Bring It Iran

[themightysrc 5]

"I do not think we need to go to war with Iran but if we had a choice in 02-03 between Iran and Iraq, Iran was the only one that provided a viable threat to the USA. Saddam was horrible but as we "Mercuns" fail to realise he was not a sponsor of international terrorism like Iran was and is. The way to defeat the Ayatollahs is from the inside but we have fu**ed up the region so bad now that Iraq is now a Shia sattellite of the Ayatollahs."

 

Possibly the most intelligent comment on this thread. I opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq as it was quite apparent that it would lead to Iranian hegemony in the region and also ensure that the Shias would prevail. Knowing this, it was hardly the most intelligent course of action to actively bring this about, particularly when Iran is about the most populous country in the Middle East. But, hey, Bush and Blair knew better, even though I'm still waiting for evidence of the WMD.

 

Both sides will bluster about war - rather like some of the posters on here. Glass plain? Very nice - let's drop nukes on Iran; what can possibly go wrong there? There'll be bluster and a few idiots on either side will get stiffies about another war, but the truth is that neither America nor Iran (nor the rest of the world) can afford a war there. The economies of both countries (and TROTW) are thoroughly screwed and I hardly see how the closure of the Straits of Hormuz is going to enhance anyone's economies. And before some idiot leaps on here to accuse me of being a godless pacifist commie, I'll point out to them that not only am I a godless pacifist commie (well socialist, but most people on here couldn't tell the difference), but I'm also quite well informed, read widely and, as per above, have a pretty much 100% hit rate on outcomes when it comes to conflicts like this.

 

Of course the Iranians have come out with this statement to big themselves up with their population. If America's leaders fall for this, then they play into the hands of the demagogues running Iran (who, frankly, I loathe) who will immediately appeal to Iranian patriotism to bolster their own (weakening) position, both politically and economically. Look at many of the posts here - uber patriotism, simply because someone dared wave a stick at your navy. If it works (in an admittedly tangential manner) with so many US posters here, why wouldn't it work in binding the Iranian people closer to a government that they otherwise dislike for the most part?

 

A much more careful response is required, particularly in mind of not only the effects of sanctions on the Iranian economy (and people), but also in terms of the wider regional and world economy (which you might have noticed tends to depend on oil). I say call the Iranian government's bluff by offering to sell them nuclear fuel for their 'power stations' but also insisting that all fuel must be accounted for and their reprocessing plants decommissioned. That way, if Iran is being genuine, then they'll accept and the bellicose nonsense is put away. If they cavil - and surely Iran's government has publicly stated that all they're after is nuclear power - then the position changes completely and the amount of leverage that this available not just with Iran but with nations that might support them is greatly increased, whilst diminishing the amount of sympathy and leverage available to Iran's government.

 

I dare say that I'll be flayed alive for bringing such views to this thread, but I thought an alternative viewpoint might be appreciated by some.

 

Cheers,

Si

[eraser_tr 29]

Well at least someone else will get the godless pacifist commie lashing instead of me for once

 

Honestly, if you did look at it from the perspective of someone living in any country that wasn't a superpower, if the US had been clamoring for war with your country for a decade, you'd bet that country would get pretty defensive and try to build up military capabilities to match their potential invader. Our talk of bombing Iran and anyone else who looks at us funny is taken by the middle east the same way Israel takes the Arab countries talk of wiping them off the map.

 

It just becomes a vicious circle of aggression.

 

Call their bluff, all they have to do is abide by the NPT and follow all of the IAEA's safeguards they can use nuclear power and medicine. They have to follow the rules like anyone else. Though this is terribly undermined by the fact that we sold nuclear material to India lately outside of the NPT.

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

Wrong indeed. Iran since 1979 has with out any doubt and with tons of evidence has been responsible for 75% of the worlds terrorist acts world wide. Hezbollah is a subunit of the Qudz Force. Qudz Force operatives have been killed and captured in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran is directly resposible for the ethnic violence in Iraq. They are responsible for the proliferation of EFP's in both warzones, which have killed 1,000s of US and NATO personel. They have been waging a covert proxy war against us and our allies for years. Should we invade them. No way. Should we ensure the world's oil supply flows freely? Yes we should. Should we support regime change from within? We are doing so right now but it is alot harder than we realised. The Iranian government is the most dangerous thing we have in the world today. Kind of like the little guy that lives in your neighborhood who shoots meth all the time. One on one you could beat his a** but you never know when him and his crew will sneak in your house and shoot you in your sleep.

[MAKO69 186]

The issue is not that Iran would blatantly attack us. They're not that stupid. They know China and Russia oppose Western opposition to Iran just on principle, and those are the nations that can face off with the US, not them. Any action would be an attempt to play to them.

 

Either they would do it in a way that they could attempt to deny culpability ("it was not us, it was Zionist powers who attacked carrier to make us look guilty, but if US attacks us in retaliation we will kill all of them with no losses because we really rock and stuff"), or they would simply pretend they've been attacked by us (perhaps stage it somehow or even just plain out lie) and then THEY would have to retaliate, all the while claiming innocence.

 

 

Not worried about China & Russia, It's Iran, N. Korea and other rouge Terror supporting nations I worry about. China and Russia are not dumb enough to come to the "Rescue" of Iran, they would let Iran sink before they help. To much U.S. $ is involved w/China.

Edited January 5, 2012 by MAKO69

[Teras 67]

Wrong indeed. Iran since 1979 has with out any doubt and with tons of evidence has been responsible for 75% of the worlds terrorist acts world wide. Hezbollah is a subunit of the Qudz Force. Qudz Force operatives have been killed and captured in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran is directly resposible for the ethnic violence in Iraq. They are responsible for the proliferation of EFP's in both warzones, which have killed 1,000s of US and NATO personel. They have been waging a covert proxy war against us and our allies for years. Should we invade them. No way. Should we ensure the world's oil supply flows freely? Yes we should. Should we support regime change from within? We are doing so right now but it is alot harder than we realised. The Iranian government is the most dangerous thing we have in the world today. Kind of like the little guy that lives in your neighborhood who shoots meth all the time. One on one you could beat his a** but you never know when him and his crew will sneak in your house and shoot you in your sleep.

 

totally true and agreed , when i was SpecOps in 2009-2010 we've killed and arrested many iranians in Samarah , they all were terrorists with a lot of money and specialist with bombing cars and bombing tankers with some specific gas material

i remember one night when our patrol near samarrah had an IED attack and then a fireshots by small arms but we replayed firing on the source we had that firefight and then after 30 mins its over with 3 kills from the shooters and arrested the rest ( 8 men ) , all of them were iranians from what so called Failaq Al Qudz or Qudz Force and they also have contacts with Hezbollah-iraq and al qaeda

i think iranian government is anti-humanity

[JediMaster 451]

It's ok, their Ayatollah has a direct connection with God, he knows exactly what to do to bring about His wishes.

 

That of course is the problem with a theocracy, you can't argue with the leader without being accused of blasphemy (which of course is a capital crime) thanks to how the system is set up.

[+ST0RM 145]

You guys are thinking too "conventionally". Given the opportunity, the Iranians will strike first and with the hardest weapons in their arsenal because they know that they won't get a second chance.

 

Closing the Straits did not work out well for them in the 80s and they've learned from that.

 

The real question is why aren't the Gulf Nations doing anything about this? It's their backyard.

 

-S

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

Because the do not have navies.

[+Brain32 265]

They all have navies...

[+Dave 2,322]

They all have navies...

 

 

4 row boats and a pontoon boat do not make a navy.

[+Brain32 265]

4 row boats and a pontoon boat do not make a navy.

 

No, but frigates, corvettes, minesweepers, patrol boats and support wessels armed with CIWS, Harpoons, Exocets and other SSM-s and armament with even some naval aviation do indeed make a pretty good navy and that's just the Saudis, UAE also have some corvettes and other Exocet armed boats.

