2026 Iran War Strategy and Analysis

HighGround

Senior Member
Registered Member
I miss those NAFO guys talking about "stupid Ruzzia" losing those A-50s to incompetence and being too corrupt to build hardened aircraft shelters.

Remember that guy @SolarWarden who used to only post in the Ukraine thread about the invincibility of the Patriot?

One thing is for sure though, Iran has seemingly made western systems look far more vulnerable than Russia has. Perhaps it's because it has been preparing for this forever. Shaheed/Geran in Ukraine was already a moment, but knocking out multiple KC-135 and E-3 is a heavy blow. The dismantling of THAAD in SK, Chinese sanctions couldn't do it.

What's interesting is that the LUCAS drone cannot be used to the same effect. Despite the claim of being Low Cost at $35 - $50K vs. at least million+ for a Tomahawk. Is it lack of scale? Lack of targeting data? Lack of tactical experience?
Iran made Russian air defense look like wunderwaffen. Considering that Russia has been under constant threat and raids, while covering a very large airspace...

But to be fair, part of the problem is that United States entered this war poorly prepared. A different administration would've probably massed far more AA and airpower before starting this campaign.

Combat aircraft shoot down drones and missiles too.
 

klimsa

New Member
Registered Member
One thing that is still confusing me - before this war heavy Mossad subfiltration of IRGC was practically an assumed condition, but as time has passed we are begging the question of how they have turned out to be so ludicrously underprepared and surprised by IR capabilities/resilience. Had the IRGC successfuly decentralised their command structure in response much earlier than anticipated? Was the degree of infiltration (this is becoming increasingly likely) less than expected?
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
They allow it for political and economical reasons.

Doesn't change the fact wahhabism is a puritanical branch which considers the veneration of shrines (a fundamental part of Shia theology) as a violation of Tawhid (the oneness of God). Their stance is rooted in the teachings of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and Ibn Taymiyyah. And Saudi Arabia has spent in excess of $100 billion in promoting this branch so obviously there will be clash with shia proxies and Iran.
You do realize that both Iran and SA are funding members of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation since 1969, do you?
You also realize that the head office of Parliamentary Union of the OIC Member States (PUOICM) is situated in Tehran.
Wahhabis which rule SA consider Shias heretics/idolatrous non-muslims (most Sunnis do)

Tell us how could a non-muslim country get into a islamic organisation? How could all Sunnis allow the head office of PUOICM be located in a "non-muslim" country?

You are only projecting your personal view on everyone else including Sunnis and Shias, a very twisted view to say the least.
 

Serb

Senior Member
Registered Member
One thing that is still confusing me - before this war heavy Mossad subfiltration of IRGC was practically an assumed condition, but as time has passed we are begging the question of how they have turned out to be so ludicrously underprepared and surprised by IR capabilities/resilience. Had the IRGC successfuly decentralised their command structure in response much earlier than anticipated? Was the degree of infiltration (this is becoming increasingly likely) less than expected?

I think this is more of a psychological pattern in Western "civilization," including Israel, constantly overestimating oneself and underestimating the enemy.

Because what is the logic there, attack Hamas, no decisive result, attack Hezbollah, same story, then escalate to Iran like that will somehow go any better.
 

supersnoop

Colonel
Registered Member
Iran made Russian air defense look like wunderwaffen. Considering that Russia has been under constant threat and raids, while covering a very large airspace...

But to be fair, part of the problem is that United States entered this war poorly prepared. A different administration would've probably massed far more AA and airpower before starting this campaign.

Combat aircraft shoot down drones and missiles too.
With respect to the Russia comparison, the point was tailored towards Iran's offensive capabilities/strategy. The nature of the conflict is totally different. Iran's success in striking strategic targets like PAVE PAWS, E-3G, THAAD systems is something that the defense establishment was obviously not prepared for. Definitely on the level of the F-117A downing.

In the Russia Ukraine war, there was no illusory superiority besides the worst NAFO clownposters. M1s aren't invincible, F-16s are old, ATACMs are limited in quantity. It was not a full NATO proxy war, just a war featuring various western systems.

Was the US really poorly prepared? This was one of the largest masses of air power since the second Iraq war. You also had the full commitment of the IAF. I think they were only poorly prepared in the sense that they thought a decapitation strike would end the country. Probably the worst miscalculation.
 

HighGround

Senior Member
Registered Member
With respect to the Russia comparison, the point was tailored towards Iran's offensive capabilities/strategy. The nature of the conflict is totally different. Iran's success in striking strategic targets like PAVE PAWS, E-3G, THAAD systems is something that the defense establishment was obviously not prepared for. Definitely on the level of the F-117A downing.

In the Russia Ukraine war, there was no illusory superiority besides the worst NAFO clownposters. M1s aren't invincible, F-16s are old, ATACMs are limited in quantity. It was not a full NATO proxy war, just a war featuring various western systems.

Was the US really poorly prepared? This was one of the largest masses of air power since the second Iraq war. You also had the full commitment of the IAF. I think they were only poorly prepared in the sense that they thought a decapitation strike would end the country. Probably the worst miscalculation.
United States was poorly prepared. It's quite clear that they did not anticipate this level of resistance and needing this much time to defeat Iran. I'm not sure why they were so poorly prepared for what would be an obvious counterattack in the form of BM and Drone raids, but they were.

I think US and Israel really did expect Iran's ability to retaliate to falter and their C2 to fail once they killed Iran's leadership and hit Iranian defense nodes. If I had to guess, US forces expected this campaign to mirror Israel's campaign in Lebanon in 2025.

