What's new

PDF Project: Case study of IRAQ-IRAN WAR

Slav, we'd do it in parts, no doubt but first we need to decide what we're truly doing. Is it a historiography? An analysis? and so on.

Now, my first part is to discuss the military action itself, why? Because it's the least controversial: we trace out the strategic/tactical positions of both these belligerents and analyse them in terms of the ramifications they had.

Second, we delve into the history of it. This comes later because it would be more controversial (trust me)

Third, we discuss effects of this war on the region and on the world (last one as it can be done by more people).
@jajbi
The Iran Iraq war case Study needs to de discussed one by one.
I introduce you two types of formats:
-The chronology style(discussions of topic with timeline)
-The trilogy style.
Now what is trilogy?
A trilogy is defined as a book which is divided into 3 sections.
Applying such format,we can divide our research into,three sections:
-before war ie political situation which leads to warfare
-during war ie all operations from Iraq and then Iran
-After war ie life loss,casualties
 
Slav, we'd do it in parts, no doubt but first we need to decide what we're truly doing. Is it a historiography? An analysis? and so on.

Now, my first part is to discuss the military action itself, why? Because it's the least controversial: we trace out the strategic/tactical positions of both these belligerents and analyse them in terms of the ramifications they had.

Second, we delve into the history of it. This comes later because it would be more controversial (trust me)

Third, we discuss effects of this war on the region and on the world (last one as it can be done by more people).
jaibi,it will not be analysis exactly,but competitive approach in terms of capabilities of armed sectors,trust me.
Like we do it in osteology,place bones of animals and compare,which one has shaft,type of groove etc
same we do here in case of army.
-------------------------------------
Now about politics,,like authentic historians show point of views of first party,second and then third which is called as neutral,we are gonna do that.
Eg:
country A lost 2000 according to source A while a/c to source B it was 2500....where as neutrally say 2600...
If we jump to army's comparison,,then we will not be able to work harmonically,but if we initiate from beginning,then our understanding will be strong.:)
However,if you persist then i have no objections:D

I'm free to do that now.
Thats my bro.....:D
 
Last edited:
@Slav Defence the problem is that you and I won't be directly involved as we need to keep our guns blazing at the Wiki. @Secur will personally murder you and me if we come over here :D
 
@Slav Defence the problem is that you and I won't be directly involved as we need to keep our guns blazing at the Wiki. @Secur will personally murder you and me if we come over here :D
hahahahaha.....yeah,I have promised him,to backup at command structure blue print...:D
 
Last edited:
@Pakistanisage C'MON bro !! u can do this ! help pls




I will gladly help, although I have to admit my contributions will be based on the material I can find online. I do have a unique perspective based on the fact that in the late 60's and early 70's we were Pakistan Air Force was training Pilots from many Middle Eastern Countries including Iranian and Iraqi Air Force Pilots. Iranian Pilots performed far better than the Iraqis. Some Iranian pilots were also being trained by USAF and after the last batch that graduated with my course in late October, Iran started sending all the future batches to the US.
 
For this project to be taken serious you need to have users that are completely neutral and likewise sources. So including those two nationalities in this supposed work is not being serious enough.

Lastly it was a stalemate. 1 Arab country (Iraq) out of 22 Arab countries that is 3 times smaller and had/has a population nearly 2.5 times smaller was not conquered or defeated despite being ruled by a dictator who only had the support of a minority of the country and despite being flat land.

Iraq also faced a Kurdish rebellion in the North at the same time, Israeli air attacks and most of the Iraqi front was in the South (a majority Shia part of Iraq that Saddam neglected and that was very much anti-Saddam and anti-Ba'athi).

So if anything it is astonishing that Iran could not defeat or conquer more Iraqi land even for short periods.
 
Last edited:
I agree ^^

You want it to be neutral exclude Iranians, Iraqis and the Anti Shia gangs, but if you apply that then how many people would be left, so that’s not a real option.

I guess then it’s best to maintain neutral opinions as much as possible, also don’t use ""Saddam army/Saddam air force " simply cause saying Khomeinis army does not fit either.
 
I agree ^^

You want it to be neutral exclude Iranians, Iraqis and the Anti Shia gangs, but if you apply that then how many people would be left, so that’s not a real option.

I guess then it’s best to maintain neutral opinions as much as possible, also don’t use ""Saddam army/Saddam air force " simply cause saying Khomeinis army does not fit either.

both iraqi and iranian members must participate , both to give more info and also to correct any probable unwanted mistake , if u dont want to participate , its okey ask one of your iraqi friends .

i think there are some .

and about the saddam air force , iraq air force it is !! see , we want those mistakes to be cleared .
 
so after the failure of iran in karbala 2, 3 iran launched karbala 4 in order to capture some iraqi land to send a political message to the kuwait summit (islamic summit conference) . however this operation also ended in failure for iran as iranians gave 2 time more casualties .

