It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran: The Likelyhood That They Will Attack The US in Iraq First?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 09:21 PM
link   
With due credit to our ATS member insite, in another thread he raised this possibility, that Iran may very well attack the US forces in Iraq first. ATS searches revealed no thread titles on the subject, so I appoligize if this has been raised in another post.

But this seems entirely plausible, given the current state of affairs.
1) The US continues to publish reports that they have evidence Iran is developing WMD's, despite Iran's claims to the contrary, and despite the recent deal with the IAEA.
2) The Iranians are no doubt considering the fact that the US launched a war in Iraq with no formal declaration of war, required by our Constitution. And the US also did this despite very strong opposition from the rest of the world. Therefore, opposition to the US threat against Iran bears less weight.
3) Iran, like a wounded animal, has been backed into a corner, with a US force across their border, and a very real threat. Wounded animals with no other option usually do one thing, and that is attack.
4) Iran may not wish to wait until the US develops a stronger force there to attack them. They may also be sensing a lower morale among US troops, IF reports of this are true. The recent US Army mandatory no-loss poilicy of keeping US soldiers in Iraq against their will may lend some credence to this point.
5) Iran just started conducting the most extensive military exercises ever, as just reported in another thread.
6) Iran has tried al-Qaida members themselves instead of handing them over to US forces, despite requests.

These and other reasons make insite's point a real consideration, IMO. So what's yours?




posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 10:33 PM
link   

originally posted by sep
I seriously doubt that Iran will invade Iraq. First off, Iraq is a flat ground therefor it is good for the side with more technology. Iran is not going to send in their forces to get slaughtered in open desert.
-ATSNN

The article states that it involves the air force. Why wouldn't Iran be able to repeat the assault the Americans carried out? Largest military exercises EVER on the border??


Sep

posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by insite
Why wouldn't Iran be able to repeat the assault the Americans carried out?


That is not a hard question to answer. Iran cannot raise the same amount of bombers or jets as the US, and when Saddam was in power his whole country was pretty much a sitting duck, now (I assume) there is air defences around the country which makes it difficult for any country to attack. Irans best chance is to control the Persian Gulf (using their anti-ship missile), and try to take away the supplies and spare equipment of the Americans, and then start a huge land invasion backed up by their cobras and artillary. And before they do this, they should stir up things in Iraq using their influencial clerics, help a few people in Afghanestan and then suprise the Americans.

But again there remains alot of questions and alot of risks, like is America going to use WMDs to stop Iran from controlling oil and save themselves a humiliating defeat? Are the Iranians going to fight offencivly because the Iranians really hate attacking people without being provoked. What aircraft does Iran have? they are very secretive. They announced they could mass-produce Shahab 3, what do they mean by mass-produce? Can the Shahabs get past the Americans shields? How many cruise missiles has Iran imported? How many planes has Iran imported? How many planes has it produced? How will the Iraqis react to the invasion of their land by "Persians" who they learned to hate for many years? How will the Eu, Russia and China react? Who side will Pakistan be on? Will Turkey allow their air space to be used? Who will remain allies with the Americans? How will the American public react?

When all this is answered then we might get a reletive picture of what might happen and find out if Iran will attack the US or not.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 11:00 PM
link   
The odds are 1 in a thousand if that, they are no fools....



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 11:01 PM
link   
All good questions sep. Hard to predict, but not as impossible as previously thought. I just read another report that a US general is hinting that some forces may be coming out of Iraq after the elections there. So that raises the quesstion where are they going?



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 11:05 PM
link   
If they did attack us in Iraq, then that would be just about perfect wouldn't it. Remember the Highway of Death?



