Why Iran wouldn't last a few days against US

[B.K.N]

Afghanistan is open border. A huge portion of population didn't even know why they are being attacked and just treated the invaders as another unwelcomed assholes just like in the history. All empires go to die in Afghanistan. After neatly 20 years, Taliban has gain more territories and that is a military defeat for US. Stop watching Hollywood. War is about motivation and will.

So Iranian are going to fight like Taliban this is what US wants

 

[GWXP]

Because Uncle Sam is basically a nice guy.

When we look at a million dead in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Yugoslavia --when we look at illegally destroyed countries, we don't agree that Uncle Sam is just a nice guy

They said the same thing with Desert Storm prior to my deployment. Back then, the world braced for oil shortages, extreme financial movements, internal violence, and environmental disasters. The only thing that happened was the environmental bit.

Incompetent journalists said that there will be "oil shortages, extreme financial movements, internal violence, and environmental disasters", but US military analysts realized that :1) Iraq has no geographical position and navy to close the Strait of Hormuz 2) Iraq has no anti-ship missiles and geographical position to destroy oil tankers 3) Iraq has no precise ballistic missiles in large quantity to target oil terminals and petrochemical plants in Saudi Arabia

So whatever journalist wrote --US military knew that Iraq is incapable to threaten oil infrastructure of the region

Today situation is different-----journalists say that war with Iran will be an easy walk, but US military analysts know that Iran can close the Strait of Hormuz, Iran has large number of anti-ship and ballistic missiles and wonderful geographical position to paralyze oil traffic.

US President and US military know that attack on Iran will end up with a MASSIVE ECONOMIC CRISES----and this is the SINGLE REASON why Iran still stands and is not attacked. (and not because Uncle Sam is a nice guy)

From your part, to base your views on experience you had 30 years ago against a country 4 times smaller in size is the worst thing you can do. You Americans are blinded with arrogance.

Instead of claiming that you are experienced and competent enough to claim that nothing will happen with the global economy if Iran will be attacked because :---Ohhh when I was young 30 years ago incompetent journalists claimed the same with Iraq (a 4 times smaller country that Iran and geographically differently positioned) but nothing happened and that is why nothing will happen if Iran is attacked---you should better answer these questions:

1)Will Iran be able to close the Strait of Hormuz? If not-why? If it will----how much time will be required to reopen it and what will happen until then with oil supply and what consequence it will have on global economy (experience with Iraq 1991 is worthless because you are dealing with a different country)?

2) Iranian anti-ship missiles are deployed all across the Persian Gulf, including Iranian anti-ship ballistic missiles like Khalij Fars----these missiles can target oil tankers---what will happen with oil supply and global economy if Iran targets oil tankers and how US can prevent it?

3) Iran has hundreds of ballistic missiles that can target oil refineries and ports in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, UAE----how this will affect oil supply and global economy?

4) What will happen with oil supply if 5 million Shias who live in Eastern province of Saudi Arabia (where all of the oil is located) will rise against Saudi regime ?

5) Iran has 200k troops near the border with Iraq---if they will cross the border and move toward Kuwait----what forces US will need to block them and what time of deployment is required? What damage to oil infrastructure in Iraq and Kuwait is expected and how this will affect oil supply?

6) US think tank Stratfor estimated that if Iran closes the Strait of hormuz oil price will climb to 500 dollars per barrel----what will happen with global economy with this price of oil and who will be blamed?

YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS---ALL YOU CAN SAY IS THAT OHH--THEY TALKED THE SAME IN REGARDS TO IRAQ IN 1991 AND NOTHING HAPPENED....

You don’t know the answer, BUT US PRESIDENT DOES---he knows that it will be an economic catastrophe for which he will be blamed---AND THIS IS THE SINGLE REASON WHY IRAN IS NOT AND WILL NOT BE ATTACKED-----this is the reason....NOT BECAUSE UNCLE SAM IS A NICE GUY.

We learned from our mistakes in Afghanistan and Iraq. More from Iraq than from Afghanistan. The main lesson is that the ME is not worth our effort to introduce democracy.

