• Civ7 is already available! Happy playing :).

The Plan for Iran....

Hawks and doves: do you agree or disagree with the assesment of how a war with Iran might go?

Considering it comes from the U.S. Government, I couldn't disagree more.
 
No, no , no and no. My plan for Iran will be visiting them at the end of the year. Will be bringing photos back.

Cool, my wife and I are planning to go again in march next year. Although we are being talked into buying a share of a house in the UK so for financial reasons it might have to be an either/or.
 
Why are China and Russia "more concerned about the prospect of the U.S. bombing Iran than of Iran getting a nuclear bomb"? What agenda and interests do they have?

the audacity of them to have any agenda which may disagree with American war-plans...

not to see the Us being able to determine the course of a soverign nation through violence thousands of miles from its borders would probably be the answer
 
Military buffs: Correect me if I'm wrong, but didnt Russia sell Iran some fairly high-end SAM systems last year? I know they couldnt completely stop an attack but werent these paraded as somewhat of a detterent?
 
if i recall correctly last January Russia delivered an estimated 29 Tor-M1 (SA-15 Gauntlet) missile systems to Iran for an estimated 700.000.000 USD, a couple of months ago Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the Vice Chairman of Russia's State Duma, declared that he hoped that Russia would sell Iran the S-400 Triumf (SA-21 Growler) missile system as soon as possible but this seems very unlikely to happen anytime soon.
 
Military buffs: Correect me if I'm wrong, but didnt Russia sell Iran some fairly high-end SAM systems last year? I know they couldnt completely stop an attack but werent these paraded as somewhat of a detterent?

Not really. More of a speed bump, you could expect to see them offline in the first hours.
 
Fëanor;6178095 said:
if i recall correctly last January Russia delivered an estimated 29 Tor-M1 (SA-15 Gauntlet) missile systems to Iran for an estimated 700.000.000 USD, a couple of months ago Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the Vice Chairman of Russia's State Duma, declared that he hoped that Russia would sell Iran the S-400 Triumf (SA-21 Growler) missile system as soon as possible but this seems very unlikely to happen anytime soon.
They are fairly decent arent they?
 
They are fairly decent arent they?

Its one of the best low to medium-altitude, short range SAM system there is.

TOR/SA-15 said:
Kill probabilities for later versions are quoted as:
  • 0.92-0.95 against aircraft
  • 0.80-0.96 against helicopters
  • 0.60-0.90 against cruise missiles (with an effective range of around 5 km/3 miles)
  • 0.70-0.90 against precision munitions (LGBs, glide bombs, etc.)
  • 0.90 against UAVs
 
Military buffs: Correect me if I'm wrong, but didnt Russia sell Iran some fairly high-end SAM systems last year? I know they couldnt completely stop an attack but werent these paraded as somewhat of a detterent?

They sold something like 50 missiles to Iran. But that doesn't mean they'll be able to hit anything. To hit something with them, you need several radar sites to "spot" for them. The US surely knows of this, that's why the stealth bombers go in first; they could send in F-18s with a EA6B, too, that would jam their radar and not give them a firing solution.

Properly deployed, the Russian missiles are very good. One-on-one, they excellent at hitting planes, and would pose a threat to a lesser nation. However, the fight is unfairly in America's favor, because of both its jamming capabilties an ultimately its steath plane fleet.

Of course, mistakes happen, things happen, I'm not saying no American planes will be shot down, just that it's hardly doughboys charging a machine gun.
 
:) Sounds like more than a speedbump then

These are fantastic missiles, but as Cheezy says we still have the advantage. In numbers, technology, and firepower.

Iran will bleed us badly, but in the end we will overpowe there defenses and once we take don there radars etc. the missilesd will be useless. America's victory is assured, but we will be bled pretty badly in a war.

All that said I'm defenitely against an attack. Pre-emptive strikes aren't really the moral highground imo, and in this case considering the situation with the rest of the world we must attack from the moral high ground, if we attack at all.
 
I have no doubt America will win militarily. But any country fighting the US only needs to inflict roughly 1/200th of the casualties the US has to and they can claim victory.
 
I have no doubt America will win militarily. But any country fighting the US only needs to inflict roughly 1/200th of the casualties the US has to and they can claim victory.

Victory how? By having cruise missiles hit "suspected nuclear sites?" No offense but that would make mostly all the Iranian people support their president (Which they don't do now).

ran will bleed us badly, but in the end we will overpowe there defenses and once we take don there radars etc. the missilesd will be useless. America's victory is assured, but we will be bled pretty badly in a war.
DO you think the US public would like to lose an aircraft carrier or 2? (I don't think they would!) I would how the president would tell us that an aircraft carrier was sunk and i wonder if he would say something like "I'm sorry but we had to attack iran before they nuked israel!"

Sounds like more than a speedbump then
So if we do attack what would stop iraq from slipping into chaos?
Military buffs: Correect me if I'm wrong, but didnt Russia sell Iran some fairly high-end SAM systems last year? I know they couldnt completely stop an attack but werent these paraded as somewhat of a detterent?
And they did sell iran some anti-ship missiles. I wonder how the american public would react to 3k-10k less sailors?
 
Victory how? By having cruise missiles hit "suspected nuclear sites?" No offense but that would make mostly all the Iranian people support their president (Which they don't do now).

Oh definitely. but the objectives, stricly miltary ones they set for themselves will be achieved.

DO you think the US public would like to lose an aircraft carrier or 2? (I don't think they would!) I would how the president would tell us that an aircraft carrier was sunk and i wonder if he would say something like "I'm sorry but we had to attack iran before they nuked israel!"

Not rally sure what point youre making. you drunk?

So if we do attack what would stop iraq from slipping into chaos?

It already has, it would undoubtedyl get much worse


And they did sell iran some anti-ship missiles. I wonder how the american public would react to 3k-10k less sailors?

I wish I had your faith :lol:
 
Ralph, I really wouldn't bother if I were you. This is George - I learned quite awhile ago that he has the unique ability to turn any conversation into a long pointless series of one liners rebutting other one liners. In the end, you just get frustrated because he's being intentionally dense and you haven't actually accomplished anything. I tend to just ignore him, myself.

Not that he's on my ignore list. No, then I couldn't see his posts, and I have to keep myself amused, don't I?
 
Oh definitely. but the objectives, stricly miltary ones they set for themselves will be achieved.
What would be the military objections? Destory all nuclear sites? I really doubt that they could destory all of them without using nucear weapons (Even if they do know where all of them are, which i know they don't know!)



Not rally sure what point youre making. you drunk?
That the president would turn 3k+ dead soldiers into a they died for the good of israel


I wish I had your faith :lol:
I think your meaning that iran would not sunk any carriers or any other ship. I wonder how you would felt in 1987 if i would of said that an anti-tank misslie could sink/cripple a military ship. (I'm sure you would of said "HAHA right, and after you get back to planet earth we need to talk!")
 
@George, IMHO its very unlikely that Iran would be able to sink a Carrier as it would take at least a half a dozen good hits by Iranian missiles to sink it, but even if they manage to sink a carrier or even several carriers its almost impossible that thousands of people on them would die, this is not the WW2 pacific war we are talking about, rescue operation would save the vast majority of the carrier crew within hours.
 
Top Bottom