charles brough
Registered Senior Member
a very good assessment. . .
Are We Going to War With Iran?
- Thread starter Bowser
- Start date
a very good assessment. . .
If Iran were just as powerful as the US would they engage in actual combat?
I guess the actual question is, is Iran not aggressive because they are genuinely looking for peace, or are they not aggressive because they know they will lose.
And if the second is true then the next question is, do they believe that a nuclear arsenal will even the odds enough to initiate open war?
I guess the actual question is, is Iran not aggressive because they are genuinely looking for peace, or are they not aggressive because they know they will lose.
And if the second is true then the next question is, do they believe that a nuclear arsenal will even the odds enough to initiate open war?
Iran wouldn't need to fight the US navy to shut the strait down to merchant traffic. Simply dumping a bunch of mines into the strait would cause a huge headache and take a long time to clean up. They could also use the threat of land-based weapons to keep merchant ships from traveling through the strait. Of course, such actions would surely hurt Iran far, far worse than anyone else.
In that case, a state of mutually-assured desctruction would exist between Iran and the USA.
But, note that Iran would have had to do something like expand to take over the entire Middle East in order to be "just as powerful as the US."
Whence the premise that Iran is "not aggressive?" They are certainly careful not to provoke a direct military reaction from the USA, but seem more than willing to act out in other ways whenever possible (support of Hizbollah, statecraft in Iraq, overtures towards Bahraini opposition, etc.).
Surely not. They'd still be in a position where they'd lose a war against the USA (and allies), especially if they were seen to initiate such. I'd say it's more like a hedge against the USA initiating open war against Iran, which would embolden Iran to throw it's weight around the region more freely.
But that could all backfire by prompting neighbors like Turkey and Saudi Arabia to nuclearize, or at least acquire an explicit "nuclear umbrella" guarantee from Uncle Sam.
Frankly, I think it's as much an issue of internal prestige (to stoke nationalist support for the regime), than of geostrategy.
Any such action would immediately invite a military conflict with the USA, which would set about not only clearing the mines but also eliminating nearby land-based threats. And likely with the blessing of the UN and UNSC, to boot - China and Russia are not going to shield an Iran that is seen to be aggressively interfering with global oil shipments for its own political ends.
Sure, the Iranian navy would probably cease to exist by the end of the first day, but that wouldn't magically clean the mines up. Clearing sea mines is a huge, time-consuming headache, and if Iran dumped a lot of mines into the strait it could make travel unacceptably hazardous for merchant shipping for a good long wile.
As for the land-based threats, in the past the US military has proven itself to be not-so-great at eliminating mobile launch platforms, even with when it had air superiority. Note that Iran's mobile launchers for its anti-ship missiles are about the size of a car, much smaller and easier to hide than the scuds that the US military had so much trouble finding during Desert Storm. Basically park one in any garage, and there's virtually no chance of someone seeing it from the air. Of course the US would probably stamp them out eventually, but again, it could take a good long time...
It would take some time, yes, but such disruption would still pale in comparison to the damage Iran would suffer (both in material terms, and in political/prestige terms).
I'd suggest that comparisons w/ Desert Storm are not going to have good predictive value. That was before the rise of drone warfare. There have been big changes in these terms over the past decade or so. You may well be able to hide mobile launchers in garages, but to actually use them you have to bring them out into the open. They also require supplies of fuel and munitions, which can be tracked. Also, said missiles are not useful without a targetting system - and you can bet that Iranian radars and command centers in the area would be discovered and destroyed in short order.
Iran is not Iraq nor Afghanistan nor Libya. Its a way more substantial foe than anything USNATO has encountered recently.
The Geo-Politics of the Strait of Hormuz: Could the U.S. Navy be defeated by Iran in the Persian Gulf?
Sadly, given recent events and words, I would wager that in the event of a showdown, tactical nukes would be employed, which of course would be a further blight on so called civilization and lead topredicable unpredictable and far reaching outcomes.
The Geo-Politics of the Strait of Hormuz: Could the U.S. Navy be defeated by Iran in the Persian Gulf?
Sadly, given recent events and words, I would wager that in the event of a showdown, tactical nukes would be employed, which of course would be a further blight on so called civilization and lead to
This is all about the sanctions. We are hurting them economically, and they want us to feel it too.
They do have access to a fair number of Chinese and Russian-built Silkworm-type anti-ship missiles with their own on-board radar guidance systems. Probably would cost them a lot more so might not be a dominant component of their missile forces, but it's still something to watch out for. There's that old saying about the only kinds of ships in the navy being submarines and targets, so I do have to wonder how good America's naval missile defense systems are in an actual combat situation.
This is a stupid discussion. I get the feeling you guys want war.
So you think Iran is risking war through petulance?
Hence my statement that Iran would suffer far more than anyone else in my original post...
Uh...it's a missile on the back of a small truck. If you hide it in a garage/shed/whatever, no one is going to spot it with a drone. It would only need to be "out" for a matter of minutes before launch. The missiles have onboard search radar, so you really only have to point them in the right general direction. Not really a great tactic in a naval battle, but more than sufficient to threaten shipping.
