I have read what I posted and have read what you posted , and simply quoted what was I referring too
they used unrealistic strategies and created an unrealistic scenario , thus why I am suggesting the Millennium Challenge
is not a proper "source" to refer to Iranian and US capabilities
when I say 1 US destroyer is enough , I am implying US can just stay out of the range of anti-ship missiles
and still be able to strike Iranian targets
I don't know why Iranians here assume US naval fleet has to enter Persian Gulf , which indeed can create a dangerous situation for them while they can easily operate outside of it
Do you think US navy will enter the tiny Persian Gulf , when Iranian navy and naval defenses are still intact?
Its even more ridiculous to suggest Iran can destroy the whole fleet and even conduct strikes on host countries
Correction: They used unrealistic strategies on the 2nd run not first run. But never formally published the results of the first run. You need to be really thinking outside the box to accept a test result that is significantly different from what you thought it would be. It seems like it was only Van Riper who was open minded enough to see the reality.
Why do we think US navy will enter Persian Gulf?
1- Maybe because they are already there? The fifth fleet base in Bahrain. And F-22 Raptor base in Emirate. Bases in Kuwait, Afghanistan,.....All within Iran's ballistic missile range. What are they going to do? Abandon those bases until they can bomb Iran into stone age? How are they going to send supplies to those forces? Currently they are all supplied through sea freight.
2- Maybe because all those decorated generals like Van Riper thought an engagement with Iran's navy is likely enough scenario to throw $250 million at a simulation to see what actually will happen? Maybe you should tell them what idiots they are by underestimating their own capabilities.
3- Maybe because it is impossible to locate, let alone hit every single tiny missile boat and midget submarine that Iran possesses? Unless as per the script of the 2nd run of the simulation, Iran let US know where they are.
4- Maybe because it is impossible to hit those tiny missile boats within the high commercial traffic of Persian Gulf? Shutting down the freight traffic in that body of water is not an option. The first countries that will starve to death are US Arab allies. And then US also needs to deal with angry China, India, South Korea and Japan and of course, Europe. Any slow down in the economies of those countries will eventually hit US.
5- Maybe because it is not possible to locate and destroy Iran antiship missiles on back of trucks until they actually shoot? Which then means there was something in the range of their missiles a.k.a US naval units?
6- Maybe because according to US Marine Corps manual and the rest of military text books you can never control an area until you set boots on the ground and Persian Gulf is one of 10 critical locations that US needs to maintain control according to its national security policy?
There are so many other reasons. This article actually does a good job in explaining why US can't limit the war with Iran the way it did with Iraq or Iran back in 80s, provided you really read it. I have attached the paragraph that is related to this subject and this is according to Seymour Hersh, an accredit political journalist:
What is it About Iran that Scares the US?: On Tehran’s Military Capabilities
Finally, the conditions of the confrontation prevent the US from planning a limited or containment strike that would disable Iran from retaliating. As Seymour Hersh wrote in a report about this issue years ago, US military officials discovered that limiting the war against Iran, the way it happened in Iraq in 1991, is impossible. It is not possible to hit Iranian nuclear sites without securing US air bases in the region. This requires hitting Iranian missile platforms but this could not be done while the Gulf is teeming with anti-ship missiles. Hence, little by little, the targets of the US campaign began to expand to include invading the Iranian coast and destroying a large number of military facilities in the country. The quick air campaign turned into a comprehensive war plan with hundreds and thousands of targets. US generals went as far as seriously contemplating using tactical nuclear bombs to quell Iranian defenses according to Hersh's sources.
Above was for the case of trying to destroy Iran's nuclear plants. In the case of a full fledged war, it will be even worst.
However, all this conversation started when someone brought up the shooting down of Iran airliner by a US destroyer. That destroyer was in Persian Gulf but back then Iran didn't possess any anti naval missiles capable of hitting the destroyer. The argument is that if such atrocity happen again at present, that destroyer will be cut in half, something well within Iran's declared abilities.
