U.S VS Iran getting close

Status
Not open for further replies.

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
It is rather more complex than that Bluejacket, it is all about losing the advantages of being the worlds reserve currency as a direct consequence of the petrodollar.

I would love to go on in greater depth but it is heading way :eek:ff and beyond the normal bounds of a Military forum.

Suffice to say it means no more cheap credit, no more cheap gasoline and a very painful time as the US learns how to live within its means.

If you want to learn more, then you will need to look elsewhere.
 

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
It is rather more complex than that Bluejacket, it is all about losing the advantages of being the worlds reserve currency as a direct consequence of the petrodollar.

I would love to go on in greater depth but it is heading way :eek:ff and beyond the normal bounds of a Military forum.

Suffice to say it means no more cheap credit, no more cheap gasoline and a very painful time as the US learns how to live within its means.

If you want to learn more, then you will need to look elsewhere.

Sampan I did not now about that issue of changing worldwide oil transactions to the Euro. As usual you "follow the money" and put a new spin on something that us simple military people would never have realized.

In fact you've inspired me. Now I will use my economic knowledge to refute some things I read on this amatuerish Iranian Defence Forum.

Basically the posters were saying that Iran must become self sufficent in meeting its defence technology needs. They used Iran's two fighter aircraft programs (forget what their called) as examples of the future. Viewed from an economic context this is totally incorrect. Iran is known for its energy exports, essentially energy is what it is economically "good at". Other nations, particularly Russia and China, are economically "good at" producing (among other things) weapons. Every national economy has only so many resources, so for Iran to reduce the amount of efficent energy and consumer product prodcution its is doing now and refocus resources on inefficently beginning to produce high tech military goods when it can trade energy and labor for weapons is economically wrong. It reduces the "opportunity cost" to both economies because they both sell what they can to get what they want.

Does anyone think that it is feasible for the US to execute a sort of Osirak Reactor attack on the Natanz plant? I can think of several reasons why that wouldn't work (eg dispersal of nuke sites). The question I'm more asking is whether or not you think that Iran would overtly retaliate for a very limited attack.
 

The_Zergling

Junior Member
Supplementing Popeye's post...

Troops Authorized to Kill Iranian Operatives

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The Bush administration has authorized the U.S. military to kill or capture Iranian operatives inside Iraq as part of an aggressive new strategy to weaken Tehran's influence across the Middle East and compel it to give up its nuclear program, according to government and counterterrorism officials with direct knowledge of the effort.

For more than a year, U.S. forces in Iraq have secretly detained dozens of suspected Iranian agents, holding them for three to four days at a time. The "catch and release" policy was designed to avoid escalating tensions with Iran and yet intimidate its emissaries. U.S. forces collected DNA samples from some of the Iranians without their knowledge, subjected others to retina scans, and fingerprinted and photographed all of them before letting them go.

Last summer, however, senior administration officials decided that a more confrontational approach was necessary, as Iran's regional influence grew and U.S. efforts to isolate Tehran appeared to be failing.

...

Advocates of the new policy -- some of whom are in the NSC, the vice president's office, the Pentagon and the State Department -- said that only direct and aggressive efforts can shatter Iran's growing influence. A less confident Iran, with fewer cards, may be more willing to cut the kind of deal the Bush administration is hoping for on its nuclear program. "The Iranians respond to the international community only when they are under pressure, not when they are feeling strong," one official said.

With aspects of the plan also targeting Iran's influence in Lebanon, Afghanistan and the Palestinian territories, the policy goes beyond the threats Bush issued earlier this month to "interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria" into Iraq. It also marks a departure from years past when diplomacy appeared to be the sole method of pressuring Iran to reverse course on its nuclear program.

There's something that really made me bang my head against the wall.

Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the director of the CIA, told the Senate recently that the amount of Iranian-supplied materiel used against U.S. troops in Iraq "has been quite striking." [Or not.]

"Iran seems to be conducting a foreign policy with a sense of dangerous triumphalism," Hayden said.

This mentality and attitude can't bode well for our Middle East foreign policy... I'll leave it at that. If I expressed my true feelings on this I would get myself banned.
 

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Hi Finn

Sampan I did not now about that issue of changing worldwide oil transactions to the Euro. As usual you "follow the money" and put a new spin on something that us simple military people would never have realized.

In fact you've inspired me. Now I will use my economic knowledge to refute some things I read on this amatuerish Iranian Defence Forum

Always glad to be of service:)

If there is any interest in this area I might start a Thread in The Club Room. It is an interesting subject and one, which oddly enough, never seems to be mentioned by the US Media.
 

