Why Iran won't be easy to fight....Geography.

Originally posted by VerityPhantom
I think an entire country of people is never an easy thing to fight.

From my understanding of Iran they seem like a country that won't roll over and take it from the U.S. though...

I read this the same way. With subtle, covert help to the opposition this could work without war. However, the very best chance that had to work is an opportunity Obama just watch slip past for some baffling reason. I'm talking about the open unrest and fighting in the streets that Iran had a couple years ago.

However...Yeah, I think you're right. If the United States or any other outsider openly attacks Iran, then nationalism will likely trump everything and everyone else. They are Iranian and Persian and proud of it. I do believe we'll see a fair % of that 73 million people either support the fight or actively participate in it. After all, they've been born and raised for this specific battle with their 'Hate America' propaganda from the regime for over 30 years.

The way Israel talks there is no intention for full out war. They are basically saying they want to go in, bomb the sites, go out. The continuing war will probably be regional and have a lot less to do with Iran than ATS seems to expect.

They say go in, bomb the sites, get out, and then probably have to do it again in a couple years.
If I can find the link that talks about this I will. It stuck with me because how they seemed so confident that it wouldn't be all out war, and the weird idea that it would just set them back and they would bomb them again when necessary if they forged on with their program.

Everyone insists that all those borders mean something more than they really do. Like these are all different wars. They aren't different wars - they are one war, and it has been being waged for about 11 years now, after a decade of provocation to kick it off before that.

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
EMP Tehran - disable comms.
Send in dozens of lightweight drones broadcasting signatures for jets - waste Irans SAM sites
Send in some B2's to pound Irans bases and Military
then send in the jets to destroy the iranian facilities.

No need for troops.But.. you would also need the navy to saturate the coastline with heavy shelling to eliminate all ground based antiship missiles.
Use the apaches to hit suicide boats..
Then all you need to worry about are the missiles being lobbed at Europe, Iraq, Israel and Bahrain..

But if we get to that stage.. im pretty sure Iran would just use some sort of nasty chemical to hit the Americans where it hurts the most..

They'd probably launch on Saudi oil fields too..

bad bad bad days ahead

Where do you get Iran delivering any sort of chemical delivery to the states? The best they could do is Biological and we'd be all over it at the first signs of outbreak, Bio can be smuggled in, but a chemical Icbm attack? this is silly, any boat coming remotely near the Atlantic will be stalked by sub and satellite and we'd know the second they armed anything

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by VerityPhantom
I think an entire country of people is never an easy thing to fight.

From my understanding of Iran they seem like a country that won't roll over and take it from the U.S. though...

I read this the same way. With subtle, covert help to the opposition this could work without war. However, the very best chance that had to work is an opportunity Obama just watch slip past for some baffling reason. I'm talking about the open unrest and fighting in the streets that Iran had a couple years ago.

However...Yeah, I think you're right. If the United States or any other outsider openly attacks Iran, then nationalism will likely trump everything and everyone else. They are Iranian and Persian and proud of it. I do believe we'll see a fair % of that 73 million people either support the fight or actively participate in it. After all, they've been born and raised for this specific battle with their 'Hate America' propaganda from the regime for over 30 years.

Very true I think Iran has as much nationalism as America they wouldn't take too kindly to any invaders.

I think that Iran shouldn't be taken lightly at all I mean don't they have nukes as well? Or aren't they in the process of perfecting them? In any case this can't end well for either party. And what of Irans allies? Isn't China and Russia backing them up or something? (sorry for my lack of knowledge on this subject I don't read up too much about Iran)

Originally posted by VerityPhantom
I think an entire country of people is never an easy thing to fight.

From my understanding of Iran they seem like a country that won't roll over and take it from the U.S. though...

Generally the goal is to capture/kill the leader. Once the leadership falls, the opposition political parties will be in touch to takeover where the existing regime left off. Generally the deal is discussed waaaaaaaaaaaay ahead before any war/conflict is planned. Besides do you think every single individual of Iran is crazy about their domestic policies? The goal generally is to topple the regime and establish a new regime. Now the only thing that can make it difficult to the already given issues is neighbors if they decide to send in their specialists just the way Iran has been/did during Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts. However so far it has been 3 for 3 (Saddam, Gaddafi, Osama??).

