What's new

Persian Might: How strong is the Iranian Military

A master is the one who gives in an uneven trade and does not ask for the price (nothing is free) you know which countries accepts these "aids."

But we are trading partners, buying our equipment with our own money.

I know that you're saying that for psychological reasons to make yourself feel better but everyone knows it's the truth.
they are taking millions of barrels oil for free from you, they have all control of your oil industries, you're the laziest peoples on earth, you're their slaves, your workforce provided by south Asian/east Asian countries, their is not much oil left on the middle east, within 60 year or so there will be no oil in Middle East, so what should you do then
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@jaibi

Fanciful statistics aside, question should be how competent Iranian armed forces are actually. They shot down a passenger aircraft near an Iranian airport - an incident which has exposed a glaring weakness in the quality of men. Their greatest asset is ballistic missiles (even these have 30% failure rate) but USAF and USN can take good care of these assets when these forces will be operating over Iranian air space. There is also the issue of internal rifts in Iran - these cracks are increasingly apparent in recent years.

Agreed. When thinking about a conflict with Iran, a ground invasion is out of the question. Even Americans themselves say such a thing is silly. Some analyst say the US probably does not even have the logistical support etc to do it.


So a conflict would really involve aerial bombardment. And as we we know, aerial attacks simply do not achieve objectives by themselves. Now when we consider what Iran could do in retaliation, such as recking havoc on world economy by disruption of oil supplies, then cost of a conflict outweigh any benefits (whatever those benefits are?).

When many people think about a conflict between Iran and US, they seem to think of a direct war i.e plane vs plane, ship vs ship, but in reality, such a conflict and how Iran will damage the US will be much more hybrid and not conventional. Only a fool would engage the US in a conventional way. Never fight the enemy in a an area where they have the upper hand.
You might not like my response but below are my thoughts. And my take on these matters is usually accurate.

American Army and Marines while under Air Cover, will crush your armed forces even in a ground invasion and level your cities which might be up in arms (Fallujah style), with minimum casualties. This is not Iraqi Army of the 1980s which could not reach Tehran even in 2 years due to significant logistics-related problems and poor Russian-origin Armor which could not hold ground in clashes with even Iranian irregulars at the time. However, this level of commitment to a war, is a question of political will in American centers of power as well as how American Public will perceive this move.

As for assymmetric dimensions, US have been contending with these type of forces since 2001 and they have learned a great deal from these operations. I suggest you study Operation Inherent Resolve. They know all about so-called hybrid warfare concepts - Russian doctrine by the way.

Iranians are emboldened by the fact that US has not attacked Iran in force yet. This might change in coming years depending upon how events unfold further and Iranian regime is able to mend its ties with US or not. And this is not a good sign.

What surprises me most is the fact that some of you guys haven't learned anything from the fate of your neighboring Iraq which once had a strong military and regime but look at it now. Very simply - do not pick fights that you cannot win.
 
Last edited:
You've cut it with a rozor, sir; however, these things are usually a little more qualitative, perhaps, hence harder to talk about easily. But I agree with you.
@jaibi

Fanciful statistics aside, question should be how competent Iranian armed forces are actually. They shot down a passenger aircraft near an Iranian airport - an incident which has exposed a glaring weakness in the quality of men. Their greatest asset is ballistic missiles (even these have 30% failure rate) but USAF and USN can take good care of these assets when these forces will be operating over Iranian air space. There is also the issue of internal rifts in Iran - these cracks are increasingly apparent in recent years.


You might not like my response but below are my thoughts. And my take on these matters is usually accurate.

American Army and Marines while under Air Cover, will crush your armed forces even in a ground invasion and level your cities which might be up in arms (Fallujah style), with minimum casualties. This is not Iraqi Army of the 1980s which could not reach Tehran even in 2 years due to significant logistics-related problems and poor Russian-origin Armor which could not hold ground in clashes with even Iranian irregulars at the time. However, this level of commitment to a war, is a question of political will in American centers of power as well as how American Public will perceive this move.

