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 Invasion with US Ground Forces

page: 3
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Dude trust me, its way bigger than Washington or any other capital.



Originally posted by jcarpenter

Originally posted by princeofpeace
A massive aerial assualt on Irans nuclear facilities and command and control centers. No regime change therefore no boots on ground (in that manner).





The only "boots" we should be taking about are the steel toed boots rammed up Washinton's #. How long are we going to continue to submit and pay taxes to an out-of-control criminal enterprise that is victimizing a significant portion of the freakin' globe?

Had enough of this BS yet?





posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


So has all this killing ended the problems? Is there actually an end to these means and what does it look like to you? We have been killing each other for many thousands of years and now we have the means to kill just about everybody, yet the problems do go on. American would have to be one of the most secure nations in the world, the tunnels and boarder crossing with Mexico may leave some work to be desired but as for a military invasion your biggest problem is your own population rather than a foreign body.

And what is really being secured with these incursions, Poppies in Afghanistan, Oil in Iraq and Libya, these are multinational corporate interests, not national sovereignty ones. But I can understand how it is hard to make such a distinction these days.

I do understand that killing is very much a part of this world, we kill our meat to eat, we kill our environment for resources and we kill out morality and values to try and live with the horrors and complexity that we sometimes have to face. Every nation has its own challenges and problems to deal with as this world becomes more interconnected and more interdependent. To kill that which we do not understand is to kill a part of us that we never will.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 08:55 AM
link   
There are some fundamental things that must be accomplished and recognized before we invade.
1. The Syrian "question" must be resolved and I doubt this will happen before the US election of 2012.
2. Russia, China, and even Pakistan have to be dealt with or at least we need verification that they will not intervene.
3. We did learn a lot from Iraq. We need to stay away from Iran's infrastructure. Cutting off Iraq's power, water, and general services from the civilian population was the match that lite the fuse for civil war.
4. Do not disband the military. We learned this in WWII in Europe and in Iraq in '03. We will need their military to control the population.
5. This will be kicked off by massive waves of Drone Strikes and Cruise missile strikes before we even send in the Stealth bombers and B 52's. Iran has a very advanced and sophisticated air defense network. We will not put troops on the ground in Iran unless we can provide CAS for the ground forces.
6. We will need a large build up of forces along the western border in northern Iraq. Maybe two armored divisions and a lot of Mechanized infantry with a solid logistical footprint on the Iraq side of the border. We have much of what the military needs in Kuwait already. We will be heading straight for Tehran.
7. We will not be crossing Iran from the East. ISAF forces in Afghanistan are already busy doing their jobs there. There is also not much strategic value to Eastern Iran. Allied forces in Afghanistan I think will just lock down the border between Iran and Afghanistan.
8. Large forces of MEU's will need to secure strategic port cities to open up supply lines for the invasion. The border between Iran and Pakistan in the South East must also be locked down.
9. SOCOM units will most likely link up with local indigenous and Kurds in the North West to close that border as well.
10. Destroying the Iranian way of life is not the goal. Removing the leadership and the Mullahs is the key. Dismantling the government may also be a bad idea. I don't think we should even give them democracy, maybe just put someone in power who we can play ball with. I am not saying that is right, but giving countries a choice of democracy tends to lead to civil war. Look at Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Yemen, and even Syria right now.
11. We must not leave an occupational force. We neither have the money or the resources. This should be a regime change not a occupation.

It is a very hard decision to make. I think we should stay away, but if we do invade we must be honest with ourselves about what we want. We want a western friendly government that is stable that may or may not be democratic. South America is a good example. The US tends to support authoritarian democracies there. America likes countries that can exact control on their population, and those governments are then controlled by the US, effectively giving the US control of the country.