Do you naively believe that this was a noble effort to introduce democracy by killing a million people and destroying a country?

Research by a well known Dr. Mearsheimer who is a professor in the University of Chicago and Dr. Walt -a professor in Harvard University.

From 29:13 ---Israel and the Jewish lobby are the main driving forces behind the decision to invade Iraq...It is hard to imagine that war in the absence of the Jewish Lobby

It was Jewish lobby who forced US president to go to war with Iraq. Aim---to destroy Israeli enemy with American hands....

Jews brought you-naive American soldiers like sheeps to the Middle East to do all the dirty job for Israel.----and of course you are told tales about democracy, freedom and other nonsense like this.

Today Jewish lobby tries to destroy Israeli enemy-Iran with American hands one more time----they lobby war---but healthy elements in the American intelligence services say war against Iran is not in US national interests----will see who wins---Jewish lobby or healthy elements within the American politics

Article By John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt----Israeli Lobby and US Foreign Policy
http://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/pdfs/IsraelLobby.pdf

Even funnier -- that Iran can win.

Yes, I understand am talking smack for US and I do sounds like you guys talking smack for your countries, whatever country maybe. But am not talking from ignorance. I am USAF veteran: F-111 Cold War, then F-16 Desert Storm. With the Cold War, I know what kind of deterrence we can present. With Desert Storm, I know the true executions of those capabilities. You can say Iran is not Iraq, but then the USAF today is not the USAF of Desert Storm. We became more mobile, agile, networked, longer reach, and combined -- more lethal. We WILL own the sky over Iran, and we will give it back at our convenience.

Iran does not try to defeat US Air Force----and of course US will own the sky over Iran...but it will be TOO LATE------entire might of Iranian military---navy, army, air force is concentrated NOT to defeat US military machine----but to DESTROY OIL INFRASTRUCTURE------Iran plans to paralyze you economically

Iran's Khalij Fars anti-ship ballistic missile: a wonderful weapon to destroy oil tankers and US Navy vessels everywhere in the Persian Gulf....Saddam didn't have such a weapon...did he?

"War is like opening the door into a dark room. One never knows what is hidden in the darkness"-Adolf Hitler

 

[mohsen]

Shiaism was shoved down into your throat.

Based on you Zionist/Wahhabis, but don't worry, one day we will shove it in your throat (as promised by prophet).

 

[Bahram Esfandiari]

Even funnier -- that Iran can win.

Yes, I understand am talking smack for US and I do sounds like you guys talking smack for your countries, whatever country maybe. But am not talking from ignorance. I am USAF veteran: F-111 Cold War, then F-16 Desert Storm. With the Cold War, I know what kind of deterrence we can present. With Desert Storm, I know the true executions of those capabilities. You can say Iran is not Iraq, but then the USAF today is not the USAF of Desert Storm. We became more mobile, agile, networked, longer reach, and combined -- more lethal. We WILL own the sky over Iran, and we will give it back at our convenience.

So far the U.S has made big noise about deploying the USS Abraham Lincoln and B-52s into the Persian Gulf trying to scare Iran into coming to the "negotiating table" with Donald Trump. In response Iran not only showed no interest in Negotiating with the U.S, Iran demonstrated that it can attack the two oil routs that the U.S and her allies had established to circumvent the straight of Hormuz in case of Iran closing it, right under your nose. What has been the U.S and her allies response to these Iranian actions? A big fat load of Nothing! You can talk all you want about your experiences as a retired Air Force pilot about how war with Iran will be just another desert storm but the reality is that Iran has watched your capabilities in our region very closely for the past 40 years and yet Iran is not scared of you and has shown that it is not scared of you. So far it is you that has proven to us with your lack of action who is really afraid of who!

 

[gambit]

When we look at a million dead in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Yugoslavia --when we look at illegally destroyed countries, we don't agree that Uncle Sam is just a nice guy

We can debate the characters of nations indefinitely, and it will be interesting considering the ME have nothing but dynastic dictatorships whose internal treatments of their citizens would fill a few libraries. But then, we would never know since they allowed no such libraries to build.

