Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Iran repels simulated air attack in war games???

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 02:01 PM
link   

The Revolutionary Guards land forces fought back the hypothetical air strike from enemy helicopters, planes and missiles with 620 anti-aircraft cannon and shoulder missiles, state television said Tuesday.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Link


Think they are trying to make a point???

Think it will fall on deaf ears????

Think it is really going to scare the US????




posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 02:04 PM
link   
I know I'm scared, who would think being the "great Satin" ould suck so much



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Iran doesn't stand a chance of repeling a US invasion, period. Iran is not significantly stronger than Hussein's Iraq. The US military was designed to be able to invade and defeat the Soviet Union, on multiple fronts, while repeling attacks against the US mainland.

They have no chance, at all, of repeling a US attack. They clearly COULD have a wildly violent insurgency that racks up lots of US casualities and causes hundreds of thousands of Iranian civilian deaths, and that could cause the american public to decide to pull the American troops out of the smoking, ruined, husk that was iran, but they sure as heck can't actively defeat the US military in the field.



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 02:07 PM
link   
But we have to kill them because they're a threat right?



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 02:11 PM
link   
I never said we have to/should/will invade iran.



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 02:12 PM
link   
They don't have to REPEL the attack - that would be impossible. They just have to make sure it's costly enough for the US that they can claim some measure of success against the big bully on the block.

With US public opinion largely driven to be anti-Iraq-war because of the casualty count, how many opening day casualites will it take for the "Iran war" to be seen as not worth it on day 1 or 2?



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by LookingIn
They don't have to REPEL the attack - that would be impossible. They just have to make sure it's costly enough for the US that they can claim some measure of success against the big bully on the block.

They won't be able to claim anything because they won't exist anymore. Hussein's cohorts can't claim success against hte US, even when teh US does leave Iraq in a year or so.


With US public opinion largely driven to be anti-Iraq-war because of the casualty count, how many opening day casualites will it take for the "Iran war" to be seen as not worth it on day 1 or 2?

I think its kinda moot point anyway, if we're leaving iraq, we're certainly not going to get involved in Iran. Part of the reason why the US was reluctant to get involved in open warfare in the past was because of the "vietnam effect", too many casualities caused public protest, and that lead to pulling out. But then we had the Balkan's War and the Gulf War, and people realized that we could fight and win. The Iraq War completely undid that, and now we're back to where we were then. Too reluctant to stay in one country, let alone start invading another.

Any other country will notice this, and plan accordingly. The US is basically pretty weak and unable to act right now, so now'd be a good time to take the most 'dangerous' or 'provacative' actions.



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 03:35 PM
link   
At least if the US go into Iran alone ,there won't be any more incidents of friendly fire



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrmonsoon

The Revolutionary Guards land forces fought back the hypothetical air strike from enemy helicopters, planes and missiles with 620 anti-aircraft cannon and shoulder missiles, state television said Tuesday.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Link


Think they are trying to make a point???

Think it will fall on deaf ears????

Think it is really going to scare the US????


This is funny because I'm sure we were watching these "hypothetical air strikes" and now we know how they will react to an air strike and we can act accordingly. This trial run just showed us what they will do in that situation. Smart on their part



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Here is what scares me the most!

I feel that this administration is capable of anything when it comes to justifing their agenda. Americans are very war weary and they know it.

Looking back:

When America went into Somalia in the early 90's (93 I think) on a peace mission to give their people food.We had eigteen troops killed and some of our dead were drug through the streets of Mogudishu and it was brodcast on CNN. I don't even know what sparked all the violence. Nonetheless, Americans were irate and we quickly pulle out.

These politicians are not stupid! They know it will take an event that is greater than or equal too Pearl Harbor or the World trade center event to justify bombing Iran, and that is what they ultimately want. A regime change in Iran.

Forget that the Iranian Prime minister was one of the students that kidnapped americans and held them for over a year in the early eighties. Forget that Iran was responsible for the 1983 Marine Barracks bombing that killed more American marines since Iwo Jima. Forget that Iran is responsible for the American Embassy Bombing in Lebanon in 1983 that killed around 60 Americans. Also, the 1983 bombing of the American Embassy in Kuwait that killed six, forget that too. Also, pay no attention to the 30 or more Americans that were kidnapped beteen 1982-1992, that is not important. I can go on but that is not the point.

My point is:

The Bush administration knows that before we attack Iran, something will have to happen that not only unites Americans but also causes the world to aid us in our attack, ala World trade center bombings and Pearl Harbor.

Personally, Iran is way over due for their spanking as far as I'm concerned, but I am in the minority. Something major will have to happen in America or to one of our closest allies (Israel) for America to be justified when we do finally attack Iran.