It's not pretty but I believe it is the most effective way to force regime change with minimal bloodshed of the local population.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoRemorse762
There are some fundamental things that must be accomplished and recognized before we invade.
1. The Syrian "question" must be resolved and I doubt this will happen before the US election of 2012.
2. Russia, China, and even Pakistan have to be dealt with or at least we need verification that they will not intervene.
3. We did learn a lot from Iraq. We need to stay away from Iran's infrastructure. Cutting off Iraq's power, water, and general services from the civilian population was the match that lite the fuse for civil war.
4. Do not disband the military. We learned this in WWII in Europe and in Iraq in '03. We will need their military to control the population.
5. This will be kicked off by massive waves of Drone Strikes and Cruise missile strikes before we even send in the Stealth bombers and B 52's. Iran has a very advanced and sophisticated air defense network. We will not put troops on the ground in Iran unless we can provide CAS for the ground forces.
6. We will need a large build up of forces along the western border in northern Iraq. Maybe two armored divisions and a lot of Mechanized infantry with a solid logistical footprint on the Iraq side of the border. We have much of what the military needs in Kuwait already. We will be heading straight for Tehran.
7. We will not be crossing Iran from the East. ISAF forces in Afghanistan are already busy doing their jobs there. There is also not much strategic value to Eastern Iran. Allied forces in Afghanistan I think will just lock down the border between Iran and Afghanistan.
8. Large forces of MEU's will need to secure strategic port cities to open up supply lines for the invasion. The border between Iran and Pakistan in the South East must also be locked down.
9. SOCOM units will most likely link up with local indigenous and Kurds in the North West to close that border as well.
10. Destroying the Iranian way of life is not the goal. Removing the leadership and the Mullahs is the key. Dismantling the government may also be a bad idea. I don't think we should even give them democracy, maybe just put someone in power who we can play ball with. I am not saying that is right, but giving countries a choice of democracy tends to lead to civil war. Look at Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Yemen, and even Syria right now.
11. We must not leave an occupational force. We neither have the money or the resources. This should be a regime change not a occupation.

It is a very hard decision to make. I think we should stay away, but if we do invade we must be honest with ourselves about what we want. We want a western friendly government that is stable that may or may not be democratic. South America is a good example. The US tends to support authoritarian democracies there. America likes countries that can exact control on their population, and those governments are then controlled by the US, effectively giving the US control of the country.

It's not pretty but I believe it is the most effective way to force regime change with minimal bloodshed of the local population.


The real question, is the US capable of NOT replacing the government with a democratic one?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by DevilJonah
 


The only reason they call these puppet governments democracies is to sell it to the media and general public. It's not whether the government is capable, it's whether the world at large will accept the US government putting in something other than a democracy.
edit on 13-6-2012 by NoRemorse762 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by NoRemorse762
 


Yes, but would China or Russia even allow another democratic country?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by DevilJonah
reply to post by NoRemorse762
 


Yes, but would China or Russia even allow another democratic country?

That is my #2 point. That is an issue all in itself. Who knows how we could appease China or Russia. Who knows what they would want. Arms and natural resources contracts? Who knows? It is a hypothetical point. I think that we will not go to Iran unless we get the approval of Russia or China.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Russia wants a divided muslim world between sunni and shia. They have to have someone to sell weapons too.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Russia wants a divided muslim world between sunni and shia. They have to have someone to sell weapons too.


So does that mean they will be against or for another Middle East war?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:36 PM
link   
by looking at this map mideastweb.org... Iran will be surrounded first, yes we will have to go into Iraq again,[if we even left] now the second part would be an air campaign in Syria , we are in Turkey Afghanistan and use Pakistan for supply routes. Iran is by a Mil stand point surrounded
Turkmenistan www.cia.gov...
Turkmenistan is the only unknown, would they help Iran or help the NATO/US forces?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by bekod
 


We currently have assets in Turkmenistan. Turkmenistan also does not want to get involved. They neither have the resources or the political will to get involved. Iran scares them as much as the rest of us.
edit on 13-6-2012 by NoRemorse762 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Turkemenistan is not the only unknown. Azerbaijan and Oman also have close political ties with Iran and need Iranian support to stave off the advances of Saudi Arabia (In Oman's case) and other Mid Eastern nations.

Also, the US would be hard pressed to launch ground invasions from the Iran-Iraq border or the Iran-Afghan border as it is highly mountainous and had been reinforced ever since the Iran-Iraq war. If Saddam couldn't take the areas with double the men and air superiority I don't think the US is going to find it a walk in the park.

Also, if the US did launch a ground assault it would take some heavy casualties from the Revolutionary Guard (250,000 strong), the Iranian Army (550,000 strong with 600,000 reserves) and some 10 million State sponsored militiamen.

