Encircling Iran: US claims would win in 3 weeks

[HOLLYWOOD]

[noxnoctum]

It's funny how this has kinda faded into the background lately. I wonder what the reason for that is.

[awake]

Where have we heard that before. Fresh batch of stupid coming right up.

[Dark_Horse_Rider]

Russia and China will use their nuke option to stop an attack on Iran. They will not let another oil nation fall into the hands of the USA. WW3 is the only outcome of attacking Iran and there will be no winners except the elite who planned the whole thing.

The elite will not fare so well either when the next one breaks out ... whole other ballgame that will make borders and distinctions of any kind meaningless

[GuerrillaXXI]

Whether the US would win, and how quickly, would depend on what kind of war was waged.

Hypothetically, the US could simply destroy Iran with nukes. But that's extremely unlikely to happen, since there would be severe environmental consequences to Iran's neighbors, a possible backlash from nations like Russia and China, and possibly the uniting of the world against the US as a rogue state.

In a conventional war with "big" weapons like cruise missiles and jets, the US would still win, but I honestly don't know how long it would take. I'm just not familiar enough with Iran's large-scale military capabilities. Three weeks does sound a little optimistic.

If the US were to attempt to occupy Iran and the Iranians were to resist through guerrilla tactics...well, we've seen how that sort of thing turns out for the US.

[seyferjm]

http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/...res568-SUS.pdf

[Liberty74]

That 3 weeks could turn into 3 years or more after China and Russia comes to Iran's defense. Those countries said they would...

[nbruno322]

In every official war game that I am aware of, it hasn't ended pretty. One such war game, called Millennium Challenger, was carried out in 2002 by the Pentagon. It had to be canceled before it ended because the Iranian side was in the process of defeating the US Navy using asymmetrical and conventional warfare techniques.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

Iran is believed to have more than 5,000 mines available, many of modern design and exceedingly difficult to detect, sweep, and disarm. The Iranian Navy has also become adept at small-boat swarming tactics, in which large numbers of light vessels attack larger warships in what have been described as suicide runs.

Advanced weaponry from Russia and China as well as Iran’s asymmetrical warfare capability help maintain some deterrence. Iran has Chinese sea-skimmer models and has also developed its own variants.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-800_Oniks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-N-22

[jmdrake]

They haven't figured out how to stop every last shell from hitting Saudi Arabia yet...

If Iran knew anything they wouldn't even begin to fight back until 6 months after the invasion.

Quite the opposite. If Iran simply follows the U.S. military's own OPFOR plan they can sink whatever U.S. ships are hanging around in the Persian Gulf and close down the Straights of Hormuz in a day.

See: http://www.armytimes.com/legacy/new/...25-1060102.php

But it won't even come to that. China and Russia will not let the U.S. attack Iran. Remember that Obama takes his orders from the U.N. And they have veto power on the U.N. security council. Iraq had nobody to stand up for it.

[Demigod]

In every official war game that I am aware of, it hasn't ended pretty. One such war game, called Millennium Challenger, was carried out in 2002 by the Pentagon. It had to be canceled before it ended because the Iranian side was in the process of defeating the US Navy using asymmetrical and conventional warfare techniques.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

Iran is believed to have more than 5,000 mines available, many of modern design and exceedingly difficult to detect, sweep, and disarm. The Iranian Navy has also become adept at small-boat swarming tactics, in which large numbers of light vessels attack larger warships in what have been described as suicide runs.

Advanced weaponry from Russia and China as well as Iran’s asymmetrical warfare capability help maintain some deterrence. Iran has Chinese sea-skimmer models and has also developed its own variants.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-800_Oniks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-N-22

To be fair there is no way to determine that Iran has a General which is as capable or more than the American general Van Riper in the Millennium Challenge.

Iranian generals did use mass WW I style attacks against the Iraqis so their strategical capabilities are yet to be seen.

[RickyJ]

Is this still going on? I thought the Iran thing kinda faded into the background. I didn't know they were still talking about it.

