I'm most definitely sure Iran will beat the US Navy fifth fleet

You are the funniest op of the day, I'll give you that.

Anyone that quotes wikipoopia and has a pot leaf for an avatar must be believable, right?


NO!!!!

i'm not being funny...i'm dead serious

so millenium challenge was a fake?

I agree with you, but this is the exact type of thinking that is the reason why humans are not going to make it to the Star-Trek type of future that we all want.

We spend all of our technological ability finding better ways to kill each other, instead of trying to find ways to make life better.

the americans intend to win by the amount of money they spend, and every one expects to do it in comfort and to go home. Those are their only beliefs.

the muz dont care about the above, they simply want to win for their beliefs, and will do what it humanly takes even if it kills them. Americans dont understand that, and are unprepared for that tactic, even now.

It's a credibility thing

You dumb ass

That was not an international exercise, both teams were American.

^^this

when did i ever say it was international?!

Okay, I did.

First of all, the author, Viktor BURBAKI. Does he have an account here? I can only find a handful of articles written by him, with no evidence of any background to support him knowing what he's talking about, with most of his news articles revolving around trumping that a "Great war" is "Imminent" for nearly 5 months now. This guy is as much an armchair general as anyone in this topic, just a little more researched.

As for the article, it's extremely vague and unspecific in how Iran would accomplish any of the goals he suggests they do. I presents a senerio where all major powers in the region join Iran in their struggle, which is insane with Iraq occupied and Syria in the middle of a civil war. It talks about Terrorist attacks against civilians but, let's be honest now, what Civilians in the middle east are Americans going to care about? There are not so many Iranian sleeper agents in America they can strike us here very well, and the possibility of doping something major like 9/11 is low, and in any case might have the Opposite effect to what they would want.

In conclusion, it was a decent article but it is FAR from proving that Iran would prevail in such a conflict.

That did not necessarily let the Japanese win, and it will not necessarily let the Iranians win here. Even IF their culture is as single minded as you think, which, talking with people I know in Iran, I do not think they are.

I am going to spell this out in truthfulness... I hope this war doesnt happen, but I think it will, and this is what will happen.

Iran could potentially defeat the US Navy if all of our firepower were huddled close in the Straight... but USA will not do that because we have far superior long-range weapons. Our ships will start an attack from outside the reach of Iran's weapons, and destroy most of their capabilities to fight back by taking out communications, and anti-air capabilities.

I suspect that most of the support flagships of the Iranian Navy will be unk by US Air Force and Navy fighters so that our Carriers dont have to be within the range of a 'guerilla type' swarm attack such as the 2002 Millenium Challenge.

Once the Iranian Navy threat is decimated, our carrier groups will be able to move in closer to Iran's shores to make the bombing campaign more efficient.

Hopefully they will confirm destruction of nuclear capabilities and end the war. I see no reason why we should have to put boots on the ground.

I feel sorry for the Persian Iranian people because they are about to be run-over by the murderous Sunni Arabs. I hope that America has some kind of plan to relocate the Shias and Allawites (sorry for misspelling) to somewhere safe before the Muslim Brotherhood clams their new territory.

In the end, all of this muslim brotherhood shit is going to destroy Israel anyway... I hate to see Americans supportting a war effort that cannot be won, against a people who are no threat to us. It disgusts me.

Yet one more asshole Canadian betting AGAINST the US, their neighbor, and hoping the US loses

You have no idea how much I have come to LOATHE Canada and the nasty self-impressed, holier-than-thou, passive aggressive and yet so bland douchebags who live in that icebound tundra

I hate you guys. I really do. I am so tired of reading your anti-american bullshit, your non-stop bashing of the American people (not just our goverment), your gloating over any little downturn we experience

Americans have never been as unkind, as rude or plain vicious towards Canadians as you are on a daily basis

The worst sin we ever committed is not know enough about your geography and your history. But we were nice to nearly every Canadian who came to spend time in Florida or elsehwere in the US

Meanwhile, Canadians are just plain nasty, and I make it my new policy to return in kind to any visiting Canadian I find on my way

Your words and actions have spoken volumes and if Canada were ever in trouble, I wouldn't even cross the street to raise a nickel for you

Assholes x 100

Go fuck yourselves

I read about it at the time from multiple sources. Seemed credible to me. In fact IIRC the general playing the red commander had a few things to say about it himself.

It's just asymetric warfighting. Something the US doesn't do all that well. For multiple reasons.

It all adds up to a very good reason not to initiate a war with Iran. Besides the fact that the US is bankrupt.

Last Edited by s. d. butler on 08/19/2012 08:45 PM

okay now allow me to elaborate on how Iran can defend themselves

about war with Iran scenerio
don't be too naive..read this page and do your research then come talk to me with a legitimate counter argument..if i see a message of you calling names then i would know that you have no idea what you're talking about.

