Iran about to get wiped from the pages of history

[zenspiderz]

It would take a third party interceding. Iran, alone, could not defeat the US militarily.
There's a variety of websites with estimates on equipment, with some general agreement on most number of functional aircraft. Wikipedia is about as balanced as they come, but I consulted others. A quick google search for "Iranian Air Force" will get a lot of responses.

Of particular interest is the Iranian air forces and SAM forces. The general consensus is they have a small number of contemporary aircraft (MiG 29 and SU-27's), plus a variety of aged US aircraft (F4, F5, F14) that lack maintenance and parts. Oddly enough, Iran is currently the only country flying F-14 Tomcats. They do not have the sophisticated technology and training to manage an air battle in the manner the US does. That will ultimately spell the downfall of the Iranian aircraft. They will get some kills, but not many.

SAM's they have more, but nothing like what Iraq had. The majority of their systems are older generation missiles that pose little threat to US aircraft. They do have some current, high performance Soviet and Chinese weapons. Depending on the crew performance, this will get some kills.

My comment referred to trying to create a stable government after conquering Iran. True - Iran currently does have a fairly stable, and reasonably democratic government. There are some rumblings of discontent, but that's true even here in the US.

I hope (and suspect) that nothing from the US will happen. China desperately needs oil, and will continue to use access to their technology and weapons to gain preferred access to Iranian resources. The US cannot stop this. The UN won't stop this.

Eventually, Israel will do something foolish, and be successful but not as successful as their strike on Iraq. This will be tacitly supported by the US. An already bad situation will deteriorate further, possibly leading to more overt actions against Iraq and Israel by Iran.

-- Ravensfire

Ok you are not a rabid neo-con tool; I grant you that.

Also I freely admit I am hoping that if (GOD forbid ) US/isreal attacks Iran I am totally biased and supportative of Iran and as a result of wishful thinking hope that Iran can repel the attack with minimal consequences for Iranian people.

Ok now I should say that Iran is already the beneficiary of 3rd party intervention. In the form of weapon sales of Tor SAM defences and 'Sunburn' anti-ship ballistic misslies from Russia. This is why I say that a easy military victory for the US forces is by no means 'cut and dried'. I think we are not in disagreement that ground forces (of the US) would be met with impossilble odds (worse than Iraq). But even if the US admin intended only an air strike. They would be met with some serious dificulty. Nevermind the Iranian fighter command; they may well be, as you say, fielding mostly obsolete aircraft. Tor and Sunburn would give serous trouble for the US all by themselves...
Ok Tor you can understand, it is specifically an anti-aircraft system, but sunburn? Sunburn though will make the persian gulf effectively off limits for US aircraft carriers (is this not so?) significantly reducing US air capability since only long range aircraft (bombers) will be able to penetrate significantly into Iranian territory.

Also I have heard that Russia has signed a mutual defence pact with Iran. It may be that Russia chooses not to honour its commitment but then again what if she does....

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

If we are going to attack Iran, it had better be just airstrikes. I can't imagine that our forces are capable of taking on an invasion of the country.

Skadistic seems to disagree. Apparantly there are 300-500 thousand American ground troops that could be thrown in there.

 

[CaptainF]

I find it utterly mind boggling how people can possibly support yet another bloody war against a non-aggressive country.

A few trillion dollars in debt, a few tens of thousands of Iraqi lives lost, 3,000 Americans dead, the trust of the world lost, 4 years of time wasted, terrorists bred and raised, resources down the drain, an economy wrecked, a castrophe that will take generations to heal, a civil war in the making...

...and yet my war lusting country men still want to attack another country. A country twice as big, much more mountainous, much larger army, many more people.

What the hell?

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

...and yet my war lusting country men still want to attack another country. A country twice as big, much more mountainous, much larger army, many more people.

What the hell?

This "occupation" stuff is being difficult, tedious, and boring. They long for those glorious opening moments of air strikes and missile launches. Attacking another country is the only way they can get that good feeling again.

