Today, 07:38 AM
Yes you are absolutely right that it would be a catastrophe. Yes, Washington has air superiority from the get go, but it would not be as quickly and easily as the first gulf war. Even just an air invasion would be more costly than the Washington establishment admits. The vastly larger area, terrain, and hardened target sites alone makes it more risky and costly. Yes, air alone was the ingoing belief for victory for Korea, and Vietnam, and Soviets in Afghanistan, and they all lost in the end. Be skeptical of buying into the sales pitch that air superiority trumps everything and it will be a cakewalk. We’ve heard that over and over before.
Of course Washington could and would drops lots of bombs and missiles, but they will still lose jets and pilots. Iran has both S-300 as well as Chinese air defense SAM systems. While limited, it is certainly not nil nor impotent. And the truth is, Washington really does not know how effective Iran’s air defenses are. It won’t be free. Washington will blow up things; kill some people; but they will lose some jets and pilots; and in the end have negligible military effect. It will not accomplish any strategic objective. Not to mention Iran has hardened and secured its most important targets. And of course Iran has tactically scattered its military targets and missile launch locations strategically throughout its very large and mountainous terrain in hard to reach and protected locales. Additionally cheap decoys are probably being used and will certainly be implemented to saturate Washington;s ability to strike targets.
Meanwhile Washington has provided plenty of near targets for retaliation. Response would be asymmetrical. Even if Washington launches strikes from near bases, it has 2 aircraft carriers and twenty ships as sitting targets in the Persian gulf for the attack boats and the anti-ship ballistic missiles. In addition Washington has extended plenty of nearby targets in Iraq, Afghanistan and throughout the middle east. Iran has the Sejjil missiles that can reach throughout the middle east. Then there is supplying Shia militia throughout the middle east. Iraq is now an ally of Iran, Shia controlled, and majority Shia. Iran could easily supply Shia militia in Iraq, as well as militia in Afghanistan, wreaking havoc for Washington in the middle east. And then of course there is Hezbollah - man per man perhaps the most effective ground fighting force in the middle east. The only force to take on Israel head to head and against odds and deliver Israel a humiliating defeat. Now Hezbollah is equipped with modern high tech smaller missiles. Response would be asymmetrical and unending. Any air attack on Iran would not come without costs.
Then of course even Washington does not dispute that Iran has the capacity to shut down the Strait of Hormuz - trapping any Washington ships and shutting off vital shipping lanes from Saudi Arabia.
So of course Washington can drop lots of bombs, but they will not achieve any positive outcome and not come out unscathed.