Bra!!!
Iraqi targets arent Iranian targets, false analogy. Iranian air defences today are way stronger than Iraqi defenses back then.
flying from which bases? also many are dropping out of the skies too, plus they cost alot to operate during wars and need lots of maintenance.
that dont exist in reality.
yes it is, especially when its loaded with weapons.
Lol, but is it actually combat tested? against a strong/standard competence national military?
not in winning wars..
definitely not- this one is fatter and more useless- almost a yearly defense budget of almost a $1trn and US is running out of ammunition to try to save stupid Ukraine's butt? OMG. SO much for "the private indfustry will solve all the issues" - that's not solving the US's current ammunition production and scarcity issues.
or you want them go go away from people's minds after they became flaming toast from Russian troops attacking them?
Lemme give that to you- Americans arent afraid of Kowsars, but that comments suggests they are still afraid of something....and if its not Kowsar then what it is? 40+ years with no conventional attack despite all the hype and technology and resources and blah blah all you US military boot lickers on PDF will say..US military winning record in modern times is bad...US is conventionally stronger than Iran's military, the US can definitely rain punishment and destruction on Iran, but it wont win in the end, and Iran doesnt want its country destroyed for nothing to give US the opportunity to try to take Iran back to the stone ages.Whereas In Iran, broadly speaking only significant advances we're seeing are ballistic missiles and SAMs. Please don't get mad at me for saying but Americans aren't afraid of Kowsar
They stayed there 20 years before pulling out, if you're content with getting invaded for 20 years then your logic makes perfect sense.
lol wtf is this
Soviet Union wasn't a mad radical Shia regime that literally boasts about how they would wipe out Israel and the US every day and paint "death to Israel" on ballistic missiles that can carry nuclear warheads
US would wipe the floor with garbage Iranian air defenses lmao
Correct, they were a mad radical communist regime.
Except when you are in a death cult that praises the shahada
pff.. every muslim country does that, by your logic Pakistan should have nuked India by now.
Red Team: How to Succeed By Thinking Like the Enemy - read this book. This principle was adopted in MC02 to check the impact of certain technologies and tactics. MC02 featured a total of two combat scenarios - each representing a different deployment tactic to see how it can shape the course of battle and outcome. US Navy failed in combat scenario 1 due to questionable deployment tactic in the Gulf of Oman and other restricted rules of engagement - this was intentional to see what happens (i.e., setting yourself up for failure can be instructive). Shift from combat scenario 1 to combat scenario 2 was assumed to be changing the rules of the simulation, which is misleading and false.
| 2001 | 2018 |
| AEGIS Baseline 6 | AEGIS Baseline 9 |
| Munition SM-2ER = 8 SM-2MR = 46 ESSM = 8 TLAM = 32 VLA = 8 
| Munition SM-3 = 8 SM-6 = 16 SM-2MR = 30 ESSM = 16 TLAM = 32 VLA = 6 
|
Here:
My statement is in view of the article that you posted in this thread, the author Scott Ritter has grossly overestimated Iranian capability and grossly underestimated American capability to fight a war in typical American fashion to overhype a particular enemy. The intent might be to push American MIC to do a better job, or Scott Ritter is bitter due to his questionable past.
I see.
Sun Tzu: Appear weak when you are strong...
Colossal target list (many times that of so-called "Desert Storm")? Do you have statistics?
It is true that Russia, US, and Israel had distinct objectives and established a hotline to avoid clashes in Syria:
www.globaldefensecorp.com
Situation on the ground does not look good to me.
Expulsion of Iran from Syria is unlikely because Assad regime has welcomed Iranian troops and Hezbollah in sectors under its control. But Israel is making it very difficult for Iran to provide arms to Hezbollah and Assad regime in Syria. Israel has carried out hundreds of strikes, killed scores of Hezbollah fighters among others on the ground, and prevented Iran from improving Syrian defenses thus far.
Iran might be able to inflict losses on US-led forces in war (expected), but your claim is over-optimistic.
Iraqi air defense system was one of the largest and most capable in 1991 - see above.
And US military capability is frozen in time since 1991, right?
General Donn A. Starry proposed AirLand Battle doctrine to defeat opposing forces in 1982. This doctrine was successfully applied to liberate Kuwait from Iraq in 1991 (Operation Desert Storm), to defeat Al-Qaeda Network in Tora Bora mountains of Afghanistan in 2002 (Operation Anaconda), and to topple Saddam regime in Iraq in 2003 (Operation Iraqi Freedom).
www.newamerica.org
Your options are limited like that of a regional power - have I not pointed out this reality repeatedly?
Do you see US attacking virtually any country for having disagreements with it? Humanity is a thing and Americans are not devoid of it. US is a democratic country and not led by a dictator to do his bidding.
Scott Ritter did not take into account following observations:
See above.
If your statements are to be taken at face value - Iran is superpower with unmatched military might in current times.
US can bring substantial firepower to a region in less than 24 hours. US Navy can degrade Iranian defenses from a distance and make it possible for the US Marine Corps to establish ingress points on Iranian lands. Historical references include Operation Overlord in 1944, the Battle of Iwo Jima in 1945, and the Battle of Inchon in 1950.
You are living in the past, brother. American surveillance system is GLOBAL in scale.
www.thespacereport.org
Saudi are learning how to fight a war and their access to American surveillance system might be limited. Understandable.
This is immature claim.
Scott Ritter is making false claims.
www.pbs.org
You missed my point.
1983 Beirut barracks bombing incident occurred when Lebanon was in turmoil due to different reasons and was carried out by a non state actor. Reagan administration did not come up with a plan of action to hold any side accountable for this incident due to its members having soft corner for Iran in view of broader Cold War dynamics:
foreignpolicy.com
www.jstor.org
www.euronews.com
www.pewresearch.org
Natanz sabotage in 2010?
www.fpri.org
1. Under Saddam regime, Iraq developed chemical weapons, and created three of its most competent military arms such as the Republican Guards, integrated air defense system, and ballistic missile force. Iraq was also rebuilding its navy. Iraqi military technology was sourced from USSR and France and Iraqi military capability was globally respected and feared in 1990. What else Iraq could do at the time?
FYI
www.rferl.org
www.rusi.org
This war has taken a toll on Russia on the level not witnessed in a long time.Russian arms industries are churning out greater quantities of ammunition than the west.
Russian manufacturers are making up to 7 times as much ammunition as Western arms makers, Estonian defense official says
The country fired about 10 million rounds of artillery last year, but is on track to produce just two million rounds this year, The New York Times reported.www.yahoo.com
But the conflict scenarii are too different to warrant an equation.
www.lemonde.fr
www.al-monitor.com
This is not good enough.
I have shown otherwise in this post - see above.
The intensity of the ongoing Ukraine - Russia War is said to be on the level of clashes witnessed in World War 2.
India to Pakistan is different from what Israel is to Iran.
Lol
F-22 and F-35 are entirely different beasts, nevertheless.
MC02 was aimed to test battle tactics and spur USN to make its ships more capable and survivable than ever before:
This is the point.
MC02 has served its purpose.
