• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

US vs Iran

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#81
Shah of Iran

Shah of Iran

<sidebar>

Geesh. I'm old.

I remember the Iranian students hanging a lifesize poster depicting a blindfolded Shah (Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi) tied to an executioners post on the big oak tree outside the LSU Student union in the mid '70's. They were protesting the Shah's "secret police" (SAVAK), his "political prisoners" and his "tyranny". (It used to always chap my hindsides when these barely-english speaking guys set the curve in engineering classes. All they did was study. No frat parties for them.....but I digress)

Oh, btw. The US and Iran were buddy buddy back then. With the SAVAK running amuck and his policies of modernization, allowing suffrage for women, and recognizing Israel he gradually lost favor with the Shi'a clergy et al. and eventually a revolution ensued and he was ousted (in '79 I believe). Seems his reign was rather benign by todays' standards.

</sidebar>
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alexander Ostmann
Upvote 0
#83
Alexander Ostmann said:
So what river are those giant oil tankers going to go through in Iran?
Click to expand...

They have these awesome things now called pipes. The truth is if they wanted to send their oil East rather than West they have the added benefit of having direct land access to those countries, which cannot be said for us here in the US.

Alexander Ostmann said:
But I highly doubt Russia would commit any troops. [
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grabbed_by_the_Spetsnaz
Upvote 0
#84
[Mad_Murdock] said:
They have these awesome things now called pipes. The truth is if they wanted to send their oil East rather than West they have the added benefit of having direct land access to those countries, which cannot be said for us here in the US.
Click to expand...
This is true. I have a feeling their economy would collapse with the ever increasing amount of sanctions before any pipeline could be built, however.
[Mad_Murdock] said:
Now while i also doubt that Russia will send any actual troops, im sure they can find something in material aid. And while we're on the subject, can you elaborate on this one? Because last I heard thrashing someone all the way back to their own capital is hardly 'sub par'.
Click to expand...
This is also true, as made example in the Korean, Vietnam, 6 Day, and Yom Kippur War. But aid and support from the Soviets/Russians only shaped the outcome in one out of four of those wars. Iran's military is not too brilliant the last time I heard, and giving a sub par military more equipment is not going to do anything.

"Intelligence failures were quite evident, as demonstrated by the inability of units to communicate space-based and electronic intelligence, which consequently 'failed to inform the country’s leadership of the concentration of Georgian troops.' ... A recognizable pattern emerged which focused on aged vehicles, hardware, and weaponry; ineffective command and control organizations and systems; lack of interservice coordination; failures of intelligence support and the GLONASS (Global’naya Navigatsionnaya Sputnikovaya Sistema, or Global Navigation Satellite System)..."
More can be found on the matter here http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/Articles/09spring/mcdermott.pdfhttp://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/Articles/09spring/mcdermott.pdf

You look at the size of Georgia, and then you look at the size of Russia, one should come to the conclusion who is going to get bashed to whose own capital.
[Mad_Murdock] said:
They don't necessarily need the oil, I'm sure they would love the opportunity to spite us. Then there are the principles to consider.
Click to expand...
This is also true. And they've already done just that by purchasing Canadian petroleum (at our own peril unfortunately). :D
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#85
I find the "Iran is completely innocent" comments rather humorous. The leadership of Iran willing uses deadly force on its own citizens who are protesting against the government. Large amount of Iranians do not trust their government. To put it simply any rational person would be worried if such a country obtained a nuclear weapon considering what they do to their own population.
 
  • Like
Reactions: =GG= Mr Moe
Upvote 0
#86
Nestor Makhno said:
I do not think an awful, corrupt, nepotistic society where political opponents regularly disappeared could be called 'benign' by any but the most laboured stretch of the imagination.

If Pahlavi were still in power today he would almost certainly be the subject of an 'Arab spring' (Though technically Iranians are not Arabs).
Click to expand...

He was the original post-war Arab spring subject......:p
You must've missed the 'by today's standard' part of my analogy. (And I always try to excercise my imagination....:cool: )
 
Upvote 0
#87
Ohs nohs theyre gonna put mines in the Persian Gulf. Quick, send in the dolphins!