As for assymmetric dimensions, US have been contending with these type of forces since 2001 and they have learned a great deal from these operations. I suggest you study Operation Inherent Resolve. They know all about so-called hybrid warfare concepts - Russian doctrine by the way.

Iranians are emboldened by the fact that US has not attacked Iran in force yet. This might change in coming years depending upon how events unfold further and Iranian regime is able to mend its ties with US or not. And this is not a good sign.

What surprises me most is the fact that some of you guys haven't learned anything from the fate of your neighboring Iraq which once had a strong military and regime but look at it now. Very simply - do not pick fights that you cannot win.
 
In the end we had to back down because USA is nuclear power ....

So despite all bravely our Generals , they knew they cant really slaughter Americans because USA has nukes and if they find another chance , they will use it ....
Ok.....they will persuade us to make our own nuke.......for sure our leader is waiting for a threat from americunt
 
If you replicate the 1991 US-Iraq gulf war campaign, replacing Iraq of 1990 with Iran of today. Iran stands no chance and will quickly lose its naval, air and strategic ground assets in the USAF air campaign.

That's phase 1 which would pave the way for next phases.

Isolated cases such as the RQ-170 downing don't prove that much, Iraq's air force brought down an MQ-1 predator in the 90's. Back then this was a major thing, how many air-air combat episodes exist of bringing down an MQ-1? A major conflict would look closely to that of 1991 and anyone with half a brain knows the outcome. A group of MIG-25's forced a group of F-15's to abort their mission and a ballistic missile caused over 100 casualties in Saudi Arabia in '91. Eventually, all that won't dispute the big difference in military power.

That's simply why Iran avoids direct confrontation as much as they can, otherwise, there were targets in Iraq which would have easily led to hundreds of American casualties (softer targets than an airbase such as the embassy).

I prefer these animals attack one another directly and leave the region alone with their proxies.
 
You've cut it with a rozor, sir; however, these things are usually a little more qualitative, perhaps, hence harder to talk about easily. But I agree with you.
Iranian security apparatus is definitely potent for its regional rivals, particularly with its ability to strike at infrastructure anywhere in the Middle East. Iranians have planned for numerous contingencies including housing ballistic missiles in a facilities inside mountains.

For reference: https://www.euronews.com/2015/10/15...r-missiles-perhaps-bid-to-reinforce-deterence

No country in the Middle East have the capacity to invade Iran and/or subject it to a military occupation. KSA does not have sufficient number of quality troops, and Israel does not have a massive navy to pull off a Normandy on Iranian soil. Both KSA and Israel can strike at Iran from a distance at most. Stalemate dynamics.

USA is a completely different beast in comparison to any country in the Middle East. They have a huge military force that also happen to be better equipped and experienced in methods of warfare than any other in the world (better equipped being an understatement; vast disparity is the term). USA can strike at any coastal country from virtually any angle and fight a war in the manner it wants to. Americans can destroy virtually anything in Iran including those deeply buried facilities. In no way or form, Iran is equipped to deal with this kind of threat.

Some Iranian members mistake US for a country in the Middle East.
 
Last edited:
The intent is discussion based on military capability, not trolling nor politics so kindly stick to the intent of the thread. I think discussing this is important for today's geopolitical analyses and I wanted a somewhat neutral opinion. Please, refrain from discussing politics and IR here, we're here to discuss the military power of Iran especially in the context that it may come into active service.

Persian Might: How Strong Is Iran's Military?


Dragan Stavljanin and Pete Baumgartner – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty

irnmil.jpg

With the possibility of a major conflict brewing with the United States since the killing of Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani, the capabilities of the Iranian military are being sharply scrutinized.

So just how strong are the Islamic republic's armed forces?

The answer to that question hinges largely on what strategic goals Iran pursues.

Tehran’s main goal is to project its influence and protect its interests throughout the Middle East or to at least prevent adversaries, like Saudi Arabia, from gaining the upper hand.

