It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


A look at a war in Iran and what would likely happen

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 12:38 AM
There's a lot of talk of a war with Iran, how big it would be, how long, etc etc. To tell you the truth there are so many views to it and so many ways to view it it's ridiculous. So I wanted to put up a few things to basically get the story straight of what a war would look like and what it would be like, etc etc.

First point up, there will be NO third world war if a war with Iran breaks down.

The reason is simple. Iran does not matter that much.

The proof of this is in the wording. Iran recently threatened to cut talks with the P5+1.

Who are the P5+1?

The P5+1 are what we all here would call the New World Order. They are the permanent UN security council members, plus Germany (Germany essentially is a permanent member but it's just a WW2 thing). They run the show, more or less. Russia, China, US, UK, France, Germany. Yep. It's what stops a global nuclear war and what enables such a long term peace between the major powers of the world.

To quote,

"If the five permanent members of the UN Security Council -- Russia, China, France, Britain and the US -- plus Germany (P5+1) tighten the UN Security Council sanctions Resolution 1929, they should not expect Iran to continue talks," IRNA quoted Head of the Iranian Parliament (Majlis) National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Alaeddin Boroujerdi as saying on Sunday

What this means is that while we all may like to think Russia or China care about Iran, they don't. The P5+1 were specifically targeted by Iran. Iran would literally cut talks with Russia and China, along with the rest of the P5+1. Iran sees them all as one in the same.

Now looking at the past, Iran HAS discussed this matter with the P5+1. Iran wrote a letter to Germany, and apparantly tried to get nuclear technology from it: temid=26

This IS odd why Iran specifically asked Germany. It seems, from the evidence at hand, that Iran is trying to act like pre-war Germany circa 1930. Seemingly trying to ask for help in matters. Germany basically is like WTF? Because it is not 1930 anymore and is wondering why Iran wants to be like them.

Indeed, much of What Iran is doing seems to indicate its desire to be the New Nazi Germany.

Before we go on, let's get a few things straight about such a statement. What is good and bad about such a thing.

As Winston Churchill put it, the War was to stop German industry, not necessarily to stop Hitler or the third Reich, Reason for that is simple. Germany abandoned the economic banking systems, which enabled such rapid growth.

Likewise, Iran is seemingly trying to reinvent this with new nationalism. Unfortunately, like Germany, they need a scapegoat, as evident by some of those letters to Germany.

So just what does this mean? The Good is that Iran wants a very social nationalistic nation with powerful industry. The bad? they want a victim to blame. Specifically Israel. And because Israel has become essentially a barbarian, indifferent to those they fight in morals and honor, Iran has a pretty good case!

So that's what that means.

Back to what we were talking about, it is faulty to say we have not helped Iran to get to where we are. Indeed Iran has been operating on much of our aid! To which sanctions threaten it.

Just as Henry Ford built Nazi Tanks, it seems we have helped build Iranian military power.

This is also evident by the large numbers of pre-1989 military hardware we've sold to them:

So you see, there is a host of talks going on, and have been for some time.

No one wants a war. Lets get that also straight. There is nothing to gain from a war in Iran.

In fact, The US would probably like it if Iran stayed as it is, with a new Government,

You see, Most Iranian oil does not go to the west, but rather, to the east:

What this means is simple. There is fair share for Oil to the east, as there is for the US from Iraq and Canada. Considering most Iraq oil goes to the East and Europe as well, there's not that much to say for the US being Oil hungry.

So why would the US want Iran to stay where it is with a friendlier government? Because the last thing the US wants is an oil hungry China. If China is fed, the US can enjoy itself without worrying about a complete break down of their own gas flow.

Indeed, it can be said that most of the US' actions is not to take oil for itself, but rather, to divide the conquered oil for the US and China.

The Three way relationship between the US Russia and China also prevents a world war from occurring.

