War Talk: Could U.S. Forces Execute an Amphibious Assault against Iran?

[nahtanbob]

And where exactly would "the full might of the us airforce" operate from when all of its regional bases in the pg and mena are within range of irans missile forces?

you tried war of the missiles with Iraq

 

[Raghfarm007]

you tried war of the missiles with Iraq

Im guessing you have never studied the war?

 

[nahtanbob]

Im guessing you have never studied the war?

i do study some military history

 

[Raghfarm007]

If you were referring to the Iran Iraq war of 30 years ago... then study it more....also in no way can Iran´ capabilities or the situation of the time, be compared to today´s realities.

The reality is that America has not started a war with Iran because of Iran´s vast military capabilities.

 

[Sineva]

you tried war of the missiles with Iraq

Seriously....!?
Come on we both know that was back in the mid 80s ie almost 35 years ago,hell not to mention that at the time iran couldnt even indigenously build old garden variety scud B,not until the late 80s anyway.Basically the modern iranian ballistic missile forces as we know them today did not even exist yet.To give you an idea of just how crude it was back then I remember an old photo that was posted,possibly on this site,that showed one of the earliest iranian scud launches.The missile was being fueled by hand using buckets[!!] because either the fueling truck or the firing troops did not have the correct hoses necessary,even worse because of the extra time being taken and the outside temperature the firing troops who were performing the fueling had stripped their protective coveralls down to the waist which completely negated their protection apart from their gas masks.
There is a literal world of difference between the iranian missile forces of then and today,not only in terms of the performance and effectiveness of the various weapons types and the role that these play in irans defence strategy,but also in the training and professionalism of those operating them as well.

 

[nahtanbob]

Seriously....!?
Come on we both know that was back in the mid 80s ie almost 35 years ago,hell not to mention that at the time iran couldnt even indigenously build old garden variety scud B,not until the late 80s anyway.Basically the modern iranian ballistic missile forces as we know them today did not even exist yet.To give you an idea of just how crude it was back then I remember an old photo that was posted,possibly on this site,that showed one of the earliest iranian scud launches.The missile was being fueled by hand using buckets[!!] because either the fueling truck or the firing troops did not have the correct hoses necessary,even worse because of the extra time being taken and the outside temperature the firing troops who were performing the fueling had stripped their protective coveralls down to the waist which completely negated their protection apart from their gas masks.
There is a literal world of difference between the iranian missile forces of then and today,not only in terms of the performance and effectiveness of the various weapons types and the role that these play in irans defence strategy,but also in the training and professionalism of those operating them as well.

ballistic missiles are great for nuclear wars. for conventional wars i say good luck

 

[Hack-Hook]

Depend on how precise the variant is . ballistic missile that can precisely hit a Dam or a fuel storage is pretty damn good for conventional war.

ballistic missiles are great for nuclear wars. for conventional wars i say good luck

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

To conquer Asia you need the Turkic folks!!! 22 Empires in the last two millenniums are the testimonies.....

 

[Sineva]

ballistic missiles are great for nuclear wars. for conventional wars i say good luck

Yes,that was pretty much the wests military doctrinal view back during the cold war......however the soviets never subscribed to that view and produced a variety of tbms that in addition to their nuclear payloads also had chem and conventional warhead options.Strangely enough even during the last decade of the cold war the us deployed the pershing 2 which altho designed as a nuclear delivery system was equipped with a radar guided separating warhead that had an accuracy of 30m,which was certainly good enough for conventional targeting,of course systems like the alcm and tomahawk had comparable accuracy but were also considered mainly as nuclear delivery systems at the time [1970s/80s].Now it shouldnt take a rocket scientist to see all of the further technological breakthrus and improvements of the last 40 years that could be applied to something much like a pershing 2 or even liquid fueled types like the scud or rodong,that would take the cep down from the 30m of the late cold war era to 5m or less today which is pretty comparable to many air launched pgms.When you start to combine that level of accuracy with enough weight of numbers then you start to have something that in terms of its potential military capability could be considered as an air power analogue.

