LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quoteany takers?
War on Iran Hello it's again time to use our over active imaginations to try and make out a little scenario for our own entertainment and mental growth. I'm setting the scene...
It's October 2006, The USA has finally grown tired of Iranian words and attempts to get the bomb. They launched a covert airstrike on Iranian nuclear facilities. It wiped them out entirely. The us got in and out without any losses, they had complete air supremeacy at the time so no planes where lost. The mission was hailed as a success by hawks and condemned by europeans and liberals alike.
However Iran did not take this lying down, they retaliated with a strike against US troops in Baghdad by firing missile at thier compounds, they fired some shots at bases in Saudi Arabia, miraculously nobody was killed in the attacks due to the poor acuracy of the missiles and the luck of US forces.
Now a reply is essential, America is fuming, the world on edge, political leaders have okayed an invasin, they don't want another air strike or Kosovo style campaign, they need you to take them out, an invasion is must, however the last call is yours.
What do you do?
Factors
- Iran is willing to fight you. If you attacked Iran thier army will not lie down, they'll want to take out as many Americans as they could, so this will not be a TV war like Iraq. You'll be facing thier full military, and expect heavy resistance in the cities, like Grozny in the first russian campaign in the 90's.
- This country is full of generations who just so hate you guys. that is all they do, hate you guys, they don't work or nothing, just smoke herione and hate you guys.
- American forces have been deployed worldwide. Correct me if i'm using out of date information but according to this map you only have like 250,000 real soldiers and 150,000 reserves available to fight right now.
- All these forces need support like tanks, trucks, APC's bombers, choppers, tents, cooks, kitchens, doctors, asprin etc, can the uS afford to do that?
- If you got into Iran Iraq would certainly flare up as the south is predominantly Shia and muslims have this stupid brotherhood kinda thing.Also IRan is linked to Afghanistan and big warrlords like Ismael Khan are propped by Tehran, they might start fighting you in Afghanistan.
- You'll need a plan for after you've marched on Tehran
What i need to know is would you go to war, what you think it'd be like and if you think you'd win what would you do with Iran afterwards? Please can we avoid...
[insert thick southern accent] "i'd nuke the ba5tards" [end accent].
any takers?
I would nuke the bastards... or just bomb them back into the stone age...
We're discussing this in a lot of threads right now, from both the conventional and nuclear angles.
Iran really doesn't stand a chance against a massive ODS style prolonged air campaign, which IMO, is the route the US is most likely to take.
I'm going to answer the only one of these points which is really open to debate.Originally Posted by platinum786
Obviously, the Iranians will see the error of their ways. They will quickly realise that what they really want is to watch Britney Spears videos in McDonalds all day. They will therefore obviously not conduct a bloody guerilla campaign against an occupying army, the American public will not rapidly lose their stomach for spreading 'freedom' in the face of mounting US casualties, and US companies will not win lucrative reconstruction contracts.
The world will become a better place, and everybody will happily ever after.
After all, isn't this what past experience teaches us?
Last edited by Popgun; 15 Apr 06, at 00:55.
Why oh why would the US invade Iran wise and all-knowing Genius of Geniuses?
I have no idea, but then I'm not a wild-eyed neocon.
Go olde skool on 'em. Bomb 'em 24/7/365. Primary targets, all military forces, and political leaders, from community leaders up. Any attempt to retaliate, any move towards a border, and all infrastructure targets become viable. Any successful retaliation, or penetration of a border, and carpet bombers start targeting cities. The only options for ending the seige, total surrender, or total anarchy...
History teaches us that both war and peace can go either way. A European should be well versed in that fact.
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry
So you have actually talked to wild-eyed neocons and they told you they want nothing less than an invasion of Iran?
The funny thing is all the "wild-eyed neocons" that you think are here will be the first to tell you we won't invade.
I still don't even know what a neocon actually is.
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry
Back to the original thread.
They lob missiles at us, we'll lob some back. They march into Iraq, we'll annihilate them.
There's no need to invade. It doesn't serve our interest.
You mean a ground force invasion? Or an air invasion? Or both?
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry
I don't know either.I still don't even know what a neocon actually is.
I think it means a war monger conservative. Not sure if it includes the "evangelical christian" part or not.
It's quite a handy term though. Like how we call them liberals or libs. Neocon has that zing to it. It sounds serious and scary. Good to scared the uninformed masses.
I think the original post was asking about a full scaled ground invasion.
I don't think there's a need to put boots on the ground. Air supremecy should be good enough after we take out all their nuke facilities. We don't even need them to surrender. Demanding something means they have something we want (cooperation, surrender...etc.). We'll just bomb them every now and then to make sure they stay in line, but demand nothing from them. It's just the way it is.
I'm with that bit, demand noting, heck say nothing, make them come crawling to us.
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: