Ex Israeli Intel Boss: It Is Impossible For USA To Defeat Iran

[nahtanbob]

You are the living proof of why Americans are outright ignorant when it comes to international affairs. Open some history books before you let your uneducated mouth speak.

Iran just went through a bloody and chaotic revolution at that time, which changed the entire political order, but also saw its Imperial army being purged, with most of its generals being either executed or arrested. Almost its entire officer corpse was removed as well. Deemed as royal loyalists, most of its pilots either fled, were executed or imprisoned. In the war, Iran was fighting despite having less manpower, less armoured vehicles and tanks, less fighter jets, way less international political, military and economic support (the Saudis bankrolled Iraq throughout the entire war). You should check these numbers to understand the odds Iran was fighting against. The fact that Iran managed to survive, even recapturing all of its territory, was a bloody miracle, and couldn't have been possible without the sacrifices of the Iranian people.

Strength comparison:

Iraq: 9 well-armed divisions, 2750 tanks, 1400 artillery pieces, 4000 ACPs and 340 fighter bombers

Iran: 2 badly-depleted divisions and equally brigades, 500 tanks, 300 artillery pieces and no less than 100 operational aircraft.

What saved Iraq was not only petrodollars from the Gulf, but also US intelligence support. Rick Francona, who was a US intelligence officer in Iraq during that war, claimed that Iran would have captured Baghdad if it wasn't for the battlefield intelligence the Americans provided the Iraqis with. The same intelligence which were then used by Iraq to effectively use chemical weapons against Iranian forces:

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26...rove-america-helped-saddam-as-he-gassed-iran/

Do not blame us for your stupidity in eliminating competent military officers

Iraq was in possession of Iranian territory in 1988. If Iran had less manpower because they sacrificed entire generation of youth in human wave tactics

 

[Mithridates]

If it's to severely damage Iran's government, its military, and it's civilian infrastructure, the US can make it happen fairly quickly

our missiles can reach their max range in 3-7 min, the whole war would end in one hour with 1000 missiles fired on US bases around us. i assure you there is no way to stop our missiles to pour on their bases. if they start a war there will be no place to hide for them.

 

[raptor22]

One thing that no one mentions about Iran-Iraq war is the fact that we had no effective foreign policy apparatus to turn our victories on the battlefield into a meaningful lasting peace plan for Iran .. from revolution to the day that the war started we had 6 different FMs till May 1980 we had 10 FMs in office ... they failed even to see the shadow of the war let alone to prevent it or take any step during the war to turn situation in favor of Iran .. first Iran's FM whom lasted for a long period was Velayati that at best was a pediatrician .. within a year of war Iraq advances was stopped and reversed, Khoramshar was liberated later on Iraqi Air force & navy were weaken badly which meant all Saddam objections at the beginning of the war were turned now to distance mirages while all these were achieved under hardest time politically and economically .. .. if we had a reliable foreign policy with clear insight of Iran interests at time & augmented with the military might to defend Iran's right internationally then we wouldn't have needed to lose a pilot like Abbas Dowran to gain a political goal ...

If any war takes place which is unlikely our foreign policy apparatus must be the most active part of government.

 

[That Guy]

our missiles can reach their max range in 3-7 min, the whole war would end in one hour with 1000 missiles fired on US bases around us. i assure you there is no way to stop our missiles to pour on their bases. if they start a war there will be no place to hide for them.

Let's multiple that by a 100, and assume Iran launches 100,000 missiles at all the surrounding US bases. Let's say that the US doesn't intercept a single one with its anti-missile defense systems. Let's say Iran completely wipes put all those surrounding bases, and not a single soldier lives to tell the tale.

You're completely ignoring US carrier groups, subs and other systems where the US can launch counter strikes from. They don't even have to get close to Iran, they can launch counter attacks with far more devastating cruise missiles. They can launch bombers from their European bases, with the help of refueling planes.

The Saudis and the Emeratis will be salivating at this opportunity, and would let the US use their other air fields to launch air strikes against Iran.

Anyway, the point is, don't underestimate the US. There is a reason why the US is a super power, and Iran is just a regional power.

Iran's military planners are smart, they know they can't win against a US force head on, which is why they've developed and are continuing to develop non-conventional capabilities. In case of a war, I personally believe Iran's goal wouldn't be to win, but rather not lose (and there is a huge difference in that). Iran's goal would be to drag out the war, and make it so costly that US public turns against it. The problem with this is, the US probably also realizes this fact, and would try and end the war as quickly as possible, having learned from their mistakes from the Iraq and Afghan wars.