Incompetent journalists said that there will be "oil shortages, extreme financial movements, internal violence, and environmental disasters", but US military analysts realized that :1) Iraq has no geographical position and navy to close the Strait of Hormuz 2) Iraq has no anti-ship missiles and geographical position to destroy oil tankers 3) Iraq has no precise ballistic missiles in large quantity to target oil terminals and petrochemical plants in Saudi Arabia

Everything you posted about how Iran could do this and that, I have read before but with the Iraqi version. Yes, Iraq would -- not could -- do at least serious damages, if not actually destroy, regional oil production, thereby plunging global economy into a recession and even a depression.

The flaw in your 'analysis', and I use that word very generously, is in your failure to study Desert Storm. But of course, such failure is common and repeating over the yrs.

The flaw is that in Desert Storm, we planned for a land war and focused our tactics to that. With Iran, there will be no land war so that mean all our resources will focus on destroying Iran's ability to attack regional oil production. Of course the Strait will be closed, but smarter minds than you know that the US will open it again. That certainty, one can call it 'faith', will be the stabilizing factor in the markets. Iran's geographical size matters little because there will be no land war.

The Jews? Of course you have to bring up the Jews. What a shocker...

 

[Bahram Esfandiari]

So Iranian are going to fight like Taliban this is what US wants

If you equate Iran's concept of Asymmetrical warfare with "fight like the Taliban" than you really have no idea what you are talking about!

 

[Sine Nomine]

Based on you Zionist/Wahhabis, but don't worry, one day we will shove it in your throat (as promised by prophet).

Hahah come up with something better then Zion/Wahabi/Salfi/Tikafiri
I am glad you have got prophet,who likes to shove things into people throat.
Mine was statue of character,morality,truth,knowldege,beacon of guidence and composition of every good human trait in existence.He never needed to shove anything into someone's throat,mankind followed him due to his exemplary personality.

 

[GWXP]

We can debate the characters of nations indefinitely, and it will be interesting considering the ME have nothing but dynastic dictatorships whose internal treatments of their citizens would fill a few libraries. But then, we would never know since they allowed no such libraries to build.


Everything you posted about how Iran could do this and that, I have read before but with the Iraqi version. Yes, Iraq would -- not could -- do at least serious damages, if not actually destroy, regional oil production, thereby plunging global economy into a recession and even a depression.

The flaw in your 'analysis', and I use that word very generously, is in your failure to study Desert Storm. But of course, such failure is common and repeating over the yrs.

The flaw is that in Desert Storm, we planned for a land war and focused our tactics to that. With Iran, there will be no land war so that mean all our resources will focus on destroying Iran's ability to attack regional oil production. Of course the Strait will be closed, but smarter minds than you know that the US will open it again. That certainty, one can call it 'faith', will be the stabilizing factor in the markets. Iran's geographical size matters little because there will be no land war.

The Jews? Of course you have to bring up the Jews. What a shocker...

If your "analysis" could match that of Pentagon---Iran would have already been attacked and lay in ruins since the times of George W Bush--------ability to seriously threaten oil infrastructure and US inability to protect it -- is the largest Iranian deterrence.....

If smarter minds than mine knew that US could easily reopen the Strait of hormuz and oil infrastructure can be easily protected without serious consequences for the global economy --Iran would have already lay in ruins just like Iraq during Desert Storm

And claim from your "analysis" that Uncle Sam is just a nice guy and that is why Iran is not attacked doesn't make sense.

The Jews? Of course you have to bring up the Jews. What a shocker...

Regarding the Jews---you better read more and listen more to your own respected American professors---

one more time.... this video is for you

Instead of playing down anti-Israel position you can turn on your brain and read this article which is also for you

http://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/pdfs/IsraelLobby.pdf

You are free to argue what is from John Mearsheimer claims are conspiracy, antisemitism or a lie

Otherwise you can live in ignorance believing that protection of tiny Israel and hated from 1bln Muslims is the best American National Interest

 

[mohsen]

Hahah come up with something better then Zion/Wahabi/Salfi/Tikafiri
I am glad you have got prophet,who likes to shove things into people throat.
Mine was statue of character,morality,truth,knowldege,beacon of guidence and composition of every good human trait in existence.He never needed to shove anything into someone's throat,mankind followed him due to his exemplary personality.