2001 2018 AEGIS Baseline 6 AEGIS Baseline 9 Munition
SM-2ER = 8
SM-2MR = 46
ESSM = 8
TLAM = 32
VLA = 8
Munition
SM-3 = 8
SM-6 = 16
SM-2MR = 30
ESSM = 16
TLAM = 32
VLA = 6
Latest developments:
- SM-2 munition is entirely replaced with SM-6 munition and SM-3 munition loadout is increased.
- TLAM improvements ongoing
- AEGIS Baseline 10 is emerging
The SM-6 missile is three missiles in one. It's the only weapon that can perform anti-air warfare, ballistic missile defense and anti-surface warfare missions. SM-6 munition is designed to intercept virtually any type of airborne threat including long range ASBM. Case in point = FTM-31 E1a live fire test. Evidence in action.
Here:
Iran’s ballistic missiles constitute a primary component of its strategic deterrent. Lacking a modern air force, Iran has embraced ballistic missiles as a long-range strike capability to dissuade its adversaries in the region—particularly the United States, Israel, and Saudi Arabia—from attacking Iran. Iran has the largest missile force in the Middle East, with a substantial inventory of close-range ballistic missiles (CRBMs), short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs), and medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) that can strike targets throughout the region as far as 2,000 kilometers from Iran’s borders. Iran is also developing land-attack cruise missiles (LACMs), which present a unique threat profile from ballistic missiles because they can fly at low altitude and attack a target from multiple directions.
Decades of international sanctions have hampered Iran’s ability to modernize its military forces through foreign procurement, but Tehran has invested heavily in its domestic infrastructure, equipment, and expertise to develop and produce increasingly capable ballistic and cruise missiles. Iran will continue to improve the accuracy and lethality of some of those systems and will pursue the development of new systems, despite continued international counterproliferation efforts and restrictions under UNSCR 2231. Iran is also extending the range of some of its SRBMs to be able to strike targets farther away, filling a capability gap between its MRBMs and older SRBMs. [For more details on UNSCR 2231, see Appendix J.]
Iran can launch salvos of missiles against large-area targets, such as military bases and population centers, throughout the region to inflict damage, complicate adversary military operations, and weaken enemy morale. Although it maintains many older, inaccurate missiles in its inventory, Iran is increasing the accuracy of many of its missile systems. The use of improved guidance technology and maneuverability during the terminal phase of flight enables these missiles to be used more effectively against smaller targets, including specific military facilities and ships at sea. These enhancements could reduce the miss-distance of some Iranian missiles to as little as tens of meters, potentially requiring fewer missiles to damage or destroy an intended target and broadening Iran’s options for missile use. Iran’s more-accurate systems are primarily short range, such as the Fateh-110 SRBM and its derivatives. Iran’s longer-range systems, such as the Shahab 3 MRBM, are generally less accurate. However, Iran is developing MRBMs with greater precision, such as the Emad-1, that improve Iran’s ability to strike distant targets more effectively. Iran could also complicate regional missile defenses by launching large missile salvos.
This information is taken from an American Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) report that was published in 2019 - before Iranian attack on Ayn al-Assad Airbase in Iraq.
Defense Intelligence Agency Releases Report: Iran Military Power
The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) today released “Iran Military Power,” an intelligence product that examines the core capabilities of Iran's military.www.dia.mil
1. American intelligence community is expected to have a better understanding of these developments in comparison to individuals commenting on American mainstream media of-course.
2. Iranian attack on Ayn al-Assad Airbase in Iraq provides a more concrete evidence of the Iranian claims about accuracy of its Ballistic Missile (BM) technology of-course. Evidence in action. This is how it is.
Colossal target list (many times that of so-called "Desert Storm")? Do you have statistics?
Iraq had created a massive air defense force by 1990:
Credited to RAND
This was one of the strongest aspects of Iraqi military capability in 1991, this force brought down a total of 60 Coalition jet fighters in the war while none were lost in aerial clashes above Iraq. Impressive, if you ask me.
Numbers are but a part of the game, you do NOT have to match and fight opposing forces on bullet per bullet basis. You need to understand the system and cripple it.
Credited to RAND
View attachment 954297
Credited to RAND
US focused on HOW TO prevent Iraqi military from fighting like a cohesive fighting force in war. US came up with excellent combination of strategy, tactics, and technologies to destroy Iraqi armed forces and liberate Kuwait, in a matter of days. This war was fought with the intent to win and not to appease American MIC. American leadership of the time was fully committed to the cause.
In addition to creating a massive air defense force, Iraq had created 20 Airbases, hundreds of hardened shelters, and numerous bunkers housing sensitive equipment. This infrastructure was bombed repeatedly to the extent that Iraqi Air Force lost 141 aircraft on the ground and scores of Iraqi pilots thought that it was better find refuge in Iran (138 aircraft fled to Iran).
Iraqi C2 military bunker complex at Al Taji Air Base was encased in reinforced concrete and buried 100 feet deep. This complex withstood numerous attacks during the war but US came up with a solution:
For days, U.S. warplanes had pounded the Iraqi military bunker complex at Al Taji Air Base north of Baghdad without success. Even huge 2,000-pound bombs designed to slice through six-foot-thick bunker walls could not breach the command lair, encased in concrete and buried 100 feet deep.
On the evening of Feb. 27, four days into the ground offensive against Iraq, a U.S. Air Force F-111F fighter-bomber streaked north across the Saudi desert on a course for Al Taji. A long, cylinder-like device fell from the plane and, guided by a laser, hurtled toward the bunkers.
A small puff of smoke suddenly shot from an entrance to Taji Bunker No. 1. About seven seconds later, a huge explosion ripped through the command post, reducing the bunker to a jumble of broken steel and concrete, according to Air Force officials.
The mission marked the spectacular battlefield debut of the GBU-28, a bunker-killing bomb developed and rushed into combat with unprecedented speed by the Air Force, Texas Instruments Inc. and Lockheed Missiles and Space Co. during the Persian Gulf War.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...ulf-war/246c123d-8833-465b-a848-4bd046060c83/
S-300 and S-400 systems are getting wrecked in Ukraine in fact; Ukrainian forces are not hesitant to engage and destroy virtually any Russian military asset within reach. Ukraine has also lost a number of its S-300 systems to Russian forces in the war.
The trouble with Russia’s S-400 Triumf surface-to-air missiles in the Ukraine war
Ukraine has destroyed more than five batteries of Almaz-Antey manufactured S-400 surface-to-air missiles in Donetsk Oblast, Kherson Oblast, Tokmak and Crimean peninsula using cheap kamikaze drones and American-made HIMARS artillery rockets. Threat detection, tracking, and Targeting solutions...
So much for the "in a real confrontation with Russia things would unfold quite differently" claim.
Expulsion of Iran from Syria is unlikely because Assad regime has welcomed Iranian troops and Hezbollah in sectors under its control. But Israel is making it very difficult for Iran to provide arms to Hezbollah and Assad regime in Syria. Israel has carried out hundreds of strikes, killed scores of Hezbollah fighters among others on the ground, and prevented Iran from improving Syrian defenses thus far.