Kyodo reports that the Japan will join the United States and United Kingdom in minesweeping exercises in October. The exercises, to be held off the coast of Bahrain, will be held October 15-30. The MSDF will send the minesweeper tender Uraga and minesweeper Tsushima, 180 sailors in all.
This will be the first time Japan has participated in the U.S. – U.K. exercises. The exercise was not named in the article, but it may be something like this exercise held in 2007.
http://newpacificinstitute.org/jsw/?p=7847
Yeah well based on my understanding of your past posts, your feelings don't really have much correspondence to what actually happens in reality. I say sanctions are the answer, and it should be Iran which decides whether that should lead to war. And that's what I've been saying here for a long time now.
I want to destroy my enemies. If we can do it without war, so much the better.
charles brough
Registered Senior Member
Iran has a very complex political system which I think explains a lot. It means it is not inclined to engage in military adventures. It has always taken a defensive position in modern times, unlike its neighbor under Saadam Husain.
I believe they want to be able to produce nuclear weapons should it be necessary for her survival. As the Ancient Persia of Islam (Shiite), she considers herself as sort of "holy" and having the responsibility of being the center of and protector of Shiite Islam.
Also, it seems to me that Israel hopes we will invade Iran since bombing would only delay Iran's nuclear weapon production ability. She wants us to do it in order to pass the onus on us instead of herself. Iran very well might protect her territorial waters in the nearby straits at the cost of world oil shipment trade, but we may have an out. We may back down on cutting her oil exports since Japan gets 10% of her oil from Iran and needs every drop of it because of the nuclear power shut down.
There are no enemies, anywhere on the planet, we are all one. It has been proven by science, we are all genetically related. The mothers, fathers and Iranian children in Persia are your enemies? What madness is this? Who hurt you so much as a small boy? What unfulfilled dreams do you have that the desserts need to run red with blood and the air need be filled with more radiation?
You have been fed a steady stream of propaganda, hate fills your soul, fear clouds your thinking.
Iran is a sovereign country, they have the right to do what ever they wish to with in their borders. The U.S., N.A.T.O., and Israel are the aggressors. Even if Iran said, yes, we may bomb you with BIG FAT NUKES if and when we get them if you piss us off, it still gives no nation the right to violate their sovereignty. Those are the rules of international relations. Those are the rules of civilized nations.
If a nation violates them, THEY are the aggressor state, they are the bad guy. We have done it before to IRAN, so why shouldn't they seek to defend themselves. The west and Israel are being obtuse. Both Russia and the Chinese have both said they will stand by Iran. Where does the west get off?
Now this video is making the rounds. If and when this Carrier goes down? Even if Iran actually could pull it off. . . .NOBODY in this country, or at the U.N. would EVER believe it now. So it's moot. Iran has nothing to gain by starting a war. This bullying by the U.S. is stupid.
USS Enterprise False Flag!!
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/01/false-flag-operation-coming-against-uss.html
The oil embargo is going to collapse. They will need a new plane.
Iran WILL have a bomb, it is time for the U.S. to get used to the idea. If Israel doesn't like the idea, then they are going to have to go it alone. . . unless?
Yes, I know we have a major disagreement about the nature of reality.
You're assessment of it tends to be woefully off the mark, and mine is as accurate as a laser beam. When I told you Osama bin Laden had been dead for a decade you told me I was full of crap. I've posted testimony from Benazir Bhutto, then you asked me why they just now "announced" his death.
I told you, because they were planning a whole new round of wars. Well? :shrug: Libya was just warming up. And we are just getting started with our meddling in Libya and in Africa. We haven't even begun with Syria. And now. . . Iran?
The job isn't exactly finished in Afghanistan yet.
But you know, most people don't really following world events and don't know what I know. For instance, YOU, you would argue with me, and deny that we have troops, are will have very soon in Libya. You will deny that we have a private Army, and a privatized base inside of Pakistan. You will deny that we have been conducting a privatized automated war against Yemen. None of this information is easy to find and all of it still harder to corroborate. You have to get it through back channels and personal blogs.
Looks like my "feelings" had a pretty accurate correspondence after all to what has transpired in the end though.
YOU'RE reality comes to you via satellite, cable, AP news, ITN, TASS, GOOGLE, whatever. You don't dig like I do. I don't blame you, that's not your job, you are what, a physics grad student? You don't know, and your cognitive dissonance wouldn't allow you to believe anything different.
Listen, I don't pretend to know but the barest layman's understanding of physics. But my knowledge of international covert interest groups. . . you do know what an interest group is, don't you? And how they affect U.S. policy, is probably a bit more than yours. That is my specialty. Please give me a little credit. I don't muck about and try to criticize your little quantum theories, I'm out of my league. Trust me Bork, you're out of your league here.
So, you have your reality, I'll have mine, and let's just try to be polite, not criticize each other, and see where the cards play out, shall we?