If everything goes "according to plan" 10 years later a statue will be erected in Washington D.C depicting dolphins and having a scripture "Flipper the Patriotic Dolphin who saved our oil way of life" but the dolphin will be covered by a black cloud of smog and the scripture will be under a few feet of water.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Flogger23m
Upvote 0
#88
Doesn't Iran, as a sovereign nation, have the right to build nuclear bombs?

The U.S. has thousands of nuclear warheads; I'm pretty sure Israel has them too.

Doesn't Iran have the right to protect itself?



We're going to bomb Syria (Iran's ally) soon too.


Must have been on the Baghdad Late Late Late Show on the former Saddam Channel :p:

Iraqi War Movie - YouTube[/URL]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nezzer
Upvote 0
#89
Gamburd said:
Doesn't Iran, as a sovereign nation, have the right to build nuclear bombs?

The U.S. has thousands of nuclear warheads; I'm pretty sure Israel has them too.

Doesn't Iran have the right to protect itself?



We're going to bomb Syria (Iran's ally) soon too.


Must have been on the Baghdad Late Late Late Show on the former Saddam Channel :p:

Iraqi War Movie - YouTube[/URL]
Click to expand...
Yes, they are a sovereign nation, but they are also a part of the IAEA. And the IAEA is telling them to NOT build nuclear weapons. The IAEA said we can, so we do.

Iran has the right to protect itself, but no nation in this day in age is going to use a nuclear weapon to defend itself. The only thing they would use that for is terrorism/annihilating Israel (if they can even make one that is accurate). The problem is, Iran is unstable, and when they advance in a dangerous technology, the world isn't too happy about it. The same can be said for North Korea. If France were to make some deadly new technology, no one would care because they are stable and aren't going to use it without probable cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flogger23m and =GG= Mr Moe
Upvote 0
#92
Alexander Ostmann said:
If France were to make some deadly new technology, no one would care because they are stable and aren't going to use it without probable cause.
Click to expand...

You are so lucky you did not say that in front of a NZer!!! As a part of the free world we'd support just about any western military with open arms but we would NEVER let a Frenchman set foot onto our territory.
 
Upvote 0
#94
If Iran produces a nuclear weapon, they're probably going to hand it off to some organization that has the intention of setting it off in a truck in Israel. That's why the US government is worried. No one has any delusions about the nuke going off on US soil. If they do, they're not worth listening to.

Iran does not have the right to produce or test nuclear weapons. They can use nuclear technology peacefully however. They're a signatory of the NPT. Only India, Pakistan, and Israel have not signed.
 
Upvote 0
#95
Kipper said:
If Iran produces a nuclear weapon, they're probably going to hand it off to some organization that has the intention of setting it off in a truck...
Click to expand...

This is what I would be worried about. Even if Iran was to build a nuclear weapon, however unstable they may be, they will not use it themselves. If they did, their sovereignty is forfeit, and not only the US, but the aforementioned Russia and China, are gonna stomp all over them. As much as they want to be a thorn in our side, they will not sit by and allow the use of a nuclear weapon against a civilian population. Thus they would have no choice but to hand it off to some shady organization and have them do it.

Kipper said:
They can use nuclear technology peacefully however. They're a signatory of the NPT.
Click to expand...

This is what I hope they are aspiring to, and if they are I believe they are fully within their rights to do so. I will not jump onto the "Lets get them!" bandwagon until i see CONCLUSIVE proof that their nuclear project is weaponized.

Kipper said:
Only India, Pakistan, and Israel have not signed.
Click to expand...

Funny that.

Alexander Ostmann said:
Iran's military is not too brilliant the last time I heard, and giving a sub par military more equipment is not going to do anything.

"Intelligence failures were quite evident, as demonstrated by the inability of units to communicate space-based and electronic intelligence, which consequently 'failed to inform the country’s leadership of the concentration of Georgian troops.' ... A recognizable pattern emerged which focused on aged vehicles, hardware, and weaponry; ineffective command and control organizations and systems; lack of interservice coordination; failures of intelligence support and the GLONASS (Global’naya Navigatsionnaya Sputnikovaya Sistema, or Global Navigation Satellite System)..."
More can be found on the matter here http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/Articles/09spring/mcdermott.pdfhttp://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/Articles/09spring/mcdermott.pdf
Click to expand...

