Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

A war with Iran?


  • Please log in to reply
374 replies to this topic

#201 Cataduanes

Cataduanes

    The power of the riff compels me!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,835 posts
  • Nation Name:Cataduanes
  • Alliance Name:The Last Pint

Posted 21 March 2012 - 08:42 AM

If the power bases of the regime are hit hard enough, it will collapse.
The Libyan opposition did not need significant NATO presence on the ground to overthrow Qaddafi.

heh Iran is no Libya or Afghanistan, the Islamic Republic is an entity that lost 1.5 million in a war with Iraq and survived, a regime that has endured decades of relative global isolation and thrived. I think it will take alot more than bombing their infrastructure to oust the regime. The Ayatollah's are the real power not Ahmadinejad and his buddies, and the Ayatollahs influence will survive such a protracted aerial campaign...it would be foolish of both Israel and the States to allow a regime of this sort to survive war.

#202 Freddy

Freddy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,284 posts
  • Nation Name:Wussyland
  • Alliance Name:United Purple Nations
  • CN:TE Nation Name:adventuretime
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:The Phoenix Cobras

Posted 21 March 2012 - 09:30 AM

Iran isn't the problem with attacking Iran. We would have hit them long ago if not for China.

#203 Golan 1st

Golan 1st

    DAWN

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,353 posts
  • Nation Name:Danieland
  • Alliance Name:Democratic Alliance of Wise Nations

Posted 21 March 2012 - 02:04 PM

heh Iran is no Libya or Afghanistan, the Islamic Republic is an entity that lost 1.5 million in a war with Iraq and survived, a regime that has endured decades of relative global isolation and thrived. I think it will take alot more than bombing their infrastructure to oust the regime. The Ayatollah's are the real power not Ahmadinejad and his buddies, and the Ayatollahs influence will survive such a protracted aerial campaign...it would be foolish of both Israel and the States to allow a regime of this sort to survive war.

For quite a long time, Qaddafi survived harsh sanctions, worse than those imposed on Iran until recently. His fall did not come as a result of those sanctions.
I agree, though, that the Iranian regime is probably better established and will need more blows before it collapse, but it's really mostly a matter of time, during which the US can supply the opposition and train them. I think that Iran with, it's more educated population and a stronger national identity, is actually likely to raise a real alternative to the current regime, in contrast to the chaotic situation in Libya.

#204 Ayatollah Bromeini

Ayatollah Bromeini

    War of holy principles

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,072 posts
  • Nation Name:Rock n Rollah
  • Alliance Name:NSO
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Soviet Tennessee
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:The Warriors

Posted 21 March 2012 - 04:16 PM

I think that Iran with, it's more educated population and a stronger national identity, is actually likely to raise a real alternative to the current regime, in contrast to the chaotic situation in Libya.


Well, it's hard to say because the Iranian people are so oppressed, especially their freedom of speech, but during the 70's there was a really strong leftist movement in Iran, and during the period when Rezas' regime was collapsing, there were many leftist organizations who came forth and tried to take power of Iran and many kibbutz-like communities appeared until the Khomeini regime came to power and suppressed them.

It's possible that these feelings still exist in Iran and that with a regime collapse, Iran could adopt a social democracy similar to Israels.

#205 Lord GVChamp

Lord GVChamp

    Liberation is at hand

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 16,183 posts
  • Nation Name:Quanda
  • Alliance Name:GREEN TEAM!

Posted 21 March 2012 - 05:05 PM

This is true, but again, they're catching up in doctrine as well, I would presume. IE: That Kiev-class they have is being used for training purposes.

It's not just a matter of doctrine, either, it's a whole system approach. For instance, it's not correct to compare the F-22 to the Su-30. You compare the entire air network system of the US to the entire air network system of Russia, and then it looks even MORE lopsided.

