may be Trump needs to start a new war to win elections !!!It's a question of when... The current build up is similar to what preceded Gulf War II.
would you accept Russia or US to balance the link between India & Pakistan!!!Iran is our good ally , we could have acted as a link between israel and Iran , Iran is quite useful is balancing gulf countries and their version of islam
Trump base is anti war. That is why he got out of Syria and is negotiating with Taliban to get out of Afghanistan.may be Trump needs to start a new war to win elections !!!
Iran tried to be like the corleone family, tried to take full control of the neighborhood by knocking out rivals one after another. First Iraqis, then the Syrians and Lebanese. The other two gangs, Israelis and the Saudis, although engaged in their own turf wars, saw a common threat and decided to call the godfather of the entire syndicate to settle this matter....Iran is our good ally , we could have acted as a link between israel and Iran , Iran is quite useful is balancing gulf countries and their version of islam
President Trump is spearheading a kind of gung-ho American nationalism quite unlike anything in recent memory. A war with Iran quite fits into his nationalist narrative and appeals to a large number of Americans. So yes Trump may want this war.may be Trump needs to start a new war to win elections !!!
I am ignorant on this topic. Can an "Iraq" actually be done on Iran?It's a question of when... The current build up is similar to what preceded Gulf War II.
But air strikes will achieve very little. What Israel and the Saudis want is clerical regime overthrown and replaced by a docile regime, apparently Trump administration seems to concur. For this they will require a full ground invasion and from what we see on their news that is what they are preparing for.Guys I still think invasion is too far fetched.
American style is air strikes.
If they really are preparing, then I guess this will be the toughest war US will ever have fought in west asia, possibly toughest war after 1945.. unlike Iraq, they don't have the benefit of terrain; unlike Afghanistan, they don't have the benefit of free airspace, for Saudis, they don't have the benefit of under-equipped enemy (i.e., Houthis).. no idea what Israel has in mind.. I have a feeling this won't end well..But air strikes will achieve very little. What Israel and the Saudis want is clerical regime overthrown and replaced by a docile regime, apparently Trump administration seems to concur. For this they will require a full ground invasion and from what we see on their news that is what they are preparing for.
Iran has a substantially larger population than Iraq. However their military is as obsolete as their western neighbor was before US invasion. Iran has been under western sanctions far longer than Iraq was and most of their equipment is antiquated. Iranian Air defense will not survive two full weeks of US aerial assault.I am ignorant on this topic. Can an "Iraq" actually be done on Iran?
Iran invasion is more difficult than Iraq. And who will pay for it?But air strikes will achieve very little. What Israel and the Saudis want is clerical regime overthrown and replaced by a docile regime, apparently Trump administration seems to concur. For this they will require a full ground invasion and from what we see on their news that is what they are preparing for.
But I guess they need to achieve air superiority before they could do air strikes.. Iran seems to have a pretty strong AAAD network..Guys I still think invasion is too far fetched.
American style is air strikes.
Look at this way, Americans consider war with Iran will be easy, may be only little more tougher than Afghanistan, but still a walkover. This confidence comes from being a superpower. It's difficult for regional powers like us to understand (imagine India worrying about invading Nepal or Sri Lanka - actually we won't worry)If they really are preparing, then I guess this will be the toughest war US will ever have fought in west asia, possibly toughest war after 1945.. unlike Iraq, they don't have the benefit of terrain; unlike Afghanistan, they don't have the benefit of free airspace, for Saudis, they don't have the benefit of under-equipped enemy (i.e., Houthis).. no idea what Israel has in mind.. I have a feeling this won't end well..
Not cheering for war.. but I am curious to find out how will tomahawks perform against S-300 (and vice-versa)Look at this way, Americans consider war with Iran will be easy, may be only little more tougher than Afghanistan, but still a walkover. This confidence comes from being a superpower. It's difficult for regional powers like us to understand (imagine India worrying about invading Nepal or Sri Lanka - actually we won't worry)
I agree it will be tough but nothing that a superpower cannot surmount. I doubt their air defense will outlast sustained aerial assault, despite their S-300. Iran cannot expect any support from thier sunni neighbors. Iraq in all probability will act neutral. It's likely that the attack will be from the south (on the Persian gulf coast) and this region is sparsely populated (most of the population is in the northeast) American might find themselves on advantageous terrain and force the Iranians to spread out (Iran would have found it easier defending thickly populated regions around Teheran)
Saudis and the Gulf states will be happy to bank roll the invasion, not that US cannot finance it by its own means (but Trump is good at extorting money from the Arab sheikhs.)Iran invasion is more difficult than Iraq. And who will pay for it?
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Iran Israel conflict | OSINT | 43 | ||
Gulf of Aden & Red Sea Conflict 2023 - Op Prosperity Guardian | Subcontinent & Central Asia | 603 | ||
Iran finalizes Su-35 jet, Mi-28 helicopter deal with Russia | West Asia & Africa | 12 | ||
Defense ministers of Iran and Saudi Arabia meet for the first time | West Asia & Africa | 1 |