If attack on Iran happens anyway, two scenarios possible:

1. Air-strikes only. Since nuclear and other critical facilities are dispersed and most are deep underground and well protected, air-strikes would have a limited impact. Iran might even not retaliate on a large scale if damage is minimal, to avoid confrontation growing to a full-scale war.


Israel is the main force behind possible attack on Iran, and their reasoning is based on a lie - Iran president never said "we will wipe Israel off the map", its a fake mistranslation, and yet its the cornerstone of Israel's foreign politics and a possible war against Iran! Iran president simply said: "The Zionist regime will pass away, just as Soviet regime fell in Russia." In the same speech further: "The human and civil rights of all people, including jewish people, Christians and Muslims must be respected."

Air-strikes most definitely wouldnt change Iran's nuclear (peaceful or otherwise) ambitions, if anything - they might push Iran to withdraw from NPT, kick out IAEA from the country, and start making ultimate deterrence - nuclear bombs.

2. A full-scale war. Its the only hypothetical solution to take from Iran nuclear ambitions - by changing (i.e. killing) current government and pretty much everyone who supports it, and placing puppet regime instead.

Attack should happen in all fronts - air, navy, ground and info war.

* Navy.

US have the strongest NAVY in the World, however its vulnerable to swarm attack, as shown in Millennium Challenge 2002, when most of US Navy was destroyed in an exercise: Millennium Challenge 2002 - [link to en.wikipedia.org]

US is trying to address swarm issue with Mk 38 Mod 2 machine gun (reliable up to 2,5 km, when target moves as predicted) and helicopters Hellfire (in the future might include Rayguns, etc). let's not forget the sunburn anti-ship missiles Iran poses that US has no air defense capability to hit them. anyways..

Several issues with this defense - speedboats dont even have to come close, Iran's anti-ship missiles have 15-300 km range, up to 2000 km if we include Sejjil and other ballistic missiles (Iran recently successfully tested 2 such missiles hitting targets at 1900+km range in Indian ocean). Hit and run swarm strategy by hundreds of missile boats should still be very effective, plus specifically against US helicopters Iran developed new missiles as well.

US Navy defense against missiles:

Remember how a single 1st generation Iranian Kowsar did major damage and sunk the best Israel 5-Class corvette? Israel said their defense was down, and regardless if we believe them or not, consider the fact Iran has thousands of 3rd generation Kowsar's, and its the weakest anti-ship missile in Iran disposal!

US would use their most advanced AEGIS ABM with SM-3, in controlled tests it has success rate 80+% (1-2 missiles at the same time). If there are more missiles - intercept accuracy significantly drops, and after ~13 tries to intercept missiles, ships run out of initial battery and becomes exposed.

US Naval War college estimates:

"The U.S. Navy's Targeting Problem. The Navy would almost certainly fire two ABMs (AEGIS SM-3) against each of the incoming ASBMs. Doing so would of course increase the probability of a successful intercept. However, with only twenty-four or twenty-five ABMs aboard, each Aegis ship escorting a carrier would at that rate be able to engage at most thirteen ASBMs."

"the fact that many kinds of penetration aids are quite cheap relative to ABMs is one reason why the United States cannot "buy its way out" of this problem."

Iran strategy:

simultaneous attack of wide range missiles, speedboats, subs, etc. 30-50 various missiles per warship plus decoys ("Persian Gulf", Ghader, Qiam, Kowsar, Nasr, Noor, Raad, Fajre Darya, underwater Supercavitation torpedo Hoot, various other torpedoes,Sunburn, mines, etc), and no US warship can survive that, maybe except aircraft carriers. For those Iran might use several more ballistic missiles (or not - if intention isnt to sink but to disable them - who needs sunken carriers with nuclear reactors in their backyard waters? ;-)

Bottom line: US Navy will keep out of Persian Gulf if the war starts, unless they want to provide high-tech houses for the local coral reef ;-) Most likely Navy would stay at reasonably safe 2000+ km distance. This would limit their contribution, but its better than a sunken fleet. Which means that Iran is very capable of closing the straight of Hormuz and it will initiate WW3.

* Airforce.

Iran most definitely is inferior head-to-head in air combat. Iran's SAM, AAA, etc. are quite decent, and should provide quite a challenge for US/NATO forces. Also Iran instead of few large stationary radar systems, focuses on mobile radars, including stealth detecting, passive/untraceable ones. Thus US airforce cant destroy them all, as it usually does as soon as they attack some country.