 

[Arminkh]

Do not blame us for your stupidity in eliminating competent military officers

Iraq was in possession of Iranian territory in 1988. If Iran had less manpower because they sacrificed entire generation of youth in human wave tactics

You guys sometime need to hear it from your own kind. Specially listen to the part that he explains the difference between Iran's army today and what it was back in 80s. He is a veteran who has encountered Iran or its proxies at least three times:

 

[AUz]

Loooooooool

Such videos were popular before Iraq invasion as well (1991 one as well!)....but US absolutely routed Iraq with minimal losses of its own. Iran war won’t be any different militarily. Loss might lose 10k soldiers instead of 5k in Iraq but Iranian defeat is certain.

Only issue is how bad could the insurgency be in Iran and beyond? And that’s a different topic.

US can easily bomb Tehran into stone ages by destroying its electric grid, cutting off water supplies, and bombing all the institutions of state. What can Iran do to stop USAF from bombing its cities day in day out 24/7? Nothing!

Iran’s only hope is to fight asymmetric fight...which is BY DEFINITION means fighting from weakness (since you can’t take on the invading enemy via direct military power).

Iranians are smart. Let’s not get carried away by such “israeli experts” lmaoo

 

[Mithridates]

Let's multiple that by a 100, and assume Iran launches 100,000 missiles at all the surrounding US bases. Let's say that the US doesn't intercept a single one with its anti-missile defense systems. Let's say Iran completely wipes put all those surrounding bases, and not a single soldier lives to tell the tale.

You're completely ignoring US carrier groups, subs and other systems where the US can launch counter strikes from. They don't even have to get close to Iran, they can launch counter attacks with far more devastating cruise missiles. They can launch bombers from their European bases, with the help of refueling planes.

The Saudis and the Emeratis will be salivating at this opportunity, and would let the US use their other air fields to launch air strikes against Iran.

Anyway, the point is, don't underestimate the US. There is a reason why the US is a super power, and Iran is just a regional power.

Iran's military planners are smart, they know they can't win against a US force head on, which is why they've developed and are continuing to develop non-conventional capabilities. In case of a war, I personally believe Iran's goal wouldn't be to win, but rather not lose (and there is a huge difference in that). Iran's goal would be to drag out the war, and make it so costly that US public turns against it. The problem with this is, the US probably also realizes this fact, and would try and end the war as quickly as possible, having learned from their mistakes from the Iraq and Afghan wars.

iran's goal is not "just not to lose", recently they announced that they are changing the whole military approachs, offensive instead of defensive. actually it makes sense, why fight in your own home and draw shit all over it, fight in enemy lands and be sure that even if you lost, your enemy gonna suffer too.
as soon as we captured US bases and their soldiers and their puppets, there gonna be a fraction in the ex-enemy land's power and politics and we gonna fill them with our friends and russia and china, like syria, at the end of the day we gonna have several thousand US soldier in our custody(which they are now considered terrorist under our law so we can execute them and this is a positive point), enemy lands (oil rich lands) and russia and china are along with us.

 

[nahtanbob]

Our defence doctrine is based upon making war costly for the enemy. That either prevents war or makes the enemy pull back.
Did you win in Vietnam, Korea, bay of pigs? are you able to defeat taliban with your superior airforce?

Vietnam and North Korea had supply line & lifeline with China and USSR. What do you have ?

All out war is the complete destruction of the Iranian state and its ability to wage war. Look at what we did to Japan and Germany in World War 2.

You guys sometime need to hear it from your own kind. Specially listen to the part that he explains the difference between Iran's army today and what it was back in 80s. He is a veteran who has encountered Iran or its proxies at least three times:

There is no difference as far as USAF goes. they will bombard you with standoff weapons

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

Vietnam and North Korea had supply line & lifeline with China and USSR. What do you have ?

All out war is the complete destruction of the Iranian state and its ability to wage war. Look at what we did to Japan and Germany in World War 2.

Japan and Germany were part of a world war: world against both of them, with Japan being a small isolated island and Germany fighting giant power soviet union.
You brought destruction upon vietnam, but you lost and it was a costly war. Your "easy" wars in middle east (libya, afghanistan, Iraq) cost you 7 trillion dollars without a clear result... (yes expanding Irans influence because some short sighted jews made you fight their wars).
And don't even think that Russia is waiting for a puppet regime in Iran to border Central Asia and Caspian sea. Neither is China waiting for increasement of American influence in Central Asia or Iran.

 

[nahtanbob]

Japan and Germany were part of a world war: world against both of them, with Japan being a small isolated island and Germany fighting giant power soviet union.
You brought destruction upon vietnam, but you lost and it was a costly war. Your "easy" wars in middle east (libya, afghanistan, Iraq) cost you 7 trillion dollars without a clear result... (yes expanding Irans influence because some short sighted jews made you fight their wars).
And don't even think that Russia is waiting for a puppet regime in Iran to border Central Asia and Caspian sea. Neither is China waiting for increasement of American influence in Central Asia or Iran.

