Iran war scenario 26 replies

Please wait...

Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#1 12 years ago

Well no offence but this forum is getting extremely boring lately. No interesting topics anymore, no good discussions. What happened? And a lot of good members are gone also. So I'll start with something interesting: How do you think a war with Iran will go? I strongly believe such a scenario will not occur in the near future. Cowboy Bush loves war and to fight for "freedom" but even he knows it that such a war will turn up a disaster. 1. If Iran is attacked while not provoking anyone (Attack based on assumptions they are getting WMD's), the things won't look good. There are 2 countries that might commit such an attack: USA and Israel A. Oil will skyrocket around the world. B. In turn everything else will go up. C. Taxes will increase dramatically in the US. D. High chance of inflation in the US. Now you must know that in order for such a strike, the White House needs to convince Congress that its the best decission to attack. And with this administration, its kind of hard to do that, especially now after Iraq and false WMD reports. If Iran is attacked while not provoking anyone, few countries will support the attacker (USA/Israel) . Europe will be divided on the Issue, and China and Russia will be against it. Anyway lets go back to the situation on the ground now. A. The US will most likely attack from the air only. (Air campaign). Now the Iranian air defence is not the best in the world, but not like Iraq either. What they will most likely do is attack Israel with missiles. Israel will support the US air campaign and might even take part in it so it becomes a target straight away. Its really hard for them to stay neutral, if not impossible. Once Iran retaliates, all hell will break lose. Literary. The US will not be able to stop the attacks on Israel with its air power, so what it will most likely do is retaliate on Iranian cities. But that won't change much since the Iranian population will support Iran's government, and they already lost to much to give up. B. So this whole mess will get into an even nastier mess. US/Israel has no choice but to invade, or declare peace. If the US invades, things will be very very ugly, but I doubt that will happen so I won't get into it now. C. At the end of the day the US destroys the known Iranian nuclear facilities. But what about the unknown ones? And after that happens what will stop the Iranians from really wanting a bomb. Because they were provoked and attacked before. And the US will find a hard time getting solid proof that the Iranians were actually going for a WMD. So it will be really hard to justify the bombings. D. It will also cause more hate and it might even fuel way more terrorism. E. The situation at home will get really bad. For the average American, a small descrease in the living conditions will be HUGE compared to the dcrease the average Iranian will have. Plus they are used to it more than Americans. Bottom line is the status quo won't change for the better, but for the worst. And the goals will not be fully achievied because like I said, what about the hidden facilities? And what will stop Iran from actually getting a WMD in the future. Israel, Pakistan, India, NK are good examples. They aquired WMD in secret without anyone knowing and declared that they have them. What will stop Iran from doing the same thing, if they really wanted a WMD.




-DarthMaul-

I'm way cooler than n0e (who isn't though?)

50 XP

11th February 2003

0 Uploads

5,051 Posts

0 Threads

#2 12 years ago
A. Oil will skyrocket around the world.

Definatly ecspecially with Hugo chavez warning that any attack on Iran shall result in Venezula starting an oil-embargo agains the united states.

If Iran is attacked while not provoking anyone, few countries will support the attacker (USA/Israel) . Europe will be divided on the Issue, and China and Russia will be against it.

True, even France has ruled ourt sanctions in favor of talks/diplomacy, and Britons arent really fond with the current Iraq war or tony blair..and he is about to leave office anyways, I doubt another big time supporter of the bush agenda might come into power atleast this term.

A. The US will most likely attack from the air only. (Air campaign). Now the Iranian air defence is not the best in the world, but not like Iraq either. What they will most likely do is attack Israel with missiles. Israel will support the US air campaign and might even take part in it so it becomes a target straight away. Its really hard for them to stay neutral, if not impossible. Once Iran retaliates, all hell will break lose. Literary. The US will not be able to stop the attacks on Israel with its air power, so what it will most likely do is retaliate on Iranian cities. But that won't change much since the Iranian population will support Iran's government, and they already lost to much to give up.

air only campaign? unlikely IMO, I dont think a war with Iran can be Air only, as Iran WILL RETIALIATE with everything it has.

