Sabre-rattling over Iran

[neo29]

US already busy in the AF Pak region, Iraq, tensions with North Korea. With already costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan why will they risk another costly war with Iran. Besides Iran is not Iraq and Afghanistan where they can just walk in.
Obama administration will not talk of war or be with war for next 15 years.

Israel will surely try to go to war with Iran over nuclear weapons development. Its on US if it can actually put pressure on either to back down. But if Iran and Israel go to war, India will be in fix since both are its good friends.

 

[Neil]

US already busy in the AF Pak region, Iraq, tensions with North Korea. With already costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan why will they risk another costly war with Iran. Besides Iran is not Iraq and Afghanistan where they can just walk in.
Obama administration will not talk of war or be with war for next 15 years.

Israel will surely try to go to war with Iran over nuclear weapons development. Its on US if it can actually put pressure on either to back down. But if Iran and Israel go to war, India will be in fix since both are its good friends.

i think US just have to worry about Israel right now....its turning increasingly unease due to US inaction and if Israel goes to war so will US

India will not openly support Israel and US but i think covertly it will.....even we are in danger and dont want another pakistan in our region....so India can supply military hardware or allow refueling of ships and planes....

 

[anoop_mig25]

i think US just have to worry about Israel right now....its turning increasingly unease due to US inaction and if Israel goes to war so will US

India will not openly support Israel and US but i think covertly it will.....even we are in danger and dont want another pakistan in our region....so India can supply military hardware or allow refueling of ships and planes....

no i do not think so. Indian politics doesn't allows any present/future Indian government to openly support Israel. plus in event of war India would remain neutral ready to provide any humanitarian aid to both countries .
Actually interesting point would be how Muslims nations specially gulf country reacts it when specially Israel attacks Iran and not america.plus present financial conditions of US doesn't allows america to engaged in any war. i think its not possible in any democratic led government in america. also i think war with Iran would be highly un-popular within america itself so even republicans would think 1000`s of times before launching any war. war with Iran means us would be highly un-popular in Muslim world. it will seen as deliberate attack on Muslim country.

plus let us assume iran acquires nuclear bomb what would happen i do not think they are going to use it against Israel. only gulf countries can fear it . and would ask america to help this in turn would help america to improve its financial status.there is more pressure of gulf lobby on america to prevent Iran form acquiring nuclear bomb then Israel. i think Israel name is just being used as a cover up

Iran acquiring paste can help to legitimize its hidden nuclear bomb . it can say to world that it has nucleared powered enemy in form of iran and if Iran can have so to can Israel

 

[sandeepdg]

so India can supply military hardware or allow refueling of ships and planes....

You can completely forget that, mate !!! The government is already having a lot of trouble with various issues in the Parliament, giving military support to the US and Israel will be nothing short of a suicide pact for the current government ! The opposition will tear it apart, also the general public sentiment among the Muslims will always be against such a move. The government will never make such a mistake.

 

[pankaj nema]

USA will not attack for atleast two years.Till diplomatic options run out .
USA through The IAEA inspectors has acquired most of the information that it needs i e What is the production capacity and the current status ,the technological capability of the Iranians

It is not that Iranians can spring a surprise and declare themselves as N power overnight.
Just as North koreans did.

Iran says it is committed to its NPT obligations. And it also says that it does nt want N weapons.
So constant inspections by the IAEA will go on .

However if diplomacy does nt work then We will see a war.
US will never allow Iran to get Nukes

 

[neo29]

India can not support US or Israel if they go to war with Iran. Even covert support is forbidden. Remember Iran has never been hostile to us. They provide us oil and gas. They have also given permission to use their Airforce base to attack Pakistan. Why will we want to go against a country thats good with us??

But India must help in defusing tensions between Israel and Iran. If it wasnt for Ahmedinejad India would have tried to convince Iran to give up nuclear weapons development or atleast abide IAEA rules and observation for its civil nuclear program.

 

[sandeepdg]

They have also given permission to use their Airforce base to attack Pakistan.