"Israel itself predicts that a major air assault to knock out Iran's nuclear facilities would involve the loss of fully one-third of the planes, which would be knocked out by missiles and Russian-provided air defense systems." And thats one wave, if each wave loses 1/3 of the planes, very soon Israel wouldnt have any airforce at all ;-)

As mentioned above, US Navy would most likely stay 2000+ km away, and as admitted by US:

"U.S. Air Force can conduct air operations most efficiently from bases no more than five hundred miles away from the target."

US bases in near-by countries are all within reach of Iran's ballistic missiles. In the first few days of the war, those bases should be either destroyed, or at least unusable for aircrafts.

Bottom line: for airstrikes USAF main weapon would be long range bombers and cruise missiles, some of them would be intercepted. Considering US limited airstrikes and well protected underground critical facilities, damage against those would be limited, however more extensive against civilian objects. US would try to destroy power lines, water supplies, etc.

* Ground forces.

If US/NATO wants to win over Iran, ground forces are essential. However that's were the most casualties would come from, for both sides. Iran has well trained and armed 1,2 million soldiers (regular army and reserve), plus 12 mln. trained volunteer forces. They know terrain inside-out, they have extensively prepared for both direct and guerrilla warfare.

Some people tend to dismiss Iran's army, but consider Iranians combat spirit and motivation - Iraq started war against newborn revolutionary regime with no real army (Shah's army was disbanded), Husein got help from US and Russia, and still couldnt win, even tried WMD, Iranians just weren't afraid to sacrifice themselves for the country.

We saw another recent example in Hezbollah-Israel war. Israel has one of the best militaries in the World, while Lebanon is the next door weak neighbor, and yet Israel couldnt win against 1000 Hezbollah members plus 6000+ Hezbollah volunteers, trained by Iranians. Consider Iran has over million of such trained soldiers, and over 12 million volunteers. Iran's terrain is better suited for guerrilla warfare, and they are better and more extensively armed than Hezbollah. Need I say more? NATO simply cant win, all they could do is to temporarily occupy parts of Iran, but due to heavy loses and high cost, its only a matter of time till NATO retreats. Iranians are prepared to die in millions for the country, how about NATO forces?..

* Information war

West would win, no question about it. Most people in the West would believe its all "evil" Iran's fault, how they're making nuclear bombs to attack poor West and Israel (with no evidence, but who cares - worked with Sadam, isnt?).

War stages:

some argue if Iran would be beaten in the initial direct battle and occupation starts, Iran lost the war. In reality after attackers would break through the defenses, war doesnt end, it begins for Iranians. Why? No country in the Middle East could beat US/NATO head on, so initial defenses are meant for deterrence and inflicting some damage, and despite patriotic Iran claims how they would repel the attack, they cant, and they know it better than us.

If you follow Iran's military industry, their goal isnt static, concentrated military, but extremely mobile, dispersed and hidden weaponry, with a massive preparations of underground/cave facilities for guerrilla war. Even their new pride - ballistic Sejjil-2 can be hidden and used from anywhere.

If you think NATO has issues with Afghanistan (Taliban more or less controls 54-72% of the country, after a decade of war with NATO!). Thats only 35.000 people with a locals support, with ancient weapons. Now consider Iranians would fight in millions, with quite advanced weapons and very extensive stockpile, probably with factories deep in the mountains to make more weapons in case of war. If Afghanistan cost NATO 4+ trillions, how much Iran would cost? How many loses NATO could sustain? In my opinion, US and EU would bankrupt faster than win over Iran, or even more likely - there wont be any war in the first place.

That was about Iran, how about other unavoidable outcomes of the war:

1. Israel would not only receive a lot of high-impact precise ballistic missiles from Iran (2000, or so they claimed a year ago), but also Hezbollah and Hamas would do all they can, it wont be pretty. Its possible such war would actually end up with Palestinians regaining lost territories, and Israel would be lucky to keep '67 borders.

2. Severely disrupted oil and gas flow. ~25% of World supply would be cut off during the war. Prices would skyrocket, a lot of countries economies would suffer, some are on the verge of bankruptcy already, war wont help them by any means.

3. Ultimate winners of such war - China and Russia. While US, Israel and EU influence in the region would significantly decrease, especially if/when they lose the war.

Last Edited by moeskyhigh on 08/19/2012 08:47 PM

.


When are you people will finally understand that Iran will NOT be attacked?




















.

.


When are you people will finally understand that Iran will NOT be attacked?




















.

.






they just can NOT attack IRan.


IF they want to have their signature in ENDING the world as we know it, they MIGHT want to

atttack Iran.


HA!


IT IS not the time yet.

Right, by what? Iran has no advanced weaponry, just rubber boats, Photoshop pictures missiles, bongogle republican guard, old planes, outdated russian technology.