China gets its oil from US wars, so it can continue to grow and develop. This is probably unofficial debt payment for the US. The US does not want to go to war with China because that would be difficult and probably long and for nothing. China is no longer communist unofficially, so the US and China just want to do business and chilax. Russia is not interested in war as they have their own problems. They are more interested in economic deals with Europe, maybe Africa down the road.

So more or less, a war with Iran would result in a WW3 nuclear stand off. it would result in something like the first gulf war. And probably the US would have to broker a deal between the new Iranian government and China, forfeiting most of the oil to ensure lasting peace.

A war would probably involve an invasion of the western portions of the Iranian Republic. Maybe a little bit of eastern strike. It would not be long. maybe a week or two or three. doubtful if we would occupy. More than likely we would strike our targets and contain their army. We would not put many, if any, foot soldiers on the ground.

Now, what does the Iranian army offer? As the link before shows, mainly old USSR and US military equipment. A few custom made jobs. Nothing spectacular. It is essentially Iraq's pre-2003 army, plus a UAV or two.

What Iran wants is simple. It is positioned to be a world power, but the P5+1 do not want another world power. They want a nation that will stay put, not disrupt, give them oil for their money and products, and shut up.

Call it nation building, call it global slavery, call it what you want. No one wants a major war and occupation.

Thus far evidence shows that Iran is try to act like 1930 Germany but does not have the ability to do so for economic reasons.

One COULD argue that Iran wants sanctions so it can be TREATED like pre ww2 Germany and respond the same way.

In the end, everyone needs to calm down about a global war and disaster.

The facts say otherwise. It's the P5+1 against Iran, and Iran doesn't even have the support of half its nation.

More than likely there will be some sort of conflict, but it will be short lived and see the current president and Imams ousted for a US puppet leader who will have to hybridize Iranian right to rule with US relations.

One thing is for sure, this is not over oil. If it was, China would get involved against the US. Instead, the P5+1 have decided to share the oil appropriately.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:22 AM
You said:

"There's a lot of talk of a war with Iran, how big it would be, how long, etc etc. To tell you the truth there are so many views to it and so many ways to view it it's ridiculous. So I wanted to put up a few things to basically get the story straight of what a war would look like and what it would be like, etc etc. "

I say thats just your own opinion. Just another view. Nobody knows what will happen. Look at the Iraq fiasco... That whent well and to plan didnt it? And Afghanistan? That also whent according to plan..... NOT!

Good thread and well thought out but it wont be like that. You forgot to mention the Zionists in Israel. They are dying to drop 1 of their nukes they dont have on Iran. Thagt my friend would be ww3 x10000

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:58 AM
From what I understand, Iran, Syria, Venezeuela etc have a mutal defence pact.. and I personally do not feel they'll let any kind of attack go unresponded to.

So an attack Iran however limited is, IMHO is a game changer, it puts the Iranians in the position of being a liberator of the oppressed in the region.. placing that concept alongside nationalism you have troops feeling they are fighting a just cause against an evil oppressor.

So *If* attacked I would assume the Iranians would attack Iraq and Afghanistan (under the banner of regional liberators) while Syria enters Iraq creating a second front in the country.

There in lies a possible hook up between the 2, and gives Iran a route to supply Syria and from there to supply Lebanon.

I highly doubt israel would not take advantage of an attack on Iran to have a dig at Lebanon/West bank or Gaza..

With the Iranians creating a second front in Afghanistan woud also create issues in that Landlocked nation..

None of those forces have to be big, a few thousand troops in civilian dress spread over a vast areas on each of those fronts negates Western advantages in air superiority etc.

That's how I see it starting... before even looking at the wider picture of how Venezuela, or North Korea will react in their regional theaters.

Personally any attack on Iran will devolve into a mess of multi-fronts in multiple nations realy quickly.. with other nations taking advantage of the opportunity to press ahead with whatever opportunistic neighbour bashing comes up.