Both of these are true, but newer equipment shipped from Russia couldn't HURT them either. Unless they got some defective RPGs or something :)

I would not, however, entirely discount the possibility of Russian troops for a different reason. They have as much ground to lose to the Chinese as we do, and if they see China going for it, they will have no choice but to go as well or take a back seat militarily. Which is not something I believe they will be willing to accept. Iran benefits either way.

The other thing is that even if push comes to shove we cannot take Iran's military lightly. They may be outdated or sub par compared to Western standards, yes, but they are no Afghanistan for example, or Iraq, and I think that our troops would take a far heavier beating there than they have so far. Especially how reluctant the population, and parts of the military themselves, would be to enter another war.

Furthermore, the civilian population would not take as kindly to us either, not that I would rate Afghanistan's response to us as "kindly". They may not love their current leaders, but I am pretty sure they would rank higher than Saddam.

The second point is a known problem with the Russian military. Being from Russia originally it's kind of embarrassing to tell the truth. They still are nowhere near at the same level as Western armies when it comes to information technology. Back in the 80s this wasn't a problem because everyone did things this way, but these days its a game changer, and they cannot afford to fall behind any more. I will sit here and argue in defense of their weapons/training/vehicles all day, but unless they figure out a way to integrate all of those successfully like the US or Germany, they will cease to be a viable security force/deterrent because they could just be outmaneuvered on a strategic scale.

Simultaneously, sending a contingent of troops to Iran to test against the Western powers and the Chinese could be exactly the chance they are waiting for to get the practice they need. They have not needed the level of organization or information processing used in the Georgian War since Afghanistan in the 1980s so I would not be surprised if inexperience plays a big role in their shortcomings.

WALL OF TEXT!
 
Upvote 0
#96
This is what I would be worried about. Even if Iran was to build a nuclear weapon, however unstable they may be, they will not use it themselves. If they did, their sovereignty is forfeit, and not only the US, but the aforementioned Russia and China, are gonna stomp all over them. As much as they want to be a thorn in our side, they will not sit by and allow the use of a nuclear weapon against a civilian population. Thus they would have no choice but to hand it off to some shady organization and have them do it.
Click to expand...

It could be worse actually. Let's say Iran builds a bomb. If they hand off the bomb, people can trace it back to Iran and then they're screwed. But let's say, instead they pass it off to an organization but claim it's been "stolen" while it was in transit somewhere in Iran. Iran makes a press release saying that some extremist group found out they were moving it and then they stole it en route. No one can really attack Iran because they didn't hand off the bomb. A tragedy happened and it was stolen. Maybe it's just a bad Tom Clancy novel but, hey, you never know.

I'd also like to note that the Iranians don't need a navy to pose a threat to ours. The Straits of Hormuz are small enough that missiles pose a significant threat to ships. The Iranians have the technology to sink ships. US CIWS can only deal with a finite number of threats at a time. This is why the Soviet/Russian navy is built the way it is. They're cruise-missile happy for a reason. And it's always scared the US.

I'd also second not underrated the Iranian military. While the US would undoubtedly win a confrontation, it'd be a much closer-run thing than people would expect.
 
Upvote 0
#97
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#98
Nestor Makhno said:
LOL - made my day.

I am not sure about Syria getting bombed, tbh.

Syria is usually used as a testbed for SAMs. I don't know what concealment techniques the Syrians would use but all it'd take would be for one US plane to get shot down or a cruise missile to accidentally land on an orphanage in Turkey or somewhere and it'd be a huge PR s***rain for US Military power
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
#99
With what is going on in Libya, should western forces even intervene at this point? Would there be more bloodshed with sectarian violence vs. government violence? This is a very sticky situation on our hands...


Plus:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17026007

Is Israel right in saying the government was behind this attack? Who knows...
Interesting stuff though I have to say. There hasn't been this many attacks perpetrated by Iranian nationals on foreign soil before. I wonder what is to come.
 
Upvote 0
#100
my parents grew up in iran (though they are not persian) before immigrating here about 25 years ago; i was born here.

about 90% of my family came here afterwards, so i always joke around with my grandparents than im going to enlist so i can go kill some iranians and bomb their old neighborhoods; its funny watching them flip out. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Verluste, NoxNoctum and Alexander Ostmann
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu