How the situation with Iran may reflect on Georgia

Discussion in 'Nuclear, Chemical & Bio Weapons' started by jeddie80, Nov 23, 2011.

  1. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Even if Iran could reach Israel it doesn't matter as any incomming Missile would be shot down by U.S. Missle Defense which exists at an extremely high level of capability.

    Don't you understand that the U.S. in an attempt to generate some degree of normalized relations with Iran gave Iran what it wanted.

    We are also the one's preventing Israel from bombing your illegal Nuclear Facilities.

    If Iran honors it's agreement with the United States then a new era of relations will be ushered in and trust will be built.

    But if Iran does not honor it's agreement with the U.S. this will only spell DISASTER for Iran.

    This is it...it is the end game...either Iran honors the agreement or the U.S. must invade Iran.

    There will be no other chances for Iran.

    So realise this and honor the agreement because to not honor the agreement will mean the end of Iran as you know it.

    AboveAlpha
     
  2. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The decision of a photo editor of Fars News Agency to hide the fact that one of those missiles failed to launch is irrelevant, except as propaganda against Iran. At most, that decision detracts from the credibility of Fars News Agency.

    But talking about propaganda, all I can tell you is this: more people are visiting Iran these days and even a short visit to Iran will leave you without any doubt that the entire image of Iran in the west is the product of propaganda. Anyone who visits Iran quickly discovers Iran is nothing like it is portrayed to be in the west. That is what I call 'propaganda', not what you refer to.

    In the meantime, your post said nothing that I found useful on the subject. Of course, we can say all cars are a model T I suppose and all missiles are variants of the V-2, but that is not what you really were saying about Iran's missiles when you said they were Scuds. You were engaging in propaganda. And the quotes I threw back at you were not from Iranian sources!
     
  3. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I have been to Iran twice and I find the people to be very friendly and accepting....but this is what is tragic as the people of Iran and as we know over 70% are under the age of 30 years old....cannot say much in public as they fear reprisals against them by the Religious Secret Police...but in Private they desperately desire Democracy and a secular nation.

    The problem going on is all about the NPT.

    Iran did not have either the technology or capability to build Nuclear Reactors so by signing the NPT they were allowed to purchase Nuclear Reactors and Reactor Grade Fuel.

    After that Iran has broken just about every aspect of the NPT.

    The United States cannot allow under any circumstances Iran to get away with developing Nuclear Weapons and a few Fission Bombs which Iran currently has enough weapons grade Uranium to built at least 1 or 2 circa 1945 U.S. Military Gun Barrel design Fission Bombs....well this is not going to stop the U.S. Military Invasion of Iran if Iran does not honor it's agreements with us.

    My hope is Iran will come to it's senses and realise that this threat of Invasion is very real and automatic if Iran does not honor the agreement.

    A war against the United States could possibly result in the deaths of a Million Iranians or more and we don't target civillian populations but if Iran was to attempt loading a Nuke in a passenger jet or place it on a truck and drive it to target the U.S. would attempt to seize it and if that was not possible we would have to destroy it and this radiation poisoning would kill A LOT OF IRANIANS!!

    We don't want to go to war with Iran...but to preserve the NPT....we will....as we will have no choice.

    AboveAlpha
     
  4. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    First, the US has never "prevented" Israel from doing anything. That is the product of your fantasy. At one point, in fact, with Israel being too overbearing in pressuring the US to engage Iran, the US told them to do it themselves if they wish to! Israel was at war with Hezbollah in 2006 as a dress rehearsal to show how the US how a war with Iran would go. Israel played the role of the US in that war, enjoying all the military advantages US would enjoy against Iran. Hezbollah played the role of Iran, following the tactics and doctrine that Iran follows. In that war, Israel had to resort to killing innocent Lebanese civilians to terrorize them in the futile hope of undermining Hezbollah's political support in Lebanon by forcing the Lebanese (including the Christian Lebanese community) to blame Hezbollah for the destruction. In military terms, Hezbollah inflicted more damage on Israel than vice versa. Not only an Israel warship was badly damaged, not only Israeli bases suffered direct hits, but Israel's so-called elite Golani brigade was unable to wrestle control of even a border town call Bint Jbeil despite many attempts to capture that town from a much smaller Hezbollah force.
    Second, unfortunately, Iran will abide by the deal has negotiated. It is a bad deal for Iran, especially since the other side (US) lacks the requisite good faith and the Republicans are openly advertising their unwillingness to abide by it. But that deal does show that ultimately, while Iran has the means to make any war against it costly, it is engaged in a battle against a much stronger foe. A foe with a lot more diplomatic, economic, political and military tools than Iran. Negotiating with such a foe, unless the negotiation is intended to achieve a rapprochement similar to Nixon's engagement with China, will often produce unbalanced deals such as the nuclear deal with Iran.
     
  5. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I am sorry but this post is wrong at so many levels, it just gave me a headache!! I will leave you to your twisted views. I just can't believe you have actually been to Iran, because nothing in your comments betray any understanding about the country. Not to mention, it shows you have no clue about Iran's nuclear program.
     
  6. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    If you think the little SKIRMISH you talk about would be the way a U.S. Invasion of Iran would go you are out of your mind!!!

    The fact you even mention this shows me just how little you understand how the U.S. Military fights a war.

    We would obliterate all Iranian Targets and Military Divisions by airpower alone far before any U.S. Forces were on the ground.

    The rate of destruction of Iranian Military units would be so fast and so violent there would be a mass exodus by Iranian Military Men from their units.

    You describe a scenario that would never happen.

    The ONLY end result of such a war would be the total obliteration of the entire Iranian Military.

    Again you are talking FANTASY.

    AboveAlpha

    - - - Updated - - -

    The only thing twisted here is your utter lack of knowledge of very real events.

    You had best hope Iran honors the agreement.

    If it does not.....that will be the end of Iran as you know it.

    AboveAlpha
     
  7. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I would not say that for one very big and important reason.

    Iran is significantly larger then iraq, and it's major cities are much deeper inland then those of Iraq.

    Yes, tactically the US could easily destroy much of their military capability in a short amount of time. But that is not the same as saying we could eliminate all of it, nor is it the same as saying we would take them out faster. In fact, because they have so much more land to exchange for time, it would be a much longer and harder battle then that in Iraq.

    Iraq in 1991 took 3 days to eliminate as a threat in Kuwait. To take them out on the ground in 2003 it took over a month and a half, this is because we were not simply eliminating their military but invading their country. Expect an invasion of Iran to easily take from 6 months to a year.

    Actualy, Iran at that time still had a lot of top of the line US export weapons, among the finest in the world. It also was much longer so as previously mentioned, could trade space for time.

    Their problem in the Iran-Iraq war was two-fold. For one, like Stalin in the 1930's they had largely decapitated their military leadership, and replaced them with people who were "religiously acceptable". In other words, senior Generals and Colonels were taken to the back and shot, and all to often replaced with morons. Then when they had equipment break, they were unable to acquire enough replacements because of the US embargo.

    Then to add another problem, both sides were largely using a modification of the Warsaw pact Doctrine. A military doctrine that has rarely worked as promised since WWII (and even then only with horrible losses). Throwing large number of infantry at each other without adequate close air support and only using artillery and rocket barrages to soften up the enemy is effective, only when you have the manpower to back it up. Against even more sophisticated militaries like the US and Israel, it failed over and over and over again.

    Now granted, they have done some rather impressive workarounds. They are not only still manufacturing the HAWK missile system (the US retired it over a decade ago), they have actually improved it and even been able to mount it onto aircraft, giving it yet another life as a heavy hitting air launched system.

    And the backbone of their newest air defense system (Mersad) is a locally produced HARK that has been improved even more.

    And as you have seen, I am one of the first to readily admit this.

    However, "improving" is not the same thing as "bringing them to a par where they could challenge the US/NATO/CIS". I admit to the improvements, and think many are very clever. That however does not mean they are the same capabilities as the US has.

    And please give an actual quote where I said "they were SCUDs". Please, do so, I would love to read it. Because for years here in similar threads I have always described them as "variations", not as "SCUDs". Mostly because they are not SCUD missiles at all, but a completely seperate missile made locally.

    Look, if you are going to debate me, use real quotes, do not paraphrase me then claim victory. Once again, a complete and utter fail.
     
  8. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    For a quick clarification, the following is what I use when i say a missile is a SCUD.

    Either a Soviet R-11/R-17, made in the Soviet Union/Russia, or in another country copying Soviet plans. Of a short to medium range capability, fired primarily from mobile launchers, with a paylod in the range of 1 ton.

    When a country takes that missile and makes significant changes, then it is a "variant" of the SCUD. It is not a SCUD, and normally it is the payload and/or range that has been increased (Iraq and Iran both have taken the SCUD, reduced the payload and increased the range). It is not a SCUD, no more then the HMMWV or Land Rover are "Jeeps". But there is little question that both of those iconic vehicles are varients of the Jeep.

    So are the Shahab-1 or Al-Samoud 2 missiles "SCUDs"? No, of course not. But they are generally considered to be SCUD class missiles, each based upon the old Soviet SCUD design.

    If the V-2 was not such a crude and primitive weapon, I might even call them V-2 variants. But that would be ignoring the significant advances that Soviet engineers put into their own modification of the V-2. Turning an unguided, immobile, and largely useless terror weapon into a real guided and tactical weapon which could be quickly moved and fired under battlefield conditions.
     
  9. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Back during the Iran/Iraq War the Iranian's would charge Iraqi Mechnized Forces in HUMAN WAVES and get mowed down.

    The fact is that the Ayatollah's and Mullah's are always ready to issue a FATWA or a Islamic Religious Law or Legal Opinion supposedly inspired by Allah and interpreted by a Religious Scholar....and such Fatwa's can be anything such as the one Ruhollah Khomeini gave sentencing Salman Rushdie to death for writting his book called the SATANIC VERSES....all the way to issuing a Fatwa that every man, teen or boy older than 7 must pick up any weapon they can find in a region and charge headlong into TANKS AND ARTILLARY.

    Now because of such IDIOCY.....several GENERATIONS OF IRANIAN'S WERE KILLED.....so many in fact that over 70% of the current Iranian Polulation is UNDER THE AGE OF 30 YEARS OLD!!!

    Because of this the vast majority of Iranian's who fanatically celebrated the 1979 ISLAMIC REVOLUTION ARE LONG DEAD!!!

    The current 72.8% of all Iranian's who are under the age of 30 years old WERE NOT EVEN BORN IN 1979!!!

    Most of them were born between 1988 and 1997!!

    Because of this their loyalty to the Old Iranian Religious Guard is NON-EXISTANT!!

    They were brutally oppressed during their non-violent peaceful nationwide demonstrations to promote DEMOCRACY AND GREATER FREEDOMS!!

    Members of Qud's Force and the Iranian Secet Religious Police sent in young Religious Fanatics to penetrate the Iranian Student and Democratic Groups and when they actually began protests this Penetration allowed members of the Secret Police and Qud's Force....a group that promoted the tenet's of the 1979 Iranian Islamic Revolution Worldwide....to beat take into custody but in most cases SHOOT AND KILL ALL PRO-DEMOCRACY STUDENT LEADERSHIP AND PRO-DEMOCRACY GROUPS LEADERS!!

    They were arrested, tortured, electrocuted, shot, acid bathed, had cutting done through their stomachs and had water hoses placed into their intestines which is by far the most painful torture imaginable and one does not survive it as they sought information of other Pro-Democracy Groups.

    Because of this the population of Iran has no intention of supporting an UNNECESSARY WAR WITH THE UNITED STATES as I have tried to explain to the Iranian Member here....the United States will not allow Israel to BOMB IRANIAN NUCLEAR FACILITIES.

    To do so would completely poison the entire Region with Radioactive Dust thus if Iran does not Honor it's agrement with the U.S. we will have no choice but to seize all Iranian Nuclear Sites.

    To do so will require Thousands of U.S. Rangers and Special Forces, Special Teams and CIA Teams.

    While they are doing this we are fairly certain that the Iranian Air Force, Navy and Regular Army would STAND DOWN and not fight as they will be needed as a defense force to protect Iran's soon to be new Democratic Government as the Population want's this badly.

    Talks began with the Iranian Military Leaders and this is no secret....shortly after that former Iranian little nut job of a President talked about blocking the Strait of Hormuz which is without a doubt something that would result in an instand and immediate Military Response by the U.S. Military.

    As the Iranian Air Force, Navy and Regular Army Leadership KNOWS they would be the very FIRST TO DIE....as any orders from the Religious Leadership which is the REAL POWER in Iran not the President....to actually do this or attack any U.S. Forces would be seen by the Iranian Air Force, Navy and Regular Army as SUICIDE.

    Thus we are fairly certain they would stand down.

    Those who would not stand down are the REPUBLICAN GUARD and as they rushed Mechnized Forces into and around Iranian Nuclear Facilities...that is if they did not pre-position themself there first.....we would have to destroy them in their entirety.

    Iranian Missile Attacks against Israel would not be a concern as U.S. and Israeli Missile Defense is very good and multi-tiered and with the positioning of Ticonderoga Class Cruisers and Carrier Battle Groups in the Persian Gulf, Red Sea and Med Sea equipped with the SM-3 ABM/ASAT's as well as the Raytheon Improved Patriot II Ground Based Anti-Missile System and 2 other systems I will not discuss....Israel should be well protected....as well should our Arab Allies in the region.

    If Iran has a few Fission Bombs with nominal yielld between 5 to 7 Kilotons....they could place these on Passenger Jet's for suicide runs or drive them to target but U.S. Radiation Detection exists at such a high level of capability we would KNOW where such weapons were being moved to and from.

    I really hope this never happens as once the Old Religious Guard dies off and we are only talking 5 to 7 years for most of them....Iran could become a very close U.S. Ally as 95% of Iranian's stated in polls that not only do they want good relations with the U.S....they want extremely close relations with the United States.

    All that stands in the way is a few very old men and the NPT.

    AboveAlpha
     
  10. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Iranian Missile design is rudimentary and they have extremely poor guidance.

    Iran currently has no capability to place a Nuclear Weapon upon a Missile as they need at least 15 years to develop a Nuclear Warhead small enough and light enough to fit and be carried by a missile and right now even if they had such a warhead their missiles would NEVER be capable of carrying them to target.

    Remember.....we are talking about Iran...a nation that does not even have the technology to enrich uranium in any way other than to use 17,000 CENTRIFUGES which in technology terms is like ANCIENT IN THE EXTREME A METHOD!!!

    If they can't and don't have the relatively simple technology to enrich Uranium other than by using thousands of centrifuges.....I can state that IT IS A LOT MORE DIFFICULT TO DESIGN A SMALL ENOUGH AND LIGHT ENOUGH WARHEAD TO BE PLACED UPON A MISSILE AND DELIVERED ACCURATELY TO TARGET!!!

    By the time the U.S. was doing this we had already developed FUSION BOMBS which is nowhere near as heavy as a circa 1945 Gun Barrel Fission Bomb that Iran either has waiting to assemble or has assembled. This is basically how it works.

    Fusion Bombs
    Fission bombs worked, but they weren't very efficient. It didn't take scientists long to wonder if the opposite nuclear process -- fusion -- might work better. Fusion occurs when the nuclei of two atoms combine to form a single heavier atom. At extremely high temperatures, the nuclei of hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium can readily fuse, releasing enormous amounts of energy in the process. Weapons that take advantage of this process are known as fusion bombs, thermonuclear bombs or hydrogen bombs. Fusion bombs have higher kiloton yields and greater efficiencies than fission bombs, but they present some problems that must be solved:

    Deuterium and tritium, the fuels for fusion, are both gases, which are hard to store.
    Tritium is in short supply and has a short half-life.
    Fuel in the bomb has to be continuously replenished.
    Deuterium or tritium has to be highly compressed at high temperature to initiate the fusion reaction.
    Scientists overcome the first problem by using lithium-deuterate, a solid compound that doesn't undergo radioactive decay at normal temperature, as the principal thermonuclear material. To overcome the tritium problem, bomb designers rely on a fission reaction to produce tritium from lithium. The fission reaction also solves the final problem. The majority of radiation given off in a fission reaction is X-rays, and these X-rays provide the high temperatures and pressures necessary to initiate fusion. So, a fusion bomb has a two-stage design -- a primary fission or boosted-fission component and a secondary fusion component.


    To understand this bomb design, imagine that within a bomb casing you have an implosion fission bomb and a cylinder casing of uranium-238 (tamper). Within the tamper is the lithium deuteride (fuel) and a hollow rod of plutonium-239 in the center of the cylinder. Separating the cylinder from the implosion bomb is a shield of uranium-238 and plastic foam that fills the remaining spaces in the bomb casing. Detonation of the bomb causes the following sequence of events:

    The fission bomb implodes, giving off X-rays.
    These X-rays heat the interior of the bomb and the tamper; the shield prevents premature detonation of the fuel.
    The heat causes the tamper to expand and burn away, exerting pressure inward against the lithium deuterate.
    The lithium deuterate is squeezed by about 30-fold.
    The compression shock waves initiate fission in the plutonium rod.
    The fissioning rod gives off radiation, heat and neutrons.
    The neutrons go into the lithium deuterate, combine with the lithium and make tritium.
    The combination of high temperature and pressure are sufficient for tritium-deuterium and deuterium-deuterium fusion reactions to occur, producing more heat, radiation and neutrons.
    The neutrons from the fusion reactions induce fission in the uranium-238 pieces from the tamper and shield.
    Fission of the tamper and shield pieces produce even more radiation and heat.
    The bomb explodes.

    Thus by the time the U.S. was placing Nukes on Missiles they were FUSION WARHEADS that are MUCH LIGHTER.

    I do not see Iran developing a Fission Warhead of a sufficiently light enough and small enough design to be placed atop a Missile.

    AboveAlpha
     
  11. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't disagree with anything you say in this particular post. But if you read your original post, I think you will see that you were painting with a much broader brush, suggesting all of Iran's missiles were Scud variants. The fact is that Iran has a variety of missiles that just don't belong to the Scud family at all, even if the Shahab 1 and 2 clearly do. Indeed, the latest Iranian missiles (Sejil, Sejil 2, Ashoura etc) are indigenous designs and not derived from what is developed elsewhere.

    The truth is that Iran's advancements in missile technology, while still disputed a few years ago, are no longer even at issue. For instance, it wasn't that long ago that all of Iran's missiles were referred to as being derived from North Korea's "Nodong" missile and it wasn't that long ago when there was this suggestion that Iran relied on North Korean technology for its missile advances. Yet, when Iran showcased the Sejil, and then the Safir Space Launch Vehicle, all that line of argument and propaganda was put to rest. If for no other reason, because Iran was able to successfully launch a satellite into space using the solid fueled Safir SLV back in 2009, at a time when North Korea was still having trouble doing the same using their most advanced rocket (the Taepodong). (The North Koreans managed the same feat after several failed attempts more recently).

    While to prevent the Israelis from using these programs to increase pressure on Iran, the Iranian government has announced that it will not pursue ballistic missiles with a range more than 2,000 miles, the fact is that the development of the Simorgh SLV by 2010 showed that Iran had largely mastered what is required to develop ICBMs as well. Iran, however, is not pursuing that path because its not interested in Israel making the Europeans and Americans worried that we intend to launch missiles at them! However, we are still continuing with our missile and space program. A few months ago, for instance, Iran successfully launched its 4th satellite into space using the Safir SLV.
     
  12. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The main folly of comparing American military action against Saddam to comparing such action against Iran, is because Iran and Iraq are simply not comparable in any way. Indeed, except for some limited insights that can be gained from attempts to destroy Saddam's scud capability during Desert Storm, there isn't a single useful lesson from America's engagements against Iraq (whether Desert Storm or the subsequent invasion of Iraq) that is relevant to any war with Iran. In every other sense, Iran and Iraq present diametrically opposed dynamics.

    For instance, the strength of Saddam's military was found in the Iraqi armies armored divisions, particularly the Republican guard armored divisions and their T-72 tanks. Because those units were somewhat effective against Iranian infantry, Saddam imagined that the best way to fight the US was to face them in open desert tank warfare as well! Never mind that Saddam was actually pulling his troops out of Kuwait when most of them were gunned down in the so-called Highway of Death during Desert Storm (with much of his forces ready to surrender to journalists because they had no loyalty to him, being most Shia enlisted soldiers); the few real engagements that did take place between Saddam's forces and the US forces showed that to be a foolish tactic as well. Before Saddam's tank units could fire their shots, they were destroyed by US tank forces with superior range and superior night vision capabilities.

    But against Iran, that is not how the war will be fought at all. Iran's tactics and strengths rely on what is referred to as asymmetric warfare. That is true both for naval doctrine as well as our doctrine on the ground. There will no WWII style tank battles against Iran. No "top gun" like dog fights against Iranian fighters. What you will have instead is the kind of fighting that the Israelis encountered going after Hezbollah. Despite complete air supremacy (more complete, in fact, than what the US could ever hope to enjoy versus Iran, since Iran is a much much bigger country than Lebanon, has its own variety of anti-aircraft missiles including ones that are similar to the stinger and others in development that resemble the Russian S-300), despite their Merkava tanks, and despite fighting Hezbollah on their own border using their elite force (the Golani Brigade), going against a much smaller Hezbollah force, the Israelis were actually defeated in the Battle of Bint Jbeil. Their Merkava tanks were often a liability, while even turning Bint Jbeil into a ghost town from constant bombardment, didn't help them capture the town!