Edit to add:
*IF* I was a Western Commander/Strategist, I'd be planning my Amphib assault against Syria or Lebanon, simply to ensure that Israel does not feel so threatened it goes nuclear, as that would devlove the mess futher into a real WW3 situation.

I really hope cooler heads prevail as this could get messy very quickly, and it'll be us, the people of the world, not the elites who would pay in blood for whatever goes down.

[edit on 6/7/10 by thoughtsfull]

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 02:00 AM
Actually, you are getting a bit messed up with the history. Germany is part of the P5+1 group because before the group was formed the Europeans were dealing with Iran as a trio (UK, France and Germany).

China, US and the Russia joined the European framework in their dealings with Iran.

Plus, a point to note is that Germany is a major trading nation to Iran, so their involvement is important.

Lastly, there won't be a war and I hope this thread does not turn into the blabbering justification that Iran should have nukes. AS nuclear armed Iran is a poor prospect for the world and if people don't see that then they are on another planet. Iran has contempt for their own population, so imagine what contempt they hold for others.


posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 08:09 AM
reply to post by Master Shen long

There's no reason to drop a nuke on Iran. Israel would do what the rest would do in a war. Bomb with planes.

The age of nukes is over. The only way you can successfully actually strike a target is via sub, and that requires you to cloak a sub from scans. Not really likely.

No one wants to nuke anyone. especially Israel.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 10:40 AM
To believe that Iran does not have a viable military is foolish. they have about 836 missle launchers capable of launching thousands of missles per day. Not Scuds but sophisticated missles. I would think all airbases and oil fields within their reach would be primary targets. The US may not need Iranian oil but they certainly need Saudi oil. The Iranian army is HUGE. They can easily send a half million troops into Iraq. You, of course know Iran sent a crude satillate into orbit last year which indicates they have ballistic technology. Do not think for a second their military equipment is antiquated. During their war with Iraq, Iraq had the best US eguipment and could not defeat Iran.

Not to mention their allies. Syria and Hezbollah!

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 11:21 AM
Iran's Army < Iraq's 2003 Army < US army

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 11:26 AM
reply to post by gem_man

Yea that's not much. 1950 Soviet Russia got a rocket into space. It's not hard to do. It does not mean you have ballistic capabilities. It means you know calculus.

Missile launchers aren't worth much, considering you can track the tail smoke and pop a rock on it.

Iran's military is made up of antiquated equipment from the 80s. They've only now started developing T90-like tanks and a few interesting concepts, however nothing in mass production.

Iraq had the same stuff. And we beat them without advanced technology on foot. Now we do have advanced technology everywhere. Iran could not make it more than a week or three. There's simply nothing to stop a team of fighters from nailing down everything.

The entire army of Iraq was destroyed in a few days from bombers and fighter planes. What makes Iran any different? They have a few UAVs, but even they are not that advanced.

Point is simple. There's a good reason why Egypt, Iraq, and army others chose to side with America. They get to use out toys.

Also, Hezbollah is nearly destroyed and Syria has a UN force present in the country.

These are not armies to fight. The US China and Russia are all at least 20 years ahead of Iran. the US is a full half century ahead.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:12 PM
Nobody knows what will happen if anyone attacks Iran.

What I hope happens is, whoever does attack them will get their arses kicked right back to where they came from, and they are taught the biggest lesson of all, stop sticking their damn noses into the cultures of other countries, and stop starting wars in the name of profit.

Those who are wanting to go to War with Iran, need a bloody nose, so big that the thought of invading another country will be bottom of their list of things to do for the rest of Mankind's selfish attendance on this Gorgeous World.

Perhaps then we can grow as a race and species, instead of trying to destroy everything we touch.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:24 PM

Originally posted by Master Shen long
You said:

I say thats just your own opinion. Just another view. Nobody knows what will happen. Look at the Iraq fiasco... That whent well and to plan didnt it? they dont have on Iran.....