Iran–Israel conflict during the Syrian civil war - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
General Donn A. Starry proposed AirLand Battle doctrine to defeat opposing forces in 1982. This doctrine was successfully applied to liberate Kuwait from Iraq in 1991 (Operation Desert Storm), to defeat Al-Qaeda Network in Tora Bora mountains of Afghanistan in 2002 (Operation Anaconda), and to topple Saddam regime in Iraq in 2003 (Operation Iraqi Freedom).
Lt Gen Norman Seip proposed Multi-Domain Operations Doctrine in 2017. This is a new doctrine and the element of surprise.
Defense Technical Information Center
apps.dtic.mil
The Army and Multi-Domain Operations: Moving Beyond AirLand Battle
Dennis Wille explains the evolution of AirLand battle in the Army and where Army doctrine could take us next.
Multi-Domain Operations/Joint All-Domain Operations
Discover Lockheed Martin's advanced JADO and JADC2 solutions for unmatched defense across land, air, sea, space, and cyber, ensuring rapid threat deterrence.www.lockheedmartin.com
You are living in the past, brother. American surveillance system is GLOBAL in scale.
2016 - Missile Detection Satellites
Only two countries are known to operate global missile detection and warning satellites—Russia and the United States. During 2016, only one country, the United States, has been able to conduct global monitoring with missile detection and warning satellites 24 hours a day. Russia appears to...
Relatively focused surveillance of virtually any country can be easily established.
Do you have proof of Iran having created thousands of TEL for launching missiles? You might be confusing missile stockpile(s) with TEL inventory. Even China does not have these numbers.
Scott Ritter is making false claims.
What led up to Trump's firing of John Bolton
President Donald Trump and his national security adviser rarely saw eye to eye on global hotspots. The national security adviser held far more hawkish views than the "America first" president.
Donald Trump did not start a war in any region, to his credit. But Trump was not afraid to call the shots when circumstances demanded it, he ordered US forces to prepare for war with North Korea in 2017 - a country that is more dangerous than Iran. He openly threatened to destroy North Korea but South Korea played a role in diffusing tensions between the two countries.
Ahmed Chalabi obituary
Controversial Iraqi politician who claimed falsely that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destructionwww.theguardian.com
1983 Beirut barracks bombing incident occurred when Lebanon was in turmoil due to different reasons and was carried out by a non state actor. Reagan administration did not come up with a plan of action to hold any side accountable for this incident due to its members having soft corner for Iran in view of broader Cold War dynamics:
When Reagan Cut and Run
The forgotten history of when America boldly abandoned ship in the Middle East.
The Iran-Contra Affair | American Experience | PBS
Ronald Reagan's efforts to eradicate Communism spanned the globe, but the insurgent Contras' cause in Nicaragua was particularly dear to him.www.pbs.org
Khomeini setup in Iran was NOT close USSR and Reagan administration wanted to keep it this way.
Obama administration was content with defeat of Jaish al-Mahdi and stabilization of Iraq. Obama administration ordered withdrawal of American troops from Iraq in 2011 and sought to rebuild bilateral relations with Iran by supporting JCPOA.
Chapter 2 Jaish al-Mahdi in Iraq
The U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003 was an emphatic military success. The resulting occupation, however, proved far more problematic, with various groups and factions opposing the U.S. militarycco.ndu.edu
Barack Obama announces total withdrawal of US troops from Iraq
President says 'America's war in Iraq will be over' with decision to pull all troops from Iraq by the end of the year
The Obama Presidency and the 5+1 Agreement with Iran on JSTOR
MAURO LUCENTINI, The Obama Presidency and the 5+1 Agreement with Iran, Rivista di Studi Politici Internazionali, NUOVA SERIE, Vol. 82, No. 3 (327) (LUGLIO-SETTEMBRE 2015), pp. 335-342
Shocking, right?
Trump administration ditched JCPOA, put more sanctions on Iran, and decided to assassinate Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. Trump administration identified this man as the architect of Shiite insurgency in Iraq during the (2003 - 2011) period.
But Trump administration was not on good terms with Europe and did not get another term:
How did US President Donald Trump impact Europe over his four years?
Donald Trump's unpredictability and America First policy have shaken the post-WWII global order and strained relations between Western allies.
America’s Image Abroad Rebounds With Transition From Trump to Biden
A new survey of 16 publics finds a significant uptick in ratings for the U.S., with strong support for Joe Biden and several of his major policy initiatives. But many raise concerns about the health of America’s political system.
Therefore, Trump administration could not do much about Iran.
Iran had been lucky thus far.
Biden administration does not want to escalate matters with Iran:
Statement from President Joe Biden on the Return of American Detainees from Iran | The White House
Today, five innocent Americans who were imprisoned in Iran are finally coming home. Siamak Namazi, Morad Tahbaz, Emad Sharghi, and two citizens who wish to remain private will soon be reunited with their loved ones—after enduring years of agony, uncertainty, and suffering. I am grateful to our...www.whitehouse.gov
Iran Releases 5 Americans as U.S. Unfreezes Billions in Oil Revenue for Tehran
The terms of the deal have generated intense criticism from Republicans, even as the White House insists Iran will be prevented from spending the money on anything except humanitarian goods.www.nytimes.com
Biden's Middle East Balancing Act: Iran’s Nuclear Program and Saudi-Israeli Ties - Foreign Policy Research Institute
For some months now, officials in Washington and other world capitals assumed that diplomatic efforts to reach a deal between the United States and Iran to
Iran's luck continue to shine.
FYI
Russian Officials Predicted A Quick Triumph In Ukraine. Did Bad Intelligence Skew Kremlin Decision-Making?
Was the Kremlin decision to invade Ukraine based on flawed intelligence? Or was it good intelligence that was misused? A bogged-down military campaign, and an arrest in Moscow, add to intrigue.
Russia planned to invade Ukraine over a 10-day period and thereafter occupy the country to enable annexation by August 2022. The Russian plan presupposed that speed, and the use of deception to keep Ukrainian forces away from Kyiv, could enable the rapid seizure of the capital. The Russian deception plan largely succeeded, and the Russians achieved a 12:1 force ratio advantage north of Kyiv. The very operational security that enabled the successful deception, however, also led Russian forces to be unprepared at the tactical level to execute the plan effectively. The Russian plan’s greatest deficiency was the lack of reversionary courses of action. As a result, when speed failed to produce the desired results, Russian forces found their positions steadily degraded as Ukraine mobilised. Despite these setbacks, Russia refocused on Donbas and, since Ukraine had largely expended its ammunition supply, proved successful in subsequent operations, slowed by the determination – rather than the capabilities – of Ukrainian troops. From April, the West became Ukraine’s strategic depth, and the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) only robbed Russia of the initiative once long-range fires brought Russian logistics under threat.
Preliminary Lessons in Conventional Warfighting from Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: February–July 2022
This study of the early phases of the 2022 war sheds light on Ukraine's strengths and vulnerabilities, and the need for further Western support.
This war has taken a toll on Russia on the level not witnessed in a long time.
