Day One - The War with Iran

F

FreeAsia2000

Junior Member
Fairthought said:
After having read the article that started this thread, I have to say the author was engaging in a little embellishment with regards to the consequences. He seems to favor the worst case scenario.

He also forgets the preliminary maneuvers the US will take prior to the attack:

1. The US will siphon and store enormous petrol reserves in Iraq to keep US troops there well supplied with fuel in preparation for a major and prolonged oil shortage. Certainly, it is understood that Iran's retaliation will be focussed on American oil supplies in the middle east.

2. The US will once again seek and be denied UN support and the US will once again make the UN irrelevant by creating a coalition of the willing (Israel, UK, and australia plus whatever eastern European countries they can bribe). The president will announce this coalition to the public just as the air strikes commence (evening, american time) so americans will be given plenty of time to react before monday morning rush hour. Panic at the pumps will be minimized.

3. Iran will unleash a wave of attacks on US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Just as these troops are well positioned to strike Iran, they are also well positioned to be struck by Iran. Iranian agents already move freely in Baghdad and Kabul, both places were formerly off limits to them under Saddam Hussein and the Taliban. They already have numerous strikes planned out on well spotted targets. They simply await the order.

4. Scuds are very effective in knocking out oil refineries. Oil laden supertankers in the persian gulf are also easy targets by a variety of means. The US navy will have their fleet working hard maintaining protective umbrellas for the thousands of tankers snaking past Iran's coast. This will be a permanent job, Something the US taxpayer will burden alone.

5. Any international outcry will be muted. Protestors can cry foul around the world, but it will not lead to any oil embargo against the US. Hugo Chavez is all bark no bite.

6. Bunkerbuster bombs are easily foiled with some inventive bunker designs. Since the bunkerbusters used on Iraq were basically HEAT rounds built on a Giant scale, the solution is obvious. The only question is will the US use the new nuclear bunkerbusters?

In the end, the US will congratulate itself for saving the world from a nuclear Iran. The US will also shoulder itself with still more ongoing military missions to pay for and still higher oil prices. Suffering a few thousand dead American soldiers will be accepted as part of the necessity of defending liberty.
Click to expand...

Fairthought thanks that was a good post though I disagree with you somewhat. However how do you think this will end ? At what stage will Iran and it's agents in Iraq and other countries STOP their attacks ?
 
F

Fairthought

Junior Member
As long as the US is actually bombing Iran, than we can expect Iranian attacks on US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. I do not expect Iran to actually attack refineries in Qatar, Kuwait, Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. But if they choose to do so, it would cause oil to skyrocket. If the US actually used nuclear bunkerbusters, then these oil facilites will be targeted.
 
I

IDonT

Senior Member
VIP Professional
FreeAsia2000 said:
IDont your're making the SAME error that Americans have made in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq

Simply you have NO exit strategy. Your assessment is that American wants to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities and Iran wants to protect them. END OF GAME. Life is not a chess game.

What happens AFTER america has blown up most of Iran's nuclear facilities ?
Click to expand...

The problem with the US policy is that they want everybody to like them and want their enemies to know that they have been beaten.

The US should have left after they captured Saddam, Regime Change being the object of the invasion, and let Iraq to fend for themselves.
 
utelore

utelore

Junior Member
VIP Professional
ONE WORD....ZAGROS MOUNTAIN RANGE. it is insane to even think of the U.S launching an attack into Iran to sieze Terhan. I here this insane talk of droping a airborne and special forces div into Terhan........are those people nuts. there are 40,000 troops backed by a armour division in Terhan to counter such attack. plus as I was saying the U.S 4th ID would have to cross the Zarogs mountain range while fighting very determined iranian commandos and mountain troops with all kinds of ATGW the likes of which not seen in Iraq.
 
bd popeye

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
IDont your're making the SAME error that Americans have made in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq

Simply you have NO exit strategy. Your assessment is that American wants to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities and Iran wants to protect them. END OF GAME. Life is not a chess game.

What happens AFTER america has blown up most of Iran's nuclear facilities ?
Click to expand...

Oh no! Something must be happening to my little brain. I find myself agreeing with my pal and busom buddy FreeAsia2000!..The world may stop spinning in a monent!

I really hope that some sort of diplomtic solution can be reached over the situation with the Iranian nuke program. If the EU and US decide to strke Iran they better consider all the factors and not send one foot solider into Iran.

The problem with the US policy is that they want everybody to like them and want their enemies to know that they have been beaten.

The US should have left after they captured Saddam, Regime Change being the object of the invasion, and let Iraq to fend for themselves
Click to expand...

IDonT, I agree with you also on most issues. And agree with you on this posting.