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Iran doesn’t need to attack Iraq in order to make trouble for US. US is currently having problem with Iraqi Sunnis which only consists 20% of Iraq population, the other 80% consists of Kurds 20% and Shias %60 and Iran have influence in both, so if Iran really feel threaten, she can supply and finance these people and they will fight the war for us.
Also Iran could order Afghan Northern Alliances to attack US forces in Afghanistan.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by persian
Iran doesn’t need to attack Iraq in order to make trouble for US. US is currently having problem with Iraqi Sunnis which only consists 20% of Iraq population, the other 80% consists of Kurds 20% and Shias %60 and Iran have influence in both, so if Iran really feel threaten, she can supply and finance these people and they will fight the war for us.
Also Iran could order Afghan Northern Alliances to attack US forces in Afghanistan.


Your right,and im sure that iran has already helped the insurgents.
If iran attacked us in iraq, it would only fuel the fire and give us an excuse to use force against them directly.something our leadership would love to do.
One fact is for sure,the iranian military is alot more dug in then saddams.
im sure their generals have learned alot from watching us in both iraq wars.
Theres no way we can attack iran without igniting the entire arab world.
things would quickly become unmanagable.IMHO



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 01:27 AM
link   
The likelyhood Iran would strike coalition forces in Iraq, currently or in the immediate future, given the state of current international affairs is extremely remote.

On December 5, 2004, Iran stated and declared it [Iran] is under no obligation to allow nuclear inspectors access to military facilities.

I was reminded of a speech given by the former president of Iran Hashemi Rafsanjani (1989-1997) which occured December 14, 2001. Containing mainly hints to Iran seeking nuclear weapons as a regional deterrent to the country of Isreal and Western influences. Specifically, in this speech he stated, "If one day, the Islamic world is also equipped with weapons like those that Isreal possesses now, then the imperialist strategy will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Isreal will destroy everything. However, it will only harm the Islamic world. It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality." This man was not speaking alone nor to an unattentive and non supportive culture.

If Iran truely has ties to the nuclear 'black market', and I see no reason why they would not, (China, North Korea, Lybia, Russia, Nigeria, etal.), would not elements and channels inside these circles know of 'illegal' purchases and exchanges for events and purposes either by governments or organizations? Armed with that information, (or even the hint of fact) as a governemnt wouldn't it at least be prudent to prepare for a defense should the finger get pointed your way (in Iran's case another finger) after such an event or prepare to take advantage of a catistrophic situation because the element of surprise is on your side.

If the United States, Europe, the UK and/or Isreal were attacked with nuclear weapons or devices, any and all currently proliferation defiant nations would be open to obliteration. At the same time the United States', Europe's, the UK's and Isreal's interests would be wide open to attack.

From 1980 to 1988, Iran sustained 600,000+ casualties during a border war with Iraq. How much more would she give as would other Islamic fundementalist nations to sacrifice her forces and people in the name of God and Islam? Perhaps she knows what to prepare for when the first domino falls.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 01:29 AM
link   
Why would they spend the time and resources for this? Iraq will clearly be a shiite country. An Iran redux.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 01:35 AM
link   
My opinion is that Iran won't do anything to jepordize their WMD development. It would be illogical for them to start a war with America at this time.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 03:27 AM
link   
Agreed, notice how al-sadr is keeping relatively quiet in iraq lately , maybe some pressure from Teheran to keep sji'ites out of the crosshairs from the americans for a while until the "peacefull" nuclear program is in place. Also I think that they will try avoid getting any international terrorist attacks getting somehow linked to them. Given the change Washington would like to "find" OBL in Iran.

That's from a strategic perspective.

From a tactical perspective starting a war in open desert seems unattractive for the iranians , better wait for the americans to start one (also politically better, as to try convince the world who is the agressor) and wait near the cities. Naturally having nukes and missiles, preferably capable of reaching saoudi oilfields and or israel would make even Rumsfeld more cautious, after all, the damage would stretch beyond some bodybags, and a lot of corporate interests could be hurt in the process, can't have THAT kind of collateral damage now can we?


