Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and other Related Conflicts in the Middle East (read the rules in the first post)

Sinnavuuty

Captain
Registered Member
That's what many laymen (especially in the West) said about Ukraine as well. In fact they thought less than a few weeks, only a few days. Iran is not under sanctions from the countries that matter, not being able to buy a Ford chevvy or Italian tomatoes doesn't limit Iran from equipping hordes of "good enough" troops.

Will Iran lose in the longer term? Yes, assuming US affords to spend all their effort their for years. But that's a pretty big assumption.

Unlike Russia, US can't put all their efforts on hold for the duration of a war like this. So I don't think anything will happen. US also needs way more forces in the theatre.
If there have been two weeks of military build-ups, with perhaps another two weeks of more build-ups, then we can expect a major build-up of military equipment for CENTCOM.

The point is that Iran is only really strong in air defense, where it can offer really tough opposition to the Americans, but the launches to suppress air defense can be standoff, which would give a symmetrical advantage to the Americans in the bombing campaign, they would have no reason to put their aircraft within range of Iranian air defense, especially HIMAD.

For a grueling and long bombing campaign hitting all the main Iranian targets it would be something like this assessment:

In fact, perhaps the results of True Promise I/II have encouraged Americans and allies to act now rather than delay until the future. Iranian deterrence has failed completely.
 

obj 705A

Junior Member
Registered Member
if Russia helps Iran by constantly supplying it with long range defensive and offensive weaponry then Iran could survive this.
however if Russia doesn't help Iran then Iran is finished.
I think the true president of the united states that is Netanyahu is set on terminating the regime in Iran.
Trump gave Iran two months supposedly to reach a deal. however there will be no deal.

the US/Israel don't need / want to send troops to Iran and occupy it. they just want to kill the Iranian leadership. the US will launch a massive strike which would destroy the Iran nuclear program in addition to the destruction of missile & drone production facilities.

after that Trump will declare to Iran if you retaliate we will kill the entire political leadership including Khamenei. at which point Iran is likely to try to avoid a full scale war with the US by launching a retaliatory symbolic strike against some US base either in Iraq or Syria intentionaly avoiding killing any US soldiers and instead just injuring them like what they did after the Soleimani assassination. in addition Iran may also bomb some building in northen Iraq and kill some Kurds there and say they destroyed a Mossad operation base (yes they actually did that once) and then the Iranian leadership will try to sell that as a sufficient retaliation for the complete destruction of their nuclear program.
 

Sinnavuuty

Captain
Registered Member
Iranians waffled on their nuclear deterrence now they might pay dearly for it. Hope the worst doesn't come to pass! .
Exactly. It was Kim who understood this.

When Trump threatened that he would not allow the DPRK to create its own intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) capable of reaching the United States. Just as in the case of the Middle East, in the Far East the US also has a remote island in the ocean, which is a vital base for working in the region from afar. And if in the case of Iran it is Diego Garcia, then in the case of the DPRK it is the island of Guam.

So, in the year of North Korea's march towards ICBMs, huge efforts were focused on a missile capable of reaching Guam. Firstly, such a missile (with a range of 3500 or more) is a valuable combat missile in its own right and a good basis for developing an entry-level ICBM.

Secondly, even single missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads to Guam would significantly worsen the conditions for conducting a possible operation against the DPRK. Thirdly, the possibility of a preemptive nuclear strike on Guam usually worsens the situation.

So, on April 15, 2017, several launchers with a new, unknown large missile were paraded in the DPRK. In May, after several unsuccessful test launches, the rocket flew successfully. And it also showed, when launched at a normal angle, the real possibility of flying to the island of Guam.

The rocket was made so urgently that in April 2017 alone there were three test launches. All were unsuccessful, but the engineers were quick to make changes. Therefore, already in May everything flew successfully.

Even before the first successful flight, several launchers were prefabricated and paraded.

When the first ICBM Hwasong-14 was tested (July 4, 2017), Pyongyang already had the means to reach Guam. But even after two successful launches of Hwasong-14 missiles in July 2017, the crisis did not end. In the background, the missile, which had been tested only once in May, was urgently sent for production and to the troops. Already in mid-August, the DPRK media published photographs of Kim Jong-un in command of the missile forces, which contained maps of the planned launches of the Hwasong-12 in the waters near Guam.