 

[innonimatu]

Ok now I should say that Iran is already the beneficiary of 3rd party intervention. In the form of weapon sales of Tor SAM defences and 'Sunburn' anti-ship ballistic misslies from Russia.

That sale may have had many different intentions. Embolden Iran so as to facilitate a war? Deny the possibility on an israeli attack and force the US to do its own dirty job? Or really dissuade an attack?
Also the US has plenty of cruise missiles for an initial attack, and Iran has a finite number of SAMs... Failing that there was talk that the use of nuclear weapons was being considered.
I would like to see Iran beat an american attack, but it's practically impossible. Iran's true weapon is the disruption of oil supplies. IF it can destroy saudi facilities. That might topple the empire. If Russia provided Iran with the means...

Also I have heard that Russia has signed a mutual defence pact with Iran. It may be that Russia chooses not to honour its commitment but then again what if she does....

You heard wrong. Russia is in no haste no start WW3, and has voted for the UN resolution that may very weel come to be used as an excuse for an attack, after February 27.
Russia gains from a war between Iran and the US, provided Iran doesn't totally collapse. Higher energy prices, and difficulties for the US, a perfect scenario. I can easily believe Russia is encouraging Iran to adopt a confrontational attitude.

 

[Nobody]

Dont these wars cost billions of dollars? I remeber before iraq people were throwing around the 500billion dollar number (i have no idea if its true just i remeber seeing it).

And it seems americas congress is not going to give the president the money for 20000 troops to iraq, Where are they gettting the money for to attack iran?

What about troops arnt their hundreds of thousands tied up in Iraq and afganistan? Without a draft how could they occupy iran?

I dont think their going to invade iran, Maybe some airborne attack. But what if iran then invades Iraq? Dead amercians either way! more dead irani and iraqi people but still a lot of dead americans.

 

[CaptainF]

This "occupation" stuff is being difficult, tedious, and boring. They long for those glorious opening moments of air strikes and missile launches. Attacking another country is the only way they can get that good feeling again.

Sort of like when you take opiates, you feel nice and warm at first, then you crash...

 

[GrandAdmiral]

1st of all what conspiracy theorist need to realize is that nothing they predicted happened last year so why would it be any different this year?

We aren't going to war with Iran but if we did, conventionally we would put them in their place. However our government is stupid enough to think they could occupy the place and that the people would drape them with roses while they cheer for our troops.

 

[mythmonster2]

5. Finally, stop that Free Religion nonsense - adopt Christianity as State Religion, and select Theocracy. Cities with churches get +1 happiness, it will stop the spreading of the most wicked of all faiths, Islam, and last but not least, it will give new US troops an extra +2XP, ie, a free promotion!

Are you kidding on the Islam part? Anyways, if Bush does attack Iran this is what would happen. First, all Middle East nations + Pakistan and India(they pledged to support Iran, i think) would attack the U.S.A. NUKE ANYONE? Then China would come to the support of Pakistan. (They're good pals. I know. I was born in Pakistan) Then a bunch of other nations would join on the Middle Eastern side. The there will be a WWIII!!!

 

[JonnyB]

Are you kidding on the Islam part? Anyways, if Bush does attack Iran this is what would happen. First, all Middle East nations + Pakistan and India(they pledged to support Iran, i think) would attack the U.S.A. NUKE ANYONE? Then China would come to the support of Pakistan. (They're good pals. I know. I was born in Pakistan) Then a bunch of other nations would join on the Middle Eastern side. The there will be a WWIII!!!

I doubt that. I think there would be a lot of yelling and demonstrations, but most countries would do what's in their best interests, nothing.

Seeing India and Pakistan siding together would be nice though...

 

[MobBoss]

Are you kidding on the Islam part? Anyways, if Bush does attack Iran this is what would happen. First, all Middle East nations + Pakistan and India(they pledged to support Iran, i think) would attack the U.S.A. NUKE ANYONE? Then China would come to the support of Pakistan. (They're good pals. I know. I was born in Pakistan) Then a bunch of other nations would join on the Middle Eastern side. The there will be a WWIII!!!