But even then, it's clear that there was no Plan B or failsafe. We were unprepared for what would happen if Iran didn't fall apart and sustained their counter-attacks. Jury's still out of course, but I think we can all see where this is heading.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Man, the wake-up call is going to be hard if they are still this much in denial or they are just polling boomers

Wellll, in an absolute sense, it's true. Iran has suffered horrible damage to its civilian infrastructure and America's only losing its middle-eastern military assets so it can be easy to justify that the US is winning because it's dealing more damage than its taking.

BUTTTT to say that the US is winning would be in the same vein as saying that getting 2 of your fingers torn off by a crab while you take 1 of his legs for dinner is winning just because the crab has suffered a larger injury. In reality, that would probably be a dinner you have nightmares about and regret for the rest of your life.
It’s not surprising in the slightest due to the fundamentally flawed way the war prep was conducted.

There are, generally speaking, three kinds/categories of modern warfare. The first is the one the west has gotten accustomed to, where they can hit a hopelessly overmatched opponent from a position of absolute safety with minimal chances of losses and zero expectations of the enemy being able to hit even your major forward operating bases. In this kind of war, the attacking west holds all the cards and can decide how far to go and when to stop.

The second category of war is the one that we are seeing now, where opfor has genuine and sustained ability to hit back deep and hard. Where even major forward operating bases and carriers are not safe, which correspondingly massively limits and restricts western sortie generation rate, which is the heart and soul of western war fighting ability.

The third category of war is where you are fighting a true peer, if not outright superior force, that can not just damage your major assets and force concentration but decisively defeat them and potentially outright destroy them. Such a foe will also be able to take the fight right back to the west’s homelands without needing to go nuclear.

The fundamental strategic errors the US made in this war are hilariously many, but chief amongst them is the fact that America was preparing for entirely the wrong kind of fight, and not even doing the full prep needed for that. They thought it was going to be a Category 1 fight like with Iraq, where western air power could run rampant and dismantle Iranian war fighting ability and industrial capabilities systematically and quickly, but actually found themselves fighting a Category 2 war without all the tools and resources in theatre needed to fight at that level.

But as anyone with even cursory knowledge of history can tell you, during both Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom, the US backed up and underpinnned its air power dominance with massive amounts of ground forces. Because even at the peak of its air power dominance, competent US commanders were cognisant of the limits of air power and knew that you needed boots on the ground to be able to both take full advantage of your own air power, as well as to force opfor into concentrating and revealing forces for your air power to hit.

Without the threat of ground forces, you see exactly the situation the US faces now, where the Iranians can disperse and hide their strengths so American air power is massively blunted, having all the fury but nowhere suitable to unleash it against. This is why they are bombing girls schools, universities and other soft civilian targets.

The US also realises this, but the problem is that they have already squandered the opportunity to build up and amass ground forces in peace before the commencement of combat operations, they cannot bring in army armoured divisions now as there is nowhere to land and base those forces now, not without receiving massive amounts of Iranian and local insurgent attacks, which will result in unacceptable levels of material and human losses before they can even get to the battlefield. Which is why they are now belatedly rushing in marines and airborne. But that’s an even worse option as you are throwing light infantry into the teeth of the enemy’s whole army with dubious supply lines, relying almost exclusively on air power for fire support, and with basically no fall back position or room for manoeuvre and limited evacuation options in the event it goes catastrophically wrong as they are setting it up for.

Let’s not forget that Iran has been holding back basically its entire anti ship arsenal. So there is a real chance the marines won’t even be able to make it alive to even hit the beaches in the first place. Or if the Iranians are really confident, they could allow the marines to land and then almost hold them hostage and trapped, obliging the USN to feed more and more ships into the slaughter in a doomed bit to resupply, reinforce and them exfil the amphibious forces. If the Iranians had any ASBMs or similar aces up their sleeves, that would also be perfect time to play them, because even damaging a carrier will basically doom the whole operating.

I think the key question now is whether the generals and admirals in the Pentagon can talk Trump down from this Epic Dumbass move, and what alternatives they could possibly fathom to turn this situation around.
Bro, that was a sentence-to-sentence parody of the alternate reality shit @Michael90 wrote.
 
Last edited:

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
One thing that is still confusing me - before this war heavy Mossad subfiltration of IRGC was practically an assumed condition, but as time has passed we are begging the question of how they have turned out to be so ludicrously underprepared and surprised by IR capabilities/resilience. Had the IRGC successfuly decentralised their command structure in response much earlier than anticipated? Was the degree of infiltration (this is becoming increasingly likely) less than expected?
My theory with no evidence other than observed results: they infiltrated the top but not the middle or the rank and file. This fits perfectly with their decapitation strategy: either kill or infiltrate the top.

This fits with the neofeudal idea that the nobility is inherently more important than the people and that the people cannot organize themselves without the nobility.

It was also a gross misjudgement of what Iran actually was
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
My theory with no evidence other than observed results: they infiltrated the top but not the middle or the rank and file. This fits perfectly with their decapitation strategy: either kill or infiltrate the top.

This fits with the neofeudal idea that the nobility is inherently more important than the people and that the people cannot organize themselves without the nobility.

It was also a gross misjudgement of what Iran actually was
That's one hell of an obviously stupid mistake that Israel made. Spend decades infiltrating the Iranian elite, who can use their influence to cuck Iran. Then, kill all of them so new uncorrupted young guns take up the mantel and make Iran stand strong in the most crucial time of war. I can't imagine how they made this miscalculation. Did they just get carried away with it and start killing everything they could kill to try to induce a fear factor?
 
Top