Terrorists say the same thing, yet they have no business with knowledge, history, humanity, etc. dead brain, blind and deaf!

Just like you who want to erase the whole history of Shiah before Safavids (in your mind), so that you could conclude your own agenda.

According to Quran, such people actually do need to shove it in their throat, cause they are even inferior to animals in incorporating their brain and senses:
ام تحسب ان اکثرهم یسمعون او یعقلون ان هم الا کالانعـم بل هم اضل سبیلا
فرقان/سوره۲۵، آیه۴۴

 

[Sine Nomine]

According to Quran, such people actually do need to shove it in their throat, cause they are even inferior to animals in incorporating their brain and senses:
ام تحسب ان اکثرهم یسمعون او یعقلون ان هم الا کالانعـم بل هم اضل سبیلا
فرقان/سوره۲۵، آیه۴۴

Often done by Tikafiris for justification of their every ill.

Just like you who want to erase the whole history of Shiah before Safavids (in your mind), so that you could conclude your own agenda.

History of Shiaism is very old,it dates back even Islam but in Iran concept is not more then 500 year old for large chunck of population
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_conversion_of_Iran_to_Shia_Islam

 

[Hack-Hook]

Because Uncle Sam is basically a nice guy.

Damn it ,it's here
https://giphy.com/gifs/i-want-you-uncle-sam-LumWabqmdcRLq

 

[gambit]

Iran would have already been attacked...

This argument is so stale it can be used for salad croutons.

Back in WW II, even Hitler tried negotiations before he used the army. Going back further, Saladin negotiated. The US and JPN tried negotiations before JPN decided to attack Pearl Harbor.

No, the US does not want any situation to deteriorate to what von Clausewitz characterized as 'continuation of politics by other means', in other words, we do not want the situation to deteriorate to a shooting fight.

So from that perspective, the Iranian military is very much at the mercy of the US military.

 

[Tigers]

US does not have the stomach for a major war and the dotard sitting in the White House is himself saying that. He is up for re-election and it won't look very good if he is sitting in the middle of 5,000 caskets wrapped in stars and stripes. But I must say this thread contains some of the most wildest and idiotic comments I have ever read.

if your country resorts to asymmetrical warfare, you have already lost, US has no intention of occupying Iran, just completely crippling your country, and if you are resorting to asymmetrical warfare, well then your country has already been crippled in every possible way.

This is the truth. If Iranians are thinking of fighting the war in the streets of Tehran then Iran has already lost the war. Iranians should visit Mosul to see what happens when you use this sort of tactics to fight your enemy. What is the next bright idea? Fighting the US army in their bedroom?

Better to live and die free then to live as a slave.

And remember how the US "won" Iraq in 2 weeks?
How did that turn out for them?

Iraq has been smashed into oblivion and US is humming along even if the war in Iraq took more than two weeks. This is how it all turned out.

And then we watch and keep silent?
What if shia militias in Iraq, without any violence, pressure all Iraqi oil industry to stop producing and exporting oil in solidarity with Iranian muslim brothers who are attacked? What will happen with oil prices and how can US intervene of 5 million barrels a day suddenly stop being produced, let me know.
This is only one simple and "soft" measure out of 500 measures which could be taken.

When the Shia militias in Iraq don't get their payments on time, they will turn to Baghdad or CIA who will once again deliver money to them in briefcases to keep the oil flowing. This won't be the first time they have taken money from the CIA.

2And of course the U.S. military is much more powerful than Iran of that there is no doubt but they were also far more powerful than Vietnam and look what happened there & unlike Iran today the Vietnamese had no real means of retaliation nor the capability to effect 1/4 of the worlds Oil supply or the ability to produce weapons as advance as the weapons Iran is producing today. So short of a wide scale nuclear attack on Iran a U.S. war with Iran will be far from easy!

Iran is not Vietnam. Vietnam was divided at 17th parallel. This allowed Viet Cong leadership complete operational freedom which they put to good use by crisscrossing into Laos and Cambodia (Ho Chi Minh Trail) to attack South Vietnam where the US Army was based. Similar arrangement is in place on the Korean peninsula which is divided at 38th parallel and allows Kim dynasty to survive. In Afghanistan, the Taliban leadership hid in Pakistan. Which country will shelter Iranian leadership? Iraq? Syria? Lebanon? Turkey? Afghanistan? China? Russia? India? Pakistan? France?

With Iraq and Libya, there were no such arrangements in place and in both cases the leadership was eliminated. Iran falls into this latter camp. There will be no North-South Iran which will allow the regime to survive and what happened to Iraq and Libya will be Iran's fate.

1) one can't compare Iraq of 1991/2003 with Iran----because Iraqi military in 1991 was designed for POSITIONAL WARFARE and its command and control and supplies were extremely vulnerable to US air power. Once US established air superiority, it used its air power to easily paralyze Iraqi army's supply and command and control before US ground force attacked.

If Iraqi military was designed in a different manner, war in 1991 could have been different. (One example is how ISIS tactics allowed them to survive US air strikes).

War with Iran will look like war between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006.

Hezbollah was prepared for a war with a country that enjoys full air superiority. As a result Israeli air strikes and artillery were extremely ineffective and when Israeli ground forces invaded Lebanon, they were stopped by anti-tank missiles and Hezbollah infantry force.

2) USA can't invade Iran because of its size and terrain.

In 2003 to invade Arabic part of Iraq that had a population of 20mln people, US required 250.000 troops and Donald Rumsfeld claimed it is not enough, (even despite intelligence estimated showed that there will be no resistance from Iraqis).

Iran is 4 times bigger in terms of population and several times bigger in terms of territory.

If 250k troops are required for invading a 20mln country, then to invade 80mln Iran you will need 1mln troops. More realistic estimates claim 1,5-2mln troops are needed to occupy such a big country like Iran. These resources are beyond US capabilities.

Also, USA military spending on Iraqi occupation was 150bln$ a year,(even despite virtually no resistance against American forces).

Based on this number, we can estimate that to invade Iran --military spending will be 800bln$ and more realistically 1-1,5 trln a year.

US WILL GO BANKRUPT! US simply has no money and resources to occupy such a big country like Iran (for this they will have to mobilize huge portion of their population and economy and go to WWII style total war).

Also, US military is designed for war in Europe and is effective in a flat terrain of Iraq. But Iran is a mountainous country. Armored brigades and divisions are ineffective in a mountainous terrain. Mountains are hell for invader and a paradise for defender.

It will be very difficult for US forces to penetrate the mountains and supply its forces, while Iran will easily defend its territory and ambush supply convoys. Every single hill will be turned into a fortress.

Mountain war is an infantry war and this is where Iran has advantage, because its military is specially designed for this kind of warfare --war in a mountainous terrain against an enemy that has technological superiority.

Conclusion is that US can't occupy Iran, but it can make a limited invasion occupying Khuzestan province and islands in the Persian Gulf, (and later trade to return them for peace). But for invading Khuzestan US will need to create a spearhead and amassing troops takes a lot of time.

3) US calculates that if it will attack Iran, 200.000 troops Iran has near the border with Iraq will attack American forces in Kuwait and oil infrastructure of Saudi Arabia.

So for protecting Kuwait, US will have to bring its own ground force to the region and the deployment process will take 5-6 month---a LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

Probably Iran will not repeat Saddam's mistake and wait for 6 month watching how Americans deploy forces. Maybe Iran will use its large ground force to strike first.

Also 10 years ago there were rumors that if US starts bringing large forces to the region, Iran planned to sink its own oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz to block it and paralyze US deployment.


4) To attack Iran, US will rely on its air power which was extremely effective against Iraq in 1991 and will be ineffective against Iran today (just like against Hezbollah in 2006).

US will bring 1600 fighter aircrafts and its support infrastructure to the 30 airfields of Saudi Arabia and these aircrafts will be parked like this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_...15E_parked_during_Operation_Desert_Shield.jpg

These aircrafts will become an ideal target for hundreds of Iranian ballistic missiles with cluster munitions.

5) Even is US manages to deploy its forces, the main phase of war will last for 2-3 days.

During the first 3 days, a) Iran will launch all of its ballistic missiles and damage US air force and oil infrastructure/water supply infrastructure in Saudi Arabia/Kuwait/UAE b) Iranian navy will lay mines in the Strait of Hormuz c) Iranian anti-ship missiles will destroy oil tankers in the Gulf, possibly oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz.

By the 10th day of war---Iranian navy and air force will be destroyed, but it will be TOO LATE----Strait of Hormuz will be blocked, oil tankers will be sunk, ports and oil infrastructure in the Arabian Peninsula will be damaged/destroyed.

It will take 1-3 days to destroy oil infrastructure of the region and it will take many months to restore it and resume oil traffic.

6) Shia rebellion in Saudi Arabia will do even more damage to oil infrastructure of the region and create permanent instability that will keep oil price high.

pro-Iranian militia in Iraq can paralyze oil supplies from Iraq and Kuwaiti oil infrastructure is vulnerable not only to Iranian missiles but also to Iranian ground force.

And even if Strait of Hormuz is reopened---a single anti-ship missile launched at oil supertanker can block the Strait one more time.

Persian Gulf supplies 25% of world's oil and 50% of oil exported by sea.

If the Strait of Hormuz will be blocked, oil price will skyrocket---this will generate inflation and physical deficit of oil in the world---stock markets will crash, banks and investors will lose their money and will go bankrupt, business will default on debt generating a debt crises and recession.

And who will be blamed for a massive economic crises?--US president! Congress will blame the President for starting illegal war of aggression without authorization of Congress---a war that made serious damage to US economy and welfare of American people----a war that damaged interests of United States----President will be impeached.....

In short:

1) US air force can attack Iran---but US can't invade Iran

2) in the first day of war Iran will lay mines in the Strait of Hormuz, launch ballistic missile at oil terminals in the Arabian peninsula and anti-ship missiles at oil tankers in the Persian Gulf

3) By the 10th day of war Iranian Navy and Air Force will be destroyed but it will be TOO LATE for USA---oil infrastructure will be destroyed and oil supply will stall.

4) it will take months to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and rebuild oil infrastructure of the region and until then global economy will collapse---US president will be impeached for the damage he has done

5) Instability in Shia regions of Saudi Arabia will become permanent keeping oil supply at risk and oil price high

And of course Iran should develop nuclear weapons. The idea that you can rely on some promises or treaties guaranteeing peace and security is naive and stupid.

Examples of illegal aggression of USA against Iraq, Lybia, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, ---plots to topple regimes in Syria, North Korea and Iran-- show that these "international laws" worth nothing and the only thing you can rely for your security is nuclear weapons.

Only your own brute force in form of nuclear weapons and ICBMS capable of delivering them to the territory of potential enemy is the best guarantee of your survival.

Before developing nuclear weapons Iran should develop ICBM, because nuclear weapons without means of delivering them to US territory are useless and can only invite preventive strike.

Iran will test ICBM technology by testing large solid fuel SLV in 2022 or 2023....by 2025 Iran will have several ICBMs capable of reaching US territory....by that time Iran will also master IR-6 centrifuge technology and mass produce it and install it in Natanz in large quantities....this will allow Iran to be able to mass produce uranium bombs in short periods of time......And this is the time---around 2025-- when ICBM is ready and nuclear weapon mass production infrastructure is ready---this is the time when Iran should go nuclear.

If US knows that Iran has ICBM that can make an EMP attack it will never conduct a preventive strike....