Ex: The US and France are pretty similar in technological aspects. But the US is flush with AWACS, cruise missiles, tankers, etc, which allows us to do all sorts of things that France just wouldn't be able to match. When it comes to Russia, who cares if they have a numbers advantage? We have satellites and an intelligence advantage, so we know where they are. We can position all of our fighters in Turkey and make Russia think we are attacking there, then we can refuel all of our planes, swing all the around Europe, and attack St. Petersburg, while all the while every border radar station Russia has is blinded and they are none the wiser, PLUS we can bring in AWACS planes from elsewhere to support the attack in St. Petersburg, even if we don't have any actual ground infrastructure to support the aerial attack.

How is Russia having some numbers going to make up for that?

China's biggest advantage is distance. The Pacific is huge compared to Europe. The US also lacks powerful allies in the Pacific, which it does not in Europe.

There's also a sizable education and middle-leadership advantage that shouldn't be discounted. The US military is going to be able to react a lot quicker at smaller levels than the Chinese military.

Offensive technology is a lot more expensive than the defensive technology which neutralises it.

Like I've been saying, it isn't just a simple matter of technology vs. technology.

#206 Arcturus Jefferson

Arcturus Jefferson

    Killing Lannisters isn't treason.

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,748 posts
  • Nation Name:Selukia

Posted 21 March 2012 - 06:25 PM

For quite a long time, Qaddafi survived harsh sanctions, worse than those imposed on Iran until recently. His fall did not come as a result of those sanctions.
I agree, though, that the Iranian regime is probably better established and will need more blows before it collapse, but it's really mostly a matter of time, during which the US can supply the opposition and train them. I think that Iran with, it's more educated population and a stronger national identity, is actually likely to raise a real alternative to the current regime, in contrast to the chaotic situation in Libya.

What opposition are we arming? The MEK?

#207 the rebel

the rebel

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,572 posts
  • Nation Name:rebellion

Posted 21 March 2012 - 07:18 PM

It's not just a matter of doctrine, either, it's a whole system approach. For instance, it's not correct to compare the F-22 to the Su-30. You compare the entire air network system of the US to the entire air network system of Russia, and then it looks even MORE lopsided.

~words~


America verses Russia and/or China are pointless arguments and pointless to give examples, forget money, forget technology and forget military might. All it takes is balls and a nuclear deterrent, Russia and China are getting ballsy. Showing America the door and telling them to stop interfering in their affairs and sphere of influence. A perfect example of that was Russia walking into Georgia (an American ally) what happened? Jack !@#$.

Come on why did you bring up a classic circle argument of whose better?

#208 Lord GVChamp

Lord GVChamp

    Liberation is at hand

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 16,183 posts
  • Nation Name:Quanda
  • Alliance Name:GREEN TEAM!

Posted 22 March 2012 - 04:11 PM

America verses Russia and/or China are pointless arguments and pointless to give examples, forget money, forget technology and forget military might. All it takes is balls and a nuclear deterrent, Russia and China are getting ballsy. Showing America the door and telling them to stop interfering in their affairs and sphere of influence. A perfect example of that was Russia walking into Georgia (an American ally) what happened? Jack !@#$.

Come on why did you bring up a classic circle argument of whose better?

All the major powers have extensive conventional arsenals, so basically every policy maker in the world disagrees with you that these sorts of scenarios are irrelevant. I am only talking about the technological aspect anyways.

#209 the rebel

the rebel

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,572 posts
  • Nation Name:rebellion

Posted 22 March 2012 - 05:29 PM

All the major powers have extensive conventional arsenals, so basically every policy maker in the world disagrees with you that these sorts of scenarios are irrelevant. I am only talking about the technological aspect anyways.


The point flew right over your head.

Edit: But to answer your comment, of course they have extensive conventional arsenals, otherwise their nuclear arsenals become their first and only option instead of the last.

Edited by the rebel, 22 March 2012 - 05:38 PM.


