2026 Iran War Strategy and Analysis

[ReanFean]

I think Iran is finished. Realistically, the US presence is increasing in the middle east. And between the US and Iran, countries that want to open the strait of hormuz will pick iran as the sacrificial lamb. Maybe a coalition will form if this stalemate continues for several more months. It is unsustainable for iran to keep blocking the strait and even charging tolls. While the tolls were payed for a bit, it goes against international law and against the interests of most countries including China. If you normalize charging tolls like this, what if malaysia or indonesia start charging toll, its not looking good.

 

[solarz]

You gave a very inappropriate example: the Korean Peninsula was a springboard for invading China, a strategic location that China would never relinquish under any circumstances. While participating in the Korean War was extremely risky, China had no other choice.
Participating in the Korean War was the most prudent decision China ever made.

You really should read your history. Everyone in the politburo was opposed to the intervention, Chairman Mao was the only one who saw the necessity. Everyone else was terrified of American military superiority. Lin Biao refused to take command, only Peng was willing. It's not for nothing that Chairman Mao wrote 谁敢横刀立马 唯我彭大将军!

No, long term planning, intelligent resource allocation, sustained rapid growth in state, industrial, and technological capacity while having a well defined mission is what made the PLA what it is today. Or would you suggest that if those incidents did not occur, the PLA today would be somehow a less capable force?

You confuse process with drive. In the early 90s, PLA generals were still stuck in their thinking of People's War. The Iraq War shocked the Army out of their complacency, while the Yinhe incident, along with the Hainan incident, drove the modernization of the PLAN.

That right there is a perfect example of how not to use military force. Sending in the military is like drawing a gun during an argument. You must not do it unless you are fully ready, willing and able to use it and accept the consequences of doing that. Drawing a gun purely to intimidate with no will or ability to actually use it is the most likely way to get yourself shot or worse.

Ah yes, the most important event for generations and you want to blunder into it because you wanted to throw your weight around needlessly half way around the world?

The fallacy I keep seeing popping up here is that if China sends warships to the Gulf region, they better be able to win a fight against the USN right there.

No, the point of a naval presence is to send a message of deterrence. To use your analogy, it's not drawing the gun, it's making sure you bring the gun with you.

China isn’t waiting for an opportunity to go do
AR, as that implies that there are elements outside of its control that it cannot overcome or mitigate, there are none left. It also insultingly implies that China has no restraint and will attack as soon as it is able to.

The reality is that China has been ready for AR for probably over a decade now, and every year that has passed since would have seen the cost of AR drop exponentially to the point where it’s hard for it to realistically drop any lower now. But still China isn’t rushing to go because it’s playing a much grander game for a much bigger prize. Taiwan has long since stopped being the ultimate goal of Chinese military modernisation and strategic planning. It’s basically merely a milestone now, expected to be ticked off rapidly with minimal cost as the PLA advance to its broader goals.

As you described it yourself, the cost of AR has dropped where it's hard to drop any lower now. What matters now is the right opportunity to provide a strong justification.

As I have already stated, AR would only happen, in relation to the current scenario, if the US was moronic enough to attack PLAN ships. It is an escalation trump card, not something China is going to play on the first hand.

What many fail to realize is that by blockading Hormuz and targeting Chinese ships, the US has just escalated against China. Without an appropriate response, China would be emboldening the likes of Trump. Yes, there are economic measures China can take, but sending a naval presence to the area is actually one of the most cost effective and appropriately sized escalation responses China can take. As I pointed out above, the idea that China needs to win against the USN in the Middle East as a precondition for sending a military presence is a fallacy.

 

[Maikeru]

This particular crisis is the wrong time and the wrong place for PRC to confront the US. PLA capabilities will be vastly improved just 5 years from now in this respect.

 

[Puss in Boots]

You really should read your history. Everyone in the politburo was opposed to the intervention, Chairman Mao was the only one who saw the necessity. Everyone else was terrified of American military superiority. Lin Biao refused to take command, only Peng was willing. It's not for nothing that Chairman Mao wrote 谁敢横刀立马 唯我彭大将军!

Who opposes it is not important; what matters is the final decision.
If China had been eager to participate in the war from the outset, the Soviet Union would certainly have been happy to watch from the sidelines.Some things require feigning reluctance; otherwise, the Soviet Union wouldn't have been willing to provide sufficient support.
The Korean War began with Kim Il-sung's tacit approval from Stalin, without the CPC's prior knowledge. As the war worsened, fearing direct confrontation with the United States, the Soviet Union did not want to directly intervene to help Kim Jong-il, and thus sought Chinese intervention.
If you were in charge of deciding whether China should send troops to aid North Korea, what would you do? Would you unhesitatingly agree to participate, resulting in the needless sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of Chinese, only to receive a few words of praise from the Soviet Union and North Korea: "Our second brother is invincible."
Clearly, the CPC is not as naive as you.
Even in the late Qing Dynasty, Empress Dowager Cixi fought several battles over the Korean Peninsula. History has proven that losing the Korean Peninsula would leave China's northeastern gateway wide open, making it impossible for China to relinquish it.