I suspect that within the next two months, we will see the spark that ignites the flame. It's going to happen so be ready!



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Think they could repel an attack from isreali? heh What a crock. Iraq had a bigger army no?



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 07:42 PM
link   
I wounder.... If they failed to repel the attack , think they would have told us?



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 08:40 PM
link   
I might be a bit of a dummy but i look at the world map coalition forces in Afghanistan,Iraq,and Turkey likly to help out, Iran faces a possible three front war, Its like a war game, if i was playing moving my pieces around the board Iran looks in trouble hit from all directions. i thought from the out set of this war that Iran is the next likely Target..
I would love to see a stable Middle East but i fear The "Mother of all wars " is the only way in the curent climet that stability could be achievd the thought of Iran having a Nuke weapon in its arsnel scares the crap out of me and Iran would sell even give Our enemies the weapon aswell so i think our paronia is justafied We are in this up to our necks im afraid and that bugs me coz it looks like its all because of LIES we the public where Duped but honestly does one seriously think the Coalition can pull out with honour. im just some jo blow in Austrailia who just wants to provide for my family be as happy as we can be etc etc But it all seems like Doom and Gloom, but if they are going to do it DO it well and get the bloody job done im sure some jo blow Iranian wants the same for his family And i dont want my son fighting this war in 15years time. anyway my two bob's worth.



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
They won't be able to claim anything because they won't exist anymore. Hussein's cohorts can't claim success against hte US, even when teh US does leave Iraq in a year or so.



Thats hogwash. See how many of the former "Deck of Cards" villians were actually charged with anything. The majority of them were released with the exception of a few that went on trial. While they may not be able to claim an actual victory, what exactly did we accomplish? Plenty of those Baathists exist just maybe not in Iraq right now.



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Nothing was accomplished in Iraq other than the realization that the U.S is truly the largest terrorist organization on this planet more than willing to use coercion to further their own interests.




Iran is not significantly stronger than Hussein's Iraq.


Exactly where are you deriving this from?

Luxifero

[edit on 20-2-2007 by Luxifero]



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 09:22 PM
link   
This was on Wiki,

en.wikipedia.org...

The Islamic Republic of Iran has two kinds of armed forces: the regular forces and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), totalling about 545,000 personnel.[1] Both fall under the command of the Ministry of Defence & Armed Forces Logistics.[2]

* The regular armed forces has an estimated 420,000 troops in three branches: Ground Forces, 350,000 troops; Navy, 18,000 sailors; and Air Force, 52,000 airmen.[3]
* The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps has an estimated 125,000 personnel in five branches: Qods Force (Special Forces), Basij (Paramilitary), Navy, Air Force, and the Ground Forces.[4]

Iran also has a paramilitary volunteer force called the Basij (or Baseej), which includes about 90,000 full-time, active-duty uniformed Basij members, up to 300,000 reservists, and a further 11 million men and women who could be mobilized.[5]


Luxifero



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 09:23 PM
link   
If the Iranian Revolutionary guards said so, it must be true.

If it ever comes to blows it will be almost funny as the Iranians fire off their hardware at unamanned UAV's and bogies during that first night, finding that all they really did was shoot into the sky and waste their weapons.

The US Airforce combined with the Navy is sort of like the Green Bay Packers of old. You know what they are going to run and how but you still can't stop them. First Irans C&C and air defences will go, then the airfields and harbors. After that, it is command of the skies. Don't think the small amount of new Russian SAMS will make a difference, I'm sure we already have their locations scouted out. Once air superiortiy is gained that is all she wrote for Irans military capability in any meaningful manner.



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by MinMin
paronia is justafied We are in this up to our necks im afraid and that bugs me coz it looks like its all because of LIES we the public where Duped but honestly does one seriously think the Coalition can pull out with honour.


Duped? In afghanistan? Iraq?

Which one is more justifiable? Answer..Both of them. And to put it plainly, there was NO 'duping' to it. Of course, the facts are that Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Vladamir Putin and 77 of 100 Senators (including Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and John Edwards) all believed that Saddam had WMDs, particularly since he used them against the Kurds and Iranians before. The whole world thought saddam had WMDs. So no, its not just bushys fault.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
The US military was designed to be able to invade and defeat the Soviet Union, on multiple fronts, while repeling attacks against the US mainland.


The US military certainly wasn't capable of doing such things while the Soviet Union existed.

Iran is certainly capable of preventing a US invasion, considering the state the US military is in, that is if Iran plays its cards right.
AAA guns aren't going to stop the USAF, that's for sure.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by GiantPanda1979
Think they could repel an attack from isreali? heh What a crock. Iraq had a bigger army no?


Size isn't everything and if you honeslty think 2003 Iraq is in anyway comparable to 2007 Iran then you are sadly mistaken.





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join