Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[News] Middle East conflict



Zeberdi

“Vorsprung durch Technik”
NSC Patron
Oct 20, 2022
6,443
I asked if Iran would pose a tougher foe that Sadam Hussain, you seem pretty clued up. Any idea?
I’m really not clued up more than anyone else 🤷‍♂️

I posted a link above to a very good article - I’ll post it again - it answers any questions about the enormous difficulties and implications of trying to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Hopefully it won’t come to it but Netanyahus could have taken his playbook straight from the words of GWB:
States like these and their terrorist allies constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger…. We'll be deliberate; yet, time is not on our side. I will not wait on events while dangers gather. I will not stand by as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons.
-- President George W. Bush, State of the Union, January 29, 2002
 
Last edited:




Zeberdi

“Vorsprung durch Technik”
NSC Patron
Oct 20, 2022
6,443
I realised I didn’t really answer your question @GingerBeerMan sorry but imo Iran would be a much harder adversary than Iraq for a number of reasons (just a lay person’s opinion!)

Even the war in Iraq took 8 years; cost the US an estimated $3 trillion and caused an estimated 461,000 deaths in Iraq. American forces are still based in Iraq 13 years later - It was a pyrrhic victory and Saddam’s regime was a tough nut.


We learnt a lot of lessons from that war, not least:
  • that you need an exit strategy before you commit,
  • you need to be sure of your intelligence, and have clear objectives.
  • you need a concensus of opinion and most of all
  • leave the world more stable than it was before you went in.
The War in Iraq against Saddam Hussein failed on every count above imo. but there were aspects that would have made it easier than launching a similar campaign against Iran;
  • It was a very broad international coalition against terror that was fighting the Ba’ath Party and Saddam‘s Republican Guard
  • the allied troops were able to launch an invasion from Kuwait - I doubt Iraq would be willing for Israel and western allies to launch an attack from Iraq on Iran.
  • Iran is also like Afghanistan very mountainous
  • at the first sign of attack, Israel would be fighting an onslaught of very well armed militia groups with an impressive missile arsenal on 3 fronts - Yemen, Lebanon, Syria ( and possibly Hamas in Gaza still) as well as Iran.
We went into Iraq under the pretence of looking for WMDs but it was all about regime change. I think it would be very difficult to see out that objective today - wars always have mission creep and always last much longer than the protagonists say it will. The public has lost its appetite for expensive and protracted conflicts.
 
Last edited:


Bakero

Languidly clinical
Oct 9, 2010
14,811
Almería
I asked if Iran would pose a tougher foe that Sadam Hussain, you seem pretty clued up. Any idea?

In terms of personnel, we're talking similar numbers. Iraq had one of the largest armies in the world under Saddam and Iran are up there in terms of numbers. Likewise, both have (had) a fair bit of kit.

Iran have been cut off from the international arms market since the revolution other than some sales from Russia. They have a lot of domestically produced gear though.

Compared to Israel, Iran's budget is rather small though (about a third). And obviously Israel have all the latest tech.
 


Zeberdi

“Vorsprung durch Technik”
NSC Patron
Oct 20, 2022
6,443
In terms of personnel, we're talking similar numbers. Iraq had one of the largest armies in the world under Saddam and Iran are up there in terms of numbers. Likewise, both have (had) a fair bit of kit.

Iran have been cut off from the international arms market since the revolution other than some sales from Russia. They have a lot of domestically produced gear though.

Compared to Israel, Iran's budget is rather small though (about a third). And obviously Israel have all the latest tech.
Yes these points in addition to the attempt at an answer I gave @GingerBeerMan above - although don’t forget Iran has an enormous stockpile of ballistic missiles and have been supplying Russia with those too.

(It would be interesting what impact an war with Iran might have on the Russian Ukraine war - )
 
Last edited:






Zeberdi

“Vorsprung durch Technik”
NSC Patron
Oct 20, 2022
6,443








Dec 29, 2011
8,191
I realised I didn’t really answer your question @GingerBeerMan sorry but imo Iran would be a much harder adversary than Iraq for a number of reasons (just a lay person’s opinion!)

Even the war in Iraq took 8 years; cost the US an estimated $3 trillion and caused an estimated 461,000 deaths in Iraq. American forces are still based in Iraq 13 years later - It was a pyrrhic victory and Saddam’s regime was a tough nut.


We learnt a lot of lessons from that war, not least:
  • that you need an exit strategy before you commit,
  • you need to be sure of your intelligence, and have clear objectives.
  • you need a concensus of opinion and most of all
  • leave the world more stable than it was before you went in.
The War in Iraq against Saddam Hussein failed on every count above imo. but there were aspects that would have made it easier than launching a similar campaign against Iran;
  • It was a very broad international coalition against terror that was fighting the Ba’ath Party and Saddam‘s Republican Guard
  • the allied troops were able to launch an invasion from Kuwait - I doubt Iraq would be willing for Israel and western allies to launch an attack from Iraq on Iran.
  • Iran is also like Afghanistan very mountainous
  • at the first sign of attack, Israel would be fighting an onslaught of very well armed militia groups with an impressive missile arsenal on 3 fronts - Yemen, Lebanon, Syria ( and possibly Hamas in Gaza still) as well as Iran.
We went into Iraq under the pretence of looking for WMDs but it was all about regime change. I think it would be very difficult to see out that objective today - wars always have mission creep and always last much longer than the protagonists say it will. The public has lost its appetite for expensive and protracted conflicts.
Thanks for taking the time to write these replies.
 




nicko31

Well-known member
Jan 7, 2010
18,350
Gods country fortnightly
So the Israeli's are now levelling buildings in Lebanon in non-Hezbollah areas that may contain their potential new leader, missiles into the west bank killings 18, oil prices spiking as there's talk of attacking oil facilities.

FFS..
 












sydney

tinky ****in winky
Jul 11, 2003
17,965
town full of eejits
i just can't believe , that at this stage in our supposed human development , we are considering sanctioning a major obliteration ........this is fuckin unreal and has global implications , can't believe it ....totally ridiculous.
 


The Clamp

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jan 11, 2016
25,872
West is BEST
i just can't believe , that at this stage in our supposed human development , we are considering sanctioning a major obliteration ........this is fuckin unreal and has global implications , can't believe it ....totally ridiculous.
££££$$$$$
 








SeagullinExile

Well-known member
Sep 10, 2010
6,155
London
I think Israel will hit Iran's Oil depot on the island in the Gulf next.
Yep. Then Iran will fire another salvo of missiles and/or possibly close down the Straights of Hormuz.
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here