REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Iran Powerup

POSTED BY: ANTHONYT
UPDATED: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 19:00
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 671
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, August 23, 2010 8:04 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/08/22/iran.drone.unveiled/index.ht
ml?hpt=Sbin


Hello,

I think that Iran is still decades behind the U.S. in military capability, but they sure are plucky and motivated to improve their arsenal. I feel like the country is at a 1970's era of military tech comparability to the United States, minus the nuclear weapons. Obviously, they will never be able to field the vast quantity of materiel that we can, but they seem determined to inch ever closer to us technologically.

Of local military experts, I ask- What technology level do you think Iran is at, and what do you think their rate of progress is? How long before they can match the West in terms of technological equivelancy?

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 23, 2010 8:24 AM

KANEMAN


Why ask at all, we all know Israel is going to do what it has to do regardless what we advise.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 23, 2010 8:31 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Of local military experts, I ask- What technology level do you think Iran is at, and what do you think their rate of progress is? How long before they can match the West in terms of technological equivelancy?


In terms of what they can produce themselves they are decades behind the West with little or no progress since the 1970's. The only access they have to modern technology comes from purchases of equipment and technology from Russia and China. Since they are cash rich with oil reserves they will always have access to advanced technology, inferior to the West and with limited ability to supply and maintain their equipment.

What you will get in conflict with Iran is a very capable but fragile military force that will quickly expend or degrade its supply of modern weapons until it reaches its 1970's technology base.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I find those statements amazing. I said I found your remarks 'amazing'" Niki2, 2010.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 23, 2010 2:10 PM

FREMDFIRMA



Technological superiority isn't all it's cracked up to be, a lesson I rather thought we'd learned from vietnam, honestly.

We could, with a minimum of effort, annihilate their air force and acheive air superiority, but you can't win a war that way, and they know better than to fight us by going toe to toe in areas where we are able to clean their clocks - something with chair polishing pentagon strategists just don't seem to get, even though Van Riper *firmly* trounced THAT notion as early as 2002.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

Any naval craft we got would wind up on the bottom, a lot of em, once you get past the fancy and often ineffective gewjaws, they're basically 1950's tech, and the newer boats rely on electronics instead of armor, which is all fine and dandy, WHEN that shit works, against something vulnerable to electronic fuckery.

They'd swamp the defenses of our naval assets within the first ten minutes, and they got a couple of Kilo class diesels which WILL finish the job as they are are smaller, more maneuverable, and much more effective in those regions than our massive cold war nuke-subs, which while undeniably supreme in the open ocean, would be way out of their league in those waters for reasons obvious to anyone who knows a damn thing about submarine operations.

Then there's the situation on the ground, as they have actual armor in decent condition as opposed to cold war relics held together with duct tape like Saddam had, and you bet your sweet bippy the russkies would be more than happy to funnel them more in repayment for Afghanistan and to protect their foothold and oil supply - our tanks may be technically superior, sure, but the Panther and Tiger were technically superior to the Sherman, and it did those bastards no good at all cause we had a LOT of Shermans and the ability to cut them off from fuel, and a stranded tank is just a target - we'd be facing a fekkin horde of T72s which while technically/technologically inferior, would outnumber our armor and have a solid fallback line for fuel and parts while we'd have to extend our lines... but that'd be stalemate cause the fucking A-10 is a beast which makes mincemeat of armor, so deadlock, there.

The blow that would tell however is that our military is fatigued, overextended, and mistrustful of a high command which seems to be employing them for something more approaching a religious crusade than any rational reason, plus our tactical doctrine is right from the fucking battle of the Somme, hey diddle diddle, right up the middle, backed up by infiltration teams slaughtering civvies in an attempt to terrorise the population a'la Phoenix/COIN, which in practice only serves to drive the enemy into a fanatical hatred of us rather than the intended effect.

Then there's our troops having damn near ZERO personal initiative, to where losing radio contact whatever causes them to flail about all helpless and clueless without someone up the chain to hold their hand and tell them what to do, and how with all that armor on their mobility is so terribly compromised they're easy prey for lightly equipped raider units, who's rifles will actually FIRE as opposed to our mighty mattel piece of shit - seriously, did any of you READ some of the after-action reports of the many incidents where the Iraqis handed us our ass while our troops were desperately trying to get their weapons to work ?
Well over HALF the casualties taken by the 507th Maintenance company in that infamous Nasiriyah ambush came as a direct result of weapon FTFs, Sgt Riley and the two troops with him were captured after not one, but THREE rifles jammed as he attempted to use them.

Anyways, they're not gonna line up for us in an open field gotterdamerung, the days of large scale pitched battles are OVER, and since the folk behind all our tactics, training, and equipment specs cannot get it through their thick damned heads even now any more than they could in 1970, should we make the same mistake of assuming tech superiority and arrogance makes us invincible, the Iranians will be quite happy to teach us the same lesson the Vietcong did.