Bring out your dead A joint investigation by Meduza and Mediazona reveals the true number of Russian soldiers killed so far in the invasion of Ukraine — Meduza
Roughly 47,000. That is how many Russian soldiers have died so far in the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, according to a joint study by journalists at Meduza and Mediazona and Tubingen University statistician Dmitry Kobak. Analyzing existing reports about published obituaries, mortality data...meduza.io
The secret carnage of military losses in Ukraine
Both Kyiv and Moscow are downplaying or keeping silent about the number of soldiers killed and wounded, but casualties are comparable to those of the First World War.
Modern-age hybrid war can prove very costly to fight in all aspects as both Ukraine and Russia are finding out lately. Ukraine might have collapsed if NATO had not come to its aid.
Iran does not have unlimited funds and a good economic outlook either:
Iran's economic woes persist a year on Mahsa Amini protests
Inflation and unemployment rates remain high, which could contribute to a renewed burst of demonstrations.
And Iran is unlikely to draw support like Ukraine in view of its current global standing.
It is easy to talk about ballistic missile stockpiles but modern-age hybrid war has so many aspects to consider.
This is not good enough.
The intensity of the ongoing Ukraine - Russia War is said to be on the level of clashes witnessed in World War 2.
War On Terror was fought in a way that defence contractors could make profits.
Profits from ‘war on terror’
WARS are no more fought for territorial conquests or ideological reasons, much less for causes such as democracy,...www.dawn.com
France's Macron says Bangladesh commits to order 10 Airbus aircraft
Once you asked me like an idiot if I have read about Ottoman Dynasty. Now, I ask you did you ever read history of Bengal beyond Class lV level? All these Mir Zafar stuffs are written there to make us happy. Can you give a reference that Mir Zafar took part in that war and annihilated the troops...pdf.defence.pk
US might decide to fight its next war in a different way, to win in a short span of time.
US will not touch Iran for now because Biden administration is working to recover American prestige. US have found a way to regain its importance in European affairs: Russian invasion of Ukraine provided this opportunity. Europe was warming up to both Russia and China previously. US is reaching out to more countries to support them - some in Asia. International standing is important consideration. Refer back to decisions of Reagan administration.
US might wait for Iran to make a mistake.
Very comprehensive, beautiful post *chef's kiss* it was very much fun to read.Red Team: How to Succeed By Thinking Like the Enemy - read this book. This principle was adopted in MC02 to check the impact of certain technologies and tactics. MC02 featured a total of two combat scenarios - each representing a different deployment tactic to see how it can shape the course of battle and outcome. US Navy failed in combat scenario 1 due to questionable deployment tactic in the Gulf of Oman and other restricted rules of engagement - this was intentional to see what happens (i.e., setting yourself up for failure can be instructive). Shift from combat scenario 1 to combat scenario 2 was assumed to be changing the rules of the simulation, which is misleading and false.
The Red Team in MC02 is shown to be highly motivated, competent, and skilled in conduct of war - are you sure that Iranian forces live up to the MC02 simulation standard in view of incidents such as How an F-22 pilot scared Iranian fighters away with just one sentence, IRIAF Commander reportedly fired after he kept secret that Israeli F-35 stealth fighters had violated Iran Airspace and Iranian commander sentenced to 13 years for shooting down Ukrainian passenger plane?
These incidents do not provide a convincing picture. I will not be harsh on a force for failing to handle cutting edge aircraft such as F-22 and F-35 - these aircraft are not virtually defenseless like ISR drones. Even the RQ-170 incident is a one-off due to complacency of its operators after 3 years of conducting ISR missions deep inside Iran; somebody thought that it was a good idea to dispatch a drone for ISR in broad daylight deep inside Iran. F-22 and F-35 are entirely different beasts, nevertheless.
MC02 was aimed to test battle tactics and spur USN to make its ships more capable and survivable than ever before:
This is the point.
MC02 has served its purpose.
2001 2018 AEGIS Baseline 6 AEGIS Baseline 9 Munition
SM-2ER = 8
SM-2MR = 46
ESSM = 8
TLAM = 32
VLA = 8
Munition
SM-3 = 8
SM-6 = 16
SM-2MR = 30
ESSM = 16
TLAM = 32
VLA = 6
Latest developments:
- SM-2 munition is entirely replaced with SM-6 munition and SM-3 munition loadout is increased.
- TLAM improvements ongoing
- AEGIS Baseline 10 is emerging
The SM-6 missile is three missiles in one. It's the only weapon that can perform anti-air warfare, ballistic missile defense and anti-surface warfare missions. SM-6 munition is designed to intercept virtually any type of airborne threat including long range ASBM. Case in point = FTM-31 E1a live fire test. Evidence in action.
Here:
Iran’s ballistic missiles constitute a primary component of its strategic deterrent. Lacking a modern air force, Iran has embraced ballistic missiles as a long-range strike capability to dissuade its adversaries in the region—particularly the United States, Israel, and Saudi Arabia—from attacking Iran. Iran has the largest missile force in the Middle East, with a substantial inventory of close-range ballistic missiles (CRBMs), short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs), and medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) that can strike targets throughout the region as far as 2,000 kilometers from Iran’s borders. Iran is also developing land-attack cruise missiles (LACMs), which present a unique threat profile from ballistic missiles because they can fly at low altitude and attack a target from multiple directions.
Decades of international sanctions have hampered Iran’s ability to modernize its military forces through foreign procurement, but Tehran has invested heavily in its domestic infrastructure, equipment, and expertise to develop and produce increasingly capable ballistic and cruise missiles. Iran will continue to improve the accuracy and lethality of some of those systems and will pursue the development of new systems, despite continued international counterproliferation efforts and restrictions under UNSCR 2231. Iran is also extending the range of some of its SRBMs to be able to strike targets farther away, filling a capability gap between its MRBMs and older SRBMs. [For more details on UNSCR 2231, see Appendix J.]
Iran can launch salvos of missiles against large-area targets, such as military bases and population centers, throughout the region to inflict damage, complicate adversary military operations, and weaken enemy morale. Although it maintains many older, inaccurate missiles in its inventory, Iran is increasing the accuracy of many of its missile systems. The use of improved guidance technology and maneuverability during the terminal phase of flight enables these missiles to be used more effectively against smaller targets, including specific military facilities and ships at sea. These enhancements could reduce the miss-distance of some Iranian missiles to as little as tens of meters, potentially requiring fewer missiles to damage or destroy an intended target and broadening Iran’s options for missile use. Iran’s more-accurate systems are primarily short range, such as the Fateh-110 SRBM and its derivatives. Iran’s longer-range systems, such as the Shahab 3 MRBM, are generally less accurate. However, Iran is developing MRBMs with greater precision, such as the Emad-1, that improve Iran’s ability to strike distant targets more effectively. Iran could also complicate regional missile defenses by launching large missile salvos.
This information is taken from an American Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) report that was published in 2019 - before Iranian attack on Ayn al-Assad Airbase in Iraq.
Defense Intelligence Agency Releases Report: Iran Military Power
The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) today released “Iran Military Power,” an intelligence product that examines the core capabilities of Iran's military.www.dia.mil
1. American intelligence community is expected to have a better understanding of these developments in comparison to individuals commenting on American mainstream media of-course.
2. Iranian attack on Ayn al-Assad Airbase in Iraq provides a more concrete evidence of the Iranian claims about accuracy of its Ballistic Missile (BM) technology of-course. Evidence in action. This is how it is.
My statement is in view of the article that you posted in this thread, the author Scott Ritter has grossly overestimated Iranian capability and grossly underestimated American capability to fight a war in typical American fashion to overhype a particular enemy. The intent might be to push American MIC to do a better job, or Scott Ritter is bitter due to his questionable past.
US forces have a rich history of confronting strong adversaries and prevailing in some of the toughest battles to be fought in human history and also in battles where US forces were less capable on paper.
The Battle of Midway - 1942
The Battle of El Guettar - 1942
Operation Overlord - 1944
The Battle of Iwo Jima - 1945
The Battle of Chosin Reservoir - 1950
The Battle of Hue City - 1968
Operation Apache Snow - 1969
The Battle of Fallujah (First and Second) - 2004
These achievements are not possible with decision makers like Scott Ritter. Human spirit is a thing.
I see.
Still, nobody sane would want to escalate exchanges with the US to the point of no return.
Sun Tzu: Appear weak when you are strong...
Colossal target list (many times that of so-called "Desert Storm")? Do you have statistics?
Iraq had created a massive air defense force by 1990:
Credited to RAND
This was one of the strongest aspects of Iraqi military capability in 1991, this force brought down a total of 60 Coalition jet fighters in the war while none were lost in aerial clashes above Iraq. Impressive, if you ask me.
Numbers are but a part of the game, you do NOT have to match and fight opposing forces on bullet per bullet basis. You need to understand the system and cripple it.
Credited to RAND
View attachment 954297
Credited to RAND
US focused on HOW TO prevent Iraqi military from fighting like a cohesive fighting force in war. US came up with excellent combination of strategy, tactics, and technologies to destroy Iraqi armed forces and liberate Kuwait, in a matter of days. This war was fought with the intent to win and not to appease American MIC. American leadership of the time was fully committed to the cause.
In addition to creating a massive air defense force, Iraq had created 20 Airbases, hundreds of hardened shelters, and numerous bunkers housing sensitive equipment. This infrastructure was bombed repeatedly to the extent that Iraqi Air Force lost 141 aircraft on the ground and scores of Iraqi pilots thought that it was better find refuge in Iran (138 aircraft fled to Iran).
Iraqi C2 military bunker complex at Al Taji Air Base was encased in reinforced concrete and buried 100 feet deep. This complex withstood numerous attacks during the war but US came up with a solution:
For days, U.S. warplanes had pounded the Iraqi military bunker complex at Al Taji Air Base north of Baghdad without success. Even huge 2,000-pound bombs designed to slice through six-foot-thick bunker walls could not breach the command lair, encased in concrete and buried 100 feet deep.
On the evening of Feb. 27, four days into the ground offensive against Iraq, a U.S. Air Force F-111F fighter-bomber streaked north across the Saudi desert on a course for Al Taji. A long, cylinder-like device fell from the plane and, guided by a laser, hurtled toward the bunkers.
A small puff of smoke suddenly shot from an entrance to Taji Bunker No. 1. About seven seconds later, a huge explosion ripped through the command post, reducing the bunker to a jumble of broken steel and concrete, according to Air Force officials.
The mission marked the spectacular battlefield debut of the GBU-28, a bunker-killing bomb developed and rushed into combat with unprecedented speed by the Air Force, Texas Instruments Inc. and Lockheed Missiles and Space Co. during the Persian Gulf War.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...ulf-war/246c123d-8833-465b-a848-4bd046060c83/
It is true that Russia, US, and Israel had distinct objectives and established a hotline to avoid clashes in Syria:
US = Operation Inherent Resolve = to counter ISIL movement in Syria = since 2014
Russia = Support Assad regime = to counter Syrian rebels = since 2015
Israel = Target Iranian supplies to Hezbollah and Assad regime = to counter Iran in Syria = since 2017
But Russia was not taking its chances. Russian RED LINE was not to attack Assad regime and its forces, and deployed an S-400 system to show its intent.
But there were situations in which US felt the need to attack infrastructure of Assad regime, and Israel was more likely to engage Assad regime due to its focus on attacking Iranian supplies to Hezbollah and Assad regime. Both US and Israel came up a strategy to neuter Russian S-300 and S-400 systems with advanced applications of Electronic Warfare (EW) and stealth without resorting to destroy them while attacking infrastructure of Assad regime.
S-300 and S-400 systems are getting wrecked in Ukraine in fact. Ukrainian forces have destroyed several S-400 systems by now. Ukraine has also lost a number of its S-300 systems to Russian forces by now.
The trouble with Russia’s S-400 Triumf surface-to-air missiles in the Ukraine war
Ukraine has destroyed more than five batteries of Almaz-Antey manufactured S-400 surface-to-air missiles in Donetsk Oblast, Kherson Oblast, Tokmak and Crimean peninsula using cheap kamikaze drones and American-made HIMARS artillery rockets. Threat detection, tracking, and Targeting solutions...
So much for the "in a real confrontation with Russia things would unfold quite differently" claim.
US continue to have strongest war machine and technological supremacy over any country in the world.
Situation on the ground does not look good to me.
Iraq = a banana republic whose sovereignty is violated on a frequent basis
Syria = a banana republic whose sovereignty is violated on a frequent basis
Lebanon = a banana republic whose sovereignty is violated on a frequent basis
Palestine = shrinking
Iran = sanctions
Iran provides arms to Hezbollah and Assad regime in Syria, but Israel is monitoring and attacking these shipments in Syria since 2017. Israel has carried out hundreds of strikes, killed scores of Hezbollah fighters among others on the ground, and prevented Iran from building its defenses in Syria thus far. Iranians find it easy to downplay these developments because your kin do not seem to care about the lives lost in Syria.
Iran might be attempting to encircle Israel with the intent to bring about its capitulation but this mission is unlikely to succeed. Israel is slowly but surely consuming Palestine and can cripple Hezbollah in Lebanon if it attempts to do something. Israel might also attempt to cripple Assad regime in Syria. Israeli military capability has grown by leaps and bounds since 2006. Lobbing rockets at Israeli cities makes no difference whatsoever because Israeli citizens have created underground shelters while Israel continues to expand its air defense options.
If Iran chooses to attack Israel, US and Israel might join hands and attempt to cripple Iranian military capability and implement no fly zones above the country in response. This will be a significant blow to Iran and this level of pressure might be sufficient to bring about Iranian capitulation.
PDF Iranians seem to chill while living in foreign countries? I would be very concerned if I was an Iranian citizen.
Iran also has tensions with Turkey due to Armenia - Azerbaijan conflict?
Choose your battles wisely.
Expulsion of Iran from Syria is unlikely because Assad regime has welcomed Iranian troops and Hezbollah in sectors under its control. But Israel is making it very difficult for Iran to provide arms to Hezbollah and Assad regime in Syria. Israel has carried out hundreds of strikes, killed scores of Hezbollah fighters among others on the ground, and prevented Iran from improving Syrian defenses thus far.