The DPRK military also officially stated that, in order to calm the United States, Pyongyang could carry out a warning launch of four Hwasong-12 missiles with their warheads falling outside its territorial waters. But only tens of kilometers from the island. Then, in August and September, two launches were carried out. Both were over Japan (the missiles were already flying over the country in neutral space - over 100 km).

In addition, in September, combat training exercises were held, which practically demonstrated the possibility of flying to Guam. Shortly before that, the DPRK detonated another powerful thermonuclear charge, and in November it tested another ICBM, the Hwasong-15.

Its trajectory, when launched at a normal angle, already allowed it to safely hit the main continental territory of the United States. In early 2018, Pyongyang, having achieved the officially announced targets for 2017, took a break. And the crisis subsided. Diplomatic maneuvers began. But at the subsequent military parade in early 2018, six standard Hwasong-12 launchers were already on display.

As you can see, the North Koreans wasted no time in 2017. And they worked at a pace and format that minimized time. Many things were developed not sequentially, but in parallel. And for the sake of speed, the same Hwasong-12 missile system was being developed in the army. And Pyongyang openly sent quite clear signals to its opponents.

As a result, the DPRK built its own ICBM and survived Trump's first term. But even after the creation of longer-range missiles, the Guam-Killer's value did not disappear.
 

obj 705A

Junior Member
Registered Member
Mannnn....we can dislike the US but have to admit that their military capabities and ability to fight anywhere around the globe is unprecedented and still unmatched by any country so far..
obviously the US has alot of CVNs and other bases but for a major power the capability to strike smaller states is really not exlusive to just the US. it's just that the US is the only one among the three major powers who is hostile enough to actually want to do it.

Iran has no nukes so they are just a prey against the US. a difficult one but a prey nonetheless. Russia could also do the same thing that the US does. for example if Israel had no Nukes and if Russia was as hostile as the US then Russia could easily destroy Israel just using the strategic bombers without sending any troops.
back when Russian launched strikes against ISIS in Syria. Russia had the Tu-160 circle the entirety of Europe, launch it's missiles and then go back to Russia. Russia could easily target random African countries if they want to, it's just that they are not crazy or hostile enough to do it.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
Iran has been under sanctions for years, its air force is not modernized and does not compare to the USAF/USNA/USMC, and its air defense advantage can be nullified or permanently destroyed/suppressed by conventional bombings that can last for weeks.
So you completely ignore the effect of geography and the fact that there is a fundamental difference between Iraq and Iran even for the air force: Iraq couldn't even produce parts for their planes while Iran can.

Why don't you calculate the sortie rate out of Diego? This sort of thing has already been worked out by people paid to do this and the conclusion is, it will take a Desert Storm level effort with equivalent buildup time, for much less than Desert Storm level effects.
 

Minm

Junior Member
Registered Member
Exactly. It was Kim who understood this.

When Trump threatened that he would not allow the DPRK to create its own intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) capable of reaching the United States. Just as in the case of the Middle East, in the Far East the US also has a remote island in the ocean, which is a vital base for working in the region from afar. And if in the case of Iran it is Diego Garcia, then in the case of the DPRK it is the island of Guam.

So, in the year of North Korea's march towards ICBMs, huge efforts were focused on a missile capable of reaching Guam. Firstly, such a missile (with a range of 3500 or more) is a valuable combat missile in its own right and a good basis for developing an entry-level ICBM.

Secondly, even single missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads to Guam would significantly worsen the conditions for conducting a possible operation against the DPRK. Thirdly, the possibility of a preemptive nuclear strike on Guam usually worsens the situation.

So, on April 15, 2017, several launchers with a new, unknown large missile were paraded in the DPRK. In May, after several unsuccessful test launches, the rocket flew successfully. And it also showed, when launched at a normal angle, the real possibility of flying to the island of Guam.

The rocket was made so urgently that in April 2017 alone there were three test launches. All were unsuccessful, but the engineers were quick to make changes. Therefore, already in May everything flew successfully.

Even before the first successful flight, several launchers were prefabricated and paraded.

When the first ICBM Hwasong-14 was tested (July 4, 2017), Pyongyang already had the means to reach Guam. But even after two successful launches of Hwasong-14 missiles in July 2017, the crisis did not end. In the background, the missile, which had been tested only once in May, was urgently sent for production and to the troops. Already in mid-August, the DPRK media published photographs of Kim Jong-un in command of the missile forces, which contained maps of the planned launches of the Hwasong-12 in the waters near Guam.

The DPRK military also officially stated that, in order to calm the United States, Pyongyang could carry out a warning launch of four Hwasong-12 missiles with their warheads falling outside its territorial waters. But only tens of kilometers from the island. Then, in August and September, two launches were carried out. Both were over Japan (the missiles were already flying over the country in neutral space - over 100 km).

In addition, in September, combat training exercises were held, which practically demonstrated the possibility of flying to Guam. Shortly before that, the DPRK detonated another powerful thermonuclear charge, and in November it tested another ICBM, the Hwasong-15.

Its trajectory, when launched at a normal angle, already allowed it to safely hit the main continental territory of the United States. In early 2018, Pyongyang, having achieved the officially announced targets for 2017, took a break. And the crisis subsided. Diplomatic maneuvers began. But at the subsequent military parade in early 2018, six standard Hwasong-12 launchers were already on display.

As you can see, the North Koreans wasted no time in 2017. And they worked at a pace and format that minimized time. Many things were developed not sequentially, but in parallel. And for the sake of speed, the same Hwasong-12 missile system was being developed in the army. And Pyongyang openly sent quite clear signals to its opponents.

As a result, the DPRK built its own ICBM and survived Trump's first term. But even after the creation of longer-range missiles, the Guam-Killer's value did not disappear.
North Korea has an extremely favourable geopolitical geography. They could develop nukes while conventionally threatening Seoul. They neighbour Russia and China. They didn't have to fear attack after leaving the NPT

Iran only has the connection to Russia via the Caspian sea and is always at risk of an Israeli attack. Had they begun a dash for a bomb, Israel would have attacked and potentially even used nukes for that. For a long time, tens of thousands of enemy troops were in Afghanistan and Iraq, just next to Iran. Nuclear development at this threat level was not feasible.

For North Korea, the fast strategy made sense. For Iran, a slow approach is much better and safer. Salami slicing their way towards the bomb.
if Russia helps Iran by constantly supplying it with long range defensive and offensive weaponry then Iran could survive this.
however if Russia doesn't help Iran then Iran is finished.
I think the true president of the united states that is Netanyahu is set on terminating the regime in Iran.
Trump gave Iran two months supposedly to reach a deal. however there will be no deal.

the US/Israel don't need / want to send troops to Iran and occupy it. they just want to kill the Iranian leadership. the US will launch a massive strike which would destroy the Iran nuclear program in addition to the destruction of missile & drone production facilities.

after that Trump will declare to Iran if you retaliate we will kill the entire political leadership including Khamenei. at which point Iran is likely to try to avoid a full scale war with the US by launching a retaliatory symbolic strike against some US base either in Iraq or Syria intentionaly avoiding killing any US soldiers and instead just injuring them like what they did after the Soleimani assassination. in addition Iran may also bomb some building in northen Iraq and kill some Kurds there and say they destroyed a Mossad operation base (yes they actually did that once) and then the Iranian leadership will try to sell that as a sufficient retaliation for the complete destruction of their nuclear program.
Khamenei is almost dead anyway, killing him won't do much good for the US.

In reality, a strike from the limited American forces that they have available in the region may damage but not eliminate the nuclear program. And you can't erase the knowledge or make the uranium disappear, even if it's been bombed.

If the attack is against the Islamic Republic as a system, they will fight with everything they have. If it's a limited attack only against nuclear facilities, Iran can leave the NPT with minimal consequences. Symbolic strikes without going into a ruinous major war is the smart thing to do. Attacking an enemy against which you have no chance of victory, Hamas style, is stupid and irresponsible for a major nation.