B. So this whole mess will get into an even nastier mess. US/Israel has no choice but to invade, or declare peace. If the US invades, things will be very very ugly, but I doubt that will happen so I won't get into it now.

Ofcourse it wont :P. Bomb them, then declare peace? and how do you expect Israel to invade? swim over there? fly over Arab countries without permission? using the suez to use the considerably small navy to the persian gulf?

And the US will find a hard time getting solid proof that the Iranians were actually going for a WMD. So it will be really hard to justify the bombings.

IE; Iraq?

D. It will also cause more hate and it might even fuel way more terrorism.

E. The situation at home will get really bad. For the average American, a small descrease in the living conditions will be HUGE compared to the dcrease the average Iranian will have. Plus they are used to it more than Americans.

Ofcourse it will, and more Arab/Muslim hatered towards the US for bombing Muslim countries..who knows bush might declare this also as a crusade. Your forgetting alot of Americans might not even support the war if they know it is going to happen.

And we are leaving many other things out. Iran being a big shi'ite country, well it wont need to do so since its instinctive, provoke Iraqi Shi'ites to start attacking american troops again. and Sunnies might even get swayed into this.

Iran's whole military wont stand by and be attacked expect missiles to rain down upon US Military bases in Iraq, and targets in Israel as well.

And I highhly doubt that now with 2 years left, bush would want to start a war like this...

and your right forums getting boring lol, thats why Im hardly ever on..as much as I disliked thier views, I miss many people including Nite, USMA, and some others.




Mr.Panzerschrek

[130.Pz]Muller

50 XP

16th April 2005

0 Uploads

449 Posts

0 Threads

#3 12 years ago

-DarthMaul-Definatly ecspecially with Hugo chavez warning that any attack on Iran shall result in Venezula starting an oil-embargo agains the united states.

True, even France has ruled ourt sanctions in favor of talks/diplomacy, and Britons arent really fond with the current Iraq war or tony blair..and he is about to leave office anyways, I doubt another big time supporter of the bush agenda might come into power atleast this term.

air only campaign? unlikely IMO, I dont think a war with Iran can be Air only, as Iran WILL RETIALIATE with everything it has.

Ofcourse it wont :P. Bomb them, then declare peace? and how do you expect Israel to invade? swim over there? fly over Arab countries without permission? using the suez to use the considerably small navy to the persian gulf?

IE; Iraq?

Ofcourse it will, and more Arab/Muslim hatered towards the US for bombing Muslim countries..who knows bush might declare this also as a crusade. Your forgetting alot of Americans might not even support the war if they know it is going to happen.

And we are leaving many other things out. Iran being a big shi'ite country, well it wont need to do so since its instinctive, provoke Iraqi Shi'ites to start attacking american troops again. and Sunnies might even get swayed into this.

Iran's whole military wont stand by and be attacked expect missiles to rain down upon US Military bases in Iraq, and targets in Israel as well.

And I highhly doubt that now with 2 years left, bush would want to start a war like this...

and your right forums getting boring lol, thats why Im hardly ever on..as much as I disliked thier views, I miss many people including Nite, USMA, and some others.

hehe ya usma is livin it up at Wstpt. All i gotta say is if Americans vote bush in again (if he runs) that asshole is gonna start WW3 :uhm:




Medhiv

Resistance is Futile!

50 XP

12th September 2006

0 Uploads

297 Posts

0 Threads

#4 12 years ago

and we all thank god, that he can't be elected for a 3rd time ... don't we :D :smokin:

And what will stop Iran from actually getting a WMD in the future. Israel, Pakistan, India, NK are good examples. They aquired WMD in secret without anyone knowing and declared that they have them. What will stop Iran from doing the same thing, if they really wanted a WMD.

i'd go with you on that point ... but the question is always, how much did the us and other country secret-services really new about those weapons being build, because if they can't infiltrate a state and spy on them, determinating if they have WDM's or not, that gives them a really poor reputation further more, if they can't spy a country, i don't think that they are capable of spying those fundamentalist groups that if had WDM's would actually make use of them. because for all that's been said about iran and WDM's, if if they did acknowledge the plan of building them it would be just a mere power-symbol for them ... so they can claim to be in the nuke-team of this planet and even if france and the present/future uk administration do disagree on the us foreign-politics for now, we all know what their collective response would be for iran nuking israel or other countries probably might as well end as the iraq-conflict ... devestation and too many casulties ... :rolleyes:




masked_marsoe VIP Member

Heaven's gonna burn your eyes

50 XP

16th April 2005

0 Uploads

8,063 Posts

0 Threads

#5 12 years ago

It won't happen. The US military is overstretched as it is, and can't take on another war with its commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan. Which, really makes you wonder if the term "superpower" is thrown around too much as it is.

In the meantime, the EU is dealing with Iran. In the way Iran should be dealt with. http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/thepress/0,2106,3809789a6428,00.html




AzH

I'm too cool to Post

269,650 XP

17th September 2003

0 Uploads

24,050 Posts

0 Threads

#6 12 years ago

Congress would never authorise pre-emptive action against Iran. The U.N. (France, Russia) would always veto any serious sanctions against Iran. Iran has supplied the most documents to the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding it's nuclear plans and everything points to it being for peaceful purposes. Claims by the US Government that Iran is close to producing weapons grade material are far-fetched and stink of bullshit and propaganda. There is no justification for an attack on Iran and it will not happen.

Bush might be labelled a fool, but he isn't that stupid. Struggling with English is not the same as stupid enough to push for Armageddon.

Even is he was, the results would be disastrous. Sure, U.S. airpower would be dominant and the USAF would fly pretty much unchallenged across Iran raining death and destruction upon the Iranian armed forces. But Iran is at least three times the size of Iraq, and Iran is as close to a democracy as you can get in a theocracy. The Iranian people would not suffer "regime change" gladly. They would not welcome the U.S. into their cities and into their hearts. The only way to push through and defeat Iran comprehensively would be through a hostile occupation. With three times the landmass and a hostile population to subjugate, an invasion of Iran would be only for the fearless, or the foolish.

The ramifications of such action would be felt world-wide. The predominantly Shia Iran shares links with Shia Muslims across the Middle East. Most notably in Iraq where the insurgency would intensify. In Palestine the reaction to an invasion of Iran would be hostility towards Israel. Hezbollah and Hamas would take advantage of the crisis to launch attacks against Israeli settlements with support from Syria. Israeli reactions would lead to an escalation of violence across the region and across the world. New terror attacks would hit the US and Britain. The crisis would lead to a huge rise in oil prices. Someone previously mentioned a Venezuelan embargo on the U.S. and coupled with diminished supplies from Iran and Iraq this would lead to an oil shortage across the globe and resulting damage to global economies. Most notably, the U.S (and as a consequence) Japan (which relies on US growth for it's growth).

So with price increases, a loss of consumer confidence and oil shortages, the resulting recessions in the US, across Europe and the Far East would be devastating. Add to that an increase in paranoia due to the threat of terrorist attacks and an increase in terrorist activity - the resulting loss of freedoms and persecution of suspect races, legislation such as the Patriot Act being passed in the name of Nation Security, and instability around the world due to the conflict, it isn't going to be a very rosy future.

But then, maybe I'm just being a pessimist.




Force Recon

Semper fidelis

50 XP

10th July 2004

0 Uploads

2,637 Posts

0 Threads

#7 12 years ago

it will lead to more terrorism. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5384366.stm it will be really messy.I was really surprised when France wanted to make a soft approach.Maybe if they had someone like Sarkozy ...