#210 Starfox101

Starfox101

    Hazard

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,138 posts
  • Nation Name:Burbank
  • Alliance Name:Polar

Posted 31 March 2012 - 08:17 PM

Everytime someone talks about how strong Iran is makes me laugh. Iraq back in the 90's was thought to be tough as well, and we steamrolled their 500,000 man army and threw their ass out of Kuwait while losing a couple hundred soldiers. So let's say Israel attacks Iranian nuclear reactors, and Iran attacks them. Well the US will destroy their troops in transition and Iran goes back to turtling in their defenses. I say this as a member of the US Army, the US Air Force is not rivaled by any force on earth. It wouldn't be a war, it would be a slaughtering of the Iranian people, and neither side wants that.

#211 Prodigal Moon

Prodigal Moon

    So the world might be mended

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,356 posts
  • Nation Name:Nightmerica
  • Alliance Name:New Polar Order

Posted 31 March 2012 - 10:25 PM

I think the Israeli civilian population would be the ones who would potentially get it the worst in an Israel/US vs Iran war.

#212 Golan 1st

Golan 1st

    DAWN

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,353 posts
  • Nation Name:Danieland
  • Alliance Name:Democratic Alliance of Wise Nations

Posted 31 March 2012 - 11:45 PM

I think the Israeli civilian population would be the ones who would potentially get it the worst in an Israel/US vs Iran war.

I agree that the Israeli civilians are likely to suffer a lot in such a war (though we have the worlds most advanced defence systems exactly for such situations). However, in any scenario I can imagine, Israel's enemies will suffer a lot more.
Even in the worst case scenario, we have, according to foreign sources, the means to turn Iran to rabble.

#213 Kenadian

Kenadian

    MAGNIFY

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51,685 posts
  • Nation Name:Kenadia

Posted 01 April 2012 - 09:00 AM

I agree that the Israeli civilians are likely to suffer a lot in such a war (though we have the worlds most advanced defence systems exactly for such situations). However, in any scenario I can imagine, Israel's enemies will suffer a lot more.
Even in the worst case scenario, we have, according to foreign sources, the means to turn Iran to rabble.


Nukes can do that, yeah.

#214 Starfox101

Starfox101

    Hazard

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,138 posts
  • Nation Name:Burbank
  • Alliance Name:Polar

Posted 01 April 2012 - 01:02 PM

I think the Israeli civilian population would be the ones who would potentially get it the worst in an Israel/US vs Iran war.

Possibly, but that would mostly be from insurgency, not the Iranian military. Iran's military would never reach Israel, and Israeli's can sleep soundly knowing at least that much.

#215 Prodigal Moon

Prodigal Moon

    So the world might be mended

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,356 posts
  • Nation Name:Nightmerica
  • Alliance Name:New Polar Order

Posted 01 April 2012 - 05:52 PM

Possibly, but that would mostly be from insurgency, not the Iranian military. Iran's military would never reach Israel, and Israeli's can sleep soundly knowing at least that much.

I'm thinking along the lines of rocket attacks from Syria, long range missiles from Iran, suicide bombings/shootings, and the possibility of a dirty bomb getting smuggled in. I realize Israel has that Iron Dome system, but they (whole nation) are just a lot more exposed to the consequences of a strike on Iran than we (U.S.) would be.

#216 Golan 1st

Golan 1st

    DAWN

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,353 posts
  • Nation Name:Danieland
  • Alliance Name:Democratic Alliance of Wise Nations

