According to a December 2017 Rand Corp. , a major conflict with Iran would require the U.S. to deploy 21 Air Force fighter squadrons, five heavy bomber squadrons, six Marine Corps fighter squadrons, 18 attack submarines, four aircraft carriers, a suite of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance vehicles, six Marine infantry battalions, three Army brigade combat teams, and a crowd of special operations forces — not to mention a host of drones, satellites, cruisers, counter-mine vessels, supply ships, refueling aircraft, and surface-to-air batteries. Put another way, a war with Iran would require the U.S. Air Force (for example), to deploy nearly half of its fighter squadrons (there are 55 in all) to a single conflict. It could do it, but just barely. What is being assembled is barely enough for a war with Iran. It’s likely Trump is trying to pressure Iran. Or they are underestimating Iran setting themselves up for a catastrophic fiasco if war breaks out.
Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and other Related Conflicts in the Middle East (read the rules in the first post)
- Thread starter phrozenflame
- Start date
I don't think they're planning this buildup for a prolonged high-intensity contingency, it could be like Operation Desert Fox.
Operation Desert Fox was done after already degrading Iraq in Desert Storm and putting them under postwar sanctions that Iraq never recovered from. And it followed from a constant no fly zone + light bombing.
In contrast Iran is mountainous forest including the approaches to urban regions, is much more resilient to sanctions than Iraq was, based on end results, and hasn't been degraded by a decade of war.
If they move on Iran with so few assets I'm surprised the US forgot it's own lesson of applying overwhelming force.
Mannnn....we can dislike the US but have to admit that their military capabities and ability to fight anywhere around the globe is unprecedented and still unmatched by any country so far..CENTCOM may have the potential to see 3 CSGs in a given period:
Perks for having 800 bases throughout the globe i guess
Yes but their comparative advantage is shrinking over time. Especially with more and more drones used by even weak nations.
I am impressed by the American logistics transport capacity through the AMC. They demonstrated part of this capacity in the "Kabul Airlift", and are demonstrating it again now with the crisis with Iran. There are 153 REVO and 300 heavy and medium transport aircraft.
Iran has been under sanctions for years, its air force is not modernized and does not compare to the USAF/USNA/USMC, and its air defense advantage can be nullified or permanently destroyed/suppressed by conventional bombings that can last for weeks.
That's what many laymen (especially in the West) said about Ukraine as well. In fact they thought less than a few weeks, only a few days. Iran is not under sanctions from the countries that matter, not being able to buy a Ford chevvy or Italian tomatoes doesn't limit Iran from equipping hordes of "good enough" troops.
Will Iran lose in the longer term? Yes, assuming US affords to spend all their effort their for years. But that's a pretty big assumption.
Unlike Russia, US can't put all their efforts on hold for the duration of a war like this. So I don't think anything will happen. US also needs way more forces in the theatre.