We can block Strait of Hormuz , but USA can open it : Former IRGC Commander

[XDescendantX]

Instead of risking expensive warships & the lives of naval forces, why not just drop sea-mines in the Strait of Hormuz? Sea-mines can be produced by the tens of thousands and are inexpensive. Even the most powerful naval powers would take several months or years to diffuse them all.

Sea-mines are like IEDs but in the ocean and better. There are over 500 different types. Some can even "swim". Others can lie dormant and when activated they can travel as fast as a torpedo.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

I dont want war for anyone period.....why are you so stupid as to advocate war?

Americans don’t know anything. This is why they elect idiots like Trump. The most misinformed people that are still struggling in a war with goat herders in afghanistan.

 

[gambit]

Comparing Iraq of Desert Storm that had just exited a devasting 8 year was, to Iran’s military today shows your blissful ignorance.

And to think that the US military of today is still the same level of lethality as yesterday shows yours. Am an Air Force guy, so am going to speak for airpower.

Do not take the negative news about US airpower as any indication that we have been in a 'decline'. No one is interested in positive news. In that vein, US airpower have evolved to be more precise, coordinated, flexible, networked, its personnel better educated and trained, and definitely can do more with less.

The upper echelons of US military establishment are against war with Iran. Not because they fear they can’t achieve their military objectives, but because of the day after. Many in depth articles have been written about this so I won’t go into it further. Even the most anti-Iran general Mad dog Mattis doesn’t want war with Iran, he believes that people like you exist that paint a rosey picture of what war would be.

The military exists NOT to encourage war but to prepare for war. That is where you are wrong in understanding the role of the military in general, let alone US military in particular. What happens in 'the day after' is a political issue, not a military one. I do not paint a 'rosy' picture of war, considering I am Desert Storm veteran I would know war better than you do, but since this is a military oriented forum, it would be a serious remiss if objective discussions of warfare is discouraged out of the fear of nationalist passions.

So objectively speaking, in modern warfare, the lack of airpower is a guarantee of defeat. By that I mean the lack of an opposition airpower that cannot withstand an attack.

What have the Iranian Air Force done? Barely maintaining the few F-14s and putting twin vertical stabs on the the few F-5s. Pretty much the highlight of Iran's military aviation. And please do not bring in that fraud of a 'stealth' fighter.

Iran do not have a credible opposition air force against US airpower. Missiles do not count as they are one-way and essentially disposable weapons.

Air Dominance -- The ability of an air force to compel other air forces to re-array themselves, often into subordinate postures.

Air Superiority -- The ability of an air force to take control of contested airspace, repeatedly if necessary, and if there are losses, those losses would not pose a statistical deterrence to that ability.

Air Supremacy -- He flies, he dies.

We do not need to achieve air superiority over all Iranian airspace. Just a few tactical and strategic areas will do.

But I wouldn’t expect a military grunt to understand geopolitics or the big picture. They only understand what their shiny toys can do.

If you want to go there, what are your experience in military affairs that you can dismiss mine? None? Then what make you think your perspective of that 'big picture' is more valid than mine?

 

[Cthulhu]

I dont want war for anyone period.....why are you so stupid as to advocate war?

I am a Desert Storm USAF F-16 veteran. I heard the same argument before deployment.

@gambit So you are a veteran of this war?

 

[925boy]

Iran has powerful air defense. If America attacks Iran you see S-300PMU2 flying and American jets go down. Trump would lose 2020 election. He ain't gonna risk that.

Trump already said yesterday that he would delegate keeping strait of hormuz to arab allies and support them. that was worrisome because thats indirectly admitting US is actively avoiding military confrontation with Iran. I agree with @That Guy that for Iran to close the strait, all Iran has to do is cause insecurity in it. Thats enough. In security, perception is often as good as reality. If people/marine traffic thinks the strait is insecure, then it is. Trump bluffs too much and it will cause problems sooner or later.

Iran is no way near strong enough to stand up to the U.S. Iran needs to develop a massive military capability...strong enough that it'll overwhelm Israel and U.S interests in the region, in case of any American invasion. Do you have this capability? No.