Strategically US has Iran covered from all directions. Now the troop withdrawal and logistics movement is the key to understand if it actually occurred or was it just announced to get them ready and then once the conflict breaks out, since the troops and equipment was already set to move, simply re-direct them to another location.

Troop withdrawal and reduction was announced not too long ago for Afghanistan and Iraq. However it doesn't happen overnight. It is a huge task to move military and the equipment. Some of it is left behind and some of it is sold but everything else is moved back to the nearest US base(s).

Originally posted by hp1229

Originally posted by VerityPhantom
I think an entire country of people is never an easy thing to fight.

From my understanding of Iran they seem like a country that won't roll over and take it from the U.S. though...

Generally the goal is to capture/kill the leader. Once the leadership falls, the opposition political parties will be in touch to takeover where the existing regime left off.

I think this is basing everything that follows on a bad assumption. Iraq and Libya were both very much what one would call a 'cult of personality'. Killing Saddam or Gadaffi DID effectively end things..at least the immediate goals and collapse of the national government.

Iran is far closer to the United States in Government than Iraq..and let me explain before I get pummeled for saying that. Iran has a President..just like us and just like Iraq. Where Iraq had a President with ABSOLUTE and total power on everything within his national borders, Iran has a President who simply represents a much wider and broader system. Just like ours.

If we're in the heat of a war..would killing the U.S. President win the war for the enemy? I'd say not. I think they'd see a whole new level of hell unleashed by U.S. forces in vengeance for a lost President than anything they could have imagined.

So, if Obama is thinking he can decapitate Iranian leadership...he better accept something that I do NOT believe he has the courage to even consider. He'll have to outright kill or capture one of the leading religious leaders in the world. It's kinda hard, I know, for US to think of the Ayatollah that way...but ask an Iranian Shiite. I'll bet they readikly confirm that the Ayatollah is far more to them than the elected President of their nation is...but the Ayatollah is who pulls the strings....along with another council...of the entire Iranian Government.

So..even something as simple as eliminating the national leadership is NOTHING but another complex set of nightmares and impossible choices. Isn't Iran going to be a fun place? Sun, Guns and dead end warfare until we give THIS one up and leave, too.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Salutations Wrabbit2000

Good post but some of the aircraft range approximations you have posted reflect their combat radius which is skewed because you had already doubled the distance needed to travel to target.

I would also point out that all the aircraft you sourced (sans the AH-64) have mid air refueling capability which extends their reach globally.

As a footnote, the F-117 has been mothballed for some time now, if a tactical stealth platform is required the roll will be filled by either the drone fleet or the FA-22.

Regarding the perceived lethality of the S300 family of air defense weapons, the hills around groom lake have been sporting various S300 tracking/targeting radars for some years now as a good look at google earth will attest.

Any air action over Iran will almost certainly be a replay of the first Gulf War.

I wont comment on the possibility of a large commitment of ground forces because I believe the reality is that a ground presence beyond special operations teams is not necessary to achieve the goals sought by the west in regards to curbing Irans nuclear program.

My two cents

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


So looking at this issue from a non-US centric point of view, what are the weapon systems Iran has? Seems like a lot -- but certainly not all -- of this thread strikes me as a Pentagon J.O. session, gloating over all the high-tech US weapons available for an illegal, pre-emptive strike of aggression against Iran. People seem to not be talking a lot about what Iran may have up its sleeves..

Clearly they have some Silkworm missiles, most of which have ranges around 200km, although a more recent Chinese model has a range of 300-500 km. Looks like that would cover just about all of the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman an a ways into the Arabian Sea. The question then because one of targeting, where I assume Iran would be at a distinct disadvantage because of lack real-time/near-real-time satellite imagery and US ECM. Does anyone know if China or Russia has GPS-targeting capabilities? I would think that they would love to export such technology to a country that has a shot at taking out a US carrier or two.

Then there are much shorter range anti-ship missiles, with a range of 35 km. Probably not much use against a US carrier strike force, but plenty good for closing the Strait of Hormuz

And what about high-tech mines and possibly even drone torpedoes/torpedo boats? Seems likely that Iran has been working on such projects, and/or may have received such technology from China or Russia. I assume the latter two countries are working on such items as they would love to have low-cost countermeasures to the US navy. I acknowledge this is pure speculation, but it seems highly likely.