Iran–Israel conflict during the Syrian civil war - Wikipedia
US is working with the Syrian Democractic Forces (SDF) group in Syria to dismantle ISIL in Syria. SDF is on good terms with Assad regime as well and US is OK with this arrangement. US does not care about expulsion of Iran from Syria.
Turkey is not comfortable with presence of SDF near its border with Syria and is attempting to reshape demographics of this region with support of friendly Syrian rebels. This is an issue for Assad regime as well.
However, as noted earlier, if Iran chooses to attack Israel, US and Israel might join hands and attempt to cripple Iranian military capability and implement no fly zones above Iran in response. This will be a significant blow to Iran and this level of pressure might be sufficient to bring about Iranian capitulation. Pro-Iranian militias might attack American troops in Iraq and Syria but USAF can be called to deal with these groups: Operation Inherent Resolve provides valuable experience to this end.
Iran might be able to inflict losses on US-led forces in war (expected), but your claim is over-optimistic.
Iraqi air defense system was one of the largest and most capable in 1991 - see above.
Yugoslavian air defense system was also one of the largest and most capable in 1999. Yugoslavia had created a more mobile and survivable air defense system than that of Iraq with radar systems that could detect stealth aircraft and provide early warning. Yugoslavia is the only country to have managed to down an F-117 in war. But NATO overcame Yogoslavian defenses in war and secured liberation of Kosovo.
US understands how to cripple C2 or C4ISR infrastructure of a hostile country.
And US military capability is frozen in time since 1991, right?
You are way too focused on the numbers game to understand how these systems work and can be crippled. What good is this vast ballistic missile arsenal when US can cripple Iranian C2 or C4ISR infrastructure and prevent Iran from acting like a cohesive fighting machine in war? This is the point.
There are additional considerations.
What is the type and range of each BM? How many are optimized for ASBM role? What if all are intercepted? Iran is willing to attack American troops in Iraq but can it do this in other countries? What are the consequences?
General Donn A. Starry proposed AirLand Battle doctrine to defeat opposing forces in 1982. This doctrine was successfully applied to liberate Kuwait from Iraq in 1991 (Operation Desert Storm), to defeat Al-Qaeda Network in Tora Bora mountains of Afghanistan in 2002 (Operation Anaconda), and to topple Saddam regime in Iraq in 2003 (Operation Iraqi Freedom).
Lt Gen Norman Seip proposed Multi-Domain Operations Doctrine in 2017. This is a new doctrine and the element of surprise.
Defense Technical Information Center
The Army and Multi-Domain Operations: Moving Beyond AirLand Battle
Dennis Wille explains the evolution of AirLand battle in the Army and where Army doctrine could take us next.
Multi-Domain Operations/Joint All-Domain Operations
Discover Lockheed Martin's advanced JADO and JADC2 solutions for unmatched defense across land, air, sea, space, and cyber, ensuring rapid threat deterrence.
Iran does not offer anything new to the US in war. Tell me one thing that Iran has created that is unique or a game changer or a trend setter. Iran is taking ideas from other countries to develop its military capability and assumes that a war can be won with extensive use of BM - this strategy might intimidate weak countries or those with inadequate defenses but US has built excellent defenses that will be brought to the fore in case of war with Iran.
Your options are limited like that of a regional power - have I not pointed out this reality repeatedly?
US surprised much of the world with its battlefield innovations in 1991.
US continues to re-invent methods of war.
US will surprise Iran as well.
Do you see US attacking virtually any country for having disagreements with it? Humanity is a thing and Americans are not devoid of it. US is a democratic country and not led by a dictator to do his bidding.
Scott Ritter did not take into account following observations:
1. Iraq was fighting a war with Iran during these years.
2. USSR was fighting a war in Afghanistan during these years; Pakistan and US had jointly prepared the so-called Mujahideen to confront Soviet forces in Afghanistan in response.
3. USSR was not in the position to reach and take over the Persian Gulf due to its weak economic situation and pressure of war in Afghanistan.
And this:
Organization and Readiness
Fiscal year 1984 marked a shift in the composition of the United States Army force structure. The Army refined many of the 16 active and 10 reserve component division designs through the Army of Excellence design initiatives to accommodate force structure needs within a constrained active Army end strength. These initiatives helped to develop a light division tailored for the low-intensity threat that the Army forecast into the twenty-first century, while retaining the capability to fight on the mid- to high-intensity battlefield when properly augmented. Light divisions, through their relative improvement in deployment, permit the timely application of combat power to stabilize or neutralize the situation at minimal force levels. In addition to the light infantry division, the Army of Excellence placed increased emphasis on providing the corps commanders with the means to conduct the AirLand Battle. This included shifting artillery, intelligence, and combat aviation assets from the division to the corps. The Army of Excellence recognized the efficiencies that could be gained from new and emerging technologies.
If US wanted to, Iran could be neutralized with support of Iraq and even some of the Mujahideen could be diverted to this end in the 1980s. Iran stood no chance against these odds.
But US showed restraint and limited its action to stopping Iranian Navy in view of the Tanker War between Iraq and Iran. Anything more was not on the cards in political terms.
See above.
Why would US invade Iran unnecessarily? To prove something to naysayers? There will always be naysayers. Let's assume that US destroys Iran in a war - some will say that US destroyed a heavily sanctioned country that was lacking in defenses. A war is NOT fought to address naysayers, therefore.
Do you and your kin actually desire war with a military juggernaut that is US? Like seriously?
Nothing learned from the fate of Iraq?
Iranian Navy was good enough to destroy Iraqi Navy in 1980 (Operation Morvaird). But Iraq was unable to destroy Iranian Navy even though Iraqi Air Force could attack and sink ships as the USS Stark incident showed in 1987. Iranian Navy was involved in the Tanker War with Iraq.
But USN crippled Iranian Navy in 8 hours: Iranian Navy lost 2 frigates, several missile boats, and 2 oil platforms. The remainder was not good enough to challenge USN or continue the Tanker War with Iraq. USN produced battlefield effects in 8 hours that Iraq could not produce in 8 years. This is the point.
If your statements are to be taken at face value - Iran is superpower with unmatched military might in current times.
Does Iran have military capability and experience at par with or greater than that of the US?
Iran has come up with new battle doctrines and tactics?
Iran has come up with technological innovations in support of its new battle doctrines and tactics?
US forces have a rich history of confronting strong adversaries and prevailing in some of the toughest battles to be fought in human history and also in battles where US forces were less capable on paper as noted above. US forces are known to come up with new battle doctrines and tactics and technological innovations to apply them in battles or operations.
US is a trend setter - others are mostly followers.
US can bring substantial firepower to a region in less than 24 hours. US Navy can degrade Iranian defenses from a distance and make it possible for the US Marine Corps to establish ingress points on Iranian lands. Historical references include Operation Overlord in 1944, the Battle of Iwo Jima in 1945, and the Battle of Inchon in 1950.
US can deliver significant blows to Iranian military in 1st day of war much like it did to Iraq in 1991. American strike options are considerable in current times.
