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.

 

America Poised To Attack Iran! And The Horrendous Consequences!

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by KilrathiLG

8.i wouldn't so much worry about this being a REAL war as America does pretty good in REAL wars its the insurgency occupation nonsense we have problems with


Golly !

It is a very long time since any government anywhere declared formal warfare against another nation.
And even longer that America led a noble cavalry charge with drawn sabers that won a war anywhere.

These days it is all done by assassination, bribery, espionage and CIA covert operations, and cowardly bombings.
And the US military will butcher and torture you just like any other insurgents.

It will take a vast number of dead American civilians before the US military can ENFORCE freedom and democracy to America.

Those horrible insurgents you speak of, are just ordinary people (just like you and I) that object to being invaded, occupied, raped, tortured, and butchered in their OWN COUNTRY.

When Obama declares martial law, and a complete lock down of the US, it is YOU will be the people creating the insurrection.


[edit on 8/8/2010 by Silver Shadow]




posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Silver Shadow
 


was more refering to ww2 and that scenario and the fact that since then we have been trying to perfect our ability to fight armys not insurgancys and i never ones called them horrible but thats besides the point

as for pakistan and india EVER fighting on the same side good luck with that they got a kinda mini middle east hatred thing going on with each other so thats not too likely but thank you for atleast including them most people dont props for that!

as far as justification for this goes take your pick

either the usa says there devloping nukes(weather or not they are dosent realy matter rember all those wmd's we were supposed to find and never did) might blame the BP spill on iran(hey its the us government you never know what stuff they will pull outa there butts)or any other hair brained scheme)

[edit on 8-8-2010 by KilrathiLG]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by pavil
While it's hypothetical, it's based on a pretty good understanding of U.S. doctrine. We always knock out AA, air assets and communications in the first wave of attacks. It stands to reason we will also target ports as well to limit naval engagements. Once Air Superiority is attained, we go about destroying other targets.

All in all, it's a pretty accurate idea of what will happen.


It's a decent idea and plan, true. What's laughable is that some people posting on this thread think it's 100% accurate and based on actual US war plans, if not an actual war plan.


And how do you know this is not based on actual war plans? This isn't something 'laughable' as you say, but deadly serious business. You have a Plan A, and a Plan B, right? Which is this one? Can't figure that out at this stage as it depends on the prevailing environment and threat perception (capability + intention) which is dynamic in nature. Remember we still don't know the full capabilities of Iran accurately enough but intel being continuous in nature, more inputs would help in selection of the most viable war plan.

And then as I mentioned, this is just an outline plan. The detailed plan would run into several pages.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 05:07 AM
link   
China nor Russia will do nothing but publically condemn the attack.

You can bet your bottom dollar that if the US strikes Iran it will have already been agreed behind closed-doors between the US-Russia and China.

More likely what will happen is, like Syria, Israel will strike Iran's sites and Iran will not launch all-out-war. The most likely outcome of this is for a new war between Hezbollah and Israel.

Iran is not going to screw up the straight of Hormuz and oil prices considering their close ties with China and Russia.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 05:29 AM
link   
well if it does happen i hope for a quick war, imagine if the draft was again needed.

a war within a country i think if they tryed to draft men and some women to the front line.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by KilrathiLG
reply to post by Silver Shadow
 

as for pakistan and india EVER fighting on the same side good luck with that they got a kinda mini middle east hatred thing going on with each other so thats not too likely but thank you for atleast including them most people dont props for that!


Oh boy you made me think of and gave me a chuckle for even entertaining the idea of an alliance-like Pakistani-Indian relationship in the foreseeable future.

In all seriousness though, save that Operation Persian Rug Stain becomes a boots-on-the-ground quagmire like we have in Iraq and Afghanistan, a conflict between the Iranian and US military forces proper would be so one sided. The combined penis sizes of US's Naval and Air forces, the missiles stored underground in the continental states and whatever may be orbiting overhead (armed or otherwise) that would be utilized in the opening salvo on Iran would make the Shock and Awe tactic of 2003 look like an illegal Safe and Sane fireworks show in front of your house on the 4th.

It looks like the people seeing the US failing a war with Iran base their opinions on the possibility of Russia or China coming to the aid of Iran.
All I say to that is:


Russia:
-No way are they going to involve themselves in a war against the US be it as a main combatant or supporter. They have just as much on their plate as the US does in nearly all aspects of government (Political- Disputed arctic shipping routes with Canada, Chechen rebels; Social- Police corruption on a national scale, rampant violent racism against immigrants; and Environmental- A VERY bad fire season).
-They go into war against the US and Iran could kiss goodbye any hopes of help from China since they'd be too busy clearing up any "boarder discrepancies" with Russia in Manchuria.

China:
-Really now? China going against the biggest consumer nation of Chinese junk? Yes they hold a hefty percentage of US debt but they won't see a damn dime of that money if they go to war against us. It's bad for business and the Chinese love American consumerism!
-I know someone brought this up earlier and I thank them tremendously: the Three Gorges Dam... For the sake of China I would absolutly HATE to see the cracks enlarge on that behemoth of silly putty technology... I'm sure the impact of such an occurrence many of you are fully aware of. It's not like China needs MORE dirty water flooding the homes of millions of people.

All in all, Iran, militarily, wouldn't stand a chance against the long &^#* of the US military industrial complex. The business of America is business and if it's shown a war against Iran is good for business then business will be a-booming!
As much as I may disagree with war and killing and the international douche-baggery, in the eyes of those that make the decisions my opinion on the matter is worth as much as an Iranian's, probably less. I'd be a complete sod to believe the military might of the US armed forces would be in any way overcame by Iranian forces even with backing by a foreign power...

Will parts of the world hate the US? Yes, but it'll stay around the same level that it's been for the past decade. As for public sentiment here in the US, we'll have our protests and talking points but whilst we still have our HDTV, In-N-Out, and Call of Duty 2 the majority of the masses will remain calm and complacent. And the sad truth is even if there is a 5 million man march on DC, it's still pittance compared to the multitude of Americans who just don't give a damn...



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
Not to nitpick but Carriers don't have Cruise Missiles, usually other ships carry them. The initial CM salvo will probably come from subs and other support ships.


Pavil, apologies for this. What was meant was Carrier Strike Group (CSG). In any case an aircraft carrier never operates in an autonomous mode whether in battle or during peace time maneuvers. It normally consists of:

> One Aircraft Carrier.
> A destroyer squadron (DESRON).
> One to two Aegis guided missile cruisers (CG) equipped with BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles for long-range strike capability.
> Two to three guided missile destroyers (DDG).
> Up to two attack submarines.
> Two Anti Aircraft Warships. Or a multi-mission surface combatant used primarily for anti-aircraft (AAW) and anti sub (ASW) warfare.
> One or two Anti Sub Destroyers or Frigates.
> A combined ammunition, oiler and supply ship (AOE/AOR).



The USS Abraham Lincoln battle group during the 2000 RIMPAC exercises.
Courtesy: Wikimedia








[edit on 8-8-2010 by OrionHunterX]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   
I'd be astounded if anything resembling this actually happens. Theres not going to be any invasion of Iran. It cant be afforded. While Israel might like it I don't think the USA is in any position to delivery it.

What there might be is a bombing campaign to try and cripple the nuclear effort, but if that was easy to do it would already have been done.

Its a double edged sword. The best people to reform Iran are the Iranians. They've done it before. The Iranians have been trying to push their way to proper freedom for 100 years.

They had many monarchs/dictators. They did at one time grab a proper democratic government but the US/UK toppled it.

From the UK Telegraph

"Britain's reputation for deviousness was further enhanced in the 1950s when British intelligence officers helped Kermit Roosevelt, the CIA station chief in Tehran, to overthrow the democratically elected government of Mohammed Mossadeq in 1953. Mossadeq, in common with many Iranians, wanted a more equitable distribution of Iran's new oil wealth, which was still overseen by the British-controlled Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. But when Mossadeq attempted to nationalise the oil business and depose the shah, the British and American governments authorised a counter-coup that restored the shah to power."

The suspicion with which the USA/UK is held by Iranians is a logical outcome of our previous actions in the cold war and in the case of Britain imperial meddling that goes back another 100 years. We squashed democracy for control of oil. Our troubles now are a result of that. (In an irony for US readers the company in question became BP).

That dodgy deal worked for nearly 30 years until the resentment blew the lid off. Unfortunately, what they put in its place has proven as bad if not worse for them and much worse for everyone else. They need to be given time to make the correction again. They are trying as the last election protests show. If we attack them (which will involve the accidental murder of innocents, it always does due to the fallibility of people and technology) we will strengthen the current regime. Nobody likes the people that are blowing their neighbours up, regardless of normal politics.

An assault on Iran runs counter to our long term interests. Which is a reformed properly democratic Iran. Without our previous bungling Iran could and probably should be our natural ally in the region. Instead we support the repressive, extremist funding, absolute monarchy of the saudis. Its a mad world.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by OrionHunterX
 


No worries....... The subs that have the cruise missiles would be the Ohio Class ones that have been retrofitted to carry Cruise missiles. We have four of them, each carrying 154 little sticks of death for those keeping score. They can be conventionally tipped or nuclear. I would tend to think we will avoid using nukes if at all possible.

Each Ticonderoga class of missile cruisers can carry 122 Cruise Missiles.

If I were watching things, I would try to figure out when those subs are in port....when all 4 are out to sea is when we would be attacking. They are the perfect platform for launching an early decapitating strike. They won't know what hit them till they start landing.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
And how do you know this is not based on actual war plans? This isn't something 'laughable' as you say, but deadly serious business.


Well, I know it's "deadly, serious business". I helped write them up for my squadron.

What I'm saying is that you started this thread, and every Swinging Richard here is thinking you're preaching the gospel. You wrote up a fictitious plan and everyone is getting all worked up into a state of rage over a plan that only exists in your mind.

As someone said, a lot of it's based on common, open source, stuff. That's great, I don't have a problem with that. You could have put a statement or something for the Von Brauns on ATS that this isn't an actual plan, but your thoughts and impressions.


Originally posted by OrionHunterX
And then as I mentioned, this is just an outline plan. The detailed plan would run into several pages.


Several pages? Try volumes.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionHunterX
 


yeah i had a feeling thats what you ment and yeah those BG's(battlegroups) got some serious firepower well thought out postings i applaud you!



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by mistafaz
 


thank you for saying what i tried to say but with good grammer and whatnot and with out the scatterbrainedness



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by KilrathiLG
 


You're welcome guy, it's my touch of OCD that makes me read and reread nearly every post I make just to be sure.

It's amusing to see the amount of Bald Eagle and Hummus flavored Haterade being downed on nearly every single thread concerning the ME. Seriously, a decade ago nobody gave a rat's ass about the military strength of Iran's forces. But now since the hated Imperial/Zionist Coalition of Baby Killers (their words, not mine) don't like the fact Persia wants to glow green in the dark with their Legos, Tinker Toys and table scraps from other countries it's now:
"Whoa whoa whoa! Back the fudge up bro! Don't you know Iran's got a uber 1337 Guard compared to your newb Marines?? Plus they have those 1000 speed boats for every US Naval warship! Total pwnage with max DPS! LOLOLOL!"

But in all seriousness, living in San Francisco my entire life and especially since 2001 I've become comfortably numb to the sounds of US/Israel bashing while every other country could do no wrong. But to take a word form from the inmates at work, it's straight "ignance" to believe that America, with its 50+ years of industrial military development, would lose a conventional war against a country who feeds off the developments of other countries who are only exploiting that country's natural resources.

We only fail militarily when we take on the responsibility as the world police to "patrol" nations that are as friendly to us as the riff-raff are to the cops in Oakland, but with greater use of force restrictions. I don't know if anybody is going to agree that a decade long "police action" in any US city is going to succeed much less an entire country that resents us. IMO I don't see being an occupational force in Iraq/Afghanistan as being a good idea and wouldn't want that to occur in Iran either, but it would be telling to see which troops are going to be taken out of Iraq.

I don't believe the US or Israel are brazen enough to conduct preemptive strikes on any Iranian military complex or site without the support and evidence (whether faked or not) over in the States like it happened in 2003. While we may be goading the Iranian government to make a move in response to a possible US/Israeli secretly backed action, it would be Iran's own damn fault for falling for such an attempt. They talk a big game by postulating and speaking against the I/ZCBK (2nd para) failing to realize the big boys they are up against and only do so because they believe they have the backing of two meh-so-so super powers who wouldn't turn on any US-led forces for the sake of their own countries' economic and political stability. I'm sure though that any conflict with Iran would cause nations like Venezuela and NK to lose more face than they have since they so enjoy being bedfellows.

Obama may be nothing but a "community organizer" with an unlimited budget but with that comes the massive ego of an "Aww hell to the naw!" reaction to any military action made by Iran. And when the nation of Iran has completely gone to @$&* and every other loud-mouth nationette has STFU, I'll be sitting comfortably at home eating pizza and watching Dual Survival knowing that Hell hath no fury like a pissed off American who some chicken[snip] country made them miss a season of American Idol.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65
As someone said, a lot of it's based on common, open source, stuff. That's great, I don't have a problem with that. You could have put a statement or something for the Von Brauns on ATS that this isn't an actual plan, but your thoughts and impressions.

Isn't it obvious that top secret war plans won't be displayed on the inter net?
Secondly, you say that this is all open source stuff. I challenge you to show me anything remotely resembling such a phased plan. If you do, I would be delighted!



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:18 PM
link   
I got to ask you guys this.....what makes you a expert? do you think your smarter then US generals and strategists? do you think they dont know all of issues you just talked about? do you think they dont have back up plan after back up plan? Do you think they have not accounted for all the consequences? Do you think they have not planned for EVERY possibility? We are talking about the most power military the world has EVER seen.

I would go even as far as to say you have no comphrehension of the power that the USA military has at its command.

You are all just a bunch of children at the dinner table discussing war,while US strategists and generals are the grown ups at the tabe looking at you thinking "oh kids will be kids! how cute...they have no idea".



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 02:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nofoolishness
I got to ask you guys this.....what makes you a expert? do you think your smarter then US generals and strategists?

Yes if not more because when someone has experience of serving in the Armed Forces for 35 long years reaching the top rungs, he knows what the heck he's talking about! Right? So don't give me this bull.


Do you think they dont have back up plan after back up plan?

Who says there are no options? There always are in the operational sense.


Do you think they have not accounted for all the consequences? Do you think they have not planned for EVERY possibility? We are talking about the most power military the world has EVER seen.

Simple answer - NO! Remember Iraq? Afghanistan? They screwed up at every level, political as well as military. You are aware of the mess created by as you say, 'the most powerful military the world has EVER seen'. Most powerful, yes, but see what happened to the greatest military power in Vietnam? Iraq? Afghanistan? Congo? Did they think and analyze the consequences? Yes, to a degree but they screwed up. Their appreciation and analysis went haywire from day one.

And remember, generals make the war plan and prosecute it. The geopolitical consequences are the responsibility of the government and NOT the Defense Forces. I thought you knew that?

Where consequences are concerned, you better direct this question to Bush, Cheney and the neo-cons. They probably would tell you why they went into Iraq. Did our political bosses and so called 'think tanks' analyze the consequences with any accuracy? They screwed up bad and how! Just like what will happen if ever they try and stir the pot in Iran!


I would go even as far as to say you have no comphrehension of the power that the USA military has at its command.

Don't give me this bullcrap when you don't know me!


You are all just a bunch of children at the dinner table discussing war,while US strategists and generals are the grown ups at the tabe looking at you thinking "oh kids will be kids! how cute...they have no idea".

Oh yes! We here on this thread are just a bunch of children! And you my friend aren't even in the womb yet. So don't waste your time here. Go play in the garden and catch some butterflies rather than commenting on serious subjects.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrionHunterX

Originally posted by Nofoolishness
I got to ask you guys this.....what makes you a expert? do you think your smarter then US generals and strategists?

Yes if not more because when someone has experience of serving in the Armed Forces for 35 long years reaching the top rungs, he knows what the heck he's talking about! Right? So don't give me this bull.


Do you think they dont have back up plan after back up plan?

Who says there are no options? There always are in the operational sense.


Do you think they have not accounted for all the consequences? Do you think they have not planned for EVERY possibility? We are talking about the most power military the world has EVER seen.

Simple answer - NO! Remember Iraq? Afghanistan? They screwed up at every level, political as well as military. You are aware of the mess created by as you say, 'the most powerful military the world has EVER seen'. Most powerful, yes, but see what happened to the greatest military power in Vietnam? Iraq? Afghanistan? Congo? Did they think and analyze the consequences? Yes, to a degree but they screwed up. Their appreciation and analysis went haywire from day one.

And remember, generals make the war plan and prosecute it. The geopolitical consequences are the responsibility of the government and NOT the Defense Forces. I thought you knew that?

Where consequences are concerned, you better direct this question to Bush, Cheney and the neo-cons. They probably would tell you why they went into Iraq. Did our political bosses and so called 'think tanks' analyze the consequences with any accuracy? They screwed up bad and how! Just like what will happen if ever they try and stir the pot in Iran!


I would go even as far as to say you have no comphrehension of the power that the USA military has at its command.

Don't give me this bullcrap when you don't know me!


You are all just a bunch of children at the dinner table discussing war,while US strategists and generals are the grown ups at the tabe looking at you thinking "oh kids will be kids! how cute...they have no idea".

Oh yes! We here on this thread are just a bunch of children! And you my friend aren't even in the womb yet. So don't waste your time here. Go play in the garden and catch some butterflies rather than commenting on serious subjects.


They did not screw up afganistan or iraq. They beat iraq militarily within a week. we are talking just straight out war here though right? not occupation.

[edit on 9-8-2010 by Nofoolishness]



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by mistafaz

In all seriousness though, save that Operation Persian Rug Stain becomes a boots-on-the-ground quagmire like we have in Iraq and Afghanistan, a conflict between the Iranian and US military forces proper would be so one sided.


Yes...speaking of Iraq and A-stan, howze that ol' shock and awe workin' for you so far? You really need another hole to throw your youth and your tax money into? Kinda make you want to re-define 'winning' if you ask me.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


The Shock and Awe was doing wonderfully until we decided to get into this whole BS "nation building" business and got stuck in the whole quagmire of being a police force rather than a military. I completely agree with you on the fact that there is absolutely no need to start another war on a Middle Eastern country.

The point I make is that no one should be saying that the military forces of Iran is in any way comparable or better than any US, Israeli or NATO forces since the last enemy they fought were the same Iraqi Republican Guard we put to shame in 2003. The US [sniped]-up when we decided that it's completely reasonable to dismantle the only stable government in Iraq.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:10 PM
link   
"Operation Iranian Freedom"?! This is disgusting! I don't know what I am going to do if this goes through..



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join