Even better if Iran secretly purchases 10-15 nuclear weapons from North Korea no matter how expensive it is......A country that has lost a million dead and wounded and suffered a 500bln financial loss during Iran-Iraq war should know the price of security....

Iran should follow example of North Korea and develop a nuclear arsenal and means of delivering nuclear weapons.

Of course Americans can use their influence and try to isolate Iran and impose harsh sanctions---but that is what they are doing even when Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons....

Unlike North Korea, Iran is an important country---important in a sense that Iran is the most powerful country in the world most sensitive and important region---the oil rich Persian Gulf---oil from the Gulf is like a blood spilling through the veins of the global economy......and Iran is the most powerful country of the Gulf...

If Iran develops nuclear weapons it can become more confident and assertive....Iran can confidently threaten to close the Gulf if US impose harsh sanctions......If Iran develops nuclear weapons, US will be forced to talk with Iran politely and gentle if they want to guarantee free flow of oil from the region...

This is what makes Iran different from North Korea---its position in the oil rich Persian Gulf......and nuclear weapons will only boost Iranian position.

At the same time....in the near future....new centers of gravity will develop in China, India, Russia, Turkey and PAX AMERICANA world will be finished and their ability to threaten Iran with isolation will erode....



I try not to develop my own theories because as you said I might lack relevant experience and education.....What I say mostly comes from the US think tank called Stratfor and Geopolitical Futures

The idea that Iran can't be conquered comes from Stratfor analysis---read their article: The Geopolitics of Iran: Holding the Center of a Mountain Fortress
https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/geopolitics-iran-holding-center-mountain-fortress

In 2011 Stratfor estimated that oil price can go up to 500 dollars per barrel if Iran closes the Strait of hormuz---and of course such a price will generate global recession---and guess who will be blamed?--US president

Comparing Iraq to Iran is like comparing Poland To Russia------Iran is 4 times bigger country.

old video from Stratfor

This is realistic and unsurprisingly is triggering the American members on this thread.

High oil and gas prices will be a big financial windfall for American shale industry but fighting a war during the price crunch will easily cost over $200B per year.

Iran cannot be defeated and pacified. They will fight like Taliban for decades, and probably have Turkish, Pakistani, and Afghan Taliban support throughout.

US will be stuck in the biggest quagmire of its history and it will bleed US.

Iran will collapse, but the US will no longer be a superpower.

They are not brave enough to undertake it. They only prey on weakened states like Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, Syria, and Libya.

If Iran fought like Taliban for decades then Iran will become another Afghanistan.

Defeating Irani Military yes but consequences in the area would be fatal. Hey i noticed you used to post on Pakistan defense threads, what happened got bored? Lol

He doesn't get paid enough to monitor this forum.

It will accomplish damage to western economies, China, India and it forces them to intervene against US agression.

You are pinning the hope of saving the Islamic Republic of Iran on a Hindu nationalist in India and an atheist commie in China?

US has been in Afghanistan for two decades which shares a border with China. What has China done? Practically nothing. China and its military are paper tigers.

 

[mohsen]

History of Shiaism is very old,it dates back even Islam but in Iran concept is not more then 500 year old for large chunck of population
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_conversion_of_Iran_to_Shia_Islam

Yeah, I just needed you to throw some Zionists' link at me so that I could forget the pre-Safavids' history of shiah in Iran!

 

[GWXP]

Back in WW II, even Hitler tried negotiations before he used the army. Going back further, Saladin negotiated. The US and JPN tried negotiations before JPN decided to attack Pearl Harbor.

No, the US does not want any situation to deteriorate to what von Clausewitz characterized as 'continuation of politics by other means', in other words, we do not want the situation to deteriorate to a shooting fight.

So from that perspective, the Iranian military is very much at the mercy of the US military.