 

Ok Qatar is a vee bit pathetic with only about a dozen exocet armed fast attack crafts, Kuwaiti is...well no need to mention...

 

Bahrain is interesting with rather good navy for such a small country even has OHP frigate plus some corvettes all well armed with sams, SSM-s, support helos...nice stuff.

 

The only thing Iran has on them are the subs...

[Gr.Viper 131]

No, but frigates, corvettes, minesweepers, patrol boats and support wessels armed with CIWS, Harpoons, Exocets and other SSM-s and armament with even some naval aviation do indeed make a pretty good navy and that's just the Saudis, UAE also have some corvettes and other Exocet armed boats.

 

Ok Qatar is a vee bit pathetic with only about a dozen exocet armed fast attack crafts, Kuwaiti is...well no need to mention...

 

Bahrain is interesting with rather good navy for such a small country even has OHP frigate plus some corvettes all well armed with sams, SSM-s, support helos...nice stuff.

 

The only thing Iran has on them are the subs...

Why bother and risk the hardware if the US is willing to do the dirty work gratis?

[Nixou 25]

Well, if you look at it, they are quite logical into their madness. They have seen that no one f***s with a country having nuclear power.

 

http://en.wikipedia....an_missile_test

 

http://en.wikipedia....Cheonan_sinking

 

 

 

 

I don't even think anyone here understand why the Iranians hate the west

 

 

You should look at Iran history from 1951 ( 1953 Iranian coup d'état http://en.wikipedia....p_d%27%C3%A9tat) to iran hostage crisis (1979-1981 http://en.wikipedia...._hostage_crisis) and it will probably give you an idea.

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry, but there is no such thing as an Iranian perspective. It's not allowed. You see, the Iranian people have been held hostage for over three decades by an imperialistic Islamofacist government.

 

 

You are overestimating muslims reasonability and underestimating muslims islamic patriotism. Of the last insurgencies in islamic countries, Iran is one of the rare muslim countries in which people remained calm.

 

And libyan free people are voting for an "islamofacist" party.

 

 

Wake up, most muslims are happy to have an "islamofacist" government. Most people believe the contrary simply because they have never spoken with muslims.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Nix

[+Typhoid 231]

Good point. If I may say so myself...

 

Speaking of foreign relations, POTUS might not be the way many people wish...

 

...but I think he's already proven by now that he ain't no punk.

 

 

SidDogg

 

With all due respect, I don't think Leading From Behind while he guts the force structure is going to cut it in this situation.

[+Typhoid 231]

No, but frigates, corvettes, minesweepers, patrol boats and support wessels armed with CIWS, Harpoons, Exocets and other SSM-s and armament with even some naval aviation do indeed make a pretty good navy and that's just the Saudis, UAE also have some corvettes and other Exocet armed boats.

 

Ok Qatar is a vee bit pathetic with only about a dozen exocet armed fast attack crafts, Kuwaiti is...well no need to mention...

 

Bahrain is interesting with rather good navy for such a small country even has OHP frigate plus some corvettes all well armed with sams, SSM-s, support helos...nice stuff.

 

The only thing Iran has on them are the subs...

 

Overall the gulf states do have the combined naval and air power (in terms of equipment and personnel) to make short work of the Iranian forces without any help from us.

 

And they have a lot of axes to grind as well (Persian vs Arab, Shiite vs Sunni, etc).

 

Whether they have the training, coordination, leadership and will to pull it off is the key question.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Typhoid

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

Okay Typhoid we can refrain from spouting FOX news talking points. We should strive to keep this disussion oriented toward Iran's asshattery not personal political opinions.

[themightysrc 5]

Well, I'm still not seeing any suggestions put forward that don't lead to a ruinous war that no-one can afford, and I don't see very much other than the mocking of neighbouring states on the basis that they can't stand up to Iran.

 

Does anyone have any working, sane, and non nuclear fantasies inspired suggestions that tops selling Iran nuclear fuel with strict conditions?

 

I appreciate that there are a lot of American ex-service people who probably feel very strongly about the current impasse, but I would very much appreciate if the level of conversation could be lifted beyond a waspish precis of what's wrong with the people who live in the Middle East. An intelligent solution is required and some more (sensible) suggestions would be much appreciated.

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

Guys, take alook at this paper titled, Iran's Asymetrical Naval Warfare. This is spot on. many interseting points to discuss in this.

PolicyFocus87.pdf

[+Brain32 265]

Just did, still don't see how other Persian Gulf nations couldn't confront it just as good especially considering that they are there and have no need for AC carriers but do have apso-freakin-lutely top notch aviation that far surpasses by both numbers and often technology most of the European countries...

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

Typhoid nailed it in his second post. The Gulf States lack the training,coordination, and leadership to get the job done. This duty falls within the realm of responsibility of the USN.

[eraser_tr 29]

You guys are thinking too "conventionally". Given the opportunity, the Iranians will strike first and with the hardest weapons in their arsenal because they know that they won't get a second chance.

 

Closing the Straits did not work out well for them in the 80s and they've learned from that.

 

The real question is why aren't the Gulf Nations doing anything about this? It's their backyard.

 

-S

 

They've been begging us to do something about it. IMHO they should bury the hatchet with Israel and beg them to do it. They gladly would and with us out of Iraq we aren't in the awkward position of letting them through the airspace. We can say we had nothing to do with it with a wink and a nod to Israel for doing the dirty work.

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

src::

Well, I'm still not seeing any suggestions put forward that don't lead to a ruinous war that no-one can afford...

Most likely, no war. But never say "never" about war. Iran~vs~USA has been pumped hard on FOXCNN for a decade. What they don't pump, worry about.

 

Ruinous only to common men and women, the endless wars are quite "affordable" through endlessly increasing bank debt which is only possible through legal tender law allowing epic financial fraud. That is a key to a suggestion you are looking for.

 

I'm not the only one thinking like this lol..

 

Gen. Smedley Butler, USMC, ret::

:

:

And let us not forget the bankers who financed the great war. If anyone had the cream of the profits it was the bankers.

:

:

~ http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/Military/War/WarIsARacket.htm

[Teras 67]

i have to say what jedimaster said about what so called ayatollah is a true thing , they obey them morethan you can think

if ayatollah ordered them to kill their mothers thy will do

 

but what .. iranian navy , i mean i really can't think about it . iranian navy is really weak , us navy can beat it in blink of an eye

in 80s war iraq had only mirages and exocet missiles and that was enough to brake the whole navy of iran..

[Capitaine Vengeur 263]

Guys, take alook at this paper titled, Iran's Asymetrical Naval Warfare. This is spot on. many interseting points to discuss in this.

Asymetrical naval warfare. That's the point. There is no need for an efficient or willing heavy navy to challenge and humiliate an overconfident naval power. In the Dardanelles, 1915, the Allies faced no Turkish navy and lost six battleships to mines, coastal artillery, and one single petty German sub. During both wars, the Italian heavy navy proved less than inefficient, a laughing matter like Iran today. But their frogmen riding manned torpedoes and using limpet mines managed to sink or disable at least three battleships (Austrian Viribus Unitis in 1918, HMS Queen Elizabeth and Valiant in 1941); and their torpedo boats proved quite efficient too (battleship Szent Istvan in 1918, cruiser HMS Manchester in 1942). In the 1960s, the CIA even worked on dolphins for a possible use in underwater warfare.

 

More modern means could be found, through simple imagination rather than expensive technology. Superpowers often believe their technologic lead makes them invulnerable, the way the Redskins believed about their magic skirts. It's true - but only provided the enemy fights following the superpowers' rules. Vietnam and Afghanistan have proved that wasting billions in ultra-modern sensors is of little use against willing illiterate local peasants who always find another way.

 

A true danger today could be 'Trojan horses' acting as saboteurs on the USN ships. Let's hope the NCIS keeps a cautious eye on Muslim... on some seamen.

[+Gepard 11,289]

Good point.