GOD111

I Am Teh God

50 XP

1st July 2004

0 Uploads

6,967 Posts

0 Threads

#8 12 years ago

USA will never ever bea ble to fight on a third front. The US armed forces might be one of the strongest in the world. But even they have their limits. And since America in general is against conscription, they just don't have the manpower to make an attack on a country like Iran. Iraq and Afghanistan will be considerd a walk in the park compared to Iran. And I also said this before, if you think they are fantaics in Iraq And Afghanistan, just wait till you reach Iran. USA will unfourtenlly not stand a chance as long as they use conventional weapons, and we all know how the talk went after the last time they dropped a couple of non-conventionl bombs, so I don't see that it will happen.




masked_marsoe VIP Member

Heaven's gonna burn your eyes

50 XP

16th April 2005

0 Uploads

8,063 Posts

0 Threads

#9 12 years ago
SwedeUSA will never ever be able to fight on a third front.

Though admittedly, it will just be connecting two fronts into one big rolling shithole from the Syrian border east to the Pakistani border. I'm not sure that has been managed since Genghis Khan.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#10 12 years ago

AzHCongress would never authorise pre-emptive action against Iran. The U.N. (France, Russia) would always veto any serious sanctions against Iran. Iran has supplied the most documents to the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding it's nuclear plans and everything points to it being for peaceful purposes. Claims by the US Government that Iran is close to producing weapons grade material are far-fetched and stink of bullshit and propaganda. There is no justification for an attack on Iran and it will not happen.

Bush might be labelled a fool, but he isn't that stupid. Struggling with English is not the same as stupid enough to push for Armageddon.

Even is he was, the results would be disastrous. Sure, U.S. airpower would be dominant and the USAF would fly pretty much unchallenged across Iran raining death and destruction upon the Iranian armed forces. But Iran is at least three times the size of Iraq, and Iran is as close to a democracy as you can get in a theocracy. The Iranian people would not suffer "regime change" gladly. They would not welcome the U.S. into their cities and into their hearts. The only way to push through and defeat Iran comprehensively would be through a hostile occupation. With three times the landmass and a hostile population to subjugate, an invasion of Iran would be only for the fearless, or the foolish.

The ramifications of such action would be felt world-wide. The predominantly Shia Iran shares links with Shia Muslims across the Middle East. Most notably in Iraq where the insurgency would intensify. In Palestine the reaction to an invasion of Iran would be hostility towards Israel. Hezbollah and Hamas would take advantage of the crisis to launch attacks against Israeli settlements with support from Syria. Israeli reactions would lead to an escalation of violence across the region and across the world. New terror attacks would hit the US and Britain. The crisis would lead to a huge rise in oil prices. Someone previously mentioned a Venezuelan embargo on the U.S. and coupled with diminished supplies from Iran and Iraq this would lead to an oil shortage across the globe and resulting damage to global economies. Most notably, the U.S (and as a consequence) Japan (which relies on US growth for it's growth).

So with price increases, a loss of consumer confidence and oil shortages, the resulting recessions in the US, across Europe and the Far East would be devastating. Add to that an increase in paranoia due to the threat of terrorist attacks and an increase in terrorist activity - the resulting loss of freedoms and persecution of suspect races, legislation such as the Patriot Act being passed in the name of Nation Security, and instability around the world due to the conflict, it isn't going to be a very rosy future.

But then, maybe I'm just being a pessimist.

Though I agree with your list of ramifacations, I believe that the strongest opposition would actually come from Russia and China, not France and Russia. The EU-3 has been very instrumental in the talks with Iran, but I am sure that you know this already.

*SW3D3*, though there are a lot of hardliners in Iran, that country also has its liberal progressives. They are generally college students (of course) much like China's. Though I doubt they would play too much of a role in a war between the US and Iran, I'm just throwing that out there for everyone to think about.