To accomplish that, Tehran has done everything possible to deter and harass the enormous contingents of U.S. forces deployed in 10 countries throughout the region with the ultimate objective being to push them out.

In pursuing that goal, Iran will likely avoid a full-blown war because its military is no match for the American armed forces and Washington's allies stationed in the Middle East, experts say.

No Nukes, Lots Of Proxies

The Iranians have a well-publicized and highly controversial nuclear program, but do not currently have the capability to make a nuclear weapon.

"They have a ballistic-missile program but no long-range missiles that can reach the United States," The Atlantic noted.

It added that Tehran lacks any major friends in the region: "Iran has decent relations with Russia and China but no stalwart, great-power allies."

As arguably one of the world’s most-isolated countries, Iran has mainly embarked on a strategy of proxy wars or conducting asymmetrical strikes aimed at exploiting the vulnerabilities of American and U.S.-led forces.

The Iranian military -- which is the eighth largest in the world based on active personnel -- is suited to pursue a strategy of asymmetrical warfare.

Modest Military Budget

Iran's defense budget in 2018 was more than $13 billion, ranking it 18th in the world in terms of military expenditures, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

But Tehran lagged far behind regional foes such as Saudi Arabia, which spent some $70 billion, and Israel, at $18.5 billion (the United States is without rival at more than $700 billion).

In addition, Iranian military expenditures declined by 9.5 percent in 2018 compared to the previous year due to massive economic problems caused by U.S. sanctions, a strategy that Washington refers to as "maximum pressure."

But Iran’s military establishment, especially the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), does not depend merely on the state budget for its funding, according to the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD).

"The military establishment controls [one-fifth] of the market value of companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange and owns thousands of other companies, all of which generate revenue for the armed forces," the FDD reported. "Additionally, the IRGC controls a significant portion of Iran’s underground economy."

Biggest In The Middle East

In terms of overall military strength, the Iranian armed forces rank 14th in the world out of 137 countries that are ranked in 2019 by Global Firepower and Business Insider.

With some 523,000 active-duty forces and another 350,000 reserves, Iran has the largest standing military in the Middle East.

The active forces are comprised of 350,000 in the regular army and at least 150,000 in the IRGC, which has the most powerful forces in the Iranian military.

In a sign of its importance, IRGC Commander in Chief Hossein Salami reports directly to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

An Army Within An Army

The IRGC itself is made up of five subgroups.

One of those groups, the Quds Force, was led for decades by Soleimani until his assassination in a U.S. drone strike on January 3 -- the event that put Iran and the United States in their current quandary.

The Quds Force is mostly tasked with overseas operations, predominantly in the Middle East.

Estimates of its exact number of forces vary.

But Jack Watling, a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, told NBC News that it is a “divisional strength military formation” of around 17,000 to 21,000 members.

Perhaps more importantly, the extraterritorial use of the Quds Force provides for the enlistment of various Shi'ite militias that number, according to The Guardian, up to 200,000 fighters. The militias operate in at least five countries in the region.

The English daily adds that these pro-Iranian proxy armies that engage "in a 'grey zone' of conflict that maintains hostilities below the threshold of state-on-state warfare."

Another group within the IRCG structure is the Basij militia, a paramilitary force with 90,000 members mobilized to enforce order, which includes quelling dissent within the country, such as the nationwide anti-government protests in November that ended with hundreds of demonstrators killed and thousands injured.

Like many related institutions in Iran, the Basij was first formed as a volunteer force during the Iran-Iraq War. But it “has since become an entrenched, and feared, part of the state,” The Washington Post reported.

Also operating under the IRCG umbrella are the 20,000 service personnel in the naval forces, which rely first and foremost on waves of armed patrol boats in the Strait of Hormuz.

With more than 20 percent of the world's oil trade moving through the strait, it is the world's most-important oil-trade route and the scene of several confrontations between Iranian vessels and foreign-flagged tankers in 2019.

Although smaller in number, the IRCG is more powerful than the regular army because of the bifurcated nature of the Iranian state. For that reason, relations between the government and the IRCG have always been strained.

Tanking Up

Iran has some 1,634 tanks, ranking 18th out of 137 countries surveyed. That number is buttressed by about 2,345 armored combat vehicles and 1,900 rocket launchers.

The large tank force is, however, mostly made up of older models and completely outdated tanks. Only the new model Karrar, which was supposed to be delivered to the Iranian military in 2018, can compare with some of the better tanks in the world. Although the Karrar looks much like the well-known Russian T-90, Iran has rejected suggestions there was any collaboration with Russia in its production.

In The Navy

The Iranian Navy is, comparatively, a modest force that has neither an aircraft carrier nor a destroyer.

Tehran's navy does possess six frigates, three corvettes, 34 submarines, and 88 patrol vessels. The submarine's arsenal contains the Russian-made "kilo" class, which are called "black holes" because they are inaudible.

The 'Fast Flyers'

With some 509 aircrafts, the Iranian Air Force lags far behind -- both in terms of quantity and quality -- regional adversaries Saudi Arabia and Israel, which can boast of having 848 and 595 state-of-the-art airplanes, respectively, in their fleets, The National Interest reported.

That doesn't include a healthy stable of U.S. planes throughout the region.

Much of Iran's air force dates from the shah era or is left over from dictator Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi Air Force, which moved many of its planes to Iran during the 1991 Persian Gulf War to avoid their destruction by U.S.-led forces.

American-made F-4, F-5, and F-14 fighters built in the 1970s remain the pillar of the Iranian Air Force, which is nicknamed "Tizparvazan" (the Fast Flyers).

Following the 2015 nuclear deal -- which lifted tough international sanctions against Iran and boosted its economy -- the country had a brief opportunity to upgrade its air force.

France's Mirage 2000 was an option, but Tehran ultimately decided against it because it was more familiar with its American- and Russian-made planes.

Iran also had a chance to buy as many as 30 sophisticated Su-30 fighters from Russia, but opted not to, The National Interest reported.

“This is probably because the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps paramilitary has never been comfortable with the regular Iranian military becoming too powerful,” the U.S. magazine concluded.

Missile Reliance

Crippled by the U.S.-imposed sanctions that have reduced its oil exports to a trickle, Iran's military equipment imports have dropped significantly in recent years.

Iran's arms imports decreased drastically in 2018 and the country's total imports for its military from 2009 to 2018 were just 3.5 percent of Saudi Arabia's total imports during the same period.

Tehran has had to therefore increasingly depend on the development of domestic technologies for its military needs, including cheaper hardware imports that come mainly from Russia and China.

Iran also relies on the development of missiles in order to overcome the disadvantage of having less military equipment that is often of a lower quality than its regional foes and, certainly, the United States and other Western countries.

Iran is, however, recognized as having the most developed short- and medium-range missile system in the region.

Among other missiles, it has 300-kilometer range Shahab 1 missiles, moving Washington to install a Patriot antiaircraft system in some neighboring countries to counter possible missile threats from Iran.

Tehran has also worked on the development of intercontinental missiles, although those programs were suspended after Iran agreed to the historic nuclear agreement with six world powers in 2015 that put curbs on its nuclear program.

Following the withdrawal of the United States from the treaty in 2018, Iran began to gradually suspend its adherence to the provisions of the treaty and ultimately announced after Soleimani's killing that it was abandoning all limits in the agreement.

That development leaves open the possibility of Tehran restoring efforts to develop intercontinental missiles.

According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), a Shahab 3 missile with a range of up to 2,000 kilometers could hit Israel and is widely considered to be Tehran’s deterrent of last resort.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies also reports that Iran has 32 batteries of Russia's S-300 air-defense system.