Just one Ohio-class SSGN is equipped with a total of 154 Tomahawk Block 4 cruise missiles. US Navy has a total of 4 Ohio-class SSGN = 616 Tomahawk Block 4 cruise missiles. These submarines can arrive in a sea and attack designated targets without warning from a distance.
Just one Nimitz-class aircraft carrier is equipped with a force of 44 strike fighters, 5 electronic attack aircraft, and 5 AEW&C aircraft. Each strike fighter can be equipped with up to 4 JASSM-ER cruise missiles. Even if a mixed loadout of 2 JASSM-ER cruise missiles, 2 fuel tanks, 4 AIM-120D3 and 4 AIM-9X is assumed for each strike fighter, a total of 88 JASSM-ER cruise missiles can be launched from the strike package in a small span of time. US Navy can commit up to 6 Nimitz-class aircraft carriers for a military operation at any point in time = 528 JASSM-ER cruise missiles.
6 Nimitz-class aircraft carriers = 6 Carrier Battle Groups (CBG)
Each GBG might contain up to 7 American warships that can launch Tomahawk Block 4 cruise missiles.
Loadout of 32 TLAM on each warship = 224 Tomahawk Block 4 cruise missiles
US Navy can bring even more firepower to the table, if necessary. Up to 110 US Navy ships are active and on the move in the seas around the world at any point in time. Many of these ships can be diverted to a theater of operations. US can convince some of its allies to join the show as well. WE are looking at a supply line of thousands of cruise missiles in this activity.
USAF can bring its own significant firepower to a theater of operations as well - separately from US Navy.
US has developed vastly superior bunker buster munitions than GBU-28 as well. GBU-28 was sufficient to destroy 100 feet deep reinforced bunker. Imagine the potential of the vastly superior counterparts.
You see where this is going? It is difficult and time consuming to explain all options that might be on the table.
You are living in the past, brother. American surveillance system is GLOBAL in scale.
2016 - Missile Detection Satellites
Only two countries are known to operate global missile detection and warning satellites—Russia and the United States. During 2016, only one country, the United States, has been able to conduct global monitoring with missile detection and warning satellites 24 hours a day. Russia appears to...
Relatively focused surveillance of virtually any country can be easily established.
Do you have proof of Iran having created thousands of TEL for launching missiles? You might be confusing missile stockpile(s) with TEL inventory. Even China does not have these numbers.
Saudi are learning how to fight a war and their access to American surveillance system might be limited. Understandable.
Saudi air defense system was able to intercept a large number of Houthi missiles and drones.
But Saudi radar coverage had gaps that could be exploited as well, I am not sure if these are plugged by now.
This is immature claim.
US did not invade Cuba for being a communist laptop.
US can bomb Cuba back to stone age in a day or two, if it wants to.
Scott Ritter is making false claims.
What led up to Trump's firing of John Bolton
President Donald Trump and his national security adviser rarely saw eye to eye on global hotspots. The national security adviser held far more hawkish views than the "America first" president.
Donald Trump did not start a war in any region, to his credit. But Trump was not afraid to call the shots when circumstances demanded it, he ordered US forces to prepare for war with North Korea in 2017 - a country that is more dangerous than Iran. He openly threatened to destroy North Korea but South Korea played a role in diffusing tensions between the two countries.
Trump was a business man and wanted to renegotiate American deals with different countries in the manner he saw fit.
You missed my point.
Ahmed Chalabi obituary
Controversial Iraqi politician who claimed falsely that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction
1983 Beirut barracks bombing incident occurred when Lebanon was in turmoil due to different reasons and was carried out by a non state actor. Reagan administration did not come up with a plan of action to hold any side accountable for this incident due to its members having soft corner for Iran in view of broader Cold War dynamics:
When Reagan Cut and Run
The forgotten history of when America boldly abandoned ship in the Middle East.
The Iran-Contra Affair | American Experience | PBS
Ronald Reagan's efforts to eradicate Communism spanned the globe, but the insurgent Contras' cause in Nicaragua was particularly dear to him.www.pbs.org
Khomeini setup in Iran was NOT close USSR and Reagan administration wanted to keep it this way. Reagan administration focused on defeating USSR in Afghanistan with support of Pakistan (Operation Cyclone). Reagan administration approved Operation Praying Mantis in response to USS Samuel B. Roberts incident at most.
Fast forward to the times of War On Terror, US found itself fighting a war in two different countries at the same time (Afghanistan and Iraq). Afghanistan was invaded in 2001 to dismantle Al-Qaeda Network and Iraq was invaded in 2003 to dismantle Saddam regime. Both countries produced insurgency in 2004 with support of neighboring countries but Bush administration could do not much in this regard due to lack of time and the subsequent Obama administration was interested in solutions. Iraqi insurgency was much worse in scale and ferocity. Fallujah was the first city to fall to Iraqi insurgents but was liberated in 2004. Other cities such as Baiji, Baqubah, Mosul, Ramadi, Sadr City, and Tal Afar also fell to Iraqi insurgents but were liberated one by one. US-led forces fought and defeated different Iraqi insurgent groups and managed to stabilize Iraq in 2011. One of these was Jaish al-Mahdi led by a powerful Iraqi Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Obama administration was content with defeat of Jaish al-Mahdi and stabilization of Iraq. Obama administration ordered withdrawal of American troops from Iraq in 2011 and sought to rebuild bilateral relations with Iran by supporting JCPOA.
Chapter 2 Jaish al-Mahdi in Iraq
The U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003 was an emphatic military success. The resulting occupation, however, proved far more problematic, with various groups and factions opposing the U.S. militarycco.ndu.edu
Barack Obama announces total withdrawal of US troops from Iraq
President says 'America's war in Iraq will be over' with decision to pull all troops from Iraq by the end of the year
The Obama Presidency and the 5+1 Agreement with Iran on JSTOR
MAURO LUCENTINI, The Obama Presidency and the 5+1 Agreement with Iran, Rivista di Studi Politici Internazionali, NUOVA SERIE, Vol. 82, No. 3 (327) (LUGLIO-SETTEMBRE 2015), pp. 335-342
Shocking, right?
Trump administration ditched JCPOA, put more sanctions on Iran, and decided to assassinate Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. Trump administration identified this man as the architect of Shiite insurgency in Iraq during the (2003 - 2011) period.
But Trump administration was not on good terms with Europe and did not get another term:
How did US President Donald Trump impact Europe over his four years?
Donald Trump's unpredictability and America First policy have shaken the post-WWII global order and strained relations between Western allies.
America’s Image Abroad Rebounds With Transition From Trump to Biden
A new survey of 16 publics finds a significant uptick in ratings for the U.S., with strong support for Joe Biden and several of his major policy initiatives. But many raise concerns about the health of America’s political system.
Therefore, Trump administration could not do much about Iran.
Iran had been lucky thus far.
Natanz sabotage in 2010?
Assassination of General Qasem Soleimani in 2020?
Attacks on Iranian supplies and troops and Hezbollah in Syria continue?
Assassination of Iranian scientists continue?