Also, U.S knows that Iran can not be allowed to develop such capability---hence it'll always keep resupplying its allies with newer weapon systems to counter Iran. And hence this game remains tilted in the U.S favor.

I would agree with you 100% IF US had already won in Afghanistan.

Let me ask you a question. how will US tackle the 400-600K ground soldiers across the middle east that Iran can muster? I believe you are correct....ON PAPER. If technology, and "newest weapons"was the real solution why is Afghanistan war entering its 17th year? Also why cant Gulf arabs even crush Yemen when they have bought billions of US weapons?(answer: because scared and cowardly Saudis cant commit 20K soldiers to drive houthis out) This argument that newer and better weapons wins wars is false!
As a matter of fact, the real truth is that the US military is fatigued. Afghanistan, Iraq and worldwide policeman operations have actually strained it, and that's why the US right now only opts for credible deterrence and strong retaliation after an attack. North Korea is still sitting there waiting for their beating, so is Iran, so is China, so is Russia. It will never come. The issue is not that these countries cant win, the issue now is that US cant win. This is why Trump is also pushing for EU countries to do more NATO "lifting"-because the US has realized the world military threats has increased to a point, the US cant contain them all, so others must start doing their work. Turkey is standing up to US like EU countries and US cant suppress her really. No sanctions are coming unless US wants to start unraveling NATO. The world has changed! if you dont believe it now you are already too late. The days of bullying developing countries into submission is almost gone completely. Economic warfare is the only viable option now, and sooner or later, that will weaken too. Just facts man!

 

[AUz]

I am a Desert Storm USAF F-16 veteran. I heard the same argument before deployment.


I am not advocating a war. I was merely making an observation that you could not.

Gambit, would a hypothetical conflict with Iran be more costly (in terms of human and material losses) for US than Iraq?

I have two opinions on it. One is conventional wisdom---that is, offcourse it will be more costly. Iran's asymmetric capability in the region far exceeds anything Iraq was able to muster. Iran can hurt U.S interests in the gulf, strait of Harmouz, and even can target Israel from Lebanon/Syria---hence expanding the theatre of conflict far beyond what Americans' would ideally like. Unlike Iraqis, Iranians, for the most part, will be united to fight against invaders of their land (even those who despise their Islamic government). Iranian geography is significantly harder for any invading military. It's mountainous, territorially much bigger in size, and not easily navigable. Iranian military will also put a better fight than Iraq's before the inevitable defeat...

However, my second opinion is that it might actually be easier for the U.S to militarily win in Iran. Why? because of U.S military experience and lessons in Iraq and Afghanistan. U.S already learnt the lessons it had to and already failed where it could have failed in the type of war that will be put up in Iran. So now, U.S military will know what to expect and how to conduct the operations more effectively without letting things get out of control so to speak.

What is your military assessement?

 

[Saddam Hussein]

don't forget the US war on Iraq started in 1991 and continued all throughout the 90's with sanctions, no-fly zones, occasional cruise missile launches and air attacks until the ground war was launched in 2003.

It's not like in any such scenario they'd jump ahead to a ground invasion like in 2003.

 

[gambit]

Gambit, would a hypothetical conflict with Iran be more costly (in terms of human and material losses) for US than Iraq?

What is your military assessement?

No. It would not be.

How long can Iran hold the block while under constant bombardment from US?

When we look at the map of the region, it is clear that Iran's access to open water is weak, as in the Gulf of Oman. US airpower will control that body of water. If we chose to open the strait, it would not be for our needs but for our allies'. All the talk about controlling oil to bring US down was all for nothing. But if we chose not to open the strait, we can bomb the strait and either seal the Iranian Navy in the Persian Gulf or destroy it in the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea as Iranian ships tries to escape. There is no winning for the Iranian Navy. I know the gullible will trot out the usual hype of the Millennium Challenge 2002 as if somehow the US Navy will obediently repeat the same conditions for Iran to replicate what General Van Riper did. Give that a rest.

We have no interests in landing on Iranian soil. For what? Yes, we have learned and learned more from Iraq than from Afghanistan. In both countries, we have non-military interests that we put upon ourselves. For Iran, we will not care what happens after the Iranian military is rendered impotent. We will leave Iran a mess if it comes to that. In the air and on the water, technical skills counts more than nationalistic passions and we will control those environments.

 

[PeeD]

Iran do not have a credible opposition air force against US airpower. Missiles do not count as they are one-way and essentially disposable weapons.

The primitive ancestor of this system killed dozens of Israeli aircraft in 1973, who also thought they would easily achieve air superiority.

A single system screwed their day. With 3 times longer range, this distant future Iranian relative has the potential to do the same for enemies around the strait of Hormuz.

 

[TheImmortal]

However, my second opinion is that it might actually be easier for the U.S to militarily win in Iran. Why? because of U.S military experience and lessons in Iraq and Afghanistan. U.S already learnt the lessons it had to and already failed where it could have failed in the type of war that will be put up in Iran. So now, U.S military will know what to expect and how to conduct the operations more effectively without letting things get out of control so to speak.

Now I realize why the West hasn’t been able to win a war against an able country since Korean War.

It’s because of incompetent people like AuS and yes men like Gambit.

WHAT DID YOU LEARN EXACTLY FROM IRAQ & AFGHANISTAN? How to LOSE while wasting hundreds of billions of dollars??

Take Afghanistan, US is begging the Taliban to negotiate with them since with all their shiney toys the US can’t beat bunch of cave dwellers. And after nearly 2 decades, the Afghan army sucks and would get destroyed by an single Iranian backed milita.

What did you learn in Iraq exactly?

You got kicked out of the country and had to have back door negotiations with Iran to have them reign in the Shiite miltias that were carving up your troops like a thanksgiving Turkey. You were incompetent and couldn’t even stop specially designed IEDS from ripping apart your finest armour. You literally fought a war for Iran and afterwards got booted out. Bravo there.

After the disaster of Iraq & Afghanistan, the US thought with Syria 3rd time was the charm. Again even without fighting on the ground with boots, you still found a way to LOSE a country after it was nearly 85% occupied by your terrorist buddies. And now you have Iran entrenched deeply in another state.


Bravo, I mean bravo. Yeah you guys are really learning....learning how to lose.

 

[gambit]

Take Afghanistan, US is begging the Taliban to negotiate with them since with all their shiney toys the US can’t beat bunch of cave dwellers.

That is hilarious considering a handful of US Special Ops operators with Dostum kicked the Taliban out of power toot-sweet.

News for you, pal. If we wanted to, we could have destroyed Afghanistan. Salted the earth. The whole nine-yds.

Bravo, I mean bravo. Yeah you guys are really learning....learning how to lose.

Every general in the world, from Beijing to Moscow, would love to have our military 'losing' record.

 

[TheImmortal]

We have no interests in landing on Iranian soil. For what? Yes, we have learned and learned more from Iraq than from Afghanistan. In both countries, we have non-military interests that we put upon ourselves. For Iran, we will not care what happens after the Iranian military is rendered impotent. We will leave Iran a mess if it comes to that. In the air and on the water, technical skills counts more than nationalistic passions and we will control those environments.

I wouldn’t expect a more pathetic answer from a grunt. You talk like this in a military war room and they would be wondering why the coffee errand boy was let in to talk among the adults.

I imagine you sitting back with a Forest Gump accent saying “We gon over der and drop some bombs who care what happen next”

I mean seriously did the military not have an IQ test? Well I guess they need people who follow orders and don’t care for lack of brain cells.

You do realize the objective is REGIME CHANGE? Right?

Bombing Iran from air only was circa 2010 and that was to stop them from nuclear weapons (which nearly every military official worth his salt said would do nothing but merely delay the program 6 months).

Iran now has advanced centrifuges that are 10X more efficient than IR-1. So let me break this down for you, that means Iran could have 10 SMALL hidden enrichment centers across the country and not a single person would know. That is why the West doesn’t want installation of next gen centrifuges. Iran could go nuclear in less than 12 months In secret and no military on earth could stop it.

So anyway besides the point, REGIME CHANGE requires boots on the ground. You can’t get regime change through the air. So last I checked, USA doesn’t have 750,000 troops to invade Iran on standby.

Finally, this notion that AirPower will somehow stop Iran counterattack is A FOLLY.

Let me explain to you why,

First the Iranian coastline is filled with tens of hundreds of antiship missiles that could be fired at very short notice and then hidden again. Add that to the Fateh family missiles and all aircraft carriers will operate safely In the Indian Ocean. That reduces the amount of sorties that can be run considerably.

Furthermore, history has shown AirPower cannot stop missiles.

If Israel could not stop or prevent missiles reigning down upon it when it had 24/7 monitoring of South Lebanon airspace in an area smaller than state of Rhode Island During the 60 Day War with Hezbollah....What in gods green earth makes you think that the US could prevent a counterattack of missile barrages being fired from a country the size of Iran?

Logistically it is impossible. Even with 24/7 air support, they wouldn’t be able to stop it.

Need a more recent example? Yemen. With all their airpower and the best targeting data that US/NATO/ISRAEL can provide, the sandal wearing Houthis are still firing archaic missiles into Saudi Arabia.

US military officials know that Iran is best in the world at managing a wide vary of militias to coalesce into a single unit and fight in multiple different theaters at the same time.

This is capability that neither Russia nor China have and the US has struggled to create since backing the Taliban during the Soviet Union Invasion. It sounds easy, yet extremely difficult. It’s why the Syria experiment failed for the West.

Make no mistake the entire Middle East would be at war, not just Iran. So be prepared to strike across Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and afghanistan.

Lastly, Iran plays the long game while every conflict since Desert Storm by the Empire has been impulsive with no direction or exit stratergy.

Your comments reflect that impulsive nature of a person who doesn’t understand how geopolitics play out on the grand stage. You lack a sense of cause and effect and how it ripples through the pond much like the Butterfly effect theory.

If your whole premise is that the US won’t invade via land Iran then your whole conversation is a waste of air.

You are using a failed military contingency plan to stop an Iranian nuclear program nearly a decade ago. That ship has long sailed.

The final decision is simple, all out war for regime change or reapproachment. US can’t afford a war with Iran and Iran knows that and thus it will continue to play the long game.

So your fantasy air campaign is irrelevant to the conversation at this point.

That is hilarious considering a handful of US Special Ops operators with Dostum kicked the Taliban out of power toot-sweet.

News for you, pal. If we wanted to, we could have destroyed Afghanistan. Salted the earth. The whole nine-yds.

And yet, the US is encouraging the Taliban and Afghan government to reconcile. Do you even follow the news Gambit?

Afghanistan is a failure. You kicked Taliban out, but they are back and US has determined that the Taliban needs to be a part of any future Afghan government. How ironic. Much like Assad must go...right Gambit?

Again your lack of intelect shows with such mistaken bravado “we could have destroyed Afghanistan. Salted the earth”.

Bravo Gambit Bravo, does that make you feel tough? The sad fact is yet you didn’t. Again wouldn’t expect anything less from a grunt with such words.

You clearly exposed yourself right there with such false bravado. No point in continuing such a conversation. You fail at understanding the big picture, even of your own military’s actions.

 

[haman10]

We do not need to physically close the strait, Just announcing it is close is enough.

which ship has the balls to ignore it

 

[AmirPatriot]

I wouldn’t expect a more pathetic answer from a grunt. You talk like this in a military war room and they would be wondering why the coffee errand boy was let in to talk among the adults.

I imagine you sitting back with a Forest Gump accent saying “We gon over der and drop some bombs who care what happen next”

I mean seriously did the military not have an IQ test? Well I guess they need people who follow orders and don’t care for lack of brain cells.

You do realize the objective is REGIME CHANGE? Right?

Bombing Iran from air only was circa 2010 and that was to stop them from nuclear weapons (which nearly every military official worth his salt said would do nothing but merely delay the program 6 months).

Iran now has advanced centrifuges that are 10X more efficient than IR-1. So let me break this down for you, that means Iran could have 10 SMALL hidden enrichment centers across the country and not a single person would know. That is why the West doesn’t want installation of next gen centrifuges. Iran could go nuclear in less than 12 months In secret and no military on earth could stop it.

So anyway besides the point, REGIME CHANGE requires boots on the ground. You can’t get regime change through the air. So last I checked, USA doesn’t have 750,000 troops to invade Iran on standby.