Posted 02 April 2012 - 12:35 AM

What I say here is based on information which is available to the public on the media, including the internet.
Iron Dome is not meant to deal with long range missiles. We have other systems for that. It can help in dealing with the missiles we expect from Lebanon and Gaza, though.
The premise here (and in military thinking in general) is that no defence system or a combination of several systems can guarantee 100% protection and with thousands of missiles fired on us, it is obvious that enough will make it through to frustrate normal life of the civilian population, cause injuries and fatalities and cause significant difficulties in the operation of necessary industries and military operations (logistics and others) away from the front.
A strange lesson we can take from Israel's recent conflicts, from the First Gulf War in 1991, the Second Lebanon War in 2006 and rounds of escalation with the Palestinians, is that the Israeli public deals very well with the problems caused by war at the home front, but is a lot more affected by casualties at the front. It is not completely surprising in a nation with a conscript military and the reserves being the backbone of fighting forces, but still, it is not what you would normally expect, ie that the military is supposed to be the civilians' shield and sustain casualties to minimize them at the home front.
It is obvious that the US population will be largely safe in a conflict against Iran. A terror attack here and there, even major ones, are possible, but this is not something that really changes anything in regard to how the war is run. While possibly significant publicly and politically, from a narrow military perspective, America will be able to dedicate all the means it needs for a successful attack.
In a scenario of a coordinated Israeli-American attack, it is clear that after the first strike (NOT NUCLEAR!!!), the Israeli forces will need to focus on suppressing threats from its most immediate neighbors, Lebanon, Gaza and possibly Syria, depending on the situation there. Until this goal is achieved, which may take from days to several weeks, the burden of directly dealing with the Iranians will be on America's shoulders. I find it hard to imagine that threats from Iran to the Israeli home front and to America's other allies in the region will be completely suppressed in a short time. I have no idea what people in Saudi Arabia and Oman think about this, but the Israeli public is well aware of this and accepts this.
There can be no doubt, though, that great number of casualties here will bring a retaliation that will cost the lives of many Iranians.

Edit:
LOL
Alarm sirens were heard in several places in Israel. As you can imagine, with all the talking about a war with Iran, some people really panicked.
The IDF says that it did not identify anything launched at Israel and that it was a technical problem with the sirens system.
Just in case the sirens know better, if you don't hear for me by the evening, it was nice knowing you, guys :lol1:

Edited by Golan 1st, 02 April 2012 - 05:55 AM.


#217 Prodigal Moon

Prodigal Moon

    So the world might be mended

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,356 posts
  • Nation Name:Nightmerica
  • Alliance Name:New Polar Order

Posted 02 April 2012 - 06:16 PM

Thank you for the insights, Golan. I hope you and your loved ones can stay safe, regardless of how things plays out.

#218 Starfox101

Starfox101

    Hazard

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,138 posts
  • Nation Name:Burbank
  • Alliance Name:Polar

Posted 03 April 2012 - 05:13 PM

In a scenario of a coordinated Israeli-American attack, it is clear that after the first strike (NOT NUCLEAR!!!), the Israeli forces will need to focus on suppressing threats from its most immediate neighbors, Lebanon, Gaza and possibly Syria, depending on the situation there. Until this goal is achieved, which may take from days to several weeks, the burden of directly dealing with the Iranians will be on America's shoulders.

Edit:
LOL
Alarm sirens were heard in several places in Israel. As you can imagine, with all the talking about a war with Iran, some people really panicked.
The IDF says that it did not identify anything launched at Israel and that it was a technical problem with the sirens system.
Just in case the sirens know better, if you don't hear for me by the evening, it was nice knowing you, guys :lol1:

That can be arranged, haha. No but really, Israel is lucky to have America in their corner. We've almost become an underrated military at this point. All it takes is a real war to show our true capabilities, and I pity whatever nation takes on America and it's bulldog Israel.

#219 Arcturus Jefferson

Arcturus Jefferson

    Killing Lannisters isn't treason.

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,748 posts
  • Nation Name:Selukia

Posted 03 April 2012 - 06:53 PM

That can be arranged, haha. No but really, Israel is lucky to have America in their corner. We've almost become an underrated military at this point. All it takes is a real war to show our true capabilities, and I pity whatever nation takes on America and it's bulldog Israel.

Well if an army can't win the wars it's sent to fight...

http://www.theonion....ne-solid,27770/

Edited by Arcturus Jefferson, 03 April 2012 - 09:05 PM.


#220 Aeternos Astramora

Aeternos Astramora

    Argent MoW, Otter on IRC

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,596 posts
  • Nation Name:Astrum
  • Alliance Name:Argent

Posted 03 April 2012 - 07:00 PM

Wars =/= Occupations.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users