I hear this alot...Iraq fiasco....why dont you make your case and how these points will manifest in Iran?

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:31 PM

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by gem_man

The entire army of Iraq was destroyed in a few days from bombers and fighter planes. What makes Iran any different? They have a few UAVs, but even they are not that advanced.

Iran wouldnt be much diffrent. There would be some wrinkles. The citizens are not as beaten down as they were in there will probably be some uprising. I for one wont hold my breath untill war...lots of talk right now but it would still be a large undertaking and there is little sign of an all out total war.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:35 PM
reply to post by azzllin

Nope. Iran would be destroyed in a full blown occupational war. That's why I was not going down that path with the post, because Iran is a cultural center and not wise to occupy.

For as long as there have been super powers, they have been sticking there nose in other people's business. That's why they are superpowers.

Persia did its fair contribution to that back in the day.

'fraid that's the way it is. And seeing as evolution takes millions of years, it's not likely we'll change. The World Union will probably be snooping into other alien's business in some day.

Hell, even on star trek the federation, hundreds of years in the future, still tried to influence non-space planets.

Hell, even with the ufo conspiracy, civilizations supposedly millions of years ahead of us are snooping their noses on Earth and trying to change us.

That's the way life is.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:40 PM
This is a fantastic attempt but wrong and missing allot of key concepts. I am struggling were to start but I’ll start with this. Russia, Russia has contracts with Iran to build nuclear power stations. The UN Security Council are not part of the NWO, just look at how week they are and how they argue with each other. Your petroleum figures are out of date by two years. You conveniently missed out that America also supplied Iran with cold war era weaponry and underestimated the Iranian defence industries technical level. A estimation of 1-3 weeks for mission completion is laughable unless your second name is bush, Iran will not be a push over like Iraq or Afghanistan.

You have disregarded Iranian WMD and ICBM capabilities, also worth noting is that current Iranian ICBM technology is not advanced enough for their current missile systems to act as a delivery vehicle for WMD’s. However they have nuclear technology and it is important to factor that in to any battle scenario and to disregard them would be dangerous.!!!!!!!!A-NEW-COLD-WAR-FROM-THE-EAST

[edit on 6-7-2010 by kevinunknown]

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:53 PM
reply to post by kevinunknown

Actually I did show the link to Iranian Military equipment. It is quite obvious we gave them lots of 1980 era technology. I did not leave that out.

the 1-3 weeks is for the actual war. If an occupation occurred it would be another decade before actual peace. The war itself, with fighting forces, would be 1-3 weeks.

Iran is a push over, considering their technological level. It is NOT that advanced. They still use AK74s and Patton tanks, and soviet era tanks. These were what Iraq had. They were all obliterated.

Like someone else mentioned, Russia and China would like to continue doing business in the area. But seeing as most of the nations the US has a presence in sell mainly to the east, they are more than happy to allow the US to go have another war if it gives them more oil. What they are concerned about are the sanctions, as it means they have to lose oil. That is what they do not like. The Russian nuclear facilities are great, and contracts are great too, but they still stand true with or without a US occupation.

And the oil figures may be off, but they have not changed that much. The numbers say that the US is essentially allowing the East to have most of the oil

