What exactly are you reading?
Its pretty commonly said the US would win the conventional battle against Iran, occupation and insurgency though would be impossible and worse than anything the US has faced.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
NYT: Trump Approves Strikes on Iran, but Then Abruptly Pulls Back
- Thread starter Halbrand
- Start date
Its pretty commonly said the US would win the conventional battle against Iran, occupation and insurgency though would be impossible and worse than anything the US has faced.
Yeah and I get some peoples distaste for the current administration but that shouldn't make you start taking Iran's twitter videos and word over your own countries intelligence. Even Adam Schiff was saying there is no question Iran was behind the tanker attacks so it is a bi partisan consensus that Iran has been doing some shady shit. Just.......blowing up an unnarmed drone shouldn't cost other people their lives.
I've not watched any Twitter shit. Fair enough, not sure why they would be lying but whatever it's possible.
...because the alternative is they shot down a US drone for no reason?
This. Not to downplay the carnage but the US could squash Iran with ease in a myriad of ways.
I think we can safely say the US is never going to actually invade Iran. Its Almost 4 times the size of Iraq and double its population. The US would require a draft to even entertain that idea.
I definitely remember that straight being all important. I don't remember if they thought it possible to keep it. I'll have to look it up later, I've been trying to ignore this til now so it's been a few years.
Yes, the same one that couldn't even handle the Iraqi army in a lot of instances much less any other.
They can't keep it, they can simply make it unusable for a significant period of time.
Do you have any reference or something I could read?
That assessment doesn't make any sense to me. Iran's been heavily sanctioned for a long ass time and before that they were in an 8 year deadlock with Iraq, a military that the US defeated in 90 days.
With the amount of money the US spends on its military Iran would need something big to stand a chance and I can't think of what that would be other then their nuke program
The strait is important but their navy would be obliterated with ease. The issue would be all the mines that would need to be cleared for it to reopen. It would take a long time.
No reason? How about retaliation for sanctions and aggressive rhetoric?
It's very clear that Iran is extremely bothered by the US pulling out of the nuclear deal and strengthening economic sanctions. Didn't we just see a tweet from a presidential advisor that basically warned the US that war is coming if sanctions aren't eased?
An unmanned drone near their territory is a good target for Iran to fight back without causing any fatalities. It brings them closer to outright conflict, but would still require the US to be the aggressor that trigger an actual war.
A draft will not happen short of WW3 or Mexico & Canada invading the US.
Military leaders don't want randoms forced in, they've been saying that since the 80's.
So... first it was 10 minutes before the strike when he called it off. Now it's 30 minutes. Oh and the planes weren't in the air, and he hadn't yet had any casualty figure from the military until 30 minutes before.
Yeah.fucking.right
Irrespective of anything else (including attempts at strategic war simulations) can we just marvel at the sheer mendacity & incompetence that this person eminates on such a crucial topic as military conflict?
Yeah.fucking.right
Irrespective of anything else (including attempts at strategic war simulations) can we just marvel at the sheer mendacity & incompetence that this person eminates on such a crucial topic as military conflict?
False. Maybe this is a reality in the old ways of war. Not anymore with our technology. Not only that, As mentioned in above posts The military doesn't want randoms and would require congressional reinstatement.
Explain how you're going to occupy a nation four times the size of Iraq and double its population and a much smarter and sophisticated resistance group with the same occupying force, and probably no outside assistance this time.
Imagine an Iranian drone flying off the coast of the US or entering US airspace. Most people have very little perspective and a complete inability to put themselves in someone else's shoes
Probably would need to use nuclear bunker busters to get rid of the nuclear sites.
You think the Republicans haven't thought about it? Take one guess which group of americans they'd love to send to war.
Mass* Occupation wouldn't be in the military's strategy. They only need to crush key military strongholds and disrupt the flow of government. There are so many ways to do this to Iran its silly to think you need to pack millions of troops on a border and march. Its archaic.
Russia sends strategic bombers towards Alaska all the time.
We send F-22s to intercept.
Russia did it twice last month.
Michael C. Bender @MichaelCBender
Military options in Iran were pushed by Bolton and Pompeo, but Pompeo was more understanding of reservations expressed by DoD, according to administration officials. Pence supported the strikes & also agreed with the president's decision to abort them.https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-says-he-s-in-no-hurry-to-confront-iran-11561122762?shareToken=steaf290b6af264207b5a624af48659d46 …
1:52 PM - Jun 21, 2019
Michael Freeman@michaelpfreeman
Trump: I want to launch against Iran now.