We can't forget about morale and Home Field advantages. The US Army is suffering from PTSD and war fatigue whereas Iran's Armed Forces have been constantly fed nationalistic speeches and the 'You're unstoppable' line. They are ready for a war to protect their nation and families thanks to Ayatollah and Ahmadinejad's constant speeches. They also know the geography much better then the US does and know exactly when to strike and when to hide.

The US was being pinned down (I think they wanted to so they could keep the oil open) by a few thousand farmers and even with greater numbers, better tech and better logistics it took them over a decade to eventually get Iraq back into working order.

Do you honestly think Iran will be a walk over? They not only have a fanatical army and long range missiles but they have the backing of several Mid Eastern nations not to mention Russia and China's constant stream of weapons and tech upgrades.

If the US/NATO does actually invade Iran they will be facing a enemy they have not faced before. The Iranians will get blown up, shot and stabbed but they will simply keep coming until you either destroy their entire nation or you are dead.

Any war with Iran will drag Syria (They can launch missiles), Pakistan, Lebannon, Palestine and Oman into war. Iran could easily face down any other Mid Eastern nation and when teamed up with Pakistan and Syria they are truly a force to be reckoned with.


On another note, Iran and Iraq have become allies in OPEC. If that works who knows where it could lead? A possible economic/political/military alliance? A triumviratae of Iran, Iraq and Syria?
Who knows what the future holds?

But one thing is certain. If Israel or the US attack Iran the repercussions will be felt world wide.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Turkemenistan is not the only unknown. Azerbaijan and Oman also have close political ties with Iran and need Iranian support to stave off the advances of Saudi Arabia (In Oman's case) and other Mid Eastern nations.

Also, the US would be hard pressed to launch ground invasions from the Iran-Iraq border or the Iran-Afghan border as it is highly mountainous and had been reinforced ever since the Iran-Iraq war. If Saddam couldn't take the areas with double the men and air superiority I don't think the US is going to find it a walk in the park.

Also, if the US did launch a ground assault it would take some heavy casualties from the Revolutionary Guard (250,000 strong), the Iranian Army (550,000 strong with 600,000 reserves) and some 10 million State sponsored militiamen.

We can't forget about morale and Home Field advantages. The US Army is suffering from PTSD and war fatigue whereas Iran's Armed Forces have been constantly fed nationalistic speeches and the 'You're unstoppable' line. They are ready for a war to protect their nation and families thanks to Ayatollah and Ahmadinejad's constant speeches. They also know the geography much better then the US does and know exactly when to strike and when to hide.

The US was being pinned down (I think they wanted to so they could keep the oil open) by a few thousand farmers and even with greater numbers, better tech and better logistics it took them over a decade to eventually get Iraq back into working order.

Do you honestly think Iran will be a walk over? They not only have a fanatical army and long range missiles but they have the backing of several Mid Eastern nations not to mention Russia and China's constant stream of weapons and tech upgrades.

If the US/NATO does actually invade Iran they will be facing a enemy they have not faced before. The Iranians will get blown up, shot and stabbed but they will simply keep coming until you either destroy their entire nation or you are dead.

Any war with Iran will drag Syria (They can launch missiles), Pakistan, Lebannon, Palestine and Oman into war. Iran could easily face down any other Mid Eastern nation and when teamed up with Pakistan and Syria they are truly a force to be reckoned with.


On another note, Iran and Iraq have become allies in OPEC. If that works who knows where it could lead? A possible economic/political/military alliance? A triumviratae of Iran, Iraq and Syria?
Who knows what the future holds?

But one thing is certain. If Israel or the US attack Iran the repercussions will be felt world wide.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Trajan
 
A very true statement "But one thing is certain. If Israel or the US attack Iran the repercussions will be felt world wide." brings to mind " and I shall gather them together... Armageddon" So are we looking the first stage of Armageddon?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by bekod
 


I have absolutely no doubt that Isreal will attack Iran, and I think the US is hoping for it. No matter what the reprecussions will also be against the US, but if Isreal strikes first it will be much easier for the US to claim its just supporting its allies...its an easier sell to the American people if they make it seem like they don't really want to be there, and makes the US look less like an instigator if they didn't technically throw the first punch.




top topics



 
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join