You couldnt be more wrong. The arabic states would most likely be cheering us on as they pretty much dont want to see a Persian resurgence to power.

India would no way in hell stop being one of our major trade partners in order to support Iran. Iran has nothing to give to them except terrorist acts, while the US does big business there.

Also, if you hadnt noticed, Pakistan has been trying to be buddy buddy with us for the last several years. I dont see that changing either. They may not let us launch operations from their soil, but I dont seem them rushing to Irans defense either.

 

[innonimatu]

This must have been the first time I agree with MobBoss… Arab states are preparing their population for a war against Iran. Some recent news:

From The Economist
Shias and Sunnis - The widening gulf
(&#8230
Some of the alarm appears to be orchestrated. In the culmination of a month-long barrage of innuendo against Iran in Egypt's state-owned press, a recent editorial in the staid Cairo daily, al-Ahram, charged the Islamic Republic with undermining chances for peace in Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon. The goal, it suggested, was to weaken Sunni Arab states so as to realise “Safavid dreams” of Shia expansion, a reference to the 16th-century dynasty that enshrined Shiism as Iran's state religion. Citing unnamed Egyptian officials, the same newspaper floated charges that Iranian intelligence agents were responsible for the kidnap and murder of Egypt's ambassador in Iraq in July 2005.
A similar campaign has unfolded in Saudi Arabia, where increasingly internet chat sites, several of which are widely believed to be infiltrated by police agents, are rife with spurious tales of Shia perfidy. A typical item affirms that, when told of Sunni fears of a “Shia crescent” spreading across the region, Iran's president said he envisioned not a crescent but a full moon. While a columnist in one Saudi daily asserted, falsely, that Shias believe they must perform ablutions if they happen to touch an “unclean” Sunni, 38 senior Saudi clerics issued a call to arms in defence of Iraq against the “Crusader-Safavid-Rejectionist plot” that seeks to uproot Sunni Islam.
Such alarmism reflects, to a degree, a desire by the Sunni, American-allied governments of countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia to staunch what they see as a rising tide of Iranian influence. The capture of power by Iraq's long-oppressed Shias is perceived as having, for the first time in history, removed the main Arab bulwark against Persian expansion. Much as most loathed Saddam Hussein, the style and timing of his execution, on a day celebrated by Sunnis as their main annual feast, smacked to many of an ugly Shia triumphalism. Iran's wider assumption of leadership for Islamist “resistance” movements, underscored by the electoral success of Hamas and by Hizbullah's spirited fight in last summer's war with Israel, gives Arab leaders even worse jitters.
(&#8230
It was with a view to cooling recent excesses that Qatar, a rich Gulf emirate, invited some 400 top Sunni and Shia religious figures to a dialogue last month. In the event, rhetoric at the conference proved embarrassingly hot. Iran's chief delegate, Ayatollah Muhammad Taskhiri, was besieged with accusations. Iran was failing to stop the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad's Sunnis, he was told. It persecuted its own Sunni minority. Its agents were trying to convert Sunnis and spread Shia texts that insult historic figures revered by Sunnis. Why, retorted Shia delegates, did Sunni clerics so rarely condemn the slaughter of Iraq's Shias? And what of the disenfranchised Shia minorities in Sunni countries?

I do think Saddam’s execution (both date and manner) were intended to foster this reaction. Perhaps one day we will know under what circumstances was the execution hastened… If it was a planned provocation, it was truly ironic that Saddam’s last attempt at dignity helped the enemy that pushed him into the gallows.
And call it a conspiracy theory, but what were the organizers of that meeting in Qatar really expecting to achieve? The result was predictable.

The writing in on the wall. And this time the doom foretold is Persia’s.