Also, I understand the Russians have developed some sort of rocket-powered, supercavitating torpedo. The range is fairly short, however, about 15 km. Has Russia sold any to Iran, or provided the technology?

Don't know anything about the Iranian air force or its anti-aircraft defenses, but I suspect they're a lot better than Iraq's were. Iran evidently stole/took Russian SA-24 missiles (similar to Stinger missile) from Libya during its revolution; I imagine Iran has been busy reverse engineering those -- as well the US drones it has acquired.

Then there's the fact that the Strait of Hormuz will be shut down to oil tanker traffic, and possible oil embargoes by Iran's allies, including Iraq and Venezuela. This will cause massive problems for the West, which depends on these sources of petroleum. Looking forward to paying $8-10/gallon of gas, warmongers?

It will be interesting to see how the "Iron Dome" fares against a vast barrage of Hezbollah rockets/missiles -- provided by Iran and Syria, and a bit better than the stuff Hamas flings on occasion. Somehow I don't see any anti-missile system being completely effective against a mass rocket/missile attack.

Then there will be more covert forms of reprisal by Iran. I would imagine there will be a major increase of support to Afghan rebels, resulting in more attacks against US/NATO forces there. Could be that a whole new round of terrorism/militantism similar to that in the 1980's, i.e. more suicide bomber attacks and kidnappings of foreign nationals by proxy organizations. Also keep in mind that the Lockerby bombing was likely a reprisal bombing by Iran for the shooting down, by the US navy, of a civilian Iranian airliner. Perhaps the perpetrators came from Libya, but it was likely financed/planned by Iran. Iran, unlike Iraq, is run by rational players and realizes it must capitalize on asymmetric warfare when fighting a superior opponent.


As for US assets, I was surprised to see no mention, in posts or any of the sources cited, of cruise missiles. Seems these would be conducted against air and naval bases, anti-aircraft facilities and other unhardened targets. The US has given cruise missile technology to Israel, so it seems likely that it would use them, too, should it attack Iran. Seems like this would be a big component of a US and/or Israeli attack and would obviate the need for as many air strikes, thus making an attack more feasible.

I'd like to hear from anyone who knows what Iran's assets/capabilities may be.

It is so sad and scary to see most of you people talking about yet destroying another country,after all the US is done to Iraq,Afghanistan ,Libya,Syria,etc,etc....I know deep down inside most of you guys know the real intentions behind these crimes against humanity,and it really hurts me deeply when i see you just encourage and support it anyways..... It is like saying i know my dad is a criminal but what the heck i might as well support him,he is my dad anyways!!....Some day your children will be very angry and ashamed of what you did or not do to prevent this mess from happening.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

thank you for your great post. I assure you that no one in Iran even the leaders wants any war. because we have experienced an unwanted long eight year war with Saddam in our home. still we are dealing with it's concequences.
USA will never attack Iran because it knows that this is not a war with just an Isolated unwanted regime as Zhionistic media claim but it is a war with people. and USA will not involve in such a war it is not benefitical to anyone and will have no winner.
nations of middle east are angry at Israel. if Israel steps wrong then it may trigger a regional uprising against Israel. and Iran can steer this potentials against Israel well. look at this:

“If we as Muslims believe that Israel is something wrong and evil, and if we believe that Iran is the complete opposite of Israel, doesn’t this mean that Iran represents the complete righteousness, and we must stand in support of it,” Nasrallah asked. edition.presstv.ir...

this is the real threat for Israel, it means war with Iran will lead to what they call it Armageddon war !!!!
do not forget it, Egptians and Syrians are more outraged against Israel than Iranians, Why!?
because Israel has occupied their lands and they feel humilation by Israel.
but media highlight Iran because it is officially against Israel existence thusly. but what is their true Idea:

Now I would like to give a benevolent piece of advice to American politicians who always stood up to defend and support the Zionist regime. So far, this regime has created countless problems for you. It has presented a hateful image of you to the regional peoples, and it has made you look like an accomplice in the crimes of the usurping Zionists. The material and moral costs borne by the American government and people on account of this are staggering, and if this continues, the costs might become even heavier in the future. Think about the Islamic Republic's proposal of a referendum and with a courageous decision, rescue yourselves from the current impossible situation. Undoubtedly, the people of the region and all free-thinkers across the world will welcome this measure.english.khamenei.ir...