Vs sat guided munition, precision bombs, unmanned aircrafts, deep bunker buster, bomblets etc.

forgot to mention that Iran will fire their bellistic missiles at the oil facilities in the Arab peninsula then occupy their land in Kuwait, Saudi, UAE, Iraq, n etc thus bringing back their old Persian Map...

Look, I am familiar with the Millennium 2002 Challenge.

A Retired Marine General payed a huge wargame against the Brunt of US Naval forces, and beat them up good using guerilla warfare such as turning off electrical and RADAR systems so that the sophisticated foe cannot see a co-ordinated swarm attack.

The US Navy learned a lesson that day... That they are not invincible, and that we have to rely more on our Air Force to provide support and cover for other forces, and to bomb communications and surface to air defense before we can bring in our expensive equipment.

We have Air Force bases all over the world hat are going to pound everything that Iran has got... precision style.

I am not a war monger. I hope this war doesnt happen. But, if it does, America (and maybe some allies) will open up a can of you-know-what.

If I had any choice in the matter. American forces would pull back, and make sure that no-one else jumps in... and let Israel and Iran go at it by themselves... America doesnt need to be involved in this bullshit.

are you retarded? don't you see their videos of their own missiles?

omg i have a very bad feeling about this...you ppl are so brainwashed

are you familiar with the anti-air defense systems that Iran poses? America has never invaded till this date a country that had air defence missile capabilities...nodda

im sure their aircrafts are made for wars such as these, but believe me, Russian anti-air missiles are no joke, which iran has alot of them...most of them are domestically modified even..

I am against a war too, but i have to let the warmongers know on this forum that their military will suffer huge if they ever go to war with Iran.

You just made me throw up. Global force for good... fuck me.

are you familiar with the anti-air defense systems that Iran poses? America has never invaded till this date a country that had air defence missile capabilities...nodda

im sure their aircrafts are made for wars such as these, but believe me, Russian anti-air missiles are no joke, which iran has alot of them...most of them are domestically modified even..

I am against a war too, but i have to let the warmongers know on this forum that their military will suffer huge if they ever go to war with Iran.




We went up against a pretty sophisticated anti-air capabilities in the Bosnian conflict 15 or so years ago. They shot down one of our most advanced bombers at that time, a B2 stealth bomber that cost 2 Billion dollars.

We still took care of it though. At the time, their air defenses were as good as some of the NATO countries.

That was 15 years ago, I am sure we have shit now that no-one has seen before waiting for the right time.

Also, we dont even have to use the USAF at first, as we can just take out anti-air capabilities from almost anywhere in the world with cruise missiles fired from ships and submarines.

And this will all take place after a crippling internet attack that will take out a lot of critical infrastructure in Iran as well.



I hope I am not coming off as an arrogant Ameri-tard, because I dont want this war to happen. I'm ust saying that the US will win this war.

Last Edited by chris999 on 08/19/2012 09:23 PM

No not B2, a F-117 Nighthawk. Big difference.

are you familiar with the anti-air defense systems that Iran poses? America has never invaded till this date a country that had air defence missile capabilities...nodda

im sure their aircrafts are made for wars such as these, but believe me, Russian anti-air missiles are no joke, which iran has alot of them...most of them are domestically modified even..

I am against a war too, but i have to let the warmongers know on this forum that their military will suffer huge if they ever go to war with Iran.




We went up against a pretty sophisticated anti-air capabilities in the Bosnian conflict 15 or so years ago. They shot down one of our most advanced bombers at that time, a B2 stealth bomber that cost 2 Billion dollars.

We still took care of it though. At the time, their air defenses were as good as some of the NATO countries.

That was 15 years ago, I am sure we have shit now that no-one has seen before waiting for the right time.

Also, we dont even have to use the USAF at first, as we can just take out anti-air capabilities from almost anywhere in the world with cruise missiles fired from ships and submarines.

And this will all take place after a crippling internet attack that will take out a lot of critical infrastructure in Iran as well.



I hope I am not coming off as an arrogant Ameri-tard, because I dont want this war to happen. I'm ust saying that the US will win this war.


The first thing that will hit Iran will be cruise missles fired from nuclear submarines far away from the coast...These will probably have some EMP capabilities so Iran will be in deep shit from the start...I'm sure they'll get off some missles and that Hezbollah and Syria will all strike Israel...The problem will come if Iran does not surrender...This cannot be an all out ground war, the USA cannot win that...This has to be quick and easy and I don't think it will be...I think it's going to escalate...

depends what you mean by "beat", OP. they'd no doubt cause quite a bit of damage. they'd no doubt score a sort of propaganda victory. but just the sheer size of the forces the usa can muster means eventual defeat.