 

[zenspiderz]

A ray of hope? article

Bush promised Lavrov not to launch war against Iran
03.02.2007 15:07 GMT+04:00 Print version Send to mail In Russian In Armenian

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Upon return from Washington Russian FM Sergey Lavrov briefed on the basic topics discussed during the meeting with President George Bush. “The Bush administration assured me that the U.S. is not planning a war against Iran,” the Russian Foreign Minister said, reports the BBC Russian branch.

“The U.S. assured us that the presence of additional forces and equipment in the Persian Gulf region is aimed at stabilization,” said Lavrov.

In his words, Moscow and Washington assume that talks with Iran should be held via the UN Security Council. Moscow rates U.S. sanctions against Iran as illegitimate and is also going to press for their cancellation. “We will press for cancellation of these sanction as in the case with “Sukhoy”, Sergey Lavrov underscored.

 

[Xenocrates]

In Tai Chi, as well as in other martial arts and spiritual disciplines I am sure, they teach that energy follows mind, so that by setting your intention, your creative energy will follow, helping to manifest your intention. So if we sit around all day mentally projecting a war with Iran, painting grim mental pictures of it in our heads, then we are helping to create this scenario with our own energies, in effect helping Dick Cheney and George Bush manifest their intention.

We should use our Tai Chi energies to stop it! I know times are hard, but they're not that hard!

From:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mac_mcki_070203_set_your_intention_t.htm


Mr Bush and others told us to fear the return of the "Islamic Caliphate", if you remember. And now he's telling us that the Sunni/Shia divide is so great that his mighty army can't govern Iraq. Am I the only one who sees a logical inconsistency here? Or maybe the divide has been amplified by the "divide and conquer" strategy?

I hope you're right Zen, that the clouds over Iran are starting to clear, but I think pessimism is still justified.

 

[Bad Player]

Bush is obviously thinking

I see a flaw in your logic.

 

[Xenocrates]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6351257.stm

The US military has accused the "highest levels" of Iran's government of supplying increasingly sophisticated roadside bombs to Iraqi insurgents.

"The weapons had characteristics unique to being manufactured in Iran... Iran is the only country in the region that produces these weapons," an official said.

Who said they had to come from "in the region"?

 

[StarWorms]

Quite frankly, if the US invaded/declared war on Iran, I'd hope that Europe and the Middle East/Asia would turn on the US.

 

[Xenocrates]

Same story this time from The Independent:

The allegations by senior but unnamed US officials in Baghdad and Washington are bizarre. The US has been fighting a Sunni insurgency in Iraq since 2003 that is deeply hostile to Iran.

Such bombs were used by guerrillas during the Irish war of independence in 1919-21 against British patrols and convoys. They were commonly used in the Second World War, when "shaped charges", similar in purpose to the EFPs of which the US is now complaining, were employed by all armies. The very name - explosive formed penetrators - may have been chosen to imply that a menacing new weapon has been developed.

The US stance on the military capabilities of Iraqis today is the exact opposite of its position in four years ago. Then President Bush and Tony Blair claimed that Iraqis were technically advanced enough to produce long-range missiles and to be close to producing a nuclear device. Washington is now saying that Iraqis are too backward to produce an effective roadside bomb and must seek Iranian help.

The White House may have decided that, in the run up to the 2008 presidential election, it would be much to its political advantage in the US to divert attention from its failure in Iraq by blaming Iran for being the hidden hand supporting its opponents.

The evidence against Iran is even more insubstantial than the faked or mistaken evidence for Iraqi WMDs disseminated by the US and Britain in 2002 and 2003.

This article cuts the nonsense to pieces.


http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/article2261526.ece

 

[Bast]

Quite frankly, if the US invaded/declared war on Iran, I'd hope that Europe and the Middle East/Asia would turn on the US.

No we should ALL be UNITED in our fight against Iran.

 

[StarWorms]

No we should ALL be UNITED in our fight against Iran.

Fight against Iran? Why? What good would that do? We should all be united against the oppression of the US if they declare war on Iran.