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by templar knight
I am also of the mind "no boots on the ground".

the Russians words were that an attack on Tehran is an attack on Moscow. I interpreted this to mean that they would finger point and huff and puff for an air campaign and special forces to take out the nuclear facilities but would not actually get involved

If Russia meant this they would have sold the Iranians the S300 for defencive purposes regardless of the sanctions. Russia would have sold them the SU 35 and SU 34 as well.

.
Just because we see some reports that say they havn't doesnt mean it hasnt
Maybe they already have, just called it another name, plausible deniability

Aeons
I would like to know why you think that there will be anyone on the ground in Iran?

Geology is still important, sure. I can't see what reason there would be to put many boots on the ground, or what use a full scale war would be?

i think this post is meant to scare the America army.we don't travel o nfoot.

A abrams tank travels at 100 miles an hour,faster than a sports car,.they won't even see it coming

we have in flight refueling.

the b-52 can circle the planet without refuelling.

we have missiles.we have jdams.we have harpoon missiles.apavhes,black hawks,we have A10 .we have f-22 and f-35 super inviasble planes.

we have rader.

we have satelittes.

any day we will have lasers.we can simply encircle iran and keep taking pot shots at them until they surrender and stop supporting hezbullerh

beckybecky

Aeons
I would like to know why you think that there will be anyone on the ground in Iran?

Geology is still important, sure. I can't see what reason there would be to put many boots on the ground, or what use a full scale war would be?

i think this post is meant to scare the America army.we don't travel o nfoot.

A abrams tank travels at 100 miles an hour,faster than a sports car,.they won't even see it coming

we have in flight refueling.

the b-52 can circle the planet without refuelling.

we have missiles.we have jdams.we have harpoon missiles.apavhes,black hawks,we have A10 .we have f-22 and f-35 super inviasble planes.

we have rader.

we have satelittes.

any day we will have lasers.we can simply encircle iran and keep taking pot shots at them until they surrender and stop supporting hezbullerh

You American say you have all these Things. I Wonder if you have all the Things after the Battle is fought. The fifth fleet is as good as gone if the US try anything against Iran.

The US have all these Things but still backed Down on Syria when Russia stepped up. And they don't have all the Things you have.
Russia will back up Iran all the way, and you americans will chicken out like you did With Syria. Because you can not afford to lose what you have because then you will never have it again because its too expensive.

spy66

beckybecky

Aeons
I would like to know why you think that there will be anyone on the ground in Iran?

Geology is still important, sure. I can't see what reason there would be to put many boots on the ground, or what use a full scale war would be?

i think this post is meant to scare the America army.we don't travel o nfoot.

A abrams tank travels at 100 miles an hour,faster than a sports car,.they won't even see it coming

we have in flight refueling.

the b-52 can circle the planet without refuelling.

we have missiles.we have jdams.we have harpoon missiles.apavhes,black hawks,we have A10 .we have f-22 and f-35 super inviasble planes.

we have rader.

we have satelittes.

any day we will have lasers.we can simply encircle iran and keep taking pot shots at them until they surrender and stop supporting hezbullerh

You American say you have all these Things. I Wonder if you have all the Things after the Battle is fought. The fifth fleet is as good as gone if the US try anything against Iran.

The US have all these Things but still backed Down on Syria when Russia stepped up. And they don't have all the Things you have.
Russia will back up Iran all the way, and you americans will chicken out like you did With Syria. Because you can not afford to lose what you have because then you will never have it again because its too expensive.

I am afraid you will lose as always.America has won every war it has fought.you imported machines are no match for America Superior technology and SCIENCE.

Everyday we invent new things.


Every single day.

i have proof.

GIZMAG IS PROOF OF THAT.just read it and be astonished.
i am so proud.

what did you invent.mothing,nada,zilch.

all the machines are imported.we have industrial might.

we can produce 1000 yards of linoleum in 20 minutes easily.

what can you do?

maes2
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

“If we as Muslims believe that Israel is something wrong and evil, and if we believe that Iran is the complete opposite

because Israel has occupied their lands and they feel humilation by Israel.

if you look at a map you can hardly see isreal.

it's a teensy weensy country and has very little land.

look at the arab lands.

huge HUGE HUGE amounts of land 98% unoccupied.

look at arabia.Absolutely vast and lybia iran irak sudan egypt and tunisa morocco.vast amounts of unoccupied land.

arabs dont do ANYTHING with all this land ...

i mean they could have given to their palastninans "brothers".did they .nooooooooo.why no..noooo.

All they do is suck oil out of the ground thanks to American technology and build thousands of giant palaces for their corrupt princes tin pot kings,dictators,and other assorted unlelected thugs in office.look at irak that soddham build 100 of palaces for himself.and syira too and lybia too.

isreal occupies so little land.

i think isreal should completely invade/take over 1/2 of syria and 1/2 of irak and 1/4 of arabia and give 10% of arabia to the palastinans separeted by irak.

reply to post by beckybecky


I know we've talked about this before....but Iranians are not Arabs. They are Persians. It's a small difference with no meaning to many Western minds, but it can be a difference of living or dying over there at times. They take that distinction VERY VERY seriously. History has rich reasons why, for what it's worth. Almost, if not more so than the Shia/Sunni separation, though I suppose that may still over-ride everything else.

Israel has all it can handle and more than it wants as it is, IMO, however others may and will disagree with that sentiment. I really doubt they'd want the Syrian desert and badlands anymore than Syria has bothered to settle a good % of their land space. There is a reason those wastelands are wastelands and no one lives in them. Very good reasons... It's not habitable with known resources for the region to support....hence people live in areas where water IS plentiful, not where it's near impossible to find.

beckybecky
[
I am afraid you will lose as always.America has won every war it has fought.

1812 and Vitenam come to mind.

beckybecky
you imported machines are no match for America Superior technology and SCIENCE.

Tell that to the Americans and Europeans that have died in modern wars.

Modern technology only gets you so far.

beckybecky


I am afraid you will lose as always.America has won every war it has fought.you imported machines are no match for America Superior technology and SCIENCE.

It is attitudes such as this which will see your beloved country crumble

beckybeckyEveryday we invent new things.

You are not the sole guardians of invention.

beckybeckywhat did you invent.mothing,nada,zilch.

????

Really, are people still this ignorant?

beckybeckywe can produce 1000 yards of linoleum in 20 minutes easily.

Team USA, taking over the world 1000 yards of lino at a time

beckybeckywhat can you do?

Sir Ernest Rutherford, Hamilton Jet, Pineapple lumps, Trench warfare, The Clean, Bungy Jumping, Jogging, Referee Whistle, Seismic shock absorber, aerial top dressing, electric fences, Thermette, First powered flight, spreadable butter....

Checkmate

aorAki

beckybecky

beckybeckywhat can you do?

Sir Ernest Rutherford, Hamilton Jet, Pineapple lumps, Trench warfare, The Clean, Bungy Jumping, Jogging, Referee Whistle, Seismic shock absorber, aerial top dressing, electric fences, Thermette, First powered flight, spreadable butter....

Checkmate

edit on 13-2-2014 by aorAki because: (no reason given)

"
Sir Ernest Rutherford, Hamilton Jet, Pineapple lumps, Trench warfare, The Clean, Bungy Jumping, Jogging, Referee Whistle, Seismic shock absorber, aerial top dressing, electric fences, Thermette, First powered flight, spreadable butter...."

old news.
....YESTERDAYS NEWS OR RATHER DECADES OR CENTURIES OLD NEWS.

Pathetic.

what did they invent last year?

what did they invent last week?

what did they invent yesterday?

what did they invent today?

Answer us.We are Waiting.


Because look what we invented today....

www.gizmag.com...

and yesterday:-

www.gizmag.com... 917105

and the day before:-

www.gizmag.com...


Awesome.We are Just Awesome.

My heart swells with pride everytime i read gizmag.