Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Iran Air War: U.S. Plans For Possibility, But Goal Remains Unclear

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Iran Air War: U.S. Plans For Possibility, But Goal Remains Unclear

    WASHINGTON -- Planning for an air war against Iran continues inside the Pentagon, and the U.S. Air Force could mount such intense strikes against Iranian targets that "you wouldn't want to be in the area,'' said Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, the Air Force chief of staff, on Wednesday.

    Indeed, some senior military officers and air power specialists caution that putting a decisive end to Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions would require a massive, all-out war -- not only to demolish Iran's nuclear facilities but to destroy its governing regime.

    Iran Air War: U.S. Plans For Possibility, But Goal Remains Unclear
    "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

  • #2
    Stitch

    Might be good to merge this thread with the ongoing thread on a possible attack.

    http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/ira...2012-a-27.html

    US planning is discussed there as well. Unless you see some reason to start a new thread, I'm inclined to merge this with it.
    To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

    Comment


    • #3
      http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/mil...tml#post862593

      Originally posted by Dago View Post
      U.S., Israel coordinated on steps against Iran: envoy



      So the US and Israel are already actively planing on a joint attack against Iran? Didn't think the US would be in planing stages with Israel. I know the US would have it's own OP plans, and Israel might be working on a OPLAN, but wouldn't think there would be a joint OPLAN.

      I wonder what is being planned jointly? If it's perhaps just logistical help, or actually, joint attack and SEAD operations.
      sigpic

      Comment


      • #4
        Does anyone know how powerful the Iran navy are? I would imagine they have high levels of weapons and maritime security measures and therefore would just as big a threat on the seas as they are in the air...
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by tomkent45 View Post
          Does anyone know how powerful the Iran navy are? I would imagine they have high levels of weapons and maritime security measures and therefore would just as big a threat on the seas as they are in the air...
          The short answer is, it's not. And neither is their air power.

          Against the United States, conventional warfare of any kind, but especially air and sea warfare, is mostly a case of well-planned suicide with a certainty of success.

          The best (and only) way to challenge the military power of the U.S. is and always has been unconventional warfare...and the U.S. has 10 years of current experience dealing with unconventional warfare.

          The Iranians aren't stupid. They know that taking on the U.S. is pure fantasy. It will mean the end of their regime.
          “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
            Stitch

            Might be good to merge this thread with the ongoing thread on a possible attack.

            http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/ira...2012-a-27.html

            US planning is discussed there as well. Unless you see some reason to start a new thread, I'm inclined to merge this with it.

            Works for me.

            Could you please merge these threads?
            "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Stitch View Post
              Works for me.

              Could you please merge these threads?
              Stitch:

              For now your thread is providing a military focus. So, Ill let it go on awhile and then merge the two.
              To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                The short answer is, it's not. And neither is their air power.


                The Iranians aren't stupid. They know that taking on the U.S. is pure fantasy. It will mean the end of their regime.
                Not really. Look at N. Korea, N. Vietnam, and the Taliban. They took on the full might of US and they are still around. In fact, one of them just became pseudo ally with US.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                  The short answer is, it's not. And neither is their air power.

                  Against the United States, conventional warfare of any kind, but especially air and sea warfare, is mostly a case of well-planned suicide with a certainty of success.

                  The best (and only) way to challenge the military power of the U.S. is and always has been unconventional warfare...and the U.S. has 10 years of current experience dealing with unconventional warfare.

                  The Iranians aren't stupid. They know that taking on the U.S. is pure fantasy. It will mean the end of their regime.
                  Agree. From what I've read its air force is a melange of aging aircraft which brings into question is capability to deal with a multi-prong air attack. Missiles and anti-aircraft guns would probably be the main line of defense.

                  Here are the sites they have to defend. The one at Natanz is the critical one. Their placement in the north appears to make them harder to attack.



                  Iran resumed uranium enrichment work at Natanz in July 2004, after a halt during negotiations with leading European powers over its programme.

                  This is the facility at the heart of Iran's dispute with the United Nations Security Council.

                  The Council is concerned because the technology used for producing fuel for nuclear power can be used to enrich the uranium to a much higher level to produce a nuclear explosion.
                  Here's a brief rundown of the other sites:

                  BBC News - Iran's key nuclear sites
                  Attached Files
                  To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                    Not really. Look at N. Korea, N. Vietnam, and the Taliban. They took on the full might of US and they are still around. In fact, one of them just became pseudo ally with US.
                    North Korea was in the 50s, Vietnam the 60s and 70s..... and that wasn't the "full might" of the U.S. military. The Taliban wouldn't be around if we could go full force into Pakistan.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                      Not really. Look at N. Korea, N. Vietnam, and the Taliban. They took on the full might of US and they are still around. In fact, one of them just became pseudo ally with US.
                      As erik pointed out, both North Korea and North Vietnam are hardly worth mentioning in this context.
                      For starters, the target restrictions of both wars rendered useless much of the US superiority.

                      The Taliban's conventional war against the U.S. lasted from October 7th to the end of November , when the "birthplace" of the Taliban, Kandahar, fell.

                      Further, the development of weapons and tactics are even more advanced than they were as little as 10 years ago.

                      Finally, hilariously, the political strait-jacket and the domestic-opinion handcuffs that typically sandbag the U.S. won't be nearly as prevalent...what with The Beloved Messiah (PBUH) being the one to pull trigger this time.
                      “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I left the Navy in 2000, as I recall the biggest concerns on our minds in the gulf were; the F-4's out of Bushehr. The small boat swarms tactic was always talked about.

                        Transiting the SOH would be worse in hostilities with the threat of mines, diesel-electric submarines, land based anti-ship missiles and air launched anti-ship missiles.

                        Again, this is a memory off the top of my head.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          ^^ Can you discuss the tactics contemplated by the U.S. Navy for patrol boat swarms?

                          F/A-18 + 20mm for those distant. But in close?

                          I'd like to see Apache helicopters available in some numbers for this task. The ability to operate MANPADS from a bouncing 35 knot platform is going to be pretty limited. And without true MANPADs, all that remains is gunfire, and that too is going to be very inaccurate. The boat swarms only true defense is speed and numbers.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                            Finally, hilariously, the political strait-jacket and the domestic-opinion handcuffs that typically sandbag the U.S. won't be nearly as prevalent...what with The Beloved Messiah (PBUH) being the one to pull trigger this time.
                            I'll have to disagree on that part, the political factor in a war with Iran would be much greater than before, especially after just getting out of Iraq with the toll it had politically and financially. This would in the eyes of many, look like a repeat of that same conflict (WMDs, crazy dictator, etc.). Any type of involvement involving boots on the ground must have significant international approval, excellent intel, substantial help from NATO and co., and a comprehensive, rapid withdrawal plan.

                            Hence why a drawn out pure air and sea approach sounds more likely as it almost fully eliminates the messy occupation and withdrawal phase out of the mix, a phase we historically have many times run into trouble with.
                            Last edited by Red Team; 03 Mar 12,, 15:35.
                            "Draft beer, not people."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Red Team View Post
                              Hence why a drawn out pure air and sea approach sounds more likely as it almost fully eliminates the messy occupation and withdrawal phase out of the mix, a phase we historically have many times run into trouble with.
                              Oh yes definitely, I wasn't referring to a boots on the ground invasion but rather as you said, a drawn out air and sea approach.

                              Even that kind of "limited" strike though, initiated by a Republican president, would result in a storm of fury from the Left (Hollywood, MSM, MoveOn.org, the rest of the moonbat brigade).

                              With Obama as CinC though, the silence will be deafening.
                              “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X