Pence: Your fiery boldness inspires us all, sir.
Trump: Hold on, I've had second thoughts.
Pence: Sir, no president has ever had your sense of prudence and restraint. Let us all kneel in gratitude. https://twitter.com/MichaelCBender/status/1142128096717475840 …
2:42 PM - Jun 21, 2019
Military options in Iran were pushed by Bolton and Pompeo, but Pompeo was more understanding of reservations expressed by DoD, according to administration officials. Pence supported the strikes & also agreed with the president's decision to abort them.https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-says-he-s-in-no-hurry-to-confront-iran-11561122762?shareToken=steaf290b6af264207b5a624af48659d46 …
1:52 PM - Jun 21, 2019
Michael Freeman@michaelpfreeman
Trump: I want to launch against Iran now.
Pence: Your fiery boldness inspires us all, sir.
Trump: Hold on, I've had second thoughts.
Pence: Sir, no president has ever had your sense of prudence and restraint. Let us all kneel in gratitude. https://twitter.com/MichaelCBender/status/1142128096717475840 …
2:42 PM - Jun 21, 2019
The US intercepts way before the aircraft enters American airspace, not 30 km away, let alone the clusterfuck that would occur if something entered the airspace.
Not sure if this has been posted yet, but apparently Iran almost shot down a US Navy plane with 35 crew members, but instead chose the drone.
That was a smart move. The moment they kill US military or civilians, the US would get international support for military retaliation.
Iran? Is the main global adversary of the United States Iran?
Like many of the other things you've said in this thread, that's just laughable.
That's step 1, remove the Iranian government. That's the easy part. Step 2 is actual occupation. How do you plan on fighting an insurgency many times larger, better equipped(and likely to be funded and equipped by Russians and Syrians), and many times better organized? The US struggled heavily in Iraq, 5,000 killed, 32,000+ wounded. Iran would inflict casualties not seen since Vietnam.
Looking at the Iraq war, we went in with a coalition of about 600,000 troops.. You're going to need twice that for Iran. You can guarantee the US wont recieve any help this time either. The US would be pulling its entire army,marines, and many reservists just for the invasion. Occupation of Iraq took 170,000 troops at its height, so, it's probably going to take at least 300,000+ to occupy Iran. Once the casualties start rolling in and deployments needing to be rotated, how exactly are they going to be able to maintain troops levels without a draft? The manpower simply isn't there.
I have no idea what's you are on about and that's even more laughable.
I mean I don't want that as much as anyone but this is absolutely insane.
So you see how it can happen. There's nothing more bipartisan than American fuck yeah hawkishness.
So what do you think would happen if the US engages in all out conflict with Iran? Do you think China and Russia just watch? Never let a great crisis go to waste.
I didn't realize that John Bolton was a member of Resetera.
What a joke of a post.
I haven't been keeping up with the story, but what is the speculated reasons for Iran's actions recently(the bombing at sea, and shooting down this drone)? Acting out as retaliation due to the US not honoring the nuclear deal, or as pretext for something else? Presumably they don't actually want full open conflict.
Doesn't make his post any less of a joke.
Any war against any nation would be "easy" for the US if their only goal was to carpet bomb the entire country into oblivion. And the fact that he thinks there would be no repercussions against US interests in the region is laughable. I'm glad US Generals are smarter than the folks in this thread. There's a good reason why the US has exercised restraint when it comes to military action against Iran.
Keep pretending that it can't happen, that way you can shower us with surprise and outrage when it does. The chance of it happening is higher than you seem to be willing to properly discuss.
Politicians have shown consistently in the past to have a rather predictable response to the manipulated callings of protection of the Homeland. I would never put it past them to do it again. Best predictor of future behavior remains to be past behavior.
You're out of your fucking mind or just delusional if you think Democrats would vote to reinstate the draft, let alone with a GOP President initiating a pointless war that will destroy the US on a geopolitical level.
The amount of people who are sitting safely at home yet feel a war with Iran wouldn't be a huge problem (not only for Iranian civilians but the whole region and even western country) is so damn disturbing.
I provided reasons and precedents, you provide personal insults.
OK!!