    To understand the dynamics of war against Iran, you would need to read about the following ancient and modern battles. They will tell you a lot more than anything from the fights against Saddam's mercenary force. These battles are the Battle of Salamis (the US playing the role of the Persian empire, and Iran the role of the Greeks), the Battle of Carhae, and the Battle of Bint Jbeil. I am sure these will have a lot more relevant lessons than what you will find in the operations being discussed.
     
  13. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    While "Mushroom" is probably familiar with the Millennium Challenge 2002 war game, I recommend reading about that exercise as well. Fighting against Iran requires fighting against a foe using those kind of tactics, and not the tactics of Saddam!
     
  14. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And what is the Nodong missile?

    A North Korean built version of the original R-11 with improvements for range.

    In other words, it is a SCUD.

    Oh, is that what you believe? Then let me revise my estimate of how long Iran qould survive.

    It would largely cease to exist within 5 days of a war starting, and descend into anarchy as it's head is disconnected and it's cities left to themselves.

    Hezbollah might be a good model for a small region barely larget thenb a City-State. But it is not a good model for a nation the size of Iran. So when they do this move you are talking about, they will end up fragmenting worse then the Taliban or PLO did. A dozen or more splinter groups will arise, especially after the first couple of "Top Leaders" are killed and multiple individuals all try to claim that they are the new top leader.

    Look, you have to realize one thing here. I am pretty much simply a neutral observer here. I give clarifications or information, but in as non-biased way as I can. I appreciate that you suddenly say I gave a post you could somewhat agree with, but I really do not care if you agree with anything I say or not. The fact is simply that I make analysis and really do not care if what I say is favorable or not. In short, generally those that claim that Iran would not last 24 hours are as idiotic that those who claim they would last 24 years in a war against the US.

    And remember, when I talk about Iran "loosing a war", I am not nessicarily talking about being taken out (although that is indeed a strong possibility). Either having the majority of their offensive hardware destroyed so they ask for peace to put an end to it (Gulf War I in Kuwait), or simply because of what is done to them has forced the Government to collapse or go into hiding (Germany in WWI, Iraq in Gulf War II, Taliban in Afghanistan, etc).

    Any time a government has lost control of it's country, it has basically been destroyed as a ruling power.
     
  15. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    War is unpredictable, but I know that the US military and DIA have war gamed various scenarios involving military action against Iran and have not liked the results. The reason being that for the US to actually subdue Iran, it may very well have to either reinstate the draft and try to march to Tehran and occupy the country or it will have to resort to nukes. No other intermediate measure will guarantee a successful outcome for the US. That is, of course, not the same thing as saying that the US will not be able to achieve a quick victory under any other circumstances. It only means that the US cannot count on such a quick victory and that the odds are strong that military action against Iran will become messy, involve many other states in the region and beyond, will see a major disruption in the energy markets and consequently affect the world economy, and could very well result in extensive damage to America's naval assets and bases in the region. If the US engages Iran in a fight, it would have to be prepared for that contingency and cannot rely on rosy scenarios alone.

    In the meantime, while Iran has made major advances in its ballistic missile, cruise missile, anti-ship and anti-tank missiles, in rockets, artillery and UAVs (drones), as well as submarines and frigates, and is quite self-sufficient in most of the armaments it requires, there is no doubt that it still has a long ways to go before it can even come close to matching what many of the countries in the region are able to acquire when it comes to aircraft and main battle tanks. To be sure, Iran has been working on developing its own MBT since the 1990s, and the Zulfaqar 3 MBT does bear some resemblance to the American Abrams tank. And Iran has produced a squadron of Saeghe fighters, which Iran likens to the F-18 but which are based on the F-5 fighters.

    Anyway, let me post below some of the weapons systems Iran has developed, starting with pictures of Iran's domestically produced naval vessels.

    [​IMG]
    Iran's domestically built Jamaran destroyer
    [​IMG]
    Iran's domestically built Fateh class submarine
    [​IMG]
    A squadron of Iran's domestically built flying boats
    [​IMG]
    Picture of Iranian fast attack boats under construction
    [​IMG]
    Two new warships being built by Iran
     

    Attached Files:

  16. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Below are pictures of Iranian anti-ship and navy missiles:

    [​IMG]
    Iranian anti-ship cruise missile
    [​IMG]
    Iran's latest anti-ship cruise missile, the Ghadir
    [​IMG]
    Another type of Iranian anti-ship cruise missile, the Zafar
    [​IMG]
    Iran's anti-ship naval missile Noor being fired by Iran's domestically built Jamaran frigate
     
  17. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    An area besides its ballistic and cruise missile force which Iran is quite advanced is in UAV technology. Indeed, Iranian UAVs have been used extensively in many conflicts in the region already. There have been articles about Iranian drones used in the Syrian conflict and this one talks about Iranian drones used in Iraq. Indeed, while Iran's UAV program doesn't get as much attention, as mentioned in that article and many others, "like it or not, Iran is a drone power" (that was actually the tile of an article in War is Boring).