Not To Forget: Cyberwarfare And Drones

Finally, Iran also has a full complement of drones that it has used in operations in both Iraq and against Israel. It is also believed that an Iranian drone was used in September to attack Saudi oil facilities.

The IRGC also boasts a cyberattack unit that is known to have been responsible for several attacks abroad.

After the assassination of Soleimani, many figured Iran could respond with a massive cyberattack against a U.S. entity, a fear that continues, according to The New York Times.

Three-Pronged Strategy?

Most analysts have predicted that Iran would not venture into an open conflict with the United States over Soleimani's killing, but would instead use its assets to conduct asymmetrical operations to try and harm U.S. forces or American interests in the Middle East.

Despite having already responded with a missile attack against the two U.S. military bases in Iraq, the threat of lower-level attacks using other strategies remains.

In such a potential confrontation, Tehran would count on "three legs," as Deutsche Welle pointed out.

One leg is "defense before the border" -- namely the operation of Quds Force units outside Iran to attack U.S. forces.

The other legs of such a strategy are the use of long-range missiles to strike further away U.S. targets or an attempt to shut down the Strait of Hormuz and send global energy markets into a death spiral.

In the event of a conflict involving action in the Strait of Hormuz, Iran can count on the world's fourth-largest oil reserves of more than 150 billion barrels to sustain it during such a blockage.

Tehran's concern of a land invasion of its territory is probably quite low, as according to some Western estimates quoted by The Guardian, such an incursion would require “an improbable 1.6 million troops” in order to prevent an Iraq-style counterinsurgency from emerging against U.S. forces.

With U.S. President Donald Trump seemingly de-escalating after Iran's January 8 missile attack caused no American casualties, few people envision Washington entertaining a scenario involving ground troops.

'Twilight War'

Another possible option for Iran is the status quo.

Historian David Crist has dubbed the four decades of the shadow battle that the United States and Iran have been locked in since the 1979 Islamic Revolution to be a ''twilight war."

As The Atlantic noted, Iran has tended to follow a certain blueprint during this time: “compensate for its inferior military capabilities relative to the United States by waging wide-ranging proxy warfare that stops short of direct conflict, allows it to maintain plausible deniability, and is carefully calibrated to advance Iranian interests at a low cost and with minimal risk."

Soleimani's assassination by U.S. forces and the Iranian missile response hitting American bases in Iraq is the first open confrontation between the two countries since Iranian protesters invaded the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979.

Although the current situation has de-escalated for the moment, it is still fraught with the risk of becoming more serious and disrupting the "twilight war" of strained but controlled relations that have existed between the two countries for so long.

From https://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/persian-might-how-strong-irans-military
Within hours of war "if full fledged" Iran loose air power, radars, power stations and most of its command centers.

What they can do best to fire ballistic missiles on U.S bases...result would be some casualties nothing more.
 
I prefer these animals attack one another directly and leave the region alone with their proxies.

you are Camel Guy and you Iraqis are responsible for this mess in first place ... even during Shah era you didn't want to reclaim whats is yours ( Kuwait ) and wanted to take as you say Ajam lands ( Iran ) which has almost clear border from Safavid and Ottoman era .... Iran in Shah era and in normal condition ,simply kicked your asses in matter of days and you had to accept Aljazair treaty which solved the problem ...

after revolution you wanted to use the opportunity but despite Soviet (which was angry at Iran because our support for Muhajidin in Afghanistan ) and Arabs and The west backing , you just manage to bankrupt yourself without gaining any thing ...

next you really wanted to reclaim Kuwait and capture if in one day ( just shows that Kuwait was yours in first place ) but your Arab brothers backstab you and USA used you as an example to shows she is the sole supper power of 1990s ...

you are projecting so much arrogant as member of country which has series of defeat and failure for past 50 years .... no matter how much I want to respect you but your arrogant is annoying ...
 
Any country with Superior Air-force which has the ability to create Air Superiority over Iran quickly will win the War. Iran is a sitting duck Vs USA. Full Stop.
 