Israel usually gets what Israel wants. They will do whatever is required to get their way and most US politcians will do whatever is required to accomodate them.

[seraphson]

I'm personally more interested on how and/or what their logic will be presented and used to convince the American people that this is a sound idea. I'd like to toss in the Christian Just Wars Theory in there as well. I'm sure the broken glass fallacy will resonate every so faintly in this engagement.

[LibForestPaul]

Why is everyone under the assumption that the elites would want the American forces to be victorious?

+1 for quote of protecting Saudi Family Assets.

[thoughtomator]

If we attack Iran we lose carriers. I don't think that we will do it, as insane as our decision makers are. The loss of one carrier would have major geopolitical consequences, and we could lose as many as three given the dumb-ass positioning of carriers in the Gulf proper.

[osan]

...just three weeks to defeat Iran...

Famous last words.

[showpan]

Israel will strike first and when Iran retaliates, the UN will have no choice but to join in.

Also, Iran has already stated if they were attacked they would sink an oil tanker in the Straights of Hormuz which would cripple the oil flow out of the Caspian Sea since the Afghan pipeline is nowhere near completion. Just imagine $6 gal gas and new record breaking profits.

[JK/SEA]

Start watching for recruitment advertisments on the idiot box. Gotta do something with all those un-employed kids.

[idiom]

For 700 Billion+ a year on defense, we better be able to beat a force in 3 weeks. I think Iran has a decent Air defense and long range missiles which would cause the most problems in an invasion. But honestly the way Iraq was handled, it was insane how fast we pushed to Baghdad. The problem is we will of course be there forever and there is no reason to even think of striking Iran in the first place, but don't tell that to any neocon.


The only countries left in 2011 without a Central Bank owned by the Rothschild Family are:

Cuba
North Korea
Iran


Problem......

New Zealands Reserve Bank is wholly owned by the Government. It is possible I guess that all the New Zealand Government itself is owned by the Rothschilds...

That is the first country I checked on...

[Barrex]

Hm... Even if they march in Iran in 3 weeks US still wouldnt win unless they kill every man woman and child. Iranian people would keep on fighting. Croatian forces in Afghanistan openly say they were winning/taking/capturing same hill dozens of times......Iran would be like Vietnam + Iraq + Afghanistan + Korea +....

[osan]

Israel will strike first and when Iran retaliates, the UN will have no choice but to join in.

One always has a choice.

[pcosmar]

New Zealands Reserve Bank is wholly owned by the Government. It is possible I guess that all the New Zealand Government itself is owned by the Rothschilds...

Bet on that.
The Bank of England Is a Rothschild holding.. Is NZ still connected to the British (Rothschild owned) Empire?

[pcosmar]

Why is everyone under the assumption that the elites would want the American forces to be victorious?

Why is everyone under the impression that winning is the goal,, and not simply War for the sake of War?

[bolil]

Why is everyone under the impression that winning is the goal,, and not simply War for the sake of War?

Because admitting human capability for perhaps the greatest evil, doesn't, by assosication, make us feel very good. Orwell wrote it in 1984, but people think that book is all about "surveillance".

[idiom]

Bet on that.
The Bank of England Is a Rothschild holding.. Is NZ still connected to the British (Rothschild owned) Empire?

One of those moments on this forum that happen very often when I can no longer tell who is trolling whom.

[pcosmar]

One of those moments on this forum that happen very often when I can no longer tell who is trolling whom.

trolling?
Not me. (not intentionally) Were you?

Despite the perhaps questionable origins,, this is something I find interesting. Especially since these players seem to be headed for exactly this,

"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustionWe shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time."

Discount and ignore it if you wish,, or do like me, and watch.

[osan]

Why is everyone under the impression that winning is the goal,, and not simply War for the sake of War?

I see both as goals... each in its good time, of course.