World War 2 was USA, British Empire and USSR against Germany & Japan. When USA entered the war in December 1941 Hitler's army was at the gates of Moscow

 

[KingWest]

World War 2 was USA, British Empire and USSR against Germany & Japan. When USA entered the war in December 1941 Hitler's army was at the gates of Moscow

Time to reeducate yourself on history. When the US entered the war in europe, the war was practically over and Germany was already a lost case

 

[Arminkh]

There is no difference as far as USAF goes. they will bombard you with standoff weapons

And then what? That is exactly what the guy in the video says you can't do. Because bombing will not achieve anything. Oil flow will still be interrupted and US bases in reach of Iran's missiles will be still hit. Price of oil will still sky rocket which then is going to hurt US back home because US GDP and Oil price have negative relation. It will turn into another unfinished war like those of Syria and Afghanistan which eventually, US will try to find a way to get out of without any tangible result.

 

[nahtanbob]

And then what? That is exactly what the guy in the video says you can't do. Because bombing will not achieve anything. Oil flow will still be interrupted and US bases in reach of Iran's missiles will be still hit. Price of oil will still sky rocket which then is going to hurt US back home because US GDP and Oil price have negative relation. It will turn into another unfinished war like those of Syria and Afghanistan which eventually, US will try to find a way to get out of without any tangible result.

You assume Iran can shut down oil for a prolonged period of time. The pressure to destroy Iran's capacity to wage war will be intense. It will be more like Berlin and Tokyo getting hit during World War 2. Those cities were hit by vintage B-29 bombers

your saving grace is that no one wants to be in charge of putting a smashed up Iran back together
American policymakers have nothing against Iran or its peoples. There are close to million Iranian Americans. Most of American society likes them. They represent your country and society better than your state/government.

Time to reeducate yourself on history. When the US entered the war in europe, the war was practically over and Germany was already a lost case

What timeline are we talking about here ?

 

[Blue In Green]

You assume Iran can shut down oil for a prolonged period of time. The pressure to destroy Iran's capacity to wage war will be intense. It will be more like Berlin and Tokyo getting hit during World War 2. Those cities were hit by vintage B-29 bombers

your saving grace is that no one wants to be in charge of putting a smashed up Iran back together
American policymakers have nothing against Iran or its peoples. There are close to million Iranian Americans. Most of American society likes them. They represent your country and society better than your state/government.



What timeline are we talking about here ?

"Most of American society likes them. They represent your country and society better than your state/government."

We Iranian-Americans are well liked in general (to an extent) but your statement is a perspective not a fact of any sort. Many Iranians in the Iranian government represent their country just fine. Your assertion makes it seem like everyone in the Iranian government is outright horrible (good and bad everywhere). Iranians in Los Angeles or Canada, Australia, Europe etc, make up a REALLY small percentage of total Iranian people and deserve to have their say about Iran but they don't represent Iran categorically (lion-share are still in Iran living life). I've always had a hard time getting across to people who aren't Iranian the practical reality that is the Iranian political landscape (that many, often White Westerners refuse to accept). It isn't just 'mullahs', there are different groups vying for power. For instance why has the current Iranian government been in power for so long? Evidently they do enjoy support from enough of the Iranian people in which legitimizes their rule (however much one my hate that, and I don't like the current Iranian governmental/political landscape). Personally I hope for a future Iranian government that relaxes unnecessary religious edicts pushed onto an increasingly secular people, one that reforms areas of the economy and how governmental officials get to run certain aspects of Iran (I do say this with a great deal of ignorance since I just assume Iran has a high level of corruption so reform can help in this sector).

Western views on Iran are filled with hypocrisy, lies, half-truths, truths and exaggerations. US is really good at (or at least used to be good at) making groups of people and nations out to be monsters when the US ON RECORD has done objectively worse actions.

Perspectives and view-points will differ always on subjects from parties with juxtaposing stances to one another. So I don't expect to really break the ice with you on this whatsoever, not attacking your character personally: just an observation about the rule of law for forums I've learned the hard way over the years lol.

 

[Arminkh]

You assume Iran can shut down oil for a prolonged period of time. The pressure to destroy Iran's capacity to wage war will be intense. It will be more like Berlin and Tokyo getting hit during World War 2. Those cities were hit by vintage B-29 bombers

your saving grace is that no one wants to be in charge of putting a smashed up Iran back together
American policymakers have nothing against Iran or its peoples. There are close to million Iranian Americans. Most of American society likes them. They represent your country and society better than your state/government.



What timeline are we talking about here ?

Depends on what you call prolonged time? In Iraq with three aircraft carriers and hundreds of jets in KSA it took 4 to 6 months to suppress their airforce. Iran is 3-4 times larger, its ballistic missile force is among the top five in the world and you cant use land bases around Iran just because of that. So the oil flow will be interrupted for least a year if not two.

That's why US is not going to attack not that it is such a responsible international player that it is worried about the aftermath or its love for Iranians.

However you are free to think what you want. The fact is the same: there won't be any war.