 

[solarz]

Who opposes it is not important; what matters is the final decision.
If China had been eager to participate in the war from the outset, the Soviet Union would certainly have been happy to watch from the sidelines.Some things require feigning reluctance; otherwise, the Soviet Union wouldn't have been willing to provide sufficient support.
The Korean War began with Kim Il-sung's tacit approval from Stalin, without the CPC's prior knowledge. As the war worsened, fearing direct confrontation with the United States, the Soviet Union did not want to directly intervene to help Kim Jong-il, and thus sought Chinese intervention.
If you were in charge of deciding whether China should send troops to aid North Korea, what would you do? Would you unhesitatingly agree to participate, resulting in the needless sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of Chinese, only to receive a few words of praise from the Soviet Union and North Korea: "Our second brother is invincible."
Clearly, the CPC is not as naive as you.
Even in the late Qing Dynasty, Empress Dowager Cixi fought several battles over the Korean Peninsula. History has proven that losing the Korean Peninsula would leave China's northeastern gateway wide open, making it impossible for China to relinquish it.

You seem to be imagining that I'm calling for China to send its naval forces to the Middle East and start firing on American CVBGs. Could you please actually read what I wrote instead of responding to what you imagine I'm saying?

 

[iewgnem]

Okay, I never thought of any of this blockade and counter blockade stuff, because I have been laughing too hard. Haha! Haha!

This war is crazy!

But, if I was forced to make up my mind on what China should to to address this American blockade in that region of the world, a few things come to mind.

1. First, China should wait. To be fair, I thought there was a time limit to this war, and now we do have a ceasefire that is holding up still. So I have go with the same idea that there is a time limit to this blockade. Right now there is no more oil. That will be devastating to Western economies. So a solution is required fast.

2. If China gets really pissed off, then weapons to Iran to blow those mo'fos out of the water, as long as Iran agrees to that.

3. Before that, China probably will announce some inspection routine for any US cargo in the Taiwan Strait. The Americans will get the hint. The Americans are belligerent by nature, still they would not like a three front war, when they already out of ammo. Haha! Haha!

4. Insist on and impress upon both sides that everyone is pissed at both of them, and remarkably, if China says this and others line up to say the same thing, a diplomatic solution is actually possible here. A high oil price will devastate the American economy. The oil shock of 1973, cough cough, no need to state all the reasons for the embargo back then, the shortages and inflation caused by that ushered in a long period of economic futility with stagflation in the United States, that was finally broken by President Reagan who let Fed Chair Paul Vokker do his thing to crush inflation.

5. If it gets out of hand, then start World War III, but not sure if sending PLAN to the Middle East is the right thing to do. If we are going to start World War III, probably better and more useful to have those ships around than aboard.

US failure was their inability to force Iranian blockade kinetically when already at war, if China do go kinetic against the US, ME would be a passing thought as land based hypersonics are more than enough to cleanse the entire Indian ocean of American surface ships.

But in that case might as well take over Taiwan and blockade US access to all Asian industrial export (if they still had any after losing ME energy), which means China might as well start with a blockade of Asian industrial export before going kinetic.

Right now the number one question is does ME situation even matter to China, IMO it's a big opportunity to neutralize other Americans vassals and complete Chinese industrial dominance, so it would be in China's interest to prolong it as much as possible.

 

[Puss in Boots]

You seem to be imagining that I'm calling for China to send its naval forces to the Middle East and start firing on American CVBGs. Could you please actually read what I wrote instead of responding to what you imagine I'm saying?

Explaining things to you is exhausting!
If you're trying to say that while China can't beat the US in the Middle East, it can defeat the US in other areas, then I ask you, why didn't you address the US in other areas from the start? What's the point of deploying warships to the Middle East? Is it to force China into an escalation?
Wouldn't it be better to confront the US in areas where you have an advantage? Why take such a risk in the Middle East? Just to make others think you're awesome?

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

I'm not opposed to the idea of the PLAN sending a beefy surface action group to the Arabian Sea to strut around, but I'm of the mind that the longer the fight with the US can be deferred, the better. I like that fight a lot better with 80+ Type 09Vs, 200 H-20s, 300-400 J-36s (not including their CCAs), etc.

 

[GZDRefugee]

Explaining things to you is exhausting!
If you're trying to say that while China can't beat the US in the Middle East, it can defeat the US in other areas, then I ask you, why didn't you address the US in other areas from the start? What's the point of deploying warships to the Middle East? Is it to force China into an escalation?
Wouldn't it be better to confront the US in areas where you have an advantage? Why take such a risk in the Middle East? Just to make others think you're awesome?

You cannot seriously be this dense. The PLAN has had a legitimate presence on the region since 2008, undertaking the same merchant shipping escort missions. It would be the US escalating by interdicting a multinational operation. If China escalates in the West Pacific without provocation, it becomes the instigating actor.

But that's a moot point anyways, because the US WON'T escalate. They CAN'T afford to start a war with China right now. For someone who quoted Sun Tzu, how do you not know what feints are? Your arguments have been incoherent from the beginning.

 

[Puss in Boots]

You cannot seriously be this dense. The PLAN has had a legitimate presence on the region since 2008, undertaking the same merchant shipping escort missions. It would be the US escalating by interdicting a multinational operation. If China escalates in the West Pacific without provocation, it becomes the instigating actor.

But that's a moot point anyways, because the US WON'T escalate. They CAN'T afford to start a war with China right now. For someone who quoted Sun Tzu, how do you not know what feints are? Your arguments have been incoherent from the beginning.

Is your brain only capable of thinking about military matters and nothing else?
For example, expressing a willingness to export anti-ship weapons to Iran, discussing RMB settlement with Middle Eastern oil-producing countries, or reinstating rare earth restrictions—aren't these risk-free forms of deterrence far more reliable than sending warships into the eye of a storm?