Unlike us, they've designed their military around attacking an opponents weakest points, instead of going strength to strength rah-rah-hoo-ah with some idiotic notion that it's a good idea to fight a war that way.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 23, 2010 2:29 PM

KLESST


Iran has plenty of oil but not a lot of gasoline refineries. They rely on imported fuel to run their economy. If their refineries were bombed and air power was used to blockade fuel shipments their economy would be in ruin within months. This would give other forces in Iran a chance to seize power. Hopefully the next regime will be an improvement this time around.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 23, 2010 2:40 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:


Millennium Challenge 2002 (MC02) was a major wargame exercise conducted by the United States armed forces in mid-2002, likely the largest such exercise in history. The exercise, which ran from July 24 to August 15 and cost $250 million, involved both live exercises and computer simulations. MC02 was meant to be a test of future military "transformation"—a transition toward new technologies that enable network-centric warfare and provide more powerful weaponry and tactics. The simulated combatants were the United States, denoted "Blue", and an unknown adversary in the Middle East, "Red".

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 lighting signals to get airplanes off the runways without using radio communication.

Red received an ultimatum from Blue, that was essentially a surrender document, that Red must respond to within 24 hours. Given that Red knew that Blue was coming, by the second day of the exercise Red used a fleet of small boats to determine the position of Blue's fleet. In a preemptive strike, Red launched a massive salvo of cruise missiles, overwhelming the Blue forces' electronic sensors, destroying sixteen warships. This includes one aircraft carrier, ten cruisers and five out of the six amphibious ships. The equivalent of this success in a real conflict would have resulted in the death 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 carrying out both conventional and suicide attacks, able to engage Blue forces due to Blue's inability to detect them as well as expected.[1]

At this point, the exercise was suspended and Blue's ships were "re-floated" and changes were made to the rules of engagement; later this was justified by General Peter Pace as: "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] In the new restarted exercise the different 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 attitudes taken on by the Department of Defense of Robert McNamara going in to and during the Vietnam War, namely the idea that the U.S. military could not and will not be defeated.



Hello,

I did not know this. This is very sad.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 23, 2010 3:15 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

In the new restarted exercise the different sides were ordered to follow predetermined plans of action...


Well, if there's one thing we know you can ALWAYS count on in battle, it's the enemy playing by the rules YOU set out for them, right?


You know what it takes to defeat a U.S. armored vehicle in Iraq? A rock with an explosive device wired to it. We spend hundreds of billions in high-tech weaponry, and we're up against a guy who blows up a rock under our vehicles and kills us and destroys our new high-tech toy. I'm guessing Iran has more rocks than we have hundreds of billions of dollars to waste, not to mention the tens of thousands of our soldiers we'd get to write off.


ETA: Fixed

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 23, 2010 3:20 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


This post has been edited because it addressed a discontinued event.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 24, 2010 1:12 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Fixed.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 24, 2010 1:20 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I suppose that despite testing that proves a country like Iran is capable of inflicting staggering casualties against us, it's still not considered particularly likely.

Why is that? Is it because we have fought in Afghanistan and Iraq, and our casualties in those conflicts have proven to be anemic on the scale of historical warfare? Do we then assume that Iran would be no different, and that while they will inflict casualties in asymmetric warfare, those casualties will veritably trickle in as they usually do, keeping all losses to 'minimal' levels?

If that is our assumption, on what do we base this? And are we correct to assume it? Is Iran the same as Iraq and Afghanistan in the grand scheme of things? Are they unlikely to seriously hurt us, despite the theoretical capacity to do so as illustrated by the Millenium affair? Is this a judgment about their morale? Do we equivocate them with other middle-eastern nations? Or is it something else?

Is there any reason to believe they'd actually make clever use of their war resources?

Is there any reason to believe they wouldn't?

Where does our military get its ideas about potential threat forces?

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 24, 2010 7:00 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Where does our military get its ideas about potential threat forces?



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Sun, April 28, 2024 16:06 - 6316 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Sun, April 28, 2024 15:47 - 3576 posts
Elections; 2024
Sun, April 28, 2024 15:39 - 2314 posts
Scientific American Claims It Is "Misinformation" That There Are Just Two Sexes
Sun, April 28, 2024 12:35 - 23 posts
Dangerous Rhetoric coming from our so-called President
Sun, April 28, 2024 07:30 - 1 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Sun, April 28, 2024 02:03 - 1016 posts
The Thread of Court Cases Trump Is Winning
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:37 - 20 posts
Case against Sidney Powell, 2020 case lawyer, is dismissed
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:29 - 13 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:28 - 745 posts
Slate: I Changed My Mind About Kids and Phones. I Hope Everyone Else Does, Too.
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:19 - 3 posts
14 Tips To Reduce Tears and Remove Smells When Cutting Onions
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:08 - 9 posts
Russian War Crimes In Ukraine
Sat, April 27, 2024 19:27 - 15 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL