The Iranian strategy to defuse an attack over the nuclear issues

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Ahh. I don't know why I couldn't see that.

It's hard to see the stage from the cheap seats.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by PLATO
I would imagine that in the event of a potential flare up that US destroyers would provide escort through the straights and that the Carriers would fly a canopy above them. Combined with Satellite survelliance on any attempts to ready fixed launchers to fire and threatening movement of mobile launchers, I think the straights will probably stay open.

When it comes to getting the oil out, the US Navy won't play.

With enough portable antiship missiles and $25k speed boats you can sink just about any ship you want right up to Aircraft Carriers. It would be even faster if you tie up the carrier's planes with decoy fighter attacks first.

[notyoueither]

Oerdin, do you have any concept of 300 US warplanes circling and looking for targets?

Trust me, Canadians will testify that 2 can be deadly effective.

[fed1943]

Sure, Iranians (or Irakians, or... even Russians, Chinese or English)

have no way to stop Americans from doing what they want.

Only Americans can do it.

Best regards,

[Sirotnikov]

Re: Re: The Iranian strategy to defuse an attack over the nuclear issues

Originally posted by VetLegion
With USA and Israel obviously hoping and praying for any provocation or opportunity to smash Iran, Iran is going to strike first?

Siro

This is a little simplistic.

The US and Israel are not hoping to enter conflict.

And yes, they will eventually need a good excuse to start a military attack.

Thus the Iranian strategy of defusing this potential by increasingly wrecking havoc that is just big enough to annoy or hurt, but not big enough to cause conflict.

This is exactly what Hamas and Hezbullah try to do. Only Israel allowed itself to over-react against Hezbullah. A war on Iran could not be launched "as conveniently".

[Sirotnikov]

Oerdin, do you have any concept of 300 US warplanes circling and looking for targets?

Do you?

You had dozens of Israeli warplanes circling southern lebanon. It is extremely difficult for fighter jets and even drones to pin-point and destroy small and highly maneuverable targets.

Perhaps easier in mid sea than on land, I'll give you that.

It requires a great combination of intelligence, command and control and luck.

[Sirotnikov]

Once the Iranians perfect the enrichment cycle, they will have the knowledge they need for any clandestine nuclear program if that is their intention, and you can't bomb knowledge away.

you can bomb away means and ability.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

Do you?

You had dozens of Israeli warplanes circling southern lebanon. It is extremely difficult for fighter jets and even drones to pin-point and destroy small and highly maneuverable targets.

Perhaps easier in mid sea than on land, I'll give you that.

It requires a great combination of intelligence, command and control and luck.

I think it would be most interesting to see how many "$25 speedboats" it would take to bring down a US carrier. I also would find it most interesting to calculate the damage to Iran that the US would cause if they were, in fact, able to bring down a US carrier.

[Patroklos]

I would like someone to actually think about how wide the Persian Gulf is, how safe one complete side of it is, the range of a C-802 (or more importantly, the range of its targeting radars) and your own personal experiance diving small speed boats across major bodies of water (if you have any).

[Sirotnikov]

I also would find it most interesting to calculate the damage to Iran that the US would cause if they were, in fact, able to bring down a US carrier.

I also would find it interesting to calculate the damage the UK would do to Iran, if it kidnaps its soldiers.
I would also like to calculate the damage the US would cause to Iran if it supports and actively promotes terrorist attacks against US troops on Iraqi soil.

Oh wait....

[Sirotnikov]

I would like someone to actually think about how wide the Persian Gulf is, how safe one complete side of it is, the range of a C-802 (or more importantly, the range of its targeting radars) and your own personal experiance diving small speed boats across major bodies of water (if you have any).

admittedly i have very little experience regarding marine warfare.

so i don't know if you're saying that my claims are silly, or that they are correct, because both myself and NYE are speculating here.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

I also would find it interesting to calculate the damage the UK would do to Iran, if it kidnaps its soldiers.
I would also like to calculate the damage the US would cause to Iran if it supports and actively promotes terrorist attacks against US troops on Iraqi soil.

Oh wait....

I think there might just be a difference in destroying several billion dollars worth of harware and killing a few thousand sailors at one wack.

If not then I think we, as a nation, have some huge problems beyond what anyone thinks now.

[VetLegion]

Re: Re: Re: The Iranian strategy to defuse an attack over the nuclear issues

Originally posted by Sirotnikov


This is a little simplistic.

The US and Israel are not hoping to enter conflict.

They are too. The politicians that is. The people are against it, they need to be pushed into it. That's why I would triplecheck every "Iranian provocation" to make sure it's not really another Gulf of Tonkin type of incident.