If the US attacks without occupying the country, Iran will certainly have nukes a couple of years later. That's how it works when you're a nuclear threshold state
 

obj 705A

Junior Member
Registered Member
If the US attacks without occupying the country, Iran will certainly have nukes a couple of years later. That's how it works when you're a nuclear threshold state
Iran will not be a nuclear threshold state. because the US will destroy all their nuclear facilities. having knowledge is useless if all your nuclear facilities are destroyed.
furthemore being a nuclear threshold state is useless against the US. Iran is infiltrated to the core with Mossad & CIA agents so the moment Iran starts working on a nuclear weapon (supposedly it takes Iran a week to produce a nuke) will be the moment that the US would destroy the Iranian leadership plus all nuclear facilities with full force.

Iran missed the chance. they should have produced nuclear weapons back during the Biden days before Trump became president.

the US will not allow Iran to have nukes especially not under Trump.
 

obj 705A

Junior Member
Registered Member
Khamenei is almost dead anyway, killing him won't do much good for the US.
dying of old age is one thing. being killed in a firestorm along your entire circle by a foreign force is another.
Khamenei is not some random guy. he is the supreme leader. he is like the emperor of Iran. furthermore it's not just Khamenei that would be killed but all of the political leadership.

just as how the assassination of Hassan Nasrallah put not only Hezbolah into shock but even his Shia base was shocked into submission. Israel launched an assassination campaign against Hezbollah and Hezbollah responded by stopping the attacks on northen Israel. remember Hezbollah said they opened the northen front to support Gaza and Israel forced them to bend the knee through assassinations.

it is possible that bombing and killing Khamenei and his circle would cause a shock among the Iranian people and whatever that would be left of Iran's leadership to the point were they would submit and appoint someone who is not hostile towards the US / Israel. and if not the US can just continue killing Iran military / political leaderships.

not only that but since it is possible that the IRGC is infiltrated at the top by CIA agents. then once the regime is destroyed the western supporters in Iran could rise to power.
 

gadgetcool5

Senior Member
Registered Member
News event: Russia has warned against strikes on Iran's nuclear infrastructure as China called for diplomatic efforts after US President Donald Trump threatened to bomb the country if Tehran did not come to an agreement over its nuclear program.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So what is China doing to prevent Iran from falling, other than buying oil? After all, Iran is China's most reliable ally in the Middle East. Furthermore, the Gaza genocide has exposed the evil of the U.S./Israeli war machine and created a great demand in many countries around the world who want to see it resisted, but are too cowardly to do it themselves.

In the past week, Trump has completely decoupled the U.S. economy from China. He has imposed tariff rates of 50-70%, far higher than any other country. He has closed off routes that Chinese companies used to use to get around tariffs, via Southeast Asia and Mexico. And a leaked Pentagon war plan has shown that the U.S. military has put the highest priority on going to war with China. China has no reason to hold back anymore to preserve their relationship with the U.S., a country whose elites are preparing for a hot war with China.

No matter what the U.S. does, the ultimate target is China. So when the U.S. is targeting Iran, it is ultimately targeting China. It aims to first solve its Iran problem, and then its Russia problem, so that it can tackle China. This was true with sanctions as well! Iran was the canary in the coalmine when the U.S. started threatening banks against doing business with Iran in the 2000s, and then passed CISADA under Obama in 2010, introducing blocking sanctions and the SDN list against state actors. That was a template for sanctions against China starting in the late 2010s. It will be the same for war. First, they will take down the smaller guy (Iran), then they will go for the boss (China).

As far as the Palestinians, there is nothing that China could do to increase its soft power and goodwill in the world than to more visibly help them, even if other Muslim countries and neighbors refuse. The other Muslim countries want to help, but they refuse rationally, because the U.S. is not dead set against them yet. The U.S. is willing to have them as client states. The same is not true of China. China has already been declared an enemy of the U.S. by bipartisan consensus, just like Iran and the Palestinians. Do not underestimate the power of goodwill in this arena. No matter what laws or sanctions the U.S. government takes, it still requires thousands of private businesses and millions of private individuals globally to cooperate. If the world sees China supporting the Palestinians, who are unquestionably being genocided by the U.S. and Israel, it will be impossible for the U.S. to win hearts and minds against China.

So in my analysis, China cannot allow the Islamic Republic of Iran to fall any more than Russia, and it should take a more active role in providing material support to the Palestinians, even at the risk of pushing Israel away or further alienating the Israeli lobby in Washington. Whether its leaders will be able to perceive and react to the changing situation in time is the issue.
 
Last edited:
Top