New Iran thread

[Gollevainen]

Iran is a target? Not for an invasion. For an stragtic strike on it's nuke capablity? Yes. I do not think the US would invade Iran because the US Army is spread so thin and the growing unpopularity of th war in Iraq in the US..

I personally dont belive US is going to attack Iran...But as the article in the starting post, many believe that US is planning to conduct some sort of military strikes against Iran. But the one of this threads purpose was to find out what we think about this situation.

As i said i personally don't believe that US is going to conduct a full scale invasion like they did against Iraq. Why? Becouse USA as powerfull it may be cannot do it. Iran isen't in the situation as Iraq was before this siccond campaing, like beat-up dog tied on the ground...Iran have had enough time to compensate it's lost from the Iran-Iraq war so if US would try to attack they would be facing a real adversor. Althoug Iran is ruled by some sort of totalitarian regime, its sosiety is noway near the turmoil as Iraq was. And against foreing invators the little grunch in the domestic situation is easily forgotten and americans would have fight against quite motivated army.
To be able to invade some country, you basicly need real advantage in technology and quantity. Althoug US is far superior in the first front, in the seccond it isent. Back in when US bombed Serbia, landwarfare wasen't an option cos the allied leadership knew that they would never been able to win the VJ whitout heavy casualityes and years of bitter fighting.
Iran is bigger country than Serbia was so able to win, US would have to commited to campaing that could last decades and it would be able to do it by itself, almoust as big alliance would be required as in during the first gulf war. Thats just equation that doesent come thru. So therefor no Iran invasion in the pipeline...

Percision attacks against Iran's nuclear facilities? Perhaps? Tough thats certainly not what i would want...

 

[MIGleader]

precision strikes? those ficilities are miles undergroud.
i hope the u.s invades, gets its @$$ kiked, and goes bankrpt.
im surprisse issa hasn't posted in this thred yet...

 

[bd popeye]

precision strikes? those ficilities are miles undergroud.
i hope the u.s invades, gets its @$$ kiked, and goes bankrpt.
im surprisse issa hasn't posted in this thred yet...

Never will happen. I pray not.

MIGleader..You need to put more thought in your post.

To be able to invade some country, you basicly need real advantage in technology and quantity. Althoug US is far superior in the first front, in the seccond it isent. Back in when US bombed Serbia, landwarfare wasen't an option cos the allied leadership knew that they would never been able to win the VJ whitout heavy casualityes and years of bitter fighting

You are essenstially correct. Pres Clinton did not want to see the 'body bags" with dead US servicemen on Tv. That is the main reason the air strike tactic was used.

Pres Clinton did not want to see a similar situation the US Faced in Somilia.

 

[crazyinsane105]

Iran does have a number of S-300 batteries. Even though they can't defeat an American air strike, many American planes would be shot down (the S-300 is pretty nasty because it can't be targeted by conventional HARM missiles).

 

[MIGleader]

welcome to the world of pres bush...hiding anything important.
well, lets say i hope the bush admin invades iran, losses $, losses troops, and losses friends. when i say america normally, i mean the bush admin. america as a country is good. bush is not.

unfortunately, since the bush admin "rules" america, i cant tracsh them withoout trashing the country. i hope iran will become the next iraq for the admin. they will surely be voted out of power.

invade iran...do you know how much gas will jump? 10$ a gallon!
an invasion will teach the bushies once and for all they are not the kings of the world and cant toy with other countries at will.

 

[FreeAsia2000]

Iran does have a number of S-300 batteries. Even though they can't defeat an American air strike, many American planes would be shot down (the S-300 is pretty nasty because it can't be targeted by conventional HARM missiles).

disagree with Gollevainen and agree with crazyinsane.

If America attacks Iran via airstrikes the Iranians will respond by
attacking America's interests worldwide. Remember american
hostages in Lebanon ?

What do you think american public opinion will say if the iranians
broadcast american hostages in abu ghreib mode? they will want
an invasion of iran. Result Bush will be forced to invade Iran

The iranians will not wait for america to starve them with sanctions
and airstrikes they will want the invasion NOW.

Regarding India's decision to bow to American pressure

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[bd popeye]

unfortunately, since the bush admin "rules" america, i cant tracsh them withoout trashing the country. i hope iran will become the next iraq for the admin. they will surely be voted out of power.

Pres Bush is not allowed to be re-elected. By US law a person can only be elected Pres of the US for two consecutive terms.

Iran does have a number of S-300 batteries. Even though they can't defeat an American air strike, many American planes would be shot down (the S-300 is pretty nasty because it can't be targeted by conventional HARM missiles).

Really!?..Actually US ECM would shut down most missile batteries and target aquisition systems.

 

[utelore]

The very idea of Iran having the ability to inflict losses on U.S warplanes is not rational. The U.S would hit Iran with B-2 and longrange cruise missiles. As it stands now Iran does not use its radars out of fear of the u.s pre-ploting Air defense nodes. This has advantages and a HUGE disadvantage. Iran has a very poor Air defense network and a even poorer airforce. A couple none-intergrated S-300 is not going to help out at all. As it stands now Global hawks fly over Iran with not much problem. The Iranians cant or dont know when the drones are flying overhead.....too funny

 

[bd popeye]

The very idea of Iran having the ability to inflict losses on U.S warplanes is not rational. The U.S would hit Iran with B-2 and longrange cruise missiles. As it stands now Iran does not use its radars out of fear of the u.s pre-ploting Air defense nodes. This has advantages and a HUGE disadvantage. Iran has a very poor Air defense network and a even poorer airforce. A couple none-intergrated S-300 is not going to help out at all. As it stands now Global hawks fly over Iran with not much problem. The Iranians cant or dont know when the drones are flying overhead.....too funny

Interesting, I'm sure if any such attack did occur the US would attack in such a way tp limit US losses. I knew the Iranian AF was in poor shape but did not know about their air defenses. Any links for information on this?

Iran does not turn on it's air defense? Gee what a schock!! That's the old Iraqi tactic. If they did turn them on during an attack the US could gain the codes immediatley and shut them down in short order. This unless of course the US already has the codes.

Isn't there a member named Issa from Iran? I wish he would post some first hand information about Iranian air defenses. How about it Isaa?

 

[Gollevainen]

Whit only airforce, even USA cannot win the war. Tough it depends its goals, If it is the overthrown the current Irans regime, then USA cannot execute that whit only attacking from air. If we once again compare this to the Kosovo crises, in there the US led alliance was unable to couse any significant damage to Yugoslavian land forces. Yugoslavia had airforces in quite similar phase as Iran does so it wasen't able to intercept the allied attackplanes, only few downed aircrafts whit the good ol' KUB SAM...but whit extremely simple discuising messures the whole VJ was left whit only few tanks destroyed. Iran is far bigger country in al means and Iranian army doesen't have no proplems to hide it's primary forces spreaded all over the mountainous landscape. As in Yugoslavia, US is forced to destroy only civilian infastructure wich opposite it's meaning cannot overthrown Irans political leadership. Not in Iran's case. In Yugoslavia, the hated president Milohcevic was put out of power only afterwards the bombings where stopped.