[edit on 7-12-2004 by Countermeasures]

[edit on 7-12-2004 by Countermeasures]



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 04:21 AM
link   
Ok, so the general consensus is here that no chance the Iranians will attack us first in Iraq. At least, not without being directly provoked further that is. So what about if the US or Israel lauched pre-emptive strikes against their supposed nuke facilities? What then? Just sit back and take it? Or at that point do you think they would attack?



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Ok, so the general consensus is here that no chance the Iranians will attack us first in Iraq. At least, not without being directly provoked further that is. So what about if the US or Israel lauched pre-emptive strikes against their supposed nuke facilities? What then? Just sit back and take it? Or at that point do you think they would attack?



It would be a disaster. The terrain in Iran would be hell on infantry and tanks. There will be no run to baghdad like in Iraq. Hell, they should go back to practicing on caribean islands. Less of a fight and you are guaranteed a win.


Sep

posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Ok, so the general consensus is here that no chance the Iranians will attack us first in Iraq. At least, not without being directly provoked further that is. So what about if the US or Israel lauched pre-emptive strikes against their supposed nuke facilities? What then? Just sit back and take it? Or at that point do you think they would attack?


No, i would say they will start and uprising which will cause great harm to the US. The most influencial cleric, sistani, is an Iranian and he is keeping everyone calm, if he calls for war that is what he will get.

Israelis, if they attack Iran will see a small uprising by Hezbollah (they havent done much for a few years), they are armed to the teeth and are just itching to attack. Iran can cause great harm without getting involved, and as someone else said before they could start an uprising in Afghanestan. Now imagine a bunch of Islamic Republics, two of which are filled with oil, and imagine the kind of things they would be capable of. And when this happens the former USSR states will probebly fall one by one. So we have a bunch of Islamic Republics who have the Russian technology and are filled with oil and natural gas. Peter the Great said that if a country controlled Istanble to India they will contol the world. Now except Turkey and India, the Islamic Republics can control it. Now after this fall we have to see what will happen to the other Arabs. Are they going to remain as they are? or are they going to fall under the pressure of their population? All hell COULD break loose.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 08:09 AM
link   
I think it wont matter. Or happen at all for that matter. First of all, the US is watching Iran like a hawk right now, it certainly would not be a surprise if they started an attack. Secondly, even though Iraq is not a haven for US supporters right now, they hate Iran even worse, Muslim or not. Iran would meet Iraqi resistance as well as US resistance.

I think if they did attack, and I think (hope) Iran understands this, the US would use massive air power to decimate their ranks long before any large ground engagements would occur. You must also understand that large ground fights in open desert we excel at. We have no difficulty there. And there is a lot of open desert between Iraq and Iran.

Now, to play devils advocate here a bit:

Iran is probably seeing this as an opportunity to get a piece of Iraq that they so desperately desire. They probably assume the Iraqis would welcome them to help fight off their current occupier. Iran is also assuming that the US’s might is so stretched right now they would have a fighting chance.

Bottom line:

Iran would fail. They certainly could complicate things for a bit, but any methods of attack they have wouldn’t work. Ground attack would be futile, they simply could not traverse all that distance without getting detected instantly and destroyed shortly after by the air. Remember the Air Force is hardly stretched at all right now. An air attack would be even more futile. Even Iran’s “formidable” air force wouldn’t last more than a day or so. So that leaves missile attacks. Although this would be “effective” in a sense, it wouldn’t win any fights. Just a random terror type of attack with no real outcome other than fear. Nukes. Now nukes would be another thing. But I don’t think Iran would risk it. The repercussions would be immense and rather instant. Israel would attack them instantly as well as the US. The world would side against Iran right away and things for Iran would get bad real fast. Yes, the world would be against Iran, even US “enemies”. Nobody wants a “sketchy” newbie nuclear power that’s willing to use nukes in regional, preemptive strikes.

So, the motivation may be there, but if they have any sanity at all, they will just sit still and behave. The US will be in downtown Tehran soon enough and the Iranians can fight them all they want..



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join