Finally, this notion that AirPower will somehow stop Iran counterattack is A FOLLY.

Let me explain to you why,

First the Iranian coastline is filled with tens of hundreds of antiship missiles that could be fired at very short notice and then hidden again. Add that to the Fateh family missiles and all aircraft carriers will operate safely In the Indian Ocean. That reduces the amount of sorties that can be run considerably.

Furthermore, history has shown AirPower cannot stop missiles.

If Israel could not stop or prevent missiles reigning down upon it when it had 24/7 monitoring of South Lebanon airspace in an area smaller than state of Rhode Island During the 60 Day War with Hezbollah....What in gods green earth makes you think that the US could prevent a counterattack of missile barrages being fired from a country the size of Iran?

Logistically it is impossible. Even with 24/7 air support, they wouldn’t be able to stop it.

Need a more recent example? Yemen. With all their airpower and the best targeting data that US/NATO/ISRAEL can provide, the sandal wearing Houthis are still firing archaic missiles into Saudi Arabia.

US military officials know that Iran is best in the world at managing a wide vary of militias to coalesce into a single unit and fight in multiple different theaters at the same time.

This is capability that neither Russia nor China have and the US has struggled to create since backing the Taliban during the Soviet Union Invasion. It sounds easy, yet extremely difficult. It’s why the Syria experiment failed for the West.

Make no mistake the entire Middle East would be at war, not just Iran. So be prepared to strike across Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and afghanistan.

Lastly, Iran plays the long game while every conflict since Desert Storm by the Empire has been impulsive with no direction or exit stratergy.

Your comments reflect that impulsive nature of a person who doesn’t understand how geopolitics play out on the grand stage. You lack a sense of cause and effect and how it ripples through the pond much like the Butterfly effect theory.

If your whole premise is that the US won’t invade via land Iran then your whole conversation is a waste of air.

You are using a failed military contingency plan to stop an Iranian nuclear program nearly a decade ago. That ship has long sailed.

The final decision is simple, all out war for regime change or reapproachment. US can’t afford a war with Iran and Iran knows that and thus it will continue to play the long game.

So your fantasy air campaign is irrelevant to the conversation at this point.



And yet, the US is encouraging the Taliban and Afghan government to reconcile. Do you even follow the news Gambit?

Afghanistan is a failure. You kicked Taliban out, but they are back and US has determined that the Taliban needs to be a part of any future Afghan government. How ironic. Much like Assad must go...right Gambit?

Again your lack of intelect shows with such mistaken bravado “we could have destroyed Afghanistan. Salted the earth”.

Bravo Gambit Bravo, does that make you feel tough? The sad fact is yet you didn’t. Again wouldn’t expect anything less from a grunt with such words.

You clearly exposed yourself right there with such false bravado. No point in continuing such a conversation. You fail at understanding the big picture, even of your own military’s actions.

I was going to make my own reply to gambit, but I guess I don't need to now.

 

[VEVAK]

Closing the strait of Hurmuz would be quite simple for Iran! And reopening a shipping lane in the Persian Gulf could easily be achieved within a few day's by the U.S. Navy! And Iran could easily close it back up again or attack ships that attempt to pass through! So the only way for the U.S. to keep it open is if they start a full scale war against Iran!

Which means Iran knows full well that any attempt to close the Persian Gulf will result in a full scale war with the U.S.! And knowing that means Iran would be better off attacking U.S. Naval and Air Forces assets from the offset prior to any attempt to shut down the Persian Gulf!!


If Iran closes the strait or starts attacking civilian Cargo & Fuel tankers in the Persian Gulf on random then Iran would have to be ready for other countries to follow suite! Which means Iranian civil cargo ships will not be safe outside the Persian Gulf either!!!!! So closing down the Persian Gulf is a last resort used if the U.S. ever tries to create a Naval Blockade against Iran AND if that ever happens Iran would be far better off attacking U.S. Naval & Air Force assets in the region prior to closing down the Persian Gulf because if we wait for them to attack 1st we risk loosing a large portion of our active ready to launch and deploy weapons.....

Which means whipping out the UAE government, military and or invading the UAE would be a far more rational move by Iran than closing down the Persian Gulf!