Warring is profitable. When warring goes according to a plan, power is gained through consolidation. This has been happening consistently over the past 100 years at least - more actually, but let us leave it at that. When one thinks "globalism", very nearly everything we see makes perfect sense. Long, drawn out, low-intensity warfare punctuated by spikes of almost umimaginable violence, death, and destruction serves the globalist well on many fronts, not the least of which is the induction of crushing fatigue upon vast populations. Some appearances aside and whatever other faults humans may hold, people are generally very predisposed to peaceable coexistence. Strife and conflict are anathema to healthy, happy, worthwhile, and prosperous living. Maintaining a constant state of stress goes far in rendering people pliable because the fatigue of chronic stress is simply unbearable to most people, and here I mean morbid stress and not ordinary sorts and levels.

The globalists are literally beating the world into submission, materially and psychologically, and making a hell of a buck while they are at it. They are also taking title to the world through the piecemeal devastation of the various national economies, trading worthless currency for real assets such as land, etc. I find it amusing to observe the confusion of so many people, even some here, who g on and on about how the purchase of toxic debt issues doesn't make any sense. It makes PERFECT sense because underlying all those lousy mortgages are real houses on real land, just to list a single but very significant example. As those "under water" continue to fail, the holders of the paper take over control of the property, though not necessarily in any obviously direct way that tells one "we own this" as most people come to expect. If and when these economic white elephants come crashing down there is no telling what new developments may arise. The relationship between the financiers and the, AHEM, "owners" of the various assets that underlie the inscrutably mountainous piles of phony baloney toxic assets could very well change dramatically and in very short order. I can readily conceive how the gloves may come off at least in part, the REAL owners of said assets very quietly and seemingly gently reading the pseudo-owners the riot act. Owners take full title of the property but allow pseudo-owners (note I do not say "former owners" because we were never really the owners of much of anything that counted, most especially real estate. Doubt this? Stop paying your property tax and count the time you remain in "your" house.) to rent. If this thing gets so utterly sewn up by "them" such that the choice is rent or live on the street, the vast and overwhelming majority will pay and be glad they are not under a bridge somewhere.

This $#@! has been gong on for decades, but in years past people were still too well schooled and would not have accepted the things that we now take as "normal" - things such as government usurpations of power that are running wholly amok. The vast majority, through the magic of salami politics ("incrementalism" as some call it) have been broken to the saddle of the globalists and I do believe that a threshold was crossed ca. 9/11/2001 or shortly thereafter where the masters in the making decided things were now safe enough to allow them to start taking larger bites, and that is precisely what they have been doing and most people either do not notice, do not care, think that it is all just dandy or simply regard it all as unavoidable. The legislative and policy bites are now so large that any rational person bearing witness to it is given ample cause for extreme alarm.

At this point I doubt that anything we do short of armed revolt is going to make a whit of difference in the direction we are heading. Even that is not likely to succeed in any meaningful way because we have 50+ years of black budget development in weapons systems, the fruits to which we are not privy in any meaningful way or degree. I doubt all that money was pissed away on whores, cheap whiskey, and cigars. We keep going regardless, but one must be at least smart enough to openly acknowledge to himself that things are looking pretty bleak at this moment. I suspect this presidential election will be insignificant in terms of the outcomes in the coming 4 years. I doubt Ron will win even if he has the majority of votes. If perchance he does, he will be treading water against the rushing tide of a single-mindedly hostile Congress, and to be honest I fear for his life because nearly NOBODY in Congress wants that boyscout in the oval office retarding the schedule of agenda items.

Buckle up. The ride is just starting to get interesting.

[John F Kennedy III]

One of those moments on this forum that happen very often when I can no longer tell who is trolling whom.

Huh?

[John F Kennedy III]

I see both as goals... each in its good time, of course.