Care to shed some light on this issue ?? Sounds really outrageous, by the way !!

 

[civfanatic]

In case of war between Iran, US, and/or Israel, India must stay neutral. If we support either side we will lose the friendship of the other side.

 

[Yusuf]

Use of airbase to attack pakistan?? Why?? India does not need that and neither have I heard of such a thing. We are building a port there and we can use that to ship material to Afghanistan via the road that we have built there.
Now a war between Israeli attack on Iran will certainly draw a condemnation from India. There is no doubt about that. And in the event of a war india will try to diffuse the hostilities, beyond that india can't do anything and no relations will get spoilt. America itself will condemn the attack so israel will be prepared for a world wide condemnation, but they care a damn about all such things when it comes to their security.

Larger question will remain how will the war be stopped? Iran will not be at fault to retaliate. The good thing is that they don't share a border with each other to send troops. Iran will shower a few missiles at israel. Hopefully they would not contain any chemical or biological weapons that would invite a nuke strike from israel. But iran can and will use its proxy in lebanon the hezbollah to wage a war.

In spite of all this the larger question will remain about irans nuke program. Would the israeli strike completely neutralize the program? I really doubt that. The program at best will be set back by a few years but this time iran will not cooperate with the international community in allowing any inspectors. And if we were to take the current iranian line that their program is for peaceful use, an attack on them will for sure put them on the path to acquire weapons.

 

[joe81]

US carriers would be targeted if attacked: Iran

TEHRAN: A senior Revolutionary Guard commander threatened that US aircraft carriers would be targeted if Iran came under attack amid a standoff with the West over Tehran's nuclear programme.

Iran has often warned of major retaliation if they faced a military strike from Israel or the West, but the latest comments appear tailored to emphasise the expanding range of Iranian missiles following 10 days of war games. The exercises included unveiling underground missile silos that Iran says is capable of multiple launches.

"Aircraft carriers ... are moving targets. If the enemy threatens us, we will target them," said Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the Guard's aerospace force, in comments broadcast on state TV.

Hajizadeh also confirmed that Iran secretly conducted missile tests in February that he claimed hit targets at the "mouth of the Indian Ocean", an apparent reference to areas near the Strait of Hormouz at the southern end of the Gulf.

Iran has tried to project its military might outside the Gulf, where the US has several air bases and the home port of the Navy's 5th Fleet in Bahrain.

Last month, British foreign secretary William Hague told the House of Commons that Iran has conducted covert tests of ballistic missiles since October in addition to the publicly announced military manoeuvres.

Hajizadeh only confirmed that missile tests were carried out. It was not clear if the covert tests in February were the same as claimed by Hague.

The Islamic Republic remains locked in a standoff with the West over its nuclear programme, which the US and its allies suspect is aimed at developing atomic weapons. Iran denies the charges, and says the programme is only for peaceful purposes.

US carriers would be targeted if attacked: Iran - The Times of India

 

[satish007]

then India and China probably helping them. without space remoting senseing( From India) and drone.
It is impossible.

 

[civfanatic]

What are they going to target US carriers with?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Iran tests anti-ship missiles

Tehran announced that it is mass-producing ballistic missiles that can travel three times the speed of sound and hit naval targets on the high seas.

In February 2011, Iran demonstrated its own anti-ship ballistic missile named Khalij Fars ( English: Persian Gulf ), a missile based on the Fateh-110 which successfully hit the target vessel. It has been reported as a short ranged ballistic missile, and is based on the Dongfeng 11 missile.[13]

The Fateh-110 (mean the conqueror in Arabic & Persian), is a single-stage solid-propellant, surface-to-surface missile with at least a 200 km range,

Cmdr. Mohammad Ali Jafari, who heads the elite military force, the Revolutionary Guards, said the missile had a range of 186 miles, cannot be tracked and can hit targets with high precision.

Iran tests anti-ship missiles - UPI.com

Anti-ship ballistic missile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fateh-110 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Godless-Kafir]

What are they going to target US carriers with?

Civ cant you read the title, it says if US attacks they will Target the carrier, it does not mean they will be able to attack. everyone can target.

 

[bengalraider]

Impalusible YES, Impossible -NO, as this wargame scenario Millennium Challenge 2002 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia by the Americans themselves suggests it is entirely possible for an experienced commander to use assymetric assets to sink/Disable high value assets like carriers using small (something Iran has in the thousands)
From the link:

Red, commanded by retired Marine Corps Lt. General Paul K. Van Riper, used old methods to evade Blue's sophisticated electronic surveillance network. Van Riper used motorcycle messengers to transmit orders to front-line troops and World War II light signals to launch airplanes without radio communications.
Red received an ultimatum from Blue, essentially a surrender document, demanding a response within 24 hours. Thus warned of Blue's approach, Red used a fleet of small boats to determine the position of Blue's fleet by the second day of the exercise. In a preemptive strike, Red launched a massive salvo of cruise missiles that overwhelmed the Blue forces' electronic sensors and destroyed sixteen warships. This included one aircraft carrier, ten cruisers and five of six amphibious ships. An equivalent success in a real conflict would have resulted in the deaths of over 20,000 service personnel. Soon after the cruise missile offensive, another significant portion of Blue's navy was "sunk" by an armada of small Red boats, which carried out both conventional and suicide attacks that capitalized on Blue's inability to detect them as well as expected.[1]
At this point, the exercise was suspended, Blue's ships were "re-floated", and the rules of engagement were changed; this was later justified by General Peter Pace as follows: "You kill me in the first day and I sit there for the next 13 days doing nothing, or you put me back to life and you get 13 more days' worth of experiment out of me. Which is a better way to do it?"[2] After the reset, both sides were ordered to follow predetermined plans of action, leading to allegations that the exercise was scripted and "$250 million was wasted".[3] Due to his concerns about the scripted nature of the new exercise, Van Riper resigned his position in the midst of the war game. Van Riper later expressed concern that the wargame's purpose had shifted to reinforce existing doctrine and notions of infallibility within the U.S. military rather than serve as a learning experience. He was quoted in the BBC–Discovery Channel documentary The Perfect War[4] as saying that what he saw in MC02 echoed the same view promoted by the Department of Defense under Robert McNamara before and during the Vietnam War, namely that the U.S. military could not and would not be defeated.

 

[nrj]

oh yes. Anti-ship missiles in Iran's inventory are quite potent. They made their way to Iran from China. But why would USN will put their ships that close to Iran? They've got better means if to attack.

 

[Dinku]

Iran strong country.

US stronger.

One US Navy Fleet based Bahrain.

Problem for Iran.

America no allow muscle showing!

 

[Armand2REP]

Iranian threats have about as much weight as Pakistan saying they will defeat the Taliban.

 

[bengalraider]

The Persian Gulf Isn't that wide or deep, It's only some 210 miles at it's widest point to a minimum of 35miles at the strait of Hormuz,with a maximum depth of only 90mtr. the missile i would be most wary of in the region would be the Iranian operated(Russian built) P-270 Moskit, with a range of 120km and a speed of 3mach a salvo of these at the straits of hormuz has a fair chance to sink a carrier, also the Iranians could try and block the straits by sinking a couple of their own VLCC's then any american vessel in the gulf would have to come through the Suez canal , the large number of midget subs opertaed by the Iranina navy could be a problem not to mention the three kilos as well.

The VLCC's could also be utilized as floating Fuel oil bombs , expensive but dangerous the smoke from a half dozen burning oil tankers could pose problems for any american aircraft in the vicinity.

 

[Yusuf]

Whenever I hear statements come out of Iran, I get reminded of the saying "barking dogs, seldom bite".

Iranian leadership is prone to making such statement to be in the news and keep it's relevance intact. If they didn't have the US to talk about, they would not have anything to sell to it's people. How will it maintain a hold on it's people if there is no "Great Satan?"