years ago, we are much better at mobolizing our troops on a quicker time schedule and not only that we are right next to the enemy in
We aren't right next to them in this case. Actually, from California, where I live, I'm almost exactly 180 degrees longitude from Iran. If I were on
the same latitude as Iran, there wouldn't be anywhere in the world I could go to get further away.
You are probably referring to our occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, which only means that a large number of our troops are sitting in Iran's back
yard, spread out around a bunch of cities and inadequately supported for open war. For Iran to overrun our forces in Iraq (which they MAY be able to
do even right now, with a little luck and a lot of planning) would devastate our military capabilities. Think about it- we have so many troops in Iraq
that we'd have to start a draft to keep them there for a long period of time or to start even a small fight anywhere else. What if they all DIED? We
wouldn't be fighting anybody for a while, even with a draft.
Phase Six: Geography, the US wouldn't send in ground troops first, they would simply bombard the Iranian strongholds and supposed facilities and
storage units for WMDS to sh!t. There probably wouldn't be too much to go in with ground troops and conquer. You are still assuming that the US is
inept and will not mobolize its forces after having a barrage of Misssiles launched upon its forces.
I'm not saying we wont mobilize, I'm saying that it will take months to complete the mobilization. I am also sticking to the fact that even against
the WORST airdefenses imaginable airpower never gets more than 10% of the job done.
And how are you gonna bomb WMDs you can't find? The last time America tried to fight a war from the air alone all they blew up was a couple of
pharmaceutical companies and a Chinese embassy.
And what do you propose that America will do to protect all of these airplanes? What stops a car load of Iranian teenagers from driving over to the
air base and beating up all of the pilots with a baseball bat?
GROUND TROOPS! That means that a serious air war can't start until a sufficient ground force is in place to defend them. We can fly a few sortees,
but no shock and awe.