Warring is profitable. When warring goes according to a plan, power is gained through consolidation. This has been happening consistently over the past 100 years at least - more actually, but let us leave it at that. When one thinks "globalism", very nearly everything we see makes perfect sense. Long, drawn out, low-intensity warfare punctuated by spikes of almost umimaginable violence, death, and destruction serves the globalist well on many fronts, not the least of which is the induction of crushing fatigue upon vast populations. Some appearances aside and whatever other faults humans may hold, people are generally very predisposed to peaceable coexistence. Strife and conflict are anathema to healthy, happy, worthwhile, and prosperous living. Maintaining a constant state of stress goes far in rendering people pliable because the fatigue of chronic stress is simply unbearable to most people, and here I mean morbid stress and not ordinary sorts and levels.

The globalists are literally beating the world into submission, materially and psychologically, and making a hell of a buck while they are at it. They are also taking title to the world through the piecemeal devastation of the various national economies, trading worthless currency for real assets such as land, etc. I find it amusing to observe the confusion of so many people, even some here, who g on and on about how the purchase of toxic debt issues doesn't make any sense. It makes PERFECT sense because underlying all those lousy mortgages are real houses on real land, just to list a single but very significant example. As those "under water" continue to fail, the holders of the paper take over control of the property, though not necessarily in any obviously direct way that tells one "we own this" as most people come to expect. If and when these economic white elephants come crashing down there is no telling what new developments may arise. The relationship between the financiers and the, AHEM, "owners" of the various assets that underlie the inscrutably mountainous piles of phony baloney toxic assets could very well change dramatically and in very short order. I can readily conceive how the gloves may come off at least in part, the REAL owners of said assets very quietly and seemingly gently reading the pseudo-owners the riot act. Owners take full title of the property but allow pseudo-owners (note I do not say "former owners" because we were never really the owners of much of anything that counted, most especially real estate. Doubt this? Stop paying your property tax and count the time you remain in "your" house.) to rent. If this thing gets so utterly sewn up by "them" such that the choice is rent or live on the street, the vast and overwhelming majority will pay and be glad they are not under a bridge somewhere.

This $#@! has been gong on for decades, but in years past people were still too well schooled and would not have accepted the things that we now take as "normal" - things such as government usurpations of power that are running wholly amok. The vast majority, through the magic of salami politics ("incrementalism" as some call it) have been broken to the saddle of the globalists and I do believe that a threshold was crossed ca. 9/11/2001 or shortly thereafter where the masters in the making decided things were now safe enough to allow them to start taking larger bites, and that is precisely what they have been doing and most people either do not notice, do not care, think that it is all just dandy or simply regard it all as unavoidable. The legislative and policy bites are now so large that any rational person bearing witness to it is given ample cause for extreme alarm.

At this point I doubt that anything we do short of armed revolt is going to make a whit of difference in the direction we are heading. Even that is not likely to succeed in any meaningful way because we have 50+ years of black budget development in weapons systems, the fruits to which we are not privy in any meaningful way or degree. I doubt all that money was pissed away on whores, cheap whiskey, and cigars. We keep going regardless, but one must be at least smart enough to openly acknowledge to himself that things are looking pretty bleak at this moment. I suspect this presidential election will be insignificant in terms of the outcomes in the coming 4 years. I doubt Ron will win even if he has the majority of votes. If perchance he does, he will be treading water against the rushing tide of a single-mindedly hostile Congress, and to be honest I fear for his life because nearly NOBODY in Congress wants that boyscout in the oval office retarding the schedule of agenda items.

Buckle up. The ride is just starting to get interesting.

This should be stickied on the front page ^

[Revolution9]

how many drones does the O man have?

They already have hacked them and can wrest control of them.

Rev9

[KingNothing]

Yeah, just like they claimed we would "win" in Iraq in 3 weeks.

10 years later...

Well, we stormed through Iraq and defeated their military in a matter of days. There's no reason to think that Iran would be any different. At the same time, there's no reason to believe that the insurgents in Iran would be even more difficult to deal with than those in Iraq.

The US military is ridiculously, absurdly, powerful. Like Michael Scheuer always says -- "if the world thinks it has seen one-tenth of American military strength, the world is sadly mistaken." A short, punitive strike lasting weeks not years would be devastating to Iran. A long term occupation of Iran would, however, be an abject failure.