The battle itself was planned and eventually executed by Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The operation would be launched under cover of darkness in order to gain a foothold along the Arvand Rūd/Shatt-al-Arab waterway. Once across, the Iranian forces would go on the offensive and eventually move onto the port city of Basra. The attack would be launched towards the Umm al-Rasas Island in the Shatt al Arab. It most likely was meant as a diversionary attack before the upcoming Operation Karbala-5 (although it may have been called that only after it failed). It would attack from Umm al Rasas island to other islands and roads to help create a broad encirclement of Basra. It may have been rushed ahead to intimidate the Islamic Summit Conference meeting in then Iraqi ally Kuwait.


==============================

Operation Karbala-5 was an offensive carried out by Iran in an effort to capture the Iraqi port city of Basra in early 1987. This battle, known for its extensive casualties and ferocious conditions, was the biggest battle of the war and proved to be the beginning of the end of the Iran-Iraq War.

aftermath :

Iran continued its shelling of Basra for the remainder of February, at one point setting fire to a petrochemical plant which released toxic gas south of the city. But it was clear by the end of the month that Iran had officially aborted the operation.

It was reported by March that the Iraqis lost 20,000 troops and 45 aircraft, while the Iranians lost 65,000 troops. Of the most experienced Pasdaran recruited to lead the campaign, roughly a quarter of them were killed. Basra’s former population of one million decreased to 100,000, the refugees having fled north to Baghdad. Nearly every building along the eastern end of the city was damaged or destroyed.

Despite the fact the battle was considered to be over, it would remain in a quasi-siege until Operation Tawakalna ala Allah launched by Iraq in April 1988. The Iranians would bombard the city, while the Iraqis would sit behind their defensive lines. With the exception of Operation Karbala-8 launched against the city in July 1987, the Iranians would launch no more large scale attacks against Basra (or anywhere else in Iraq for that matter).

After Operation Karbala-5, the Iranian military was effectively a weakened force, and did not launch large-scale offensives for the rest of the war. Much of the experienced Pasdaran were killed during the battles, in addition to Iranian morale being scarred.[70] The head of the armed forces Hashemi Rafsanjani announced during a news conference to finally end the use of human wave attacks.[96] Mohsen Rezaee, head of the Pasdaran (IRGC), announced that Iran would focus exlusively on limited attacks/infiltrations, while arming and supporting opposition groups inside of Iraq (such as the Kurdish guerillas and Badr Brigade). [75] While Iraq would be unable to truly defeat Iran and remained on the defensive until 1988, this loss, coupled with earlier ones and Iraq's 1988 offensives depleted Iran's manpower and economy, and convinced their leadership that the war was unwinnable, and accept the UN Resolution 598 ceasefire.

Though the Iraqis forced the Iranian offensive back, it was still an embarrassment due to the fact that Iran came so close to the gates of Basra, and they themselves had taken severe losses. At one point, Saddam Hussein nearly faced mutiny from his generals, who demanded the freedom to conduct operations without political interference. The battle also served as a lesson for Western forces during Operation Desert Storm. With the failure of the poorly trained and equipped Iraqi Popular Army during the first assaults of the offensive, the Republican Guard did the most in repulsing the Iranians. This show of favoritism in Saddam's army would only prove futile in the future.

The effects of the operation were also felt in the Persian Gulf, with Iran and Iraq attacking foreign oil tankers doing business with both powers. A total of sixteen ships were hit in the first five weeks of 1987. Although Iran boasted that it would step up more attacks in the next year, no such actions materialized and Karbala 5 proved to be the last in a series of 'final offensives.' The war ended on August 20, 1988.

==============================================

the next after that is karbala 6 which ended in strategic iranian victory :

Operation Karbala-6 was an Iranian operation during the Iran-Iraq War to prevent Iraq from rapidly transferring units to its defense lines atBasra after Iran had launched Operation Karbala-5 to capture the city of Basra.

Operation Karbala-6 involved 2 of the most powerful divisions in the Iranian army: the Army's 77th 'Khorasan" mechanized division, and thePasdaran’s 31st 'Ashoora' division. The 77th 'Khorasan" mechanized division was armed with helicopter gunships, tanks, 106mm, 130mm and 230mm artillery and the 31st 'Ashoora' division was armed with captured Iraqi tanks.

aftermath :

Eventually, while successful, the Iranian offensive petered out because it was not meant to be a breakthrough attack, and due to shortages of logistics, and Iraqi chemical weapons. The offensive, while successfully diverting much of Iraq's armor away from the battlefield in Basra, did not prevent the Iraqis from stopping the Iranian attack against the city.
 
Chemical_weapon1.jpg

Iranian Soldier
22 September 1980 – 20 August 1988
(7 years, 10 months, 4 weeks and 1 day)
 
In simple words, Islamic revolution of Iran was a curse for this world and humanity and Islam.

Iraq, was first victim of Iran's terrorism export.
 
Back
Top Bottom