Iran discovered and captured US stealthy RQ170 and all they could do was to hopelessly ask it back.
Iran shot down US MQ4C and all they could do was to claim a cyber attack,

Capturing/Shooting UAVs isnt a big deal.
We shot one of yours .... We dont flaunt it..

In the end we had to back down because USA is nuclear power ....

So despite all bravely our Generals , they knew they cant really slaughter Americans because USA has nukes and if they find another chance , they will use it ....
US would have never used nukes against you.But that doesnt mean you take advantage of that moral restrain.Infact there was no need for Iran to create war hysteria upon death of its general. Iran should have just focussed on its economy and internal turmoil and taken its time for reaction rather than the whole inteqam-sakht mantra and giving-in to Trumps bait.
 
Capturing/Shooting UAVs isnt a big deal.
We shot one of yours .... We dont flaunt it
Even discovering of a stealth drone is a big deal, let alone hacking it.

Rq170 is the same drone which Americans used for killing Bin Laden and your air defenses couldn't detect it.

@jaibi

Fanciful statistics aside, question should be how competent Iranian armed forces are actually. They shot down a passenger aircraft near an Iranian airport - an incident which has exposed a glaring weakness in the quality of men. Their greatest asset is ballistic missiles (even these have 30% failure rate) but USAF and USN can take good care of these assets when these forces will be operating over Iranian air space. There is also the issue of internal rifts in Iran - these cracks are increasingly apparent in recent years.


You might not like my response but below are my thoughts. And my take on these matters is usually accurate.

American Army and Marines while under Air Cover, will crush your armed forces even in a ground invasion and level your cities which might be up in arms (Fallujah style), with minimum casualties. This is not Iraqi Army of the 1980s which could not reach Tehran even in 2 years due to significant logistics-related problems and poor Russian-origin Armor which could not hold ground in clashes with even Iranian irregulars at the time. However, this level of commitment to a war, is a question of political will in American centers of power as well as how American Public will perceive this move.

As for assymmetric dimensions, US have been contending with these type of forces since 2001 and they have learned a great deal from these operations. I suggest you study Operation Inherent Resolve. They know all about so-called hybrid warfare concepts - Russian doctrine by the way.

Iranians are emboldened by the fact that US has not attacked Iran in force yet. This might change in coming years depending upon how events unfold further and Iranian regime is able to mend its ties with US or not. And this is not a good sign.

What surprises me most is the fact that some of you guys haven't learned anything from the fate of your neighboring Iraq which once had a strong military and regime but look at it now. Very simply - do not pick fights that you cannot win.
What a bunch if rubbish, USN and USAF!
Where was USN when Iran announced coming retaliation? they were 1000km away
from Iran's border cause unlike USAF they didn't have the Saddam's rat hole to hide in.
 
What a bunch if rubbish, USN and USAF!
Where was USN when Iran announced coming retaliation? they were 1000km away
from Iran's border cause unlike USAF they didn't have the Saddam's rat hole to hide in.
You are mistaking political restraint for weakness or lack of capability. Some people will never learn I suppose.

They do pass through the Strait of Hormuz from time to time. You need to pay proper attention.
 
You are mistaking political restraint for weakness or lack of capability. Some people will never learn I suppose.

They do pass through the Strait of Hormuz from time to time. You need to pay proper attention.
All these people remind me of Baghdad Bon in Iraqi Invasion or Comical Ali.

 
You are mistaking political restraint for weakness or lack of capability. Some people will never learn I suppose.

They do pass through the Strait of Hormuz from time to time. You need to pay proper attention.
Yeah it was political restraint which didn't let their junkie air defenses to even detect the strike on ARAMCO!

Who cares if they pass through strait in peace time.

USN: We had a strong presence in straight of Hormuz in peace time, but we thought 1000km is a better distance for war, lol.

You are right, some people will never learn.[/QUOTE]
 
Back
Top Bottom