The way the present regime in Iran is structured now diplomacy will take a very long time to work ..that is if it would work at all....
 
F

FreeAsia2000

Junior Member
IDonT said:
The problem with the US policy is that they want everybody to like them and want their enemies to know that they have been beaten.

The US should have left after they captured Saddam, Regime Change being the object of the invasion, and let Iraq to fend for themselves.
Click to expand...

IDont I think the problem is that the US dosn't have a consistent overall approach to the Middle East which encompasses it's military, economic and other interests. In addition it consistently underestimates the politisized nature of the people's of the middle east due to the 'regional experts' it employs who are largely divorced from the word on the street.

They need to sit down work out what they want from the Middle East in short oil then invite all interested parties with NO exceptions to negotiations. On the basis of this framework they may be able to achieve what they want and hopefully at least LESSEN the instability

Anyway regarding any invasion I think all parties here now agree that invasion and occupation of Iran is NOT going to happen whoch leaves an attack on nuclear installations which will lead to economic problems for the world economy thus leading to greater instability in the rest of the world because quite simply Iran will respond and there will be no end to the war and instability.

Tactical victory. Strategic defeat
 
I

IDonT

Senior Member
VIP Professional
FreeAsia2000 said:
IDont I think the problem is that the US dosn't have a consistent overall approach to the Middle East which encompasses it's military, economic and other interests. In addition it consistently underestimates the politisized nature of the people's of the middle east due to the 'regional experts' it employs who are largely divorced from the word on the street.

They need to sit down work out what they want from the Middle East in short oil then invite all interested parties with NO exceptions to negotiations. On the basis of this framework they may be able to achieve what they want and hopefully at least LESSEN the instability

Anyway regarding any invasion I think all parties here now agree that invasion and occupation of Iran is NOT going to happen whoch leaves an attack on nuclear installations which will lead to economic problems for the world economy thus leading to greater instability in the rest of the world because quite simply Iran will respond and there will be no end to the war and instability.

Tactical victory. Strategic defeat
Click to expand...

I agree with you but there seems to be an over estimation of Iran's capability to disrupt the flow of oil. Iran's oil reserves only number 90 Billion barrels, number 6 from Saudi Arabia...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


That leads us to overt and covert attempts to attack oil facilities, tankers, etc. Organized military capability that will threaten oil shipping, I believe will be the first on the target list and will be taken out. Those that survive, will be taken out as soon as they reveal themselves by firing. That leaves covert, suicide infiltration attacks. That can be solved by increasing security of these facilities. Oil afterall is the cash cow of oil producing nations in the middle east. They will defend them.

The price of oil will have an affect on the global...in the short run. After that economies adjust. Meanwhile, with IRAN will be cut off from trade with the rest of the world. I hope they know how to convert oil to raw materials, etc.

Also...
Russia agrees refering Iran to UN
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


From a power politics point of view, it is in the best interest of the Big 5 to keep the monopoly of nuclear weapons amongst themselves. Who know, next time it might be China who will have a confrontation with the now nuclear armed Iran.
 
MIGleader

MIGleader

Banned Idiot
i dont think its so simple. sinking commercial vessels is illegal in times of war, so all that would do is get other countries behind iran. iran also has large amounts of natural gas, not just oil.
burning irani oil staions would also be illegal, seeing how you would kill civilian workers in the process.
 
I

IDonT

Senior Member
VIP Professional
MIGleader said:
i dont think its so simple. sinking commercial vessels is illegal in times of war, so all that would do is get other countries behind iran. iran also has large amounts of natural gas, not just oil.
burning irani oil staions would also be illegal, seeing how you would kill civilian workers in the process.
Click to expand...

I meant that's what IRan will do.
 
crazyinsane105

crazyinsane105

Junior Member
VIP Professional
To be quite honest with you guys, I really doubt the US will be willing to launch an attack against Iran. For example, let's say that the Iranians start to arm the Iraqi insurgents with the latest anti-tank missiles, SA-16's, night vision goggles, basically the necessities to kill American armor and helicopters in Iraq during day or night. Can you just imagine what consequences that will bring to the American military? And what will stop Iran from stopping attacks against American troops? Iran has nearly a million men in the its military (both in active duty and reserve) plus Iran has many other groups that are willing to die for Iran. The numbers of those members are in the millions! Imagine how many more will join if Iran is attacked. Hezbollah is a very capable and dangerous organization. They will be able to wreck havoc in Europe and the Middle East. Attacking Iran would invoke such a massive relatiation, one unlike the world has seen for years.

Basically, if Iran is attacked, they won't see an end in their war until the US completely leaves the Middle East and with the destruction of Israel. I may sound far fetched, but the Persians are very proud people who don't take attacks on their homeland lightly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top