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
Re: 'US poised to attack,' claims Bulgarian agency

Another piece of the puzzle falls into place-
'US poised to attack,' claims Bulgarian agency
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
ISTANBUL - Turkish Daily News
The United States “could be using its two air force bases in Bulgaria and one at Romania's Black Sea coast to launch an attack on Iran in April," the Bulgarian news agency Novinite claimed. Commenting on the report, The Sunday Herald wrote that the U.S. build-up along the Black Sea, coupled with the recent positioning of two U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups off the Straits of Hormuz “appears to indicate that U.S. President Bush has run out of patience with Tehran's nuclear misrepresentation and non-compliance with the U.N. Security Council's resolution.”
“Whether the Bulgarian news report is a tactical feint or a strategic event is hard to gauge at this stage. But, in conjunction with the beefing up of the America's Italian bases and the acquisition of anti-missile defense bases in the Czech Republic and Poland, the Balkan developments seem to indicate a new phase in Bush's global war on terror,” wrote the Scottish paper.
The Bulgarian agency named Colonel Sam Gardiner, "a U.S. secret service officer stationed in Bulgaria," as the source its story.
Before the end of March, 3,000 U.S. military personnel are scheduled to arrive "on a rotating basis" at the United States' Bulgarian bases. Under the U.S.-Bulgarian military cooperation accord, signed in April, 2006, an airbase at Bezmer, a second airfield at Graf Ignitievo and a shooting range at Novo Selo were leased to the U.S. Army.
The Sunday Herald noted that last week, the Romanian daily Evenimentual Zilei revealed the U.S. Air Force is to stage several flights of F-l5, F-l6 and Al0 aircraft at the Kogalniceanu Base. According to the story, Admiral Gheorghe Marin, Romania's chief of staff, confirmed “up to 2,000 American military personnel will be temporarily stationed in Romania.”

© 2005 Dogan Daily News Inc.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


In a "war game" testing US options, the Saban Centre for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution found that, as the descent into civil war [in Iraq] gathered pace, confrontation between the US and Iran intensified, and Washington's leverage on Tehran diminished. Civil war in Iraq would turn Iran into "the unambiguous adversary" of the US.
Indeed, everything indicates that that is already happening. The study appeared on the same day as the Iranian ambassador in Iraq told The New York Times that Tehran intended to expand its influence in Iraq. US commanders now claim that thousands of Iranian advisers are arming and training Shia militias.
Nonetheless, the Brookings report urges the creation of a regional group to help contain a civil war. That would see exactly the contacts with Iran and Syria that the Bush administration steadfastly refuses. An alternative in the report would be "red lines" which, if crossed by Tehran, could lead to a military attack by the US on Iran.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

Vlad Plasmius

Junior Member
Hmmmmm, They seem to be a little far from Iran, unless they're being redeployed near Iran I think they may have another target. I'm thinking maybe Bush is looking to go after Syria or prevent Syria from using the conflict ot justify na invasion into Lebanon or Israel.
 

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
Hmmmmm, They seem to be a little far from Iran, unless they're being redeployed near Iran I think they may have another target. I'm thinking maybe Bush is looking to go after Syria or prevent Syria from using the conflict ot justify na invasion into Lebanon or Israel.

I don't think that's a likely scenario. An invasion of Israel would be suicide for the Assad reigeme. And there is no need for an invasion of Lebanon-Hezbollah is already close to gaining political control there.
 

Vlad Plasmius

Junior Member
I don't think that's a likely scenario. An invasion of Israel would be suicide for the Assad reigeme. And there is no need for an invasion of Lebanon-Hezbollah is already close to gaining political control there.

I'm saying we may be preparing for that eventuality if Iran is attacked, perhaps it would be to prevent a Hezbollah coup.
 

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
IMO Bulgaria and Romania bases are needed for logistics purposes and as staging areas, since those in Turkey and Azerbaidzan are off-limits in any attack on Iran and/or Syria.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Iran eyes long-range air strike capability
Iran is pursuing a longer-range strike capability for its air assets to support the delivery of more powerful strategic weapon systems, western defence sources have told Jane's.
To this end, the sources noted, Tehran is "investing considerable resources in generating enhanced operational aerial refuelling capabilities to support strike assets capable of delivering such systems, most notably the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force's (IRIAF's) Sukhoi
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
strike aircraft.
According to the sources, "aerial refuelling exercises, often originating out of Tactical Air Base 7 in Shiraz, southwest Iran, are carried out over Iran at night and at very low altitude (1,000 ft) using, in general, the 747 tanker aircraft". These simulate operational scenarios that would entail night-time refuelling of an Iranian attack aircraft, at low altitude over the Mediterranean [to protect Syria], outward bound en route to the target, said the sources.
IRIAF pilots have, the sources added, learned to make use of advanced radar tactics, terrain masking, manoeuvre and electronic counter-countermeasures in order to surprise opponents, minimise their warning time and limit enemy intercept opportunities.
Iran bolsters Su-25 fleet
Iran's original seven
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
/UBKs were flown to Iran from Iraq in 1991 as the multinational Operation 'Desert Storm' force gathered on Iraq's southern border in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Air Force (IRGCAF) then purchased three Su-25UBK two-seat combat trainers and three Su-25T anti-tank aircraft from Russia and deliveries of these have been completed. With its maximum combat load of 4,340 kg, the type now plays an important role in supporting the IRGC's rapid-reaction doctrine. It is foremost intended to provide direct air support to ground troops.
The IRGCAF is considering the purchase of more advanced variants, including the Su-25TM (Su-39), optimised for attacks on ground and naval targets in daylight, but also at night, using precision-guided munitions. However, current political circumstances may make this procurement difficult.
© 2007 Jane's Information Group
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top