 

[nahtanbob]

Yes,that was pretty much the wests military doctrinal view back during the cold war......however the soviets never subscribed to that view and produced a variety of tbms that in addition to their nuclear payloads also had chem and conventional warhead options.Strangely enough even during the last decade of the cold war the us deployed the pershing 2 which altho designed as a nuclear delivery system was equipped with a radar guided separating warhead that had an accuracy of 30m,which was certainly good enough for conventional targeting,of course systems like the alcm and tomahawk had comparable accuracy but were also considered mainly as nuclear delivery systems at the time [1970s/80s].Now it shouldnt take a rocket scientist to see all of the further technological breakthrus and improvements of the last 40 years that could be applied to something much like a pershing 2 or even liquid fueled types like the scud or rodong,that would take the cep down from the 30m of the late cold war era to 5m or less today which is pretty comparable to many air launched pgms.When you start to combine that level of accuracy with enough weight of numbers then you start to have something that in terms of its potential military capability could be considered as an air power analogue.

iran's reliance on missiles is a function of incapable air force. i will leave it at that

 

[Philip the Arab]

iran's reliance on missiles is a function of incapable air force. i will leave it at that

The U.S. does not need to make a beach head to win. As long as they took out most aerial SAM sites, they could do everything from the sky and bomb the shit out of Iran until submission. A pro-Western gov would overthrow the Mullahs after a while. Iranian power would be off in a few days, and there would be lots of civil unrest. Most weapons Iran developed are in case of a ground invasion, their SAMs are using old Soviet tech easily bypassed by EW planes like F-18 Growler. The most Iran could do is strike American allies, thus addint a bigger problem to their worries.

 

[nahtanbob]

The U.S. does not need to make a beach head to win. As long as they took out most aerial SAM sites, they could do everything from the sky and bomb the shit out of Iran until submission. A pro-Western gov would overthrow the Mullahs after a while. Iranian power would be off in a few days, and there would be lots of civil unrest. Most weapons Iran developed are in case of a ground invasion, their SAMs are using old Soviet tech easily bypassed by EW planes like F-18 Growler. The most Iran could do is strike American allies, thus addint a bigger problem to their worries.

i agree i am not sure about what a beachhead does

 

[Philip the Arab]

i agree i am not sure about what a beachhead does

Even planes operating out of Diego Garcia a UK territory could strike Iran safe from any BM or retaliation. Also, carriers could operste relatively safe from BMs because of how difficult it is to hit moving targets like ships.

 

[zartosht]

land invasion on a 80m + large mountainous country with a developed and competenet defense sector.

a military that's prepared for this for decades, and a fanatically united and hostile population that would fight block by block, street by street, inch by inch all the way to Tehran + never ending high intensity insurgency in lost civilian areas, and constant never ending ambushes on wide suppy lines.

if American troops want to get slaughtered on an industrial basis for wahabis and Zionists... they are more then welcome to try. Iran has already dug mass graves for them:

See how merciful Iran is... Iran has even planned to give the dead American troops a proper burial.

 

[Mithridates]

The U.S. does not need to make a beach head to win. As long as they took out most aerial SAM sites, they could do everything from the sky and bomb the shit out of Iran until submission. A pro-Western gov would overthrow the Mullahs after a while. Iranian power would be off in a few days, and there would be lots of civil unrest. Most weapons Iran developed are in case of a ground invasion, their SAMs are using old Soviet tech easily bypassed by EW planes like F-18 Growler. The most Iran could do is strike American allies, thus addint a bigger problem to their worries.

are u still high on that cannabis cake (?) you ate during ramadan??
most weapons we developed are missiles, including cruise missiles recently. and our missiles are in large quantity way more than enough to make US forces to submit along with it's regional allies in region up to Ukraine.
our ADS comprises of shaheen, shalamche, mersad, 3rd khordad, 15th khordad, talash (1,2,3), s-300, s-200 and buks probably. and none of them are old and for the record the sayyad-2 missiles have HOJ capability it means no growler can disrupt it's interception.