Hitler and Japan never used diplomacy as a mean to solve political problem----they used diplomacy as either deception or as a mean to win time before they conducted their long planned aggression

Hitler had aggressive intentions even before he came to power in 1933 (as he described in his book Mein Kampf), he used diplomacy to gain in Czechoslovakia without need to go to war, but on 1st of September 1939 Hitler went to the toilet with all the treaties he signed and attacked Poland. Before that, Hitler signed a non-aggression pact with Stalin, but on 22 June 1941 Hitler again went to toilet with that treaty and attacked USSR. Diplomacy was never used by Hitler as a mean to prevent war-it was used as either deception or for winning time.

When Japan invaded China, USA imposed sanctions on Japan banning sale of oil....Japan was in trouble. It had 3 choices: 1) withdraw from China -be humiliated but have US sanctions removed 2)Collapse economically in 3 month without oil 3) go to war to take oil of the British colonies in Indochina

Having these 3 choices Japan decided to go to war--but before that they had to take care of US Navy in the Pacific----so as deception they send diplomatic team to USA, while preparing there Naval force for unexpected strike in Pearl Harbor

In examples you showed, diplomacy was used as deception and never as a tool to solve underlying political problem.

We can show another examples when treaties don't work.
1) USA promised not to expand NATO to Eastern Europe (let alone former USSR)---but later Americans went to the toilet with all the treaties and promises they made and NATO now stands in the Baltic and Eastern Europe posing direct threat to Russia
2) USA made a deal with Iran under Obama----and later Trump went to the toilet with that treaty and now threatens Iran with extinction

Past experience shows that these treaties and promises worth nothing and the best protection against F-16 guys like you is nuclear weapons+means of delivering them....

Iran will also use diplomacy as deception before it will develop nuclear weapons....

Iran needs to win time----5 more years...

1) Shahrud facility in Iran is working on development of large solid fuel rocket motors. According to Michael Elleman, by 2022 Iran will be ready to test large solid fuel SLV....It's 2nd and 3rd stage will serve as potential ICBM. In 2023-2025 Iran will be testing this rocket to check its reliability and by 2025 Iran will have several ICBMs capable of reaching US territory.

2) IR-1 centrifuges that are currently installed in Natanz are slow. But Iran is working on IR-6 centrifuges which are 18 times more productive than IR-1....Ir-6 was unveiled in 2014 and it usually takes 8-10 years before all technical problems of the centrifuge are solved and it is ready for mass production....By 2025 technical problems will be solved and at a mass production rate of 60 centrifuges per day, by 2025 Iran will have 25.000-50.000 centrifuges at Natanz. This will allow Iran to produce one nuclear bomb in days, not month

3) By 2025, Bavar 373, Talash and other air defense systems will be mass produced and will form a multilayer air defense network in the Strait of hormuz....quantity of Qader and Khalij Fars anti-ship missiles will increase dramatically as well as quantity of precise long range ballistic missiles capable of striking enemy air field with high precision deep inside enemy territory---and this will serve as a deterrence against US aggression

So 2025 is the time when 1)ICBM is ready 2)IR-6 cascade in Natanz is ready 3)grip over the Persian Gulf is the strongest-----and Iran is ready to make a move and go nuclear....until then diplomacy should be used for deception

The flaw in your 'analysis', and I use that word very generously, is in your failure to study Desert Storm. But of course, such failure is common and repeating over the yrs.

The flaw is that in Desert Storm, we planned for a land war and focused our tactics to that. With Iran, there will be no land war so that mean all our resources will focus on destroying Iran's ability to attack regional oil production.

Your flaw is your failure to understand that Iran will not be playing according to your rules...Iran will give you both LAND WAR with 200k troops and 2000 tanks attacking Kuwait in order to divert your resources toward that part of the region...and while you will be busy in Kuwait repelling Iranian attacks....Iranian forces will take care of regional oil production

The largest mistake Saddam made in 1990 is how he for 6 month dumbly watched how Americans deploy division after division preparing their military muscle...Saddam should have attacked US forces with his armored spearhead once the deployment process began.

Iran should not repeat Saddam's mistake and simply watch how USA brings its forces to the region....Currently, US has one armored brigade in Kuwait and Iran has 2000 tanks and 200k troops----once Americans start deployment, Iran should attack and not give USA time to prepare