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:57 PM
A war with Iran would be ill advised. This is based off of the following current information that you can get off of the net, and the different alliances that is right now in place.
For starters it would force the US into a multifront war that it can not afford or support, forcing the US to decide which front to focus on. If you look at the different alliance, we would end up fighting a proxy war with China, on the different fronts, through the different alliances, and there is a good chance that we would lose an ally or 2 in the process that we would need.
The current allies that are directly involved with Iran is the following: Venezula, North Korea and China, those are the major players. Through Venezula, they have alliances with alot of the countries in South and Latin America. Russia does have ties with Iran, yet does not want to loose those ties, as it would mean that it could loose its energy monopoly on Europe and parts of eastern Europe. Some of the allies that the US has, and ties with Iran, countries like Turkey, and probably most of the middle eastern countries, and major players like Saudia Arabia and Egypt, probably exist there.
So this is how things are shaping up. Personally I believe that they are waiting till all of the pieces are in place, having secured alliances that are strong and with the sole thought of hating the United States. If you look at past actions, if one of those countries wants to do something, their allies starts rocking the boat, drawing attention away, from it. So that means if Iran is say wanting to do something behind the scenes, North Korea, or Venezula starts screaming, the world directs its attention to those countries and they move quickly.
I believe that if Iran goes to war with the US, then North Korea will attack South Korea, specifically targeting US bases and interest, then seeking to attack and pacify the rest of the country, while at the same time Venezeula will move on countries in South America, that are supported by the US in the claims of freeing them for US imperialism, gathering up support to go directly against the US, forcing the US and its allies into a three sided war.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 02:03 PM
reply to post by sdcigarpig

I mentioned this. The only difference is that China knows that they would get more oil in the end, seeing as they already do get most of the oil out of US' oil allies. So they and the US would not be in a proxy war, as Chian just wants money and oil for its own people. If it gets more oil in the end, it won;t do anything. And if China does not do it, Russia will not, because Russia has far more deals with China.

Venezuela is part of the South American Union. In other words, it can't do much without the whole of South America. Some hate us, some love us. Point is that they are too divided to unify on the matter. the South American Union stops that. Venezuela's only military qualities is the fact that is is a jungle nation and therefore just like Vietnam. IE, do not invade.

That's probably why Hugo's been pretty quite recently.

And Egypt and Saudi Arabia have military deals with the US to get A3 Abrahms. They WANT that tank, And the technology.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 02:05 PM
reply to post by thoughtsfull

"I was a Western Commander/Strategist, I'd be planning my Amphib assault against Syria or Lebanon, simply to ensure that Israel does not feel so threatened it goes nuclear"

This is the problem here. We shouldn't have pacified and make an apartheid state feel as thought it deserves to be protected, even at the expense of the entire world (Samson Option). The world is already doomed, the Zionist regime has 500+ nukes.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 02:10 PM
reply to post by barrywood

Every nations is an apartheid nation or has been.

Israel has no control in the matter. Israel is a US colony and nothing more. We used Israel to get closer to everyone else in the region. Now there's only Syria and Iran.

My best explanation for this is that we want to feed China and Russia so that they have their oil and don't fight. I don't know why, but most of the oil goes there, so it makes sense.

I know everyone here likes to blame Israel, but like I said in another topic, Israel and Palestine are democracies. They voted for their war and got what they wanted. I can't stop two senile old fools filled with hate from beating each other with a stick until one wins. Israel is king of the dicks, we all know this.

But no nukes will be used. There is o money in nukes.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 02:13 PM
reply to post by Gorman91

It would take allot longer than 3 weeks, you could double it to get a minimum. Saying that Iran has the same equipment as Iraq and therefore the wars will be of the same length shows a lack of understanding in military operations. Even at that, they are far more advanced that Iraq they have their own defence industry that produces tanks and fighter jets some commentators also think there is a possibility they have a biological or chemical weapons capability. As for tanks, yes they have some M60’s but they also have more advanced MBT’s. The even have a few F-14’s kicking about.

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 02:13 PM
reply to post by Gorman91

But China is a major player. North Korea and Iran will not go to war, unless they know that China is going to back them, and will seek to goad the US into taking the first shot. China is a major supplier to North Korea and Iran, as well as has been making in roads into South America and Latin America, namely the Panama Canal, which the US has stopped before, and right now Venezeula, and Cuba, offering loans, and military arms, and I would guess training. So if China is suppling and training these different nations who are willing to fight against the US, then it becomes a proxy war between the US and China. China is not going to sit by and let only of their allies get defeated and will step in to assist and or act as peace maker, only to appear that they are the good guys and the US and its allies are the bad guys.

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in