    Anyway, Iran produces dozens of different types of UAV. Here are some pictures of some of them.

    [​IMG]
    The Fotros Drone, considered Iran's largest drone
    [​IMG]
    Iran's long range Shahed 129 combat drone, capable of reaching Israel
    [​IMG]
    Production line for one of Iran's UAVs, the Sayeh
    [​IMG]
    Iran produces 4 different kind of "Mohajer" drones (Mohajer 1, 2, 3, 4) and these drones are the ones most often seen in combat over Iraq and Syria, with ISIS terrorists sometimes showing pictures of downed Iranian drones (usually Mohajer drones)
     
  18. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    OK, we have had Russian Fanbois, Chinese Fanbois, US Fanbois, English Fanbois, Nazi Fanbois, and just about every other kind of Fanboi in here publishing lots of propaganda and claims (and military hardware photo porn), so this is nothing new really.

    I guess it was only a matter of time until we got an Iranian Fanboi.

    Welcome Fanboi, just realize that those of us who are serious about these kinds of topics will really not take you all that seriously. Maybe You, KGB and JBI can have a discission as to who makes the best stuff. :alcoholic:
     
  19. Albert Di Salvo

    Albert Di Salvo New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    25,739
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    0
    IMO:

    Saudi Arabia will seek to acquire nuclear weapons in response to the Iranian nuclear weapons program. Israel and Saudi Arabia will become de facto allies against the Iranians. In time someone will make a mistake. Mistakes and miscalculations are the handmaidens of war. Living in Tehran probably isn't a good idea on a long term basis.
     
  20. KGB agent

    KGB agent Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,032
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    ^^^^
    I am worried about Mushroom's health. His butthurt attacks, caused by his own ignorance, are as often as ever. Perhaps he should visit a doctor for some medicine.
    [​IMG]


    1500 tons displacement. Other countries prefer to call that a corvete or a frigate.


    Do those newspapers keep them intact or something?
     
  21. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What are you even talking about? What I have posted is something that you can confirm referring to any knowledgeable western source, including Jane's. There is nothing 'controversial' about any of it really, other than the name to give the Jamaran warship. (It is a frigate but in Persian, frigates are usually referred to with the same name as destroyers). Otherwise, just read any source (including some that I linked for you) and you will get the picture that I presented! What are you even disputing in my post??
     
  22. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This article from the well known bastion of Iranian propaganda, namely Radio Free Europe Radio LIberty (I am being sarcastic, something I am afraid I need to spell out given some of the comments I am reading here!), provides a balanced and informative review of Iran's military forces and doctrine.
    http://www.rferl.org/content/iran-army-of-deterrence/26970263.html
    Iran's Army Of Deterrence
     
  23. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Against the current U.S. Military Integrated Services Battle Tactics Iran will not have any ability fight any concept of an asymmetric warfare battle plan.

    Why?

    Because the U.S. Military has not only had over a decade of developing methods to defeat any asymmetric warfare but as well U.S. Military Forces are BATTLE HARDENED and any Invasion of Iran would not have thousands of Iranian Militants fighting U.S. Forces in the streets as the U.S. Military would go into Iran FOR ONE SINGLE PURPOSE.

    That purpose is to seize all Iranian Nuclear Facilities and the U.S. would only go to war with Iran if either Iran annouces it has developed Nuclear Weapons of if Iran does not Honor the agreement with the United States.

    Such a war would not be at all like when the U.S. Invaded Iraq and stayed to attempt to help the Iraqi's develop a Democracy.

    Any U.S. Military attack would be specific to Iran developing Nuclear Weapons.

    The U.S. Military has not fought in an ALL OUT WAR methodology since WWII and we heald back a great deal in Iraq as the full force of U.S. Military Power was not even close to being used.

    If the U.S. went to war against Iran it would be because he have to and because we know Iran has at the moment at least enough weapons grade Uranium to build one or two 5 to 7 Kiloton Fusion Bombs and within a few years Iran could have enough weapons grade Uranium to build perhaps 10.....the U.S. Military attack against Iran would be directed at all Republican Guard Divisions, Iranian Command and Control and upon Iranian Leadership specifically the intent would be to destroy all aspects of the Iranian Leadership that the Iranian people themselves what to rid their nation of.

    You can not IMAGINE to ferocity and brutality of such a U.S. Military attack because such an attack would be designed to completely elliminate that fanatical sect of the Iranian Population that the people of Iran do not want to be their leaders and the Republican Guard would probably get one warning and one warning only just as Saddam's Republican Guard recieved before we obliterated them.

    The U.S. would first destroy all Iranian Comminication and Command and Control of their Military. Millions of Leaflets would be air dropped upon Iranian Regular Army Units as such units are comprised of just KIDS who didn't want to be in the Army in the first place.....and when you are such young Iranian Soldiers and Millions of Leaflets with a Skull upon them stating in Farsi to either disburse and GO HOME OR DIE....and such leaflets could just as well have been Bombs....such KIDS are going to GO HOME!!

    The Iranian Navy we already have been talking to and the Iranian Air Force as well and both KNOW that they have absolutely zero chance of survival thus it is highly likely they would stand down and be directed by the U.S. Navy and Air Force where to go to wait out the war.

    As I stated the Republican Guard would receive one chance and one warning and they are Fanatical and would attempt to stop the seizure of all Iranian Nuclear Facilities.....they would end up being destroyed.

    Iranian Missiles are not a threat to U.S. Forces or Israel due to current extremely high capabilities of both U.S. and Israeli ABM's which exist within the U.S. Military at multiple levels.

    The U.S. Military would essentially destroy any and all Iranian Forces that attempt to stop the seizing of all Iranian Nuclear Sites and Iranian Forces would have no chance.

    The Iranian People would not act as street insurgents although Qud's Force might but we intend to get in and get out having degreaded the Iranian Military and Leadership to such a vast degree this would allow the Iranain Democratic Movement to take over.

    As far as any Iranian SAM's such as copies of the Russian S-300.....such SAM Launchers would be destroyed very early on in the war with HARM Missiles.

    We would strike Iran ONLY.....ONLY.....ONLY....if we are FORCED TO STRIKE IRAN!!!

    It is all up to Iran.

    But if Iran is stupid enough to make Nuclear Threats....you would see a level of attack by U.S. Military Forces not done upon such a wide scope since WWII.

    Your logic is flawed in that you are under the impression that U.S. Forces in an attempt to prevent loos of life of Iranian's would get bogged down in street to street and house to house inner city battles.....as if Iran makes Nuclear threats.....the U.S. would simply use our massive Air Power and obliterate all threats with the exceptio of the Nuclear Facilities which we would seize.

    You are talking about ill trained and poorly equipped Iranian Forced being destroyed at will from high altitudes.

    You are talkig about entire Republican Guard Divisions of 100,000 men each being VAPORIZED by large wings of Stealth Bombers.

    You are talking about taking the leash off the U.S. Military as they will be allowed to fight such a war in whatever way they deam necessary.

    And you are talking about a Superpower with virtually unlimited resources and unlimited Military Capabilities having absolutely no interest in anything other than KILLING THE ENEMY.

    THAT....is what you would get if Iran does not Honor the DEAL as the U.S. Military Fights a WAR much differently against a Nuclear Capable Enemy than it did against Iraq.

    AboveAlpha
     
  24. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    These will be really good boats for the creation of ARTIFICIAL REEFS for fish and other marine animals once they are sunk.

    AboveAlpha
     
  25. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    If you think the Iranian Navy is going to even attempt to attack multiple USN. Nuclear Carrier Battle Groups you are sorely mistaken...they will stand down and will be needed to protect the new Democratic Iran that wil emerge after the war.

    Same with the Iranian Air Force and the same with the Iranian Regular Army as they will abandon their posts the moment the USAF and Psy-Op's drops Millions of Leaflets in Farsi telling them to GO HOME OR DIE!

    The Iranian People absolutely HATE their Oppresive Religious Regime as this regime beat, tortured and murdered many Pro-Democracy Leaders and Students and trucked their bodies out into the desert for mass burriel.

    You think that the over 70% of the Iranian Population that is under 30 years of age is going to take up arms and fight to preserve the rights of some Old Ayatollah's and Mullah's to keep telling their own people they must do as they are told?

    NO WAY!!!

    Iran either Honors the agreement or we will attack.

    Iran will have no chance.

    AboveAlpha
     

Share This Page