But Biden administration does not want to escalate matters with Iran:
Statement from President Joe Biden on the Return of American Detainees from Iran | The White House
Today, five innocent Americans who were imprisoned in Iran are finally coming home. Siamak Namazi, Morad Tahbaz, Emad Sharghi, and two citizens who wish to remain private will soon be reunited with their loved ones—after enduring years of agony, uncertainty, and suffering. I am grateful to our...
Iran Releases 5 Americans as U.S. Unfreezes Billions in Oil Revenue for Tehran
The terms of the deal have generated intense criticism from Republicans, even as the White House insists Iran will be prevented from spending the money on anything except humanitarian goods.
Biden's Middle East Balancing Act: Iran’s Nuclear Program and Saudi-Israeli Ties - Foreign Policy Research Institute
For some months now, officials in Washington and other world capitals assumed that diplomatic efforts to reach a deal between the United States and Iran to
Iran's luck continue to shine.
1. Under Saddam regime, Iraq developed chemical weapons, and created three of its most competent military arms such as the Republican Guards, integrated air defense system, and ballistic missile force. Iraq was also rebuilding its navy. Iraqi military technology was sourced from USSR and France and Iraqi military capability was globally respected and feared in 1990. What else Iraq could do at the time?
US was also focused on revisiting its military capability with lessons learned from the Vietnam War: US changed its military recruitment policy in 1973, came up with a new battle doctrine in 1982 (see above), restructured its military formations, and focused on developing new technologies that could be used to apply its new battle doctrine when necessary (Operation Desert Storm). Reagan administration decided to preserve American strength and ruled out war with another country including Iran in the 1980s as noted above. Long term thinking, dear.
2. Iraq found itself in good books of multiple countries for challenging Iran but made the mistake of invading Kuwait.
3. This was a strategic masterstroke for Iraq as it was in Soviet Camp at the time. Iraq was able to improve its relations with the West and convince France to supply arms. Iraq also improved its standing in the Middle East.
4. The Tanker War?
5. Iraq found itself in good books of multiple countries for challenging Iran.
6. Due to Israel.
7. Well, Iraq wasn't Panama either and military capability is important factor.
- Axis Powers in World War 2 were not massive countries but had significant achievements in war.
- North Korea was able to invade and occupy South Korea.
- Vietcong was abe to challenge foreign powers in Vietnam, and invade and occupy Cambodia.
8. Protests in Iran.
FYI
Russian Officials Predicted A Quick Triumph In Ukraine. Did Bad Intelligence Skew Kremlin Decision-Making?
Was the Kremlin decision to invade Ukraine based on flawed intelligence? Or was it good intelligence that was misused? A bogged-down military campaign, and an arrest in Moscow, add to intrigue.
Russia planned to invade Ukraine over a 10-day period and thereafter occupy the country to enable annexation by August 2022. The Russian plan presupposed that speed, and the use of deception to keep Ukrainian forces away from Kyiv, could enable the rapid seizure of the capital. The Russian deception plan largely succeeded, and the Russians achieved a 12:1 force ratio advantage north of Kyiv. The very operational security that enabled the successful deception, however, also led Russian forces to be unprepared at the tactical level to execute the plan effectively. The Russian plan’s greatest deficiency was the lack of reversionary courses of action. As a result, when speed failed to produce the desired results, Russian forces found their positions steadily degraded as Ukraine mobilised. Despite these setbacks, Russia refocused on Donbas and, since Ukraine had largely expended its ammunition supply, proved successful in subsequent operations, slowed by the determination – rather than the capabilities – of Ukrainian troops. From April, the West became Ukraine’s strategic depth, and the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) only robbed Russia of the initiative once long-range fires brought Russian logistics under threat.
Preliminary Lessons in Conventional Warfighting from Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: February–July 2022
This study of the early phases of the 2022 war sheds light on Ukraine's strengths and vulnerabilities, and the need for further Western support.
This war has taken a toll on Russia on the level not witnessed in a long time.
Bring out your dead A joint investigation by Meduza and Mediazona reveals the true number of Russian soldiers killed so far in the invasion of Ukraine — Meduza
Roughly 47,000. That is how many Russian soldiers have died so far in the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, according to a joint study by journalists at Meduza and Mediazona and Tubingen University statistician Dmitry Kobak. Analyzing existing reports about published obituaries, mortality data...
The secret carnage of military losses in Ukraine
Both Kyiv and Moscow are downplaying or keeping silent about the number of soldiers killed and wounded, but casualties are comparable to those of the First World War.
Modern-age hybrid war can prove very costly to fight in all aspects as both Ukraine and Russia are finding out lately. Ukraine might have collapsed if NATO had not come to its aid.
Iran does not have unlimited funds and a good economic outlook either:
Iran's economic woes persist a year on Mahsa Amini protests
Inflation and unemployment rates remain high, which could contribute to a renewed burst of demonstrations.
And Iran is unlikely to draw support like Ukraine in view of its current global standing.
It is easy to talk about ballistic missile stockpiles but modern-age hybrid war has so many aspects to consider.
This is not good enough.
I have shown otherwise in this post - see above.
The intensity of the ongoing Ukraine - Russia War is said to be on the level of clashes witnessed in World War 2.
War On Terror was fought in a way that defence contractors could make profits.
Profits from ‘war on terror’
WARS are no more fought for territorial conquests or ideological reasons, much less for causes such as democracy,...www.dawn.com
France's Macron says Bangladesh commits to order 10 Airbus aircraft
Once you asked me like an idiot if I have read about Ottoman Dynasty. Now, I ask you did you ever read history of Bengal beyond Class lV level? All these Mir Zafar stuffs are written there to make us happy. Can you give a reference that Mir Zafar took part in that war and annihilated the troops...pdf.defence.pk
US might decide to fight its next war in a different way, to win in a short span of time.
US will not touch Iran for now because Biden administration is working to recover American prestige. US have found a way to regain its importance in European affairs: Russian invasion of Ukraine provided this opportunity. Europe was warming up to both Russia and China previously. US is reaching out to more countries to support them - some in Asia. International standing is important consideration. Refer back to decisions of Reagan administration.
US might wait for Iran to make a mistake.
So what Iran wants to do? Encircle Israel and attempt to wipe it out? How is this pursuit helpful to Iran? Israel is a UN-recognized state and can fight back if necessary. Granted that some Muslim-majority countries do not recognize Israel, WE cannot assume that an attempt to wipe out Israel will be well-received in international forums.
One bad move can lead to terrible consequences.
International standing of the aggressor can shift over night.
Iran is not the first country to attempt to wipe out Israel. Others attempted the same only to experience defeat.
As noted earlier, if Iran chooses to attack Israel, US and Israel might join hands and attempt to cripple Iranian military capability and implement no fly zones above Iran in response. This will be a significant blow to Iran and this level of pressure might be sufficient to bring about Iranian capitulation. Pro-Iranian militias might attack American troops in Iraq and Syria but USAF can be called to deal with these groups: Operation Inherent Resolve provides valuable experience to this end.
Eschatology-driven foreign policy can backfire - this is apparent from the fate of non state actors such as Al-Qaeda Network and ISIL and those who attempted to wipe out jews and Israel. Some matters are best decided by Allah Almighty.
WE do not have to.
Study Surah al-Isra.
